Volume 13, Number 5
Sep 1989

Congressional Action on Permanent Paper

• The Pell Resolution (S.J. Res. 57), which would make the use of acid-free permanent paper for all publications and records of enduring value our national policy, was passed unanimously by the Senate July 31. An identical bill was introduced in the House by Congressman Pat Williams, but is still waiting for cosponsors so that it can be reported out of committee and voted on. It was actually referred to two committees: the Committee on Government Operations, Subcommittee on Government Information, Justice, and Agriculture; and the Committee on House Administration, Subcommittee on Libraries and Memorials. This is the time when representatives are responsive to pressure from their constituency. To find out who is already signed up from your state, call Pat Williams' office: 202/225-3211 and ask for Dave Roach. The bill is House Joint Resolution 226. As of August 4, there were no cosponsors from the following states: Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Florida, Iowa, Mississippi, Nevada, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia or Wyoming.
• Rep. Doug Walgren has introduced an amendment to the Solid Waste Disposal Act that would put permanence on an equal footing with recycling: H.R. 3094, "To amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act to ensure that recycled paper acquired by the United States is permanent paper where appropriate, and for other purposes." It refers to voluntary consensus standards (e.g., those of ANSI and ASTM) and recommends a pH of 7.5 or higher. It is now in the Energy and Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on Transportation and Hazardous Materials, and needs cosponsors.
• Congress has told the Government Printing Office to take an active role in adopting and promoting the use of alkaline paper. In its July 26 report (H. Rept. 101-179) on the Legislative Branch Appropriations Bill for FY 1990 (HR 3014), the House Appropriations Committee gave the following direction to GP0.

Finally, the Committee believes the Government Printing Office should aggressively pursue the usage of alkaline, low acid-content paper for its inhouse and commercially procured printing. With the experience acquired and technological developments at the Library of Congress and in the commercial sector over the past several years, it is apparent that one of the major causes of deteriorating stocks of paper format documents is high acid-content paper. In order to preserve archival quality, paper format documents for use by current and future generations, costly procedures, such as deacidification, microfilming, optical disk, and other techniques, must be used. If these materials are printed originally on alkaline paper, the life of such documents may be extended up to several hundred years. That may be compared to acid-based documents which sometimes begin to deteriorate or embrittle within 20-40 years.

The paper industry has seen the benefits of converting to the production of alkaline paper for printing stock. Improved quality and reduced cost of production has stimulated the industry to increase their output of such paper. Consequently, the Government Printing Office has access to larger supplies of this stock at presumably reasonable market prices.

The Committee directs, therefore, that the GP0, in consultation with the Joint Committee on Printing, develop a plan to identify the extent, source, and types of archival type printing matter produced inhouse and acquired commercially by the GP0, or other agencies. The plan should also include a strategy and schedule to convert this printing to alkaline paper. This plan should be submitted to the Committees on Appropriations, the Joint Committee on Printing, the Committee on House Administration, and the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration no later than February 1, 1990.

• It is encouraging to observe that the Walgren amendment, the report of the May 4 hearings on "Preservation of Print," and the above report of the House Appropriations Committee are all printed on alkaline paper. Perhaps the Pell resolution is too, but there is no copy in the office to test. The report of the Brittle Book Hearings (AN, Dec. 1987, p. 138), however, was not.