Report on Conference on Collections Environments

Note: The following is for information only and should not be used
to make decisions on appropriate collections environments without
consulting the professional literature and/or consultants.

Meeting on Collections Environments, Washington, D.C., Sept. 3-5

A meeting on Collections Environments was held at the Smithsonian
Institution in Washington, D.C., from September 3 to 5, 1997.  The
purpose of the meeting was to critically evaluate present
standards/recommendations for all aspects of the collections
environments and to discuss the potential impact of recent research
results.

The meeting was organized by the Conservation Analytical Laboratory
(CAL) of the Smithsonian Institution and financially supported by
the National Center for Preservation Technology and Training
(NCPTT).

To foster open discussions the meeting was by invitation only and
without an audience.  Participants were: P.N. Banks, A. Beale, J.P.
Brown, G. Cass, E. Conrad, M. Frost, L. Kelter, R. Kerschner, W.P.
Lull, S. Maekawa, S. Michalski, P.N. Perrot, F.D. Preusser (chair),
J. Reilly, W. Rose, D. Saunders, L. Stuebing, R. Waller, S.
Weintraub, and A. Zhivov.  Observers: R. Bishop, M. Gilberg, B.
Schneider, D. Williams, and L. v. Zelst.

Discussion topics included: the building envelope; HVAC
technologies; chemical, mechanical and biological deterioration;
relative humidity, temperature and air pollution; energy and cost
savings strategies, and the work of the relevant committees of
ASHRAE (American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and
Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc.) and ISIAQ (International Society
for Indoor Air Quality and Climate).  The meeting covered historic
houses, museums, libraries and archives, both in historic structures
and buildings constructed for the purpose of housing collections. It
also addressed the problems of different climate zones.  A
significant amount of time was spent discussing risk assessment and
the planning and decision making process.

It is planned to prepare one or more publications on the subject of
this meeting, incorporating its findings.

Summary of Conclusions:

Decisions on control parameters for a collection cannot be made in
isolation, but instead should result from a systematic process that
starts with a review of the mission of the holding institution and
the development of a masterplan for the institution and the
collection.  All interested parties should be involved in the entire
decision making process from the very beginning.

Factors such as the use of the collection by the constituency of the
holding institution and the frequency of access to the collection,
as well as the character of the building in which these collections
are housed, are of paramount importance when alternative options for
improvements in the collection environment are subsequently
evaluated.

The next step should consist of a comprehensive risk assessment for
the collection and the building in which it is housed.  Often,
natural and man made disasters, frequent and improper handling, and
inadequate security and fire protection pose a greater risk to
collections than fluctuations in environmental parameters. Available
resources should therefore first be invested in the mitigation of
the greatest risks.

Once it is determined that existing environmental settings and
fluctuations are the largest remaining threat to the long term
survival of a collection a plan for environmental improvements can
be drawn up.  For this purpose it is essential to know the nature
and condition of the collection and to fully understand the
performance characteristics of the building within the local
climate.  Any environmental improvements should start with such
improvements in the building envelope as are safe to its fabric and,
where applicable, allowable within the historical/aesthetical
context.  Only after this task has been accomplished can one
sensibly plan ways to further improve the interior environment.

Before deciding on the set points of humidity and temperature,
permissible fluctuations, and seasonal drifts one has to understand
if the deterioration of the collection is mostly chemical or
mechanical.  One also should know what percentages of the collection
are of very high, high, medium, or low vulnerability to
environmental damage.

Based on this knowledge of the collections, the building and the
local climate one can approach a decision about the proper humidity
and temperature settings.  Different standards may be required for
different types of collections.  The use of microclimates should be
considered as a valid strategy for protection of the more vulnerable
parts of the collection

A well controlled environment with humidity fluctuations of +/- 5%
is still considered the safest environment.  However, individual
conditions, including the nature of the building and the collections
can warrant the specification of more widely relaxed standards after
careful consideration and with awareness that the risk for
environmental damage may increase for parts of the collections as
larger fluctuations are permitted.

A flagship HVAC system, providing a flatline environment should only
be considered if the resources for its operation and maintenance are
assured in the long term. If budgetary considerations, the nature of
the building, or other factors make this unfeasible, alternative
strategies including multiple (micro)climates for different parts of
the collection can be evaluated.

For most institutions that presently operate or plan to install a
mechanical climate control system, a relaxation of the presently
most common standards will not likely lead to great cost savings,
although small to moderate savings may result. Any such savings,
however, as well as the concomitant increase in risk to the
collections, are dependent on the state and nature of the
collections and the building in which they are housed.

Frank D. Preusser
Conference Chair

Frank Preusser & Associates, Inc.
6434 Pat Avenue
West Hills, CA 91307
USA
818-348-0481
Fax:  818-348-1764

                                  ***
                  Conservation DistList Instance 11:24
               Distributed: Thursday, September 11, 1997
                       Message Id: cdl-11-24-001
                                  ***