ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries C&RL News ■ October 1999 / 741 Guidelines for the security of rare book, manuscript, and other special collections The final version, approved July 1999 Prepared by th e ACRL Rare Books and Manuscripts Section’s Security C om m ittee Ab stract In a climate w here theft o f special collec­ tions materials is an everyday possibility, se­ curity m ust be a major concern of the entire library an d special collections communities, w ith special collections adm inistrators ad­ dressing it to the best o f their abilities within their institutional context. T he ACRL/RBMS Security C om m ittee’s “G uidelines for the Security of Rare Book, Manuscript, and O ther Special Collections,” published here, is the principal ACRL docu­ m ent dealing w ith the security of library mate­ rials. These guidelines identify important top­ ics that collection administrators should address in developing adequate collection security. W hile d ire c te d p rim arily to w a rd rare books, special collections, and manuscripts, the topics are also applicable to general col­ le c tio n s. T h e RBMS S ecurity C om m ittee strongly urges implem entation of these guide­ lines, including th e u n iq u e identification marking o f materials an d the appointm ent of a Library Security Officer (LSO). I. Introduction These guidelines identify important topics that collection administrators should address in developing adequate collection security. While directed tow ard special collections, the topics are also applicable to general collections. Administrators o f rare book, manuscript, an d special collection materials m ust ensure that their collections rem ain intact an d se­ cure from theft an d damage. The security of collections is n o w especially im portant since administrators’ efforts to increase the use and know ledge o f collections in their care can result in a greater public aw areness of their value, an d may increase the risk o f theft. Se­ curity arrangem ents vary from one institution to another an d are d ep en d en t o n staffing, physical setting, an d use. Rare b o o k and m anuscript dealers also m ust concern them selves w ith collection se­ curity, since thieves m ay offer stolen materi­ als to them for sale. Librarians should m ake every effort to familiarize such dealers w ith the w ays institutions attem pt to secure and identify their materials an d help them use this know ledge to lessen an y o n e’s chances of profiting from theft. T he appointm ent of an LSO and the devel­ opm ent of a security policy can help ensure that staff is aware of their legal and procedural responsibilities in applying security measures. II. The lib rary secu rity o ffice r Each institution concerned w ith the security of rare books, manuscripts, or other special collections materials should appoint an LSO. The LSO should be appointed by the library ACRL STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 742 / C&RL News ■ October 1999 director, should have primary authority and responsibility to carry out the security program, an d should have a thorough know ledge o f all repository security needs, particularly those o f special collections. T he LSO should not neces­ sarily b e conceived o f as the library’s general security officer, although h e o r she may also hold that role. The identity of the LSO should b e w idely know n, especially am ong o ther ad­ ministrative officers of the repository. T he LSO’s principal responsibility sh o u ld b e to p lan an d adm inister a security p ro ­ gram , w h ich sh o u ld include a survey o f th e collections, review s o f th e physical layout o f th e institution, an d training o f the institution’s staff. H e or she sh o u ld d ev elo p active w o rk ­ ing relationships w ith colleagues a n d seek th e advice an d th e assistance o f ap p ro p riate p erso n n el, su ch as institutional adm inistra­ tors, c o rp o rate counsel, life safety officers, th e LSO m ail lists, a n d /o r o u tsid e co n su lt­ ants from law en fo rcem en t agencies a n d in ­ su ran ce com panies. Suggestions f o r implementation: 1. In som e repositories, the LSO an d the special collections librarian may b e the sam e person. 2. Special collections administrators, in in­ stitutions without another official for w hom the role o f LSO w ould b e appropriate, are encour­ aged to take o n this role a n d advocate that th e institution recognize th e im p o rtan ce o f th is resp o n sib ility w ith in th e institutional structure. III. The se cu rity p olicy The LSO should develop w ritten policy on the security o f th e collections. In developing the policy, the LSO should consult administrators an d staff, legal authorities, an d other know l­ edgeable persons. T he policy should include a standard o p ­ erating pro ced u re o n dealing w ith a theft o r o th e r security problem s. T he ACRL/RBMS Security C om m ittee’s d o cu m en t “G uidelines R egarding Thefts in Libraries” provides steps to p u rsu e in establishing ad eq u ate policies for dealing w ith thefts. The security policy should b e kept up-to- date w ith current nam es and telephone num ­ bers o f institutional and law enforcem ent con­ Putting it all together In a letter dated August 10, 1995, Carolyn subject of a w ell-attended seminar, w here the RBMS Security Committee sought input from the membership. In the meantime, SAC had also sent the document to an outside reviewer, w hose comments were passed on to the RBMS Security Com m ittee for consideration. All comments received up to that time w ere dis­ cussed and incorporated, as appropriate, at the RBMS Security Committee meeting at the 1999 ALA Midwinter meeting. At the ALA Midwinter conference in 1999, the document was subject to a public hearing and then presented, with further revisions, to th e RBMS Executive C om m ittee, w ho a p ­ proved it as then written and gave its permis­ sion for the do cu m en t to p ro ceed in the ACRL/ALA approval process. That approved version was subsequently published in C&RL News in April 1999 (pp. 304-311), with a re­ quest for comments. Further comm ents w ere also sought by an­ nouncements on the RBMS discussion list, by p o s t i n g th e d o c u m e n t o n th e RBMS (c o n tin u e d on n e x t pa g e) Dusenbury, then immediate past chair of the ACRL Standards and Accreditation Committee (SAC), asked Elizabeth Johnson, then RBMS chair, if the section needed to revise its “Guidelines for the Security of Rare Book, Manuscript, and Other Special Collections” as part of the five- year review cycle. That letter was referred to the RBMS Security Committee for its consideration, and the committee informed the RBMS Execu­ tive Committee that it felt the guidelines would need revisions extensive enough to warrant fur­ ther deliberation by the Security Committee. At the ALA Midwinter meeting 1995-96, the Security Committee, after some discussion, ap­ pointed a subcommittee to prepare a draft of proposed revisions and submit the draft to the full RBMS Security Committee. The subcom mittee com pleted its w ork in 1997, whereupon the entire RBMS Security Com­ mittee took on the work of completing the pro­ posed revisions. At the RBMS Preconference at Washington, D.C., in 1998, the proposed revisions were the C&RL News ■ October 1999 / 743 tacts. The institution should also review the policy periodically to insure that institutional needs continue to b e adequately addressed. The LSO should cooperate w ith an d b e in­ volved w ith developm ent an d im plem entation o f general library security m easures, as these m ay affect the security o f special collections materials. The LSO should also b e involved w ith any library em ergency an d disaster plan­ ning. Suggestions f o r im plem entation: 1. In larger institutions it m ay b e necessary to assem ble a Security Planning G roup to as­ sist th e LSO in identifying problem areas and to recom m end solutions. 2. Institutions that lack appropriate staff resources m ay wish to bring in a security con­ sultant to assist in developing a policy an d in determ ining any major threats to th e collec­ tion. W hen engaging a security consultant, the institution o r LSO should use caution in evalu­ ating the consultant’s com petence o r ability to perform the work. T he institution should in­ vestigate the security consultant’s background an d references thoroughly. IV. The sp e cial co lle ctio n s b u ild in g or area T he special collections building or area should have as few access points as possible, w ith a single entry an d exit point for b o th research­ ers an d staff. Fire an d em ergency exits, w hich should b e strictly controlled and provided with alarm coverage, should not b e u sed for regu­ lar access. Within the facility itself, th e public should have access only to public areas, not to w ork areas o r stack space. Researchers should be received in a separate reception area w here a coat room an d lockers should be provided for researchers’ personal belongings an d o uter wear. A secure reading room w here research­ ers can be continuously m onitored by staff trained in surveillance should b e identified as th e only area in w hich material m ay b e used. A security g u ard sho u ld ch eck researchers’ research materials prior to their entering the secure area as w ell as w h en they depart. K eys a n d th e i r e q u iv a le n ts , s u c h as keycards, are especially vulnerable items; there­ fore, a controlled check-out system for all keys should be m aintained. Keys to secure areas homepage, and by soliciting comments spe­ cifically from security experts in other orga­ nizations. At the ALA Annual Conference in 1999, the committee finished its revisions on the docum ent and held yet another hearing on th e p ro p o s e d revisions. T he o u tco m e of those final deliberations was presented to SAC at its meeting on Sunday, June 27, 1999, and approved. Subsequently, the document was approved by the ACRL Board and ALA at their Midwinter meetings. Numerous people have contributed to this document. I wish to thank especially all the past and present members of the RBMS Se­ curity Committee for their unflagging dedi­ cation and enthusiastic work. Along the way, various people have taken time to offer com­ ments and suggestions on various drafts of the document, and I believe the profession has a better set of guidelines because of their willingness to participate in the process. I also wish to express my thanks to the ACRL Standards and Accreditation Commit­ tee for their support and guidance. Barton Lessin, chair o f that committee, and Donna McCool, liaison to the RBMS Security Com­ mittee, w ere especially helpful and offered excellent counsel at various stages in the ap ­ proval process. Mary Ellen Davis o f ACRL and Stephen Ferguson, the RBMS Web master, have made it possible for the docum ent to be widely circulated both in print and electronic forms. Finally, I wish to express my gratitude to th e past and present m em bers o f th e RBMS Executive Comm ittee; their unfailing su p ­ p o rt o f the Security Com m ittee an d these guidelines has been crucial to their com ple­ tion. M embers of the com m ittee w ho saw this through to the final approval were Susan M. Allen (ex officio); Thomas L. Amos; Daren Callahan; Melissa Conway; Rachel Doggett; Connell B. Gallagher; Isaac Gewirtz; Rachel J. Howarth (intern); Anne Marie Lane; Katherine Keyes Leab; Ronald Liberman; Heather Lloyd; Michael North; Nancy Romero; Daniel J. Slive; and Diana M. Smith (intern).— Everett C. Wilkie Jr., chair, ACRL/RBMS Security Committee, ew ilkie@ix .n e tc o m .com 744 / C&RL News ■ October 1999 sh o u ld b e issued to staff only o n an as-needed an d Librarians, w ith G uidelines for Institutional Practice in S upport o f th e Standards.”) Suggestions f o r im plem entation: 1. T he LSO a n d special collections adm in­ istrator sh o u ld ensure that all staff are familiar w ith these guidelines an d the security policies in their institutions a n d h o w they m ay apply specifically to their institution. 2. W hen appropriate or consistent with insti­ tutional policies, background checks and bond­ ing o f staff members should be considered. 3. T he LSO o r special collections adm inis­ trator sh o u ld b e familiar w ith th e institution’s personnel policies, an d advocate security co n ­ cerns w ith th e institution’s hu m an resources staff. VI. Th e re se a rch e rs T he special collections administrator must care­ fully balance th e responsibility o f m aking m a­ terials available to researchers against th e re­ sponsibility for ensuring th e security o f the materials. Staff m ust b e able to identify w h o has used w hich materials by keeping adequate, signed check-out records, w hich sh o u ld b e retained indefinitely. Registration for each researcher w h o uses special collections materials should b e required, recording th e nam e, address, signature, insti­ tutional affiliation (if any), a n d ph o to identifi­ cation o r som e o th er form o f positive identifi­ cation to establish physical identity. T hese reg­ istration records sh o u ld b e retained perm a­ nently. Researchers should b e required to present a reasonable explanation o f their need to use the materials. Each researcher should be given an orientation to the collections requested and to the rules governing the use o f the collections. Researchers should not b e permitted to take ex­ traneous personal materials into the reading ar­ eas. This includes such items as notebooks, brief­ cases, outer wear, books, and voluminous pa­ pers. Personal computers should be removed from the case before use in the reading room is per­ mitted. Lockers or som e kind o f secure space should be provided for any items not permitted in the reading room. Staff should observe researchers at all times an d not allow th em to w o rk uno b serv ed b e ­ h in d bookcases, b o o k trucks, stacks o f books, o r any o ther obstacles that restrict staff view. R esearchers should b e limited at any on e time basis, a n d m aster keys sh o u ld b e secu red against unauthorized access. C om binations to vaults also should have limited distribution and should b e ch an g ed each time there is a staff change involving a position w ith access to the vault. Strong consideration should b e given to installing proprietary keyw ays in locks in th e s p e c ia l c o lle c tio n s a re a . (S e e R o n a ld L. Libengood an d Bryan J. Perun, “T he Key to G o o d Security: Proprietary Keyways an d Elec­ tronic Locks,” Focus on Security, 2 [1995]: 6-16.) Suggestions f o r im plem entation: 1. In institutions w h ere it is not possible to hire a n extra security guard, a staff m em ber co u ld p erform this function. C onsideration sho u ld also be given to installing a video sur­ veillance system. 2. As a precautionary policy, keys an d locks to secure areas should b e ch an g ed o n a regu­ lar basis. 3. W hen an institution plans to rem odel or renovate space o r build a n ew facility in w hich special collections materials are to b e housed, the LSO an d th e special collections adm inis­ trator should en su re that all security n eed s are addressed in th e design an d planning. V. Th e s ta ff An atm osphere o f trust a n d concern for the collections is p ro b a b ly th e b e st g u aran tee against theft by staff. N evertheless, close an d equitable supervision is essential. T he staff, including students an d volunteers, sh o u ld b e ch o sen carefully, using any an d all avenues available in m aking th e decision for hiring. Careful personnel m anagem ent is a n ongoing necessity. A w e a k p o in t in m aintaining a security system is disgruntled staff w h o m ay se e k ret­ ribution th ro u g h theft, destruction, o r willful m ish a n d lin g o f c o llectio n s. C o n sid e ra tio n sh o u ld b e given to b o n d in g e m p lo y ees w h o w o rk in special collections. T raining th e staff in secu rity m e a s u re s should b e a high priority o f the LSO. Such training sho u ld ensure that staff b e aw are of their legal a n d procedural responsibilities in relation to security as w ell as their o w n an d th e researchers’ legal rights w h e n handling possible problem s. (See also th e ACRL/RBMS “Standards for Ethical C onduct of Rare Book, Manuscript, an d Special Collections Libraries C&RL News ■ October 1999 / 745 to having access only to those books, m anu­ scripts, or other items that are needed to per­ form the research at hand. Staff should check the condition, content, and completeness of each item prior to giving it to the researcher and also when it is returned after use. This checking of materials that are returned is especially important for the use of archival and manuscript collections, which often consist of many loose, unique pieces. Researchers should be required to return all library materials prior to leaving the read­ ing room, even if they plan to return at a later time to continue their research. Researchers should not be allowed to exchange materials o r to have access to materials brought into the room for use by another researcher. Suggestions f o r implementation: 1. The LSO or special collections adminis­ trator should seek the advice of the institution’s legal counsel or other appropriate legal au­ thority w hen developing researcher policies, to ensure adequate legal recourse if research­ ers violate the use agreement. 2. T he institution should require that all researchers read an d sign an agreem ent to abide by institutional policies. This agreem ent should b e ren ew ed annually. VII. The collectio n s Administrators o f special collections m ust be able to identify positively th e m aterials in th e ir co llectio n s to estab lish loss a n d to s u b s ta n tia te claim s to re c o v e r e d s to le n p roperty. This includes keeping adequate accession records; m aintaining d e ta ile d cataloguing records an d lists in finding aids; recording copy-specific information; an d keeping con­ dition reports an d records. Lists d eveloped to fulfill the requirem ents o f insurance policies should also b e kept cur­ rent. In addition, the m aterials them selves should b e m ade identifiable. This can be ac­ com plished by marking them follow ing the RBMS “G uidelines for Marking” (see A ppen­ dix I), by applying o ther un iq u e marks, and by keeping photographic o r microform cop­ ies o f valuable items. Suggestions f o r implementation: 1. More valuable items should b e segre­ gated from the collections into higher security areas, w ith m ore restricted conditions for staff access and researcher use. 2. If appropriate security controls are ap­ plied, unprocessed materials m ay b e m ade available to researchers for short-term use. VIII. Tran sfe rs fro m th e ge n eral collection Many institutions house materials in op en stack areas accessible to all users. These op en stack areas may contain rare materials, which remain unidentified and unprotected. Materials in open stack areas are most vulnerable to breaches in security. Many thieves search open stacks areas for materials considered rare, rather than attempt to infiltrate special collections areas or outwit the security measures implemented in monitored read­ ing areas. Institutions should establish procedures for the routine areas using the ACRVRBMS “Guide­ lines on the Selection of General Collection Mate­ rials for Transfer to Special Collections” to assist in identifying rare materials on the open shelves in need of protection. IX. Le g a l and procedural re sp o n sib ilitie s The administrators o f special collections and the LSO must know the laws for dealing with library theft that are applicable in their state and must convey this information to staff. Staff mem bers must be aw are of their legal rights in stopping thefts and not infringing on the rights o f the individual suspected o f theft. The administrator of special collections and the LSO must report thefts of rare materials to appropriate law enforcement agencies and must take responsibility for requesting action from legal authorities. The theft of materials, w hen­ ever the theft is discovered, must b e reported in a timely m anner to help prevent the un­ know ing transfer o f the items and to facilitate their return. Appropriate agencies to report to include local, institutional, and state law en­ forcement agencies and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Consult A ppendix II for reporting details. For legal and procedural responsibilities, see “Guidelines Regarding Thefts in Libraries” (listed in A ppendix III). Suggestions f o r implementation: 1. LSOs an d /o r special collections adminis­ trators should take an active role in raising the 746 / C&RL News ■ October 1999 aw areness o f o th er institutional officials, e.g., institutional legal officers, p u b lic safety of­ ficers, th e library director, etc., regarding th e serio u s n a tu re o f m aterials theft, a n d urge th e institution to actively se e k th e resolution o f security threats a n d b re a c h e s a n d to s e e k th e stric te st p u n is h m e n t p o s s ib le fo r th o s e c o n v ic te d o f th e ft o r o th e r se c u rity v io la ­ tions. X. C o n c lu sio n T he guidelines p re s e n te d h ere are necessar­ ily brief since further inform ation is available thro u g h professional literature, professional organizations, a n d consultants w ithin th e rare b o o k , m an u scrip t, a n d sp ecial collections com m unity, an d in the law en fo rcem en t an d insurance professions. T he effort o f th e e n ­ tire staff, w ith final responsibility v ested in o n e senior staff m em ber, w orking in c o o p ­ eration w ith law enforcem ent, will result in m ore secure collections w h erein materials are p reserv ed a n d m ade available for all w h o w ish to u se them . A p p e n d ix I Guidelines for marking books, manuscripts, and other special collections materials I. In tro d u ctio n T here has b een m uch thoughtful discussion regarding the appropriateness o f perm anently m arking books, m anuscripts, an d o ther sp e­ cial collections materials. Failure to mark compromises security. Cases o f theft show that clear identification o f stolen material is vital if material, once recovered, is to b e returned to its rightful owner. T he fol­ low ing guidelines are intended to aid libraries an d o ther institutions in m arking their materi­ als an d to provide as consistent an d uniform a practice as possible. Even th e most conservative marking pro­ gram results in perm anent alteration o f materi­ als. Choices concerning marking are likely to d ep en d heavily o n o n e ’s aesthetic judgm ent balanced against the n eed to secure materials from theft and to assist in their identification an d recovery. Each repository will have to balance those com peting needs. T he ACRL/RBMS Security Committee recom m ends that libraries and other institutions use marking as part o f their overall security procedures an d that they attem pt to strike a balance betw een the implications for deterrence (visibility, perm anence) an d th e in­ tegrity o f the docum ents (both physical and aesthetic). II. G en eral re co m m e n d atio n s G eneral recom m endations are: A) that markings b e o f tw o types: 1) readily visible to the casual observer, and 2) hidden an d difficult to detect. B) that readily visible marks b e m ade in an approved form o f perm anent ink. C) that marks w hich are hid d en o r diffi­ cu lt to d e te c t n e v e r b e th e o n ly o r p ri­ mary types o f marking. D) that visible m arks b e placed so that they will cause significant dam age to the aesthetic an d comm ercial value o f th e item if they are removed. E) that m arks b e placed directly o n the material itself an d not o n an associated part from w hich the material m ay b e separated. F) that all marks unequivocally an d clearly identify the repository. III. D iscu ssio n A) Readily visible marks are intended to d eter potential thieves; hidden m arks are in­ ten d ed to assist in the recovery o f stolen m ate­ rials. If only o n e type o f mark is to b e used, it should be o f the readily visible type. T he size should b e kept to a minim um (ca. 5 point type size for lettering). B) Visible m arks should b e all but im pos­ sible to rem ove an d should never consist o f just a bookplate. A lthough not the only form o f a visible mark, ink is perhaps th e best m e­ dium for this purpose, so long as th e ink meets current standards for perm anence an d conser­ vation. There is still controversy surrounding w hich inks are best suited for this purpose, so a recom m endation cannot go b ey o n d urging those in charge of marking programs to b e cur­ rent on the latest developments in this field. C) H idden m arks should never b e used as the only form o f marking, because they are w orthless in alerting others, such as booksell­ ers, that material has been stolen. H idden marks are intended only as supplem ents to visible marks. C&RL News ■ October 1999 / 747 D) Much controversy has surrounded the placement o f visible marks. Given the varying nature of special collections materials and the varying nature of beliefs and sentiments con­ cerning what is proper placem ent for a visible mark, it is probably futile to overly prescribe placement o f marks. It is recom m ended, how ­ ever, that no position for a mark be rejected outright. Some repositories might, for example, be comfortable stamping the verso o f a title page or the image area o f a map; others might reject those options. But no m atter w here the visible mark is placed, it should not b e in a position that it can be rem oved w ithout leav­ ing quite obvious evidence o f its former pres­ ence. Some items do present unusual decisions on placem ent o f visible marks. The following are specific recom m endations for the formats listed. 1. Medieval a n d Renaissance Manuscripts, Incunabula, a n d Early Printed Books: O n the verso o f the first leaf of principal text, o n the low er inner margin, approxim ate to the last line of text. Additional markings may be needed w hen the item is a composite manuscript or otherwise has a substantial text that may be broken away w ithout noticeable injury to th e volum e. T he location o f each su b seq u en t m arking w o u ld b e th e sam e, i.e., lo w er in­ n e r m argin approxim ate to th e last line of text. W hen the item is too tightly bound to mark in the inner margin, alternate locations may be m ade in any blank area o f the verso, as close to the low er portion o f text as possible. The mark should be so placed that it may not be excised without extrem e cropping. (In items of double columns, the mark might be located in the blank area betw een the columns.) 2. L ea f Books, Single Leaves fr o m M a n u ­ scripts: O n either verso o r recto, at the lower portion o f the text or image of each leaf. The choice may be determ ined by the docum ent itself if one of the sides has more importance (ow ing to an illustration, m anuscript notation, etc.). T he ow nership m ark should th en be placed on the reverse side. E) Marks o f w hatever type must b e placed directly on the material itself. Marks placed only on a front pastedow n in a book, o n a portfolio that holds prints, o r on som e type of backing material are rendered useless if that elem ent is separated from the item. Especially in the case of flat items, such as maps and broadsides, it is important that the marks be applied before any backing procedure is done. F) Marks should not b e generic (e.g., “Rare Book Room,” “Special Collections,” “Univer­ sity Library,” etc.), but should rather make plain the repository to w hich they refer. It is recom ­ m ended that visible marking consist o f the repository’s Library o f Congress symbol. If a repository lacks such a symbol, the Library of Congress will supply one u p o n request. If the Library o f Congress symbol is not used, then the nam e o f the repository should b e used, being careful that no confusion arises am ong repositories w ith similar o r identical names. IV. O ther co n sid e ratio n s A) H idden marks do not have to b e marks at all. They merely have to provide som e posi­ tive ow nership indication that is extremely dif­ f ic u lt if n o t im p o s s ib le to d e te c t. Microembossers, for example, provide an ex­ tremely cheap and difficult to detect type of nearly invisible mark. Modern technology also provides non-invasive marking techniques such as m icro-photography that does not leave any mark on the item itself yet serves as positive identification. O ther technologies, such as mi­ cro-taggants, may also b e appropriate for this purpose. It is vital if such marks are used, how ­ ever, that the repository keep extremely accu­ rate records o f such marks so that they can be readily found for identification purposes if the need arises to do so. Generic secret marking systems, such as underlining a w ord o n p. 13 o f every book, should be avoided as the sole m eans o f such marks. B) Repositories should never attem pt to cancel marks, even in the event that the m ate­ rial is deaccessioned. No system has yet been devised for canceling marks that cannot be imitated with relative ease by thieves, and there seem s to be no alternative but to assum e per­ m anent responsibility for o n e ’s m ark o n a book, m anuscript, or o th er docum ent. Per­ m a n e n t r e c o r d s s h o u l d b e k e p t o f deaccessioned materials, w hether m arked or unm arked, an d the material itself w h en re­ leased should b e accom panied by a do cu ­ m ent conveying ownership. It is advisable to place stamps or notes in items indicating that they have been deaccessioned, but no attempt should be m ade to cancel or remove previous ow nership marks. 748 / C&RL News ■ October 1999 C) M arks s h o u ld b e a p p lie d to all item s w h e n th e y c o m e in to th e rep o sito ry . It is d a n g e ro u s to se n d u n m a rk e d item s in to stor­ a g e o r a cata lo g u in g b ack lo g , w h e re th ey m ay rem ain fo r y ears w ith n o in d icatio n th at th e rep o s ito ry o w n s them . D e sp ite th e fact th a t so m e item s m ay p re s e n t ex trem ely difficult a n d co m p licated d ecisio n s a b o u t m arking, th e p ro c e ss sh o u ld n e v e r b e d e fe r re d . It is stro n g ly r e c o m ­ m e n d e d th a t p ro g ram s also b e in stitu ted to m ark retro sp ectiv ely m aterials alread y in th e collections. D ) C are m u st b e ta k e n to e n su re th a t all d iscrete o r rem o v ab le p arts are m ark ed . It is re c o m m e n d e d th at e a c h sep arate plate, m ap, chart, o r o th e r su c h item in a p rin te d v o l­ u m e b e m a rk e d individually. V olum es o f b o u n d m an u scrip ts a n d co llectio n s o f in d i­ v idual m an u scrip ts p re s e n t a sim ilar p ro b ­ lem a n d e a c h d iscrete item in su c h co llec­ tio n s s h o u ld also b e m arked. E) B ecause m ark in g s h o u ld b e p a rt o f an overall security p rogram , th e ro le o f ca ta ­ lo g u in g in identifying m aterials s h o u ld n o t b e o v erlo o k ed . A ccurate a n d d e ta ile d p h y si­ cal d e scrip tio n s th a t n o te anom alies, defects, p ro v e n a n c e , a n d u n u su a l p h y sical c h a ra c ­ teristics a re essen tial ad ju n cts to o w n e rsh ip m arkings. A p p e n d ix II A d d re s se s f o r r e p o r t in g th e ft s (K ept cu rre n t a n d interactive at h tt p :/ / w w w .p r in c e t o n .e d u /~ f e r g u s o n /s e c g u i d e . html) • A B B o o k m a n ’s Weekly, Missing B ooks Section, P.O. Box AB, Clifton, NJ 07015; (201) 772-0020; fax: (201) 772-9281. • A ntiquarian B ooksellers A ssociation o f America, 20 W est 44th St., 4th floor, N ew York, NY 10035-6604; (212) 944-8291; fax: (212) 944-8293; e-m ail: ABAA@PANIX.COM; h o m e p a g e f o r t h e f t r e p o r t i n g : h t t p : / / w w w . a b a a -b o o k n e t. c o m / s to le n . htm • ACRL/RBMS Security C om m ittee, c /o American Library Association, 50 E. H uron St., Chicago, IL 60611; (800) 545-2433, ext. 2510; fax: (312) 280-2520; e-mail: ACRL@ALA.ORG; hom epage: h ttp ://w w w .ala.o rg ; RBMS hom e- page: h ttp ://w w w .p rin c e to n .e d u /~ fe rg u so n / rbms.html • Society o f A m erican Archivists, 527 S. Wells, Chicago, IL 60607; (312) 922-0140; fax: (312) 347-1452; e-m ail: sfox@ archivists.org; hom epage: http://w w w .archivists.org. Security List (m o d erated a n d o p e n to SAA m em bers only): SAASECURITYRT-L@CORNELL.EDU • Professional A utograph D ealers Associa­ tion, c /o Catherine Barnes, P O . Box 30117, Philadelphia, PA 19103; (215) 854-0175; toll free: (888) 338-4338 (U.S. only); fax: (215) 854-0831; e - m a il: C B A R N E S 2@ IX .N E T C O M .C O M ; hom epage: h ttp ://w w w .p ad aw e b .o rg • Library Security O fficer E lectronic List: S usan M. Allen, c h ie f librarian, R esearch Li­ brary, T h e G etty R esearch Institute fo r the H istory o f Art a n d th e H um anities, 1200 Getty C en ter D rive, Suite 1100, Los A ngeles, CA 90049-1688; (310) 440-7611; fax: (310) 440- 7781; s e n d re p o rts to: SALLEN@GETTY.EDU • ExLibris E le c tro n ic D is c u s s io n List: E X L IB R IS @ L IB R A R Y .B E R K E L E Y .E D U (u n m o d erated but m ust b e a m em b er to post). • Interloc: h ttp ://w w w .in terlo c.co m /lo st/ index.htm . R eporting address: INTERLOC@ INTERLOC.COM • M useum Security N etw ork: h ttp ://m u - s e u m - s e c u r i t y . o r g . R e p o r ti n g a d d r e s s : securma@p o p .xs4all.nl • Archives & Archivists Electronic D iscus­ sion List: ARCHIVES@LISTSERV.MUOHIO.EDU • DeRicci Project: DERICCI@AOL.COM (for pre-1600 m anuscripts only). A p p e n d ix III R e la te d g u id e lin e s (ACRL d o c u m e n ts a v a ila b le at: h t t p : / / w w w . ala. o rg /a c rl/g u id e s /in d e x .h tm l.) • A ssociation o f C ollege & R esearch Li­ braries. “G u id elin es R egarding T hefts in Li­ b ra rie s” (1994). • A ssociation o f C ollege & R esearch Li­ braries. “S election o f G en eral C ollection Ma­ terials fo r T ransfer to S pecial C o llectio n s” (2 n d ed . 1994). • A ssociation o f C ollege & R esearch Li­ braries. “S tandards fo r Ethical C o n d u ct o f R are B ook, M anuscript, a n d Special C ollec­ tio n s Libraries a n d Librarians, w ith G u id e ­ lin es fo r In stitu tio n al P ractice in S u p p o rt o f th e S tan d ard s” (2 n d ed. 1992). • Society o f A m erican Archivists. “Librar­ ies a n d A rchives: An O v erv iew o f Risk a n d Loss P re v e n tio n ” (1994). • Society o f A m erican A rchivists. “P ro ­ tectin g Y our C ollections: A M anual o f Archi­ val Security” (1995). ■ http://www.princeton.edu/~ferguson/secguide mailto:ABAA@PANIX.COM mailto:ACRL@ALA.ORG http://www.ala.org mailto:sfox@archivists.org http://www.archivists.org mailto:SAASECURITYRT-L@CORNELL.EDU mailto:CBARNES2@IX.NETCOM.COM http://www.padaweb.org mailto:SALLEN@GETTY.EDU mailto:EXLIBRIS@LIBRARY.BERKELEY.EDU http://www.interloc.com/lost/ INTERLOC.COM http://mu-seum-security.org http://mu-seum-security.org mailto:securma@pop.xs4all.nl mailto:ARCHIVES@LISTSERV.MUOHIO.EDU mailto:DERICCI@AOL.COM 750 / C&RL News ■ October 1999 P r o j e c t More Useful Serials Electronically B u ild in g a bigger, b etter Muse Project M use® now includes scholarly journals from ten university presses! Building on the original 47 scholarly titles offered by Johns H opkins, the M U SE collection now offers 111 full-text journals online. By m erging these titles into a single database, MUSE provides scholars w ith the critical co n ten t they need, com bined w ith all o f the benefits o f electronic subscriptions, including full-text an d field searching, easy navigation, an d full cam pus availability 24 hours a day. W ith o ur expanded list, faster servers an d increased searching options, your users will find research has never been easier. A nd as a librarian, there’s no better value for your dollar— the list price o f $8,000 is m uch less than the cost o f subscribing to these titles in print. O u r flexible subscription options include discipline-oriented packages an d single-title ordering to best m eet your collection developm ent needs. Substantial discounts are also offered for consortium , smaller an d special libraries. C o n tact us now to see w hy there’s more to M U SE th an ever before. N o w M u s e in c lu d e s jo u r n a ls fro m : P r o j e c t M u s e ® Setting the standard for scholarly eleetronic journals in the humanities and social sciences. h ttp ;//.muse.jh u .e d u Preview the expanded Project MUSE now. Contact us for your free trial subscription at muse@muse.jhu.edu or 1-800-548-1784. jhu.edu mailto:muse@muse.jhu.edu