Measuring Environmental Performance A Survey Overview EFCOG

1
Measuring Environmental Performance A Survey
Overview EFCOG Environmental ISM WG

• Judy McLemore
• Washington Group International
• Washington Regulatory and Environmental Services

2
Why A Survey?

• Collect information on environmental performance
  metrics used by EFCOG member companies
• Emphasize leading metrics
• Identify other metrics as well
• Determine how are metrics used
• Quantify frequency of measuring/reporting
• Supplement EFCOG performance analysis task
  group's information on current state of
  environmental metrics
• What can we learn from analyzing the data?

3
What was requested?

• Key environmental measures / metrics used by
  sites
• Frequency
• Leading measures or indicators
• Use

Site Date Date Submitted By Email Address Submitted By Email Address Submitted By Email Address Submitted By Email Address Submitted By Email Address
What is the Measure (including units) Include definition why measure was selected? Media Frequency Measured (daily, monthly, etc.) Reported - To Whom Frequency Measure is collected to monitor Measure is collected to monitor Is this a leading indicator? Describe how indicator data is used?
What is the Measure (including units) Include definition why measure was selected? Media Frequency Measured (daily, monthly, etc.) Reported - To Whom Frequency Impacts v EMS Effectiveness v Is this a leading indicator? Describe how indicator data is used?

4
Survey Responses

• Nine sites
• One hundred twenty five measures
• Average of fourteen per site

5
What do we measure?
Fifty eight are measures related to environmental
media
EMS effectiveness and impacts categories
determined by sites
6
What do we measure ?
EMS Effectiveness Impacts Examples EMS P2
? ? Sample Management Percentage ?
? Mobil Sources Emissions ?
? Emergency Sampling Requests ?
? Develop energy and fuel conservation plan ?
7
Good Environmental Performance Metrics Will

• Demonstrate progress toward goals
• Be linked to corporate objectives
• Improve company performance
• Motivate changes in behavior
• High quality, consistent and accurate
• Relatively easy to collect at a reasonable cost
• Clearly stated and understood
• Focus on materials, energy, water, waste,
  emissions
• Based on benchmarking by Global Environmental
  Management Initiative http//www.gemi.org/

8
Demonstrate Progress Toward Goals
Thirty-five percent of our indicators measure
progress toward internal objectives.

• Survey examples
• EMS target to reduce mobile source emissions by
  10 by the end of 2008 versus 2004 baseline.
• Maintain an internal RCRA violation rate of lt2
  of inspections not meeting criteria.
• Increase total materials recycled / total
  materials generated
• Environmental Release Severity Index Target 0.3
• Increase the percentage of environmentally
  preferred products purchased

9
Linked to Corporate Objectives
All support one or more of DOEs environmental
protection goals

• Waste prevention
• Reduction of environmental releases
• Environmentally preferable purchasing
• Environmental stewardship in program planning and
  operational design
• Post Consumer Materials Recycling

10
Measure to Improve Performance

• Leading
• measure environmental practices or operations
  that are expected to lead to improved
  performance.
• Lagging
• measure results of environmental practices or
  operations currently in place

11
Measure to Improve Performance
Leading
Lagging
Measure
Process Input
End-of-Process or Output
Quantitative or Qualitative
Approach
Quantitative
Reflect Current or Future Rather than Past
Performance
Easy to Quantify and Understand
Strength
Often Difficult to Quantify and Evaluate
Root Causes Not Identified
Weakness
Criteria Air Pollutants Enforcement Actions, Fines
Examples
Toxic Materials Eliminated Tons of High Sulfur
Coal
12
Measure to Improve Performance
Framework
Leading Indicators
Lagging Indicators
Input
Output
Processes

• Manufacturing
• Maintenance Repair
• Infrastructure Support
• Storage
• Testing
• Training Fielding
• Transportation
• Demilitarization
• Administration Housing

• Hazardous Raw Materials
• Non-Hazardous Raw Materials
• Energy Resources
• Water Resources

• Air Emissions
• Water Discharges
• Solid Wastes
• Hazardous Wastes

Pollution Prevention Emphasis
End-of-Pipe Emphasis
13
Improving Performance / Changing Behaviors
Most companies use leading indicators but there
is no consensus on them across industry
Two of the greatest barriers in using leading
indicators are finding the right mix and not
adding extra collection / reporting burden.
14
We mostly use.

• Survey Examples - Qualitative
• Recommend environmental language to incorporate
  into contract specifications for FY 07 contracts
• Evaluate fresh water usage and develop water use
  profile
• Materials Management - improve management and
  disposition of excess materials and equipment and
  improve implementation of vacating space
  requirements

Qualitative
Quantitative
15
A few use EPIs!

• Environmental Performance Indice - a score
  representing an aggregation of environmental
  performance benchmarked against a baseline.

Environmental Index Washington Closure Hanford Environmental Index Washington Closure Hanford
Weighting
Score 1 - Air Compliance (AC) calibrations complete / total required 0.25

Score 2 - SPCC Compliance plans in compliance vs. plans reviewed 0.25

Score 3 - Ecological and Cultural Clearances permits/clearances implemented correctly vs. permits/clearances initiated 0.25

Score 4 - Sample Management 0.25
Ideal Score 1 Ideal Score 1

16
Other EPIs used

• Environmental Release Severity Index
• Environmental Document Timeliness Index
• Regulatory Inspection Index
• Environmental Document Quality Index

17
How about ECIs?

• Environmental Condition Indicators

measurement of a quantity or property of a
component of the environment (e.g. contaminant
concentrations in air, water, groundwater, soil,
changes in crop yield or species population size).
Only one reported in survey Wildlife Species
Richness
18
Who receives the metrics and how often?
19
Normalization

• Can make measures more useful for comparison over
  space / time
• Common factors for normalizing are man - hours,
  units of production, revenue
• Nineteen of our measures have been normalized
• Per employee
• Per capita
• Calibrations completed vs. required
• Samples meeting requirements vs. reviewed

20
Is there a "right" number of measures ?

• Our average - 14 per site
• GEMI Benchmarking - 7 per company
• One size does not fit all
• More is not necessarily better
• Managers say greatest barriers to change are
• keeping metrics to a few critical, meaningful
  measures and
• reaching agreement on the most important ones to
  track, record and report

21
Opportunities

• Develop a shared, common understanding of
  leading indicators and how to better identify
  and use them.
• Evaluate site's indicators, are they "good"
  indicators?
• meaningful few (14 / site vs. 7 / company)
• material to our operation
• drive performance improvements/behavior changes
• normalize to make indicators more useful,
  particularly where scopes change (expand,
  contract) routinely.
• Learn more about using EPIs
• Hanford - Washington Closure
• Idaho Completion Project

22
Background
23
Resources

• Global Environmental Management Initiative (GEMI)
• Benchmarking Survey Sustainable Development
  Metrics (January, 2005)
• Survey EHS Metrics and Processes (January,
  2003)
• Measuring Environmental Performance A Primer
  and Survey of Metrics in Use (1998)
• Environmental Performance Indicators,
  Presentation by Maureen Sullivan, Office of the
  Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Environmental
  Security)