18 November 90
To: Joe Rosenthal, Chair Steering Ctte., UCPP xc: Operations Ctte.
Fr: Barclay Ogden Director
Re: Annual Report, Actions Requested, and Updates on the UCPP
Please ask the Library Council to review for approval the UC Preservation Program Budget Request, Fiscal Year 1990-91 (attached); I will forward it to the Office of the President for review, any necessary reduction to meet cost savings targets, and to initiate transfer of funds to the campuses.
The University of California Preservation Program Annual Report, (attached), documents considerable accomplishment production, training, and program development. Thus far in current fiscal year, the Program has taken the following additional actions:
* The NEH Conservation Technician Training Project has started. All 15 participants have had their first of three weeks training and have received equipment and supplies with which to implement improved techniques and procedures on their home campuses. If current positive attitudes and high enthusiasms can be taken as indicators, the Project will be overwhelmingly successful for UC.
* Collections security seems to be of concern to all campuses, but no one knows quitehow to address it. in response to a charge from the Steering Committee, a task force, chaired by Eric MacDonald (UCI) with members from southern campuses to minimize travel costs, plans to convene to determine how to proceed with these issues (Annual Report, p.5.)
* A long-planned manuscripts microfilming project proposal in the final stages of completion for submission to NEH December 1. San Diego is serving as lead campus and is being assisted by the UCPP program staff at Berkeley. To say pulling together all the needed information from all (six) participating campuses has been easy or gone smoothly would be a lie, but we hope we have learned lessons from this proposal that will not need to be learned again for future such proposals.
* Master negative microfilms and printing masters should be stored in separate facilities to maximize security. With the Northern and Southern Regional Library Facilities in UC, the Operations Committee recommended that UC try to achieve this desirable goal. The Board of NRLF recently approved a policy to “exchange” film negatives; assuming approval by the SRLF.
UC PRESERVATION PROGRAM BUDGET REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 199O-9l
|1.||Environmental Monitoring/Disaster Response|
|Equipment (monitoring and salvage)||1,500|
|0.025 FTE Director||1,559|
|2.||Education and Training|
|Travel (2 conf/mtgs)||1,600|
|NEH Technician Training Cost Share (tools and supplies shipped to campuses)||7,854|
|Staffing (0.025 FTE Director)|
|3.||Library Binding Services|
|Travel (2 mtgs., Southern Bindery)||600|
|Staffing 0.1 FTE Director||6,236|
|4.||Preservation Technologies Review|
|Staffing 0.025 FTE Director||1,559|
|5.||Preservation Operations Committee|
|0.1 FTE Director||6,236|
|0.1 FTE Administrative Assistant|
|Reprints, Photocopies, Microfilming||164,826|
* Campus allocations reduced to cover NEH Technician Training equipment and supplies sent to each campus (UCI:$l,723; UCR:$l,257; UCSD:$966; UCSF:$948; UCSB:$l,932; UCSC:$l,319. Total:$7,854).
Board, we can anticipate that procedures will be developed and implemented within the next several months.
* Of interest to members of the Steering Committee and Library Council, but not formally involving the UCPP, is an initiative of the California Library Networking Task Force to include preservation within its scope of activities. With LSCA funding, a statewide preservation needs assessment will be undertaken within the next year to provide a basis for a California Preservation Plan. In turn, the Plan will serve as justification for a request for ongoing state funding (perhaps similar to the New York State model). Berkeley has been awarded a contract to conduct the needs assessment portion of the initiative; the UCPP will want to monitor progress of the planning effort and participate for the benefit of UC libraries.
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESERVATION PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT, FY 1989-90
* 1,575,249 pages of library materials were preserved and made serviceable through a combination of original microfilming, photocopying, and purchase of commercial reprints and microforms.
* A proposal for a Conservation Technician Training Project was completed, submitted to the National Endowment for the Humanities, and awarded in the sum of $105,085. This project will train 15 UC conservation technicians from all campuses to evaluate and specify appropriate conservation treatments, to establish efficient procedures for workflow with a consistent rationale for treatment, and to execute these effectively for the long term preservation of research materials.
* Standardized abbreviations for spine marking have been adopted by eight UC campuses to reduce the added binding costs from “corrections,” that is, errors in spine marking both from tickets prepared incorrectlv bv campus libraries and from mis-marking at the binderies. A set of guidelines has been adopted and implemented at both northern and southern binderies.
1. Environmental Monitoring and Disaster Response.
A project is underway to gather Information on the environmental conditons in bookstacks throughout UC in order to provide information on improvements needed as major renovation and new construction allow. The survey forms were completed and distributed in the Spring with returns from all campuses, compilation, and evaluation anticipated to be completed in FY 1990-91.
The Loma Prieta earthquake damage was limited largely to Santa Cruz, which sustained damage to shelving and books that were knocked to the floor and Berkeley, which suffered damage to collections stored in unsecured storage shelving. There was no emergency water damage and consequently no need to emplov the stock of emergency supplies maintained in Richmond and Los Angeles for use by all UC libraries.
There were at least two notable mold outbreaks, in the Special Collections Department at Santa Cruz and at Scripps Institution of Oceanography at San Diego. The first could be traced to a failure of the environmental control system and the second to lack of equipment capable of responding to the high ambient humidity occasionally obtaining at SIO’s location. The UCPP provided both advice and an on-site visit to assist with solutions to the problems.
UC Davis reported on a water damage emergency that led to the removal of 6,000 volumes from the stacks. Damage was limited to 350 volumes, but the emergency provided Shield Library with an opportunity to test their disaster response plan.
2. Education and Training.
On behalf of the Preservation Program, the Director attended the annual meeting of Cooperative Preservation Programs in Chicago. The UC Preservation Program has an advantage in being seen by funding agencies as a cooperative program and consequently is a candidate for funds earmarked for the development of cooperative solutions to the nation’s preservation problems. Our successful bid for funding for the NEH-sponsored conservation technician training project was in part due to our “cooperative” character; a training component in the upcoming proposal for a UCPP manuscripts’ filming project (see section 5, below) will be based on the same justification.
The major accomplishment for the year under Education and Training was the successful proposal to train conservation technicians, the first ever awarded for training of conservation technicians. Training will begin this Fall and be completed in the Spring of 91. The project itself will continue for another six months to assemble the project’s training documentation for distributIon to institutions throughout the country who either have trained or wish to train conservation technicians. A follow-up proposal will be submitted to NEH in June, 91, to hold a national conference of trainers of conservation technicians to review and refine documentation and training methods. This conference will provide an opportunitv for UC to contribute to the nation our findings and to help satisfy the requirement of NEH that our training project be of “national” significance.
While low profile, the value of the semi-annual UCPP Operations Committee meetings to update UC preservation librarians cannot be overlooked. The meetings have Included discussions and information-sharing on a wide range of topics relevant to both UC-wide and campus preservation programs. The minutes of the past year reflect attention to and appropriate action on master negative storage, permanent paper for theses, establishment of preservation priorities. and national preservation policy impact on the UC Preservation Program, as well 0:5 the specific topics recorded in this report.
3. Library Binding Services.
The major work of this program component continues to be the (now ongoing) review of and communication with the UC Library Binderies. Problems in production, scheduling, billing, and communication have been identified, solutions devised and adopted, and communication among campuses and binderies much improved. The most significant areas of development during the year were;
a) standardization of abbreviations for spine marking to reduce error rates and costs for corrections (noted under major accomplishments);
b) communication with Innovative Interfaces, Inc., and with the national Innovacq Users Group to recommend enhancements to the Innovacq binding module to make it more satisfactory for UC use;
c) work toward the development of a testing program to ensure UC of approriate binding adhesives for library binding.
The binding adhesives’ testing program is of major consequence to UC libraries because current library binding technology relies heavily on adhesives to ensure long-term performance of bindings. Improper adhesives can dramatically shorten the use life of bindings, resulting in loss of parts of the text as well as much higher rebinding costs than in the past. New equipment on order for the binderies will rely even more heavily on the quality of adhesives, making this program a high priority for the UCPP.
4. Preservation Technologies Review.
The UCPP is maintaining currency with developments in mass deacidification technology. Several commercial organizations have expressed an interest in offering mass deacidification services to libraries. Some have developed their own orocesses; others are planning to franchise existing technologies. UC needs a mechanism to compare the alternatives and to that end the Director has participated in a review of the Request for Proposal being prepared by the Library of Congress.
The data gathered by LC from each of the vendors of mass deacidification services and from their own tests may enable UC to make decisions without concucting extensive testing ourselves, but due to the politics and Bureaucracy of LC and the federal government, there remains the possibility we still will be required to conduct independent testing. The Director has continued to monitor several of the vendors to remain currrent with their progress and claims, and to determine if and when UC should begin to actively address the selection of a process and evaluation of applications of mass deacidification to UC collections.
The UCPP also is interested in potential applications of optical disk tecnnology, possibly to succeed microfilming. The Director has contacted a number of organizations involved with the technology, including the Commission on Preservation and Access, Cornell University (who currently is working with Xerox Corp. on a optical disk/photocopying project), and Silicon Valley vendors of optical disk systems for document management. As of yet a project remains to be identified that offers potential benefits sufficient to warrant participation of the UCPP.
5. Preservation Replacement.
The majority of UCPP funds was allocated to the campuses to microfilm, photocopy, or purchase commercial reprints or microforms to replace materials in the collections that were no longer in serviceable condition. More than 1.5 million pages of materials were replaced with preservation copies at a total cost of $170,250 (approximately $.ll/page).
Problems with cataloging of master negatives of serials (lack of film holdings information) have been a problem for all campuses and have been investigated with RLIN and OGLC but not resolved. Problems with “exchanging” master negatives for storage in the Regional Library Facilities (to enable camera masters and printing masters to be stored separately) have been pursued with resolution anticipated in the next fiscal year.
A plan to prepare a proposal for an NEH-supported cooperative manuscripts microfilming project has been delayed in order to seek the advice of an faculty advisory committee on selection of collections to be microfilmed. (This decision was taken after informal advice from NEH that the selection of collections originally proposed by campuses would not be competitive for funding because they did not have intellectual coherence as a group.) The committee’s selection work was finished in mid-June; a proposal will be committee’s selection work was prepared for submission to NEH in December, 1990.
Production (all campuses):
6. Preservation Steering and Operations Committees.
The Steering Committee conducted its business primarily by phone, with occasional discussion of UCPP actions in Library Council meetings. The Operations Committee met twice during the year. The status of major charges over the past several years to the UC Preservation Program are as follows:
* two regional centers for reformatting be established for UC, one north and one south;
Status: UCLA and UCB are acting as regional filming centers for all UC campuses. The UCB facility recently has been renovated (to meet w/safety regulations) and has gained some not-yet-realized additional production capacity. Overall, the demand for microfilming has greatly exceeded the combined current capacity of both facilities and much filming is being contracted to microfilm service bureaus. The binderies are serving as centers for preservation photocopying; demand is exceeding production capacity, but this situation likely will be corrected by the end of the next fiscal year.
* a comprehensive environmental survey of UC libraries be undertaken to assess the overall situation;
Status: Equipment purchased, survey instrument designed and distributed, data currently being gathered. Completion anticipated in the next fiscal year.
* two regional centers for major conservation treatment be established, with minor treatment undertaken by all campuses;
Status: No action taken on regional treatment centers because no funds have been allocated for major treatment. UCLA discussing the possibility of setting up a center; UCB could serve in a similar capacity.
* education and training be organized both centrally and regionally, as appropriate;
Status: UC conservation technician training project proposal awarded by NEH. Implementation In FY 90-91. UCPP assists with ongoing information needs of campus preservation programs. The need for training of additional preservation administrators (three of the original eight trained in the UC Preservation Implementation Project either have retired or have accepted other positions) has been discussed, but no plans have been laid.
* a decision on the establishment of mass deacidiflcation treatment facilities be deferred until a technology has been selected for UC;
Status: UC monitoring current developments and normally participating in review efforts of other institutions.
* preparation of documentation to support an increase in state funding for the UCPP;
Status: Documentation prepared in 1988; no further action anticipated until the Library Council puts forward to the Office of the President a request for additional funding.
* investigate issues of security of collections and make recommendations for action.
Status: A task force has been established with the charge to identify needs of non-Special Collections materials, establish criteria for evaluating options, and make recommendations. A schedule for completion will be recommended by the task force.
The membership of the Steering Committee in 1989-90: Calvin Boyer (UCI), Joseph Rosenthal (UCB – Chair), Marilyn Sharrow (UCD), Dennis Smith (UCOP), Cloria Werner (UCLA), and Barclay Ogden (UCB – as Director, UCPP).
The membership of the Operations Committee in 1989-90: Terry Allison, succeeded by Julie Page (UCSD), Stella Bentley, succeeded by Andrew Shroyer (UCSB), Lynda Claassen (UCSD – as LAUC observer), Christopher Coleman (UCLA), Sheryl Davis (UCR), Clinton Howard (UCD), Lynn Jones (UCB – Librarian, UCPP), Eric MacDonald (UCI), Karen Mokrzycki (UCSC), Barclay Ogden (UCB – Chair), Cameron Folsom Olen (UCB – as Admin. Asst., UCPP), and Paul Wakeford (UCSF)
Barclay W. Ogden
Director, UC Preservation Program
17 November 1990
UC Preservation Program Financial Statement, FY 1989-90
|Component||Orig. Alloc||Final Alloc.||Exp/Liens||Balance|
|1. Envi/Disaster||S & E||1,500||1,500||1,543||(43)|
|2. Ed. and Train||Travel||1,600||1,335||1,273||62|
|4. Tech Review||Staffing||1,489||1,489||1,489||0|
|5. Op. Ctte. Mtgs||Meetings||500||500||519||(19)|
Last reviewed: March 4, 2004