Overview
Title
Records Schedules; Availability and Request for Comments
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The National Archives wants to get rid of old papers and is asking for permission. People can look at the plans online and tell the Archives what they think about keeping or throwing away the papers.
Summary AI
The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) has released a notice about federal agencies requesting permission to dispose of records they no longer need. These proposals, known as records schedules, are published in the Federal Register and on regulations.gov, where the public is invited to comment on them. The notice includes directions on how to access these records schedules and submit feedback. After considering public comments, the Archivist of the United States will approve final decisions on these records, which may involve preserving important records or authorizing the destruction of those without lasting value.
Abstract
The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) publishes notice of certain Federal agency requests for records disposition authority (records schedules). We publish notice in the Federal Register and on regulations.gov for records schedules in which agencies propose to dispose of records they no longer need to conduct agency business. We invite public comments on such records schedules.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
Overview of the Document
The document in question is a notice from the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), published in the Federal Register. It informs the public about requests from various federal agencies to dispose of records they deem no longer necessary for conducting agency business. These requests are known as "records schedules." NARA is encouraging public feedback on these proposals, which can be accessed via regulations.gov. This public involvement is essential as it influences the decision on whether certain records should be destroyed or preserved for historical, administrative, or legal reasons.
Key Issues and Concerns
One of the initial challenges with the document is the jargon-heavy language. Terms such as "records disposition authority" and "records schedules" may not be immediately clear to everyone. This could lead to confusion, especially among individuals unfamiliar with federal administrative procedures. Moreover, the instructions for accessing the schedules and providing comments involve navigating complex online platforms like regulations.gov. This might be particularly daunting for people who are not accustomed to using such governmental websites or those with limited internet access.
Furthermore, while the document directs readers to external websites for detailed information on the records schedules, this additional step could be cumbersome. Individuals with limited internet access might find it difficult to engage fully. Additionally, critical details about what each record schedule contains are not presented in the notice, leaving those interested in specifics to seek out this information independently.
Implications for the Public
For the broader public, the process is an opportunity to engage in the management of federal records. It ensures that an agency’s decision to dispose of records does not overlook information of potential significance to historical, research, or public understanding. However, the complexity involved in submitting comments could deter public participation. The notice does not fully explain the impact of these records' disposal or preservation. For instance, records identified for disposal might contain data of historical value, impacting researchers and historians.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For specific stakeholders, such as historians, researchers, and legal professionals, the document's outcomes are significant. If valuable records are destroyed without adequate public oversight, it could hinder historical research or legal inquiries. Conversely, the preservation of significant records can enrich understanding of federal governmental processes and decisions.
On the other hand, federal agencies could benefit from the streamlined record-keeping and reduced storage costs if they can dispose of unnecessary records. However, they too may face complications from public scrutiny and the need to justify their proposals comprehensively.
Conclusion
Overall, while this document serves an essential function in the management of federal records, its accessibility issues—in terms of language and process—pose barriers to public engagement. Improved clarity and ease of access could enhance participation, ensuring that records schedules fully reflect public interest and historical significance. The process must balance the need for efficient record management with the potential long-term value these documents hold for society.
Issues
• The document assumes familiarity with terms such as 'records disposition authority' and 'records schedules', which might not be immediately clear to all readers.
• The process for submitting comments might be complex for individuals not familiar with federal rulemaking procedures, especially those not accustomed to using regulations.gov.
• Details about the exact contents of the records schedules are not included in the notice, requiring readers to visit an external website, which might be cumbersome for those without easy internet access.
• The notice includes several long URLs and instruction sets that could be confusing or difficult to follow for some stakeholders.
• The potential implications of records being designated for disposal versus preservation are not fully explained, which may be important for understanding the impact of the schedules.
• The language is formal and bureaucratic, potentially making it less accessible to a general audience with little experience in government documentation and procedures.
• Method for commenting by email requires knowledge of 'control number', which is only found at the end of the notice, potentially complicating the commenting process.