-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Atle Skjekkeland
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 9:16 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] documenting destruction of electronic records
I have not been involved in this list before but here is my NOK 0.02...
The ERM standard MoReq in Europe says that the system must be able to
keep some of the metadata (but not copies) of destructed records in
requirements 5.3.15 and 5.3.16. You can download Moreq from
http://www.cornwell.co.uk/moreq.html
The UK National Archives spec TNA2002, which is very similar to MoReq,
uses the term "stub" (see e.g. vol. 1 requirement B.3.32, vol. 2 "Annex:
Metadata 'stub'". I think DOD5015.2 has a similar requirements but I
have not had time to check this.
Kind regards,
Atle Skjekkeland,
Vice President, AIIM International
Global Education Services
& Europe, Middle East and Africa
Tel US office: + 1 301 755 2657
Tel EU office: + 44 (0) 1905 727600
Mobile US : + 1 240 491 7498
Email: [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Brent Reid
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 10:02 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: documenting destruction of electronic records
I don't have the regs in front of me, so I can't say which ones for
sure,
but there are requirements in some regulations that say that an
organization
must retain copies of destruction reports.
I understand the point about a self perpetuating system, but usually 1
report will contain details regarding the destruction of thousands of
Records.
The processes that I most commonly design include workflow to send a
report
listing records that are candidates for destruction to all involved
parties.
Each party has XX days to respond to the report with an OK to destroy or
to
indicate a hold should be placed on certain Records. Then, the
Candidates
for destruction that have not had holds placed on them are destroyed and
the
reports with the involved parties' approvals for destruction are kept as
Records to cover the a$$es of the Records Managers.
It is important to record what was destroyed, when it was destroyed, who
approved the destruction and the method of destruction. (this may be an
incomplete list, as it is off the top of my head).
In the case of discovery, all this information is important and could be
relevant to a case. If all you can say to the judge is "The document
isn't
there, so it must have been destroyed according to its retention
schedule",
you could be facing fines and a prison sentence if you are the
responsible
party.
An Audit trail of a particular Record won't be sufficient to indicate
who
okayed the destruction. It tells What was done, and Who did it, but it
rarely contains information on who approved the destruction and I have
yet
to see an audit trail that includes any kind of signature, digital or
otherwise to indicate approval - which are present in Destruction
Reports.
My .02
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf
Of mwhaider
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 9:38 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: documenting destruction of electronic records
Hello Susan,
I agree with you. If electronic systems are configured correctly, the
audit
trails should be sufficient. I think we are coping with electronic
systems
that were not configured to provide this information - and more
importantly
were not configured to activate disposal based on the current records
retention schedule. So unfortunately we are often creating work arounds
until the technology catches up with established Records Management
practices.
ISO 14589-1 Section 9.10 Documenting Records Management Processes
"A record of disposition actions, once they have been carried out,
should be maintained."
Mary Hilliard
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
|
