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:
From:
"Cutts, Tammy D" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 25 Mar 2009 16:20:58 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (56 lines)
I think anyone at a plant/fleet is going to need some detail as to what,
exactly, you put into a personnel file and whether you define any of it
a applying to a QA program.  Protected area access records are
considered Security records, not QA and are maintained for Term + 5.
Records of individual monitoring (dose) fall under 10CFR20 and are often
maintained for Life of Policy +, based on insurer's requirements. 

Then there is how your organization defines various programs. For
instance, do you need to maintain training records to show INPO
accreditation of your training programs?

Tammy Cutts | Nuclear Records Analyst
DCPP
x3509

This email is sent on 100% unused paper
Please consider the environment before printing this email

-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Donald Mattson
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 3:04 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Retention of Personnel files for Nuclear Power Plant employees

I am currently working with IT to clear legacy personnel data as well as
reinstate the destruction of HR Personnel files. However, we have
encountered a bit of a snag while identifying and processing the older
data. 

Initially, the retention used was Term +6 unfortunately, when the last
refresh of retentions happened someone changed it from Term +6 to
indefinate and combined the retention for Nuclear site employees into
this definition. 
Previously, we retained the Nuclear personnel records for 100 years on a
seperate retention. 

I was curious as we obviously need to update the retention again if
anyone has an idea what the actual regulations for Nuclear site
personnel records should be and what standard of retention for our
non-nuclear personnel would be best practice. Normally, I would address
this during the next refresh but there is a project deadline and I need
to create and get approved updated retentions before we can actually
start scheduling reviews and destruction. 

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]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2