GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: EPA's move to 'modernize' libraries spurs concerns

• 41996
  

  Let's see, in 1953 Clair Patterson noticed that levels of tetraethyl lead in the atmosphere were responsible for lead levels in American's blood 625 times higher than in 1923, the year before leaded gas was developed. Patterson worked from 1953 to 1970 to get the Clean Air Act passed. He didn't have EPA data to help him make his case. In order to establish what tetraethyl lead levels in the atmosphere had been previous to its use as an additive in gasoline, he had to take core samples of ice in the Arctic. The company that manufactures tetraethyl lead still maintains that "research has failed to show that leaded gasoline poses a threat to human health or the environment" and even tried to pay off Caltech where Patterson did research if they would get rid of him. Arctic ice may not provide reliable records of atmospheric chemistry for much longer. It's melting. And so, it seems, was the EPA library. That only .5 of a percent of its holdings have been digitized to date is a clue that it won't be online anytime soon. To have the data, we have to have it on paper. Oh, Hannah, "moaning" and "whining" are online buzzwords used exclusively, for what reason I can't fathom, by the big business fraternity. What I am doing is INDICTING.

  Sarah Posted January 22, 2008 9:11 PM
• 41959
  

  Its the 21st Century and having books on shelves is a waste of time and money. Take the automotive industry they no longer publish detailed shop manuals for 2 reasons 1 they were costly and 2 they were impossible to keep current. The internet makes sure the data is always current and nothing is missing. This isn't another jobs program its a research function and it needs to be managed as one

  dan ketter Posted January 22, 2008 10:49 AM
• 41919
  

  EPA has 90 days from December 26, to issue its report to Congress. Members of the American Library Association's Federal Libraries subcommittee of the Committee on Legislation, FAFLRT, GODORT, SRRT, and TFOE will read this report carefully. We read reports by: Stratus Consulting on the favorable return-on-investment provided EPA staff and the public by the Library Network, EPA Librarian's (2005) dealing with a proposed $1.5 million "cost reduction."

  No one knows how the EPA will respond. You ask if we "know ANYTHING about how this is being worked out?" I ask if you attended the meetings ALA held with OEI staff at the 2007 ALA Midwinter Meeting. Were you at the SRO session at the 2007 ALA Annual Meeting, "Finding Environmental Information in the New Millennium: Continuing the Dialog" (three [3] weeks before this national forum, the EPA withdrew its speaker)? Have you been involved in meetings held among EPA/OEI and ALA, Special Libraries Association, and American Association of Law Libraries?

  ALA has been on top of this situation since PEER "broke" the story of a $2.0 million budget cut to the EPA Libraries. We invested hundreds of hours attending meetings, writing letters, participating in discussion (many with colleagues and friends in the EPA). We are librarians in the trenches working to protect collections from destruction, to assure reference services are adequate for the information needs of EPA's research, regulatory, policy, and enforcement staffs, and striving to assure that EPA information be made available to the public as it had 25+ years before the closings. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) is issuing a report to Congress on the EPA Libraries in February. Librarians external to the EPA Library Network have contributed comments and remarks to the GAO.

  Hannah, some of us have been in the trenches for nearly two years. We recognize the roles played by "conscientious librarians and civil servants" and have extended opportunities for them assure the public that their actions provide what you call, "the best information resource the EPA can make." I am sorry that you are, "tired of [our] uninformed moaning." My question to you, dear, misinformed, Hannah, is, "Where has your voice been on this matter since we began working on this issue on February 10, 2006?"

  Frederick W. Stoss, M.S. (zool/ecol), M.L.S. Posted January 21, 2008 2:17 PM
• 41652
  

  Have you studied the EPA's Report to Congress? Do you know in detail how the EPA will respond to this mandate? Do you really know ANYTHING about how this is being worked out?

  You and PEER and Sheketoff should back off and let the EPA develop its libraries. Submit appropriate comment when asked. Try to be a part of the library solution, instead of the problem.

  Every time you stir the pot, it takes more time to get to the end of the process because they have to stop what they are doing and take care of your problem! Let the thing happen - help make it happen - and get over yourselves.

  I do not understand why you insist on believing that the EPA and its libraries are being run by evildoers looking to do us out of money or information or bookmarks or whatever. Their trenches are filled with conscientious librarians and civil servants who want to have the best information resource the EPA can make...just like you and your library.

  I, for one, am tired of hearing your uninformed moaning!

  Hannah the Harpy Posted January 16, 2008 3:57 PM