Processing New U.S. Congressional Hearings for NRLF

Author: Jesse Silva
Posted in: Doe/Moffitt Advisory Group


Due to the 2011/12 decrease of the Library’s binding budget, United States Congressional Hearings will be sent to NRLF “unbound.”

Congressional Hearings arrive via the Federal Depository Library Program shipment boxes from the Government Printing Office as paper-bound items, usually stapled together.  The Hearings are received by the Serials Check-In Unit, where they are stamped, labeled, and then routed for cataloging.

The Catalog Department treats the Congressional Hearings as separates with a set call number (i.e. each Hearing gets its own monographic record, but it shares a base call number with all other Congressional Hearings).  The “separates with set call number” treatment is exceptional and is the result of a series treatment change made in 2010.  Heretofore, Congressional Hearings were treated as an analyzed set.


1.  Upon check-in the Serials Check-in Unit will place the depository label near the depository date stamp, or at the top of the front cover.

2. The UCB circ barcode will be placed on the front cover toward the top on the right. The  NRLF barcode will be placed toward the the top left corner. NOTE: It is permissible to cover non-title text on the cover since this information is repeated on the inside of the volume.  Non-title text includes the name of the committee, the Congress number spelled out, date(s) of the hearing, etc.  Titles are in bold font and located at the top of the cover; these should never be covered.

3.  The cataloger will write the call number in pencil on the unbound cover in a blank space on the left side of the page about halfway down.

4.  After cataloging, the cataloger will place standard sized hearings (either staple bound or paperback bound) on the Congressional Hearings book truck in Marking Division.  The Marking students will place volumes within archival boxes, in the order cataloged, paying special attention to keeping MVM volumes together (and in one box if possible). If volumes are too wide to fit in boxes, they should be sent to NRLF unbound without a box.  No further marking will be needed.

5. Once the box is full, one “Process for NRLF” flag is placed in the box, and the Hearings will be sent to MAIN Circulation to be prepared for shipment to NRLF.

6. Non-standard sized volumes that don’t fit into a box (taller or wider than the regular volumes) will be individually pam bound and sent to NRLF.  Estimate is it will be less than 1% of all hearings will need pam binding.  After cataloging these odd-sized Hearings, the cataloger will insert a “Process for NRLF” flag and place the volume on the Bindery Shelf.

Special Notes/Guidance

Duplication checking won’t be necessary since Berkeley is the only UC institution to retain and store the new print copy.

Thicker hearings with the heavy-brown paper cover will not be placed in boxes when they are issued as single volumes.  When issued as multi-volume titles (MVMs) they should be placed together into boxes.

As to the number of items to be sent to NRLF per FY, it is estimated to be approximately 2 fully loaded book trucks (12 shelves).

The storage coordinator will follow established procedures and organize the material by size before sending the material to NRLF.  Book trucks need to be clearly marked as “Congressional Hearing Collection” and as “Building Use Only.”

Archival boxes (as approved by Conservation) are provided by the Catalog Department.

Items rejected by NRLF will be sent to MAIN Circulation, who will then route them where needed.

Legacy Data
Author: Jesse Silva
Approval Group: ILSSC
Update Group: DMAG (Doe/Moffitt Advisory Group)
Last updated date: 07/19/12

Archived Comments

Responsible for updates:
Wed, 10/19/2011 – 13:34 — Matthew Prutsman
Cataloging Department

Item status?
Fri, 08/19/2011 – 15:01 — Charis Takaro
Numbering of steps in process appears off. Also, do you want to mention using the “s” status when the item is created? If the item gets created at NRLF this does not apply.

Created: April 28, 2016
Last revised: December 5, 2016
Review date: None set

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *