They can copy the paper. They are just familiar with it. And that is what you have. There is still a demand out there for paper copies. We have, however, converted many, many of our publications over the years, through the efforts of this committee, from paper to microfiche. In fact, we do far more in microfiche today than in any other format. We see us moving from microfiche and paper format to more and more electronic products. Mr. PACKARD. Is there a difference in the composition and setup and all of the preliminary work that goes into the printed copy versus the CD-ROM? Mr. DIMARIO. There is not much difference. Some additional premastering work is required. We are producing ours with the same database, and we are attempting to do these as multimedia products. Mr. PACKARD. Would the cost of CD-ROMs go up if that is all we did and still did the composition for CD-ROM? Mr. DIMARIO. I really can't speak to that issue. Mr. PACKARD. The composition, according to your testimony, is the bulk of the cost. Mr. DIMARIO. The composition is creating a publication. Whether it is an electronic format or not-you are putting in a page format, you are putting it in certain fonts and certain styles. You are doing that all up front. Mr. PACKARD. If you didn't do the composition for hard copy but did it for CD-ROMs, would that increase the cost of the CD-ROM? Mr. DIMARIO. Well, you would have that cost in the CD-ROM. So I would say, yes, necessarily, it would increase the cost from the current price of the CD-ROM. So, yes. But what that price would be, I just can't speak to that. Mr. PACKARD. My concern, again, is how to make this transition more rapidly toward reliance on the electronic information systems rather than both. I see now we are in the period of time where we have both. Mr. FAZIO. Mr. Chairman, maybe we are just unfortunate in one sense, although very fortunate in another, that in a very short span of history, in our lifetimes, we have gone through so many different formats, and we are still relying on all of them. I am still, I hate to admit it, a book person, and I pick up that Mr. PACKARD. But your children are learning Mr. FAZIO. My children are all asking me for more money to buy PCs. Mr. PACKARD. They start in kindergarten on the PCs. Mr. FAZIO. Microfiche is somewhere in between. I think librarians sought it to save space and we went into it, and now there are people who are moving from one format to the other and skipping microfiche. Yet, it is still a very common format out in the library world. So in a sense we are stuck in suspension here in a period in history where everything is still being utilized and probably new formats will develop before we get rid of the printed word. Mr. PACKARD. We should make clear, and I think it was in our earlier panel, we are not-there isn't anyone that is recommending 89-935 95-17 that we do away with hard copy. We certainly want to disabuse anybody of that idea. We do believe that we are in a state of transition to the electronic age. And like Mr. Fazio said, our generation is still hanging on to what we grew up and were trained with and learned in our educational background, but our children and grandchildren are really in the computer age. And they will probably not-their generation will certainly not rely on those books. They are going to rely on their PC and pull that information right up, because it is fun for them, it is what they have learned. We are in the middle of that transition. We are struggling, some of us who pay the bills and set the policies are struggling with how to hasten that transition, because we see it is a very rapid transition, it is something that is moving much quicker than any other dissemination system in the history of the globe. Earlier transitions have been very gradual. But this one is not. This is moving quickly. There are some questions here that I would like you to answer for the record. [The questions and responses follow:] Question. How much of the depository program documents are paper publications-how much microfiche-how much electronic media? Response. Over the last five fiscal years, total distribution to depository libraries has ranged from about 21 million copies to 33 million copies per year. Of this amount, the different formats averaged about 35% paper, 65% microfiche, and less than 1% in electronic format. Question. What is the economics of each format? Response. Comparing an average publication, including the costs of acquisition at the rider rate and shipping, it costs approximately 5 to 6 times as much for paper as microfiche. GPO has shifted to microfiche as the distribution format except for those publications whose usage by libraries or the public requires them to remain in paper. A similar cost comparison is not so readily made for CD-ROMs and other electronic distributions, since the typical CD-ROM equates to many more than one printed title. Question. How long will it be before the entire depository program is in electronic format and distribution? Response. GPO recognizes the potential cost savings and improved functionality which can result from the appropriate use of technology in the depository program. In development plans for the electronic storage facility required by the GPO Access Act (P.L. 103-40), we intend that the facility will be used to store and disseminate, on demand, electronic versions of depository materials. It is planned that, whenever appropriate, these electronic versions will replace the microfiche and paper publications in the depository program. However, we believe that there must be a planned, phased, transition that will take place over a period of several years. A study will be conducted and prototyping will be done to develop an electronic on demand delivery system and to determine the requirements for its use in depository libraries. It is planned to have prototyping and testing done before the end of FY 1996. At that time, it will be possible to determine time frames for the transition. However, based on our continuing discussions with the depository library community, there are very serious concerns about a rapid wholesale shift to electronic media as the sole distribution format. Many publications, such as the bound "U.S. Code," the "U.S. Congressional Serial Set," and others, have historical research purposes which the libraries believe require publication in a printed format. We will move as rapidly as possible, but we must consult with the libraries and take into consideration the interests and needs of the communities that the libraries serve and the public who rely upon Government information in printed form. Question. How much would that save? Response. For FY 1995, we estimate that distribution in electronic formats has saved $1.7 million compared to distributing the same content in paper. With the proliferation of information being created and gathered in electronic format, the savings will be offset to some extent by the greater total volume of information. Question. Give us a plan for going all electronic by fiscal 1996; by fiscal year 1998. Response. The electronic storage facility is the cornerstone of GPO's ability to make a large-scale shift to electronic, on demand delivery to depository libraries. GPO intends to move as quickly as possible to electronic delivery. In FY 1995 and 1996 we will conduct a study of electronic delivery issues and develop and test a prototype system. By FY 1998, GPO should have the capability to convert or acquire appropriate publications in either full text or image formats for on demand delivery to depository libraries. The libraries' ability to identify, receive, store, and reproduce these electronic files is the other side of the coin. Although our 1994 "Electronic Capabilities Survey" found that 80 to 90% of depositories have PCs and Internet connections, many of these have but one low-end PC. GPO has recently advised the depository community that by 1998 each depository will be required to comply with a minimal level of technological capability. However, this assumes an evolutionary shift to the use of electronic media. A more radical wholesale conversion of the program might require Federal funding, perhaps through technology grants, to ensure that the libraries are adequately equipped to serve the public with electronic information. Mr. PACKARD. I don't wish to set up or to support a system that is an infrastructure that is going to be antiquated and obsolete. I would like to set up policies that would draw people to the modern technology rather than encourage them to stay with the old. Mr. DIMARIO. Well, Mr. Chairman, if I may speak to that, we agree, we are trying to encourage people to go to the new technology. GPO has, as I indicated earlier, since the mid-1960s, been using electronic photocomposition. We have used the technologies that are available to us. We are doing the same thing today by seeing what is available out there in the entire field, and we constantly seek that. We attempt to use the latest software and to acquire and move into the latest structures. That is why we are moving into Standard Generalized Markup Language. That is the wave of the future, to create electronic products that are easily searched. We have hypertext documents and HTL. We are going beyond that to the SGML stage. That is where the world is headed. We know that and we are headed that way. On the other hand, there is great economy of scale when you are doing a huge publication, that has high demand, that the people want, to do it on high-speed offset presses. Now, the knowledge of demand coupled with the creation of a publication should dictate how you produce and distribute the publication. We are not yet fully into that approach. Let's take a large product. Let's say it is 1400 pages, and you put it up electronically. Let's say you want that entire document. What is your cost of downloading that document at the receiving end? It is an enormous cost. It is much easier, if there is a demand for it and a high demand, to do that on high-speed offset presses and to produce it. So you need to know demand, you need to know the requirements, and then you can adjust your technologies to deal with it. Mr. PACKARD. Let's talk specifically, then, about the Congressional Record, the daily Record that is printed overnight. That is usually about how many pages, a hundred, 150? Mr. DIMARIO. The average Record is about 200 pages, and contains as much type as 4 to 6 metropolitan daily newspapers. But in practice it varies. It could be 450 pages one day, and 20 pages the next. And it is not produced every day. So we get all different kinds of demand on it. Mr. PACKARD. That could be produced on a Docutech, could it not? Mr. DIMARIO. Yes sir, but it could be very expensive. Mr. PACKARD. And Mr. DIMARIO. And we use Docutech. We have a Docutech in the central office. In fact, the GAO report that you referred to, which I would like to get a question on later, also was printed in GPO on a Docutech. If you look at the spine, that was done internally on a Docutech. Mr. PACKARD. Are we moving in that direction, or are we staying with the printing process? Mr. DIMARIO. No, sir. We are manning the Docutech in the U.S. Senate. You made reference to a Docutech here. My understanding is your Docutech is not operating in the House. I may be misinformed on that. That is what people tell me. We are manning the one for the United States Senate. We would be happy to man yours. If you would check with the Senate, you will find they are getting great productivity out of that Docutech that we man for them. And that prior to our manning it, when they were running it themselves, it was a very low-volume operation. Mr. PACKARD. How do you determine, what are the criteria to determine whether you use the Docutech or the high-speed printer? Mr. DIMARIO. We consider the nature of the specific job, how many copies you want, when you want it, and the availability of the equipment. We have lots of work for lots of different people and we have only a range of equipment available, so we attempt to do all the publications in the most efficient way. We also are attempting to do and meet several other criteria. We went to new presses, going back to the Record. The new presses are in fact metric design. That was coordinated with the House and Senate leadership because there has been a change in the law, an attempt to drive metric policy. The Commerce Department was very instrumental in looking at that. We said to this committee and to others that we could save money for the Congress if the products that were being produced in the Congress were produced in new metric sizes. Now, could you produce those same documents on a Docutech in metric size? I don't know at this point. I can't speak to that issue. Can we produce the volume that is required and is necessary out there? I don't know. Our current volume is, as I say, 18,000 copies a day. There are 12,000 that come under congressional and you can go with 400 pages one day, 200 another day. Can we produce that kind of volume on the Docutechs that are available? Probably, but at what cost? Should you move to Docutech as opposed to the press? Each Docutech is $250,000. How many Docutechs do you need to produce the Record or the Register-which gives you the greatest economy of scale? I can't answer the question off the top of my head. But we need to examine all of those issues. Mr. PACKARD. Well, and certainly we need to examine whether we need the 18,000 or not. Mr. DIMARIO. Absolutely. Mr. PACKARD. Because in my office now we have that information on line. My staff is well trained to access that information, and to be honest with you, if we have one hard copy in our office, it is probably enough, instead of the many that we get. Mr. DIMARIO. Yes, sir. But we are producing it on line, we are passing it up to HIS. They put it on Scorpio. We pass it up to the Library of Congress, they are putting it on the THOMAS system. Mr. PACKARD. It may be that our depository libraries and many of the other agencies can rely on the Record online, if it is true in my office. We may be able to reduce the 18,000 down to 3- or 400 and still service the people well by providing the information through electronic device. Mr. DIMARIO. Yes, sir. Mr. PACKARD. We talked briefly about detailees before. What do you think of the suggestion that they be charged to the agencies that they service? Mr. DIMARIO. I have no problem with that whatsoever. You have 31 in the House, there are 29 on days and two on nights. I don't know what the specific costs would be, but certainly, with respect to GPO, whether we receive it as against Congressional Printing and Binding or as additional cost reimbursement coming in, it would not be significant. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS Mr. PACKARD. The Library of Congress has their own list of depository libraries. You have yours. Is there duplication there, to your knowledge? Mr. DIMARIO. I am not aware that the Library of Congress has any depositories. Mr. PACKARD. Maybe they are not called depository libraries; associate libraries. But there is about 1,200, according to my understanding. Mr. DIMARIO. I am just not aware of any. Mr. PACKARD. I was wondering if that could be merged, if we transferred the depository library programs over to the Library of Congress. Mr. DIMARIO. The Library of Congress in fact is one of our depositories. That is how they receive government publications. They do not routinely deal in the distribution of publications, to my knowledge. So if they are distributing to these libraries, I don't know what publications they are distributing. They purchase publications to put into their collection. They are a library. We are a distribution service to libraries. That is what the Federal depository library system is. We distribute the publications to the libraries. The libraries then expend a great deal of money, more than we do on an individual basis, to house those publications and make them freely accessible to the American public. That is their mandate. NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE Mr. PACKARD. At the Department of Commerce they have a technical information service which also does much the same kinds of things. Is there duplication there and could that be combined or consolidated? |