REPORT ON RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ARCHIVING ELECTRONIC RECORDS

AT BOWDOIN COLLEGE

Submitted to the Information Technology Committee
by Richard Lindemann, Director of Special Collections & Archives,
February 13, 2001

• Executive Summary
• Report
  • The Imperative
  • The Problem
  • The Challenge
  • National Trends
  • Current Approaches
  • Recommendation
• Appendixes

REPORT ON RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ARCHIVING
ELECTRONIC RECORDS AT BOWDOIN COLLEGE

Submitted to the Information Technology Committee
by Richard Lindemann, Director of Special Collections & Archives, February 13, 2001

The Imperative:

The College Archives has a mandate from the Board of Trustees to provide records management services for the creators of College records and to ensure appropriate selection, preservation and perpetual access for information deemed to be of enduring administrative, fiscal, legal, or historical value. This imperative has recently become more complex in considering electronic records: the storage media for e-records have short life spans, and electronic data are inherently subject to corruption, to problems in access, and to functional obsolescence.

On June 10, 1994, the Executive Committee of the Governing Boards authorized the establishment of the Bowdoin College Archives “… in recognition of the need to preserve official college records, files, and documents of permanent value” (for the full text, please see Appendix I). Since then, the College Archives has developed a comprehensive records management and archival program to serve both the daily and long-term record-keeping needs of the College community. Those records have typically appeared largely on paper, magnetic tape or photographic emulsions.

Currently, the increasing use of email, the broad reliance on computing applications, and a general shift towards electronic methods of communication and records creation reveal a fundamental shift in how the College conducts business and how we document our transactions and activities. Managing and retaining these electronic records, especially compared to paper-based documents and analog recordings, is highly problematic: the storage media for e-records have short life spans, and electronic data are inherently subject to corruption, to problems in access, and to functional obsolescence.

The issue of archiving electronic records is complex, and the administrative and technical challenges in managing information fixed in electronic formats raises new challenges for which even the national community of professional archivists offers no easy answers. Locally, there is College-wide recognition that electronic data are in jeopardy of being lost. Meanwhile, legal and cultural imperatives require us to preserve and provide access to the information contained in all of our Archival materials irrespective of format, and we are obliged to demonstrate our faithful stewardship of electronic records in the context of “customary business practices.” The technical complexities of electronic data storage and access demand collaborative approaches and creative solutions. Every day of delay represents electronic data at risk.

While electronic records possess certain characteristics that place peculiar demands on their management and long-term retention, industry standards and “best practices” for archiving e-records remain ill-defined. Consequently, the recommendation offered here does not intend to solve the many problems associated with archiving electronic records. Instead, I recommend that the College establish a small group of individuals from some of the College offices more intimately involved in the creation and use of electronic data, including the Archives, ETC, CIS, and Communications, to collaborate in meeting short-term needs and planning long-term strategies for managing and, when appropriate, archiving information recorded in electronic format.

The Problem:

The burgeoning growth of College information recorded electronically places new demands on the College Archives to insure that key data are not lost. Those demands are intense because electronic records possess inherent physical characteristics, like impermanence and corruptibility, that require peculiar practices for their management, and because, for some electronic records, the College no longer creates paper-based equivalents.

Consider these issues that currently face the College and challenge the Archives:

Ÿ         CIS grapples daily with ongoing issues like providing for the security and integrity of data that are under the stewardship of a particular individual or unit, and they and other offices on campus are constantly confronted with how to archive (not backup, but provide permanent retention and access) e-records authentically. Their staff recognize the value of collaborating with the Archives in determining which data demand archival retention and how best to maintain the ongoing functionality of long-lived information systems. Related deliberations by the Information Security Policy Group [Infosec] have demonstrated how important and productive such collaborations can be and suggest the necessity College-wide for a clear, common understanding about: what data constitute “College records;” who has stewardship over particular sets of data; who should insure that electronic records of enduring value are identified and scheduled for retention; where should archived e-records be stored; who should be responsible for devising automated strategies that address: 1) the long-term integrity of this information, and 2) the continual functionality of and access/restriction to these data. For paper records, access and restrictions are administered effectively through central storage in the Library—decentralized electronic storage is a different but practical model that raises special concerns especially about sensitive, restricted information.

Ÿ         Current changes in scholarship, teaching and learning are marked by a profound increase in the use of and reliance on electronic media. Thus, for example, although the Archives has always been successful in retaining honors projects, course syllabi, and published results of faculty research that are recorded on paper, the electronic equivalents of these fundamental scholastic documents—especially online works—are more elusive and defy traditional means of preservation and access over the long term.

Ÿ         For many of the projects in ETC, functionality shares a level of importance with content. The fluid linking in most Web-based products and the scattered nature of Internet resource locations complicate the prospects for reliable long-term retention of online works fundamentally. Additionally, the question of “manifestation”—how a Web-based product may appear to a specific user, or how a version may morph through interactivity—extends the consideration of long-term storage of electronic records to a numbing “virtual” dimension and begs the basic question of which version serves as the “official record.”

Ÿ         The Communications Office has adopted practices that produce works without necessarily retaining that information in a “fixed record.” College Web pages generally are composed and revised online without archival record either of composition or revision. News releases and obituaries are typically composed and delivered electronically (mainly by email, which is the preference of most publishers and news agencies), and although email is technically “fixed,” there are no procedures in place to archive those records selectively, systematically or regularly, either electronically or by printing—employees rely instead on local storage devices, usually computer hard-drives, and system-wide backup protocols. Similarly, digital cameras, especially for sports reporting and publicity, have replaced analog photography, and these digital images are rarely retained—a digital equivalent of contact sheets, for example, simply does not survive under current practice.

Discussions with various department heads throughout the College about archiving electronic records echo campus-wide concern about this problematic issue, and they reveal the necessity and difficulty for the College in addressing requirements for the storage of and access to e-records of enduring value. The technological complexities associated with those requirements, and the related policy issues that will arise, argue strongly for considering these matters collaboratively and with a clear mandate from Senior Staff.

The Challenge:

The College Archives must identify and implement ways to archive those electronic records of enduring value that document the transactions and activities of the College. Despite the fact that the development (both nationally and at Bowdoin) of established standards, “best practices” and other management tools for electronic records lags behind the pace at which e-records are created, to delay in addressing electronic records management raises the risk of losing legal, fiscal, administrative and historical information that is important to the College. Bowdoin College must devise practices and policies for e-records management despite the lack of national standards or proven program models, and we all must become more acutely responsible not just for conducting the College’s business well, but also for providing a complete and accurate historical record of the College’s achievements and transactions.

Experts acknowledge that the creation and use of electronic information far outstrip our technological abilities to retain and provide access to these data over the long term. Meanwhile, the courts have recognized the evidentiary value of electronic records, and federal and state regulations acknowledge their validity. Like all organizations, Bowdoin College is obliged to consider our electronic records in the context of customary business practice and to demonstrate that we administer these records consistently just as we do the more conventional paper-based files that document our activities and transactions. Without clear policies and consistent practices concerning our management of electronic records (both the mundane, like email, and the vital, like transcripts and financial accounts), we place the College at risk both operationally and legally.

Generally considered, the fundamental principles about records management—which may be defined as the systematic control of the creation, use, retention, storage, protection, preservation, and final disposition of recorded information—apply to information “fixed” (i.e. retained) electronically just as they do for paper-based records. For Bowdoin College, a “record” is defined as: “… all recorded information and data, regardless of physical form or characteristics, that are created or received in the course of official College business and that document the administrative transactions and activities of any College office or employee, including those by or with teaching faculty and students in the performance of their official administrative College obligations …” [Bowdoin College Archives & Records Management Collection Policy (please see Appendix II)].

Some electronic data are records and some are not. When identified or defined as records, these have a life cycle based on institutional need and value; they provide documentary evidence about the College, both cultural and historical; they reflect our customary business practices; they require custodial care and deliberate procedures to insure their integrity, authenticity, preservation, and perpetual access. As is the case with paper records, considerations such as audits and legal requisites, frequency of use, and historical value apply when appraising electronic records for retention or destruction, and those of enduring value are designated as “archival.”

Unlike paper records, however, or microfilm for that matter, electronic records possess certain characteristics that place peculiar demands on their management. Consider permanence, for instance: good quality paper will last 500 years or more; archival microfilm has a life of 200 years; aging tests for optical disks suggest a typical life of 2-5 years for “generic vendors,” with a potential life of perhaps 30-50 years for a few “best vendor” products. Moreover, unlike paper and microfilm, digital storage media do not reveal approaching failure or data loss, which introduces added uncertainty to archiving electronic records.

Besides the problem of impermanence, the corruptible nature of storage media for electronic data, the evolving development (and devolving obsolescence) of computing software and hardware design, the relational complexities that characterize computer databases and Web-based applications, and the potential for broad and remote access to electronic information all require special consideration and a wide range of expertise for effective electronic records management.

National Trends and Their Implications for Bowdoin College:

National trends provide no quick fix for the challenges in managing electronic records. National standards in particular remain in flux, and most systematic approaches to e-record management are in developmental stages. Consequently, the Bowdoin College Archives has been generally reluctant to embrace unproven technology despite our profound awareness of the trend to create College records in electronic form without paper surrogate and despite the potential for loss of valuable data if we wait too long to implement systematic archival strategies to preserve electronic records.

Leaders in archival practice, such as the National Archives and Records Administration [NARA] and numerous state libraries and archives, have only recently and gradually begun to explore issues surrounding the management and archival retention of electronic records [Cal Lee, a nationally recognized expert on archiving electronic records, has constructed a portal to most of the pertinent Web sites for governmental and academic electronic records management programs: http://www-personal.si.umich.edu/~calz/ermlinks/ ]. NARA’s General Records Schedule 20 [GRS 20], first introduced in 1995, for example, has been under the cloud of court challenges until just last spring (March 2000).

Likewise, automated Records Management Application [RMA] software products remain in nascent stages of development despite standards promulgated by the Department of Defense [DoD 5015.2-STD] in 1997; most of these automated systems presently are found in the private sector and facilitate scheduling and disposing of electronic records rather than retaining them over the long term. Meanwhile OCLC, the preeminent national library cooperative, includes in its coming three-year plan a proposal to offer “OCLC Content Management Services” for preserving and digitizing research resources, including unique content of participating libraries, and this may in the future afford institutions such as Bowdoin with warehousing services and tools, for its archival electronic records at least, at a scale economically more attractive than local development might cost.

Within the college and university community, virtually no individual institution has implemented a comprehensive electronic records management program that incorporates systematic, automated management of electronic files. Nationwide, only Indiana University has undertaken wholesale deliberate planning and experimentation (with grant support from NHPRC; see: http://www.indiana.edu/~libarch/ER/index.html ), and despite years of planning and study, defined procedures and functional implementation at that institution are only incompletely established. Electronic records management work at IU to date, nevertheless, offers potential for modeling, and a careful analysis of their project will be of benefit to us as we undertake our own work.

Similarly, the list of forthcoming National Historic Publications and Records Commission [NHPRC] grants for electronic records projects (Appendix III—an NHPRC grant funded the establishment of the Bowdoin College Archives in the mid-1990s) echoes this nation-wide condition, where universities and historical societies are just beginning to consider “best practices” and how to apply them in order to provide for continual access to and long-term preservation of electronic records. Indeed, the profound dearth of uniform standards for long-term storage and access to electronic data has conspired with a lack of institutional experience to make archiving electronic records particularly challenging. Even such basic specifications as those for the reliability and longevity of storage media beg definition (authoritative projections for “archival CD-R” [compact disc read-only] storage, for example, range from 10-100 years, and some practitioners with much data at risk on this medium confess to refreshing their data every three years). Meanwhile, metadata standards, intended to provide uniform internally coded “information-about-information” in electronic records, are in nascent and competing states of development, and approaches to capturing the functionality of obsolete software applications (e.g., XML encapsulation studies currently under way at the San Diego Supercomputer Center) remain highly experimental.

The result, for Bowdoin College Archives, has been a general reluctance to embrace unproven technology despite our profound awareness both of the trend to create College records in electronic form without paper surrogate and of the potential for loss of valuable data if we wait too long to implement systematic archival strategies to preserve electronic records.

Current Approaches in the Bowdoin College Archives:

Electronic records are addressed in the Bowdoin College Archives formal collection policy, and Archives staff continue to visit offices and to schedule records, including electronic records, for their appropriate retention period. For the relatively few electronic data in the Archives, a variety of interim preservation strategies are in place to insure the longevity, authenticity and functionality of information contained in electronic format.

To date, the College Archives has defined “College record” and insinuated electronic records into its collection policy (please see Appendix II). That plan represents a basis for developing e-records management practices and for establishing future electronic records policy. Over the past 18 months, the Archives has also reviewed and scheduled electronic records in several offices (e.g., Human Resources; Admissions), and similar appraisal and scheduling is ongoing in other offices. Regardless of the long-term effects of future planning, the Archives will continue this office-by-office appraisal and scheduling of records, including electronic records, as regularly as time allows. This task will remain essential in any imagined system specific to e-records that may develop, particularly in fostering awareness about the need to retain e-records.

In some instances (e.g. Board Minutes), the Archives has adopted a hybrid approach, receiving both electronic and paper versions of a record; we retain the paper version as the “archival” copy and employ the electronic version for “search/retrieval” purposes only. Clearly this approach begs the question for electronic records that have no paper surrogate and for which no paper version is possible (relational databases and interactive media, for example).

Recommendation:

The IT Committee should establish a small group of individuals from some of the College offices more intimately involved in the creation and use of electronic data, including the Archives, ETC, CIS, and Communications, to collaborate in meeting short-term needs and planning long-term strategies for managing and, when appropriate, archiving information recorded in electronic format.

The Bowdoin College community appreciates the distinguished historical legacy of the institution, but more must be done to educate Senior Staff, administrative and support staff, faculty, and students about the importance of preserving its vital and historical records. We all must become more acutely responsible not just for conducting the College’s business well, but also for providing a complete and accurate historical record of the College’s achievements and transactions. Doing less compromises the Governing Boards’ directive to maintain an archival record of the College, and it may place the College in jeopardy concerning its obligations towards the legal and vital records under its stewardship.

Partnership among College IT specialists, records creators and managers, and archivists in Special Collections & Archives offers the best promise for establishing a tenable, effective, long-range approach to the preservation of and access to electronic College records. I urge the IT Committee to consider this report with that goal in mind, and I offer the following recommendation as an action plan:

Appoint a small group of individuals from some of the College offices more intimately involved in the creation and use of electronic data, including the Archives, ETC, CIS, and Communications, to collaborate in meeting short-term needs and planning long-term strategies for managing and, when appropriate, archiving information recorded in electronic format.

This working group should consult with the broader College constituency, particularly officers engaged in business and finance, student records, development, human relations, and academic affairs, when appropriate and as its work progresses. The group should:

Ÿ         Advise the College Archives in its process of identifying and establishing retention schedules for electronic records.

Ÿ         Draft policy and procedural recommendations for electronic records retention, access and preservation in local and in networked environments.

Ÿ         Identify, plan and participate in implementing technological applications for electronic records retention, access and preservation, both in systems design and in automated archiving of designated electronic records.

In considering its charge, the group should address these questions:

Ÿ         What are the advantages and disadvantages of shared responsibility for the maintenance of electronic records?

Ÿ         Should Bowdoin College adopt “turn-key” ARM software?

Ÿ         Should the College explore collaborative agreements (e.g., CBB) with other institutions to address such mutual needs as data warehousing or systems design?

Ÿ         What would the consequences be if the College delays action for 3-5 years while relevant “best practices,” proven technological applications, and cooperative warehousing services emerge nationally?

Ÿ         Should the College adopt an electronic records management strategy that allows for reliable (probably decentralized) access and preservation of pertinent records for the short-term but delays implementation of long-term practices until electronic archival tools and systems are better developed?

Ÿ         Does the College have sufficient expertise to formulate a sound electronic records management strategy, or should it avail itself of consultants to assist us in our planning? [Such a consultant itinerary might include one day of College-wide educational opportunities for staff and officers—or for interested parties of CBB—and another day for consultation with the group, with the Archives and with CIS]

œ œ œ

In summary, archiving electronic records is both simple and complex. The simplicity lies in recognizing that these records represent information that is conceptually no different from that of other College records presently under the care of their creators or in the custody of the College Archives. The complexities involve both the storage media for electronic data, which are inherently unstable and short-lived, and the dynamic functional characteristics of data manipulation and interrelation, which are sometimes as important as the content. By understanding these attributes and pursuing collaborative approaches to electronic records management, the College can begin to address the significant challenges of archiving electronic records. Such a determined partnership among the College community is essential for the Archives to meet the challenges of electronic information and match the success it has enjoyed in managing and archiving the College’s paper-based records.

APPENDIX I

Bowdoin College Records Authority Statement

The Bowdoin College Archives is established by the Governing Boards in recognition of the need to preserve official college records, files, and documents of permanent value. All administrative officers of the college, and members of the teaching faculty whose performance of administrative duties, e.g., committee responsibilities, or chairs of academic departments, put them in possession of files, records, or documents concerning their official duties, are expected to observe the following guidelines:

1.       The records of the official activities of the college officers and offices, including papers and correspondence, official printed material, minutes, committee files, financial, and associated records in any format, are the property of Bowdoin College and constitute archival material.

2.       Archival material in college offices may not be destroyed or placed in storage without the approval of (a) the officer supervising the department where the records accumulate, and (b) the College Archivist.

3.       The officer in charge of the department where the records accumulate, or the officer in charge of the records of official committees, in consultation with the College Archivist, and in compliance with state and federal laws, will be responsible for deciding how long inactive papers are to be retained in and under direct control of the office, prior to disposition (i.e., destruction or transfer to the archives).

4.       Material selected for preservation shall be sent to the College Archives in accordance with a records schedule developed by the College Archivist, in consultation with the officer in charge of the department where the records accumulate and, when necessary, the Archives Advisory Group. All records preserved in the Archives remain the records of the office of origin and may be withdrawn at any time by that office for its own use.

5.       The College Archivist shall consult with appropriate administrative officers and the Archives Advisory Group regarding any special conditions of access which may be placed on any category of records. It is understood that in the absence of specific restrictions, all materials transferred to the Archives will be open to researchers on a non-discriminatory basis.

The College Archives welcomes the offer of privately owned material bearing on the history of the college, provided that the Archives incurs no obligation to retain such material as an integrated collection or in any prescribed form.

Approved by the Executive Committee of the Governing Boards, June 10, 1994.

APPENDIX II

Bowdoin College Archives & Records Management Collection Policy [rev. 02072001] 

This policy is based on the Bowdoin College “Records Authority Statement,” approved by the Executive Committee of the Governing Boards, June 10, 1994.

Selection:

The Bowdoin College Archives acquires, preserves, maintains, and provides access to those College records that possess enduring administrative, legal, fiscal, or historical value. The purpose for collecting such records is to provide a complete institutional record of the College and to document its activities, particularly: its history; its functions of teaching, learning and research; its socializing aspects; its role in the community (especially as a cultural agent); and, its place in American higher education.

The decision to preserve College records for administrative, legal and fiscal purposes is the responsibility of the appropriate College officer or administrator in consultation with the College Archives. The decision to acquire records of historic value is the responsibility of the College Archives.

The Archives welcomes offers of privately owned materials that bear on the history of the College and on the experiences of the College community. Faculty papers, letters and reminiscences of alumni/ae, reunion keepsakes, photographs, and related documents supplement and fortify the official College record, and the Archives is happy to receive such acquisitions provided their acceptance incurs no obligation to retain such material as a distinct collection or in any prescribed physical form.

Ownership and Retention:

All College records are the property of Bowdoin College and are subject to records retention schedules, which are determined by the officer in charge of the accumulated records in consultation with the College Archives. Retention periods and ultimate disposition for these records are based on legal, administrative and institutional considerations. None of these records may be destroyed or otherwise disposed of without the approval of both the official record holder and the College Archives. [“Records Authority Statement” (Exec.Comm. of the Governing Boards of Bowdoin College, June 10, 1994)]

All College records must be retained in a readable format. While records are in the custody of the office of origin, all requirements associated with records retention, such as maintenance of filing systems, storage and access, remain the responsibility of the official record holder. Records scheduled for permanent retention shall be managed in accordance with campus-wide practices and procedures under the direction of the College Archives and, with respect to electronic records, of Computing & Information Services [CIS]. Responsibility to read, to retrieve and to preserve information from inactive and Archival electronic records rests with the office of origin.

All College records preserved in the Archives remain the records of the office of origin and may be withdrawn at any time by that office for its own use. In the absence of specified restrictions, all records retained in the Archives will be available for research following the established guidelines of Special Collections & Archives.

Copyright in College records may rest with Bowdoin College or, in some cases, with the author of the work. Published use of College records beyond “fair use” as stipulated in U.S. copyright law (Title 17 U.S.Code) requires the express written permission of the copyright holder. Please consult the Bowdoin College Copyright Policy or Special Collections & Archives staff for further information.

Definitions:

College record: all recorded information and data, regardless of physical form or characteristics, that are created or received in the course of official College business and that document the administrative transactions and activities of any College office or employee, including those by or with teaching faculty and students in the performance of their official administrative College obligations, constitute College records and are the property of Bowdoin College. Examples include: official correspondence; committee minutes and reports; transcripts; grade books; student coursework and examinations; financial data; personnel and search committee files; College publications; recordings of official College events; policies; email and voicemail communications related to College business.

Personal record: all recorded information and data that are created or received independent of official administrative College business constitute personal records and are the property of the holder of those materials or data. Examples include: teaching materials; scholarly research; unsanctioned student publications; recordings of informal events; email and voicemail unrelated to College business.

Mixed records: recorded information and data that co-mingle “College records” with either personal records or official records of another institution or agency require defined custody to establish whether or not Bowdoin College shall claim stewardship over such mixed records. In any event, those portions of the mixed records that meet the definition of “College records” are subject to the information policies of Bowdoin College. Examples include: collaborative projects involving Bowdoin faculty and College administrative units; CBB consortial ventures.

Active records: records required for the ongoing business activities of the record holder; these records carry the potential for frequent and timely consultation.

Inactive records: records of administrative value but not essential to the ongoing business activities of the record holder; these records may carry auditing, legal or other stipulations that require their retention but only occasional consultation.

Archival records: records of enduring value to the College that are designated for permanent retention once their active or inactive cycle has passed. Archival records in most physical forms, including paper-based texts, photographs and magnetic media, are normally transferred to the custody of the College Archives for storage, preservation, access, and retrieval. Some electronic records may be designated as “Archival” and in the custodial control of the College Archives but may reside on storage devices outside the physical confines of College Archives facilities.

Copy of record: sometimes thought of as the “master copy,” a single copy of a document maintained by its office of origin or designated custodian that is designated as the official College record of a transaction or activity; all other copies are duplicate copies, held for convenience, and should be destroyed in the specified manner as soon as their usefulness has ended.

Office of origin: department, administrative unit or designated College officer responsible for the creation or ongoing custody of a College “copy of record” prior to its scheduled destruction or transfer to the Archives.

Records retention schedules: documents created by the Archives, in consultation with the appropriate College officer(s), that define particular groups of College records, indicate when those records become inactive, specify whether or not they should be transferred to the Archives for temporary or permanent storage and whether they are subject to general or confidential destruction, and stipulate what access restrictions apply to their use.

APPENDIX III

Grants: Electronic Records Projects

· Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ: A conditional two-year grant of $125,000 for its ECURE 2001/2002: Preservation and Access for Electronic Records of Higher Education Project to fund the planning and implementation of two conferences and two executive development seminars related to electronic records at colleges and universities.

· The Regents of the University of California: A conditional two-year grant of up to $90,000, on behalf of the University of California at Los Angeles for its Information Technology and Policy Curricula Project to identify educational needs in the area of electronic records management.

· The Trustees of Indiana University, Bloomington, IN: A conditional two-year grant of $94,642 for its Developing Instructional Programs in Electronic Records Management Project to develop and teach classes on electronic records management.

· The Global Industry Interagency Group, Woburn, MA: A conditional 15-month grant of up to $200,000 for its Good Electronic Recordkeeping Practices Project to pull together from the best available knowledge and practices Good Electronic Records Practices for the long-term preservation of and access to electronic records.

· Minnesota Historical Society, St. Paul, MN: A conditional two-year grant of $150,546 for its Educating Archivists and Their Constituencies Project to develop workshops on the eXtensible Markup Language (XML) and metadata as they apply to archival concerns about electronic records.

· State University of New York, University at Albany, Albany, NY: A 15-month grant of $355,392 in support of its Long-Term Preservation of Authentic Electronic Records Project, which supports the non-NARA elements of the U.S. research team taking part in the InterPARES Project.

· The Ohio Historical Society, Columbus, OH: A conditional three-year grant of up to $100,000 for its Developing Best Practice for a Semi-Custodial Electronic Records Repository Project.

· South Carolina Department of Archives and History, Columbia, SC: A conditional two-year grant of up to $37,460 for its Electronic Records Training and Awareness Program to develop and conduct six workshops on electronic records issues.