Recent Developments in Superintendent of Documents Programs
Remarks by Francis J. Buckley, Jr.
Superintendent of Documents

Good morning. I appreciate the opportunity to talk with you again.

This is a time of change and transition in the world of information from the ways we create, store, disseminate and use information, including government information. New buzz words like knowledge management, and the philosophy behind them, are capturing our attention. How our programs for the dissemination of government information fit into the evolving situations is what we are all trying to manage.

I find myself addressing large policy issues, such as Title 44 revision, etc., issues of relations with other agencies over new and inventive proposals for information publishing and dissemination that would chart new ground, set precedents and create new models, as well as dealing with the myriad operational issues for running a large and complex operation within the Federal bureaucracy. In terms of the operations of the programs I oversee, I feel that the staff is doing a very good job.

What I would like to cover this morning are three topics affecting the Superintendent of Documents Program:

• appropriations
• the Booz-Allen management audit
• the Document Sales program

The appropriations process for the Depository Library Program Salaries and Expenses has not been confrontational as in other years. The Senate Appropriations Committee is recommending $29.6 million, about ½ million above GPO's current funding but about $600,000 below our request, and a reduction in the GPO staffing level by 200 employees. The House Legislative Branch Appropriations has recommended $29,234,000, an increase of only $187,000 and have approved an FTE ceiling of 3,416 or a cut of 134 positions. The Senate Report asks GPO to provide the appropriations committee with quarterly reports on action taken to implement to Booz-Allen management audit recommendations, which I will discuss shortly; the House asked for an annual report on this activity.

A management audit studying various GPO functions was recently concluded by Booz-Allen & Hamilton, a consulting firm, on behalf of the General Accounting Office (GAO). It was requested by the Appropriations Committee last year and GPO was directed to provide $1.5 million out of the revolving fund to GAO to perform this audit. The theme or perspective that Booz-Allen indicated they would take in their evaluation of GPO was competitiveness and utilization of business practices, rather than evaluating us as a service. We were not sure what to expect, but as it turns out there were many positive comments in their report about GPO's printing and procurement service, the depository program and GPO Access. However, they questioned whether a Government organization should operate a retail sales activity and whether it is an inherently governmental function. I would like to discuss this later.

In responding to the management audit, the Public Printer noted that he was "pleased that the independent review performed by Booz-Allen & Hamilton affirms a continued positive role for GPO in the Federal Government in the production, procurement, and dissemination of Government information products."

The report says that GPO's Federal Depository Library Program "is well managed, provides a valuable public service, and is respected by the library community." It also indicated strong support for GPO to make an increasing amount of Government information available electronically, free of charge, over the Internet and praised the success of GPO Access. The report says GPO Access "is one of the Federal Government's largest and most active Web sites" and suggests that GPO seek additional funds from Congress to expand this program.

Among the specific recommendations for the FDLP are suggestions that are not all new. They suggested that we refine the goals of the program to include target dates for completing the transition to a more electronic program; to develop additional depository partnerships; to expand marketing efforts to all potential stakeholders; to pursue changes to Title 44 that would require agencies to provide all documents, especially those in electronic format, to the FDLP; and to hold an information campaign to make agencies aware of their compliance responsibilities.

Booz-Allen had only four months to perform the audit. I think that the recommendations were based on a cursory analysis of GPO's operations and incomplete information, since there was so little time to do an in-depth analysis.

The management audit asserts that "disseminating government information to the public is an inherent government responsibility. We found no evidence that people believe otherwise." In the opinion of GPO, these statements apply equally to the Sales Program and the FDLP. Historically these two programs have been viewed as complementary and not, as noted in the report, conflicting. The FDLP provides no-fee access to government publications/information products as defined in section 1902, Title 44. The Sales Program offers the public the opportunity to obtain, at a reasonable price, personal copies of a broad spectrum of government publications on a cost-recovery basis.

Booz-Allen suggested that the sales program could be outsourced, privatized, or remain with GPO. They based this on several findings. First that Title 44 does not mandate the sale of publication documents, rather it authorizes the Superintendent of Documents to do so, therefore there would be no need to amend Title 44 to either outsource or privatize the sales operation. Needless to say, we view the legislative mandate and a century of administrative practice and service to the public as justification for the program. Booz-Allen recommended that Congress reexamine the direction for the sales operation and consider several models:

• Outsourcing the entire sales operation to a contractor to manage;

• Transferring the sales operation to a private sector wholesaler serving book retailers and publishers;

• Privatize the sales operation by transferring the assets to a private company, such as forming an Employee Stock Ownership Plan in which current employees assume the enterprise;

• Permit and encourage GPO to enter in inter-service support agreements with other Federal agencies that offer similar services.

They based these suggestions on their findings that the prevailing trend in successive democratic and republican administrations has been to seek ways to outsource or privatize government services that are not "inherently governmental." And although Booz-Allen recognized that "disseminating government information to the public is an inherent government responsibility" and "efforts to place government documents in the hands of citizens is a laudable objective," they still felt that "having the government engaged in a retail sales operation to accomplish that objective may run counter to that prevailing trend."

I would rebut these findings and recommendations. I think the Sales Program is an essential component of our information dissemination program to provide the public with a reasonably-priced means to obtain personal copies of a broad spectrum of government publications, in the form of the official information issued by the government, on a cost-recovery basis.

The value of the Sales Program lies in its being the official source for a broad range of Government titles. Many are limited interest publications that would not meet the qualifications for inclusion in commercial sales programs. If the Sales Program were privatized the public would lose access to these publications.

I also take issue with the concerns over competition from the free dissemination of publications to depository libraries or from the increasing amount of information available on the Internet. People who need publications for extensive personal or business use will continue to need a source to procure them. Anyone who needs to read a lengthy item on the Internet will want to buy a copy as an alternative to downloading it. I expect the range of materials in the Sales Program to expand although the quantities sold of individual items may decrease. The mix is changing as items people need to consult for specific pieces of information are used on the Internet more frequently.

For a program that is required to cover all of its costs, the bottom line is crucial. I am pleased to report that the Sales Program has shown a great deal of improvement since the losses sustained in Fiscal Year 1996. In FY 1997, we handled over 1 million sales orders for more than 12 million copies of tangible products--that is single orders and subscriptions--for a total revenue of over $70 million. And, although the FY 1997 figures are not yet official because they are still being audited, indications are that Sales will show a surplus of over $1 million, putting us where we've been in all but one of the last 12 years--in the black.

In the first half of FY 1998, we are showing a surplus, and right now we're projecting a small surplus for the entire fiscal year.

In May, I reintegrated the activities of the Documents Sales Service. As you may know, for the last couple of years, Sales has been working on a new Integrated Processing System (IPS) as a backbone to support the sales function. During the IPS planing process, the responsibility for the new system as well as the Order Division, and the Laurel warehouse, which would be the primary operations using it, was assigned to the Technical Support unit. The Director of the Documents Sales Service, Jay Young, was assigned to cover the vacant directorship of Library Programs Service in addition to his responsibilities for the Field Operations and Sales Management Divisions. With this consolidation, the managers of the Sales divisions have the responsibility for pulling together all the final plans for the implementation of IPS, data conversion, training staff, organizing facilities, managing the cutover we expect to begin August 17, and going live with the new system on September 1. Until a new LPS Director is hired, I have taken the responsibility for acting in that capacity.

In Sales, we are thinking about our philosophy and mission--although we have not set up a formal planning process. My concept is that the program actually should broaden the number of titles included and keep some stock longer as a service to those who want to purchase copies of government publications for individual use or for libraries who need multiple copies of items for research (both current and retrospective). The character of the program is changing inevitably as volumes decline due to alternate ways documents are available, such as via the Internet.

The Superintendent of Documents Progam is busy and evolving to meet the needs of libraries and the public. We are faced with many mandates, a lot of oversight, and the possibility of reform by legislation. Succeeding speakers will address the Title 44 revision process and specific developments in the Federal Depository Library Program operation.

The Depository Library Public Service Guidelines for Government Information in Electronic Formats (Guidelines) are the result of nearly three years of discussion and work on the part of the Depository Library Council and depository librarians concerned with providing public access to the increasing amount of Federal Government information available in electronic formats. The Council began discussing this issue at its fall 1995 meeting in Memphis, TN, after the Congress directed GPO to investigate ways of making the Federal Depository Library Program almost entirely electronic. Subsequently, at its fall 1996 meeting in Salt Lake City, UT, Council held two focus sessions on the whole array of electronic information issues confronting depository libraries. A report on the focus groups' discussions was presented at the spring 1997 Council meeting in Arlington, VA. The Council then appointed a working group to draft public service guidelines for electronic Government information in depository libraries.

The draft guidelines were presented, discussed, modified, and adopted by Council at its spring 1998 meeting in Arlington, VA. The Library Programs Service (LPS) participated in these discussions. These guidelines set forth performance goals for Federal depository libraries in providing access by the public to Government information in electronic formats.

The General Counsel and the Public Printer have approved the guidelines, which fit within the statutory framework of Title 44. Depository libraries have a statutory obligation under section 1911 to make paper and microformat publications "available for the free use of the general public," and these guidelines articulate the logical extension of that historic obligation into the electronic information era. The General Counsel states that "any library selecting items in electronic formats must maintain a capability to allow for unimpeded use of those documents by its public patrons."

1. All depository libraries should have a written policy regarding public services for Government information in electronic formats. This policy should contain provisions for no-fee access to computer workstations with CD-ROMs, diskettes, and the Internet. These should be equal to or exceed the services provided for other collections of the library.
2. All depository libraries should offer access to Government electronic information disseminated through the Federal Depository Library Program to the general public. Attempts must be made to obtain hardware that meets the latest "Recommended Specifications for Public Access Work Stations in Federal Depository Libraries" as published annually in Administrative Notes.
3. All depository libraries should make tangible electronic products and services (CD-ROMs, floppy diskettes) which they select available to the general public in a timely manner. For example, if a product is not currently loaded and/or supported on a depository library's computer workstation, the depository library should attempt to provide access to it within a designated time frame as determined by each library. If the depository library is unable to provide adequate access to and technical support of tangible electronic products, circulation of those products should be made available in accordance with the library's circulation policies of other non-governmental tangible electronic products or other depository resources.
4. All depository libraries should provide Internet access to government information at no cost to the general public. Access should also include telnet and ftp capabilities to encourage downloading and/or transmission of electronic data.
5. Depository libraries are encouraged to develop home pages or bookmarks for government information and/or work cooperatively with other depository libraries in their area to provide links to prominent or useful sites for the general public. Such efforts would be in line with Section 8-6, (publicizing the depository collection) of the Guidelines for the Federal Depository Library Program.
6. Depository library public service areas should have a capability for fax and E-mail delivery of government information to distance users in accordance with existing policies in the library.
7. Depository libraries are obligated by law to provide public access to depository receipts, including electronic government information products. Depository libraries should provide the ability to download or print electronic government information in accordance with GPO requirements and guidelines. Limits to or costs associated with printing or downloading shall be consistent with other public service provisions of the library.
8. Whenever possible, depository libraries are encouraged to provide disk space on publicly available computers for temporary storage of electronic government information for patron use.
9. Depository libraries should provide appropriate reference service and help guides/documentation of tangible electronic products and the Internet for the general public.
10. Depository libraries are encouraged to offer training for the general public in using tangible electronic products and Internet resources.

The National Climatic Data Center is providing no charge access for the Federal depository libraries to the Online Document Library located at www5.ncdc.noaa.gov/pubs/publications.html. Libraries may access the Monthly Climatic Data for the World, Storm Data, and Local Climatological Data via this controlled access site. The user must be in the library to access the database, and libraries must protect the passwords. At this time there is no limitation on the number of concurrent users able to access the database.

[The user ID and password have been provided to depository libraries.] If you have problems accessing the database using the passwords, please contact staff in the Depository Administration Branch at (202) 512-1071, or by e-mail at rhaun-mohamed@gpo.gov.

The Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view or print these PDF files. Many of the files are quite large (over 5 Megabytes), so please be sure to review your request before you begin the download. GPO continues to work with NCDC to develop a CD-ROM product to be distributed to the depository libraries, but it has not yet been completed.

The publications available from this site include:

This publication contains monthly mean temperature, pressure, precipitation, vapor pressure, and sunshine for approximately 2,000 surface data collection stations worldwide and monthly mean upper air temperatures, dew point depressions, and wind velocities for approximately 500 observing sites.

Monthly issues contain a chronological listing, by state, of occurrences of storms and unusual weather phenomena. Reports contain information on storm paths, deaths, injuries, and property damage. An "Outstanding storms of the month" section highlights severe weather events with photographs, illustrations, and narratives. The December issue includes annual tornado, lightning, flash flood, and tropical cyclone summaries.

Summarizes temperature, relative humidity, precipitation, cloudiness, wind speed and direction observations for several hundred cities in the U.S. and its territories. Most monthly publications also contain the 3 hourly weather observations for that month and an hourly summary of precipitation. Annual LCD publications contain a summary of the past calendar year as well as historical averages and extremes. Please see LCD listing of published stations for a listing of valid stations and dates for LCD publications.

New CFR Browse Feature Offered via GPO Access

New GPO Web Service Offered:
List of Contractor-Issued Microfiche Shipping Lists

The List of Contractor-Issued Microfiche Shipping Lists is a new feature on the GPO Access Web site. This service provides the same information that appears periodically in issues of Administrative Notes, Technical Supplement. The List will continue to be included in Administrative Notes, Technical Supplement through the December 1998 issue.

The Web site, which is updated on the first Friday of each month, lists shipping lists from March 27, 1998 to the present. To get to it from the FDLP Administration page, choose Tools, Shipping Lists, and then List of Contractor-Issued Microfiche Shipping Lists. The direct link is www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/dpos/msl.html.

Dear Depository Librarian:

The Library Programs Service was apprised by the U.S. Geological survey that the publication Field Methods for Measurement of Fluvial Sediment is defective.

Descriptive information for this document is as follows:

I am requesting that you immediately withdraw this defective publication and destroy it by any means that will prevent disclosure of its erroneous contents. Thank you for your cooperation and prompt attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

FRANCIS J. BUCKLEY, JR.
Superintendent of Documents

LPS has received several requests to clarify how microfiche shipping lists numbers and dates are assigned. The explanation below outlines the process from its origins in the LPS Micrographics Section, through to the microfiche contractors, and finally to the distribution of the lists and shipments to depository libraries.

The assignment of shipping list numbers for microfiche items differs markedly from shipping list number assignment for paper, separates, and CD-ROM items.

The Micrographics Section receives documents from the Classification Section after SuDocs classification numbers and item numbers have been assigned. Each group of documents, sorted by class, is called a job. Documents for microfiche conversion fall under different contracts, and each job contains documents for only one contract.

Micrographics Technicians receive documents assigned to their respective contracts. The Technician groups a number of documents for each job depending on the maximum weekly quantity allowed under each contract. These documents are then arranged in order, first by item number and then by SuDocs class. The Technician then finds the order count assigned to the item number for each document through the Item Count Report, which determines how many depository libraries will receive each document. The Technician then determines the number of titles (documents), page count (if any), the number of microfiche necessary to film the document, the total number of copies for each job, the total number of diazos for each job, and an estimated cost for each job. This information is then input into an automated system, which produces a print order. Once the print order has been completed, the Technician notifies the vendor assigned to that particular contract that the job is ready for pickup.

When the vendor receives the job, he verifies that all the information and documents in the job match the print order assigned to that job. The vendor then calls the Micrographics Section to request a Shipping List Number. The vendor must request one shipping list number for all jobs issued on the same day under the same contract number. The Micrographics Clerk assigns the next available shipping list number.

Shipping list numbers are assigned in consecutive order beginning with 98-0001-M (for Fiscal Year 1998). At the beginning of Fiscal Year 1999, which begins on October 1, the shipping list numbers will change to 99-0001-M and continue in consecutive order until the end of the fiscal year. There is no set of shipping list numbers assigned to a specific contractor.

The vendor has 20 consecutive business days (holidays and weekends excluded) in which to complete each job. The 20^th day is the Ship/Delivery Due Date. The Shipping List Date and the Ship/Delivery Due Date is the same date.

For any date within the workweek (Monday through Friday) that the print order is issued, the 20 day count begins on the first business day of the following week, usually Monday.

Note: Contract B592-S (Bill Shipments) is the only contract in which there is a 15-day turn-around requirement, and each Ship/Delivery Due Date must be on a Friday.

The vendor must send a draft of each shipping list within 8 days of receipt of the print order. The Micrographics Technician has 3 days (after the 8 day period) to either request that corrections be made or to authorize and approve the shipping list for filming. The vendor then begins filming the documents.

The vendor must complete and deliver the following to the Chief, Micrographics Section, by the Ship/Delivery Due Date:

• Microfiche conversion of documents and agency supplied microfiche (camera copy, 2^nd generation silvers, and diazos)

• 25 copies of each shipping list

• Master copy of each shipping list

• Diskette (shipping list in electronic format)

By the same Ship/Delivery Due Date, the vendor:

• Distributes all shipping lists to all depositories

• Distributes the material to regional and selective depository libraries

Ship/Delivery Due Dates are set up on a weekly basis and vendors have distribution once a week, usually on Fridays.

Drew University Library has been a selective (36%) depository library since 1939. As Documents Assistant, I supervise the processes which take our item selections from the mailroom to the stacks. This work requires the annual hiring and training of about four student employees, who must learn how to check, mark, sort, enter, and shelve the incoming documents and how to troubleshoot any complications which arise. To help the students learn and perform these duties, I wrote an office manual in 1991. Entitled "Procedures for Processing Government Documents at Drew University Library," it proved to be a successful training/reference aid and was singled out for commendation during our last depository inspection.

Nonetheless, early in 1998 I converted the manual from its print (WordPerfect 6.1) format into HTML, and since that time our students' access to it has been entirely online. In the hope that our experience may be helpful to other depositories, this article will discuss how and why that decision was made, what was involved in the conversion, and how the change has affected our work thus far.

The paper manual went through many changes over the years. It served the office well, but it also had some fundamental problems.

First, revisions were both frequent and time-consuming. Student feedback, and my own observations, often prompted new or clarified material; there were also many changes in the DLP's products, procedures, and services. The manual grew to some 85 pages, and almost any revision involved reprinting quite a few of them. Reprinting, in turn, meant extended use of a cranky, noisy dot-matrix printer, made more onerous by our need to maintain two copies. Revisions were nonetheless done when needed; but the experience didn't inspire further development.

Second, while the manual was a good training tool, ready reference was an ongoing challenge; again, due to the volume of material. We eventually settled on an intricate I/A/1/a/1)/a) format throughout the text, with a correspondingly intricate table of contents. This did the job, but hunting for such headings as "II/B/4/c/1)" certainly fell short of optimal ready reference.

Third, some procedures were so complex that they were difficult to make "friendly" in this format. The process for troubleshooting "missing documents and mystery documents" was presented in flowcharts; certainly an improvement over text, but admittedly rather alarming to navigate if you'd been up all night preparing for a Psychology exam.

In writing the first version of the manual I'd experimented with WordPerfect's hypertext function; its benefits for relating material and providing quick access were obvious. But hypertext documents required a computer, and our office had one desktop. (The students had their own computers, issued to all freshmen since Drew's Computer Initiative in 1984, but these, too, were desktops.) With up to four possible employees, we needed multiple copies of any office manual; and since it would be consulted in many locations--on the students' work desk, near the shelflist outside the office, up in the stacks--it also had to be portable. Putting the tentative idea of a hypertext manual aside, I proceeded with the most appropriate format, print.

But by 1998 the situation had changed. There was a Web and an HTML standard, I had become comfortable with basic HTML while working on the library's home page, and--most crucially--Drew University's students were now being issued laptop computers with modems. Moreover, the library had its own server where files could easily be uploaded and revised. The world of Documents had changed, too; although processing had become increasing complex, it had been greatly facilitated by online tools such as the Item Lister, the MOCAT, and the List of Classes. I'd been teaching our advanced students to use these tools, but they couldn't be seamlessly integrated into a print manual.

Considering all of these factors and our intractable problems with the print version, it seemed to me that we'd reached a point where our student employees would find an HTML manual more accessible than print and no less functional, and that its revisions/expansions could be carried out far more efficiently. Our Documents Librarian, Jan Wanggaard, gave her support to the project. Somewhat over a month later, the manual went online.

To anyone considering such a project, I would say: don't try this without a good HTML editor! Without the capability of inserting tags, doing multiple find-and-replaces, and easily creating tables, frames, and links, the job would have been impossible. My editor at that time was Brooklyn North's "HTML Assistant Pro 97," which automates the above-mentioned processes but allows work directly with the code. I like this sort of editor because it helps in learning HTML, but there are many fine Web editors which minimize contact with the code and are more like a word processor. Follow your own personal preference. The important thing is to find an editor which suits the way you like to work, supports the HTML functions you want to try, and has help that's appropriate for your level of experience. Most editors have downloadable demo versions which you can test. This may take a bit of trial and error, but for any major project the investment of time will be repaid many times over.

The first step in the conversion was developing the online manual's design and format. Since improved navigation was a major objective, it had to be addressed in the basic layout. So I decided to display the manual in two frames; that is, two sections of the screen. The smaller frame, which would always be visible to the user, listed the main Contents; the larger frame would display whichever section of the text had been selected by clicking on a Contents link. This is a widely used, practical approach to navigating a large online text. Aesthetic concerns were addressed next: freeware graphics such as buttons, a background, an "up" arrow, and the FDLP logo were located and used to help create a simple design. At that point, I was able to create a template file with all the design-related HTML codes; the template would provide a time-saving starting point for all the pages yet to be created, because the design elements would be common to all of them.

Content was the next issue. The general plan was to maintain the subject sections of the print manual, and set up each as a separate HTML file, with the section's topics as internal links at the top of the page. This continuity was intended to ease the students' transition from the print manual. Fortunately, although some of the sections were rather long, their HTML versions all loaded at an acceptable speed.

As for the text itself, it soon became clear that to simply import or copy/paste from WordPerfect into a template and add formatting codes was only a start; a true conversion required more than that. The online environment provided new ways to present the same information, and for the conversion to be successful we needed to take advantage of whatever possibilities I could identify. Accordingly, the existing manual would have to be critically reviewed and substantially rewritten.

At the most basic level, it became clear that paragraphs which seemed of reasonable length in print appeared interminable on a monitor, particularly since they were displaying in only part of the screen. They had to be "chunked" to remain palatable, which provided an opportunity to condense and clarify the content whenever possible. But beyond that, there were many instances where the information could be structured differently for more efficient use. For example, our students had always checked the item numbers on every Shipping List against our depository selection list, about 20 annually printed pages with pencilled-in adds or deletes; the same list in columns on a single scrollable page not only allowed much faster scanning, but could be easily updated throughout the year whenever we revised our profile.

Another example of reformatting was the "troubleshooting" procedures which had previously appeared as complex flowcharts. Here, the online environment provided two major advantages. First, the if/then steps could be displayed one at a time, in different files (or widely spaced sections of the same file), so that students were not intimidated by the complexity of the process. And second, the text could include links to the online tools essential to the troubleshooting: the Item Lister, LOC, and MOCAT, making the process a seamless one--even, as events proved, an engaging one.

A final example of restructuring for the online environment was the crucial matter of ready reference. The print manual's detailed table of contents was replaced by a variety of search options in the online version. First, as mentioned, the main sections of the manual appear at all times as content links in the smaller frame. Second, one of those links is for a site map, which allows a student to scan the entire structure of the manual at a very detailed level and access any topic of interest with a click of the mouse. Third, each section has all of its topics listed as links at the top of the page. Finally, the section called "About the Manual" asks students to use Netscape's "Find" for locating specific text on any particular page. These combined options would, it was hoped, give our students the quick ready reference that print never adequately achieved.

As the files were developed, another step was checking how they would look online. Tests showed differing displays in Internet Explorer and Netscape, because of the choice to use some Netscape-proprietary coding. For instance, our item selections list--which displays neatly in multiple columns in Netscape--forms an extremely long single column in the tested version of Internet Explorer. Additionally, the choice to use frames meant that the manual would not display at all in a text browser such as Lynx. If the manual was intended to be a public-access document, these would have been very significant concerns. But since it was planned as an in-house reference tool and Netscape is our campus browser, I kept to the design. However, testing with multiple browsers is generally a good idea, even if the results are disconcerting!

The occasional innovations notwithstanding, there is no denying that much of the "creation" process was simply work, neither creative nor exciting. A lot of HTML coding is repetitive and all of it has to be checked. To speed things up a bit, I created a "coding" page containing all the lines of codes which were used repeatedly, such as <CENTER><A HREF="#Top of This Page"><IMG SRC="arrow50.gif" HEIGHT=32 WIDTH=32 border=0></CENTER></A><P>, which inserts an "up" arrow after each topic. With the coding page loaded at all times in a separate window, I could just copy and paste as needed. To complete the manual, every link was tested for accuracy and every page went through a spell-checker; finally, it was ready for the upload.

Our student employees can access the manual either on the Web, using a modem jack in the Documents office, or from two floppy disks kept at the work desk. The floppies provide a backup for the rare network downtime; the only tradeoff, of course, is access to other online resources.

The "new" manual was in use throughout the Spring 1998 semester, when we were retraining two new students and had two returning students. In theory, this provided a perfect environment for its evaluation. One snag was that our experienced students (who have older computers) needed some software installation before their laptops could access even the floppy disks, although they viewed and used the manual on the office desktop. Fortunately, one of these experienced students stayed on to work during the summer, by which time his notebook was up to speed. All the students were aware that they were, in a sense, "beta testers" for this format, and they were encouraged to share their reactions. So both their comments and my observations can be reported at this time.

The new trainees used the manual easily from the outset, and were soon carrying out some sophisticated procedures (i.e., guessing an item number might be a new one because it didn't appear in the Item Lister) which their equally capable predecessors hadn't mastered until much later in their training. One trainee reported finding troubleshooting distinctly enjoyable!

The most experienced employee, a graduate student who is older than his co-workers, did not come to Drew with a background of computer use. He told me that although abandoning the print manual was difficult for him, he felt the online version was easier to use in every way. He particularly liked the integration of online Documents resources. In fact, he suggested that I set up a page listing those links (at that time all embedded in the text) so that he could go to them directly. This was a great idea, so I created a page called "Other Useful Links for Documents Work" which is now heavily used. In the electronic version, as in the print version, student feedback makes the manual more useful to all of us.

"Other Useful Links" was just one example of what to me, as the author, is a tremendous benefit of the HTML format: the capability for easy, quick revisions and additions. All that's involved is typing up the text in the HTML editor, perhaps making changes to the Contents and the Site Map, then uploading the file to the server and copying it to the two floppies. Jan Wanggaard and I agreed that this opens up all sorts of possibilities for expanding the scope of the manual, as well as improving its present contents. Indeed, some of the design elements of the manual have already been totally redone, again incorporating student feedback.

So, although time may further disclose both benefits and difficulties with the new manual, its initial utilization has been entirely positive. But I'd emphasize that this conversion would not have been feasible until the students' laptops made electronic format as portable as print. Given that development, it appears that having an online procedures manual will streamline our students' training, provide fast ready reference, and facilitate development and revision. For those depositories where the infrastructure is suitable, it may be an option to consider.

Procedures for Processing Government Documents at Drew University Library is located at http://www.depts.drew.edu/lib/govdocs/ [ NOTE: originally, and as published in this issue of Administative Notes, the URL WAS http://forest.drew.edu/~library_www/govdocs/index.htm ].

Depository Library Council to the Public Printer
Summary of the Spring 1998 Meeting
April 20-23, 1998
Arlington, VA

Monday, April 20, Morning Session

Sheila McGarr welcomed the audience to the 1998 Federal Depository Conference. She described the contents of the conference packets and encouraged all attendees to complete the conference evaluation forms. Tours of Federal libraries and information centers had been scheduled. Since pre-registration had been required for both the STAT-USA and the Department of State tours, those tours were now closed. Ms. McGarr described the symbols used on the attendees' badges. With more than 500 registrants, networking with colleagues was encouraged. The proceedings for the conference would be published in both Web and print editions. Ms. McGarr then announced a few program changes.

Dan Barkley announced an information session that evening co-sponsored by the American Library Association's Government Documents Round Table (GODORT) and the Inter-Association Working Group on Government Information Policy (IAWG). Eric Peterson, Staff, Joint Committee on Printing, and Daniel O'Mahony, Chair, IAWG, would be speaking on developments to reform Chapter 19 of U.S.C. Title 44, the law governing the Federal Depository Library Program.

Chair Anne Watts welcomed everyone to the spring 1998 Depository Library Council meeting. Members of the Depository Library Council were introduced. Chair Watts then surveyed the attendees on a variety of topics (e.g., geographical representation, first time attendees, types of libraries represented, etc.). The Government Printing Office staff was introduced. The audience was encouraged to attend meetings of the Council. The Chair introduced Public Printer Michael F. DiMario.

After welcoming attendees to the conference, Michael DiMario noted that Eric Peterson of the Joint Committee on Printing would be speaking that evening and that he would have information on the initiative to revise Title 44.

Booz-Allen & Hamilton had delivered a draft management audit report of GPO conducted by the General Accounting Office (GAO). The draft report reviewed GPO's document sales program, production, procurement, document delivery, and financial management. While there was some criticism of management issues and the sales program, the draft report viewed the depository program positively. GPO was in the process of reviewing the report and preparing comments.

Mr. DiMario was expecting appropriations to be decided soon. There had been three hearings on GPO appropriations since January. Funding was most likely to be level which would be essentially a decrease because of rising costs. If that is the case, there may be some negative impact to the Federal Depository Library Program. Mr. DiMario hoped that these problems could be overcome with the continuing electronic transition. GPO had assured legislators that they would be in compliance with the Year 2000 computer requirements.

Fran Buckley considered this his "maiden" speech as the official Superintendent of Documents. He noted that he had served on Council and had been Council Chair. He also noted that his overall concern was access to information, either at low cost or no fee, reiterating his long-standing commitment to provide access to Federal information. His hope was to bring a public service orientation to the Superintendent of Documents position.

Mr. Buckley enumerated his areas of responsibility, including the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP), GPO Access, the nationwide Sales Program, the Consumer Information Center, the International Exchange Program, and the reimbursable program for Federal agencies. His goal is to ensure that these programs operated efficiently, complementing each other in order to provide effective public access to Government information.

The past four months have been challenging because of GPO's size, scope, and organizational structure. Mr. Buckley reviewed the major SuDocs program statistics. 1,365 depository libraries have received 13.4 million copies of 44,820 tangible products within the past year. More than 30,000 items have been cataloged for the Monthly Catalog. Approximately 188,000 people are served each week in depository libraries. Over 89% of depository libraries provide direct patron access to the Internet, while another 4% offer staff mediated access. Use of GPO Access continues to increase, with March statistics indicating 13.5 million documents downloaded since 1994. Over 65,342 titles had been mounted on the GPO servers and 44,204 links provided to agency Web sites. GPO Access had been highlighted in Roll Call (December 1996) and in the Federal Computer Week (March 23,1998).

Mr. Buckley reported on his outreach and public awareness activities. Interviews and articles have appeared in a number of journals, including Library Journal and the AALL Newsletter. In addition, he has participated in hearings, forums, and has written an editorial column for American Libraries. Mr. Buckley thanked Sandy Morton Schwalb and Gil Baldwin for their assistance in these outreach activities.

Mr. Buckley noted that automation is the backbone of the Sales Program. The Integrated Processing System (IPS) has taken longer to implement than initially expected. It was hoped that it would be available this summer.

Mr. Buckley acknowledged the assistance of Duncan Aldrich on the development of the Collection Management Plan. The plan would help set up a policy framework for GPO collections. Council would discuss the plan in later sessions.

A new Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information partnership, the Information Bridge, was announced. Mr. Buckley recognized Dr. Walter Warnick and Kathleen Chambers of the Office of Scientific and Technical Information for their work on this new partnership. The Information Bridge would provide on-demand access to DOE reports similar to those that depository libraries had received in microfiche. Access to the collection, which dates from January 1996, would begin this week.

The NTIS pilot project providing on demand and free access to scientific, technical and business reports is being expanded. The initial pilot was at the University of California-Davis. The University of Nevada-Reno is the next depository in the pilot phase.

Mr. Buckley addressed the problem of fugitive documents. He estimated that only 50% of Federal documents are currently included in the FDLP. This is because of the growth in agency Web sites and agency failure to notify GPO about the electronic versions of the reports; the failure of agencies to print through GPO or provide copies to depository libraries; an increase in agency contracting for printing resulting in copyright-like restrictions; and the increase in use of the language in Title 44 to exclude publications from depository libraries. Mr. Buckley also attributed the increase in fugitive documents to both a lack of agency knowledge about the FDLP and lack of interest in providing copies to depository libraries. He noted that one major compliance issue was publications in electronic format. Some executive agencies have not provided access for depository libraries to electronic information through GPO.

Mr. Buckley commented briefly on the Booz-Allen management audit draft report. He said that the Booz-Allen approach was to view GPO as a business. The draft report also suggested outsourcing or privatizing the Sales Program. GPO believes that there are a number of positive findings in the report.

Jay Young was pleased with Mr. Buckley's proactive attitude regarding the Sales Program. Mr. Young noted that Mr. Buckley brought a new way of looking at the Sales Program. The Sales Program staff would like to develop their on-line site to resemble Amazon.com and to provide an optional notification system for new products. Mr. Young reiterated that the Sales Program was required to recover costs. In 1997 there was a surplus of $1 million and a projected surplus in 1998. He acknowledged the hard work of the Sales Program staff in controlling costs.

The new Integrated Processing System (IPS) for the Sales Program would replace eighteen mainframe systems. The startup of IPS had been slowed by legal problems.

T.C. Evans stressed EIDS's goal of providing the best possible service to its customers. He described the growth of GPO Access including the inclusion of over 700 individual databases, requiring more than 80 gigabytes of memory. More than 100 megabytes were added daily. More than 57 million documents had been downloaded through March in FY 1998 and usage had doubled in the first half of this fiscal year. EIDS answered more than 9,000 user questions per month either by telephone or e-mail. In mid-May, user support service hours would be expanded to 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. E.S.T. EIDS user surveys had shown that the general public was even happier with GPO Access than depository librarians.

EIDS had recently added NARA and NCLIS GILS sites. The Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents now dated from 1995. Hearing applications had been added and Mr. Evans requested feedback on this effort.

Mr. Evans spoke of the constant need for training of users on GPO Access and of the Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information training interactions with EIDS staff on the new Information Bridge. A new GPO Access training booklet would be distributed and available for downloading.

EIDS had worked with the Sales Program to develop a shopping cart feature available in the Web. Customers could now order up to twenty products at a time.

Gil Baldwin presented the status of the electronic transition. The depository program was about two and one-half years into the five-to-seven-year transition. Last year GPO had been in the process of identifying microfiche and discontinuing this microfiche where the information was provided electronically. GPO believed that it was premature to eliminate tangible products; but was working on developing content partnerships, notification procedures and other mechanisms to ensure permanent public access to agency electronic information products. They would then proceed to identify and replace selected tangible products with reliable, official, and permanent electronic versions. Mr. Baldwin said the focus today was on what agencies were doing and incorporating their products into the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP).

He described the FDLP Electronic Collection as containing titles on GPO Access, at agencies, and 160,000 pages indexed in Pathway Indexer. Over 200,000 tangible product titles had been distributed over the past four years. The FDLP collection was already more than 35% electronic. He predicted that electronic products would soon outpace tangible products and that the number of tangible products would decline but not disappear.

Mr. Baldwin described the improvement in the cataloging service locator. GPO had an integrated process for providing bibliographic control to Internet resources. When a new Government product was found on the Web, that resource would be assigned a PURL and announced in the Browse Electronic Titles Pathway service. It would be cataloged with the PURL in the catalog record. Where GPO cataloging records were used, PURLS software would update the URL changes. This effort combined the work of the staff in the Cataloging and Depository Administration Branches, the Electronic Transition staff, and GPO's Production staff.

The collection management concept would have GPO manage the various electronic Government information products made permanently accessible through GPO Access as a library-like collection. They would see the whole body of the electronic collection in the scope of their responsibility. There were four main components: (1) permanent core legislative and regulatory GPO Access products; (2) remotely accessible products (GPO or partnership management); (3) tangible electronic products distributed to depository libraries; and (4) remotely accessible electronic Government information that GPO would identify, describe and link, but which would remain under the control of the originating agencies. He reiterated GPO's goal of current and permanent access to Government information.

Mr. Baldwin thanked Cindy Etkin for her assistance in developing a set of "FDLP Electronic Collections" Web pages which would provide links to resources inside and outside of GPO. He requested feedback on this new service when it was available.

Mr. Baldwin discussed the NCLIS assessment and suggestions of products for the process. An explanation of criteria had been made available in the handouts.

He described askLPS, which had been announced at last fall's Council meeting. This past month askLPS began to accept Web-based inquiries. askLPS had five components: the electronic inquiry form; WEBTech Notes (which dated back to 1991); FAQs & News; the existing FDLP Contacts page; and a FDLP directory.

Last month, LPS received 2200 inquiries, of which 75% were by e-mail and 20% by phone. The askLPS inquiry form would provide automatic acknowledgment. LPS expects that an initial response would occur within 10 business days. Inquiries received by askLPS would have priority over fax, telephone, or mail inquiries. These inquiries would be responded to on askLPS if they were general questions that might be of interest to others.

Robin Haun-Mohamed summarized the activities of the Depository Administration Branch. She emphasized LPS' service and reiterated the five components of askLPS. The inquiry form had two separate parts with one having a general inquiry form and the other having password protection. WEBTech Notes contained the Administrative Notes Technical Supplement retrospective to 1991 and would be updated weekly. The FDLP Directory was the SGML database for PAMALA and was password protected for corrections by depository libraries. She reminded everyone that inquiries to askLPS would be prioritized over fax, telephone, or mail inquiries. Response would normally be within 10 business days, but the response might also be a request for more information.

She announced another new electronic service: the Documents Data Miner (DDM), which would be a collection management tool featuring a searchable List of Classes, the Discontinued Item List, complete depository profiles, union lists, and a searchable library directory. The DDM was developed through a service partnership between the University Libraries at Wichita State University and the National Institute for Aviation Research.

The Union List of Item Selections would be updated the first Friday of each month and could be downloaded in ASCII format from the Federal Bulletin Board.

Ms. Haun-Mohamed also announced that the Shipping List service would now include the USGS Automatic Sendings. These would be posted on the Federal Bulletin Board in Word Perfect 6.0. GPO was working with their shipping list partners to find a better way to post this information.

Ms. Haun-Mohamed also presented a product update. The 1997 World Factbook in print and on CD-ROM had been distributed with additional software instructions posted on askLPS. House Committee Print 105-P, the documents relating to the Committee's hearing on the proposed tobacco settlement, had been distributed, as well as numbers 16 and 17 of the FBIS CD-ROM series. LPS had not been provided enough copies of the CIA declassified report on Cuban operations, so LPS would convert it to microfiche for further distribution.

A new Memorandum of Understanding had been signed between LPS and the National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA, formerly DMA) which would bring NIMA products back into distribution. By early May, libraries should have begun to see the NIMA products arrive.

The Depository Administration Branch had a 94% response rate to Survey 98-001, the first on-line survey. The 1998 Periodicals Supplement had been distributed under an incorrect item number. Additional stock would be obtained for redistribution under the correct item number. The new CD-ROM tour of the White House was verified as not being a Government document and would not be distributed. Bound volumes 52-59 of the Tax Court Memorandum Decisions would be distributed after conversion to microfiche, since the title was now being published commercially. The FED LOG CD-ROM would not be coming since it had been classified as "For Official Use Only."

The Depository Administration Branch was monitoring and modifying PURLS as part of its numerous responsibilities in support of depository libraries. The item selection process had been changed in 1997 and the on-line application had enabled staff to work on other projects.

Thomas Downing noted that PURLS was a critical element in the FDLP electronic collection. He acknowledged the work of Michael Clark on the PURLS project. He also thanked OCLC, the Production Department and the Library Programs Service for their work on the substantial changes in PURLS software. PURLS would support efforts to provide continued access to electronic resources. As links changed, the Depository Administration Branch would substitute new links for old ones. As they learned of new URLs for old records, they would change them to PURLS on a record-by-record basis. They expected to gradually convert most in the months ahead. With LPS PURLS, libraries would not need to update their records locally when URLs changed.

Mr. Downing announced that effective this March catalogers would apply a collection level cataloging policy when cataloging Browse Electronic Title entries. He thanked Arlene Weible and the GODORT (ALA) Cataloging Committee for their assistance in establishing a satisfactory level of bibliographic control to many Internet works.

The Cataloging Branch was involved in the revision of ALA's 1984 edition of Cataloging Government Documents: A Manual of Interpretation for AACR2. Rhonda Marker, Head of Rutgers University Cataloging Department and member of GODORT, was editing this publication.

Mr. Downing said that the Depository Administration Branch had posted 2,728 entries to the Browse Electronic Titles Web page. They had processed 13,287 pieces to date. Most of their cataloging backlog, 6,858 pieces of work, was associated with serials, many of which had been received recently.

The Monthly Catalog CD-ROM and paper issues were late. There was also a delay with cataloging tapes which was caused by reassignments of data support staff at LC, and delays in GPO due to staff assignments to assure compliance with Year 2000 requirements.

The Web Monthly Catalog was moving towards 100,000 MARC records. Mr. Downing said that when links were broken, GPO would add a note "No longer available from the Internet." In response to Council's recommendation, they were presenting a more user-friendly display for users. For those interested in using a numeric MARC display, that would still be available.

Mr. Downing reported that they would again publish the paper edition of the Periodicals Supplement which had ceased in 1995. Costs saved in publishing the Abridged Monthly Catalog had made this possible. There would be no significant difference in the Periodicals Supplement. It would also be available for purchase.

Sandy Morton-Schwalb reflected on her work at GPO first as an Expert Consultant and now as a permanent staff member of the Library Programs Service. The Electronic Transition Staff consisted of LPS staff Joseph Paskoski and Lee Morey and one outside Expert Consultant, George Barnum, who was working on the FDLP Electronic Collection, Gateways, and visiting agencies. Ms. Schwalb reported on a new link from the FDLP Administration page to a virtual tour of LPS. She was also working on information on the mission and operation of ETS with Joseph Paskoski and Lee Morey. Ms. Morey had prepared a draft of the new recommended specifications for computer workstations and would like comments from depository libraries by May 5.

They had also been working on an initial collection of sites for the Browse Topics (subject) lists. Their goal was to update all topics on a quarterly basis. She requested volunteers for this task. There were 33 topics being maintained by volunteers.

ETS staff was also working on Gateway status. Step-by-step information on Gateway status could be found in the April 15 Administrative Notes.

She also said that the Electronic Transition Staff continued to work with other staff on other Web products including askLPS. The Department of Energy would roll out OSTI's Information Bridge on Wednesday. She acknowledged Kathy Chambers and Walter Warnick from the Department of Energy who had been working with GPO on this product for over eighteen months. The FDLP ERIC digital pilot project would be rolled out this summer and would contain public domain documents from January 1997. By July 1998 300 pilot depository libraries would be accessing the database with the remaining depository libraries accessing it by late 1998. A Century of Lawmaking site from the Library of Congress would be added to the Core Documents of U.S. Democracy site.

Volunteers were requested on GOVDOC-L for the NTIS pilot project. Twenty-six depository libraries had volunteered and from them twenty would be selected for this part of the project. LPS continued to provide feedback to the Foreign Affairs Documentation Center. Later in the conference there would be more discussion on content partnerships with the USGS and Cartographers Users Advisory Council representatives.

Dan Barkley reported that Sunday's Regional meeting was very productive and was attended by approximately 45 regional librarians or their representatives. Regionals are looking at partnerships with selectives and the need to rely on selectives for their expertise. He encouraged selectives to offer their assistance and support to their regionals. The regionals did not consider depository library work as a one-sided relationship. Electronic service guidelines would be presented later in the conference. The goal of the guidelines was to provide better service in an electronic environment. He reported that many Regionals were working on the State Plans, including adding electronic service components.

Promotion of Government information was discussed at the Regional meeting. A more proactive stance was suggested with the example of providing public access training on the Web beyond the campus.

The Regional meeting was a follow-up to the meeting held in Minneapolis last August. Both meetings provided a great opportunity for Regionals to share ideas. Chair Anne Watts expressed appreciation to the University of Maryland and GPO for hosting the Regional meeting.

Chair Anne Watts announced that the afternoon session would include reports from the committees, a review of the recommendations from the previous Council meeting, and a discussion of possible new recommendations.

Diane Garner summarized the report of the Statistics Committee's work on the Biennial Survey. She suggested that we concentrate our work on sections 3, 4, and 5 of the survey. She reported that the committee believed that the Biennial Survey should be consistent from year to year, or at least for three survey cycles. New questions or topics should be announced ahead of time. She suggested that experts in statistical methodology needed to look at the survey and suggest how to collect the data. She emphasized that the main issue was to formalize and standardize the Biennial Survey. The Committee did not look at content, believing they had neither the time nor the knowledge.

Ms. Garner identified an article about statistical reporting written by Bruce Morton 10-15 years ago. Data on the costs of operating a depository library could provide us a market basket cost similar to the Cost of Living Index. Data should include public service, bibliographic control, conservation, binding, reformatting, training, etc. She recommended that another committee work on this project.

Comments:

Several members of the audience suggested adding binding questions. The cost of binding the Serial Set was mentioned.

Mr. Baldwin stated that concentrating on public service aspects for public advocacy reasons would be helpful in talking to legislative people. Questions of definition are important but this was increasingly problematic. Separate data gathering for a cost survey was being discussed.

It was noted that defining depository libraries by type, size, and selection rates was important, as well as determining cost figures for different types of depository libraries.

There was some discussion of the difficulty of gathering uniform statistics or cost figures from libraries that vary widely in their organization and practices. The usefulness of statistics as leverage to obtain more resources was mentioned.

The possibility of hiring experts to work on the survey was raised. Mr. Buckley agreed that valuable information could be obtained by sample or enumeration. He noted the lengthy process entailed in the use of consultants by GPO.

Members of the audience expressed an interest in having the Biennial survey questions remain the same from one survey to the next, while having advance notice of any changes. Mr. Baldwin said that this was a trade-off. Some of the questions were in response to questions from the legislative branch. He indicated that LPS would need to have another way of collecting this ad hoc information.

Diane Eidelman reported on the Draft Depository Library Public Service Guidelines for Government Information in Electronic Formats. Copies would be distributed the next morning and the Guidelines had been posted on GOVDOC-L. Ridley Kessler and Dan Barkley would present the Guidelines. Julie Wallace asked for clarification about the depository libraries that might not be covered by the guidelines, such as court libraries. A question on whether Federal agency libraries were outside the guidelines was also raised. Mr. Baldwin said that GPO would review the guidelines to be certain that they are consistent with other guidelines and laws before finalizing them.

A number of wording changes were suggested. It was noted that some libraries had hardware installations that might make it difficult to comply with some of the requirements. A suggestion to coordinate the public service requirements with the "Recommended Specifications for Public Work Stations" was made.

Chair Anne Watts began the review of the Fall Council Recommendations.

Discussion ensued on the physical form of the printed copy of the Serial Set, and on the eventual production of an electronic Serial Set and what form it might take. Gil Baldwin reported that about 80% of the reports and 20% of the documents were now received in electronic form. GPO production staff are encouraging Congressional committees to become more electronic.

Council would continue to monitor and suggest enhancements to askLPS. Documents librarians are encouraged to consult it regularly. It was noted that it would take time to train people to consult askLPS.

Gil Baldwin said that GPO's response and additional information would be provided the next day in the presentation on the electronic collection. The scope of what would be in the collection would be expanded and many collection management issues would be addressed. There would need to be additional discussion on how the electronic collection would relate to withdrawal requirements and to the 5-year tangible versions.

Mr. Baldwin reminded the group that some issues were firmly established in Chapter 19 of Title 44. Mr. Buckley noted that in some quarters it was questioned whether electronic titles were viewed as "depository documents."

Thomas Downing and the Cataloging Branch staff were thanked for their work on the Web Monthly Catalog display.

T.C. Evans noted that the issue of using Z39.50 or SGML was part of GPO planning discussions. It was noted that the National Library of Medicine did not see a future in Z39.50, while it was also reported that some countries were translating databases for Spanish use and they would not be able to do that if they were not using Z39.50.

The issue of GILS compliant servers was raised, since some are accessible for searching only via WAIS. Mr. Evans said GPO was not moving toward proprietary software and Mr. Baldwin said that GPO was moving away from client software.

It was recommended that Council revisit the issue in the interest of the community. There was some discussion of using client software.

Further consultation with the depository library community was suggested.

Gil Baldwin said GPO was running into some problems but production staff continued to work to make this information available. GPO would appreciate feedback from people knowledgeable about legal citations.

Council members who attended the meeting on Sunday were pleased with the discussion. Council thanked both GPO and the University of Maryland.

Diane Garner requested the e-mail addresses of the new Council members. The omission of Council names and addresses from the list of attendees was noted. Mr. Baldwin said that the addresses were in the April 15, 1998 issue of Administrative Notes.

Chair Anne Watts called the meeting to order. She announced that there would be several presentations: the electronic service guidelines and the Statistics Committee report.

Dan Barkley directed people to look at the overhead transparencies and noted that there had been some wordsmithing since they were completed. He briefly reviewed the background of the drafting of the guidelines, which began at the Council meeting in Salt Lake City (October, 1996). During a discussion on State Plans, an interest was shown in service guidelines for electronic formats. This coincided with the evolving technical specifications requirements.

Dan Barkley and Ridley Kessler began work nearly two years ago in response to Council's request for assistance. Those guidelines are the result of their work. He reiterated that these were very general guidelines and that they were probably not very different from what many libraries were presently doing. The objective was to be consistent within one's own institution and with GPO. In response to a question from Carol Bednar, Mr. Barkley said they anticipated that these guidelines would be incorporated with other GPO guidelines. Mr. Barkley proceeded to read the guidelines as amended to date.

Guideline #1. All depository libraries should have a written policy regarding public services for Government information in electronic formats. This policy should contain provisions for no-fee access to computer workstations with CD-ROMs, diskettes, and the Internet. These should be equal to or exceed the services provided for other collections in the library.

Guideline #2. All depository libraries should offer access to electronic information for the general public. Attempts must be made to purchase hardware that meets the latest Recommended Specifications for Public Access Work Stations in Federal Depository Libraries as published in Administrative Notes (updated annually).

Guideline #3. All depository libraries should make tangible electronic products and services (CD-ROMs, floppy diskettes) available to the general public in a timely manner. For example, if a product is not currently loaded and/or supported on a depository library's computer workstation, the depository library should attempt to provide access to it within a designated time frame as determined by each library. If the depository library is unable to provide adequate access to and technical support of tangible electronic products, circulation of those products should be made available in accordance with the library's circulation policies of other non-Governmental tangible electronic products or other depository resources.

Guideline #4. All depository libraries should provide Internet access to Government information at no cost to the general public. Access should also include Telnet and FTP capabilities to encourage downloading and/or transmission of electronic data.

Guideline #5. Depository libraries are encouraged to develop home pages or bookmarks for Government information and/or work cooperatively with other depository libraries in their area to provide links to prominent or useful sites for the general public; such efforts would be in line with Section 8-6, (publicizing the depository collection) of the Guidelines for the Federal Depository Library Program.

Guideline #6. Depository library public service areas should have a capability for fax and e-mail delivery of Government information to distance users in accordance with existing policies in the library.

Guideline #7. Depository libraries are obligated by law to provide public access to depository receipts, including electronic Government information products. Depository libraries should provide the ability to download or print electronic Government information in accordance with GPO requirements and guidelines. Limits to or cost associated with printing or downloading shall be consistent with other public service provisions of the library.

Guideline #8. Whenever possible, depository libraries are encouraged to provide disk space on publicly available computers for temporary storage of electronic Government information for patron use.

Guideline #9. Depository libraries should provide appropriate reference service and help guides/documentation of tangible electronic products and the Internet for the general public.

Guideline #10. Depository libraries are encouraged to offer training for the general public in using tangible electronic products and Internet resources.

There was extensive discussion on the circulation of CDs. It was noted that depository libraries have different circulation policies and that circulation of CDs may not be consistent between libraries. Most libraries do not routinely circulate CDs while other libraries collect duplicates to circulate. Some libraries work with the state data center to have backups or purchase additional copies of selected CDs. Sheila McGarr said that GPO encouraged libraries to circulate CDs if they did not have equipment or software for the product, or sufficient expertise. Comparable treatment was important.

A question was raised on whether documents could be disposed of if they became available on-line or on CD-ROM. Ms. McGarr responded that the law had not changed although they would check with GPO's General Counsel for additional advice.

Chair Anne Watts formally thanked Dan Barkley and Ridley Kessler for their work on the draft guidelines.

Diane Garner acknowledged the members of the Statistics Committee and announced that there would be a recommendation emanating from their work. She briefly described what the Biennial Survey was and noted that last year it had appeared on the Web. GPO uses the data in various ways, including updating the Master database, management, inspections, and for reports to Congress. She also noted that GPO required only one question, "Does your library wish to continue as a depository library?" She said that there had been a lack of coherence over time because questions were often asked in response to immediate information needs.

The Statistical Committee has compiled the following "General Principles for Data Collection in the FDLP":

1. The data that are gathered should meet the needs of GPO and the program libraries for program management, for program advocacy, for reporting to Congress, for depository library management, for depository library advocacy, and to satisfy the requirements of the law;
2. The data should complement and be standardized with other major data surveys, insofar as possible, e.g. IPEDS, ARL, and the Public Library Data Survey;
3. Each data element should be sufficiently defined so that FDLs can complete the survey instrument with accuracy and consistency;
4. Data elements and definitions should be consistent over time. There must be compelling reasons to add or change data or definitions;
5. Program libraries should have sufficient advance notice of new data or definitions to allow them to prepare, e.g. if annual data are required, the libraries should know at least a year in advance;
6. The content, wording and methodology of the Biennial Survey should be reviewed and tested in advance by experts in statistical and survey methodology;
7. The content, wording and methodology of the Biennial Survey should remain relatively constant or should change only with advance warning. If other data are needed on an occasional or emergency basis, GPO should use other means or special surveys. With the assistance of the Depository Library Council, GPO should review the survey instrument biennially in the off years, looking at old responses and suggesting substantive and reasoned revisions. In general, a question should be of sufficient lasting import to stay on the survey for at least three surveys.

Diane Garner further stated that the Statistics Committee was looking at questions that would be valid over time and that would assist GPO in studying their relationships. She read the Statistics Committee's recommendations:

Ms. Garner said that the last recommendation would be reworded as a commendation since GPO had already made the Biennial Survey data available on the Federal Bulletin Board.

The audience understood why questions remained the same; but was concerned that there would be a proliferation of questions coming out. The audience suggested that perhaps there could be a standard part and another part could be a miscellaneous section. Ms. Garner indicated that their suggestions would be taken into consideration. If GPO needed immediate information, they could not wait for the Biennial Survey. A suggestion was made that GPO could use questions every year as a test. It was also suggested that the classification of collections by size be revised.

It was noted that the topic of the cost of being a depository library was so overwhelming that it should be considered separately, and outside assistance might be needed. Chair Anne Watts reported that the St. Louis Public Library was undertaking a three year cost-benefit study. She said that designing a cost study would take considerable time. She inquired if the audience was in support of looking at the cost of being a depository library. The audience responded with a show of hands in support. It was noted that information would be valuable, particularly when speaking to elected representatives who might not realize the contributions made by depository libraries. It was suggested that an alternative might be case studies to provide a baseline rather than do a thorough analysis as at the St. Louis Public Library.

Chair Anne Watts thanked Diane Garner and the members of the Statistics Committee.

Chair Watts asked if the audience had any questions from GPO's presentations on Monday.

There was some discussion about the priorities of producing the cataloging tapes, and the role of the Library of Congress in the process. Thomas Downing indicated that the problem was complicated and that GPO would be discussing a solution with the Cataloging Distribution Service of the Library of Congress.

Concern was expressed about the LPS response time to written self-studies. Sheila McGarr responded that they had been short-staffed and were rebuilding the staff.

There was further discussion on Congressional hearings being available on GPO Access. T.C. Evans responded that GPO would like that to happen but that it was probably not possible in the foreseeable future, because the files are not provided to GPO in electronic form.

The use of hot links in library catalogs was discussed. Several libraries reported that there had been some problems with broken links, but that PURLS would help alleviate the problem, and that using dumb terminals for accessing the on-line catalog freed up library computers for other uses. Broken links were a general concern. The audience was reminded that vendors provide changes and updates as part of their services.

Subsequent discussion concerned the Congressional Research Service (CRS) material being distributed to depository libraries. Two bills have been introduced into Congress, and librarians were urged to write letters to their Congressional representatives on this issue.

Fran Buckley said that this project was a way of recognizing developments in the electronic transition of the program. Previously, attention was focused on distribution; now, with the advent of technology, the transition would take a fresh approach, using library management tools in the development of a collection plan. More attention should be paid to content, collections or knowledge management. He thanked Duncan Aldrich for his work in bringing this approach to GPO. Mr. Buckley said that there was a new role, a need to institutionalize all the elements of information. The electronic collection framework was still a draft.

Gil Baldwin began the presentation on "Managing the FDLP Electronic Collection" by indicating that he would discuss the collection from the Government's perspective and George Barnum would cover the librarian's point of view.

Mr. Baldwin said that the focus on the electronic collection was based on a policy and planning document that LPS had been working on for months. They had what they were going to do, but not fully how they were going to do it. Under the GPO Access Act, GPO was taking responsibility for the life cycle management of electronic products. This was a corollary to the responsibilities of the regional depository libraries for tangible products.

George Barnum listed some key assumptions and guiding principles: no-fee access was a right of the people, all Government information that was statutory in nature was to be included, and there would be a central coordinating authority.

The implementation of the FDLP Electronic Collection's goal was predicated on several assumptions including the following: GPO Access would be the primary delivery vehicle, the mix of institutions and users would be diverse and complex, and products would be selected and added according to the needs and demands of constituents. Success would depend on several factors: cooperation is key; agencies must inform GPO of new products and changes; GPO must provide timely and accurate services; and GPO must facilitate partnerships. Mr. Baldwin continued the description: a variety of media and formats which would comprise the collection; the mix of media and formats would be adjusted to meet user need and advancing technology; copyright-like barriers would be avoided; standards-based tools would enhance access and empower a broad spectrum of users; and the experience and expertise of FDLP libraries would form policies and practices for managing the collection.

Eliot Christian inquired about the central coordinating agency/authority, stating that "authority" does not imply authority. Mr. Baldwin responded that the concept was not in a strict legal definition. This central authority is needed because agencies forget their responsibilities to depository libraries and the central authority is responsible for providing for public access. In further response to a question on the involvement of agencies in developing the plan, Mr. Baldwin reported that they had not gotten to that stage yet. This document was still under review within GPO. After that, they would share it with Council, then have a public comment period from agencies such as NARA. Mr. Baldwin also responded that they were not suggesting that anyone (e.g. partnerships) would assume sole responsibility. He said that partnerships recognized that no single entity could accomplish all of this alone. The responsibility of the Government (in this case, GPO) is primary, however.

In response to a question on the explanation of "copyright-like barriers," Mr. Barnum said they wanted to avoid problems when proprietary client software was selected by the agency. Obtaining licenses for public access required a great deal of work. Mr. Baldwin pointed out that the process is slowed when they are involved with proprietary software.

Further comments from Council included the suggestion that focusing first on the presentation of information was backwards and that it seemed better to focus initially on content. Mr. Baldwin responded that this document was speaking to a number of audiences.

Julie Wallace said that she was interested and pleased that GPO was including metadata.

A member of the audience said the real interest was access to information. Proprietary software was incompatible with permanent public access.

Mr. Baldwin continued with the presentation. The FDLP Electronic Collection would include electronic Government information products except those determined by their issuing agencies to be required for official use only or for strictly administrative or operational purposes which had no public interest or educational value. Publications classified for reasons of national security would also be excluded. The elements of the FDLP Electronic Collection were: (1) core legislative and regulatory GPO Access products; (2) other remotely accessible products maintained by GPO or other institutions with which GPO had agreements; (3) tangible electronic Government information products distributed to depository libraries; and (4) remotely accessible products which GPO would identify, describe, and link to, but which remained under the control of the originating agency. He continued that the public could use the Electronic Collection without depository libraries but depository libraries do add the value that the public needs. Open system standards would be encouraged.

A question from the audience was whether GPO was envisioning this as duplicating what agencies were doing on their own sites (like census reports). Would GPO say "Gee, Census is covering that?" Mr. Baldwin responded that GPO would like an understanding with the agency on the agency's responsibility to keep their information accessible. Things would be maintained at the agency site, but they would be considered part of this collection.

Tom Andersen said that one of the criteria would be permanent public access. Mr. Baldwin responded that if the agency made their access time short, then GPO would need to have some mechanism for making the information available long term. Considerable work had been done on criteria for what products were to be included in the collection and how to deal with them.

Another question from the audience was on what "facilities and resources of depository libraries" meant. Mr. Barnum said they had wrestled with this. They wanted further discussion on supporting every user including the lower end user in Gateways. GPO had focused on depository libraries and their users but recognized a lot of users were not coming in from there. They recognized depository libraries were adding a great deal of value. They needed users with whom they could talk. Mr. Baldwin reminded the audience of T.C. Evans' survey yesterday where he pointed out that they received double the return in responses from the depository libraries than from the general public.

Duncan Aldrich pointed out that the plan called for considerable investment in outreach by GPO to Federal agencies.

Mr. Barnum said there were three big questions in evaluation of the FDLP Electronic Collection: (1) did the product meet the criteria of 44 U.S.C. sections 1901-1902; (2) what was the value and importance to the user community; and (3) what priority did it have in relation to other products. He asked what did we already have in the program in print and was it an exact copy, noting that electronic versions can have subtle differences.

Continuing his presentation, Mr. Barnum explained that GPO was responsible for providing locator services that would include standard library descriptive and subject cataloging; GILS records; metadata records including persistent naming; indexers and robots; and the Pathway indexer/browser applications. GPO is also committed to both high-end and low-end users.

Compliance with ADA requirements is expected and would be guaranteed if GPO linked to another agency. They would attempt to provide text only where feasible and cost effective. There would be some redundancy and mirror sites for disaster preparedness and for rapid response. GPO might enter into agreements for mirror sites by sharing the burden of storage and maintenance. Mr. Baldwin continued that the storage of digital information would be accomplished through a variety of mechanisms: core legislative and regulatory material in GPO Access would remain on GPO servers, agency material might be resident on GPO servers, on agency servers, or managed cooperatively by partner institutions.

In response to concern for ADA accessible sites, Mr. Baldwin said that that would be addressed in the evaluation guidelines. Mr. Barnum added that the intent was to make as much available as possible. A person in the audience acknowledged that it was realized that GPO could not replicate all sites.

The audience was also interested in mirror sites, especially on the West coast where geographic equitability was desired. It was also asked if GPO would be overloaded with PURLS and mirror sites. Mr. Baldwin did not see why a PURL site could not be mirrored. They would have to look into that issue.

It was suggested that GPO needed to become more visible. A question was posed on whether usability issues would be discussed. Mr. Barnum said that they did not know how much more they could tell agencies what to do.

Another member of the audience reminded everyone that feedback to the agency was important. GPO could be a conduit between agencies and the Federal depository libraries. Gil Baldwin said that GPO was trying to provide a choice of formats in GPO Access, both PDF and ASCII. Agencies are responsible for complying with ADA requirements. GPO would ensure agencies that GPO Access would be in compliance. He continued with a description of organizational responsibilities. Within GPO, responsibility for the FDLP Electronic Collection would be vested in the Superintendent of Documents. He then enumerated the various responsibilities of the different services under the Superintendent of Documents.

Mr. Baldwin then addressed archival preservation and permanent access, noting that they were frequently asked about their relationship with what NARA was doing. He stated that GPO wanted to complement what NARA was doing and what other national libraries and partner institutions were doing. GPO's activities were not a substitute for agencies' responsibilities to NARA.

He repeated that GPO would migrate content where feasible and cost-effective to make Government information available to a wide spectrum of users. Funding would come from the Superintendent of Documents Salaries and Expenses (S&E) appropriations. Depository money would be funding GPO Access.

In conclusion, Mr. Baldwin identified the next steps. They include coordination with other entities; cooperative agreements with agencies for retention; short term strategic planning for hardware and software, system capacity, personnel; and long term planning as data was gathered.

Chair Anne Watts thanked Gil Baldwin and George Barnum. She announced the Council's working sessions and invited the audience to attend them.

Chair Anne Watts called the meeting to order. Ms. Watts announced copies of the draft of Council's recommendations and commendations were available for the audience. Ms. Watts reminded all present that these were drafts and that Council would be wordsmithing and writing the rationales for each before they would be posted on the Council Web page. Ms. Watts would read the recommendations, Council would comment, the audience would comment. She requested those coming to the microphone to identify themselves and their institution.

Council recommends that GPO adopt the "Draft Depository Library Public Service Guidelines for Government Information in Electronic Formats" as amended at the spring 1998 Depository Library Council. Council understands that GPO may need to make certain technical amendments.

Diane Eidelman presented the rationale: The eighteen-month process of creating the Draft Guidelines had provided the entire depository community with adequate time to comment, recommend changes, and dialog with one another. Many changes were made taking these comments and GPO's into account. It was time to move forward and finalize the Guidelines.

Audience questions/comments: None

Vote of Council: Approval

Council recommends that:

• GPO formalize and standardize the Biennial Survey;
• the core elements of the Biennial Survey remain consistent over time;
• the core elements of the Biennial Survey be compatible with other major data surveys (e.g., ARL, IPEDS, Public Libraries Data Survey) wherever possible;
• Council and FDLP libraries be consulted on the content of the survey instrument;
• experts in survey research be consulted on the methodology of the survey instrument;
• Council and GPO review the instrument in the intervening years between surveys;
• new questions to survey be announced with sufficient notice; and,
• If the Biennial Survey must be used to gather data needed on an occasional or emergency basis, those questions be relegated to a special section.

Diane Garner presented the rationale: The Survey needed to be standardized and rationalized. We would get our questions in the Survey and GPO would have theirs. The committee believed that the questions needed to be tested before being used. They wanted sufficient notice (1 year) and not be caught short. There was no content presented since the committee was not ready for that.

Audience questions/comments: None

Council questions/comments:

Chair Anne Watts noted that Council was looking for volunteers to serve on the Statistics Committee and work on the Biennial Survey component.

Vote of Council: Approval

Council recommends that the Public Printer allocate appropriate resources for GPO Access training and user support and asks the Public Printer to provide a progress report to Council on the GPO Access Learning Center. In addition Council recommends that GPO expand its GPO Access hands-on training efforts.

Diane Eidelman presented the rationale: the remarkable success of GPO Access as evidenced by the phenomenal growth in its use as well as the positive publicity that had appeared in the professional literature demonstrated the need for expanding training opportunities. Council reiterates the importance of training and user support in the continuing transition to a more electronic Federal Depository Library Program despite the reality of constrained funding. The entire GPO Access user community continues to benefit from the training efforts at conferences as well as on-site training and user support.

Audience questions/comments:

There was some discussion on the GPO Access Learning Center. Council had last year recommended a training center. GPO was developing it and would call it the GPO Access Learning Center. Council wished to be kept apprised of its development.

The Center's location in Washington, DC, was questioned. The general consensus was that there was an advantage in training Government employees and congressional staff, and that the Washington base would help broaden scope of training sessions.

Vote of Council: Approval

Council recommends that GPO resolve problems related to the processing of cataloging records so that they are available in a timely manner for the production of GPO's own products and for use by libraries. Specifically, Council urges GPO to: in the short term, intensify the current analysis of tape processing problems within GPO and with the Cataloging Distribution Service of the Library of Congress, to ensure that a usable product is available promptly each month; in the longer term, work toward a solution based on modernizing the entire technological infrastructure; keep the depository community informed of developments because of the importance of these records to the libraries and their users.

Julie Wallace presented the rationale: It would solve two problems: short term and long term.

Thomas Downing expressed his appreciation to Council for their recommendation. He reported that he would be meeting the next day with the Library of Congress Cataloging Distribution Service concerning two data sets, which would speed up distribution. He pointed out a potential problem with the Periodicals Supplement; but he believed that to be small and resolved soon.

Audience questions/comments: None

Vote of Council: Approval

Council recommends more frequent updating of the on-line Superseded List. Council and GPO should establish an ongoing committee of depository librarians to evaluate new items for retention decisions, with special emphasis on tangible electronic products.

Julie Wallace presented the rationale: Mounting the Superseded List on the Web has helped and the ability to update it more frequently was possible. CDs had been a particular problem. This would be a project in which others can participate and she requested people to volunteer. She also noted that Regionals should look at CDs in the likelihood that the Selectives would discard the CDs.

Audience questions/comments: None

Vote of Council: Approval

Council recommends that GPO provide the FDLP community with guidance on retention of tangible products that are available in the FDLP Electronic Collection.

Julie Wallace presented the rationale: Council believed that even with the on-line electronic collection, there would still be a need to retain tangible documents for five years because of the legal requirements. Council would like GPO to look at the existing law and see what was appropriate and the effects on alternative formats.

Audience questions/comments: None

Vote of Council: Approval

Council recommends that GPO work with the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House to encourage more Congressional committees to create electronic files of hearing transcripts, and that these be made available through the GPO Access database of Congressional hearings.

Mary Alice Baish presented the rationale: She mentioned the encouragement of GPO to work with Congress to develop a more comprehensive electronic collection.

Audience questions/comments: None

Vote of Council: Approval

Congress is currently considering legislation (S. 1578 and H.R. 3131) that would provide no-fee public access through the Internet to issue briefs and reports of the Congressional Research Service (CRS). If this legislation is enacted, Council recommends GPO pursue making these important Congressional materials available through GPO Access.

Mary Alice Baish presented the rationale: She reminded everyone of the previous demonstration of the CRS Web site which was available to Congress but not to the general public.

Audience questions/comments: None

Vote of Council: Approval

Council recommends that GPO continue to provide an update at Council meetings on its progress in implementing Z39.50/GILS compliance for the databases GPO maintains.

Eliot Christian presented the rationale: Council reiterated its concern, expressed in recommendations of October 1997, that GPO remain committed to the interoperability of its on-line services using the Z39.50 and GILS search interface specification. This particular interface was essential to GPO's ability to keep pace with technology evolution in its own information systems as well as to GPO's ability to enable access to information throughout Government.

Audience questions/comments: None

Vote of Council: Approval

Council recommends the formation of a committee to provide expert advice to GPO and Council on issues of information architecture in systems operated in support of the FDLP.

Eliot Christian presented the rationale: The complexity of systems supporting the FDLP would be a design challenge under any circumstances. The pace of change in information technologies compounds the challenge and makes it even more critical to attend to the basics of information architecture. Council and GPO could benefit greatly from an ongoing source or architectural advice focused specifically on the FDLP. Council believes such advice could be obtained directly from information architecture expertise available among institutions participating in the FDLP. The work of such a committee might also generate a greater awareness of the FDLP among computer science and networking leaders.

Audience questions/comments: None

Vote of Council: Approval

Chair Watts then read the Draft Commendations.

Council commends Dan Barkley and Ridley Kessler for their extraordinary efforts in the writing of the "Draft Depository Library Public Service Guidelines for Government Information in Electronic Formats." Their commitment to work on this project with the entire depository community and GPO is greatly appreciated.

Council commends GPO for its active and positive role in assigning and maintaining persistent names for cataloged Internet resources. In addition to the challenges of tackling a complex technical problem, GPO has demonstrated leadership in accepting the risks associated with choosing among competing technologies such as PURLS and DOIs. Council looks forward to GPO's continued leadership in this critical area.

Council commends GPO for making the raw data from the 1997 Biennial Survey available for downloading from the Federal Bulletin Board.

Council commends Kevin Reynolds of the University of the South for his implementation and maintenance of the on-line "Needs and Offers List." This service provides a rich opportunity to Federal depository libraries to exchange depository publications.

Council commends GPO for developing a new user-friendly default public display of entries in the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications, while retaining the MARC display as an option. Council believes that the public would more easily understand this descriptive-label display.

Council commends GPO for resuming publication of the Periodicals Supplement to the Monthly Catalog. The recent selection of this title by 990 depository libraries is a clear indication of the continuing need for this product.

Council commends the GPO and the Department of Energy for providing no-fee public access to the Office of Scientific and Technical Information's "Information Bridge" through GPO Access. This partnership between a major technical agency and GPO provides a convenient and cost-effective successor to the DOE depository microfiche collection.

Chair Anne Watts requested assistance from the FDLP for several of the following Council Action Items.

New Recommended Specifications (high and low) with clarification. Diane Eidelman was leading this.

West coast mirror sites for GPO Access. Duncan Aldrich and Thomas Andersen were in charge of this.

Restate charge to Statistics Committee for cost-study. Anne Watts and Diane Garner are leading this. Diane Garner said that the Statistics Committee would be working on a revised Biennial Survey, and the draft would be needed by October 1998.

Superseded List committee. Council was looking for assistance from the FDLP community.

Electronic Collection Plan

Chair Anne Watts expressed Council's appreciation to Sheila McGarr, Willie Thompson and the many people at the Government Printing Office who had worked to made this a great conference.

Public Printer Michael DiMario thanked Council for their work. He noted that this was Anne Watts' second term on Council and her numerous contributions to the Federal Depository Library Program. Mr. DiMario expressed appreciation to the institutions for sending representatives to the Conference. Mr. DiMario then presented outgoing Council members (Eliot Christian, Dan Clemmer, Lynn Walshak, Anne Watts, Richard Werking) with Certificates of Appreciation for their work on Council.

Chair Anne Watts thanked everyone. She then presented the Council gavel to incoming Council Chair Thomas Andersen. Chair Tom Andersen announced that Denise Davis would serve as the incoming Secretary. He thanked the outgoing Council members and, in particular, Anne Watts.

Chair Tom Andersen invited all to attend the fall Council meeting in San Diego. The meeting was adjourned.

Respectively submitted by:

Margaret Walker, Secretary
Depository Library Council