ASERL’s Proposed Journal Retention Agreement

ASERL Directors’ Discussion

Spring 2010 Membership MeetingAtlanta, GA

A Brief History

• Conceived by Willis & Gherman ~ 10 years ago, focusing on monographs

• Use existing storage facilities as a “bank” of materials that would be stored for long term

• Other libs could weed/de-dupe their circulating collections based on access to “banked” items

A Little More History• April 2009: ASERL charged Shared

Storage Study Group (SSSG) to draft a proposal; focus now on print journals.

• SSSG Members:• Bob Byrd (Duke) • Millie Jackson (Alabama)• Lynn Sutton (Wake Forest)

• Studied programs & existing agreements at TRLN, PALCI, Orbis/Cascade, Five Colleges, others

• Flo Wilson (Vanderbilt – chairperson)• John Burger & Tim Cherubini (ASERL)

Overview of The Proposal - 1

• Focused on retrospective holdings of low-use print journals, especially those with reliable digital access.

• Voluntary participation & broad approach – each ASERL library can retain whatever set of titles they feel would be useful, based on completeness & condition.

• A consideration: Level of duplication with other regional retention agreements/systems.

Overview of The Proposal - 2• Creates a dim archive: Items are retained in

“closed” facility at each library; access is via digital/photocopied surrogates except in unusual cases.

• Retained items verified at the volume level.• Items to be retained thru 2035, with a review

of the agreement in 2020 & 2030.• Requires 24 months notice to exit the

agreement entirely; 12 months notice to relinquish a held set of titles.

Overview of The Proposal - 3

• Participating libs will note the retention status in their catalogs (process TBD).

• ASERL will maintain a publicly-accessible list on its website of titles retained under this agreement, so others can easily access the information.

Overview of The Proposal - 4

• No remuneration. Participating libs undertake costs for their own retention activities.

• Libraries that do not have “closed” facilities or otherwise cannot / do not agree to retain items can still consider weeding their collections -- but they have no voice in managing the process going forward.

Overview of The Proposal - 5

• Each participating library has one representative on the Steering Committee, to determine specific processes and manage affairs going forward

• Existing borrowing agreements remain the same: All ASERL libs can request digitized/photocopied surrogates of retained items using standard ILL processes.

Feedback So Far

• Two online review / comment sessions. Lots of support – yippee!

• Include partial runs? YES – minor wording change added to draft.

• Can materials be loaned to other libraries but not circulate outside lib? Under review.

• Periodic affirmation/validation of status? Referred to Steering Cmte.

Questions? Comments?

• Likes / Dislikes?

• What other information do you need to consider participating in this agreement?

Next Steps

• Recruit participants – start date of August 1?

• Letter from Library Director confirming participation, referring to final draft of agreement

Data Needed to Participate

• Title(s)• ISSN• Date range• Volume #s in range• Statement re: level

of completeness• Location where

items are retained

• Primary contact person

• Steering Cmte rep