In part, the answer lies in how well documented your practices/processes are
for generating backups.  If it is extremely clear that EVERYTHING on these
'new' backups is post-hold, and does not reflect changes to any records
impacted by the hold, they shouldn't be subject to the same requirements.

You mentioned these were incremental, which would indicate they only include
"new" information added to systems AFTER the hold was put in place and
existing backups had been 'quarantined' from rotation/destruction.  I guess
one question I would ask is what about any information related to the
incident that resulted in the hold to begin with?  If work is ongoing on
that subject, these new backups WILL include that information, correct?

Unless you have instituted practices/policies/processes that exclude that
information from being captured in daily backups and are having it all
written to separate systems (which are then backed up independently) there
is still the potential of commingled content in new backups (?)

I guess the question is how many tapes will be generated between now and the
end of the hold, what would the cost be to save them, and is it less than
the effort to institute a new process to ensure nothing impacted makes it to
the new backups?

Larry
[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]