What strikes me about this issue is that the "missing" e-mails were
determined to have existed based on the produced e-mails.  So that tells
me that what was deleted somehow fit into the threads of the e-mails
that were produced.  Thus, the issue of individual interpretation aside,
some e-mails were deleted based on retention policy and some were not.
If we produce "some" paper documents on a particular issue and claim the
rest were destroyed based on retention, then, to a court of law, we
invalidate the retention/disposition policy. Same holds true for the
electronic records.  Relying on individual interpretation of record
value for each e-mail is not a wise approach, but it seems to be the
most "efficient" for organizations that do not have electronic
applications to manage the mail.  With paper destruction, we have
verifications and cross-checks built into the process.  We need to do
the same for electronic deletion.

Ginny Jones
(Virginia A. Jones, CRM, FAI)
Records Manager
Information Technology Division
Newport News Dept. of Public Utilities
Newport News, VA
[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]