Technical Supplement To Be Discontinued in Paper

In October 1998, the Depository Library Council to the Public Printer made a recommendation to discontinue or consolidate "traditional" LPS products in tangible formats. As the Council noted, frequently updated online tools are more useful than print editions that are often dated by the time they are printed and distributed. LPS has begun implementing this recommendation by changing the List of Classes from quarterly to semiannual and reducing the number of copies distributed free of charge to each depository from two to one.

Effective December 31, 1999, LPS will discontinue the paper edition of Administrative Notes Technical Supplement. The Technical Supplement (item 0556-C, GP 3.16:3/3:) will continue to be available for download from the Federal Bulletin Board at http://fedbbs.access.gpo.gov/libs/webtechn.htm or as a searchable database at http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/dpos/webtech.html.

This change does not apply to Administrative Notes (item 0556-C, GP 3.16/3:3-2:), which will continue to be distributed in paper format to all libraries. Please make any comments to Robin Haun-Mohamed, Chief, Depository Administration Branch, by phone at (202) 512-1071 or by e-mail at rhaun-mohamed@gpo.gov.

New FDLP Brochure Distributed

A new brochure entitled "Keeping America Informed" for promoting the Federal Depository Library Program was distributed recently. All depository libraries have received a shrink wrapped packet containing 100 flyers on shipping list 99-0221-P dated 5/3/99, item number 0556-C, SuDocs class number GP 3.2:IN 3.

The stock number is 021-700-00534-9. Additional packets of 100 can be obtained at no cost by contacting:

Item Lister and UnionL Now Updated Weekly

Item Lister, at www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/dpos/itemlist.html, and UnionL (the companion files of Item Lister data for all depositories) on the Federal Bulletin Board at http://fedbbs.access.gpo.gov/libs/unionl.htm, are now updated weekly.

Item Lister/UnionL data files will be downloaded from GPO's mainframe computer each Thursday evening, and uploaded each Friday to the Web and Federal Bulletin Board to update Item Lister and UnionL.

Documents librarians are strongly encouraged to check item number drops made using the Amendment of Item Selections application at www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/dpos/amendment.html, by reviewing the Item Lister. Drops made from Friday through 6:00 p.m. on the following Thursday should show up in the subsequent Friday's Item Lister files.

If your library’s deselections are not reflected in Item Lister, please contact Joe Paskoski (jpaskoski@gpo.gov ; phone (202) 512-1698; fax: (202) 512-1432), and forward a copy (preferably by e-mail or by fax) of the Web page or e-mail confirmation you received for your dropped item numbers.

FDLP Guidelines on Substituting Electronic for
Tangible Versions of Depository Publications

At its spring 1998 meeting, the Depository Library Council asked GPO to provide guidance on retention of tangible publications that are also available in the FDLP Electronic Collection. In response to the Library Programs Service’s (LPS) request, GPO’s General Counsel issued a memorandum opinion in the fall of 1998 concerning the legality of withdrawing tangible formats and replacing them with on-line electronic equivalent versions.

The following guidelines are based on this opinion, the 1984 formal opinion regarding commercial on-line equivalents of depository publications, and the 1985 memorandum opinion regarding substituting microfiche for print versions.

In 1993, Congress passed the GPO Electronic Information Access Enhancement Act, P.L. 103-40, whereby it expressed its clear intent for GPO to use electronic technology to make Government information more accessible to the greatest number of people. This objective is stated in the 1996 Study to Identify Measures Necessary for a Successful Transition to a More Electronic Federal Depository Library Program.

A depository is permitted to replace tangible versions with electronic equivalents provided the electronic version is complete, official, and permanently accessible. GPO Access databases on the List of Official GPO Databases that May Be Substituted for Tangible FDLP Products meet these requirements.

In keeping with the free access provisions of the FDLP, as required by law, Government information in electronic form must be free of charge to the user.

Retention of substituted materials must follow retention rules for the given depository. For example, a selective depository may substitute materials if held less than 5 years, must offer the tangible products to the Regional, and must receive the Regional’s permission to dispose of the tangible material. If permission is not granted, the selective must keep the tangible material but may apply at a later date for approval to dispose of the tangible products. If permission is granted, the tangible materials must be offered to the Regional and other selectives through disposal lists, Needs and Offers, etc., as is the practice for materials older than 5 years.

Tangible products appearing in the Superseded List that are substituted with an electronic equivalent may be superseded in the normal fashion provided they are included on the List of Official GPO Databases that May Be Substituted for Tangible FDLP Products. Libraries are encouraged to offer significant superseded sets on disposal lists, Needs and Offers, etc. No library is required to substitute electronic versions for paper, microfiche, CD-ROM, etc.

A key component of an electronic FDLP is the establishment of the FDLP Electronic Collection. GPO Access full-text databases comprise a significant portion of the FDLP Electronic Collection. GPO assumes the responsibility for determining that the GPO Access electronic version is the equivalent of a tangible version. It is these full-text official electronic versions on the List of Official GPO Databases that May Be Substituted for Tangible FDLP Products which depository libraries may substitute for tangible (print, microfiche and compact disc) versions.

Detailed information about Managing the FDLP Electronic Collection: A Policy and Planning Document can be found in the hardcopy publication at SuDocs class number GP 3.2:C 68 or www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/dpos/ecplan.html.

Depository librarians should use professional judgement and consider patron characteristics, usage patterns, community needs, research requirements, and collection development policy when determining if electronic-only access is best suited for a given title. Issues to consider include:

• Is the title better suited in another format?
• What is its scope, purpose and intended audience?
• Is the title authoritative?
• What is the date range or coverage?
• Is the information time sensitive?
• Is the title's electronic presentation comparable to the tangible version?

Electronic-only information may require more staff time to learn, train, and assist patrons. Staff levels must be adequate to do this and other required depository tasks.

Electronic-only information may limit the number of patrons who can use all parts of the collection at one time. The library must be committed to funding for future upgrades of computer hardware, printers, and software to ensure adequate numbers of computer workstations for public access to electronic Government information.

Each depository library’s policies for electronic formats and Internet use must be within the guidelines established by the FDLP. The Depository Library Public Service Guidelines for Government Information in Electronic Formats can be found at www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/dpos/pseguide.html, and the FDLP Internet Use Policy Guidelines can be found at www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/dpos/ad011599.html#1.

The library should properly reference the substitution so it may be easily located and accessible to users. This can be accomplished by creating shelf dummies, OPAC/shelflist notes, or Web links.

A Regional’s disposal guidelines should include cooperation among depositories to ensure that one or more libraries in a state or region still retain a tangible version. The substitution guidelines can be negotiated in a State Plan. Maintaining a viable copy of these titles in tangible format within a state or region is still a part of a Regional’s mission. A Memorandum of Understanding between the Regional and other depository is a mechanism to ensure that a tangible copy is available in perpetuity.

With the assistance of the Depository Library Council, Library Programs Service (LPS) has revised the Biennial Survey that will be conducted later this year. The purpose of the Biennial Survey as stated in the enabling legislation, 44 USC §1909, is to report on the conditions in depository libraries. To do this and to meet Council’s recommendation to standardize the survey to allow longitudinal studies, the survey was derived primarily from the questions posed to depository librarians during the self-study and on-site inspection processes. LPS will mail the survey in October to be completed on the Web by December 1, 1999. A draft version appears below and LPS welcomes any suggestions for further revision. There will be hypertext links to policies in the Web version. Please send your comments to Sheila McGarr, smcgarr@gpo.gov, no later than July 15, 1999.

1. Enter your depository library number: (e.g., 0001, 0024A, 0681, 0681A)
2. Enter your password:

3. Enter your e-mail address here to receive a confirmation of your Biennial Survey responses:

Depository Library Number: 0123

Congressional District: 99

Institution Name: Mary Doe College

Library Name: Jones Library

Street Address: 100 West University Blvd.

City: Anytown

State: WA

Zip +4: 98765-1234

Library Director’s Title: Dr.

Library Director’s Name [First]: Shelly D.

Library Director’s Name [Last]: English

Documents Librarian’s Title: Ms.

Documents Librarian’s Name [First]: Jane S.

Documents Librarian’s Name [Last]: Smith

Documents Librarians Phone Number: (316) 575-2855:282

Public Service Phone Number: (316) 575-2855:217

E-mail address: jsmith@doe.edu

Fax Machine Phone Number: (316) 575-8000

Depository Web Site URL: http://www.library.doe.edu/govdocs/govdocs.html

I have reviewed my library’s PROFILE information above, and (choose a or b):

• a. All the information is correct
• b. Some of the information is incorrect, and the corrections were submitted to LPS using the Depository Directory Form above

1. Do you want to remain in the Federal Depository Library Program? q Yes q No

ß If you answered "No," skip the remaining questions and write a letter to the Superintendent of Documents indicating that the library wishes to relinquish its status as a depository for U.S. Government publications.

COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT

2. How many cataloged and uncataloged items are in your library system? Include Federal depository and non-depository materials, all formats, and all collections and libraries under the purview of your library director.

3. Depository’s selection rate from Item Lister? __________ %

4. Do you have a collection development policy for U.S. Government depository documents?

q Yes q No

If yes, was it revised within the last five years? q Yes q No

5. Are Federal depository documents integrated into the library’s main collection? q Yes q No

6. Are you substituting official online resources for tangible depository materials? q Yes q No

BIBLIOGRAPHIC CONTROL

7. Do you provide piece-level records for all depository receipts? q Yes q No

8. Is your shelflist for the depository collection (Check all that apply):

9. Is the processing of depository receipts integrated into the processing unit for other library materials? q Yes q No

MAINTENANCE

10. Are written binding and replacement policies in place? q Yes q No

11. Does the library have a disaster plan in which the Federal depository collection is included?

q Yes q No

12. Is the collection weeded on a regular basis? q Yes q No

13. Are documents included in the library’s major preservation and conservation activities (e.g., binding, encapsulating, materials moved to climate controlled areas)? q Yes q No

14. Is the majority of the print depository collection arranged using the SuDocs classification?

q Yes q No

HUMAN RESOURCES

15. Number of FTE (full time equivalencies) staff devoted to depository operations (e.g., Based on a 40-hour work week, for example, if four librarians spend 100 hours per week on depository activities report 2.5 FTE for librarians):

______ Librarians

______ Support Staff

______ Other (students, volunteers, etc.)

16. Is the depository operation an independently administered unit (i.e., responsible for procedures and policies)? q Yes q No

If "No," with which area(s) is documents most closely associated?

q Acquisitions

q Administration

q Cataloging

q Reference

q Special Collections

q Subject Collection (e.g., business, social sciences)

q Other, please specify: ______________________

17. Does the library administration budget for attendance at meetings and continuing education activities for professional staff? (Check all that apply)

q Local

q State

q Regional

q National

q Does not support

18. Does the library administration budget for attendance at meetings and continuing education activities for support staff? (Check all that apply)

q Local

q State

q Regional

q National

q Does not support

PHYSICAL FACILITIES

19. Since the last on-site inspection of your library, has any construction, remodeling, or relocation affected the depository operation? q Yes q No

20. Are there barriers to depository resources (print and electronic) for persons with disabilities?

q Yes q No

21. At current selection rates and with regular collection maintenance, is there five years of growth room for all depository formats ?

Print q Yes q No

Microfiche q Yes q No

CD-ROMs q Yes q No

Maps q Yes q No

22. Does the library meet the requirements for "Public Access to Electronic Information Provided Through the Federal Depository Libraries," Administrative Notes, v. 17 #7, May 15, 1996? q Yes q No

23. Does the library have computer equipment for the physically challenged that uses assistive

24. Depository CD-ROMs are currently accessible:

PUBLIC SERVICE

25. How many hours per week is the library open? __________

26. How many hours per week is there professional level assistance at a reference desk that services the depository collection? __________

27. Is there a service desk for the depository collection that is maintained separately from the library’s main reference desk? q Yes q No

28. Does your library have a written access policy for the depository collection? q Yes q No

30. Does your library have a written policy for FDLP Internet use? q Yes q No

31. Are any U.S. depository documents included in the library’s catalog? q Yes q No

32. What percent of current depository receipts are included in the library’s catalog?

________ %

33. Are Federal Government Internet sites included in your library’s catalog? q Yes q No

If "Yes," are they active hypertext links? q Yes q No

34. How are library staff regularly made aware of new Government information products, services, and resources? (Check all that apply)

q Regular staff meetings

q E-mail

q Demonstrations

q Hands-on training sessions

q Help guides created

q No regular program

35. Do you promote your participation in the Federal Depository Library Program through your library’s web page? q Yes q No q Do not have a web page

36. Do you provide reference service through e-mail or your web site? q Yes q No

37. Is the library’s catalog available via (Check all that apply):

q Dial-in access

q Internet

q Network with other libraries

q Not applicable

38. The library’s promotion (e.g., flyers, newspaper articles, etc.) of the depository to the general public can best be described as:

q Active, on-going promotion to the general public

q Infrequent promotion to the general public

q No promotion to the general public

39. On average, how many patrons use the depository collections or services each week (including all incidents of use, i.e., in person, phone, fax, e-mail, etc.)? You may choose a week to sample. This refers to the number of people using depository materials, not the number of people who enter the library. ___________

40. Has your library conducted user surveys or other studies to determine the quality of depository services? q Yes q No

41. Does your library charge a fee for any of the following depository services? (Check all that apply)

q Printer paper

q Formatted floppy diskettes

q Fax

q Extensive reference service

q None of the above

q Other, please specify: __________________

COOPERATIVE EFFORTS

42. Is your Federal depository operation governed by a State Plan for providing government information services, including such elements as interlibrary cooperation, advisory group, coordination of training, etc? q Yes q No q Don’t know

If "Yes," has the Plan been revised within the last five years? q Yes q No

43. Do you use the following? (Note: hypertext links to the these services will be provided in the final survey insturment)

askLPS q Yes q No & if "No," why not?

q Did not know about it q Know about, but not how to use it q Not useful

Documents Data Miner q Yes q No & if "No," why not?

q Did not know about it q Know about, but not how to use it q Not useful

Enhanced Shipping List Service q Yes q No & if "No," why not?

q Did not know about it q Know about, but not how to use it q Not useful

Federal Bulletin Board q Yes q No & if "No," why not?

q Did not know about it q Know about, but not how to use it q Not useful

FDLP Electronic Collection q Yes q No & if "No," why not?

q Did not know about it q Know about, but not how to use it q Not useful

Government Information Locator Service (GILS) via GPO Access q Yes q No & if "No,"

why not?

q Did not know about it q Know about, but not how to use it q Not useful

GPO Access Databases q Yes q No & if "No," why not?

q Did not know about it q Know about, but not how to use it q Not useful

GPO’s Online Catalog of U.S. Government Publications q Yes q No & if "No," why

not?

q Did not know about it q Know about, but not how to use it q Not useful

Pathway Locator Services:

Browse Electronic Titles q Yes q No & if "No," why not?

q Did not know about it q Know about, but not how to use it q Not useful

Browse Topics q Yes q No & if "No," why not?

q Did not know about it q Know about, but not how to use it q Not useful

Federal Agency Internet Sites q Yes q No & if "No," why not?

q Did not know about it q Know about, but not how to use it q Not useful

Searchable Agency Databases q Yes q No & if "No," why not?

q Did not know about it q Know about, but not how to use it q Not useful

Search the Federal Government q Yes q No & if "No," why not?

q Did not know about it q Know about, but not how to use it q Not useful

Sales Product Catalog q Yes q No & if "No," why not?

q Did not know about it q Know about, but not how to use it q Not useful

Using your most recently completed fiscal year, please provide the following information. If it is necessary to estimate, please do so.

The following information is based on ____________ fiscal year.

O-1. Salaries and Benefits. Include all full and part-time staff who were identified in question 14 above. If staff only work part-time on depository activities, estimate that portion of their time that deals with Federal depository activities. Round your answer to the nearest thousand dollars.

O-1A. How much money was spent by your library on salaries for staff working with the Federal Depository Library Program? Include benefits, if possible.

$ ___________________

O-1B. Does this figure include benefits? q Yes q No q Don’t Know

O-1C. Explain any unusually large expenditures (e.g., temporary employees for special projects):

O-2. Library Materials and Services. Include print and electronic resources, purchases from the sales program, trade publications, subscriptions, online services, site licenses, bibliographic services, preservation, binding, and any other collection resource that supports the depository operation. Round your answer to the nearest thousand dollars.

O-2A. How much money has your library spent on library materials and services that support the depository operation? $ __________________

O-2B. Explain any unusually large expenditures (e.g., received special allocation for one-time purchases):

O-3. Equipment, Furniture, and Computers. Round your answer to the nearest thousand dollars.

O-3A. How much money did your library spend on equipment, furniture, and computers in support of the depository operation? $ ________________

O-3B. Explain any unusually large expenditures (e.g., new building to furnish, grant money for computer upgrades):

O-4. Training and Travel. Include GPO or agency-sponsored events, professional library meetings, meetings in your state, and computer or other specialized training. Round your answer to the nearest thousand dollars.

O-4A. How much money did your library spend on depository staff for training and travel?

$ _________

O-4B. Explain any unusually large expenditures (e.g., training for new staff or new library system):

O-4C. How much money was spent by depository staff that was not reimbursed? $ _________

Good morning! It is a pleasure to be here with you today and to provide an overview of recent Cataloging Branch operations. My remarks will include comments on operations, efforts to recruit a serials cataloger, the by now familiar Persistent Uniform Resource Locators, or PURLs, URLs within cataloging records, OCLC’s Cooperative Online Resource Cataloging, or CORC project, and information regarding versions of the Monthly Catalog, the Periodicals Supplement, and the Congressional Serial Set Catalog. I will conclude by noting some of the issues that we look forward to discussing with Council’s Cataloging and Locator Services Committee.

The transition to a more electronic Federal Depository Library Program has produced a complex assortment of interrelated works in all media. During the first five months of Fiscal Year 1999, approximately 10,000 works in various media were received for cataloging. Approximately 11,000 of these works were processed, leaving a balance of approximately 10,000 works, mostly serials, to be processed. Most of the approximately 160 Browse Electronic Titles (BET) awaiting cataloging also consist of serials.

Given that our backlog is concentrated in serials, we are investigating the feasibility of a contract to procure commercial serials cataloging services to assist in reducing this backlog. We also expect that we will succeed in efforts to recruit a serials cataloger for a recently vacated position.

As noted in a recent message to GOVDOC-L, a time lag of six to eight weeks from the date of a shipping list until the appearance of a Monthly Catalog for works in microfiche and CD-ROM is not unusual. Because of a correlation between titles that many people consider "important" and what is distributed in paper or published via Internet sites, most works distributed in paper and those that are made accessible via Browse Electronic Titles (BET) are cataloged within approximately two weeks of shipment or posting.

A recently advertised vacancy for a serials cataloger closed on March 19. This position was announced on GOVDOC-L, CONSER, and SERIALs discussions lists and on Web sites maintained by the Office of Personnel Management and the Government Printing Office. When hired, the incumbent’s efforts will be focused on cataloging Internet related serials. We should see positive effects on reducing this backlog within some months after this person has been selected and trained.

During the first week of April, 1999 a new policy concerning the display of PURLs and URLs in Monthly Catalog records went into effect. This policy requires use of one subfield "u" per 856 field for recording a PURL. This policy also stipulates that, when re-establishing links to records that had been accessible via a URL, the URL that was in effect at the time the PURL was assigned is to be recorded either in the 530 field (multiple format record) or the 538 field (electronic only record).

As with other Internet related cataloging policies, we expect to make this policy available for review at our Web site. To give a sense of how quickly policies may change in an electronic environment, I would like to add that, based on continuing discussions, we have already modified our URL policy by stipulating that the URL in effect as of the time the work is initially posted at BET with a PURL is recorded in a note.

Given the information value that URLs have for some people, they will be recorded in either the 538 or 530 note field, as appropriate. I must emphasize that recording URLs in the 530 or 538 note field is for information purposes only, not access. We will do our best to maintain access via PURLs in the 856 field by maintaining our PURLs server. We are not able, in addition, to maintain access by frequently modifying URLs in note fields. Again, note fields are for information, not access. At the present time, we use PURLs for access because the PURLs server is a more amenable environment for changing URLs than are bibliographic records.

These policies are based on consultation with Carol Bednar, Chair, Depository Library Council Locator Services Committee, members of the American Library Association’s (ALA) Government Documents Round Table (GODORT) Cataloging Committee, and with the CONSER Coordinator at the Library of Congress. We appreciate the advice of these groups and colleagues and expect that the application of this policy will assist people to identify appropriate access-related data elements in GPO produced Monthly Catalog records.

As members of the Federal Library and Information Center Committee (FLICC), we are actively involved in FLICC sponsored efforts to investigate the potential that OCLC’s CORC (Cooperative Online Resource Cataloging) project may have for providing access to works published via the Internet.

At present, CORC is a research project launched by OCLC staff to investigate the feasibility of producing brief bibliographic records to provide access to Internet related titles. OCLC personnel have advised us that, to start this project, OCLC has extracted data from several thousand GPO produced OCLC records to "seed" the CORC database. At this time, the direction this project may take is not entirely clear. Various issues of significance have not been defined precisely. One of our catalogers will attend a FEDLINK sponsored CORC training session at the Library of Congress later this month. We look forward to continued involvement with CORC, especially as it may assist us in identifying opportunities to improve the scope or timeliness of our cataloging and locator services.

The Web edition of the Catalog consists of approximately 115,900 records. Approximately 8,500 of these records contain PURLs and/or URLs. At present, approximately 2,500 Monthly Catalog records contain PURLs. Approximately 6,000 additional older Monthly Catalog records contain URLs in the 856 field. As broken links in records with URLs are re-established, these works are made accessible via PURLs in the 856 field. At the time these PURLs are assigned, the URL that was most current at the time the resource was made accessible via PURLs is recorded in either a 530 or 538 note field.

Library Programs Service staff devote increasing amounts of time to restoring electronic access to electronic works. When our PURLs checking routines identify a broken link in a bibliographic record with a PURL, we restore access by updating the PURL lookup table on the GPO PURL server with the active URL.

Maintaining access through PURLs resolver software is intended to eliminate the need for most librarians to maintain access by updating address data in GPO produced records in their OPACs.

I would like to call your attention to a handout that is available at the back of the room. This handout represents a significant re-design of the search page and related pages of the Web edition of the Catalog of United States Government Publications www.gpo.gov/catalog.

We have given the catalog application a new look and, in doing so, we believe we have significantly improved the quality of information about the catalog and how to use it in the most effective and efficient manner. Information includes the history of the catalog, what it is, and advice on basic, advanced, and specialized searching. In keeping with our objective of making this resource into a National Online Public Access Catalog for United States Government publications, we have sought to provide a search screen, information about the catalog, hot links to relevant cataloging policies, and search strategies in an intuitive and "user-friendly" presentation.

Speaking of "user-friendly" displays, we are pleased to announce that we now have a "user-friendly" display of records. We are grateful to our Production Department for its efforts to create new display options that offer users the opportunity to display "user-friendly" records with named data elements for the most significant elements of potential interest to most catalog users and an option for a complete USMARC numeric tagged record. The "user-friendly" display, as you will see from the handout, should facilitate use and understanding of bibliographic information by public users.

The complete CD-ROM edition of the Monthly Catalog, which consists of two CDs, contains approximately 55,000 records. The combined 1996 and 1997 CD-ROM (with their respective Periodicals Supplements) should be retained for the near future. We expect that the January 1999 issue of the CD-ROM Monthly Catalog edition, which will include all records for 1998 and 1999 to date, will contain the Periodicals Supplements for 1998 and 1999.

A contract for producing the CD-ROM edition was recently re-awarded to American Multimedia, of Burlington, NC. New contract specifications requiring the contractor to receive information for jewel case inserts via electronic means should assist in more rapid product availability than is presently possible.

The 1999 paper edition of the Periodicals Supplement was distributed in March of this year. These Periodicals Supplement records will be included in the January 1999 and subsequent issues of the CD-ROM edition of the Monthly Catalog.

We estimate that the Congressional Serial Set Catalog for the 103d Congress will be published sometime during the summer of 1999. Approximately 1,200 records are expected to be included in the Serial Set Catalog.

One of the most important aspects of Council is the opportunity to consult with colleagues from throughout the United States. I would like to conclude remarks by noting how much we value the opportunity to meet with members of the Cataloging and Locator Services Committee to discuss a range of issues associated with locating and providing bibliographic control of important works published in all media, including those that are made available via the Internet.

This committee is chaired by Carol Bednar. Committee members include Maggie Farrell, Diane Eidelman, Andrea Sevetson, and Julie Wallace. We will be meeting in the Maryland Room tomorrow afternoon from 3:45 p.m. until approximately 5:00 p.m. Topics include cataloging and locator services, the mix of current services, the potential benefits of eliminating the distinctions between serials and periodicals, re-examining the need for availability records, and possible enhancements to the Periodicals Supplement. Because many of these topics could affect the distribution of cataloging records, we have invited representatives from Marcive, Auto-Graphics, and the Cataloging Distribution Service, Library of Congress. We look forward to worthwhile discussions and invite those of you with interests in these topics to attend this meeting.

I would like to conclude remarks by thanking you for this opportunity to share information. This is an exciting time to work together to create an electronic collection and a more electronic Federal Depository Library Program. I look forward to many useful discussions during the next few days. Thank you.

Library Programs Service Proposals
Spring 1999 Depository Library Council Meeting

April 12 – 15, 1999

Eliminate the production of availability records for all serial and multipart monograph tangible and electronic products for the Monthly Catalog.

This proposal covers only issues related to availability record production for serial and multipart items. A separate investigation is needed to address the issue of availability record production for map products. The proposed solutions suggested here should be considered as interim solutions.

• Would free up cataloging resources to be allocated to other work. Staff time now required to gather and input local bibliographic data for availability records could be used for other cataloging and processing activities.

• Would eliminate unique local practices that may cause confusion to some end users.

• Availability record A bibliographic record that contains information about a specific issue of a serial title or a part of a multipart set in local data fields.

• Contin A publication issued 3 or more times a year

• Master serial record A serial record that includes information that relates to all issues of a serial title.

• Multipart set A bibliographic record representing a multipart set includes information that relates to all issues of the multipart set. This open entry record is modified each time a new volume or part of the set is received.

• Produce An online transaction on the OCLC database that creates a record containing unique bibliographic and issue specific information for Monthly Catalog production. Specific field information created during a produce transaction does not remain in the OCLC database.

• Serial A publication issued 2 or fewer times a year.

• Update An online transaction on the OCLC database that adds or changes information on an existing OCLC record.

Historically, the printed Monthly Catalog was the primary tool GPO provided to the depository community for the identification of items. Availability records were created to provide current awareness for materials processed by the Cataloging Branch in the preceding month and are actually a procedural holdover from the pre-automated Monthly Catalog production era.

The sheer volume of serials issued 3 or more times a year (contins) made it a practical impossibility to provide availability records for all of them. Two separate cataloging processes were therefore created for serials: producing collective records for contins in the Serials Supplement (later the Periodicals Supplement) and producing availability records for annual and semiannual serials in the regular issues of the Monthly Catalog. Availability records for multipart monographic works were created to identify a newly published title, volume or part of a series or group of publications.

Until a change was made to the cataloging tape product in the early 1990’s, the Monthly Catalog tape product paralleled exactly the contents of the paper Monthly Catalog. With the introduction of the GPO Cataloging Tapes, the production of cataloging records now followed two separate paths: producing records for the printed Monthly Catalog and producing records for the cataloging tapes.

The GPO cataloging tapes include the last change or update made on OCLC to a cataloging record during the publishing month as well as the last "produce" transaction made to a record by GPO during the publishing month. These "produce" transactions are stripped out of the GPO cataloging tapes and used to create the printed Monthly Catalog. Essentially, the printed Monthly Catalog and the GPO cataloging tapes are two different products.

However, the availability record policy did not change. As libraries began using the bibliographic records provided by the GPO cataloging tapes in their online public access catalogs (OPACs), the need for availability records was questioned. Commercial vendors requested that availability records be uniquely identified so that these records could be stripped out if users preferred not to receive these issue-specific records as part of their tape loads. Given this background, the changes in depository library practices, and the need for LPS to modernize legacy systems, the availability record policy needs to be re-examined.

The need for availability records has again been questioned in the context of cataloging records for electronic resources. The Electronic Collection Team has encountered problems when a cataloger is required to create an availability record for a tangible product that has a related online version. Two separate URLs are needed: one for the master record, with the emphasis on citing a Web location where all online issues of a serial or multipart product can be reviewed; and another URL for the availability record that points users only to an individual issue of the serial or volume of a multipart set.

This is especially problematic given the haphazard organization of government Web sites. By eliminating the practice of producing availability records for serials and multiparts, LPS products would direct users only to the Web locations where the majority of issues reside. Because agencies do not organize their Web sites as would best fit our processing and cataloging needs, we may need to provide several URLs to cover all issues of the serial or multipart.

The question also arises as to the use and need for availability records by our library customers. Discussions with the vendors of GPO cataloging data and depository libraries that choose to receive availability records would give us a better understanding of how these records are used in library OPACs. It is generally thought that libraries do not use availability records for tangible products provided in the Monthly Catalog. It is our assumption that the majority of libraries identify a specific issue of a serial or periodical from the shipping list or a shipping list product and add their own holdings information to their library’s OPAC records.

However, LPS may need to provide availability type information for individual issues of electronic serials and multiparts for the FDLP Electronic Collection. The proper location and structure of this availability information and other metadata is being investigated in the context of the Electronic Collection.

Availability records contain issue-specific information about a particular document. Currently, these are produced for serials that are issued 2 or fewer times a year, for individual issues of a multipart set and for certain categories of maps. In most cases, the availability records contain the shipping list number, date and issue information, stock number, price information, and a unique Superintendent of Documents classification number. The designation "AVR" identifies these records in the 949 field of the MARC records. This identification allows vendors to offer these records to their customers or purge them if they are not deemed useful by the institution.

If LPS ceases production of availability records, the following products and services would be affected: Monthly Catalog, Periodicals Supplement (paper and CD-ROM version), Web MOCAT, GPO cataloging tapes, vendor products sold to depository customers, and OPAC record loads.

• If Council concurs with this proposal:

• Develop new procedural guidelines
• Prepare requirements for systems modification
• Implement Monthly Catalog product enhancements
• Develop strategy and timetable for migration to new processes
• Issue a Cataloging Guideline that reflects policy and changes in procedure
• Prepare information for Administrative Notes and FDLP community

Replace the Periodicals Supplement with a more comprehensive tool, listing all serials in the FDLP or all serials cataloged in the preceding year

Potential Benefits

• All cataloging records for serials would appear in the regular issues of the Monthly Catalog regardless of frequency.

• Would eliminate duplicate records that are a result of the production of the Periodicals Supplement from the Monthly Catalog.

• Would eliminate local practices that may confuse some end users.

The Periodicals Supplement, previously known as the Serials Supplement, is a separate volume of the Monthly Catalog that is issued once a year. The creation of this volume is a result of the Cataloging Branch processing policy for cataloging serial titles. Serial titles issued three or more times a year are processed for inclusion in the Periodicals Supplement. Serials that are issued once or twice a year receive availability records and appear in the regular monthly issues of the Monthly Catalog. The printed Periodicals Supplement was discontinued in 1996 with the introduction of the new format of the paper Monthly Catalog and the CD-ROM version. In 1998, at the request of the depository community, the publication of the Periodicals Supplement was resumed.

If the serial cataloging processing policy is changed, replacing the Periodicals Supplement with an enhanced product would be a logical outcome.

• If Council concurs with this proposal:

• Evaluate product options and select most appropriate product
• Develop new procedural guidelines for product creation
• Prepare requirements for systems modification
• Develop strategy and timetable for migration to new processes
• Produce the product
• Amend Cataloging Guidelines to reflect changes in policy
• Prepare information for Administrative Notes and FDLP community

May 31-June 7 Washington, DC

October 22 Arlington, VA

October 23-25 Arlington, VA