Thanks to everyone for your answers...I know we have a lot more work to
do before making any decisions!
-Deanna 

-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Graham Kitchen
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 2:18 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] Cost of storage

Another point to remember here is that if you are only going to replace
the removed records with a plant, what have you really accomplished?

Graham Kitchen
Corporate Records Manager
Unified Western Grocers
5200 Sheila Street
Commerce, California 90040
Telephone:  (323)264-5200 Extension 4560
Cell:  (323)243-1865
email:  [log in to unmask]  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Records Management Program
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of WALLIS Dwight D
> Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 11:30 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Cost of storage
> 
> Doug - just a word of caution for folks on your cost allocation 
> comment.
> When comparing a cost allocation numbers, you want to make sure you 
> are comparing apples and apples. Cost allocation formula are not 
> necessarily unit pricing systems. For example, a cost allocation based

> square footage cost may not compare to a unit price to store a cubic 
> foot charged by a commercial records center (this is where that fuzzy 
> "usage"
> stuff begins to play a role). The unit price component for square 
> footage within that cost allocation formula may work. Or, the cost 
> allocation figure would work if both the active and inactive storage 
> areas are utilizing the same cost allocation formula.
> Understanding the
> allocation formula helps ensure apple to apple comparisons.
> 
> The reason I point this out is the cost allocation may be supporting 
> functions not directly tied to facility square footage (for example, 
> an overall property management function). Changing a storage cost from

> a cost allocation based square footage charge to a unit pricing based 
> storage charge may save direct costs, but end up increasing the 
> remaining square footage charge due to the need to continue to support

> the supported function. In other words, you may not save the money you

> think you will.
> 
> Dwight Wallis, CRM
> Records Administrator
> Multnomah County Fleet, Records, Electronics, Distribution & Stores
> (FREDS)
> 1620 SE 190th Avenue
> Portland OR 97233
> phone: (503)988-3741
> fax: (503)988-3754
> [log in to unmask]
>  
> 
> List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
> Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
> 

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance