From lpsmail@access.digex.netFri Feb 16 12:20:41 1996 Date: Thu, 15 Feb 1996 16:10:11 -0800 From: Shipment Reply to: Discussion of Government Document Issues To: Multiple recipients of list GOVDOC-L Subject: ADNOTES: REMARKS AT ALA MIDWINTER: GIL BALDWIN THE MESSAGE BELOW IS FROM ADMINISTRATIVE NOTES, VOL. 17, #04 (Feb. 15, 1996) THE FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM IN TRANSITION Remarks by Gil Baldwin Chief, Library Division Federal Documents Task Force Government Documents Round Table American Library Association Midwinter Meeting Saturday, January 20, 1996 It's obvious that we have been well and truly cursed to "live in interesting times," as we face the most profound changes in the long history of the Federal Depository Library Program. Now change is not new to us; either in documents librarianship, Government information policy, or in the library profession as a whole. If you scan across the topics and themes of this Conference, it's readily apparent that the sea change from collections to connections that we're facing in the depository program parallels developments throughout our profession. At least from my point of view, just four short years from the millennium, the questions we have to deal with are no longer "Will we go electronic?" or even "Should we go electronic?" Today the issues have become "How fast should we go electronic?" and "How electronic will we go?" But even more closely focused; "What will be the effects of going electronic on libraries and users; and who's going pay the bill?" Section 210 of Public Law 104-53, the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act from FY 1996, required the Public Printer to include a plan for a rapid transition to an electronic Federal Depository Library Program in the fiscal year 1997 requests for the Superintendent of Documents Salaries and Expenses Appropriation. We developed the plan based on the discussions which have occurred during the GPO Study to Identify Measures Necessary for a Successful Transition to a More Electronic FDLP. We also used the input from the discussions which occurred at the fall 1995 meeting of the Depository Library Council in Memphis. Many of the points included in the plan were raised in Memphis and are expressed in the Council's recommendations to the Public Printer. It is a "tactical" plan, which covers the remainder of FY 1996 through FY 1998. One of the goals of this plan is to assist the Study Working Group in completing the study report and the longer-range strategic plan called for in Senate Report 104-114. The plan is based on our understanding of Congressional intent and direction, technological developments, and operational and budgetary realities. For the context of our FY 1997 budget request, we laid out our basic assumptions and policies and outlined actions necessary to accomplish the rapid transition to an electronic FDLP. Having lived through the scare of the proposed 50% cut in our budget that was incorporated in the House of Representatives version of our funding bill, we were absolutely convinced that our plan had to demonstrate aggressive movement toward the use of electronics. Although the planned transition may seem too fast to you now, just think where this program would already be if the House position had prevailed. With this plan we have bought time, and given us all two and a half years to accomplish these changes. All of the partners in the electronic FDLP will be significantly impacted in terms of new resource requirements, roles, and responsibilities. Many depository libraries will have to accelerate their plans to obtain public access work stations, and deal with the demand for local printing and downloading. They will have to balance the need to provide users with assistance in using electronic access services while at the same time providing access to the historical Government information contained in their pre-electronic documents collections. In the electronic environment where the FDLP information is free to all, public service, or intermediary role of the librarian, becomes the defining characteristic of a depository library. Therefore, libraries which intend to continue as depositories should have a strong commitment to public access. Any written plan reflects your best thinking and knowledge on the day it is completed; after that it begins to grow, evolve, and be modified. We have already received some thoughtful comments and input which could not be included in the original plan because of its tight deadline. I'm sure that we'll receive some more. We are very aware that there are some areas which the plan does not emphasize, largely because of its origination as a budget document. For example, we are very interested in comments on these two general areas: - the impact of this transition on the users of Government information, on libraries in general, and specifically on depository libraries; - the role of the agencies and GPO's relationship with, and services to, them. Plan Highlights I hope by now you all have taken the opportunity to read the plan. We published it in a special issue of Administrative Notes (v. 16, #18) and it's been posted on GOVDOC-L. There are also copies of the Administrative Notes issue here. As I said, we felt driven to put forward an aggressive plan for a fast transition. However, we made every effort to also be responsible. In my view, the two key strategic issues embodied in this plan are maintaining long-term access and ensuring equitable public access. As we work through the plan's contents we'll see these themes played out in several areas. As you can see, there's a lot covered in the plan, and I want to go over some specific areas this morning and give you some additional detail about what our thinking was, and the processes involved. Even though there's a lot of detail in the plan, it's important to remember that this plan is at the "what" level. It describes what we're going to do. It does not address the "how" or the "who." We expect some of that to come out of the discussions at this conference and some of the details are being worked out back at LPS. In the broadest strokes, this is what we think will happen. Transition to the Electronic Federal Depository Library Program The FDLP Today: Focus on Products The Electronic FDLP: Focus on Services Dissemination Access - to information at SOD sites - to agency databases LPS ships out physical products Users electronically connect to databases Information is in physical, tangible format Information is online, available via Internet GPO's responsibilities are short-term GPO assumes responsibility for long-term access However, before we review some of the plan's elements, I thought it would be useful to walk through the assumptions that guided us. In many ways, these assumptions are an extension of those which Mr. Kelley laid out to guide the discussions at Council. Basic Assumptions for the Transition to an Electronic FDLP 1. Based on our direction from Congress, we expect that nearly all of the information provided through the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP) will be electronic by the end of fiscal year 1998. Information which has been distributed to depository libraries in paper and microfiche formats will be available instead via remote electronic access or will be disseminated in a physical electronic format for local access at a depository library. To some extent this shift will occur regardless of how we manage the FDLP, as Federal agencies in all three branches of Government increasingly originate and publish their information electronically. In addition, during the transition period, we intend to convert publications received in paper to an electronic format for availability through the GPO Access services. 2. Typically, the information provided through the FDLP will be electronic, with the exception of a few select titles which must be available in paper as well as electronically. This assumption was predicated on our understanding of Congressional direction, and resulted in the development of the paper title core list. More on that later. 3. The costs of the transition to the electronic FDLP will be funded by reducing the distribution of paper and microfiche. We understand that showing some kind of savings is a critical consideration in this environment. This assumption drives the "Eliminating Duplication" segment of the plan. 4. In an electronic FDLP, the responsibility for ensuring long-term access shifts from the depository libraries to the Superintendent of Documents (SOD). In the electronic FDLP, connections to electronic access services operated under the authority of the SOD replace the geographically-dispersed collections of books and microfiche. This implies new and different tasks and expenses. To provide long-term access to data, SOD assumes such costs as data preparation for mounting, maintenance, storage, and ongoing costs to minimize deterioration and assure technological currency. It will be interesting to see if providing long-term electronic access proves to be cheaper or more expensive to the Government than the traditional print-based program. Let's take a minute here to define what we mean by long-term access. As expressed in the SOD policy statement incorporated in the plan, electronic information under the custody of the SOD will be maintained for access as long as usage warrants. This differs from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), which we're told defines long-term as 100 years or more. For practical purposes this means at least 5 years, with the upper limit based on an assessment of demand. We intend to coordinate with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) to offer electronic information which no longer warrants maintaining at SOD sites for the FDLP to NARA. However, we believe transfer to NARA for permanent preservation is the legal responsibility of the originating agency. 5. The GPO Access services, including the on-line service, storage facility, locator service, and the Federal Bulletin Board, will be the foundation for providing electronic access to Federal information for the FDLP. 6. Direct, no-fee access to Government information will be provided to the public by the GPO Access services as a function of the FDLP, and be funded by the Program. 7. We will coordinate with other agencies for depository library access to their electronic data. In the case of some agency databases which must be sold to be self-sustaining, the FDLP may not necessarily provide for direct, no-charge public access. However, depository libraries will be able to provide public access to these databases, either on-site, or by connecting through a gateway. 8. Some depositories need assistance in order to serve the public in an electronic FDLP environment. We are requesting funding earmarked for "technology grants" sufficient to assure at least one electronically-capable depository in each Congressional district. 9. Priority in this transition will be given to electronic access to materials already in the FDLP, with highest priority on high-demand titles. Current electronic information not presently in the FDLP will be given the next priority, with retrospective data receiving the lowest priority. We're aware that this approach has implications for fugitive information, and some of the comments we've gotten expressed disappointment that we didn't make fugitives a higher priority. Our reasoning here is that our first effort ought to be to prevent the information we already have some control over from going fugitive as the agencies migrate to electronic publishing. 10. This transition will require certain legislative changes. These are a key portion of the plan, since without these changes to the law, our ability to accomplish the transition will be limited. 11. Accomplishing this transition by the end of FY 1998 will require funding of the Superintendent of Documents Salaries and Expenses Appropriation at approximately the FY 1996 level. To this end we've requested $30.8 million for FY 1997. However, we expect that much of this money will be spent in different ways, to support the electronic transition. For example, much of what we previously spent on procuring paper or microfiche products for depositories will by FY 1997 be spent on preparing electronic files for inclusion in the GPO Access services, additional system capacity, and so on. KEY FEATURES OF THE TRANSITION PLAN Assistance to Libraries We intend to devote additional resources to promoting training and continuing education opportunities for depository librarians, to raise the level of knowledge and skills with electronic information resources. This approach will guide the development of future "Federal Depository Conferences" as we will provide hands-on training in the use of the GPO Access on-line services and facilitate training on other agencies' systems. Sheila will provide you with additional details on the conference plans in a few minutes. To the extent that public service and "intermediation" (I think I made up a word) characterize depository libraries in the electronic environment; we want to do as much as possible to assist librarians in obtaining additional training. So that we might better allocate our time and travel resources, we've put together some guidelines on "How to Request GPO Access Training or Demonstrations" [printed in Administrative Notes, v. 17, #2]. We feel there is potential for leadership growth among the librarians at the 53 regionals. Closer cultivation and coordination with the regional depository libraries and their directors should lead to a greater ability to rely upon the regional librarians as field coordinators for the FDLP. To this end, GPO is requesting that the statutory limitation on S&E travel be raised by $20,000 to $150,000 in FY 1997. If approved, we propose to bring the regional librarians together for a one-time conference, at our expense, for training, discussion of state planning initiatives, and a clarification of the regionals' role in the administration of the technology grants. We're thinking about an August or September 1997 time frame. The location is to be arranged, but we're open to having it outside of Washington. Minimum Technical Requirements Depository libraries are expected to provide access to electronic information identified in SOD Pathway services as well as information made available directly through the FDLP at no charge to the public. Fulfilling this expectation requires depository libraries to offer users access to work stations with a graphical user interface, CD-ROM capability, Internet connections, and the ability to access, download, and print extensive documents. Depository libraries are responsible for the startup and maintenance costs associated with equipment and Internet connectivity required to provide access to Federal Government information in electronic formats. However, depository libraries may charge users to recover the cost of printing information accessed electronically. These electronic capabilities are in accordance with the revised "Recommended Minimum Technical Guidelines" published in the January 15, 1995 issue of the Administrative Notes newsletter. Following the advice of the Depository Library Council to the Public Printer, these or updated capabilities will become requirements for all depository libraries in 1996. We know we need to revise these technical requirements to bring them closer to the current state of technology. In addition, we're grappling with the quantity issue; which is often expressed as "How many of these work stations should I have?" Some suggestions have included tying the number to the percentage of selections, to the numbers of users served, or to the average wait time of users in the queue at peak service hours. Again, I'd really welcome your thoughts on both of these issues. Technology Grants Some depositories lack the resources to acquire the requisite computer or telecommunications resources necessary to adequately serve the public in the electronic FDLP. Based on our most recent analysis of the responses to the 1995 Biennial Survey of depository libraries, nearly 25% of the depositories do not have public access work stations connected to the Internet. Many of these libraries are planning to offer public Internet access within two years, but over 12% (169 of 1,372 responding libraries) have no plans to provide Internet access to the public. The lack of public Internet access in depository libraries is a critical missing "last mile" in making Government information available electronically. If our plan is approved and fully funded, GPO intends to expend up to $500,000 in FY 1997 for "technology grants" to depository libraries. The technology grants are intended to ensure reasonable public access and proximity to at least one electronically-capable depository in every Congressional district. Based on preliminary returns from the 1995 Biennial Survey of depositories, LPS estimates that there are 11 Congressional districts in which no existing depository offers public Internet access. In addition, there are still 22 other Congressional districts in which there is no depository library. The technology grants, at up to $25,000 each, are to be used to acquire public access work stations and Internet connections in depository libraries. This one-time financial assistance will enable libraries to achieve a minimum level of capability to serve the public with on-line electronic Government information. Inspection Program Assuming that this plan is approved, the depository library inspection program will be redesigned, so that the resources devoted to periodic inspections can be reallocated to FDLP system support and services to depository libraries. Over the last eight years, 95% of the depository libraries inspected have been found in compliance with the requirements of the FDLP. Now that the depository library self-study has been adopted as an evaluation tool for use by the libraries, LPS intends that the basis for inspections will be that specified in 44 U.S.C. 1909, which states that "the Superintendent of Documents shall make firsthand investigation of conditions [in depository libraries] for which need is indicated ..." [emphasis added]. LPS will concentrate on site compliance inspections of those libraries which submit unsatisfactory self-studies, have major changes in staffing or facilities, have prior records of non-compliance, or if complaints are received from the public concerning depository library services. The LPS Depository Services Staff (DSS) will also be available to visit, consult with, and assist a depository library upon request. This change will permit the DSS resources to be reallocated to providing assistance to libraries during the transition to a more electronic FDLP. Paper Core List During the Congressional actions leading up to the FY 1996 Legislative Branch Appropriations Act there was considerable discussion of the use of electronic information technologies in the FDLP. Initially, the House of Representatives would have restricted GPO's authority to pay for depository library information to electronic information only, with the originating agencies being responsible for costs of print products. Another frequently expressed belief was that all information provided to the depositories should be in electronic format. It has become clear in planning for the transition to a more electronic FDLP that there is a core group of publications which must remain in paper. There are significant socioeconomic and technical impediments to a broad-based public ability to effectively access electronic information. There are other important considerations as well, such as the "official" nature of the information, and issues of long-term access and preservation. The "Paper Core List" titles contain information which is vital to the democratic process; information critical to an informed electorate. They support the public's right to know about the activities of their government. Maintaining these titles in paper format, whether or not they may be available electronically, is essential to the purpose of the FDLP. GPO's funding request includes dollars earmarked to continue providing these titles to depository libraries in paper format as long as they are published in paper. I want to give you background on how we went about this paper core list development. We started this process right after the fall Council meeting, and we pulled together a group within LPS that included over a dozen current and former documents librarians. I asked the group to identify titles which had such obvious importance that even the most ardent supporter of electronics would be convinced. We had some heart-rending sessions as numerous favorite titles were pushed out of the lifeboat, but I was convinced that we had to limit our list to truly high-impact titles, in order to prove the point that at least some print distribution was still valid. Transition Chronology Obviously this is going to be a complex transition to manage on the operational level, and some preparatory activities are necessarily already underway. For the remainder of FY 1996, LPS will concentrate transition activities on materials under our control. We will: - Begin elimination of duplication by offering only an electronic format except for core paper titles. We are beginning the process of identifying candidate titles that can be responsibly phased out, especially periodicals as the come to the end of a volume or year. - Develop initial standards for the format(s) of data to be mounted on the GPO Access service. Right now we expect that we will be using ASCII and Adobe PDF formats, which will support a wide range of functions, such as full-text searching, facsimile printing, and compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act for use by the visually-impaired. - Obtain contractual technical implementation assistance to accomplish the transition. We would still like to have the contracted study performed, to assist us in gathering data and taking an outside look at the best solutions for presenting information electronically. The much-revised statement of work for the contracted study is appended to the Transition Plan. - Establish one or more contracts to scan monographs which would have been distributed in paper or microfiche. Currently we are working with GPO Production Services on some tests of scanning. These results will assist us in developing the technical specifications for the statement of work in the event that a contract is required to absorb our projected workload. - Encourage agencies to provide SOD with electronic source files, particularly for serials or series publications. - Develop guidelines for technology grants. These two items have not yet been started, pending some feedback from Congress on whether this plan will be accepted and funded. We should have a better feel for this by the end of February, as our hearing before House Appropriations is scheduled for Feb. 21. - Inform the depository library community about the transition plan. FDLP System Requirements for Electronic Access Electronic information for the FDLP will be prepared for inclusion in the GPO Access service in two basic ways: scanning print format products, and from agency-supplied electronic source data files. We require the capability to accept scanned information and mount it on our system. This will pertain primarily to monographs which would have been distributed in paper or microfiche format. Serial or series publications will be maintained in their present format until a dependable, ongoing supply of electronic source files is assured. Scanning will be a short-term, transitional requirement assuming that the law is changed beginning in FY 1997 to require agencies to provide SOD with their electronic source files. However, even during the transition period, our scanning requirements could be very extensive. When agencies supply electronic files in a variety of formats, we require the capability to accept the various file formats, and to take whatever steps are necessary to mount them on our system. In order to gain the widest cooperation from agencies, we anticipate accepting data in whatever file format the agency offers. As an incentive for agencies to provide their data, SOD will not dictate a file format to the agencies. This approach is a direct outcome of the discussions held by the FDLP Study Working Group, which strongly indicated that we could not dictate specifications to the publishing agencies for their electronic files and still hope to get anything. However, based on a preliminary analysis, standard data formats for the GPO Access services are expected, in the near term, to be ASCII and Adobe PDF (Portable Document Format). In order to fully implement the use of the Open Text (GPO Access Phase II) software, SGML formatted files are required. In addition, there is a potential requirement to establish, at an SOD facility, on-line or "near line" access to CD-ROMs which have been, or could be, physically distributed through the FDLP. Before defining applications or candidate CD-ROM products for such a service, we need to identify, investigate and test appropriate technologies, and to explore the costs and benefits of alternative delivery mechanisms. I'm not going to go into the details of the requirements today. Rather, I want to make the point that the real value of this was for Documents, in the context of the FDLP, to express a set of general system requirements to GPO's Production Department. I don't know if you all are aware that Production actually operates the GPO Access services, runs the servers, modifies software, updates the data, and so on, with Documents in a customer role. This was a good opportunity for us to shape the development of GPO Access, which will be the principal vehicle for the electronic FDLP. Classification System Issues We are beginning to take a hard look at the Superintendent of Documents classification system, and how the transition will affect it. SuDocs classification has long been one of the hallmarks of our program. By assigning these unique identifiers to physical items, GPO has enabled libraries to shelve and provide access to their physical collections. However, such requirements are no longer valid when working with intangible electronic data. GPO expects that the application of the classification system will be reduced as the number of physical products in the FDLP declines. The "locating" function of the traditional classification system will be replaced by including the URI (Uniform Resource Identifier) data element in our records. We invest a substantial amount of resources in administering the SuDocs classification system and the related item number system. In managing this transition to electronics, we are faced with the necessity to redirect the efforts of our ever-declining staff. Many of the same personnel who are engaged in classification, shipping list preparation, item number system maintenance, microfiche contracting, etc., will be the same ones who must contact agencies and acquire electronic files. We must simplify our application of the SuDocs system, in order to reduce the amount of our resources currently devoted to it. This will mean changes must be responsibly thought out and implemented. Robin Haun-Mohamed, Chief of our Depository Administration Branch, will be the point person on scaling down the use of SuDocs classification system, but we cannot and should not do this alone. I'm here to ask GODORT to establish a work group or committee to work with us to develop some reasonable approaches, and to act as a sounding board for ideas that we may consider. Legislative Changes If we are to successfully accomplish this ambitious transition plan, it is imperative that certain legislative changes be enacted. To assure long-term access to electronic Government information, we proposed specific language for five new sections for Chapter 19 of Title 44. In my view, the most critical is the proposed Section 1921, the definitions. We took this opportunity to establish that electronic information, either in a tangible format, or online, is clearly in scope for the FDLP. And we defined the term "on-line public access" which is critical to the success of the plan. In the proposed language, "on-line public access" means that information is made accessible electronically over the Internet, or any successor network, without regard for the storage media which holds the data, or the searching mechanisms employed to access it. I thank you for the opportunity to give you this overview on the Electronic Transition Plan. We welcome your input and comments, and will make every effort to factor them into our efforts.