RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
WALLIS Dwight D <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 13 Apr 2006 11:30:54 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (45 lines)
David Gaynon wrote:
>I would suggest that records managers take care to understand that 
declaring something a non record is not an effective strategy for
evading 
a legal duty to preserve evidence.  When you have such a duty it does
not 
matter if it is a record non record or even part of an automobile.

However, depending on an analysis of risk, recognizing what comprises a
record/non-record vs. evidence can impact implementation strategies and
costs in different environments, sometimes significantly. Records
managers don't "declare" this - for public records managers, non-record
status is often quite specifically defined by law. Yet such non-record
material can still be seen as evidence. Lets also remember that such
non-record evidence - in contrast to records - becomes pertinent only in
situations where something triggers its need as evidence (a legal
action, a failure of the records keeping system, etc...). Then there is
an obligation to preserve it, but I don't see that obligation as being
part of a normal course of business. 

Lets take the office shredding bin, and assume by policy it is defined
for use for non-record material. Should we apply the same level of
documentation to the destruction of the evidence in this particular bin
that we would to the destruction of records? To do so would be overkill,
in my opinion, therefore a needed distinction between record/non-record
materiel. Similarly, with proper training, who is best qualified to
determine records status? A centralized control point through which all
potential records information flows, or individual records custodians?
Again, depending on the environment, the centralized control point may
be (an expensive) necessity - otherwise I would say the individual
custodian, particularly with e-mail.

Dwight Wallis, CRM
Records Administrator
Multnomah County Fleet, Records, Electronics, Distribution & Stores
(FREDS)
1620 SE 190th Avenue
Portland OR 97233
phone: (503)988-3741
fax: (503)988-3754
[log in to unmask]

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance

ATOM RSS1 RSS2