Spring 2002
Number 201

Table of Contents

Federal Libraries and Information Centers, Librarians and
   Technicians Win FLICC Awards

Board Talk
FLICC Forum Looks at Homeland Security
FLICC Executive Board Member Clara M. Smith Dies
Calling ALL Federal Librarians: FLICC Working Groups Need Volunteers
Editorial Staff

Federal Libraries and Information Centers, Librarians and Technicians Win FLICC Awards

The Federal Library and Information Center Committee (FLICC) announced the winners of its national awards for federal librarianship at the 19th Annual FLICC Forum on Federal Information Policies on March 19 at the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. The awards recognized the many innovative ways that federal libraries, librarians and library technicians fulfill the information demands of government, business, scholarly communities and the American public.

The award winners and their supervisors were honored at a ceremony preceding the annual Forum. General Donald L. Scott, Deputy Librarian of Congress, presented an award to each winner, who then made a few remarks. The winners’ names will also remain on permanent display in the FLICC offices at the Library of Congress.

Federal libraries and staff throughout the United States and abroad competed in three award categories for the fourth annual FLICC Awards. The winners’ efforts are presented below.

2001 Federal Library/Information Center of the Year

The National Defense University Library was recognized for its high level of customer service, the development of outstanding collections in support of the university’s mission, and its extraordinary reference services. In 2001, the library began offering distance learning students digital library access, digitized the personal papers of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and increased the library’s visibility through exhibits, tours and lectures, as well as high quality on-site and remote services.

2001 Federal Librarian of the Year

An abundance of highly qualified librarians with outstanding, innovative and sustained achievements in 2001 resulted in a tie for this category:

Pamela Dawes, Director, Haskell Library, Haskell Indian Nations University, Lawrence, Kansas, was recognized for conscientious and enthusiastic leadership in expanding and improving library services to the Haskell Indian Nations University. In 2001, she acquired supplemental funding grants and donated resources for the library that total more than $90,000. She initiated an aggressive acquisition program that increased holdings by 700 titles and created an American Indian language tapes collection. Her commitment to excellence increased the Haskell Library’s usage by 21 percent last year, and her advocacy efforts have led to enhanced accessibility for patrons with disabilities.

Lynne C. Tobin, Chief, Reference Library, National Imagery and Mapping Agency, Bethesda, Md., was recognized for her active and innovative leadership in expanding a small reference collection into a full-fledged branch of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) reference library. In 2001, she directed the retrospective conversion of legacy textual materials and loaded them into NIMA’s new Voyager ILS. Her efforts have improved access via employees’ workstations to texts and maps that are currently cataloged following MARC standards. The bibliographic instruction program and training materials she initiated are now recognized by the NIMA College.

2001 Federal Library Technician of the Year

Leslie Yeakley, Library Technician, DTIC Technical Library, Defense Technical Information Center, Fort Belvoir, Va., was recognized for her proactive work ethic exemplified by her consistent enthusiasm, initiative, tenacity and resourcefulness. In 2001, she served as the only DTIC library staff member for several months while at the same time testing software to map COSATI-format bibliographic records to the MARC format. She is also recognized for balancing her excellent technical competencies with a strong personal commitment to providing customer service. Patricia E. Tellman, Library Technician, Base Library, Naval Air Station, Fort Worth, Texas, received an honorable mention.

Information on the 2002 Award program will be announced later this summer. For the latest information on the awards, interested parties may refer to the FLICC Web site, http://www.loc.gov/flicc/wg/wg-award.html, where information regarding the 2002 nomination packet will be posted on the “What’s New” section as soon as it becomes available.


Board Talk

Everyone’s talking about recruiting new information professionals to replace the vast numbers of aging librarians who will be retiring during the next decade—even Laura Bush! (See http://www.imls.gov/whatsnew/current/011002-1.htm.) A few months ago when the First Lady announced that the Bush Administration would be recommending a $10 million initiative in 2003 to recruit a new generation of librarians, the FLICC Executive Board had already begun discussing the issue of recruitment for federal library jobs—and the FLICC Personnel Working Group had already begun considering activities they could undertake to support individual agency efforts.

During the past month, FLICC’s FEDLIB listserv was host to a rich two-week email exchange among library managers, library school students, topped-out library technicians and mid-career librarians with diverse and in some cases strongly-felt perspectives on federal opportunities for professional information work. Issues included: The inconsistency and inaccessibility of job postings on agency Web sites; the need to advance federal library technicians into professional positions; the lack of awareness at library schools (even our two DC-area MLIS programs) about federal library openings; the apparent dearth of mid-level opportunities for mid-career librarians from other sectors who are interested in federal jobs; and the confusion and ineffectiveness of the federal selection process in the rare instance when a potential applicant locates an appropriate job.

Some suggestions proposed in the listserv discussion were: promoting use by federal library recruiters of effective Web sites such as monster.com, the SLA Web site, or the FedWorld “Search for a Federal Job” site; FLICC’s making direct contact with library schools to improve their awareness of federal opportunities; work with OPM to improve the searchability of their site by library words as well as government series numbers; and presentations by federal librarians at library association job fairs or other conference venues.

Some other ideas the working group is considering are: federal library (government-wide) internships under the Student Career Experience Program and/or the Student Educational Employment Program (5 CFR 213.3202); exhibiting for federal libraries at library association conferences; providing a “pathfinder” to federal jobs on the FLICC Web site that can be easily promoted to all library schools; and developing an appealing brochure that would give an overview of federal libraries and examples of federal library jobs that could be broadcast to interest library professionals in a federal career.

The FLICC Personnel Working Group will be exploring many of these options and others over the next several months. If you have additional ideas—or would like to participate on the working group—contact me at [email protected], or contact Working Group Chair Tad Downing (GPO) at [email protected]. Send your ideas to the FEDLIB discussion listserv. (If you are not on the FEDLIB listserv, go to http://lcweb.loc.gov/flicc/listsrvs.html#fedlib for instructions to sign up.)

          Susan M. Tarr
          FLICC Executive Director


FLICC Forum Looks at Homeland Security

In the wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, many government agencies changed Web sites, FOIA practices, physical premises access, and perhaps even their publishing practices, to improve information security. The 19th Annual FLICC Forum on Federal Information Policies focused on the impact of these changes with its program, “Homeland Security: Impact of Policy Changes on Government Information Access,” on March 19, 2002 at the Library of Congress.

Following the Fourth Annual FLICC Awards Program, Winston Tabb, Associate Librarian of Congress, began by asking the audience to consider what the Forum focus might have been if not for the events of September 11.

“Early last fall we were discussing the National Book Festival, 24/7 reference, and digital preservation. Within minutes of the attacks, familiar terms like security, access, privacy, safety, preservation, freedom took on renewed and deeper meanings,” said Tabb.

Looking at how federal libraries have been affected, Tabb noted in addition to the USA Patriot Act which may, in the interest of national security, modify some of the privacy protections that have limited use of personal information collected by the government, “government leaders have supported greater scrutiny in the releasing of government information to the public, while acknowledging that information sharing WITHIN the government, among the various agencies, is of vital importance to the national security.”

Before introducing the Executive Keynote Speaker, Viet Dinh, Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Policy at the Department of Justice, Tabb concluded his remarks by posing the pertinent question of the day: How should federal libraries and information centers respond to these changes while continuing to fulfill their mission to provide quality information for the government and from the government?

Information Is the Key

Addressing the crowd of federal librarians and other information specialists, Dinh said, “The overriding objective of the Justice Department is to prevent terrorist attacks, and those of you in this room are our critical partners in this effort. Information is the key to the prevention of terrorist attacks. You must help educate the citizenry by disseminating the true policies of our government. It is critical that citizens be fully engaged in the war on terrorism.”

Dinh acknowledged the balancing act between privacy and national security. “Within the framework of the Constitution, how can we prevent terrorism?” he asked. Dinh said he believes the answer lies in having a comprehensive plan to exchange information that not only protects the nation’s core values as articulated in the Constitution, but also provides law enforcement with the tools it needs to combat terrorism.

This issue was addressed by Congress in the USA Patriot Act of 2001 (P.L.107-56), which the president signed into law in October. The purpose of the legislation, which, according to Dinh, was enacted in “record time,” is to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools in order to deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world.

“The act relaxed the legal barriers that prevent information sharing between the criminal side and the intelligence side [of an investigation],” said Dinh. “Information cannot just be gathered and lay dormant. It must be shared with the proper defense personnel. The president has said that this is a long-term war, and all hands must be on deck. In that case, the left hand must know what the right hand is doing, and that includes the state and local law enforcement agencies that are on the front line.”

Dinh also stressed the need to update the laws to reflect the latest technologies. “The laws governing criminal surveillance were developed in 1968 in an era of rotary phones and analog technology,” noted Dinh. According to Dinh, Congress recently addressed this by updating existing laws so that cable companies are treated like telephone companies, thereby making them subject to Title II wiretapping laws.

“We seek to deliver to Americans freedom from fear, but we must protect that freedom through the law,” said Dinh. “We have a common set of values that are under attack. But if we lose these values [in the process of crafting security policy] the terrorists will have won.”

Prior to assuming his current position in the Justice Department, Dinh was a professor of law and deputy director of Asian law and policy studies at the Georgetown University Law Center. A graduate of Harvard Law School, Dinh served as a law clerk to Judge Laurence H. Silberman of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. He also served as associate special counsel to the U.S. Senate Whitewater Committee and special counsel to Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N. Mex.) for the impeachment trial of President Clinton.

Executive Branch Looks for Balance

The morning panel on Agency Initiatives featured Patrice McDermott, Assistant Director, Office of Government Relations, American Library Association; Nancy Blair, Chief Librarian, U.S. Geological Survey Library and U.S. Geological Survey Security Task Force; and W. Russell Neuman, Senior Policy Analyst, Technology Division, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of the President.

McDermott, formerly of OMB Watch, launched into her presentation by saying, “Living in interesting times can be a blessing or a curse and at the moment I only see the curse.Congress and the judiciary suppressed their doubts and somewhat better judgement and passed the USA Patriot Act in a mad rush,” said McDermott.

While McDermott was encouraged that not all agencies have taken material down from their Web sites and that only one item had been withdrawn from federal depository libraries, she said, “The sky may be sagging badly in a few places, but it is not falling. We need to parse out our response carefully and thoughtfully.”

After a review of several examples regarding how abruptly access to information changed after last September, she warned the audience that “powerful industry forces have been trying for years to prevent public access to regulatory information they submit to agencies because it usually shows them in a bad light. The regulatory agencies were among the very first to take information down.”

McDermott asked federal libraries to remember that the public trusts government to protect its best interests, but should hold it accountable as well. “Who watches the watchers? Whose interests are being protected when information is withheld from the public?”

“The really scary part is that we don’t know how much information has been removed. This stems from the vast amount of information available. If we had good inventories of Web sites, we would know what had been removed. But we do not have inventories of the information so we do not know if agencies have not cataloged what is removed or preserved it,” said McDermott. She voiced further concern that there is no dialog going on, no real discussion. “How do we weigh the risks about everyone not knowing about vulnerability and hazards, and how do we weigh the interests of science and the public. Clearly there is not going to be an advanced notice in the Federal Register that a document is going to be taken down,” said McDermott.

McDermott concluded that “the events of September 11 have caused us to revisit some of our assumptions about openness and easy accessibility of government information. We need to hold our principles firmly in hand as we do that revisiting.”

Blair updated the audience about her agency and the press coverage it received soon after the attacks of September 11, 2001. “A single USGS publication received more attention than any other government Web site or report which was withdrawn. It was a U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) CD-ROM entitled Source Area Characteristics of Large Public Surface-Water Supplies in the Conterminous United States: An Information Resource for Source-Water Assessment, 1999,” said Blair. “The U.S. Geological Survey is a small agency not used to receiving media attention except when there are earthquakes or volcanic eruptions.”

“When our CD-ROM title was removed from depository, the information content was not destroyed. We will not attempt to retrieve widely distributed documents, but now the process of releasing new scientific information or updating old releases will take into consideration new directives relating to security concerns,” said Blair.

In early October, USGS set up an Operations Center for Homeland Security Activities to respond to the large number of inquiries that were received and a committee to develop guidelines for the scientific teams to evaluate releases of science information in the light of security concerns. This committee developed an internal guidance document entitled “USGS Product Access and Distribution Guidance,” which was released in December 2001. The guidance document outlines who evaluates the sensitivity of a particular publication, it established procedures for recalling publications, and states that documents already in wide distribution would not be recalled.

Blair ended her remarks by saying, “Government employees need to walk a line between security requirements and freedom of access to information. The USGS has developed guidelines that combine concerns for both. It is in the nation’s best interest that the USGS continue to be a source of the natural science information necessary for research and decision-making purposes while responding to the heightened concerns for public safety.”

Representing the administrtion’s point of view, Neuman said it was time for two slogans and then for two memos. He reminded the audience of the World War II adage “silence means security” and its corresponding phrase “loose lips sink ships.” He then asked attendees to think about the current slogan “Information wants to be free.”

“I want to ask you to think about the character of information during the Second World War and the issue of the war on terrorism that characterizes the new world of today,” said Neuman. “The irony of comparing ‘silence means security’ and ‘information needs to be free’ is important for us as we struggle with the balancing act of policies and procedures.”

Then Neuman returned to the two memos. He reported that a memo will soon circulate from the President’s Chief of Staff, Andrew Card, dealing with the specific issue of information related to weapons of mass destruction. The memo is intended to remind agencies of existing authority and policy already in place. “It is much like the attorney general’s memo (on FOIA) which traditionally is a reiteration of the new administration’s respect for the principles of the FOIA process and a reminder that the exceptions to FOIA relate to case law,” said Neuman.

According to Neuman, the second memo, expected in May, “will address the more difficult and nuanced subject of critical infrastructure protection. Here we need to address existing policy to see if is adequate to meet the needs of security.”

Information Sharing Vs. Cyber Terrorism

The afternoon session of the forum began with a congressional keynote address delivered by Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-VA). He began his remarks by affirming that information sharing among government agencies and between the public and private sectors is a critical element in the war against terrorism.

Representative Davis then voiced his concerns about federal information security in an era of cyber terrorism. Citing the results of a recent survey by the House Subcommittee on Government Efficiency, Financial Management and Intergovernmental Relations, Davis reported that 16 out of 24 federal agencies received a grade of F in the area of information security.

“Information security is our greatest vulnerability,” said Davis. “As a result of the information revolution and the ever-evolving technologies that support information collection, our vulnerability has grown exponentially. These terrorist groups may be fundamentalists, who are anti-information and anti-globalization, but they do understand our networks and inter-connectivity, and they are developing technologies to destroy them. The next attack is not likely to be by air. The amount of damage that can be done to our critical infrastructure outweighs that done on September 11.”

Compounding the problem, according to Davis, is the fact that federal information security suffers from a lack of coordinated management. “All the information was out there [prior to September 11], but no one was talking to anyone else,” said Davis, referring to the Immigration and Naturalization Service and other agencies. “It is a hodgepodge of turf wars,” he said. “In my opinion there is no framework for a coordinated effort.”

To combat the problem, Davis has introduced several pieces of legislation. The most recent, the Federal Information Security Management Act (H.R. 3844), would strengthen federal government information security; one provision would require information security risk management standards. Introduced by Davis on March 5, and co-sponsored by Rep. Stephen Horn (R-Calif.), the legislation would require the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to make standards for information technology security compulsory among federal agencies. It would require risk assessments, periodic reviews, and security awareness training for employees.

“The federal government must first put its own house in order,” said Davis. “We can’t afford to delay.”

Davis believes that, given its importance, the responsibility for coordinating federal information security should be a function housed within the Executive Office of the President. Toward this end, he introduced a bill several years ago that would have created a federal chief information officer position, reporting directly to the president. However, Davis has no immediate plans to reintroduce the bill, given the recent establishment of an associate director of information technology and electronic government in OMB.

Davis also feels strongly that there must be a coordinated effort between the public and private sectors to combat electronic terrorism. “The private sector controls about 90 percent of our telecommunications systems,” noted Davis. “The government is responsible for national security and law enforcement. The two must engage in a responsible, candid dialog. Without the cooperation of the private sector, we are hopelessly vulnerable.”

To further communication between the government and private sector, Davis introduced the Cyber Security Information Act (H.R. 2435) on July 10, 2001, two months before the terrorist attacks. The bill would “encourage the secure disclosure and protected exchange of information about cyber security problems, solutions, test practices and test results, and related matters in connection with critical infrastructure protection.”

Davis hopes the legislation will go forward, but acknowledges that it will be an uphill battle.

“There are barriers to information sharing, such as antitrust laws,” said Davis. “At the moment, private industry has every incentive not to disclose any information.”

According to Davis, private industry must be given the assurance they need to share information with the federal government in much the same way as they did to address the Y2K computer problem.

“This is not about the public knowing [what private companies are doing], but about the government knowing,” said Davis. Referring to the implications of the legislation, Davis said, “Everything is a trade-off. Let’s not let the ‘perfect’ be the enemy of the ‘very good.’”

Interagency Efforts Are Critical

Following Davis, the afternoon panel explored accomplishments in and future prospects for interagency information sharing, including what systems and standards are needed to improve security while aiding information flow among government units. Panelists June Daniels, Senior Systems Analyst, Foreign Affairs Systems Integration Program, Department of State; Kurt Molholm, Administrator, Defense Technical Information Center; and Francis Buckley, Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, discussed techniques agencies use to back up and secure sensitive information to ensure its integrity and persistence.

Daniels began by describing the State Department as “the department of diplomacy...so we guard our tongues at all levels.” She then reported on the Overseas Presence Interagency Collaboration/KM System she has been part of developing and which was accelerated by the events of September 11.

“Our project started in a tragedy, just like the September 11 events. Ours was the coordinated embassy bombings in August 1998,” said Daniels. She said the agency’s accountability review board developed a set of findings which it sent to the Overseas Presence Advisory panel. This report looked at how the agency did business overseas and how it could be done better with reduced vulnerabilities.

The panel made several recommendations regarding facility, right sizing, security, and information technology (IT). The IT recommendations included applying knowledge management in overseas posts, using Internet and Internet-like technology to support interagency collaboration, developing a common, interoperable IT platform among agencies at posts, and establishing mechanisms to provide public access to the services of the foreign affairs community.

“We need to be able to work together—all the agency presences overseas. The panel found that the lack of a common infrastructure made information exchange difficult,” said Daniels. She added that “September 11 has made us restrict information sharing with the public but it has created a boon for sharing information between agencies.”

Her project will begin as a pilot program developed by integrators from commercial, off-the-shelf-software. It will include advanced search capabilities, Internet services, common directories, email, individual and post Web pages. She said the project was “not about the technology but about cultural change. Knowledge management and knowledge sharing is a cultural change at State. We need to get people to know that sharing information is real power and can help get work done.”

Buckley, who administers the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP) and GPO Access, opened his remarks with a quotation from the eighteenth-century author and lexicographer, Samuel Johnson: “Integrity without knowledge is weak and useless, and knowledge without integrity is dangerous and dreadful.”

Buckley said, “Without free access to knowledge, the integrity of our nation and its citizens would be ‘weak and useless’ indeed. However, recent events have demonstrated just how ‘dangerous and dreadful’ that same knowledge can be when it is not coupled with integrity.”

He outlined the continuing challenge for GPO as one that required it to be as inclusive as possible, to identify public interest materials produced through GPO or agency publishing channels, to provide bibliographic control for the materials, and to provide the publications to depository libraries for public access. “Post 9-11 that mission has not changed, but agency sensitivity to what should be distributed to the public is heightening. There are no specific guidelines or criteria to determine what non-classified information the agency has published, or may publish in the future, in tangible or online formats, should be withheld from the public as administrative or official use only in the interest of national security,” said Buckley.

Molholm set the stage for his remarks with a brief description of the Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) as the central repository for defense acquisition, scientific and technical information for bona fide users. He said DTIC maintains the Defense Department’s science and technology databases, and other databases of interest, providing controlled access to information products and networks. It also administers Information Analysis Centers, provides support and services to Defense Technical Libraries and the Office of the Secretary of Defense.

Its role as the operator for the Defense Certification and Registration Services is part of its concept of operations. “DTIC is DoD’s front door to information resources through the Internet, its door to controlled information resources through its Intranets, and its content repository and information processor,” said Molholm.

The registration process is what makes the release and dissemination process work efficiently. Molholm said, “By establishing an agreement before the fact on what information can be provided and establish accountability and authority for release speeds the release process.” In addition, each technical document receives a distribution statement that limits its distribution.

For electronic resources, DTIC has also established the Lightweight Data Access Protocol (LDAP) and set up a Web-based registration system for users. “This system allows us to provide access to limited access Web sties and reduce the burden on system administrators,” said Molholm. “Because DTIC and others share the LDAP single-user database, content owners can manage user groups while users have just one password to access diverse Web sites.”

In direct response to the events of last September, DTIC initiated additional collection building by acquiring documents on homeland defense and topics related to the war on terrorism. Staff members also began physically searching and prioritizing older documents for digitizing. “We have also been answering many questions for areas such as sensor technology and chemical and biological defense. The queries have come from all over including other federal agencies, state and local governments and foreign countries,” said Molholm.

DTIC has also launched its “Defend America” and “Current Focus” Web sites via secured Web servers accessible only to authorized users. Both offer authoritative information resources screened by subject matter experts and encrypted for transmission. “Current Focus has reduced thousands of unscreened materials to a selected few links and documents to provide users specialized information support service,” said Molholm.

Molholm reported that “there are already over 800 registered users for Current Focus. Eighty percent of our users are from .mil and .gov servers. Homeland security and thermobaric warfare are among the most frequently requested parts of the site.”

Forum Finale Stresses Privacy

Peter Swire, Visiting Professor of Law, The George Washington University Law School, offered a finale for the Forum with a look at “Changes in Privacy Policies in the Interest of National Security.” He began with an overview of his background that included being Clinton’s Chief Counselor for Privacy in 1999 and 2000 and then moved onto a review of the laws regarding privacy beginning in 1970.

“The first wave of privacy activity was in response to the rise of the mainframe computer,” said Swire. “The Fair Credit Report Act and the Privacy Act of the 1970s were designed to develop fair information practices of notice, choice, access, security, and accountability.” The second wave of activity resulted from having mainframe capabilities on a laptop or desktop computer along with the development of the Internet. “Data transfers are now free, instant and global. How do we respond to more databases and more transfers?” asked Swire.

The Clinton Administration developed legal protections for children, and for medical and financial data. They used self-regulation as a path to progress, watching 88 percent of commercial Web sites developing privacy policies. “We wanted the government to be a model; so we worked with every agency to develop privacy policies as well and to prevent the government from storing cookies on users’ systems,” said Swire.

Swire then gave a detailed review of the history and current status of wiretapping and surveillance laws. While the Clinton Administration had proposed updating these laws for the Internet age, complete with a 15-agency working group discussing related issues, The USA Patriot Act made sweeping changes in response to the events of September 11.

Introduced less than a week after the attacks, the new laws included nationwide “trap and trace” laws that made one court order effective nationwide. Swire was concerned about the implications of these changes and posed several tough questions. “If you receive an order from a judge in Idaho late at night, how would you challenge that? How much would such an order cover if a suspect used a public library? Would anyone in the library be covered?”

Swire also took a look at the new laws that allowed law enforcement to “surf behind” an Internet user. The previous low limited an Internet service provider (ISP) to monitoring its own system and giving evidence of a previous attack. But it did not allow and ISP to invite law enforcement in to catch ‘burglars’. “The new laws allow the FBI to ask an ISP to invite it in and then camp at the ISP permanently,” said Swire. “I am concerned that there was never a hearing on this matter in Congress. It also has no time limit and no reporting requirement.”

“After 9/11 there is a greater focus on cyber security. Hackers are no longer cute,” said Swire. Cyber security and the need to protect critical infrastructure have led to greater tolerance for surveillance. “Many people believe this is justified by greater risks,” said Swire. But Swire said security and privacy can work together. “Good security protects information against unauthorized use, accounting becomes more obviously desirable, and a security system upgrade can be an upgrade for other requirements, like privacy, as well.”

Swire called the USA Patriot Act a work in progress. “Imagine an architecture that meets legitimate security needs and also respects privacy. Better data handling often results in both.” He said the homework was “to get engaged, to study the pros and cons of the new provisions.” He called for hearings that look at both new forms of accountability and how to stop potential abuses.

“We need accountability to ensure that the new powers are used wisely. Let’s get to work on that,” said Swire.


FLICC Executive Board Member
Clara M. Smith Dies

Clara M. Smith, Librarian Supervisor at the Department of Transportation, and new member of the FLICC Executive Board (FEB), died April 4, 2002.

Smith was born in Flint, Michigan, the fourth of nine children. She earned her bachelor’s degree in European History from Eastern Michigan University in Ypsilanti, Michigan and her masters degree in library science from the University of Michigan. She also earned a Ph.D. in Law from the University of Toledo in Toledo, Ohio.

In 1986, Smith began her library career as an Assistant Librarian at Howard University. She joined the federal library community through the Department of Transportation in 1992. During her tenure at Transportation, she earned a Special Achievement Award and a Superior Achievement Award.

She was very active at the Tenth Street Baptist Church where she was a member of the New Members Club, the Budget Committee and the Prison Ministry. She taught Sunday School, the Mid-Week School of the Bible, and was an instructor for the New Member Discipleship Training.

Smith leaves seven siblings, Curtis of Memphis, Tennessee; Shirley Moore of Flint, Michigan; Joyce Porter of Lansing, Michigan; Patricia Smith of Swartz Creek, Michigan; Tommie Jr. of Lafayette, Louisiana; Tyrone of Fenton, Michigan; Alfred of Flint, Michigan; thirteen nieces and nephews and a host of other relatives and friends.


Calling All Federal Librarians:
FLICC Working Groups Need Volunteers

  • Do you want to add your perspective to the federal library and information center community?
  • Do you want to contribute your experience to solve federal information problems?
  • Do you have ideas and opinions to share with colleagues?

Joining a FLICC working group means you can influence the future of federal librarianship. Even if you work outside the Washington, D.C. area, you can still participate fully electronically and telephonically. There are many vital issues that need your input to maintain the quality and professional performance of federal libraries. You can help!

Tackle Recruitment Issues

The FLICC Personnel Working Group is initiating an effort to improve federal library recruitment. They have already identified a number of ideas, including exploring library school internships, sending FLICC representatives to visit library schools, expanding general federal recruitment representation at national library conferences, and creating a Web “pathfinder” on federal library jobs on the FLICC Web site.

If you would like to work on these ideas or have your own ideas on how to attract well-qualified librarians to the federal sector, please send email to Tad Downing, the Personnel Working Group Chair, at [email protected].

Expand Professional Horizons

After an exciting focus group session at the December FLICC quarterly meeting, the Education Working Group is developing new programming for federal librarians and technicians. The top rated topics all embraced business skills for librarians, including

  • strategic planning/business planning
  • communication skills–networking/advocacy/politicking/schmoozing
  • program promotion/ marketing/highlighting value
  • management of change
  • e-metrics/qualitative and quantitative measurements/benchmarking
  • end-user training/remote instruction skills.

With so many programs and activities anticipated, there are opportunities for both regional and national members interested in helping FLICC to create an outstanding educational program. To add your talents to this working group, please send email to Sandy Morton Schwalb, the working group chair, at [email protected].

To learn more about all the FLICC working groups, visit the FLICC Web site at http://lcweb.loc.gov/flicc/mmabout.html or call Anna Bohlin in the FLICC Publications and Education office at (202) 707-4800.


Editorial Staff

The FLICC Newsletter is published by the Federal Library and Information Center Committee. Suggestions of areas for Federal Library and Information Center Committee attention or items appropriate for inclusion in the FLICC Newsletter should be sent to:

FLICC Newsletter
Federal Library and Information Center Committee
Library of Congress
101 independence Ave., SE, Adams Bldg., Room 217
Washington, DC 20540-4935
Email: [email protected]
Internet: http://lcweb.loc.gov/flicc

FLICC Executive Director's Office
Phone: (202) 707-4800
Fax: (202) 707-4818

FEDLINK Fiscal Operations
Phone: (202) 707-4900
Fax: (202) 707-4999

Susan M. Tarr

Robin Hatziyannis

Gail Fineberg
and Audrey Fischer

Mitchell Harrison

The Federal Library and Information Center Committee was established in 1965 to foster excellence in federal library and information services through inter agency cooperation and to provide guidance and direction for the Federal Library and Information Network (FEDLINK).


Return to FLICC Home Page

Library of Congress

Library of Congress Help Desk ( June 4, 2002 )