Meeting Minutes 4/29/2009

Agenda:

1. Updates: Peggy updated the group on a variety of topics, including: LN Congressional Hearings files have not been corrupted with a virus, CSU is ready to transfer the Serial Set to PASCAL (Peggy is ironing out the details with John Culshaw), and a potential list of serial titles that could be withdrawn without listing.
2. Cart of Tech Reports--this is a job for Peggy. Sort into "Keep" and "Not Keep". They seem to have come up from Acquisitions. If she decides not to add to the collection, item records need to be deleted.
3. Government Finance Statistics--we know have access to this database via an IMF Digital Library Trial. Jennie is not in favor of switching any subscriptions to purchase this database because of the quality of the interface. Everyone else has been advised to keep.
4. Tyvek--Using a testing pen, Deb determined that Tyvek product we have been using is not acid free. She's contacting DuPont for a definitive answer. The text of a string of e-mails on the issue is included below: Deb, etal -
   Tyvek is generally acceptable for document storage. However there are some concerns. Tyvek envelopes do not provide support. If the documents in the envelopes are being stored in something that provides support or if support is added, that would be an improvement. However, if you have a group of small items in an envelope, every time the envelope is handled the contents are likely to shift around. In addition, it is difficult to view the contents (which means more handling).
   
   Several vendors supply a variety of archival quality alternatives. For instance, there are archival file folders, melinex folders, 4-flap enclosures in various sizes/designs (some of which we can construct in-house), and so on.
   These are available in a number of sizes and shapes. Prices and quality vary depending on the vendor.
   
   If you have a small project (such as the WWII ration books & stamps), we suggest that you go ahead and use file folders to organize the material in the order and groups you think best and then let us arrange for the permanent housing of these items.
   
   If you have larger projects, perhaps we could get together with the folks involved. We can research the various options, provide recommendations, and in some instances order the material needed.
   
   Please let Pat or me know if you want to discuss any of these suggestions.
   
   Christine
   
   -----Original Message-----
   From: Debra S Van Tassel [mailto:Debra.VanTassel@Colorado.EDU]
   Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 9:01 AM
   To: McClure, Pat; Walther, Leanne; Zoller, Sheila; Rogers, Linda; Jobe, Peggy; Gerke, Jennifer; Martin, Salem
   Cc: Devries, Christine; Stewart, Carl; 'Kris McCusker'
   Subject: FW: Tyvek® for archival applications
   
   Hi everyone,
   
   I emailed Dupont directly yesterday asking if the Tyvek envelopes we have been using (# R1852) are appropriate for archival preservation of documents. I had done some research online and found that there are some "archival quality" Tyvek envelopes but nothing on our box indicated one way or the other. Below is the response I received this morning from Dupont.
   
   Deb
   
   -----Original Message-----
   From: Jesse Rodgers [mailto:jesse.l.rodgers@usa.dupont.com]
   Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 6:56 AM
   To: debra.vantassel@colorado.edu
   Subject: Tyvek for archival applications
   
   Debra.
   
   We recommend 1059B since this is our FDA approved style because it does not contain any antistat coating. Our antistat coating is water soluble and under severe moisture conditions it could start leaching out. There are a lot of people using our standard Tyvek enevlopes for archival applications without any problem, but to be 100% safe 1059B is the best product to use.
   
   
   1059B Can we purchase by contacting:
   
   PeelMaster Packaging
   Bill Sieck (847) 966-6161
   6153C West Mulford St
   Niles, IL 60714-3426
   
   Jesse L Rodgers
   Tyvek
   CRP 21-1172
   (302) 999-4115
   
5. Marcive Profile--Peggy will get details from Jim Noel at Marcive. We think our profile is fine.
6. Backstage Update: Deb reported that the backstage process found 236 Readex records with the incorrect form of the agency name. Checking the records she has discovered that some serials display incorrectly with the EBD rather than SuDocs call number. She's fixing these as she goes along.