progress report2012 · 2013. 5. 29. · 2012 involved planning and policy development work. the...

2012Progress Report

Published Spring 2013

Available at www.co.washington.or.us/Support_Services/Sustainability

2012 Washington County Sustainability Progress Report | Spring 20132

About WAshington CountyAs a political subdivision of the State of Oregon, Washington County government conducts legislative, executive and some quasi-judicial functions on behalf of its citizens. Located approximately 20 miles to the west of Portland, Washington County has a total area of 726 square miles. The northern and western portions of the county are forested, while the remainder includes urban areas, agricultural lands, and floodplains. In the 2010 census, Washington County’s population was 529,710, making it the second most populous county in the state.

MissionWashington County’s mission is to provide excellent and cost effective services that support healthy, peaceful, safe and sustainable communities; and encourage meaningful participation in community activities and County governance.

LeadershipWashington County is structured as a Council-Manager form of government, giving the five-member Board of Commissioners legislative responsibility and designating administrative authority to a Board-appointed professional administrator.

Board of Commissioners:Andy Duyck, ChairDick Schouten, District 1Greg Malinowski, District 2Roy Rogers, District 3Bob Terry, District 4

County Administrator:Robert Davis

To learn more, please visit: www.co.washington.or.us

Spring 2013 | 2012 Washington County Sustainability Progress Report 3

ExECutivE summAryThis progress report showcases work completed in order to make Washington County more sustainable. It discusses the progress made toward objectives and goals in the County’s Sustainability Plan, key projects spearheaded by departments, and focus areas for the future.

The Sustainability Program is tracking resource use in internal operations as key benchmark areas. Four areas of greatest performance include reducing energy used in County facilities, reducing fuel used in fleet vehicles, increasing recycling in County facilities, and increasing the purchase of environmentally preferred products.

The progress in improving the sustainability of internal operations has helped to lower operational expenses and conserve resources. While some improvements were made through capital investments, others were achieved through a shift in employee behavior. County employees embraced sustainable strategies and best practices in order to be good stewards of County resources. County departments have helped advance sustainability initiatives through projects completed internally and community-wide.

The Sustainability Program is also tracking community sustainability objectives in the plan such as auto use reduction, protection of waterways, recycling and waste reduction. Progress in these areas is much more dependent on community education and involvement, special project funding, and cultural changes, so no specific goals for these were set.

Today the County continues to carry out additional action items outlined in the Sustainability Plan, in order to achieve the benchmarks set by the Sustainability Program. Two areas where the County hopes to see more improvement internally are reducing waste generated and water used in County facilities. In addition, more information is needed in order to track and report the community objectives of transit-supported development and farm and forest land protection.

Looking ahead, the program will evaluate progress made on the goals set for completion by the end of fiscal year 2013, develop the next County Sustainability Plan, and conduct a second Greenhouse Gas Inventory. In addition, the program will collaborate with other departments to integrate sustainability principles into new policies and increase employee education efforts. Finally, more work will be done to measure community-based objectives, collaborate with local partners, and improve community food systems.


introduCtionWith future generations in mind, Washington County has placed an emphasis on sustainability as a framework for planning, policy development, and management. The County is committed to building upon and expanding its sustainability initiatives and practices to support its mission and vision. For Washington County, “sustainability” means that we will meet our current economic, social, and environmental needs while ensuring that future generations are able to meet theirs.

Washington County recognizes the role and responsibility for public agencies to protect and conserve natural resources, use financial resources effectively and efficiently, and celebrate the achievements of a healthy and productive organization. By implementing strategies that address many aspects of sustainability such as energy efficiency upgrades, recycling education, and purchasing of recycled-content office supplies, the County is advancing sustainable practices in day-to-day operations.

BackgroundThe Washington County Board of County Commissioners formalized its commitment to sustainability by adopting a Resolution and Order in support of that effort. The 2009 resolution and framework attachment outlines the County’s commitment to sustainable practices and is reflective of all three aspects of sustainability —environment, economy, and social equity. The County’s approach to sustainability is framed by four milestones: 1) assess opportunities, 2) create action plans, 3) implement action plans, and 4) evaluate and report results.

The Sustainability Program is guided by the objectives included in the resolution. The program is focused in four core areas: 1) planning and policy development, 3) technical assistance to departments, 3) education and outreach, and 4) measurement and tracking of progress.

Accountability Washington County believes sustainability actions must produce measurable results, provide long-term benefits, and improve operational efficiency. The Sustainability Program reports progress toward its objectives to the Board of Commissioners, County employees, and the community. Sustainability is a process of continual improvement, and Washington County is taking disciplined, thoughtful steps that are in the best interest of the organization and community—now and in the future.


mEAsuring ProgrEssA two-year work plan guides Washington County’s continued integration of sustainable practices into its operations, programs, and services. To measure progress against a 2008 baseline and 2013 benchmark goals, Washington County has identified target outcomes for its internal operations. Implementing internal sustainability initiatives requires a collaborative approach and the cooperation of all County departments and staff. Leadership from the County Administrative Office has brought sustainability to the forefront as program and policy decisions are made and new guidelines are rolled out. The internal measures encompass resolution objectives tied primarily to environmental and economic sustainability.

Washington County is also collaborating with jurisdictional and non-governmental partners on community-focused sustainability activities. This includes encouragement of and support for residential and business recycling, mixed-use and transit-oriented development, efficient and effective transit, and bike and pedestrian infrastructure. These community-driven strategies and partnerships, which are mostly voluntary, are an effective, responsible and respectful way to support and coordinate County-wide sustainability efforts. They incorporate resolution objectives around social equity as well as environmental and economic sustainability.

Based on the resolution, objectives and goals have been set for internal (operational) actions as well as community (external) activities in the Washington County Sustainability Plan.

Internal Objectives 2013 Goal Building Energy Use 10 percent decrease Energy Star certified buildings Fleet Fuel Use and Operations Five percent decrease EcoBiz certified service garage Recycling 20 percent increase in County facilities Garbage 20 percent decrease in County facilities Water Use 20 percent decrease in County buildings and landscaping Purchasing Increase proportion of environmentally preferred office supplies Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Conduct GHG inventory Set benchmark for GHG reduction

Community Objectives 2013 Goal Auto Use Reduce vehicle miles traveled and resultant fuel consumption Waterways Protect waterways during road Utilize certified best practices in maintenance and improvement waterway protection Recycling and Garbage Increase regional waste recovery rates toward Metro’s goal of 64 percent Development Increase proportion of dwelling units built in transit-supported development Farm and Forest Land Preserve rural farm and forest land by reducing conversion rate as low as possible


ProgrAm ACComPlishmEntsPlanning and Policy

Some of Washington County’s key sustainability accomplishments in 2012 involved planning and policy development work. The County’s first comprehensive sustainability plan was finalized in May 2012. The plan includes program information, strategies, goals, and action items. In addition, energy and purchasing administrative policies were developed. All program plans and policies are available on the Sustainability Program website.

Technical Assistance to Departments

The Sustainability Program provided technical assistance to all County departments by responding to questions, meeting one-on-one with key staff, and presenting program information at department meetings. In addition, the County’s Sustainability Liaisons, a green team made up of representatives from every department, provides direct assistance and promotes sustainable behavior within each work unit.

In 2012, the program helped departments create their own sustainability plans. Each department (or division) completed a plan which was approved by County administration and presented to staff. Departments were able to select individual sustainability initiatives that made the most sense for their work units. Some departments requested specific employee training on recycling and waste reduction from the County’s Solid Waste and Recycling Program. Some partnered with the Fleet Services Division to create their own idle reduction plans. Others focused on best practices for office-related tasks.

Education and Outreach

The Sustainability Program increased its public and internal presence by updating the program website and developing an intranet site for employees. In addition, education to employees was expanded by adding sustainability information into Employee Orientation and the Employee Reference Guide. The goals of employee education are to instill responsibility for the management of public resources and to create positive behavior change. In 2012, internal education was focused primarily in three key areas: energy use, recycling, and purchasing.

The County is also a member of Partners for a Sustainable Washington County Community, a coalition of 11 organizations working toward making the County more sustainable. By networking with partner agencies and businesses, Washington County is able to share resources, learn best practices, and serve as a community role model.

in 2012, internal sustainabilityeducation focused primarily in three key areas: energy use, recycling, and purchasing.


Measuring and Tracking of Progress

In 2011 and 2012, the Sustainability Program completed a major data management project that included researching, compiling, and analyzing data about County resource use and sustainable improvements. As part of the process, the program developed an audit trail of all data sources for reporting. The program also moved from a calendar year (CY) to a fiscal year (FY) system of tracking internal metrics in order to be consistent with the timeline used by County departments. This helped lay the groundwork for future information tracking and reporting of the County’s progress toward sustainability objectives.

Internal data was normalized by the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) employees in order to get an accurate year-to-year comparison of resource use. FTE is a normalizing factor frequently used in sustainability reporting because it is common to all measures.

Among Washington County’s peers in the region who regularly report on sustainability performance, none of them uses normalized data. Appendix B of this report displays all the data in both normalized and non-normalized form.

ProgrEss on intErnAl mEAsurEsBuilding Energy Use

Objectives: Reduce energy use in County buildings by 10 percent from 2008 to 2013. Meet Energy Star certification standards for those buildings that are eligible.

Total building energy use, electricity and natural gas combined in Kilo British Thermal Units (kBtu) dropped 15 percent overall from FY 2008 to FY 2012. Normalized building energy use (kBtu per FTE) is down 17.6 percent in the same timeframe. It is likely that the vast majority of the energy savings is a result of energy efficiency improvements made by the Facilities Division, especially in heating, ventilation, air conditioning, and lighting upgrades. The County is also working on changing occupant behavior towards conservation (e.g., educating employees to turn off lights, computers and other electronics when they are not needed) to further reduce energy usage.

Key investments in energy- efficient building equipment upgrades helped lower energy use and reduce energy bills.

Data Source: Washington County Support Services Department, Facilities and Parks Division


In 2010, the County’s Public Services Building met Energy Star certification standards set by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Energy Star is a voluntary program that helps businesses and individuals save money and protect the climate through superior energy efficiency. Building energy use must be tracked and reported using EPA’s online Portfolio Manager program in order to be scored for certification. The County is working to improve the energy efficiency of other eligible buildings to help them become Energy Star certified.

From 2008 to 2012, the price of electricity (average cost per kilowatt-hour) has risen by 4.8 percent; however County usage has dropped substantially, helping to lower costs by 12 percent. Natural gas prices (average cost per therm) have dropped 17.5 percent; however with the County’s usage decrease, total costs have lowered 28.3 percent. The decrease in energy bills reduced costs by more than $245,000 from FY 2008 to FY 2012.


Washington County employees are encouraged to dress for the seasons. For the safety of employees and to conserve energy, the County enforces a policy prohibiting the use of space heaters in County buildings.


Fleet Fuel Use and Operations

Objectives: Reduce County fleet fuel use by five percent between 2008 and 2013. Maintain Eco-Logical Business (EcoBiz) certification.

Tracking normalized fleet fuel use (gallons per FTE), the County has reduced gasoline and diesel use 4.8 percent, virtually meeting the goal. However, looking at total fuel consumption in gallons, the use only dropped 1.9 percent. The Sustainability Program has started educating employees on the benefits of reducing idling and planning trips.

Sheriff ’s Office (SO) and Department of Land Use and Transportation (DLUT) have the highest fuel usage of all County departments. From 2008 to 2012, SO fuel use increased 13 percent, but DLUT decreased 16 percent and all other departments decreased 11 percent in fuel use. Fourteen departments, including SO and DLUT, are implementing idle reduction plans which will contribute to total County fuel use reduction.

Data Source: Washington County Support Services Department, Fleet Services Division


The price of fuel (average cost per gallon) has risen 18 percent from 2008 to 2012; however, since County use has not increased as quickly, total fuel bills have risen only 15.6 percent.

Data Source: Washington County Support Services Department, Fleet Services Division

The Fleet Services Division service center was certified as an Eco-Logical Business (EcoBiz) in 2010. Fleet has held this certification by utilizing best practices in waste management and recycling, handling and disposal of hazardous materials, using recycled and re-refined products, and implementing a spill response plan. EcoBiz is a certification program recognizing Oregon businesses that reach high standards in environmental protection. The voluntary program is designed to prevent and minimize solid waste, air and water pollution.


Recycling

Objective: Increase recycling rates in County facilities by 20 percent between 2008 and 2013.

Recycling increased 31.6 percent from FY 2008 to FY 2012, exceeding the County goal. Normalized recycling (cubic yards per FTE) is up 27.7 percent. Sustainability Liaisons and many other employees have worked to keep recyclables out of the garbage stream by making recycling a priority in their programs. In addition, the County’s Solid Waste and Recycling Program helped by providing outreach and technical assistance, including:

• Conducting recycling trainings at employee orientations and staff meetings

• Coordinating the return of hard-to recycle items like Styrofoam ice chests and ice packs that the County’s clinics use for vaccinations

• Providing desk-side recycling boxes and central collection containers

• Creating how-to-recycle posters for employee areas


In early 2012, Facilities helped the County move to centralized garbage and recycling collection. With this system, employees are responsible for emptying their own desk-side garbage and recycling bins into larger centrally-located containers. The County’s janitorial contractor then only has to service the large collection bins in each work unit rather than emptying bins at each work station. This process saves the County money in contracted services and, in some cases, garbage bin liners that are eliminated or reused.


Garbage

Objective: Reduce garbage generated in County facilities by 20 percent between 2008 and 2013.

Total garbage volume is down 0.5 percent and normalized garbage volume (cubic yards per FTE) dropped about 2.5 percent from FY 2008 to FY 2012. Garbage and recycling amounts are reported as the size of containers emptied by our waste management hauler since actual measured volumes and weights are not available for all sites. Waste reduction (as opposed to recycling) has been less of an educational focus for employees to date; it will be emphasized more starting in 2013 by promoting reuse, encouraging low waste practices, and enabling expanded recycling services. Another priority will be to downsize garbage containers to reduce garbage volume and save money.

A materials recovery rate can be determined by taking the total amount of recycling and dividing it by the total amount of waste generated (garbage plus recycling). The materials recovery rate at County facilities increased 6.3 percent from FY 2008 to FY 2012, and is currently at 40 percent.



Water Use

Objective: Reduce water use in County buildings and landscaping by 20 percent between 2008 and 2013.

Total water use is down 0.4 percent and normalized water use (water use per FTE) has dropped 2.6 percent from FY 2008 to FY 2012. Employee education on water usage will increase starting in 2013 by promoting conservation strategies. From 2010 to 2012 there is a 15 percent decrease in water use (after a 15 percent rise from 2008 to 2010). The decrease is most likely due to improved irrigation efficiency and leak fixes. The Sustainability Program plans to see if more improvements can be achieved through employee education efforts and additional operations improvements.

The price of water (average cost per cubic foot (CCF)), has risen 27.8 percent from 2008 to 2012; however, since County usage dropped, total water bills have only risen 24.6 percent.



Purchasing

Objective: Increase the proportion of environmentally preferred office supplies purchased.

Purchase of environmentally preferred office supply products increased by 16 percent from April 2011 through June 2012. Environmentally preferred (or green) purchases include supplies containing recycled content materials, items that are refillable, and non-toxic products. At the end of FY 2012, green purchases made up about two-thirds of all County office supply purchases.

The County’s Central Services and Purchasing divisions are encouraging more sustainable procurement practices. For example all employees can pick up gently used supplies from the County’s ReUse Store in order to reduce the need to purchase new items. In addition:

•Office supply purchasing costs have decreased about 11 percent over the past three years.

•The County’s ReUse Store receives about 45 visits per month.

•Sustainable Purchasing Administrative Policy and Guidelines were adopted in April 2012 and they focus on reducing, reusing, and recycling products.

Data Source: Office Max; data tracking started in April 2011.

Environmentally preferred products made up about two-thirds of all County office supply purchases in 2012.


rEPorting on Community mEAsurEsAuto Use

Objective: Reduce vehicle miles traveled and resultant fuel consumption.

This objective includes alternative transportation programs and infrastructure that improve multi-modal options within the Washington County community. The chart below shows additions of county-funded bike lanes, sidewalks, and other pedestrian improvements such as widened shoulders and asphalt paths on county roads. Tracking of pedestrian improvements began in 2011.

The objective also includes programs that address trip reduction, the use of public transportation, and carpooling. While the county’s population increased 3.4 percent from 2008 to 2012, this chart shows a 3.1 percent drop in estimated average annual vehicle miles traveled during that same period. Estimated per capita fuel consumption is also down 3.5 percent from 2008 to 2012. In addition, the total estimated number of vehicle trips in Washington County increased at just half the rate of population growth during the same period.

Data Source: Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation


Waterways

Objective: Protect waterways during road maintenance and improvement. Maintain federal and state certifications for best practices in waterways protection.

Protecting the natural habitat is a priority when the County conducts routine road maintenance and improvement activities. In addition, the County strives to enhance waterway conditions to restore access to native fish and wildlife with its road projects. These charts show the number of fish-friendly crossings constructed and the number of newly fish-accessible stream miles added from FY 2008 to FY 2012.

Data Source: Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation

Washington County played a leadership role in developing the Fish Passage Programmatic Agreement with the oregon department of Fish and Wildlife. the agreement streamlines the approval process through predictable design and construction requirements for bridge and culvert projects.


The County has maintained federal and state certifications for best practices in protecting streams and rivers since 2006 and 2010 respectively. The certifications include:

• National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) approval under Limit 10 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) section 4(d) rule. The Regional Road Maintenance ESA Program Guidelines describe physical, structural, and managerial best practices that reduce road maintenance activities’ impacts on water and habitat.

• Fish Passage Programmatic Agreement from Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. This agreement allows the County to undertake roadway stream crossing projects without project-by-project regulatory approval by utilizing predictable design and construction requirements for bridge and culvert projects.

Recycling and Garbage

Objective: Increase regional waste recovery rates toward Metro’s goal of 64 percent.

Our third community objective relates to recycling and garbage generated within the Metro region (Washington, Clackamas, and Multnomah counties). Not only has overall waste dropped almost 17 percent since 2008, waste disposed to the landfill has dropped 22 percent. Recovered waste includes materials diverted for recycling, composting, or energy generation.

The region is making progress toward Metro’s 64 percent total materials recovery goal. The recovery rate for the region was 59.3 percent at the end of 2011.

Data Source: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality’s Oregon Material Recovery and Waste Generation Rates Report


Data Source: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality’s Oregon Material Recovery and Waste Generation Rates Report

County sPECiAl ProjECtsEnergy Efficiency, Renewable Energy, and Environmental Protection

The Facilities and Parks Services Division is leading the charge for the County’s work in energy improvements and conservation. Per the resolution framework, the division has prioritized energy efficiency and increased the use of renewable energy. Key investments in energy-efficient building equipment upgrades have helped lower energy use and reduce energy bills.

A 69 kW rooftop solar panel array installed on the Public Services Building in 2012 is helping to reduce the amount of electricity the County purchases. In addition, the County installed electric vehicle charging stations which are available for public and employee use.

The County completed a comprehensive energy management pilot through the Energy Trust of Oregon that fostered new energy data tracking, set priorities for future improvements, and provided incentives for efficiency projects. The County conducted an energy management assessment and developed an energy policy as part of this process. Facilities received special recognition for their work establishing a County Energy Team as a part of this pilot.

The County’s Facilities and Parks Division also became EcoBiz-certified in 2012. This certification recognizes landscape design, installation and maintenance that reach the highest standards in environmental protection. The goal of the program is to prevent and minimize pollution.


Waste Reduction and Recycling

The County’s Solid Waste and Recycling Program led an exceptional effort in waste recovery at the 2012 Washington County Fair. Based on a waste sort that was conducted at an earlier Fair, Program staff created the first recycling and waste reduction master plan for the Fair and set a goal of diverting 25 percent of waste material through recycling and composting.

Food composting is not widely available for businesses in Washington County, so this project required special coordination with the waste hauler, janitorial service, and the 21 food vendors at the 2012 Fair in order to capture pre-consumer food scraps.

Program staff also expanded public collection of beverage containers throughout the fairgrounds and coordinated volunteers monitoring collection sites to reduce contamination.

After the Fair, the Solid Waste and Recycling program determined that they exceeded their goal by recovering 26 percent (3.6 tons) of waste that would have gone to the landfill. In addition, the Sustainability Program worked with Tualatin Valley Community Television during the Fair to produce an informational video of the project and further showcase the sustainability efforts. To date the video has been viewed more than 500 times.

looKing AhEAdIn 2013 the Sustainability Program plans to continue monitoring and tracking County progress toward the FY 2013 goals. In addition, the program will continue to work on a number of planning, educational, and community-based projects. A few highlights of the work plan are listed below.

Internal Measures

The Sustainability Program will develop the next County Sustainability Plan, including action items and metrics. In addition, the program will set new benchmarks because current goals expire in 2013.

The Sustainability Program anticipates completion of a second GHG emissions inventory associated with internal County operations. In 2011, Washington County completed a baseline inventory of GHG emissions from internal operations. The second report will provide trend information on the County’s emissions, guide future conservation efforts, and help determine a benchmark for GHG reduction.

Progress on many of the internal measures is dependent on changing employee behavior. To that end, the Sustainability Program will ramp up employee education. The County’s Sustainability Program Educator will lead efforts to educate staff on sustainable behaviors, expand opportunities for learning, and increase outreach capacity. In addition, the newly launched Employee Suggestion Program will solicit ideas for making County operations more sustainable and reward employees for top suggestions.

3.6 tons of waste were diverted from the landfill at the 2012 Washington County Fair.


Community Measures

The Sustainability Program has been collaborating on a sustainable food systems plan by working with partners in OSU Extension Service, County Public Health, and County Administration. The group will develop a plan that includes strategies and actions to promote healthy people, a strong local economy, and a flourishing agriculture industry.

The Sustainability Program plans to coordinate with the Department of Land Use and Transportation to track the expansion of green building opportunities within the County and seek other ways to quantify and measure community sustainability initiatives. Objectives related to transit-supported development and preservation of farm and forest land will need to be analyzed for future reporting.

The Sustainability Program will continue to work with Partners for a Sustainable Washington County Community, a coalition of 11 public and private agencies working together to make the County more resilient. One priority for 2013 includes establishment of common organizational sustainability objectives and metrics.

About thE ProgrAmWashington County’s Sustainability Program provides guidance for best sustainable practices throughout the organization and in our community. In 2009, the County established the Sustainability Coordinator position to focus primarily on improving the sustainability of internal operations through education and action. The Coordinator works with all departments to learn about their practices and helps make recommendations for improvements to save money, resources, and provide better service. Many departments and divisions spearhead their own sustainability efforts, especially as a means for improving efficiency and reducing costs.

A County-wide team of Sustainability Liaisons was established in 2010 to serve as conduits of information between the Sustainability Program and the various County departments. The Liaisons have played an integral role in encouraging best practices, advocating for sustainable improvement, and leading by example.

In 2012, the Sustainability Program Educator position was established in order to help expand employee education, improve community outreach, and lead coordination of the Partners for a Sustainable Washington County Community.


Acknowledgements

Many County departments and divisions have contributed to the success of the Sustainability Program. In addition, several key employees provided data, information, and assistance for this report. Those employees include:

Sia Lindstrom County Administrative Office

Zane Hadzick and Janna Allgood Sustainability Program

Tom Baylis and Arleen Stephens Fleet Services Division

Candi Paradis, Bill Gamble, and Jan McFarland Facilities and Parks Services Division

Theresa Koppang, Heather Robinson, and Michelle Pimentel Solid Waste and Recycling Program

Stephen Roberts and Shelley Oylear Department of Land Use and Transportation

Mike Strauhal Central Services Division


APPEndix AStatus of 2012-13 Sustainability Work Plan Activities

This matrix forms the foundation for Washington County’s Sustainability Plan. It includes the Board’s sustainabil-ity objectives, the organization’s activities, which department/division/program holds primary responsibility for implementing each activity, proposed outcome measures, and the current status.

Internal Objectives

Status of 2012-13 Sustainability Work Plan Activities

This matrix forms the foundation for Washington County’s Sustainability Plan. It includes the Board’s sustainability objectives, the organization’s activities, which department/division/program holds primary responsibility for implementing each activity, proposed outcome measures, and the current status.

Internal Objectives

Resolution Objectives 2012-13 Work Plan Activities

Primary Responsibility

Proposed Outcome Measures

Status

Create appropriate policies/guidelines for green building standards for all new or renovated county property.

Facilities new buildings will use less energy and fewer non-renewable resources.

Future project

Create and implement a plan for water reduction strategies throughout the organization. this plan could result in the creation of organizational policies/guidelines.

Facilities reduce water use. Future project

reduce energy consumption.

CompletedCreate and implement a plan for energy use reduction using Energy trust’s Energy management Assessment/Plan process. Pursue Energy star designation for the juvenile building.

Facilities and sustainability Program receive Energy star

designation. in progress

reduce toxics in County buildings.

in progress Pursue appropriate “good housekeeping” certification for our cleaning products and services.

Facilities

increaseenvironmentally-preferred products.

in progress

Pursue appropriate certification for our grounds and parks maintenance.

Facilities meet standards for best practices in sustainable grounds maintenance.

Completed

1. realize economic and resource savings through the construction, operation, and maintenance of high performance public buildings and landscapes.

integrate updated pest management strategies and pursue certification as appropriate.

Facilities reduce toxics used in county landscaping.

Completed

Create Fleet procurement guidelines that optimize fuel efficiency, right sizing, alternate fuels, and emerging technologies.

Fleet reduce fuel consumption and emissions.

in progress

Work with departments to implement new idling guidelines

Fleet and sustainability Program

reduce fuel consumption and emissions.

in progress

2. Enhance the fuel efficiency of County fleet vehicles and use of alternative fuels as practicable.

maintain “green” fleet services certification.

Fleet meet standards for best practices in sustainable fleet services.

Completed





Status

Create and implement a plan for paperless workflow and electronic records management strategies throughout the organization. this could result in the creation of policies/guidelines.

its reduce paper consumption and waste.

Future project 3. Enhance recycling rates in County operations…and promote waste reduction at the source.

integrate waste reduction and recycling education into new employee orientation.

solid Waste and recycling Program

reduce waste and increase recycling rates.

Completed

Assess success of green office supply purchasing program. implement changes as appropriate.

Purchasing and sustainability Program

increase the proportion of green office supplies purchased.

Completed4. develop sustainable procurement strategies for all County operations where practicable.

Assess need and create appropriate policies/guidelines for sustainable procurement practices.

Purchasing and sustainability Program

increase the proportion of green office supplies purchased.

Completed

reduce energy consumption.

CompletedCreate and implement a plan for energy use reduction using Energy trust’s Energy management Assessment/Plan process. Pursue Energy star designation for the juvenile building.

Facilities and sustainability Program receive Energy star

designation. in progress

5. Prioritize energy efficiency and increase the use of renewable energy.

support electric vehicle infrastructure development.

Facilities, Fleet, and CAo legislative team

Add Ev charging infrastructure.

Completed

Create employee telecommute and alternative work schedule policies/guidelines.

human resources andsustainability Program

increase telecommuting options for employees.

in progress

Continue to support Employee Commute options program, including Passport Program, carpool assistance, bike and pedestrian facilities. Fully comply with ECo trip reduction goals through these initiatives.

Facilities, human resources, and sustainability Program

reduce vehicle miles traveled (vmt).

Completed/Ongoing

Create and implement a plan to increase the number of County services offered electronically.

its and departments

reduce paper usage, waste. increase customer efficiency.

Future project

6. support transportation programs and infrastructure that address capacity, multi-modal options, trip reduction, and the use of public transportation and car pooling.


Facilities, Fleet, and CAo legislative team

Add Ev charging infrastructure.

Completed

7. invest in facilities, equipment, and durable goods that reflect the highest feasible efficiency and lowest life cycle costs.

referenced in objectives 1 and 4 above.

Facilities and Purchasing

reduce waste, energy use, and water use.

in progress

Internal Objectives


Internal ObjectivesResolution Objectives 2012-13 Work Plan

Activities Primary Responsibility


Status

Continue to coordinate the annual Energy Fair to educate County staff on ways to reduce energy use at work and home.

Facilities and sustainability Program

reduce energy use. Completed/Ongoing

Continue to convene the sustainability liaisons and set goals for staff education on sustainability practices, including energy and water use reduction, recycling, waste reduction, green purchasing practices, and employee commute options.

sustainability Program

reduce waste, resource use, and emissions.

Completed/Ongoing

increase visibility of the County’s sustainability efforts via the County’s website and community outreach efforts (e.g., tabling at community events).

sustainability Program and departments

n/A Completed/Ongoing

integrate sustainability into new employee orientation.


reduce waste, energy use, and water use.

Completed

reduce waste, energy use, water use, and emissions.

Completed

8. develop and implement communication and education plans to promote and report on the County’s sustainability activities and “best practices.”

Create department-specific sustainability plans to address idling reduction, waste reduction and recycling, energy and water use reduction, paperless workflow, electronic records management, electronic service access, and other sustainable strategies as appropriate.

sustainability Program and departments

increase usage of durable goods, recycling, and e-records storage.

Completed

9. Participate in Partners for a sustainable Washington County Community (PsWCC) and other collaborations to document “best practices,” share information, and develop collaborative programs and efforts.

serve on governing board and operations team of PsWCC. Participate in other local and regional sustainability networks as appropriate.

CAo andsustainability Program

n/A Completed/Ongoing

Produce trend data for the Program.

in progress Prepare a greenhouse gas inventory of internal operations using 2009 - 2012 data.


set goals for reduction. Future project

10. monitor and measure progress and report periodically to the board of Commissioners.

report progress on outcome measures annually to the board of Commissioners. make report available to the community by posting it on the County website.

CAo andsustainability Program

n/A Completed


Community ObjectivesCommunity Objectives




Status

1. Emphasize land use planning, development, and building policies and practices that promote sustainable communities.

implement various strategies to promote auto use reduction, green building strategies, and transit-supported development.

dlut reduce vehicle miles traveled (vmt), emissions, energy and resource use.

Completed/Ongoing

implement various strategies to preserve farm and forest land, including waterways protection strategies for dlut routine road maintenance

dlut natural resources conserved.

Completed/Ongoing 2. Protect and foster productive and healthy agriculture, green spaces and natural resource lands.

implement food system strategies.

hhs and osu Extension

develop and implement a strategic action plan.

in progress

3. support transportation programs and infrastructure that address capacity, multi-modal options, trip reduction and the use of public transportation and car pooling.

implement various strategies to promote auto use reduction and transit-supported development.

dlut reduce vehicle miles traveled (vmt), emissions, energy and resource use.

Completed/Ongoing

4. Enhance recycling rate in the community and promote waste reduction at the source.

implement residential recycling and recycle at Work programs to support community adoption of recycling and waste reduction strategies.

solid Waste and recycling Program

reduce waste. increase proportion of recycled material.

Completed/Ongoing

Continue support for the DriveLess/Save More campaign.

CAo legislative team

reduce vehicle miles traveled (vmt), emissions, energy and resource use.

Completed/Ongoing


Facilities and CAo legislative team

reduce emissions and energy use.

Completed/Ongoing

5. support legislative and economic development initiatives consistent with the County’s interests.

implement food system strategies.

hhs and osu Extension

increased access to sustainable food options.

Completed/Ongoing


APPEndix bSustainability Program Data

The tables in this appendix include the data used in the graphs found throughout the 2012 Progress Report. The data is sourced from departments within Washington County unless otherwise noted.

Internal Objectives

The data for the internal objectives was normalized from year to year by using the total number of full time equivalent (FTE) employees. June 30 was selected for tabulating the number of regular County employees; temporary employees are not included.

Total regular FTE on June 30 2008 1,735.39 2009 1,765.47 2010 1,741.57 2011 1,782.97 2012 1,788.70

Building Energy

Sustainability Program Data

The tables in this appendix include the data used in the graphs found throughout the 2012 Progress Report. The data is sourced from departments within Washington County unless otherwise noted.

Internal Objectives

The data for the internal objectives was normalized from year to year by using the total number of full time equivalent (FTE) employees. June 30 was selected for tabulating the number of regular County employees; temporary employees are not included.

Total regular FTE on June 302008 1,735.39

2009 1,765.47

2010 1,741.57

2011 1,782.97

2012 1,788.70

Building Energy

FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 Building Energy Use

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline total building electrical energy use (kWh) 16,746,599 16,682,733 -0.4% 15,963,330 -4.7% 15,382,891 -8.1% 14,050,606 -16.1% total building natural gas use (therms) 544,293 565,010 -96.6% 551,205 -96.7% 551,063 -96.7% 468,739 -97.2% total building electrical energy use (kbtu) 57,139,396 56,921,485 -0.4% 54,466,882 -4.7% 52,486,424 -8.1% 47,940,668 -16.1% total building natural gas use (kbtu) 54,429,300 56,501,000 3.8% 55,120,500 1.3% 55,106,300 1.2% 46,873,900 -13.9%

Total kBtu 111,568,696 113,422,485 1.7% 109,587,382 -1.8% 107,592,724 -3.6% 94,814,568 -15.0%

kBtu/FTE 64,290 64,245 -0.1% 62,924 -2.1% 60,345 -6.1% 53,008 -17.5%

FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 Building Electricity Cost

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline total building electrical energy use ($) $1,250,798 $1,278,451 2.2% $1,261,689 0.9% $1,201,064 -4.0% $1,100,112 -12.0% building electrical energy use per FtE ($/FtE) $721 $724 0.5% $724 0.5% $674 -6.5% $615 -14.7%

FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 Building Natural Gas Cost

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline total building natural gas use ($) $333,904 $355,019 6.3% $310,409 -7.0% $290,198 -13.1% $239,512 -28.3% building natural gas use per FtE ($/FtE) $192 $201 4.5% $178 -7.4% $163 -15.4% $134 -30.4%

Fleet Fuel

FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 Fleet Fuel Use and Cost

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline total fuel consumption (gallons) 450,420 438,560 -2.6% 432,626 -4.0% 450,233 0.0% 441,879 -1.9% Fuel consumption per FtE (gallons/FtE) 260 248 -4.3% 248 -4.3% 253 -2.7% 247 -4.8%

total fuel costs ($) $1,343,243 $1,074,594 -20.0% $1,092,687 -18.7% $1,369,599 2.0% $1,553,233 15.6%

Fuel costs per FtE ($/FtE) $774 $609 -21.4% $627 -18.9% $768 -0.8% $868 12.2%

Fleet Fuel


baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from



baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from


Fleet Fuel


baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from


total fuel costs ($) $1,343,243 $1,074,594 -20.0% $1,092,687 -18.7% $1,369,599 2.0% $1,553,233 15.6%



baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from



baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from


Fleet Fuel


baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from


total fuel costs ($) $1,343,243 $1,074,594 -20.0% $1,092,687 -18.7% $1,369,599 2.0% $1,553,233 15.6%



RecyclingRecycling

FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 Recycling Generated in Buildings

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline

total building recycling volume (yds3) 2,483 2,696 8.5% 2,836 14.2% 3,512 41.4% 3,268 31.6%

building recycling volume per FtE (yds3/FtE) 1.4 1.5 6.7% 1.6 13.8% 2.0 37.6% 1.8 27.7%

Garbage

FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 Garbage Generated in Buildings

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline

total building garbage use (yds3) 4,907 4,832 -1.5% 4,938 0.6% 4,831 -1.5% 4,929 0.4%

building garbage use per FtE (yds3/FtE) 2.8 2.7 -3.2% 2.8 0.3% 2.7 -4.2% 2.8 -2.5%

total waste, garbage plus recycling (yds3) 7,390.4 7,527.6 1.9% 7,773.8 5.2% 8,342.8 12.9% 8,196.8 10.9%

recovery rate, recycling divided by total 33.6% 35.8% 2.2% 36.5% 2.9% 42.1% 8.5% 39.9% 6.3%

Water

FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 Building Water Use and

Cost baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline total water use in cubic feet (CCF) 49,989 55,748 11.5% 57,433 14.9% 51,775 3.6% 50,183 0.4%

Water use per FtE (CCF/FtE) 29 32 9.6% 33 14.5% 29 0.8% 28 -2.6%

total water use (gallons) 37,391,540 41,699,235 11.5% 42,959,884 14.9% 38,727,700 3.6% 37,536,884 0.4% Water use per FtE (gallons/FtE) 21,546 23,619 9.6% 24,667 14.5% 21,721 0.8% 20,986 -2.6%

total water use cost ($) $85,285 $99,104 16.2% $109,868 28.82% $109,282 28.14% $114,376 34.1%

Water use per FtE ($/FtE) $49 $56 14.2% $63 28.4% $61 24.7% $64 30.1%

Garbage

Recycling


baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline



Garbage


baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline





Water


Cost baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from






Water

Recycling


baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline



Garbage


baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline





Water


Cost baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from






Purchasing

The County’s office supply vendor started providing data on environmentally preferred (green) purchases in spring 2011.

Purchasing

The County’s office supply vendor started providing data on environmentally preferred (green) purchases in spring 2011.

Monthly Cost Percent of Purchases Three-month Average Office Supply Purchases total green other green other green

April 2011 $22,044 $12,202 45% 55%

may 2011 $30,771 $16,998 45% 55%

june 2011 $24,233 $14,480 40% 60% 43% 57%

july 2011 $45,781 $35,716 22% 78%

August 2011 $30,779 $12,366 60% 40%

september 2011 $19,785 $7,881 45% 55% 42% 58%

october 2011 $59,733 $41,246 31% 69%

november 2011 $20,790 $9,064 47% 53%

december 2011 $23,080 $11,275 42% 58% 40% 60%

january 2012 $30,769 $22,897 26% 74%

February 2012 $23,468 $16,953 28% 72%

march 2012 $28,121 $20,741 26% 74% 27% 73%

April 2012 $45,290 $39,696 13% 87%

may 2012 $26,668 $19,531 27% 73% june 2012 $33,584 $23,842 29% 71% 23% 77%

data source: office max


Community Objectives

Auto Use

Community Objectives

Auto Use

CY 2009 CY 2010 1/1/11-6/30/11 FY 2012 Auto Use Reduction Measures

measurement baseline

yearbaseline

value value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline

Population estimates

july 1, from Psu Population research Center 2008 518,581 525,641 1.4% 531,070 2.4% n/a n/a 536,370 3.4%

total auto use

total fuel sales (gallons) from state gas tax reports multiplied by Avg Fuel Efficiency of light duty vehicles (miles) from bureau of transportation statistics 2008 4,896,988,302 4,973,924,848 1.6% 4,912,903,362 0.3% n/a n/a 4,906,479,837 0.2%

total fuel consumption

total fuel sales (gallons) from state gas tax reports 2008 206,623,979 208,988,439 1.1% 206,424,511 -0.1% n/a n/a 206,154,615 -0.2%

Per capita auto use

total auto use divided by population estimate (miles per capita) 2008 9,443 9,463 0.2% 9,251 -2.0% n/a n/a 9,148 -3.1%

Per capita fuelconsumption

total fuel consumption divided by population est. (gallons per capita) 2008 398 398 -0.2% 389 -2.4% n/a n/a 384 -3.5%

bikeways County-funded bike lanes added (miles) 2008 9.5 6.2 n/a 7.2 n/a 0.8 n/a 4.4 n/a

sidewalks

County-funded (mstiP) sidewalks added (miles) 2008 6.8 5.6 n/a 4.3 n/a 0.8 n/a 4.4 n/a

Pedestrian improvements

sidewalks, asphalt paths, widened shoulders added (miles) 2011 0.7 n/a n/a n/a n/a 0.7 n/a 1.2 n/a

bicycle use bike counts at five locations Fy 12 1,033 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 1,033 n/a

WaterwaysWaterways

FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 Waterways Protection

Measures measurement baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline

total fish-friendly structures installed in current year

installations (number constructed) 3 2 n/a 6 n/a 1 n/a 3 n/a

total upstream miles opened to fish passage in current year

upstream benefits (miles) 4.5 0.56 n/a 9.64 n/a 0.1 n/a 3.35 n/a

Cumulative miles opened since 2008 total miles 4.5 5.06 12.4% 14.7 226.7% 14.8 228.9% 18.15 303.3%


CY 2008 CY 2009 CY 2010 CY 2011 Recycling and Waste Reduction Measures

measurement baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline

Waste recovered (lbs per capita) 1,529 1,356 -11.31% 1,352 -11.58% 1,349 -11.77%

Waste disposed (lbs per capita) 1,516 1,334 -12.01% 1,252 -17.41% 1,180 -22.16% Waste generated, recycled, and disposed Waste generated (lbs per capita) 3,045 2,690 -11.66% 2,603 -14.52% 2,530 -16.91%

Calculated recovery rate (recovered/generated) - percent 50.2% 50.4% 0.2% 51.9% 1.7% 53.3% 3.1%

recovery rate total recover rate (includes 6% recovery credits) 56.2% 56.4% 0.20% 57.9% 1.7% 59.3% 3.1%

data source: oregon department of Environmental Quality’s oregon material recovery and Waste generation rates report

Waterways

FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 Waterways Protection

Measures measurement baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline

total fish-friendly structures installed in current year

installations (number constructed) 3 2 n/a 6 n/a 1 n/a 3 n/a

total upstream miles opened to fish passage in current year

upstream benefits (miles) 4.5 0.56 n/a 9.64 n/a 0.1 n/a 3.35 n/a

Cumulative miles opened since 2008 total miles 4.5 5.06 12.4% 14.7 226.7% 14.8 228.9% 18.15 303.3%


CY 2008 CY 2009 CY 2010 CY 2011 Recycling and Waste Reduction Measures

measurement baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline value

Change from

baseline

Waste recovered (lbs per capita) 1,529 1,356 -11.31% 1,352 -11.58% 1,349 -11.77%

Waste disposed (lbs per capita) 1,516 1,334 -12.01% 1,252 -17.41% 1,180 -22.16% Waste generated, recycled, and disposed Waste generated (lbs per capita) 3,045 2,690 -11.66% 2,603 -14.52% 2,530 -16.91%

Calculated recovery rate (recovered/generated) - percent 50.2% 50.4% 0.2% 51.9% 1.7% 53.3% 3.1%

recovery rate total recover rate (includes 6% recovery credits) 56.2% 56.4% 0.20% 57.9% 1.7% 59.3% 3.1%

data source: oregon department of Environmental Quality’s oregon material recovery and Waste generation rates report


For more information, contact:Robin Straughan, Sustainability Coordinator

155 N First Ave, Suite 270, Hillsboro, OR 97124503-846-8857 | [email protected]

www.co.washington.or.us/Support_Services/Sustainability

progress report2012 · 2013. 5. 29. · 2012 involved planning and policy development work. the...

Documents