RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 3 May 2017 22:01:11 -0400
Reply-To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=UTF-8
From:
Steve Whitaker <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (82 lines)
Operational (reference need)
Fiscal (if any)
Regulatory (if any)
Legal (if any)
Historic (if any)
The retention will be the longest of the above researched and evaluated
retention factors.

A certificate of destruction..., if one still creates those to document the
destruction/deletion of records...., is like any other record.  The
retention policy for those should be developed in exactly the same way as
retention policy is developed for any other information.

Seems stupid to create a record to document the destruction of other
records.  If the history of retention policies is retained, as they should
be, I see absolutely no need to CREATE a dadgummed record to document the
destruction of other records!.  I stopped that practice at 4 organizations
in which I worked in RIM/IG.

I hate paper.


Best regards, Steve
Steven D. Whitaker, CRM, IGP


On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 9:24 PM, Jennie Dubin-Rhodin <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I would argue that it would make sense to keep them for a time equal to
> how long you retained the record. Unless there is a regulation I am
> unfamiliar with that gives a set period of time, this would seem logical,
> so as to avoid a bunch of Certificates floating around.  Also, that should
> be long enough if someone needed/wanted to see it, they could. Can’t see a
> reason someone would really need to see the Certificate fifty years after
> the records were destroyed.
>
> Have a nice night,
>
> Jennie Dubin-Rhodin, MLS
> > On May 3, 2017, at 9:07 PM, Earl Johnson <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Good evening,
> >
> > Just curious as to how long you are keeping Certificates of Destruction?
> > I've always thought of them as permanent records but am beginning to
> > rethink that.  I'm not sure they are even long-term records... I'm
> thinking
> > they're more like  7-10 year record.  For example, what business purpose
> > would a 25-year old Certificate of Destruction serve?
> >
> > As usual, any and all responses are appreciated.
> >
> > Thanks.
> > Earl
> > -------------------------
> > Earl Johnson, Jr., CRM
> > [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]
>

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]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2