Here's a link to the story Roy mentioned.
http://www.sltrib.com/ci_3907507?source=rss

Interesting.

Generally, in reading stories about NARA, despite all my knowledge (or 
because of it?), I waver between giving NARA the benefit of the doubt 
on issues and wondering what the heck really is going on.  Federal 
agencies coould be heavy handed in instances where NARA's own experts 
might assess balancing tests differently or better.  Or, then again, 
all the parties might act in sync.  I tend to hope someone in NARA is 
pushing to do the right thing.  But, ya never know.   In this case, 
there may have been legitimate reasons to restrict some items in the 
files the researcher was looking at.  Or not.  It's hard to tell, the 
account is murky.  Becasically, there's insufficient detail in this 
story for me to assess this properly.

But it is interesting, thanks for passing it on, Roy!

Maarja

________________________________________________________________________
Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email 
and IM. All on demand. Always Free.

A posting from the Archives & Archivists LISTSERV List sponsored by the Society of American Archivists, www.archivists.org.
For the terms of participation, please refer to http://www.archivists.org/listservs/arch_listserv_terms.asp.

To subscribe or unsubscribe, send e-mail to [log in to unmask]
      In body of message:  SUB ARCHIVES firstname lastname
                    *or*:  UNSUB ARCHIVES
To post a message, send e-mail to [log in to unmask]

Or to do *anything* (and enjoy doing it!), use the web interface at
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/archives.html

Problems?  Send e-mail to Robert F Schmidt <[log in to unmask]>