1. ACERA Briefing on FRA IPT 04/06/2011 Mark Giguere, Lead IT (Policy & Planning) Paul Wester, Chief Records Officer

2. Why We Did This? OMB Tech Stat

3. What Was Authorized by AOTUS? Convene working group and identify areas for statutory revision – August 1, 2010 Deliver final work breakdown structure for evaluation activities – August 15, 2010 Open up wiki to participants delineated in ‘Other Participating NARA Offices’ for revision suggestions and ranking – August 31, 2010 Shut down wiki/Begin analysis of comments – September 15, 2010 De-brief NRMC on wiki results – September 30, 2010 Complete review of wiki comments – October 15, 2010 De-brief N/ND on comments – October 31, 2010 Provide draft final report to N/ND for comment – November 15, 2010 Comment adjudication of N/ND comments – December 1, 2010 Clear final report with N/ND – Dec 15, 2010 Transmit to OMB – December 31, 2010

4. Who Was On the FRA IPT IPT Management Sponsor: Paul Wester IPT Lead: Mark Giguere IPT Members: – Jason Baron, NGC (Office of General Counsel) – Laurence Brewer, NWML (Scheduling & Appraisal) – Matt Eidson, NR (Regional Records Services) – Laura McCarthy, NPOL (Archivist’s Office – Policy) – Shawn Morton, NCON (Congressional Relations) – Scott Roley, NRI (Regional Records Services)

5. Who Was Asked to Input Suggestions? FRA IPT Members National Records Management Program NARA RM Council Select individuals (per Charter) – Cummings (Acting Head Reference Services) – Phillips (E-rec Lifecycle Coordinator) – Sullivan (NARA Records Officer)

6. What High-Level Decisions Were Made Based on Input Received? Regulatory changes would not be included in the evaluation, until such later time as OMB reacted to statutory revision proposals No statutory changes were needed to enable TechStat Objective 3 – Provide for mandatory use of ERA Office of General Counsel determined that AOTUS already has sufficient authority to require such.

7. What Changes Were Suggested to OMB Proposal #1 – Modernizing the definition of a record Where? – Title 44 §3301 What is proposed? – Generalizing the definition of a record from an enumeration (i.e., “books, papers, maps, photographs, machine-readable records…”) to “recorded information” Why? – To acknowledge e-records are composed of data – To more accurately reflect agencies’ creation & use of e-records

8. What Changes Were Suggested to OMB Proposal #2 – Providing AOTUS with clear authority to define records Where? – Title 44 §3301 (b) What is proposed? – Making binding on all agencies the Archivist’s determination Why? – Subsequent OLC [DoJ] opinion ratifying the Government’s position in Kissinger v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press 445 U.S. 136 (1980)

9. What Changes Were Suggested to OMB Proposal #3 – Providing AOTUS with clear authority to require digital preservation of e-records Where? – Title 44 §2904 & 2901 What is proposed? – Amended versions of ECPA (HR 5811) and EMPA (HR 1387) language Why? – E-management & preservation of e-records is more efficient, provides for enhanced sustainability & are more easily transferred to NARA (pre-accessioning) into ERA

10. What Changes Were Suggested to OMB Proposal #4 – Elimination of the 30-year presumption on transfer of permanent records & provide an enforcement mechanism for NARA’s pre-accessioning policy Where? – Title 44 §2107 What is proposed? – Eliminate “in existence for more than 30 years” language and allow AOTUS to enforce pre-accessioning on a case- by-case basis Why? – Agencies inappropriately interpret “…30 years…” language as a lower limit – Clarifies AOTUS’s ability to enforce pre-accessioning while clarifying agencies’ on-going responsibility for mediating access to pre-accessioned records

11. What Changes Were Suggested to OMB Proposal #5 – Clarification of Archivist’s sole authority in the area of records management Where? – Title 44 §2904 What is proposed? – Eliminate multiple references to the Administrator of GSA Why? – Because it is important to coalesce Federal RM responsibilities under a single position… AOTUS

12. Where Are We Now? Final draft report transmitted to OMB – December 30, 2010 Currently still pending under OMB review Unable to share widely with ACERA at request of OMB – Pre-decisional information