Meeting with Del. Cox Today on HB 1791

Thank you for responding to this issue so promptly. Are the following changes you suggested to be made to HB1791 prior to its introduction or will an amended bill be introduced, and, if so, when?

<3. The change in section 42.1-86-1 appears to imply that the records can’t be destroyed until the Certificate of Records Destruction has been sent to the Library of Virginia. ... I would be happy to rewrite of part (ii) of 42.1-86.1 to clarify that the completed, signed, original form merely has to be filed with the Library of Virginia upon destruction of the records.>

I am glad that the implication was not the intent. Unfortunately, statutes rarely explain intent and are viewed as legally binding requirements. Your suggested wording would, indeed, clarify the requirement and remove the adverse implication.

<4. 42.1-82, paragraph 3 - removing administrative, legal, fiscal, or historical considerations for retention values... . ...The Library of Virginia has no objection if the terms administrative, legal and fiscal are retained in 42.1-82 (3). We always have and always will follow those basic principles in the development of records retention and disposition schedules.>

I endorse this suggestion and am pleased that the wording will be restored and the basic principles of RIM supported by the law. It will help prevent unnecessary confusion and burdensome expense on the part of agencies and localities. It follows, of course, that using the terms in the body of the Act will require the definitions of administrative value, legal value, fiscal value, and historical value also to be retained in the Act.

First I want to thank everyone for their consideration and commentary on this legislation. The reworking of the Virginia Public Records Act is a program that has been many years in the making. For all of us involved in the management of public records it is they key enabling legislation that helps us do our job. The original legislation was developed in the 1970s and does need updating. I would like to discuss with you some of the comments that I've heard and let you know our thinking on them.

1. The definition of a public record - The intent here is to simplify the definition of a public records while still retaining the original intent. The primary change is to remove the laundry list of possible mediums the record could be recorded upon. By making clear that the determination of a record is independent of the medium the record is recorded upon we remove the need to modify the VPRA in the future should there be an unanticipated technological change. The change also places the definition closer to the definition in the ISO Standard 15489-1 Information and Documentation - Records Management Standard. The definition in the standard states that a record is "information created, received and maintained as evidence and information by an organization or person, in pursuance of legal obligations or in the transaction of business".

2. The removal of the first paragraph in section 42.1-83 will put the security microfilm storage vault in jeopardy. The first paragraph deals with the obligation of the Library of Virginia to have a microfilm program for counties, cities and towns. This program was a victim of the budget cuts several years ago and unless the Library is the beneficiary of a substantial budget increase one we are unable to resurrect in the future. The last sentence of the next paragraph states that "Microfilm shall be stored in the Library of Virginia...". Further in section 42.1-86 states in the second to last section that "Security copies shall be preserved in the place and manner prescribed by the State Library Board..." The deletion of the first paragraph in no way diminishes the place of the Microfilm Security Vault nor does it diminish the commitment of the Library of Virginia to the preservation of security copies of permanent microfilm. In fact we are looking at ways in which we can extend the security vault concept to permanent electronic records.

3. The change in section 42.1-86-1 appears to imply that the records can’t be destroyed until the Certificate of Records Destruction has been sent to the Library of Virginia. This section was rewritten to reflect the process that any public record must follow for legal disposition. Prior to this the process was not spelled out in the Act. There is no intent in this legislation to suggest that the Certificate of Records Destruction must have prior approval before destruction can take place. It does clarify and codify that the designated records officer must approve of said destruction. I would be happy to rewrite of part (ii) of 42.1-86.1 to clarify that the completed, signed, original form merely has to be filed with the Library of Virginia upon destruction of the records.

4. 42.1-82, paragraph 3 - removing administrative, legal, fiscal, or historical considerations for retention values and replacing them with only archival considerations implies the general schedules will be based solely on archival or historical need or value. In no way is this meant to imply that there is only one determinant, archival value, for the retention periods set for general or specific schedules. The Library of Virginia is responsible for the development and implementation of records retention and disposition schedules. These schedules have been and will continue to be developed and approved along records management principles. The administrative, fiscal and legal values are always considered in the development of a records retention and disposition schedule. The Library of Virginia has no objection if the terms administrative, legal and fiscal are retained in 42.1-82 (3). We always have and always will follow those basic principles in the development of records retention and disposition schedules.

The Library of Virginia has worked very hard to make sure that there is significant input from the records users in the general records retention schedules that we develop. We invite public comment and encourage focus groups to advise us on users concerns. The Public School Records Consortium is one such group and we encourage the formation of others. I encourage all of you to participate in or lead such a group.

I hope this answers the major questions that have been presented. Certainly the work of updating the Virginia Public Records Act and the impact of electronic records upon it will go on. I invite those who are interested in joining a to be formed working group to develop these changes to let me know that you would be willing to do so.

Robert F. Nawrocki CRM

State Records Administrator

Library of Virginia

800 East Broad Street

Richmond, VA 23219

804.692.3505

Innovate and Infuriate

Lead, Follow or Get out of the Way.