Aic
A m e r i c a n
I n s t i t u t e
C o n s e r vat i o n
Historic
artistic works
for
of
and
news
AIc
Inside
From the President 2
AIC News 3
Annual Meeting News 6
FAIC News 6
JAIC News 10
Grants, Awards, and Fellowships 11
Grant Deadlines 12
People 13
Allied Organizations 14
Worth Noting 15
Health and Safety 15
Specialty Groups 17
Conferences, Courses, and
Seminars 23
Positions, Internships, and
Fellowships 27
Art Crimes and Conservation, Obligations and
Ethics
Jean D. Portell
Introduction
In the course of our work for institutions and private collectors, we may be
asked to examine and possibly treat a cultural object that comes under suspicion for
being faked, stolen, or illegally imported. In such situations, what are our responsibili-
ties and our vulnerabilities?
What if an object that we have accepted to examine and possibly treat is already
(unbeknownst to us) the subject of a criminal investigation, and suddenly a law enforce-
ment agent asks us to turn over records regarding that object? Are we obliged to do so,
despite our professional responsibility to maintain the confidentiality of our client?
If a criminal case is quietly settled out of court, yet we are aware that a major
scam might have occurred, are we bound to remain silent? Which is our greatest obli-
gation: to protect the confidentiality of our client, to protect the record of a deceased
artist's oeuvre, or to protect the public from further effects of a scam that must remain
secret according to the conditions of the settlement?
Questions like these compelled me to attend the June 8, 2005, panel discussion
sponsored by the International Foundation for Art Research (IFAR) in New York
City, which introduced the recently-formed Federal Bureau of Investigation Art
Crime Team (FBI-ACT). I wanted to know how the FBI-ACT operates, and whether
the laws that the FBI and other law enforcement agencies use to prosecute art cases
might affect how conservators conduct business.
Applicable Laws and Enforcement Agencies
By interviewing representatives of the FBI, the branch of the Department of
Homeland Security called Immigration Customs and Enforcement (ICE), and the New
York City Police Department (NYPD), I learned that art crimes can be prosecuted
under a variety of laws, depending on the nature (and sometimes the market value) of
the art object and on the nature of the alleged crime. NYPD detectives investigate most
art crimes within the Major Cases Squad (grand larceny, burglary) or Special Fraud
Squad (forgeries, communications fraud).The FBI relies largely on a law that prohibits
transportation of stolen goods over state lines, laws against wire and mail frauds, and a
statute that makes it a federal crime to steal from a museum. ICE relies largely on the
1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing Illegal Import, Export
and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property and on the 1983 Convention on Cultural
Property Implementation Act. All three agencies are very aware of each other's jurisdictions
and strengths, and they cooperate as necessary. In addition, each of them has ties with
Interpol which is the world's largest international police organization with 182 member
countries. Interpol maintains operational databases of information that can assist all
organizations whose mission is to prevent or combat crime.
The FBI's Robert K.Wittman told me, "The art market is one of the largest
unregulated industries in the U.S. if you look at the dollars that are spent in the U.S.
November 2005
Vol. 30, No. 6
continued on page 7
The topic for the 2006 Annual
Meeting Issues Sesssion is
"Emergency Preparedness."
AIC is now offering liability
insurance as a member benefit.
For more information, visit
http://aic.stanford.edu/members/
benefits.html
Annual Meeting
Membership
2 AIC NEWS, November 2005
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. 20036, (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. 20036
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 January Editorial Submissions
(jandruzzi@aic-faic.org): December 1, 2005.
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, Positions Available, and Classified Ads
is: $1.05 per word for members and $2.15 per word
for nonmembers; the minimum charge is $75.
Print and AIC News Online Combination
Package: Reach the greatest number of qualified
candidates possible in the shortest amount of time
with this money saving option. Post your ad right
away on AIC News Online for 21 days and place
your ad in the next issue of AIC News. Cost is
$1.50 per word for AIC members and $3.35 per
word for non-members, for both listings, 25% sav-
ings. Minimum cost is $100.
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 Ruth Seyler at
rseyler@aic-faic.org.
A
IC NEWS STAFF
Lisa Goldberg, Editor
Eryl P.Wentworth, Managing Editor
Jennifer Andruzzi, Production Editor
Ruth Seyler, Membership Manager
Sheila Paige, Meetings & Marketing Officer
Jessica Oplak, Administrative Assistant
© Copyright 2005. AIC News cannot be reproduced in
its 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.
AIC NEWS
From the President
As conservators, we know that assessing damage
and recovering cultural property after a disaster is part
of the discipline called conservation. Now there are
others who know this too. In the aftermath of the
hurricanes that recently hit the Gulf Coast, conserva-
tors can feel pride in what has been accomplished.
Even before Hurricane Katrina came ashore, con-
servator and Chair of the AIC Emergency Preparedness,
Response & Recovery Committee, David Goist, was
working around the clock to gather information and
develop an assistance plan. As conservators from
throughout the country began calling in to volunteer,
AIC quickly created the Emergency Response
Volunteer Database which Beverly Perkins agreed to manage.The AIC also initiated
an effort to identify and locate AIC members from within the hurricane region.
Board Director for Communications, Paul Messier, and "CoOl"Walter Henry
began working on publicity and creating the National Collections Emergency
News website. Board Director for Specialty Groups, Mary Striegel, became a local
resource and tirelessly promoted conservation and the AIC. Our Executive Director,
Eryl Wentworth, participated with me on the Heritage Emergency National Task
Force organized by Heritage Preservation with supporting funds from the Institute
for Museum and Library Services.The Task Force brought together representatives
from numerous preservation organizations to discuss, via conference calls, the
impact of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. As an outcome of these calls, AIC part-
nered with the American Association of State and Local History and sent volunteer
conservators to serve on teams for one-week tours of duty that included assessment,
training, and recovery. Chris Stavroudis, a Team 1 volunteer, developed an assessment
form/database for cultural collections. AIC also forwarded conservator names to
teams sponsored by the National Trust for Historic Preservation.We helped create the
forms used by FEMA to assess buildings and archaeological sites, provided language
for policy and protocol statements, and participated in discussions about developing
guidelines for working with contaminated collections and establishing a repository for
records generated during assessment and recovery. All of the conservators who volun-
teered through the AIC database, and those invited by other organizations, have made
truly outstanding contributions to the recovery of art, architecture, archives, archae-
ology, and library resources in the Gulf region.
After speaking with many volunteers who served in the Gulf region, it is clear
that conservators were problem solvers who could think on their feet. Conservators
characteristically worked hard, asked for more ways to help, and, after they left the
region, continued to think of ways to improve the recovery effort.The AIC Board is
discussing how to follow up on what we have learned from this experience.To be as
effective as possible, we need to coordinate long-range planning both within our
organization and with other responders and cultural organizations. For example, it is
critical that more conservators become truly prepared for disaster response and recov-
ery.We encourage members to (a) have current tetanus and hepatitis shots; (b) have an
approved fit-tested respirator; and (c) obtain training in disaster and wet material
recovery. It is also important that we improve conservation awareness so that organiza-
tions and private collectors know about conservation services and understand that
conservators are first responders for assessing damage and recovering cultural property.
There are many people to thank for all the work accomplished during the
recovery effort, and I look forward to working with our talented members to
develop a wide-reaching national emergency preparedness plan for AIC.
--Nancy Odegaard, AIC President Conservator, Arizona State Museum
Professor, Anthropology and Materials Science Departments
Co-Director, Heritage Conservation Science Program, University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ 85721
(520) 621-6314
fax: (520) 621-2976
AIC News
AIC's Response to Hurricane
Damage: the NCEN
In the immediate aftermath of Hurricane
Katrina, the AIC membership began gathering
and exchanging information about the hurri-
cane's impact on colleagues and cultural institu-
tions. Messages and inquiries were posted on the
various AIC listservs, including listservs estab-
lished for the AIC Board, the specialty groups,
and committees.Walter Henry of the Stanford
University Libraries immediately saw the need
to tie together disparate strands of information,
and he created a single web platform so that
news about the disaster recovery would be avail-
able to all AIC members, allied organizations,
and the public.After approximately one week of
intensive set-up work and collaboration,AIC's
National Collections Emergency News
(NCEN) was established as a web-based, central
repository for news and other information.This
news service contains useful information for
people who are working to preserve cultural
material affected by disasters, as well as people
with related health and safety concerns.
NCEN is accessible through a link on the AIC
homepage--the URL is http://palimpsest.
stanford.edu/byform/mailing-lists/ncen/.The
site organizes information both chronologically
and by subject matter. Initial posts, which began
September 8, 2005, announce the formation of
the Heritage Emergency National Task Force,
FEMA's requests for assistance, and AAM's efforts
to gather information about damage to muse-
ums. More recent posts include updates from the
initial conservation assessments of sites in
Mississippi and Louisiana; a press release describ-
ing the work of the AIC/AASLH recovery
teams; and important deadlines for FEMA fund-
ing.This resource was widely announced on
September 15, 2005, through emails sent to AIC
members and numerous allied organizations;
soon after it was announced on the
Conservation Online DistList. Since then, organ-
izations such as the Association of Moving Image
Archivists, Heritage Preservation, Louisiana's
Cultural Assets Message Exchange, the Texas
Association of Museums and many related
groups have linked to the site. Information is
posted to the site by emails sent from AIC mem-
bers serving on the Emergency Preparedness,
Response and Recovery Committee, the
Health and Safety Committee, Specialty Group
Chairs, and the Board. Additions to the site are
welcome from any source and can be made by
contacting individuals serving as chairs of these
AIC committees and specialty groups, mem-
bers of the AIC Board or by sending an email to
Paul Messier,AIC Director of Communications,
pm@paulmessier.com.
Information About AIC Members in
the Gulf Coast Region
Over the past six weeks, the AIC has
been very concerned about members in the
Gulf Coast region.We have attempted to
contact every member in hurricane-affected
areas and the responses we've received are a
testament to our members' dedication.
Despite damage to their homes and the hard-
ships of temporary relocation, our Gulf Coast
members have been actively involved in cul-
tural recovery efforts as they assist local muse-
ums and private collectors.
While the situation varies greatly in
New Orleans--with nearly block by block
disparities in damage and recovery--the fol-
lowing quote shows a glimpse into the daily
life of a Gulf Coast member.
"On the positive side we are alive,
healthy, there's electricity, water, and spotty cell
phone service.The French bakery opened up
on Magazine [Street]; clients are calling, busi-
ness is booming; if there was only a place to
work, more employees, and endless energy."
--AIC member, Shamil Salsh, Hudson &
Salah, New Orleans, LA 70115
AIC remains actively involved in the ongo-
ing cultural recovery efforts in the Gulf Coast.
Membership Committee
Demystifying the Professional
Associate Application Process
Have you often thought about becom-
ing more involved and committed to your
profession? Membership retention is a stand-
ing charge to the AIC Membership
Committee and AIC staff, and within that
charge rests the implicit responsibility to
encourage the members of AIC to advance to
the highest category of membership for
which they are eligible.With this column we
will endeavor to demystify the Professional
Associate application process--a process that
was intended to be straightforward but which
appears to confound many in ways heretofore
unimagined.This column will tackle the
many myths concerning the Professional
Associate category and application process.
Myth number one: AIC wants to keep
the numbers of Professional Associates low,
giving the category more status, making it
hard for anybody new to be accepted.
First
and foremost it is important for all to under-
stand that it is the intent of the Membership
Committee to elevate as many applicants for
Professional Associate as possible, but to do so
without diminishing the significance of the
category.The review process is taken very
seriously, and it begins by matching the appli-
3 AIC NEWS, November 2005
M a i l b ox
A l e r t
Please keep an eye out
this month for an AIC
survey regarding profes-
sional development.We
need your help to make
sure we are on the right
track.The information
collected will help us
provide you with the
education services, for-
mats, and topics you
need to remain up-to-
date on developments in
the conservation field.
This is a follow-up to a
similar survey conduct-
ed in 2001 and will be
very important as AIC
evaluates its current pro-
fessional development
programs and establishes
goals for the future.
As a further incentive to
return the survey, a
drawing will be held for
a free registration for
the AIC 34th Annual
Meeting in Providence.
Two winners will be
announced this spring.
The survey is funded in
part by a Preservation
and Access Education
and Training grant from
the National
Endowment for the
Humanities.
cant with a committee member who is in the
same discipline, or as close as possible.This is
to ensure that supporting documentation is
properly understood, and that nuances which
make the difference between an ordinary
application and one that is extraordinary are
not overlooked. An applicant's work will
always be reviewed by a colleague in his or
her field and during the review process the
committee is looking for reasons to accept an
application rather than for reasons to deny.
Myth number two: If you have not
been through any of the recognized graduate
programs, don't bother to apply because you
won't get accepted.
What cannot be denied is
that the application process, regardless of how
straightforward it is, is more difficult for the
applicant with training and early experience
outside the recognized graduate programs.
One of the more difficult steps is for alterna-
tively trained applicants to clearly define
when their two years of training ended and
their three years of experience began.While
the reviewer can usually figure this out, it is
the applicant's responsibility to make this dis-
tinction clear so that the review process goes
more smoothly.To be approved for
Professional Associate status, the committee is
looking for conservators from graduate train-
ing programs, as well as those who have com-
pleted apprenticeships, foreign or on-the-job
training and who display a natural affinity for
the work, excellent problem solving skills, and
have demonstrated the ability to assimilate
complex information and apply it effectively
through sound decision making.
Myth number three: The application
process is long and drawn out with a lot of
writing.
The application essay is short, and has
a 250-word limitation.What the committee
wants to read is something that clearly
demonstrates an understanding of the intent
of the Code of Ethics and Guidelines for Practice
through applied conservation treatments, and
the extended goals of AIC through public
outreach, continuing education, and contribu-
tions to the profession.
Surprisingly, treatment documentation
that is submitted as supporting material for a
Professional Associate (and Fellow, for that
matter) application is frequently a weak link,
regardless of whether the applicant is gradu-
ate program-trained or alternatively trained.
Common problems to avoid include inade-
quate or missing examination/condition
reports, treatment proposals or plans that
don't necessarily reflect the findings in the
condition report, and most frequently, pro-
posals that lack an authorizing signature.
Inclusion of this material is not mandatory
for a Professional Associate application, but it
can be a powerful component for those who
have come into the field through alternative
routes. Most importantly, poorly prepared
treatment documentation will be the kiss of
death for any applicant. All applicants should
review the Guidelines for Practice that pertain
to documentation (numbers 24-28) and their
associated Commentaries when preparing
their applications.
Myth number four: I don't know three
AIC Professional Associates or Fellows so
therefore I can't get the sponsors needed.
Each Professional Associate applicant must
have three letters of recommendation from
AIC Professional Associates and/or Fellows,
only one of which may be from their current
workplace. The question about how to get
sponsors has arisen several times in the past
year or so, especially from those conservators
who work in isolated locations or studios, on
very specialized materials, objects or projects,
or who come to the field with alternative
and/or foreign training. It is the applicant's
responsibility to seek out sponsors who can
objectively and fairly evaluate the application
materials and professional credentials. The
requirement for a sponsor to be familiar with
an applicant's work, philosophy, etc., is not
intended to restrict the pool to only those
with whom the applicant has an established
relationship. A conservator seeking election
to Professional Associate who does not have
an extended network of colleagues who are
personally familiar with the applicant's body
of work can use the AIC Directory to find
qualified colleagues and make them familiar
with his or her practice, documentation, and
general approach to the conservation of cul-
tural material. This can be accomplished by
telephone conversations and correspondence
to the degree that the solicited sponsor feels
comfortable supporting an application.
Myth number five: Sponsors have it
easy.
It is the sponsor's responsibility to review
the applicant's application. Sponsors should
request examples of typical documentation of
conservation treatments. If a sponsor is not
fully satisfied with an applicant's material it is
appropriate to request explanations for the
choices of materials or techniques. If a
response remains unsatisfactory it is appropri-
ate for a sponsor to act as a mentor, offering
suggestions to help the applicant improve the
documentation or learn of a better technique
or material. It is the sponsor's obligation to
recognize and respect simple differences of
opinion in the preference for techniques and
materials. However, if an application is truly
flawed by the evidence of poor choice of
4 AIC NEWS, November 2005
Reward Your
Colleagues
Every year, AIC gives
out five different
awards to members
and other supporting
professionals for out-
standing and distin-
guished contributions
to the field of conser-
vation.There is also
an award for support-
ing institutions and a
joint award presented
by AIC and Heritage
Preservation that rec-
ognizes an organiza-
tion whose commit-
ment to conservation
has been sustained and
exemplary.
Please take a minute
to let us know about
the colleagues and
institutions that
deserve recognition
for making significant
contributions to our
field.The nomination
deadline for all awards
is December 15. Let
us hear from you c/o
the AIC office by
writing a letter or
sending an e-mail
message to info@aic-
faic.org. Details can be
found at the AIC
website, but here is a
brief description of
each award:
Sheldon and
Caroline Keck
Award:
Recognizes a
sustained record of
excellence in the edu-
cation and training of
conservation profes-
sionals. Candidate
must be an AIC
Fellow or PA.
AIC
AWARDS
materials or techniques, a sponsor should
strive to find a constructive way of pointing
this out, and work to help the applicant rec-
ognize and correct the problems. If a conser-
vator who has been asked to serve as a spon-
sor feels that he or she cannot do so objec-
tively and fairly, he or she should respectfully
decline in a timely manner so as not to inter-
fere with the applicant's desire to meet a par-
ticular cycle deadline. Sponsorship is an excel-
lent opportunity to serve as a mentor to our
colleagues, yet too many letters of sponsorship
are brief to the point of being meaningless, if
not damaging, to an application. It is the
sponsor's responsibility to demonstrate a gen-
uine interest in the applicant's advancement
and professional development.
Myth number six: It is expensive and
inconvenient to apply for Professional
Associate status.
The cost to apply for
Professional Associate status is only $15.
Applications are accepted four times during the
year: January 1, May 1, July 10, and October 1.
Myth number seven: I am in private
practice, so being a Professional Associate has
no tangible benefit for me.
Only Professional
Associates and Fellows are listed in AIC's
online Guide to Conservation Services.The
general public can access the online guide via
AIC's website and plug in their location and
type of article needing conservation and
receive a list of Professional Associates and
Fellows in their area. In 2004 the online
guide received over 8,000 hits.
Any conservator who is qualified to
upgrade his or her membership category to
Professional Associate is strongly encouraged
to do so. Membership advancement is not
done just for the betterment of one's self or
AIC; rather it also is done to strengthen the
conservation profession. Please feel free to
contact the Membership Committee Chair or
the Membership Manager for answers to your
questions.
--Thomas M. Edmondson, Chair, AIC
Membership Committee
Heugh-Edmondson Conservation Services,
(816) 283-0660
Fax: (816) 283-0740
tedmond1849@earthlink.net
New Fellow Profile: Janet Hughes
Janet Hughes joined the National
Gallery of Australia (NGA) in 1996 as manag-
er of conservation, and was promoted to her
current position of head of conservation in
2000. In addition to managing a conservation
and administrative staff of about 20, Janet's
responsibilities include developing collection
services policies and procedures; gallery
updating and enhancement, including various
health, safety, and environmental considera-
tions; and the development of conservation
practice guidelines, procedures, staff develop-
ment, and research for Australian art galleries.
Janet has had a noteworthy role in sever-
al major NGA projects including the prepara-
tion of a disaster management plan; conserva-
tion regimens for The Book of Kells, Monet in
Japan, and Three Centuries of Australian Art; a
Hennessy report on the NGA air condition-
ing system; and, as principal investigator, an
Australian Research Council grant to treat
Australian aboriginal bark paintings.
After receiving a degree in Industrial
Chemistry from the University of New South
Wales in Sydney, Janet received an associate
diploma in Materials Conservation from
Canberra College of Advanced Education. As a
student at Canberra, Janet focused on metals
conservation; however, she also maintained a
minor course of study in textiles, objects, and
photographs. In order to broaden her knowl-
edge and remain up-to-date on current conser-
vation developments in management and treat-
ment, Janet attended several important lectures
and workshops in the years subsequent to com-
pletion of her training. At the time of this writ-
ing, Janet has completed, or nearly completed,
her thesis, "Deterioration and Conservation of
Historic Sites in Antarctica," and expects to
earn a Ph.D. from the University of Canberra.
Janet has made and continues to make
important contributions to the conservation
field through her mentoring, lecturing, con-
sulting, and publishing in peer-reviewed jour-
nals. Her membership in professional organi-
zations includes AIC, International Institute
for Conservation, International Committee
on Museums (ICOM), and the Australian
Institute for the Conservation of Cultural
Material (AICCM). Janet actively participates
in conferences and meetings sponsored by
ICOM and AICCM and assists the AICCM
editorial staff in reviewing articles for the
AICCM Bulletin. Recently, Janet was accept-
ed as a member of the Charter Institution of
Building Services Engineers in Britain.
As one of only a few Australian members
of AIC, Janet recognizes that her membership
is part of a developing international network
of professional conservators. Moreover, Janet's
interest in applying for Fellow membership
status honors the goals and mission of AIC
and its significant role, along with other pro-
fessional organizations worldwide, in advanc-
ing the principles of conservation.
We are pleased to welcome Janet as an
AIC Fellow.
5 AIC NEWS, November 2005
Rutherford John
Gettens Merit
Award:
Recognizes
outstanding service to
AIC.
University
Products Award:
Recognizes distin-
guished achievement
in the conservation of
cultural property.
Honorary
Membership:
Recognizes a member
for outstanding con-
tributions to the field
of conservation.
Forbes Medal:
Awarded for distin-
guished contribution
to the field of conser-
vation by a non-con-
servator or institution.
Joint AIC/Heritage
Preservation Award
for Outstanding
Commitment to the
Preservation and
Care of Collections:
Honors museums and
other collecting institu-
tions that have been
exemplary in the
importance and priori-
ty they have given to
conservation concerns
and in the commit-
ment they have shown
to the preservation and
care of its cultural
property.
Take a step back,
think about who has
made a difference to
our field, and send us
your nominations.
--Molly Lambert,
Arthur Beale, and Peggy
Ellis
AIC
AWARDS
6 AIC NEWS, November 2005
Annual Meeting News
Call for Posters
AIC welcomes poster abstracts for
presentation at the 34th annual meeting
in Providence, Rhode Island, June
1619, 2006.The poster session will
provide an open forum for sharing
information among colleagues.We
encourage presentations from students,
new members, and professionals from
allied fields.This is an ideal opportunity
to present preliminary findings, tips, and
any projects that could not be included
in the specialty group sessions.
A one-page preliminary abstract
should be submittted by January 23,
2006, via e-mail, fax, or post (e-mail is
preferred). Acceptance will be confirmed
by February 3 and final abstracts are due
by February 17.The conference lan-
guage is English, but assistance is avail-
able for presenters for whom English is a
second language. If you require transla-
tion assistance, please contact the poster
session co-chairs prior to January 23.
The co-chairs can be contacted at:
Valinda Carroll
Harvey Library
Hampton University
Hampton,Va. 23668
(757) 727-5553
Fax: (757) 727-5952
Cary Beattie Maguire
(401) 297-9024
AICposter@craquelure.net
FAIC News
Joyce Hill Stoner reports that at
the 14th Triennial Meeting of ICOM-
CC at The Hague, September 1216,
2005, for the Working Group on Theory
and History of Conservation, she pre-
sented a paper,"The Legacy of William
Suhr: from Berlin to New York" based
on Suhr's file in the FAIC oral history
archive. Stoner was also asked to report
on the 30 years of the FAIC archive, the
150-plus interviews, and 81 internation-
al interviewers, and the initial launch of
the file in 1975 after consultation with
similar oral history projects at Columbia
University, AASLH, and the Archives of
American Art. Several other internation-
al projects are now using the FAIC proj-
ect as a model, and nine ICOM-CC
meeting attendees asked for packets and
suggested important international pio-
neers to be interviewed. Rebecca
Rushfield, Coordinator of the Working
Group for the last three years, was
praised for her leadership and for the
many oral history interviews which she
has transcribed herself.
Grant Deadlines
Deadlines for FAIC Grant and
Scholarship Applications are February
1 and 15.
Applications are due in February
for requests for funding in seven cate-
gories that support projects by AIC
members. Guidelines and application
forms are available at http://aic.stan-
ford.edu/faic or from the AIC office.
To be considered for a grant or schol-
arship, all materials must be received by
the published deadline.
February 1:
The Christa Gaehde
fund promotes study and research in
the conservation of art on paper by
members of AIC. Projects may involve
individual study; attendance at work-
shops, conferences, or other events;
purchase of materials for research proj-
ects; or other activities in keeping with
the purpose of the fund. Awards typi-
cally range from $500 to $1,000.
February 1:
The Carolyn Horton
fund supports continuing education
and training for AIC members who are
professional book and paper conserva-
tors. Awards typically range from $500
to $1000.
February 15:
George Stout
Memorial awards help support atten-
dance at professional meetings by AIC
student members. Awards typically
range from $300 to $1000.
February 15:
Individual Professional
Development Grants offer support of up
to $1000 to help defray professional
development costs for AIC members.
February 15:
Lecture Grants offer
up to $500 for the purpose of present-
ing public lectures to help advance
public awareness of conservation.
February 15:
Regional Angels
Grants offer up to $1,000 toward the
development and implementation of
volunteer projects that mobilize teams
of conservators to work with collections
in need of care around the country.
February 15:
Workshop
Development Grants offer up to
$1,000 to help defray costs for devel-
opment and presentation of regional
workshops for conservators.
Projects should begin no earlier
than April 1 for full consideration. Hard
copies (no faxes, please) of application
forms, supporting documents, and any
required letters of support must be
delivered to the AIC office by the pub-
lished deadline. Applications can also be
submitted electronically if prepared
according to the guidelines published
with each grant category. All letters of
support should be sent by mail, not by
fax or e-mail.
Correction
: Susanne Sack's name
and address were listed incorrectly
on page 11 of the November AIC
newsletter (vol.30, no.5) The
correct information is:
Susanne Sack
67 Willow Street, Apt. 2
Brooklyn, NY 11201-1628
Annual Meeting
Marketing Opportunities
Exhibition Hall:
AIC's 34th
Annual Meeting will be held June
16-19, 2006, in Providence, Rhode
Island, at the Westin Providence.
More than 800 AIC members who
are leaders in the conservation field
attend the Annual Meeting, giving
exhibitors rare access to the deci-
sion-makers in the conservation
marketplace. Reserve your exhibi-
tion booth by December 10 and
receive $100 off the rental fee.
Advertisements:
Make 2006 a
banner year for your company--
advertise with AIC. In addition to
Annual Meeting exhibition booths,
advertising opportunities are available
in Annual Meeting publications: the
registration brochure, final program
book, and abstract book.You can also
reach your target market with a 2006
advertising package in AIC News and
the Journal of the American Institute for
Conservation.
To discuss advertising with AIC,
please contact:
Ruth Seyler, Membership Manager
AIC
1717 K Street, NW, Suite 200
Washington, DC 20036
(202) 452-9545, ext. 18
rseyler@aic-faic.org
7 AIC NEWS, November 2005
through the auction houses, art gal-
leries, and antique markets. ...The art
market has no regulatory board. Often
million dollar sales are based on noth-
ing more than a handshake and a
promise.This creates a scenario which
can be rife with fraud.That's why the
collector, conservator, or museum spe-
cialist has to do due diligence before
acquiring a work of art." Although
conservators are not in the business of
buying art,Wittman's comment is still
pertinent--it appears that conservators,
too, should do due diligence before
agreeing to examine and treat a work
of art that raises suspicion.
New York City Police
Department (NYPD)
Police departments in large cities
are among the law enforcement agen-
cies, other than the FBI, that sometimes
investigate and prosecute art crimes.
According to Detective Mark Fishstein,
of the NYPD Major Case Squad, art is
involved in only a small portion of
crimes investigated in New York City,
however "the Major Case Squad has
always had an art cop." All complaints of
art crimes are made to the precincts, he
said, and precinct detectives are free to
investigate these cases up to a point.The
larger cases, such as those that involve
burglaries from museums and art gal-
leries, are forwarded to him. One action
that Fishstein takes is to list photographs
of the stolen property with Interpol and
the Art Loss Register.
Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE)
From its start, the U.S. Customs
Service took an interest in the cultural
artifacts that come across our borders.
When the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) was formed in 2003, it
absorbed the Customs Service, and
ICE became its investigative branch. Its
primary art crime investigator is Senior
Special Agent James McAndrew.
According to McAndrew, ICE works
closely with Interpol and other organi-
zations to control the traffic of cultural
property over our borders. In addition,
ICE attachés and field agents work out
of 62 U.S. embassies.
In a global environment, the juris-
dictions of law enforcement agencies
must complement each other.The spe-
cific jurisdiction of ICE is to protect the
country's borders and control the traffic
that crosses them.The FBI, which is the
investigative arm of the Department of
Justice, protects and defends the U.S.
from crime and terrorism. However,
major crimes that affect the U.S. are
often planned and carried out interna-
tionally.Thus, both ICE and the FBI
maintain contacts with Interpol and
other foreign-based agencies.
FBI Art Crime Team
Until last year, there was no spe-
cial FBI squad for art crimes. According
to Robert Wittman, the FBI's old Art
Theft Program was basically the
National Stolen Art File, a database for
law enforcement use only. Wittman
said that the FBI formed the Art Crime
Team to investigate art crimes in the
U.S. and to help other countries when-
ever they need the Team's assistance. He
added that the Team's responsibilities
include investigating art related crimes,
educating the public to keep them
from becoming the victim of art related
crimes, and combating the movement
of illicit property.
When the FBI-ACT was formed
in November 2004,Wittman was
appointed senior investigator. He works
out of Philadelphia where he oversees
investigations based in both the
Philadelphia region and in the regions
of six other cities: New York, Los
Angeles, San Francisco, Indianapolis, St.
Louis, and Salt Lake City. Each city has
a regional coordinator who is responsi-
ble for coordinating the investigations
in multiple offices.The coordinators
gather intelligence and assist, when
necessary, with the investigations.Two
assistant U.S. attorneys and several FBI
analysts support the team.
One way the new FBI team pre-
pared for their assignment was by tour-
ing the Philadelphia Museum of Art's
Paintings Conservation Lab. According
to head paintings conservator Mark
Tucker, who led the presentation, mem-
bers of the FBI Art Crime Team and
several other FBI representatives spent
over two hours with PMA conservators,
who demonstrated and discussed
approaches to the examination of paint-
ings. Participants noted the similarities
to police forensic work, with both pur-
suits frequently depending on gathering,
interpreting, and applying evidence in a
disciplined manner.
Conservators and Due
Diligence
The FBI and ICE senior investi-
gators that I interviewed each inde-
pendently urged conservators to do due
diligence before agreeing to work on
an object that might have been illegally
acquired (e.g., stolen, looted, or illegally
imported).This might entail, for exam-
ple, looking up an object on the Art
Loss Register to see if it was reported
missing.These investigators made me
realize that the liability issue for conser-
vators hinges on what we know--or
are presumed to know--about the ori-
gin of an object that is being investigat-
ed.Wittman advised us to take great
care in how we describe objects in our
conservation reports. McAndrew
explained that when an ICE agent who
is investigating a case reads a descrip-
tion of an object in a conservator's
report, the agent might assume that the
conservator has additional information
about the object's provenance (for
example, that it was illegally imported)
and may draw the conservator into the
criminal investigation.
AIC's Guidelines for Practice and
the supplemental Commentaries oblige
us to be attentive to certain legal
responsibilities (Guideline 3--Laws and
Regulations, and Guideline 7--
Art Crimes from page 1
National Law Enforcement
Agencies:
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Art Crime Team
http://www.fbi.gov
http://www.fbi.gov/page2/march05
/act030205.htm
(Headline Archives, "Meet Our New
Art Crime Team")
CONTACT: Senior Investigator
Robert K.Wittman
Telephone: (215) 418-4141
Department of Homeland
Security, Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE)
http://www.ice.gov
CONTACT: Senior Special Agent
James McAndrew
Telephone: (646) 230-3399
E-mail: james.mcandrew@DHS.gov
8 AIC NEWS, November 2005
Confidentiality, with particular men-
tion of Section D, "Special Practices").
But individual situations are often
complicated by some of the questions
posed at the beginning of this article.
The experiences of a few colleagues
will illustrate some complications.
Case Number 1:
A few years
ago, when ICE was investigating the
origin of some imported silver antiqui-
ties,Tom Chase's records were request-
ed because he had performed metallur-
gical analyses for the dealer. Chase was
concerned about breaching client con-
fidentiality, so he turned to Kathleen
Garland, who then chaired the AIC
Ethics and Standards Committee.
Garland told me recently that members
of that committee are obliged to
destroy all their committee notes when
they step down but she recalled that
she advised Chase to be guided by the
Commentaries to AIC's Guideline 7--
Confidentiality.The Commentaries
state (in part): "In certain circumstances
(e.g., ... legal proceedings), the expec-
tation of confidentiality is superceded
by legal obligations of the conservation
professional.The owner, custodian or
authorized agent should be informed of
impending breach of confidentiality,
unless there is a legal reason not to do
so."With Chase's records in hand, the
ICE agent arrested the dealer, who later
pled guilty to falsifying documentation
on the Iranian origins of the objects.
Case Number 2:
The
Commentary for AIC Guideline 7
makes it clear that we must not with-
hold records normally considered con-
fidential when law enforcement
authorities ask us to cooperate.What is
not stated clearly anywhere in the
Guidelines and their Commentaries is
how we should react when we believe
we have special awareness about a pos-
sible scam. Early in 1999 one of Paul
Messier's clients, a photograph collec-
tor named Michael Mattis, asked
Messier to find an objective, materials-
based way to distinguish lifetime Lewis
Hine prints from those made after
1940, the year the photographer died.
Within months Messier came up with
three objective ways to evaluate the
age of twentieth century photograph
papers. He tested this three-part system
on his client's collection of Lewis Hine
photographs, some of which turned
out to be printed on papers that were
not available during Hine's life.The
source of the posthumous prints sold as
lifetime prints turned out to be Walter
Rosenblum, a former student and close
friend of Hine who had become the
primary authority on Hine's work.
In the fall of 1999, after Messier
completed his materials research for
Mattis, the collector sought a settle-
ment against Rosenblum. A group of
dealers who learned (not from
Messier) about the conservator's
research also demanded retribution for
the prints of dubious authenticity that
they had purchased from Rosenblum.
Both disputes were settled out of
court, but only the parties of the latter
dispute were bound by a non-disclo-
sure agreement. Some time later,
Mattis released Messier from his obli-
gation to respect client confidentiality.
Messier was troubled by the
implications for scholars and collectors,
who might never find out that some of
the Hine prints they study in order to
understand Hine's printing preferences
were in fact made after the photogra-
pher's death. Details about the Hine
scam have now been published, howev-
er other scams may remain secret unless
more attention is paid to the effects of
lawyers' restraints on publicizing settled
cases. Messier describes the conserva-
tor's dilemma in such a situation as:
"There is a definite conflict if a conser-
vator knows of fraudulent material
being traded on the marketplace if this
knowledge comes from work done for
a client who requires confidentiality.
Interpreting the present [AIC] code,
the conservator in this situation must
maintain confidentiality despite knowl-
edge of potential criminal activity."
Case Number 3:
Catherine Sease,
in her 1997 Journal of the American
Institute for Conservation article
"Conservation and the Antiquities
Trade," described her experiences as an
expert witness in a suit involving the
looted fragments of a mosaic from a
Byzantine church in Cyprus. In 1989,
the fragments turned up in the hands of
a dealer in Indianapolis. Sease explained
that when antiquities and archaeological
objects are torn from their historic con-
texts, the loss to historians is incalcula-
ble. She also warned readers that "By
treating a looted artifact, the conservator
could legally be considered an accessory
and, therefore, be prosecutable."
Informative Websites:
U.S. State Department, Bureau of
Educational and Cultural Affairs,
International Cultural Property
Protection
http://exchanges.state.gov/culprop/
overview.html
This site provides essential
information for American citizens
about international legislation to
protect cultural property.
Art Loss Register
http://www.artloss.com
The mission of this commercial site
is to "recover stolen and missing art
and antiques and to provide a
central clearinghouse for acquirers
of art to determine good title
thereby deterring theft and the trade
in stolen art."
International Foundation for Art
Research
www.ifar.org
IFAR, a not-for-profit organization,
was awarded grants in 2004 to
partially fund the transformation of
its website into an information
resource that will contain a body of
art and cultural property case law
and legislation, and databases of
catalogues raisonné.
Illicit Antiquities Research Centre
www.mcdonald.cam.ac.uk/IARC/
iarc/info.htm
This British Website advocates
against the illicit excavation of
archaeological sites, and for the
widespread adoption of the 1970
UNESCO Convention.
Los Angeles Police Department
www.lapdonline.org/get_involved/
stolen_art/prevention/prevention.htm
The LAPD's webpage with art theft
"Crime Prevention Tips" is directed
to individuals and museums and
libraries.
9 AIC NEWS, November 2005
In a recent email message, Sease
pointed out that a conservator's choice
of treatment methods could play a part
in the legal determination of how dam-
ages are assessed. She observed that the
lawyers who prosecuted the dealer
were also working out a strategy to sue
the person who restored the fragments.
(The suit to return the mosaics to
Cyprus was won; subsequently the case
against the restorer was dropped.) Sease
said that the lawyers' "approach was to
establish what is considered to be stan-
dard practice and then show how the
restorer involved did not follow accept-
ed practice. In this way, they would
prove that through ignorance he was
responsible for much of the damage
sustained by the mosaics. So they want-
ed to know about professional organi-
zations. Did he belong to AIC? Is it
standard practice to document treat-
ment, and if so, how is this done? What
are the acceptable materials and meth-
ods of treatment for mosaics? Why did
he use unacceptable materials and
methods of treatment? And so forth."
Ethics Discussion
While preparing this article, I also
talked with Joanne Hackett, the chair
of AIC's Ethics and Standards
Committee. Hackett circulated my
questions among the three other mem-
bers of her committee: Jan Paris, Helen
Mar Parkin, and Bettina Raphael. In
Hackett's subsequent email to me she
stated that "It is clear that we have
both a responsibility to hand over
client files when asked to by appropri-
ate law enforcement authorities and to
report suspected illegal activities to the
same authorities." However in instances
where a case is dropped or settled out
of court and the conservator is aware
of someone's past and possibly contin-
uing illegal behavior, Hackett said,
"This is a much more gray area."
When AIC's Code of Ethics and
Guidelines for Practice leave questions
unanswered, the logical next place to
seek guidance is within the Ethics and
Standards Committee. Open discussion
among members at an Annual Meeting
might be another way to address these
complex questions.
--Jean D. Portell
(718) 643-1222
jeandp@aol.com
Acknowledgements:
Preparing this
article required the cooperation of
many people. I wish to thank the con-
tributors named in the text and
acknowledge the following people:
Denise Ballew, Kevin Czartoryski,
Eugene Whyte, Sharon Flescher, Lynn
Grant, Barbara Hall, Mark Harpainter,
Sam Harris, John Hirx, Stephanie
Hornbeck, Jeffrey Kimball, Jane
Levine, Herb Lottier, Pieter Meyers,
Mark Thorn, John Twilley.
Fact Witnesses and Experts in
Legal Proceedings
James Martin
Jean Portell's article describes the
work of government law enforcement
agencies to investigate stolen and fraud-
ulent cultural property, and confidential-
ity issues that may arise when conserva-
tors who examine or treat such property
are compelled to produce relevant docu-
ments and records or to maintain confi-
dentiality concerning alleged fraud.
Indeed, conservators who exam-
ine or treat cultural property, or give
statements or render opinions that have
bearing on damage, age, or authenticity
of cultural property may become
involved in criminal proceedings or,
more likely, civil proceedings as wit-
nesses. Such cases are rarely publicized
because participants are often bound
by confidentiality agreements or
because the vast majority of all crimi-
nal and civil cases are plea-bargained or
settled, respectively, before trial--more
than 90 percent by some estimates.
The adversary legal system used in
the United States relies on the attorney
"to present his or her side's position in
the very best possible light and to chal-
lenge the other side's position as vigor-
ously as possible" (Feeley 1987, 753). As
part of this work, a skilled attorney will
endeavor to find facts and opinions that
support his or her position, and will
expose weaknesses and cast doubts on
the strengths of an adversary's case.
Witnesses who possess relevant
information about facts at issue in a
legal proceeding may be compelled to
disclose that information through a
formal pre-trial exchange of facts,
opinions, and other information.This
process is called discovery.The primary
objectives of discovery are to encour-
age settlement or plea-bargaining of
cases before trial, to eliminate surprises
at trial, and to minimize miscarriages
of justice (Brazil and Weber 1987).
Courts are obliged to curtail discovery
if it is used to "fish" for information or
is used as a weapon to "annoy, embar-
rass, oppress, or injure the parties or
witnesses who will be subject to it"
(West Group 1998, vol. 4, 102-103).
Discovery rules vary from federal
to state courts and criminal to civil
courts, but two of the most commonly
used discovery tools are most likely to
target witnesses.The first tool is the
subpoena duces tecum, which commands
the witness to produce documents,
photographs, and other tangible evi-
dence for inspection.The second tool
is the oral deposition, which records
oral testimony to questions asked out
of court. Both tools can help identify
leads to other information, but deposi-
tions also are used to find out and pre-
serve what people will say at trial, and
to evaluate the demeanor of the possi-
ble witness under cross-examination
(Brazil and Weber 1987).Witnesses
who are discovered to possess useful
evidence may be compelled to testify
in court as fact witnesses.
Attorneys are also permitted to
retain experts in fields relevant to a
case to help sort out and explain sci-
entific or technical issues. Experts
might also collect and test evidence,
prepare and evaluate discovery, prepare
questions for direct and cross-exami-
nation at trial, evaluate responses, etc.
A consulting expert generally works
anonymously behind the scenes, while
a testifying expert (or expert witness)
is retained with the expectation that
Further Resources:
Sease, Catherine, "Conservation and
the Antiquities Trade," JAIC Vol. 36
(1997) pp 49-58
Trillin, Calvin, "Frenchie and the
Persians,"The New Yorker,Vol. 63
(June 29, 1987) pp. 44-67
Woodward, Richard B.,"Too Much
of A Good Thing: Photography,
Forgery, and the Lewis Hine Scandal,"
The Atlantic Monthly,Vol. 291 (June
2003) pp. 67-76
10 AIC NEWS, November 2005
he or she will testify at trial about
facts, and opinions based on those
facts--provided the court finds the
expert is qualified and the testimony is
admissible.
A qualified testifying expert is an
individual who, because of education,
profession, experience, or some combi-
nation of these, is believed to have
some special competency and knowl-
edge in a field relevant to a case, suffi-
cient that a judge and jury may benefit
from the expert's opinion when decid-
ing a case (Garner 2002). Admissible
testimony includes facts and opinions
that are relevant and material to a case,
are based on valid scientific, technical,
or other specialized knowledge, and
which will not "confuse, mislead, or
prejudice the jury" (Schultz 2002,
165). Judges determine whether an
expert is qualified and testimony is
admissible. Whereas attorneys advocate
on behalf of their clients, testifying
experts have duties to the court and
their own professional ethics and stan-
dards of practice to investigate and tes-
tify openly and impartially to the
truth, "not a portion of the truth, not
shades of the truth, just the simple
truth" (Safir 2002, 8).
Discovery rules pertaining to
experts generally depend on whether
the expert is a consulting expert or
testifying expert.While a consulting
expert's "identity, theories, mental
impressions, litigation plans, and opin-
ions" are exempt from discovery by the
work-product doctrine, work product
privilege does not extend to testifying
experts (Safir 2002, 4; Garner 2002). In
general, a party must disclose the testi-
fying expert's identity, qualifications,
and opinions, including "all informa-
tion that the witness considered in
forming the opinion" (Garner 2002,
619). Depending on the jurisdiction,
disclosure might also include other
documents--such as notes, written and
electronic correspondence, contractual
agreements, diaries, billing records--
and oral deposition.
Discovery and other phases of
legal proceedings are strange, if not
intimidating, territories for most con-
servators. However, conservators who
become involved as fact witnesses or
experts in legal proceedings can act,
guided by their professional experi-
ence, like experts from other profes-
sions. Dedication to personal integrity
and competence, careful examination
of facts, and action based on sound
evidence and methods are hallmarks of
a professional conservator--and an
effective expert and witness.
References
Brazil,W. D. and G. S.Weber. 1987.
Discovery. In Encyclopedia of the
American judicial system, ed. R. J.
Janosik,Vol. 2. New York: Charles
Scribner's Sons.
Schultz, D. 2002. Encyclopedia of
American law. New York: Facts on File,
Inc.
Feeley, M. 1987.The Adversary System.
In Encyclopedia of the American judicial
system, ed. R. J. Janosik,Vol. 2. New
York: Charles Scribner's Sons.
Garner, B. A. 2002. Black's law
dictionary, 8th ed., St. Paul:West.
Safir, G. I. 2002. Legal Aspects of
Forensic Science. In Forensic science
handbook, ed. Richard Saferstein,Vol. 1.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
West Group. 1998. West's encyclopedia of
American law. St. Paul:West Group.
--James Martin
Orion Analytical, LLC
Box 550
Williamstown, MA 01267
(413) 458-0233
martin@orionanalytical.com
JAIC News
Staff changes
Regretfully, two valuable mem-
bers of the JAIC editorial staff have
resigned this year: Catherine Sease and
Judy Bischoff. As book review editor
for eight years, Cap Sease provided
high quality reviews that many people
have commented were the first thing
they read in each issue. Judy Bischoff
brought her irreplaceable experience
from the fields of industry, education,
and conservation to her work as an
associate editor for eight years. Luckily
for JAIC, Harriett Stratis, Chicago Art
Institute, has competently and cheer-
fully stepped up to the task as the new
book review editor.
JAIC Standards and
Submissions
For papers submitted to any pro-
fessional journal, such as JAIC, the
forefront examination level is peer
review. Peer reviewers primarily
examine the papers for topic, content,
clarity, completeness, and organiza-
tion. A second level of review occurs
when the Journal editors examine the
paper to weed out minor problems
and ensure it meets "Journal stan-
dards." As the term "standards" can
mean different things to different peo-
ple, this newsletter article will discuss
some of the most frequent problems
encountered in Journal submissions
and present a short list of standards. In
most cases, a good article will not be
rejected for having a couple of these
problems. In a few cases, however,
some problems may distract reviewers
and editors from recognizing an arti-
cle's merit.
1. Improper use of case.
Believe it
or not, more than half of the articles
submitted to JAIC use first person at
least once. First person (I, me, mine,
we, us, ours) indicates the writer is pre-
senting a personal experience.These
personal sentences are appropriate in
essays, prose, presentations, letters, and
emails, but never in a professional pub-
lication.The purpose of a professional
publication is for the writer to step
back and objectively present the topic.
This objectivity can only be shown by
writing the article in third person case.
· All professional articles must be written
in third person.
2. Insufficient or incorrect refer-
ences.
As a general rule, all ideas or
facts presented in the article that are
not produced by the authors need to
have an associated citation. In profes-
sional journals, there are two styles for
references.The first is the author-date
system, which is used by JAIC. In this
format, sources are cited in the text in
parentheses using the author's last
name and the date of publication. Full
11 AIC NEWS, November 2005
citations are presented alphabetically at
the end of the paper.The second style
is the notes-bibliography format,
which allows the use of footnotes or
endnotes.This style often produces
choppy articles that are difficult to
read. According to the Chicago Manual
of Style, these two styles should not be
mixed, and for JAIC, only the author-
date system is acceptable.
· Ensure citations are included as needed
using the correct format.
3. Incomprehensible tables and
figures.
Tables and figures are an excel-
lent means of presenting and/or com-
paring materials and results. It is criti-
cal, however, that the tables and figures
include sufficient information for the
reader to understand their content
without having to refer to the text.
Multiple sentences can be used if
needed in the titles and captions. Units
must be supplied for all numbers.
Explanatory notes can be added below
a table/figure to explain abbreviations
or give sources for the data. In a figure,
axes must be labeled and all symbols
should be identified in a key.
Dimensions must be provided for pho-
tographs and micrographs.
· All tables and figures must contain suffi-
cient explanatory information.
4. Missing substantive information.
Every paper published in a professional
journal must contain enough informa-
tion for the work within it to be repro-
duced by others in the field. For exam-
ple, a sentence like `a replacement part
was made and installed' should be fol-
lowed with explanatory steps such as
material selection, method of construc-
tion, shaping, adhesion, and visual rec-
onciliation. Optimally, a photograph
should also be included. Likewise, a
statement like `FTIR was used to deter-
mine the sample contained protein'
needs an accompanying paragraph stat-
ing sample selection and preparation,
analysis technique, instrument type, and
all selectable parameters. A second para-
graph discussing the analysis results and
degree of certainty in the identification
should also be included. In many cases
this requires a figure showing the spec-
tra for the sample compared to a known
reference material.
· Details must be provided for all work
mentioned in the article.
5. Significant figure errors.
Every
number obtained by a measurement, as
opposed to counting, should be writ-
ten to reflect the error in the measure-
ment where the right most digit con-
tains the uncertainty. More sensitive
equipment will produce numbers with
greater accuracy. For example, a pH
taken with indicator paper may be
written as 6 (1 significant figure) while
the pH of the same solution obtained
with an electrode may be accurately
written as 6.37 (3 significant figures).
All calculations must reflect the error
of the least accurate measurement. For
further explanation see the following
website:
http://chemed.chem.purdue.edu/
genchem/topicreview/bp/ch1/sigfigs.
html#add
· All numbers should accurately represent
any measurement errors.
6. Failure to follow JAIC format.
Over the years, the JAIC editorial
team (editors, publications managers,
and copy editors) has carefully put
together two very specific documents
containing the format and structure
required for all JAIC submissions. The
"Guidelines for Authors" is found at
the back of every single issue of the
Journal. The more extensive JAIC
Style Guide is found on the AIC
website at http://aic.stanford.edu/
library/online/index.html. All submit-
ted articles are checked against these
guidelines and authors are asked to
correct deviations.
· All submissions must follow the JAIC
Guidelines and Style Guide
Writing journal articles is never
easy. But as professionals, we are under
an obligation to write articles that doc-
ument the methods and discoveries
made in our work. Because these arti-
cles are passed down to future genera-
tions as an archive of our current tech-
nology, it is critical that we write every
article as clearly and as completely as
possible.
--Michele Derrick, JAIC Editor-in-Chief
(781) 862-0448
mderrick@mfa.org
Grants, Awards, and
Fellowships
IMLS to Expedite Grant
Review Process and Release
Awards Early to Museums for
Projects that Meet Needs
Caused by Hurricane Katrina
Agency Also Extends Grant
Application Deadlines for Museums
in Declared Disaster Areas
The Institute of Museum and
Library Services (IMLS) will expedite
the grant review process and release
awards early to successful museum
applicants throughout the country
whose project proposals meet the
needs caused by Hurricane Katrina.
The two federal grant programs
affected are Conservation Project
Support (http://www.imls.gov/grants/
museum/mus_cps.asp), and Museums
for America (http://www.imls.gov/
grants/ museum/mus_mfa.htm). In
addition, the grant deadlines for these
two grant programs have been
extended for museums in declared
disaster areas (http://www.imls.gov/
whatsnew/current/091505a.htm).
Funds from Museums for
America grants will be released in
mid-March, four months early, to
museums across America with winning
grant proposals that meet the needs
caused by Hurricane Katrina. Other
awards will be announced in mid-July.
In addition, the application deadline
for museums in declared disaster areas
has been extended for one month, to
December 15. For all other applicants,
the grant deadline remains November
15. For more information contact
Program Officer Christine Henry, at
chenry@imls.gov.
Funds from Conservation Project
Support grants will be released in mid-
February, two months early, to success-
ful museum applicants across the coun-
try whose applications address conser-
vation needs created by Hurricane
Katrina. All other grant awards will be
released as previously scheduled, in
mid-April. For more information,
contact Program Officer Steve
Shwartzman, sshwartzman@imls.gov.
The agency also announced today
that it is extending the grant period of
its current museum recipients in the
12 AIC NEWS, November 2005
American Association of Museums (AAM) at
www.aam-us.org
·
Museum Assessment Program: February 15
American Association for State and Local History
(AASLH) and the History Channel
info@saveourhistory.com
·
Save Our History Grant Program: October 21, 2005;
2006 deadline not yet announced.
·
Alderson Internship Grant Applications deadline:
December 15
FAIC
·
Carolyn Horton Fund: February 1, 2006
·
Christa Gaehde Fund: February 1, 2006
·
FAIC Samuel H. Kress Conservation Publication
Fellowships: November 1, 2005
·
George Stout Memorial Award: February 15, 2006
·
Individual Professional Development Grant: February 15,
2006
·
Lecture Grants: February 15, 2006
Getty Grant Program at www.getty.edu/grants
·
Architectural Conservation Grants, Planning Grants: no
deadline
·
Architectural Conservation Grants, Implementation
Grants: no deadline
·
Campus Heritage grants: no deadline
·
Education and Training Grants, Conservation Training
Program Grants: no deadline
·
Education and Training Grants, Professional Development
Grants: no deadline
·
Getty Research Grants for Institutions: no deadline
·
Getty Conservation Guest Scholar Grants: November 1,
2005; 2006 deadline not yet announced.
·
Museum Conservation Grants, Survey Grants: no
deadline
·
Museum Conservation Grants,Treatment Grants: no
deadline
Heritage Preservation at : www.heritagepreservation.org
·
2006 Conservation Assessment Program (CAP)
application deadline: December 1
Institute for Museum and Library Services (IMLS) at
www.imls.gov
·
Conservation Project Support: October 1, 2005; deadline
for museums in declared disaster areas extended to
November 1, 2005
·
Conservation Assessment Program: December 1, 2005
·
Grants to State Library Agencies: Revisions of five-year
plans due April 1, 2006
·
Librarians for the 21st Century: December 15, 2005
·
Museum Assessment Program: February 15, 2006
·
Museums for America: November 15, 2005; deadline for
museums in declared disaster areas extended to
December 15, 2005
·
National Leadership Grants for Libraries: February 1,
2006
·
National Leadership Grants for Museums: February 1, 2006
·
Native American Library Services, Basic Grants with
Educational/Assessment Option: March 1, 2006
·
Native American/Native Hawaiian Museum Services
Program: April 1, 2006
·
Partnership for a Nation of Learners Community
Collaboration Grants: March 1, 2006
National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) at www.nea.gov
·
Arts Indemnity Program: Multiple deadlines
National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) at
www.neh.gov
·
Challenge Grants: November 1, 2005 deadline for
individuals and institutions in declared disaster areas
extended to November 29, 2005; May 2, 2006
·
Collaborative Research Grants: November 1, 2005
deadline for individuals and institutions in declared
disaster areas extended to December 1, 2005.
·
Consultation Grants for Museums, Libraries, or Special
Projects: September 16, 2006
·
Grant to Preserve and Create Access to Humanities
Collections: July 17, 2006
·
Grants for Teaching and Learning Resources and
Curriculum Development: October 14, 2005; deadline
for individuals and institutions in declared disaster areas
extended to November 14, 2005.
·
Implementation Grants for Humanities Projects in
Libraries and Archives: February 6, 2006
·
Implementation Grants for Museums and Historical
Organizations: February 6, 2006
·
Implementation Grants for Special Projects: February 6,
2006
·
Planning Grants for Museums, Libraries, and Special
Projects: September 11, 2006
·
Preservation and Access Education and Training Grants:
July 3, 2006
·
Preservation and Access Research and Development
Projects Grants: July 3, 2006; Precis due May 16
·
Preservation Assistance Grants for Smaller Institutions:
May 15, 2006
·
Recovering Iraq's Past: Request for Proposals to Preserve
and Document Iraq's Cultural Heritage: October 1, 2005
(Preliminary proposals due September 9, 2005)
·
Reference Materials Grants: July 17, 2006
·
Stabilization of Humanities Collections Grants: October
3, 2006
·
United States Newspaper Programs: July 3, 2006
The National Center for Preservation Technology and
Training (NCPTT)
·
PTT Grants Call for Proposals application available
online at http://www.ncptt.nps.gov by September 15,
2005. Proposals due December 1, 2005