Just to make sure someone makes this point. A retention schedule is of
course a living document so I've always considered boxing two series
together a risk because while the retention period might be the same,
throughout the length of the life, the retention periods of the two boxes
might become different because of legal requirements, legal considerations,
operational requirements or holds. Also, if you're only tracking records at
the box level then your system or software might only allow you to use one
retention code on the box. While you might be able to adapt a solution by
tricking the system, that's something that can get lost over the years
(after you win the lottery tomorrow and retire!).
This might not be an answer, but my company has a significant amount of
business with a box vendor and I had them make me a model for a half box.
It's exactly half the height of a 10x12x15 box with a regular size lid and
the size is perfect for our in-house records center shelves so we can place
two where one box is.
Also, as long as you aren't abusing the privilege of free boxes (we only do
this for records shipped in from stores), the medium size Fed Ex box is a
great size. You can fit three Fed Ex Medium boxes in the same space as one
10x12x15 box. If you needed to, you can also fit those three boxes inside a
10x12x15 box.
Just some thoughts.
Tom
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Graham Kitchen
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 6:44 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Multiple years of records in the same box?
I would say do not allow this.
The solution is to fill the box with records of another series, but ensure
the retention period is the same as the first group of records. In this
way, you will not have to go back to the box year after year to purge the
records that are to be disposed of in that year.
Kind of a convoluted answer, but I think you get the point.
Your first way was very labor intensive and you would end up storing part
boxes all over the storage area.
On 8/29/07, Kelly Hamilton <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Good afternoon all! I have searched through the archive back a couple of
> years, and I can't find anything related to this particular question.
>
> We have some smaller business units that want to box up their records.
> However, they don't have nearly enough of one type of record for a single
> year to fill a box, so they want to put multiple years' worth of a record
> series into the same box.
>
> Are there any other organizations that allow this practice? On one side,
> we're thinking that for some departments that would have a low risk of
> litigation, then it would be fine. The boxes would be destroyed according
> to the retention schedule, and would occur based on the date of the latest
> document in the box. However, on the other side, this could open
> Pandora's
> box, so to speak, unless we put some controls in place (should we decide
> to
> say 'yes' to this practice).
>
> Please let us know if you allow this practice, and what criteria/controls
> you give to your users.
>
> Thanks!!
>
> Kelly Hamilton
> Records Specialist
>
> Safeway
>
> 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]
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]
|
