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:
Re: 3 Year Operational Need 'Standard'
From:
Larry Medina <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 10 Apr 2014 12:44:13 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (32 lines) 
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Ben Greene <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> Anyone know the concrete purposes for why many reporting/operational
> retention periods end up at 3 years?
>
> Ben Greene, CRM
> Minneapolis, MN
>


"Concrete purposes"?  No... but many records have a Current year plus 2
years (CY+2) retention period and it can be traced back to a majority of
NARA General Records Schedule periods on common records being the same.

I'd assume that businesses thought, "If it's good enough for the
Government, it's good enough for us"

Larry
[log in to unmask]

-- 


*Lawrence J. Medina Danville, CARIM Professional since 1972*

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]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2