[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 134 (Wednesday, September 25, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11326-S11328]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




              AUTHORITY TO PRINT REPORT AS SENATE DOCUMENT

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the report 
mandated by Public Law 101-423, entitled ``Final Report to Congress on 
the Joint Resolution to Establish a National Policy on Permanent 
Papers,'' be printed as a Senate document, and I ask further that 300 
additional copies be made available for use of the Joint Committee on 
the Library.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. PELL. Mr. President, I am pleased to call to the attention of my 
colleagues--especially those who co-sponsored my legislation 
establishing a national policy on permanent paper --the final mandated 
report to the Congress on progress in reaching the objectives of that 
policy. That legislation, which became Public Law 101-423 on October 
12, 1990, stated that:

       It is the policy of the United States that Federal records, 
     books, and publications of enduring value be produced on acid 
     free permanent papers.

  The Librarian of Congress, the Archivist of the United States, and 
the Public Printer were required to make three progress reports to the 
Congress over a 5 year period, and the last of these has now been made, 
reporting developments through 1995. This latest report is a record of 
remarkable progress and I am pleased that it will be printed as a 
Senate document.
  When I first introduced a permanent paper bill in October 1988, 
almost all documents and publications produced by the Federal 
Government or by Federal funds were on acidic papers with a useful life 
of less than 100 years. These papers had been in general use since the 
mid-19th century. The Federal Government was not unique. State and 
local governments and private publishers all used such papers.
  Librarians and archivists had for some time expressed their concerns 
about the loss of irreplaceable historical, cultural and scientific 
books, publications and other records. Many millions of dollars were 
already being spent by research libraries, foundations, and State and 
Federal governments either to save these materials by deacidification 
or to preserve their contents by microfilming--both costly processes.
  I might note that when the present Librarian of Congress, James H. 
Billington, appeared before the Senate

[[Page S11327]]

Committee on Rules and Administration for his confirmation hearing on 
July 14, 1987, he described at considerable length the deterioration of 
the holdings of our national library. In response to our questions, he 
told us that he regarded the problem of ``brittle books'' as a major 
one, both retrospectively, in terms of salvaging the records of the 
last century and a half, and prospectively, in terms of preventing 
continuation of the problem. He spoke of the need for ``mobilizing 
informed opinion to assure that we get a better response from those who 
publish, so that this problem is not with us in the future.''
  It was by no coincidence that an active campaign to ``mobilize 
informed opinion'' ensued thereafter. Many people throughout the 
library community were actively involved, but I would particularly like 
to cite the efforts of Robert Frase, former vice president and 
economist of the Association of American Publishers. Mr. Frase was 
instrumental in conceiving and helping to bring to fruition the 
resolution to establish a National Policy on Permanent Paper, which as 
I indicated, was first introduced in 1988.
  Looking back at the short span of eight years since that time, one is 
struck by the relatively low level of activity in permanent paper 
production that then prevailed. Research had demonstrated that the 
deterioration of papers produced from mid-19th century onward was 
caused by chemicals in a process using wood pulp rather than rags as 
raw material. The resulting acidic papers began to yellow and crumble 
(hence the term ``brittle books'') within a few decades, while the 
earlier rag papers continued to last for centuries. Research financed 
by the Council on Library resources and others, however, had 
demonstrated that wood pulp based papers could be produced by 
an alkaline process, resulting in estimated useful lives comparable 
with the old rag papers. A small amount of such papers was actually 
being produced.

  What was required at that point was an increased awareness of the 
problem and a dramatic demonstration that something was going to be 
done about it. This would then lead to an increased demand for new 
papers, and in turn induce paper mills to convert to an alkaline 
process. Increased production would result in lower costs and prices 
competitive with acidic papers. The American Library Association 
started the ball rolling by passing its first resolution on this 
subject in January 1988. After my first bill was introduced in October 
of that year it was promptly endorsed by another ALA resolution in 
early 1989. This led to similar resolutions by other U.S. organizations 
and then by the International Federation of Library Associations and 
Institutions [IFLA] and the International Publishers Association later 
in 1989.
  A big and prominent institution was needed to provide the impact of 
taking the first step into an action program, and the U.S. Government 
was an obvious choice. Its responsible agencies--the Library of 
Congress and National Archives--were well aware of the issues and the 
enormous problems and costs which were building up for the future 
unless alkaline paper came into general use; it was the world's largest 
producer of publications and documents; and its example would have a 
profound influence both at home and abroad. These were the 
considerations that led to the introduction of the bills that became 
Public Law 101-423 --my Senate Joint Resolution 57 and Representative 
Pat Williams' House Joint Resolution 226, both in early 1989.
  Public Law 101-423 did not mandate the use of alkaline papers by 
Federal agencies. To have done so would have been impractical because 
the supply of such papers was limited and the price uncompetitive. But 
by establishing a policy and a goal, it set a process in motion which 
in a period of a few years would achieve the same results.
  An important technical prerequisite to realizing the goal was the 
establishment of a clear definition of the term ``acid free permanent 
paper.'' Since the most important factor in paper deterioration is 
acidity any long-lived paper must be acid free, or alkaline. To be 
permanent, however, a paper must conform to additional technical 
specifications, the most widely recognized of which is designated as 
the American National Standard and often referred to by the acronym 
ANSI/NISO. The technical designation is ``American National Standard 
for Permanence of Paper for Publications and Documents in Libraries and 
Archives, ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992.'' As a practical matter, companies 
deciding to produce alkaline paper can easily take the small further 
steps required to produce permanent paper meeting the ANSI/NISO 
standard.
  An important feature of Public Law 101-423 was a monitoring device to 
help ensure that the national policy was actually being carried out, 
and that device is the requirement that three progress reports be made 
to the Congress on December 31, 1991, 1993, and 1995, by the Librarian 
of Congress, the Archivist of the United States, and the Public 
Printer. Although the 1995 report is the last to be required by law, 
these three officials have stated their intention to continue to 
monitor progress in achieving the goals of the legislation on an ad hoc 
basis. I welcome their decision, a sentiment I am sure is shared by the 
many members of Congress who have taken an interest in this matter, as 
well as those in the library, archival, scholarly and historical 
professions throughout the world. I urge that these progress reports 
continue to be issued every 2 years through the rest of this century.


                   Progress in the Federal Government

  Since Public Law 101-423 focused on the production of Federal 
records, books and publications of enduring value on acid-free 
permanent paper, I am very pleased to note that the third report 
documents a number of very encouraging developments in this regard. 
Here are some of the most notable:
  The National Archives and Records administration has circulated 
widely bulletin No. 95-7, Procurement of Writing, Copying, and Printing 
Papers for Federal Records, which provides guidance to Federal agencies 
in the use of alkaline and permanent papers. Permanent or alkaline 
papers are recommended for all Federal records; at least alkaline for 
routine use; and permanent in offices that create and file a high 
proportion of long-term and permanent records.
  There has been a notable increase in the availability of permanent 
and alkaline paper for Government use. When Public Law was enacted in 
1990, the Joint Committee on Printing listed only one grade of 
permanent paper. In 1995 it had four; plus 16 grades of alkaline paper.
  The General Services Administration provides papers for purchase by 
Federal agencies that match the standards set by the Joint Committee on 
Printing.
  The executive branch has ruled that the requirements of Executive 
Order 12873 mandating the use of recycled paper by Federal agencies are 
not to conflict in any way with the concurrent requirement for 
permanent paper use.
  The National Endowment for the Humanities and the National Historical 
Records Commission mandate the use of permanent and alkaline papers in 
projects they fund.
  The National Library of Medicine has carried on a remarkably 
successful, and little recognized, campaign to ensure that the world's 
biomedical journals are printed on alkaline or permanent paper. This 
effort was started in 1988. Then only 4 percent of the 3,000 journals 
throughout the world that were indexed in the Library's Index Medicus 
were being printed on alkaline paper. Due in large part to the 
Library's campaign, this figure had risen by April 1995 to 91 percent.


                     Progress in the Private Sector

  The ultimate success of the permanent paper campaign depends on 
inducing changes in the nongovernmental sector. Governments--Federal, 
State, and local--primarily produce documents, many of which, of 
course, need to be preserved. But publications, the carriers of our 
literature, culture, history and science, are overwhelmingly produced 
by private publishers, profit and nonprofit. These publishers had to be 
persuaded to use permanent paper and the paper mills had to be 
persuaded to produce it. Publishers would not use permanent paper, even 
if they thought they should, because it was not easily available at 
competitive prices. Paper manufacturing companies saw no reason to 
shift to an alkaline process lacking a strong demand from publishers.
  It was here that the development of standards for permanent paper 
played

[[Page S11328]]

an important role. These were developed primarily in the private sector 
by a collaborative effort of profit and non-profit organizations, but 
with participation also of Government agencies. Such standards enable 
publishers to state their permanent paper requirements without having 
to develop, by themselves, the specifications included in their paper 
purchasing contracts. We have already taken note of the 1992 American 
National Standard ANSI/NISO, which was first developed by the library 
and publishing committee of the American National Standards Institute 
in 1984 and subsequently revised and expanded in 1992. Standards had 
also been developed by the American Society for Testing and Materials 
and the Council on Library Resources. Since publishing, paper 
manufacturing, and libraries are not confined to national boundaries, 
it was appropriate that an international standard for permanent paper 
compatible with the American standard should be published in 1994.

  In the spring of 1988, the New York Public Library began a campaign, 
jointly with well-known authors, to get book publishers to use alkaline 
or permanent paper. Public pledges to this effect were secured from 
prominent publishing houses. The industry trade group, the Association 
of American Publishers, gave its endorsement to the campaign. 
University presses--publishers of scholarly, scientific, and historical 
works, had earlier recognized the problem of paper deterioration and 
had begun to use alkaline paper for their relatively small editions. 
They have not only been the most faithful in doing so, but also in 
noting this fact in the books themselves and in the bibliographic 
information provided to the Library of Congress under the Cataloging in 
Publication program.
  But the most gratifying development in the private sector in the past 
several years has been the great increase in the production of 
permanent papers in the United States and Canada. A 1988 report of the 
Congressional Office of Technology Assessment had estimated that only 
15 to 25 percent of the books produced in the United States were on 
acid-free paper and predicted that this percentage was unlikely to 
change. It now appears that this prediction has proven to be unduly 
cautious.
  Two indications of this production increase may be noted. The first 
is the fact that 99.9 percent of book papers procured through bulk 
purchase by the Government Printing Office in 1995 were alkaline. The 
second is the information provided in North American Permanent Papers 
1995, published as a public service by Abbey Publications of Austin, 
Texas. This catalog of papers produced by 34 United States and Canadian 
companies lists by brand name 423 different papers that are reported to 
meet the specifications of the 1994 ANSI/NISO permanent paper standard.
  The great increase in permanent paper production has come about 
primarily through the conversion of existing paper mills from acid to 
alkaline processes, a shift encouraged by regulations issued under the 
Clean Water Act, requiring the reduction of pollution of streams by the 
effluent of paper mills. Conversion to an alkaline process reduces this 
pollution, but also results in the production of paper at the same or 
lesser cost. The happy result was that environmental preservation 
helped to promote the availability of acid-free paper.


                         Progress in the States

  Connecticut led the way to conversion to permanent paper at the State 
level. As a result of a campaign led by the State Librarian, the first 
statute was enacted in 1988. Subsequently additional legislation 
extended the use long-lived paper to most State and local documents. In 
later years many other States took action, either by legislation or 
administrative rulings, to require alkaline or permanent paper use to 
some degree. But few went as far as Connecticut. The progress of State 
legislation was stimulated by three letters to State Governors from the 
U.S. National Commission on Libraries and Information Services calling 
attention to developments under the Federal law and requesting 
information on State activity. The last such survey, jointly with the 
Library of Congress, was conducted in July 1995. In the third report 
the following 21 States were listed as having taken some kind of 
action: Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, 
Kansas, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New 
Mexico, North Carolina, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, 
Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. Utah has now been 
added to that list.


                             International

  The international library community had long been aware of the 
problem of brittle books. The subject was discussed as early as the 
1920's at a conference in Europe. It was not until 1989, however, that 
the first resolution urging action was adopted by the International 
Federation of Library Associations and Institutions [IFLA]. A similar 
resolution was adopted that same year by the International Association 
of Publishers. Note has already been taken of the impact of the program 
of the U.S. National Library of Medicine on biomedical journals 
throughout the world.
  Nevertheless, until recently European publishers and governments 
lagged behind this country. A 1993 survey of 142 publishers in 17 
European countries reported that: 31 did not know that most currently 
used book paper becomes brittle after 50 years; and 90 were unaware of 
the ANSI/NISO permanent paper standards. Governments, with some notable 
exceptions, have been slow to require the use permanent paper by 
legislation or administrative regulations, even with respect to their 
own publications and documents. The same has been true of the agencies 
of the United Nations. But in the last couple of years the pace has 
picked up. A number of European organizations, both official and 
private, are now actively promoting permanent paper. European paper 
manufactures contributed to a 1994 catalog listing about 100 different 
permanent papers being sold by 26 paper mills or their agents--papers 
meeting the specifications of the 1992 American National Standard.


                                Summary

  It is now 9 years since I first raised the question with Librarian of 
Congress Billington as to whether something could not be done to bring 
to an end the indefinite production of brittle books. Enormous progress 
been made--at least in the United States, in Canada, in much of Europe, 
and in Japan--in the production of books, other publications, and 
documents on paper which should endure for several centuries, instead 
of self-destructing in less than 100 years. Many individuals and 
organizations, public and private, have contributed to this result--
some known to me and others not. I note once again the efforts of 
Robert Frase in this connection. We owe them all a debt of gratitude. I 
celebrate the fact that the Congress and Federal agencies have made 
major contributions to this progress in a variety of ways, not the 
least of which has been through the passage and the implementation of 
Public Law 101-423 to establish a National Policy on Permanent Papers.

                          ____________________