It's the first time I've gotten applause. Nobody ever claps for me. Thank you, Alina. So good morning, everyone, and welcome to the first February bridge meeting in two years. So we always stress every year when we're planning our bridge calendar. It's like, well, we're going to plan for a February bridge, but with the weather, we don't know if it's going to happen. But you know what? This February, weather? Not so much. Not really a problem. So we're glad we're able to hold our February agency services bridge meeting. We've got some important things to talk about, some announcements, and then some fun in the afternoon with appraisal team one. OK, so first, some administrative announcements. So hopefully, for those of you in the room, you're able to join us for coffee and donuts outside in the hallway. Just want to remind you, if you didn't come early, it's nice to be able to chat, do some networking, catch up with folks. We have it from 9 to 10, right outside McGowan, just informal, get together. So plan a little bit earlier, come by, have some coffee, and join us before the next bridge in April. Also, I would like to just remind everyone that when we do get into the program and the Q&A part, a lot of agencies are joining us via the YouTube webcast. So we will have microphones on the aisle. For folks in the room, please wait for a microphone so that the people on the webcast can hear you. And then just please identify yourselves by name and agency. And the same goes for those of you who are chatting on YouTube or monitoring here up front. So if you have a question, send it in a chat and let us know who you are or where you're from and we'll make sure your question gets asked and answered. Also, as I noted, as always, at 1 o'clock today, we will have our meet and greet hosted by appraisal team 1. So appraisal team 1 staff are here, as are the FRC account managers. We'll also be joining you at 1 o'clock. It is in the Washington Room, which is upstairs. So please make plans, go out and have lunch, and then come back and meet with our staff there. So I have a couple of announcements before we get into the main program. I just wanted to let you know. It's been a while since we met. We had the holidays. We didn't have December Bridge. So a couple of things have happened. One, from the very small to the major, starting with the small one, scheduling changes, I just wanted to remind everyone that we did change the date of the June Bridge meeting. We had a scheduling conflict on our end, so please make a note that the June Bridge is not June 16th. It has been moved to June 23rd, June 23rd. Also, bigger news. I know some of you may ask and I'm sure all of you are busily working on the targets and the goals in OMB NARA M1921. And just wanted to let you know, since we have talked about it before and have made some promises or at least expressed intention on NARA's part to issue further guidance related to OMB NARA M1921. At this point, I don't have anything new to tell you about the documents that we are working on. They are still under review within NARA and we're still trying to push those things forward. So as soon as we have something to share, I can assure you, you will know. And in the meantime, I think there are still plenty that all of us can do as agencies, when you look at M1921 and sort of planning out what you need to do, what you need to accomplish and then consistent with paragraph 2.1 where it talks about exceptions to the requirements in M1921, you could still be working very comprehensively on the kinds of things that fall into those categories and getting it prepared for when we have our guidance ready, which will give you more details on what to do and how to develop communications to us related to that paragraph and if an exception is needed for any of those requirements. So I just encourage you to keep working on it, staying in contact with us and as soon as we have something further to communicate, you'll be the first to know. So some good news. In January, we kicked off the new agency records officer credential. So we issued a bulletin that basically said the AROC replaces the certificate of our records management training. It is targeted towards agency records officers and just wanted to let you know that in January we held our kickoff and our first course for agency records officers. We have 26 new AROs enrolled in the course from agencies such as DOD, Department of Labor, Interior and we have already awarded our first AROC credential to one records officer who took the test and passed and then received the credential. But everybody else decided to go through the course and we're excited to finish up the course and get some feedback so that we can continue to make improvements to the AROC curriculum as we move forward. For those of you who are records officers with a certificate of federal records management training, as it says in the bulletin, you are good for now, but we will be doing a refresher renewal three years from now and that's when we will be reaching out to all of you to get that agency records officer credential. So very exciting in how that program is rolling out in addition to the fact that our curriculum 2.0 our refresh of all the curriculum which is up on our website in the web catalog is now complete for all three levels of the curriculum. So I would encourage you to let staff know and use that curriculum within your own agencies to inform and train all employees about records management. Shifting gears a little bit, just a reminder, as I'm sure you're all well aware, we are right in the middle of the annual reporting period. So you should all hopefully have received your links to the templates and have within your possession the senior agency official for records management report template, the RMSA and the permanent records and email maturity model report. The deadline is, believe it or not, fast approaching March 13th. It's gonna be here sooner than we would actually, actually can't get here soon enough when you talk about March and hopefully we won't have any major snow storms in March this year. But March 13th is the deadline. So if you have any questions about the report or the template, I would encourage you to send emails to rmselfassessmentatnary.gov, we have staff standing by. The same folks you've probably been working with for many years now to answer any questions you have about the new templates and any of the questions that we have on the reports. So that is it for my announcements and we're gonna get to the program in a second but for now, I would like to turn things over to Jay Trainer, executive for agency services for a special announcement. Thank you, Lawrence. So as Lawrence said, I'm Jay Trainer, I'm the executive for agency services here at NARA. On any given day between 40 to 45% of NARA's staffing resources call agency services home and are working with the federal agencies on records management and other activities that includes one of our smallest components, the Office of Government Information Services, but we also have ISOO, the Information Security Oversight Office, the National Declassification Center and then the two programs that run bridge, the Office of the Chief Records Officer with Lawrence and the Federal Records Center Program under David Weinberg. And I'm here today to recognize David on the occasion of his retirement from federal service. And in typical David fashion, he has picked February of 2020, a leap year so that he can get one more day of federal service. So David has a 20 year run here at the National Archives. He came in at a very difficult time. It was a lot of opportunity, but also a lot of threats because 20 years ago is when the Federal Records Center Program that actually started in 1950 moved from an appropriated environment to a revolving fund environment. And the jury was out as to whether it would be successful or not, but I think we have answered that and we've answered that through David's leadership. I wanted to highlight at least three big areas that David has had a tremendous impact at the National Archives and for other federal agencies. One is the move to a revolving fund. It required a lot of changes in policy. It required a lot of changes in the mindset of the Federal Records Center Program. Prior to that it had been free for federal agencies and we kind of got to tell you exactly what to do. We still kind of do, but had to add a lot more customer service to that. Had to add a billing component to that. And David was very instrumental in the financial success of the Federal Records Center Program. It started with a corpus of around $20 million as sort of a savings account from the appropriation to begin its operations. And David has achieved tremendous growth in that area which allows us to do a lot of capital improvements. In the area of capital improvements, there's two really big items. One is in the area of information technology. When David came on board, the case management reporting system that we utilize today at the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis was on the drawing board, but David pushed it across the finish line. And again, it's a system we use today to manage our operations at the National Personnel Records Center. It allows veterans and other agencies to make requests for official military personnel folders online. And it allows us more importantly to run 1.2 million requests each year through the various steps at the National Personnel Records Center. The other one had much more impact on all federal agencies, and that's the Archives and Records Center Information System or ARCIS. David was the leader in envisioning that system, developing that system, implementing that system, and driving refinement of that system over the 20 years that he's been here at the National Archives. ARCIS, again, allows the federal agencies to do online requests, but also allows us to better track transfers, disposition, reference, refiles, interfiles throughout the 18 federal record centers across the country. The other huge impact that David had on the program is in the area of facilities. 12 of the 18 federal record centers, when David started, there were 16. We've added two since he's been with us, but 12 of the 18 are what we would call newer. They're less than 25 years old. David was instrumental in many of those coming online. He was also instrumental in rehabbing or doing facility changes, improvements at the other six record centers that allow all 18 of the centers to meet the stringent standards under 36 CFR 1234. So again, in the area of financial impact, IT impact, and the facilities, David's efforts have dramatically improved the Federal Record Center program. The other areas would be, NARA has strategic goals like any agency, and David really embodies two of those goals. One is make access happen. He has made a lot of policy changes. He's made a lot of IT changes. He's done a lot with the centers to improve our ability to make access happen for federal agencies. And while we are focused on federal agencies, the Federal Record Center program does also have to interact with the public through court records and also the official military personnel folders that are in St. Louis. The other one is connect with customers. David was instrumental in creating a customer relationship management group within the Federal Record Center program. Many of that staff is here today helping with the bridge effort. And my prime example would be Bridge actually started under the predecessor of the Office of the Chief Records Officer. And David kind of co-opted the hour before Bridge to do a Federal Record Center program. And then I'll say he negotiated his way into having the Federal Record Center program co-host Bridge with the Office of the Chief Records Officer. And it was all simply because he felt that was a good way for us to connect with customers. So with that, I would like to bring David Weinberg up to the stage and recognize him on this occasion of his retirement from federal service. Thanks. So good morning. I've been going through this tour over the last year. Keep thinking about it's the last time I'm in Seattle or the last time I'm in San Bruno. Today's the last time I'm here at the Bridge meeting in the capacity that I sit. And actually I was entering the building this morning. I saw the archivist and I said, yes, this is my last time at A1 at the National Archives building. And he said, well, hopefully it's not your last time. I said, okay, it's my last time coming through this entry. So again, there's been a lot of recollections over the last year. And I just want to thank all of you for your support of the Federal Record Center program and of the National Archives. It was funny listening to Jay talk. Again, sort of spawned a lot of different random thoughts, but the one talking about the Arcus system and the development of Arcus. And I think before we had Arcus, for those who've been with us for a long time, we had the old SIPS system, C-I-P-S, Centers Information Processing System. And we were always behind the times that it wasn't web-enabled, that when you web-enabled SIPS, web-SIPS, we thought that was the best thing. And of course, we made light year changes by the deployment of Arcus, the improvement of CMRS, the digital conversion units in many of the centers, lots of IT infrastructure. But we really did, I think, have a pretty remarkable run. We had that remarkable run because of all of you and your colleagues throughout the country. Generally grateful for the support you've all provided to the record centers. We know we were not the only game in town. Things are changing, of course, as we go as we look to the future, but for the last 20 years, we kept saying, will agencies stay with us? We've been very gratified that they have. Early on, it was the whole, as Jay talked about, getting used to charging and paying for services that were, quote, free before fiscal 2000. And now, agencies are very much wedded to us and they rely on the federal record centers. They rely on the office of the chief records officer. And I think, especially for Lawrence, I want to give a shout out to Lawrence and his whole team that we've been able to form this partnership. Jay talked about how I co-opted and merged. I look at it as this starts at 10, that started at nine. So, again, I think it's been a very good relationship in joining forces with Lawrence's organization. So again, my thanks to Lawrence and to his entire team. I also want to recognize Gordon Everett because Gordon's team from the customer relationship management, they are the face to all of you. The account managers, many of whom are here today, work regularly with all of you.  If there were any kind of issues you had with any of the centers, they do a tremendous job. They continue to be your go-to points of contact. So I do hope you will utilize them. So again, my hats off to the account managers who are here, to those who are not here, but again, my thanks to all and to Gordon for his leadership of that team. So again, I'll keep this brief because I know we've got a full program, but my thanks for all your support over the years. I am genuinely looking forward to what's next. A little nervous about all of that because it really is a whole new thing for me, having been here at the National Archives for 20 years and in their profession for 40. So now, once the end of the month hits and now I would then be considered a federal retiree, I'll have a whole different set of responsibilities. But it's not managing the program here. And it is certainly in very, very capable hands. So with that, thank you all very much. So David was right. We do have to get to the program at some point. But before we do, I just wanted to share my own appreciation for David, my partner in crime, for many years doing these bridge meetings. And one of the things that is just a very short story goes back 20 years. And I'll never be able to forget you, David, because the one thing that we have in common is I showed up at the National Archives in College Park for the first time 20 years ago to get in-processed my first federal job. And they're waiting for me in the personnel office downstairs on the first floor of the National Archives building was David Weinberg, who was also getting in-processed the same day. So we have that sort of link. We came into federal service together. I only wish I was going out of federal service at the same time. Unfortunately, I still got a ways to go. But congratulations to you, David. And bridge just won't be the same without you. So as I promised, I went the wrong way. Let's try this. The agenda. So in a second, I'll bring Kirsten up here to talk about the work that we partnered. That seems to be the theme of the day with OGIS in last year's RMSA. She's gonna talk a little bit about the results of that. Gordon's gonna do some FRCP updates. And then Maggie Hawkins is here to talk about where we are with capstone email management and some of the things that we're doing and some of the things that are coming. And then we'll close the program with Lisa who's gonna talk about some of the changes, hopefully you all are aware of, and how we are communicating with all of you and doing our outreach and how we are, for lack of a better word, modernizing that a bit. So with that, I will turn the microphone over to Kirsten. Good morning and thank you, Lawrence. I'm Kirsten Mitchell, compliance team lead at OGIS. OGIS is the Office of Government Information Services and we are tasked in the FOIA statute with reviewing FOIA policies, procedures and compliance with FOIA. We're also tasked with offering mediation services to help resolve disputes arising in the FOIA process. In short, OGIS is the FOIA ombudsman. We are here for requesters and for agencies and to advocate for a FOIA process that works for all. Since 2016, OGIS has collaborated with the Chief Records Officer on the RMSA. It is a great marriage, if you will, between two NARA programs. Crow has particular expertise in collecting self-reported compliance information through the RMSA and has done so since 2009. OGIS, of course, has particular expertise in FOIA and we opened in 2009 as the FOIA ombudsman. We think this is a great partnership given that a strong records management program is essential to a successful FOIA program. Data collected through the FOIA questions in the RMSA complement the observations we make as the FOIA ombudsman working to improve the FOIA process for all. I'd like to say thank you to Jay Besenko, NARA's Chief Operating Officer and to Jay Treanor, who you heard from earlier, the Executive for Agency Services, who several years ago had a strategic vision and saw an opportunity for this collaboration, serving as matchmakers, if you will. I'd also like to thank Cindy Smolovek, Don Rosen, and of course, Lawrence. So a quick note, I have a few photos in my presentation. They are all from the National Archives catalog and this is the only one I'll comment on, but this photo is of a young World War I Army veteran and his broad, who went on to become the 33rd President and First Lady of the United States, Harry and Bess Truman. So I thought that was a nice illustration of the theme of the day. So in the early days of our collaboration on the RMSA, we heard some concerns from records managers who were being asked FOIA questions in this records management tool that is not accidental. The RMSA process encourages coordination and collaboration between FOIA officers and agency records officers. Results of previous RMSA show that for about 2 thirds of the agencies, the agency's records officer and the FOIA officer are either the same person or they collaborate very closely. So I'm going to go briefly through the results of the 2018 RMSA, but want to point you to our report based on our analysis and observations and it's at the website, archives.gov forward slash ogis, ogis and we think it's a pleasant 11 page read. It's nice and short. There are a lot of good graphics in it that didn't translate well to the slides. So I'd encourage you to have a look at it. So now on to the results. So two questions that we asked for a second year in a row show a very encouraging uptick. We asked the question about FOIA searches and the specific question you may remember was records needed to respond to a FOIA request are readily accessible and located by staff responsible for FOIA. Always, most of the time, some of the time, never or do not know. We saw a 13% increase between 2017 and 2018 in agencies that say they can access and locate records necessary to respond to FOIA requests always or most of the time. And during that same period between 2017 and 2018, the percentage of respondents who said that they can access and locate records needed to respond to a FOIA request only some of the time dropped from 18% to 11%. And the percentage who said that they can never access necessary records or do not know dropped from 2% to 0%. So very encouraging results overall. So another question that we have asked several years in a row is about communication with FOIA requesters. This, the wording was tweaked a bit after the Congress amended FOIA in 2018, I'm sorry, in 2016 with the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, that law changed required agencies to include in their FOIA response letters information about the services offered by the agency FOIA public liaison and to alert requesters of OGIS's dispute resolution services when there is an adverse determination and when the agency needs more than 10 additional days to process a request due to unusual circumstances. So the RMSA asked at what point in the FOIA process does your agency inform requesters of OGIS's dispute resolution services? And this was one where respondents could check all the options that applied when there is an adverse determination, when notifying that the agency needs more than 10 additional days when responding to a requesters appeal, never, and then there was a category for other, please explain. Respondents could also check, do not know. We are very happy to see that the numbers of respondents who said that they alert requesters to OGIS services in all responses increased 22% between 2017 and 2018. And a little side note about FOIA, all responses includes when records are fully released with no redactions, that's called a full release. It's important because requesters may not be satisfied with what the agency has released even though the agency considers it a full release. But the requester still has the right to appeal the search for responsive records, which of course gets back to the records management issue. So the 2018 RMSA asked three new FOIA topics, including on performance management. We know from our assessments of individual agency FOIA programs that well-managed FOIA programs use metrics to help manage the resources they have and to advocate for additional resources. We also know that well-managed FOIA programs regularly report to their agency leaders on FOIA performance measures. Agencies are all over the map in terms of their reporting, but the good news is that just 3% said that they never report. The 19% that are in the other category responded that they have less formal methods for reporting such as verbally during regular meetings, posting to the agency FOIA website and informing leadership when necessary or upon request. So we like to say that the mechanism of reporting isn't important like the frequency of it, but the fact that they do it is important and what might work for one agency may not work for another. So the final two areas of questioning evolved directly from the FOIA advisory committee. The committee is a group of 20 FOIA experts from inside and outside the government who are appointed by the archivist of the United States to study the federal FOIA landscape and advise on improvements to the administration of the statute by the 15 cabinet level agencies and 103 independent agencies. In 2018, at the end of the 2016 to 18 term, the FOIA advisory committee asked the archivist to task OGIS with assessing the methods agencies use to prepare documents for posting on agency FOIA reading rooms. One of the RMSA questions forms the foundation for that assessment, which we officially launched earlier this month. The question was, does your agency have procedures for preparing documents for posting on FOIA reading rooms? The good news, the overwhelming response, 83% said yes, 11% no, 7% do not know. And for you math wizards out there, no, this is not archival math, the percentages are rounded up. So we asked a follow-up question to the previous question and that is who is responsible for preparing the documents for posting? In our role as FOIA ombudsman, we have often heard from agency FOIA professionals who are challenged by this duty in the face of reduced resources and an increased number of requests. And we were not at all surprised to find that more than half said that it's the FOIA staff who are responsible for preparing the documents for posting. We hope that as part of our assessment, we are able to provide agencies with some best practices on the topic. And as I mentioned, we launched that assessment just a few weeks ago and we hope to publish it by the end of the fiscal year. So finally, the RMSA asked, do your agency's employee performance work plans and appraisals include performance measures for non-FOIA professionals to ensure compliance with the requirements of FOIA? This question also grew out of the 2016 to 18 term of the FOIA advisory committee, which recommended in 2018 that the archivist direct or just to examine the use of performance standards and submit the results of its assessment and any recommendations to Congress and to the president. Not surprisingly, agency performance work plans and appraisals generally do not include performance FOIA performance measures for non-FOIA professionals. And as I said earlier, this response forms the foundation for another assessment that OGIS is kicking off later this spring. So looking ahead, I mentioned the two assessments, both of which we hope to publish by the end of this fiscal year. Lawrence mentioned the current RMSA that's going on right now and I'm open through March 13th. That asks five FOIA questions. So for those of you who haven't seen those, they revolve around FOIA training, review of agency FOIA responses, and that's specifically who in your agency is reviewing FOIA responses before they go out the door, deduplication of records, which is a huge issue with email threads. And there are many, many FOIA requests out there for email threads. The availability of records on FOIA websites and section 508 compliance, providing access to records to people with disabilities. So just a reminder to respond to the current RMSA and if you don't know your FOIA officer, this is a great opportunity to get to know that person. So thank you for listening and thank you for answering the FOIA questions in the RMSA, both in years past and this year. I'm happy to take any questions or comments, but before I do, I would like to invite you back here to McGowan Theater for the March 5th FOIA Advisory Committee meeting. The committee has three subcommittees, including one focused on records management and the committee is expected to discuss and vote on several recommendations from that subcommittee. Go to archives.gov forward slash ogis and click on events, which takes you to an event-bright registration if you'd like to attend in person. Like this meeting, it will also be live streamed. So I'm now able to, one more slide. Yes. So questions, comments? Good morning. Good morning. I am Greg Carroll. I am the records officer at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. Just wanted to go back to something you had mentioned about request disputes. You had said that you would provide non-redacted copies of stuff that the agency may have redacted. At least that's how I heard it. For our agency, of course there's law enforcement sensitive information, there's PII, there's tax information, so who determines what can be redacted and what's not redacted? Oh gosh, I'm sorry if I gave that impression because that isn't what I meant to give. So ogis does provide mediation services to resolve disputes in the FOIA process, but we do not get involved in whether redactions are properly or improperly made. That's not part of what we do. We focus solely on the process, on the administrative process. We're there to help along the way for agencies and for requesters, and if the dispute is serious enough we do provide mediation services. Is that helpful? Okay. And I understand we have someone monitoring online. Yeah, no questions online. Okay, okay. Well, I'm going to turn this over to Gordon Averex. Good morning. I have a few updates from the Federal Records Center program that I'll bring to you this morning. What is it, about six bullet points? And we'll work through these and grab my notes here. It's that time of year when we do a annual customer survey. We want to get customers feedback on the services from the Federal Records Center program. We do it on a calendar year basis. So we'll be asking your input on how we service you in 2018. The plan is to have your account manager send those surveys out. Really, it'll act the first of March because the survey will be open March 2nd through March 30th. We'll give you 30 days to do it, to complete the survey. And we ask that you help us with that. We normally get about 21%, an average response rate around 21%. And we'd like, that's at the bottom of the kind of the base level. So we'd like to increase our response rate. And so that's why we're going to leave it open for about four weeks versus the normal two weeks that we normally do. And midway through, we'll send you kind of a reminder email and just to let you know, well, we don't know who it's anonymous, but we would just send you a reminder and say, hey, yeah, please take this survey so we can get that feedback from you. And in the June bridge, we'll bring you results of the survey. We think if you guys are gonna do the survey, we should also provide you with the results from the survey and share the responses from you. So look forward to that. We'll get that out to you in early May. It'll come from your account managers and we'd appreciate your feedback on that. Many of you also have been sending us your interagency agreements and we thank you. And we'd ask that you please get those in if you haven't. Many folks have. So we can get the funding in line for your services. Now, we are aware of some of the delays that we've had in getting signed agreements back to you. And I apologize for that, but we're working closely with our CFO's office to improve that timeline. We've gotten some things in place to turn around a little bit quicker than we have. We realize we've been responsible for some of those delays. And I think we're improving that process for you guys. So interagency agreements and your terms and conditions, let's please get those back in so we can continue to provide the necessary services for your records. I believe it's soon to come. I think it's April. Let me see if I have the date. The customer disposition profile, it is April. We do that every year for customers. And the profile also, it highlights the records that are passed due for accessioning or destruction. And also it allows you to see how much money you can save by taking some action on these records. So that will come out as it did last year. There'll be no difference in the reporting or in the report that we had last year for you. So we're asked that you take a look at that profile, take some action on those records, particularly. And if you have issues or concerns with it, talk to your account manager and they can also help you with that or any questions that you may have. Lawrence talked earlier about the M1921. That's the December 31st, 2020. And I'm gonna read this just so everybody's clear. By December 31st, NARA will to the fullest extent no longer accept transfers of permanent or temporary records in analog formats. And will accept records only in electronic format with the appropriate metadata. Folks, we have in the Federal Records Center space across the country, three million cubic feet of open space. But what we don't want everybody to do is hit us in 2022. So we'd like for you to maybe talk with your account managers, let your account managers make some appointments with you to talk about your plans and the paper records that you have out in your field offices. If you're looking to reduce your footprint on paper records, our account managers can help you with that from a standpoint of helping you organize, get records packed, fast pack services or whatever to get those records in. That three million cubic feet will go quickly. So as of the day, there's three million cubic feet of space and we certainly want to fill up that space with your records. So your account managers are here today. Matter of fact, if you don't know them all here, everybody with David Williams, Arthur is here, Arthur Hawkins, Pam Northern, Ron Mitchell, Andrew Shear and Scott Thompson are all here today. So the account managers who are in the room, can you stand up for a minute, folks? In case you don't know some of these folks, Ron's in the back, Andrea, Scott, Pam, and I saw Arthur, but he might have stepped out. Okay, so these are folks, these are your account managers and we're there for you and we can help you get those records into the Federal Records Center program. Last thing, we've set up NWNRC, we've set it up in three spaces across the country. In San Bruno, in Kansas City and in NWNRC, we have set up dedicated CUI-controlled and classified information storage space. Those spaces have been certified by ISU and those spaces are available for your CUI records. What we plan to do in probably April is offer a tour. We'll start with NWNRC, a tour of our facility at the Washington National Records Center down in Suitland of that space. So we'll send that information out, ask you to RSVP if you're interested in coming out, taking a tour of that dedicated space to see how your controlled and classified information records will be protected. With us today also is the Acting Director, Shannon. Shannon is the Acting Director at Suitland, so he's with us today. So folks, take advantage of that, we'll send that out if you have an interest and we'll set that program up for you. That is the last thing I have. Are there any questions for the Federal Records Center program? Any questions online? Good, that means we did a good job. Alrighty, thank you. Who's the next one? Let's see. Okay, Maggie Hawkins. Thank you, Gordon. Good morning, everyone. I'm Maggie Hawkins, Director of Records Management Operations. And I'm here to talk about capstone email management and some changes that have already occurred and some upcoming changes. And since, as Lawrence noted, we have actually had a February bridge meeting first time in two years. What I've done then is I'm splitting my presentation between now and the next bridge meeting. I would have rolled them into one if we had canceled, but there's some stuff we're working on that I'll explain more about and I'll come back with more detail on that at a subsequent bridge meeting. So one of the things I first wanted to talk about is what is capstone? We've become aware that, of course, there's many of you out there who may be new, new to records management, new to bridge, either in the room or online. And so I'm gonna very briefly describe what capstone is. So capstone is an approach to managing email and it's not required or mandatory, but it's a strongly recommended approach. And what it involves is applying disposition at the role position level rather than on email content. So for years, most agencies were engaged in what we called print and file, whether it was a literal print, a piece of paper and file it or an electronic filing. And some agencies still do this. We kind of refer to this more as traditional records management, again, even if it's done electronically. But that can be quite burdensome and compliance with it can be difficult for the end user and for records officers and others to monitor and ensure compliance with. So several years ago, we rolled out the capstone approach where we are looking at how designating certain accounts as permanent. As slide notes, it's generally based on roller position and generally senior level people. For instance, Jay Traynor who's here today is a capstone official as is Lawrence Brewer and there are many others in NARA and at other agencies. And as part of the capstone approach, all other accounts are temporary, usually a seven year and also we do have one group for three year for employees who just would not be engaged in supervisory things or maybe working in a warehouse or position such as that. And this is all in NARA Bulletin 2014-6 and in addition to that bulletin, if you are new to capstone, you can go to our website on the records management page and you will find myriad of resources that explain what is capstone. And also we use as part of this is the NA 1005 which is verification for using capstone GRS 6.1. So the actual legal disposition authority is in the GRS and since the government is so broad and varied and different situations and agencies, we do have agencies submit a form describing what positions they're putting into the various categories, whether the permanent or temporary and we review those at NARA, both the appraisers, management, Lawrence and I look at them and as well as our stakeholder units. Just to see if things are doled out properly and all the permanent accounts have been designated and those are all listed on the form which is currently a PDF form. So again, that's a refresher on what is capstone in case you're new to it. We have about 200 approved capstone forms and a couple dozen in the pipeline. So many of you have already are not only familiar with it, you may have actually successfully completed the process and have an approved form. And you may be wondering, okay, I've got that. What's new? What's changing? So this is a quick summary of the changes and then I'll go through them in more detail. One of the things I think a lot of people will be happy about is that we will be incorporating the form into ERA 2.0. And another change is that we are posting them along with other records control schedules in our repository and I'll talk a little bit about that and I have a few screenshots. And the last one is that we will be establishing a process for resubmission and re-approval of forms. The last one is something very, many agencies, especially those who have already submitted and have approved forms are very interested and curious about. So I'm going to talk a bit about that today. And for the first and the last, the ERA form and the resubmission, those are the two topics I'll be back to talk about again at a subsequent bridge, either the April one or the June one. So one of the first changes I wanted to talk about in a little bit of detail is that the form NA-1005 will be incorporated into ERA 2.0. As many of you probably know from past presentations or communications, other communications from NARA, we are developing ERA 2.0 even as we speak and the record scheduling part of it should be rolled out in the current timeframe right now is February 2021. So essentially a year from now. As we all know with any project, timetables can go awry. It was supposed to be a few months before that so it's already changed a little bit but it's looking good for February 2021 and that will include a new record schedule, business object as we call them. And also what I'm here though to talk about today, we will be putting the NA-1005 form into that. So we will not be using PDF anymore. I think that's going to make a lot of people happy depending on how you generated the positions, how you stored them. Some people had to retype everything depending on if they were doing it in Excel, some people had to cut and paste. It served us well, I will say that but now we would like to move it into ERA. So what we're gonna have in ERA is all that beginning information on a capstone form, agency name, number of positions, the scope, content notes, things like that will be in ERA the same way a schedule is now. But all the information about who is in the various capstone positions, those 10 categories that were referenced on the other slide will be an Excel attachment, which we think will make your lives a lot easier, especially those of you who are going great guns on capstone and have it managed through a database, you should be able to export it and move it into that Excel more seamlessly. And I don't have the draft form to show you now, it's a little more complicated than it sounds because we'll be looking at having it be a cumulative form. So we have a pretty good draft going, we wanna get it a little further along before we bring it to you for looking at it and commenting on it. However, I do think it'll be quite a big improvement over what we have now. One of the other things that I mentioned, some changes were coming, like the ERA form is coming and some changes are already done. This next one is a change we've already completed. So originally we had been using GitHub for posting of approved forms and some of you may be familiar with GitHub. It's original and primary intent is to post code for sharing amongst any entity, whether it's government or not, for reusing and sharing software code. And it has a way of you're able to parse data and reuse data. And there was some sense that a public would be taking the Capstone forms, downloading them, putting data analytics against them and doing assessments of how the government was coming along with Capstone. To our knowledge that never occurred and GitHub is, it's not a seamless thing to work with and you can't make a lot of changes to the forms and there are various issues associated with it and people weren't finding the forms there anyway. So what we did is we moved all the approved forms over to the records control schedule repository. This is the repository of all approved schedules that are scanned and online. I'm hoping you all are familiar with it and if you're not, you can go to our records management webpage or do my favorite thing, which is Google it. Records controls, schedules, national archives, it'll be the first hit up there. And we have moved those approved forms over to the RCS and we've put them there in two different ways given that there is a lot of interest in email amongst the public, other federal agencies, oversight entities, so we've tried to make it as easy as possible. And what we've done is we've moved into the running list as you can see of all the agencies. I know it's a little hard to see, but essentially it's a running list of all the agencies that have approved capstone forms and you would search it the way you would search anything. So they're all the capstone forms that are approved on one place. The other way we've done it too is we've done it within each record group up online here. We have a national security agency. They were the second agency with an approved capstone form. NARA was first. They were signed within minutes of each other. And so we like to highlight that and you can see there's a line to where their capstone form is in with all their other record schedules. So this is information we think might be useful. For you all, you may be curious what has a similar agency like yours? Do they have a capstone form approved? You can go look and see. And if they do, how have they doled out their positions? What do they have in the various categories? What's in there? I think I'd encourage people to read the scope notes and other things, because there's some good information and models for how people have handled legacy email and how they're treating that. So I think they provide some good examples for you all to look at. And if you're within a larger cabinet level agency where they're submitting them individually, you can see what your other fellow components have done as well. So that leads to a much, much bigger change that I wanted to talk about. And as I've mentioned a couple of times, resubmission is a work in progress and I'll be back again to talk about it in more detail. But I wanted to give you all a heads up about what we're looking at here. So I wanted to point out that first off, the capstone verification form is a snapshot of reflecting an agency's organization at a specific time. However, we all know sometimes painfully aware that agencies tend to reorganize often. Depending on the agency, it can be at almost just a bright next beat of reorganizing others may make major shifts every few years. And sometimes these are minor changes and sometimes they are major reorganizations that would affect senior leadership positions, therefore affecting your capstone form. And one of the things we want to see is the NA-1000-5s to be as accurate as possible because ultimately what we want is to ensure proper implementation and try to make implementation as easy as possible. Also, one of our challenges with any record schedule or something like the GRS and something like capstone is that we have a document that needs to meet multiple needs. The primary one is you are the federal agencies, you need to implement this position on your records. However, capstone does capture, as we know, permanent accounts, which means they will be coming to the National Archives at some point and we have our accessioning staff that will at one point be bringing them in and they need accurate forms to ensure smoother transfer, processing, verification, and just generally to smooth the accessioning. So whenever we, I mean, the Chief Records Officer, are working on any, what I'll call business object, whether it's a record schedule or a capstone form, we're really always trying to look at both sides of this. We're advocates for you all and trying to look out for what you need to implement disposition, but then we also have to, especially where permit records are concerned, be mindful of our custodial units and other parts of NARA. So one of the things we found with resubmission is this has come up already. We have agencies requesting guidance on resubmission very soon after the first forms were approved. If you were getting a form in early, it meant you were on top of it. And frankly, anybody who's gotten a form in even recently means you're on top of it, you care about it, you're trying to do the right thing.  We'd like to resubmit, what's the deal with resubmitting? And one of the things we initially did was we tried to kind of forestall what I'll call minor resubmissions. We'd say, wait till you have a bunch, roll them up, kind of like when you submit some expense accounts or other things, it's dealing with it more in bulk. This was okay for some agencies, for other agencies, especially those in the public spotlight or under a lot of potential litigation. They had a lot of concern about making sure that that form that was posted on the web was accurate and up to date. So that if somebody went and looked at it, it didn't have positions that had been reorganized out of existence three months ago, six months ago, what have you. So we've come to the conclusion that we need to be more flexible about it. I think we were concerned about a deluge of incoming change, minor changes from agencies. And we found that most people are flexible about it themselves and we did not have a deluge. So that gets the question of, okay, so there may be minor changes and what is a minor change? A minor change might be a change in position title where the duties otherwise stay the same and something of that ilk. Major would be, as I mentioned before, complete reorganization of the agency or major components where you've got new positions and other ones being eliminated. So the question then is, well, okay, so we may have minor changes, we may have major changes, what do we do with them? And what we are looking at putting out guidance on, which is in draft, under development, that's very far along, is looking at mandatory resubmission on a four-year cycle beginning January 2023. There's nothing in that language that specifically links it to a change in administration, but generally, whether or not the incumbent is continuing or not, it's often a time where things are changed, even if it's the same person, same party, often it'll be a time for political pointees who have put in their time in government service to move back out to other opportunities, so there's often a lot of changes at that time. And so, but that often don't happen immediately. It can take a little while for things to turn over. So we are looking at, and again, this is right now in draft, we are looking at requiring beginning in January 2023 that agencies take a look at where they stand and do a mandatory resubmission. And I'm gonna be coming back with more detail about how that would work, so I just wanted to give you a heads up about that. But then there's also the ad hoc submissions. I had mentioned that people had come to us and said, hey, we'd really like our forum to be up to date, and this would be outside the mandatory resubmission cycle. And we're not requiring that agencies resubmit for minor changes, which again could be titled changes, change to the number of positions, although we are requiring that you keep track of it behind the scenes. One of the major keys to successful implementation of Capstone is monitoring who's in the positions, but then also keeping track of all of it, what I'll just call behind the scenes. Capstone forum, for those of you who are familiar, does not have names on it. It may say deputy director of global services, it does not put the person's name in there because the notion is the position may stay the same, people may change, you're keeping track of all that behind the scenes. And then at some point, transferring that those permanent Capstone accounts over. So while we're not requiring resubmission for minor changes, we do need people to be keeping track of them behind the scenes and eventually queuing up some and resubmitting it, whether it's mandatory or in this ad hoc process. And those can be done, the ad hoc submissions can be done at any time. And I'd encourage you to talk to your appraiser about them, your appraisal archivist, you each would have an assigned person. If you're having questions about whether something rises to the level or you're getting a lot of pressure inside your agency to get a new updated Capstone forum that is approved and up on our website. And like I said, we're seeing how we need to be more flexible about that and more aware of the pressures you all may be under as you are working to manage your agency's records. So again, those are some upcoming changes and I'll be back with more detail about the ERA forum and more detail about the resubmission process. We also will be, once we finalize the resubmission process, we will have guidance on it. We will be adding to the FAQs that already exist. We will be having other guidance and we will be reissuing the GRS to make these changes mandatory. It's gonna take a little while to all play out but I wanted to give you a heads up in the sense of that. So now we're to the questions part and as we know, we've got the microphones in the room. We also have online YouTube and the other email address for questions. Thank you. This is Susan from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. So if we resubmitted revised form now, what's the timeframe that it takes to get it approved for a couple major changes because of a reorg? I would say a time it takes to approve you, I'm gonna guess you'd be looking at a couple of months if you already have one that's submitted. The initial forms could take a while depending on how many questions and how fast people are able to get answers to questions back. I would think resubmission would, well we have no metrics on it because we've not in taken a lot of them. I think it would be faster and you would be a team one agency? Yes. Right, so we have the after bridge meetings this afternoon or there's some of the team one people up there and they can talk to you about it more as well. Thank you. Yes. Hi, so down the road we're looking more into the legacy capstone users and our agency I'm from Treasury sort of evolves drastically over time with capstone positions. So if we have legacy capstone officials that no longer have those titles, should we still include them on the form even though they're not technically current positions? So what we're gonna be doing with the new form and this was when I mentioned it's harder than it might seem is that issue of what happens when you have positions that were on a capstone form and now they've changed and you have a resubmission and we're looking at having the form be cumulative so that it would be all in one document but our challenge is making that as herky as possible and that's what we're refining right now. So what I would recommend is your first line of defense is always in that sort of behind the scenes making sure you know everything you know the dates. Dates are very important especially for implementation on the IT side and on the custodial unit side when they verify things and then when we have that new form I think it'll be fairly obvious how to move stuff into it for the legacy positions. Other questions? Okay, we have another one in the room. Hi, I work for CBP. We are currently in the process of implementing capstone. It's a big job, there's a lot of people there. A lot of email, a lot of positions have come and gone. Several reorgs later, here we are. So fast forward, we're kind of getting out of the start-up phase of the implementation project we're trying to and we're looking at a bunch of questions related to the logistics. So the question is, first question is, have you had many capstone official permanent records transfers or accessions yet? No, we have not. So yeah, that'll be a brave new world. Got it. Right, figured that would probably be the case but my IT team has, you know, naturally they have questions about the transfer process. I mean I know you guys have format guidance on your website and I assume that that is pretty robust and you update it frequently, right? Right, and I think it would probably only answer some of their questions because if they're really trying to look ahead and get into the details of how they're going to stage things or what have you, what I would recommend is working with your appraiser and we'll work with the custodial unit to I think the best thing to do would probably be to bring your questions to a meeting. We've done this with a couple of agencies already and it really helps to start planning ahead. We're probably not going to be able to answer like a gory level of detail on how they might best prep something for eventual implementation but the custodial units I think would be very happy to help get those things queued up. Very good, thank you. Last question. So is the thought or the idea that in batches, every period, permanent records would be downloaded onto some type of removable media and then that would physically be transferred into the custody? I think what will eventually happen is if somebody has a capstone form they're going to get that first batch that may include legacy and then thereafter they're probably looking at annual transfers because you're going to have, if you're doing it on employee tenure there's going to be a certain number of people who have left in a certain year and it's 15 years later, 25 years later it's ready to go. So I think once that ball gets rolling for an agency it is looking at a yearly transfer. I would say in terms of those specifics of talking about removable media that is not necessarily how it would work. They're rolling out cloud to cloud transfer in research services and it's going to depend on if it's classified, not classified. I would say that's probably forecasting a little too far ahead unless you're looking at you've got your first batch ready to go in the next six months. But even then they have different means of doing transfer other than that. Although that is essentially what's happening with classified records right now. Thank you very much. Sure. Any online questions? Oh there is, wow. Yeah, yes we do actually have an online question from Patty at NASA. Okay. Has NARA given any consideration to expanding capstone to apply to the management of other electronic communications, text messages, instant messages particularly of capstone officials? That's an excellent question. Again the question is have we, emails just one form of electronic messaging have we thought about broadening it out to others? And I will say yes we have. So first off we did consider it originally when we first rolled out capstone. The concerns were both about the substance of what might be in chats, text messages, other things and also we were concerned about putting a burden on agencies where the technology didn't exist necessarily at the time to capture this. The world's changed a lot since then. We had several years later. And that is one of the major issues we are considering when we reissue both the GRS and the bulletin is that we are looking at rolling into other forms of communication other than email. Given that that is still in the works, still under discussion, we still have to have discussions about how to scope that. That was not in my formal presentation but it is something that we are looking at. I would be very interested especially since it's only 11.17 and we have a little time here if people had any thoughts on yay or nay on that prospect. Okay I see a thumbs up. I'm seeing thumbs up. Well we do have another question. Okay. Well Nuclear Security Administration. All right. Would contracting officers be considered an official for Capstone? Would who? Contracting officers in general. I would say they're probably not normally in one of our categories and I do have my bat phone here. I have my Capstone expert out there who can maybe weigh in on this. So I don't think normally they would be but however one needs to look at your unique situation. I think our Capstone guidance in many junctures talks about how there may be other accounts other than kind of the classic deputy under secretary or chief records officer or head of an agency that may be creating permanent records that you would need to identify. So my expert here on the bat phone says generally no. They would not be but again I'd look at your individual situation. So thank you. Here's a question from DOE, Department of Energy. My question is will NAR consider managing these Capstone positions across the government using HR systems to mark and identify these positions federal wide? That would be amazing. That would be a whole new world. I don't see that on the immediate horizon. I think it's a great thing to keep in mind and it would be a fantastic way to do it. What we, the best we've seen now or there are some agencies that are in a very robust way using their HR systems to interact with their own databases to manage Capstone forms. There's at least a handful of them that I know about. I think that would be a starting point and then those agencies could garner lessons learned and what are the pros and cons of that approach and if we ever reach the point where that could be done government wide or even in a large swath of government, that would be something we should really keep in mind and I would look forward to pondering that and seeing what we could do with that. Yes, another question. So this came up at the CUI training recently that NARA held and it's, so I don't know what's outside the scope of Capstone but it involves the Capstone emails that eventually need to be permanently transferred to NARA electronically and then with CUI, a lot of those emails or at least some of them are gonna be encrypted because they're CUI and contain CUI information and then NARA won't accept encrypted emails from Capstone officials. So the instructor brought that question back but I thought it was worth raising here as an issue going forward as we implement CUI as well and having a whole load of Capstone emails that need to come over that have encryption. Yes, encryption is another burgeoning issue that we are looking at. Our understanding from the Federal Records Management Council and other sources is that it is definitely a burgeoning problem. Certain software email packages allow it to be much easier for an end user to encrypt their own either email or attachments. My understanding is in, for instance, the Microsoft environment, there are ways to address that and either turn it off or allow administrators to de-encrypt. We're just hearing about this largely outside of, in what I'll just call civilian agencies, relatively recently as a problem in the last six months it's been coming to us. We do require that records be not encrypted when they're transferred. So we would look to agencies to establish policies within their agency on handing over, it used to be handing over the keys to documents, now it's passwords to records management upon departure or setting up other protocols. I don't have a lot of good information about that in the sense that, again, it's just coming to us for attention and we've been talking about it in our Capstone Development Team meetings and we will be looking at putting out some information about that.  And again, that's the kind of thing we're more than happy to have people come to Federal Records Management Council or their appraiser and describe what's happening so that we can look at what we might be able to do government-wide. Thank you. Next question? Yeah, hi, I'm with the DOD. Question about the transfer at some point in time. Are you, if this was a perfect world, would you be looking at an annual transfer or would you kind of want that Capstone position holder to be finished with that position and then us transferring everything? Have you thought about how you kinda wanna start collecting these items once? So the transfer would go from how you've laid it out in your Capstone form. So different agencies are doing different things depending on a variety of factors. So there's kinda like two classic scenarios. One would be I'm an agency with a lot of long-term employees who need their email and maybe their email's really sensitive. My Capstone form might have me cutting it off at the end of the employee's tenure. So we'll use David Weinberg here as an example. 20 years and a February, his gets cut off and then it's held and transferred at some interval after that. We might be 15 years, might be 25 years, might be five years, that's a classic way to do it. So then what then they'd be looking at is rolling through and gathering all the people who happen to retire or leave the agency. So you'd have a whole, like in any given agency you could have like 50 Capstone people who left in a year, so you'd be batching them every year. Some agencies are doing it end of calendar year. So I could be a sitting Capstone official and with a 15 year transfer, I'm still in my 20th year NARA service or what have you and my email might be coming over to the National Archives while I'm still sitting in my position. That's something to talk about with your agency, with your general counsel, with your people and your FOIA staff. We do apply the FOIA, we do review and restrict records. I was just wondering if NARA had a preferred method. No, I would say it gets down to the first thing would be where do you stand with it in terms of the transfer? But as I mentioned earlier, at some point if things go according to plan, agencies would be sending a batch every year, whether it's within a few years if they have a relatively short cut off or some of the agencies where it's a 25 year, the first batch might not be showing up for a little while. Any more questions in the room? Any questions online? Okay, and again, I think these were all really great questions and they left a lot of things for us to look at, encryption, implementation issues and other tricky topics. So what I encourage you to do is talk to your appraisers and we will look at facilitating meetings with others within NARA if we need them to weigh in on things and all these questions you bring to us and things you point out do inform us as we're developing government-wide policy. So I really encourage you to bring those questions forward. We really appreciate it. All right, well that's all I had. Well, thank you very much and I'm going to turn it over to Lisa Harrell-Lampus who is going to talk about some changes in communication. Good morning, my name is Lisa Harrell-Lampus and I work in the Office of the Chief Records Officer for the US government. I'm the Director of Records Management, Policy and Outreach. And so today I am wearing the outreach hat, a little bit more outreach than policy today. I wanna talk to you about some of the ways we're going to be changing how we communicate. I feel a little bit like I'm preaching to the choir because you all must have received the information to know to be here today from our new tools that we're using. The first thing that we're changing is simply I wanted to let people know that we have changed our email contact management tool. In the past, we use a listserv from GSA and now starting on December 31st, we have moved to using constant contact. I am mentioning the brand here and now not as an endorsement of any, in any way, shape or form but I wanted to tell you what tool we were using in case you happen to know of any issues or concerns in your agency with a specific tool. We are going to use this tool in two specific ways. We're gonna use it to manage all of our email contacts. We work with a wide number and variety of people who are interested in talking to us from a variety of different roles and we're hoping to have a one place where we can all be able to access and use the same information. No more spreadsheets kept by different people on who they have to send information to. And we're going to be using constant contact to send out group emails. So who are the groups, you wonder? What do we talk about when we send out group emails? We have four different lists or groups of people that we generally need to send out for contacts. The first is agency records officers. We also send out group emails to senior agency officials for records management, our SAOs and we generally copy agency records officers at the same time. We have other individuals that we talk to that are specifically involved in reporting. For those of you who do that, you know who you are. You may not be a records officer but we have your name and we send you the RMSA link every year and work with you to answer those questions. And then our biggest group by far, we just call records management contacts. Records management contacts were who, way we referred to you before. If you were on our GSA listserv and have been receiving messages, you most likely were in the role of RM contact. We have imported that information into our new constant contact and we have made sure that every SAO and agency records officer are also on that list. So we've proactively added you. You should be receiving messages. And what do those messages look like? I just wanted to highlight that we did a little bit of a change to how we send AC memos. We have a new look. So if you were wondering what is this, this is why it came from. We have put our visual brand for our office so you know who it's coming from. We've been able to change a little bit of our and professionalize our emails so you can see it's coming from our office. Generally they have a name and number and we are still sending them from the same email we had in the past which is rm.communications at narra.gov. That's one of our main office numbers. It's one of the ways you can reach us. So if you've seen something new, this is not spam. This is official records management communications. I wanted to explain that in addition to the different ways you can connect with our office. We know that, again, this is just our own processes, our own practices. We're trying to improve how we connect with the wide variety of federal records managers that are out there in different spaces. So yes, now you can subscribe to our RM contacts yourself to make sure you get the information that we send out that way. We generally send out AC memos. They sometimes it's the list that will have bridge announcements on them come out that way. We'll talk about GRS. We'll talk about a lot of sometimes they're very specific policy information we want people to know. There's an opportunity to comment. And we do that through those records management emails. We also, if you ever have any questions can just email us directly at rm.communications. We also continue to have our records express blog. So sometimes if you're having a problem receiving AC memos, we've noticed a lot of people are just subscribing to our blog, checking that out and doing their own feed. We generally tend to talk about, we'll generally have sometimes the same information in both. So if we have put out a request for comment, we'll put it out on both the blog and the listserv. We've tended to use the blog as a way to communicate more informally and sometimes sort of share or repeat information that maybe isn't official policy but it's just a nice time to remind folks that what is metadata? What is happening in different areas? Is there any weather related issues that are coming up? And we just want to remind people about the emergency records guide. So we sort of use that as more of an informal way to communicate versus the AC memos which are a little more formal. We also have, so we have our blog. If you ever were concerned, have I seen all AC memos that have come out? We keep a copy of those on the blog so you can proactively check that. And for people who have questions about bridge, we have the same bridge. We've made all of that available. So right up there on the top of our webpage where it's connect with us. So you can find out what's happening with bridge? What have I missed? How do I make sure I can connect so I don't miss future messages? And of course, the blog. We love Records Express. We use it in a variety of ways. We're also improving the way we connect on social media. We do have a Facebook page which has mostly been used for training information. We have our Twitter account which isn't the most active, but every once in a while, you'll find a tweet from us on a records management activity. We have our YouTube channel which contains not only bridge meetings which is happening now, but we have a lot of training materials and information that are also on the YouTube page. Oh, well it's not here now. I hope to have it soon in the future. We also have records management office the chief records officer on LinkedIn. And we're just trying to be sure that when we communicate things that we have a variety of tools and ways to reach you. So that's our goal. We want to connect with you. And it seemed probably a pretty good idea to tell you that we wanted that. So if those of you who are listening could be like, yes, I have been following the blog and maybe I'll go check LinkedIn as well. So that was the main change that we've made changing one tool and we're trying to be more proactive in communicating across our variety of tools. I am aware there might be some problems that have happened. So my ask for you today is just to check to see if you have been receiving AC memos. In the past few weeks, we've sent out four of them including the first memo telling you that we were making the change. If you didn't get that one you may not have gotten the next four or we sort of announced some updates with the GRS. We've announced the reporting reminder. We just want to make sure to see if you're getting those. If you are not, you can contact us at our communications myself and another person. We're monitoring that box and we're trying to connect and see what happens. Like if we did we not have the email address correctly or is it being blocked and filtered and then we can let people know that that's true. You haven't been getting the messages and we'll see if we can come up with some options or some workarounds for you. So I would ask for a little patience just a little patience as we've made this change and a lot of perseverance both from our end and from yours. We do want to make sure we're connecting with you and if we have to take some time to work it through that's what we're gonna do. So that was a very short and sweet letting you know that we're changing our communications as always. See we're doing better and better. If you have any questions about that I was, for everybody who did not get the AC memo raise your hand. For everybody who did not hear that we changed our events, let me know. And other than that, this is where you can find us. Are there any questions about this change anybody wants to ask? Lisa, what about a records officer that, do they need to double check? And are they, what if you know records officers aren't getting those communications? Why thank you for asking that question. Yes, so just for those of you who wanted to know we are very concerned and wanna make sure that records officers receive communications specifically, because they have a very important role in an agency. They have a very important role. And for any agency records officer that we know was blocked, that we saw the message wasn't going through, we are going ahead and adding another step and we are emailing them directly just to make sure that they get those messages. We won't be able to do that for the thousand of people who are on our list but we figured for that list of just records officers the 297 of them that are out there that I now have their name, their agency and much better insight as to what we've been doing. We're really working hard to make sure they don't miss it. So my second question would be is if I can ask if you are a records officer and you notice that there's having problems with your staff if we could work together to perhaps improve that communication as well that's something we're going to do. Any other thoughts or questions to share? All right, well with that I'll invite Lawrence to come back up and close our program. Thank you Lisa and thanks to all the presenters today. It was great to have you all here in February and let's hope the rest of the winter continues the way it's been and we will be meeting again when the weather is hopefully warm. Next bridge meeting is April 14th. So until then for those of you who are sticking around here today just another reminder the meet and greet with the Pracel team one and the FRC account representatives will be one o'clock in the Washington room upstairs. So have a great day all of you. Have a nice lunch and hopefully we'll see some of you back here at one o'clock upstairs in the Washington room. Thank you.