Code "b" was used in 008/29 (Reference evaluation) for pre-AACR2 records, which includes the record for Spacher.  Currently the chief use of "b" is for records with nonroman script references, because these do not have to follow normal guidelines for references.

Go to and follow the link for

LC Guidelines Supplement to the MARC 21 Format for Authority Data, 008/29.

If you upgrade the record for Spacher, you have to evaluate the references and make any necessary changes for RDA. Then you can change the code to "a", unless there are nonroman references.

John Hostage
Senior Continuing Resources Cataloger
Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services
Langdell Hall 194
Harvard Law School Library
Cambridge, MA 02138
[log in to unmask]<../../owa/redir.aspx?C=fff0248a4daa423caadeb2f835259a11&>
+(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice)
+(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax)
ISNI 0000 0000 4028 0917

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Gemberling, Ted P <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 3, 2018 18:24
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] References "consistent"?

I want to understand better what is meant by “consistent” references in the Ref status fixed field code. I’m working on n  79009111 (Spacher, Stephanus Michel) which has the 667 “Cannot be used in RDA” note. I’m assuming the reason is because it has the Ref Status b code (references are not consistent).

What would make the references “consistent”? I’m guessing sometimes it’s because the qualifiers are not the same (say, if the 100 had one set of dates and the 400 had different ones). Is that right? But in the OCLC documentation it says, “the references may not have been re-evaluated in their relationships to the new heading.” Does that mean this was originally not an AACR2 authority, and the 100 was different?

What standards would have to be met for the 400, “Spaher, Michael,” to be consistent with the 100?

Thanks for any enlightenment,

Ted Gemberling

UAB Lister Hill Library