May 2004

s with every major research library in the
world, the Library of Congress is con-

fronted with the complex problem of provid-
ing access to research materials that are in
such poor condition that they cannot be han-
dled safely.These "too-brittle-to-serve" mate-
rials are often so degraded that even the
process of reformatting (microfilming or dig-
itization) would cause irreparable damage.
This so-called "content preservation" is also
inadequate for some types of detailed image
material and does nothing to preserve the
original object. Preserving the original paper

support of these materials is also complicated
because of the high degree of degradation. In
fact, the only way to save these original
materials and keep them accessible is to find
a way to actually strengthen the paper.

Complete yearly editions of newspaper

runs in the Library's collection are just one
example of brittle and increasingly rare mate-
rials. Many institutions have opted for the
more economical approach of microfilming
such collections, and no longer retain more
than occasional issues because reformatting

May 2004

Vol. 29, No. 3

From the Executive

Director

2005 AIC Directory

Deadline

Annual Meeting

Schedule at a

Glance

FAIC News

FAIC Fund Drive

AIC Annual Report

Angels Seek

Volunteers

Grant Deadlines

Publications

Committee Seeks

Members

AIC News

Submissions

2004 Publications

List

Inside

LMER

USMAN

, C

INDY

ONNELLY

YAN

AND

EAN

ALDWIN

American Institute for Conservation of Historic & Artistic Works

Investigating a Mechanized Mass Treatment

for Research Collections: The 20022004

Paper-Strengthening Pilot Program at the

Library of Congress

ROWN AND

THEL

ELLMAN

Let's Give Them Something To Talk About:

The Discussion Group Format in BPG

continued on page 3

n 1979, fifty conservators gathered at the
AIC Annual Meeting in Toronto to discuss

forming a special interest group to meet the
needs of book and paper conservators. Since
that meeting two decades ago, the Book and
Paper Group (BPG) has grown to be the largest
of the specialty groups in AIC and has devel-
oped to meet the needs of a diverse group of
conservators. Members may be experienced
conservators, high-level conservation adminis-
trators, conservation scientists, or conservators
new to the bench. The group's diversity is also
enriched by differences in the interests and

concerns of book and paper conservators
peculiar to the settings in which they work,
e.g., private practice, museums, archives,
libraries, and historical societies.

As BPG grew, groups of individuals shar-

ing special interests began to consider how to
facilitate specialized discussions. The Library
Collections Conservation Discussion Group
[LCCDG] and the Archives Conservators'
Discussion Group [ACDG] held their first
"official" meetings at the 1992 AIC Annual
Meeting in Buffalo. Each group spoke to the

continued on page 7

June 914,

AIC 32nd Annual Meet-

2 AIC N

EWS

, M

2004

Table of Contents

AIC Annual Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

AIC News . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

Allied Organization News . . . . . . . . . . . .19

Conference Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

Courses, Conferences, and Seminars . . . . . .31

FAIC News . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

From the Executive Director . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Grants, Awards, and Fellowships . . . . . . . . .20

Health & Safety News . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21

New Materials and Research . . . . . . . . . . .21

People . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

Positions, Internships, and Fellowships . . . . .36

Recent Publications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

Specialty Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26

Worth Noting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

AIC NEWS

AIC News (ISSN 1060-3247) is published bi-monthly by

the American Institute for Conservation of Historic &

Artistic Works, 1717 K Street, NW, Ste. 200,Washington,

D.C. 20006, (202) 4529545; Fax: (202) 4529328;

info@aic-faic.org; www.aic-faic.org

Periodicals postage paid at Washington, D.C.

Postmaster: Send address changes to:

AIC News

1717 K Street, NW, Suite 200

Washington, D.C. 20006

AIC News is mailed to members for $18 per year as a

portion of annual membership dues.

Opinions expressed in the AIC News are those of the

contributors and not official statements of the AIC.

Responsibility for the materials/methods described herein

rests solely with the contributors.

Deadline for July Editorial Submissions

(narmbruster@aic-faic.org):

June 1, 2004

We reserve the right to edit for brevity and clarity.

Advertising

AIC accepts position-available ads only from equal

opportunity employers. All position ads must conform to

the standards for equal opportunity employment.The cost

of Internships and Fellowships, Position Available, and

Classified Ads is: $1.05 per word for members and $2.15

per word for nonmembers; the minimum charge is $75.

The cost of advertising in Supplier's Corner is $175 for

100 words.The cost of display ads is: 1/6 page $215; 1/3

page $360; 1/2 page $445; 2/3 page $570; full page $695.

Deadlines for advertising copy are February 10, April 10,

June 10, August 10, October 10, and December 10.

All ads should be submitted to Mary E. Seng at

mseng@aic-faic.org.

AIC News Staff

Lisa Goldberg

Editor

David Harvey

New Materials & Research Editor

Eryl P.Wentworth

Managing Editor

Nora A. Armbruster

Production Editor

Mary E. Seng

Meetings & Marketing Manager

Maayan S. Heller

Administrative, Publications & Website

Assistant

entirety without permission from AIC. Individual articles may

be reproduced if permission has been granted by the owner

of copyright and proper citation attributed.The paper used in

this publication meets the minimum requirements of

American National Standard for Information Sciences--

Permanence of Paper for Publications and Documents in

Libraries and Archives, ANSI/ NISO Z39.481992.

was (and is) often followed by discard of the originals. Such
practices have led to a situation where original issues of
various historic newspapers no longer exist. The Library of
Congress, however, still holds an estimated 28,000 bound
newspaper volumes, ranging in date from 1801 to 1961
(paper in earlier newspapers was generally manufactured
from rags and is generally not at risk). And, even if only half
of this collection was susceptible to rapid embrittlement,
single-item conservation treatment would be prohibitively
expensive.

In 2000, the Preservation Directorate of the Library of

Congress started planning a three-year pilot program to
investigate possibilities for dealing with this predicament.
The aim of the pilot program was to select a treatment pro-
tocol that could address the condition of the heavily
degraded papers in bulk, in a cost-effective manner. Such a
paper-strengthening program could potentially grow into
an integral part of the Library-wide preservation effort,
giving custodians an alternative to existing preservation
options such as rehousing, reformatting, or conservation.

In the fall of 2002, the U.S. Congress funded the pilot

program through a special appropriation. A three-member
team, consisting of a paper conservator, a book conserva-
tor, and a conservation scientist, coordinates the program.
Additional guidance is provided by a five-member advisory
committee comprised of experienced preservation profes-
sionals from various institutions around the country. The
program team and the advisory committee meet annually
to discuss and evaluate paper-strengthening options, treat-
ment results, and selection criteria. The team reports
directly to the director for preservation who actively mon-
itors the program direction and progress.

Various approaches have been used to strengthen

degraded paper in the past. These treatments have included
incorporation of an external support such as cellulose
acetate, chiffon silk, or Japanese paper. Unfortunately, the

first two processes actually increased the degradation rate
of the paper they were meant to preserve. Lining with
Japanese paper is limited to documents with text only on
one side, as it obscures any medium over which it is
applied. Other approaches used in both single-item and
mass treatments include impregnation of the weak paper
with synthetic compounds like methylcellulose, styrene, or
parylene, but none of these materials adequately enhances
paper strength and all of them radically and permanently
change the chemical composition of paper and media.

Another option, paper splitting, has been well estab-

lished in paper labs for decades, but only recently has the
technique been mechanized and made more cost-effective.
Paper splitting combines elements of both processes
described above by introducing a new paper support layer
and adhesive inside the paper, and its effectiveness in
strengthening weakened paper is promising. Paper splitting
is accomplished by temporarily adhering a support layer on
each side of the brittle object with gelatin. At the right
humidity, the support layers are pulled apart, splitting the
paper laterally in the middle. The two support layers now
each carry one side of the original, between which an addi-
tional paper ("core paper") can be inserted and adhered
with methylcellulose. This thin core paper is sandwiched
between the original paper halves and the composite is
pressed together. The temporary support layers are released
in an enzyme bath, and the sheet is dried and flattened.

Paper splitting is without question an extremely invasive

treatment. Most conservators would consider paper splitting
a treatment of last resort. Splitting paper permanently
changes its physical structure. It tears apart interior paper
fibers and introduces a new support layer, which in all prac-
ticality will never be removed despite the fact that the
treatment is reversible in principle. Perhaps most troubling
to conservators is the risk of additional damage. Sometimes
the process results in incorrectly lined up page halves or the
creation of tears or losses in the original material. However,
the treatment also brings many benefits.The treatment pro-
tocol includes washing to remove unstable degradation

products and the introduction of alka-
line agents in the core adhesive and
core paper to improve the physical
and chemical stability of the paper.

The Zentrum für Bucherhaltung

(ZFB) in Leipzig, Germany, is currently
the only company that offers this serv-
ice on a commercial basis and can
handle the scale of treatment the
Library of Congress might require. In
the fall of 2002, a contract was estab-
lished between the Library of Congress
and ZFB, which called for ZFB to use
mechanized paper-splitting technology
on various types of materials, including
newspapers, rotogravures, and comics.

Both institutions were able to dis-

cuss and adjust the treatment protocol

AIC N

EWS

, M

2004 3

Paper-Strengthening Program
continued from page 1

An untreated and treated volume of the New York Journal.The paper of the treated volume was washed, leaf
cast, split, and rebound.

to address a range of different problems. For instance, the
preparatory bathing treatment recommended by ZFB was
of particular concern to the Library. The pre-splitting treat-
ment consisted of washing at elevated temperatures (70°C)
for seven hours, followed by a three-hour bath in sodium
borohydride (NaBH

0.19%), also at 70°C. The elevated

temperatures, bath duration, and the use of sodium boro-
hydride were all specified by ZFB to optimize washing cas-
settes of up to 60 sheets, in multiples of 4 cassettes per tank.
Research at the Library as part of this program showed that
elevating the temperature of washing water and prolonging
the washing time indeed increased the efficacy of the treat-
ment significantly.The replicated treatment protocols varied
in bath temperature, bath duration, and inclusion of NaBH

Aged and unaged samples were analyzed using brightness,
cold extraction pH, and tensile strength. Although analysis
showed that the use of higher temperatures and longer bath
durations were clearly beneficial to the paper, the benefits
of NaBH

were not so clear. In fact, when the paper is sub-

sequently split the benefits are no longer detectable. In con-
sultation with ZFB, the Library decided not to incorporate
the use of NaBH

, which would reduce the treatment price

as well as some difficulties in treating materials with col-
ored printing inks.

A trial run of the splitting process with various wet-treat-

ment options on a group of brittle newspapers from the 1950s
produced inconsistent results. The newly obtained paper
strength and flexibility, well-adhered leaf cast margins, and
most importantly, significantly decreased rate of deterioration
were all very positive results. Testing after accelerated aging
showed both initial improvements from treatment and
enhanced retention of brightness, pH, and strength properties
for treated versus untreated samples after accelerated aging.
Unfortunately, samples also returned with increased gray
tonality, light spots, visible alkaline deposits, and partial splits.
Partial splits were of particular concern. This phenomenon
occurs when the paper is not fully split because the gelatin
fails to create a secure bond to the original. As a result, the
core paper is not deposited in the interior of the paper but on
the surface, obscuring the medium underneath. Other obser-
vations included areas of increased paper discoloration, wrin-
kling of the core paper, and adhesion of paper fragments on
the surface.

These flaws show how complicated, and at the same

time remarkable, the process of mechanized paper splitting
is. ZFB was able to fix these shortcomings and adjust treat-
ment protocols. Poorly performing gelatin was replaced and
bath protocols were modified. In the fall of 2003, ZFB
commenced with the treatment of specifically identified
portions of Library collection material.To date, occasions of
the dreaded partially split paper have been found in less
than 1% of the 10,000 sheets treated. When present, the
partially split areas were mainly located in the unprinted
margins, although sometimes in printed regions too. Wrin-
kling of core paper, white spots, and alkaline deposits on
the paper surface were not observed. A slight graying of the
paper will always occur and seems in large part due to the
removal of yellow brown discoloration products.

Selecting objects for this type of treatment is one of the

most challenging aspects of this program. Rarity, though
generally not uniqueness, is the primary selection criterion.
At this stage of the program, the bulk of selected objects
are rare newspaper editions. A good example is the recently
completed treatment of the 18961899 New York Journal.
The Library is the only institution in the U.S. that holds
paper copies of more than 42 months over this four-year
period. Unfortunately, the selection of rare and historic
newspapers for treatment is severely limited by the maxi-
mum 46 cm width of the paper splitting machine. This
width limitation prohibits the treatment of the majority of
historic U.S. newspapers that would otherwise be ideal can-
didates. The efficacy of treatment on additional types of
library materials is still being investigated. Potential candi-
dates include sheet music, type written manuscripts, and
certain kinds of brittle Chinese paper.

The Library program is limited to the treatment of

printed material because of the relative stability of this
medium in an aqueous treatment. Clay-coated papers
cannot be treated safely as the gelatin will pull off the
kaolin layer from the original paper. Other materials with
large areas of densely applied inks or papers containing
hand-written notations need to be examined carefully
before a decision can be made to have them treated. There
are options within the mechanized paper splitting process
to fix soluble inks with fixatives, but they come, like all
preparatory treatments, with additional cost.

The total treatment cost per sheet has been somewhat

elusive. A standard newspaper sheet could be treated for
U.S. $5.20 in September 2002, excluding 16% value added
taxes (VAT), which the Library of Congress is obliged to
pay. The Euro value has outpaced the U.S. Dollar value and
has added another 2025% to the treatment cost.When one
factors in inflation, the total treatment cost is about 40%
higher in 2004 than at the inception of the contract in
2002. Other costs are incurred in the preparatory steps nec-
essary for a safe splitting treatment. To date, the treatment
cost per sheet as defined by the Library's contract is on
average U.S. $9.24.

The paper-strengthening services that ZFB can deliver

for brittle newspapers is impressive. Where a newspaper
volume before treatment could not be consulted without
causing damage, it can now be handled with the ease of a
newly released issue. This is accomplished by strengthening
the paper and adding a leaf cast margin around every sheet
before the splitting process. The added margin also allows
for securing the pages in a post-binding that ZFB produces
according to Library of Congress specifications. The leaf
casting takes place before the splitting process. Thus a
secure bond is created as both the original sheet and the
leaf cast areas are split and connected by the core paper.

The pilot program has demonstrated that no mecha-

nized treatment, including paper splitting, is straightfor-
ward. Very often treatment required additional preparatory
steps. For example, sometimes there was old tape to be

4 AIC N

EWS

, M

2004

continued on page 6

From the

Executive Director

The Annual Meeting in the

dynamic setting of Portland,
Oregon, is fast approaching. We
learned that delivery of some reg-
istration brochures was delayed or
never completed. We're trying to
determine what happened and
appreciate those who called. We

were able to send replacement brochures to a number of
members, but at this late date, please go to the AIC website
(www.aic-faic.org) to locate the registration brochure. If
you haven't registered yet, please do. It's going to be a ter-
rific meeting, and I'm looking forward to seeing you there!

Thank you for your patience while we work through all

the issues related to launching the new website. I've appre-
ciated your comments--both those congratulating us on
the design of the site and those pointing out problems
found. As the "glitches" (a highly technical term I use to
cover those things I don't understand) are straightened out,
we will be adding additional features, so please don't hesi-
tate to make suggestions! Meanwhile, my thanks go out to
John Burke, Walter Henry, Berit Oskey, Maayan Heller, and

others who continue to work on making the site easy to
navigate, while providing you with the information you
want and need.

I also encourage you to register on the AIC website for

the AIC forums, designed to allow AIC members to partic-
ipate in discussions pertinent to your profession. Current
threads are outreach and professional development, with
certification and the Annual Meeting coming soon. As
issues arise that need broad discussion, more threads will be
added. There is also an FAQ page to answer additional
questions regarding the new forums area.

It's easy to register. When you go to "forum" in the

"members" section of the menu bar, log on with the user
name "aic" and password "AIC04." Click on "register" and
follow the instructions. For the user name and password,
use your own name and password. Once you fill out your
profile and select user options, an e-mail will be sent to
you. Be sure to click on the URL in that e-mail to verify
your e-mail address and complete the registration process.
When you reenter the forums site, use the AIC user name
and password. Select "Main Forum," then click on the
thread on "AIC Professional Development" or the thread
on "Outreach" and join the discussion!

I hope you have had an opportunity to enjoy another

new member benefit--staying at Club Quarters. If you are
traveling on AIC business, the bill can be sent directly to

AIC N

EWS

, M

2004 5

Nouvir Reearch
Half page
New
Film supplied

removed, shattered sheets to be aligned or the need for
extra effort to make the gelatin penetrate homogeneously
into densely inked papers. If mechanized paper splitting is
added to the preserva-
tion program, conserva-
tors will need to invest
time to become
acquainted with the
process and learn to
appreciate both its possi-
bilities and limitations in
order to participate
effectively in the selec-
tion of materials to be
treated.

Conservators

will also need to estab-
lish evaluation criteria
and learn to recognize
typical types of damage
that can be caused during and by the (mechanized) paper
splitting process. A conservator is also usually required to
conduct preparatory treatment steps and prepare the mate-
rials for safe shipping. In short, conservators must play a
vital role in both the selection and treatment evaluation
process.

Without exception the Library's collection custodians

have been very positive about treated materials. Saving the
original format and making the content accessible again is
a winning combination. Mechanical paper splitting might
never be an accepted treatment option in the museum com-
munity, but for libraries and archives it promises to be a
useful alternative. Various U.S. and European libraries have
tested ZFB's ability to treat brittle material and are gener-
ally pleased with the results. However, relatively few insti-
tutions have incorporated mechanized paper splitting as a
permanent part of their preservation program. Unfamiliar-

ity with the treatment process and results, as well as lack of
funding are likely factors in what appears to be a hesitation
to explore this treatment option. The per-page cost of U.S.
$9.24 can add up quickly when large collections are con-
sidered for treatment, and this cost can be significantly
affected by currency fluctuations. Nonetheless, mechanized

paper splitting remains a
valid alternative to a
single-item treatment
approach, which is more
expensive still and does
not easily lend itself to
being adapted for bulk
treatment.

What may also be at

issue is a reluctance to
accept the degree of risk
associated with any mass
treatment in the context
of materials that we
wish to maintain in their
original format. Like any

type of mass approach to preservation, mechanical paper
splitting has produced imperfections that would perhaps be
unacceptable as the result of single item treatment. The key
question becomes how much and what type of imperfec-
tions are we willing to except? The Library's experience
with mechanical paper splitting suggests that it may be time
to re-examine some of our old assumptions about value and
risk, accepting that there is not a single standard that can
be applied to the complex process of selecting candidates
for the full range of treatment options. In the opinion of the
pilot program, the vastly improved condition of specifically
selected material has so far outweighed the occasional
imperfection or damage.

--Elmer Eusman, Assistant to the Director for Preservation, Library

of Congress, eeus@loc.gov, and Cindy Connelly Ryan, Preservation

Specialist, Library of Congress, crya@loc.gov

6 AIC N

EWS

, M

2004

Additional Resources

Brueckle, I., J. Dambrogio. 2000. Paper Splitting: History and
Modern Technology, Journal of the American Institute for Conserva-
tion 39: 295325.

Gast, M. 1993. Paper-splitting: A Problematic but Indispensable
Method in Paper Restoration, Restaurator 14: 234252.

Waechter, W., J. Liers, and E. Becker. 1996. Paper Splitting at the
German Library in Leipzig Development from Craftsmanship
to Full Mechanisation, Restaurator 17: 3242.

Paper-Strengthening Program
continued from page 4

the AIC office for payment. Indicate billing preference
when you book. For easy arrangements, make your own
reservations online at reservations@clubquarters.com.

I attended my first IAG meeting in March and appreci-

ated all the welcoming comments. It was a pleasure to see
the group at work and to meet so many more active mem-
bers. The high level of thoughtful participation was impres-
sive. And, judging by the completed evaluation forms, the
meeting was considered a great success by everyone. See
you in Portland!

--Eryl P.Wentworth, AIC/FAIC Executive Director,

ewentworth@aic-faic.org

From the Executive Director
continued from page 5

2005 AIC Directory

If you have changes/updates to

your member listing, please note
that the deadline for submitting
changes is

July 1, 2004

. Corrections

will appear in the 2005 Directory.

Please notify AIC by e-mail at

info@aic-faic.org.

needs of conservators with specific concerns--LCCDG to
conservators who were responsible for collections in
libraries and ACDG to conservators responsible for archival
collections, primarily of documents on paper. Conservators
working in libraries and in archives are responsible for
thousands, sometimes millions, of items that are intended to
be used. Accessibility and functionality must be considered
along with maintaining the integrity of the object and the
information it contains. Effective and efficient treatment
techniques are crucial to a responsible collections conser-
vation laboratory. LCCDG and ACDG were an opportunity
to address treatment decisions, specific treatments, research
issues, and administrative responsibilities from a shared con-
textual point of view.

In the last 12 years, LCCDG and ACDG have attracted

larger participant bases and have become permanent, if
unofficial, fixtures within BPG. Although originally a
response to the interests of members in specific types of
institutions, LCCDG and ACDG have attracted participants
from a variety of institutional and noninstitutional settings.
The phenomenal growth of BPG was a significant factor in
this development, because the sheer number of BPG mem-
bers attending the formal sessions left little time for discus-
sion of questions and issues raised in the presentations.

LCCDG and ACDG have been able to be flexible in

determining the format of their sessions. The smaller, vocal
participant base and their shared interests have made evalua-
tion of group structure and program planning easier. Partici-
pants have enjoyed open discussions, panel discussions, and
formal presentations, especially for groundbreaking topics in
areas new to the BPG. For example, LCCDG was the venue
in which Sue Allen presented "Connoisseurship of Nine-
teenth-Century Bookbindings." A later session reviewed the
"Checklist of Primary Bibliographical Evidence Contained in
Nineteenth and Early Twentieth-Century Publishers' Book-
bindings." The group also heard Dr. Thomas Tanselle talk
about "The Future of Print Records," and hosted a seminal
panel discussion on the history of and conservation issues
related to collections of paperback books.

These discussion groups have profited from "show and

tell" sessions on effective and efficient conservation treat-
ments, humidification and flattening techniques, mass
deacidification, mold remediation, and surface cleaning.
ACDG discussed the commentaries for the Code of Ethics
and Guidelines for Practice as they apply to archives. Dis-
cussion group participants have toured the facilities of an
international disaster recovery vendor, addressed problems
of pressure-sensitive tape on collection materials, and com-
miserated over malicious mutilation of library and archival
materials, prevention and treatment options. They have
shared information on security systems, on finding, training,
and supervising conservation technicians, and on maintain-
ing treatment statistics.This year LCCDG topics are "Doing
More With Less: Strategies for Stretching a Conservation

Dollar" and "Ergonomics for Collections Conservators:
Design of Work Areas, Benches, and Computer Stations."
The ADCG program, a fresh overview of the field, is enti-
tled "Archival Collections Conservation: Who, What,
When, Where, Why, and How."

While the discussion group participants have been

enthusiastic, the logistics of putting together LCCDG and
ACDG has fallen to dedicated individuals. Because the
groups are not officially part of the BPG structure, they
have sometimes suffered from lack of sanctioned support
for publicity for the sessions or scheduling. On occasion,
the discussion groups were scheduled in conflict with the
official sessions, creating difficult choices for some partici-
pants. In addition, conservators in libraries and archives
often share interests covered in other specialty groups, such
as the Electronic Media Specialty Group and Photographic
Materials Specialty Group, and the chairs also tried to avoid
scheduling conflicts with those groups. The strong interest
in LCCDG and ACDG has been evident in a consistently
high level of participation, even when the programs were
scheduled in the evening or in the last time slot on the last
day of the annual meeting!

Without official status in BPG, budgetary support fell to

the discretion of the chair of BPG, who, because the issue was
not clear, was put in the difficult position of justifying any
monies expended on the groups. Chairs of LCCDG and
ACDG were aware of the difficulty this presented for the offi-
cers of BPG and were always grateful for support received.

As the needs of the Book and Paper Group have grown,

BPG program chairs have realized the benefits of introducing
the discussion group format into the general BPG program.
These groups differ from LCCDG and ACDG in that they
focus on specific treatment topics, without the contextual
component so important to participants in LCCDG and
ACDG. The topics addressed have included media consolida-
tion, stain reduction, wet treatment of water-soluble media,
board reattachment, the use of cyclododecane in paper con-
servation, book exhibition issues, adhesives and leather, and
inpainting.These new discussion groups do meet the needs of
members to share information in a less formal manner that
allows for extended discussion. They have been well received
and well attended.

In keeping with the smaller, more focused nature of the

groups, moderators have determined the format. Some have
been formal presentations with demonstrations of tech-
niques, while others have relied on audience participation.
The only complaint is the necessity of having to choose one
group over another in order to create the smaller groups
that allow for individual participation. Summaries of these
discussion sessions are published in the Book and Paper
Group Annual and they have been audio taped for the BPG
archive. Video taping the sessions has been suggested, but
has not been feasible to date.

The Book and Paper Group is a large, diverse collection

of conservators who profit from each other's experience
and expertise, whether shared in a formal presentation
before a large, anonymous audience or in a relatively inti-

AIC N

EWS

, M

2004 7

Discussion Group Format in BPG
continued from page 1

mate affinity group. Our problems with scheduling, choos-
ing between sessions, finding time to question and discuss,
are the result of our success in attracting members to excel-
lent programs. We will continue to face difficult scheduling
choices at each annual meeting. Sometimes we'll choose
well; sometimes we'll have regrets. We know, however, that
this is a problem of luxury. We are fortunate to be part of
an active, dynamic, growing organization trying its best to
meet our various needs.

--Meg Brown, Conservator, Raleigh, N.C., and Ethel Hellman,

Collections Conservator for Widener Library Harvard College Library,

Cambridge, Mass.

Note: For a history of LCCDG programs, see BPG Annual,
2001, pp.4348.

AIC News

Proposed Bylaw Change Will Not Be Brought
to a Vote

The AIC Board has been following the discussion con-

cerning the elimination of the practice of sending postcards
to all fellows informing them of proposed applicants to fel-
lowship. The proposed change to the by Bylaws, Section II:
Memberships/Fellows, 4(e) is being carefully considered.
Notification of a vote on the change in the March 2004 AIC
News was premature. Bylaws are one of the most important
documents of an organization, defining rules, directions, and
guidelines for operation. The Board prefers that changes to
the bylaws should be infrequent and be brought to the mem-
bership only when several modifications are up for a vote.The
current proposal is the only one under consideration, so the
majority of the Board feels it is in the best interest of AIC not
to bring it forward for a vote at this time.

--Thomas Chase, AIC President;

Jane E. Klinger, AIC Director, Committee Liaison

Guide to Conservation Services

One of the most popular features of the AIC website is the

"Guide to Conservation Services." Increasingly, a variety of
publications and websites refer to the Guide. Museums and
other affiliate organizations recommend it. And, the public is
responding with a greater number of inquiries. Meanwhile,
more members are volunteering to be added to the list and,
while we have not done a survey, I suspect that most everyone
on the list has been contacted for advice or a consultation.

Using the guide is easy.Try it out and encourage those you

know to use it. On the home page of the AIC website, look
for "Public Info" on the site navigation bar. Click on "Select-
ing a Conservator" in the drop-down bar. Once there, follow
the instructions regarding the specialty area, type of material,
and geographic area. Or, from any main page, click on "Guide

to Conservation Services" in the left-hand navigation screen
and follow the instructions.The user is provided with a list of
names, city and state, and telephone numbers, which makes it
easy to find a conservator ready and able to help with a proj-
ect or willing to help locate an appropriate specialist.

For conservators listed in the "Guide to Conservation Ser-

vices" come telephone inquiries, contacts, and potential sources
for clients. Since this tool serves as an interface with the public,
willingness to participate means that we have agreed to act as
ambassadors for the field of conservation. By returning these
calls as quickly as possible, even if the call is not pertinent to
your own work, you ensure that the guide serves as one of our
best outreach tools. You are helping the general public gain a
better understanding and appreciation of the importance of
preserving our cultural heritage, along with their own family
histories.

If you are a PA or fellow who is not on the list and wish

to be, fill out the form that came with your membership
renewal. If you are not a PA and wish to be included, please
apply for PA membership to take advantage of this important
member--and public--benefit. Thank you.

--Craig Deller, AIC Director of Communications, (630) 232-1708;

craig@deller.com

Seeking a Fellow To Join the Ethics and
Standards Committee

What Does the Committee Do?

The Ethics and Standards Committee is a standing com-

mittee as defined by AIC's bylaws.The Committee consists of
five people who usually have staggered, renewable, two-year
terms.The bylaws require that the Committee include at least
three fellows and no more than two professional associates.
The Committee has had strong representation by private con-
servators; currently there are two private conservators and a
private conservation scientist in our group of five.

The Committee's purpose is to review allegations sent

to the AIC president of misconduct by members of AIC. If
there seems a reason to investigate the allegation, the Com-
mittee will let both the complainant and the AIC member
know in writing, and will set out a timetable to review the
evidence.The Committee relies on a very careful reading of
the Code of Ethics and Guidelines for Practice before
making recommendations to the president, who then brings
the matter to the AIC Board if actions are required. Any
decisions can be brought to the Appeals Committee for
consideration. The Ethics and Standards Committee's
charge is outlined in Section II, 2 of the bylaws.

Confidentiality is critical. Only the Committee and the

president and executive director of AIC know the names of
the individuals involved. Members of the Committee do
not keep any records when they rotate off the Committee.

The Committee members are selected to represent our

field as fairly as possible. We strive for a balance of special-
ties and geography. If a case occurs in a specialty not cov-

8 AIC N

EWS

, M

2004

ered by the Committee members, a respected conservator
in that particular field is consulted. Again, confidentiality is
maintained in this consultation.

The Committee reviews anywhere from one to four

cases a year. A large proportion of complaints are about
associate members using AIC membership for marketing
purposes. In this case the president sends a polite reminder
that only PAs and fellows can use their affiliation to pro-
mote their business, then suggests that the member become
a PA. Most of the complaints we look at in detail turn out
to be misunderstandings, which are resolved through dis-
cussion with the conservation professional and the client or
person lodging the complaint. This is the approach encour-
aged by the Committee and the AIC Board.

Working on this committee has taught its members a lot

about our profession, especially the value of our Code of
Ethics and Guidelines for Practice.

Personally, I find it very reassuring that adhering to the

Code of Ethics and Guidelines for Practice covers most pro-
fessional contingencies, and that the Code and Guidelines
are excellent tools for thoughtfully resolving issues. The
value of good and thorough documentation, including pho-
tography, clear treatment proposals, contracts and the like,
has been made exceedingly clear to me. Good documenta-
tion is key in resolving any complaints.

Please feel free to contact me at (816) 751-1253, or

Mark Harpainter, the incoming chair, at (510) 849-3206, if
you are a fellow of AIC and would like to help.

--Kate Garland, Chair, Ethics and Standards Committee

IAG March 2004 Meeting

AIC's Internal Advisory Group met for a day and a half

this past March, and I think that most attendees would agree
that this was a fabulous meeting. The schedule's extended
length permitted a relaxed atmosphere that set the tone for
thoughtfulness and candor.

The meeting opened on Friday afternoon with an intro-

duction to our new AIC executive director, Eryl Wentworth.
Emphasizing our fiscal stability, Eryl outlined ideas for
expanding and enhancing AIC's and FAIC's maintenance and
growth. In her preliminary flow chart, provided earlier to the
AIC Board, Eryl offered ideas as to our current highest pri-
orities--examining AIC's mission statement; the FAIC mis-
sion statement; a combined vision statement for how the
world will think about us in 25 years; and strategic plans for
AIC and FAIC. Eryl is eager to hear from you--the mem-
bership--by way of anecdotes, stories, and words of excite-
ment about conservation. She welcomes your feedback on the
strategic plan and our efforts to increase the visibility of AIC
and conservation in general.

Rick Kerschner's treasurer's report noted efforts to

improve the way in which financial guidance and training is
provided for all specialty groups, committees and task forces.
A sample budget packet is now sent to all groups with a
budget worksheet and budget guidelines. Megan Nash, assis-
tant director for finance and administration, is working on a

step-by-step procedure and is always available to help. Despite
our current financial health, we still must improve the num-
bers of members contributing to FAIC.

Following Rick's presentation, Mary Striegel introduced

specialty group chairs who reported on exciting or notewor-
thy activities. It was gratifying to learn that despite differences
in subject matter, many of the specialty groups are working
toward similar goals. Architecture (ASG), paintings (PSG),
photographic materials (PMG), and wooden artifacts (WAG)
are taking another look at their rules of order to strengthen
their organizational structure. Objects (OSG) and book and
paper (BPG) are working on publications and workshops.The
textiles (TSG) group is sponsoring an outreach program in
Chile, and WAG is embarking upon a second furniture tour
to France. Look for upcoming joint ventures at the Portland
meeting between ASG and PSG on murals in an architectural
setting and PMG and electronic media (EMG) on "What is a
Photograph." A joint luncheon on better use of the Internet
for searching will be held by BPG, PMG, CIPP, and EMG. For
the first time, RATS will hold a whole-day session along with
a lunch discussion to exchange ideas and emphasize its inter-
est in collaborating with all specialty groups.

Jane Klinger introduced chairs and offered them an oppor-

tunity to comment. Paul Messier reported that the Publications
Committee, spearheaded by Walter Henry, has produced best
practices for specialty group print publications and is also
working on best practices for web dissemination and for dis-
tributing on CD and optical disc. Maria Grandinette reported
that a 58-page draft report of the Collections Care Task Force
had been issued on the role of collections care specialists and
technicians, and was seeking feedback on distribution options.
Nancy Schrock provided background on the goals of the
Archives Task Force, which include a request for proposal for
records management guidelines for conservators in private
practice, assistance in placing conservator records, and review
of Commentaries on documentation to ensure long-term
preservation.

On Saturday morning, Patricia Griffin enticed us with

news about the program of the Annual Meeting in Portland
featuring a keynote address by James Beck, a history of AIC
by Kirby Talley, and a panel discussion led by Charles Rhyne
on the meeting's "cleaning" topic. Nancy Odegaard spoke on
behalf of Jay Krueger for the Annual Meeting Task Force.This
new task force will consider issues such as length of meeting,
number of events, location, structure, economics and cost fac-
tors, networking, and dates. By the close of the IAG meeting,
it was determined that the Annual Meeting will be the sub-
ject of the issues session in Portland.

Terry Drayman-Weisser assured us that progress continues

on certification and the formation of a small core committee
representing specialty groups and others is imminent. Terry
hopes to involve everyone who has an interest and plans to
make use of working groups devoted to a particular topic. She
took this opportunity to remind us that certification will also
be open to people outside of AIC and its voluntary nature is
preferable to licensure--a mandatory qualification run by a
government body, on a state-by-state basis.

Elisabeth Batchelor provided an update on membership

AIC N

EWS

, M

2004 9

growth. While PAs show a nice steady increase, fellow and
institutional membership is flat. Associate membership is
where we can have the highest growth and expect the
redesign of the website to attract a more general membership.
Katharine Untch followed with an update on professional
development activities, highlighting the new electronic distri-
bution list for students and interim members and the phe-
nomenal growth of professional development workshops.
Representing JAIC, Michele Derrick encouraged paper sub-
mission for the peer review process, a constructive and help-
ful way to think about the work you are doing. Nancy Ode-
gaard led the group in a discussion about our relationship
with affiliates and how we can best conduct outreach to allied
professional organizations. Mary Striegel closed out the after-
noon with a discussion of the Guide and professional cour-

tesy, timing of membership dues, clarifying specialty group
limitations on fundraising activities, and selecting a topic for
Portland's issues session.

Numerous suggestions were made during the ongoing

discussions over the course of the meeting. These ideas cov-
ered topics such as ways to approach the reorganization of the
FAIC, suggestions for improving the Annual Meeting, ways to
increase the number of nominations for awards, review of the
AIC dues timetable to increase timeliness in payment, discus-
sions about alternative membership categories, ideas for
increasing the quality of online communications, and thoughts
about AIC's outreach activities with affiliate organizations.

--Hilary A. Kaplan, AIC Secretary, NARA,

hilary.kaplan@nara.gov

10 AIC N

EWS

, M

2004

2004 AIC Annual Meeting Schedule at a Glance

Wednesday, June 9

Various times

Tours and Workshops

5:307:30 p.m.

Public Lecture, Portland Art Museum

Thursday, June 10

11 a.m.4 p.m.

Poster Sessions

8:40 a.m.12:20 p.m.

General Session

(morning session)

25:45 p.m.

General Session

(afternoon session)

6:309 p.m.

Opening Reception at the Portland Art Museum

Friday, June 11

89 a.m.

Workshop: Respirator Fit Testing

8:30 a.m.12:20 p.m.

General Session

10 a.m.6 p.m.

Exhibit Hall and Poster Sessions

12:302 p.m.

Health & Safety Lecture

25:30 p.m.

Issues Session, Business Meeting

Various times

Specialty Group Events

(Architecture, Book & Paper, CIPP, Paint-

ings,

Photographic Materials, and Textiles)

Saturday, June 12

7:458:30 a.m.

First-Time Attendees Breakfast

Various times

Specialty Group Events

(Book & Paper, CIPP, Electronic Media,

Objects, Paintings, Photographic Materials, and Textiles)

10 a.m.5 p.m.

Exhibit Hall and Poster Sessions

10:3011:45 a.m.

IAG Meeting

6:30 p.m.Midnight

AIC Reception, Banquet, and Awards Presentation

Sunday, June 13

Various times

Specialty Group Events

(Architecture, Book & Paper, Electronic Media,

Objects, Paintings, Photographic Materials, RATS, Textiles, and Wooden

Artifacts)

Monday, June 14

Various times

Tours and Workshops

10 a.m.5 p.m.

EMG Special Session

AIC N

EWS

, M

2004 11

Suzanne Deal Booth: Invited FAIC Board Member

This profile is the first in a series to introduce our cur-

rent invited FAIC Board members. We are grateful to them
as they assist us in repositioning the Foundation to better
support development activities.

Suzanne Deal Booth may be familiar to many AIC

members as a conservator. Indeed she is, but in recent years
she has built on her earlier training and experiences and
expanded her focus in the profession by advancing the need
for, and importance of, cultural heritage preservation.

Prior to attending the Conservation Center and the Insti-

tute of Fine Arts (IFA) New York University, Suzanne worked
as an intern with Perry Huston at the Kimball Art Museum
and with Carol Mancusi-Ungaro at the Menil Collection,
Houston. While in New York and at the IFA, she studied
paintings conservation under John Brealey at the MMA. A
recipient of several prestigious scholarships, including the
Friends of French Art Fellowship, the Georges Pompidou
Foundation, and the Kress Foundation, she studied paintings
conservation at the Musee National d'Art et de Culture, Cen-
tre Georges Pompidou, France, under the supervision of
Jacques Hourriere. She also received a Smithsonian Fellow-
ship to intern at the Museums of New Mexico, Santa Fe,
under the direction of Claire Munzenrider. In the late 1980s,
Suzanne began working as training program coordinator at
the Getty Conservation Institute. She also worked privately as
a paper conservator with Paula Volent in Los Angeles, and as
a consultant to the Art History Information Program at the J.
Paul Getty Trust.

In the early 1990s, Suzanne served on the AIC Board as

committee liaison. In 1996 following a discussion with her
husband, CEO of a large investment firm who also serves on
the Board of the American Academy in Rome, Suzanne left
the Getty to begin exploring ways to make a more significant
impact in conservation and heritage preservation efforts.

In 1998, Suzanne founded Friends of Heritage Preser-

vation, a group of individuals dedicated to the recognition,
preservation, and conservation of artistic cultural heritage.
Over the past five years, the group has offered financial
support for a broad array of international conservation
projects ranging from murals to panel paintings to church-
es and easel paintings in regions from Mexico to Germany,
Israel to Los Angeles.

When in Rome in 20012002, she and her husband

became avid students of history while her children attended
international schools.When the American Academy in Rome
started awarding prizes for conservation a few years ago,
Suzanne and her husband decided to endow the fellowship.
In 2003, the "Booth Family Fellowship in Conservation" was
established at the American Academy in Rome. The first
recipient of this fellowship was T.K. McClintock.

Suzanne has served and continues to serve on several

boards, including the Geffen Playhouse at the University of
California Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Conservancy, the
Pont Aven School of Contemporary Art, Brittany, France and
the Los Angeles County Museum of Art. She is also serving
on the Advisory Committee of the Friends of Florence. Most
recently she has been appointed to serve on the Board of the
California Cultural and Historical Endowment which is
responsible for the allocation of approximately $128 million
to government entities and nonprofit organizations through a
competitive grant application process.

We appreciate the experience and talent Suzanne brings

to the FAIC Board. Her visionary outlook is critical to
FAIC, and we look forward to growing the organization
with her on board.

--Katharine Untch, AIC Director, Professional Education & Training

FAIC Awards More Than $26,000 in Grants and
Scholarships

The Foundation of the American Institute for Conserva-

tion gave out 49 grants and scholarships this spring, totaling
$26,624. The awards will support professional development,
student attendance at professional meetings, lectures, and a
regional Angels project. Funding for the grants and scholar-
ships comes from donations by AIC members, specialty
groups, and friends, as well as earnings from invested funds.

FAIC Individual Professional Development Scholar-

ships:

Julie Biggs, "Mastering Inpainting"
Harriet Irgang, "IIC Meeting"
Fiona Johnston, "Iron Gall Ink Corrosion"
Yasmeen R. Khan, "Illuminations of the East"
Molly Lambert, "Attingham Summer School"
William Lewin, "Furniture in France"
Ingrid Neuman, "Conservation of Glass"
Nancy Purinton, "Master-class on Japanese Conserva-
tion Techniques"
Martha Singer, "IIC Meeting"
Julie Trosper, "Ancient and Historic Metals"

Ten additional FAIC Individual Professional Development

Scholarships were made possible by grant funding from the
National Endowment for the Humanities to help support
attendance at AIC workshops supported by the NEH:

Karen M.K. Clark, "Aqueous Methods for Cleaning
Historic Textiles"
Rachel L. Danzing, "Contemporary Machine-made
Paper"
Kathy Francis, "Aqueous Methods for Cleaning His-
toric Textiles"

NEWS

The Foundation of the American Institute for Conservation of Historic & Artistic Works

Nancy Love, "Aqueous Methods for Cleaning Historic
Textiles"
Debora Mayer, "Contemporary Machine-made Paper"
Sheilah Mackinnon, "Aqueous Methods for Cleaning
Historic Textiles"
Theresa Voellinger Shockey, "Contemporary Machine-
made Paper"
Suzanne Siano, "Tear Repair of Paintings"
Rebecca Tinkham, "Aqueous Methods for Cleaning
Historic Textiles"
Faith Zieske, "Contemporary Machine-made Paper"

An FAIC Regional Angels Grant was made to the Nor-

wich Historical Society of Vermont. Mary Jo Davis will coor-
dinate volunteer conservators to organize the storage areas in
the new building purchased by the Society. FAIC funds will
enable the purchase of supplies needed to line shelves, replace
backing boards, and safely store objects and textiles.

An FAIC Lecture Grant was made to the Washington

Conservation Guild to present a lecture by Polly Willman
titled, "The First Ladies' Gowns:The Conservator as Detec-
tive" at the National Museum of Women in the Arts in
October.

With the financial support of AIC's specialty groups and

donations from individual members, 21 FAIC George Stout
Grants were made. The George Stout fund supports con-
servation students who wish to attend professional meet-
ings. This year, 18 awards were made to assist with costs
associated with AIC's Annual Meeting in Portland, and
three awards were made to assist with students planning to
attend the 2004 IIC meeting in Spain:

Tatiana Bareis Ausema, IIC Meeting
Mary Catherine Betz, AIC Meeting
Melanie D. Brussat, AIC Meeting
Veronica Bullock, AIC Meeting
Sara Creange, AIC Meeting
Abby Haywood, AIC Meeting
Margaret Kipling, AIC Meeting
Yadin Larochette, AIC Meeting
Cary Beattie Maguire, AIC Meeting
Kate Winston Moomaw, IIC Meeting
Christina Milton O'Connell, AIC Meeting
Caitlin O'Grady, AIC Meeting
Anne Peranteau, AIC Meeting
Paulette Reading, IIC Meeting
Dawn Rogala, AIC Meeting
Theresa Smith, AIC Meeting
Minah Song, AIC Meeting
Amber Lee Tarnowski, AIC Meeting
Craig Uram, AIC Meeting
Renee J. Walker, AIC Meeting
Rachel Kay Wetzel, AIC Meeting

Two FAIC Carolyn Horton Grants were made this year:

Beth Doyle, "Values and Decision-making in Special
Collections Conservation"
Susan Russick, "AIC Annual Meeting"

Two FAIC Christa Gaehde Grants were also made:

Linda Stiber Morenus, "Hiromi Paper International
Tour of Japan for Paper Conservators"
Kristi Dahm, "AIC Annual Meeting"

No FAIC Workshop Development Grants were awarded

in this cycle. The next funding deadline is September 15,
2004, for Individual Professional Development, Workshop
Development, Lecture, and Regional Angels projects. The
Christa Gaehde and Carolyn Horton deadlines are Febru-
ary 1, 2005; the next George Stout deadline is February 15,
2005. Descriptions, guidelines, and forms are available at
www.aic-faic.org or from the AIC office.

FAIC Christa Gaehde Scholarship Initiated

Thanks to the generosity of family, friends, and col-

leagues, the Christa Gaehde Fund reached its target goal
and became the third named endowment of FAIC. This
spring the first FAIC Christa Gaehde scholarships were
awarded:
·

Kristi Dahm, Mellon fellow in paper conservation at
The Art Institute of Chicago, to support her attendance
at the AIC Annual Meeting in Portland, where she will
present original research on Paul Gauguin's works on
paper.

Linda Stiber Morenus, senior paper conservator at the
Library of Congress, to support her participation in the
"Hiromi Paper International Tour of Japan for Paper
Conservators."
The review committee commented that the winners

were especially deserving because their projects reflect
Christa's commitment to original research that combines
science and connoisseurship.

The Christa Gaehde Fund was established through

FAIC. to promote study and research in the conservation of
art on paper by members of AIC. Its scope is broad; proj-
ects may involve individual study, attendance at workshops,
conferences, or other events, purchase of materials for
research projects, or other activities in keeping with this
goal. Earnings from the fund will be used to offer awards
annually.

Applications for next year's scholarships are due Febru-

ary 1, 2005. Information and forms are available on the AIC
website, www.aic-faic.org, or from the AIC office. Dona-
tions to the Christa Gahede Fund are welcome and will be
added to the endowment. Checks should be made to FAIC
and sent to: FAIC, 1717 K Street, NW, Suite 200, Washing-
ton, DC 20006.

12 AIC N

EWS

, M

2004

Correction

The March 2004 issue of AIC News incorrectly listed

Barbara Appelbaum's name as Barbara Applebaum in

"JAIC News," page 23. We apologize for the error.

AIC N

EWS

, M

2004 13

Much appreciation to all members par-

ticipating in the FAIC 2004 fund drive.
Your contributions to FAIC funds are
greatly valued. Donations are still coming
into the office; if you contributed and do
not see your name here, please be assured
you will be listed in the next AIC News.

Thank you for helping build a

stronger future for FAIC.

Professional Development

M. Randall (Randy) Ash
David Bayne
Cynthia Berry
Barbara Brown
John Canning
Sara Chase
Celina Contreras de Berenfeld
H. Cummings
Thomas Edmondson
Marlene Eidelheit
Judith Eisenberg
Maria Fredericks
Nancy Heugh
T. Rose Holdcraft
Philippa Jones
Jeff Kimball
Sharon Koehler
Riitta Koskivirta
Tracey Mazur
Mary McGinn
Alice Paterakis
Jerry Podany
Eric Pourchot
Carol Pratt
Olivia Primanis

Nancie Ravenel
R. Reynolds
D. Shoop
Laurent Sozzani
Joyce Stoner
Maria Sullivan
Betty Walsh
Lynn Wicks
Frank Zuccari
Joyce Zucker

FAIC

Carole Abercauph
Gary Albright
Theresa Andrews
Julie Baker
Alicia Bjornson
Roy Blankenship
Ann Boulton
Arsen Charles
Neel Chatterjee
Ignatius Chiarello
Diana Dicus
Jeanmarie Easter
Nancy Fonicello
Ria German-Carter
Lisa Goldberg
Paul Gratz
Laramie Hickey-Friedman
Gerald Hoepfner
F. Carey Howlett
Mary Kaldany
Jamie Kamph
Michele Kay-Billig
Alexandra Klingelhofer
Masako Koyano

Meghan Mackey
Tracey Mazur
William Minter
Ingrid Neuman
Noelle Ocon
Frances Prichett
Nan Rudolph
Victoria Ryan
Shelly Smith
Carol Snow
Nina Vinogradskaya
Fredrick Vogt
Amparo de Torres (Carolyn Rose,
"Take a Chance")

Horton

Rachel Danzing
Tracey Mazur
Ralph Ocker
Abigail Quandt

Stout

Gerald Hoepfner
Helen Ingalls
Tracey Mazur

Gaehde

Sarah Bertalan
Irene Brueckle
Betty Fiske
Marildi Hitchings
Tracey Mazur
Pia Pell
Nancy Schrock

D O N A T I O N S

Margaret Holben Ellis, former AIC Board

member and professor of conservation at the
Institute of Fine Arts, New York University,
presented the AIC/Heritage Preservation
Award for Outstanding Commitment to the
Preservation and Care of Collections to the
Canadian Museum of Nature (CMN). The
presentation was held during a luncheon at the
Museum Trustees Association's "Assembly
2003" in New York last October. As CMN
chairman, Dr. Frederic Kasravi accepted the
award. Special thanks go to Amanda Ohlke,
MTA executive director, for allowing AIC to
share the podium at this event.

Pictured from left to right: Roy Piovesana,

trustee, CMN; Joanne DiCosimo, president
and CEO, CMN; Dr. Frederic Kasravi; Mar-
garet Holben Ellis; Kenneth Armstrong, trustee,
CMN; Irene Byrne, corporate secretary, CMN;
Patricia Stanley Beck, trustee, CMN; Maureen
Dougan, vice president and COO, CMN.

14 AIC N

EWS

, M

2004

AIC 2003 Annual Report

The year 2003 was one of assessment, growth, cele-

bration, and transition for the American Institute for Con-
servation and its foundation.

Annual Meeting

Created around the theme, "The History, Philosophy,

and Ethics of Conservation," the 31st Annual Meeting in
Arlington, Virginia, drew more than 960 attendees. Tom
Chase commented that "The general session was ground-
breaking, pioneering, and also fun." At the opening recep-
tion at the Library of Congress, Librarian Dr. James
Billington provided a warm welcome, stating that "Preser-
vation and conservation are fundamental to the transmis-
sion of knowledge." Members gave the Annual Meeting
high marks, particularly for its workshops and tours, the
breakout discussions during the issues session, specialty
group sessions, the exhibit hall with a record number of
58 booths, and the registration process. The breakfast for
first-time attendees, funded by Metal Edge, Inc., and
organized to provide an opportunity for first-time atten-
dees to meet each other and AIC leadership, proved its
success with standing-room only attendance.

Professional Development

AIC's professional development activities moved forward

on many fronts in 2003. New topics, new venues, and inter-
national instructors attracted more than 415 conservators to
19 events conducted from Boston to Seattle. Highlights
included producing five new workshops, co-sponsoring
another five workshops, and increasing the number of work-
shops to nine at the Annual Meeting. Professional Develop-
ment, Horton, and Stout scholarships were given to 30 indi-
viduals for professional development activities, and two
organizations were given FAIC grants for workshop devel-
opment. In addition, private donations supported the estab-
lishment of the Christa Gaehde Fund to support research and
education in the area of conservation of works on paper.

Specialty Groups

Architecture:

The first JAIC issue devoted entirely to archi-

tectural conservation was published in Spring 2003 (vol. 42,
no. 1), and was dedicated to the memory of Morgan Phillips.
ASG sessions at the Annual Meeting focused for a half-day
on concrete, with the remainder of the day devoted to short
talks on a variety of nonconcrete topics.

Book and Paper:

Presentations at the Annual Meeting

were fittingly varied for a large specialty group and
included topics attracting interdisciplinary attendance.
BPG members contributed generously in 2003 to both the
Carolyn Horton and Christa Gaehde Funds.

Conservators in Private Practice:

The "Introduction

to Spot Testing" workshop at the Annual Meeting was a

huge success, as was the discussion on financial planning
at the working lunch. The CIPP list serve, providing sup-
port for running a conservation business, grew to more
than 90 subscribers in 2003.

Electronic Media:

The transcripts of the "Education

Needs for Electronic Media Conservation" are now posted
on the EMG website. Popular sessions at the Annual Meet-
ing included the "Identification and Care of Videotape"
workshop and a joint session with PMG. To better serve
members, a list serve was established in 2003.

Objects:

The OSG is working on a special JAIC issue, to

be published in 2005, which focuses on preventive con-
servation, and is dedicated to Carolyn Rose. OSG will
work with the publications committee to pilot a project in
preparation for the electronic publication of future Post-
prints for its Annual Meeting presentations.

Paintings:

Sessions at the Annual Meeting included

topics such as retouching, individual artists' materials and
techniques, as well as historical perspectives on the evolu-
tion of the field of conservation. The lunch-time tip ses-
sion was particularly successful.

Photographic Materials:

The PMG winter meeting in

Puerto Rico was a great success, with an excellent program
and warm hospitality extended by many. Guidelines and
application procedures for financial assistance for independ-
ent research projects were developed and adopted in 2003
and are now available on the PMG website.

Research and Technical Studies:

In 2003, RATS focused

on increasing membership, encouraging members to publish
more, strategies for increasing the integration of science in
conservation research, and updating the RATS website.

Textiles:

The Directory of Hand Stitches Used in Textile Con-

servation was reprinted in 2003 and is available through the
AIC. New officers were elected and changes made to TSG
rules of order.

Wooden Artifacts:

The Florence Gould Foundation

awarded the FAIC $50,000 in support of a second Furniture
in France Study Tour scheduled in 2004. WAG-Announce,
an e-mail distribution list, was activated in 2003 and has
proved helpful and popular.

Committees and Task Forces

Appeals Committee

had no requests for action in 2003.

Bylaws Committee

responded to requests for two bylaw

changes, which were voted on in June and passed.

Certification Development Committee

was organ-

ized following a membership vote to develop a proposal
for the certification of conservators to be voted on by the
membership.

Collections Care Task Force

submitted a final draft of

Requisite Competencies for Conservation Technicians and
Collections Care Specialists to the AIC Board. The Board
expressed appreciation and respect for the work put into
this document and requested an executive summary. The
document is under final review and will be published
prior to the Annual Meeting.