RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Blake Richardson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 12 Oct 2011 08:45:22 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (75 lines)
Good morning Sarah; my staff and I have also been going through a major
retention schedule overhaul, addressing some of the same issues.  In our
case we remove the record series from the schedule and "defunct" the
record series in our physical records management application.  Our
defunct mechanism still allows the retention of the boxes to be managed,
but no new boxes can be classified using the code.

Thanks
Blake

-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Sarah Wagner
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 5:36 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Obsolete Records in Retention Schedule

Hello Everyone!

I have been working on a project since May of moving from over 250
departmental retention schedules over to one corporate-wide functional
records retention schedule. A large part of this project, which will be
key
in implementation is the cross references/crosswalks. In comparing
current
schedules to what we have stored in our records management system for
box
storage, I have noticed that there are some retention numbers/record
types
that are no longer included in the current schedules, but are in the RIM
system for those boxes living out their life (although some are
permanent).
When certain records are no longer created and stored, but there are
boxes
stored, how do you address this? Do you still have them incorporated in
your
box storage system, and if so, do you still include it in your schedule,
or
do you remove it? I'm just trying to figure out the best way to address
this, especially since some of these will be retained permanently, and I
feel they should still be incorporated into the retention schedule, even
though new records for this category are no longer retained.

I would appreciate any feedback, experiences, suggestions, etc. I would
also
love to hear about any experiences you have had in creating and
converting
to a functional retention schedule for those of you that have!

Thank you,

Sarah Wagner
[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]


"Email Firewall" made the following annotations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Warning: 
All e-mail sent to this address will be received by the corporate e-mail system, and is subject to archival and review by someone other than the recipient.  This e-mail may contain proprietary information and is intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s).  If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient(s), you are notified that you have received this message in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately.   
 
 =============================================================================

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