Historical Newspapers of South Carolina

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

GAMECOCK LXXIV, No. 72 University of South Carolina Thursday January 28, 1982 ! ? Officials Defend ucr1'. n 1 Af uol s r urcnase ui | Xerox Copier BY TOM COYNE KJnuiC Eflilo. $ Disadvantages of the Addressograph-Multigraph 2850 as well as heavy work load are the justification USC gave in a letter to the Division of General Services citing reasons for using single-source to purchase a Xerox 9500 copier. The letter from Lynn Mahaffey, assistant vice president of administration, to David Warren of General Services Purchasing Office stated, "The Xerox 9500 was found to offer the technology which would enable University Printing to greatly improve internal efficiency at a cost which is overall ^:vjupt;iii.ivc wmi uuneiii processes. "In addition, the capabilities would enable the university to broaden the service offered to using departments and would centralize a large amount of high volume copying in one location. This would act to decrease the need for high volume copying in one location. This would act to decrease the need for high volume copying capabilities throughout the campus and maximize the utilization of the sources." Mahaffev said shp alnnc with T">nn Prnitt nHminictmtirm assistant to the printing department, did a feasibility study to determine how the printshop could better meet the demands of the university. Pruitt said he determined the print shop would have to replace the current Addressograph-Multigraph 2850 to meet the growing needs. The feasibilitv studv hv Mahaftev and w */ "" ?/ ?1 ~ ~ Pruitt determined a Xerox 9500 copier would fill the current need of the university. In the letter Mahaffey stated, "In conjunction with our i 9 need for this equipment, Xerox Corp. is currently offering $12,000 on a trade-in of the Xerox 2400 when any 9000 model duplicator is purchased. The university has one such 2400 that is no longer in use and is available for this trade-in. Thio nffDr fmm Yo^av nvrvi?^ac am M/\i? OA 1 A01 Dr\/>r?i^ ^f a liio u1iv1 11 vui iivi va to uii liuv. OV/ ijol. uctdudc UA the time restrictions, the university requests approval of this proposal as soon as possible to take advantage of the trade-in savings." Two letters were sent from Mahaffey to Warren stating the attributes of the Xerox 9500 and not the reason for using the single-source method. ? ' W.C. Holler, office manager of the Eastman Kodak (Columbia office, said he had not been contacted in USC's feasibility study. IThe letter stated that the university's reason for purchasing the copier rather than renting was, "We reviewed ' Empty Conveni ? j^^K?r^S*? ^B*Wyfc >?aBff\jKlnilBMK?j^H "v-~': ->^ :^i\-~-?,~ -^--.-v-^cc^- -,-v m * c, a . jfi?^HH||^5j3d&^M^^H^n^Sr j Fraternities were denied use of the building m friMMMiMiiiiMttttiwwiitfc'i'ittWfftwttWYiiMivinv-i' ' ' '' B I ip^ Xerox Corp. officals will decide by the en to return the 9500 model copier. several pricing options and found that the purchase option is the most economical. Under the Xerox rental plan the monthly costs would be $5700. The cost under the purchase plan would be $4600 resulting in an annual savings of $1302. Tony-Ellis, a materials management officer for the state 'Department of General Services said the university misused the single-source clause in trying to speed the procurement process. Ellis said the American Bar Association had a grant to draw model procurement code to help all entities of the state in the procurement process. ] He said the five methods were: I Competitive bidding? The agency sets specifications so ] closely there is no doubt as to what the agency wants and the ? lowest bid automatically receives the contract. Competitive proposal? the reliability, technical expertise and interface possibility with current equipment are all taken into consideration. The agency provides a list of criteria for bidders and the proposals are evaluated in ability to meet criteria. The bidders are informed of the criteria. Sole-source? The piece or need of the agency can only be ence Store Off Limits Staff PtMto By LAURA W1IAJND r ilint ii/tiifn <liA ?rtti?>ntiiQM/?n I Uiat' USCU W llUUklV illl/ WIIT VII1\/I1VV v-?V\fl V* PURC UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA No. oivision or nj?cMAsiNc ano supn-r Columbia S C. 29208 - - , IN COKN . f .1 < -VKMI KEOiJ _ :_ J . OATI l,yl5/ni VIHOO* NO ' ? *'yt/ """ ULASE OE. 'E? TH| FOLLOWING T XEKQX CUKP %/A r jankckS THjST a?Aj 3 1JU1 utRVAU i T LuLJHbI A i C 2V2l.lv , v>., SEND ALL INVOICES TO ACCOUNTS PAYABLE I i " ' l<w \* 1 0 M NUMIU j >V>NO ClA*? A^Airt?<A4 *A%QUNt IKX/tUnOM j 6bCJ0 j AlwU S60O0 *l/?W UHfjtd.oo bOLIN - PKIN 1 j 4 ITIMI OjA^nrr U/M c/?QV 3IS?t?mOM ' VH<I rtKI """ 3L^NKt T ?jKUC "< trKcuTIVt l-Vil/Bi I'rtKj o/jO/^2 ! ; 01, l .?.u 1 LOT! 70u 5t> I XlKUX 9^>UO V ^L^KCMCE v^ILt LHjn^.JbOOJ - 1 -> T KH X o oo L o AtKUX ZWvJlPn uN T C^vJlTY ?*v.an ll jT "H ICc *il2fW7.00 i u-ii IKAUt-lM J jC 4LCj'*i d icft * ISU-O ? /U TU L2|<.w0?00 '-Aa.1 OHICc lUl.tiW7.C0 Tlit CaSH CKILC Jt- ?l0i?0V7.C0 rflLi. ue >>Alo KM SlXrt tuUAL ?oO) ? AYM(?N T!i Ut- ??! WAXI<anTY ^a^TS t. LA?OK ;: ! ' V- IT':,,: ' . 'A ( ' ' ' w*' ^ ' ' t d of the week whether they will allow USC Staff Photo by CHIP LOWKLL filled by one source. Emergency need? Some necessary piece of equipment hrpalrc Hnuin Small purchases? for any purchase less than $2,500 the agency is to seek the most reasonable price. Christopher Vlahoplus, senior vice president of administration, said the confusion centered around the new procurement law which went into effect July 1,1981. Under university regulation the purchasing officer, Marion Dantzler, is able to sign such regulations, but the new procurement procedure requires the agency head, President Holderman to submit a letter of justification for the use of the single-source method. Vlahoplus said the order went through the office of Pete Denton, system vice president for business, then on to Ellis' office who approved it. Ellis said his office does not have the power to approve or disapprove the single-source procedure. What he signed was the review installment contract. i To Fraternities By GLENN BURKINS used now by the dining st<l(j Writer service nor are there any future plans for its use. USC fraternities * were HpnipH thp nf n hnilHincr ? ? ?~ "- ? iic oaiw me siui c wdh that once housed a con- closed after the spring venience store operated by semester 1980. "The store the University Dining just wasn't making any Service. money. There was also a Gro.0 I.pnnnrH fnrmpr enri At 1C nrnKl A m uriiK _ 0 OV/I l\/UO pi UU1V/111 Willi l lid t, president of Delta Upsilon, so the store was closed." said his fraternity requested that a lottery be held among Bob Stewart, director of all fraternities that don't auxiliary services said the have a space in the McBryde building is now being used as quadrangle. The winner of a maintenance shop, the lottery would use the building for meeting and a maintenance employee parties. "??v/ *>\/uiu 11 lut'iuuy himself said he had no According to Leonard, knowledge that the building their request was denied for was being used for a shop, no apparent reason. He said, "They never told us why we Mark Shanley, director of couldn't use tne building. I student development, said don't think that the building use of the building was is being used." denied because it was Tony Hardy, director of directly under space already university uining services oeing used as living quarsaid the space is not being ters.