I'm not sure whether others I responded in a similar manner as with the
following points....but I'll add this...

I would assume that you have a formal "process" for the disposition of
records which includes a "disposition" form for records disposal.  That
form therefore should include a signature area for the "most top ranking
position (manager, director, vp, etc.)" within that
"part/department/division" within your organization that wishes to
dispose of whatever records.  The form will indicate that person is
stating (by signature) there is no "litigation pending or imminent, or
no pending audits" that would include the records listed for
disposition.  That person would in most all circumstances be the one
person besides your legal department that would know this.  If not, then
your legal department should be required to sign off on that as well as
your auditing department.  And as well...the records manager should sign
off in an area on that form indicating that they have reviewed it and
that the records have met your required retention period.  

I'm in a "public" organization (public university) but I don't think
there would be any difference in the "review" process for records
disposition.  We're all guided by the same considerations...retention
period, pending legal actions, audit requirements, etc.  If you would
like to see the form we use at my organization goto www.uwf.edu/records
and look down the list of items on the left of the screen...and choose
"RECORDS DISPOSITION FORM."  It's a pdf file and will appear as such on
your screen.

Hope this helps answer your question...

Gus Harris
Records Manager
The University of West FL
Pensacola, FL


-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Diane Carlisle
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 3:56 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] Who gives final destruction approval in your company?

Perhaps a follow-up clarification is appropriate here --

I am mostly interested in the controls that are in place to fulfill the 
organization's responsibility to suspend the destruction of records 
affected by legal holds. Since this responsibility extends to holds that

are "reasonably anticipated" it seems to require a more active role from

the Legal Dept. Agree?

While the other points several have made are related, I am really
focused 
in on the ultimate responsibility to protect records from being
destroyed 
if they are the subject of a hold.

Thanks for the interest and postings thus far -- if I receive any
off-list 
posts, I will summarize for the list itself.... so far, there haven't
been 
any of those!

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]