Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facilities Energy Clean Buildings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pasco district outlines steps to meet Washington’s Clean Building Performance Act, cites grants and timetable
Summary
District staff presented an initial audit and energy‑use benchmarks for large high school buildings under House Bill 1257, reported Pasco High EUI at 58.7 (target 53.9) and Chiawana at 73.1 (target 53.9), and described grant applications and operational changes to pursue compliance
Pasco School District staff reviewed the Washington Clean Building Performance Act (House Bill 1257) and outlined district steps to benchmark energy use and pursue reductions required of large commercial buildings.
The nut graf: Engineering and operations staff told the board they completed initial energy benchmarking for district buildings as of December 2024, audited Pasco and Chiawana high schools (both above 220,000 square feet), and plan a mix of behavioral and capital strategies — plug‑load reduction, HVAC commissioning and schedule optimization, and LED lighting upgrades — combined with grant funding to reach state energy‑use intensity (EUI) targets.
Chief engineer David Okada (consultant Engineering Economic Inc. present) and district operations staff explained the EUI results shown to the board: Pasco High School’s current EUI was reported at 58.7 with a target of 53.9; Chiawana High School’s EUI was reported at 73.1 with the same target of 53.9. Staff described initial conservative savings assumptions (for example, a 15% conservative estimate on some plug‑load actions) and explained that HVAC commissioning and lighting upgrades would further reduce energy use.
Staff said they are working with consultant Engineering Economic Inc. and will standardize an energy management plan with benchmarks and operations targets. The district plans to pursue state Department of Commerce and federal grant programs (staff said grant applications are under preparation; one slide referenced a current grant application due in two weeks). Staff told the board middle schools and elementary schools would be phased in after the high‑school effort because tier‑1 (larger) buildings face the earliest compliance deadlines.
Directors asked for clarity about color coding on the EUI slide: green indicated buildings meeting targets, yellow/goldenrod indicated newer buildings governed by newer codes, and red indicated older buildings farthest from target. The board also asked about funding and whether existing grants could be applied to smaller buildings; staff replied that some grants could be applied to both tier‑1 and tier‑2 measures and that the district retains funding for middle‑school work from an earlier grant. A district staffer said grants are not guaranteed and that, without grant funding, achieving targets would put substantial pressure on local budgets.
Board members raised questions about potential penalties, extensions and the state’s enforcement posture. Staff said OSPI and Department of Commerce conversations indicate that as long as districts demonstrate ongoing progress, penalties are not automatic; the district can request extensions if it shows demonstrable forward movement and an adopted plan. Staff also described supply/asset reuse practices should a funded upgrade later be superseded by a replacement or bond project (equipment can be repurposed or parted out for other facilities).
Ending: Staff asked for board direction on prioritization; no formal vote was taken. The district will continue applying for grants, finalize benchmarks, and report back on projected savings and timelines as grant awards and project scopes are clarified.
