There was much controversy over the last mailing concerning this matter but these two emails do give us websites with the proposals so I am sending them on to you. Kathy ***** The NARA proposal to revamp the system and fees for providing copies of Military Service Records, Bounty-Land Warrant Applications Files, and Pension Application Files has been published in the 25 April 2000 issue of the Federal Register. Public comment is invited and should be directed to NARA Regulation Comment Desk 8601 Adelphi Road College Park, MD 20740-6001 Fax: 301 713-7270 The comment period closes on 26 June 2000. NARA prefers that you use either the postal address or fax number to submit our comments rather than e-mail A complete copy of the Federal Register notice is available from the NARA Web site at http://www.nara.gov/nara/fees-pro.html. The proposed Reproduction Fee Schedule covers a number of items, but the the Military Service Records, and the Pension and Bounty-Land Warrants are of the greatest concern to genealogists. NARA proposes three major changes: 1. The NATF Form 80 would be discontinued, to be replaced by two new forms: NATF Form 85 to request both Bounty-Land Warrant application files and Pension files (more than 75 years old), and NATF From 86 to request Military Service Records (more than 75 years old). 2. For all three types of files, NARA would no longer send a selection of pages, but would send the complete file. This would eliminate the two-step process currently used and should be beneficial to most genealogists. 3. The fees for all three types of files would be raised. For Military Service Records the new fee would be $17.00, regardless of the number of pages included in the file. For Bounty-land Warrants the fee would be $17.25, again without regard to the number of pages. For Pension Files the fee would be $40.00, regardless of the number of pages. Finally, the proposal would go into effect on 1 September 2000, if approved. Many genealogists may consider the proposed fees to be excessive. NARA specifically invites comment on the proposed fee schedule. The FGS/NGS Records Preservation and Access Committee urges everyone who wants to comment to carefully read the full proposal before submitting comments. The proposed fees are intended to cover the actual cost of locating, copying and mailing the records, plus 10% as authorized by law, and are based on the average size of the files. NARA states that the average for Military Service Records and Bounty-land Applications is somewhere under 20 pages, while the average for full Pension Files is 105 pages. The FGS/NGS Records Preservation and Access Committee will be looking at the NARA proposal carefully, and will submit comments as appropriate. Individuals who would like to provide input to the Committee's evaluation are welcome to do so but are also encouraged to comment direct to NARA at the address given above. Comments for Committee consideration should be e-mailed to fgs-access@fgs.org, or mailed to Federation of Genealogical Societies, Attention: RPAC, PO Box 200940, Austin, TX 78720-0940. In order for the Records Preservation and Access Committee to adequately evaluate such input it must be received by 26 May 2000. The deadline for comment to NARA, however, is still 26 June 2000. Posting of this message to other mail lists is encouraged. A copy of this message will also be available on the Records Preservation and Access page of the FGS Web site <http://www.fgs.org/fgs-recordsnews.htm> and on the NGS Web site <http://www.ngsgenealogy.org> **************** In the referenced message I wrote "The FGS/NGS Records Preservation and Access Committee urges everyone who wants to comment to carefully read the full proposal before submitting comments." Then, in the very next sentence I demonstrated why one should read CAREFULLY! The offending sentence states "The proposed fees are intended to cover the actual cost of locating, copying and mailing the records, plus 10% as authorized by law...." This is not correct. The proposed fees are intended to cover full costs, but NOT an additional 10%. I misread a portion of the NARA proposal wherein the 10% additional charge is clearly stated to apply to publications of "special works and collections of resources" and to releases of "historical photographic materials and sound recordings." Let me make it completely clear: NARA is not proposing to include a 10% "profit" in the fees. Now that I have so cleverly demonstrated why it is important to read the full release carefully, I must also plead guilty to having hit the Send button before adding a signature line to the message! Some days are just like that! Oh! And if you forwarded the original message to anyone, please do the same with this. Shamefacedly, Jack Brissee Chair, FGS/NGS Records Preservation and Access Committee