Staff at NRLF are trained to very strict standards for what they will accession into the facility. UCB is the largest of the submitting campuses to NRLF and the largest contributor among the UCB libraries is, understandably, the Main Collection.
Relative to their size, some SSLs have comparable rates of submission of records that result in materials being bounced from accessioning due to errors, so the record problems extend beyond the Main Library.
All of us make mistakes, but the submission of materials to off-site shelving is often the LAST CHANCE to get it right. Library patrons are not served by a mis-match between what the catalog record describes and what is actually on the shelves at NRLF. Such mismatches can also negatively impact collection management decisions at all UC libraries, as access to RLF persistent copies often factors into those decisions. It becomes increasingly critical in that future of a shared ILS, that we correctly identify when we have exactly the same item as another campus or if the UCB copy is unique for the purposes of shelving at NRLF.
Staff are doubtless aware that no duplication of items is accepted at the RLFs, except for where all copies at NRLF are Restricted Use. You’re probably also aware that items sent for deposit count toward your allocation whether they are accepted or rejected, as NRLF staff spend time processing the items regardless. So, items rejected due to record or condition issues will count when they are rejected and will be counted again, as new submissions, when they are corrected and returned for deposit.
Please verify that all bibliographic elements for materials submitted are supplied and accurately represent the item being submitted. If you find variation or errors in the elements required for deposit below, or are unsure if the item matches, please submit a request to BadCat for record cleanup before depositing the item.
Consider the following elements when checking materials to ensure record accuracy and minimize NRLF flags/rejections:
• The item must have a Cat Date in the fixed field
• 001 The item must have an OCLC number
• 020 ISBN (if present) in Millennium must exactly match the value on the item
• 040 |b Language of cataloging (if present) must be in English (code = eng)
• 1xx Author (if present) should match the Millennium value or be an authorized form of the name entered in field 245 |c (Please ask if you are not sure about the correct form of the 1xx/name)
• 245 |a and|b Title and subtitle must match the title page. |c is accepted with minor errors
• 250 Edition statement (if present) must match the value on the piece
NOTE: a numbered “Reimpresion, Auflage or edicion” may not always reflect a new edition, but rather a reprinting, which may not justify the creation or use of a new record.
• 260 |a |b and |c Imprint (place of publication, publisher and date of publication) must match the values in Millennium <– this is a major source of rejected records at NRLF.
• 300 |a Pagination of the work, including initial pages, must match the values in Millennium <– another significant source of rejected records.
• 490/830 The series entry and numbering should match the values on the item.
• 500 Cover title/Title from cover. If the work has no distinct title page and the source comes from the cover, the catalog record should state that.
• 7xx In the absence of a 1xx, at least 1 personal, corporate or conference name should appear if present on the title page
For items that are not literary works (LC classification P-PZ), it is desirable to have at least 1 6xx subject entry (second indicator of 0 = Library of Congress heading)
For monographs, except for MVMs, please remember that photocopies must have some indication in the record that they are not originals. The cataloging practice for this has varied over time, but under “provider neutral” guidelines, the present practice is to use a 533 note reading: Print reproduction. Photocopies will commonly carry a lower case “a” after the date in the call number.
Volumes that have multiple items bound together must generally have a separate record for each title in the volume and the item must be linked across each of those bibliographic records.
MVMs: ideally, we would be sending all holdings of an MVM.