ELECTRONIC EXCHANGE OF SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION (STI) STRATEGIC PLAN

U.S. Department of Energy

Office of Administration and Management

Office of Information Resources Management

Office of Scientific and Technical Information

January 1993

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORD

INTRODUCTION

1.0 MISSION STATEMENT

2.0 VISION STATEMENT 2001

3.0 SITUATION ANALYSIS

4.0 STRATEGIC GOALS

5.0 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

6.0 STRATEGIC ISSUES

7.0 STRATEGIES

Appendix-Electronic Exchange Strategic Planning Team Members

FOREWORD

The strategy adopted will be based on national and international standards for electronic publishing, hardware, software, telecommunications, and data related to the management of scientific and technical information (STI).

This plan follows the Guidelines for Strategic Planning (DOE/PE-0099) set forth by the Office of Policy, Planning and Analysis in July 1991. Consistent with these guidelines, the plan uses a top-down rather than a bottom-up approach. Although objectives and milestones for achievement are stated in broad terms, this document is not intended to be an operating plan. As stated in the Guidelines, while strategic plans spell out where we hope to be in the future, they do not lay out a detailed road map to get there. They offer strategies basic directions or courses of action but not operating plans.

The next steps in the planning process will be to develop a multi-year program plan, followed by specific operating budget plans. This strategic plan is intended to be a living document, and will be updated throughout the planning and implementation process.

Contact:

Janice M. Blanton

Director, Scientific and Technical Information Services Division

Office of Scientific and Technical Information

P.O. Box 62

Oak Ridge, TN 37831

(615) 576-1323

INTRODUCTION

A pre-planning meeting was held in Albuquerque, New Mexico, on November 5-6, 1991, to discuss issues and identify a DOE-wide Strategic Planning Team on Electronic Exchange. The Team met at OSTI on February 25-27, 1992, to begin developing this Strategic Plan. The Team is composed of information managers and professionals and computer scientists from DOE and contractor sites across the country. (See the appendix for a list of the members of the Team.)

Although the initial objective is to provide for electronic transmission of STI, the ultimate goal is to achieve electronic transfer, retrieval, and exchange of full documents. Electronic transfer can be defined as providing documents on an electronic medium in such a way that they are usable by the recipient in the format in which they are transmitted (e.g., sending floppy disks containing SGML-formatted documents). Electronic exchange then refers to the fully automated transfer of information between one or more electronic systems so that content-based retrieval can be performed with precision. To accomplish this goal, it will be necessary to analyze (and possibly adjust) the services provided by OSTI. As the users of STI make the transition away from paper as the major medium, OSTI and other information providers must be prepared to accept and provide STI on electronic media, such as online networks, magnetic tapes, and floppy disks, to a much greater extent.

This initiative will emphasize and enhance full life-cycle management of STI. Electronic exchange of STI will benefit users, generators, and managers of information. The full realization of the implementation of SGML will facilitate interchange among the members of the scientific and technical community by providing increased versatility of information (new ways to use information), encouraging multiple uses of information, stimulating increased use of STI, and providing more flexible access to many types of information. The potential for global electronic interchange of STI and the focus on content rather than format is expected to revolutionize the use of information.

It is anticipated that the electronic exchange of STI will begin to be commonplace by the year 2001. Shifting the focus from technology to management, development, and use of the information itself will promulgate a broader definition and vision of STI, which will include graphics, supporting data for technical reports, etc. The focus will be on adding value to the information by making more of it accessible and usable than ever before. The implementation of electronic information/document exchange will integrate the DOE community horizontally and vertically. Site leaders in this initiative will work with STI sources (e.g., authors, editors, originators, generators, developers, etc.) to determine needs, capabilities, current related activities, and potential involvement. The DOE information management community will be called upon to help develop the strategy and provide education and training. Planning and implementation will be coordinated with the Office of Administration and Human Resource Management (AD), program offices and field offices, and contractor management to ensure that all budgetary, program, resource, and other needs are met. In addition to establishing internal guidelines and standards, DOE must work with vendors of commercial products to ensure that the hardware and software needed to support DOE STI exchange will be in place.

1.0 MISSION STATEMENT

2.0 VISION STATEMENT-2001

3.0 SITUATION ANALYSIS

3.1 Requirements

• SGML must be generally accepted as the DOE-wide standard.
• The Technical Operating Guidelines must be in place by September 1993 to ensure consistent implementation across the Department.
• Accountability requirements (e.g., records management) must be considered and incorporated to the extent possible into planning.
• Implementation, even in the initial stages, must focus on electronic exchange of content in a useful form (to include all forms of electronic media), not just electronic transmission of static images.
• Implementation must comply with FIPS 152, Standard Generalized Markup Language (SGML), and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requirements.
• All other pertinent laws, regulations, orders, and standards must be identified, complied with, or modified to accommodate electronic exchange.
• STI deliverables must be clearly defined and understood throughout the DOE community.

3.2 Present Situation and Planning Assumptions

3.2.1 Present Situation

Massive quantities of STI are generated by the Department and its contractors each year. While much of this information is accessible in the form of project deliverables and other reports, a great deal of STI is never captured in an accessible format (e.g., supporting data contained in researchers - notebooks). The problem is not a lack of information, but rather that the existing information is often inconsistent and not in a format that can be easily transferred. In addition, no common mechanism exists for users to access STI, and users have no full understanding of what is available.

Currently, STI deliverables are provided primarily in paper copy. While more use is being made of electronic media for storing and disseminating information, several studies have shown that paper will continue to be an important medium for many years. The National Archives and Record Administration (NARA) currently accepts only paper, microform, or computer tape for permanent copies. Both NARA and DOE are hesitant to accept other media as permanent copies because of the lack of standards. Therefore it may be a long time before electronic documents are fully accepted.

The adoption of a standard for electronic information exchange will be a new initiative for DOE and will involve cultural change throughout the STI community. Management support at all levels will be crucial. Other standards-based programs, such as the Computer-aided Acquisition and Logistics Support (CALS) initiative, which are evolving simultaneously with SGML, will also affect the environment in which electronic exchange will occur.

3.2.2 Planning Assumptions

• The ultimate DOE-wide network for information exchange will be based on an open architecture for both input and output of information. The network will be able to accommodate both traditional and nontraditional formats of STI (e.g., video, etc.).
• Information (documents) will be tagged before delivery to DOE/OSTI. The source of the SGML tagging and the point at which documents would be tagged will be determined by each contractor. For instance, the contractor may elect to have the tagging done by authors/contributors, editors of documents, or a subcontractor once documents are finalized.
• Existing DOE contracts and requirements for submission of information will have to be modified to address deliverables (i.e., electronic phase-in and transmission). The requirement to tag documents using SGML
• The record copy of a document will be maintained in read-only format to preserve data integrity and intellectual property rights.
• Commercially available equipment will be used to ensure that the effort does not become dependent on a single vendor. Although transmission of STI on a common communications network accommodating both classified and unclassified information is the ultimate objective, use of removable media such as floppy disks and magnetic tape will also be acceptable. Online storage capacity and transmission speed will be primary concerns in implementing such a network and must be balanced by acceptable costs. Integrity of data transmitted in this fashion will also be a concern.
• The electronic exchange technical requirements will support multiple platforms for tagging, parsing, and converting documents.
• Funding and budgeting for implementing SGML and electronic exchange is considered to be a part of that allocated by DOE for STI programs/projects.
• The benefits of electronic exchange will have to be aggressively marketed for this effort to be successful. The DOE community must be educated concerning costs, benefits, requirements, and technological considerations. Eventually, DOE Orders will be developed or revised to address SGML and electronic exchange.
• Given that much information generated by DOE is sensitive or classified, computer security issues must be resolved as quickly as possible. In addition, guidelines for information access will need to be defined for the following types of information: Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRADA), proprietary, FOIA, and copyrighted information.
• This initiative will use a phased implementation approach beginning in September 1993, following the publication of the Technical Operating Guidelines. However, it is recognized that some sites are already in the process of implementing SGML and that all sites will not proceed on the same timetable.
• Pilot Projects to develop prototypes of STI report formats, Document Type Definitions (DTDs) suited to DOE needs, and relevant software tools, such as translators, will be communicated to OSTI and the DOE Task Team so that lessons learned and success stories from these prototypes can be shared among sites to reduce duplication of effort. OSTI will maintain or coordinate a clearinghouse of prototype documentation, shareware, and expert referrals.
• A standardized SGML tagging methodology for DOE and consistent DTDs will be developed to maximize consistency and sharing of information throughout the Department. These model DTDs will promote use of those SGML features that improve the usefulness and retrievability of STI. OSTI will serve as a clearinghouse for the library of standard DTDs.
• Electronic versions will be accepted as official copies of documents including authorization, forms, etc.
• A policy statement on ownership of information will be developed to clarify intellectual property rights.

3.3 Key Stakeholder Considerations

3.3.1 Identified Stakeholders

	       Stakeholders
	      Internal and External 
     Developers: Operations staff, scientific/engineering staff, 
     management/administrative staff  
     Agents: Librarians, writers/editors, legal staff,
     Data processing/networking staff, academia,
     compositors, text processors, records managers,
     unions, hardware and software vendors, peer
     graphics professionals, clerical staff, data
     review boards, legal staff
     processing/networking staff, academia,
     information-related unions  

     Users: DOE management, AD management, DOE
     program management, contractor management,
     subcontractor management, Work For Others
     program participants, other federal agencies
     overseeing and performing research, other
     federal agencies using research results, DOE
     security, public, legal community, financial
     organizations  

3.3.2 Considerations

• The primary financial impact of implementing electronic exchange will be to the agents (i.e., those who facilitate the use and transmission of STI). However, cost will be a concern for all stakeholders. Stakeholders will be required to expend significant resources and effort to implement SGML at their sites.
• As the new age of shared information becomes a reality, there will be a new emphasis on cross-functional analysis. Users of STI will start looking at information in an integrated, concurrent manner instead of as sequential and independent.
• As information becomes more readily and widely accessible, data security and intellectual property rights will become important concerns for stakeholders. The internal power distribution may change: the owner of information has power and ownership is apt to be redefined.
• A number of cultural changes within the DOE community will be necessary. Many of these changes will be in the area of human resource development. Extensive training and user education will be required. Staff profiles and job descriptions are likely to change to accommodate the new types of work required to prepare and manage information. Organizational changes may include downsizing or contracting of organizations or functions. Some organizational restructuring and updating of missions will be required.
• Procurements of all required hardware and software must be in compliance with the FIPS. Procurement personnel must be made aware of the technical specifications of what is already existent and must begin evaluating products based on the capability of the technology rather
• Space requirements and allocations will be affected as fewer paper documents are generated and stored. However, electronic storage space needs will increase correspondingly.
• The varied contractual arrangements held by DOE contractors (e.g., fixed fee, cost plus award, award fee, etc.) may require that SGML requirements be incorporated into the wording of contracts to ensure compliance.

3.4 Key Trends

3.4.1 Opportunities

• Increased DOE involvement in non-DOE work, such as the Department of Defense Work for Others program, will generate DOE expertise in CALS (of which SGML is a part). This expertise can then be applied to DOE's SGML implementation.
• Electronic libraries and increased electronic access within sites will create a potential market for electronic documents. The technology will be available at the local sites to make use of STI in electronic formats.
• Changes in missions of DOE sites will continue as the traditional production missions become de-emphasized in the wake of the end of the Cold War. The growing need for environmental safety and health (ES & H) information will clearly demonstrate the value of STI. With the increased emphasis on ES & H, more people will become involved in producing and managing information. This will spur a proliferation of information professionals.
• The maturation of electronic (i.e., computer) literacy of end users will have a number of implications both for how end users access STI and how the role of the information professional is perceived. The distinction between the functions of end users and information professionals will become blurred. End users will be more involved in the front-end encoding process of information they generate. Having increased information skills will mean that these users will be more critical of the information professional and more demanding in their expectations for ease of retrieval and quality of information. The trend for users to want everything at a single point of access will continue. As end users assume more control over their own searches, the role of the information professional will become more that of a facilitator than of an information source or provider.
• Leading edge media, such as optical and compact discs, are increasingly being used for dissemination and storage of STI. More and more sites and libraries are acquiring capabilities to use these media. Also, CD-ROM vendors are beginning to use SGML technology for loading and storing data.
• The increasing use of hypertext will make it possible to store and retrieve STI beyond the traditional technical report (e.g., researchers notebooks, supporting analyses, etc.). The increased demand for access to partial documents, so that users can zoom in on specific content, will help demonstrate the need to categorize and tag documents in a consistent way.
• Electronic dissemination of government-produced information to the public will continue to be a major issue. It is probable that legislation will be enacted that will require government agencies to electronically disseminate STI to the public.
• The cultural change resulting from DOE's commitment to Total Quality Management (TQM) will facilitate the implementation of SGML, as there is increased emphasis on building in quality during the development process.
• The commercial desktop publishing industry is beginning to standardize. A window of opportunity currently exists to influence these standards.
• Tighter budgets will mean that libraries will need more OSTI support. Sites may dissolve parts of their libraries as more centralized resources become available. As local collections decrease, the market for electronic collections located elsewhere will increase. At the same time, activities and budgets will become more decentralized, putting greater emphasis on OSTI's role as a coordinator of STI management.
• The information explosion will continue, resulting in a much larger volume of documents being created. The need and demand for nontext data (e.g., multimedia, sound, video, etc.) will dramatically increase.
• Computing technology is moving toward diversity rather than standardization. As the variety of hardware and software platforms continues to grow, more emphasis will be placed on seamless interoperability that is invisible to the user.
• The validity of electronic information is beginning to be recognized.
• The increasing use of networks by DOE, other government agencies, industry, and academia will drive the need for electronic document exchange and will facilitate electronic transmission.

3.4.2 Threats

• As Departmental and site budgets continue to tighten, fewer personnel resources will be available to staff current initiatives. It may be difficult to obtain the resources necessary to make this initiative a reality. The SGML implementation effort may be hampered by the budget crunch.
• There is a tendency toward cultural resistance to change, particularly change of this magnitude. The new requirements for document categorizing and tagging may be seen by contractors as micro-management by DOE. Effective use of prototypes could help alleviate this perception.
• There are currently no standards for desktop publishing/documentation products.
• There will be islands of information and program managers who are concerned with their individual areas of need above the need to achieve electronic exchange.
• The trend in producing publications at DOE sites is moving away from central administration to do-it-yourself publications. While this may be an opportunity to reclaim some lost information, it could also be a threat in terms of loss of standardization of document formats. The trend toward specialized work groups each with its own computing environment will also lead to a proliferation of document types. Only if the benefits of SGML-based STI very clearly outweigh the appeal of work-group diversity will this project achieve its goals.

4.0 STRATEGIC GOALS

GOAL I: Develop an institutional architecture with clearly defined roles and responsibilities and consistent program direction that will fully support the electronic exchange of STI.

GOAL II: Develop a standards-based technological architecture that will be flexible over time, cost-effective, and provide the highest possible level of utility for electronically exchanging STI.

GOAL III: Ensure stakeholder buy-in/customer satisfaction at all levels by coordinating with and obtaining feedback from internal and external stakeholders throughout the planning and implementation processes.

GOAL IV: Ensure compliance with the current and future legislative, policy, and regulatory environment and incorporate the electronic exchange of STI into pertinent DOE Orders.

GOAL V: Ensure resource effectiveness by taking advantage of lessons learned from other initiatives and reducing redundancies in the institutional and technological architectures.

5.0 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

• Development of accepted DOE Technical Operating Guidelines by September 1993.
• Creation and acceptance of a DOE-wide catalog of uniform SGML codes for use in scientific and technical documents.
• Implementation of a technological framework, including identified standards, minimum computing requirements, and acceptable media.
• Increased usage of full-text DOE STI, as measured by OSTI and commercial vendor usage statistics, increased citations, and improved recall of sought information.

6.0 STRATEGIC ISSUES

• Unclassified, unlimited information is available to the public. With standardization of document types, OSTI will be able to do a better job of getting the information to the public suppliers. Use of SGML would make information easier to access and would increase the compatibility and usability of vendor products. The scope of the information provided would also be increased.
• Other emerging commercial or government standards may be related to, contradictory to, or competing with SGML.
• OSTI is well-suited to coordinate this initiative because of its current position as the DOE center/office for scientific and technical information and software management, as well as a major contributor to Federal STI.
• The electronic form of documents has not been recognized as official from a business perspective. Also, what is considered to be the official archivable copy has not been determined. If electronic documents are not deemed acceptable for archivable or record copies, paper or microfiche copies will still have to be maintained as well, resulting in higher storage costs with no reduction in paper.
• The need to protect sensitive or proprietary information will become increasingly important as STI becomes more easily and broadly accessible. Also, while SGML will be an asset to controlling the access to information, if information is miscoded, it may not be adequately protected. Data rights to summary information or references are still an unresolved issue.
• In the past, very few SGML-based editors and parsers were available. Now, however, more and more companies are introducing products that support SGML, including word processors and database management systems. The wider availability of off-the-shelf commercial products will help SGML be accepted more readily.
• Currently, SGML is poorly understood and is not yet accepted as the DOE-wide standard. In fact, SGML is viewed by some as just another word processor. Because no guidance currently exists, a great deal of non-SGML tagging is taking place. The requirement to convert these documents to SGML in the future may be costly and may impede acceptance of SGML as the standard. This lack of understanding may also mean that the right tool is used the wrong way.
• The many commercial full-text databases currently available will greatly influence users expectations for DOE management of full-text information. The vast amount of information available today has been groomed at an expense. An industry-provided standard for database cataloging can be a threat if it is not compatible with SGML. While DOE will be bound by regulatory issues in tagging and storing STI, users expectations will be based on comparisons with commercial vendors products.
• The lack of standardization for format of documents created by various organizations will be a major issue in successfully implementing SGML and electronic exchange. There must be a common understanding of what constitutes a given document type and how documents created by others should be handled. Merging information from several sources will also be a problem if there is a lack of consistency in how documents are categorized and tagged. Another problem is that many originators of STI lack skills in how to structure and analyze documents. While the originators have knowledge of the content, the ability to structure and categorize information has not been presented to them as a requirement. Therefore, they must first be convinced of the need to acquire these skills and then given appropriate training.
• Consistent, clearly documented DTDs will be a crucial element in successful electronic exchange. The process of performing document analysis and developing DTDs is lengthy and little progress is being made in this area. Some DTDs currently being developed do not follow computing conventions or standard structures, thus further slowing the overall maturation of SGML. Critical review of DTDs drafted by vendors and professional societies will be needed to identify the features most appropriate for DOE needs.
• Most sites are not currently equipped with the necessary computing capabilities for full implementation of electronic exchange. There is currently a lack of definition for minimum computing resources to implement SGML. This will be an important issue for sites that have limited budgets for additional equipment acquisitions. While most sites currently have hierarchical or relational database systems, object-oriented databases are best suited to storing and retrieving information based on DTDs. Also, although SGML has been in existence for ten years, only two SGML parsers are available.
• If the validity of electronic signatures is not recognized, this initiative will be negatively impacted since without this recognition the validity of electronic documents will not be accepted.

7.0 STRATEGIES

Strategies:

• Define organizational roles and responsibilities (players, participants).
• Define exchange framework (network configuration).
• Define interrelationships of exchange partners; clarify site roles and responsibilities.
• Develop Site Program and Implementation Plans in accordance with the Electronic Exchange Strategic Plan.
• Develop program and financial support for Strategic Plan implementation.
  1. Develop training and orientation modules for DOE field and headquarters staff who oversee contractor operations.
  2. Develop generic cost models and budgeting schedules.
  3. Identify program-based DOE and contractor site representatives for additional training and continued liaison.
  4. Identify Plan accomplishment as one of the management goals given to contractor management as part of the Award Fee and other performance specifications.
  5. Include evaluation of Plan implementation in DOE performance evaluations of contractors including IRM and STI evaluations.

Strategies:

• Influence standards groups and commercial software vendors to ensure that DOE STI exchange needs are accommodated.
  1. Adopt standards and incorporate into Technical Operating Guidelines.
  2. Encourage support for optional parts of standards that are important for DOE's specific needs.
• Use the Electronic Exchange Strategic Plan as a basis for developing Technical Operating Guidelines.
  1. Conduct market and technology assessments.
  2. Establish common technological perspective (hardware, software, standards, etc.).
  3. Identify minimum technical specifications for standard compliance.
• Establish a panel of technical experts to provide guidance on the development of the technological architecture.
  1. Identify technical representatives.
  2. Review lessons learned from the Department of Defense's experience with CALS and incorporate into Technical Operating Guidelines.
  3. Review examples and experiments prepared by professional societies and academic groups interested in STI exchange (e.g., the American Mathematical Society and the Text Encoding Initiative).
• Develop operational prototypes to improve consistency among DOE sites and accelerate sharing of STI.
• Develop and conduct technical training.
  1. Design training courses and collect or draft syllabi.
  2. Provide ongoing advice and consultation.
  3. Maintain or support a clearinghouse for DOE syllabi, course materials, and examples (e.g., model DTDs) at or under the auspices of OSTI.

Strategies:

• Coordinate with Department of Commerce, Department of Energy, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Library of Medicine, Department of Defense (CENDI); Joint Committee on Printing (JCP)/Government Printing Office (GPO); and other identified non-DOE stakeholders to ensure compatibility and transferability of information.
• Identify end user needs and capabilities.
• Work with commercial vendors on product development to ensure portability of information exchange over time and storage media.
• Promote general awareness; develop and conduct education and training.
• Perform benefit analysis (expected benefits).

Strategies:

• Identify all relevant Standards, Orders, and Directives and ensure compliance with these.
  1. Comply with FIPS 152 and other Standards.
  2. Comply with DOE Orders and Directives and/or revise/develop DOE Orders as appropriate to accommodate SGML/electronic exchange of STI.
  3. Revise reporting requirements to permit SGML as deliverables.
  4. Consider implications of High Performance Computing and Communications Act of 1991 (NREN Bill) and the American Technology Pre-eminence Act.
• Maintain ongoing assessment of legal implications of electronic exchange (e.g., electronic signature, copyright, etc.).
  1. Comply with JCP/GPO and other legislative requirements.
  2. Consider implications of public access interests (e.g., the GPO Windo Bill now under discussion).

Strategies:

• Work with participants and other stakeholders to reduce redundancies in systems and processes.
  1. Build on existing initiatives, such as IRM, to reduce the need for separate training, etc.
  2. Incorporate lessons learned from CALS effort and other related initiatives.
  3. Ensure sharing of knowledge and experiences to minimize reinventing the wheel and to maximize decision making about what to buy, etc.
• Take advantage of group buying power.
• Develop a coordinated training and education program that will benefit the overall DOE community.
• Encourage adequate budget and personnel resources to accomplish the initiative.
• Weigh the short-term costs against long-term value to programs adopting electronic SGML-based transfer of STI.

APPENDIX - ELECTRONIC EXCHANGE STRATEGIC PLANNING TEAM MEMBERS

Janice M. Blanton 
Director, Scientific and Technical Information 
Services Division 
DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information  

David C. Bellis 
Group Leader, Database Products Branch 
DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information  

Ray Cook 
Communications Specialist 
DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information  

Tom Coyne 
Manager, Graphics Services 
Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory  

Ed Engebretsen 
Manager, Technical Information & Publications 
Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory  

Amy B. Finnerty 
Products & Services Research Specialist 
DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information  

Jean Freeney 
U.S. Department of Energy
DOE Field Office, Oak Ridge   

T. R. (Terry) Girill 
Documentation Group, NERSC 
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory  

Mary Hall
Information Control and Accountability
DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Jeff Hammond 
Westinghouse Savannah River Site   

Barry Hudson 
Advanced Technology
Westinghouse Savannah River Site 

F. Sutton Kay 
Group Leader, Electronic Publishing Group 
DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information 

Nancy Kenny 
Deputy Manager, Business and Information Services
BCS Richland, Inc. 

Phillip L. Kienlen 
Section Head, Advanced Publishing Technology 
Martin Marietta Energy Systems 

Kathryn S. Macal 
Director, Information & Publishing Division 
Argonne National Laboratory 

Michael Margolies 
Graphics & Publishing Supervisor 
REECo Print Plant 

Louise Millard 
Head, Technical Information Department 
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory 

Diane C. Mirvis 
Manager, Technical Information Division 
Brookhaven National Laboratory 

Pam Novak 
Manager, Applied Technologies Communication Section 
Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratory  

Sharron Oneal 
Printing Officer 
U.S. Department of Energy 

Adron Pritchard
Systems Manager 
Sandia National Laboratories 

Gwen R. Schreiner 
Technical Information Officer 
DOE Field Office, Albuquerque  

Norm Smith 
Senior System Analyst 
Science Applications International Corporation 

Judy Spraker 
Program Analyst 
DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information 

Larry Thorn
Program Director, Labat-Anderson Incorporated
DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Tom Wrenn 
Information Services Supervisor 
EG@amp;G/Morgantown Energy Technology Center