1 / 25

BENCHMARKING SURVEYS FOR RECYCLING AND AFFIRMATIVE PROCUREMENT

BENCHMARKING SURVEYS FOR RECYCLING AND AFFIRMATIVE PROCUREMENT. Al Villareal Sandia National Laboratories. Sandia is a multiprogram laboratory operated by Sandia Corporation, a Lockheed Martin Company, for the United States Department of Energy under contract DE-AC04-94AL85000. INTRODUCTION.

stacy-armstrong
Télécharger la présentation

BENCHMARKING SURVEYS FOR RECYCLING AND AFFIRMATIVE PROCUREMENT

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. BENCHMARKING SURVEYS FORRECYCLING ANDAFFIRMATIVE PROCUREMENT Al Villareal Sandia National Laboratories Sandia is a multiprogram laboratory operated by Sandia Corporation, a Lockheed Martin Company,for the United States Department of Energy under contract DE-AC04-94AL85000.

  2. INTRODUCTION • Benchmarking enhances the P2 Program’s efforts toward continuous improvement • Required to perform benchmarking in prime contract with DOE (Performance Evaluation Plan – Objective 8) • Benchmark = comparison study • Determine SNL/NM’s performance relative to other DOE and governmental sites for FY 2003 • Identified two categories to benchmark • Recycling • Affirmative Procurement

  3. METHODOLOGY • Identify NNSA sites and other exemplary Federal programs to include in benchmark comparison • Identify standardized question set • Conduct study • Pull data from DOE Website • Contact individuals • Send question set and data • Discuss answers to questions • Collate results and present to management

  4. RECYCLING BENCHMARK SURVEY

  5. Recycling Question Set Content • Types and quantities of material recycled • Used FY03 data from DOE Website • Costs, revenues, and opportunities for recycling associated with other recycling programs • Recycling Program descriptions • Whether data set includes all construction and D&D waste

  6. Barbara Markwenas, Argonne National laboratory – East (ANL-E) Joe Coenenberg, Candice Marple, Hanford Site Bruce Campbell, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) Monica Witt, Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) Al Karns, Nevada Test Site (NTS) Susan Michaud, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Bill Allen, Pantex Site Wayne Larson, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) Steve Mackmull, Rod Stewart, John Harley, Savannah River Site (SRS) Participants

  7. RECYCLING APPROACHES • SRS uses single stream collection • All others segregate materials for collection • On-site storage facilities • Hanford, LANL, NTS, Pantex and SNL/NM • Dumpster storage only • ANL-E, LLNL, NTS in Las Vegas, Oak Ridge, and PNNL

  8. RESULTS • Routine Materials Recycled • Paper Products Recycling • “Other Items” • Scrap Metals • Routine Percent Recycle • Recycling Program, Costs Revenues, and Opportunities • Total Recycling including Non-Routine • Conclusions

  9. Costs, Revenues, and Opportunities • Incomplete cost and revenue information • Five of the nine sites • Several sites did not know program costs or revenues • Information provided does not account for the same program components • Not possible to conclude whether one collection and storage system more cost effective • However, having said that . . . . . .

  10. Recycle Program Costs per Person

  11. Total Recycled Materials • Routine = Office and lab generated recyclables • Non- Routine = Construction and D&D • Total Recycle = Routine + Non-Routine

  12. All Non-Routine NOT Reported ANL-E Hanford LANL ORNL PNNL SRS Includes all Non-Routine LLNL NTS Pantex SNL/NM Data Reported

  13. Routine versus Total Percent Recycle

  14. The Rest of the Story

  15. Conclusions • Absolute comparisons between sites are difficult to make • However, the following general conclusions are offered

  16. BEST PRACTICES

  17. General Conclusions • Program success: high correlation with local infrastructure and community support • $$$ spent on a recycling program does not necessarily reflect program success • Minimizing sanitary waste important aspect of overall program success • Total recycle as a % of sanitary waste can only be calculated if all waste data are captured • Recycling concrete is necessary to have a successful program • Recycling mixed paper program is essential to a high routine waste recycle percentage.

  18. SNL/NM Conclusions • Need to increase white paper recovery (general participation by individuals) • Need to initiate mixed paper recycling • Concrete needs to be recycled to have a successful total program

  19. Affirmative Procurement Survey

  20. AFFIRMATIVE PROCUREMENT QUESTION SET • Purchasing systems • Total purchases compared to compliance percentage and recycled purchase percentage • Justification parameters • Inclusion of construction subcontractors • Programs beyond EPP (life cycle thinking, biobased)

  21. AP SELECTED SITES (11) • Sandra Cannon, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory • Jim Behrman, Fish and Wildlife Service Region 6, Colorado • Linda Rice, Fort Eustis and Fort Story, Virginia • John Hix, Naval Undersea Warfare Center Division, Connecticut • Chris Tumbusch, Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio (Did not respond) • Sonja Saltzman, Los Alamos National Laboratory • Keith Trychta, Argonne National Laboratory-East • Darrel Brown, Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory • Tom McGeachen, Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory • Bruce Campbell, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory • David Chen, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

  22. FOR MORE INFORMATION • Both Benchmarking Reports are being processed through the Sandia Review and Approval system and will be available for public distribution in approximately three weeks. To get a copy of each report: • Indicate your interest now. • Visit the web site, http://www.p2.sandia.gov • Contact Jack Mizner (505) 845-3576

More Related