|
|
Enron Mail |
Does this fit our understanding of the policies? DF
---------------------- Forwarded by Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron on 09/05/2000 01:21 PM --------------------------- Dorothy McCoppin 09/05/2000 12:18 PM To: Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON cc: Michael Moran/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Louis Soldano/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kathy Ringblom/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Britt Davis/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: Document Retention On Conoco, I would think athat drafts of the settlement agreement -- to the extent there could be future disagreement over what was done/meant, etc. might be important. Otherwise, with agreements that are terminated/expired, the retention policy is to retain them for 10 years (last time I saw a retention policy on contracts, that is; also, the reson behind the 10 years was that, although the gen'l stat. of limit. in Texas was 4 years, the stat. of limit, in Nebraska was, I think, 6 years, and then some additional time was thought to be appropriate). For copies of contracts, no retention period is required, as I recall. Since you had outside counsel, they will likely retain all the documents from the case itself. --Dot From: Drew Fossum 09/01/2000 11:08 AM To: Michael Moran/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dorothy McCoppin/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Louis Soldano/ET&S/Enron@ENRON cc: Kathy Ringblom/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Britt Davis/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Document Retention We are now addressing the distasteful task of sorting through the mountain of files accumulated during the Conoco litigation. Kathy is taking the lead on reviewing our document retention policies and advising Britt and I of what she thinks we can destroy and what we need to keep. In some instances, the appropriate approach is not entirely clear. Have you folks run across any "document retention policy specialists" that she ought to talk to? We have a fairly detailed policy applicable to "Interstate Law" (which I guess means GPG law--the policy document is fairly old) but I'm less clear on what authority or right Legal has to enforce the doc. retention policy as to other groups. Rod Hayslett suggested during Conoco that it would be good if Legal followed up now and then and made sure that pack rats were following the policy. His comment arose from a little situation in which we were served with requests for "3 year plans" and Rod was displeased to learn that some folks had kept old plans from 10 years ago. He (and I suspect all of us) would be happier if that didn't happen again. Any thoughts? Thanks. DF
|