Jan Corbin said "when you consult with NARA they will tell you that making the electronic scanned versions the official record is not only acceptable but encouraged.  This has stood up in court time and again. The paper can become the convenience copy and would have a shorter retention life. Having just completed 2 years of scanning 20 years worth of records into an electronic format it is a chore but is saving us a lot of space and storage."

In my posting, I am making the distinction between admissibility into evidence in legal and regulatory proceedings of electronic records produced by scanning paper records, and PRESERVATION of the records for the very long term (since Wayne Hoff, in his inquiry, had stated these are PERMANENT records).

I have no doubt that, if correctly produced (an interesting discussion in itself), the scanned version of a paper document is admissible into evidence.

I have equally little doubt that, as I stated, the scanned version of a paper document is the worst possible choice for long-term preservation.

Finally, the cost of off-site storage of paper records is so low that it alone cannot justify the cost of conversion. Justification of conversion is normally based on advantages relating to ACCESS.

Best regards,

Fred
-----------------------------------------------------------
Frederic J. Grevin, Vice-President
Records Management Department
New York City Economic Development Corporation • www.nycedc.com
[log in to unmask] • w. 212.312.3903 • mobile 917.510.3016 • f. 212.618.5722

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]