Rebecca

I've twice in the last ten years approved the destruction of 20 - 30 boxes
of unlisted, unexamined, unsentenced documents on the grounds that the
health risk was significant and required special handling which could not be
justified given the low probability that the documents were records or that
any of them were still current records. The boxes had not been opened for 30
- 60 years and interviews with staff from the area, and examination of the
labels visible (from afar) on the boxes showed they probably contained
nothing archival. In each case I wrote a half page summary as a destruction
record, along the lines I've just explained, and signed it in all my
official glory as corporate records manager, degrees, qualifications,
professional memberships etc.

I didn't ask any lawyers, and I didn't check with State Records. I did what
I regarded as adequate due diligence, and I hope what I did would be
regarded by any court as prudent and reasonable. When you have a pile of old
boxes which cause you to start coughing when you are 15 metres away, health
and safety rate far higher than records preservation.

So that's the message - due diligence, balancing cost, risk and benefits.
Shred the lot!

Glenn

Glenn Sanders MRMA
[log in to unmask]
Australia

These views are mine alone. They may or may not be those of any
previous or present employers or clients. I don't know. If I'd asked
and they'd agreed, I would have signed it "Harry Peck and Co and
Glenn". Or whatever. But I haven't, so I didn't.

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance