Ian,
I'm replying from home so don't have access to all the relevant
records, but here are some general guidelines.

Ann Ercelawn
serials cataloger & series authority coordinator
Vanderbilt University

>If your library has a subscription to the above series, I'd appreciate
>hearing how you handle it.  This is the situation:

>1.  We have a standing order, not a subscription.  Items are received
>together with an invoice labelled "monograph standing order."  That is,
>each issue is separately billed.  We check each issue in as we do our
>serials.

>2.  The series statement, "NOLPE monograph series," often with a
>volume number, is given on several issues (on the cover of the last
>few, which I have seen).  Some, however, have no volume number.

**Check the publication dates of the titles in the series.
If the unnumbered vols. are interspersed with the numbered vols.
then the series is considered numbered and unnumbered at the same
time.  If the unnumbered vols. follow the numbered vols., then
the numbering has been discontinued and two series are involved;
one with the heading NOLPE monograph series; and the other with
the heading NOLPE monograph series (Unnumbered).  If the numbered
vols. follow the unnumbered vols. and assume numbering with v. 4,
for example, (after 3 unnumbered issues) then you have only one
series.

>3.   Recently a couple were issued with the series statement,
>"NOLPE monograph/book series."

**Where do they fall in the publication sequence?  If they are
interspersed with vols. with the title NOLPE monograph series,
this may be considered a variant title.  If, however, NOLPE monograph/
book series becomes the stable title, then you would consider the series title
to have changed with the vol. that first manifests the title
NOLPE monograph/book series.

>4.   One of these was used as the "source data found" (field 670)
>of an authority record, containing "no 93022447" in field 010.

***I don't have access to the authority record, and therefore can't
tell which vol. is cited in the authority record.  However because
of LC's workflow, the series authority record will be based on
the piece in hand, regardless of whether the series title actually
represents the series heading or is a variant (which can only be determined
by examining the run of the series).  We always base our series heading
on the first piece in our database, which means that we sometimes edit
LC's records.

>5.  No authority record is available for "NOLPE monograph series."

***LC just didn't have a vol. in hand that showed that form.

>6.   Several publications received on the same standing order do not
>have any series statement at all.

***They may be part of the series, in which case you could bracket in
the series statement (and numbering if relevant), provided that they
fit into the run of the series, which sometimes can only be determined
when the next piece in the series is received.

>Those are the facts.  Given the ongoing debate over earliest/latest/
>successive entry, one might expect a variety of treatments of this
>sort of situation!  Has anyone worked out a policy for this specific
>series, or for situations like it?  Does your library's policy on
>earliest/latest/successive entry apply to series of this type?
>If a title is received on a standing order that supplies works that
>usually bear a series title but the one received doesn't, would you
>include a series added entry in the record?

>Please reply to me or to the list.  I'd prefer the list, because I'd
>like to see discussion of this subject.  By the way, I did
>an LDBASE search of the SERIALST archives, but didn't
>retrieve anything.

***There are some postings on numbered vs. unnumbered series in the archives.