NARA Proposes Major Fee Increases for Photocopies

Warning to all U.S. genealogists! Two rules published in the Federal Register on Monday, February 26, 2007, relate to fees for reproductions of records at the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). On page 8327 is a proposed rule revising fees for reproductions to cover NARA's costs for providing copies.  On page 8279 is an interim final rule removing from the fee schedule fees for the reproduction of records of other Federal agencies stored in NARA records centers.

The proposals are written in the finest governmental "legalese" language. However, it is obvious that the proposal is to INCREASE all fees. No surprise there, right? The item that leaps off the page of this proposal, however, is the plan to increase the price of providing copies of Civil War pension applications:  a whopping 338% increase!

The proposals are written in the finest governmental "legalese" language. However, it is obvious that the proposal is to INCREASE all fees. No surprise there, right?

Here is the list:

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       

Type of record	Order form	Proposed Fee
Passenger arrival lists	NATF Form 81	$25.00
Federal Census requests	NATF Form 82	$25.00
Eastern Cherokee applications to the Court of Claims	NATF Form 83	$25.00
Land entry records	NATF Form 84	$40.00
Full pension file more than 75 years old (Civil War period).	NATF Form 85	$125.00 (a 338% increase from the present fee of $37.00!)
Full pension file more than 75 years old (non-Civil War)	NATF Form 85	$60.00
Pension documents packet (selected records).	NATF Form 85	$25.00
Bounty land warrant application files	NATF Form 85	$25.00
Military service files more than 75 years old	NATF Form 86	$25.00

 

 

Both rules are open for public comment until April 27, 2007. There's much more information available in the Federal Register.

The link to the proposed rule is: http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20071800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/E7-3160.htm

The link to the interim final rule is: http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20071800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/E7-3162.htm

Comments

[Barbara]

I never like to see fees increase for the cost of preserving family history.
The increase to $125.00 for the full pension file seems out of line on the surface. However, after reading the rationale for this increase I can agree that it is reasonable that fees cover costs.
A couple of years ago, I requested a pension file of my 2nd great grandmother. The soldier's civil war pension file was 4 pages! But the widow pension file was 237 pages. I paid $37.00 for the package that cost $17.00 alone for first class mail. I am not opposed to paying actual costs on an individual basis. However, a flat fee increase of 338% for every request seems out of line. Perhaps a fee based on actual copy and mailing costs with a reasonable additional service fee for the lookup would be more appropriate.

[Barbara Puster]

It seems the fees for some of these documents are reasonable due to the time it takes to retrieve and send them. Why is the fee proposed for the full pension over 75 years old so much more than that? If some files contain more information and would cost more in time and materials to retrieve, copy and send, then perhaps those files should be charged according the the number of pages sent, with a flat fee as a base charge.

I am grateful that these files are available to researchers. Thank you for your help.

[Jason Presley]

For $125, it would be more reasonable for NARA to just send the requestor a copy of the microfilm roll their record came from. That way, the person could just take the roll to a local library or FHC and have it printed themselves. Would be a lit cheaper to ship. The Tennessee State Archives sells copies of their rolls for somewhere between $20-30.

[Ingrid]

I work for a ministry and make very little money, but I can afford the things I really want. I do my "major" genealogy purchases at tax time when I have some money (one of the perks of near poverty). NARA has been a God-send to me, and I am okay with increases. I have sent for records from California, and paid $1.00 page for a 154 page document. I think I can go $125.00 on a gg-grandfathers pension file, but once a year, not on a weekly or monthly basis.

[kelly]

I think everyone has seen your post, Dick. I ordered three files this morning using the online payment feature, which I have used before and it works great. The NARA immediately sends an email copy of the order with a reference number. In four minutes time, the reference number increased by 212. It seems that they are going to be VERY busy ! ! This increase in price is going to make research very expensive. I have to go look for more names right now ! !

[Joan]

This type of increase will certainly curtail senior citizens or anyone else who is on limited income from asking for and receiving important genealogical facts of their families. I had to send $37.00 twice to get the entire file on one of my relatives -- someone at the archives decided the first time what they thought was important and what was not. When I asked for the complete file the second time, I got a wealth of information not included in the first packet sent. If this happens after, the fee increase, the amount would be astronomical. Give those on limited income a break, please.

[Elsie]

Perhaps the increase in fees will allow NARA to microfilm the Civil War pension records. The only pension records on microfilm are the Revolutionary War records. If CW pensions were microfilmed, it would be great cause we could order the films from NARA or the LDS.

As a former volunteer at the Pittsfield branch of NARA, I have seen the number of patrons decrease from a waiting list for one of the 30+ microfilm readers to 5-9 people per day. The patrons now consist of newbies or those who wish to use the computers because they don't have subscriptions to genealogy sites. I loved helping the patrons and miss it very much. Online info is wonderful, I use it myself. But in my humble opinion, perhaps something is lost by not being with people, sharing and discovering together.

[Bob Franklin]

One has to wonder why the full pension file more than 75 years old (Civil War period), has such a large fee increase. It is my thinking that the NARA is basing their pricing on supply and demand. I have no actual figures at hand but we all know that our Civil War era ancestors are the most researched at all levels today, especially with new genealogist. In the computer age comes large databases and massive number crunching applications. It is my guess that the NARA has run that data through their computers and are basing the fee structure on the results.

With the increase in CW records from the NARA, we might need to look at obtaining pension records at the lower level. I obtained my gg grandfather's CW pension records from the Texas archives at a modest cost.

[Sarah Sheffield]

Regarding the Civil War pension file increase: I think it is too high and out of line with the other increases, but it applies, I believe, only to pensions of Union soldiers, as I think those are what NARA holds. Confederate pension are held in southern states and would not be effected.

[Fran Anderson]

When the fee for Civil War pension files was raised to $37, that stopped me from ordering the records of a couple of great uncles. I had recieved the records for my grandfather and one great uncle just before that fee increase. I certainly could never afford to pay the proposed fees. Even $37 was more than I could afford. It's certainly too bad the records aren't on microfilm.

[Evelyn Hendricks]

Not all Confederate records are held on the state level. I could not find my great-grandfather anywhere on the state level, but I hired someone to search the National Archives for me. They found his record, complete with enlistment date, etc. Of course, that was in the early 1970's. I have no idea if his record finally got to the state archives or not.
Evelyn

[Sarah Sheffield]

Evelyn and others,
I think the Confederate service records are at NARA, but didn't think the actual pension records were there for southern soldiers. Have you received Confederate pension records from NARA? BYW, let's not forget to voice our concerns at the NARA site that Dick posted for official citizen input, which I did.

[John Sentell]

It is sad to know that when people find something that they enjoy, such as genealogy, that someone, a group or company will find a way, explaine it in such a way that people will think they understand, and make a large amount of money for profit.

[John Sentell]

It is sad to know that when people find something that they enjoy, such as genealogy, that someone, a group or company will find a way, explaine it in such a way that people will think they understand, and make a large amount of money for profit.

[Roger Lester]

As a Civil War history buff/genealogist, I find the 338% increase for a pension file to be a little much. I'm going to order pension files on my veteran ancestors that I don't yet have before the increase takes effect.

[Ron Bestrom]

While all of us want to do our genealogy for free, or very inexpensive.
Consider this. The NARA is a Federal Agency but NOT set up for genealogy
research. The archives was established to properly store and maintain
government records. To have workers go through hundreds of boxes in large
warehouses, then individual files, to obtain personal records only for
private genealogical purposes is time consuming and very expensive. The research
time for these archivists, the copy expense, the mailing expense becomes
very expensive.
Also, your math is a bit out of whack... "Full pension file more than 75
years old (Civil War period).NATF Form 85 $125.00 (a 338% increase from the
present fee of $37.00!)" Actually, $37.00 plus 338 % is $162.00. $37.00 to
$125.00 is about 238.1 percent additional.
To research Civil war records, it would probably take several hours
to days to locate the records, time to transfer to a copy machine, copy,
return the records, put the copied records into a mailing and pay postage.
And this is just for ONE request. These people are not paid to just do
genealogy records. If they hired enough people to do genealogy work,
someone would complain of the growth of government employees. These records
are not just in a computer database. They are probably not even on
microfilm. If they were...how long would that take just by itself to scroll
through microfilm records?
Granted, the costs go up. BUT, who would you want to pay for this
research? Another taxpayer?

[Arvina Copeland]

I don't have enough knowledge to comment intelligently. I am going to ask a question though. Why don't they scan the information in and let people access and research it for themselves? They could collect an access fee to pay for doing this. The old papers won't hold up to all the handling anyway. It won't take up near the room and they could easily make backup copies to store at another facility as insurance.

[william T.Arand]

I do not agree with this new proposal to increase the cost across the boards a whopping 338 plus percent.
The NARA should review our e-mails and pick a cost that is fair to all. Why should one person pay $125.00 for 4 pages and another pays $125.00 for 250-400 pages, is this fair ??????????????????.

Come on NARA, reconsider our input and change your cost structure,so you don't come across as thoughtless and greedy.

There are many ideas presented here, that are far more fair to the genealogy public. I to am here to say, you will never get any more money from me at these increased cost, so be nice to we the people that have taken time to respond with " FAIR " to all ideas.

[CW]

I have been to the Archives and they pull the file and you can make the copies. So I know this doesn't take days to do. How can we protest this increase????

[Linda]

I think this is outrageous!!!! Those people only have to copy those records for people who are unable to travel there. If you go there, all they do is pull the file and hand it to you to copy. It sounds to me like the genealogist is being intentionally discriminated against. I would think that family history would be a very important part of the history of America. The NARA should be ashamed of itself! That 338 percent increase on anything is totally uncalled for.

[Bill Gatchell]

My reading of the document describing proposed increase in fees seems to point to the fact that the cost associated with making copies of the Civil War era documents is exceeding the fee currently charge. Further the bulk of requests (7700 Civil Pension records) was specifically the Civil War period. It's our government but if they're not charging enough to cover their projected budget of expenses I see no other alternative then to increase the fees.

Others have commented already to have the fee relevant to the number of pages in the request which might be a viable fee structure. This might however make some requests where the page count is very high out of this world costs for some files.

I read elsewhere that NARA is in an agreement to film/digitize documents with an outside company. This is really the way to go with these genealogists specific documents as well.

Bill Gatchell
San Antonio, TX

[Fred Mussler]

First they cut back the hours they are open, then they raise prices on their services. If the private sector were run this way, our economy would look like that of the old Soviet Union.

[Nancy Porter]

They would have made much more money from me by charging $50/Civil War File (for example) where I would have ordered several files over time than by charging $125 where I won't order any.

[Marie Varrelman Melchiori, CG, CGL]

The Archivist of the United States, Dr. Allen Weinstein, will be up on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, March 14, to talk to the subcommittee on Budget Requests, about the NARA budget.

Rep. Jose E. Serrano (DEM-NY-16th) (jserrano@mail.house.gov) is the sub committee chair of the Financial Services and General Government Committee, that deals with budget requests.

The increase, in prices of the NARA mail order requests is not a budget item. However, anyone with comments about the increase, proposed by the National Archives Trust Fund [NATF], might want to send an email to Rep. Serrano before the meeting, just to keep him in the "loop."

I wasn't able to locate a subcommittee email address but there is a listing of the other members of the committee on the website. The schedule of hearings only covers through the 7th of March so Dr. Weinstein's meeting isn't listed. It might be on Monday.

The main address for locating a member of Congress is: http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home

Even if you have already responded to the website listed in the "Federal Register" it won't hurt to contact Rep. Serrano.

I checked this link today and was able to pull up the original article http://calibre.mworld.com/m/m.w?lp=GetStory&id=243232971http://calibre.mworld.com/m/m.w?lp=GetStory&id=243232971

[Mary H Ray]

I agree fully with the first comment from Barbara. I have no problem with actual cost of photocopies, plus time involved but am convinced that all files do not require $125.00 to reproduce. Mary H Ray

[BETTY ANN WARNER]

I think this is outrageous!!!! I would think that family history would be a very important part of the history of America, and now because a lot of us want to find out about our familys past, now you want to sock it to us.The NARA should be ashamed of itself! That 338 percent increase on anything is totally uncalled for.