| Overall Rating | Silver - expired |
|---|---|
| Overall Score | 57.04 |
| Liaison | Larry Cook |
| Submission Date | Feb. 29, 2016 |
| Executive Letter | Download |
University of South Carolina
OP-14: Office Paper Purchasing
| Status | Score | Responsible Party |
|---|---|---|
|
0.55 / 1.00 |
Namita
Koppa Assistant Director for Program Management Office of Sustainability |
Does the institution have an institution-wide stated preference to purchase office paper that has recycled content and/or is certified to meet multi-criteria sustainability standards for paper?:
A copy of the paper purchasing policy, directive or guidelines:
The paper purchasing policy, directive or guidelines:
Office Supplies: The University currently utilizes the State Term contracts for office supplies. Their catalogs lists numerousitems identified as having recycled content material by the inclusion of the recycle ‘loop’ symbol. The copy paper purchased through the state recycled paper contract has a 30% recycle content, which meets federal guidelines.
A brief description of steps the institution has taken to ensure that the purchasing policy, directives, or guidelines are followed :
All purchasing of paper at the University of South Carolina is done through a centralized purchasing office, that requires the product to meet certain levels of recycled content. This also allows the purchaser to choose from FSC certified papers.
Does the institution wish to pursue Part 2 of this credit (expenditures on office paper)?:
Expenditures on office paper with the following levels of post-consumer recycled, agricultural residue, and/or FSC certified content::
| Expenditure Per Level | |
| 10-29 percent | 0 US/Canadian $ |
| 30-49 percent | 287,227.73 US/Canadian $ |
| 50-69 percent | 0 US/Canadian $ |
| 70-89 percent (or FSC Mix label) | 0 US/Canadian $ |
| 90-100 percent (or FSC Recycled label) | 0 US/Canadian $ |
Total expenditures on office paper :
The website URL where information about the paper purchasing policy, directive, or guidelines is available:
Data source(s) and notes about the submission:
The information presented here is self-reported. While AASHE staff review portions of all STARS reports and institutions are welcome to seek additional forms of review, the data in STARS reports are not verified by AASHE. If you believe any of this information is erroneous or inconsistent with credit criteria, please review the process for inquiring about the information reported by an institution or simply email your inquiry to stars@aashe.org.