Minutes of January 15, 2015 Meeting

G. Agnew, T. Izbicki, B. Lipinski, R. Marker, K. Mulcahy (co-chair), L. Palumbo, J. Pilch, J. Sauceda, J. Sloan, G. Smulewitz, E. Sosnowska (via videoconference), J. Still, M.B. Weber (recorder)
E. Gorder, A. Watkins, V. Pelote
J. Croft

1. Approval of Agenda-All

The agenda was revised to eliminate item 8 "Reports from SC/UA and IJS" since both E. Gorder and V. Pelote were excused from the meeting. The agenda was otherwise approved as distributed.

2. Approval of the Minutes from December 18, 2014 meeting- All

The minutes were approved as distributed.

3. Chairs' Report- K. Mulcahy

K. Mulcahy distributed two spreadsheets, RUL non-state funds FY 15 through 1/14/15 and RUL non-state funds 2006-2015 through 1/14/15. Monograph funds need to be spent and selectors were urged to spend out their allocations within the next two and a half months.

Ten year trends in non-state funds were discussed. The current year is the lowest year without accounting for inflation. We are below the mean and median years for the decade.

4. AUL Report- T. Izbicki

Reported on the Cabinet meeting:

RUL is receiving applications for the VPI/UL position.

A. DiPaolo is working to finish this year's budget. At this point, RUL is not being asked to model cuts.

There has been no replacement for Phonathon (P) funds.

Journals that have been borrowed more than five times have been identified. We will investigate whether it costs more to borrow them through interlibrary loan versus that purchasing a subscription. These journals are mostly in the sciences and social sciences. Cabinet accepted the mold policy and the policy regarding the acquisition and retention of journals. Further consolidation of print holdings may be explored.

The Physics Library is likely closing.

The Collections Analysis Group is considering new models for purchasing monographs. It is anticipated that the approval plan will have funding to run through the current fiscal year.

The HathiTrust Task Force held its initial meeting.

The university making a one-time payment to cover our CIC costs. Shared purchased are being finalized. We will purchase additional Alexander Street Press materials and backfiles of journals. T. Izbicki and Dan Mack (University of Maryland) are lobbying for a more responsive approach to CIC shared purchases.

RUL is working with the Beth Mardutho Library and others on a possible hidden collections grant for Middle Eastern materials.

Special Collections and University Archives will hire an archivist to process the Lautenberg papers.

There will be forthcoming exhibits for the Rutgers 250 Anniversary.

5. AUL Report- G. Agnew

Reported that her OLE presentation at the VALE User Conference was a success. She is happy with the current OLE release.

Reported on a visit to Lehigh to see their OLE implementation.

A test version of OLE was installed at Rutgers in October. We can do universal borrowing without additional programming. The alpha implementers now want to go live when RUL does in 2016.

The next goal for VALE is to make universal borrowing operational. This will enable live sharing of books across the five alpha institutions.

July 1, 2016 is the firm date for RUL to go live with OLE. This will give us an estimated $100,000 annual savings. LIS is the prime mover behind the transition and will serve as the OLE implementation team.

6. CTS Report- M.B. Weber

Ingram will provide iPage training in the spring. Ipage is the new interface for Ingram's user interface for acquisitions and ordering and will replace OASIS. People will not be asked to begin using iPage at this time.

7. DTS Report- G. Smulewitz

The DTS move to the Technical Services Building has been finalized. Things are going well and they hope to gain efficiencies from the change. There is a shelf in Alexander for people to drop off transfers and relocs. A DTS staff member will be at Alexander three days a week to handle them.

About three-fourths of cancellations have been completed. What has not been canceled: databases where the renewal is not yet due, databases for which the vendor was paid last year and a refund has been requested, and YBP resources. It is difficult to cancel resources with YBP since they require six weeks advance notice. Cancellations should be completed by February and DTS will analyze the monetary savings.

DTS is negotiating with JSTOR to reduce costs. They charge by the campus. We spend $127,000 yearly in access fees for what we purchased. We have reduced the status of size and category for purchase for Camden and Newark. New Brunswick will continue as is. This will be an ongoing reduction.

In addition to $800,000 from cancellations, $182,000 was also saved from renegotiated subscriptions.

DTS is gathering more meaningful statistics for collection analysis. They will examine more than just usage, and are adding enrollment for different disciplines and will use this information for next year's renewals.

DTS is doing a cash flow analysis for A. DiPaolo that includes how we negotiate inflation on an invoice by invoice basis.

DTS is working with Access Services, particularly Imaging Services, to transfer oversight of the microforms reading room. The work study students who staff the microforms reading room will remain on the DTS account for now and will eventually transfer to Access Services.

8. Article Request/CONTU Issues- J. Croft

Croft reported on an article request and CONTU issues report from G. Sandberg. CONTU is the National Commission on New Technological Uses of Copyright Work. ILL does triage for requests. They try to do most borrowing (physicals, returnables) within our borrowing group. If titles are available in EZBorrow, we borrow from them. JerseyCat, Uborrow, and METRO transactions are free but we pay a membership fee. If we can't borrow from one of the above, we go to SHARES libraries. If you lend more than borrow within SHARES, you receive a dividend. If SHARES is not viable, we borrow from unaffiliated libraries through OCLC.

There is a $15 standard fee for lending. The cost is greater for overseas.

Rapid is used for non-returnables (articles). There is a yearly fee, not a per item cost. The average cost is $20 per request. This includes staff time, shipping costs, etc.

We try to go to the least expensive place, and then go to places to which we pay an annual fee.

CONTU stipulates that we turn away people when they request more than five articles from the same journal. When the number of requests exceeds five, we might need to pay a copyright cost unless the request goes through the copyright clearance center.

We have had to turn away up to twenty-five requests for a single title. When this happens, should we purchase a subscription to the journal? The subscription cost must be compared to the cost to request a title if we are over the limit.

We also need to consider whether the same journal has had requests over a number of years. We want to avoid buying a journal when there has been only one year of requests.

Some journals refuse the over five requests limit and tell us we need to purchase the journal.

9. ILL, CONTU, and the Law- J. Pilch

Janice reported on the work of the small group tasked in September 2014 to make a recommendation concerning ILL payment practices. On July 1, 2014 the practice of charging ILL requesters for any balance over $25 in connection with ILL CONTU-related article requests took effect for legacy UMDNJ. Previously such costs were covered by the legacy UMDNJ libraries. This change has generated numerous complaints from RBHS requesters.

In recent years, legacy UMDNJ has paid about $997 annually in CONTU fees- not a significant amount. RUL CONTU costs in recent years have about $1,400 a year, also not significant. Patrons pay the remaining balance of roughly the same amount. The average number of requests has been 56, and with RUL paying $25, that adds up to about $2,800 in CONTU costs. The report being considered by Cabinet, with a figure of $95,634/year, was based on an extrapolation that differs greatly from actual payments.

The small task force recommended on December 18 that RUL revert to the previous UMDNJ practice by which the Libraries pay the full costs of CONTU payments for medical and life sciences requests, given the nature of those disciplines and given that this would be a simple and low-cost solution.

Janice explained that eliminating CONTU guidelines is not an option given their authority. CONTU is not an arbitrary fair use guideline, but rather a congressional interpretation of section 108(g)(2) of the law related to systematic reproduction and distribution done in such aggregate quantities as to substitute for a subscription to or purchase of such work. The guidelines are standard ILL practice nationwide. Other factors were suggested as contributing to a rise in requests, including the webscale discovery service that enables large numbers of ILL requests to be generated quickly and that a notice to users might be a solution.

T. Izbicki is working on a different solution, involving using one-time money to underwrite ILL costs this year while we look at our options This will be discussed by Cabinet.

J. Croft was asked to get the number of request for books and the number of requests for non-returnables. This information will be compared with previous years to determine if there are spikes in the academic year. If possible, this information on requests will also be sorted by faculty, graduate students, and undergraduates.

10. Collection Analysis Group Draft Charge- T. Izbicki

The group will broadly represent disciplines. Izbicki is formalizing the charge and the group will make recommendations to LRC. Agnew proposed another group with R. Marker and SC/UA to examine internal collection development, including Open Access. The chair would serve as an ex-officio member of the Collection Analysis Group.

There will be a special collections summit when the IJS director position is filled. Not all special collections are in SC/UA. Recommendations will be made to USC, Cabinet, etc. We need a coherent approach to these collections and they need to feed into what we are doing with digitization projects.

11. Handling current print periodicals in the absence of routine binding- G. Smulewitz

There is a crisis in that we have not bound periodicals in three years. There has been no agreement on how to handle what has been accumulating in the periodicals reading room. The Phonathon funds that had been used for binding have been diverted to collections.

This does not include RBHS. Their information is needed to calculate binding costs.

We need to review titles since some have electronic access. We need to determine which titles need to be bound. We need to look at those that have been canceled in print that have online access to see what has been kept and why and what has been embargoed. Recommendations need to be made in consultation with selectors. Possible exceptions are art and music.

12. Announcements- All

Smulewitz: Distributed the JerseyCat databases list. These are not represented in our databases list. We need to discuss what we want to include on the RUL pages. The list will be posted to Sakai. There are twenty databases. Izbicki will assign selectors to write descriptions.

Marker: TAS is hosting a Fulbright Scholar. She will make a public presentation before the next LRC meeting. Everyone is encouraged to attend.

13. Agenda for February 19, 2015 meeting

Mulcahy will issue a call for agenda items.

Possible future agenda item: Analyze whether SCOPUS is an adequate replacement for Web of Science. Do we need both?

URL: http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/rul/staff/groups/lrc/minutes/lrc_15_01_15.shtml
Website Feedback  |  Privacy Policy
© Copyright 1997-, Rutgers University Libraries