aserl-selectives Mailing List: FW: FDLP Parking Lot issues - summary/recommendations

[John Burger (jburger]

ASERL Friends:

 

Wanted to be sure everyone with an interest in the ASERL FDLP proposal has received the update below from Judy Russell.  These are the decisions made by ASERL library directors regarding the “parking lot” issues that arose from our summit meeting earlier this year.  These decisions will be incorporated into a revised version of the Proposal for Managing FDLP Collections in the Southeast Region, which will be circulated for review in early 2011.

 

Please let me know if you have any questions or would like other information.

 

Thanks.

 

--jeb

 

 

 

---

From: Russell,Judith [mailto:jcrussell [at] ufl.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 11:16 AM
To: John Burger
Subject: Fwd: FDLP Parking Lot issues - summary/recommendations

Subject: RE: Parking Lot issues - summary/recommendations

The members of the ASERL Deans FDLP Task Force met on Tuesday, November 16^th, to consider the recommendations on the parking lot issues from the August meeting and subsequent discussions. The Task Force members made the following decisions:

 

1.     Center of Excellence. Agreed to use the term Center of Excellence consistently throughout the proposal.

2.     Mass Digitization. Agreed that digitization would remain a voluntary activity, but Centers of Excellence will be encouraged to optimize use of digitized documents in Hathi Trust and available from other stable public domain sources.

3.     Timeframe for Discards. Agreed that discards should be listed for a total of 45 days, the first 15 days for Centers of Excellence only, the next 15 days for COEs and Regionals, and the final 15 for all libraries in the SE Region. [1]

4.     Listing Microfiche. Agreed no library should be required to post microfiche, although the software does permit posting microfiche and institutions withdrawing large sets will be encouraged to see if a COE for that agency needs anything from their sets. [2]

5.     Recommended Process for ILL. Agreed that there was a strong preference for digital delivery through systematic or on demand digitization and the use of stable public domain copies from other sources. Agreed that loaning print should be decided on a case by case basis by the lending institution, recognizing that some items will be truly rare or fragile. Decided that ILL fees should be waived for requests from any libraries in the SE Region (including Puerto Rice and the Virgin Islands) IF AND ONLY IF the requesting library clearly identified the requested item as a Federal Government Document. [3]

6.     Shipping Costs. Agreed that the discarding library should be responsible for up to $50 per shipment to another library. Agreed that payment of shipping costs for shipments in excess of $50 should be negotiated. Agreed that use of existing intra- and inter-state delivery services should be used whenever possible to avoid shipping costs.

7.     Long-Term Oversight/Governance. Decided that once the Implementation Plan is approved, the FDLP Task Force will be dissolved and an ASERL FDLP Steering Committee established to provide long-term oversight and governance.

8.     Cataloging of Disposal Items. Decided that all Centers of Excellence, all 12 Regionals in the SE, and all Selectives that are ASERL members will be required to catalog items received through the disposition process.  Decided that cataloging of items received through the disposition process will be strongly recommended, but not required, for all other Selectives in the SE Region.

 

EXPLANATORY NOTES:

 

[1] Initially, COEs will be on the honor system to only select materials from their areas of responsibility during the first 15 days, since the software will not be able to limit what they take to specific SuDoc stems. In Phase II, the software should be able to allow all libraries to view all items from the time they are posted. Regionals or Selectives who see an item they wish to obtain, but are not yet eligible to select it, could immediately “request” that item, but their request would be held until the 15 or 30 days had elapsed, then the first library to “request” the item would receive it if it was still available. Effectively this puts the item on a watch list, to be acquired at the appropriate time if a library with a higher priority has not already taken it.

[2]  In Phase II there will be a needs list capability, so discarding libraries could easily check to see if a COE (or any other library) is seeking specific microfiche or microfiche sets before discarding them.

[3] Staff in centralized ILL offices cannot be expected to accurately identify Federal Government Documents and it is not appropriate to increase their workload by asking them to research a request to determine if it is for a Federal Document. Therefore the burden of correctly identifying the item should fall on the borrowing/requesting institution. Specific procedures will need to be developed and promulgated.

 

More Information on the Needs List Capability in the Phase II Software:

 

The needs list will automatically notify a discarding library if it posts an item or a group of items that match an item on another library’s needs list. For example, if Library X is discarding House Commerce Committee Hearings from 1960 to 1980, and UF (as a COE for Hearings) has listed 3 hearings from that committee during those years that it needs, the discarding library would immediately get an e-mail asking it to check for those three items and UF would be notified that there was a discard list that might cover items it needs. If there is an exact match of a single  item, it would automatically be selected on behalf of the library with the identified need and both libraries would be notified that the item had been taken. We will seek to provide a way for a COE to identify the needed items as necessary for its COE collection, so a request from a COE can be given preference over a request for the same items from a library that is not a COE for that SuDoc stem. Otherwise, in the event of a tie, the item with the earliest date/time stamp would get the item.

 

Thank you all so much for working on these issues. It was very helpful to have the recommendations, but also to have the benefit of the thoughtful discussions.

 

The next step is to revise the Discussion Draft, incorporating the changes identified in August and these decisions, and issue a draft Implementation Plan. The ASERL Deans FDLP Task Force will review the draft Implementation Plan with the deans and documents coordinators at all 12 Regionals in the SE and then circulate the draft to all of the affected Selectives (and others with an interest) for comment/concurrence. We plan to  bring the Implementation Draft to the spring ASERL meeting for approval.

 

Please let me know if you have any questions or comments.

 

Happy Thanksgiving – and thank you again for all your work on this.

 

Judy

 

Judith C. Russell

Dean of University Libraries

George A. Smathers Libraries

University of Florida

535 Library West

PO Box 117000

Gainesville FL 32611-7000

 

Phone: 352-273-2505

Mobile: 202-262-6501

Fax: 352-392-7251

E-Mail: jcrussell [at] ufl.edu

Web: www.uflib.ufl.edu

 

From: Glenn, Valerie [mailto:vglenn [at] ua.edu]
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 3:13 PM
To: Russell,Judith; Selby, Barbara (bms8z); McAninch, Sandra; SUDDUTH,III, BILL; Hallie Pritchett; Swanbeck,Janet P; John Burger; jeff.carrico [at] library.gatech.edu; Cheryle Cole-Bennett; Dinsmore, Chelsea S; cetkin [at] gpo.gov; RichG; bbhard [at] wm.edu; lgharper [at] olemiss.edu; Harris,Winston; Naomi Harrison; jhurley [at] gsu.edu; lmkellam [at] uncg.edu; patricia.kenly [at] library.gatech.edu; sandra-leach [at] utk.edu; Lundgren,Jimmie Harrell; macewbj [at] auburn.edu; CherylM; William GRAY Potter; jprescod [at] utk.edu; lquery [at] tulane.edu; jrholes [at] olemiss.edu; larry.romans [at] vanderbilt.edu; blr [at] email.unc.edu; bselby [at] virginia.edu; diane.smith [at] lexisnexis.com; libdlv [at] learnlink.emory.edu; weisbel [at] auburn.edu; cnichol [at] clemson.edu; Harris,Carol; Harper,Paige S Jr; Wisnieski,Mary M; Thomson, Mary Beth; Martin, Heath C; rfranks [at] latech.edu; Lucy Farrow; freilich [at] memphis.edu; Stephanie Braunstein
Subject: Parking Lot issues - summary/recommendations

 

Hi all,

  Thanks for your input on the parking lot issues.  A summary of the discussion, as well as the recommendations made by the Steering Committee, has been posted at http://www.aserl.org/documents/2010_Fall_Mtg/Parking%20Lot%20Summaries.pdf

 

I’m sure we’ll be hearing more about this in the coming weeks and months; thank you again for your participation and have a great weekend!

 

valerie

-------------------------------
Valerie D. Glenn
Government Information Librarian
University of Alabama Libraries
205-348-4971
vglenn [at] ua.edu