| Overall Rating | Bronze - expired |
|---|---|
| Overall Score | 37.67 |
| Liaison | Trina Larson |
| Submission Date | March 1, 2019 |
| Executive Letter | Download |
Chandler-Gilbert Community College
OP-19: Waste Minimization and Diversion
| Status | Score | Responsible Party |
|---|---|---|
|
2.77 / 8.00 |
Sara
Haidle Sustainability Project Assistant Administration |
Figures needed to determine total waste generated (and diverted):
| Performance Year | Baseline Year | |
| Materials recycled | 45.96 Tons | 50.03 Tons |
| Materials composted | 1.80 Tons | 0 Tons |
| Materials donated or re-sold | 0 Tons | 0 Tons |
| Materials disposed through post-recycling residual conversion | 0 Tons | 0 Tons |
| Materials disposed in a solid waste landfill or incinerator | 334.95 Tons | 293.81 Tons |
| Total waste generated | 382.71 Tons | 343.84 Tons |
A brief description of the residual conversion facility, including affirmation that materials are sorted prior to conversion to recover recyclables and compostable materials:
Start and end dates of the performance year and baseline year (or three-year periods):
| Start Date | End Date | |
| Performance Year | July 1, 2017 | June 30, 2018 |
| Baseline Year | July 1, 2014 | June 30, 2015 |
A brief description of when and why the waste generation baseline was adopted (e.g. in sustainability plans and policies or in the context of other reporting obligations):
Figures needed to determine "Weighted Campus Users”:
| Performance Year | Baseline Year | |
| Number of students resident on-site | 0 | 0 |
| Number of employees resident on-site | 0 | 0 |
| Number of other individuals resident on-site and/or staffed hospital beds | 0 | 0 |
| Total full-time equivalent student enrollment | 7,968 | 8,047 |
| Full-time equivalent of employees (staff + faculty) | 558 | 601 |
| Full-time equivalent of students enrolled exclusively in distance education | 1,055 | 824 |
| Weighted campus users | 5,603.25 | 5,868 |
Total waste generated per weighted campus user:
| Performance Year | Baseline Year | |
| Total waste generated per weighted campus user | 0.07 Tons | 0.06 Tons |
Percentage reduction in total waste generated per weighted campus user from baseline:
Percentage of materials diverted from the landfill or incinerator by recycling, composting, donating or re-selling, performance year:
Percentage of materials diverted from the landfill or incinerator (including up to 10 percent attributable to post-recycling residual conversion):
In the waste figures reported above, has the institution recycled, composted, donated and/or re-sold the following materials?:
| Yes or No | |
| Paper, plastics, glass, metals, and other recyclable containers | Yes |
| Food | Yes |
| Cooking oil | No |
| Plant materials | Yes |
| Animal bedding | No |
| White goods (i.e. appliances) | No |
| Laboratory equipment | No |
| Furniture | No |
| Residence hall move-in/move-out waste | No |
| Scrap metal | Yes |
| Pallets | No |
| Tires | No |
| Other (please specify below) | Yes |
A brief description of other materials the institution has recycled, composted, donated and/or re-sold:
Batteries, electric motors, transformers, copper wire recycled along with our scrap metal
Materials intended for disposal but subsequently recovered and reused on campus, performance year (e.g. materials that are actively diverted from the landfill or incinerator and refurbished/repurposed) :
Does the institution use single stream recycling (a single container for commingled recyclables) to collect standard recyclables (i.e. paper, plastic, glass, metals) in common areas?:
Does the institution use dual stream (two separate containers for recyclables, e.g. one for paper and another for plastic, glass, and metals) to collect standard recyclables (i.e. paper, plastic, glass, metals) in common areas?:
Does the institution use multi-stream recycling (multiple containers that further separate different types of materials) to collect standard recyclables (i.e. paper, plastic, glass, metals) in common areas?:
Average contamination rate for the institution’s recycling program (percentage, 0-100):
A brief description of any recycling quality control mechanisms employed, e.g. efforts to minimize contamination and/or monitor the discard rates of the materials recovery facilities and mills to which materials are diverted:
A brief description of the institution's waste-related behavior change initiatives, e.g. initiatives to shift individual attitudes and practices such as signage and competitions:
Students are currently creating signage and marketing materials for waste, recycle, and compost bins to encourage better recycling habits. Students will also be visiting each classroom to inform people of the new food waste recycling program.
A brief description of the institution's waste audits and other initiatives to assess its materials management efforts and identify areas for improvement:
Regarding food waste collection for composting: students are sorting through the food waste collected and monitoring the rate of contamination. This will help show evidence of improvement after education and awareness efforts take effect.
A brief description of the institution's procurement policies designed to prevent waste (e.g. by minimizing packaging and purchasing in bulk):
A brief description of the institution's surplus department or formal office supplies exchange program that facilitates reuse of materials:
Maricopa Community Colleges holds public auctions for our surplus property, including sealed bids on vehicles, specialty equipment, computers, tables, chairs, desks, and more. All auctions and bids are conducted in accordance with Governing Board policies and Arizona regulations, and auctions are conducted by Sierra Auctions Management, Inc.
A brief description of the institution's platforms to encourage peer-to-peer exchange and reuse (e.g. of electronics, furnishings, books and other goods):
Peer to peer exchange is facilitated through email on a district wide level as the first step before sending items to the surplus auction.
A brief description of the institution's limits on paper and ink consumption (e.g. restricting free printing and/or mandating doubled-sided printing in libraries and computer labs):
Standard double sided printing for every computer on campus.
A brief description of the institution's initiatives to make materials (e.g. course catalogs, course schedules, and directories) available online by default rather than printing them:
We don't print course catalogs anymore.
A brief description of the institution's program to reduce residence hall move-in/move-out waste:
A brief description of the institution's programs or initiatives to recover and reuse other materials intended for disposal:
The website URL where information about the programs or initiatives is available:
Additional documentation to support the submission:
Data source(s) and notes about the submission:
We send all of our unwanted furniture, appliances, cars, electronics, etc to Stauffer (surplus auction) so nothing is sent to the landfill. We do not have tonnage data for these waste streams because it hasn't been tracked closely. In the future we intend on tracking this diverted waste more closely.
Performance year (2018) recycling partially estimated by extrapolating data from 2015. Our commingled recycling service at the main campus stopped weighing pickups of the front load dumpsters. Based on interviews with our custodial management, there has been no significant behavior change with recycling since 2015. We are still using the same dumpsters. The previous monthly average recycling tonnage was used to estimate current rates.
We send all of our unwanted furniture, appliances, cars, electronics, etc to Stauffer (surplus auction) so nothing is sent to the landfill. We do not have tonnage data for these waste streams because it hasn't been tracked closely. In the future we intend on tracking this diverted waste more closely.
Performance year (2018) recycling partially estimated by extrapolating data from 2015. Our commingled recycling service at the main campus stopped weighing pickups of the front load dumpsters. Based on interviews with our custodial management, there has been no significant behavior change with recycling since 2015. We are still using the same dumpsters. The previous monthly average recycling tonnage was used to estimate current rates.
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.