![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Case Study
Okemos Public Schools (Michigan)
"Cleaner Air Program - School Buses" (CAPSB)
Overview:
Very early on, Okemos Public Schools (the District) recognized the importance of reducing their students' exposure to diesel exhaust by partnering with the Michigan state environmental agency, other area school districts, the local technology vendor and the rest of the community. The District's leadership efforts created a successful public-private partnership and created the opportunity to apply for and win a competitive grant through the Clean School Bus USA grant program. The grant funds were used to purchase 78 retrofit technologies for the District and ten other school districts at a lower price than if individual districts had purchased the technologies on their own. Okemos Public Schools' efforts have been recognized by the media and by national and state environmental programs, as well as appreciated by the community's students and parents.
Background:
Okemos is a suburb of the state capital, Lansing, and is located near the center of the Lower Peninsula of Michigan. Okemos Public School District has nine schools serving almost 4200 students in grades K through 12, with 2000 students riding the school buses every day. The other ten participating school districts have the following number of schools, student enrollment, and students riding the buses: Dewitt (6 schools, over 2700 students, 1300 riding buses); East Lansing (9 schools, over 3600 students, 1095 riding buses ); Grand Ledge (10 schools, over 5500 students, 4000 riding buses); Howell (10 schools, over 8100 students, 5200 riding buses); Lansing (43 schools, over 17,600 students, 6000 riding buses); Leslie (3 schools, over 1400 students, 574 riding buses); Mason (6 schools, almost 3300 students, 2500 riding buses); St. John's (8 schools, over 3400 students, 3350 riding buses); Waverly (7 schools, over 3400 students, 1450 riding buses); and, Williamston (4 schools, over 2000 students, 1445 riding buses).
The eleven districts are both urban and rural. The population for the eleven districts is around 400,000. Ingham County, where Okemos, Lansing and East Lansing are located, has been designated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as not attaining the 8-hour air quality standard for ozone.
Proposal:
Okemos Public Schools applied for and was awarded a Clean School Bus USA grant for 2004. The Clean School Bus USA funding amount was $70,000 with a match from the District equaling $12,500. The District's proposed implementation strategy recognized the importance of forming partnerships early in the process. Working with surrounding communities, they proposed to coordinate the purchase of retrofit technologies of approximately 56 of the area's 300 to 500 buses. They targeted school districts in the greater Lansing area, which was comprised of 28 area community school districts. These serviced multiple urban and rural school districts in the greater Lansing area. The project outlined a plan that would rely on close communication with the Air Program contacts at the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ),
the Michigan Environmental Council (MEC), as well as with the elected technology vendor to successfully meet its goal of retrofitting the buses in a timely manner.
Implementation:
Inviting other School Districts to Participate: Once the award announcement was made on June 14, 2004, letters were immediately sent to the 28 surrounding school districts inviting them to participate in the "Cleaner Air Program - School Buses" grant that was awarded to the District. Letters were mailed to Community Education Directors and/or Transportation Directors. Both the District's Director of Community Education (Director) and the project's Fleet Mechanic Coordinator (Mechanic Coordinator) utilized their respective local/state professional organizations (Capital Area Continuing and Community Education Association (CACCEA) and Michigan Association for Pupil Transportation (MAPT), respectively) to inform their counterparts in the other districts that this opportunity was available. This further increased awareness and responsiveness to the invitation. Subsequent follow-up was successful due to both the Director's and Mechanic Coordinator's efforts in contacting their colleagues.
USEPA Administrator Leavitt presenting Clean School Bus USA "Check" to representatives from the Okemos Public Schools. From L to R - John Zappala, Okemos Schools Director of Community Education; Mary Ann Sdao, Okemos Schools Bus Driver; Michael Leavitt, USEPA Administrator; Todd Sharp, Okemos Schools Director of Transportation; and, Aaron Dempsey, Okemos Schools Fleet Mechanic Project Coordinator.
A follow-up letter was sent in July, 2004 to school districts that indicated an interest in participating in the project. The letter requested specifications for the buses that were to be retrofitted with diesel oxidation catalysts (DOCs) and invited the transportation director and/or chief mechanic from the interested districts to participate in a luncheon/demonstration and orientation, planned for the following month. Eleven districts (which included Okemos Public Schools) participated in the project, including Lansing and East Lansing Public Schools.
Bid Process: During the first two months, invitations to bid on the retrofit project were sent to all contacts on the USEPA's Verified Technologies List for DOCs. The District went through a district-established bidding process. Based on the price per unit and proximity of the contractor to the school districts, the bid was awarded to Capital Area International Truck and Engine (Vendor). The District felt fortunate to have selected their Vendor and appreciated his commitment to the project as well as his accessibility, in part, due to the proximity of the Vendor to the District. Because the Vendor was local, he was able to provide a lot of individualized technical support as well as serving as a direct liaison between the manufacturer and the District. This liaison role was important since initial lead time for the Bid process were much greater than the District had expected, and the project's timely implementation was paramount for both the District and the Vendor.
Mechanic Coordinator, Aaron Dempsey, installing a diesel oxidation catalyst (DOC) on an Okemos School Bus
Training: A luncheon/demonstration seminar was held in Month 3 for representatives of the eleven school districts. The Vendor demonstrated installation of a DOC. This seminar also was used to highlight the District's great efforts in reducing diesel emissions, so media representatives, along with a state and federal representative, were invited.
Scheduling Installations: The District installed 78 DOCs in the eleven districts instead of the proposed 56 due to competitive pricing. During Month 3, the first of the units were delivered to one of the school districts installing fewer DOCs. Okemos Public Schools found it beneficial to complete one school district installation at a time so that units could be inspected and recorded by installation date and by school districts involved in the project. It also allowed an additional opportunity for determining whether the buses needed additional specific hardware, such as clamps and hangers, to secure the DOCs on a variety of bus frames. This would be particularly beneficial for other buses that were to be retrofitted later.
By assessing the fleets early in the process and working closely with the Vendor, the District was able to manage the project in a more seamless fashion. Although some school districts had elected to install their own DOCs, all units were inspected by the project's Mechanic Coordinator, regardless of who had installed them. Because of the ability to work closely with the Vendor and MDEQ for technical support, all 78 units were installed securely and functioning by Month 7 of the project.
Timeline:
- June 2004 - Month 1: Award and Media Event; Letters sent to surrounding school districts inviting them to participate. Bid Invitation to USEPA-Verified Technology vendors.
- July 2004 - Month 2: Follow-up letter with interested school districts.
- August 2004 - Month 3: Technology Orientation/Installation Demonstration Seminar; First DOCs delivered to one of smaller school districts. First installation completed.
- Sep. through Dec. 2004 - Months 4 through 7: Delivery and installation of DOCs by school districts or vendor. Inspection by the project's Mechanic Coordinator of the school-district installed DOCs.
Cost:
The cost of the DOCs per unit was $800, installed. For those districts electing to install the unit themselves, the cost was $740, plus inspection fees (which varied, as the fee was hourly.) Seven districts opted to install the units themselves, but all were inspected by the project's Mechanic Coordinator. Because this price was less than what was in the initial proposal (over $1400 for each DOC), an additional 22 buses were able to be retrofitted with catalysts, per approval of the USEPA Project Officer. Thus, a total of 78 buses were retrofitted with DOCs.
Lessons Learned:
When working with other school districts, the District found it challenging to address their skepticism about being involved in such a project as well as their lack of knowledge about retrofit technologies and idling practices. However, finding a key champion in the district or the community to help educate and support the school district can help overcome this challenge. In addition, both the Director and the Mechanic Coordinator found it critical to rely on their respective professional organization network to "get the word out" on the project. Also, offering the opportunity to be trained further about the technology and installation process was quite useful.
The timing of working with school districts was also an issue. Sometimes, because of scheduling conflicts with transportation operations or school events (i.e., summer or winter break), opportunities to partner on the project were missed. To address that, early outreach efforts to neighboring school districts to raise awareness, along with allowing for it in project timelines, was important. Again, the networking opportunities through using the established professional organizations were important in announcing the project.
Understanding of, and diligence to, the proposed timeline was a factor that the District highlighted as an issue. During the school district invitation process, contacting the other districts over the summer vacation period was difficult. Initial lead times for the Bidding Process were longer than expected for getting a response from industry representatives. The Vendor that received the Bid Award though was able to intercede with the manufacturer to catch up and meet the dates on the timeline. The District wanted to keep on schedule in order to demonstrate to the community and USEPA that it was committed to reducing the emissions from the diesel school buses.
Knowing the fleet was also important. Sometimes, the design of buses required some additional hardware or required more one-on-one focus for specific bus installation projects. By assessing the fleet thoroughly and working closely with a vendor offering USEPA verified technologies or California Air Resource Board (CARB) verified technologies helped reduce the time needed to resolve re-engineering problems.
Successes:
Early technical support and encouragement by the State Agency (MDEQ), and subsequent commitment by the Vendor allowed the District the leadership opportunity to work with other school districts to accomplish its goal of maximizing emission reductions in the area. In addition, utilizing the established networks of which the District's leaders were a part allowed for easier flow of information between districts.
School boards and Administration in all eleven districts were quite pleased with the efforts by the transportation managers to provide cleaner diesel school buses for the communities. Media announcements planned around specific events (i.e., award announcement, training/demonstration event, etc.) also provided an excellent vehicle to collaborate with other districts, vendors, media, and the overall community. Additional updates to the community, students and parents, as well as their peers provided additional community support for the project. In times of public scrutiny of school districts, these were excellent public relations opportunities for the District.
Coalition building and partnering with other school districts maximized the District's purchasing power. It allowed the District to buy larger quantities of DOCs for lower prices. This not only provided leadership opportunities in the community, but it also maximized the public health benefit by extending the emission reductions well into communities beyond the border of the District.