Yes, there is a legitimate reason for the 75 year retention. It's many times associated with employment records, but hats because lots of Agencies never segregated health, exposure, or other records indicating where specifically people worked.  

The retention is based on epidemiological issues and potential employee exposure to harmful substances.  The citation I've routinely seen cites this as the reasoning:

"Epidemiological issues are the basis for the '75 years after an event' (in this case, separation from employment) retention. This retention is formulated to include an initial age of 25 years for 'the nuclear workforce' at the time of possible risk and their life expectancy; and encompasses 2 lineal generations, achieving the age of 21."

This was set by NARA, in conjunction with the Department of Health and Human Services, and was determined to have continued value due to the EEOICPA. (You can look that one up, if you need more)

My World, and welcome to it. 

Larry
[log in to unmask]

Sent from MY iPhoneSeís

> On Jan 7, 2016, at 6:45 PM, PeterK <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> Today’s Analyst Tip video answers another one of our frequently asked
> questions around here: Why do so many employment records have a retention
> period of 75 years? Is 75 years significant for some reason? Who decided
> that retention period?
> 

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]