Interesting approach, but unfortunately, we have a great deal of other
survey materials that would be so similar to this (not to this particular
site, but of the same type of record, re., ALTA surveys, records of survey,
field data), that I would think it would be hard to legitimately justify
delineating this material out for a seperate retention period at a policy
level.


On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 8:34 AM, Peter Kurilecz <[log in to unmask]>wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 11:18 AM, Joseph Morris <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for your reply.  The material in question was created by us
> (survey
> > drawings and data).
> >
>
> why not create a retention period specifically for these type of records
> such that they are independent of the project?
>
>
> --
>  Peter Kurilecz CRM CA
> [log in to unmask]
> Richmond, Va
> http://twitter.com/RAINbyte
> Information not relevant for my reply has been deleted to reduce the
> electronic footprint and to save the sanity of digest subscribers
>
> List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
> Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
> To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already
> present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the
> message.
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
>

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]