I hate paper.   I have no issue with output to film for information with
a true "Permanent" retention policy.  If there is any anticipated
reference (semi-active or even inactive status) to the info I would
retain the electronic copy in your system.  That would also meet a
redundancy criteria if the record series is considered Vital and/or
Historic.  (pension; benefits; corporate minutes, etc.)

Did I forget to mention that I hate paper? 

Best regards, Steve
Steven D. Whitaker, CRM
Records Systems Manager; City of Reno

>>> [log in to unmask] 4/3/2009 11:59 AM >>>

<snip>
If you really have to keep the records "permanently" (but do you
REALLY?), stick with microfilm--but make sure you "do it right" all
along the line.

An alternative to microfilm is permanent-record paper (ref. ANSI/NISO
Z39.48 "Permanence of Paper for Publications and Documents in Libraries
and Archives" and National Information Standards Organization - TR01
"Environmental Guidelines for the Storage of Paper Records"). (Sorry,
Steve Whitaker*this is where paper beats out bits).

Best regards.

Fred
===================================================================
Frederic J. Grevin
Deputy Commissioner and Chief Information Officer
The City of New York,
Department of Records
Email: [log in to unmask] 
Land phone: 212.788.8615
Cell phone: 347.436.5360
Fax:  212.788.8614
www.nyc.gov/records 
31 Chambers Street
New York, NY 10007
USA

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]