A11107 1=16062

NBS SPECIAL PUBLICATION 624

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE/National Bureau of Standards

Proceedings of the National

Water Conservation Conference

on Publicly Supplied

Potable Water

100

,U57

No. 624

1982
NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

The National Bureau of Standards' was established by an act of Congress on March 3, 1901. The Bureau's overall goal is to strengthen and advance the Nation's science and technology

and facilitate their effective application for public benefit. To this end, the Bureau conducts

research and provides: (1) a basis for the Nation's physical measurement system, (2) scientific and technological services for industry and government, (3) a technical basis for equity in trade, and (4) technical services to promote public safety. The Bureau's technical work is per- formed by the National Measurement Laboratory, the National Engineering Laboratory, and

the Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology.

THE NATIONAL MEASUREMENT LABORATORY provides the national system of

physical and chemical and materials measurement; coordinates the system with measurement

systems of other nations and furnishes essential services leading to accurate and uniform

physical and chemical measurement throughout the Nation's scientific community, industry,

and commerce; conducts materials research leading to improved methods of measurement,

standards, and data on the properties of materials needed by industry, commerce, educational

institutions, and Government; provides advisory and research services to other Government

agencies; develops, produces, and distributes Standard Reference Materials; and provides

calibration services. The Laboratory consists of the following centers:

Absolute Physical Quantities2 — Radiation Research — Chemical Physics —

Analytical Chemistry — Materials Science

THE NATIONAL ENGINEERING LABORATORY provides technology and technical ser- vices to the public and private sectors to address national needs and to solve national problems; conducts research in engineering and applied science in support of these efforts; builds and maintains competence in the necessary disciplines required to carry out this research and technical service; develops engineering data and measurement capabilities;

provides engineering measurement traceability services; develops test methods and proposes

engineering standards and code changes; develops and proposes new engineering practices;

and develops and improves mechanisms to transfer results of its research to the ultimate user. The Laboratory consists of the following centers:

Applied Mathematics — Electronics and Electrical Engineering2 — Manufacturing

Engineering — Building Technology — Fire Research — Chemical Engineering2

THE INSTITUTE FOR COMPUTER SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY conducts

research and provides scientific and technical services to aid Federal agencies in the selection, acquisition, application, and use of computer technology to improve effectiveness and

economy in Government operations in accordance with Public Law 89-306 (40 U.S.C. 759), relevant Executive Orders, and other directives; carries out this mission by managing the Federal Information Processing Standards Program, developing Federal ADP standards

guidelines, and managing Federal participation in ADP voluntary standardization activities; provides scientific and technological advisory services and assistance to Federal agencies; and

provides the technical foundation for computer-related policies of the Federal Government.

The Institute consists of the following centers:

Programming Science and Technology — Computer Systems Engineering.

'Headquarters and Laboratories at Gaithersburg, MD, unless otherwise noted; mailing address Washington, DC 20234.

! Some divisions within the center are located at Boulder, CO 80303.
Proceedings of the National Water Conservation

Conference on Publicly Supplied Potable Water

April 14-15, 1981

Denver, CO

Edited by:

-f~7 W

Dynamac Corporation

11140 Rockville Pike

Rockville, MD 20852

NATIONAL BYJRHAU OF STANDAJ1U5 LIBBABT JUL 1 9 1982

f\Crt 0~tc - CJ

O-UOO

no ,(o>4

Sponsored by: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

National Bureau of Standards (NBS)

U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI)

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (CE)

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban

Development (HUD)

U.S. Water Resources Council (WRC)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Malcolm Baldrige, Secretary

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS, Ernest Ambler, Director

Issued June 1982
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 82-600551

National Bureau of Standards Special Publication 624

Nat. Bur. Stand. (U.S.), Spec. Publ. 624, 467 pages (June 1982)

CODEN: XNBSAV

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON: 1982
/

A NATIONAL CONFERENCE

Abstract

This "Proceedings" is a complete compilation of the

papers presented April 14 and 15, 1981, at the National

Water Conservation Conference - Publicly Supplied Potable

Water in Denver, CO. The Conference was primarily directed

toward elected and administrative officials of local governments, the individuals who are responsible in some part

for the quantity and quality of water available to their

communities

Techniques for, and analysis of, potable water con- servation and wastewater flow reduction were presented.

The topics addressed included:

9 Water-Saving Technology

- Plumbing fixtures

- Testing and performance of low-flow devices

- Leak detection and repair

- Potential problems in wastewater flow

reduction

- Landscaping with native vegetation

• Public Education and Motivation

• Economics

- Water pricing systems

- Analysis of cost/benefits

- Development and management of data

• Planning

- State and local urban planning

efforts for conservation

- Federal programs and incentives

• Case Studies

- From California, Washington, Utah,

Arizona, North Carolina, Maryland,

New Jersey, and Massachusetts.

Key words: municipal water systems; potable water reduction;

water conservation.

Preface

During a recent Midwest Governors' Conference, the

population shift from snowbelt to sunbelt was acknowledged. The speaker continued to forecast that although

people are moving to the sunbelt now, snow and ice will

melt into water, and the 1990' s may witness a new

population shift from the sandbelt to the waterbeJt!

Residents of the Midwest are not alone in speculating about water. There is today a growing voice of

concern for water supply, and for improved water quality,

throughout all of the United States.

Over 450 people, from snowbelt, sunbelt, East and

West, attended the 1981 National Water Conservation Conference - Publicly Supplied Potable Water. They came

to Denver, CO, representing towns and cities; public

and private interests; and local, State, and Federal

offices. They learned of the latest professional experiences wi th potable water conservation and wastewater flow

reduction from speakers with equally diverse backgrounds.

This "Proceedings" records the speakers' comments and

becomes yet another educational tool in the national effort

to eliminate the wasteful use of clean water—a luxury we can no longer afford.

1 want to thank each speaker, panelist, and moderator who made the Conference possible. The time and

effort required in the presentation of their papers are greatly appreciated.

Special thanks is also due to the Federal agencies

and individuals who sponsored, planned, and conducted the

April Conference:

v
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

The Office of Water Program Operations, in response to section

214 of the Clean Water Act, contributed the major share of

funding. Throughout the Conference planning and management, T had the full support and encouragement of:

James N. Smith, Acting Assistant Administrator for

Water and Waste Management,

Henry L. Longest, TT, Director, Water Program Operations,

William Whittington, Director, Facility Requirements

Division, and

Myron F. Tiemens, present Acting

Requirements Division.

Without their concern for public

reduction, this Conference would

good idea.

Director, Facility

education in wastewater f]ow

have remained just another

National Bureau of Standards

In February 1980, Dr. Lawrence Galowin, Building Equipment

Division, conceived the idea of this gathering in order to

appraise the progress in water conservation efforts since EPA's

1978 Chicago Conference. His knowledge, enthusiasm, ideas, and

energy sustained the planning group throughout the year of

detailed activities. This "Proceedings" is printed by the

National Bureau of Standards, thanks to his office. Jacqueline

Elder, Research Psychologist, also with the Building Equipment

Division, contributed many creative ideas during the conference

planning and, in particular, designed and coordinated the workshops on Manuals and Handbooks.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Following the invitation of Kyle Schilling, Chief, Policy

Studies Division, Institute for Water Resources, many of the

Nation's leading exponents of water conservation agreed to

speak to the April gathering. Steve Light provided a comprehensive analysis of the Conference evaluation, and the Institute

for Water Resources provided substantial financial support.

Office of Water Research and Technology, U.S. Department of the

Interior

John Cunningham, John Campbell, and Ken Suter, of OWRT,

provided financial support and valuable program suggestions.

vi
I am saddened to learn that their office sustained major cuts

in the current effort to curtail Federal spending. OWRT's

research efforts in the field of water resources management

represented a major national inquiry. OWRT programs enabled

the Nation to understand the economics and environmental

benefits of water conservation, an understanding that is sure

to become increasingly valuable during the next decade.

• U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

Jerome H. Rothenberg, Director of Energy, Building Technology

and Standards, assisted throughout the Conference planning and

arranged for the HUD printing of the Conference announcements.

• U.S. Water Resources Council

Denzil Fisher, Acting Director of State Programs Division,

contributed knowledge of the Nation's water resource problems

and ideas about how and who should address them.

Special mention is due to the Conference host, EPA Region VIII,

Denver, CO. David Standley, Water Division Director, provided

valuable advice on the selection of speakers, advice that resulted in

a well-balanced program. Without his assistance and that of Dean

Chaussee and many others in the Water Division Office, the myriad of

details that need attention before and during any successful conference would not have been managed

The administration of the Conference was successfully coordinated

by Denis Lussier, EPA Center for Environmental Research Information,

Cincinnati, OH, and Dynamac Corporation, Rockville, MD. Tor Rothman,

Gail Cioban, and especially Sheri Marshall were extremely efficient

and equally gracious in the management of Conference logistics and

editorial refinement.

Tt was a privilege for me to direct the Conference. My task was

rewarded with the acquaintance of leaders in conservation who attended

and who spoke at the Denver meeting. Their dedication and perseverance continue to be an inspiration to me.

Thank you all.

Barbara Yeaman

Conference Director

vii

Supplied I JjS/^* /

Potable VWy^/

ujater=lSSL

conservation

)Q<| A NATIONAL CONFERENCE

Table of Contents

Page

ABSTRACT Ill

PREFACE v

AGENDA 1

OPENING REMARKS AND WELCOME 13

Roger L. Williams

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS/LOCAL EXPERIENCES 15

Water Law: Impact on Water Conservation 17

William R. Walker

Motivating the Public to Save Water in

the Absence of a Crisis 27

John 0. Nelson

Providing Section Services in Technical

Information and Training 37

David B. Preston

Water-Saving Plumbing: A Flow Control

& Maintenance Program to Reduce and Control

Water Use in Multi-Housing Properties 47

David P. Wilborn

Landscaping Alternatives and Irrigation

Conservation 53

Nicholas M. Schmidt

Water Conservation: The Leaks in

Implementation 61

James S . Lyon

ix
RESOURCES: MANUALS AND HANDBOOKS 67

Developing and Testing a Water Conservation Handbook .... 69

Barbara Yeaman and Edwin F. Wesely, Jr.

Flow Reduction: Methods, Analysis Procedures, Examples . . 81

Sandra L. Postel

State Water Conservation Planning Guide 91

Denzel L. Fisher and James A. Yost

The Role of Land Use Planning in Water Conservation .... 103

Welford Sanders and Charles Thurow

Aurora, Colorado: Rational Landscape Alternatives 113

Joanne D. Ron don

IMPACT OF LOW FLOWS ON WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEMS AND

TREATMENT FACILITIES 121

Water Conservation and Wastewater Flow Reduction -

Is It Worth It? 123

Jimmy S. Koyasako

Effects of Water Conservation on Municipal Wastewater

Treatment Facilities 135

John A. Davis and Taras A. Bursztynsky

PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE 145

Planning for the Future 147

Polly C. Knox

Water Conservation in Arizona: Past, Present, and Future . 151

Delores M. Gillum

Water Conservation as a Long-Range Supply Option for

Massachusetts: Dispelling the Myths and Facing Reality . . 155

Helen S. Linsky

EDUCATION/ INFORMATION: PAST EXPERIENCES AND CURRENT PLANS . . 167

Water Conservation in Rental Apartment Complexes by Means

of Controlled Installation of Watersaving Devices 169

Albert Frank

x
Enhanced Water Education Versus Status Quo Et Al 173

Jack A. Barnett

Information and Consumer Adoption of Water

Conservation Measures 179

Duane D . Baumann

RESOURCES: MANUALS AND HANDBOOKS 191

Residential Water Conservation Handbook 193

Pabon, Sims, Smith, and Associates, Inc.

A Procedures Manual for Evaluating Water

Conservation Planning 197

James E. Crews and Kyle E. Schilling

AWWA Water Conservation Handbook 207

George L. Craft

Before the Well Runs Dry: A Handbook for Designing

a Local Water Conservation Plan 211

New England River Basins Commission

BENEFITS AND IMPACTS/ECONOMICS 225

Cos t-Ef f ective Residential Water Conservation Decisions . . 227

Stephen F. Weber, Barbara C. Lippiatt, and

Anne P. Hills trom

A Water Supply Simulation Model: Analyzing for the

Implications of Conservation 239

Robert M. Clark, Ph.D., Richard M. Males, Ph.D., and

William E. Gates, Ph.D.

Cost-Effectiveness of Potable Water Conservation - Multifaceted Approach 247

Wallace J. Hopp and William P. Darby, Ph.D.

Municipal Water Conservation - A Water Project That

Pays for Itself 259

Will E. Bet chart

DEVICES AND TECHNOLOGY 267

Devices and Technologies for Water Conservation - State of the Art: Standards for Industry 269

James A. Burgess

xi
Performance Requirements and Test Procedures for

Water Closets 273

Thomas P. Konen

Experiences and Benefits of the Application of Minimum

Flow Water Conservation Hardware ... 281

Larry K. Baker

Technical Requirements for Low-Flow Devices 289

Frank R. Holy cross

A Model for the Transport Mechanisms of Solids in

Building Pipe Drains 293

Lawrence S. Galowin

DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS /DATA COLLECTION 327

Developing Data for Residential Water Savings 329

William 0. Maddaus and Jerome H. Rothenberg

How to Implement a Water Conservation Program - The Denver Experience 339

John J. Wilder

Management Information Systems for Water Resources .... 347

Frank J. Smith

KEYNOTE ADDRESS 353

Keynote Address 355

Major General E.R. Heiberg, III

FEDERAL PERSPECTIVES - PROGRAMS/ INCENTIVES 365

Comparison Between Water Conservation Practices in the

United Kingdom and the United States 367

D.G. Jamieson and G.S. Million

Federal Water Resource Agency Planning Requirements

and Implications for Water Conservation 373

Gerald D. Seinwill

Plumbing Codes - Essential in Water Conservation Programs . 379

Lawrence S . Galowin

xii
LOCAL PERSPECTIVES - PROGRAMS/INITIATIVES 399

Water Conservation in California 401

Ronald B. Robie

The Need for a New Federal Water Policy 409

Francis X. McArdle

Local Response for Officials and Consumers 413

William H. Miller

CASE HISTORIES - EXPERIENCES WITH SOLUTIONS 419

A Future Look - What Are the Unknowns? 421

Jerome B. Gilbert

Appraisal of 1978 Conference Case History:

Do the Benefits Endure? 427

John M. Brusnighan

Conservation in a Noncrisis Environment - Township

of East Brunswick, New Jersey 433

L. Mason Neely, Michael J. Opaleski, Theodore

B. Shelton, Ph.D., and Dennis Palmini, Ph.D.

Case Study - In-School Water Conservation

Education Program 443

Suzanne Butterfield

Case Study - Distribution of Residential Water

Saving Devices 449

Suzanne Butterfield

Results of a Peak Management Plan for Tucson, Arizona . . 453

Gene E . Crank

Water Conservation Efforts in Rural Areas 465

A.R. Rubin

Water Conservation/Flow Reduction in Facilities

Planning for Salt Lake County 471

Gerald H. Kinghorn

xiii
Program Quality and Participant Involvement in National

Water Conservation Conference - Publicly Supplied

Potable Water

Stephen S. Light and Kyle E. Schilling

SPEAKER AND STAFF ROSTER

Disclaimer

These proceedings have been reviewed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Bureau of

Standards (NBS) , and approved for publication. Approval does

not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views

and policies of the U.S. EPA or NBS, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recom- mendation for use.

xiv
Agenda

MONDAY - APRIL 13, 3 981

7:30-9:30 p.m. REGISTRATION

TUESDAY - April 14, ]981

8:00-9:00 a.m. REGISTRATION

9:00 a.m. OPENING REMARKS AND WELCOME

Roger L. Williams, Regional Administrator

Region VIII

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Denver, CO

9:30 a.m. MORNING PLENARY SESSION

Panel Discussion: Practical Applications/

Local Experiences

Moderator: Francis T. Mayo, Director

Municipal Environmental Research

Laboratory

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Cincinnati, OH

Water Law: Impact on Water Conservation

William R. Walker, Director

Virginia Water Resources Research Center

Blacksburg, VA
Motivating the Public to Save Water in the

Absence of a Crisis

John 0. Nelson, General Manager

North Marin County Water District

Novato, CA

Providing Section Services in Technical

Information and Training

David B. Preston, Executive Director

American Water Works Association

Denver, CO

Panel Discussion: Practical Applications/

Local Experiences (continued)

Moderator: David Farrell

Illinois Department of Commerce

and Community Affairs

Springfield, IL

Water- Saving Plumbing: A Flow Control & Maintenance Program to Reduce and Control Water Use

in Multi-Housing Properties

David P. Wilborn, Vice President

Metropolitan Watersaving, Inc.

Washington, DC

Landscaping Alternatives and Irrigation

Conservation

Nicholas M. Schmidt, Vice President of

Marketing

Sanford Homes, Inc.

Englewood, CO

Water Conservation: The Leaks in Implementation

10:20 a.m. BREAK

10:40 a.m. PLENARY SESSION

James S. Lyon, Research Associate

Environmental Policy Institute

Washington, DC

12:00 Noon LUNCHEON

2
1:30-2:30 p.m. CONCURRENT WORKSHOPS: TECHNICAL ADVANCEMENTS

AND REQUIREMENTS

WORKSHOP A - RESOURCES: MANUALS AND HANDBOOKS

Developing and Testing a Water Conservation

Handbook

Moderator: Barbara Yeaman, Public Education

Consultant

U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency

Washington, DC

Flow Reduction: Methods, Analysis Procedures,

Examples

Sandra L. Postel, Resource Economist/Analyst

INTASA, Inc.

Menlo Park, CA

State Water Conservation Planning Cuide

Denzel L. Fisher, Acting Director

State Programs Division

U.S. Water Resources Council

Washington, DC

The Role of Land Use Planning in Water

Conservation

Welford Sanders

American Planning Association

Chicago, IL

Aurora, Colorado: Rational Landscape

Alternat ives

Joanne D. Rondon, Water Conservation

Technician

Aurora Water Conservation

City of Aurora

Aurora, CO

WORKSHOP B - IMPACT OF LOW FLOWS ON WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEMS AND TREATMENT

FACILITIES

Moderator: Myron F. Tiemens, Acting Director

Facility Requirements Division

U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency

Washington, DC

3
Water Conservation and Wastewater Flow

Reduction — Is It Worth It?

Jimmy S. Koyasako, Senior Engineer

California Department of Water

Resources

Sacramento, CA

Effects of Water Conservation on Municipal

Wastewater Treatment Facili ties

John A. Davis, Vice President

Jefferson Associates, Inc.

San Francisco, CA

Larry K. Baker, Vice President*

Weatherby Associates, Inc.

Jackson, CA

WORKSHOP C - PLANNING FOP THE FUTURE

Moderator: Monte Pascoe

Colorado Department of Natural

Resources

Denver, CO

Planning for the Future

Polly C. Knox, Program Coordinator

Water Conservation Office

Seattle Water Department

Seattle, WA

Water Conservation in Arizona: Past,

Present, and Future

Delores M. Gillum, Municipal Program

Speciali st

Arizona Department of Health Services

Phoenix, AZ

Water Conservation as a Long-Range Supply

Option for Massachusetts: Dispelling the

Myths and Facing Reality

Helen S. Linsky, Senior Planner

Wallace, Floyd, Ellenzweig, Moore, Inc.

Cambridge, MA

*Paper not included.
WORKSHOP D - EDUCATION/ INFORMATION: PAST

EXPERIENCES AND CURRENT PLANS

Moderator: Jacqueline Elder, Research

Psychologist

Center for Building Technology

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, DC

David Farrell*

Illinois Department of Commerce

and Community Affairs

Springfield, IL

Water Conservation in Rental Apartment

Complexes by Means of Controlled Installation

of Water saving Devices

Albert Frank, Planner

Howard County Department of Public Works

Ellicott City, MD

Enhanced Water Education Versus Status Quo,

Et Al.

Jack A. Barnett, Secretary-Treasurer for

Board of Trustees

Water and Man, Inc.

Salt Lake City, UT

Information and Consumer Adoption of Water

Conservation Measures

Duane D. Baumann

Department of Geography

Southern Illinois University

Carbondale, IL

BREAK

CONCURRENT WORKSHOPS: TECHNICAL ADVANCEMENTS AND REQUIREMENTS

WORKSHOP A - RESOURCES: MANUALS AND HANDBOOKS

Moderator: Elroy Spitzer, Deputy Director

American Water Works Association

Research Foundation

Denver, CO

*Paper not included.
Residential Water Conservation Handbook

Barry Schechter * Pabon, Sims, Smith, and Associates, Inc.

Washington, DC

A Procedures Manual for Evaluating Water

Conservation Planning

James E. Crews, Civil Engineer

Institute for Water Resources

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Ft. Belvoir, VA

AWWA Water Conservation Handbook

George L. Craft, Resources Engineer

American Water Works Association

Denver, CO

Before the Well Runs Dry: A Handbook for

Designing a Local Water Conservation Plan

F. Michael DiGiano, Program Manager

Water Supply/Conservation Program

New England River Basins Commission

Boston, MA

WORKSHOP B - BENEFITS AND IMPACTS /ECONOMICS

Moderator: David Standley, Director

Water Division

Region VIII

U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency

Denver, CO

Cost-Ef f ect ive Residential Water Conservation

Deci sions

Stephen F. Weber, Economist

Center for Building Technology

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, DC

A Water Supply Simulation Model: Analyzing

for the Implications of Conservation

Richard M. Males, Vice President

W.E. Gates and Associates

Batavia, OH

6
Cost-Effectiveness of Potable Water Conservation - Mult ifaceted Approach

William P. Darby, Associate Professor

Department of Technology & Human Affairs

Washington University

St. Louis, MO

Municipal Water Conservation - A Water Project That Pays for Itself

Will B. Betchart, Senior Environmental

Engineer

INTASA, Inc.

Menlo Park, CA

WORKSHOP C - DEVICES AND TECHNOLOGY

Devices and Technologies for Water Conservation - State of the Art: Standards for

Industry

Moderator: Jim Burgess, President

Canadian Standards Association

Ontario, Canada

Performance Requirements and Test Procedures

for Water Closets

Thomas P. Konen, Chief

Building Technology Research Division

Davidson Laboratory

Stevens Institute of Technology

Hoboken, NJ

Experiences and Benefits of the Application

of Minimum Flow Water Conservation Hardware

Larry K. Baker, Vice President

Weatherby Associates, Inc.

Jackson, CA

Technical Requirements for Low-Flow Devices

Frank R. Holycross, Manager

Manufacturing Engineering

Delta Faucet Company

Greensburg, IN
A Model for the Transport Mechanisms of Solids

in Building Pipe Drains

Lawrence S. Galowin, Senior Engineer

Building Equipment Division

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, DC

WORKSHOP D - DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS /DATA

COLLECTION

Developing Data for Residential Water

Savi ngs

William 0. Maddaus, Supervising Engineer

Brown & Caldwell

Walnut Creek, CA

How to Implement a Water Conservation

Program - The Denver Experience

John J. Wilder, Conservation Officer

Denver Water Department

Denver, CO

Management Information Systems for Water

Resources

Frank J. Smith, Associate Professor

North Carolina State University

Raleigh, NC

RECEPTION/ CASH BAR

FURTHER PERSPECTIVES ON WATER AND ITS

CONSERVATION*

The Water Conservation Program for the

Regional Municipality of Waterloo: A Review

of Research and Experience

Moderator: James E. Robinson, Assistant

Professor

Department of Man-Environment

Studies

University of Waterloo

Ontario, Canada

*Papers presented on this panel are not

included

8
A Residential Retrofit Program: Pesearch and

Evaluation

Roger Needham, Research Coordinator

Water Conservation Program

Regional Municipality of Waterloo

University of Waterloo

Ontario, Canada

Interactions of Water Closet Performance with

a Sanitary Drainage System

Thomas P. Konen, Chief

Building Technology Research Division

Davidson Laboratory

Stevens Institute of Technology

Hoboken, NJ

Research Activities in Plumbing at the

National Bureau of Standards

Lawrence S. Galowin, Senior Engineer

Building Equipment Division

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, DC

WEDNESDAY - April 15, 1981

8:00 a.m. MORNING PLENARY SESSION

Dean R. Chaussee*

Region VIII

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Denver, CO

8:45 a.m. KEYNOTE ADDRESS

Major General E.R. Heiberg, III

Director of Civil Works

Department of the Army

Office of the Chief of Engineers

Washington, DC

9:05 a.m. FEDERAL PERSPECTIVES - PROGRAMS/ INCENTIVES

Moderator: Kyle E. Schilling, Chief

Policy Studies Division

Institute for Water Resources

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Ft. Belvoir, VA

*Paper not included.

9
Comparison Between Water Conservation

Practices in the United Kingdom and the

United States

Derek G. Jamieson

Thames Water Authority

Reading, England

Federal Water Resource Agency Planning

Requirements and Implications for Water

Conservation

Gerald D. Seinwill, Acting Director

U.S. Water Resources Council

Washington, DC

Plumbing Codes - Essential in Water

Conservation Programs

Lawrence S. Galowin, Senior Engineer

Building Equipment Division

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, DC

10:20 a.m. BREAK

10:45 a.m. LOCAL PERSPECTIVE - PROGRAMS/INITIATIVES

Moderator: Evan Vlachos

Governor's Front Range Committee

Denver, CO

Water Conservation in California

Ronald B. Robie, Director

California Department of Water Resources

Sacramento, CA

The Need for a New Federal Water Policy

Francis X. McArdle, Commissioner

NYC Department of Environmental Protection

New York, NY

Local Response for Officials and Consumers

William H. Miller, Manager

Denver Water Department

Denver, CO

12:00 Noon LUNCHEON

10
CASE HISTORIES - EXPERIENCES WITH SOLUTIONS

Moderator: John Campbell

Office of Water Resources & Technology

U.S. Department of the Interior

Washington, DC

A Future Look - What Are the Unknowns?

Jerome B. Gilbert, President

American Water Works Association

General Manager, East Bay Municipal Utility

Di strict

Oakland, CA

Appraisal of 1978 Conference Case History:

Do the Benefits Endure?

John M. Brusnighan, Assistant General Manager

Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission

Hyattsville, MD

Conservation in a Noncrisis Environment - Township of East Brunswick, New Jersey

Michael J. Opaleski, Water Superintendent

L. Mason Neely, Finance Director

Township of East Brunswick

East Brunswick, NJ

Theodore B. Shelton, Associate Specialist

Water Resources Management

Cook College - Rutgers University

New Brunswick, NJ

Case Study - In-Schoo] Water Conservation

Education Program

Case Study - Distribution of Residential

Water Saving Devices

Suzanne Butterfield, Chief

Office of Water Resources

California Department of Water Resources

Sacramento, CA

BREAK

11
CASE HISTORIES - EXPERIENCES WITH SOLUTIONS

(continued)

Moderator: Robert J. Foxen, Chief

Engineering & Economic Policy

Section

U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency

Washington, DC

Results of a Peak Management Plan for Tucson,

Arizona

Gene E. Cronk, Director

Tucson Water, City of Tucson

Tucson, AZ

Water Conservation Efforts in Rural Areas

A.R. Rubin, Professor

Biological & Agricultural Engineering

Department

North Carolina State University

Raleigh, NC

Water Conservation/Flow Reduction in

Facilities Planning for Salt Lake County

Gerald H. Kinghorn, Partner

Kapaloski, Kinghorn & Alder

Salt Lake City, UT

ADJOURNMENT

12
OPENING REMARKS AND WELCOME

Roger L. Williams

Regional Administrator

Region VIII

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Denver, Colorado

Good morning and welcome to Denver. We are very pleased to host

this conference because of the importance of water conservation —

particularly in the West. Due to a dry winter, cities all over the

country will be facing water shortages this year. We are certainly

feeling the pinch in this area. For example, in Denver, outside water

restrictions will have to begin a month earlier this year. Another

city has recently doubled the water rates for use above 20,000 gal/month

and quadrupled the rates for use above 30,000 gal/month in an effort to

cut demand.

However, it is a serious mistake to consider conservation measures

only during dry spells or emergencies. The problem does not disappear

with the first rainfall. Effective management of our water resources

is becoming increasingly Important because of steadily increasing and

competing demands for water. This in concert with the difficulty, expense, and long lead time of developing new sources underlines the

importance of sound conservation measures.

This conference will be particularly useful in discussing how

successful some of these measures have been in reducing water use. However, I feel the major challenge in potable water conservation is

not technology but public education. In this sense, the drought is

helpful because it certainly brings home the importance of water con- servation to each consumer. Conservation measures will not be com- pletely effective unless the public understands and supports them.

Since conservation may require modifications to lifestyles, public

support is definitely not automatic.

Water use restrictions and rate increases can also result in public

opposition as many city managers and mayors can attest. This is largely

due to the public being accustomed to having their water demands met

regardless of weather or community growth. In turn, the water utilities

have felt it was their primary responsibility to meet these demands to

protect public health and foster a more pleasant environment, at the

lowest cost possible. In fact, water rate structures have traditionally

13
encouraged use rather than conservation. This management approach has

resulted in many cases where demands have outstripped supply or treatment capacity.

We can no longer afford management policies that encourage continued

increases in per capita use. Communities must take a critical look at

their future water needs to determine the most effective means to meet

those needs. A sound conservation program should be a part of the

overall plan.

A variety of conservation alternatives are available, many of which

will be discussed at this conference. The key point is that each com- munity must decide on the measures that will be the most effective for

their situation.

For example, Denver feels that potable reuse in addition to other

measures may be necessary to meet future needs. As a result, Denver,

with financial assistance from EPA, has launched a progressive effort to

determine the feasibility and health implications of potable reuse. Construction on a 1-million-gallon-per-day demonstration plant has begun.

The plant will begin operation in the spring of 1983 and will be the

major part of a $31-million program including several years of water

quality and health effects testing. Denver is certainly a national

leader in potable reuse, and I commend them for their foresight and

commitment.

In summary, I feel we all share the responsibility of educating the

public on the importance of water conservation and involving them in

developing effective water conservation plans. I think all of us have

underestimated the public's interest in, and willingness to try, water

conservation measures. To encourage this interest and willingness, we

must do a better job of stressing the positive aspects of conservation

by:

0 improving the efficiency of a water system, thereby

reducing costs

• easing short-term water shortages

• deferring the need for additional sources or treatment

capacity (water and wastewater) , in some cases

• conserving energy

• maintaining water quality and aquatic habitat.

If we do a good job in this critical area, it will be easier to start

conservation programs and they will be even more successful.

1 am confident that these issues will be thoroughly discussed in the

next two days. Through the understanding and knowledge gained from meetings like this, conservation will become an accepted means of resource

management before our "well runs dry." Again, I want to welcome all of

you to Denver and wish you success in this important conference.

14
'SI

A NATIONAL CONFERENCE

Practical Applications/Local Experiences

WATER LAW: IMPACT ON WATER CONSERVATION

William R. Walker

MOTIVATING THE PUBLIC TO SAVE WATER IN THE ABSENCE OF A CRISIS

John 0. Nelson

PROVIDING SECTION SERVICES IN TECHNICAL INFORMATION AND

TRAINING

David B. Preston

WATER-SAVING PLUMBING: A FLOW CONTROL & MAINTENANCE PROGRAM

TO REDUCE AND CONTROL WATER USE IN MULTI-HOUSING PROPERTIES

David P. Wilborn

LANDSCAPING ALTERNATIVES AND IRRIGATION CONSERVATION

Nicholas M. Schmidt

WATER CONSERVATION: THE LEAKS IN IMPLEMENTATION

James S . Lyon

WATER LAW: IMPACT ON CONSERVATION

William R. Walker, Director

Virginia Water Resources Research Center

Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University

Blacksburg, Virginia

ABSTRACT

Laws with respect to water are unusual because they may vary

depending on the form in which water is found. It is further complicated because the states do not have uniform laws for water in its

various forms. Water with bed and bank in the western United States must

conform to the prior appropriation doctrine which places emphasis on the

protection of private property rights rather than maximum utilization.

Water in this same form in the East is governed by the riparian doctrine

which defines the water rights according to the place of use. Water

under the ground may follow the English, American, or reasonable use

rule. Diffused water which flows over the surface of the ground must be

captured to establish a right. All of these laws evolved generally for

historical reasons and have been modified slightly by statutes but not

uniformly. None were designed to reduce consumption, promote efficiency

or facilitate change to a higher beneficial use. The development of

constitutionally protected water rights has made change more difficult.

Yet these laws and the institutional structures which have evolved to

implement them must be modified to promote greater use of a finite

resource

INTRODUCTION

Common though it may be in nature, water is an unusual commodity in

law. Often laws which apply to water depend on the form in which the

water is found. Thus, one set of laws may govern water with bed and

banks (streams and lakes) , while another deals with water below ground

and still another may apply to diffused water (water flowing over the

surface of the ground) . These water laws may be further complicated

because the states do not have uniform laws for water in its various

forms

Water laws are the management tools for implementing water policy,

and the many water laws found throughout the United States reflect many

different, and often conflicting, water policies. Federal, state, and

17
local governments

and perspectives,

are not clear and

all have water laws which reflect their varying roles

The lines of demarcation among these jurisdictions

sometimes reflect concurrent responsibilities.

Water laws can have a significant impact on how effective a conser- vation program can be related to water supply. For the purposes of this

paper I have defined conservation as those activities which 1) reduce

the total consumption of water use for a given activity, 2) make more

efficient use of a given water supply, or 3) encourage water to be put

to its highest and best use as determined by the mores and values of the

time

Let's examine the laws related to surface water (those with bed and

bank) to see to what extent they can encourage the conservation of water

as defined above. In a general sense surface waters are governed by two

doctrines: the prior appropriation doctrine which governs those states

located west of the 98th meridian and the riparian doctrine which is

reflected in the common law in most of the eastern states. It should be

understood at the outset that in none of these states are the laws

exactly similar.

PRIOR APPROPRIATION

The prior appropriation doctrine, which is the framework for the

western law, allocates water in specific amounts for the use of the

various appropriators on a stream. With very few exceptions this doctrine does not encourage or facilitate any form of water conservation,

as defined above. Most of the problems under the prior appropriation

doctrine are waste-related and result from the priority system of rights

where uses are frozen in terms of the original amount, place, and

purpose of use (1)

In the West, more than 85 percent of the water is used for irrigation. Since most of the water in surface streams has been allocated,

additional water for public water supplies must come from the amount

currently being used in agriculture. The first question is to what

extent existing laws and institutions permit and/or facilitate a change

from an agricultural to a public supply use. The second question is

whether the existing laws encourage activities which facilitate this

change in use without significant reductions in agricultural production.

As will be seen, these questions are not separate and distinct but

interrelated

The problems of waste are easily identified with irrigation, but

they are not peculiar to irrigation and can be classified in three very

distinct and somewhat overlapping groups. First, given the place and

the purpose of a particular use, the amount of the water diverted for it

is frequently excessive and wasteful. Second, given the purpose of a particular use, its location is often such that the same purpose of use

18
at another location would require a smaller amount of water. Third, even though the location and the amount used are appropriate for the

particular purpose for which water is being applied, this purpose may be

such that the same amount of water used for a different purpose would

constitute a more beneficial use.

Wasteful Amounts

The obligation to use only the amount reasonably necessary has been

said to demand an unrealistic display of self-restraint. The problem

and the difficulty of finding a workable solution is well stated in the

1938 Law Review :

. . . while the [doctrine of appropriation] reads well on paper, it

is based on an altruistic concept of human behavior which practice

has shown to be grossly deficient. The appropriator is under a duty to take no more water from the stream than he can use, and he

may under no circumstances waste or extravagantly use the water

which he has appropriated. Yet, experience has shown not only that

he may not be trusted in his own judgement to so confine himself,

but that the enforcement of his duty against him is attended with

extreme difficulty. Even today, enforcement rests largely in the

individual initiative of fellow appropriators who are hardly in a position to inspect his use for waste (2).

Appropriators may be able to divert more water than is necessary

because the maximum rate of flow covered by an appropriation right is

usually greater than is actually necessary at many times of the growing

season. Fear of forfeiture of the unused part of a right is likely a cause for unnecessary uses of water.

While irrigation techniques are continually improving to allow

greater production per unit of water use, individuals are slow to change

without an incentive. Since the change would benefit junior appropriators in the form of additional water, there is almost a disincentive

present. Professor Stone in a recent article (3) argues that under

Montana law there is probably no right to saved water (4)

As part of his water right, the appropriator ' s method of diverting

water from the stream is protected if his method is deemed reasonable

under the circumstances. This protection, however, can prevent another

person from using apparently available water if a senior appropriator '

method requires preserving certain flow conditions to propel his diversion machinery or to keep the water level within reach of his intake

facilities. Whenever an inefficient method of diversion is deemed

reasonable by the courts, a part of the stream flow will have to pass

substantially unused.

19
Wasteful Locations

A particular use may be so located that its value is relatively low

in terms of the amount of water necessary to maintain it. Though

changes in the place of use are generally permitted, an appropriator may

often feel that changing an existing wasteful use would not be in his

individual interest. The interdependency that exists where water is

successfully used and reused by a number of appropr iators frequently

means that a change cannot be made because of the requirement that

existing conditions of supply must be preserved and subsequent rights of

supply cannot be impaired.

A change in the point of diversion whether the move is up- or downstream will affect other users between the old and the new points by

altering the velocity, quantity, and level of flow reaching them. A

change in the place of use may mean that the seepage water and the water

flowing from the surface of the field will take a different course back

towards the stream, perhaps cutting the supply of the person who was using the water along its previous route and perhaps waterlogging land

along its new route. Because the soil at the new location of use or along the new route may be different, the unconsumed water may re-enter

the stream at a different time or with a different content of dissolved

solids—to the injury of the downstream user. A change in the place of use may be reflected in timing, velocity, quantity, level, and purity of

flow and such a change may be especially disruptive to established

conditions if the new purpose is more consumptive than the former one.

The earliest settlements of the western valleys frequently occurred

in downstream areas, with the result that many senior appropriator

rights are located in these areas today. In order to satisfy a senior's

right to a certain amount of water at a downstream point, therefore, it

may be necessary that junior upstream appropriators let several times

this amount pass by them to allow for these channel losses. A fuller

use of stream flows could often be achieved by a greater upstream use

and a successive reuse by each lower appropriator of the water reaching

him. Since irrigation is a relatively consumptive use, a considerable

decrease in quantity could result from upstream junior appropriators'

uses. Water that returns to the stream may be lower in quality and

delayed in reaching downstream points—to the injury of senior downstream

rights. The uses a junior upstream appropriator can make may therefore

be quite limited by the existence of these downstream rights.

Wasteful Purposes

An appropriation right allows water to be applied to the same purpose forever. The interdependency among users is likely to block

changes to different purposes if existing conditions of supply are to be

strictly preserved for the benefit of established users.

20
Whenever there is insufficient water for all the appropriators

,

their uses must be terminated in reverse order of priority until the

entire supply gives senior appropriators their full entitlement. No

allowance is made for the relative value or needs of different uses at

that moment. In the case of irrigation, different crops or different

fields of the same crop may require water at different times, and high

value crops may be in critical need of water that goes instead to a low

value crop (even, perhaps, in less immediate need of water) because the

latter is irrigated under a senior right.

Several cases in Oregon have held that an appropriator may use water only to the extent needed for which it was appropriated and when

not needed for that specific use, junior appropriators are entitled to

such water (5) . These cases all involved the circumstance where a senior appropriator was attempting to cover additional uses with his

existing right.

There appears to be a tendency for the appropriation system to

freeze the initial patterns of resource allocation. The West has been

warned in strong language that "it may soon decide whether its future

must be sacrificed by its antiquated priority system in water use." (6)

Water Rights Appurtenancy

In some states the water right is appurtenant to the place of use. Thus the transfer to a "higher and better use" is dependent upon the

water being able to be used on the land to which the water right attaches,

In addition, junior appropriators who rely on return flows are usually

fully protected and in some states, such as Nevada, specifically protected by statute. In South Dakota, water is appurtenant to the land

and cannot be transferred unless it can be shown to have become impracticable to use economically. Query, is water "saved" no longer economically necessary and thus eligible for use on other land?

A review of the western state laws shows two fundamental reasons

are apparent for the ostensible "anti-conservation position of the

majority." The first is a strict adherence to the notion of "water

rights appurtenancy." The second is the very real and complicated

problem of potential impairment to water users who rely on the transferor's return flow. The Arizona Kavocovich case is a classic example

of the former. In this case the irrigators concrete-lined their ditches

and were able to save sufficient water to irrigate additional adjacent

land. A legal battle ensued over whether they could apply this "saved

water" to new adjacent land. The Arizona Court of Appeals rejected this

procedure, relying in part on "impairment" but mainly on the notion of

traditional appurtenancy of water to a particular piece of land:

". . .this court is of the opinion that the doctrine of beneficial

use precludes the application of water gained by conservation

21
practices to the lands other than those to which the water was originally appurtenant." (7)

Water Rights Impairment

The issue of "impairment" through transfer recognized in several

states is clearly more important. Judicial attitudes regarding appurtenancy may be changed, but if conservation and subsequent use of

conserved water actually hurts another water user, a much more serious

problem exists. Since all western law protects persons relying on returned flows of water, a conservation practice which eliminates the

return flow runs "head-on" into the basic foundation of western water

law principles. The problem is further exacerbated by the court's and

administrator's frequent inability to address the issue of return flows

and to arrive at a good method of quantifying how much return flows

would be "lost" to other right-holders if the water "saved" were transferred .

In theory, the owner of the water right is free to exercise it as any other freehold interest. In practice, however, no change in a water

right is permitted if the change will injuriously affect the rights of

other appropriators on the stream. It thus must be concluded that prior

appropriation does tend to preserve existing patterns of water use.

Integration of Tributary Ground Water into Priority System

Historically, the prior appropriation doctrine was based on the

characteristics of water flowing on the surface. Groundwater has

become a supplemental source, and today depletion of groundwater aquifers

has occurred. This depletion in groundwater aquifers has an effect on

the flow of natural streams. A conflict has thus developed between the owners of surface water rights (who are senior in the priority system)

and groundwater users. The hydrologic interplay between tributary

groundwater and surface flow, while extremely complex, is well acknowledged .

Some states such as Colorado have attempted to administer tributary

groundwater and surface water on the basis of prior appropriation. The

result sought by this integration is the maximum utilization of water

resources. Despite legislative pronouncement coupling these two concepts, the -two elements do not make a happy marriage.

Because of the constitutional protection of property rights in water,

any system of integrated use of ground and surface water must cope with

vested rights perfected pursuant to the doctrine on appropriation.

Prior appropriation doctrine is based on the immediate (in a relative

sense) availability of surface flow. Groundwater, however, has no immediacy of flow characteristics. In the case of surface water, when

22
an adverse effect to a senior user is detected, the junior user is

shutdown and the benefits to the senior are immediate. Groundwater, on

the other hand, flows very slowly and in a complex manner. The adverse

effect of a junior's well may not occur for months or years, and likewise the resulting benefits to a well shutdown will not occur for a corresponding period. Thus it is less likely that the benefits of a shutdown of a junior user will reach the senior in time for his need.

Prior Appropriation and Maximum Utilization

The goal in the management of a finite resource is the maximum

utilization of the resource. Prior appropriation grants claimant private

property rights on a first come, first served basis. Maximum utilization, on the other hand, would appear to involve a sharing of water

among senior and junior appropriators to foster intensive and efficient

use of water for the overall benefit of the state. It is not a quantityof-use concept but a quality-of-use concept. Maximum utilization would

appear to involve an analysis of the best means and patterns of allocation for the state and its people. Such a concept does not lend itself

to a system designed to protect private property in the water where the

protection of vested rights is the paramount concern.

In a 1973 Colorado case the Supreme Court upheld a decision of the

state engineer who denied a permit for some wells located 13 miles from

the nearest natural stream because there was no unappropriated water.

In denying the well permits, the Supreme Court showed its determination

to avoid use of wells so as to diminish the amount of water available to

senior surface rights. It c oncluded that the doctrine of maximum utilization should not interfere with those vested property rights. One must

conclude that no matter how desirable from an analytical point of view,

maximum utilization does not lend itself to a system of prior appropriation.

RIPARIAN DOCTRINE

Under the riparian doctrine, the use of surface water from a stream

is restricted to the owner of the land contiguous or riparian to the

stream. Generally, the riparian status extends only to land lying

within the same watershed of the stream from which it is taken. The

right of a riparian owner to use the water is said to arise from the

ownership of the land and the use of water is limited to the riparian

land

The amount of water a riparian owner may use and the purpose for

which he may use it are not subject to exact determinations. Originally

there was a "natural flow" rule which permitted each riparian to divert

water to the extent of his domestic needs and which allowed him to

demand that the natural flow of the stream reach his land materially

unaltered except for the domestic uses of upper riparians. This rule

23
has been modified in most jurisdictions in favor of the "reasonable use"

rule. This rule permits each riparian to use water to the extent of his

domestic needs and then, subject to the domestic needs of other riparians,

he may use water for such purposes in such an amount as is reasonable in

light of all other riparians having a similar right.

The restriction of water use only on riparian land is limiting

since it presupposes that the best use of the water is always on land

which is in immediate contact with it. Thus water may go unused because

the law does not permit it to be transferred to lands which are not

riparian to the stream.

This doctrine does not require that the water be used efficiently.

The only requirement is that it must be "reasonable" in relation to

others having a similar right. The number of people having similar

rights varies with time and no riparian owner loses his right to use water through non-use.

A further restriction on the users of water under this doctrine

relates to municipalities. In most eastern states municipalities cannot

acquire riparian status. Cities or towns withdrawing water from streams

do so 1) with an expectation of having to buy riparian rights in the

future when someone is damaged, or 2) having acquired existing and

future rights on a stream prior to withdrawing.

In general the riparian doctrine does not apply to groundwater. It

would be applicable to groundwater if there were clear evidence that the

water beneath the surface were in fact flowing in an underground stream.

Most states have very strict rules as to how an underground stream must

be determined and as a result most groundwater is considered to be

percolating. As such they are subject to one of the prevailing groundwater doctrines—English, American or correlative rights.

GROUNDWATER LAW

The English rule has very few restrictions with respect to groundwater. There are no restrictions on places where it may be used; there

is no liability for pumping activities which interfere with others using

the underground water in the absence of malice. Dissatisfaction developed

with this rule and after 1900 most cases applied a reasonable use rule

or "American Rule." This rule says that one man can use thereon the

water percolating through his own lands in a manner reasonable to the

needs and necessities of his own tract of land, while also having due

regard to the coequal rights of his neighbors whose lands overlie the same strata. The correlative rights doctrine is based on the theory of

proportionate sharing of withdrawals among overlying landowners. Under

this rule landowners of percolating groundwater have coequal and proportionate rights to their overlying ownership. Under this rule a landowner may not extract more than his share, even if it is to be used

beneficially on his own land, when the rights of other overlying land- owners will be impaired by his use. None of these rules are concerned

24
with keeping water use to a minimum or ensuring that water is efficiently

used in terms of its highest and best use. It is only when conjunctive

use of surface and groundwater becomes a reality, that we can expect a uniform set of laws for managing surface and groundwater which are interrelated physically.

CONCLUSION

Increased water supply needs in the future will have to be met by

1) decreasing the amount of water currently being used for certain

activities, 2) being able to shift water from existing uses to new ones,

3) restructuring management strategy so ground and surface waters can be

used conjunctively, and 4) recognizing that water supply and water

quality are part of the same problem. Waste can no longer be tolerated

because certain practices were historically acceptable, efficiency will

have to be a serious criterion in determining how water is used from both

a technical and economical perspective, and total resource management

will have to become something more than a "catch phrase." The eastern

states may need to restructure their total water codes to keep from

operating on a crisis to crisis basis. Politically it may not be easy

but vagrancies of nature and increasing population may force

acceptable compromises. In the West the problem has been further com- plicated by the Federal Government's policy of providing "cheap" water

and the reserved water rights of both Indians and the Federal Government. Both levels of government must work together to make more water

available through conservation for water supply purposes.

In addition to existing laws, there are areas where there are no

laws or they are very vague. An example is the status of underground

storage: Who owns the rights? Can those who put water down be certain

of their right to recapture from a legal perspective? These areas need

to be examined in detail.

In my opinion, a patchwork approach will likely make the problem

worse. As one area is addressed another one is aggravated. Unless all

levels of government—Federal, state, and local —begin to recognize the

seriousness of our legal and institutional problems, we are going to

have some very critical water problems in the future.

REFERENCES

1. Clyde 0. Fischer, Jr. "Western Experience and Eastern Appropriation

Proposals," The Law of Water Allocation , D. Haber and S.W. Bergen,

editors, (1958).

2. Williams, "Irrigation Law in Colorado," 10 Rocky Mountain Law

Review 87, 178, 190, (1938).

25
Stone, "Montana Water Rights—A New Opportunity," 30 Mont. Law

Review 1, 57, 67 (1978).

48 Mont. 437, 138 P. 1094 (1914); 110 Mont. 495, 103 P. 2d 1067

(1940); 101 Mont. 550, 55 P. 2d 697 (1936).

Broughton vs. Stricklin , 1460r.259, 30 P. 2d 332 (1935); In re North Powder River, 750r.83, 144 P. 485 (1914); and Williams

vs. Altnow , 510r.275, 97 P. 539 (1908).

U.S. President's Material Policy Commission, Resourc es for

Freedom, Vol. 5, 94.

411 P. 2d 201 (1966)
MOTIVATING THE PUBLIC TO SAVE WATER IN THE ABSENCE OF A CRISIS

John Olaf Nelson, General Manager

North Marin County Water District

Novato, California

ABSTRACT

Managing municipal water demands on a regular basis can be an important tool in helping to balance the supply-demand equation. Various

elements or techniques can be considered by the utility, i.e., consumer

education, pricing formulas, devices suitable for retrofitting existing

homes, devices suitable for new development, irrigation equipment,

drought-tolerant plant materials, and codes and regulations. But how

do you successfully implement these elements and induce consumers to save water when there is no spectre of a water shortage to help congeal

public action? In this paper the author shares his experiences in implementing water conservation in the North Marin County Water District

and provides some tips and advice that have evolved from this experience. The thrust is a "volunteerism" type approach that first seeks a commitment from the consumer, followed by education and supply of

materials, and lastly, follow-through surveys to determine the effective penetration of the idea or technique. Much of the advice developed by the author parallels empirically derived criteria employed by

successful advertising agencies.

THE BASIC STRATEGY

Water conservation is one element of demand management which holds

significant potential for optimizing our water resource delivery systems while reducing energy consumption. But how do we motivate water

consumers to use water wisely and frugally? How do we implant the idea

in their heads that conserving water is in the best interest of man and

nature? How do we do this when, in all but a few years, most of our man-made systems function well and are supplied by abundant quantities

of fresh water?

For a clue to the answer, let's harken back for a moment to a pronouncement of one of our greatest statesmen:

"With public sentiment, nothing can fail, without

it, nothing can succeed."

Abraham Lincoln, August 21, 1857

27
Add to this, the wisdom of a now anonymous sage:

1

What the public thinks is what the public hears."

Now we are shown a way - public education. By constantly and repeatedly

telling the story about water conservation, we can achieve a public

awareness - a sentiment - which in the balance, once favoring conservation, will result in conservation.

HOW DO WE IMPLEMENT THE BASIC STRATEGY?

It is, of course, easy to create public awareness in situations

of drought. It is not so easy, in fact extremely difficult, to achieve

awareness in the absence of drought. But to make water conservation an effective tool in optimizing water resource use, that's exactly the

challenge we face.

Fortunately, we don't have to look far for help, for this same problem has faced many before us, only the context was different. What

I speak of is the multitude of advertisers who must constantly struggle

for a "piece of public awareness" in order to sell their wares and services. We can learn well from the techniques developed over the years

in the field of hard knocks known as advertising. First, however, we must orient ourselves to this field, which to most of us is as mysterious and vague as the Pythagorean theorem when we first heard the ominous term in our geometry class.

Let's start at the beginning. What is advertising?

Specifically, effective advertising is the art of getting our message

on water conservation, or more accurately, our claim about water con- servation, into the heads of the most consumers at the lowest possible

cost. Let me parenthetically note here that most of the concepts re- garding advertising set forth here were derived from a book on the subject entitled Reality in Advertising by Rosser Reeves, Chairman of the

Board of the successful advertising firm of Ted Bates & Company.

The measure of advertising effectiveness, simply put, is that upon

hearing our claim, the consumer remembers it. To be effective, an advertisement must meet three requirements:

1) it must make a proposition or claim (i.e., state that if

you conserve water you will enjoy some specific benefits)

2) the claim must be unique and clearly stated or purveyed; and

3) the claim must be strong .

it Advertising is salesmanship in print.

John E. Kennedy

28
If we achieve these three goals in setting forth our proposition, it

will be remembered and, perhaps, even implemented.

A caution to bear in mind at this point is that we must respect

some cardinal principles developed by advertising experts:

1) Remember that the consumer tends to remember just one thing from a given claim; therefore, provide the back-up

detail needed but keep the basic message short and simple

and focused on the key concept.

2) Use visuals to strengthen the claim and create a "feeling"

for it and make sure the visuals let the consumer "see

with his eye" what he is reading or hearing so that the

effect is one of reinforcement - not the opposite.

3) Seek wide dispersion of your message , i.e., try to reach

the greatest number of consumers in every feasible way - don't rely on only one avenue of approach. For instance,

consider and utilize:

- bill stuffers

- newsworthy stories or press releases for local press,

radio and television

- paid advertisements

- school education programs

- commercial approaches, i.e., a poster contest sponsored

by a local group of businessmen, displays in merchants'

windows, working with commercial outlets on giving high

profile to water conservation items (such as in the local

hardware store setting aside a special area labeled

"water conservation center,..." or a similar set-up in

the local nursery (s) presenting water conserving plants)

- a booth at energy conservation and other types of fairs

- speeches before service clubs, seniors, and local organizations and groups

- distribution of information materials at new business

openings, supermarkets, etc.

- community conservation efforts, such as organized retrofit programs, and repeat of such programs

- activities aimed at new development seeking installation of water conservation devices or use of drought

tolerant landscapes; consider connection fee discounts;

also ordinances or regulatory requirements if you think

it necessary

29
- special efforts to reach large customers and work with

them by class or on a case by case basis in metering

inplant use and performing water conservation audits

- special efforts to provide information to key segments

of the development sector, i.e., informational materials

for landscape architects regarding the use of drought

tolerant plants

- seminars and distribution of information on appropriate

irrigation systems and irrigation management

- water conserving plant demonstration gardens

- water conservation device displays.

4) Penetration - that is, the effectiveness of sinking the message home into the consumer's head - is achieved in part by

"pressure" in the form of repetition . Tell the story again

and again - at every opportunity. Try not to change it too

often or unnecessarily, and check your progress with followup consumer surveys

In the time permitted for this paper, it is not possible to go

into detail on every aspect of our water conservation effort at North

Marin, but I would like to share two of our experiences with you.

CASE EXAMPLE ONE - WATER SAVING DEVICES IN NEW RESIDENTIAL GROWTH

Facing a water shortage while awaiting an expansion project, North

Marin County Water District introduced a moratorium on new connections.

This triggered a lawsuit from the last developer eligible to receive

water. The remaining supply was insufficient to serve the developer's

project but/ by implementing a water conservation plan including use of

low-flush toilets, shower and faucet flow controls, faucet aerators,

insulated hot water lines, appropriate irrigation equipment and special

soils preparation, water demand for the project was reduced to fit the

available supply. The plan was developed utilizing significant input

from the developer's engineer, plumbing contractor, etc. A detailed

description of the plan is contained in North Marin's Little Compendium

of Water Saving Ideas , March 15, 1977 edition. The crisis quickly

passed with approval of a bond issue and start of work on the expansion

project. The water saving plan worked so well, however, that North

Marin County Water District decided to encourage other developers to

install water conservation devices. Public commendations and news stories were utilized to encourage developer participation. Help was solicited from engineering consultants serving residential development

interests. We met with these engineers and pointed out the benefits of

such a program given our dependency on periodic expansion of our overland aqueduct system. We modified the plan slightly, based on experience with the first project, and then strongly encouraged its use. With persistence, first one, then another, and another developer installed the devices. Soon, within about two and a half years,

30
utilization was approaching 80 percent. At that point we proposed the

program be made mandatory for all new residential development (except

for individually constructed single family homes). A hearing was held,

minor modifications made, and on August 17, 1976, the plan was implemented. Since that date, all agreements for water supply contain the

following provisions:

" Water-Saving Devices for New Buildings and Landscaping ." Prior to the commencement of water service to the real property

and project the Applicant shall, at Applicant's expense, install water conservation devices and materials required by the

District's Regulation 15e as follows:

(1) All interior plumbing in new buildings shall meet

the following requirements

(i) toilets shall not use more than 3-1/2 gallons per

flush, except that toilets and urinals with flush valves may

be installed,

(ii) shower heads shall contain flow control inserts,

valves, devices or orifices that restrict flow to a maximum

of approximately 3 gallons per minute,

(iii) kitchen and lavatory faucets shall have aerators

or laminar flow devices together with flow control inserts,

valves, devices or orifices that restrict flow to a maximum of

approximately 2 gallons per minute.

(2) All new parks, median strips, landscaped public areas

and landscaped areas surrounding condominiums, townhouses,

apartments and industrial parks shall have a well-balanced

automatic irrigation system designed by a landscape architect

or other competent person and the system shall be operated by

electric time controller stations set for early morning irrigation. Landscaping covering clayey soils and slope areas

shall be equipped with low output sprinkler heads permitting

a slow water application rate. Prior to installing the irrigation system, the landscaped area shall be scarified and

covered with a mixture of not less than four to six inches of

topsoil (preferably native topsoil) amended with at least four

cubic yards of organic material (nitrolized redwood sawdust,

rice hulls, or equivalent) per 1000 square feet, and other

soil amendments in a quantity and type approved by the developer's landscape architect. The District's Board of Directors

may on the written request of an Applicant, waive any part or

all of the requirements of this subsection if it finds that

the area to be landscaped is too small or does not otherwise

justify the automatic irrigation system or soil preparation.

The District will consider, and may approve, requests to

substitute for any of the requirements of this section welldesigned alternatives or innovations that will effect significant reductions of water requirements."

31
To sum up, I believe the key to the success of our program for new construction lay with the fact that, first, we designed the plan with

input ':rom the professional engineers and contractors who regularly ser- vice the development community in our area; second, we employed publicity helpful to the developer in marketing his dwellings; third, we re- lied on a spirit of volunteer cooperation on the part of the developer;

and last, when the program reached 80 percent penetration, we converted

to a mandatory plan to pick up reluctant participants - as much out of

equity to the volunteer participants as for any other reason.

CASE EXAMPLE TWO - RETROFIT KITS FOR EXISTING RESIDENCES

During the drought of 1976-77, distribution of water-saving kits

to existing residential customers became popular. Typically, these

kits contained a displacement bottle (s) or bag capable of displacing

about 0.7 gallons of water in the toilet tank, dye tablets with instructions on how to check for toilet leaks, shower head flow restrictor

inserts of one design or other, and a general brochure or other information providing tips on things to do to save water.

In late Spring of 1976, although suffering no water shortage,

North Marin County Water District notified its customers, via a simple

bill stuffer, that free water saving kits were available. The kit

consisted of:

1) two one-quart plastic toilet tank displacement bottles

(4-1/4" x 1-3/4" x 8-1/2")

2) a flow-tube -type shower flow-control insert including

an "O" ring to eliminate noise;

3) two dye tablets with instructions for conducting a toilet-tank leak test; and

4) instructions for installation, follow-up toilet leak

trouble-shooting and repair, and tips and information

on water conservation in general.

Each kit cost about $1.00. The bottles were weighted with the proper

amount of gravel to assure submergence, and all items were placed in

a plastic bag designed to be hung on a door knob. Customers were asked

to join in an effort to "SAVE WATER TODAY. . .FOR TOMORROW!"

The first bill insert, mailed in Spring of 1976 with no rationing

in effect, is shown in Figure 1. Parallel with distribution of the

bill stuffer, media stories were released, a poster contest with prizes

supplied by local merchants was launched, speeches were presented to

local citizen groups, and notices were placed in the two local newspapers. Of the 12,350 connections existing at that time (most of these

were residential connections) , 58 percent responded that they would

like to receive a kit. Volunteers were utilized to assemble and

32
distribute the kits and all orders were filled relatively promptly.

All this was a big job and it involved many children in the community - Girl Scouts, Bluebirds, Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts, etc., thus serving to

increase penetration even more. The next year, 1977, the second year

of the dry spell hit California, and most San Francisco Bay Area com- munities, including North Marin County Water District, were forced to

reduce water consumption an average of 30 percent. Customers were

again asked to participate in the kit program, and at the same time,

customers were surveyed as to the fate of items received in kits distributed in the prior year. The second bill insert, mailed in Spring

of 1977 with mandatory rationing in effect, is shown in Figure 2. Responses increased to 82 percent with this second mailing. Regarding

the questionnaire which reflected penetration achieved in the first

year, 8,900, or 72 percent, of the District's customers responded.

Three thousand of these responses were selected at random for analysis.

Taking into account the level of penetration and extrapolating results

to the whole service area, the survey revealed the following:

1) 60 percent of all customers installed bottles.

2) 5 percent of those installing bottles reported unsatisfactory performance.

3) 43 percent of the customers performed the leak test.

4) 30 percent of the customers installed shower inserts.

Admittedly, the second year of this program occurred during a crisis. The first year, however, did not; yet amazingly high penetration was achieved.

We believe the high penetration achieved in the first non-crisis

year was due to the following factors:

1) The program was accompanied by significant advertising

(most of it free, incidentally) which was diverse in nature

and which was repeated many times over the course of

three months.

2) The claim was simple and understandable ("install a kit

and help save one million gallons of water each day")

3) Kits were "engineered" to be easy to install.

4) Kits were supplied only to customers who had asked for them.

5) A plethora of volunteers was used - mainly children, thus

saving money while at the same time increasing penetration

and media interest.

By comparison, experience recorded in the San Diego area by the

33
State of California Department of Water Resources during 1977 and utilizing three different approaches to distribution, revealed much less

satisfactory results (see Table 1) . The author believes the three most

important reasons for the higher penetration in the first year of the

North Marin County Water District program were:

1) Customers were asked to make a commitment (request a free kit). We believe this commitment, be it ever so small, placed the customer in a "follow-through" frame

of mind when the kit was delivered.

2) Program advertising was intense, diverse, and repetitive.

3) Volunteers from almost every childrens' group in town

were involved in the distribution.

SUMMARY

To summarize, I believe there are ways to successfully motivate

a community to save water - even in the absence of a clear and present

drought. Some of our experience on the matter is included in the two

case examples described in this paper. The means and knowledge to

accomplish water conservation are available to us and stem from the

tools of the trade plied by the traditional ad man. What is required

is a sensitive yet practical, common-sense approach to the problem and

a willingness to accept the hard work necessary to bring it off.

FREE ONE-TIME WATER SAVING OFFER

Please check box, fill in address, and return this card with

your water bill.

Yes, I wish to join with my neighbors and help save 1,000,000 gallons of water per day (and energy as well)

Please send me (without charge) the toilet water saving

bottles, shower flow control insert and toilet leak test

kit together with instructions.

My address is:

Note: The water saving devices, contained in a plastic bag,

will be hung on your door by a volunteer service group

should you elect to participate in this water conser- vation effort.

WE MUST SAVE WATER TODAY... FOR TOMORROW!

A Public Service by North Marin County Water District

999 Rush Creek Place, Nova to, California 94948

Figure 1. First Bill Insert (Spring 1976)

- No Rationing in Effect

34
FREE WATER SAVING OFFERS

Last year North Marin Water offered a free water saving kit to

its customers in a joint effort to save one million gallons of

Russian River water per day. WE AGAIN MAKE THIS OFFER AND WILL

DELIVER THE KITS TO YOUR DOOR PROVIDED YOU RETURN THIS INSTRUCTION LETTER TO OUR OFFICE BY NO LATER THAN MARCH 11, 1977. Even

if you do not wish to receive a kit, we ask that you fill out

and return this letter with your next water bill payment.

Did you request a kit last year? D Yes D No

Did you receive a kit last year? Yes No

Please check the following actions and observations as appropriate

I inserted bottles in toilet tank(s).

O I installed shower inserts.

I performed the toilet tank leak test.

I found 2 bottles per tank worked satisfactorily.

I found I could use only 1 bottle per tank and maintain

a satisfactory flush.

Any problems or complaints with kit materials:

If you did not participate in this water saving effort last

year or if you would like to receive an additional kit, check

here. q

Enter address here

In order to calculate water saved we ask that you tell us how

many people live at the above address. people.

A public service by North Marin County Water District

999 Rush Creek Place, Novato, California 94948

CONSERVATION MAKES GOOD CENTS

Figure 2. Second Bill Insert (Spring 1977)

- Mandatory Rationing in Effect

35
TABLE 1

Households

UTILIZATION AND RETENTION (PENETRATION) OF

WATER SAVING TOILET AND SHOWER INSERTS 1 IN THE SAN DIEGO METROPOLITAN AREA IN 1977

(Program Sponsored by State of California,

Department of Water Resources)

Initial

Distribution Penetration' Retained

Mode'

Net Penetration ' Toilet Shower Toilet Shower Toilet Shower

270,000 depot 20% 12%

60,000 mass 30% 16%

40,000 door to door 23% 11%

70% 82% 14%

21%

16%

10%

13%

9%

1 Different types of toilet inserts of principally either the water

dam or displacement variety were distributed. Plastic orifices con- trolling flows to 11.4 1/min (3 gal/min) were distributed.

Distribution mode key:

• Depot distribution: kits were made available in a variety

of neighborhood locations such as shopping centers, fire

stations, etc.

• Mass distribution: workers and volunteers hung kits on doorknobs without talking to residents.

• Door to door distribution: workers called at each home,

explained the program, asked resident to participate and

left kit if resident agreed.

3 Percent of total households. Many households did not receive the

kits. By distribution mode area, total households not receiving

kits were: depot - 68%; mass - 33%; door to door - 56%.

H Percent of households that initially utilized devices based on statistically significant follow-up survey conducted approximately

two years after distribution.

5 Percent of total households.

36
PROVIDING SECTION SERVICES IN TECHNICAL INFORMATION AND TRAINING*

David B. Preston, Executive Director

American Water Works Association

Denver, Colorado

The American Water Works Association's (AWWA's) training and

technical information programs have been undergoing a major evolutionary change over the past several years. The planning, development,

and implementation of various programs administered by the education

department have been a time-consuming process; currently, however,

established programs are online and new directions are being examined

to expand and improve member services.

What have been the primary causes that have brought about the

dramatic changes in the Association's education services? Most visible has been the increase in staff from three to nine members in the

past 5 years. The expansion of professional staff has been a building

process of selecting persons with abilities in specialized areas of

technical information retrieval, program coordination, and training

materials development, who function as a team. The turning point,

however, can be traced to two factors that have resulted in substantially changing the Association's posture and providing the impetus to move in new directions.

1. Several years ago, the Officers and Board of Directors made a commitment to establish a technical library. This commitment was one

of underwriting long-term support for the library's development and

growth as a repository of literature relating to the water supply

industry. At that time, no one anticipated that what would emerge

would be a technological breakthrough for the Association in providing

instant, online literature searches.

*Presented at the 1981 Annual Conference of the British Columbia Water

& Waste Association, Penticton, B.C., April 22-28, 1981. Text prepared by AWWA Education Department staff: B. Haskins, K. Keeley, L.

Janak, and D. Cooperider.

37
2. The attitude of the Association's leadership changed nearly 5 years ago with respect to accepting Federal assistance for the development of training materials. Since then, nearly $15 million has been

funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for a variety o training programs and implementation activities.

In part, recent accomplishments are the result of the Board's

position on accepting supplementary program grants and commitment to

supporting a relevant education program on an international level.

The education department is one of the few departments in the Association that has contact with sections on a regular basis. Because of

the communication linkage with individual members and sections, staff

view their primary role as serving members by providing information to

the hundreds of questions received on technical literature, seminars, and

types of training materials available.

My purpose today is to inform you about what we're doing and to dis cuss our plans for meeting the challenges of the '80s in responding to

section interests and needs in the areas of technical library services,

seminars, and the development of training materials.

TECHNICAL LIBRARY SERVICES

The Technical Library was authorized by the Board of Directors in

May 1977. By August, staff was hired to organize the technical information published by AWWA and establish a system for cataloging books and

reports already existing at the Denver Headquarters. The primary objective of the library has been to provide information on the water utility

industry to Association members and headquarters staff. This is currently being accomplished through three basic programs:

• Audiovisual Services

• Reference/Research Services

• Standardized Bibliographies

Audiovisual Library Services £

The Audiovisual Library Service has been one of the most visible

member services for several years. The immediate collection contains

approximately 100 different selections to supplement training programs

and to provide media resources for use in public information presentations to schools and community groups. In an average year, the library

receives approximately 700 circulation requests for various 16-mm films,

35-mm slide presentations, and videotape programs listed and described i

the audiovisual catalog. When a request is received, the "show date" is

confirmed in writing and the media is made available for a 3- to 5-day

period. Costs for the use of media are nominal, and rental fees typically amount to $10-$25 for each type of media requested. This service

charge covers handling, mailing, media repair, and replacement.

38
New titles recently added to the collection Include:

• Sampling and Analysis of Trihalome thanes (Videotape)

• Vault Safety (Videotape)

• Managing the Water We Drink (Slide/Tape Presentation)

• How to Use the Chlorine Institute Emergency Kit "B" for

Chlorine Ton Containers (Slide/Tape Presentation)

• Without Water (16-mm film)

There are very few good public information and training audiovisual

materials produced each year, and the staff relies, to a large extent, on

others for information concerning the availability of new media materials

produced commercially or by various organizations. In the future, AWWA

will be obtaining more videotape cassettes. There is evidence that a significant number of utilities now have the necessary videotape playback

equipment. Also, we will be encouraging utilities to evaluate the feasibility of using videodiscs now entering the market as an adjunct to their

inservice training programs.

Reference/Research Services

One of the most recent services provided by the technical library is

providing up-to-date reference and research information for members. The

service is performed principally by computer searches, although staff

still handles a limited number of reference requests through manual

searches. Computer data bases provide us with instant access to water

supply information throughout the world via several major computer online

reference bureaus subscribed to by the Association. Library staff have

the capability of tapping more than 50 information banks, or data bases,

that store more than 30 million published articles, reports, books, proceedings, and other technical documents.

Here's how the system works. The client provides staff with key

words or phrases on the topics being researched. From terminals located

at the Association, key words are transmitted to data bases and matched

with key words coded with the titles of articles stored in computers.

The search takes only minutes. What the client receives within days is a bibliography containing all reports, articles, and books related to the

search topic. Almost all bibliographic citations contain two to threesentence abstracts. Another phase of the reference service is to assist

the client in obtaining the search document in hard copy. Many utilities

and consulting firms are finding the Association's reference and document

delivery service more efficient and time saving than using their own

people to manually locate important references.

Computerized information retrieval is a relatively new library technology. Most data bases cover literature published since 1970, and the

data files are updated monthly. The cost for a computer search typically

runs $50-$75, depending on the type of bibliographic search requested.

AWWA has advanced the data base concept one step further and is now

entering and testing what we call "AWWA INFO." When this project is

completed, we will have developed a private, composite data base that will

39
cross-reference all Journal articles since 1976, all Water Quality Technology Conference papers since 1973, all Annual Conference and Preconference Seminar papers since 1975, and all AWWA Research Foundation

publications since 1977. \

Standardized Bibliographies

Standardized bibliographies are gaining in popularity and use since

their inception 2 years ago. They were compiled in response to frequently asked reference questions on specific topics of water treatment,

distribution, and management. For example, the standardized bibliography

on "Softening and Iron-Manganese-Color Removal" contains bibliographic

references to 15 articles, each containing a three- to five-sentence abstract. Standardized bibliographies listed below currently appear in the

Publications Catalog and sell for $3.50 each, member rate.

© Asbestos/Asbestos Cement Pipe and Drinking Water

o Cast Iron Pipe Corrosion

• Connection Charges, Tap Fees and Main Extension Financing

• Cross Connection Control and Back Siphonage/Back-Flow Prevention

© Data Processing/Automation in Water Systems

e Energy Conservation

• Giardiasis

• Leak Detection and Unaccounted-for Water

• Metering/Telemetering/Meter Repair & Testing

• Rates and Cost of Service

© Softening and Iron-Manganese-Color Removal

@ Water Hardness and Health

• Water Main Replacement - Water Main Breaks

Staff is in the process of preparing 10 new standardized bibliographies, which will be available in August.

® Chlorine Resistant Bacteria in Distribution Systems

• Diatomaceous Earth

• Direct Filtration

a Disinfection Alternatives

» Drought

• Home Water Treatment Units

» Regionalization

® Sludge Disposal

• Taste & Odor Control

• Trihalomethanes

SEMINAR PROGRAMS

As most of you know, for many years we have offered seminars to

improve the technical, professional, and managerial skills of personnel

employed in the water industry. We view the program as a forum for the

exchange of ideas and technology among our members and nonmembers alike.

Many of you have been participants and found that the program gave you

40
the opportunity to share experiences and ideas with others who were doing

similar work and facing many of the same challenges.

Currently, there are eight types of seminars, including Chlorination, Cost of Service, Cross Connection Control, Customer Service, Emergency Planning, Taste and Odor Control, Safety, and Water Loss Reduction.

Seminars cover a wide variety of topics ranging from current technical

procedures used in water treatment to handling irate customers and establishing equitable rate structures.

As needs of the industry change, new programs are developed to

provide training and educational opportunities that will meet those needs.

Our goal is not to duplicate training provided by vocational/technical

schools, colleges, and universities, but to bridge the gap between formal

education and on-the-job experience.

In 1976, the Association offered only five seminars. Most were directed toward water utility operators. Recently, however, certain

pressures have forced utilities to examine their internal operations and

improve efficiency in providing services.

A program for customer service representatives was piloted in 1977

in response to the growing demand for assistance to improving customer

relations by providing training for employees who had daily contact with

customers. Prior to the development of the Customer Service Seminar,

there were no programs available to customer service representatives,

billing clerks, or meter readers. The seminar has proved so successful

that, to date, nearly 75 programs have been presented to over 2,000

seminar participants.

The Cost of Service Seminar—an introductory course for managers,

planners, and consulting engineers—was developed in 1979 to address

concerns related to the process of setting and managing rate levels and

allocating costs of services.

The newest seminar, piloted in late 1980, is the result of the need

for utilities to reduce lost and unaccounted-for water. It is estimated

that 30 Water Loss Reduction Seminars will be presented in 20 sections of

AWWA this year. Developed for managers and water distribution system

personnel, the program provides practical suggestions for reducing revenue losses by repairing meters, locating and repairing underground leaks,

and improving billing systems. This is the first program that brings

both management and operations together with a common goal. The response

to this approach has been extremely positive, often resulting in more effective interdepartmental communications.

We recognize that the success of the seminar program is directly

attributable to our sections. Section Education Committees play a vital

role in identifying training needs within the section where the Association can supplement their training activities. A major goal of the education department is to involve the sections more in planning educational

41
activities. Steps have already been taken with Section Education Chairmen, Safety Chairmen, and Newsletter Editors to improve communications

between sections and AWWA training staff.

Last year, Section Education Chairmen were furnished with updated

procedural guidelines for scheduling seminars with headquarters. Systematically, twice a year, Education Committee Chairmen are contacted by

letter and telephone by our Training Programs Coordinator, who works with

sections on seminar arrangements. When a seminar request is received

from a section, every effort is made to ensure the program's success. Seminar promotion, student materials, instructors, speakers, and adequate

meeting facilities are arranged by the department's coordinator. There

is no cost whatsoever to the sponsoring section, and every effort is made

to avoid burdening the section with seminar arrangements. Generally, an interested member in the city where the seminar will be held is asked to

provide information on hotels with meeting rooms, and to receive and

distribute student materials at the seminar. This person is designated

the Local Arrangements Chairperson (LAC), and in exchange for his/her

assistance, he/she attends the seminar as a guest of the Association.

While the Association is not a certifying agency, Continuing Education Units (CEU's) earned by those attending seminars are applied toward

certification renewal in many States and provinces. A permanent record

of CEU's has been maintained by the Association on persons attending

seminars since 1976.

For several years now, we have been introducing sections to the concept of "contracting" for seminars. Many utilities, government agencies,

and training organizations have found this approach to providing training

successful. For example, a section or utility may request a seminar for

30 persons. The cost is negotiated on the basis of services performed

and materials required. There are many options, but the more services

performed by the contracting organization, the lower the cost. Since the

sponsoring organization or section has "purchased" the seminar, the

registration fee (if any) is set by the sponsoring organization. Many

sections have contracted and fully subsidized the program by offering the course at no cost. Others have used this method to generate revenue, in

which case everyone benefits. Sections earn a moderate profit and students receive the training at a lower cost, since fees set by sections

are usually less than the fee charged by the Association.

Contracting for seminars is a method whereby sections or utilities can retain responsibility for the program without having to develop

materials or recruit instructors. Moreover, they become actively involved in the training process.

In the past 5 years, over 7,500 water utility personnel, regulatory

officials, and consultants have attended more than 250 seminars. That

amounts to approximately 90,000 person-hours of training.

Water utility management, increasing costs, water quality, and improved service were major concerns in the '70s. The challenges of the
'80s will undoubtedly include financial considerations related to growth, new sources of supply, facilities expansion and replacement, and water

conservation practices. Already, many utiltities are experiencing revenue short-falls as a result of voluntary and enforced water conservation

measures. Inflation, population growth, and migration compound the very

difficult task of planning and developing adequate drinking water

supplies for the future.

The Association must be prepared to offer training that is geared

toward helping utilities cope with these new challenges. Through systematic evaluation, statistical interpretation, and reporting, the education

department will respond to section needs by expanding and upgrading

seminar services.

TRAINING AND PROGRAM MATERIALS DEVELOPMENT

Perhaps one of the most recent and significant changes in program

direction has resulted from a reorganization of the education department

and the assignment of staff to a materials development section. This

group of people is responsible for the preparation and recent publication

of a Chlorination Training Package. The training package concept is a new thrust for the Association in providing training alternatives that

have not existed before. The chlorination package has been prepared in

10 individual modules of instruction and offers the user several options

for conducting inservice training sessions on a short- or long-term basis.

The various instructional components that make up the package

include

• Instructor Guide, 110 pages illustrated

• 35-mm slide illustrations (80) correlated with discussion topics

• 16-mm film entitled "Safe Handling of Chlorine"

• Slide/tape presentation on "Chlorine Residual"

• Water Chlorination Principles and Practices, Manual M20, AWWA

• Chlorine Manual , the Chlorine Institute

• Handbook of Chlorination, , Van Nostrand Reinhold Company

• Standard Methods , 15th Edition, AWWA/APHA/WPCF

• Water Quality and Treatment , McGraw-Hill Book Company

• Water Treatment Plant Design , AWWA/ASCE/CSSE

The instructor guide has been organized in a way that each module of

instruction contains an overview, training objectives, methods of instruction, supplemental materials, selected references, lesson outlines,

and instructor notes. Instructors are encouraged to prepare data using

local examples and to draw upon their experiences to supplement course

notes.

As we have seen before, in periods of spiraling inflation and administrative budget pressures, it always seems that training funds are the

first to be cut. We believe the training package concept will provide a way of conducting training at a substantially lower cost per student.
The use of packaged program materials is not only an efficient method of

providing training and improving operating performance, but probably the

most cost-effective. It is more economical than paying registration

fees, transportation costs, and per diem expenses for outside training.

Here are some advantages that should be evaluated in considering the

purchase of a packaged training course:

• Training expenses can be shared with neighboring utilities.

• Training can be adapted to deal with inplant operating problems.

• Instruction can be paced to the learning rate and interests of

plant operations staff.

• Course materials can be taught at a time most convenient to the

work schedule.

• Instructional materials are reusable. They will be around for a long time, providing opportunities to hold refresher courses or train new employees.

As fewer and fewer dollars are appropriated for training at the

national level, it will become increasingly important that AWWA sections

as well as local utilities provide the necessary training for their

employees.

Over the years, the Association has been engaged in a number of

training projects that have been funded by EPA and the Indian Health

Service (IHS).

• Two excellent slide/tape presentations on Chlorine Residual and

Turbidity Analysis were produced in conjunction with various SDWA

publications. The presentations emphasize proper sampling and

testing procedures as well as how test results are calculated.

• A Five-Volume Operator Training Program Series has been under

development for the past 3 years. Each volume focuses on a specialized segment of water supply operations from source to

tap. Titles in the series include:

Volume 1, Introduction to Water Sources and Transmission

Volume 2, Introduction to Water Treatment

Volume 3, Introduction to Water Distribution

Volume 4, Introduction to Water Quality Analyses

Basic Science Reference Handbook (an applied supplement to

Volumes 1-4)

Volume 1 and the reference handbook are presently in print, and

Volumes 2-4 are scheduled for publication in 1982.

Most recently, the Association has been preparing training

materials for EPA and IHS on the operation and maintenance of

44
sanitation facilities on Indian lands. As a spinoff from the

project, the Association is preparing a book on Management of

Small Water Systems , which is scheduled for publication late this

year.

Work is currently in progress on the development of another comprehensive training package on safety practices. The training course will

emphasize topics identified by a needs assessment survey mailed to member

sections last year. Particular attention is being devoted to safety and

distribution operations, where 70 percent of all accidents in the

industry are reported to occur.

Future plans for program development include packaging existing AWWA

seminars, such as Cross Connection Control, Customer Service, and Water

Loss Reduction. In addition, a number of course topics have been identified that deal with the operation and maintenance of ground water

systems.

CONCLUSION

As the '80s unfold, there will certainly be many more issues con- fronting our industry than we contemplate today. The consequences of the

years ahead will demand that new ideas be applied to traditional approaches, that new technology and procedures replace obsolete ones, and,

perhaps most important of all, that we have access to information to

enable us to resolve unfamiliar situations. To accomplish these tasks, we need your help in identifying how our education, training, and information services can serve your interests and needs most effectively. We

ask for your continued cooperation and support in this joint endeavor.

45

WATER- SAVING PLUMBING: A Flow Control & Maintenance Program

To Reduce and Control Water Use In Multi-Housing Properties

David P. Wilborn, Vice-President

Metropolitan Watersaving Company

Washington, D.C.

ABSTRACT

Evaluation of water consumption at multi-housing properties often reveals excessive and costly water use. The

challenge to reduce and control water flow is being successfully met by a program designed to modify plumbing fixtures

and provide management of water consumption.

INTRODUCTION

Management responsible for budgeting operating expenses

at apartment and condominium communities has expressed increasing interest in devices to save water and energy as

utility costs have increased rapidly in recent years. In

far too many cases, however, management failed to put forth

an effort toward reducing water consumption equal to their

interest. Unfortunately, many efforts directed towards

saving water produced results far inferior to what can be

expected from a water conservation program.

As a manufacturer and supplier of flow control devices,

we have supplied numerous projects for the past ten years.

Many times we have delivered quality devices which , instead

of achieving significant reductions in excessive water use,

find their way to the supply room to await installation

during a vacancy or turnover. When complete installation

is immediate the job is sometimes carelessly performed.

And even when installation is as complete and professional

as one could hope for, the consumption analysis which follows is often incomplete or incorrect . These problems are

usually compounded by the fact that other important water

management responsibilities are completely overlooked.

Any effort to conserve water in a multi-housing environment

will encounter a number of obstacles, any one of which can

adversely affect the result of the program.

47
Being absolutely certain that flow control devices can

provide a significant reduction in consumption ,. Metropolitan Watersaving decided to market devices through, a program

of water management , thus guaranteeing results over which we

previously had little or no control. Instead of delivering

products to be used or abused at the whim of maintenance

personnel, we would deliver results through a professional

program of water management.

A complete retrofit service is offered to modify

existing showers, faucets and toilets to perform at more

efficient flow rates.

Shower: Overgenerous showerheads (5-6 gpm) are

changed to a water/energy- saving model

that uses less than 2.5 gpm. Several

models are tested to confirm efficiency

and to permit selection of preferred

spray pattern.

Faucet: Kitchen and lavatory faucets are fitted

with flow control aerators to govern

flow to under 2.75 gpm. Aeration

offers benefits such as non-splash

flow and better sudsing action.

Toilet: Conventional tank-type flush toilets

consume an average of 5.2 gallons per

flush. Toilet tank dams are installed

to modify existing tanks to use 3.5

gallons per flush for an average reduction in water use per flush of 1.7

gallons. Careful installation and

minor adjustments when necessary assure

adequate flushing action. Toilet is

carefully checked to assure fixture is

leak free and water level is at proper

height

In addition to the hardware phase, other phases of the

program include:

a) analysis of water use

b) survey of building/unit fixture

c) installation service to assure

standardized flow rate on a per unit basis

d) monitoring service as follow-up

48
Several recent job consumption figures illustrate the

benefits of flow control devices when used as part of a complete water management program:

Job Number: 0073-0050

Units: 128

Location: Silver Spring, Maryland

Meter Consumption

Da i j-/ di "1i vy //Tin un ii ti

f era 1 1 one: ^ 1/18/80 - 2/19/80 251

2/19/80 - 3/18/80 234

? /I 8 /80 - 4 /IS / 80 221

4/18/80 - 5/19/80 220

5/19/80 - 6/24/80 242

6/24/80 - 6/30/80 230

6/30/80 - 7/21/80 271

7/21/80 - 8/22/80 232

8/22/80 - 9/22/80 229

9/22/80 - 10/17/80 207

10/17/80 - 11/21/80 154

11/21/80 - 12/19/80 156

12/19/80 - 1/21/81 132

1/21/81 - 2/23/81 134

2/23/81 - 3/19/81 135

3/19/81 - 4/20/81 132

implement flow control

Average reduction: 102 gallons daily per unit

Dollar savings annually: $14,272.50

235 gal x 128 units x 365 days @ 2.33/1,000 = 25,581.54

133 gal X 128 units x 365 days @ 1.82/1,000 = 11, 309. 04

annual savings = 14,272.50

Implementation cost: $1,996.80

Expenditure recap period: 1.7 months

49
Job Number: 3701-3705

Units: 936

Location: Bailey's Crossroads, Virginia

Meter

Reading

Period

Consumption

Daily/Unit

( gallons

)

1/11/79

4/12/79

7/11/79

10/15/79

1/12/80

4/11/80

7/17/80

10/10/80

1/19/81

4/12/79

7/11/79

10/15/79

1/12/80

4/11/80

7/17/80

10/10/80

1/19/81

4/10/81

142

150

155

166

171

144 implement flow control

142

105

101

Average reduction: 66 gallons daily per unit

Dollar savings annually: $47,576.79

66 gal x 936 units x 365 days @ 2.11/1,000 = 47,576.79

Implementation cost: $11,033.75

Expenditure recap period: 2.8 months

50
Job Number: 0408-6000

Units: 1200

Location: Alexandria, Virginia

Meter

Reading

Period

Consumpt ion

Daily/Unit

( gallons

)

4/24/80

5/22/80

6/23/80

7/25/80

8/25/80

9/23/80

10/22/80

11/19/80

12/22/80

1/22/81

2/21/81

3/23/81

5/22/80

6/23/80

7/25/80

8/25/80

9/23/80

10/22/80

11/19/80

12/22/80

1/22/81

2/21/81

3/23/81

4/22/81

179

189

191

199

202

196

205

190

191

133

127

157 implement flow control

Average reduction: 70 gallons daily per unit

Dollar savings annually: $53,655.00

70 gal x 1200 units x 365 days @ 1.75/1,000 = 53,655.00

Implementation cost: $18,369.00

Expenditure recap period: 4.1 months

51

LANDSCAPING ALTERNATIVES AND IRRIGATION CONSERVATION

Nicholas M. Schmidt

Vice President/Marketing

Sanford Homes, Inc.

Englewood, Colorado

INTRODUCTION

I would like to make a few general comments concerning the subject of water conservation and what we in the home building industry

are doing about that important subject. First, for the last 2 years

the home building industry has been the recipient of a voluntary

effort on behalf of the plumbing industry to provide water-conserving

devices as standard equipment. New homes in Colorado have been

receiving low-volume, 3-1/2-gallon toilets; low-volume showerheads;

and faucet aerators. This is a dramatic case where voluntarism

through private enterprise has moved at a faster pace than any government codes. Second, the trend toward smaller, more dense housing,

which has primarily been motivated by issues of af fordability , certainly has been a positive factor relative to water conservation.

Outside irrigation demands are reduced by this trend toward more density. Third, I would hope that this audience would find the most

recent National Association of Home Builders Consumer Survey very

interesting. The historic main reasons for people buying new homes

have been the need for moving to a larger home and moving to a nicer

neighborhood. Energy has now become the number one subject of concern. Although the current main concern of energy is heating, the

subject of water conservation also is included in the broad concern

for energy-conserving homes.

DENVER LAWN WATERING PROGRAM

Now I would like to discuss a very exciting 1981 Denver lawn

irrigation program that will be using mass media to change the existing patterns of overwatering in our area, but first a word about the

supply problems in the Denver area. Currently, we are operating with

a treatment limitation until a new plant can be completed next year,

which means that we operate with an every- third-day watering schedule

to assist in the lowering of that peak demand. In addition, we also

have a raw water supply problem. This means that this region of the

country is very interested in long-range conservation efforts that

53
could alleviate, to some degree, the necessity for developing as much

raw water as is currently being contemplated. As a result of the

negotiation that led to the permissions required to proceed with the

construction of the new treatment facilities, a Citizens Advisory

Committee was formed for the purpose of providing citizen commentary

and input to the Denver Water Department. This Citizens Advisory

Committee, which has been in existence for 2 years, has several Task

Forces. 1 am Chairman of the Task Force for Landscape Water Conservation. Other Task Forces include: the Home Water Conservation,

Water Metering, and Long-Range Planning Task Forces. Serving on a Citizens Advisory Committee can be a very frustrating experience due

to lack of mission, undetermined goals, poor attendance, lack of staff

support, and ineffective leadership. Recognizing these liabilities,

our Landscape Conservation Task Force set up an operating philosophy

that included the following points: One , the Chairman personally

solicited key members via telephone; he explained the purpose and

assured them that the meetings would be brief and to the point, and

that the Task Force would be disbanded after completing its mission.

The membership included sod growers, sprinkler company representatives, savings and loan and mortgage bankers, conservation officials

from neighboring cities, landscape architects, garden store owners,

consulting civil engineers, and other interested citizens. Two , we sought and expressly recruited key members of the Denver Water Department staff to attend our meetings and to participate. This included

members of the Community Affairs Department as well as the Conservation Officer. The theme of this strategy was working together toward

a common cause. Three, meetings were held, no more than monthly, at

the Denver Water Department; they started at 4:15 p.m., making it more convenient for all people to attend on a regular basis. The meetings

for this program started in October 1980, and continued through April

1981. Four, our meetings were devoted to getting outside local speakers to cover the subject of new technology, mass media communication

opportunities, and a market program to unite the two.

As Marketing Vice President for Sanford Homes, Inc., which builds

400 homes per year, my skills are in the field of marketing. Therefore, the prime strategy was to seek out the areas of greatest marketing potential (in this case, existing bluegrass lawns in the Denver

metropolitan area) to review the existing knowledge base, which turned

out to be the one at Colorado State University at Fort Collins; and

then devise a plan whereby these concepts could be "sold" to the consumer utilizing contemporary marketing and public relations techniques.

Our Conservation Task Force focused on lawn watering as an area

of high potential. During periods of hot weather of over 90° F in

July and August, approximately 80 percent of all water used in the

Denver system goes into the irrigation of bluegrass lawns. Another

way of expressing this high consumption is to note that on an annual

basis Denver has a usage of 150 gallons per day per person. This

consumption rises to over 500 gallons per day per person during maximum day conditions, which in Denver can occur back to back for several

54
days at a time. With the cooperation of the Denver Water Department

staff and other neighboring communities, we attempted to learn how

much people were actually watering their bluegrass lawns. We now have

some evidence that it may be as high as 1.9 inches of water per "week.

Other data indicate that typical watering in our area ranges from 1.5

to 2.0 inches of water per week through the 22-week growing season,

which is from May through early October. Some of the information from

Colorado State University indicates that very attractive lawns only

require 0.9 inches of water on the average throughout the growing

season. If people are willing to accept an option of a lawn appearance that is satisfactory but somewhat less green, then the watering

requirement can be decreased to 0.7 inches of water per week. Our

Task Force saw that this could be an area of high potential savings

for the Denver area if the consumers could be informed, educated, and

motivated to apply this information.

The Task Force felt it advisable to do some basic research about consumer attitudes. A common theory stated by conservation-interested

individuals was that "the public really does not care about conservation and therefore it is unwise to spend a great deal of resources on educating the public when the demand is not there." The Task Force

asked the Metro Poll Survey, a division of the Denver Consulting

Group, to do a February 1981 survey to test these assumptions. The

survey, performed as a public service, generated some very encouraging

and startling results. First, over half of the consumers were vitally

interested in saving water through better methods of lawn irrigation.

Second, the citizenry was extremely informed about the necessity for

water restrictions in the Denver area, which are due to growth, limitations on plant treatment capacity, and the present drought conditions.

From a marketing viewpoint, the gasoline energy crisis and shortages, the escalating utility bills that relate particularly to natural

gas and electricity, and the nationwide drought with its excessive

publicity have contributed greatly to the public awareness that was verified in this survey. The Task Force recommended that the Denver

Water Department hire a public relations firm to undertake the coor- dination of these programs. At one of our early sessions, we heard a presentation from a Vice President of Public Affairs from Channel 9, our ABC affiliate, who was most enthusiastic about our ability to gain

major commitments on the television stations relative to free public

service announcements, talk shows, and other support commitments. At our meeting, Ms. McKinley committed 26 spots per week during the summer. A second major commitment was received from the News Director of

Channel 9 relative to supporting our watering forecast system. A few

years ago, the Denver Water Department had produced the very excellent

"Water Folly" cartoon educational announcements. We are planning on expanding this series to better emphasize outside lawn irrigation. A new brochure will be prepared in four colors with distribution through

Channel 9, the Denver Water Department, and major retail outlets and

local garden stores. It will be designed to better explain the system

of bluegrass watering, which ties into the daily watering forecast.

55
The Denver Water Department also intends to install a telephone

call-in system whereby a customer could phone in and get various taped

messages on a timely basis that would explain many aspects of water

conservation and current weather conditions as they relate to the

watering forecast. For many years, the Denver Water Department has

used a newsletter with its billing process. The Task Force

recommended that the newsletter be reviewed from the viewpoint of

increasing readability through more contemporary graphics and

formatting.

For the Colorado State University information, T wish to express

my gratitude to Dr. Jack Butler and his staff. For many years, horticulturists have been provided with evapotranspiration (ET) rates for

agricultural crops. Dr. Butler has expanded this information to

include bluegrass lawns. The accompanying table describes three

quality levels of lawns: country club, which is 80 percent of ET and

is a very attractive, good-looking lawn; meadow, which is 60 percent

of ET and is mostly green but includes some brown and still overall

has a very attractive appearance; and prairie, which is mostly brown

and perhaps not appropriate for an urban environment. The table was prepared using average conditions in the Denver area; it shows the

various options the consumer might select. In reviewing the table, it

is important to recall that our data indicated that the average

consumer in Denver watered 1.5 to 2.0 inches of water per week, but

country club only requires 0.9 inches of water per week and meadow

only requires 0.7 inches of water per week throughout the growing

season. The accompanying figure from Colorado State University

indicates the importance of adequate lawn fertilization in this

program. As can be seen, a reduction of 30 percent in applied water

for a lawn that has adequate nitrogen or is properly fertilized only

shows a drop in appearance level of 1, on a scale of 1 to 10, whereas

the lawn that is improperly fertilized shows a dramatic drop in lawn

quality as the water is reduced.

The scope of our program for 1981, therefore, included a Denver

Water Department daily calculation of ET data, including daily information about solar radiation, wind, temperature, and local precipitation, if any. This information will be provided to a major television

channel for inclusion in the weather forecast as well as to The Denver

Post , which has made a commitment to include not only the 3-day

watering schedule but the watering forecast for the next day. The

special four-color brochure will be prepared as previously discussed,

and we will be supporting this program with articles by our public

relations consultant for the newspapers and speciality magazines

within the Denver area. We also hope to have several of our experts

from the Task Force as well as local horticulture experts go on various local talk shows. I am pleased to report that this program, in

its entirety, was presented to the Denver Board of Water Commissioners

and received their total endorsement as to its viability and priority.

As to future plans for improving the conservation potential of

bluegrass in the Denver area, we hope to offer a consumer kit that

56
could be available for about $18. It would include some simple measuring devices to better determine the output of sprinkler systems; the

four-color informational brochure describing the various options of

lawn quality that might be selected; a probe specially designed for

lawns, very much like the watering probe that is now being used for

indoor house plants, indicating when to water; and a special watering

permit that could go in the homeowner's window, exempting those homeowners from 3-day watering. This kit would give the above information along with the daily ET watering forecast, allowing the homeowner to select the kind of lawn desired and to water only when the

lawn needs it. There is no question that excessive water waste occurs

during the 3-day cycle, since many homeowners water each third day

because they feel their lawns cannot go 6 days without water. If they were allowed to water only as needed (as indicated by the probe),

they might stretch out the time period to 4 or 5 days, which would

greatly enhance the root growth of the lawn.

SUMMARY

I can say with a great deal of enthusiasm that we have a high

potential coalition of lawn experts, Denver Water Department staff, mass media, and interested parties who have worked very hard to pull

together some specific information that can help the average consumer

reduce dramatically his water use during the summer. We are fortunate to have an excellent program and a consumer demand that makes the

marketing of this program a very viable prospect. We look forward to

reporting our success with the summer 1981 Denver lawn watering

program.

57
TABLE

Average climatic data and recommended

average daily irrigation levels for

urban lawns to provide lawn quality

ratings of prairie, meadow, and

country club.

City: Denver, Colorado

Elevation (feet): 5,280

°F

Average

PrecipitationPotential

ET

Irrigation

in/week

Lawn Quality

Month in /week in/week Prairie Meadow Country Club

May 60° 0.60 1.38 0.39 0.66

June 68° 0.45 1.91 0. 16 0.88 1.27

July 76° 0.40 2.09 0.28 1.07 1.49

August 76° 0.29 1.82 0.30 0.99 1.35

Sept. 68° 0.26 1.32 0. 17 0.66 0.91

October 52° 0.26 0.77 0.28 0.41

58
FIGURE

Adequate Lawn Fertilization

30% reduction

(applied water)

10

0 1 1

1

1

1 11

1 1 4—

.1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1.0

Relative ET

(watering)

Colorado State University

04/81

59

WATER CONSERVATION: THE LEAKS IN IMPLEMENTATION

James S. Lyon

Environmental Policy Institute

Washington, D.C.

It is a pleasure today to address such a distinguished body which

represents a field so vital to our future. America, for the first time,

is beginning to realize that water, like energy, minerals and other

natural resources, is a limited commodity which it can no longer afford

to waste. America has experienced droughts, water shortages, and facility failures in almost every region of the country. Water Conservation is no longer a new idea. It has been successfully applied in

enough situations and under different circumstances, that it should no

longer be the subject of blind skepticism. Many of the people taking

part in this conference bring ideas and results gained from the actual

field rather than from studies and hypotheses as was the case in the

past. Water Conservation is no longer a new idea. However, while it

is considered the answer to future water needs, its future is not tomorrow, but today.

In a conference such as this, it is important not only to look at

where we are going, but also to analyze where we are. The Environmental Policy Institute (EPI) is currently conducting a project which in

part will do just that. EPI is presently developing a model water con- servation program for the state and local level. The first step was

to find out what presently exists in our systems. Our initial process

was to review all of the 50 state water codes for existing water con- servation laws. Second, we surveyed all state governments or Departments

of Water Resources. Using a questionnaire, we asked these agencies

what the states had in terms of a water conservation program, conservation statutes, proposed water conservation programs, or individual con- servation elements. In addition, the project is surveying the state

university systems and land grant colleges in much the same manner, as well as reviewing successful water conservation programs on the local

level

While the EPI study has not yet been completed, there are trends

developing that are worth noting. When reviewing the state codes, we found that under Montana State code 85-1-203:

61
State water plan shall set out a progressive program for conservation, development, and utilization of the state's water resources and propose

the most effective means by which these water resources may be applied for the benefit of the

people, with due consideration of alternative

uses and combination uses.

When we contacted Montana, however, we were told that there is no water conservation program.

The State of Florida, under State code 373. 016(1) (2b) states:

The waters in the state areamongits basic resources.

Such waters have not heretofore been conserved or fully controlled so as to realize their full beneficial use. It is further declared to be the policy

of the legislature: To promote the conservation,

development and proper utilization of surface and

ground water.

In actuality, Florida has nothing resembling a Water Conservation effort .

The State of Delaware, currently experiencing the northeast

drought, under code 6001 states:

In view of the rapid growth of population, agriculture, industry, and other economic activities, the

land, water and air resources of the State must be

protected, conserved and controlled to assure their

reasonable and beneficial use in the interest of the

people of the State.

Yet all Delaware has is a maximum flow requirement in their plumbing

code for new construction.

The State of Mississippi, under code 51-3-20(3) states:

The council shall develop an annual statewide

plan for implementing works of improvement for the

purposes of drainage, prevention of flood water

damage or the conservation, development, utilization, and disposal of waters for recreation, beautification, welfare, and other beneficial use.

When we asked for a copy of their annual statewide plan, Mississippi

replied: "As is often the case in legislation no funds were made

available for carrying out these provisions."

62
It is not my intent to single out any one of these states for any

other purpose than to show how representative they are of the conditions

in most of our states.

When analyzing our state survey we developed minimum criteria by

which we judged if a state has a water conservation program. To qualify, highly residential states must have:

• a comprehensive public education program

• a residential retrofit distribution program

• progressive rate structure reform

(where local law permits)

High agricultural or rural states must have:

• an agricultural conservation program

• a ground water management program

• a public education program

I would like to stress again that these are minimum guidelines and not

all of the elements needed for an overall comprehensive program. It

should be also noted that state water situations and conditions vary; are not easily comparable to each other; and not all reported water

conservation elements are equal to each other in scope, funding or results.

According to our survey, only one state comes close to having a state water conservation program: the State of California. While we

felt their program did not extend far enough in such areas as rate

structure reform and agricultural and ground water management, California is progressively and agressively moving ahead in most other conservation areas. It is most likely only a matter of time until they address these weaker points.

Our survey recorded six to eight states as having partial state

programs. A partial program would have several water conservation elements such as a progressive plumbing code, a leak detection, leak repair program, and a metering requirement program. While this would

not meet our criteria for a full program, it is certainly going in

the right direction.

Twenty states possess one or two conservation elements such as

a metering requirement or a progressive plumbing code. Often these

elements were instituted for reasons other than water conservation.

These states do not appear to be moving toward a program.

Approximately five states have proposed state water conservation

programs designed for future legislation or implementation. These

states presently have little or no conservation elements in practice.

Several of these proposed programs are quite impressive; however, they

63
process of review,

Finally, sixteen states do not presently have, nor do they foresee having, any form of a water conservation program. The apparent

reasons for this are quite diverse in nature. Most of these states

tend to be in the Northwest, Midwest, and Southeast regions of the

country.

One early assessment that can be made from this survey is that

a gap exists. There is a gap between the state water codes and their

implementation, a gap between local water conservation and its state

counterpart, a gap between studies and proposed plans and their implementation.

These gaps are not new nor are the reasons for them few in number.

However, one of the older and primary reasons for this gap is the variety of definitions attached to water conservation. In too many areas

of this country, conservation still means structural approaches such as the building of dams, reservoirs, innerbasin transfer networks, and

desalinization plants. This misleading interpretation addresses only

increasing supply and storage capability. This has usually been in

spite of the consequences. The consequences have meant devastation to our prime farmlands, wetlands, wildlife, water quality, towns, and

generational family way of life.

The consequences also mean enormous cost overruns that the taxpayer and local resident must bear. The Stonewall Jackson Dam in Lewis

County, West Virginia, has produced such problems. While water supply

is only one of the minor purposes for the project, Stonewall Jackson

Dam offers a good example of the enormous costs and effects that a project can incur. The Dam will displace approximately 1,800 residents

and destroy 400 farms. The original cost of the project was estimated

by the Corps of Engineers to be $34.5 million. The current costs have

run up to $225 million. Now the non-federal share of that payment is

$58 million. This $58 million must be assumed by the West Virginia

residents and taxpayers. The State of West Virginia has no water con- servation program.

Another example is the City of Boston, which is reported to be

leaking approximately 76 million gallons of water per day. Instead of

repairing its leaky system, Boston has proposed to transfer the same amount of water out of the Connecticut River into the Quabbin Reservoir

through the construction of the "Northfield Diversion." The Quabbin

Reservoir is another result of Boston's desire for more water. Its

construction resulted in inundating four towns, displacing 2,500 residents, and the exhumation of 7,500 bodies from 34 cemeteries.

Politics and political favoritism are additional barriers against

conservation implementation. For years water rate structures have

still must be subjected to the legislative and agency

some of which may never be passed or enacted.

64
benefitted the large consumer at the expense of the small consumer and

federal taxpayer. These rates have encouraged overwatering, waste,

and the growing of high water consumptive crops in non-native regions.

Cotton, for instance, which is native and essential to the economy of

the Southeast, is now grown in abundance in the Southwest. Until this

federal and state subsidy of water to favored regions and consumers is

ended, and the price of water is set at its true value, there is no reason for the consumer to conserve.

Another factor that hinders implementation is that the public is

still largely uneducated about the benefits of water conservation.

Most of the public views conservation as only to be practiced during a water crisis. As a whole, they have failed to understand the long- and

short-term benefits and the public and private savings that it offers.

Our government leaders and elected officials also remain ignorant

and apathetic to water conservation. Towards the end of 1980, when

the present Northeast drought first began to develop, it was shocking

to find that most state and local governments involved didn't know what

direction to take. It was as if the California program, the Washington

Suburban Sanitary project, and the Tucson, Arizona experience had never

happened. Aside from an outdoor use ban, the threat of water rationing,

and an occasional public education effort, what is the Northeast's plan

for solving their problems? They are still trying to develop one.

A final major reason for the lack of conservation implementation

is the anticipated start-up and operational costs. In actuality the

investment returns on these programs can be enormous. Not including

the cost of labor or the cost of retrofit kits, the City of Tucson, Arizona, spends approximately $3000 annually on its water conservation

project. They have reduced their peak demand by 1/3. Elmhurst, Illinois, during 1977, reduced their maximum daily consumption rate by

30 percent and their daily consumption rate by 5 percent. The cost of

their program is $1.00 per capita.

In older cities, capital improvement programs such as metering a non-metered system or repairing a badly leaking system can require

huge capital investments. These cities, often financially strapped,

find it hard to justify or produce funds for such programs, regardless

of the long-term returns and benefits. Technical and financial assistance must come from the states. The State of Massachusetts, for

example, has a $10 million, 50 percent matching fund program with the

local level for leak repair programs. However, this type of innovative

funding proves to be more the exception than the rule.

The problems hindering water conservation are large and complex.

The solutions, however, are amazingly basic in nature. One solution

is education: the public must see that water conservation is more than

just an alternative solution to a water problem. It is the most sound

and economically feasible solution which must be applied to a problem

65
before any other action is taken. The public needs to understand this

and demand it. We must educate our government leaders and elected officials. Once educated, we must urge and pressure them into adopting

water conservation as an operating policy. This is by no means an easy task, but until our leaders do so, conservation will remain only

sporadically in test projects around the Nation.

Innovative funding programs are essential, especially now that

the present Federal administration is cutting Federal programs in

these areas. Such agencies such as the Office of Water Research and

Technology, and other technical and financial aid sources are being

abolished. This more than ever puts the burden on the states.

Matching funds, rate structure changes, and tax incentives are just

a few areas than can make up the difference. Much more, however, is

needed

The problem of implementation is real. Failure to address the

problem will mean that our studies and proposals will continue to sit on the shelves of libraries rather than being put into action in

solving our water problems of today and tomorrow.

66
Publicly I AX^RIf I Ur Supplied

Potable conservation

A NATIONAL CONFERENCE

Resources: Manuals and Handbooks

DEVELOPING AND TESTING A WATER CONSERVATION HANDBOOK

Barbara Yeaman and Edwin F. Wesely, Jr.

FLOW REDUCTION: METHODS, ANALYSIS PROCEDURES, EXAMPLES

Sandra L. Postel

STATE WATER CONSERVATION PLANNING GUIDE

Denzel L. Fisher and James A. Yost

THE ROLE OF LAND USE PLANNING IN WATER CONSERVATION

Welford Sanders and Charles Thurow

AURORA, COLORADO: RATIONAL LANDSCAPE ALTERNATIVES

Joanne D. Rondon

DEVELOPING AND TESTING A WATER CONSERVATION HANDBOOK

Barbara Yeaman, Public Education Consultant

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Washington , D . C

Edwin F. Wesely, Jr. , Director

Potomac River and Trails Council

Washington, D.C.

ABSTRACT

How do we "sell" water conservation?

The advertising community would suggest that we begin

by educating the residential consumer. "Easy Ways to Save

Water, Money, and Energy at Home," a 32-page booklet produced by the Potomac River and Trails Council, was designed

to do this

What follows is the distillation of experience gained

by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which commissioned the booklet, and the Potomac River and Trails

Council (PRTC), which designed and printed it.

We also describe "Project Water Watch," a program

undertaken by PRTC in Frederick, Maryland, a small but developing city of 30,000 where there is no perceived water

supply problem. With a small EPA grant, PRTC has been testing the attitudes of local residents about water conservation, and about the booklet "Easy Ways to Save Water,

Money, and Energy at Home."

EASY WAYS TO SAVE WATER, MONEY, AND ENERGY AT HOME

To improve water quality and reduce the cost of wastewater treatment, Congress, in the 1977 Clean Water Act

Amendments, charged EPA to encourage less costly alternatives to conventional wastewater treatment systems. Recognizing that public education was essential if "alternative"

and "innovative" systems were to gain acceptance, Congress

also charged EPA to develop "a continuing program of public

education" on these topics, and on "methods for the reduction of wastewater volume."

69
"Reduction of wastewater volume," or "flow reduction,"

is probably the cheapest way to reduce the cost of treating

wastewater. In addition, it can relieve overloaded treatment

systems; extend the life of existing facilities; and in some

cases permit towns to build smaller new plants than they

might have thought necessary.

It can also bring inexpensive relief to homeowners with

failing septic systems, and to communities faced with building major sewage facilities to cope with septic failures in

rural towns and subdivisions.

We planned "Easy Ways to Save Water, Money, and Energy

at Home" to make it useful in the EPA Construction Grants

Program, which requires communities planning new wastewater

treatment facilities to address water conservation as an

"alternative" in sizing plant capacity. But we also wanted

a booklet that would be suitable for anyone - town or

household - who was interested in saving water.

Given these "target groups," we decided the diction

and graphics should be informal, non-technical, and fun to

read and look at - but not "corny" or patronizing. And since

we didn't want to produce a forbidding tome, we thought

35 or 40 pages would be about the right length (the printed

version comes to just 32 pages)

Over the year and a half it took to get the booklet

from concept to printed page, we learned that developing

such a "simple" booklet was anything but simple!

On the production side, the writer thought: "Well,

all I've got to do is review the 'literature' on the subject, condense it down to what I need, and start writing.

And then find someone to do the graphics and layout."

And the project officer at EPA thought: "Gee, since

I've dug up all sorts of material for the writer to review, and since we're just talking about 30 or 40 pages,

in two or three months I'll have the book!"

No one anticipated how hard it would be to get just

the tone of voice we wanted, or how difficult developing a theme - a common thread that tied things together - would

prove. And once we decided that line drawings would be a lot more "informal" than photographs, we could not forsee

that the artist (whose sketches were "perfect") would get

cold feet and back out of the project - which set us back

about four months.

70
The "education" of the writer was perhaps the most

difficult (and time consuming) aspect on the production

side: for he soon learned that reading about water conservation was not enough. To make the booklet "informal"

required him to put it in his own words (and not words

borrowed from the experts), and this, as it developed,

required many weeks of tinkering and record keeping at

home .

And as the tinkering and data collecting progressed,

the book went through draft after draft, and a shift in

narrative from third person ("he, they") to the first person ("I, we") - which, we thought, would enable readers to

identify with the writer as a person like themselves, and

not think of him as an outside "expert" preaching to them.

Basing the text on what was learned at home enhanced

this effect by enabling the writer to take the stance of

a "layman"; and say to the reader: "I'm in the same boat.

But what I've tried at home has saved a lot of water and

money - and here's what I've learned."

Eventually we saw the relationship between a gasguzzling car and the water-guzzling plumbing that most of

us inherit with all but the newest homes; and the really

large energy savings that ride piggy-back on hot water

conservation

This, after many false starts, gave us the theme:

"We're all stuck with water-guzzling plumbing fixtures,

but by retrofitting with good low-flow devices now on the

market, we can save a lot of water, energy, and money - and, incidentally, reduce the need for costly new water and

sewage facilities that we pay for through rate increases."

While the author felt strongly about the environmental

benefits that water conservation can bring to local rivers

and streams, he also assumed that few householders would

invest $25 or $30 in flow-reduction devices just to "save

the environment." While the book includes a few references

to environmental quality, they are low-key and not insisted

on .

We approached the illustrations with several biases:

(1) Drawings are more specific ana can show a lot more detail than photographs.

(2) Even the simplest plumbing fixtures are a mystery to

Harriet and Harry homeowner. Clear illustrations,

71
keyed to the text, are the most effective tool we have

to motivate people to d_o something about water conservation.

While it's easy enough to remove an old showerhead and

replace it with a good low-flow model, unless the

illustrations show this a lot of readers will never

make the attempt.

As it was, finding the r ighillustrator to do what

we wanted turned into a nightmare. To get the range of

technical and humorous drawings that we wanted, we finally

settled on three artists: a woman who was just right for

some of the imaginative "fun" drawings could not do good

plumbing illustrations, for example. Since we didn't want

to sacrifice her successful drawings, we decided to get

another hand to do the plumbing fixtures. We even incorporated a few sketches by our first artist, who backed out

when it came time to do some finished art.

The work of three hands may not be wholly compatible,

but we think there is a lot of life to the illustrations

even so. We also learned that with proper guidance we

don't always need "professional" illustrators: imagination

and dedication to the job are equally vital qualities.

For several "professionals" who submitted sketches, it was

obvious to us that this was "just another job," and that

we'd get polished but lifeless work from them.

Some of our best drawings are by a young woman just

out of college - who had no published work in her portfolio,

but who had a fertile imagination and a genuine interest in

the subject of water conservation.

For anyone embarking on a project like ours, in which

a government agency encourages the production of an illustrated booklet (either in-house or out), we have the following additional tips:

(1) Ideally, try to find a project director who really

understands and believes in your cause or program.

(2) Time spent by the director in interviewing writers and

illustrators is well worth it. By all means get

samples of their work, and in the case of illustrators

have them try their hand at sample sketches. In our

case, we had them sketch faucets, toilet fixtures, etc.

(3) Don't be fooled by flashy studios or portfolios full of

72
published articles or illustrations. Will the person

invest the time and energy to learn about this subject

and audience? If you don't think so, forget the person's

reputation and look elsewhere.

The writer and illustrator should work together. Once the

text is taking shape, have them begin to decide on the

number and kinds of drawings that will be needed - and

on the appropriate treatment.

We didn't start with an illustrator until the text was

finished; and then compounded the problem by failing to

give her a clear idea of just what drawings we wanted.

"You look over the text and tell us what you think needs

illustrating," was our approach - and so it was probably

inevitable that this person back out of the job.

The project director (or the firm you choose to direct

production) must give you realistic estimates of the time

and money it will take to do the job.

In our case, we greatly underestimated the difficulty

of the job, and the budget that was needed. The typography, for example, cost the PRTC a lot more than had

been budgeted

Neither EPA nor PRTC expected such a lengthy project;

the booklet was produced with a very low budget largely

because both EPA and PRTC believed in the "cause";

but a case like this will be the exception rather than

the rule

Allow plenty of time for drafts of the text (and artwork) to be sent around for review.

We sent drafts to about 10 or 15 "expert" hands, and

to 20 or so "laymen" (members of PRTC) . Many of the

comments were important ones, and led to needed revisions of the text. The writer and project director

are often so "close" to the subject they overlook

important points.

In our case, we sent out about three sets of drafts

before we were satisfied, and the process took about

three or four months.

Get an imaginative, creative person to do the layout.

The best of texts and illustrations will be "wooden"

73
in a poor layout.

Layout is a time-consuming job so be sure to budget

properly for it. In our case, it took about a' week

to get the "right" cover design.

PROJECT WATER WATCH

The Potomac River and Trails Council has been trying

to test people's attitudes and perceptions about water conservation in a city of 30,000, where there has never been

a problem with water supply, and where water and sewer rates

are quite low

We also thought it would be an interesting place to

test our booklet "Easy Ways to Save Water, Money and Energy

at Home." Since Frederick, Maryland is in a humid climate,

and did not feel the 1980 drought that troubled other communities in the East, we wanted to see what the "selling

point" would be for water conservation.

We began with a market survey of plumbing, hardware,

and other stores that carry even a modest number of

plumbing fixtures. We found, in Frederick, that:

(1) The most common items offered for sale are faucet

aerators. Very few stores handle low-flow shower

heads, and only one sells toilet dams.

While clerks and store managers agree that water

saving might be a good idea, they were unanimous

that there was no market for low-flow plumbing

devices in Frederick.

In a store that carries a few low-flow shower

heads the manager said, "We've sold one low-flow

shower head in the last two years. And it will take

about that long to sell another one."

(2) None of the store managers was interested in stocking additional low-flow devices.

(3) The chain stores, generally, do not order their own

supplies. Virtually all of them carry a trade-name

plumbing line, and orders are placed for them by a regional or national office.

(3) We bought and tested four b

were just a standard shower

with a plastic washer inser

rands of shower heads. All

head (most of them plastic)

ted to make them "low-flow."

74
None gave a satisfactory shower.

After meeting with the Mayor and head of the city's

Public Works Department, we decided to develop a slide show

that would teach city residents where their water came from;

how it was treated to make it potable; how Frederick handled

its wastewater; and how the city billed residents for

water and sewer service.

We also added a section on water meters for people

who wanted to check out their home water use; and about

30 slides that show how low-flow plumbing devices work and

how to install them.

Finally we developed two questionnaires: one to find

out what Frederick residents know about the city's water

supply and their own household water consumption, and a second questionnaire to get their evaluation of our booklet .

Our idea was to have meetings in discrete parts of

town: in the black community, the downtown historic

district, in several new subdivisions, etc. To date we've

had six public meetings, all but one poorly attended.

We've met in a church basement, local homes, and a downtown

community center.

Since we are testing attitudes as well as people's

responses to our book, we decided to advertise the meetings

through "normal" channels: the newletters and channels of

communication that each group normally uses. In other

words, we haven't gone out of the way to "drum up business";

and, indeed, the one downtown meeting that we scheduled for

a general audience (and so advertised through radio spots

and in the newspaper) had n_o attendees.

At the other five meetings we followed a similar format: administer the water supply quiz (respondents do

not sign it or identify themselves); give our slide program

(which answers questions raised by the quiz) ; answer

questions, and then have a general discussion about lowflow devices. Each participant gets a free copy of "Easy

Ways to Save Water..." and an evaluation form about the

book that we ask them to return in a self-addressed

stamped envelope.

We also loan out low-flow shower heads and toilet dams

75
to people who want to try them

What we have learned so far is about what we could have

predicted: without a water-saving campaign backed by the

city government the level of interest and application in

water conservation will remain low - except where there is

a dynamic community leader to influence his neighborhood

or civic group

And we think that only a prolonged drought or maybe a massive population influx that would strain existing water

supplies would bring the city to start the kind of campaign

that will get results.

Or perhaps if Frederick had to make extensive capital

investments in water and sewer facilities that led to

big rate increases, the new rates themselves might trigger

an interest in conservation. (Interestingly, this has just

happened in a large subdivision a few miles from Frederick.)

Even if the city launched an extensive campaign - which

included increasing block rates to reward conservation - a lot would depend on the availablity of good low-flow

plumbing devices. After our program, for example, everyone

asks, "Where can I get toilet dams or low-flow showerheads ?

And we have to tell them, "These things aren't available

at stores in Frederick."

So either the city would have to supply reliable

devices, or induce local merchants to stock them

Our other findings I'll sketch briefly:

(1) People will not return evaluation forms, even when

the envelope has a stamp and return address. To date,

we've given out 70 of our booklets around Frederick

and had just six evaluation forms returned.

As a "control," when we were asked to give our program

at a National Conference on "Water Programs in the

Reagan Administration" (sponsored by the American

Rivers Conservation Council), we brought along our

booklets and evaluation forms. At this conference,

attended by citizen leaders from all over the

United States, we gave out 40 booklets and evaluation

forms - hut, in the intervening months, not one

evaluation has been returned.

(2) Frederick residents, new and old, know next to nothing

76
about their city's water and sewer system. Over half

the people we quizzed thought the city's sewage is

treated and discharged into a river 25 miles from

t own

Less than a quarter knew the source of their drinking

water.

Not surprisingly, town residents knew as little about

their household water consumption. The pattern was to

consistently underestimate the amount of water used

by various household appliances - especially the bath

and shower.

Most respondents were about 50 percent low in their

estimates of the water used in an average bath or

shower

Willingness to try low-flow shower heads and toilet

dams varied from group to group. We found that a lot

depended on the group leaders.

Two examples: not one town-house resident in a new

subdivision was willing to try a shower head. And we

noted that our host, who was chairman of their civic

group, was especially cool toward the idea.

Two weeks later we met with a well-organized civic

association from single family homes in the same

subdivision. Their president was a dynamic, knowledgeable person who welcomed us warmly and asked

a lot of lively questions.

By the end of the meeting, all 1

participants wanted

to try (even buy) our shower heads and toilet dams.

So far, low-income residents have shown little interest in our program. In three meetings at churches and

public places in a lower income part of town, we've

had a total of 15 participants.

A church minister in this part of town seemed the most

hopeful contact for us. But when it came to testing a low-flow shower head in his home, he wanted none of it

The moral - for readers who may be interested in establishing a water-saving program - is obvious: identifying forceful and concerned citizen leaders should

be one of the first priorities.

77
Another is to coordinate with your local government and

water utility. We received outstanding cooperation from

Frederick city officials: indeed, to help us > prepare

our slide show, the head of the Public Works Department

drove us to all of the city's water facilities, dug up

typical water meters for us to photograph, etc.

In the event that Frederick ever wants to launch a water-saving campaign, we will have done a lot of the

spadework for them.

City officials were also grateful that we contacted

them. Had we tried to "go it alone," we might well

have earned their enmity.

As another "control," we took our program to a new

community called Fountaindale , about 10 miles from

Frederick, a subdivision that has exorbitant water and

sewer rates. (These are now about $800 a year for a family of f our .

)

Given the long-standing battle the community had

fought with their local water company, and the attendant newspaper publicity, we thought that here,

surely, the residents would have more knowledge and

interest than in Frederick.

Our idea was to do about 30 door-to-door interviews

at houses chosen at random: give them a water-use

quiz (modified to meet conditions in Fountaindale);

discuss the economics of water saving; and leave a flier advertising "Easy Ways to Save Water...." (We

were curious to see how many residents would order a free copy of the booklet; but so far, after 30 interviews, we haven't received one order.)

While we were very well recieved in Fountaindale, and

found that everyone wanted to talk about the water

system, to our surprise the residents knew as little

about the workings of their public and household water

systems as Frederick residents! One example illustrates this: 20 of the residents we interviewed believed their water came from reservoirs, when, in

fact it comes from a large public well. Except for

a few respondents, estimates on home water use were

also 1 ow , comparable to estimates made in Frederick.

Most surprisingly, few Fountaindale residents had

a clear idea of what they were paying for water and

78
sewer service: estimates ranged from $150 to

a year. Several new residents thought their

would be about $75 a year!

$800

bill

CONCLUSION

Since late January, when "Easy Ways to Save Water..."

was published, we've received orders for about 16,000

books (including one large order from a water utility). We

also had many favorable comments from readers all over the

count ry

Most of our orders have come from people and communities in dry climates, or from humid areas in the East that

were hard hit by the 1980 drought.

But even in Frederick, where there is little interest

in water conservation, a few key assumptions we made in

producing the booklet have been reinforced:

(1) Barring drought or disaster, economic motives are the

main way to interest people in conserving water. Only

a few are swayed by appeals to "good citizenship" or

to "save the environment," etc.

(2) Where water and sewer rates are low, and there is

little money to be saved by conserving water (as in

Frederick), people have to see the relationship

between saving HOT Water and saving ENERGY; and that

wasting water in the shower or tub will add a significant increment to their annual energy bill.

(3) Even with exorbitant water and sewer rates (as in

Fountaindale) we shouldn't assume that people know

much about their public and household water systems.

We found that Fountaindale residents wanted to save,

but had little idea how much water they were using

or how to begin saving.

So even with a motivated audience, a good public education program is vital.

(4) Talking to people in Frederick and Fountaindale reinforced another idea that was central to our booklet:

most of us would rather rely on a good low-flow device

than change a habit. "I'm not about to take a shorter

shower," one man said, "but I will change to a low-flow

79
shower head if I can find one that will give me a decent shower .

So the effectiveness of a water-saving campaign will

depend in great measure on the availability of effective low-flow plumbing devices. A person who gets

"turned-on" to water saving may soon get "turned-of f

if he can't find low-flow shower heads and toilet dams

or, worse, if he buys a slipshod model that gives a lousy shower.

Where water is concerned, don't count on people to

mail in requests for booklets, water-saving devices,

etc.

Meetings and door-to-door interviews work best.

80
FLOW REDUCTION: METHODS, ANALYSIS PROCEDURES, EXAMPLES

Sandra L. Postel

Resource Economist /Analyst

INTASA, Inc.

Menlo Park, California

ABSTRACT

Increasing numbers of communities across the nation are realizing

the benefits of flow reduction in managing their wastewater treatment

facilities. Among these benefits are savings in wastewater treatment,

water supply and energy costs, as well as the ability to meet a greater

portion of future needs with existing treatment capacity. Flow Reduction: Methods, Analysis Procedures, Examples (1) was prepared for the

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to assist communities in developing cost-effective flow reduction programs. The manual's flexible, yet

structured step-by-step procedure is a useful guide to developing program alternatives, analyzing program benefits and costs from a community

viewpoint, providing for adequate public participation, and selecting a recommended program based on the analysis results. The manual also provides detailed information on flow reduction measures and specific devices, including their associated costs and water and energy savings,

as well as examples of how to calculate a program's net monetary benefits. Two additional volumes will supplement Parts I and II of this

manual. Part III will demonstrate the manual's procedure using two realworld communities; Part IV will provide additional guidance and material

for developing flow reduction public information programs.

WHAT IS FLOW REDUCTION—AND WHY CONSIDER IT?

As its name implies, flow reduction refers to ways of reducing or slowing the growth of the quantity of wastewater flowing to a wastewater treatment facility. It is essentially a subset of water conservation. Whereas water conservation focuses on reducing water use in

general, flow reduction focuses more directly on reducing water used indoors since this is the water which enters sewer lines and flows to the

treatment plant. Selected water conservation measures applied to the

residential, commercial, public and small-scale industrial setting form

the core of any flow reduction program.

There are two principal motivations for communities to consider

flow reduction. First, communities can reap substantial benefits from

an effective flow reduction program. Using relatively common water81
saving measures, indoor water use can easily be reduced by approximately

25 percent (see Table 1) . The corresponding reduction in wastewater

flow may allow communities to either delay building new components of

treatment facilities or to size certain facility components smaller.

This of course will save the community and its water users money over

the long term. Similar savings may result on the water supply side. In

addition, individual water users will realize savings on energy bills

since a large portion of the indoor water saved will be hot water. Spiraling costs of water supply, wastewater treatment and energy will con- tinue to make these potential benefits increasingly difficult to ignore.

Many communities have already been successful in reducing wastewater

flows through conservation efforts. To cite just a few:

® Oak Park, California reduced dry weather wastewater flows

through a retrofit program by about 25 percent (2).

• Springettsbury Township, Pennsylvania reduced average wastewater flows to its eight-million-gallon-per-day (mgd) treatment plant by about 30 percent through flow reduction and

inf iltration/inflow programs (3).

• Oakland and Berkeley, California have reduced dry weather

wastewater flows by 10 percent. During the 19 77 drought,

flows were reduced by 28 percent (4)

• Elmhurst, Illinois reduced its average flow by nine percent

and its peak day flows by 14 percent (5)

The second main motivation for flow reduction is that EPA now re- quires any community planning a wastewater facility through its Construction Grants Program to do a flow reduction analysis (6) . Only com- munities with populations under 10,000, with an average daily base flow

less than 70 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) , or which already have

an approved program are exempt from doing the analysis. As shown in

Figure 1, while the major tasks in facilities planning are progressing,

three additional tasks are performed to refine the community's wastewater flow projections: a flow reduction analysis, an industrial flow

analysis (to reduce flows from specific, large industrial water users),

and an infiltration/inflow analysis (to reduce the amounts of groundwater and rain water entering the wastewater system) . Refining projected wastewater flows through these three efforts may enable a com- munity to adjust the sizing or staging of its treatment facilities,

thereby saving on construction and operating costs.

FLOW REDUCTION ANALYSIS

Flow Reduction: Methods, Analysis Procedures, Examples was prepared for EPA by INTASA, Inc. of Menlo Park, CA, to assist communities

in performing the flow reduction analysis and in developing costeffective community flow reduction programs. The manual develops a step-by-step procedure as a guide to carrying out the analysis.

82
>U

CU

COcoo

•H

co60

(=1 •H>

CO

5-4 cd uo

CHT3

C3

crj o +j

43P

•H3

a) p. co

•H

4->

O

CO ^> T3 H CJ 0)

CO 50

C3 ' OO

CO

C

°T

4J

a o CO ^ O > T3

s-i

a

i—u cu ex

CO •H

W 60

ti

C ^ou oco CN

r-- CN

H

co

LO

CN

O

CN co co

cu 4-1 a) to 4-1 ON CO en i—

p C CO

!=> CO a) .H

+J 5-i

u o O LO o LOO i—

ex

u

O o S-i <f co CM

O

QJ

H o 0) rH • •U TD cx CO >>

CO

C

<" e CO

H

w

da T3

i—

!-i cO • 4-1 <U •H CO CU CO cx

4-1 i-H CU

C3 •H c3 CO

0)

O •H TJ c 4-) 43 •H H H CJ CX

CO 00 M—

CO CO

0) c cO

O 6 CJ Pi CO •H u

60 01 CO CU 60 5-i

U 0)

C 42

O T3 CO

G CD o CO •H CO O •H a o t3 4= •H a C 43

nj CO •H TJ

O CO CO CO

C S-i CO CU ca

d

1—

CD i—

c<3 E Es o

4-1 60 0) i—i CO GO u >> c CO CO T3 rH • 4-1 c o 5-i •H CO co C CO H 5-1 le hi at nd nk i—1 PQ

CO <d CO CJ

cd

O

H 4-1 > D •H 4J rH O O CO co CO 5-i o • 43 -a EH pq o EH CO 43 CJ CO c H i—

CO

CNoLOm

CO

5-1 CU 43

CO

CO>

43

CO •HT3

60

(3 •H>

5-1 CD

CO

f3oai

5-4 CD

4-J CO&

C3

CO

co

4-1 H

CD

CO

f3 •HT3

COCD 43

5-4 CDo

43

CO

CJ H

83
V 1 

rfil

[if ! i. V 1

Cu-.-.

1.1- I : i C 0) C rv I J I e o33» p U u & IU = D

0) :=O

"2 = _

O

w

D

r i-

£0 I

iS 1 51Q11CD

(1)

1/1

C 3 n

in

C Uu

D ^ C to 0 5 _ c

32

O u. "O P £ Q C

ao1atIG

3=oDnc U CD ^

CDc

t/1 <D

fC

I/) >>c

<:o

a:

a»

cn

84
Figure

volves

2 portrays this sequence of steps. Briefly, the approach in-

• Determining whether, under EPA's criteria, the analysis is

required for the given community.

• Projecting the community's water supply and wastewater treatment needs without flow reduction to establish a base condition.

• Developing a first-cut flow reduction program.

• Evaluating the program's monetary and nonmonetary benefits

and costs.

• Repeating the evaluation for reasonable alternatives.

• Obtaining the public's views on potential programs.

• Selecting and documenting a recommended program.

Each step is described individually in the manual with emphasis on

the information and specific analytical tasks needed to carry out the

step. Where useful, examples are provided to indicate how certain tasks

may be performed.

Developing a Community Flow Reduction Program

A large portion of the manual focuses on Step C—developing a firstcut flow reduction program. Three distinct but related components com- prise an effective community program:

• a set of flow reduction measures selected from four broad categories: structural measures (e.g., retrofitting existing residences with low-flow devices); economic measures (e.g., changing water rate structures); legal/institutional measures (e.g.,

changing building or plumbing codes); and education measures

(e.g., promoting water-saving habit changes).

• a public information program which supports the set of flow

reduction measures by informing the public about these measures

and the benefits they and the community at large can expect

from implementing them.

• an implementation plan which sets forth the budget and manpower

requirements of the program, the timing of the different program elements and provides for needed coordination and cooperation from other agencies and groups.

Since many community planners will not be familiar with available

flow reduction measures, the manual supplies substantive information to

aid communities in selecting a set of measures to include in a program.

85
86
For example, the manner in which retrofitting programs are carried out

(e.g., door-to-door distribution of devices without professional installation versus device distribution with installation) greatly affects the

results achieved. Thus, the manual describes these different retrofitting strategies and indicates the results obtained by various communities which have used them.

Detailed attention is also given to specific water-saving devices

and appliances that can be included in a flow reduction program, including retrofits for toilets, faucets and showers, low-flow fixtures for new construction, pressure reducers, and water-saving appliances. Along

with descriptions and pictures of devices, the manual gives a firstorder comparison of their relative cost-effectiveness taking into

account typical community savings in water costs, wastewater costs and

water users' hot water energy costs. The significant assumptions used

in developing these comparisons are clearly stated so that communities

can develop comparisons using numbers reflecting their own particular

circumstances

Evaluating Program Benefits and Costs

A flow reduction program will result in both monetary and nonmonetary costs and benefits to the particular community in which it is implemented. To provide a basis for selecting a program alternative which

is economically beneficial and environmentally sound, a comprehensive

evaluation of the program's full effects is needed. To avoid doublecounting either program costs or benefits, a community viewpoint is

maintained throughout, simultaneously considering effects on three com- munity entities: the wastewater utility, the water supply utility, and

water users.

A flow reduction program's monetary costs consist only of the direct costs of the program, and include: (1) the cost of purchasing and

installing flow reduction devices, (2) the costs of the public information program, including such things as printing flyers and developing

exhibits, and (3) the costs of implementing the program including, for

example, needed staff time.

The monetary benefits of the flow reduction program consist of the

total savings in costs to each community entity. Specifically, these

monetary benefits will include cost savings to:

• the wastewater utility due to net reductions in capital and

operations and maintenance (O&M) costs resulting from the

projected reduction in wastewater flows.

• the water supply utility due to net reductions in capital and

O&M costs resulting from the projected decrease in water

demand.

87
• water users due to decreased energy costs resulting from savings of hot water.

The monetary benefits to the two utilities are determined by comparing

the projected capital costs and O&M costs (expressed in terms of present

worth) without the flow reduction program to the capital and O&M costs

with the flow reduction program. The difference between these costs

throughout the planning horizon represents the program's monetary benefits to each respective utility.

Figure 3 portrays a simplified hypothetical example for a wastewater utility. In this case, the reduction in projected peak wastewater

flows resulting from the flow reduction program allows the utility to

adjust downward the sizing of certain facility components. These would

include unit processes which are hydraulically determined—those sized

according to the volume of flow. The monetary benefits to the utility

would include the savings in capital costs from building smaller facility components and any savings in annual O&M costs which result from the

reduced average daily flow to the treatment plant. It must be noted

that the occurrence and magnitude of variable O&M cost savings from re- duced wastewater flows will vary depending upon the particular characteristics of the wastewater treatment plant, the collection system and

the wastewater flow itself (7).

A similar procedure is followed to determine the capital and O&M

cost-savings to the water supply utility. The present worth of the

cost-savings to the utilities along with the present worth of the water

users' hot water energy cost-savings together comprise the total monetary benefits to the community from the flow reduction program.

Subtracting the direct program costs from these total monetary

benefits yields the program's net benefits to the community. When this

determination has been made for all program alternatives and the public's

views have been obtained (Step F) , a sound basis exists for selecting a program that will be cost-effective, supported by the public, and able

to be implemented.

DEMONSTRATION CASE STUDIES AND ADDITIONAL MATERIALS

The procedure developed in the flow reduction manual is purposefully flexible to allow communities to tailor the analysis to their particular circumstances. INTASA is now working with EPA to actually demonstrate the manual's methodology using two real-world communities. One

west coast and one midwestern community have been selected as the demonstration sites. The results of these two case studies, to be published

as a separate volume (Part III), will demonstrate not only the manual's

methodology, but the tangible results that can be obtained from a flow

reduction program.

In addition, a third volume (Part IV) will provide additional guidance on developing flow reduction public information programs as well as

88
89
general materials communities can actually use in their public information programs. Together, these three volumes will provide the practical rationale and guidance needed to realize flow reduction's potential

in various community settings.

REFERENCES

1. U.S. EPA. March 1981. Flow Reduction; Methods, Analysis Procedures,

Examples . Prepared by INTASA, Inc., Menlo Park, CA, for EPA Office

of Water Program Operations. Washington, DC.

2. U.S. EPA. 1979. Water Supply-Wastewater Treatment Coordination

Study . Prepared by INTASA, Inc. , for EPA Office of Drinking Water.

Washington, DC.

3. California Department of Water Resources (DWR) . September 1979.

"22 Months Later the Oak Park Retrofit Program Still a Success."

District Report. Sacramento, CA.

4. Sharpe, William E. 1978. "Why Consider Water Conservation?"

Journal American Water Works Association 70: 475-79.

5. Vossbrink, David. August 1980. Personal Communication. Office of

Public Information, East Bay Municipal Utility District. Oakland,

CA.

6. Fulton, Neil R. August 1980. Personal Communication. Chief,

Bureau of Resource Management, Division of Water Resources, Illinois

Department of Transportation. Formerly, Assistant City Manager,

City of Elmhurst.

7. U.S. EPA. September 27, 1978. "Municipal Wastewater Treatment

Works Construction Grants Program (40 CFR, Part 35, Subpart E)."

Federal Register . Washington, DC.

8. Koyasako, Jimmy S. 1980. Effects of Water Conservation Induced

Wastewater Flow Reduction: A Perspective . Prepared for U.S. EPA

Wastewater Research Division. Cincinnati, OH.

90
STATE WATER CONSERVATION PLANNING GUIDE

Denzel L. Fisher, Acting Director

State Programs Division

U.S. Water Resources Council

Washington, D.C.

James A. Yost, Principal Engineer

Brown and Caldwell, Consulting Engineers

Sacramento, California

ABSTRACT

The U.S. Water Resources Council, under the authority of Title III

of the Water Resources Planning Act of 1965, provides grants to States

for the development of comprehensive water and related land resources

plans. Through the water policy initiatives of President Carter in

1978, agencies were directed to emphasize the integration of water con- servation in the implementation of water resource management programs.

Acting upon these initiatives and the directives of the President, the

Water Resources Council emphasized the integration of water conservation in State programs.

To assist States in this endeavor, the Council developed the State

Water Conservation Planning Guide. The planning guide is to be used

primarily by State water planners in establishing and implementing a water conservation program. The guide details many of the necessary

actions to implement an effective water conservation program. A prime

objective of this guide is to bridge the gap that exists in many States

between State and local water planning and implementation efforts. It

is imperative that the participation and support of local utilities,

municipalities, and other water purveyors be solicited during plan

development and extended into implementation. The philosophy and

objective of the planning guide, the proposed implementation guide, and

the Water Resources Council grant program were always to extend Federal

assistance, both technical and financial, down to the States, and

through the States to local water purveyors. To accomplish more efficient water use, Federal efforts must be carried down to the local

level

INTRODUCTION

The U.S. Water Resources Council was established by the Water Re- sources Planning Act of 1965 (P.L. 89-80) as an independent executive

agency. The membership of the Council was established under Title I of

the Act to consist of the Secretaries of the Interior, Army, Agriculture, Energy, Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Commerce,

and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. The

91
Council's responsibility under the Act is to encourage, through the

cooperation of the States, the conservation, development, and utilization of water and related land resources of the United States on a comprehensive and coordinated basis.

Title II of the Act authorizes the President to declare the es- tablishment of a river basin commission upon request by the Council,

or a request addressed to the Council by a State within all or part

of the basin or basins concerned if the request: (1) defines the

area, river basin, or group of river basins for which a commission

is requested, (2) is made in writing, and (3) is concurred in by the

Council and by not less than one-half of the States within which

portions of the basin or basins concerned are located.

Under Title III of the Act, the Council is authorized to provide

grants to States to assist them in developing and participating in

the development of comprehensive water and related land resources

plans. Since Fiscal Year 1967, the Council has provided such assistance on an annual basis. For the first 13 years, Congress

authorized $5 million annually to be appropriated for the program,

and for the past two years $10 million have been appropriated. Due

to recent revisions in the Federal budget, however, future appropriations for the program remain uncertain.

THE STATE WATER CONSERVATION PLANNING GUIDE

Purpose of the Guide

From the water policy initiatives of President Carter in 1978,

Federal agencies were directed to develop procedures for integrating

water conservation into existing programs, and to emphasize water

conservation in the development and implementation of water resource

management programs. In response to these directives, the Water

Resources Council amended the implementing guidelines for the

planning grant program under Title III by including water conservation as one of five major program areas which were to be addressed

by States while participating in the program.

As a means of providing technical assistance to States developing or modifying water conservation programs, the Council initiated

preparation of the State Water Conservation Planning Guide . First, it

was concluded that most States had instituted water conservation

programs to one degree or another. Many, however, were not adequately

equipped with the necessary tools for developing a comprehensive water

conservation program. Some States were actively involved in water

conservation activities , but did not have a comprehensive or welldefined program that incorporated clear water conservation objectives.

In developing this planning guide, the major goal of the Council was

to prepare a document that would be of optimum benefit to all the

States, both those with very modest efforts in water conservation and

those with well-defined programs. The major objective of the guide

92
is for it to be used selectively by each State to apply those

elements of the guide which are most appropriate to each State's

specific conditions and needs.

By no means was this planning guide ever conceived as a panacea

for all water supply problems, or as a mandate to States that they

must institute a water conservation program or publish a water con- servation plan. The planning guide was intended as a guide and

nothing more. President Carter emphasized the need for increased

attention to water conservation and the Water Resources Council

responded by developing a document that can be used to whatever extent

a State may choose or feel is necessary. It is designed to provide

the basic essentials for assessing the feasibility of water con- servation and for developing and implementing a water conservation

program should such action be considered necessary.

Development of the Guide

Development of the planning guide was begun in early 1980 by the

J. B. Gilbert Division of Brown and Caldwell, a consulting engineering

firm of Sacramento, California. Mr. Jerome B. Gilbert, Vice President,

directed the preparation of the guide and Mr. James A. Yost,

Principal Engineer, was the project manager.

An initial draft of the planning guide was completed in March

1980 and was distributed to all States and territories for their

review. In conjunction with this review, a series of workshops were

scheduled in Boston, Washington, D.C., Atlanta, Chicago, Denver, and

Seattle. The Council requested that States review the draft guide

and prepare to discuss their comments at these regional workshops.

The States then were asked to submit any additional comments in

writing upon completion of the workshops.

The regional workshops were conducted in July and August of 1980.

Forty-eight States and Territories participated in the workshops and

provided valuable input to the project. The recurrent theme of the

comments revolved around the need for including implementation

strategies and contingency planning in the guide.

It is recognized that implementation strategies and contingency

planning are extremely important to water conservation planning and

need more attention. However, it became clear they could not be

adequately addressed in the guide without interrupting its basic purpose. It was decided that these issues, particularly implementation

strategies, should be handled in a separate document. A condensed

chapter on contingency planning has been added to the final version

to provide a limited amount of information on this subject. It is

expected that a document exclusively directed toward implementation

strategies will be developed as a logical follow-up to the planning

guide.

93
All comments received on the planning guide were carefully

analyzed and, to the extent possible, were incorporated into the

final draft of the document. An extensive amount of time and effort was expended by State personnel in commenting on this planning guide.

It goes without saying that these efforts were extremely helpful and

greatly appreciated. The document was published and distributed to

all States, to all workshop participants, and to other interested

individuals

Scope of the Guide

The definition of water conservation for the purposes of this

planning guide does not implicitly exclude storage as a means of water

conservation. However, the guide is not necessarily useful in planning for storage projects. Generally, planning and development of

water projects may be more appropriately handled in water supply

planning rather than including it as an element of a water conservation plan or program. This does not suggest that water conservation

planning should be instituted independently of water supply planning

or independently of any aspect of a State's water management program.

The Council's definition of water conservation, which is included in the final guidelines for the State Water Management Program,

is:

'"Water conservation' means activities designed to

(1) reduce the demand for water, (2) improve efficiency

in use and reduce losses and waste of water, or (3)

improve land management practices to conserve water."

In some States, water resources management is a function of an agency which has broad environmental concerns. In others, water

management may be divided among several agencies with a separation

between water quality and water quantity concerns. Because of these

institutional differences, as well as geographical ones, there are varying definitions of the term "water conservation." Each State's

definition of water conservation will also depend on the State's

overall water management goals.

This guide describes water conservation practices that fall within

the Council's concept of water conservation at the time it was prepared. This may limit the guide's usefulness for States which define

conservation more broadly. Nevertheless, the guide can still be used

to the extent applicable.

Content of the Guide

The planning guide is divided into five major sections: the

introduction, developing water conservation priorities, State program

development, water conservation plan elements, and implementation of

94
the State program. These sections are followed by two appendices,

one of which provides a comprehensive water conservation bibliography and the other which lists those individuals which participated in each of the regional water conservation workshops.

Section 1 of the guide is an introduction to the guide and gives

a brief background discussion on the purpose of the guide. It provides a discussion of the existing water conservation goals, policies

and regulations at the time, beginning with President Carter's

Water Policy Message. It follows with the purpose of the guide, the

development of the guide, and the scope and content of the guide.

In Section 2, the various considerations for establishing

particular water conservation goals and objectives are discussed in

greater detail. This section emphasizes regional differences that

may affect water conservation priorities in different parts of the

country. Considerations such as water use patterns, energy re- quirements and sources of supply are discussed. This section also

includes many of the benefits as well as problems which may be

expected from increasing efficiency in water use.

Section 3 descri

State water conservat

vation plan. Program

bes suggested procedur

ion program, including

development activitie

es for developing a

a State water consers include:

• an initial assessment of the

conservation in the State

• coordination of conservation

• development of a State plan

• public participation

• plan implementation

value and feasibility of water

efforts among concerned agencies

Each State can review the steps in program development and selectively

combine those that apply to its specific circumstances into an approach to program development. These program development procedures

should help each State integrate water conservation into its continuing water management program.

Section 4 describes the elements of a comprehensive State water

conservation plan. Each element can be provided either by the State

in consultation with water users, or by local and regional agencies

and then composited into a State plan by the responsible State agency

Suggested chapters or sections for organizing a State plan are:

• Summary

• Introduction

• Projections of Water Demand

• Water Supply Inventory

95
• Supply and Demand Analysis

• Description of Long-Range Water Conservation Practices

• Institutional and Legal Factors

Evaluation of Long-Range Water Conservation Practices

® Emergency Conservation Plan

• Plan Recommendations

The recommended plan should detail actions to be taken by interstate,

regional, and local agencies. Each water purveyor should have a plan

specific to the supply and demand situation.

Section 5 includes State activities which are dependent upon the

stage of development of the water conservation program. For the purposes of the guide three such categories for the development stage were established:

• Assessment Stage — no State program defined.

• Planning Stage — primary activities devoted to planning.

Implementation Stage — primary effort in program implementation.

This section provides general guidance on program procedures for each

of these States. These procedures are general and must be adjusted

accordingly by each State to satisfy individual needs.

Appendix A is a water conservation bibliography that contains

many references that provide useful information for all phases of a water conservation program. The bibliography is arranged in the following general subject headings:

» Water Use

o Water Conservation Planning

• Water Conservation Practices

g Pricing and Revenue Planning

• Institutional/Legal

o Public Participation

• Public Education

• Energy Assessment

• Wastewater Reuse

o Emergency/Contingency Planning

o Water Conservation Impacts

Appendix B to the guide provides a list of all individuals who

attended and participated in the regional water conservation workshops

held prior to final publication of the guide.

STATE ROLE

One of the major requests raised by State planners participating

in the workshops was for more specific suggestions on implementation

96
of procedures defined in the guide. Specific information and guidance

were requested for program development, plan preparation, and program

implementation.

Program Development

Additional guidance was requested on:

• Procedures to quickly assess the potential benefits of a water

conservation program and to interpret planning results. • Involvement of local utilities and municipalities in program

development

• Selection of the best planning approach to suit specific conditions in a State including how to prepare a plan, who should be

involved, method of financing the planning effort, staffing re- quirements (estimates of levels of effort), and scheduling.

Plan Preparation

The planning guide suggests procedures which are broadly applicable to varying conditions and needs across the United States. It was suggested by State water planners that more specific data, procedures, and examples of their application would be quite helpful.

Specific items identified at the workshop included:

• More specific information on importance and use of various types

of data in planning and implementation decision making.

• Nationwide data on water use by category.

• Advice on resolving problems with water rights.

• Procedures for defining the factor of safety in the analysis of

the risk of source deficiency during drought conditions when the

supply and demand relationship has been tightened through water

conservation.

• Costs, effectiveness, public acceptability, operational characteristics, and environmental considerations for various conservation

practices

• Impact of water conservation on utility revenues. • Guidelines on the feasibility, costs, and effectiveness of leakage surveys.

• Energy relationships of water conservation practices.

Program Implementation

The planning guide was expanded following the workshops to provide additional assistance on implementation. Resultant revisions are presented below.

Integration of Planning Results

Other ongoing activities in the State that are sensitive to the

97
results of the planning efforts should integrate appropriate plan elements. Examples include:

• Facility planning for water supply and wastewater management

systems

• Statewide energy conservation programs.

• Agricultural, technical, and financial assistance programs.

Integration or coordination efforts should extend to the Federal,

State, regional, and local levels.

Implementation of Action Programs

There are many possible actions which can be implemented soon after adoption of the conservation plan as shown in Table 1. The role

of individuals, agencies, and companies should be identified in the

plan.

There are a number of ways that the State could assist in financing these actions including, for example:

• Developing tax incentives comparable to those in energy conservation programs of the State and Federal Government.

• Instituting a program to surcharge water utility bills to develop

a fund for water conservation activities.

• Instituting public utility commission requirements for the development of plans and inclusion of the costs thereof in rate determinations (such as those that have been developed in California)

• Making direct appropriations.

o Utilizing pass-through to local agencies of some of the State's

assistance under the Water Resources Council Title III Program.

• Participating in other Federal grant programs, including those

under the Clean Water Act.

Development and Adoption of Legal/ Institutional Changes

Most State programs will probably be based on an existing institutional and legislative framework. However, changes in legislation,

regulations, or administrative procedures may be necessary to effectively implement conservation practices. Examples of possible implementation activities include:

• Drafting and assisting in adoption of legislation requiring water

efficient appliances and plumbing fixtures in new construction.

• Developing legislation to provide incentives for implementation

of a conservation program such as (1) tax credits, subsidies, or other similar incentives to homeowners, utilities, farmers, com- mercial establishments, and industries for implementation of

conservation practices, or (2) allocation of priority points in

water supply grant or loan programs for incorporation of water

conservation measures.

98
V

t r

~ r > — > — — K —

5-1

1

Sic

E

C j j

r

t

Pi Pi

II

B

c&

if

"0 *<

i1 2 >

V £ J III

s. -S —

u c v e Sail 1 " e. -

It — — £

It — S w

p?

J- i

.3*

III

; <- = one

i §£

pi

i!

^ • t

c

t. — Sb C » t

ft W — ill

g

2

1 £ a u

i a

y v ~

2 f —

to & *

51 C c —

w —

5 9

is \ —

! =

* 3

g I

D - Pi

0 B c c w —

Pi

Z P !i! (J, 4,

5 5 e

| |i

i - - u C e

7>06 i

Pi

a a — w

B

w « t f 2 o> — o II h

S5 B — a> P^5

5-Z

66 K

U i

. C b R Si " 5« c « »

IIIt & ph? t> s 8 *

5 I P -

B C.

«' J!

sr. — *

— — Bl

IS — 5 £ w

s *l — -

> O B 10 u e» s * a — § P «

1 b

— 5 41 ~

*< — — u

6. — t C.

& a

> —

0 > w 0)

* E

01 — — (I w — « u "Hi's J e B a> a, — C e

w a ? 5

p (bit i c » —

O & C f 0 — • —• 01 b M

— ei £. ; c o j B

* B | 2 si

c i a o w 62 § g ill

Zoic

•o a> — u IIP!

e

c

« Sit

u i w

i-5 r

H

" 1 - — C 41 id m = -> y

>- i. & - I

w

V

t.2

99
• Amending administration of the States' water rights procedures to

encourage more efficient water use without jeopardizing future

water entitlements or priorities. This could require special

legislation in some States, or changes in administrative policies

and procedures in others.

o Requiring conservation practices to meet lower water duties in

future water rights permits.

• Working with State and local planning agencies to help remove

social impediments to more efficient water use such as development policies and standards that encourage landscaping with low

water-use plants.

• Mandating leak detection programs or leakage surveys as a condition of the allocation of any Federal or State assistance in water

system rehabilitation or expansion.

• Requiring gradual conversion of water rate structures to a form

that encourages more efficient water use.

Continuation of Planning and Demonstration Projects

Additional planning may be required to address specific problem

areas which were revealed but could not be adequately addressed during

plan development. Examples could include methods for providing incentives for agricultural water conservation, detailed evaluation of

the impacts of water rights procedures on water use, and investigation

into the applicability of water banking.

It may also be necessary to conduct research and demonstration

projects to provide data on conservation practices. One expressed

concern is the effect on existing multi-story building plumbing systems

of retrofitting with low water-using plumbing fixtures and appliances.

Results of these planning and demonstration projects can be integrated

into the program during future plan updates.

Conduct of Public Education Program

A key to successful program implementation is an informed and en- thusiastic general public. Use of channels of communication established in the public participation element of the plan development

should be continued into implementation. Techniques which can be used

by the State to supplement the ongoing public participation program

can include:

• Special seminars or workshops to draw attention to the conservation program and its goals.

• Technical assistance and encouragement to local agencies to implement their own public education efforts. The State can greatly

enhance these efforts by providing educational materials (bill

inserts, technical pamphlets, movies, materials for educational

programs in elementary and high schools, etc.) at a lower rate

when produced on a statewide volume.

100
• Public information displays at fairs or other major events.

• Speakers bureau.

• Hotline with a widely publicized number where local agencies and

individuals can obtain advice and technical information.

Assessment of the Effectiveness and Updating of Program Elements

The water conservation program, particularly the plan, should be

viewed as dynamic and subject to modification as to the effectiveness

of various measures is determined and as water demand and supply con- ditions vary in future years. The State should adopt a series of

priorities for implementation of the plan emphasizing the least costly,

most readily accepted measures and deferring large-scale action on new practices until demonstration projects have shown positive results or until evidence from other areas of the country has been accumulated.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ROLE

It is clear that the planning guide is to be used primarily by

State water planners in establishing and implementing a water conservation program. The guide details much of the necessary actions to

bring about an effective program. However, as one can readily conclude, there is only so much that a State can do in implementing a water conservation program, albeit this can result in truly significant results. The real success of a water conservation program can be measured through local action. The distance between the State

government and individual citizens can be a barrier to achieving optimum results in water conservation efforts. The hands-on experience

of the local water supplier and the ability of local officials to

determine the need for water conservation are invaluable for establishing an effective water conservation program.

Most States indicated that they are working or will be working

closely with the local governments and local water purveyors in establishing and implementing their water conservation programs. Beyond

statewide institutional and legislative changes to effect water con- servation, local government and water suppliers possess the most

effective means of implementing water conservation programs. For

example, the planning guide discusses a number of possible actions

that can be taken by individuals, agencies and companies to implement

water conservation programs. The State can require changes in the

construction codes or rate structures for the purposes of water conservation. However, local governments can require water conservation

devices as a condition of service, they can adopt changes in the code,

or require meters, increase leak detection programs or take any number

of actions without the benefit of any State action. Most important,

they are better able to implement programs tailored to their own specific needs as opposed to applying their situation to a statewide mandated water conservation program. Any statewide program in water

conservation is only as effective as the local governments can make it.

101
IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE

After completion of the workshops and incorporation of comments

into the draft planning guide, it was evident to the Council that more

specific information on many of these topics could be quite helpful to

the States. It was intended at that time to prepare a follow-up guide

for implementation that would provide more detail on the above items

and present methods for coordinating State and local efforts. Water

use reduction is accomplished at the local level. It is, therefore,

imperative that the participation and support of local utilities, municipalities, and other water purveyors be solicited during plan development and extended into implementation. A prime objective of this

guide was to bridge the gap that exists in many States between State

and local water planning and implementation efforts. Methods which

have been successfully applied in some States to maintain long-term

contact and cooperative implementation between State and local agencies include water resources centers to provide technical assistance

and water supply/demand data. Other States have provided retrofit

devices to local agencies at low unit costs which the States can obtain through large-volume purchases. Public education materials can

also be purchased at large volume by the State and provided at low

unit cost to local water purveyors.

The philosophy and objective of the planning guide, the proposed

implementation guide, and the Water Resources Council grant program

were always to extend Federal assistance, both technical and financial,

down to the States, and through the States to local water purveyors.

To accomplish more efficient water use, Federal efforts must be car- ried down to the local level.

102
THE ROLE OF LAND USE PLANNING IN WATER CONSERVATION

Welford Sanders and Charles Thurow

American Planning Association

Chicago, Illinois

ABSTRACT

Land use planning and the regulatory controls that grow out of

this process influence demand for water. Land development policies

are formulated in the planning process and implemented through land use regulations. These regulations, especially zoning and subdivision

controls, influence how much water a municipality will need by regulating the types of buildings that are built, their location, and the way

open space is used around them. This paper examines how this influence

can be used to conserve water. Water conservation elements in comprehensive plans are considered along with patterns of development that

conserve water. Land use regulations that can serve to implement water

conserving residential development are also examined.

Land use planning can be important to water conservation. It can help conserve supplies or reduce demand. Traditionally, land use planners have not played a direct role in water supply planning, but for some time they have helped communities manage and protect watersheds

or aquifer recharge zones that are threatened by urban growth. In re- cent years, a growing number of local planning agencies have recognized

the potential for land use planning to reduce the need for urban water.

Some communities are now including water conservation elements in their

comprehensive plans, which identify both opportunities for water con- servation and implementing strategies. A few communities have also

built water conserving principles into their zoning and subdivision

regulations

WATER CONSERVATION ELEMENTS IN COMPREHENSIVE PLANS

The Proposed General Plan for Los Angeles County, California, calls

for the protection of both water supply and quality:

Conserve Water Supply and Protect Water Quality

The supply and quality of local water must be conserved and

protected. Otherwise the County could face critical shortages

in the future.

103
Policy

Protect ground water recharge and watershed areas , conserve storm

and reclaimed water, and promote water conservation programs.

Encourage the maintenance, management and improvement of the qual

ity of imported domestic water, ground water supplies, natural

runoff and ocean water.

The plan recommends the following measures to implement its water

conservation policies:

1. Require the installation of low-flow or restricted-flow

plumbing in all new construction.

2. Make available lists of native and domestic vegetation

classified by the demand of plants for water.

3. Require the installation of dual water systems when and

wherever feasible to achieve the maximum use of reclaimed

water.

4. Investigate the potential for greater use of reclaimed

water by industry and residences as well as for ground

water replenishment wherever such use will not endanger

public health.

The proposed plan also calls for concentrated development rather than

low densities. This pattern of development requires less landscaping

than lower densities and, in turn, less exterior water demand.

Water is a prime consideration in Santa Fe County, New Mexico's

proposed General Plan. One of the plan's three major policy recommendations has to do with water demand:

The growth and density of future development is to be re- lated to availability of water resources given a recognized

need to accommodate some future growth.

To implement this policy the Plan introduces a procedure to determine

appropriate lot size of new residential developments in relation to

water availability. The Plan explains:

The lot size determination involves several steps. The first

step is a calculation of water availability and demand:

1) The amount of ground water in storage is determined for

each aquifer by using available data regarding geologic

conditions and well characteristics;

104
2) The amount of ground water recharge is estimated by using

precipitation data and geologic and topographic considerations; and

3) The annual amount of water demand is estimated based on population projections, on historic and projected water

usage for typical residential households, and on known or projected irrigation, mining and other needs.

The second step is to determine the basis for water management in

a given area. Three different policies have been recommended.

1) In areas where municipal water services are relatively

accessible (metropolitan areas) , it is the policy of the

Plan to deplete ground water in storage over the period

of 40 years;

2) In the remaining areas underlain by the Santa Fe Group

aquifer (basin and basin fringe), the policy is to deplete

ground water over the period of 100 years; and

3) In areas with little ground water in storage (mountain

and homestead), a steady-state policy is proposed, where

water consumption is balanced against recharge on a longterm average basis.

The population capacity of each area is determined by comparing the

projected demand against the available supply, for a mining or steady

state, as appropriate. This population capacity divided by the area

of each aquifer gives the acceptable residential density.

The base densities so calculated assume that the annual water use

per household will be approximately one acre-foot including both indoor

and outdoor usage. In practice, many rural households utilize less

water; with careful conservation measures it is easily possible to limit annual water to one quarter acre-foot per household, or even less.

Therefore the plan proposes to permit higher densities wherever a proposed development includes provisions which will reduce water use below

the one acre-foot per year value. A restriction on water use may occur

through any or all of the following:

1) Conservation measures, such as installation of low water

use bathroom fixtures or other construction techniques,

and water covenants, such as restrictions against swimming

pools and large lawns;

2) Clustering of up to four houses on one metered well, with

annual meter reading reported to State Engineer, or construction of a metered community system; and

105
3) The use of cisterns to collect water on the site, which thereby reduces demand for well water.

In these cases, where water conservation measures are instituted

and where a cluster of as many as four homes are served by a community

water system, as much as a fourfold increase in density is allowed.

This applies to all rural and metropolitan areas.

In addition to allowing increased densities where water conservation measures are implemented, the Plan provides that densities may be

altered if well tests and hydrology reports demonstrate that the water

available to a particular development exceeds the conservation estimates

used by the Plan.

WATER CONSERVING PATTERNS OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING TYPES

Patterns of residential development that use less water are touched

upon in both the Los Angeles County Plan, which encourages concentrated

development and moderate rather than low density, and the Santa Fe County

General Plan, which encourages housing clusters of up to four dwelling

units per well. The broader concept of clustering, involving a clustered

site design for an entire subdivision, represents the most efficient

pattern of residential land use from a water conservation standpoint.

Similarly, small lot developments and single family attached housing re- quires less water than large lot, single family detached developments.

Cluster Developments

A growing number of communities are offering developers the option

of reducing residential lots in single family detached subdivisions,

and concentrating or clustering housing units on the most buildable portion of the tract. These cluster subdivisions usually require much less

water than conventional large lot subdivisions with substantially larger

lawns. The cluster option allows the developer to develop lots smaller

than those specified in the zoning ordinance provided the land saved is

reserved for permanent common use, usually in the form of open space,

and often in its natural state. Many of the communities that offer the

cluster option in subdivision design allow for up to a 50 percent reduction in the size of lots in their most restrictive large lot districts.

Such reductions allow for comparable reductions in yard or lawn size.

In regions where outdoor use accounts for a substantial portion of total

residential demand—40 percent to 50 percent—clustering can mean significant savings in water over conventional subdivision design, especially

when open space assembled in the subdivision for common use is kept in

its natural state. The cluster subdivision plan (B) in Figure 1 allows for over 30 acres of land to be assembled as common open space.

106
number ol lots 152

road length 16 000 tin It

lot area 30.000 so. It mm

open space none

number ol lots 148

road length 10.550 lin. It.

lot irea 20.000 so tt mm

open space M 3 acres

Figure 1. Comparison of Conventional (A) and Cluster (B) Subdivisions.

Source: New Hampshire Office of State Planning, Concord, NH.

Handbook of Subdivision Practice. Technical Planning Associates 1972

In addition to its water conserving potential, clustering is an environmentally sound form of site design. The well-planned cluster

subdivision is cost effective, requiring less pavement and shorter utility runs, preserves natural drainage systems and open space, and other

significant natural features that help control stormwater runoff and

soil erosion.

Even greater water savings can be realized when attached housing

units, like townhouses, are clustered or mixed with single family detached units in the same subdivision. Most side yards are eliminated

when housing units are attached, allowing for further savings in outdoor

watering. Figure 2 below demonstrates the dramatic difference in private open space or lawns in single family detached and attached units.

SINGLE FAMILY

dedicated open space 'fm l ——

t

utilities

Figure 2. Comparison of Single

Family Detached and Attached

Housing

Source: "Citizens, Computers,

Clusters: A Way to Parks and

Housing." John Rahenkamp and

Andrew Wolffe, Landscaping for

Living, The Yearbook of Agriculture . United States Department

of Agriculture. 1972.

107
LAND USE REGULATIONS FOR WATER CONSERVATION

Water conservation policies identified in the planning process can

be implemented through zoning and subdivision regulations'. These controls regulate features that have a direct bearing on the level of water

demand that a given land use will require. Zoning regulates density and

use, by establishing requirements for lot size; the type and location of

buildings; and yard and open space requirements. Subdivision regulations

regulate the conversion of raw land into building lots. These regulations ensure that new development is consistent with zoning requirements

and establishes requirements for streets, drainage and storm sewers,

water and sewerage facilities, utilities, and site design. Building

water conserving principles into land use regulations must begin by re- moving barriers or regulatory provisions that waste water or allow for

unnecessary water losses.

Removing Barriers to Water Conserving Land Use

Conventional land use regulations waste water. For example, con- ventional large lot zoning, requiring one or more acres of land per lot, means large areas that must be irrigated as well as a sprawling pattern

of development that requires longer utility runs and greater opportunity

for water loss in the system. Water conserving alternatives to this

pattern of development, such as clustering and higher density developments, have been discussed earlier. From a regulatory standpoint, cluster

ing can be easily achieved by an amendment to the zoning ordinance that

allows reduction in lot size when the land saved is assembled as common

open space. Many communities also allow clustering under the Planned

Unit Development (PUD) process. PUD is a much broader concept involving

mixed uses —increased density in return for additional project amenities

and relaxed public improvement standards in return for better design. In

either case, the more concentrated cluster approach to land development

allows for a more efficient use of water than conventional zoning and

subdivision practice.

Conventional zoning usually also requires that single family detached dwellings must have setbacks from four property lines, allowing

for two side yards and a front and rear yard. Side yards provide access

to the rear area of the dwelling, can prevent crowding of buildings, and can allow for greater privacy. It is questionable, however, that two

side yards are absolutely necessary to achieve these ends. Some communities have taken a less rigid approach and allow what is known as Zero

Lot Line Developments (ZLL) . This concept allows buildings to abut one

or more of the property lines, usually a side lot line. This placement

eliminates one of the side yards, thus reducing lawn area that can re- quire irrigation. Sometimes, the house is sited on the corner of a lot

so that it abuts both the rear and one side line. This arrangement

allows each dwelling unit to concentrate its yard in one continuous

space rather than the small yard areas allowed by the traditional pattern of four setbacks.

108
The well-designed zero lot line development can be a cost-effective

way of providing single family detached housing. Higher density and

less lawn area requiring irrigation make this pattern of residential

development more water efficient than conventional single family detached housing. At the same time, the amount of usable yard space is

maintained. Two styles of zero lot line development are presented in

Figure 3.

Common aero lot lines Parallel aero lot lines

!

Figure 3. Two Styles of Zero Lot Line Development"!!

Source: American Planning Association, Chicago, Illinois.

"Zero Lot Line Development." Teresa Zogby. PAS Memo . 79-9.

1979.

Another zoning concept that offers greater flexibility than con- ventional zoning practice is the performance approach. Unlike the

essentially prescriptive, traditional zoning provisions which specify

what can or cannot be done with a parcel of land, performance controls

specify minimum or maximum levels of performance for various land use

features. For example, a specification standard for water conservation

might require that outdoor area in a residential development which requires irrigation must be limited to a given size. The reasoning is

simple, of course—less lawn areas will require less watering. A more

flexible performance approach could establish a maximum volume of water

that can be used for outdoor irrigation, leaving it up to the developer

to select the most appropriate way of handling outdoor areas. He could

limit lawn size or use native vegetation, or a combination of both. Any

design solution that does not require more water than the established

maximum would be acceptable. Ideally, the land use ordinance could re- commend design solutions that would limit outdoor watering to a preestablished level, but the developer would be free to propose any method

that he could prove would perform properly.

Santa Fe County, New Mexico's proposed General Plan, discussed

earlier, calls for a performance approach to implement its water con- servation policy. This approach offers residential developers the

option of either adhering to preestablished density standards or building at higher densities when the proposed development includes water

conserving features which will reduce water use below a prescribed level.

109
Building Water Conservation Principles Into Subdivision Controls

The subdivision process offers an excellent opportunity for incorporating water conserving techniques in new residential .development

The use of tried and proven water conservation techniques, such as the use of native vegetation for outdoor areas or the proper soil preparation for lawns, can be made a condition of subdivision approval. Ideally, subdivision regulations can require that all new residential developments must be designed to conserve water. One example of how water

conservation requirements may be structured in subdivision regulations

is found in the subdivision regulations for El Paso County, Colorado.

The ordinance states:

All subdivision design shall take into consideration the importance of water usage for the well-being of the region and

the development of effective aquifer recharge capabilities.

Planners and subdividers shall consider the applicability of

non-potable water as an irrigation source, the development of

ponds and catchment basins, and the effect of groundcover modification on aquifer recharge capability.

1. Use of large areas of artificial groundcover or groundcover not indigenous to the region shall be discouraged

except in cases where a plan is submitted to use non- potable water as a primary irrigation source or in cases where such groundcover can be proven to be suited to the pre-existing natural conditions.

2. Subdivision design, lot design, and site design shall

incorporate, whenever possible, the use of vegetation

suited to the natural cl imatological and soil conditions

of the area in which the subdivision is located.

El Paso County has also enacted Revegetation Specifications which identify native vegetation that developers can use to satisfy the requirements outlined in the subdivision regulations. These specifications

also establish standards for finished slopes, soil preparation, fertilization, planting, and irrigation.

The city of Santa Fe, New Mexico, has taken a less elaborate

approach, involving enactment of a water conservation ordinance that

establishes certain requirements for new construction. This ordinance

requires that:

Irrigated areas shall be no more than 1,000 square

feet per dwelling unit except for native vegetation

requiring only initial irrigation.

110
SUMMARY

Land use planning and regulations can have a significant impact on residential water use. Patterns of development that use less water can

be identified in the comprehensive plan and implemented through the

land use controls that grow out of the plan. To be most effective, land use regulations must be flexible, allowing for subdivision design that

includes clustering, attached housing, zero lot line, water conserving

landscaping and other patterns of residential development that conserve

water. Most communities are only beginning to understand the importance

of land use planning to water conservation. Future progress in this area will undoubtedly depend upon greater awareness among land use planners of water supply planning principles and greater understanding on

the part of water supply planners as to the important role that land use planning can play in this area.

This paper is based on a larger study designed to develop a guidebook for city planners on current local experience reducing demand for

urban water and the role of land use planning in water conservation.

This project is sponsored by the Office of Water Research and Technology,

United States Department of the Interior. The guidebook will be distributed directly to local government planning offices through the American

Planning Association's Planning Advisory Service.

Ill

AURORA, COLORADO: RATIONAL LANDSCAPE ALTERNATIVES

Joanne Rondon

Water Conservation Technician

Aurora Water Conservation

City of Aurora, Colorado

The City of Aurora, Colorado, lies starkly on the high plains

at an elevation of 5,400 feet, with an annual precipitation of

about 15 inches. It's a place where the Indian and Buffalo once

roamed, Buffalo and Grama grasses thrived, and Soapweed Yucca,

Sage, and Rabbitbrush still persist.

Aurora, Colorado, the fastest growing city over 100,000 population, has given way to the plowing and bulldozing of the

native short grasses only to be replaced by highly cultivated

Kentucky Bluegrass lawns. The clayey and sandy soils characteristic to Aurora, lacking organic matter found in areas of

greater rainfall, are susceptible to wind and soil erosion; and

are consistently forced to grow plants by the simple addition of

water

Water . . . water comes to Aurora by transmountain diversions

from relatively distant areas in the Rocky Mountains west of

Denver. With a population of 166,400 people, Aurora competes

with Denver for water rights. Water rights in Colorado are based

on the appropriation doctrine, and water close to Aurora and

Denver is fully appropriated. Thus, rights with a high enough

priority to provide a firm yield during droughts must be purchased

from previous owners which often had agricultural uses. The total

length of the Aurora network is about 135 miles.

The realities are the higher costs of transporting water and

the increasing competition for water rights have created some political and environmental constraints for expanding existing

utilities' capabilities to supply more water. The test of what

will happen is underway. The drought of 1977-78 only slightly

forced Aurora to reckon with nature. The drought of 1980-81 may

be the "day" of reckoning.

In 1979, Aurora put into action a water conservation program

which has the potential to really conserve water. The goal is to

reach every person with the best contemporary knowledge of en- vironment, design, grasses, plants, soil, and watering techniques,

113
in order to achieve a beneficial reduction in water use or in water

losses

One of the major steps has been the compilation ofi local information about landscaping into a book entitled, Landscaping for

Water Conservation in a Semiarid Environment . Written for the

homeowner, the book has received metropolitan-wide support and

acceptance. With the help of Colorado State University professors,

CSU Extension Horticulturist Dr. Jim Feucht, two planning con- sultant firms (THK Associates and Carl Worthington Partnership),

and a Soil Conservation Service District Office, Aurora became

publisher of a thoughtful, thorough document on rational landscape

alternatives. This publication has filled a gap in desperately

needed reading material for the resident and professional who want

to create a landscape that fits the environment. The philosophies

expressed in the landscape handbook are those of the author and

those who assisted the author. The book was put together by people,

for people to use; and the City was the sponsor. The stereotype

of the typical suburban community was replaced by Aurora leading

the way to change. The endeavor has been a learning experience

for all—a risk well taken.

Planning: Designing a Thoughtful Landscape

The design chapter is particularly exciting for the designer,

as well as being very practical for the homeowner. It encourages

the homeowner to design landscapes with a master planning approach.

Once the plan is completed, priorities can be set; and landscape

development can be phased over several years to spread out the

cost. However, when using a phased approach, the landscape

planner should carry out landscape construction in the proper con- struction sequence. Landscape components are defined listing concepts, uses, advantages, and disadvantages. The eight components

are plant materials, structures, mulches, irrigation, grading/

contouring, soil, lighting and water (as a design feature). For

instance, under "Structures" there are the concepts of fences, re- taining walls, walls, overhead structures, surfaces, buildings,

and sculpture. The use of a retaining wall would be to create

useable level areas, i.e., terraces, to prevent water runoff. The

"Mulches" component defines organic, inorganic, ground fabrics,

and plastic concepts listing advantages and disadvantages of

each. Using the landscape components and their various concepts

and uses, four prototypical designs (older home, new cluster

home, new suburban home, and older farmstead) are illustrated.

The Older Home demonstrates how an existing landscape can be

renovated to make use of the following components and concepts: remove existing walks to permit creation of lawn and deck areas;

pavement and decking in high activity areas to reduce amount of

irrigated areas and to create more useful areas; remove unused

lawn areas; planting beds to replace lawn to reduce water re114
quirement and maintenance; water-conservative planting in parkways

to replace lawn; large canopy deciduous trees for summer shade;

planting masses for privacy screening; and flower beds as visual

focal points.

The New Cluster Home is on a small lot 40 f x75' and specifically

addresses patio development. Landscape components and concepts are:

fences to provide a high degree of privacy and containment of views

inside the courtyard; variety of hard surfaces for intensive use

areas; overhead structure for shade; automatic irrigation system to

reduce maintenance; extensive plantings to create more comfortable

outdoor room with good views; large canopy deciduous tree for summer

shade and "ceiling effect"; and lack of lawn area to reduce maintenance and conserve water.

The New Suburban Home is a large lot 100'xl70' and has no ex- isting vegetation. The suburban home landscape utilizes the

following components and concepts: hard surfaces for intense

active use areas; overhead structure for shade; dry creek bed to

channel runoff around home and active use areas, for visual interest,

and to create an edge between differing landscape types; plantings

along dry creek bed edge to utilize runoff; lawn areas for active

uses such as play, games; dryland plantings for non-active use areas to reduce water requirement and maintenance; fence and plants

as windbreaks to lessen impact of winds; fence, berms, plants for

greater privacy; berms for good drainage and visual interest;

irrigation system to reduce maintenance and for efficient distribution of water; play area for children located adjacent to lawn

area in clear view from house (kitchen) ; and large deciduous trees

for shade.

The Older Farmstead is several acres, very open and exposed to

winds, and has a surrounding prairie landscape. This rural re- sidential landscape makes use of the following components and

concepts: most intense landscape use adjacent to house; transition

landscape between the outdoor intense activity area and the

natural prairie; natural prairie landscape in outlying areas and

covering the greatest amount of area; planting windbreaks to lessen

the effect of the winter winds; channelization of the summer breezes for cooling effect; retaining wall to eliminate steep slope

to create a level terrace for the outdoor activity area and to

create an edge between differing landscape types; gravel surfaces

for driveway and footpaths; and irrigation system to reduce maintenance and for efficient distribution of water.

Grasses: An Alternative

A new landscape ethic and esthetic consciousness needs to be

developed. By learning anew or relearning what it means to live

in a semiarid climate where water is a precious, limited resource,

a new consciousness can be developed in planning the landscape.

115
A Colorado style can be unique by the use of native and adapted

grasses. However, residents need to prepare themselves for the

different esthetic quality this will create. Native grasses are softer and gray-green; and they cannot be compared to turf grasses

because they are not a lawn substitute. Native grasses should be

thought of as a design component

„

Jack Gilcrest, a landscape architect who assisted with the

book, has a three-year-old Buffalo grass lawn. Buffalo grass needs

at least two seasons in order to establish a good cover. It needs

full sun, clayey soil, gets to a natural height of four inches,

and has seed heads to about six inches. Jack mows his lawn in the

spring and fall and watered it once during the 1980 summer. The

edges are occasionally trimmed to give a somewhat more manicured

look. The grass has a gray-green color for about six months during

its growing season and is a light brown in color during dormancy,

the other six months. Jack mixed wildflowers into the seed mixture

when he sowed the seed to create a naturalized meadow.

Gary Powell, another landscape architect who assisted with the

book, has a six-year-old Buffalo grass lawn in his front yard. He's

planted it with Aspen. Gary mows his grass more frequently, however

When Buffalo grass is kept mowed, it immediately gets compared to

Kentucky Bluegrass and naturally does not hold up to the test be- cause it is browner and less dense.

To do away with Kentucky Bluegrass would not be appropriate

either, for it is the most efficient ground cover in terms of weed

control and the ability to withstand traffic. Bluegrass is quite

drought-resistant and can endure long periods without water, providing there is good soil preparation first and it is watered

properly. The care of Kentucky Bluegrass is very important and can reduce water requirements. The Aurora landscape book settles

some old arguments concerning lawn care:

(1) Mowing height should be two inches or more.

(2) Grass clippings should be left when mowing; however, grass

should need frequent and consistent mowing if leaving the clippings.

(3) A thick layer of thatch less than 1/2 inch is beneficial

and should not be removed.

(4) Aerification should be done on a regular basis, especially

on compacted soil.

(5) Low-nitrogen fertilizers shduld be used which contain

a phosphorus and potassium to increase the ability of the turf grass

to survive drought stress.

Plants: Native and Adapted

The third chapter lists many native and adapted plants that are effective and distinctive, which are suitable for a residential

landscape; and choices should not be limited to native plants alone.

Choosing plants with the same water requirements in a mass planting

116
can be fun and creative. Proper use of mulches goes hand-in-hand

with mass plantings, and plants with mulching can require less water.

Creating a berm of eight to ten inch smooth river cobble with Sedum

and Aspen is an interesting planting for a front yard.

Soil: The Most Important Part

Soil is the most important consideration in developing a water

conserving landscape. Most soils in the Denver metro area lack

organic material. Adding soil improvement can save the homeowner

money in the long run because it will save water. The gardener

should learn what an ideal soil is, and soil tests should be taken

prior to planting. Terracing is an important consideration. If

the slope is so steep that water commonly overtops the ridges left

by tillage, terraces are needed at intervals to intercept the runoff.

Watering: The Final Meeting

Knowing when and how to water is the goal of proper irrigation.

Automatic sprinkler systems are the most efficient way to water.

Whether the choice be automatic or portable sprinklers, it is important to understand the lawn's requirements and signals. One

must be very familiar with his sprinkling equipment. The rates at

which the water is applied and the pattern of water distribution

will vary. The homeowner is encouraged to measure patterns of

water distribution.

Drip irrigation has gained more attention in recent years

because of its potential for decreasing water requirements. Drip

systems cannot be used where it is desirable to provide mist. A

combination of overhead sprinklers for lawn areas and drip for

shrubbery and trees provide an ideal system.

For watering trees and shrubs and along driveways and sidewalks, a deep-root irrigator is the best method to avoid runoff or evaporation. Hand watering dry spots can allow the rest of the

lawn to go unwatered several more days. Runoff water should be

captured and channeled to direct water flow toward planting areas where it can be used.

Knowing when to water is just as important as knowing how to

water. Give plants some credit for hardiness. Stop watering by

the calendar. Take a shovel or screwdriver into the garden and

turn one blade of soil. If the soil is dry, water it. Learn to

recognize a plant's way of telling when it is thirsty. If footprints show when walking on bluegrass lawn, it is thirsty.

The following are some basic guidelines to improve water

application

(1) Have the land in good condition. Level land makes it

117
possible to apply water more evenly to all parts of a yard.

(2) Have a good irrigation system.

(3) Determine water intake rate.

(4) Check soil moisture before irrigating.

(5) Check depth of water penetration.

The results of efficient water application are uniform growth and

maturity and savings in water and labor.

Other Measures

The City of Aurora has not only published a landscape booklet

but has created the Aurora Water Conservation Office to better serve

and educate residents. By the formation of this office, the City

committed itself to a long-range public education water conservation

program.

The City has recently passed a lawn ordinance too. The ordinance restricts the amount of Kentucky Bluegrass lawn a homeowner can install based on the total square footage of the lot and requires

soil preparation before planting. Anyone installing a new lawn must

obtain a lawn permit, and must have proof they installed organic

matter.

Since the Aurora Water Department was established in 1949, all water

services have been metered. All billings are made on a metered basis

including useage for parks, schools, and other public facilities.

All Aurora water users pay a monthly service fee based on meter size*

In addition, all water used is billed at a uniform rate which varies

by customer class. This is a straight line rate which adds an economic incentive to conservation.

Present Aurora plumbing code requires the installation of certain

water saving fixtures on all new and remodeled construction. Customers

can purchase low-flow showerheads, toilet dams, and faucet aerators

from the Aurora Water Conservation Office to retrofit homes constructed

prior to 1977 when the plumbing code went into effect.

Some people are comparing the drought of 1980-81 to the dust bowl

days of the thirties. The measures that Aurora will be taking because

of the emergency situation of the drought are every third day watering

beginning May 1 and a penalty rate structure allowing 15,000 gallons

per month per household at the current rate of $1.03 per thousand

gallons; at a usage of 15,000 to 30,000 gallons, the rate would be

$2.06 per thousand, and above 30,000 gallons, the rate would be $4.12

per thousand. Customers will receive computer printouts in April and

May showing the previous usage for their households so they can monitor

usage and try to reduce their consumption, and beginning in June cus- tomers will be billed monthly rather than bimonthly. In addition, in

June, the Aurora City Council will decide whether or not there should

be a new lawn moratorium depending on reservoir levels.

118
The City of Aurora is facing reality. Whether it be in a drought year or a plentiful year, change is needed. It's time to

look at the real necessities of life: water, air, soil, and light.

When water is placed at the top of the list, everything else falls

into place.

119

Impact of Low Flows on

Wastewater Collection Systems

and Treatment Facilities

WATER CONSERVATION AND WASTEWATER FLOW REDUCTION - IS IT

WORTH IT?

Jimmy S. Koyasako

EFFECTS OF WATER CONSERVATION ON MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER

TREATMENT FACILITIES

John A. Davis and Taras A. Bursztynsky

WATER CONSERVATION AND WASTEWATER FLOW

REDUCTION - IS IT WORTH IT?*

Jimmy S. Koyasako

Senior Water Resources Engineer

California Department of Water Resources

Sacramento, California

ABSTRACT

This question was the subject of a recent research study largely

funded by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) . Two study reports

were prepared: a detailed report published by EPA and a summary report

published by the California Department of Water Resources. This study

of indoor water conservation and resulting wastewater flow reduction

arrived at one main conclusion: There are overwhelming benefits to be

derived from community water conservation programs and they should be

vigorously promoted.

I would like to share with you today:

The study background.

The study approach.

Key findings of the study.

THE STUDY BACKGROUND

During the last 10 years, urban water conservation has attracted

much attention and has come to be considered an essential part of the

effective management of our water resources. Urban water conservation

not only saves water but also saves precious energy. While saving

water has become increasingly popular across the country, the most

intensive water conservation effort probably took place in Northern

California during the acute drought of 1976-77. The drought is not the

subject of this study, but it did provide a good opportunity for measuring some of the effects of water conservation.

* This paper is based upon a detailed report, "Effects of Water Conservation - Induced Wastewater Flow Reduction — A Perspective/"

EPA 600/2-80-137, August 1980, published by EPA, and a summary report

with the same title, dated June 1980, published by the California

Department of Water Resources. Both were written by this author.

123
During the drought, Californians were encouraged by governmental

and water resources management agencies to conserve water, both outside

and inside their homes. In most critically dry areas, mandatory controls were applied to conserve water. Some of the common practices

included cutting back on or eliminating landscape irrigation, and

installing low- flow faucet aerators; low-flow showerheads or flow

restrictors ; and "water dams," plastic bottles, or plastic bags in

toilet tanks to reduce the amount of water used for flushing. These

and other measures, however, were often undertaken without a full

knowledge of the positive and negative aspects of conserving water,

particularly with regard to reduced wastewater flows. Questions raised

then are still being asked:

What are the effects of water conservation on wastewater collection

and treatment systems?

What are the effects of any changes in the quality of the treated

wastewater on wastewater reuse?

What are the positive and negative aspects of water conservation,

and is water conservation still worthwhile after both aspects have

been considered?

This study was made to answer those questions.

STUDY APPROACH

During the 1976-77 drought, numerous local agencies in Northern

California experienced reductions in wastewater flows and nearly all

of the major communities there were under some form of mandatory con- servation. Data were collected from these agencies primarily to measure

any significant effects of flow reduction on their operation. Various

local agencies were contacted to obtain actual data concerning:

Reduction in wastewater flow.

Changes in wastewater quality.

Specific operational problems encountered in collection and

treatment facilities.

To answer the question "Is conservation in indoor water use worthwhile?", its primary benefits and costs were analyzed and compared.

This was done by choosing conditions for analysis to represent what

could be expected in the future on a statewide basis if indoor water

conservation measures were taken.

The next 20-year period, 1980-2000, was used as the basis for

analysis. This time span represents a period for which expanded or new wastewater facilities would be sized for capacity. Two cases were

examined in small, medium, and large wastewater systems.

124
Under Case I conditions, existing sewer systems are enlarged to cover a larger service area and existing treatment plants are expanded

to receive a larger flow due to new population growth. Thus, since

water conservation-induced reductions in wastewater flows from both

existing and new building constructions affect the sizing of new wastewater facilities both types of conditions were considered.

Under Case II conditions, new sewer systems and treatments are constructed to serve the new population growth independent of the

existing facilities. Thus, water conservation induced reductions in

wastewater flows from new building construction only affect the sizing

of new wastewater facilities, so only these new facilities were

considered

The conceptual reduction in the new wastewater system capacity,

when wastewater flows are decreased due to indoor water use reduction

in existing and new building constructions, is depicted in Figure 1.

Benefits resulting from savings in water, energy, and wastewater

facilities costs were examined.

The amount of water saved was treated as the amount of water that

would not be needed in the future. The cost of supplying that water,

which otherwise most likely would be incurred in the absence of water

savings, was used as a measure of water supply benefits.

Two types of energy savings were considered} one, the savings

due to less use of hot water and two, the savings due to less water

needed for treatment and conveyance in the local water supply distribution system.

The extent to which future construction of wastewater collection

and treatment facilities could be sized smaller and construction costs

saved were examined. Any savings in the operation and maintenance (O&M)

costs due to reductions in wastewater flow were also taken into account

in the benefit analysis.

The negative effects, or costs, of water conservation measures and

their impact on wastewater reuse also were examined.

The cost of various scenarios of water conservation measures at

different levels of water conservation efforts ranging from minimal to

potential were examined.

The negative impact on wastewater reuse due to increased salt

concentration in the effluent was assessed. Three major uses of wastewater, namely crop irrigation, landscape irrigation, and industrial

use, were examined to determine how much they are affected by changes

in wastewater quality as a result of flow reduction.

125
The net worth of water conservation was measured by determining its

"net benefits," which is the difference between all its benefits and

costs. Stated in another way, it is the excess of benefits over cost.

The point where the maximum excess benefits occur is the point of opti- mum development.

KEY FINDINGS

Effects on Wastewater Facilities

Some agencies experienced two years of flow reduction, in 1976 and

1977, while others experienced only one year, in 1977. In the first

year of reduction, the average flow reduction was 17 percent. In

the second year, the average flow reduction was 39 percent.

One-half of the 17 wastewater systems surveyed encountered operational problems during periods of flow reductions. In general,

however, the problems were not severe enough to greatly affect the

system operations. Common problems in the sewer system were solids

settling and odor. Common operational problems in the treatment

plants were odor in the primary and secondary clarifiers, and bulking in secondary clarifiers due to excessive growth of filamentous

bacteria

Remedial measures were taken to resolve the problems, and there

were no documented cases where the wastewater facilities could not

continue to be properly maintained.

Changes in wastewater quality during periods of flow reduction did

not generally result in more frequent treatment plant violations

of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) or suspended solids (SS) discharge requirements.

The BOD and SS concentrations of the wastewater entering the treatment plant generally increased while the concentrations leaving the

plant generally decreased during years of flow reduction. The

efficiency of treatment plant removal of BOD and SS generally

increased slightly.

Energy and chemical uses were the primary items affected by wastewater flow reduction.

As shown in this graphic (Figure 2) , the overall O&M costs for the

wastewater collection system decreased slightly, with a maximum of

3 percent cost reduction at 50 percent flow reduction. Most of the

reductions in cost resulted from decreased energy use for the lift

pumps.

The decrease in energy use for the treatment plants amounted to a maximum of 20 percent at 50 percent reduction in flow due to lower

126
pumping requirements for the hydraulic load. Use of chemicals

ranged from a decrease of 30 percent to an increase of 50 percent.

As shown in the next graphic (Figure 3) , the overall O&M costs ranged

from a decrease of about 5 percent to an increase of about 4 percent. For treatment plants that experienced higher costs, increased

use of chemicals was the major factor.

Water Conservation Benefits and Costs

The findings are listed separately for the two cases analyzed.

Case I - Where the new wastewater facilities are additions to or expansions of the existing facilities to take care of new population growth. Thus, wastewater flows from both existing

and new building constructions were considered.

Indoor water use reduction for the water conservation measures

examined ranged from 10 percent with minimal water conservation

effort to a potential of 35 percent.

As shown in the next graphic (Figure 4), savings in capital cost of

treatment plants ranged from 12 percent at 10 percent indoor use reduction to 22 percent at 20 percent to 35 percent indoor use reduction.

The annual cost of water conservation measures increased from

$0.20 per household at 10 percent reduction in indoor use to

$30 per household at 35 percent reduction.

As shown in the next graphic (Figure 5) , the major benefit is

energy savings due to less use of hot water in homes. Other

benefits are cost savings in water supply and cost savings in

municipal wastewater systems.

As shown in the next graphic (Figure 6) , there are considerable

excess benefits over costs (net benefits) . The optimum level of

indoor water use reduction is nearly 30 percent and the benefits

are about three times as great as the costs.

The optimum level of indoor water use reduction would require a strong water conservation effort.

Water conservation in existing buildings is responsible for

generating about 70 percent of the total net benefits.

Case II - Where the new wastewater facilities serve new population

growth independently of existing facilities. Thus, wastewater flows from new construction only were considered. The

findings for Case II are similar to Case I, except for the

following major differences:

127
Indoor water use reductions for the water conservation measures

examined ranged from 30 percent with minimal water conservation

effort to a potential of 40 percent.

The annual cost of water conservation measures ranged from $0.10

per household at 30 percent reduction in indoor use to $10 per household at 40 percent reduction. The costs are lower than those for

Case I. The reason is that water-saving toilet, shower, and faucet

fixtures, which are responsible for most of the reductions, are mandatory in new construction in California and would cost less than

retrofitting existing buildings.

As shown in the next graphic (Figure 7) , the net benefits for Case

II are considerably less than those for Case I. The comparison of

net benefits for Cases I and II reflects the dramatic beneficial

effect of water conservation in existing buildings.

Effects of Changes in Wastewater Effluent Quality

The impact of increased salt concentration (as a result of flow

reduction) on wastewater reuse for crop irrigation, landscape

irrigation, and industrial uses has no noticeable effect on the

"net benefits" (gross benefits minus costs) of water conservation.

Thus water conservation is not counterproductive to wastewater

reuse.

"Penalty costs" reduce the net benefits only slightly. Penalty

costs are borne by consumers as a result of increased salt con- centration in its water supply and are associated with use of home

water softeners, soap and detergent, bottled water, and water

heaters

Desalting and blending of the effluent would mitigate any increased

salt concentration. However, the cost of desalting would be con- siderably greater than the penalty costs.

Savings in Future Capital Expenditures for Secondary Treatment Plants

At the optimum level of indoor water use reductions in new and

existing building constructions, the expected savings in capital

expenditures of secondary treatment plants proposed for new construction

and enlargement in California is on the order of $210 million (1979

dollars)

I have described to you the study background, the study approach,

and the key findings. Before concluding my remarks, I would like to

briefly address the issue of "What Should We Do Next?"

WHAT NEXT?

The positive results of this study, positive conservation statements, federal regulations for cost-effective analysis, and existing

128
policies, which all promote water conservation, do not necessarily cause

a community to undertake concerted water conservation efforts in a non- crisis water supply situation. This is indicated by the sudden increase

in the amount of wastewater flow in California during the year immediately following the drought. This increase averaged 34 percent even though the flow quantity did not reach pre-drought flows. The tendency

for the community to revert to old habits points out a need for an understanding of the "incentives" of water conservation as viewed by

different elements within the community. In urban water use, a variety

of interested parties are involved with water supply development, treatment, and delivery; consumer use; and wastewater treatment disposal.

Although water conservation may result in a net economic gain to a community, when viewed as a whole system as was done in this report,

the financial impact is different for each party.

The solution approach is to investigate the primary economic gains

or losses of water conservation from at least three points of view —

those of the water suppliers, the consumers, and the waste discharger.

When individual interests understand the benefits to themselves

as well as to the total community, they will generate a willingness

to take action leading to the development and implementation of a workable plan to conserve water.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Credits

This study was largely funded by a grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) . Terry Bursztynsky of the Association

of Bay Area Governments, Berkeley, California; Wen H. Huang of EPA,

Washington, D.C.; and Takeshi Asano of the California State Water

Resources Control Board, Sacramento, California, assisted in the study

analyses

129
Flow from existing and new

buildings without water conservation

Water conservation induced

flow reduction from new

buildings only, Case H .-

5

O

hE—m

Water conservation induced

flow reduction from both

existing and new buildings

Cose I

New facilities sized for capacity

to serve new

population growth

without water

conservation -

New facilities sized for capacity

in Case II

New facilities sized for capacity

in Case I

1980 2000

NEXT 20-YEAR PERIOD OF ANALYSIS

Figure 1. Effect of wastewater flow reduction on new

wastewater system capacity.

130
131
o

(0001 $) SXIJ3N38 1V0NNV

C

©

Q.

E

b

0)

c

o

0)o

u

o </> 3

e

O

O

O

o

INVId INSWiVSdl dO 1S03 IVildVD Nl N0li0n03d

132
c 5

> O

V)

o o

* o

•o

c >

JO —

^ E = E

§

c 1°

c *_

< o

0J

l_

c

o o • —

(0001 $! S1S03 /SilJ3N38 IVflNNV

133

EFFECTS OF WATER CONSERVATION ON MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT

FACILITIES

John A. Davis, Vice-President

Jefferson Associates, Inc.

San Francisco, California

Taras A. Bursztynsky, Manager of Water Programs

Association of Bay Area Governments

Berkeley, California

ABSTRACT

As part of a regional environmental planning study, the Association

of Bay Area Governments estimated the effects of water conservation on wastewater treatment facilities. In general, passive water conservation

programs that save 10 to 20 percent of municipal water use will have a minor effect on existing secondary wastewater treatment plant performance. New facilities downsized to accommodate a 10 to 20 percent

average dry-weather flow reduction would net a construction cost saving

of 2 to 5 percent. Hydraulically sized unit processes could be downsized; organically loaded processes could not and may even need to be

enlarged.

INTRODUCTION

A comprehensive environmental management plan for the San Francisco

Bay Area was completed in 19 78 by the Association of Bay Area Governments. The plan includes water quality, water supply, air quality,

and solid waste elements. The water quality element contains a list of

wastewater facilities needed to provide sewerage service in the region

until the year 2000. A guiding principle followed during plan preparation was that the plan elements should be fully integrated; that is,

they should be based on a common set of land use, economic, and population projections and that the effect of environmental controls proposed

in one plan element on another element should be taken into account.

The purpose of the water supply element was to determine how the

future demand for water in the Bay Area might be met. The plan recommends a mix of wastewater reclamation, water saving, and development of new water sources. Clearly, if water savings programs are implemented

the flow of municipal wastewater will decrease. In order to make the

water supply and water quality elements consistent with each other it

became necessary to estimate the extent of the flow reduction and how

this might influence the need for, and cost of, wastewater facilities.

WATER SAVINGS

In 1975, residential, commercial, and industrial water

nine-county bay region totaled 40.9 m^/s (934 mgd) . If the

135

use in the

region'
population grows from its 1975 level of 4.6 to 6.1 million in the year

2000,' then water use is expected to grow to 61.5 m

J /s (1,404 mgd) if

water-saving programs are not put into effect.

The Bay Area's environmental management plan includes a recommendation that a "moderate level" of water conservation be implemented

throughout the region. A moderate conservation program is defined as one that emphasizes retrofit of water-saving devices in existing

structures and building water-saving devices in new structures. Shower

flow restrictors and toilet tank volume displacement bottles will be

installed in existing homes. New homes will be fitted with low-flow

shower heads, low-flush-volume toilets, faucet flow controls with

mixers, shower cutoff valves, pressure regulators, and hot water pipe

insulation. State legislation already exists requiring the installation

of low-flush-volume toilets in new construction.

It is estimated that retrofit of water-saving devices in existing

homes will save about 34 1/cap/d (9 gal/day /cap) . It is expected that

if the devices are distributed to homeowners without charge, but installation is voluntary, then they will be installed in 15 to 30 percent

of homes. Thus the average saving in existing homes is 6.4 1/cap/d (1.7

gal/day /cap) . It is assumed that all new structures will be fitted

with water-saving devices; a saving of 62.8 1/cap/d (16.6 gal/day/cap)

is expected. In addition to the savings resulting from installation

of devices , it is estimated that a further overall 5 percent saving will

result from informational programs designed to increase public awareness of the need for water conservation.

Implementation of the program described above will reduce the demand for water in the Bay Area by about 7.0 m3/s (160 mgd) by the

year 2000.

WASTEWATER FLOW PROJECTIONS

The initial wastewater flow projections were made for each of 50

sewerage units assuming that no water conservation program would be

implemented. It was further assumed that in most areas historic per

capita rates of wastewater flow generation would be maintained until

the year 2000. In a few areas where a large amount of development is

expected the rates were adjusted upwards. The rate used for most of the

50 sewerage units was in the range 303 to 397 1/cap/d (80 to 105 gal/

day/cap). Industrial flows were estimated from data contained in individual dischargers' facilities plans.

A second set of projections was made assuming implementation of the

"moderate" water-savings program. It is estimated that of the 7.0 m^/s

(160 mgd) of water saved in the year 2000, approximately 3.2 m3/s (75

mgd) will be translated into reduced wastewater flows. Projections with

and without conservation are shown in Figure 1.

ANALYSIS OF EFFECTS OF CONSERVATION ON WASTEWATER FACILITIES

While water-savings programs are expected to result in some re136
FIGURE I

35

137
duction in wastewater flows, they are not expected to reduce tne mass

of pollutants discharged to the sewer. The latter is obviously of

great significance with respect to effects on treatment facilities because these facilities are designed to handle a certain pollutant load

as well as a certain flow rate. The effect of water savings on individual wastewater treatment process units is discussed at the end of this

section. The discussion is preceded by some remarks on the differences

in effects on new and existing plants and the relationship between con- servation program-induced wastewater flow variations and variations

caused in other ways.

New and Existing Facilities . A distinction must be made between

the effects of water saving on existing facilities and on those yet to

be designed and built. In the former instance a wastewater facility

was designed to treat a certain waste flow and pollutant load. The ex- pected waste flow and pollutant load were determined based on population

projections and historic records of per capita waste generation rates

and wastewater strength. The effect of a water conservation program

initiated sometime during the life of the plant will be to reduce ex- pected flows while still retaining the expected pollutant load. Wastewater strength obviously will increase. Subsequent sections attempt

to estimate the effect of this change on plant performance.

In the case of new facilities the existence of a water conservation

program is a given in the design process. Subsequent sections attempt

to determine to what degree this will alter the size and cost of needed

facilities as compared to a no-water-conservation scenario.

Water Savings and Flow Variation. The volume of wastewater entering a treatment plant varies depending on the hour of the day, day of

the week, and month of the year. In addition, flow tends to increase

annually as more homes and businesses are connected to the sewer system

tributary to the plant. Thus, in most cases, a municipal treatment

plant must be designed to accommodate a fairly wide range of flows.

It is conventional engineering practice to design a plant to treat

the average daily dry-weather flow in the last year of the design

period. The design is then checked to make sure that the process units

will continue to function reasonably well during extreme high and low

flows. Most process units will operate satisfactorily within a range

of loading rates. Figure 2 shows flow into a hypothetical 0.44 m^/s

(10 mgd) treatment plant during a 10-year period. It is assumed that

the plant comes into service at Year 0 and is designed to treat flows

until Year 10. At startup the average dry-weather flow through the

plant is 0.26 mVs (6 mgd). If effluent limitations are to be met, it

is clear that the plant must perform well within the flow range 0.26 to

0.44 m^/s (6 to 10 mgd), the range of average dry-weather flows that

the plant will experience during its design lifetime.

138
FIGURE 2

FLOW VARIATION

*ADWF = Average Dry Weather Flow.

139
For a plant serving a population of 100,000, the Water Pollution

Control Federation Manual of Practice No. 9 (1) indicates that the ratio

of peak to average daily flow will be 2 and the ratio of minimum to

average daily flow will be 0.5. If it is taken as a design principle

that the plant must perform adequately during daily extreme values for

its entire design life, then the design flow range becomes 0.13 to 0.88

nP/s (3 to 20 mgd) , minimum flow in Year 0 and maximum flow in Year 10.

From Figure 2 it is apparent that the plant must perform perfectly within the flow envelope defined by the solid lines and at least adequately

within the flow envelope defined by the dotted lines.

If it is now assumed that water agencies in the sewerage service

area initiate a water-saving program beginning in Year 2, the rate of

increase of wastewater flow will decline. By the tenth year, the design

year, average daily dry-weather flow will be about 0.39 m3/s (9 mgd),

approximately 0.04 rn^/s (1 mgd) less than would be expected if no savings program had been initiated. If the same peak and minimum flow

factors apply, it is apparent that even with the saving program the

flows will remain within the flow envelope within which the plant will

perform adequately. Thus, from the point of view of hydraulics of an existing plant, the flow variations resulting from water savings are much smaller than those that result from normal diurnal changes in use

of the sewer system and consequently no adverse impact on performance

might be expected. In fact, again from the point of view of hydraulics,

the reduction in flow could extend the life of the plant. Clearly,

however, organic loading as well as hydraulic loading must be considered

in an analysis of the effects of water savings on treatment plant design.

Analysis of Process Units . Design practices for process units

including sewers, headworks , primary and secondary sedimentation, trickling filters, activated sludge, lagoons, chemical treatment, filtration

disinfection, and solids handling were reviewed to determine how a reduction in flow might affect them. In most cases, the source of the

design practice was "Wastewater Treatment Plant Design," published by

the Water Pollution Control Federation (2). The results are presented

in the Conclusions section.

EFFECTS OF DROUGHT ON WASTEWATER FACILITIES

During 1976 and 1977 California experienced a severe drought. In

the Bay Area many water distribution agencies imposed mandatory water

rationing programs. Wastewater flows were reduced correspondingly.

To provide a check on the predictions of the effects of water conser- vation on wastewater facilities, the effects of the drought on several

treatment facilities in the Bay Area were determined. Table I sum- marizes the effects on a typical conventional activated sludge plant.

140
TABLE I: Effect of Drought on Plant Performance

PRE-DROUGHT DURING DROUGHT

PARAMETER UNIT JUNE' 75 JULY' 75 JUNE' 77 JULY' 77

Flow total mJ /s 0.24 0.23 0.20 0.20

Per capita 1 / cap /d 291 276 212 220

SS :Influent mg/1 250 225 448 403

Per capita kg/cap/d 0.08 0.06 0.1 0.09

Effluent mg/1 69 94 62 40

Removal rate 7a 1 Z

R Q JO ob 90

BOD:

Influent mg/1 252 199 401 37 7 rer capxta kg/ cap /d U . Uo U . U j u . uy o no Effluent mg/1 103 93 107 110

Removal rate % 59 53 73 71

Clarifier loading:

Primary- m3/m2 /d 69.3 65.2 55.0 58.7

Secondary m3/m2 /d 26.5 25.

21.2 22.4

RDlUlUgXLdl 1 n 1 n rr 1 p o 1 c> >~i r~> i~ r~\ -v* • A-ccLCLUIT • MLSS kg 6940 7530 7258 6940

F/M ratio 0.77 0.53 0.93 0.97

Chlorine gas kg/d 249 290 277 336

Power kWh/d 6580 6530 6600 6270

During the drouj*ht, per capita wastewater flows dropped by about

20 percent. At the s ame t ime , per capita SS and BOD loads increased

No explanation for the latter phenomenon was apparent but it was observed at several plants. In general, plant performance improved

substantially. The improvement was particularly marked at one plant

(Table I) , probably because the primary clarifiers were somewhat

overloaded at normal flows. Few savings in energy were observed because most energy use is associated with the aeration equipment.

Chlorine usage usually declined, although not at the plant for which

data are given in Table I.

CONCLUSIONS

Performance of Existing Facilities . A theoretical analysis of the

effects of water conservation on existing wastewater facilities leads

to the conclusion that, within the expected range of water savings

141
(10 to 20 percent), effects will be fairly minor. Conservation-induced

flow variations are relatively small compared to variations caused by

other factors. With the exception of biological reactors, the reduced

per capita flow will result in some extension in the length of time

before treatment units reach their design capacity, as shown in Table

II. Theoretical analysis indicates that in order to maintain effluent

quality with increased wastewater strength, the performance of biological reactors must improve. Practical experience with plants receiving

reduced flows has shown that the overall performance of secondary

plants does tend to improve. The improvement is probably attributable

to increased solids removal in the clarifiers. In general, it appears

that water conservation programs will not cause any major problems at

existing plants and may, in fact, improve performance and extend the

time to reach design capacity.

Cost of New Facilities , The capital cost of a new facility designed to treat wastewater for a 10-year period, assuming implexmentation of a water-savings program, will be less than for a similar

facility designed assuming no water saving. As indicated in Table II,

the process units that can be down-sized represent about 40 percent of

the total cost of, as an example, a 1.31 m^/s (30 mgd) activated sludge

facility. Thus, with scale economy, 2 to 5 percent cost savings will

result from a 10 to 20 percent reduction in wastewater flow. Operation

costs also will be slightly less. It should be noted, however, that

these cost savings can be accrued only when infiltration and inflow

are small. If wet-weather flows far exceed dry-weather flows, the need

to provide hydraulic capacity for these large flows will eliminate the

opportunity for cost savings.

TABLE II: Wastewater Treatment Unit Processes Affected by Water

Conservation

UNIT

EFFECT ON

TIME TO

REACH DESIGN

CAPACITY

EFFECT ON PERCENT OF CAPITAL

NEEDED COST FOR 1.31 m3 /s

SIZE OF NEW (30 mgd) ACTIVATED

FACILITY SLUDGE FACILITY

Sewers Incre ase Decrease Not included

Headworks Increase Decrease 18

Primary sedimentation Increase Deere ase 8

Biological Very Slight Very Slight 22 (actiDecrease Increase vated sludge)

Secondary sedimentation Increase Decrease 10

Chemical treatment Varies, Insi£ Varies, Insig-• Not included

nif icant nificant

Filtration Increase Possible Not included

Decrease

Disinfection Incre ase Decrease 4

Sludge handling No Change No Change 34

Adminis tration/ No Change No Change 4

Maintenance

142
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Credits . This investigation was conducted as part of the Association of Bay Area Governments Environmental Management Program and was supported by a grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Dave Sullivan of Engineering-Science, Inc., Don Forrester of Union

Sanitary District, and George Burridge of the City of Hayward provided

assistance in the study.

REFERENCES

1. "Design and Construction of Sanitary and Storm Sewers," Manual of

Practice No. 9, Water Poll. Control Fed., Wash. D.C. (1969)

2. "Wastewater Treatment Plant Design." Manual of Practice No. 8,

Water Poll. Control Fed., Wash. D.C. (1977)

143

Planning for the Future

PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE

Polly C. Knox

WATER CONSERVATION IN ARIZONA: PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE

Delores M. Gillum

WATER CONSERVATION AS A LONG-RANGE SUPPLY OPTION FOR

MASSACHUSETTS: DISPELLING THE MYTHS AND FACING REALITY

Helen S. Linsky

PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE

Polly C. Knox

Water Conservation Office

Seattle Water Department

Seattle, Washington

ABSTRACT

There is a long-standing base of environmental consciousness

among the people of the Pacific Northwest. The conservation ethic

is an important part of policies and actions affecting the region's

resources. In 1975 a number of prestigious policy-making bodies and

organizations strongly recommended water conservation as an alternative to development of new resources. The low rainfall of 1976-77

was the incentive to the Seattle Water Department to consider the con- servation alternative. The Department examined the feasibility of

the subject during the three ensuing normal years and, in 1980, the

City adopted a Conservation Program. Without an impending disaster,

the Program could assume a course based upon human value and rationality associated with future sources of supply. A cost/benefit analysis was conducted during the initial study for the Program based on

an eight percent reduction in total demand to be reached over a tenyear period. The findings supported the adoption of the Program.

The need to construct another source of supply will be delayed by six

to seven years if the Program goal is reached. At the core of the

Program are six voluntary cooperation projects and three public use management projects. Water customers were targeted and specific water use habit changes were identified to accomplish demand reductions

through the projects. Program evaluation methods are being closely

monitored by the City Council, which expects timely accomplishment of

the projected reductions. Currently, the Office is involved in as- sessing evaluation in the light of staffing, methods and computer ca- pabilities .

WHY DOES "RAINY CITY, U.S.A." HAVE A WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAM?

The question has been posed to the Seattle Water Department (SWD)

Conservation Office Staff, "Why, in one of the nation's cities noted

for its damp, rainy climate, are you undertaking a water conservation

program?" There are a variety of strong reasons for our efforts and

they are addressed in this paper. , In the Seattle water-served area

there exists a strong awareness and conservation attitude toward the

environment among many native and new residents. There has long ex- isted a base of environment consciousness in the Pacific Northwest.

This conservation ethic is reflected widely in policies and actions

147
affecting the region's resources. Water, in the form of rain - one

of the region's unappreciated and ubiquitous resources - is usually

in abundant supply. Even among the environmentalists it is taken for

granted to a large degree until an infrequent low-rainfall year oc- curs .

A number of issue-sensitive citizens who served on important advisory committees during the '70's brought into regional consciousness the importance of water. Beginning in 1975, several prestigious

regional policy-making bodies and organizations began to strongly re- commend water conservation as an alternative to the development of new sources of water supply. The River Basin Coordinating Committee

(RIBCO) and Water Resource Management Study (WRMS) recommended in

1975 that water conservation policies be adopted by responsible decision-making bodies. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (METRO)

,

the regional sewage disposal and treatment management agency, made a recommendation in 197 5 for the implementation of water conservation

practices before development of additional sources of water. A City

resolution and a citizen task force also supported these statements.

The low rainfall of 1976-77 became the strongest incentive for

the SWD to undertake conservation. The SWD responded to that minor

crisis and then undertook to research the subject during the three

ensuing years of normal rainfall. Few agencies in the nation involved in water resources and conservation have had a similar luxury,

that of unhurried preparation of a conservation plan.

The Seattle Metropolitan Water Supply Study (SEAMWWS) and the

Seattle Comprehensive Regional Water Plan (COMPLAN) , finalized in

1977 and 1980 respectively, both recommended conservation; the Conservation Program is part of the COMPLAN. There was no emergency

and no impending disaster. Pragmatic stop-gap measures were not ne- cessary and the direction for the Program assumed a course based on human values and rationality for the future.

A cost-benefit analysis was conducted to examine the financial

consequences of the conservation program. The analysis sought to

examine the effect of an eight percent reduction in annual projected

demand for a ten-year period. Results supported the adoption of a conservation program.

If the Program goal is reached, the need to construct another

source of supply for the Seattle area can be delayed for six to seven

years. Delay of construction will result in savings because costs

and rates will remain lower during the period of delay.

It was recognized that the size of the savings to be sought by

the Conservation Program may be limited by the feasibility of achieving significant conservation in the absence of an observable shortage.

In addition, the public may not perceive the need for the actions

suggested to them as a means to lower demand.

148
Reliance on developing a conservation ethic is an important part

of the Conservation Program. One project, which focuses on the con- servation education of school children (tomorrow's citizens), has a direct relationship to the awareness and adoption of water-saving ac- tions which will hopefully delay development of future sources of supply.

At the core of the Program are six voluntary cooperation projects

which are adaptations of actual projects or directions taken by other

national programs. These include the Denver Water District, the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, North Marin County Water District and the East Bay Municipal Utility District. Emphasis is on the

benefits to the customer in energy savings and lower water and sewer

costs, plus the preservation of a natural resource, rather than on

the spectre of brown lawns or empty reservoirs.

In addition to the voluntary cooperation projects there are three

public-use management projects: reservoir rehabilitation, leak detection and pipeline relining. These efforts are being implemented under system repairs and maintenance. The Conservation Office role is

to act as a liaison between the Department and the public, utilizing

the media. The water conservation benefits being realized by these

system improvements will be emphasized.

The voluntary cooperation projects were designed to target cus- tomers in the residential sector, which account for 52 percent of the

demand in the Seattle system. Specific water-saving devices and ac- tions have been identified which will aid in accomplishing projected

demand reductions. Identification of the most efficient means of

evaluating the projects is currently being developed. This will allow the relationship between project benefits and costs to be gradually learned in the ensuing months and years of the Program.

The Department exists within City government and the evaluation

methods to be used are being closely monitored by the City Council,

which expects timely accomplishment of the projected demand reduction. The Office is currently involved in assessing program evaluation in the light of staffing, methods and computer capability.

REFERENCES

1. City of Seattle, Ordinance 108773, January 15, 1980.

2. Denver Water Board, Water Now and In the Future , Denver, Colorado,

1978, 8 pp.

3.. Lattie, J.E. and Vossbrink, D.J. , "Water Conservation: Education

for the Public", Journal AWWA, November, 1977, pp. 568-573.

149
4. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (METRO), Resolution No. 2328,

August 21, 1975

5. North Marin County Water District, North Marin's Little Compendium

of Water-Saving Ideas , Novato, California, 1976, 206 pp.

6. River Basin Coordinating Committee - Water Resource Management

Study, Part I; Water Resources in King County , Prepared by

CH 2 M Hill, Robinson & Noble, Inc., O.J. Stober and J.B. Grayhill

of the University of Washington Fisheries Institute, Funded by

HUD, SWD and METRO, Seattle, Washington, December, 1974.

7. Seattle Water Department, Seattle Comprehensive Regional Water

Plan , Kramer, Chin and Mayo, Inc., Seattle, Washington, March,

1980, 340 pp.

8. Seattle Water Department, Seattle Metropolitan Water Supply Study , Kramer, Chin and Mayo, Inc., Seattle, Washington, December, 1977,

118 pp.

9. Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, Final and Comprehensive

Report: Cabin John Drainage Basin Water-Saving, Customer Education

and Appliance Test Program , Hyattsville, Maryland, Feb. 14, 1973.

150
WATER CONSERVATION IN ARIZONA: PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE

Delores M. Gillum, Municipal Program Specialist

Bureau of Water Quality Control

Arizona Department of Health Services

Phoenix, Arizona

ABSTRACT

In the desert regions of Arizona and much of the Southwest, water

is an extremely valuable commodity and should have the highest of

priorities. Water conservation and good quality water are the key to our future and the future of our Nation. Arizona is currently involved

in three water conservation programs. They are: 1) Beat the Peak and

Slow the Flow, 2) Flow Reduction, and 3) A New Groundwater Law.

BEAT THE PEAK AND SLOW THE FLOW

Beat the Peak was initiated in 1976 by the City of Tucson. It was

an urgently needed summer program to reduce outdoor water usage during

the periods of highest demands. Water treatment plants were at their

capacity and the peak flows had to be reduced until facilities were

expanded. Out of $145 million needed for capital improvements, $45 million could be postponed if a conservation program was implemented.

Beat the Peak Public Awareness Campaign requested Tucson residents to

only water every other day and never between 4:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m.

(This followed a recent 17 percent increase in water rates.) Public

response was terrific and Beat the Peak has resulted in a 25 percent

reduction in peak flows. The per capita water consumption dropped from

179 gallons per day to 139 gallons per day, which resulted in a total

water savings of 3.5 billion gallons. It was calculated that the average household saved $50.00 a year. All of this was accomplished

through voluntary efforts.

Pima County, like other areas in Arizona, is experiencing a rapid

depletion of groundwater. Slow the Flow was a year-round water conservation program developed in 1979 to supplement Beat the Peak. This was

sponsored by the Pima Association of Governments, the City of Tucson,

Pima County Wastewater Management and the League of Women Voters. Slow

the Flow was designed to decrease the ever-growing demand on groundwater tables and to reduce flows to the wastewater treatment plants.

Slow the Flow is a cooperative effort encouraging residents to reduce

their indoor water use by installing simple home water-saving devices,

such as faucet aerators and toilet dams, and by practicing simple water

conservation techniques. Nearly 100,000 free water saver kits have

been distributed countywide. An extensive public education program was

151
developed utilizing billboards, bus ads, public service announcements,

slide shows, exhibits, etc. The key to the success of Beat the Peak

and Slow the Flow has been communitywide cooperation.

FLOW REDUCTION

The Flow Reduction Program was developed by the State Water

Quality Control Council. The policy is simply this - in order to be

eligible for a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) grant to con- struct a wastewater facility, grantees must incorporate a wastewater

flow reduction program into the facility planning process.

A Technical Committee was appointed to design workable guidelines

for implementing the policy. The Committee was composed of city officials, attorneys, public works directors, government representatives,

plant operators, and engineers. The guidelines require a 10 percent

reduction in wastewater flows for municipalities over 10,000 in population. Municipalities with a population between 3,500 and 10,000 must

develop a plan, and if it is cost-effective, implement the program.

Each Flow Reduction Plan will cover a period of 20 years. To achieve

the 10 percent reduction, each municipality will choose the method best

suited to its needs. As an example, a community with a rapid growth

pattern may simply amend the building codes to require low-flow fixtures in all new construction. This method might not be effective for

a community with little or no growth. The flow reduction requirement

will only affect the communities within the State that will receive an EPA construction grant. This could, however, conceivably include up to

94 percent of the State's total population. This policy is expected to

generate capital savings by reducing the size of the wastewater treatment plants.

GROUNDWATER LAW

Two-thirds of all water used in Arizona is from groundwater

sources. The most progressive and comprehensive conservation effort

thus far is the State's newly passed Groundwater Management Act. This

legislative action was brought about by the realization that there was

a very serious and rapid depletion of the State's groundwater.

Depletion of groundwater in some areas of Arizona is approximately five

times faster than nature can replenish it. State legislators and citizens were aware that we could not continue withdrawing groundwater at

the present rate. Until passage of the Groundwater Management Act,

which created the Arizona Department of Water Resources, there was limited control of Arizona's groundwater. The Act designated four major

Active Management Areas. Each has an Area Director and Groundwater

Advisory Council. The Active Management Areas are located in Arizona's

most populated areas and where groundwater is a major source of water

supply. Additional Active Management Areas may be established when the

need arises. Each Active Management Area Director has the responsibility to determine the area's per capita, industrial, and agriculture

usage. During management planning, the uses will be compared to the

152
available surface and groundwater supplies, and their future impact on groundwater levels. These management plans will identify how much

groundwater can be used by each farm unit, each city, town or private

water company, and each independently supplied industry.

A major goal of the Groundwater Management Act is to balance

groundwater withdrawal with recharge in the urbanized Active Management

Areas by the year 2025. Methods which are to be used in management

planning are: 1) Conservation, 2) Augmentation of water supplies, and

3) Purchase and retirement of irrigated land.

The Act mandates that persons selling subdivided lands in an Active Management Area will be required to obtain a certificate assuring a 100-year water supply. Groundwater pumpers will be required to

maintain records and to file reports. The Department of Water Re- sources will have the authority to inspect property for compliance with

the Groundwater Law. Penalties for noncompliance can be civil or criminal

The Groundwater Management Act provides financial assistance to

increase water supply. The Act is designed to be fully coordinated

with the large federally constructed Central Arizona Project (CAP)

,

which will transport mainstream Colorado River water into the urbanized

areas of central and southern Arizona. The Central Arizona Project will

be completed in 1988 at a cost of over $2.0 billion. If by the year

2006, conservation methods do not balance groundwater withdrawal with

recharge in the Active Management Area, the Act authorizes the purchase

of Grandfathered Rights of irrigated agricultural lands for permanent

retirement. A Grandfathered Right is a person's right to withdraw

groundwater which he was legally withdrawing and using prior to the

establishment of the Active Management Area. Grandfathered Rights will

be established on a person's usage between January 1975 and January

1980. Persons who have been irrigating land during this time may continue to do so; however, no additional irrigated land will be allowed.

When land is sold the irrigation rights may also be sold.

All wells in Arizona must be registered. To drill a well or to

relocate an existing well requires either a Notice of Intent to Drill

or a permit from the Director of Water Resources. Well drillers are required to be licensed and well construction standards apply statewide. Wells pumping over 35 gallons per minute must install an approved

water-measuring device. Groundwater withdrawal fees will be established.

This has been a brief summary of a very complex law. The rules

and regulations are being developed at this time. The first management

plan is scheduled to be completed by 1983 and implemented by 1985. This

plan will cover a five-year period, from 1985 to 1990. Each following

management plan will cover a 10-year period (1990 to 2000, 2000 to

2010, etc.). I hope to have conveyed the fact that this is an enforceable law which will change the water use habits of Arizona's agriculture, industry, and residents.

153
Arizona has made substantial progress in water conservation. The

three programs are essential to the future of Arizona, for without an adequate water supply, desert living would be an impossibility. Conse

vation is the key to the future growth and general well-being of the

State, and it will require a concerted effort on the part of all

concerned

SOURCES CONSULTED

1. Ms. Carol Dorsey, Public Information Officer, Pima Association of

Governments, Pima County.

2. Mr. Don Maughan, Deputy Director, Department of Water Resources,

State of Arizona.

154
WATER CONSERVATION AS A LONG-RANGE SUPPLY OPTION FOR MASSACHUSETTS:

DISPELLING THE MYTHS AND FACING REALITY

Helen Strieder Linsky

Senior Planner

Wallace, Floyd, Ellenzweig, Moore, Inc.

Cambridge, Massachusetts

ABSTRACT

The Metropolitan District Commission (MDC) , serving Metropolitan Boston,

is considering conservation as a long-term water supply option. The

present MDC supply system has enormous storage capacity, however, and

the impression of abundant water supply creates a situation quite different from the public perception of imminent shortages which characterize the national experience with water conservation.

A conceptual framework must be developed for converting national

experience to realistic expectations for a long-range program in an area suffering from a myth of abundance but facing a gradual depletion

of supply.

In order to include water conservation in long-range water supply

plans we must scale down our expectations for potential demand reductions and be more realistic in our assessment of the costs and benefits

of various programs.

INTRODUCTION

The Metropolitan District Commission (MDC) delivers water to 44

communities serving almost 2.5 million people, mostly in Metropolitan

Boston but also in communities nearer to the supply source 80 miles

west of the city.

The principal supply source is Quabbin Reservoir. With a capacity

of 412 billion gallons, it is one of the largest reservoirs in the

world built specifically for domestic supply. The Commission also receives supply from the Ware River Watershed and the Wachusett Reservoir, a smaller facility (65 billion gallons) about 35 miles from

Boston. Safe yield estimates are presently under review but have

previously been set at approximately 300 million gallons per day

(mgd)

It is estimated that for the last 10 years MDC users have been

consuming water at an average annual rate which exceeds the estimated

safe yield of its supply by as much as 10 percent. Recently, the prob155
lems of chemical and sodium contamination of groundwater supplies in

neighboring communities have compounded the potential shortage. Now

the MDC communities must consider sharing their supply with those whose

supplies have been impacted by contamination incidents. The MDC is

considering at least 9 alternatives for closing the gap between supply and demand — water conservation is one of those options.

The MDC's first plan for the current shortage was a traditional

structural supply augmentation solution: divert part of the flood flows

of the Connecticut River and/or a tributary to supplement Quabbin's

supply. Wallace, Floyd, Ellenzweig, Moore, Inc. (WFEM) is presently

preparing an environmental impact study for this option and several

other structural solutions in addition to water conservation and watershed management.

It is apparent that the MDC's enormous storage capacity is at once

a blessing for the system's users, and a problem for the MDC in promoting water conservation. The size of the facility gives the deceptive impression of timeless abundance. The continual withdrawal of

average amounts in excess of the calculated safe yield from so large a storage facility results in a gradual drawdown of the reservoir during

years of average precipitation rather than the prospect of imminent

shortage. Even in a drought, serious shortage would be forestalled

several years by the storage capacity and the more immediate danger is

that of quality degradation.

Developing a conservation program for such a situation has been

first a matter of dispelling the myths and then the more difficult

matter of determining what kind of program is realistic in the absence

of a public perception of shortage or a crisis under which most con- servation programs have been successfully implemented. Specifically,

WFEM is trying to determine the degree of confidence which the MDC can place on estimates of anticipated demand reduction from a conservation

program given the lack of national experience with long-range conservation efforts.

The Northeast has for years believed in a myth of abundant water

supply. It enjoys a high rate of precipitation compared to many areas

of the nation where conservation is not such an unfamiliar concept.

Massachusetts averages 43" of precipitation each year at the watersheds

supplying the MDC system. Nevertheless, Massachusetts, not unlike most

states, has long faced regional shortages caused mostly by growth in

certain river basins outstripping the recharge capacity of its water

resources. The solution has always been to turn to another basin for

diversion of new supply. This was the way in which Quabbin Reservoir

was developed. As closer supplies serving the Metropolitan area

became inadequate, the more distant ones were made available.

Now, along with dispelling the myth of abundance, we must dispel

some myths about conservation before it can be adopted as a realistic

long-range demand management program.

156
The first myth is the definition of conservation. Based perhaps

on the actual experience with conservation during times of crisis, con- servation remains distastefully linked in the New England mind with the

discomforts and rigors of energy shortages. People with their thermostats set at an all-time low seem to find warm showers a helpful alternative (for those not perceiving the direct energy-cost link) . It does

not seem likely to be successful to ask more lifestyle changes of consumers already skeptical about shortages and feeling, as a region,

over-burdened by the energy crisis. It would, as the traditional definition of conservation suggests, be asking more of them or their beleaguered economic sector than is fair. The reality is that the kinds

of changes in user habits generally perceived to be required by "conservation" are not appropriate for long-range supply planning. In fact,

the kinds of techniques available are many and varied and are not likely

to cause hardship on the part of the consumer. For this study, conservation methods have been defined as "any action by the MDC, its user communities or their consumers which contributes to a reduction in the

quantity of water which must be collected and distributed by the Commission. "

The variety of conservation programs which fit this definition

also have accomplished a wide variety of results in communities where

they have been implemented. These experiences have documented that

potential water use reductions cannot be extrapolated from the theoretical water savings in individual households. A review of the theoretical literature describing the various conservation methods in com- parison with national experience clearly illustrates a gap between

theory and practice. Individual household, industry, or commercial

reductions can always be demonstrated in a controlled experiment. The

uncertainty is about actual water savings which might result from a community-wide program. Experience with program implementation

nationally report a variety of water use reduction outcomes ranging

from zero to over 60 percent. The differences are in part due to

varied baseline conditions: for example, the amount of discretionary

water use in the community. But, more importantly, the degree of success is dependent on the degree of private participation in the program.

The amount of consumer cooperation is a key variable.

A long-range program should not depend on private, voluntary action

for success in the absence of a public perception of crisis, but rather

on those measures most within administrative control. Methods requiring

the most intensive private participation or habit changes by users should

be saved for drought contingencies. Conservation measures therefore have

been organized for the study in four scenarios reflecting increasing reliance on private action and therefore decreasing the degree of confidence

in success, or at least requiring increasing levels of public action to

get compliance. These scenarios provide the conceptual framework for

estimating expected water savings from a range of actions with the potential for quite dramatically different impacts upon the general public.

We are developing information with which to estimate the water savings

157
which could be made from these programs for the study period (from the

present to the year 2020)

SCENARIO 1: PUBLIC ACTION

These are measures largely within the control of the MDC, local,

or state government. Included are those which reduce water wasted in

the distribution system or offer incentives to users to reduce consumption.

Programs

• System leakage detection and repair;

• Meter repair and replacement;

• Pressure reduction in areas where it is excessive;

• Pricing and rate structure changes to encourage

conservation;

• Regulatory options requiring water-saving fixtures

in new construction or renovations and enforcement

of same;

• Educational programs to develop water consciousness;

• Income tax credits for investments in water-saving

devices; and

• Low-flow device installation in all public sanitary

facilities.

Implications for Long-Range Planning

It is estimated that the largest amount of water from any of the

programs can be realized from the leakage detection and repair program.

Initial estimates of potentially recoverable leakage from the distribution systems of the 44 MDC water user communities range from six to

27 percent of the total flow, with the most probable value at 15 percent ( 1 ) . In order to narrow these estimates and help determine how

much is actually recoverable, we are developing a rough model of the

relationship between estimates of leakage and the actual drop in con- sumption in those systems having completed a formal detection and

repair program. In every case this actual net value is lower than the

estimates of potentially recoverable leakage.

This indicates that we must contend with the myth of total leakage

recovery and, at least in the Northeast, lower expectations for recovery

programs are warranted. National standards call for unavoidable leakage

to be reduced to about five percent of system flow. In the Northeast

158
this is probably not realistic since national standards are based on averages from all systems and partially a standard formula for leakage

per length of pipe. Densely populated areas like the majority of MDC

communities have a high density of service connections per mile of

pipe and experience in Boston indicates that 80 percent of undetected

leakage probably occurs in service connections. In addition, the systems are older than many in the nation and the degree of deferred maintenance has been costly. Furthermore, the heavy frosts experienced in

Boston mean yearly damage to the infrastructure making it more difficult

and costly to keep up with continuing leakage. The rate of leakage

continuing to occur between programs must be taken into account in

estimating annual benefits of leakage repair programs and long-range

expectations for reduced consumption.

We must also be realistic about the costs of leakage repair. Although it has been estimated that the direct costs of locating and

repairing a typical leak is about $2,000 in Boston, the indirect costs

of disruptions from torn-up streets, traffic control, administrative

costs, and public inconvenience are harder to estimate ( 1). Nevertheless, it can be shown that it is cost effective to repair any leak

which can be detected with conventional electro-acoustical equipment,

at the MDC communities' typical rate of about 50c per 1,000 gallons

(retail to customers) (1 ).

It is apparent that, as a political and policy matter as well as a judgment about good management, this first scenario will be required of

the MDC and its user communities as an adjunct to or, if it produces

enough water, an alternative to new structural supply augmentation

programs. We are recommending that estimates of water savings from

this scenario therefore will be used to reduce demand projections for

the planning period.

The study design proposes that the impact of three additional

scenarios reflecting increasing reliance on private action should be

assessed in comparison with structural supply options.

SCENARIO 2: COMBINED PUBLIC AND PRIVATE ACTION

This scenario is a device-oriented demand reduction program.

Programs

• Domestic leakage detection and repair;

• Residential device installation through mass distribution

of water-saving showerheads, toilet tank capacity reduction

devices and faucet aerators; and

• Tax credit incentives for devices to retrofit all other

(multi-unit residential, and non-domestic) use categories

financed by private investment, including:

159
a campaign directed at apartment owners and managers to

install water-saving devices in rental units;

an industrial, commercial, and institutional sanitary use device installation program; and

- a program to encourage, through tax incentives and technical assistance, recycling or reuse of industrial and

commercial cooling and process water.

Implications for Long-Range Planning

This scenario presents the real difficulty of estimating results

in the absence of experience with acceptance of such a program in a non- crisis atmosphere.

Much has been learned from national experiences, however, which

is useful for designing a program for a large regional system which

includes a variety of community types. We cannot transfer directly the

results of programs implemented elsewhere to an estimate of potential

reductions in the MDC service area because of varying baseline characteristics — climate, demography, per capita water use, housing stock,

etc. But experience documented in California and other areas does

lead to some useful conclusions about the factors affecting voluntary

installation rates in programs encouraging the use of residential

water-saving devices. The demographic makeup and existing water use habits of households can help to indicate where and by whom water-saving

devices are more likely to be installed.

Residential Use

All studies evaluating programs targeting residential use seem to

share three underlying assumptions: 1) the most important factor in the success of a residential water conservation program is the consumer's

willingness to cooperate; 2) most experience is with short-term intensive campaigns during periods of shortage and the perception of a problem or a crisis situation will generate more consumer cooperation (2)

(15) (20) ; and, 3) an educational program is a necessary adjunct to and

improves the success of all other programs (15) (23).

In New England, a program by the Department of Energy distributing

flow-reducing inserts for showerheads clearly demonstrated that devices

which also achieve energy savings (i.e., hot water reductions) are likely to be accepted and installed (23)

Other findings of residential device installation programs elsewhere which may be transferable to a long-range program in the Northeast

are that:

• Proper installation and follow-up maintenance in a device

installation program is very important (3) (15). Therefore,

160
use of better designed devices may achieve greater overall

reductions than less satisfactory devices which have greater

theoretical per unit savings but which cause problems (such as double flushing, removal of shower widgets)

• Devices are more likely to be installed by households with

higher income and educational levels which have higher initial

water use characteristics (12).

• Additional efforts in a long-term device installation program

are likely to continue to reach new audiences in lower

income/educational groups (4).

• Incentives for renters to install devices are less direct.

Therefore higher success in apartments may be achieved by

directly addressing the large unit owners or managers (27).

Non-Domestic Use

The potential for water savings from device installation to reduce

sanitary use in industrial, commercial, and institutional uses as well

as for recycling and reuse of industrial and commercial cooling and

process water is being estimated through a direct telephone survey of

300 large users in the district. An initial finding is that many con- servation steps have already been taken by these firms in response to

energy costs and the pretreatment requirements of the Clean Water Act.

Here we may be contradicting some long-held views of the price elasticity of

demand for water. On the one hand is a popular view that water prices

should reflect the true cost of service and that raised prices would

reduce use. On the other hand is the weight of evidence from popular

experience and studies indicating a very low price elasticity for residential water demand. The reality lies somewhere between these two

shibboleths. Indoor residential use probably is not responsive to

limited price changes alone but in combination with rate structuring, pricing

is an essential element in an overall conservation program.

Previous studies have found that major non-domestic users are more

responsive to price than residential users. In addition we are finding

that the true cost of water is comprised of not only the direct price

but also energy and sewer charges. New elasticity studies may be necessary to evaluate these real costs. A direct assessment of how much

conservation activity has already been accomplished as well as the

configuration of the demand characteristics of these users will result

from the direct survey of major users. This information will lead to a realistic estimate of remaining potential for cutting demand in this

sector.

Action to reduce energy use may be having an additional impact on

indoor domestic water use. New water-using fixtures such as dishwashers and washing machines have energy-saving requirements which

reduce hot water use. Estimates of replacement rates for these and

161
other fixtures may indicate a major

regardless of further public action

decrease in domestic water

for water conservation.

use

SCENARIO 3: MAJOR PRIVATE AND PUBLIC INVESTMENT IN USE OF NON-POTABLE

SOURCES

Another popular conception of water conservation is that it does

not require major capital investment. But under our definition, sce- nario three would include the development of dual systems for delivery of non-potable water from local sources or treated municipal

effluent to selected large users.

Programs

• Reuse of treated wastewater effluent by selected large

non-domestic users for cooling or process use;

• Reuse of treated wastewater effluent for aquifer recharge;

and/ or

• Use of non-potable groundwater sources by local non-domestic

users for cooling or process use.

Implications for Long-Range Planning

There are many examples from other areas of the country where lowquality water is used by industry or for aquifer recharge (16) . Unlike

areas where water is much scarcer and more expensive, however, the

costs of dual piping involved in this option in combination with the

treatment costs for delivering water to a few major users may mean that

this will not prove to be a cost-effective alternative in New England.

Information from the non-domestic user survey will indicate where

a major user might be able to accept some amount of non-potable water

for cooling or process use. This data will be correlated with local

groundwater surveys to be conducted in the next phase of the study.

If a match is indicated, a feasibility study will be done to evaluate

the costs and benefits of this type of supply option.

SCENARIO 4: PRIVATE USER HABIT CHANGES

Program

Scenario 4 is a drought contingency program. It includes all the

traditional measures ranging from voluntary outside use restrictions

to rationing.

Implications for Long-Range Planning

The estimates of reductions in use under this scenario will more

nearly approximate the traditional conservation experiences in other

areas of the country. The difficult part will be to integrate this

162
scenario in a long-range conservation program. How often can such re- strictions be called for? Can a supplier accept a higher risk of system failure and depend on drought contingency plans for the long-term?

Here some additional myths come into play. What is a successful

program? The dramatic cutbacks experienced under drought conditions

do not represent the measure of success for a long-range conservation

program. The true measure is cost-effectiveness in comparison with

unit costs of supply augmentation proposals.

CONCLUSIONS

Two additional conceptions about water conservation are unrealistic

for long-range planning. They are that programs must make dramatic

percentage savings to be successful and that water conservation is

cheap. Including the cost of shortage to the consumers, estimates of

the unit cost of the water saved in the California drought ranged from

$89 per acre-foot in the East Bay Municipal Utility District to $308

per acre-foot in Marin County (20) . In each case conservation was half

as expensive as the supply augmentation measures used but each case benefited from the massive media coverage, since the program was implemented during a drought crisis. Here is the real issue in trying to

estimate the costs and benefits of trying to get consumer cooperation.

It is possible that the MDC can substitute paid or public service

advertising for the free media which encourage cooperation during a drought. After all, Madison Avenue has been persuading consumers for

years to buy things which are far less crucial to their self-interest

than water conservation. It is well known, however, that such suc- cessful advertising programs are not cheap. And it is unlikely that

taxpayers will be persuaded to pay for being persuaded to do things

they do not wish to do.

We have not yet arrived at a level of detail that will enable us

to estimate a unit cost for a long-range water conservation program.

And even if the direct costs are great they must be weighed against

the indirect environmental and energy costs of augmentation alternatives

Probably the most likely estimates will be related to level of effort.

It cannot be assumed that long-range conservation programs can be

achieved through voluntary efforts of residents persuaded by free

media coverage. Demand management under these circumstances will have

substantial program costs and the level of expenditure will probably

relate directly to the water savings achieved.

We have also found that converting national experience with water

conservation during drought crises to realistic expectations for such

programs as part of long-range water supply plans in the Northeast

requires dispelling some additional myths about water conservation:

• Appropriate programs for a long-range water supply plan are different from those for a drought contingency. The key

variable is consumer participation. Greater reliance must be

163
placed on programs requiring less consumer cooperation and

which are more in the control of the public sector.

• Water conservation programs for long-range supply are likely

to be more expensive, both because they are more capital and

labor intensive (such as leakage repair) and because they will

not have the free media coverage of a crisis situation.

• The success of a long-range water conservation program should

not be measured alone in terms of total percentage reductions

but rather in terms of unit costs for water conserved against

unit costs of alternative supply augmentation options.

Overall, it appears that for long-range water supply planning to

include water conservation we must scale down our expectations of

inexpensive use reductions and be more realistic in our planning. On

a long-range basis, conservation programs are not free and probably

will produce significant but not dramatic reductions in use.

From the standpoint of a professional effort to assess the potential results of a program with some degree of confidence, we must be

more rigorous in our analysis of the consequences of water conservation

efforts and not rely on the traditional mythology. However, it is

probable that achievement is likely to be related to the degree of

effort, and results are not predetermined by program selection but by

levels of public investment in the program. As practitioners, or as consultants employed by practitioners, it is apparent that we need to

detail the "how to" of the water conservation options and advise immediate implementation. Conservation programs are tending to be

available sooner, freer of ancillary political and environmental costs,

and are generally producing tangible benefits in lieu of supply augmentation options.

REFERENCES

1. Bechtel, Inc. Draft Technical Memorandum: Preliminary Evaluation

of Leakage and Unmetered Water . Submitted to the Metropolitan

District Commission as part of the Northfield Environmental

Impact Study, Phase I, August, 1980.

2. Bruvold, William H. "Residential Water Conservation: Policy Lessons

from the California Drought." Public Affairs Report . University

of California, Berkeley, Institute of Governmental Studies. December, 1978.

3. California Department of Water Resources. A Follow-Up Survey of

Households Which Participated in the San Diego Pilot Water Conservation Program . Prepared by Copley International Corporation.

October, 1978.

4. California Department of Water Resources. A General Public Survey

164
to Evaluate the Santa Barbara Water Conservation Program . Prepared

by Field Research Corporation. August, 1980.

5. California Department of Water Resources. A Pilot Water Conservation Program . Prepared by Field Research Corporation. August, 1980.

6. California Department of Water Resources. 22 Months Later, The Oak

Park Retrofit Program, Still A Success . Southern District Report.

September, 1979.

7. Elder, Jacqueline. State-of-the-Art Summary of Incentives for Residential Water Conservation . Prepared by National Bureau of Standards, Center for Building Technology for the Department of Housing

and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research.

Washington, D.C. October, 1980.

8. Linsky, Helen Strieder. Water Conservation Recommendations for the

Metropolitan District Commission . Boston, Massachusetts. 1980.

9. Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs. Massachusetts Water Supply Policy Statement . Prepared by Wallace, Floyd,

Ellenzweig, Moore, Inc. Cambridge, Massachusetts. 1978.

10. Milne, Murray. Residential Water Conservation . Davis, California.

California Water Resources Center, University of California. Report

#35. 1976.

11. Milne, Murray. Residential Water Re-Use . Davis, California. California Water Resources Center, University of California. Report

#46. 1979.

12. Morgan, W. Douglas and Peter Pelosi. "The Effect of Water Conservation Kits on Water Use." Journal of the American Water Works Association . March, 1980. 131-3.

13. Nelson, John Olaf. Flow Reduction by Sensible Water Conservation,

paper from North Marin County Water District. Novato, California.

September, 1980.

14. New England River Basins Commission. Before the Well Runs Dry; A

Handbook for Designing a Local Water Conservation Plan . Boston,

Massachusetts. October, 1980.

15. New England River Basins Commission. Before the Well Runs Dry:

Literature, Survey, and Analysis of Water Conservation . Boston,

Massachusetts. July, 1980.

16. Pratt, Janice and Warren Litsky. The Attitudes of Industry and Public Officials on Industrial Use of Reclaimed Municipal Wastewater

Effluent in Massachusetts . Water Resources Research Center, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts. Publication No.

106. August, 1979.

165
17. Seattle Water Department. Seattle Comprehensive Regional Water Plan . (COMPLAN) . Vol. XI: Summary ; Vol. II-C: Water Conservation Program.

March, 1980.

18. Sharpe, William E. "Water Conservation Devices for New or Existing

Dwellings." Journal of the American Water Works Association . 73:3,

(March, 1981) 144-149.

19. Sharpe, William E. and Peter W. Fletcher. The Impact of Water Saving

Device Installation Programs on Resource Conservation . University

Park, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania State University, Institute for

Research in Land and Water Resources. Publication #98. 1977.

20. Teknekron, Inc. Urban Drought in San Francisco Bay Area: At Study of

Institutional and Social Resiliency . Funded by a grant from the

National Science Foundation. Directorate for Applied Science and

Research. 1978.

21. Turnovsky, Stephen. "The Demand for Water: Some Empirical Evidence

on Consumer Response to a Commodity Uncertain in Supply." Water

Resources Research. 5:2 (1969) 350-360.

22. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources. The

Role of Conservation in Water Supply Planning . Contract Report 79-2.

Southern Illinois University. 1979.

23. U.S. Department of Energy. The Low Cost/No Cost Energy Conservation

Program in New England. An Evaluation . Prepared by Booz, Allen,

and Hamilton. Bethesda, Maryland. July, 1980.

24. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Effects of Water Conservation

Induced Wastewater Flow Reduction. A Perspective . By Jimmy S. Koyasako. California Department of Water Resources. August, 1980.

25. Wallace, Floyd, Ellenzweig, Moore, Inc. Technical Memorandum: Evalu- ation of Information to Assess the Demand Management Alternative,

Northfield EIR . August, 1980.

26. Wesely, Edwin F., Jr. Easy Ways to Save Water Money and Energy at

Home . Potomac River and Trails Council. Frederick, Maryland. 1980.

27. Wilborn, David. Metropolitan Water Saving Inc. Telephone Interview.

November 4, 1980.

166
Education/Information: Past

Experiences and Current Plans

WATER CONSERVATION IN RENTAL APARTMENT COMPLEXES BY MEANS

OF CONTROLLED INSTALLATION OF WATERSAVING DEVICES

Albert Frank

ENHANCED WATER EDUCATION VERSUS STATUS QUO ET AL

Jack A. Barnett

INFORMATION AND CONSUMER ADOPTION OF WATER CONSERVATION

MEASURES

Duane D. Baumann

WATER CONSERVATION IN RENTAL APARTMENT COMPLEXES BY MEANS OF

CONTROLLED INSTALLATION OF WATERSAVING DEVICES

Albert Frank, Planner

Howard County, Maryland, Department of Public Works

Ellicott City, Maryland

ABSTRACT

Howard County, Maryland, in common with many other local jurisdictions, is experiencing rapid growth of its population and housing

stock. As a result, it is expected that demand for water and sewer service will continue to increase, and that expansion of service into new areas will be necessary. In order to satisfy these needs, major

new investment will be required. A primary strategy designed to

offset the impact of this trend is reduction of per capita water

use and waste flow.

The program which has been developed to implement the strategy

will initially focus the County's efforts (to reduce water use and

waste flow) on rental apartment complexes. It will be accomplished

by employing a relatively unique concept: co-funded, controlled

installation of watersaving devices concurrent with leak detection,

repair, and preventive maintenance.

Howard County proposes that the development of a practical con- servation program, based on controlled use of resources and cor- rective maintenance, will result in significant reductions of water

(and energy) costs relative to investment, will enhance the stateof-the-art, and will provide a valuable case study for use by other

jurisdictions

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the program is to reduce water use and waste

flow in rental apartment complexes which represent 25 percent of

Howard County's residences. The goal is to accomplish a 20 percent

reduction by means of co-funded, controlled installation of watersaving devices concurrent with leak detection and repair. In order

to insure continuity of the savings achieved by the program, preventive maintenance programs (funded by a portion of the savings

which accrue to apartment complex managements) will be developed.

In addition, the program will add to the state-of-the-art by

169
demonstrating the efficacy of cooperative programs which enable

management to reduce operating costs with minimal investments and,

at the same time, enable local government to offset the need for

expansion of water and sewer service capacity. It is expected that

the development of such a program, with its emphasis on a practical,

cost-reduction approach to the problem, will elicit positive cooperation from management, thus increasing the likelihood of success.

The results of the program will provide valuable case study data for

other jurisdictions.

In the future, Howard County expects to propose that the concepts developed by the program be tested by application to developments of townhouses, condominium apartments, and neighborhoods of

single-family dwellings.

METHODOLOGY

In the experience of many jurisdictions, conservation programs

are conceived and implemented in response to drought emergencies.

Under such conditions, little or no time is available for planning

or definition of suitable program target groups. Mass distribution

of watersaving devices, without means for verification of installation, exposes these programs to waste and reduced effectiveness.

Without focus, and with less than sufficient emphasis on concurrent

leak detection and repair, such programs are only temporarily

effective because they can exercise emergency mandates to impose

price penalties and other punitive measures. Other programs,

developed during periods of normal supply, have emphasized the

educational and attitudinal aspects of the conservation effort which,

while important, cannot alone be expected to be completely effective

without the stimulus of emergency conditions.

The co-funded controlled installation approach to water con- servation in rental apartment complexes is considered to be unique

in several respects:

1. Simple, inexpensive watersaving devices will be purchased

by the County and distributed, free of charge, by means

of the installation procedure .

2 . Rental Apartment managements will be required to co-fund

the program by paying for installation of the devices,

for leak repairs, and for preventive maintenance.

3 . Installation will be accomplished only by contractors who

are paid on a per-unit basis by the rental apartment

managements. Installation will be monitored by the program

administrator. On-site apartment maintenance personnel

will not be required to install devices, since it is

assumed that they have other duties, but they will be made

fully aware of the procedures for installation and the

170
3. operation of the devices. Devices will not be distributed

directly to apartment residents, but they will be notified,

prior to installation, that the management intends to

reduce water use.

4. Concurrent with installation in each apartment unit, the

installer will perform a leak check and provide the management of the apartment complex and the program administrator

with written reports detailing repairs which are required.

It will be the responsibility of the program administrator

to review repair requirements with the management of the

apartment complex in order to expedite completion of the

repairs

5. Base data regarding per-unit consumption of water in each

apartment complex will be prepared by the program administrator with the assistance of the water-billing section

of the Office of Finance. Follow-up data, developed from

future water bills or meter readings, as required, will be

used to measure the results of the program. Reports of this

activity will be made available to the apartment complex

management .

6. Upon completion of installation and repair procedures and

initial verification of savings, the program administrator

will meet with the apartment complex management to develop

plans for ongoing preventive maintenance .

7. A technology transfer report will be prepared by the program

administrator for distribution to interested jurisdictions.

RELEVANCY

The events of the summer of 1980 underscore the importance

of water conservation, and the value of programs which are in place

before the onset of drought conditions. Water supplies, already

threatened by Weather Service predictions of below-average rainfall,

are further strained by increasing residential and manufacturing

demand. Howard County suggests that the proposed program goes

directly to the issue of water conservation by focusing on flow re- duction and waste, requiring participation but providing service,

and by enthusiastically encouraging rewards for conservation.

The hypothesis to be tested is whether or not controlled

installation of watersaving devices coupled with reduction of needless waste (leakage) and ongoing preventive maintenance is an effective approach to conservation in rental apartment complexes, and by

inference, other multi-family unit residential areas, including townhouse and condominium developments and neighborhoods of singlefamily homes.

171

ENHANCED WATER EDUCATION VERSUS STATUS QUO ET AL.

Jack A. Barnett

Secretary-Treasurer and Member of the Board of Trustees

Water & Man, Inc.

Salt Lake City, Utah

ABSTRACT

Water resource authorities, appointed by the governors of the

twelve western states, determined six years ago that there was a significant need for better water education. These officials, members

of the Western States Water Council, felt it was important for the

public to be well informed on water resource issues as the nation moves

ahead and faces many difficult water resource decisions. They

determined that the Western States Water Council was not the appropriate

vehicle for the preparation of these water education programs, and

that the need for water education was not limited to the western United

States. The Council instructed that a non-profit water education

corporation be formed to pursue these most worthwhile educational

efforts

Water & Man, Inc. is the new non-profit corporation fostered

by the Council, and has been growing from a very humble beginning six

years ago, through various stages of support, solicitation, fundraising,

and the creation of water education materials. The Trustees of Water

& Man have determined that their first effort would be to prepare and

disseminate quality water education materials to be used in the public

schools of the nation in grades K-12. Initial materials have been

prepared and they are currently being disseminated to participating

states

THE BEGINNING

It has been said that we should have no small dreams for they fail

to stir the imagination of man. Six years ago, when I first was approached by a representative of the Governor of the State of Idaho

concerning a potential water education program, I was caught up in

a dream, and I was almost overwhelmed by the scope of it. The thesis

of the concern was that Americans are poorly informed about their water

resources and that students in the schools of this nation are taught

limited concepts which are prejudiced to various special interest

points of view. The dream said, let's do something about it .

173
The dream was first presented to the Western States Water Council,

composed of gubernatorial appointees from twelve western states

including: Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana* Nevada,

New Mexico, Oregon, Texas, and Wyoming. Appointees debated the merits

of the State of Idaho proposal and found it to be meritorious. They

concluded, however, that the Western States Water Council was created

by the western governors to deal primarily in water politics; water

education was not their specific mission. They further concluded that

if the water education effort was successful, the size of the staff

and the magnitude of the effort would far exceed the ongoing efforts

of the Western States Water Council.

The Council contributed some funds to the effort and instructed

that a non-profit water education corporation be formed. Participation

in the corporation was to be solicited from a broad base of public

interest groups, and the materials created would be objective and

balanced

Water & Man, Inc. is the result of the initial Western States

Water Council effort. Funds were contributed not only by the Western

States Water Council, but by the National Water Resources Association,

the American Farm Bureau, Morrison-Knudsen Company, and International

Engineering. These funds were used to assist a small grant from the

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, in making an analysis of the need for

water education and to create some sample water education materials.

A contract was entered into with Energy and Man's Environment, a non- profit energy education corporation, and some preliminary investigation

was completed. Some materials were prepared and reports issued.

Trustees of Water & Man (see Appendix I) concluded that they would

initially focus on the preparation ot classroom materials for grades

kindergarten through twelve. With the concepts refined, the Trustees

turned to a plan of implementation. This was a difficult time as there was a significant need for the creation of sample materials, but a dirth of funds to complete the creation of such materials. The question

was, "Which comes first, the duck, the duckling, or the egg?" We

concluded that the egg must come first.

With a great deal of donated labor from the many water resource

specialists and educators who expressed an interest in this water

education effort, and the limited funds provided by the participants,

the egg was fertilized and an embryo was developed. The initial reports

were published and it became a time for show and tell.

The U.S. Water Resources Council and the U.S. Office of Water

Research and Technology were intrigued by what they saw. They entered

into a contract and provided grant monies to Water & Man for a nationwide survey of ongoing water education programs. The survey also

inquired regarding the need for water education materials as seen by

water resource officials in all regions of the nation. The results

174
of the survey revealed that no comprehensive water education program

was available in any of the fifty states. It was further revealed

that there was nationwide interest in securing water education

materials

Many water education subject areas were identified. It was determined that water conservation should be a part of all water

education subject areas. The contract with the Water Resources

Council/Office of Water Research and Technology also called for the

preparation of framework materials that would outline the approach

that should be undertaken and the materials that would be needed for

a comprehensive water education program.

EMERGENCE FROM THE EGG

With the completion of these studies and reports, the duckling

had emerged from the egg. It was the time to show and tell again.

Eight states decided to enter into contracts with Water & Man for the

creation of water education materials. These states include: Arizona,

Nevada, Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, Oklahoma, Texas, and Idaho. Much

time was spent in the preparation and revision of a conceptual

framework, the creation of activity guides for three grade levels,

the preparation of lesson plans, and the creation of supportive

materials, such as a bibliography, glossary, and a poster. These

materials were created by water resource specialists and educators

as they were brought together in various workshops for creation and

review purposes. The states contracted not only for the creation of

the materials, but for printing them in a form that would be attractive

and usable in the classroom.

THE BIRD SHOWS ITS FEATHERS

Six publications have now been printed and are available from Water

& Man. Materials are listed as Appendix II of this discussion. They

can be purchased by contacting Water & Man, whose address is 220 South

200 East, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111, or by calling 801-355-4458. The

States of Arizona, Wyoming, Nevada and Texas have contracted for

workshops that will allow specialists in water education to introduce

water education materials to the classroom teachers. Water & Man has

determined that this is a most important part of the process and

strongly encourages teachers to participate in workshops before

purchasing and utilizing the water education materials.

Lesson plans have been created and are available for distribution

as individual lessons. The lesson plan is a step-by-step procedure

for teachers to use in presenting a particular concept and objective

of water education. Lesson plans cover a wide variety of subject areas

and are available for kindergarten through twelfth grade.

175
Water & Man is now busily engaged in contacting additional

states, school districts, and water resource agencies and organizations

in search of further opportunities to provide water education materials

to the students of this nation.

176
APPENDIX I

Ray Rigby, Attorney

P.O. Box 250

Rexburg, Idaho 83440

Edward H. Southwick

NWRA

1483 Wall Avenue

Ogden, Utah 84404

Jack A. Barnett

Executive Director

Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum

220 South 200 East

Salt Lake City, Utah 84111

Robert B. Christensen

Vice President

International Engineering Company, Inc.

180 Howard Street

San Francisco, CA 94105

James E. Sexson, Director

Water Resources Department

555 13th St. , N.E.

Salem, Oregon 97310

Cecil Miller, Jr.

President

Arizona Farm Bureau

2618 So. 21st Street

Phoenix, Arizona 85034

Edward P. Ortleb

Facilitator

Saint Louis Public Schools

721 Pendleton at Enright Avenue

St. Louis, Missouri 63108

APPENDIX II

"A Conceptual Framework for Water Education"

"Water Education Activity Guide", K-4 , 5-8, and 9-12

"Water Jargon"

"Water Education Bibliography/Directory"

water poster

set of twenty-four lesson plans for grades K-4, 5-8, and 9-12

177

INFORMATION AND CONSUMER ADOPTION OF WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES

Duane D. Baumann

Department of Geography

Southern Illinois University

Carbondale, Illinois

ABSTRACT

Educational campaigns concerning a specific issue are likely to

fail unless they are based upon specific information about the recipients.

There is some experience that some consumers respond to pleas for re- ducing water use during periods of shortage. However, during nondrought periods, more specific information is needed in order to design

an effective water conservation program: it simply is not sufficient

to assume that knowledge of water conservation measures will result in

adoption.

INTRODUCTION

The fact that a person is aware of the opportunities to conserve

water is no guarantee that he or she will act upon that information,

except under conditions of a serious drought. Little is known about the

effectiveness of water conservation measures, and even less is known

about the changes required to elicit the public to adopt water conservation measures during times when drought is not present.

The purpose of this paper is to briefly review what is known about

the effects of public education programs on water conservation, con- servation being the beneficial reduction in water use and/or water

losses. The potential dividends to a better understanding of the public

response to water conservation educational efforts are twofold: (1) to

better predict the extent of public acceptance of conservation measures

in order to obtain more precise estimates of effectiveness in water

supply planning; and (2) to promote efficiency in water use.

How Effective Are Conservation Measures?

It is not uncommon to read about enormous reductions in water use

for a specific community attributed to conservation. For example, a study in Rhode Island noted that municipal water use can be reduced

during periods of shortage by 35 percent without drastically changing

life styles (1).

179
How useful are such estimates in assessing the role of conservation

in urban water resource planning? As will be pointed out, such estimates

are of little value and frequently misleading.

Based upon a review of the literature, the major conclusion about

the effectiveness of water conservation measures is that comparatively

little is known. Concerning information about the probable adoption of

voluntary conservation measures, even less is known.

There are numerous reports that provide estimates of expected re- duction in water use, but there is marked variability among such estimates. For example, estimates on reduction of water use for shallow

trap-flush toilets range from 3.9 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) to

7.5 gpcd, and for dual-flush toilets the range is from 4.4 gpcd to 15.5

gpcd.

There are two major reasons for the variation in estimates of the

effects of specific water saving strategies. First, many estimates are applicable only for the conditions at the sites from which they were

derived. Second, the studies to estimate effectiveness may be poorly

designed, leading to erroneous conclusions.

The environmental and socio-economic conditions of each community

in which water use reducing strategies are evaluated have a profound

effect on the extent of adoption and consequently on the degree of

effectiveness. Clearly, during a prolonged drought residents are more

likely to employ water reducing devices than during average or wet

years; hence, estimates on effectiveness measured during drought cannot

be assumed to be applicable during nondrought years. However, most of

the estimates of effectiveness have been derived during periods of

drought. This is particularly true today concerning the recent

California drought. In addition to drought, average weather (climate)

varies from place to place and is an important determinant in water use

and therefore on the effectiveness of water conservation measures.

Similarly, the socio-economic conditions with which each community influences the effectiveness of water conservation vary markedly. Is the

community primarily residential or is there significant industrial and

commercial water use? What is the price of water? What is the income

of the customers? What is the lawn size of the residential customers?

In order to calculate more precise estimates of water use reduction,

community water use must be disaggregated and relevant information on the characteristics of each user class must be obtained to derive more

precise estimates of effectiveness.

A related problem is that estimates on the effectiveness of

specific conservation measures are site specific. Statements that a given conservation measure will result in a savings of 35 percent of

total water use contain little information regarding effectiveness of

specific measures or proposals. Water conservation measures are frequently directed to specific water uses or they may affect different

groups of water users differently; e.g., higher prices result in

180
different responses from different types of users. Since no two

communities have exactly the same mix of water uses, and many communities

differ markedly from others, stating effectiveness in aggregate terms

has the effect of concealing the actual water use change by the affected

group of users. The aggregate change in reduction of water use is re- levant only to the community for which it was originally calculated; it

cannot support estimates for another community with a different water

use structure.

The second fundamental reason for the variability of estimates in

the published literature stems from the quality of the studies. One

must be alerted to several problems when evaluating the credibility of

specific estimates of effectiveness. First, many estimates are nothing

more than a priori judgments; they are not derived from carefully designed empirical studies. For example, low-flush toilets are estimated

to reduce water use per flush from 5 to 6 gallons to 3.5 gallons; however, reduction in actual water use may not be as great as one might

expect because of multiple flushes! Inspection of chapter two in The

Role of Conservation in Water Supply Planning provides additional

examples in the variation of estimates (2).

Second, empirical studies of the effectiveness of conservation

measures are few and may be poorly designed and/or pertain solely to

drought conditions. The most common problem is simply stated: the re- search design and analysis is based upon a before and after condition,

not a with or without condition. It is not uncommon to read about the

great reduction in water use during the two years following a communitywide education program to save water. However, seldom are the other

factors that affect water use during the same period of time analyzed,

such as weather conditions or price. For example, a widely cited study

of an experimental installation of devices to reduce flushing volumes

in water closets has been reviewed in an unpublished paper by Manning

(1979) (3). Based on eleven years of data, Sharpe and Fletcher

claimed an average reduction in water use of 97 gallons per household per

day. Manning noted that available estimates of the effectiveness of

the devices used indicate potential savings of about 30 percent of the

water used for flushing, which is approximately 40 to 45 percent of

total household water use, giving a maximum reduction of only about 39

gallons per day—about two-fifths of the effectiveness suggested in the

earlier study. Furthermore, after accounting for the effects of

certain systematic errors in the data, changes in weather conditions,

and near doubling of real price, Manning estimated the effectiveness of

the devices at no more than 30 gallons per household per day!

Finally, there is little or no information about the factors

affecting consumer adoption of voluntary water conservation measures. Estimates on the effects of educational campaigns are usually based

upon communities under crisis conditions, namely drought. Clearly,

additional research is required to determine the factors that affect consumer adoption of water conservation measures during noncrisis situations. Such information is essential in estimating the effects of

181
proposed measures and in the formulation of a cost-effective educational

campaign.

Educational Campaigns to Promote Water Conservation *

Sound planning and management of water supply facilities, fully incorporating water conservation, requires the ability to predict the

effectiveness and the costs of various water conservation programs- In

particular, it must be possible to identify the factors which affect the

adoption or non-adoption of various water conservation measures by the consumers. Insight must be gained into the benefits and costs of water

conservation measures, as perceived by the individual consumer, in order

to understand the incentives that various conservation programs might

offer. Sharpe notes that many constraints exist concerning the adoption

of conservation measures and there is available little data. As cited

in the U.S. Office of Water Resources and Technology, Water Resources

Conservation Research Program Priorities , " very little is known

about what changes will be necessary to convince the various com- ponents of our society of the need for water conservation."

In a recent review of mass media campaigns, the conclusion was

reached that is directly relevant: educational campaigns concerning a specific issue are likely to fail unless they are based upon specific

information about the recipients. We have some evidence that some con- sumers respond to pleas for reducing water during periods of stress

(drought), but more specific information is needed in order to design

an effective water conservation program during the time when shortages

do not appear imminent. It simply is not sufficient to assume that

awareness of water conservation measures will result in adoption or implementation.

A few studies claim success in the reduction of water use because

of an educational campaign. However, the findings must be approached

with caution for the reasons cited in the previous section. Brigham (4)

emphasizes that "education is the key to success in water saving." The

program instigated by the Washington Suburban and Sanitary Commission

(WSSC) is purported to be highly effective, as Brigham reports reductions in wastewater flow ranging from 6.1 to 17.9 percent over a twoyear period. Larkin also reports reductions of 38 percent in the East

Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) during the intensive conservation

campaign but which occurred ruring the recent drought (5)

In both of these educational efforts (WSSC and EBMUD) a variety of

techniques were employed: television and radio announcements, leaflets,

information centers. It is important to note, however, that in neither

of these examples was the educational campaign the sole effort made to

reduce water use. The WSSC has implemented plumbing code restrictions

aimed at reducing water usage and the EBMUD had launched a multi-pronged

attack on demand reduction by changing to a new rate structure. Thus,

the effect that an educational campaign exerts in and of itself is still

182
unknown.

It is only with the past decade that specific studies have begun

to investigate a wider variety of variables drawn from the fields of

economics, demography, sociology and psychology (6-13)

Linaweaver and his associates conducted a study in the city of

Baltimore (14). The principal factors found to affect annual residential use were the number of homes in a given residential area, the

economic level of the consumer, the climate, and whether the consumers

were on a metered or a fixed rate schedule. By utilizing disaggregate

data from Santa Barbara County, Morgan (15) demonstrates "an economics of

scale with respect to household size holding other variables constant."

In transforming his equations to a per capita form, Morgan (16) claims,

"It is easily seen that as household size increases, water use per

person declines approaching the asymptotic value of 17.8 hundred cubic

feet per year." He summarizes the exercise by stating that the

number of persons per dwelling is important and that, "area projections

based on Howe and Linaweaver' s residential domestic demand model could

lead to biased per capita use figures unless the people per dwelling

unit is similar to their sample mean."

While Dunn and Larson also found the factor of family size to be a significant factor in household water demand, they found that it was

the occupation of the household head that had the highest correlation

with water use (17). The authors go on to note that individual domestic

water use patterns differ "but slightly from the use patterns of the

socio-economic group of which they are a part."

A study in Boulder, Colorado by Hanke found that as the price of

water increased, water demand fell (18). A change from a flat rate to

metering substantially reduced the average residential water use by

approximately 36 percent and this reduced consumption rate did not tend

back towards its original level. Personal interviews of Boulder residents indicated that 51 percent of those samples adopted conservation

practices with the advent of metering and had further intensified those

practices; only 1.7 percent reported a drop in conservation practices

after the first year (19).

Watkins employed a factor analysis in conjunction with a Guttman

attitude scale to assess both the relationships between water consumption in residential areas with socio-economic variables and with water

conservation attitudes (20). Using Homestead and West Palm Beach,

Florida, as the study area, Watkins reports that the income of the

family head and the number of appliances in the home were the most

important variables related to water use. He claims that the number of

persons per household is not important, a finding that contrasts

sharply with previously cited studies. Measuring three attitudinal

factors: (1) the perception of water as an economic commodity, (2) the

183
willingness to conserve, and (3) the awareness of water conservation as

a social issue, Watkins found them to be significantly related to the

education and income level of the family head.

A study of residents in Albuquerque, New Mexico by Lupsha, Schlegel

and Anderson demonstrated a positive relationship between water use and

income, home value, and level of education. These relationships interacted with conservation attitudes (21). Thus, the authors state:

"One sees that per capita use at every income level is significantly

lower if one has what we have classified as water conservation attitude.

We also note that this has a particularly strong effect on use at the

higher income and demand levels." They suggest that, "Attitudes can indeed have an effect on use...," but state that,

"Overall, it would appear that the impact of attitudes on demand is a relatively weak and minor aspect of any water

use equation. While attitudes do have an impact, it is

small and tends to reflect self interest, which probably

has stronger surrogates in economic and appliance variables

and the micro-environmental factors which are probably

better tested by the landscape and sprinkling practice

variables .

In their survey of eastern U.S. water managers and customers,

Abbott, Cook and Sleight have found that voluntary conservation measures

are as effective as compulsory ones and that 75 percent of their re- spondents preferred metered to flat rates (22). They concluded that

most people are willing to conserve water in an emergency but due to

their ignorance of water use and supply, lack the capability to save water. The authors suggest that a continuing educational campaign be

initiated and maintained.

Bruvold, studying conservation programs in drought-stricken

California, identifies two factors as determinants of their effectiveness — one, a program must be seen as fair and equitable, and two, a program must be seen as a response to a serious situation (23). Thus,

the public reacts more positively to reduced allotments made on a per

capita basis (as opposed to previous use), and to programs that are mandatory (as opposed to voluntary).

In summary, economic factors such as income, number of persons per

household, price of water and value of home are closely related to re- sidential water usage. Other factors such as the perceived seriousness

of a water shortage, attitude toward water conservation and knowledge

of water uses are also linked to water conservation behavior. However,

because most efforts to reduce residential water use have utilized a combination of water conservation measures such as restriction, voluntary measures and pricing changes, it is difficult to extract the

actual role that any one of these two factors plays in this process.

184
The literature review thus far has concentrated solely on the topic

of residential water use. Research in a related area — individual re- sponses to other environmental problems — can contribute further insights into conservation behavior. The predominant thrust of research

in this domain has been in the area of human response to natural hazards.

Several studies have demonstrated that variance on dimensions of personality are correlated with differing hazard behaviors (24-31) . Whether

or not low probability, high-risk events, as dealt with in such natural

hazards research, are analogous to shortage problems of water borders

on the speculative. However, the findings cited provide a fertile

framework for the conceptualization of research on water conservation

behavior.

Research dealing with conservation and the energy crisis has yielded

some interesting results. Haas, Bagley and Roger's study (32) claims that,

"Although increases in the perceived likelihood of an energy shortage

had no effect, increments in the perceived noxiousness or severity of an energy crisis strengthened intentions to reduce energy consumption."

This agrees rather closely with the results of Bruvold already

discussed. Foster and Sewell, in studying early adopters of solar

energy technology, have found that those subjects committed most deeply

to solar energy were more technically oriented, greater risk takers and

less socially independent than those least involved in the same

sample (33).

Finally, a recent study (publication forthcoming) by the Institute

for Water Resources of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on the social

acceptability of water conservation in Atlanta, Georgia, and Tucson,

Arizona, provides additional direction in the understanding of the role

of information and adoption of conservation measures. There appears to

be a marked lack of correspondence between how much a person knows about

a measure and how highly he rates that measure overall. For example,

building codes and sewage reuse, despite a consumer's high overall assessment, are rated 5th and 8th, respectively, in how much is known about

them. Conversely, reduction of lawn watering, a measure with which the

public is most familiar , ranks only 6th in overall favorable evaluation.

Familiarity with a conservation measure is no guarantee of its perceived

value. This finding casts doubt on the assumption that an effective

educational campaign can convince the public of the value of a technically feasible conservation measure . The single most potent predictor

of a conservation measure's overall evaluation is its perceived effectiveness; that is, how much water it is thought to save. Thus, when the

two highest and two lowest ranking measures in overall evaluation

(building codes and sewage reuse vs. pricing and growth control) are

examined, three out of four of these measures occupy the same positions

in perceived effectiveness. And the fourth measure, pricing, differs

by only one position in perceived effectiveness.

At least two explanations exist for this strong association. First,

it may be that the general public, in forming an overall evaluation of a

185
conservation measure, considers, first and foremost, how effective it

would be. In this view, a perfectly objective cost-benefit analysis re- sults in a totally pragmatic determination of the value o,f a particular

measure. Or, conversely, it may be that the general public's rating of

the effectiveness of a measure is a function of its overall evaluation

of the measure, an evaluation which, in turn, is determined by other

factors. Implied in this position is the assumption that clear perceptions and rational processes are vulnerable to unknown influences

from uncritically held belief systems.

Which one of these explanations is the more persuasive would have

ramifications for efforts aimed at educating the public regarding water

conservation measures. For example, if perceived effectiveness determines overall evaluation of a measure, then educational campaigns

would stress potential savings of gallons per day and dollars per year.

But if, on the other hand, perceived effectiveness is the result of the

overall evaluation, careful attention must be paid in educational cam- paigns to the "collateral" qualities of a proposed measure such as its

convenience, equitability , etc. Which of these alternatives is true is

indicated by the fact that the correspondence between perceived effectiveness and overall evaluation is not very strong for middle-ranking

conservation measures. Thus, for example, educational campaigns rank

only 7th in perceived effectiveness but 3rd in overall preference. It

seems, then, that the determinants of overall ranking are complex and

require further research.

Moreover, the survey in Tucson showed that there is little or no relationship between how much an individual knows about a specific water

conservation measure and how highly that measure is rated overall.

Moreover, a low overall ranking of a specific water conservation measure

does not result from ignorance of the measure. There is, however a weak

relationship between an individual's perception of the effectiveness and

economy of a specific conservation measure and its overall evaluation.

Finally, there is some weak evidence to suggest that if people are given the opportunity to learn more about a particular measure, they tend

to evaluate it more favorably — if true, an educational campaign would

hold promise.

In summary, the available evidence is weak on the relationship between awareness or knowledge and the consequent adoption of conservation measures. While the obverse is not true, that is, that no information will result in behavior change, the effects of information can be

simply summarized:

Information may lead to behavior change...

under highly specified conditions...

if properly executed. .

with specified targets.

The question then is, what influences an individual to adopt a

186
potential conservation measure? The answer is that little is known,

past research is suggestive and offers, at best, some general directions

or guidelines. With respect to the role of the mass media in providing

information to elicit behavior change, our knowledge is at an embryonic

stage; a similar conclusion (34) was reached concerning the same question

managing natural hazards: "...Little is known about mass media activities in hazard mitigation and preparedness."

The question still stands: Why do some persons listen and act

while others appear to deny and do nothing? What factors or guidelines

are available that do convey to the target population that warrants

their adoption of a measure? In summary, past research has provided

some general insights and direction:

1) The information must be clear;

2) The information must convey what are the most beneficial measures;

3) The information must be perceived as coming from a credible source;

4) The information must be reinforced socially and at the local level;

5) The medium used to disseminate the information is important; and,

6) The type of appeal must be considered and assessed.

In summary, what is needed is the identification and formulation

of the most cost-effective strategies of encouraging the adoption of

water conservation measures. A few examples should suffice: Who is

most likely to adopt? What should be the content of the message?

That is, what kind of information on water use and water conservation

will result in the greatest rate of adoption? Which water conservation

measures are most likely to be adopted, and conversely, which measures

meet with resistance? What is the best agency or authority to disseminate the information?

REFERENCES

1. Schoenfeld Associates, Inc. Water Demand Modification Study

State of Rhode Island . November 1978.

2. Baumann, Duane D. , J. Boland and J. Sims, et^ al. The Role of Water

Conservation in Water Supply Planning . Fort Belvoir, Virginia:

Institute for Water Resources, U.S. Corps of Engineers, 1979.

3. Sharpe, W. E. and Fletcher, P. W. (Eds.). Proceedings—Conference

on Water Conservation and Sewage Flow Reduction with Water-Saving

Devices . Institute for Research on Land and Water Resources,

Pennsylvania State University, 1977.

4. Brigham, Arthur P. "Water Conservation and the Drought." Water

and Sewage Works 65 (July 1977).

5. Larkin, Donald G. "The Economics of Water Conservation." Journal

of the American Water Works Association 70 (No. 9, 1978) : 470-474.

187
6. Dunn, Dorothy F. , and Thurston E. Larson. "Relationship of Domestic

Water Use of Assessed Valuation, with Selected Demographic and

Socio-economic Variables." Journal of the American Water Works

Association 55 (No. 4, 1963) : 441-450.

7. Hill, Duane W. "Defining Social and Political Feasibility." In

Achieving Urban Water Conservation , pp. 139-154. Edited by J.

Ernest Flack and Wade P. Weakley. Fort Collins, Colorado, 1977.

Colorado State University, Colorado Water Resources Research Institute Completion Report #80.

8. Hanke, S. H. "Demand for Water Under Dynamic Conditions." Water

Resources Research 6 (No. 5, 1970) : 1253-1261. See also "Some

Behavioral Characteristics Associated with Residential Water Price

Changes." Water Resources Research 6 (No. 5, 1970) : 1383-1386.

9. Hanke, S. H. and John J. Bo land. "Water Requirements or Water

Demand." Journal of the American Water Works Association 63 (No. 11,

1971): 677-681.

10. Lupsha, Peter A., D. P. Schlegel, and R. U. Anderson. Rain Dance

Doesn't Work Here Anymore, or Water Use and Citizen Attitudes Towards Water Use . Albuquerque: University of New Mexico, Division

of Government Research, 1975.

11. Morgan, Douglas W. "Residential Water Demand: The Case from Micro

Data." Water Resources Research 9 (No. 4, 1973) : 1065-1067

12. Snodgrass, Robert W. The Roles of Water Conservation Values in

Community Policy. Unpublished Masters Thesis, Dept. of Political

Science, Colorado State University.

13. Watkins, George A. "A Sociological Perspective of Water Consumers

in Southern Florida Households." Gainesville, Florida: University

of Florida, Florida Water Resources Research Center, Publication

No. 18, 1972.

14. Linaweaver, F. P. Jr., John C. Geyer, and Jerome B. Wolff. "Summary

Report on the Research Project." Journal of the American Water

Works Association 59 (No. 3, 1967) : 767-782.

15. Morgan, Douglas W. "Residential Water Demand: The Case From Micro

Data." Water Resources Research 9 (No. 4, 1973) : 1065-1067.

16. Ibid.

188
17. Dunn, Dorothy F., and Thurston E. Larson. "Relationship of Domestic

Water Use of Assessed Valuation, with Selected Demographic and Socioeconomic Variables." Journal of the American Water Works Association 55 (No. 4, 1963): 441-450.

18. Hanke, S. H. "Demand for Water Under Dynamic Conditions." Water

Resources Research 6 (No. 5, 1970) : 1253-1261. See also "Some

Behavioral Characteristics Associated with Residential Water Price

Changes." Water Resources Research 6 (No. 5, 1970) : 1383-1386.

19. Hanke, S. H. and John J. Boland. "Water Requirements or Water Demand." Journal of the American Water Works Association 63 (No. 11,

1971): 677-681.

20. Watkins, George A. "A Sociological Perspective of Water Consumers

in Southern Florida Households." Gainesville, Florida: University

of Florida, Florida Water Resources Research Center, Publication

No. 18, 1972.

21. Lupsha, Peter A., D. P. Schlegel, and R. U. Anderson. Rain Dance

Doesn1 t Work Here Anymore, or Water Use and Citizen Attitudes Towards Water Use . Albuquerque: University of New Mexico, Division

of Government Research, 1975.

22. Abbott, H. E., K. G. Cook and R. B. Sleight. "Social Aspects of

Urban Water Conservation." Century Research Corporation. Prepared

for the Office of Water Resources Research. August 1972.

23. Bruvold, William H. "Consumer Response to Urban Drought in Central

California." NSF Grant #ENV77-16171, 1978.

24. Adams, R. W. "Uncertainty in Nature, Cognitive Dissonance, and the

Perceptual Distortion of Environmental Information." Economic

Geography 49 (1973) : 287-297.

25. Baumann, Duane D. , and J. H. Sims. "Human Response to Hurricane."

In Natural Hazards: Local, National, Global. Edited by Gilbert

F. White. New York: Oxford University Press, 1973.

26. . "Flood Insurance: Some Determinants of Adoption."

Economic Geography 43 (No. 3, 1978) : 189-196.

27. Kunreuther, Howard. Limited Knowledge and Insurance Protection:

Implications for Natural Hazard Policy . Philadelphia, PA, 1976.

University of Pennsylvania, Department of Decision Sciences CC.

28. Sims, John H. and Duane D. Baumann. "The Tornado Threat: Coping

Styles of the North and South." Science (176, 1972) : 1386-1392.

189
29. Sims, John H. and Thomas F. Saarinen. "Coping with Environmental

Threat: Great Plains Farmers and the Sudden Storm." Annals of

the Association of American Geographers 59 (No. 4, 1969) : 677-686.

30. Sonnenfeld, Joseph. "Equivalence and Distortion of the Perceptual

Environment." Environment and Behavior 1 (No. 1, 1969a).

31. "Personality and Behavior in Environment." Proceedings : Association of American Geographers 1 (1969B) : 136-140.

32. Haas, Jane W. , Gerrold S. Gagley, and Ronald W. Rogers. "Coping

with the Energy Crisis: Effects of Fear Appeals Upon Attitudes

Toward Energy Consumption." Journal of Applied Psychology 60

(No. 6, 1975): 754-756.

33. Foster, Harold, and W. R. Derrick Sewell. Solar Home Heating in

Canada: Problems and Prospects . Ottawa, Canada: Dept. of

Fisheries and Environment, 1977. Office of the Science Advisor,

Report //16.

34. National Academy of Sciences. Disasters and the Mass Media . Washington, D.C., National Academy of Sciences, 1980.

190
Resources: Manuals and Handbooks

RESIDENTIAL WATER CONSERVATION HANDBOOK

Pabon, Sims, Smith, and Associates, Inc.

A PROCEDURES MANUAL FOR EVALUATING WATER CONSERVATION PLANNING

James E. Crews and Kyle E. Schilling

AWWA WATER CONSERVATION HANDBOOK

George L. Craft

BEFORE THE WELL RUNS DRY: A HANDBOOK FOR DESIGNING A LOCAL

WATER CONSERVATION PLAN

New England River Basins Commission

RESIDENTIAL WATER CONSERVATION HANDBOOK

Pabon, Sims, Smith, and Associates, Inc.

Under Contract to:

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

Washington, D.C.

ABSTRACT

This practical guide to residential water conservation entails the

review and evaluation of water-saving plumbing devices, appliances,

and techniques for their technical and economic feasibility, as well as their public acceptance and regional applicability. The resulting

consumer handbook aimed at the homeowner was produced to help consumers

conserve water. The handbook was market tested for content, theme,

readability, language and style. A national information dissemination

plan was researched to ensure widespread distribution of the handbook

to targeted audiences.

BACKGROUND

Water conservation is a long-term need—not a short-term measure

designed to combat crisis situations. Consumers can be convinced of

the genuine need to protect this valuable resource through public

education and participation in conservation. Only then can truly

effective conservation programs be implemented that will actually alter

long-term consumer attitudes and behavior.

A recently conducted National Science Foundation study which

examined consumer willingness to adopt residential conservation measures

confirms this statement. The two successive years of short supply in

central California (1976-1977) represented a natural experiment whereby

the equity and effectiveness of various conservation programs could be

evaluated and compared. It was found that in three water supply

districts, people actually saved more water than they were requested to

by effecting average reductions of 58 percent. Additionally, the

people with the lowest per capita daily use of water were those who perceived the drought as a harbinger of a longer-term need to live with

less water in the future. These consumers continued conservation behavior even after the emergency situation ended. People who believe

only in a short-term crisis did not reduce water consumption as effectively, either during the crisis or in the long run. This example

proves that people can and will implement conservation programs if the

193
need is clearly communicated and if they perceive an economic incentive

to save.

In order to encourage water conservation, consumers must also be

shown the methods available to save water. One of the most effective

tools is the distribution of conservation handbooks to residential

customers which explain techniques and devices that can be used to cut

down on both the use of water and the generation of wastewater. Most

of the booklets, however, do not provide comparative performance information for various water-saving methods, devices, and appliances, nor

do they indicate the estimated cost savings of the various measures.

The purpose of this U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

(HUD) sponsored project was to fill in this important gap in consumer

information and to ensure the broadest dissemination of this material

to residential water users. Practical information would help consumers

make informed conservation decisions and proye a valuable addition to

the available water-savings literature.

PROJECT SCOPE

The application of a variety of market research techniques and dissemination strategies enabled the development of this residential water

conservation handbook. Aimed at homeowners, this handbook contains cost

and performance information about various water-saving devices, appliances, and lifestyle modifications.

SAVING WATER MAKES CENTS

The handbook stresses the potential

economic benefits of water conservation.

Extensive research concluded that singlefamily homeowners and condominium owners were the most appropriate target audience.

To encourage the practice of water conservation by providing easily implemented

techniques; device and appliance performance

information; and cost comparisons.

Market-research applications were used to

tailor the handbook theme, audience, and

graphic design.

The handbook is divided into eight major

sections; it is 28 pages in length; text

and illustrations are attractively integrated; contains charts and tables usable by

Handbook Outline

TITLE:

THEME:

TARGET AUDIENCE:

OBJECTIVE:

METHODOLOGY

FORMAT:

194
readers; and ranks tips, devices, and habit

changes in order of cost-saving priorities.

STYLE: The language is simple and easy to read; the

illustrations are sex, age, and race representative; patronizing tone and language are avoided; and illustrative characters appear

on a recurring basis throughout the handbook.

HANDBOOK ORGANIZATION

The handbook has been organized into the following eight

sections

Section 1: Why Conserve

This section serves as an introduction to the handbook. It is

designed to capture reader interest, present handbook organization and

content, as well as present several inducements for saving water.

While economic incentives are stressed, mention is also made of environmental considerations.

Section 2: Down the Pipe, Down the Drain

Average residential water-consumption tables and charts are included in this section enabling the reader to compare his/her personal

consumption with typical residential patterns. Savings derived from

practicing water conservation are also described. Instructions for

measuring water use and reading conventional water meters are provided.

Section 3: The Inside Story on Saving Water

Indoor water conservation practices, devices and appliances are provided for the reader in Section 3. Methods for saving water on indoor activities such as dishwashing, showering, and garbage grinding

are identified. Specific devices and practice recommendations ranging

from dual flush toilets to simple toilet inserts are also described.

Faucet leak detection and repair procedures are identified for the

reader

Section 4: There's an Outside Chance You're Wasting Water

Outdoor water savings tips from gardening to recreational activities are presented in this section of the handbook. Specific gardening tips include floral selection, winterizing hose bibs, sprinkler

systems, and moisture meters. This section additionally presents an overview of water pressure and its effect on appliances and water

consumption.

195
Section 5: The Cost of Water

This section is a general overview of the varying types of water

rate structures. Declining and inclining block rates, uniform commod

ity rates, peak demand rates, and lifeline rates are described.

The advantages and disadvantages of each rate type are discussed.

Section 6: Spreading the Word on Water

The benefits of community-wide involvement in water conservation

efforts are described in this section. It additionally suggests a number of steps the reader can undertake to organize a community-wide

water conservation program.

Section 7: And What's More

Sources for obtaining additional information about water conserva

tion are identified for the reader. A reading list is provided for

handbook readers wishing to delve more deeply into the water conserva

tion issue.

Section 8: Waterlog, A Trouble Shooting Guide

This detachable, tear-out table enables readers to chart their

water-saving maintenance and repair activities.

196
A PROCEDURES MANUAL FOR EVALUATING WATER CONSERVATION PLANNING

James E. Crews, Civil Engineer

Kyle E. Schilling, Chief, Policy Studies Division

Institute for Water Resources

Water Resources Support Center

Ft. Belvoir, Virginia

INTRODUCTION

In the past few years, the role of water conservation in the management and planning of water resources has become increasingly important. A number of factors account for this emphasis: (l) new reservoir

sites have become increasingly scarce; (2) concern for environmental

quality has grown; (3) groundwater resources are increasingly inadequate to meet the demands of urban areas; (4) political, economic, and

institutional problems of interbasin transfers have proliferated, making

it nearly impossible to plan for transfer of water from one basin to

another; (5) the costs of water resource development have risen enor- mously in the last decade as a result of the increase in the price of

energy, the increase in the cost of money, and the rise in water quality

standards as manifested in the passage of Federal legislation such as

the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments (1972), the Safe

Drinking Water Act of 1974, and the Clean Water Act of 1977; and (6) the

demand for urban water has continued to increase. In combination, these

factors have created a situation which directs attention to the possibilities of water conservation.

The Corps of Engineers recognized these trends and began policy

studies and research early in 1978 to define and integrate water con- servation into its Civil Works program. This paper presents one of the

major outputs of this research effort and discusses how the Corps views

water conservation.

WATER CONSERVATION?

Water is an essential resource. It is important in everything we

do —food and fiber, production, energy, pollution control, transportation, environmental quality—and the list goes on. Along with this, the

growing scarcity of water is well documented. Cost-efficient and environmentally sound water conservation measures offer an excellent opportunity to meet growing future demands for water-dependent goods and

services. Used in conjunction with traditional water supply development

and more efficient use of existing supplies, our limited water resources

can be stretched to meet ever-growing demands.

197
To most people, water conservation is a noble and laudable goal,

but in the formulation and implementation of water conservation policies

a formidable obstacle is encountered: "What exactly is water

conservation?"

Water conservation is not a new term; however, its use has been so varied that a universal definition has not evolved. Water conservation

is different from other forms of conservation. Energy conservation is

usually thought of in terms of non-use so that the resource will be

available at a future time. Fish and wildlife conservation provides

for use of the resource, but in a manner that preserves and protects

the regenerating capability of the resource. Non-use of water does not

automatically insure its availability at a later time, and the regenerating process (hydrologic cycle) is pretty much beyond our ability to

manage at this time.

Since the historic 1908 Governors Conference in Washington, D.C.,

the term conservation has been subject to many interpretations. Gifford

Pinchot , considered by many to be the father of the conservation movement in this country, stated that "conservation is the use of natural

resources for the greatest good of the greatest number for the longest

time .

Critical analysis of this definition, however appealing the prose,

concludes that it fails as an operational definition. It does not serve

as a guide to the formulation of national policy.

Historically, many other definitions have emphasized the wise and

judicious use of available supplies, but few distinguished between water

conservation and comprehensive, efficient water supply and demand

management

In summary, many past definitions leave something to be desired;

while laudably comprehensive, they lack precision. Consequently, the

Corps of Engineers developed a water conservation definition and evaluation process that emphasizes a balanced approach to analyze both supply

and demand management on a similar basis. This will permit a consistent

trade-off between increments of new supply, water conservation measures,

and measures that result in more efficient use of existing resources.

WATER CONSERVATION DEFINED

To be helpful, the Corps' definition possesses two attributes:

(1) it is precise; and (2) it is practical, and it considers conservation as management of the demand function. Therefore, the Corps'

definition is as follows: "Water conservation is any beneficial

reduction in water use or in water losses."

Based on this definition, water management practices constitute

conservation only when they meet two tests: (l) their purpose is to

198
conserve a given supply of water through reduction in water use (or

water loss); and (2) their total national economic and environmental

benefits outweigh their total national economic and environmental costs.

Water use is the withdrawal of water from a supply or other action

which denies the availability of that water to another user. Uses range

from human consumption to support of fish and the natural environment

associated with streams. A reduction in water use is beneficial if the

aggregate of all beneficial economic and environmental effects resulting

from implementation of the water management practice exceeds the aggregate of all adverse economic and environmental effects occasioned by

such implementation. Recognizing that just as in the case of augmenting

supply, conservation measures may deplete other scarce resources (such

as energy), the above definition of beneficial reductions assures that

all scarce resources are conserved.

Water supply and water conservation, as defined above, have much in common. Neither can be implemented without making demands on other

scarce resources, and the merits of both must be evaluated using the same basic criteria. In addition, the fact that not all new supplies

should be considered desirable is also applicable to water conservation

measures. The evaluation of the adequacy of existing water supplies and

the measures needed to address future water needs require an assessment

of: (l) demand reduction practices; (2) more efficient utilization of

existing supplies; and (3) need for new supplies.

EVALUATION PROCEDURE

The Corps of Engineers has developed a procedures manual ( The

Evaluation of Water Conservation for Municipal and Industrial Water

Supply: Procedures Manual) , detailing an evaluation process that permits

a consistent and balanced trade-off between water conservation and increments of new supply.

Figure 1 presents an overview of the general evaluation procedure

indicating that simultaneous evaluations can be made of both the supply

and conservation options.

Water supply plans are formulated according to existing procedures

without consideration of additional water conservation measures. Water

conservation measures are identified by the measure-specific analysis.

These individual measures are then evaluated against alternative water

supply plans. Based on this evaluation, water conservation proposals are developed which can be integrated into water supply plans, yielding alter

native water supply/conservation plans.

199
GENERAL PROCEDURE: AN OVERVIEW

FORMULATION

NED, E Q and OTHER

water supply plans*

excluding water conservation

DEVELOPMENT

of universe of all possible water conservation measures

-- INFORMATION

ANAl_YSIS

Measure- Specific"

EVALUATION

c water conserv

ifation measures

INTEGRATION

of water conservation proposals

into : NED, E Q and OTHER

plans

PLANS

NED, EQ and OTHER

Water Supply/ Conservation

plans

FIGURE 1

Water supply plans may also be the water supply portion of a multi-purpose plan.

200
DEVELOPMENT

The evaluation of water conservation starts with the development

of a universe of possible water conservation measures (regulation,

management, and education, as shown in Table 1). These measures are

then tested for applicability, technical feasibility, and social

acceptability. The potential measures are those that are applicable to

the study area and setting, are technically feasible, and have potential for being socially acceptable.

MEASURE-SPEC IE IC ANALYSIS

A measure-specific analysis, as shown in Figure 2, establishes the

characteristics of the measures that are independent of the water

supply plans. These include the implementation conditions (coverage

and duration), the effectiveness of the measures, the costs foregone

for water supply, energy savings, the costs foregone for treatment of raw water and wastewater, implementation costs, and environmental

effects

EVALUATION OF WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES

Other positive and negative effects of substituting a water

conservation measure for an equivalent amount of water supply are dependent upon the specific water supply plan considered. To test all

potential measures and combinations thereof for inclusion in several

supplv plans requires an inordinate number of calculations. The

procedure outlined in Figure 3 was developed which reduces the number

of calculations, yet retains acceptable limits of accuracy. The procedure is to include each potential measure in the water supply plan, one at a time, to determine the net change in outputs of the plan that are attributable to that measure. The measures are then ranked in

merit order based on their net increase in the desired output. For

example, the measure that produces the largest increase in net economic

benefits is ranked first for that process of integrating water conservation into the plan. Other measures would be ranked according to

their impact on net benefits. The same ranking procedure would apply

to the environmental quality with net positive impacts on the environment being the ranking factor.

INTEGRATION OF WATER CONSERVATION INTO WATER SUPPLY PLANS

The ranking of measures in merit order permits a once-through

process for integration of the water conservation measures into the

water supply plans to produce plans that maximize the desired outputs.

This procedure is shown in Figure 4.

The maximization of outputs is accomplished by substituting the

measure ranked first in merit order for an equivalent amount of water

supply. The increase in net beneficial effects of the plan is then

calculated. The second measure in merit order is then substituted

201
4-1 E en

CJ

a E

03 Cfl co

4-J 60 4-1 P O C O c W) i—

o )-i CD o i—

» 

CJ Ph > P

03 « H

W Ph

H S t—

P

QJ CO 0 i—

< 4-J c P*J co o

cj o CO • H 0 U 0) CO CO 0) u H^ <H H i-t- CJ

!=> •H tu cu (X) CO O PL, 1 en 1 ow < PP o n

COK3

co

en

cu JScc

•H

4-J TO>u

CDa:Coun

QJ

4-) 03 £

14-1 O

CO •H

rJ

CU>H

4J

03

l-l -u

COD

03 H

bO a) CO

rjt—

cu • H 03 H O Pi •X) « r-l cu •iH p P<2 bO bO CU bO CO p< O Pi fi bO Pi 43

H

O -H ' H P 03

D

CO

W ^ cj

O 03 ,fi CO

OJ CU CO PO -r4 •H CJ rM •H o Pi P CJ TD

w CJ CJ

a bO Ph Ph rJ 0) fi •H • H e CO 03

r—t i—

•rH X) r—

CO fij fi O O 03 CO 03 03 CO

w o Oh Ph e 03

O fiu CO OJ • ^ txO •H 0) i—

o cu co > o bO C M w Pi ^! CO cu •H u fi • H C O 03 cfl 1 o 4-1 < <v Pi • pH «9 C 0) QJ 3 X fi

4-1 cu

O 1—1 Ph CO CO PJ cu

CD 03u •H

u

O £ cu r-l fi P. 03 T3 cu C4-I H

cu

03 *j

X

CU 03 03 Pi .—

O)

H < CP CJ

co

S3oHH

<!

rJo

PJ

PS o

Ph

CO

03

13

fi >>

CO

U e

cuE

T3C

CU

O

Ph

4-J o<P

cu

CJ <u

cu

4-1 03

bDC

coCUUC

03C

•H

T3MO

co

0)

!-i

4J

CJo

i-l 4-J CO&

cu la

s-i o

M-l

coCU T3 bO O C O c

bC • H

CO

cu

co

<U 0) U PL C co

cO cj C co •H 13) bO o c c

V4 (J -H O hJ Hu

03 4-1

O 4-1 c T3 4-1

C -H CJ bO

4-1 fi

O CO •H c bO 4-1 •H OJ fi CO CU u-i 5-t 03 fi •H i—1 CO Pi •H

T3 1 Q • H tw ^ cu CO fi -a • H CN C CO 4P o fi bO u fi o C CO CTn CO CU cu E J-< QJ O •H

CO CU cu M-H TD fi 4-J )-( co 4-1 •H 4-1 y> hJ CO O i—

QJ CO 4J CO i—

Ph Ph CJ co CJ Ph Pi CO CJ

O Ph

CO •H

^1 t—!-i QJ CO 4J T3 < PP u n CJ PP CJ o CO < QJ O OJ Ph .J Pi

toCU •H

4-> •H

5^O

fi

CO

•r-l T3 r-l Pi C CO CO

fi Ph CO cu •H

03 CO CJ rH QJ CJ U

Ph

US li CU

SU

CU rP> CO o

bO Pj 3 C o CO -H

03 CU PhO CJ cu 4-1 fi 4-1 4-1 •H co U 0 fi CO CO fi 4-1 fi =J •H • H CU QJ -H 0 CO o S-i 4J CJ CO CO CU i—i 4-1 CO Pi ;3 co 14-1 CO Pi CO CO CO a cu O c CJ fi fi QJ o Ph CO O OJ o o Pi

4-J OJ c * r-i Pi •H •rH

.—1 CU •H

W o 4-J 4J -M hC

<3 1 (X pj •H CJ CU

O fi CO hO CO 4J •H 4-J •H 4-t CO T3 CO CJ i-i CO Pi CO S-i •H IS

cu -rH o fi 4-) > 4-1 4J

y. p. r-i -H •r-l CO •H CO CO Pi • H CO CU P, 6 QJ Pi cu C cd PH > Ph Ph

eter

Pi Ph Pi r-l CJ

I—

CM

p r-l

CP

202
MEASURE -SPECIFIC ANALYSIS

UNIVERSE OF POSSIBLE

WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES

APPLICABILITY OF MEASURES TO

WATER USES IN PLANNING AREA

TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY

SOCIAL ACCEPTABILITY

POTENTIAL WATER

CONSERVATION MEASURES

IMPLEMENTATI ON CONDITIONS

EFFECTIVENESS

ADVANTAGEOUS EFFECTS

DISADVANTAGEOUS EFFECTS

EVALUATION OF WATER

CONSERVATION MEASURES

TO FIGURE 3

Public Involvement Program

Social Acceptability Analysis

Institutional Analysis

FIGURE 2

203
EVALUATION OF WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES

POTENTIAL WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES

EVALUATE MEASURES AS FIRST-ADDED TO N E D* PLAN

DETERMINE

FOREGONE SUPPLY COST

DETERMINE

FOREGONE NED BENEFITS

DETERMINE REDUCTION IN NEGATIVE EQ EFFECTS

DETERMINE INCREASE IN NEGATIVE EQ EFFECTS

SUMMARY OF

MEASURE EFFECTS

INCLUDE DATA

FROM FIGURE 2

ELIMINATE MEASURES THAT

FAIL ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

TO FIGURE 4

FIGURE 3

NED, E Q or Other as appropriate.

204
INTEGRATION OF WATER CONSERVATION INTO WATER

SUPPLY PLANS

INFORMATION FROM FIGURE 3

Arrange Measures

in Merit Order for N E D*Plan

Let First Measure

Equal Trial Proposal

Compute Increase in Net Beneficial Effect on Plan

Objective, Accounting for Interactions

If Increase is Not Positive,

Delete Last-Added Measure From Trial Proposal

IF DELETED

IF NOT DELETED

I

Add Next Measure

to Trial Proposal

Incorporate Trial Proposal

into Water Supply Plan

NED, E Q AND OTHER

WATER SUPPLY /CONSERVATION PLANS

FIGURE 4

* N E D, E Q or Other as appropriate.

205
after careful consideration of the interactions between the first and

second measures. When interactions exist, the incremental effect of the

second measure will probably be less than its effect as a single measure. This procedure continues until the addition of another measure

reduces the net beneficial effects on the plan objective. For the NED

plan, measures are added until the next measure would reduce the net NED

benefits of the plan. The resulting plan represents the NED plan for

water supply/conservation.

Finally, the water supply/conservation plans should be tested for

compliance with the desired system reliability. Dependability can be

designed into plans that include water conservation in the same way that

it is included in plans for water supply.

APPLICATION

The Corps of Engineers has developed a methodology to evaluate

water conservation in its planning process. Obviously, this type of

research must now be tested, evaluated, and communicated to the users

in the field districts and changed if necessary.

To accomplish this objective, continuing research will be conducted

to refine and clarify portions of the manual, such as the more longer

term effects of specific conservation measures and data availability.

Specific case studies are being conducted or planned where close coordination and specific guidance can be given by IWR personnel to fully test

the procedures manual. Workshops are being planned to impart the

principles of the manual to the Corps field personnel who will actually

be conducting the studies, and additional policy studies and guidance

(such as advancing the state of the art in dealing with groundwater

conjunctive use and improving forecasting methodologies) are planned to

further develop the Corps' role in water conservation planning.

SUMMARY

Water conservation has taken on an increasingly important role in

Federal water policy these past few years. The Corps of Engineers has

met the challenge to fully integrate water conservation into its Civil

Works program. The Corps defined water conservation in such a way that

the definition is both precise and practical. Along with this definition, a procedure was developed that permits an evaluation of water

conservation where consistent trade-offs between increments of new

supply and measures that result in more efficient use of existing

supplies can be made. This procedure encompasses four basic steps:

(l) the development of a universe of possible water conservation

measures; (2) a measure-specific analysis which is independent of the

water supply plan(s); (3) an evaluation of conservation measures

incorporating the characteristics of the water supply plan(s); and

(4) the integration of the water conservation measures into the water

supply plan(s) to form the final water supply/conservation plan(s).

Continuing Corps research will further refine and enhance the Corps'

involvement in water conservation planning.

206
AWWA WATER CONSERVATION HANDBOOK

George L. Craft, Resources Engineer

American Water Works Association

Denver, Colorado

INTRODUCTION

I am really here under premature circumstances in that the AWWA

Water Conservation Handbook that was scheduled to be completed by now

is not. Therefore, instead of telling you what our handbook is, I will

tell you what we hope it will be, as well as some of the problems

encountered during its development.

The American Water Works Association (AWWA) is a nonprofit,

scientific, educational society for the drinking water industry. Our

membership numbers 32,000 and consists of water plant operators,

utility managers, engineers, consultants, manufacturers, and water

utilities. These members comprise sections representing the United

States, Canada, Mexico, and Puerto Rico. With this widespread and

diverse membership, you can see that many regions with varying types of

climates are represented, and there begins our problem of uniform

policie s.

Water Conservation: What is it? Can you define it? Water con- servation means something different to each of us, depending on where

we live. At the end of 1980, for example, New York was starting to see

the bottom of their reservoirs and began trying to "think conservation." The Institute for Water Resources, U.S. Corps of Engineers,

defines water conservation as "any beneficial reduction in water use or water losses."

AWWA has not really tried to define water conservation as such,

but does refer to conservation in the official AWWA Policy Statement on Water Resources by stating: "Water is a renewable natural resource.

It must be managed to best meet all of the many needs of man. Every

effective means to prevent and minimize water loss and promote wise use

should be employed by all entities, public and private, engaged in

water resource activities." Now that's a mouthful'. But it does promote the "wise use of water" from the broad viewpoint of the water

utilities—a nice, comfortable middle ground for a conservation policy.

207
The need for AWWA to publish its own water conservation handbook

was brought to the forefront with the western drought years of

1975-76. An Ad Hoc Committee was formed by the AWWA Technical & Professional Council consisting of nine AWWA members from the water

industry. The committee members were from all regions of the United

States and were the most capable men available to oversee the formulation of the Handbook .

In July 1978, AWWA hired a professional engineer to write the

Handbook for the committee to approve. After 10 months of working on

this book, the writer produced 200 pages of water utility experiences

with drought, but no conservation material. We then contracted another

author plus an editor to edit the copy prior to submittal to the com- mittee. This second effort began in the spring of 1979 and concluded

in August of 1980. This author furnished us with a good, philosophical, middle-of-the-road approach, but failed to include the how-to-do-i

portion for the Handbook . The committee is now working with a third

author who has provided an additional draft of how-to-do-it water con- servation practices to be implemented by water utilities that are running out of water due to drought, political restraints, or emergency

disasters.

At this point in time, AWWA does not advocate water conservation;

officially, however, it does advocate the wise use of water—all the

water you need, not one drop to waste. The Handbook that was originally begun in 1977 is now nearing completion; it will be targeted to

water utilities and will emphasize that water conservation is not a substitute for good management and planning .

The Handbook will also tell the water utilities that water con- servation is not a substitute for eliminating system leakage . Leak

detection and repair of existing systems will not only conserve the

existing water supply, but will help improve the efficiency of water

production and increase income by eliminating nonrevenue-producing

water that is now disappearing somewhere. It is estimated that 5-15

percent of a utility's water is lost in a leaking system. This water

will be saved by diligent leak detection and repair of leaks. In older

systems, this lost water may be higher than 15 percent.

How does a utility account for its water, and how does a utility

charge for water use? Metering, of course. This is one tool that is a must to a successful water conservation plan. AWWA has officially advocated 100 percent metering of water customers for several years.

Many individual utilities have adopted that policy because it is necessary to have complete metering. Metering presents a mechanical, non- arbitrary method of recording water use, but also a way to account for

the water distributed in the system. Without water accountability , how can a utility know the conservation effort is furnishing results or even know if it is running out of water?

After instituting good management procedures with long-range

planning and meter maintenance programs, and eliminating all leakage

208
that is possible to locate, the water supply is still slowly being used

up. This situation is needed for severe problems if water usage is not

curtailed quickly. The Handbook will suggest to the water utilities

emergency measures that can be taken to prolong the water supply until

an emergency, such as drought or disaster, is over. Examples are:

Quotas can be imposed as implemented in the San Francisco area in 1976;

retrofit restrictions in the home can be installed as in Elmhurst,

Illinois, and in several other cities in 1976; and water rates can be

increased for increased use of water as the Washington Suburban

Sanitary Commission has utilized for the past few years.

Public education, a "must" as discussed in John Nelson's paper

entitled "Motivating the Public to Save Water in the Absence of

Crisis," should begin immediately because attitudes and perceptions of

the water customers are very important considerations in achieving

maximum effectiveness in implementing a water conservation program. A

program that is understood by the customer as a viable option to running out of water will be successful.

The AWWA Water Conservation Handbook will provide guidance as well as examples of how a water utility can conserve water. Tt will

also contain all pertinent bibliographic references for those desiring

more information on the subject.

209

BEFORE THE WELL RUNS DRY: A HANDBOOK FOR DESIGNING A LOCAL WATER

CONSERVATION PLAN

Water Supply /Conservation Program Staff

New England River Basins Commission

Boston, Massachusetts

ABSTRACT

In February 1979, the New England River Basins Commission (NERBC)

received funds from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) , Resources

and Land Investigations Program, to research and develop a planning

procedure for water conservation. The project included an extensive

literature search, development of local case studies, interviews with

water supply engineers and policy makers, and an evaluation of the

effectiveness of alternative water conservation measures. From the

information it gathered and analyzed, NERBC developed a seven-step

procedure for designing a local conservation plan. The sources

for the procedure and the procedure itself are presented in a twovolume technical report, Before the Well Runs Dry .

In 1980, NERBC received additional funds from USGS's Water

Resources Division to prepare a handbook for the practical application

of the information contained in the technical report. The handbook

is designed to provide a concise, clear-cut procedure for local

water supply planners to follow in designing a conservation plan. The

procedure outlined in the handbook has been reviewed by water supply

engineers, administrators, superintendents, and planners throughout

New England. It is flexible, can be used by any type of water utility,

and can meet a variety of goals. This paper summarizes the information presented in the handbook.

INTRODUCTION

Water conservation is an effective and efficient means of solving

many water supply problems: it can ease a community over a short-term

shortage; it can eliminate the need for new source development; it can improve a water system's efficiency; it can reduce operating

costs; and it can help a community cope with water supply emergencies

including the loss of supply due to contamination.

Many communities in California have used conservation measures

successfully to cope with serious water shortages: in one of their

worst droughts in history, up to 60 percent water use reduction

was achieved through conservation. Most residents and businesses

211
were able to pull through the drought with little hardship. In Madison,

Wisconsin, and Elmhurst, Illinois, conservation programs were introduced

to reduce the need for new source developments. By hot having to

drill new wells, Madison saved $750,000; Elmhurst saved $400,000. The

Boston Water and Sewer Commission in Massachusetts is currently undertaking a conservation program to improve its system's efficiency.

Already, it has reduced average use from 150 million gallons per

day (mgd) to 134 mgd. In Arlington, Massachusetts, water costs were

reduced by $36,000 per year through conservation. Numerous communities,

including Woodbury, Connecticut, and Provincetown , Massachusetts, have

used conservation to cope with losses of supply due to contamination.

Conservation has also been successful in helping to solve other

water-related problems including excessive waste water flows and

excessive energy consumption. The Washington Suburban Sanitary

Commission, Maryland, implemented a comprehensive conservation plan

to reduce waste water flows to its overloaded sewage treatment plant.

The State of California initiated a conservation plan to determine

how much energy could be saved by reducing the need to heat water.

It was estimated that the city of San Diego, California, could save

57,300 barrels of oil (or $860,000) per year if most of the residents

conserved water.

To ensure that a conservation program will achieve its full

potential and will help a water system in the way it helped the

systems described above, the program must be carefully planned. Too

often water conservation programs are designed without considering

the full range of options, and the potential impacts of each option

on the utility, the users, and the community.

The seven-step procedure for designing a local conservation plan

presented in the handbook has been developed to help you design a plan

that will achieve its full potential in your community. The procedure

was developed primarily to deal with water supply problems, although

it can be used for other problems as well, including excessive energy

consumption and excessive waste water flows. If the procedure is

to be used for problems other than water supply, however, certain

modifications will be needed. For example, if you are interested in

reducing waste water flows or energy used for heating water, you will

want to focus on the conservation programs that are aimed towards

reducing users' consumption. If you are interested in reducing

excessive energy consumption within your utility, you will want to

focus on the programs that will reduce loss and waste within the

water production and delivery systems. However, before a specific

area of concentration can be chosen, it is helpful to have a general

knowledge of the many factors that enter into the development of a water conservation plan including the social, political, and economic

impacts. These factors are interspersed throughout the seven-step

procedure.

The seven steps include the following:

212
Step 1: Step 2:

Step 3: Step 4:

Step 5:

Step 6:

Step 7:

Identify problem/establish conservation goal;

Assess potential of supply management;

Analyze cost-effectiveness and impacts of management programs:

Identify actions to minimize adverse impacts;

Choose management program(s) /design the specifics of each

management program(s);

Evaluate and select hardware/software;

Summarize conservation plan.

As stated previously, this procedure can be used in part or in

its entirety. However, to get an idea of all the conservation programs available, and the advantages associated with them, you should

begin by reviewing the complete procedure.

Even though water supply planning is conducted at all levels of

government, the water supplier has the prime responsibility for

developing adequate sources, ensuring safe and potable water, and

delivering water in the most cost-effective and equitable manner

possible. You (if you are the water purveyor) also have the prime

responsibility for water conservation planning.

As a local supplier, you are expected to answer to the various

federal and state regulatory agencies, local government bodies,

corporate boards, and water users who oversee and/or depend upon your

operation. Your conservation planning, therefore, will have to reflect

your local legal- institutional setting. The seven-step procedure

presented in this handbook is designed to accommodate individual

communities with distinctive needs.

To use the procedure, you will need to gather information about

the utility and the community you serve. The type of information

needed includes system data, use data, and revenue and budget data.

OVERVIEW OF THE SEVEN- STEP APPROACH

The planning approach is designed to help you to:

• Consider the full range of options;

• Evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of various options,

and;

• Assess the potential impacts of each option on your utility,

the users, and the community.

The first step is to analyze the problem and establish a conservation goal. This is also the time to begin thinking about a public participation program.

The next step requires an analysis of whether your goals can best

be met on the supply side — making improvements in the water supply

system — or on the demand or consumption side of the system, or a combination of both.

213
The third step calls upon you to analyze the cost-effectiveness

and impacts of various management options.

In Step 4 , you consider ways to avoid or minimize any adverse

impacts evident in the supply and demand management programs you are reviewing.

In Step 5 , you choose and design the specific supply and/or demand

management programs you will use.

For demand management programs, this includes designing new water

rates, water-use restrictions, or educational materials.

In Step 6 , you choose the actual hardware or software that

physically reduces water use.

In the final step , you combine the results of your various

analyses and decisions in the form of an implementable water conservation plan.

Step (1), Establish a Conservation Goal , is the key to the planning

procedure because all decisions are based on whether the various

alternatives under consideration can meet the goal.

The goal is defined by 3 factors or needs:

1. Peak and/or average use has to be reduced;

2. High or low percentage reduction in use is needed, and;

3. Short- or long-term span.

Peak use refers to the summer average daily use usually caused by

outside uses.

Average use refers to the annual average use.

Express percentage reductions by number, with a range of 1-10%

as low and 10-20% as high.

A short-term time span is approximately one year or less, while

long-term is a year or more.

Step (2) , Assess Potential of Supply Management . At this point,

discussion of Steps 2-6 for supply management will be presented first,

and then Steps 2-6 for demand management.

This step is conceptually straightforward. Yet, it requires

considerable analysis and planning.

The goal of supply management is to improve efficiency within the

production and delivery system. It is often the best long-term option

214
because conservation goals are met without depending on water uses. While this is standard operating procedure for a well-run utility,

sometimes a water supply problem can be solved through better management alone.

Supply management is best used for long-term, low percentage reduction

goals. It may be useful for short-term goals if your system has not

been adequately maintained over the years. It may also be useful for

peak-use reduction if the problem is caused by inadequate storage

capacity or inadequate pipe capacity.

The advantages of supply management are the following:

• program under your direct control;

• lost revenues could be recovered; and

• slack maintained in system.

The disadvantages include the following:

• programs could be expensive;

• programs could be labor intensive; and

9 long lead time may be necessary.

Your analysis may require much time or little time, depending

upon past studies and experience. In general, supply management is

preferable to demand management because it yields long-term improvements in the system. Consider it first. Costs are high, though the

"crisis mentality" created during a period of water shortages may help

to build a potential constituency in favor of long-term changes, even

if they prove costly.

Step (3), Analyze the Cost-Effectiveness and the Impacts of Various

Supply Management Programs

For supply management, there are five programs: metering; leak

detection and repair; pressure reduction; watershed management; and

evaporation suppression.

Metering

While metering itself does not reduce water consumption, it

provides an accurate accounting of all water uses throughout the

system, thus being useful for leak detection and repair programs,

pricing programs, and other conservation programs.

Leak Detection and Repair (LD&R)

LD&R can substantially reduce water waste within the system.

LD&R also includes unaccounted for water analysis. Categories of

unaccounted-for water include: abandoned services, inaccurately

215
metered water, illegal hook-ups, defective hydrants, etc.

There are two basic methods for conducting surveys. , If your

system is losing water primarily through leaks, a system scan would

be most effective; if your system is losing water through illegal

hook-ups, meter under-registration (i.e., unaccounted-for water), a water audit would be most effective.

Leak detection and repair programs are almost always costeffective. This strategy is best for long-term, low percentage reduction goals unless the system is not well maintained. If so, leak

detection and repair could achieve a higher percentage reduction goal.

Pressure Reduction

Consider pressure reduction if there is a a significant number of areas where pressure is high (80 lb/sq in. or greater).

Pressure-reducing valves installed in street mains or individual

services can reduce waste simply by reducing the amount of water

passing through the system. Such an approach is used for long-term,

low percentage reduction, average-use goals.

Watershed Management

Watershed management is used primarily to protect or increase

water flows to the supply and to protect ground water sources. Techniques include: (1) forestry management (thinning forests in the

watershed) ; (2) zoning by-laws to prohibit inappropriate land uses within the recharge area; (3) purchasing surrounding watershed land

to maintain it under your control; and (4) sub-division regulations

which allow development to proceed in a manner which does not harm

the watershed. This strategy is best used for long-term, low

percentage reduction, average-use goals.

Evaporation Suppression (reservoir covers)

Only useful when evaporation is responsible for significant water

loss (greater than 10%). Rarely cost-effective in New England.

The impact analysis for supply management entails a review and

analysis of the financial and economic, technical and environmental,

and legal and institutional impacts of each of the supply management

programs

Step (4) , Identify Actions to Modify Adverse Impacts

In Step 3 you identified the impacts of various supply management

approaches. In Step 4 you identify actions which can minimize the

adverse impacts associated with each program, and then choose the

216
best program.

The handbook lists potential actions you could take to minimize

adve rs e impac t s

Step (5), Choose Supply Management Programs

Now that you have analyzed the cost-effectiveness, impacts, and

modifications to the impacts of supply management programs, you'll

be able to select programs most effective for your community. Review

each supply management program again to be sure that it has the

potential to achieve the conservation goal you have established.

Step (6) , Choose Specific Hardware and Software

For supply management the specific hardware/software will depend

on your individual system and preference. For example, for leak

detection and repair, you will have to choose a system survey method.

Steps 2-6 for demand management are described below.

Step (2), Assess Potential of Demand Management

If supply management is not adequate to achieve your conservation

goal set in Step 1, then consider demand management. Demand or consumption management requires water users to modify their behavior

and reduce consumption in a home or business setting. It has potential

to achieve any conservation goal.

The advantages include the following:

• versatility;

• low expense (potential)

• may not be labor intensive; and

• implemented quickly.

The disadvantages include the following:

• revenues may drop;

• results dependent on user's cooperation;

• requires political support; and

• possible opposition from users.

Step (3), Analyze the Cost-Effectiveness and the Impacts of Various

Demand Management Programs

In the demand (consumption) management programs, you have a choice of three tools to encourage users to reduce their use:

pricing; regulation; and education.

217
In many cases, you may mix all three tools.

Pricing - If a pricing program is carefully designed, it can generate excess revenues while it encourages use reductions. Therefore, it should be considered as part of many conservation programs.

Pricing is best used for long-term, low percentage reduction goals.

The costs of a pricing program are mostly one-time costs.

These costs will be for a rate survey, or cost of service study,

costs to institute a new billing system, and if your utility is

regulated, costs for an attorney or someone to present your new rate

before the public utilities commission.

The major disadvantage to pricing is user, local government, and

public utility commission opposition.

Regulation - This program can be used to achieve any conservation

goal. It is most effective for short-term goals and long-term, low

percentage reduction goals. Regulation can be quickly implemented

and can achieve immediate results.

Costs to implement regulation are limited to costs of enforcement.

If you do not have the authority and/or manpower for enforcement, you

may have to secure the assistance of the police department or the

local government.

The major disadvantages to using regulation are that revenues

will decrease as consumption drops and some users may oppose

limitations on how they can use their water.

Education - Education programs can help any conservation program

because it is so well received and can reduce user opposition to

other programs. It is effective for any goal, except long-term, high

percentage reduction goals.

The major disadvantages to education are that revenues may decrease as consumption decreases, and results are less reliable than other

programs because of its voluntary nature.

The types of impacts for demand management programs include the

following:

• what a change in revenues, up or down, will mean to the

utility or company;

• how a change in water rates might affect high-volume users,

including potential impact on employment;

• determining the effect of reduced water use, such as reduced

wastewater treatment costs, postponing new source development,

potential damage to landscaping, and increasing the potential

for adding new connections;

• public reaction to the conservation program, including the

equity of the program;

218
• costs to implement the program; and

• the limit established by law, regulation, or ordinance.

A series of tables in the handbook list most of the impacts of

demand management programs for different utility types (investor

owned or publicly owned) . They are to be used as a guide to help you

determine what is most important for your more thorough consideration.

Step (4), Identify Actions to Modify Adverse Impacts

In Step 3 you identified the impacts of various demand management

approaches. In Step 4 you identify actions which can minimize the

adverse impacts associated with each program, and then choose the

best program.

A series of tables in the handbook list potential actions you

could take to minimize these adverse impacts.

Step (5), Choose and Design Specific Management Programs^

After you've completed the analyses in Steps 3 and 4, choose the

programs that are the most cost-effective and have most beneficial

impacts . Step 5 is the place to begin detailing the specific elements

of a conservation program. On the demand side, this includes the

following

Pricing : establishing a new water rate;

Regulation : choosing water use restrictions; and

Education : choosing education tools/devices/campaign materials.

Pricing : design a new water rate. A new water rate includes

both price level and structure. Price level is price per unit of

water. Price structures vary price level according to quantity used

or time of use. Price level is most important because only when

the price level is high enough — regardless of structure — will

users consider how they are using water and conserve.

There are six basic steps for designing a new water rate.

A. Determine the goal for percent reduction — 5%, 10%, etc.

B. Estimate the decrease in water use by consumers in response

to price increases. This change is termed "price elasticity

of demand. 11 There are several guidelines to keep in mind

when trying to gauge consumer response to price increases.

New price leve l: the lower the price, the less the response.

Average user income : the higher the income, the less the

response

Average number of people per household : the larger the number,

the less the response.

219
Average rainfall and temperature : the more temperate the

climate, the less the response.

C. Determine the percent change of price necessary to achieve

the goal.

D. Calculate the new total revenue, as a result of the new price.

E. Compare the new total revenues to your annual costs (remember,

variable costs will drop as water use drops).

F. Select a price structure.

Twenty common price structures are listed in the handbook.

They are grouped by their applicability to meeting peak or average

conservation goals.

When using pricing there are several guidelines to keep in mind.

• Responses to a price hike generally diminish as users get used

to paying more.

• Pricing is most effective in reducing peak use among residential

users and average use among large- volume users.

• In New England, the price of water has been traditionally low

and responsiveness to price hikes is generally low, especially

among residential users.

Regulation

Choose a regulation program from the following methods:

restricting a specific water use; restricting the time/season during

which a specific use is allowed; requiring permits for some water

uses; restricting the quantity of water which can be used; and

requiring appliances and equipment which use a smaller amount of

water.

Various regulations have a different potential for meeting

conservation goals. A chart in the handbook summarizes this

potential.

Keep in mind that some regulations may be prohibited in your

community. In other cases, regulations may require enforcement

you are not able to provide, i.e., limiting a specific use. Finally,

some regulations, such as rationing or plumbing code changes, may

not be effective because of user or political opposition.

Practical experience has yielded several recommendations.

• Reserve stringent regulations such as rationing and use bans,

to high percentage reduction, short-term goals, and to times

of extreme emergency, such as extended drought.

• Use less stringent regulations, such as plumbing code changes

and limits on specific uses for long-term, low percentage goals.

220
• Most regulations that limit outdoor uses are easy to implement

and can achieve water use reductions immediately.

• All regulations require some level of enforcement — make

sure enforcement staff is available.

Education

Education can stand on its own, or augment price and regulation

programs. The number of education tools are many — it's

important to match the right educational tools and techniques to your

community setting. Each available tool is bound by two factors:

type of community and budget resources.

A chart in the handbook presents just a partial list of

educational methods used to encourage water- use reduction. Some are better suited to small communities than large; some are more

expensive than others.

When developing education programs, work with communications

prof esssionals . The assistance of a local newspaper editor or public

relations practitioner can help you design a better, more focused

program.

Past experience has provided some education-related recommendations .

• Keep the conservation message short and simple. Provide

detailed data on how to reduce consumption after getting

people's attention.

• Mix the media. Use visuals to strengthen claims or message.

• Reach as many consumers as possible with as many techniques

as possible, budget allowing.

• Repeat the conservation message as often as possible. Users

need constant reminders of the need to conserve.

Step (6) , Choose Specific Hardware and Software

In this step, you select hardware/ software that will reduce water

use in your community.

There are 3 categories of hardware/software for demand management

programs

• water-saving fixtures;

• reuse/recycle systems; and

• user habit changes.

Again, you need to review each technique to determine which is

most applicable to your community.

221
Water- Saving Fixtures

Reduce water use by modifying the design of a conventional

plumbing system.

When suggesting water-saving fixtures, costs should be

approximately equal to conventional fixtures; fixtures should not

require excessive maintenance; fixtures should reduce water use significantly; and fixtures should gain easy acceptance by consumers.

There are many types of water-saving fixtures. Of more than

60 different types, the 20 most cost-effective fixtures are detailed

in a chart in the handbook.

Reuse/Recycle Systems

Reduce water use by using the same water more than once. Best

for long-term, high percentage goal.

Reuse : Using the same water for more than one function with

little or no treatment prior to discharge.

Recycle : Using the same water repeatedly, usually with some treatment

They are generally very effective and very expensive.

A chart in the handbook details the eight situations in which

reuse/recycle systems are used most.

UserHabit Changes

User habit changes are designed to reduce water use by changing

the user's behavior pattern. Best for long-term, low percentage

goals and short-term, high percentage goals.

There are two basic behavior pattern changes: use less water to

perform the same function; and perform the function less often.

Developing a long-term or short-term education program is the

key to affecting user habit changes.

Users need information before they change their routine behavior.

Users need constant reminders and reinforcement if user habit changes

are to continue.

A chart in the handbook matches some habit changes with con- servation goals.

222
Step (7), Summarize Conservation Plan

To summarize your conservation plan, draw together the results

of the prior steps.

GOAL

SUPPLY MANAGEMENT: HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE

DEMAND MANAGEMENT: HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE

223

Publicly 1#1 A<^WIl

Supplied conservation

'81 A NATI0NAL conference

Benefits and Impacts/Economics

COST-EFFECTIVE RESIDENTIAL WATER CONSERVATION DECISIONS

Stephen F. Weber, Barbara C. Lippiatt, and Anne P. Hillstrom

A WATER SUPPLY SIMULATION MODEL: ANALYZING FOR THE IMPLICATIONS OF CONSERVATION

Robert M. Clark, Ph.D., Richard M. Males, Ph.D., and

William E. Gates, Ph.D.

COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF POTABLE WATER CONSERVATION - MULTIFACETED

APPROACH

Wallace J. Hopp and William P. Darby, Ph.D.

MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION - A WATER PROJECT THAT PAYS

FOR ITSELF

Will B. Betchart

COST-EFFECTIVE RESIDENTIAL WATER CONSERVATION DECISIONS

Stephen F. Weber, Economist

Barbara C. Lippiatt, Economist

Anne P. Hillstrom, Research Assistant

National Bureau of Standards, Center for Building Technology

Washington, D.C.

ABSTRACT

An economic decision rule is presented for utilities to use in

recommending water-saving devices that are cost effective for homeowners. The rule takes into account the major costs (acquisition,

installation, operation, maintenance, repair, and replacement) and

benefits (dollar savings on water, sewer, and energy bills) associated

with the installation of water-saving devices. One of these benefits,

the dollar value of water savings, depends critically on water prices.

An analysis of the water rate schedules of a national sample of 90

utilities indicates that, because of the widespread use of large

fixed and minimum charges, homeowners' actual benefits from saving a unit of water are significantly lower than the average price paid for

water. Thus, estimated water bill reductions will frequently be overstated if calculated on the basis of average price. The decision rule

allows one to select the economically optimal device from a set of

mutually exclusive alternatives, or the economically optimal combination of compatible devices for all the plumbing services in the

house. The paper concludes by describing an interactive computer

program that performs all the calculations needed to implement the

decision rule.

INTRODUCTION

A consistent method is needed for choosing among the wide variety

of residential water-saving features and devices currently available.

The first section of this paper describes and illustrates a selection

method that maximizes the net economic benefit for homeowners. The

method considers the costs likely to be incurred over the useful lives

of devices: acquisition, installation, operation, maintenance, repair,

and replacement. The three major benefit categories are also considered: savings from reduced water consumption, wastewater treatment,

and energy used for water heating. The dollar value of the water

savings depends critically on local water prices. Thus, the second

section presents a detailed analysis of water rate schedules. The

paper concludes by discussing a computer program for performing the

calculations needed to implement the selection method.

227
SELECTION METHOD

This section presents a method for selecting water-saving devices

in two situations: (1) when the devices being evaluated all serve the same plumbing function so that only one can be utilized with regard to

a given fixture (mutually exclusive devices); and (2) when each device

serves a different function so that all of them could be used simultaneously by one household (compatible devices)

To illustrate the concept of mutually exclusive water-saving

devices, consider three alternative shower modifications: (1) replace

ment with a new low-flow showerhead (3 gpm) ; (2) replacement with a new medium-flow showerhead (4 gpm); or (3) adding a flow restrictor

upstream of the existing showerhead. These alternatives are mutually

exclusive in that only one of them could be applied to any particular

shower. The homeowner needs to know whether any of the three alternative modifications represents an economic improvement over the

existing shower and, if so, which one represents the greatest economic

improvement. Both these decisions can be made by calculating the Net

Present Value (NPV) for each alternative water-saving device:

NPV = [W + En] - [Ac + I + M + R] , [

where NPV = Present value of the net benefits expected to result from

installing a particular alternative device;

W = Present value of water and sewer savings, calculated by

evaluating the annual amount of water expected to be saved

at the price (s) for each unit of water saved (including

per unit sewer charges and taxes) and discounting to the

present

En = Present value of energy savings from reduced hot water

usage, calculated by evaluating the annual amount of

energy expected to be saved at the price (s) for each

energy unit saved (including taxes) and discounting to

the present;

Ac = Acquisition cost of the device being added to an existing

fixture or the differential acquisition cost of a newly

installed water-saving fixture compared with a standard

model

I = Installation cost of the add-on device or the differential

installation cost of a newly installed water-saving

fixture compared with a standard model;

M = Present value of operation, maintenance, and repair costs

expected to result from the add-on device or from the

special feature of a newly installed fixture; and

228
R = Present value of the cost of replacing the add-on device

or the special feature if replacement is expected during

the homeowner's planning horizon.

The discounting of future values (savings or costs) to the present

in equation 1 is accomplished by applying the standard discount

formulas in table 1. For example, consider a low-flow showerhead that

is expected to need replacement at the end of year 15. If the replacement cost at the end of year 15 is $10 in today's prices, and the

real (excluding inflation) rate of interest is 8 percent, then one would discount the future replacement cost as follows:

PV = F • (1 + i)~

n

= $10.00 • (1.08)"15

= $10.00 • (0.3152) = $3.15.

Similarly, if the value of the annual water and sewer savings

from the low-flow showerhead is expected to be $20, the planning

horizon of the homeowner is 20 years, and the real interest rate is

8 percent, then the discounting would be carried out as follows:

Table 1. Formulas for Discounting Future Values to the Present

Value Being Discounted

Single Future Value (F)

Uniform Recurring Value (A)

Escalating Recurring Value (E)

where

Formula for Present Value (PV)

PV = F • (1 + i)"n

1 - (1 + i)

i r l 1 + e +

X

1*

i - e Mr+

F = a future value occurring once at the end of period n; A = an annual value repeated regularly at the end of each of n periods;

E = an escalating value increasing at a constant growth rate,

e, and repeated regularly at the end of each of n periods;

i = the real (excluding inflation) rate of interest per period;

n = the number of compounding periods; and

e = the real (excluding inflation) rate of growth per period

of an escalating value (e.g., the price of energy).

Assumes i ^ e. For the special case of i = e, PV = E • n.

229
PV = A

1 - (1 + i)"

n

= $20.00

= $20.00

1 - (1.08)

-201

.08

L.(9.818) = $196.36.

The last formula in table 1 is employed when a recurring value,

rather than remaining fixed over the planning horizon, is expected to

increase at a constant rate greater than that of general inflation.

This might be likely in the case of the annual dollar value of the

energy savings from reduced hot water usage. Although the same number

of energy units might be saved from year to year, the dollar value of

those savings could grow because of escalation in the price of energy.

For example, suppose the dollar value of the annual energy savings of

the showerhead is $30 at the current price of energy. If the price

of energy is expected to increase at a real (i.e., above general

inflation) annual rate of 5 percent, then the present value of the

energy savings over the 20 year planning horizon would be calculated,

discounting at 8 percent interest, as follows:

PV = E

1 +

= $30.00

1 -

1.05

1 + e

1 + i

08 - .05

1 - 1.05

1 .08

201

= $30.00 • (15.076) = $452.2!

Before applying these discounting procedures, the analyst should

eliminate from further consideration those alternatives whose acquisition and installation costs exceed the homeowner's financial budget.

The economic decision rule for choosing among the mutually exclusive

alternatives is to select the affordable alternative with the highest

positive NPV. If none of the affordable alternatives yields a positive

NPV, then none should be selected and the existing fixture should not

be modified.

This decision rule for selecting one (or none) among several

mutually exclusive devices is illustrated in the following example.

Suppose NPVs for the three alternative shower modifications were as follows: low-flow showerhead (NPV = $600); medium-flow showerhead

(NPV = $450) and flow restrictor (NPV = $350). In this case, the

decision rule of maximizing NPV would lead one to select the lowflow showerhead as the best alternative among the three being

considered. One should note that all three modifications would

represent a positive economic improvement over the existing shower,

but the purpose of this decision rule is to choose the best affordable

alternative given that only one can be selected (i.e., they are mutually exclusive)

230
Many available water-saving devices are not mutually exclusive,

but rather compatible in that it is technically feasible to install

any combination of them in a given house. Typically, compatible

devices are those which are installed or incorporated as features in

different plumbing fixtures. For example, the following devices

could be considered compatible with one another: low-flow showerhead,

shallow trap toilet, and kitchen sink faucet flow restrictor. When

evaluating compatible devices, one, all, or any combination of them can be selected. In order to achieve the greatest net economic

improvement, all those compatible devices should be selected for

which NPV, as calculated by equation 1, is positive, and all the

others should be rejected. This combination is optimal in that it

cannot be modified (by the elimination or addition of devices) to

increase the homeowner's economic welfare. It is assumed that the

homeowner is able to finance the acquisition and installation costs

of all the cost-effective compatible devices. If investment funds

are limited, a different criterion, based on the Savings-to-Investment

Ratio, must be used, as discussed in (1).

AN EXAMINATION OF WATER RATE SCHEDULES

A crucial factor in making cost-effective water conservation

decisions is the dollar value of water savings, as measured by water

bill reductions. The approach commonly taken for estimating bill

reductions is to use the average price paid by the homeowner to value

each unit (typically 1000 gallons or 100 cubic feet) of water expected

to be saved. Because current water rate schedules are complex,

however, the actual bill reduction will often be quite different from

that estimated by using the average price of water. This section first

describes the major types of water rate schedules. Then it analyzes

a national sample of schedules to compare the correct price for

valuing a unit of conserved water with the average price of water.

Water differs from most commodities in that charges for its use

are based on a rate schedule rather than on a single price. A single

price is the charge per unit (unit rate) applicable to all units

consumed. Charges in a rate schedule, on the other hand, vary with

one or both of the following parameters: (1) amount of water consumed,

and (2) length of the billing period.

There are five major types of rate schedules: fixed charge per

period, uniform rate per unit, varying rate per unit, peak load

pricing, and mixed. Under a fixed charge schedule, any particular

customer is charged the same dollar amount per period regardless of

the quantity of water consumed. Some form of fixed charge must be

used for customers without water meters. In a uniform rate schedule,

the unit rate is the same for all units of water consumed. This is

*The average price (in $/1000 gallons) paid by a homeowner for water

consumed during any period is given by: (1000 X total water bill)/

gallons consumed.

231
equivalent to a single price. Uniform rates are usually combined with

other charges in a mixed schedule, as discussed below.

A varying rate schedule can either be a declining or an increasing

block schedule. Under a declining block schedule, a certain rate per

unit is charged for all units consumed up to a specified quantity.

Such a bounded consumption range is known as a "block". For water

consumed in the next block, a lower unit rate is charged. In this

manner unit rates decrease for succeeding consumption blocks. The

increasing block schedule is the reverse of the declining block type

in that unit rates increase with each succeeding block.

A peak load pricing schedule uses either a seasonal rate or a surcharge. Under a seasonal rate schedule, higher unit rates are imposed in the summer, when demand increases due to lawn sprinkling.

The unit rates can either be uniform or varying. Under a surcharge

schedule, uniform or varying rates are charged for a base amount of

water. Higher rates are charged for water in excess of the base.

These higher rates can be applied either during the summer sprinkling

season or throughout the year.

Most rate schedules in effect today are mixed in the sense of

combining unit rates with a flat charge. The flat charge can either

be a minimum charge or a fixed charge. A minimum charge includes a certain allotment of water, beyond which unit rates apply. In this

paper, a minimum charge allotment is treated as a block. A fixed

charge in a mixed schedule does not include a water allotment, so that the unit rates are imposed beginning with the first gallon of

water consumed . Flat charges are commonly used to recover those

costs that are independent of the amount of water consumed, such as billing and administration costs.

If one assumes that households are more inclined to save water

at higher water prices, then the theoretical conservation incentive

of each rate schedule type can be indicated. Fixed charges provide

no incentive to conserve because the quantity of water used is not

related to the price of water. The uniform rate schedule fosters

water conservation in a manner that does not vary with increased

consumption. The declining block schedule provides a conservation

incentive that diminishes as consumption increases. On the other

hand, the increasing block schedule and peak load pricing schedules

have the most potential for inducing water conservation by creating

an incentive that increases with greater water use. This type of

incentive is likely to be most effective in reducing the lawn

sprinkling component of water use. For mixed schedules, the incentive

to conserve depends on the type of unit rate in the schedule, except

when consumption lies within a minimum charge block. In this case, a mixed schedule provides no incentive to conserve since the homeowner

must still pay the full minimum charge.

232
Table 2. Relative Frequency of Water Rate Schedule Types for a Sample of 90 Schedules3

Relat ive

Type of Rate Schedule Frenuenfv CZ}

Uniform Rate 2.2

Fixed Charge/Uniform Rate 6.7

Fixed Charge/Declining Block 4.4

Fixed Charge/ Increasing Block 3.3

Fixed Charge/Seasonal Rate 1.1

Minimum Charge/Uniform Rate 25.6

Minimum Charge/Declining Block 55.6

Minimum Charge/Increasing Block 1.1

Total 100.0

Schedule types were determined based on charges for the first

50,000 gallons of consumption per month. This limit represents

"maximum" residential water consumption per month—the average

monthly consumption for a household of six in Alaska, the State

with the highest per capita consumption level.

A national sample of 90 water rate schedules will now be

analyzed in terms of the mean values for key schedule variables. The

sample was drawn from a survey by the American Water Works Association

(AWWA) of its entire utility membership. Over 700 rate schedules from

1978 and early 1979 were submitted. The sample of 90 schedules

resulted from an attempt to select at random two schedules for each

State. The AWWA survey yielded fewer than two complete schedules for some States.

Table 2 presents the relative frequency of schedule types for the

sample of 90 water rate schedules. Note that over half the utilities

use the minimum charge /dec lining block type of schedule and another

25 percent the minimum charge/uniform rate type. Furthermore, less

than 6 percent of the schedules can provide a conservation incentive

that increases with more water use (f ixed/ increasing , f ixed/ seasonal,

and minimum/ increasing) . This suggests that the redesign of rate

schedules could lead to increased water conservation.

To assure comparability of schedules within the sample, a number

of guidelines were followed. For example, since water rate schedules

do not always account for sewer service and fire protection, these

charges were always excluded.

Two measures were used to determine that portion of each rate

schedule relevant to this analysis: typical per capita residential

*For the complete set of guidelines, see (1)

233
water consumption, and the range of household sizes that accounts for

most single-family dwelling units. First, a national average value,

54.6 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) , was used for typical per

capita residential water consumption (2). Second, rate schedules were analyzed using households of from two to six people, accounting for 92

percent of all people in families living together in a household (3).

A computer program generated the mean values of four key rate

schedule variables for the sample. These values are presented in

table 3 by household size. The total charges on a monthly water bill

range between $5.02 for a household of two and $9.98 for a household

of six (column 3) . Assuming these average values in column 3 approximate a typical schedule, one can establish the order of magnitude of

savings that might be achieved. For example, a 25 percent decrease

in consumption for a household of four from 6,552 to 4,914 gallons/

month (column 2) would save $1.25 ($7 . 42 -$6 . 17 , column 3) on the

monthly water bill.

The correct price for valuing conserved water is marginal price.

The marginal price of water is the reduction in the total water bill

resulting from saving a unit of waters Similarly, it is the

increase in the total water bill resulting from the last unit of water

consumed. The unit rate associated with each non-minimum charge block

in a rate schedule is the marginal price for each unit consumed within

that block. A minimum charge block implies a marginal price of zero

for each unit consumed within that block.

The results in column 4 indicate that the mean marginal price for

the block of water in which consumption for a household of four lies

is $0.78/1000 gallons. In contrast, the mean average price of water

(column 5) is $1.13/1000 gallons for a household of four. This

striking difference between marginal price and average price is also

seen in column 6, which presents marginal price as a percent of

average price for each household size. For a household of four,

marginal price represents only 69 percent of average price.

The primary reason for such a sizeable difference between

marginal price and average price is the widespread use of large flat

charges. As observed in table 2, over 97 percent of the rate schedules in the sample have these fixed or minimum charges. Moreover,

these charges which are unrelated to consumption are a large percentage of the total water bill. For a household of four, for example,

flat charges comprise on average 55 percent of the total water bill.

These charges increase average price and either leave marginal price

unaffected or reduce it to zero. The latter occurs whenever consumption falls within a minimum charge block. This is the case for a household of two in over one-third of the rate schedules in the sample

The marked difference between marginal price and average price

may lead homeowners to overinvest in water conservation. When

calculating NPV for a water-saving device, the present value of water

234
QJNH

COO

0)COo

IX!>^

COa; iH3

T)

0) x:a

CO

0)CJ U-l 01 •H O oH u M d PU

a)CJ

C

•H a) CO 60 Ph }-i U 0)

CO CO > S CO <

0) 6^? bO ^ O

CD o U i—I o H U CO rH U CD bO X

CO

O CN

aj S o ^

&o o

CO CM rH /-v M O "»«. CO

CD -COw

0)o

•H

f-i

CO S H 14-1 bO O w

CO

CObO O ^^ O

rH co- &u

ti rH o r-H /-n g H oo

pq

w

rH

4-> cd oH CO 3:

CO rH

CJ «*-» ^

O X

•H 4->

O

T3 4-1

C CO

<u s-ia o x

g oj S 6 3 4J 3 • CO CO CO rH <f < O M II CN o

rC QJ

OJ

N

CO -H 3 CO O

00 o m o 00 CO m

CO OO CN m CN rH o O

rH rH

H rH rH

CM CO 00 00 o o o o o

CN CN o 00 O rH

LO 00

CN

<r CM o 00

rH

m CN CO CN o> m rH 00 !>. CO CO o> CO

T3

CJa

bO

^3- LO

tio

43oeo

coeo

QJCO

CO CP

235
and sewer savings (W in equation 1) will frequently be overstated if

based on average price. The fixed or minimum charge, which tends to

raise average price, must be paid whether or not water is conserved.

The accurate indicator of a homeowner's benefit from saving a unit of

water is marginal price. Therefore, in the computer program discussed in the next section, marginal price is used for calculating NPV.

COMPUTER PROGRAM

A computer program, SAVINGS, has been developed to calculate NPV

for eleven water-saving devices applied to water closets, showers,

kitchen faucets, dishwashers, and clothes washers. One must input

only four data items to use SAVINGS: (1) local water and sewer rate

schedule(s); (2) State of residence; (3) device to be analyzed; and

(4) fuel used for heating water. The program contains default values

for all other variables, including acquisition, installation, and

maintenance costs, and usage characteristics of the device. However,

the user may override these default values.

SAVINGS can be used with all types of water rate schedules with

the exception of the surcharge schedule type. A f ew rate schedules

must be modified for use by SAVINGS. The analysis assumes monthly

billing periods, so rate schedules using different billing periods

must be converted to an equivalent monthly basis. Likewise, the

analysis assumes constant rates year round, so seasonal rates must be

averaged over the year.

SAVINGS calculates monthly water and energy savings (if applicable), the corresponding monthly and life-cycle cost savings, and NPV.

These results are illustrated in table 4 for a shallow trap toilet,

using the current water and sewer rate schedules for Denver, Colorado.

The Denver water rate schedule is based on bi-monthly consumption, so

it was converted to a monthly basis. The sewer rate schedule for

Table 4. Evaluation of Shallow Trap Toilet in Denver, Colorado,

by Household Size

Household Size

2 3 4 5 6

Monthly Water

Savings (gal) 750.00 1125.00 1500.00 1875.00 2250.00

Monthly Water & Sewer

Cost Savings ($) 1.22 1.83 2.44 3.06 3.67

Life-Cycle Water & Sewer Cost Savings ($) 170.96 256.44 341.92 427.40 512.87

Net Present Value ($) 149.30 234.78 320.26 405.74 491.22

236
Denver, $0.95 per 1000 gallons of water used, was added to the water

rate schedule. The resulting schedule includes a fixed charge of

$2.35, $1.63 per 1000 gallons for the first 15,000 gallons of water

used, and $1.53 per 1000 gallons for the next 35,000 gallons used.

Table 4 shows that NPV for a shallow trap toilet in Denver would

range from $149.30 to $491.22 for household sizes of two and six,

respectively. Although these results assume the house has only one water closet, SAVINGS can accommodate alternative cases.

In its present form, SAVINGS has several limitations. One

limitation is that the analysis is restricted to the two cases of addon devices and new applications. Add-on devices modify existing

fixtures. The total costs associated with the add-ons are included

in the calculation of NPV. New applications are fixtures installed

as part of new construction, renovation, remodeling, or repair

activities. Only the differential costs of new applications (i.e.,

the costs attributable solely to the water-saving features of the

fixture) are included in the NPV calculation. SAVINGS does not treat

the case of a retrofit application, in which a water-saving fixture

replaces a properly functioning fixture.

Another limitation is that SAVINGS cannot be used to select the

best combination of compatible devices. It treats each type of device

independently, so that all calculations of savings are done at the

margin. In other words, it treats the device being analyzed as the

only type of water-saving device in the house. Rate schedules often

have different unit rates for different blocks of consumption. The

water savings of one device could change the homeowner's consumption

block, and thereby change the amount of dollar savings attributable to

the next device to be installed. When devices are treated in combination, the likelihood of changing blocks is increased. Because

of this, the monetary savings from devices installed in combination do

not necessarily equal the sum of the savings from the devices treated

individually.

SAVINGS is also limited in that the device is assumed to be

installed everywhere it is applicable. In reality, a device could be

installed in only some of the places where it is applicable. With

further research and program development, SAVINGS could be modified to

overcome all the above limitations.

SUMMARY

The method presented in this paper for selecting water-saving

devices can encourage conservation in two ways. First, the

evaluation results can be distributed by utilities to homeowners to

provide them with the information they need to select cost-effective

water conservation devices. Secondly, a utility can compare the

results for a variety of rate schedules to determine what impact

alternative schedules have on the cost effectiveness of water-saving

237
devices. The utility could then redesign its schedule to foster

voluntary installation of conservation devices.

When calculating NPV, it is important that the marginal price of

water, rather than its average price, be used to value conserved

water. Indeed, the foregoing analysis of a national sample of water

rate schedules indicates that homeowners' actual benefits from saving

a unit of water (as measured by its marginal price) are considerably

lower than the average price paid for water. Thus, NPV will frequently

be overstated if based on average price.

A similar study could be conducted for sewer and energy rates.

Because wastewater treatment and water heating can be reduced when

water is saved, a study of sewer and energy rate schedules would

contribute to more rational water conservation decisions.

Acknowledgments—Special thanks are due to George Craft of the American

Water Works Association who provided the sample of water rate

schedules. The authors appreciate the generous assistance of Lawrence

Galowin, Laurene Linsenmayer, and Harold Marshall.

REFERENCES

1. Weber, Stephen F. ; Thompson, Bruce E.; and Lippiatt, Barbara C,

Economic Framework for Cost-Ef f ective Residential Water Conservation Decisions , National Bureau of Standards Interagency Report

81-2304, Washington, D.C., August 1981.

2. Murray, C. Richard and Reeves, E. Bodette, Estimated Use of Water

in the United States in 1975 , Geological Survey Circular 765,

Arlington, Virginia, 1977, pp. 4 and 20-21.

3. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United

States: 1979 (100th ed.), Washington, D.C., 1979, pp. 4 and 49.

238
A WATER SUPPLY SIMULATION MODEL: ANALYZING FOR THE IMPLICATIONS

OF CONSERVATION

Robert M. Clark, Ph.D., Chief, Economic Analysis Activities,

Drinking Water Research Division, USEPA, Cincinnati, Ohio

Richard M. Males, Ph.D., Vice President, W. E. Gates and Associates,

Batavia, Ohio

William E. Gates, Ph.D., President, W. E. Gates and Associates,

Fairfax, Virginia

ABSTRACT

Water conservation, as it relates to the operations of water

supply systems, is not simply a problem of reducing user demand.

Financing structures for water utilities are traditionally such

that a reduction in demand may necessitate an increase in rates

charged to the consumer, to avoid shortfalls in utility income

for debt service and fixed operating expenses. In addition,

a number of "beneficiaries" of the water supply system, such

as those who enjoy fire protection, or those whose land is more attractive for development due to the availability of water,

but who are not major consumptive users of water, tend not to

bear the potential increased unit costs associated with user

demand reduction.

The problem can be considered as one of spatial economics - water system customers of certain classes, located in portions

of the service area, subsidize other beneficiaries of the system

in other classes and areas. The impact of demand reduction,

coupled with the existing financial and revenue structure, can

be expected to exacerbate the existing subsidizations of water

system beneficiaries. The Drinking Water Research Division of

USEPA has developed a systematic approach, organized as a set

of computer programs, to assist analysts in examining problems

of spatial economics and physical behavior of water distribution

systems. The approach, known as the Water Supply Simulation

Model (WSSM) , consists of a data base describing the physical,

economic, and spatial characteristics of the distribution system

and program modules to: create and maintain the data base; display

it graphically; perform hydraulic network, time of travel, and

other physical analyses; and to perform economic allocations

to develop spatial cost of service. The system is general-purpose

in nature, and can easily be modified to suit the needs of a specific situation. Through combination of concepts of spatial

analysis, spatial economics, data base management, and analytical

mathematical modeling, the WSSM provides a powerful tool for

239
examining the consequence of alternative policies related to

water supply utilities. The structure of the WSSM, and sample

applications, are described.

INTRODUCTION

Issues related to conservation have become of increasing

importance to the water supply industry over the last several

years. A drought in California, a water emergency in New Jersey,

and potential water shortages in other parts of the United States

have heightened interest in conservation as a means of water

demand reduction.

Conservation has many facets, ranging from hardware

considerations such as design and installation of mechanical

flow regulating devices, to broader economic issues related

to conservation-oriented rate structures. Most of the early

focus on conservation was on the selection of the best fixtures,

fittings, and devices to be installed in households and

businesses.^ More recently attempts have been made to

understand the implications of water conservation for utility

financing and pricing activities.

In an attempt to explore the latter issue the Drinking Water

Research Division has developed a Water Supply Simulation Model

that will assist in the physical and economic analysis of water

supply distribution systems. The WSSM incorporates techniques

from spatial data management, data base management, mathematical

modeling, and computer graphics. ^ The spatial framework within

which the WSSM operates can provide a number of interesting insights

into issues of equity and subsidy between users of different

classes and locations within a utility service area. It provides

a mechanism for the formulation and testing of "cost-of-service"

pricing structures, in which the rate charged to a given user

is commensurate with the cost of serving that user. The basic

concepts and overall structure of the WSSM, together with implications

for water conservation planning, are described below.

MODEL DEVELOPMENT

Water supply systems are generally composed of (1) acquisition

facilities, (2) treatment facilities, where needed, and (3) delivery

systems. 3 Delivery can be further subdivided into transmission

and distribution. Acquisition involves either tapping a source

of water that is adequate in quantity to satisfy present and

reasonable future demands on a continuous basis, or converting

an intermittent source into a continuous supply by storing surplus

water for use during periods of low flows. If the water is not

of satisfactory quality at the point of acquisition, treatment

240
plants purify it; that is, polluted water is disinfected, esthetically

unattractive or unpalatable water is treated to make it attractive

and palatable, water containing iron or manganese is subjected

to deferrization or demanganization, corrosive water is stabilized

chemically, and excessively hard water is softened. The delivery

system, which constitutes the water transportation system and

includes transmission and distribution components, conveys water

to the consumers. Constructing and operating an urban water

works system involves large investments in both operating and

capital funds.

Water supply systems are often public utilities as well.

These systems can be thought of as spatial service or commodity

networks as will be discussed in the following section.

Spatial Framework

Public utilities can be divided into those providing transportation services and those which provide services through

physical connection between the plant of the supplier and

the premises of consumers. In the first group, one might

include metropolitan transit authorities and solid waste

management; and in the second, electricity, cable television,

gas, sanitary sewers, and telephone services.^

All of these utilities can be characterized as networks

overlaid upon a spatial distribution of supply and demand. Most

models of public utilities incorporate physical modeling of the

network itself, or economic modeling of the system as a whole.

Socially, politically, and economically, however, the proper

functioning of a utility system is determined by the manner in

which it satisfies local demand, as well as the "global" economies

of the situation.

If we consider population and industry to be "spatial"

parameters, described by type, intensity, and location, it

is clear that there is a "feedback" relationship between

these parameters and the utility networks which service

them. That is, the spatial parameters describe and create

the "demand" for utility services, but at the same time the

extension of a particular network into an area where there

is no demand can encourage establishment of population or industry. Such a pattern is common in the case of new sewer

construction, which opens new land to development, creating

the demand for additional utility services.

As noted above, the joint analysis of spatial and network

data is seldom undertaken, but such an approach provides a powerful

tool for data management, data analysis, research, and policy

241
information. This paper describes the development of an analytical

model representing the cost of distributing water supply services

in a single urban area. The model explicitly includes the relationship

of transmission costs to the problem of serving spatially distributed

demand.

Water supply systems furnish a service that is often without

competition. The local water utility is ordinarily a pure monopoly

except to the extent that industrial customers of water may furnish

their own supplies.

As mentioned earlier, it is possible to separate the water

supply system into two components: (1) the treatment plant, and

(2) the delivery (transmission and distribution) systems.-' Each

of these components has a different cost function. The unit

costs associated with treatment facilities are usually assumed

to decrease as the quality of service provided increases. However,

the delivery system is more directly affected by the characteristics

of the area being served. The cost trade-offs between the two

components will determine the least-cost service area. As pointed

out by Dajani and Gemmell, "Economies of scale may be offset

by diseconomies of dispersion, agglomeration, or spatial arrangement

and pattern.

By accumulating the costs to provide water to a particular

area (which will vary depending upon a variety of factors), the

"true cost" (as opposed to the rate charged) can be calculated.

It is assumed that, when pricing of a resource more closely

approximates the time marginal cost of that resource, it more closely approximates the true marginal cost of that

resource, and more efficient use (i.e., conservation) will

result

It is in this context that the Water Supply Simulation Model

can be used to analyze the implications of conservation, by developing

spatial distributions of cost of service, and testing alternative

revenue structures.

STRUCTURE OF WSSM

The WSSM is organized into a data base and program and display

modules. The data base consists of permanent data files describing

a water supply network. Two inter-related files are used: the

Node File and the Link File. The water supply network is characterized

as a set of connected elements, each element being either a node

or a link. Thus, demands and water sources (storage tanks, treatment

plants, etc.) are characterized as nodal elements, while pipes

are characterized as link elements. For nodal elements, information

on location, elevation, and quantity of demand or supply is

developed and stored in the data base. For link elements, size,

242
length, age, coordinates of the end points, type, and other pertinent

variables (including the connectivity to the nodes) are developed

and stored. In addition, the Node and Link files can handle

user-specified information that may be of interest for a given

simulation analysis, such as number of pipe breaks or surrounding

land use.

Program modules operate upon information in the data base,

extracting needed information, performing analyses, and inserting

calculated values into the data base, if desired. A hydraulic

analysis module determines pressures and flows throughout the

system (under steady-state conditions), given the above-noted

information as to demand, system layout and connectivity, pipe

size, etc. A general-purpose module solves a variety of problems

that can be formulated as simultaneous linear equations derived

from the network, including time of travel, concentration of

constituents at nodes, and linear cost allocation to demands.

Additional program modules allow for direct manipulation (insertion

and modification) of data in the Link and Node files, and original

creation and error-checking of these data files.

Display modules provide graphical or tabular display of

information maintained within the data base. Graphical display

consists of a computer generated map of the network, with a variety

of options, including numerical annotation of nodes or links

(e.g., displaying pressures, velocities, or other information

maintained in the data base), selection of links to be displayed

based on specific criteria (e.g., show all pipes in which velocity

is less than some minimum value), and display of specific portions

of the entire area. Plots can be generated at any scale desired.

A general-purpose report program allows for tabular display of

link or node-oriented data under user control, and other display

programs allow for the display of information about individual

nodes or links, as specified by the user.

The WSSM is programmed entirely in FORTRAN, and every attempt

has been made to allow for programs that are transferable among

different computers. The WSSM incorporates the WATSIM hydraulic

network analysis program, a public-domain hydraulic simulation

technique originally developed for the Office of Water Research

and Technology. ^ While the overall WSSM can be implemented on medium-to- large size computers supporting FORTRAN and direct

access storage techniques, the requirements of hydraulic network

analysis dictate that large network simulations be restricted

to large computers. Reports describing the WSSM, including documentation and program listings, are currently in the process

of development.

As noted above, the concept of "true-cost" pricing should

lead to more conservation-oriented consumption practices. The

WSSM can aid in the development of such pricing through allocation

243
of cost to demand points, based on a number of alternative policies.

Since pressures and flows are known at all demand points^ it

is also possible to test alternative revenue structures, based

on factors other than consumptive use and class of user. A revenue structure that combines pressure and flow factors could be used

to develop pricing that takes into account the extra costs associated

with providing water to high service areas. By comparing costs

(as determined from the WSSM) with revenues, the pattern of spatial

and class of user subsidies can also be examined."

The ability to test innovative pricing structures also allows

for wider considerations relative to cost and benefit incidence

for a water utility. In general, water utilities need to generate

sufficient income to finance debt service and fixed operating

costs, independent of the amount of water supplied. As conservation

practices are put into place with rate structures based on consumption

the unit costs charged must rise to bring in the same amount

of fixed dollars. Thus, the consumptive users are bearing the

entire cost increase. There are beneficiaries of the water system,

however, who are not major consumptive users - for example, those

that benefit from the existence of fire protection, in the form

of developable property and lowered insurance rates, but do not consume large quantities of water, as in a warehousing operation.

While it can be argued that "non-consumptive" users do not contribute

significantly to the "need" for conservation, it is also true

that the capital cost of a water distribution is frequently determined

by the size requirements for satisfying fire demand, not average

use. Thus, some methodology, such as a rate structure that takes

into account the maintenance of pressure or defined fire flow

capability in an area, can be devised and simulated with the

WSSM, and thus capture cost recovery from a wider class of benefited

users

The physical simulation capabilities, and data management

orientation of the WSSM, also allow for its use in examining

problems of unaccounted water and pipe breakage. Information

can be stored on known sites of pipe breakage, and correlated

with spatially oriented data such as soils, pressure changes

in the system, etc., to predict areas of high pipe breakage,

and to optimize the repair/replace decision. At the same time,

the hydraulic simulation capability can be used to assist in

the identification of zones in which large amounts of unaccounted

water appear. The effect of demand reduction at nodes due to

specific conservation practices can also be simulated, and reductions

in utility energy costs estimated.

244
SUMMARY

The WSSM is a multi-purpose, flexible tool that should be

useful for analyzing conservation impacts in water utility.

By combining techniques of spatial analysis, economic and physical

simulation, and data base management, a wide variety of analysis

options are made available. The WSSM is "open" in character;

that is, the user can easily modify or add capabilities to suit

the needs of a particular water utility situation.

REFERENCES

1. Sharpe , William E. , "Water Conservation Devices for New or Existing Dwellings," Journal of the American Water Works

Association Vol. 73, No. 3, March 1981, pp. 145-149.

2. Clark, Robert M. , and Males, Richard M. , "Spatial and Demographic

Data: A Means for Predicting Urban Service System Performance,"

in the Proceedings of the Specialty Conference on the Planning

and Engineering Interface with a Modernized Land Data System . Edited by G. Warren Mark, American Society of Civil Engineers,

345 East 47th Street, New York, 10017.

3. Koening, L., The Cost of Water Treatment by Coagulation,

Sedimentation, and Rapid Sand Filtration . Part I. Report

prepared for the U.S. Public Health Service, Division of

Water Supply and Pollution Control, Technical Services Branch,

January, 1966.

4. Schmalensee, Richard. "A Note on Economies of Scale and

Natural Monopoly in the Distribution of Public Utility Service,"

Bell Journal of Economics 9 (Spring): 270-76, 1978.

5. Clark, Robert M. , Stevie, Richard G., and Trygg, G.

" The

Cost of Municipal Water Supply: A Case Study. " EPA- 60/2-

76-179. Cincinnati, Ohio: Drinking Water Research Division,

Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, 1976.

6. Dajani, J. S. and Gemmell, R. S. "Economic Guidelines for

Public Utilities Planning," Journal of the Urban Planning

and Development Division 99 (Sept.) 171-82, 1973.

7. Rao, H. S., Bree, J. W. Jr., Bonzvi, R. , Extended Period

Simulation of Water Distribution Networks , Final Technical

Report for OWRR, Project C-4164, Systems Control Inc., Palo

Alto, CA, February 1974, NTIS PB-230148.

8. Clark, Robert M.,and Stevie, Richard G., "A Water Supply Cost

Model Incorporating Spatial Variables," Land Economics , Vol.

57, No. 1, pp. 18-32, February 1981.

245

COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF POTABLE WATER CONSERVATION - MULTIFACETED APPROACH

Wallace J. Hopp

Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories

Richland, Washington

William P. Darby, Ph.D.

Department of Technology and Human Affairs

Washington University

St. Louis, Missouri

ABSTRACT

This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of household water

conservation measures in terms of overall economic efficiency as well

as from the individual points of view of homeowners, representatives of

municipal wastewater treatment utilities, and representatives of public

water supply utilities. The analysis considers potential capital and

operation and maintenance cost savings resulting from reduced volumes

of drinking water subject to conventional, as well as conventional and

granular activated carbon, treatment processes; reduced volumes of domestic wastewater subject to secondary treatment; and reduced domestic

hot water use. Evaluation is carried out using a net present equivalent

which considers the time value of money as well as the effects of inflation and real price escalation. Results indicate that a household water

conservation program consisting of a toilet-tank dam insert and a simple

shower flow restrictor is cost-effective from all points of view con- sidered .

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

The amount of freshwater used inside the home and provided by public water supplies accounts for about 6.3 percent of the total amount

of fresh water withdrawn for use in the United States. Compared to

withdrawals for other purposes, such as irrigation, which accounts for

46.9 percent of total water use, and industrial/commercial uses, which

account for an additional 45.7 percent of the total, household water

makes up only a minor portion of the overall water use picture (1)

Therefore, conservation of household water can have but a very small

effect on the quantities of water available throughout the United States.

Public supplies of household water typically represent not just a volume of water, but water which has been highly purified in water

treatment plants. Inside the home, some of the water is heated to

provide hot water, using energy resources. Nearly all the water delivered to individual residences eventually becomes sewage and must be

disposed of on site in septic tanks, or collected in municipal sewerage

systems and purified in a wastewater treatment plant before being

247
discharged, often into the same stream from which it was originally

taken. A reduction in household water use would therefore be accompanied by reductions in the total amount of water treated to achieve

potable quality, in the quantity of sewage to be treated**

Household water conservation has the potential to reduce the cost

of supplying drinking water in three respects. First, by reducing the

total amount of water that must be treated and distributed, household

water conservation could reduce the flow-dependent costs of treating

and pumping. Second, in growing communities, household water conservation could obviate the need for additional treatment capacity or reduce the size of the necessary increases in capacity. Third, recent

Federal regulations issued under the Safe Drinking Water Act will

require some communities to reduce concentrations of trihalomethanes

(THMs) in the drinking water. For those communities in which THMs will

be controlled by treatment with granular activated carbon (GAC) , a re- duction in the amount of water demanded could permit installation of

smaller, less expensive GAC systems, as well as reduce the flow-related

operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for the GAC systems.

A reduction in household water use also offers potential savings

to the homeowner. In areas where domestic water use is metered, using

less water might decrease the monthly household water bill, although a savings in reduced water bills would be offset if decreased revenue

necessitated an increase in water rates. In cities where homeowners

are billed a flat monthly charge for water, regardless of the amount

used, household water bills would probably be unaffected by a reduction

in use. But reductions in household water bills are not the only source

of savings for homeowners who conserve water. Typical homeowners spend

roughly 10 times as much for energy to heat the necessary portion of the

household water supply as for the entire household water supply. The

energy used to heat residential hot water accounts for approximately

14.9 percent of the total energy used in the home (2), and about 3.5

percent of the total end use energy in the United States (3) . A reduction in hot water use would reduce household energy consumption, and

result in a reduction in household energy costs.

In most cities, the majority of household drinking water used within the home is disposed of as sewage via direct discharge into municipal

sewerage systems and wastewater treatment plants. The Federal Water

Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 and The Clean Water Act of 1977

require that publicly-owned municipal wastewater treatment plants provide best practicable wastewater treatment technology over the life of

the facility. In general, this has been defined to be a requirement of

secondary treatment except where receiving water quality considerations

dictate more stringent levels. The two acts authorize approximately

$45 billion in Federal funds to States and municipalities to pay 75

percent of the cost of constructing collector and interceptor sewers and

conventional wastewater treatment plants (4) . A reduction in household

water use, and thereby household wastewater flow, would save part of

the cost of constructing a wastewater treatment plant by enabling a smaller-sized plant to serve the same population. Any O&M costs which

248
are dependent of the quantity of wastewater flow would also be reduced

through household water conservation.

A reduction in household water use can be achieved by means of a wide variety of measures. One possibility is lifestyle changes on the

part of homeowners in order to use water more sparingly. Examples include turning off the shower while lathering up, discontinuing use of

the toilet as an ashtray or garbage pail, and not running the water

while shaving or brushing one's teeth. Some of these steps would involve little effort by the homeowner and may be able to be encouraged

through only small efforts at educating the public. Other lifestyle

changes may require larger changes in water use patterns and may be

perceived as constrictions in personal freedom, and therefore may be

met with resistance from some segments of the public. While we recognize the large potential of lifestyle changes to reduce household water

use, because of the uncertainty of predicting the degree of public ac- ceptance and the questionable feasibility of implementing some of the

more drastic steps, these water conservation measures are not directly

considered in this study.

Instead, the analysis concentrates on household water conservation

achieved through the use of devices designed to reduce the use of water

in the home with little change in the level of effort or behavior of the

homeowner after installation. Numerous such devices are currently

available, ranging from a shower flow restrictor costing less than a dollar to a composting waste disposal system costing thousands of

dollars

The degree of reduction in water use from a particular water-saving

device would not be the same for all homeowners. Differing conditions

and water use habits among homeowners cause variations in the effectiveness of water-saving devices from one household to another. For instance, a household with very high water pressure, which causes the

water flow from the shower to be quite large, would probably be able to save more water by using a shower flow restricting device than would a household with lower water pressure and thus smaller water flow from

the shower. Water use habits can also play a role in determining the

actual quantity of water saved by a water-saving device in a particular

household. At least partly because of differences among households,

there is substantial variability in estimates of the water savings from

similar devices.

In this study, we have performed a preliminary estimate of the financial savings from these reductions and compared them to the estimated

financial cost of household water conservation. Combining these individual components, a comprehensive evaluation of the cost-effectiveness

of household water conservation as it relates to the potable water supply sector, the homeowner, and the wastewater treatment sector can be

carried out.

249
DESCRIPTION OF THE ANALYTICAL METHOD

_______ Overview »

The approach taken in this analysis is based on examination of the

net present equivalent of the series of costs and cost savings resulting from alternative, device-focused household water conservation programs. Calculation of the net present equivalent includes an assumption of continuous compounding, as well as consideration of inflation

and real-price escalation, in addition to the time value of money.

The following sections describe conceptually the mechanisms through

which cost savings can accrue in each of the three sectors considered:

in-home hot water heating, municipal wastewater treatment, and public

drinking water treatment.

Household Energy Cost Savings

The principal cost savings that accrue to homeowners who participate in a household water conservation program are due to the energy

savings resulting when heated water is saved. In the limiting case,

this is the only savings that will accrue to homeowners : when water

use and sewage flow are not metered or when rate restructuring is

necessary to maintain revenues in a metered area.

On an individual basis, the energy cost savings that will accrue

to a household during any increment of time can be calculated in current dollars from the reduction in energy required for water heating,

the present energy price, and forecasted values for the average rates

of inflation and real energy price escalation over the period of analysis. The aggregated savings for the community during any increment of

time are the individual household savings multiplied by the number of

households that are participating in the program. The net present

value, in constant dollars, of the aggregated savings during some increment of time can be calculated using the conventional continuous

discounting method. And the net present equivalent, in constant dollars, of the series of aggregated cost savings can be calculated by

integrating the net present value over the useful life of the conservation device.

Wastewater Treatment Cost Savings

Household water conservation can result in cost savings in several

different aspects of municipal wastewater treatment. Because nearly

all the drinking water used within the home ultimately becomes wastewater, household water conservation is really tantamount to wastewater

flow reduction.

As soon as a conservation program is implemented, the reduction in

wastewater flow results in a corresponding reduction in the flow-dependent portion of the O&M costs for the existing wastewater treatment

250
plant. In a growing community, the O&M cost savings for each successive

increment of time increase at a geometric rate determined primarily by

the population growth rate. The net present equivalent of the series

of O&M cost savings can be determined by accounting for the time value

of money, inflation, and real price escalation, and integrating over

the appropriate period of time. The more and the earlier the wastewater

flow is reduced, the greater the net present equivalent of the O&M cost

savings.

If the population growth rate is such that the capacity of the

existing wastewater treatment plant will be exceeded, household water

conservation can produce additional cost savings. Implementation of a household water conservation program really represents a reduction in

the per capita wastewater flow rate. Assuming that the reduced per

capita rate is applicable to the existing population at the time of

program implementation as well as to all population increases thereafter, the household water conservation program will extend the life of

the existing treatment plant. Present capacity will be reached later

because of the lowered per capita wastewater flow rate.

If plant expansion or construction of new facilities is required

when existing capacity is reached, water conservation will affect

capital cost in two ways. First, since capacity will be reached later

because of the smaller flow, expansion can be postponed. The net present value of this capital outlay decreases as it is moved into the

future, as determined by the discount rate. Delaying the cost of con- struction results in a reduction in the net present value, provided that

inflation and real price escalation do not increase the construction

cost at a rate rapid enough to offset the reduction due to discounting.

Second, if it is necessary to provide adequate wastewater treatment

capacity for some specific time horizon, then the capacity of the ex- panded treatment facilities can be smaller as the result of implementing

household water conservation measures. This lowered capacity requirement is also likely to reduce the construction costs that would be

required in the absence of flow reduction measures. The principal factor that determines whether the net present value of the smaller-capacity facility built later will be less than the larger-capacity facility

built earlier is the relationship between the inflation and real price

escalation rates that affect construction costs and the discount rate

that reflects the time value of money. And as long as the water con- servation program is implemented before existing capacity is reached,

the decrease in required additional capacity and any resulting cost

savings depend only on the amount by which the flow is reduced and not on the time the reduction occurs.

In general, flow reduction measures, including household water con- servation programs, are mandated under the Federal Construction Grants

Program that will finance 75 percent of the construction cost of publicly-owned conventional municipal wastewater treatment works. Many States

have similar programs that further reduce that portion of the

251
construction cost borne by the municipality. In the absence of State

funds, any reductions in the construction cost of municipal wastewater

treatment facilities accrue 75 percent to the Federal Government and

25 percent to the municipality. Through this mechanism, the Federal

Government is a party-at-interest in household water conservation programs .

The wastewater from a community that has implemented household

water conservation measures will be slightly more concentrated. Water

conservation measures will reduce the volume of wastewater, but not the mass of organic matter and other pollutants present. The design

characteristics of the expanded facilities may need to be altered

slightly to reflect the higher strength of the influent. This change

may offset, to some degree, the savings realized if volumetric flow

reduction were the only consideration. But some small environmental

benefit may be realized. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

has defined requirements that must be met by most municipal secondary

wastewater treatment facilities in terms of effluent concentrations (5)

A water conservation program will reduce the volumetric flow rate but

the effluent concentration may not increase beyond the standard set by

EPA. One environmental effect of a water conservation program is a reduction in the mass of pollutants entering the receiving waters by

necessarily requiring a slight increase in the efficiency of the treatment plant.

Potable Water Treatment Cost Savings

Household water conservation measures can effect cost savings in

both conventional drinking water treatment (directed toward improving

the microbiological quality of the water) and more recent treatment

techniques to reduce contamination of the water by trace organic com- pounds (specifically, trihalomethanes) . In the area of conventional

drinking water treatment, cost savings due to household water conservation behave in much the same way as in wastewater treatment. Reducing

the volume of drinking water required results in a reduction in the O&M

costs of drinking water treatment that are flow-dependent. And in a growing community in which the demand for drinking water will ultimately

exceed treatment capacity, household water conservation will delay the

construction of additional capacity as well as reduce the amount of

existing capacity needed to meet demands through some specified time

horizon. The relationship between the inflation and real price escalation rates for construction costs and the discount rate chosen to represent the time value of money will determine whether the net present

value of the smaller treatment plant built later will be less than that

of the larger plant built earlier.

Recently promulgated regulations have established a maximum contaminant level (MCL) on the amount of trihalomethanes in potable water.

The MCL of 100 ug/1 for total trihalomethanes (TTHMs) initially applies

to water supplies that serve at least 10,000 persons (6) . Of the

2,685 public drinking water supplies in the United States that serve

over 10,000 persons, it has been estimated that the MCL will require

252
515 to take steps to reduce THMs (6) . Several measures are available to

reduce THM concentrations in drinking water. These include altering the

point of chlorination, switching to a disinfectant other than chlorine,

and implementing GAC treatment. While specific estimates vary considerably and substantial controversy is involved, GAC treatment is expensive

both in terms of capital cost and O&M costs. Estimates are that about

20 percent of the drinking water supplies that currently have TTHM con- centrations far above the MCL will act to meet the MCL by instituting

GAC treatment (6) .

For those plants that will add GAC treatment to comply with the

MCL, household water conservation will reduce the amount of water subjected to the additional process. Any GAC O&M costs that are flowdependent would be reduced. If sufficient GAC treatment capacity is to

be provided to handle the increasing water demands of a growing population through some time horizon, the necessary treatment capacity will be

less due to the household conservation measures. However, since the

year of construction of GAC systems depends only on the timetable set by

Federal regulations, a reduction in water use will not delay construction. Therefore, no tradeoff between the discount rate and inflation

and real price escalation rates for construction costs is applicable

here, as it was in the analysis of wastewater treatment and conventional

drinking water treatment cost savings. Household water conservation

necessarily results in installation of a smaller GAC system with a lower

capital cost and a lower net present value.

Cost and Timing of Program Implementation

Because this analysis focuses on household water conservation devices that become essentially transparent to the user after installation,

instead of achieving water conservation through changes in behavior and

daily routine, the cost of the conservation program is an important con- sideration. The net present savings due to household water conservation

is the difference between the net present equivalent of the resulting

cost savings and the net present equivalent cost of implementing the

program.

On economic grounds, we assume as an objective, the maximization of

the net present savings. Both the cost and timing of program implementation must be considered in conjunction with the discount rate. It may

be better to implement the program soon in order to take advantage of

O&M cost savings in wastewater and conventional drinking water treatment,

as well as any household energy savings due to conserving heated water,

all of which begin as soon as water conservation does.

On the other hand, construction cost savings for expanded wastewater treatment and conventional drinking water treatment facilities

are fixed in time and amount, as long as the program is implemented

before existing capacities are exceeded. Both the construction cost and

O&M cost savings in GAC treatment are similarly fixed, as long as the

conservation program is operational prior to the regulatory deadline for

253
meeting the TTHM MCL. Earlier implementation of the conservation program will not affect cost savings in these categories.

It is best to implement devices that are relatively* inexpensive,

as soon as possible, to take advantage of the savings that begin immediately. Depending upon who pays costs and to whom the savings accrue,

as expensive devices are used, it may be best to delay implementation to

take advantage of the reduction in net present equivalent due to discounting. This phenomenon requires considering the possibility of

staged implementation of a water conservation program consisting of installation of several different devices (for example, shower flow re- strictors and toilet tank inserts) in each household. Unless there is

likely to be a substantial reduction in administrative costs or increase in participation rate due to simultaneous implementation, it may

be better to install the inexpensive devices immediately and delay installation of the more expensive devices as long as possible (that is,

until just before existing capacities of the treatment facilities are reached)

APPLICATION OF THE METHOD: RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

In order to illustrate the method, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of applying two alternative household water conservation programs

to a hypothetical community of population 600,000. The characteristics

of the hypothetical community used in the analysis are shown in Table 1.

The mathematical details of the analytical method are available elsewhere (7,8,9,10).

The first alternative conservation program consisted of providing a shower flow restrictor for homeowner installation at a cost of $1.00

each. The second program included both the shower flow restrictor and a toilet tank insert (plastic dam) . The toilet tank insert was provided

for homeowner installation at a cost of $7.00 each. Installation costs were not included. We assumed that each device achieved a 10 percent

reduction in household water use. Accounting for the assumed participation rate of 80 percent and for the assumption that residential water

use was approximately 40 percent of the total, Program Alternative I (the shower flow restrictor) reduced total water use by 3.2 percent and

Program Alternative II (the shower flow restrictor and the toilet tank

insert) reduced the total by 6.4 percent. For simplicity, we also assumed that when each program was implemented, sufficient devices would be

purchased to provide the needs of the growing population for the planning horizon of 30 years. Under these conditions and for devices that

reduce household water use by 10 percent and cost less than approximately $10.00, optimal implementation time is immediately, in the hypothetical community.

Table 2 shows the results of our analytical method as applied to

the hypothetical community. This table shows that Program Alternatives

I and II result in total overall net present savings of $59.83 and

$73.13 million, respectively. Table 2 also shows that by far the

254
largest portion of the total savings from household water conservation

is the energy cost savings realized by homeowners as a result of reduced

hot water use. These savings to homeowners account for approximately

60 to 70 percent of the total savings. The Federal Government and the

wastewater utility each realize savings that are in the range of 10 to

15 percent of the total. The savings to the drinking water utility

make up approximately five to 10 percent of the total net present savings. But all four sectors have net present equivalent savings that

far exceed (by at least a factor of two) the net present cost, for both

program alternatives. This means that it would be cost-effective for

any one of the four sectors to bear the entire cost of the conservation

program, even if the cost-effectiveness criterion were a comparison of

costs and cost savings for each sector separately.

The results indicate the importance of the household energy cost

savings from reduction in household hot water use to the implementation

of a successful community-wide household conservation program. In the

hypothetical community, this was the only source of savings to homeowners. We assumed no reduction in total water bill or sewer charges.

Even if the wastewater and drinking water utilities offer no economic

incentives for homeowners to make use of the water-saving devices, the

homeowners will still realize large savings in the form of reduced

energy costs if devices which conserve hot water are used in the water

conservation program. In addition, conservation of hot water allows

homeowners to participate in furthering the national goal of conserving

energy resources.

These energy cost savings to homeowners imply two important policy

considerations for a community which plans to implement a large-scale

household water conservation program. First, since energy cost savings

provide a substantial incentive to homeowners to make use of watersavings devices, the utility implementing the water conservation program

should make use of this fact to encourage public participation in the

conservation program. This could be done through implementation of a public education program designed to make homeowners aware of the potential energy cost savings from the use of a particular water-saving

device. Second, because a shower flow restrictor is less expensive,

smaller, easier to distribute, and may even be easier to install than a toilet tank dam, it might be the preferred choice for a community-wide

conservation program which makes use of only one type of water-saving

device.

REFERENCES

1. Darby, William P., Drinking Water: Conservation, Cost, and Treatment, Department of Technology and Society, College of Engineering

and Applied Sciences, State University of New York at Stony Brook,

NSF Grant # SED-77-19298 , 1978.

2. Stoker, H. S., Seager, S. L., Capener , R. L., Energy: From Source

to Use, Weber State College: Scott, Foresman and Company, 1975.

255
3. Application of Solar Technology to Today's Energy Needs , Vol. 1,

Office of Technology Assessment, Washington, D.C., 20510, June,

1978, No. 052-003-0053905.

4. Environmental Quality - 1977 , eighth annual report to the Council

on Environmental Quality, U.S. Government Printing Office,

Washington, D.C., 20402, December, 1977.

5. Environmental Quality - 1978 , ninth annual report of the Council

on Environmental Quality, U.S. Government Printing Office,

Washington, D.C., 20402, December, 1978.

6. Federal Register 44:68624-68707, "National Interim Primary Drinking

Water Regulations: Control of Trihalomethanes in Drinking Water

Final Rule," November 29, 1979.

7. Hopp, Wallace J., Cost-Effectiveness of Household Water Conserva- tion in Municipal Water Use Strategies , Report No. THA/CDT 79/4,

Department of Technology and Human Affairs, Washington University,

St. Louis, MO 63130, October, 1979.

8. Hopp, Wallace J., and William P. Darby, "Household Water Conservation: The Role of Indirect Energy Savings," Energy - The International Journal 5 (12) : 1183-1192 (December 1980).

9. Hopp, Wallace J., and William P. Darby, "Wastewater Treatment Costs:

Home Conservation Effects," Preprint No. 80-098, 1980 National Convention of American Society of Civil Engineers, Portland, Oregon.

10. Hopp, Wallace J., and William P. Darby, "Household Water Conservation: A Cost-Ef f ective Component of Municipal Wastewater Treatment," Journal of the Water Resources Planning and Management

Division, A.S.C.E. (in press, April 1981).

256
Table 1. Characteristics of Hypothetical Community for Analysis

Population in year zero Population growth rate

Water use/wastewater generation rate

Residential component of water use/

wastewater flow

Average numbers of persons/fixture

Existing drinking water /wastewater

treatment capacity

Current dollar discount rates:

Homeowners

Drinking water /wastewater utility

Combined inflation and real price

escalation rates:

Household energy cost

Construction cost

O&M cost

Household water heating fuels:

Natural gas

Electricity

Fuel Oil

Marginal prices* of energy:

Natural gas

Electricity

Fuel Oil

GAC treatment required

Planning horizon

Program participation

Reductions in water use/wastewater flow:

Shower flow restrictor

Toilet tank insert

Costs* of conservation program:

Shower flow restrictor

Toilet tank insert

600,000 persons

2 percent/year

145 gallons/cap «day

40 percent

2.5 persons/toilet

2.5 persons/shower

110 MGD (million gallons/day)

18 percent/year

10 percent/year

10 percent/year

7 percent/year

6 percent/year

60 percent

30 percent

10 percent

$0.29/100 cubic feet

$0.042/kWh

$0.49/gallon

year 5 30 years

30 percent

10 percent

10 percent

$1.00/device

$7 .00/device

*June 1978 prices expressed in June 1978 dollars.

257
Table 2. Net Present Equivalent of Costs and Cost Savings Resulting

from Alternative Household Water Conservation Programs

Total Overall Net

Present Savings

(million dollars)

Program

Alternative I

59.83

Program

Alternative II

73.13

Net Present Equivalent

for the Wastewater

Utility 5.65 11.28

(million dollars) (9.4)* (14.7)

Net Present Equivalent

for the Drinking

Water Utility 3.57 7.13

(million dollars) (5.9) (9.3)

Net Present Equivalent

for the Residential

Community 43.8 43.8

(million dollars) (72.7) (57.2)

Net Present Equivalent

for the Federal

Government 7.25 14.42

(million dollars) (12.0) (18.8)

Net Present Cost

of Program Alternative

(million dollars)

*Numbers in parentheses indicate

equivalent of savings.

0.44 3.50

percent of the total net present

258
MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION ~ A WATER PROJECT THAT PAYS FOR ITSELF

Will B. Betchart

Senior Environmental Engineer

INTASA, Inc.

Menlo Park, California

ABSTRACT

Municipal water conservation's direct economic impact is one of its

most intriguing aspects. When analyzed and presented carefully, it is

also one of water conservation's strongest selling points. This paper

describes a structure utilized for analyzing municipal water conservation benefits and costs. The key to the structure is inclusion of all

significant direct benefits and costs. Three examples of results from

utilizing the analytical structure are then described.

INTRODUCTION

Over the past few years, we at INTASA have been participating in a group of projects addressing municipal water conservation. These include:

• The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) "Water

Supply - Wastewater Treatment Coordination Study" (1). This

report to Congress was developed in response to Section 1442 (c

of the Safe Drinking Water Act and Section 516(e) of the Clean

Water Act. One topic selected for detailed discussion was mun icipal water conservation—due to its obvious implications for

quantities of flow in both ivater supply and wastewater.

• The U.S. EPA's handbook on "Flow Reduction: Methods, Analysis

Procedures, Examples" (2). This handbook is designed to assis

community planners and engineers in the context of EPA's Construction Grants Program.

• A research project for the U.S. Office of Water Research and

Technology (OWRT) on "Local/Regional Variations in Benefits

and Costs of Municipal Water Conservation. "

• A U.S. Army Corps of Engineers case study applying its "Manual

of Procedures" (3) for water conservation analysis to Tucson,

Arizona.

259
In each of these projects the economics of municipal water conser- vation has been a central focus. The purpose of this paper is to highlight the common thread in these projects —municipal water conservation

economic analysis.

SCOPE AND STRUCTURE OF THE ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

Three imperatives characterize the economic analysis approach

utilized:

• Focus on direct economic impacts.

o Maintain a community-wide perspective.

• Include all significant benefits and costs.

The focus on direct economic impacts is achieved by identifying

direct water-related expenditures and asking which ones change with water

conservation. It is not implied by this focus that secondary or indirect

impacts don't matter. The crucial thing is to properly characterize the

direct impacts first.

Maintaining a community-wide perspective is important to avoid con- fusion. Otherwise it is easy to get a mixture of perspectives which re- sults in a partial or duplicative coverage. Thus, rather than focusing

on a single family, one thinks in terms of all residential water users

in the community while doing the economic analysis. The obvious need

for a community-wide perspective is to then include commercial, industrial, and public users as well.

The third imperative—including all significant benefits and costs

is then facilitated by the bounds established by the first two. The task

becomes that of identifying a complete (but nonduplicative) group of ex- penditures that change significantly. The following categories of benefits and costs have been found to be workable.

The direct economic benefits of municipal water conservation accrue primarily as cost savings in three categories:

© Lower overall expenditures by the water supply utility.

• Lower overall expenditures by the wastewater utility.

o Other decreases in water-related expenditures by water users

especially for energy to provide hot water.

In the cases of the water supply and wastewater utilities, one looks at

the changes (with versus without conservation) in the annual utility

budget over time. This includes changes in capital expenditures (e.g.,

delayed or smaller capacity expansions) and changes in operation and

maintenance expenditures (e.g., less pumping cost). The difference,

260
discounted to the present year, is the present value of this type of cost

savings (i.e., the benefit). In the third category, the primary saving

to the user which is not reflected in his water and wastewater bills is

hot water energy savings. If he uses less hot water he uses (and pays

for) less energy to heat it. The present value of such savings over the

study period is another direct water conservation benefit.

The most important point is to include all three types of water con- servation benefits in order to achieve a true community-wide perspective.

Many early economic analyses have left out one or two of these benefits.

For example, water people have often overlooked the hot water energy

savings and thereby significantly underestimated the benefits.

The direct economic costs of municipal water conservation are primarily the costs of a "conservation program" which usually has three com- ponents :

• Conservation devices (including installation labor when appropriate) such as flow controllers to retrofit showers or pressure reducers as an added item in new construction.

• Public information so people understand and cooperate with the

program.

• Program implementation activities such as staff activities to

study and change water rate structures or building codes.

This overall structure for economic analysis of municipal water con- servation and each type of benefit and cost are presented in detail in

EPA's recently published handbook—"Flow Reduction: Methods, Analytical

Procedures, Examples" (2).

EXAMPLES OF POTENTIAL RESULTS

The following subsections present some examples of the potential

economic results of municipal water conservation. At this point they

are analytical—they do not represent any specific community. They have

been chosen to indicate aggregate economic impacts which municipal water

conservation potentially could have.

Typical U.S. Community

The first example is oriented toward a composite of characteristics

which could represent a typical U.S. community. These assumed characteristics include:

• Population is 50,000.

• Growth rate is two percent per year.

261
o The community is close to needing expanded capacity in its

water supply and wastewater facilities.

o A water conservation program is designed and~ adopted which, over time, achieves a 20 percent reduction in per capita water

use

The 20 percent reduction in per capita use is taken as an example of

potential —something that might realistically be achieved if the relatively simple and inexpensive water conservation steps were widely implemented both in new construction and through retrofit of existing buildings. The results of an economic analysis (utilizing many more very detailed assumptions) are shown in Table 1. Note that the benefits greatly exceed the costs. Benefit to cost ratios in the range of five to ten

should be common in such analyses.

Table 1. Typical U.S. Community Results

(present value; $ million)

Benefits

Water Supply 9.8

Wastewater 12.1

Hot Water 8.2

30.1

Net Ben

Costs

Devices (& Labor) 1.4

Public Information 1.0

Implementation 0.4

2.8

fits: 27.3

Changes With Different Population Growth

In the research project being sponsored by OWRT, the foregoing

analysis is being extended by looking at the sensitivities of costs and

benefits to changes in several local/regional parameters. The community's

population growth rate is one example of a parameter that is especially

interesting. Figure 1 shows water-related costs (with and without water

conservation) for the previously discussed "typical U.S. community" (the

2 percent growth rate) and for similar communities with three alternative

growth rates. Figure 2 then shows the difference between the two curves

in Figure 1 —the net benefits of water conservation for each growth rate.

Note the following with respect to Figure 2:

» The increasing net benefits with increasing growth rate.

• The range of the present value of net benefits between $20

and $35 million—no small amount for a community of 50,000.

o The community-wide net benefits translate into approximately:

- $550 per capita for the 2 percent per year growth rate,

$680 per capita for the 5 percent per year growth rate.

262
Present

Value

($ million)

Population Growth Rate (%/year)

Figure 1. Community-Wide Water-Related Costs.

40 -

Present

Value

Population Growth Rate (%/year)

Figure 2. Community-Wide Net Benefits of Municipal Water Conservation.

263
National Implications

Of particular interest from a national viewpoint is the impact which

municipal water conservation could have on energy imports. Assuming

nationwide implementation of the 20 percent reduction in per capita water

use, the energy savings would have an oil equivalent of approximately

260,000 barrels per day—about 90 percent of this being hot water energy

savings and about 10 percent being energy savings in water supply and

wastewater operations. As shown in Table 2, this is equivalent to approximately 3 or 4 percent of the Nation's oil imports. Similarly, the

energy savings can be translated into an impact on the Nation's balance

of trade. As shown in Table 3, the value of the energy savings is in

the range of 4 to 9 percent of the trade deficit.

Table 2. National Impact on Oil Imports

(barrel of oil equivalents)

Oil Imports Energy Savings

Year (!Q

6

bbl/Day) (!Q

6

bbl/Day) Percent

1977 8.8 0.26 2.9

1980 7.0 0.26 3.7

Table 3. National Impact on Balance of Trade

Trade

„ . , „ . Savings Deficit Oil Price

Year ($/bbl) ($10 /yr) ($10 /yr) Percent

1977 13 1.2 26.5 4.5

1980 31 2.9 32.3 9.0

CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS

The most obvious question regarding municipal water conservation

economics is one which was quickly asked at this conference—"If municipal water conservation is so economically sensible, why don't we (the

Nation) do more of it?" This writer believes we will do more municipal

water conservation but that its present status and slow progress is re- lated to three major needs at the community level.

Improved awareness of community-wide economics . Too often

only part of the benefits are recognized. The water supply

utility manager tends to look only at the cost savings for

264
his utility and to ignore wastewater and hot water energy savings. Similarly, the wastewater and energy people consider

only their areas of activity. The benefits of municipal water

conservation are significant in all three areas and analyses

must draw them together to create the needed community-wide

picture

• Cooperative, community-wide, long-term outlook . Part of the answer is for the three utilities (water supply, wastewater,

and energy) to work jointly in developing perspectives on the

future needs of the community and beneficial ways of influencing those needs. In that way specific problems (such as potential water supply revenue reductions) can be identified

and agreeable responses worked out.

• Programs oriented toward a high percent coverage and longterm effectiveness . Presently, many water conservation programs achieve a relatively low percentage penetration (e.g.,

20 to 30 percent of existing households) and utilize conservation devices with limited life spans. To really reap the

benefits of municipal water conservation, program designs must

be developed which are cost-effective and socially acceptable

and, at the same time, achieve high percentages of penetration with essentially permanent devices or improvements.

REFERENCES

1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Drinking Water.

August, 19 79. Water Supply-Wastewater Treatment Coordination Study:

Report to Congress (Public Comment and Review Draft) . Prepared by

INTASA, Inc. Contract No. 68-01-5033. Washington, DC.

2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Program Operations, Facility Requirements Division. March, 19 81. Flow Reduction: Methods, Analysis Procedures, Examples . Prepared by INTASA,

Inc. FRD-15. Washington, DC.

3. Planning and Management Consultants, Ltd. , April, 1980. The Evaluation of Water Conservation For Municipal and Industrial Water

Supply: Procedures Manual . Prepared for U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources. Fort Belvoir, VA.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The work upon which this paper is based was partially supported by

funds provided by the U.S. Department of Interior, Office of Water Research and Technology, as authorized under the Water Resources Research

Act of 1964, Public Law 88-379 (as amended) through Contract No. 14-34-

0001-0485. Additional support for the work has been from the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency through Contract No. 68-01-50 33 and

265
Contract No. 68-01-6052. The author also wishes to acknowledge the con- tributions of his colleagues at INTASA and of the several government em- ployees who have been associated with the above projects.

266
Devices and Technology

DEVICES AND TECHNOLOGIES FOR WATER CONSERVATION - STATE OF THE ART: STANDARDS FOR INDUSTRY

James A. Burgess

PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS AND TEST PROCEDURES FOR WATER

CLOSETS

Thomas P. Konen

EXPERIENCES AND BENEFITS OF THE APPLICATION OF MINIMUM

FLOW WATER CONSERVATION HARDWARE

Larry K. Baker

TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LOW-FLOW DEVICES

Frank R. Holycross

A MODEL FOR THE TRANSPORT MECHANISMS OF SOLIDS IN BUILDING

PIPE DRAINS

Lawrence S. Galowin

DEVICES AND TECHNOLOGIES FOR WATER CONSERVATION - STATE OF THE ART:

STANDARDS FOR INDUSTRY

James A. Burgess, President

Canadian Standards Association

Chairman, Executive Committee

Waltec Inc.

Wallaceburg, Ontario

MODERATOR'S REMARKS

The United States and Canada share the largest freshwater system in

the world, the Great Lakes. Both east and west of the Great Lakes, river

systems form or cross the international border. It is natural that the

two countries share similar problems in dealing with a shared natural

resource. There are also many differences due to Canada's substantial

freshwater lakes and streams, in addition to the Great Lakes, and also

due to a much lower density of population and to the special problems

of the Far North. Both countries face the economic factors of increasing energy costs, the treatment of waste water, and the capital cost of

expanding water supply and disposal systems. A recent study done by

the Canadian Department of the Environment, which identifies a few problem areas, and also another recent study under the auspices of the

Canadian Standards Association, will be reviewed to see if reduction in

maximum flow rates for plumbing fittings would help solve certain municipal supply problems.

It is an honor and a distinct pleasure for me to be here in Denver.

We share the largest freshwater system in the world, the Great Lakes.

In addition to this mutual resource, there are river systems flowing

into the Atlantic, the Pacific, and the Arctic Oceans. We share geography, rainfall, weather, and the benefits and problems of a heavy

industrialized society.

Like so many of our resources, we have had to reassess our attitudes

and consumption patterns to practice conservation to assure water will

continue to be readily available in those parts of the country where it

is in short supply. The availability and cost of energy to distribute,

heat, and treat water have escalated in the last decade and are now

important factors in our thinking. The capital costs of expanding water

distribution and waste treatment facilities can be reduced by good programs of water management.

In my country, the provincial governments have the direct responsibility for water conservation within their boundaries. At present,

269
Alberta is the only province that has been concerned with water supply

on a provincial basis. This is because of inadequate reservoir capacity

in growing communities.

The Federal Department, Environment Canada, supports research including many river basin planning studies and university research projects. In addition, they have special projects dealing with water

supply, use, and conservation in the Yukon and Northwest Territories

where, because of low precipitation and extreme climatic conditions, it

is difficult to transport water and dispose of wastes for many months

of the year.

In a report published last year, Environment Canada discussed

water conservation alternatives of the North. It describes a broad

range of devices, lists advantages and disadvantages, and details initial and operating costs. However, no government testing program was carried out. Performance data are based on published literature, manufacturers' information, and the personal experiences of the authors.

Nevertheless, it does provide a valuable guide for Canada's northern

communities

Generally speaking, Canada has an abundant water supply, but

regional variations do exist. The southern interior of Western Canada

is generally regarded as a water-short region, basically short of agricultural water for irrigation.

In the regional municipality of Waterloo, an industrialized area

60 miles west of Toronto, they have depended on ground water sources rather than piping water in from the Great Lakes, as has been done in

other communities in the area. They have also experienced periodic

shortages. The region has done a comprehensive study of conservation

and has developed standards for water-efficient plumbing devices. The

regional government offers grants to encourage builders to fit new

structures with toilets, showerheads, and faucets that comply with their

criteria. The people responsible for this conservation program are here

and will be telling their story later this afternoon.

The Waterloo program is similar to a number of local programs in

this country. It is in the initial stage of implementation, so it is

too early to report any statistical results. The Canadian Standards

Association set up a task force to determine if flow rates in faucets

would (materially) reduce water consumption.

Data from the city of Montreal had an important bearing on the

conclusions reached by the committee. Both daily and annual water

consumption figures in Montreal continued to rise in spite of negative

population growth from 1970 to 1978. Uses other than residential

represent over 50 percent of consumption. It was estimated that less

than 1 percent of the potable water was used for cooking or drinking.

270
The committee concluded that an effective water conservation

program must include the following elements:

1. Water meters, with bills related to consumption.

2. Conservation programs must be developed for industry.

3. Domestic use of water is, on one hand, time related: for

example, showers; on the other hand, it is receptacle- or cycle-related: for example, wash basins, toilets, washing

machines, and dishwashers. Therefore, a reduction in flow

rates could result in water savings in time-related functions but not necessarily in receptacle-related use.

4. User satisfaction and long-term, trouble-free service life

must be maintained in water conservation products if con- sumer support is to be sustained.

As a member of the Plumbing Manufacturer's Institute (PMI) , I have

followed the recognition of the need for water conservation and have

followed the development of conservation standards. The PMI program

was undertaken during a severe drought in the Southwest. Shortly after

the first standard was published, there was a flood in California. I am going to be very interested to see what happens following this conference.

271

PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS AND TEST PROCEDURES FOR WATER CLOSETS

Thomas P. Konen, Building Technology Research Division

Davidson Laboratory, Stevens Institute of Technology

Hoboken, New Jersey

ABSTRACT

Stevens Institute of Technology has completed the development of

requirements and procedures for evaluating the sanitary performance

of water closets. This effort was undertaken in conjunction with the

U.S. Department of Commerce - National Bureau of Standards and the

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The overall objective of their program is to provide technology to achieve a significant reduction in residential water use.

The objective of our studv was to develop test methods for use

by industry, code groups, enforcement agencies and others to determine

the functional performance of water closets and thereby provide safe

and efficient designs and installations. This activity has paralleled

the development of the proposed revision to the American National

Standard A1 12. 19-2 - Vitreous China Plumbing Fixtures. The opportunity

to incorporate our findings into the product standard has added to the

significance of this program.

A review of the present techniques found many of the major producers using test media spanning a wide range of size, form and

density. Little information was found within the industry as to the

characteristics of waste products; however, an electronic search of

biology and medical journals produced several interesting studies

which led to the selection of the test media. In addition to physical

simulation, the media must lead to repeatable and discriminatory tests.

The primary characteristics of the water closets for which test

methods and procedures were developed include: surface cleansing,

waste removal, including solids and liquids, and volumetric efficiency.

As a service to industry and the general public the Laboratory makes

available a test kit which includes the media, instructions and data

sheets

273
INTRODUCTION

An awareness and public education program can effect savings in

potable water. This, however, is just the beginning. Significant

opportunities exist - first with little or no change in technology

and second with new technologies. The key to the success of these

alternative techniques is the development and acceptance of plumbing

products based on functional performance requirements.

Plumbing fixtures and appliances may be divided into two classes:

fixed volume devices where the user has little or no control over the

water consumption (examples are water closets, washing machines and

dishwashers) and variable rate fixtures such as lavatories and sinks.

Fixed volume fixtures account for as much as 6h percent of the water

used in homes equipped with dishwashers and automatic laundry equipment. For this reason, their functional performance and water efficiency is paramount in our conservation effort.

In this paper, one fixed volume plumbing product , the water

closet, is addressed and a review of what has and is being done to

measure the sanitary performance of this device is given. This

research effort is part of a major undertaking of the U.S. Department

of Housing and Urban Development and the U.S. Department of Commerce - National Bureau of Standards to provide the technology to achieve a significant reduction in residential water use.

OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE

Our specific objective was to develop test methods for use by

industry, code groups, enforcement agencies and others to determine

the functional performance of water closets and thereby provide safe

and efficient designs and installations. This activity has paralleled

the development of the proposed revision to the American National

Standard A112.19.2 - Vitreous China Plumbing Fixtures. The opportunity

to incorporate our findings into the product standard has added to the

significance of this program. The scope of our work included the

fol lowi ng:

Documentation of Existing Performance Requirements

Establishment of Field Operating Parameters

Development of Test Methods and Procedures

Recommendations for Consensus Standards

A full documentation of the research effort is underway.

274
TEST MEDIA

The widely recognized existing product standard, ANSI A112.19-2-

1973, Vitreous China Plumbing Fixtures, provides information relative

to materials of construction, types and sizes of commercially available designs, features of construction, dimensions, grading, inspection

methods and one flushing test using paper as the media. A review of

the evaluation techniques used by the industry found many of the major

producers using test media spanning a wide range of size, form and

density. The demand for water saving units necessitated the establishment of requirements based solely on the requirements for collecting

and transferring body wastes to the drainage system. While little

information was found within the industry as to the characteristics

of waste products, an electronic search of biology and medical journals

produced several interesting studies, which suggested the normal maxi- mum weight of waste as 2h3 grams. This led to the selection of the

proposed test media. In addition to physical simulation, the media

must provide the basis for repeatable and discriminatory tests.

TEST METHODS AND PROCEDURES

Uniformity in the reporting of the performance of units mandates

that a standardized water supply system be used. This technique

ensures that the water closet under test will have an adequate supply

under conditions simulating installation in a single family residence.

The experimental arrangement for tank type closets is shown in Figure

1. A similar setup is used with flushometer units.

A high pressure water supply system is connected to a flow meter,

pressure regulator, control valve and a fixed orifice or second valve

simulating a standard ballcock. The static pressure is set at 20 psi.

A flow rate of 3 gpm at 8 psi flowing pressure is established by

adjusting the control valve and simulated ballcock. These conditions

(position of control valve) are not disturbed when the supply system

is connected to the water closet under study and the performance tests

conducted at higher pressures. The rationale for using static pressure

as the reference is derived from nationally recognized model codes.

In our Laboratory, the spent water is collected in a receiving

vessel mounted on top of a load cell. The output from the load cell

is displayed through an electronic voltmeter calibrated such that the

display units read directly in gallons. This experimental setup is

shown in Figure 2.

The primary characteristics of the water closets for which test

methods and procedures were developed include: surface cleansing,

waste removal, both solids and liquids, and volumetric efficiency.

The five performance requirements and test procedures are shown

in Figure 3. The ball test measures the basic function of bowl design

and is considered fundamental to the evaluation of water closets.

275
Tests of this type are used throughout Europe as a standard measure of

performance. The granule test, developed to simulate a slurry, has

been found a good indicator of the quality of the siphonic action.

The cylinder test, conceived as a measure of the bowl capacity, has

been useful in evaluating trapway design. Aside from the waste removal

tests are the surface wash test, which at present measures cleansing in a qualitative way, and the water change test, which provides a quantitative method for the dilution of liquids.

As a service to industry and the general public, the Laboratory

makes available a test kit which includes the media, instructions and

data sheets. The kit contents are shown in Figure k.

TEST RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Fifteen water saving water closets, three each of five distinct

designs, were evaluated in our program along with three of each of

two designs for conventional equipment. The following general comments

refer to test results obtained at 20 ps i static pressure. The conventional equipment passed all tests with the exception that one bowl in

each design failed the cylinder test. The water saving equipment,

with the exception of one design, did very well. Eleven out of twelve

units tested passed the ball test, all passed the granule test, six

out of twelve passed the cylinder test, nine out of twelve passed the

surface wash test and nine out of twelve passed the water change test.

While there is an obvious reduction in performance in the water saving

units, we are confident that the manufacturers will consistently

produce good products. We have continued to improve the cylinder test

and have recently acquired one-piece cylinders which we believe provide

a better simulation of waste material. We expect this to improve the

reported performance of all units.

The establishment and acceptance of a reasonable set of perfor- mance requirements has stimulated the manufacturers to increase the

production of water saving units and may lead to offsetting the

confusion that exists by the passage of numerous water conservation

laws and regulations. It appears, today, that the volume of water

required to dispose of wastes is governed by the transfer of body

wastes into the system. As more efficient water closets are developed

and marketed the governing parameter may become the transport mechanism

as the basic function of water in waste systems is to act as the

carrier.

276
y<|— S imulated

Ballcock

Gauges

x 9 71 S

HXIO-

-cx—t=v

Flow Filter Regulator Control

Meter Bypass Valve

Closet

under Test

JA

T

z 3^ Kl &

Figure 1. Water Supply System for Closet Tests

Closet

under Test

Sol ids I nterceptor

Receiving Vessel

Load Cell

Figure 2. Test Stand for Closet Tests

277
ll

(! v_ Jr JJ

°~ s _ CD

n (/i

J* ' C %JJ m

'o

TM* *— N /

a\ *m

JP

1/1 ^ r

—

r_ p— 4) a? Q

f- r- „_ d) o

p—

Ft jj

_

*m _j Q_ m ill ? !-- — O

m »— 3

fi I OJ Q- _ . (U "O

*5 [*|~

U

— 0) (/) l/l c L_ c .O li- -C a)

(D

w

O

C

— 4-» t/i _C i/i (D E 0 (0 t/1 <0 in u — C 0) *D -C — ra D a> -m c 4) J2 <D 4-» > •4— 4- -o —

M— cn

U (/I 4-> o U- c c u CO ro . <D a) <D

<L) L. £ C X)

DL cn <D o ro ro a> > E — o _c m O to i/i _c o V +-» t- D 3 U 0] o c _c — — O _c 'V X c 2 c < *-> <-t- 4- 12. in 0) <c V) 4-J —

03

QJM

CDOO

S-l G

CO

01 CL

a>

C JZ I- ro 2 C 14- X o 4-> 0) ~J 1_

ra c I o ill ID o 4-1

N JD 3 4-> 0) 0) -Q <y _o IS D U- JZ E 4-4

X

CLI 4J c 4! «-O c a> 4-J E a in

C

U o 01

D 4) <0 c OJ

(1)

u i/> 3 D 11 o 5) 01 4-> o Z)

C JZ JZ Z) c 3 C '0 O •O 4) JZ C U at nj _c c -M 4-> > E -C -C 1) l- > u» > Ul in o 14- 0-) 1) ro

a) 4) a> J-J cn

O (D JZ OJ in

U cn j;

C JZ l- 4-1 jc -o (/j i. 3 O 4-J c X) m ft) 0.1 1) c 4-J CJ cn Zl JZi w -o 0 1- flj "J > -a o JZ zt XI o

0) -C U1 c L. Q- 4J >~

U z> c c 1) 4-' 4-J cn o 0) c ro JZ ID u tn c OJ c c c 1— u 4)

a) i-> 4) -a "o 41 IB ro 3 3 Q. z> JT- o l_

L. 11 n- -C Q_ 4-» 11 i»- > u XI o c 4-J 1- ro in O >~ 4-1 M- 13 0 cn 4) o o Q_

-o a> a) o 3 01 JZ 4J T) 4) cn [— ro cn ID

4)u c 9) 3 (U 4->O '.- c l) 4-J

C 01 41 XI c £ c 4) 4J

U (0 0 J= (U in 11

O JZ 3 C JZ 0 0) JZ ro o J3 JC 4J a> 11 1) J-> x: j—

C in OJ i_ in 4-1 X

L. </« *j JZ QO 1 4J in 4-1 4)

m 11 o in 0. O *J a <U <n Z) 4) L. .j 1) >- 1) o in ro 4J 14- o c E or o o c U I) j3 o XI JZ 01 > U Q. nj o a 3 r. O 1) o 4-> 14- a z> T) O ro -1-J M— OJ 4) OJ

f"

O o > E 0 -D 4) 4) L- X1 XJ OJ CL in

a> a) 0 O tn (!) 0 o O 1) Q. T3 c D c in 4) 4->

J.T o i> 01 4) 11 -C

u in

O

L in « o oc 0)

u +J c (D "O 4->

u ID >- in in -C in

L_ SL si 3 — «) 4-1

u -C > Q. >~

U ID 4-1 a. O. 0) tn in Q- — C c Q. 1) in ro 4-1 0) (1) O

m o 4-J 3 in !/> flj 4J - a ig 4J 3 Ol 1) +J C 3 XI >- >

L. 1_ 4- (0 i- c ro L_ <4- c 10 0) o fil rrj OJ u- c m o (- < n- > a 4J 3 4-> < aii- < 14- 4-J a <LD J3 4J 3 1_ O if) 3 14-

O

4-1 CD aH

C/j

ro

OJc .v: 01 M— 3

>- o -O

a.O 1- 0J

i— 4) cn

Cl 4_»

m

>~ 1) i- o E 41 On 0 ro >

o.

X

ro 6i o C o ID ID CO

C71X1

d 1 c c

ID 14- +J > or

in II) JZ

0J JZ ' J >- 1- c 4-1 in 1 inc

rc ID 1) a) J3 m xi

4- o o

in in

O

(!) >~

X JZ 4-> D 4-J M— C in 0 ro E c E <i) cn X E -O

4) ^ = o c —CO o OJ 3 E

-QO

>- L, 1 JZ 4) d"e"

4-4 cn ro 4J OJ 0) ro >- m >- E i- cn

0) ro l) h- 0 > LIA Cl T) ro on

ii) Xi E c d ) 1.1) G ro c a o 10 ro m XI on

1- JZ c • o m OJ ro O

JZ

4-4 c in

10 4) *3

ch o

l_ in c >.

l> 11 4-4 4-J 4-» 1 ID ft) XI CO m E (0 cro

ro 1_ ro 4) E

1- I X

U 3 X JZ O u 4) in

14- JZ <z i-- cr. E O O ID ID 1 c 1 L. 1_

CVJ JZ 4) cn

4-> 1 4J >

l/l cn ID

OJ c O

in oj ul X

L

U c 3

1) 4) 4) JZiO

"O Xi 4-> C c -o ID ro c l. LTN 3 4) a ON

>-

O > c

<-J o i_O ID

d

0)3

ciC •H

278
— ID

4-> ID

X in 0> O I 4)

4-1 o c 4)

X oO

ID

C ID c -u

0) ij_

— > O 4J e i

u- sis n TJ c O 4J

C

V

m j: c ID in

VI 1/1

x 4) ID Cn 4J cn 4)

X 4> c x 0 <D 0 c — in c i- i_ ID — X 3 4> 4) 4-> 4) XI Cn > ID c C ID c

>4-

— ro o 14- On — 4) o

ID tnX XI

X 4)

— 4) 4) 4-1 • o 4) U£ « X XI V) c

Cn 4J .—U

CC 4->

CC c —O 3 ID ID

4) c — .— L. 1- 4J — 0 (D XI X X 0 x: 4) *j c O — Cn O 3 in in w O

ID

C ID 4-> ID 4) 4) 4J — 4) 4J X 4J 4-> X 0 C xi C 3

4J .- 1- 4) 4) - 4)

ID 4> 4) E X 4)

4> E 4-1

O mo i- ID

X 4> 14-X 4)

C

X

X 1- 1- ID 4) </) — 4-» < in

in 4) 1 ID 3 o 4) 4) 4-1 X a 4J 1— c o X 1 4-1 14-

OX 4) in ID ID "o 4)

— XI

C !_ 4J 3 4) ID o ' —

ID 4) XI in O- a. 4) 0 Q. > 4)

X 3 u

X ID in XI .- 4) 4-» i *o

O

a in 4) ID 4) 4-1 XI cn E 4) c 4-1 14- 4) 1/1 I- c o ~

4) 4JX in I_

O in E 4) 4-1

X

O

— c C

O 3 4/ o >- E 4J

O LTN IDO 3 4J 1- L. 4) L_ 4)

U ID 3 3 i_

X 4-1 X) ID 4-1

C 14-

C L. in

L. 14- 0 X > 4> 4-J ID in l- H- 4-1 -. 4) 4>

O M- X) T3

4) 1- XJ L. in 4) 4)

X 4) 4-> XJ cn

O 3 o xt

u

m

O 4) 4) S o c 4)

ID E 3 4) ID 3 X X> 4J XI O. 4) 4> CM 4) E 4>

— c 4-> ID 4)

X E nui in — 4-1 u 4) in 4-J 4) °o 4) 14- 4) O 3

*3

O CL La in 0 4) <4- 1) 14- o OC ID E 1/1 •> 41 4) O E C X u 4) XI c in o u 4) 1— 3 O to L- XI ~ O X > ID X O 4-> •H

4)

X 0)

J

ID 4) 4) 4-< 14- a> > 4) in 4J o O X \~ XI X 0) in 1- i_ C O "o 4J o 4) XI 4) X) X 4-> 4J

ID 4J c 4-J *4)

X c X 4) > c c 14- • X 4)

X i- 3 3 c 14- ID ID X 41 4J X 0 4J U O 4) 4) °8 4-» 4J L- ID 4J 4) 4) 41 L.

'4-1 xi o 3 i

>- X) 3

14-o X

L. cnc 10c

4J

Or

4-1

X

4)

4)E 1_4)m o c

10U 4J4)

in

4) c

in

ID

4-1 10

4)

1-

X4-1 "o

in c3

4)C o

in c 4) 4) ID o X 4)

u ID 4-1 1— 14-O

— 4-> ID 4) 3 ID 3

Xt in 0) c in l/l in 4-> L. 3 4) c 3 Q. Cl

C 4) 4) 10 cn 3 c £3 o 3 4-1 o C X) ID 4) in V. 4-1 XI in 4) ID c 4) 10 E ID >^ 1— 4-> C O — C 1 4) c a 3 4) 4) C ID ID c C O — u o 1— O 4) X) 3 X o CL t- 4) 4) 14- X 4) C 4) X 4) 4) >- ID o c 3 4-> 4-> U XI O CO X t_ c 4-J E 4) 4) L. 4-1 'i E L. O O 4-1 X O O u- 4)

in TJ cn 4) L_ 4) 0 11 cn 4-> l_ ID ID

u ID S8 4-> XI

UX TJ 3 in ID X)

OU 4> 3 4) c X 14- X 0) 4) 1) D 3 4-1 a. C 4) >» a l_> L. 41 3 1- c O l- X ID E 4) 4_l i_ in E XI X 4) 4J X 4) — LT\ 3 10 XI 4) U O 4-> ID in l- 10 4- X i— — 3 3 4) o L_ L. 4) L. 4-1 L. XI XI X 3 in 14- in 41 Q. 3

W) 3 3 — 4) o U Cl in 4) X U Q. c 4) a C- 3 - 4-J c < •»J in LU — c o ID

4>

U

O ID 4) l_ ID

C o O 4) 0 4-* ID

— o in ID ID 4) 4) 3 O ID 4) 4->

X

U

OX L. 1— 4) L.

u l_ 4) -—

— o c 4-> <^ 0 4)

XX <^>O L,

X 10 •H

1- in

m in 14- o <J h- z. Q. Cl ID ID 4-1X in o XI CVJ in XI 4-1 E 4-* 4-> 4)

X 4-> 4-» 4-> XJ fxi

4) ax

x _i 3 3

in i4) O - O

cn

u c

.- ^ X I—

in id

10 XJX

4) 4-1 o —

10 3

IC 3 4)

C

l- 3

4)

—

4J

X

ID3 4-1 c I (0

4>cn i— c ID 10 x O o a

4) 4J 4)

10 >- 3 XJ

279
280
EXPERIENCES AND BENEFITS OF THE APPLICATION OF MINIMUM FLOW

WATER CONSERVATION HARDWARE

Larry K. Baker, Vice-President

Weatherby Associates, Inc.

Jackson, California

ABSTRACT

Minimum flow water conservation is achieved by using hardware and

techniques specifically designed around minimizing consumption while

maintaining the function, both physiological and aesthetic, of the use

as opposed to modification or redesign of existing hardware and

fixtures

These techniques and hardware have been used to significantly

reduce water and energy consumption and sewage treatment and disposal

problems in both commercial and residential applications. This paper

presents results of these applications with over an 80 percent reduction

in water consumption in commercial and 60 percent in residential applications. Impacts on sewage systems have been observed and projected

for both on-site and central systems. Reductions in plumbing and water

heating facilities are also discussed.

The hardware discussed represents an 80 percent to 85 percent

reduction when compared to conventional flow reduction techniques.

INTRODUCTION

Water conservation equipment are generally conventional water

fixtures modified to lower flows, but using the same basic mechanisms

as their high-use counterparts. The hardware and techniques presented

in this paper do not exclude, but are not limited to, modifications of

conventional technology. The major fixtures that contribute to the high

levels of flow reduction presented here are those designed to provide

the same function physiologically and aesthetically, but use mechanisms

that minimize consumption. For purposes of this paper, these high

levels of flow reduction will be called "minimum flow."

When water consumption is reduced to the levels obtained using

these techniques, there are significant impacts on not only water but on

energy and sewage. The purpose of this paper is to present the concept

of minimum flow; give a brief background of experiences using these

techniques; and present a brief analysis of the impacts of minimum flow

on an actual planned unit development.

281
DOMESTIC WATER USE CHARACTERISTICS

Most of our experience with flow reduction impacts lias been in the

foothills of northern California. For this reason, the parameters used

in the analysis will be those characteristic of that region. Translating the results to other areas can be accomplished by changing the base

data to that of the area to be considered.

Conventional Flows

Based on the analysis of winter flows, when no outside water occurs,

and on occupancies for the residential portion of Amador City, Martell,

Mokelumne Hill and Murphys, California, an average daily per capita flow

of approximately 64 gallons has been obtained. This agrees very closely

with the findings of Bailey, et al.(l) in reviewing the work of others.

He defined the water use patterns tabulated in Table 1.

Table 1. Average Conventional Flow Water Use

Fixture Gal/Use Use/Day Gal/Day Use Rate

Toilet 5 5 25 5 Gal/Flush

Bathing 20 1 20 4 GPM

Lavatory 2 Dishwasher 15 .25 3.75

Kitchen Sink 3 Laundry 50 .18 8.75 50 Gal/Load

Utility 1.25

Gallons/Person/Day 63.75

As can be seen from Table 1, 70 percent of the flow from the household occurs in toilet flushing and bathing. If the laundry is added to

the flows from these two uses, 85 percent of the flows are accounted for.

Modified Conventional Flows

This class of flow reduction includes toilets that use conventional

technology, but are basically scaled down, and showers that restrict flow

by means of orifices or controllers and are designed for lower flows.

This does not include toilet dams or flow restrictors. Table 2 presents

flows expected from this class of flow reduction.

Minimum Flow Fixtures

In order for a flow reduction technique to provide a predictable

positive impact on water energy and sewage systems, it must possess the

following characteristics:

a) Provide a significant predictable flow reduction

b) Not rely on habit pattern changes

c) Protect public health

d) On-going use must be verifiable

282
The fixtures we have found to best meet these criteria are the

class of water carriage fixtures referred to here as "minimum flow."

Table 2. Average Modified Conventional Flow Water Use

Fixture Gal/Use Use/Day Gal/Day Use Rate

Toilet 3.5 5 17.5 3.5 Gal/Flush

Bathing 15.0 1 15.0 3.0 Gal/Min.

Lavatory 2.0

Dishwasher 15.0 .25 3.75

Kitchen Sink 3.00

Laundry 50.0 .18 8.75

Utility 1.25

20 Percent Reduction 51.25 Gal/Person/Day

These fixtures are specifically designed to reduce the use of water

in their operation, while providing the same function as their conven- tional counterparts.

Toilets

Several toilets exist in this category between 1.9 £/flush (0.5 gal) and

3.8 £/flush (1.0 gal). The mechanisms used for flushing vary from wash

down bowls at 3 i and 3.8 I, to vacuum and air assist at 1.9 £ . One

toilet we have used in our applications and will be the basis for presenting the project impact analysis is the air assist toilet.^'

We have found this toilet to function well in both commercial and

residential applications, and to produce significant, predictable flow

reduction.

Bathing

The air assist shower^ uses a flow rate of 1.9 I /minute (0.5 gpm) or 2.8 a/minute (0.75 gpm), depending on the model selected and an air

flow rate of 40 cubic feet per minute. We have used this unit in both

configurations for commercial and residential applications and have

found it to produce the results anticipated.

The forced air assist provides the driving force lost when the

water flow is reduced, with no increase in bathing times when compared

to conventional 15.1 I /minute (4 gpm) showers, as reported by

Shatzburg, et al. ( 5 )

Laundry

A front-loading automatic washing machine utilizes a horizontal

axis drum to provide agitation. These machines use approximately 40-50

percent less water than top-loading washers.

Table 3 presents the reductions in flow obtained using minimum

283
flow technology.

Table 3. Average Minimum Flow Water Use

Fixture Gal/Use Use/Day Gal/Day Use Rate

Toilet 0.5

Bathing 2.5

Lavatory

51

2.50 .5 Gal/Flush

2.50 .5 Gal/Min

2.00

3.75

3.00

Dishwasher 15.0

Kitchen Sink

.25

Laundry 30.0

Utility -

.18 5.50 35 Gal/Load

1.25

68 Percent Reduction 20.50 Gal/Person/Day

APPLICATION EXAMPLES OF MINIMUM FLOW

Several examples of actual flow reduction applications will illustrate the types of problems that have prompted the use of the technology.

Dodge Ridge Ski Area

In 1973, Dodge Ridge was faced with closure due to a continuous

surfacing of wastewater from an existing leach field. Installation of

0 . 5-gallon-per-flush toilets reduced their waste flow from 80,000 gpd to

10,000 gpd. The field has not surfaced since; a periodic water shortage was eliminated; and a $500,000 connection to the Pinecrest community

sewerage system, to be made two years later, was not required.

Carlson Residence

In 1979, a home was purchased and a five-person family moved in.

Shortly thereafter, they were notified by the health department that

wastewater surfaced from the leach field serving their residence each

winter, and had prompted numerous complaints from neighbors, due to

odors. Rather than replace the leach field, as requested by the health

department, 0.5-gallon toilets and .75-gpm showers were installed and no surfacing occurred during two subsequent winters. This winter was above

average in rainfall.

Badger Pass Ski Area

In 1976, the Badger Pass Ski Area installed oil flush toilets with

a septic tank and leach field system for gray water disposal from the

lodge. In 1978, it was determined that the oil flush system had to be

removed due to problems discussed earlier in this paper. By installing

0 . 5-gallon-per-flush toilets, it was shown that the gray water system

could handle the total flow from the lodge. Surface and subsurface mon- itoring of the leach field for two years has proven the validity of the

approach

284
Red Corral Commercial

One business was served by a small septic tank leach field on a lot

where the owner wished to construct seven more non-water intensive com- mercial spaces. Due to limited area, it was proposed that the existing

building be converted to, and the new buildings constructed with, 0.5-

gallon-per- flush toilets and spring- loaded faucets. The existing system

is now serving the complex and 100 percent expansion area is available.

INTEGRATED WATER MANAGEMENT

A retirement community is currently planned for construction in

1981-82, which will utilize an integrated water management approach

throughout. One of the prime objectives of the project is to reduce on- going costs to the residents. Table 4 presents the type of buildings to

be constructed for Pioneer Junction

n Amador County, California.

Table 4. Pioneer Junction Construction Types

Type Construction Units

Cluster Residential

Retirement Apts.

Medical Clinic

Offices

Commercial

Motel

Restaurant

298 Residences

60 Apartments

60 Rooms

120 Seats

The following will be a brief summary of the analysis of the impacts of a design utilizing minimum flow technology. Although the development includes other flow reduction techniques, such as proximity

control faucets, the major fixture changes involve those shown in

Table 5.

Table 5. Fixture Characteristics - Minimum Flow

Toilet: 0.5 Gallons/Flush Air Assist

Bathing: 0.5 Gallons/Minute Air Assist

Laundry: 30 Gallons/Load/Front Load

The relative cost of these fixtures installed when compared to

conventional are shown in Table 6.

Table 6. Estimated Installed Fixture Costs

Conventional * Minimum

Toilet $210 $496

Shower $110 $330

* Includes Air Equipment

285
The collection system costs were determined through analysis of

conventional gravity and pressure sewer alternatives for both flow

levels. The gravity alternative was the least cost project for conven- tional flows and a pressure collection system for minimum flows.

The treatment plant in both cases is a completely housed fixed film

reactor designed specifically for the flows and strengths of each alternative. The waste characteristics for minimum flow were obtained

through sampling of actual flows from a minimum flow installation.^ 7 ^ The plant was selected for its low operating costs and reliability.

Effluent disposal is by subsurface discharge.

The capital costs of the least cost alternatives for both flows

are shown in Table 7.

Table 7. Water-Related Capital Costs

Conventional Minimum

Fixtures

Sewage Collection

Sewage Treatment

Sewage Disposal

235,400

417,500

375,000

109,000

603,900

341,400

160,000

34,700

Total $1,136,900 $1,140,000

The capital costs are practically the same for both alternatives as can be seen from Table 7. The next analysis was annual operating costs.

The only phase of this analysis that may not be familiar to the reader

is water heat energy costs. The only energy available at the development is electricity projected at $.088 per kilowatt hours (KWH) . Using

this energy source at a heating efficiency of 80 percent and a water

cost of $1.35 per 1000 gallons, the costs of water used by the various

fixtures can be shown in Table 8.

Table 8. Water Use Temperatures and Costs

Tempered

Fixture Temp . °F Temp. °C Cost/1000 Gal

Toilet Amb. Amb

$ 1.35

Bathing 107 42 15.26

Lavatory 105 41 14.77

Dishwasher 140 60 23.32

Kitchen/Other 105 41 14.77

Laundry (Ave.) 105 41 14.77

resulting annual costs of water-related activities for

munity are shown in Table 9.

Since the capital costs are the same, this savings accrues to the owners. In addition to the economic savings, a resource savings accrues

as shown in Table 10.

286
Table 9 . Water-Related Annual Costs

Item 1*1 lnimuiu oaveu

Water $ 35,600 $ 11,800 $ 23,800

Water Heat 179,500 80,200 99, 300

Fixture O&M -0- 3,230 ( 3,230)

Sewage Collection 2,500 5,000 ( 2,500)

Sewage Treatment 36,000 13,000 22,500

Total $253,600 $113,230 $139,870

Table 10. Annual Water and Water Heating Savings

o,"6 Conv. Min. Saved Saved

Water

Mil. Gal. 26.38 8.73 17.65 67%

Heat Energy

Million KWH 2

The ultimate objective of

dents. This savings, based on

in Table 11.

.24 1.00 1.24 55%

the project was a savings to the resiequivalent residential flows, is shown

Table 11. Annual Equivalent Living Unit Costs

Item Conventional Minimum Saved

Water $ 73 $ 24 $ 49

Water Heat 359 160 199

Sewerage & Fixtures

O&M 77 43 34

Total $509 $227 $282

Based on 500 Equivalent Living Units

This project points out that the benefits of significant flow

reduction cannot be fully assessed with a complete analysis of the impacts on both capital and ongoing costs to both the utility and the user

for, in fact, they are one and the same.

REFERENCES

1. Bailey, J.R., Benoit, R.J., Dodson, J.L., Robb, J.M. and Wallman,

H. , "A Study of Flow Reduction and Treatment of Waste Water from

Households." Water Pollution Control Research Series, 11050FKE,

Advanced Waste Treatment Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio,

December, 1969.

2. Microphore, Inc., P. O. Box 490, Willits, California 95490.

287
3. Minuse Systems, Inc., P. 0. Box 316, Mokelumne Hill, California

95245.

4. Baker, Larry K. , "The Impact of Water Conservation on On- Site Wastewater Management , " Seventh National Conference on Individual On-Site

Wastewater Systems, Ann Arbor, Michigan, September 23-25, 1980.

5. Schatzberg, Paul, Jackson, Drew F. , Kelly, Charles M. , and Harris,

Lynne R. , "Energy Conservation Through Water Resource Management-A

Reduced Flow Bathing Shower , " Naval Ship Research and Development

Center, Second National Conference on Water Reuse: Water's Interface

with Energy, Air and Solids, Chicago, May 4-8, 1975.

6. Raymond Vale Assoc., Pioneer Junction Master Plan, 1981.

7. Unpublished test data by Aqueonics Division, ARCO Environmental,

Inc., P. 0. Box 2600, Dublin, California 94566.

288
TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LOW-FLOW DEVICES

Frank R. Holycross , Manager

Manufacturing Engineering

Delta Faucet Company

Greensburg, Indiana

ABSTRACT

There are many technical problems that we, manufacturers of

plumbing products, are aware of. Low flows, pressure fluctuations,

pressure regulation, solids transportation, ad infinitum. We, individually and collectively, have some answers to these problems. Some

of these answers are available now, to put to use. However, there

are some problems that cannot be answered because of the confusion

in codes. Where a solution is good in one code area it may not apply

in another area. The systems of today do not lend themselves to

solutions based on new system types. We, P.M.I, and our individual

companies, are ready to work toward the end of conserving water

resources. We feel we have the knowledge from experience and the

capabilities to contribute to the solution of "our" problem and should

be in any and all discussions of the planning and resolution of this

gigantic and grave problem.

INTRODUCTION

I'm here today representing P.M.I. Plumbing Manufacturers Institute, an organization to which my company and I belong, is a trade

association of leading manufacturers of plumbing products, including

fittings, trim, fixtures and appliances, which is a broad representation of industry manufacturers.

We, the manufacturers, believe we have an obligation to provide

safe, sanitary, functional products to the end users. We constantly

work on standards committees and with code authorities, bringing

different fields of expertise to bear in the preparation of standards

which protect the users of our products.

P.M.I, has long been the leader, in espousing water and related

energy conservation and in bringing rationality to regulation ot our products and installation practices for such products. We are performing valuable public service by innovations in the field of re- source conservation.

289
There may be some of you who believe the water problem is a recent one. Quite a number of people have had an interest in this

for a number of years. I have been designing faucets for nearly 40

years and at all times the flow rate of 3 gpm was a target for

showerheads. While my work with water closets has been mainly from

the ballcock/flush valve side, we were always working to get a reduced

water requirement flush. Even so, the flow rate for the ballcock

was, and is, required to be rather high and noise free.

My point here is that manufacturers of plumbing fittings and

fixtures have been aware of and have wrestled with the water resources

problem for longer than I can remember. We have a fountainhead of

experience and knowledge that is there for the asking.

One of the largest problems manufacturers have is the variety

and inconsistency of codes and the numerous certifications required.

In addition, there are areas where these codes overlap, causing many

problems of compliance to the plumber, contractor, wholesaler and

manufacturer

The second largest problem in achieving a reduction in potable

water consumption, to this time, is the general public. People in

most areas of the United States have become accustomed to "all I want." So, the manufacturers of fittings have gone along, and in

fact, specifications and codes for flow rates have, in the past, been

minimum rather than maximum. These flow rates were established long

ago, by code and standard formulating organizations, not by manufacturers .

At the moment there are many areas which have flow rate limits

while many other areas have no such requirements. Enforcement of

the flow rate requirement is not at all well done, where low flows

are mandated. However, at the present time, with some areas of the

United States requiring flow limiting and with other areas not wanting

it, some manufacturers make two versions of each faucet. One, un- limited as they have always been, and another almost identical to

the first except that it is flow limited. The flow-limited version

is manufactured to a specified flow rate or to a standard adopted

by several code agencies. As you can see this requires more paperwork and large inventories are required to be able to ship on time.

Without the inventory the product is made to order, which delays

deliveries and increases cost -- which, of course, are passed on to the

end user. Other manufacturers make all their faucets flow limited.

Now this holds down costs and makes for much faster deliveries but,

at the same time, it causes field problems. Many, many complaints

from irate customers are received because of flow and the manufacturer

is constantly defending his product from those who do not understand

the consequences of the flow requirement in their area or from persons

in areas where no flow requirement is mandated. However, most installers know that the flow- limiting devices are rather easily removed

or changed. In areas where flow rates are not limited many of the

290
flow- limiting devices are removed, A lot are removed in areas of lowflow requirements.

Another problem. The water transport system is totally integrated.

From source through disposal, one component cannot be appreciably

altered without upsetting the system. We, manufacturers, are more

than slightly aware of this. One major aspect of this total system

is the volume of water required to move solid waste through the

drainage component. While fitting manufacturers can produce any

variety of low-flow fittings and fixture manufacturers can produce

low-volume -usage fixtures, there is a limit to these reductions for

adequate drainage through in-place systems. For years it has been

possible to make water closets, flush on very little water, in the

laboratory. These require more precision in manufacturing and thus are more expensive. However, the D.W.V. systems in place

a different environment from the lab and there are as many "environments" as there are installations. This means the water closet must

be made to function with the worst average system into which it might

be installed.

If the parameters of new systems could be spelled out and all new systems were rigidly held to these parameters, then we could design components toward the goal of reduced water use. It would, of

course, leave the problems of present systems to be coped with, but

these hopefully will "fade out." There are many innovations which

have been looked at by current manufacturers and by independent firms

and persons. Some of these are practical with today's systems. Some

require a change in our thinking but most are more costly.

There is another large problem which exists in flow limiting

of showers. We all, I'm sure, have at least heard of, if not in fact

said, "I'm taking a shower, don't anyone use any water." The reason

for this is pressure fluctuations. When you go to take a shower,

you set the temperature for the shower by allowing a specific proportion of hot and cold water to pass to the showerhead. As pressures

in the supply lines vary, the proportion changes and, consequently,

the outlet temperature changes. When these occur rapidly, there

a shock potential, resulting in sudden reaction by the bather which

could culminate in injury. Wide sudden fluctuations can and have

resulted in severe burns. This is an historical problem; however,

when we limit the flow at the point of easiest access, the showerhead,

we have greatly magnified the problem of sudden and drastic temperature

changes

Where before the limiting requirement, a pressure fluctuation

of 10 psi, did not cause too much temperature change, that same

10 psi change now can cause as much as a 25° F change in outlet

temperature. We, as an industry, are having to work and live with

this. Each case that comes up has to be handled upon its own

merits. The severe cases are caused by poorly designed supply

291
components (of the total system) and/or where the distribution component

is totally inadequate. The fitting manufacturer is now expected to come forth with a panacea for multiple component problems.

When the first words were out about flow-limiting showerheads,

we, as individuals in our industry and collectively as P.M.I. , presented this reality to various code agencies, one of which was California. Their response was, "We have tried the flow restriction in

showerheads in several institutions and have had no reporting of such

occurrence; therefore, we shall proceed." So here, also, we have

a problem in low flows and that is, getting the message across to

those in positions to write and specify, that there are specific fluid

mechanics problems, all interrelated to the total system. There is,

however, an answer now to this pressure fluctuation problem. Even

though our industry has for years had pressure-balanced valves which

maintain the outlet proportion, irrespective of pressure fluctuation

in the supply lines, most users do not know this and specifiers,

contractors and plumbers do not recommend these, I presume because

of cost. These valves hold the proportion so that the temperature

never changes beyond ±3° F. An additional safety feature of pressurebalanced valves is, if one supply fails the nonfailed line is shut

down to under 10% of the original flow, which in most showers is

a dribble of water from the showerhead.

There are many more specific problems that the manufacturers

of plumbing products have been aware of for years. Each of us is

doing research or has done research on many of the problems that need

to be solved to retain our potable water resources. We are willing

and eager to be active in any work that will preserve our country's

future

We, P.M.I, and the total plumbing industry have, collectively,

hundreds of people who are astute in their fields of endeavor and

can contribute much to the cause and prevent lost time in achieving

a viable end. Again, each manufacturer and P.M.I, are available—and

who should know more or should be able to contribute more than the

manufacturers of plumbing products?

292
A MODEL FOR THE TRANSPORT MECHANISMS OF SOLIDS IN BUILDING PIPE DRAINS

Lawrence S. Galowin

Senior Engineer, Building Equipment Division

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C.

ABSTRACT

The requirements for potable water conservation have resulted in

the introduction of low water usage devices and plumbing fixtures in

buildings. Reductions in the quantity of water discharged into the

gravity drainage plumbing system can result in inadequate transport of

wastes after entry into the drain pipes.

Currently, studies* of the transient partially-filled pipe flow

with solids in pitched horizontal drains include analytical modeling of

the hydraulic/solids interactions and experiments to develop a data bas

for validation of design methods or empirical correlations applicable t pipe sizing methods for the plumbing drainage system. Initial results

from the research on transport mechanisms for solids required for sweep

ing solids through pitched drain pipes are presented. The modeling

parameters and test data for the flow characteristics, solid size, pipe

diameter, and pitch of the pipes are discussed. The dependence of the

transport phenomena on the depth of the wastewater stream, the length

to diameter ratio of the solids, pitch of the pipe, and wall friction

are identified as significant parameters. The computed results from th

predictive model for the hydraulic forces are shown to be physically

consistent

LIST OF SYMBOLS

2 Ay cross sectional flow area at water depth 6 (mm )

dB(=2Rg) diameter of solid cylindrical body (mm)

F resultant body force (gm)

Fg buoyancy force (gm)

Ff friction force (gm)

* Research jointly sponsored by National Bureau of Standards and Office

of Policy Development and Research, Department of Housing and Urban

Development

293
^HU> ^HD hydraulic head force on base areas of body at upstream

and downstream condition respectively (gm)

V V

^ r = /gD = /gh~ Froude number based on a reference diameter, or depth, h

Fy body weight force component parallel to centerline of

pipe (gm)

Fy^j body weight force normal to wall of pipe (gm)

Fg Force due to surface shear stress on wetted areas (gm)

g gravitational constant (m/sec^)

H depth of water flow, 6, in reference (6) notation

I solid body length (mm)

n Manning coefficient of equations 9a, 9b

oQ flow rate of water (£/s)

Ng numerical buoyancy factor, 0<Ng<l

Njj numerical hydraulic head force factor, 0<Njj<1

s pipe pitch

Rg radius of cylindrical solid body (mm)

hydraulic radius of water flow of depth 6 (mm)

Rp pipe radius; in reference (6) D = 2 Rp

x axial distance in drain pipe test rig, reference (6)

6 depth of water flow in pipe (mm), where subscripts

U,D denote upstream or downstream depths,

respectively

\if coefficient of friction between solid and pipe wall

o=Pb/pw specific gravity

o Pg density of solid body (gm/cm )

o Py density of water (gm/cm )

294
INTRODUCTION

The transport of waste solids from plumbing fixtures within

gravity-driven building drainage systems is, to a large extent dependent

on the maintenance of sufficient wastewater flow depth in the pitched

drain pipes. The prediction of waste solids transport under representative conditions for partially-filled pitched pipes requires development

of the interrelationships between the controlling transport parameters,

e.g., time-dependent wastewater flow rates and depth, the dimensions of

the solids, the pipe diameter, pitch and internal surface conditions

(which affects the wall friction between the solids and/or film lubrication). Similar partially-filled pipe flow with solids occurs in sewer mains except under "flooded" conditions. The reduction of water discharged from fixtures, such as water closets or appliances, with reduced

quantities of stored water or decreased flow rates, can result in lower

pipe sweeping velocities or reduced solids carrier capability in conventional sized drain piping. Alternatively, in new building design,

smaller diameter drain pipes which maintain satisfactory solids movement

with smaller quantities of water are feasible. The study of characteristics of the flow and interactions with solids has become the subject

of recent drainage research on effects of reduced water usage in water

conservation programs.

A major criteria in design of building drainage systems is to

prevent full bore wastewater flow in the drainage network while providing adequate solids waste transport. The requirement for partiallyfilled pipe flows in the branch drains and building drains (the laterals

to onsite treatment systems or the public sewers) is based on a need to

retain a clear air passage throughout the pipe network to prevent trap

seal failure.

The initial developments of computational techniques derived from

theoretical force and momentum equations for solid body transport and

surrounding flows was reported in (1,2,3). Although the feasibility of

the computational techniques was demonstrated, the lack of agreement

between predicted and experimental results indicated the need for further research to refine the preliminary models for the hydraulic and

solid body interactions. Experimental measurements were reported for

motion of large solids (4) (such as sanitary napkins in long hospital

building drains) and the transport of cylindrical waste solid simulants

with transient wastewater surge characteristics (5,6,7). The theory and

experimental test data indicate that transport with flows (established

either from actual water closet plumbing fixtures or laboratory experiments with a controlled discharge tank) in pitched drains cause the

bodies initially at rest or introduced with small velocities to undergo

an early acceleration followed by a gradual deceleration. Observations

of the phenomena show that following the surge peak the depth of the

water in the pipe decreases and the solid velocity decreases or the body

may be deposited within the pitched drain pipe; subsequent wastewater

discharges from the same or other fixtures then can convey the solids

to the soil stack or beyond the building through the lateral drain.

295
Experiments with reduced flows from water closets show flow depth

reductions in the drain and indicate enhanced probability of solid

depositions in long pipes (4,6,7). It is apparent that under such con- ditions supplementary wastewater flow is required for solids removal

from the building drainage systems and laterals with low flow fixtures.

Sources for additional water-borne transport are either repeated

flushing of the water closet, other fixture discharges, or by release of

stored grey water.

The attenuation of the input surge wave along the length of the

drain results in decreased depth of water and an increase in the time

interval for passage of the surge wave which reduces the transport

effectiveness (sweeping of solids) in long drains (1,8). The prediction

and measurement of this phenomena is of significance in the context of

evaluation effects of reduced water consumption. Similar effects of

reduced flows in sewers is discussed in the summary of experiences (9)

during the California 1977 drought. With flow velocity reductions

abnormally large grit (solids) load deposits accumulated and were only

cleared when storms occurred after the drought; however, a "stronger"

older sewage was reaching the plants. With the exception of the cases where infiltration/ inflows into sewer lines from ground waters

occurred, some benefits of lowered water usage were identified at the

wastewater treatment facility. The provisions for sweeping of solids

or establishing a carrier flow to provide waterborne transport is of

considerable concern for designers of ultra low flow installations

(10); for such applications the projected level of water usage is onethird of that conventionally experienced and under those aggravated

conditions new approaches for applications of stored grey water are under consideration to provide sweeping in the drains.

The theoretical approach to solve the problem of solid transport in

the waste stream requires simultaneous solution of the governing fluid

momentum equation with the continuity equation and the equation of the

motion for the solid. Currently, research efforts are focused upon more rigorously defining the model for the forces acting on the solids in the

time-dependent partially filled pipe flow. Details of the mechanisms of

hydraulic interactions at the solid interfaces are provided from the

increase in experimental results to improve the preliminary model

adopted in earlier efforts (1,2,3). The derivation of an improved force

model is presented for solid cylindrical simulated waste bodies applicable to: (a) the general computer program (3) for time dependent

motion of solid materials; (b) for analytical determination of the

breakaway of a deposited solid (incipient motion from rest); (c) for

steady motion of the solid. The parameters investigated are the interrelationship of flow rate, pipe size and pitch with the length to diameter (fineness) ratio of the cylindrical bodies, the water depth to

body diameter ratio and the wall friction.

This report presents a summary of:

(i) considerations involved in modeling forces on solids for

the pipe flow regimes likely to be encountered in drains

296
(ii) typical experimental data for understanding the

hydraulic-solids interactions

(iii) the results of a detailed modeling study

(iiii) the application examples for determining pipe sizes and

waste water flows required for incipient motion of the

body.

HYDRAULIC-SOLID BODY INTERACTION

In order to solve the equation of motion for solids transported in

partially-filled drain pipe flow requires the analytical development of

a model for the forces acting (on the body) due to hydraulic interaction and pipe wall friction. The description of the forces acting on

the body for coupling the fluid momentum effects derived from the sur- rounding flow conditions is analytically complex. Swaffield (3)

developed a simplified model of the body forces for large solids, (see

Appendix). The force model was included in a general computer programs

for subcritical and supercritical pipe flows. The capability of

establishing the boundary condition at the moving surface of the

solid and obtaining numerical solutions based upon the forces assumed

acting was demonstrated, however, agreement with experiments was not

satisfactory. The need for refining the model or introduction of

empirical factors was recommended in order to bring the predicted

results into agreement with laboratory tests.

The numerical solution of the hydraulic parameters is based upon

the method of characteristics. In this technique, the (characteristic)

waves intersect at a point which is dependent upon the flow regime.

Classification of the flow regimes for unsteady and steady state is

based upon the Froude number (with possible modification for hydraulic

dimensions in partially-filled pipe flow):

V

F

r = /gD~

For partially-filled pipes the flow regimes may be identified that

affect the initial conditions on which subsequent solutions may be

based.

V

(1) Subcritical flow, Froude No. =

^ < 1

Here the local wave speed in surge type flows exceeds the flow

average velocity, thus waves may be propagated both upstream and

downstream in the flow, i.e., c > V.

V

(2) Supercritical flow, Froude No. = ^gTT < 1

Here the local wave speed in surge flows is less than the average

flow velocity at that section and hence waves cannot be propagated

upstream, i.e., V > c. 297
The flow regime applicable to any partially-filled pipe flow may be

determined by a comparison of the flow normal and critical depths (2).

The tracing of the body motion for both location and velocity will depend

upon a pseudo-characteristic line in the space coordinate and time variables .

Parametric modeling for the forces acting on the solids resulting

from hydraulic interactions may be based upon (i) flow energy exchange

and energy losses, or (ii) the derivation of the detailed pressure head

acting over the upstream nose area and downstream base area, as well as

the shearing flow streaming past the wetted (immersed) surfaces, or (iii) defining the net forces as an appropriate force or drag coefficient thereby "lumping" all fluid velocity effects without details of

pressure and shear stress distributions. To represent the relative

velocity of the water with respect to the solid (to define the "leakage"

or streaming past the solid) the description of the flow passing the

body must be analytically developed; that flow and surface shear stress

on wetted surface areas of the body can be applied in (ii) or (iii).

For unsteady motion, the time-dependent depth of the upstream

(approach) flow to the solid(s) must be considered for the depth less

than, equal to, or exceeding the height of the body. Also, the geometrical representation of the characteristics of the solid(s) mass for regular or irregular cross sections as a basis for determining reference

areas (over which pressure and shear stresses act) or as reference areas

in applying nondiraensional force coefficients must also be developed.

Three possibly distinctive conditions related to the initiation of

motion of the body from rest may be identified: (i) the water surge

(wave) is large and scoops up the body and carries the solid along the

wavefront as a "floating" waterborne object with negligible flow energy

losses; (ii) impulsive forces are initially developed due to a rapid

momentum exchange (impact) between the water and solid(s) over a small

time interval followed by the continued buildup of water and solid

interactive set of transport forces; (iii) a gradual buildup of transport forces resulting from interactions of hydraulic head due to water

depth, shear and buoyancy forces, with the friction and weight component forces as shown in figure 1, which results in the initial solid(s)

acceleration. When the upstream flow approaching the solid inundates

the body (i.e., complete submergence condition where buoyancy forces

tend to be equivalent to the weight for specific gravity near unity) the

dominant dynamic forces are due to the hydraulic head forces and

possibly shear stresses on the surface of the solid.

The forces shown in figure 1 are due to the hydraulic pressure

distributions, shear and friction, buoyancy, and weight components.

Discussion of the derived model for the solid body analysis is presented

in (11) with the analytical derivations which include body size, pipe

diameter, and pipe-body wall surface friction and the pitch of the pipe;

the model is generally applicable to the flow regimes described above

with the pressures properly described when the depth exceeds the body

diameter

298
For the general case of building drainage systems, two types of

solid motions must be considered in an analytical development. Those

are: (i) the motion of the solid subsequent to injection into the flow

with a downstream velocity to be representative of water closet discharges; and (ii) the motion of the deposited solid(s) from the condition of the body initially at rest (to represent one or more depositions

along the length of the drainage pipe). With very low water usage,

solids can be transported over successive intervals over arbitrary pipe

lengths and be redeposited on the pipe wall; the flow from any plumbing

fixture discharged can be the wastewater source to initiate the motion.

The conditions considered in this report represent both the

breakaway of a solid from rest (as the forces gradually build up) and

also the case of steady motion. The initiation of motion for the

deposited stationary solid case represents the severest set of conditions (as compared to the solid injected with finite velocity) relative

to the effectiveness of wastewater flow for transport purposes. Since

the body is at rest initially, the forces causing acceleration are required to increase to the level which causes breakaway; that situation corresponds to the change from static equilibrium with the larger

static friction force than that which exists after motion occurs when a reduced "lubricated" film friction contact condition exists. Consequently, to initiate motion, larger forces are required as compared to

the condition for maintaining the body in motion; development of the

larger forces require a greater amount of water. In the case of the

stationary solid, as well as a moving solid, the body acting as an obstacle to the flow causes an increase in the water depth upstream

which increases the possibility of the surge developing into an instantaneous full bore flow condition (closure of the pipe diameter). If

the flow becomes full bore (plug flow), then significant air pressure

reductions can occur in the drain causing a loss of trap seals.

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

Laboratory experiments with surge flows and nearly steady uniform

flow contribute insights useful in the derivation of a simplified solid

body force model of the hydraulic and solids interaction phenomena. Results from tests in a 75 mm diameter pipe are reported (5,6) and laboratory tests in a 100 mm pipe are continuing to develop data for a wide

range of flow and solids parameters. Additional compilations of test

results and details of development for data analysis are presented in

(12).

In long partially-filled drainage pipes the shape of the input

surge wave is altered due to energy dissipation during passage along

the conduit. In the absence of any downstream inflow from other branch

connections the depth of water decreases, i.e., the wave attenuates,

and the time for the surge to pass any station increases indicating a reduced flow rate in the downstream direction. The analysis and the

computer program for numerical solution for flow attenuation (8) provides the capability of determining the flow properties. The favorable comparisons of the predicted results with test data are shown in

299
figure 2 for the case of pipe surge flow without solids. The laboratory

test data was obtained in the 5 meter length instrumented test facility

(5,8).

Local disturbances in the surge flow profile or steady flow profile

(observed and measured) result from the presence of a solid body acting

as an obstacle to the flow. When the solid is stationary or moving with

a velocity less than the water velocity the flow depth is locally

increased at the upstream end and decreased in the wake downstream of

the body (as shown in the sketch, figure 1). Test results obtained in a 100 mm diameter pipe are shown in figures 3 and 4. In figure 3, the

effect of two different solid bodies on the surge profiles where the

depth changes across the body have locally altered the flow is shown for

a two liter tank discharge volume. The change in depth across the solid

in the case of (nearly) steady flow is shown in figure 4 for three different solids. The test data indicates that the change from upstream to

downstream depth is a function of the fineness ratio of the body (Jl/dg).

Since the water velocity exceeds the solid velocity a wake region

appears ahead of the body with a smaller depth than upstream.

The velocities of various bodies for several flow conditions in a 100 mm diameter pipe are shown in figures 5, 6, and 7 and in table 1.

The effects of the several variables, such as volume of water discharged, the pitch of the pipe, the location of the solid in the pipe

and associated water depth, the specific gravity of the solid, as well

as the fineness ratio are illustrated. Figure 5 shows the dependence

of the velocity on water volume discharged and stations along the pipe

length (with implied change in water depth). Typical results in figures 6 and 7 show the strong dependence of the solid velocity on body

size, specific gravity and distance (or time) for the two types of

flows considered, surge and near steady conditions. In these examples

the solids were initially at rest close to the pipe inlet. Gradual

acceleration from the static equilibrium condition at rest is displayed; the experiments show that acceleration to peak velocity

requires one to two meters (an almost instantaneous impulsive reaction

would be characterized by a stepwise acceleration). The observations

and test measurements provide a basis for assuming the gradual force

buildup conditions in the derivation of the breakaway and near equilibrium modeling for both surge and nearly constant velocity conditions.

The quantity of flush ahead of the solids, when the solid cleared the

drain, ranged from 10 percent to 40 percent in the data associated with

table 1. Those quantities of water which stream past the solids are then no longer serving in the transport mechanisms. In table 1 and

figure 8 typical results are shown for the stoppage of the solid bodies

Plumbing Research Laboratory, National Bureau of Standards.

Test results from the 15 meter 100 mm diameter pipe were obtained

from the collaborative NBS program with the Drainage Research Group,

Brunei University, United Kingdom.

300
Table 1. Solid Velocity and Distance Traversed for Cylindrical Solids

in 100 mm Diameter 15 Meter Length Drain*

Pipe Solid Water

Pitch Size Closets- Average Velocity^ Dis tance

dgx£ (mm) Flush (m/sec) at Station Travp t eH

Volume

(

H ) ° \ m / (m)

1/300 37X80 10.5 11 • 436 4JU 1 ?01 13.5

1/150 37X80 10.5 2 . 004 1 . 288 0.765 Cleared

1/80 37X80 10.5 1 937 1 37? 0 9?7 riV> -X- parpd V— CL X. *— V_l 1/40 37X80 10. 5 1 944 1J- • 637 U J / Vj -L d CL X. \A 1/300 37X80 6 1.715 0 .872 8.785

1/150 37X80 6 1 K06 0 9? 1 9 . 79

1/80 37X80 6 1 797 0u • QfiQ 707 fi S7

11 . 53

1/40 37X80 6 1 . 739 1 .218 0. 950 Cleared

1/150 37X42 10 2 . 083 1 .283 0.818 CI earer1

1/80 37X42 10 2.115 1 .405 1 .039 Cleared

1/40 37X42 10 2.112 1.584 1.234 Cleared

1/150 37X42 6 1.762 0.982 0.539 11 .83

1/80 37X42 6 1.776 1.073 0.713 13.39

1/40 37X42 6 1.817 1.292 1.052 Cleared

1/150 25X80 10 2.197 1.389 0.933 Cleared

1/80 25X80 10 2.309 1.532 1.095 Cleared

1/40 25X80 10 2.195 1.686 1.228 Cleared

1/150 25X80 6 1.868 1.199 0.661 12.94

1/80 25X80 6 1.890 1.236 0.822 Cleared

1/40 25X80 6 1.934 1.373 1.132 Cleared

( ) i European washdown water closet.

( Solid initially at rest 0.8 m from inlet to drain.

Average of 10 tests.

Note: Specific gravity of solids - unity.

* From test series of collaborative program at Brunei University.

Drainage Research Group, Uxbridge, U.K.

301
which did not clear the drain. The potential for blockage when multiple

solids are transported with reduced flow in the drain pipe is one of the

concerns in the efficiency of solid transport with reduced flow and is

the subject of future research.

FORCE MODEL FOR SOLID - RIGID RIGHT CIRCULAR CYLINDER

The model developed for forces on a rigid right circular cylinder

within a pipe, as shown in figure IB, is based upon the observations and

derived results of the testing program. The simplified model for such

solids assumes that a gradual change in water depth adjacent to the body

occurs; no impulsive forces are assumed, and no angle of attack force

loads from the body, tilted with respect to the stream, occur. The body

is assumed to maintain contact with the pipe wall and the orientation of

the centerline of the body and pipe remain parallel. Details of the

derivation of the equations for the force model and discussion of the

assumptions, e.g., neglecting the shear of water streaming past the

body, are discussed in reference (11). The forces considered are:

Fjjuj ^ED ~ hydraulic head due to upstream and downstream water

depths

Fg - buoyancy force, normal to wall of the pipe

Fj^ - weight force component normal to the wall of the pipe

Fy - weight force component parallel to the centerline of

the pitched pipe in the direction of motion

Ff - friction force at the wall parallel to the centerline

of the pipe determined from the product of friction

coefficient, y, for static (dry) or lubricated film

condition and the sum of the forces (F^ ~ Fg)

perpendicular to the wall

Fg - surface shear force on the solid due to the stream

stresses on immersed (wetted) body area; subsequently

assumed to be negligible

The appendices of (11) provide the detailed derivation of the force

equations; only the final equations are summarized below.

Buoyancy force - The buoyancy force through the center of gravity,

Fg, is determined from the volume of water displaced and is, therefore,

independent of the specific gravity of the solid.

5 FB

= / Pwd(Vol) [1]

Carrying out the integration and simplifying to a nondimensionalized

form, the result is:

302
Ftj , -1 —~ = ,n + i I f (5 - 1 ] /f2 - 6 1 6 + sin r 6 - 1 n [la]

Pw* B

It is assumed that the body is immersed at uniform depths, over

the length, g; however, a correction factor based upon test observations

of nonuniform depth must be introduced. With the body velocity zero, or with the body in motion at less than the water velocity, the water level

varies over the body length; as the body approaches the velocity of the

water the immersion depth tends to be uniform. In order to take into

account the variation of depth across the length on the buoyancy force,

the numerical factor, NB , reduces the total buoyancy force (below that

for uniform depth) in calculations, where 0 < NB

< 1 . Since the depth

variation along the body length is generally unknown, this calculation

procedure provides a method for parametrically determining the effects

of the variable depth. An exact solution for displaced water volume

would require an integration over the length of the body with known

depth profiles from measurements or other analyses. The term NB

F B will

be introduced in the equation (6a) for determining the resultant force

acting on the solid.

Hydraulic head forces - The hydraulic forces, Fj^j , F^, on the base areas are obtained by integration of the water pressure distribution

over the wetted base surface area to the respective depths, gu> §D> f° r the upstream and downstream conditions.

6 F H

= r pd (Area) [2]

Completing the quadrature and simplifying to a nondimensionalized

form results in:

Fjj 1 / cin~l

2 Pw "B

=

1 (6 + 1) rf 6 -11 / [2 - 6 ) 6 +

sin

f<5 - 1] + 11

+

1 6 7(2 - 6 ) 6 [2a]

Rtj ./ 1 RB

j Rb

The exact expressions for hydraulic forces on the upstream area,

FHU , and downstream area, F^, are obtained by inserting the appropriate

values of gu> gD • T^e terms > however, may be combined to obtain the net

resultant force to simplify the parametric calculations. Those forces

act in opposite directions and appear as F^y-F^n in obtaining the

resultant force acting on the body. The term %FHU will be introduced

in equation (6a) as the parametric formulation for the hydraulic base

area resultant force. The numerical factor, %, between zero and unity,

scales the value of FHU and thereby parametrically determines the influence of the pressure head force terms. Accurate base area immersion

depth data has not been determined for most experiments. For a constant

depth this force cancels out (the numerical factor set to zero) and for

303
varying upstream and downstream depths as in figures 3 and 4, the factor

Njj is less than unity.

Friction force - The friction force resulting from the forces normal to

the pipe wall surface and a coefficient of friction, Uf, either static

(assumed to be the value for "dry" conditions) or for lubricated film

conditions is given by:

Ff - M f (FWN - FB ) [3]

Body weight force components - The body forces are resolved into two

components, one normal to the pipe wall, Fy^, (aligned through the center

of gravity with the buoyancy force) and the other parallel to the pipe

wall, Fy. For the small angular pitch of the pipe the approximations of

cos(s) = 1 and sin(s) = s are introduced in resolving the weight in

terms of the density, p B

, and volume, IHRg^, as:

W = p R IURB

2 = aB

p wIURB

2 [4]

with the specific gravity, o"b =Pb/pw*

Under conditions where the body is completely submerged, then

depending on the value of the specific gravity, one or more forces may

vanish, e.g., for ag<l , Fy^ = Fg, and then the friction force vanishes.

The summation of forces on the body in the direction parallel to the

pipe wall becomes:

IF = FHU - Fhd + FW

- U f (FWN - FB ) + F s [5]

With Fg = 0 (assumed to be negligible) the equation of motion for the

solid is:

7iT ZF "

FHU - FHD + FW

" »f ( FWN " F

b)

TM

and upon introduction of the parametric factors Njj and Ng the equation

becomes

W dVR , ~ = VHU + FW

" »f ( FWN " N

B

F

b)

^

The zero acceleration condition for "breakaway" or steady motion is

that the resultant force, IF, equals zero. Three cases correspond to

the zero acceleration state:

(i) The body is initially at rest and remains at rest until

initiation of motion; this is the "breakaway" condition.

The body remains in static equilibrium until that instant

when the sum of the forces in the direction of impending

motion increases and overcomes the retarding forces in the

upstream direction.

304
(ii) The body has undergone an acceleration to a steady velocity

(an occurrence with steady flow in partially-filled pipe or alternatively an instantaneous peak solid velocity in a varying surge flow).

(iii) The body comes to rest in the pipe when the available flow

can no longer sustain the body motion (i.e., the retarding

forces on the body have decreased the solid velocity).

Short duration small volume surge discharge tests indicate that the

three conditions can occur during different time intervals in experiments, figures 6A, B, C, and D. Near-steady flow test conditions show

a trend toward the condition (ii), figures 7A, B.

For either conditions (i) or (ii) to initiate or sustain body

motion, the resultant force term ZF, of equation [6A] is set equal to zero and after simplification yields:

i_ = J_ = (IS) x dg 2Rg ag

where the factors and Ng represent the aforementioned numerical

factors for hydraulic and buoyancy forces respectively with values

between zero and unity and 6 is understood to be the upstream depth.

Although Njj and Ng are interrelated, they are treated as separate

parameters in this study; the variation of depth along the solid is

required to develop such an equation.

Examination of equation [7] leads to several deductions based upon

the force model adopted. For = 0, it is implied that the upstream

and downstream base areas have equal depths and in this case Ng should

be unity, i.e., the depth about the solid is constant. Hence, the

weight force component in the direction of motion is balanced by the

wall friction force since equation [7] was obtained by setting ZF = 0.

This can be recognized from equation [6a] when the quantity Fw-yf

(Fy^-NgFg) is set equal to zero and collecting terms to yield

£H [_s + {1 _ 5L (f

- 1) /(2-i-) L. + sin"' [|_ - 1) + K] = 0 W

2R

g

Ogll Rg Kg Kg Kg I

Since & an take on any value, the term in the brace of equation [8]

2RB vanishes; the remaining terms are proportional to the weight component

and friction force. The condition for Ng = 0 represents vanishingly

small buoyancy force, possibly due to a sharp drop in water depth along

the length of the body or as a result of trickle flow; then the friction retarding is not significantly reduced by the buoyancy force term

(due to displacement of the water volume). The change in friction

305
coefficient, yf, from a value for dry static condition to a film

lubrication condition with a reduced value can be assessed by substituting decreasing values of Uf. When the weight component force and

friction force approach each other and cause the value o.f the denominator to vanish, then except for Njj = 0, the body length to diameter

ratio becomes increasingly large. Under that condition there is no retarding force (assuming FhU^fHI)) to inhibit motion of the body and

any finite level of hydraulic pressure force in the direction of motion

will cause the body to be set in motion or continue in motion down the

pipe. The buoyancy term is negligibly small when bodies of very high

specific gravity, ag factor tends to make £/2Rg+0, i.e., the hydraulic

forces are insufficient to initiate motion. A range of numerical

examples for various values of the ratio 6/Rg, £/2Rg, Uf , Njj, and Ng are presented in the following section.

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

The calculated effects display the trends anticipated, e.g., a larger

friction factor requires greater hydraulic forces to establish the

condition for breakaway. The numerical examples provide the quantitative differences as each parameter is changed. The results of calculations and the effects of each parameter indicate that expected effects

of varying one parameter at a time computed from equation [7] are shown

in figures 9 and 13. Extended results of calculations for a wide range

of variable parameters as well as the application to pipe sizing are presented in (11). In the figures, the areas to the right of the curves

are regions where the sum of forces acting are positive and will accelerate the body. Those domains to the left of the curve are rejected

since the sum of forces are negative (do not reach the null value of

ZF = 0). The physical explanation is that for any value of £/dg as the

as the depth 6/Rg increases (a) the hydraulic base force in direction of

impending motion increases, (b) the increase in buoyancy force reduces

the friction force acting in the direction opposite to impending motion.

At the points on the curve obtained from equation [7] the resultant

forces vanish and for any greater value of the depth the resultant force

exceeds zero. The intervals of time required for the forces to attain

the levels required for incipient motion will vary depending on the

water flow rate profiles as well as the body and pipe characteristics.

The effect of increased pipe pitch shown in figure 9 results in a decreased depth of water for the breakaway conditioning. The effect of

increasing the friction coefficient shown in figure 10 with all other

conditions remaining the same results in a lower water depth for

breakaway.

The figures indicate that for the pipe pitch values of s = .02,

.04, the increase in friction coefficient requires a greater depth of

water for incipient solid motion (breakaway) or sustained constant velocity. The physical interpretation is that the increase in the retarding

friction force must be overcome by greater hydraulic and buoyancy forces

(associated with greater depth) before the solid can be set into motion

or to maintain the solid in motion. When the solid is already in motion

then the (lubricated) coefficient of friction may be reduced from the

306
static (dry) equilibrium value (moving from a curve of higher to lower

value of Pf); correspondingly, under that reduced friction level a decreased depth of water is required for a solid with a constant value

of length to diameter ratio; that is indicated by shifting from the

higher \if value to lower Uf value curve on figure 10.

The effect of changes in specific gravity shown in figures 11 and

13 (as expected) indicates that solids of higher density (increasing

values of a) require a greater depth of water and with reduced density

require a lesser depth. The friction retarding force increases with

increasing ag, therefore, in order for motion to be initiated or maintained, a greater depth is required to increase both the hydraulic

driving force and buoyancy forces. Similarly, in figure 12, when the

buoyance factor Ng<l is applied the required depth increases since the

friction force increases. Observations from tests show variations of

depth along the length of the solid (those results suggest that Ng

values ranging from 1/4 to 2/3 may be applicable). Decreasing the

effective hydraulic driving force, by reducing in figure 13,

increases the depth required. Here, a reduced value of Njj represents

the influence of an increase of the depth on the downstream base area

of the body relative to the upstream depth (but less than the upstream

value) thereby increasing the pressure head force acting opposite to

the direction of motion (i.e., a reduction of the resultant hydraulic

force in direction of motion). In figure 13, the effect of changes in

the specific gravity (1 and .5) and hydraulic factor (1 and .5) is

illustrated. In principle, the values of NH

and Ng are interrelated

since these parameters represent the influence of varying water depth

from one end of the solid to the other end which simultaneously changes

the pressure head and buoyancy forces; that interrelationship is

required to be developed from further studies. The introduction of the

complete force model of equation (6) into the computer programs for the

hydraulic-solids interaction has been completed. The initially computed

results show very satisfactory agreement between experimental and predicted velocities of the solids (14). That indicates the force model

discussed herein has resolved the problem of lack of agreement between

theory and experiment.

The applications of the results obtained to pipe sizing are illustrated in figure 14. From the widely accepted empirical equations for

water flow velocity and flow rate (simplified by the use of the constant

pitch, s, for the pipe)

v =

Q

=

H

S [9a]

n

» p 2/3 Q 1/2

W H

S [9b]

where the hydraulic radius, RH , and water flow cross-sectional area, Ay, are functions of water depth. Then for any given Manning coefficient,

307
n, the assumed constant value for the empirical factor indicating the

pipe roughness, the requirements for water velocity and flow rate for

breakaway or maintenance of constant velocity in the pipe can be calculated. The problem of developing a correlation between n and y requires extensive efforts since the empirical constant n is not only a factor indicative of pipe roughness; it also serves as an adjustment to

include other unknowns, e.g., Reynolds number dependency. In figure 14,

results are shown for 50, 75, and 100 mm diameter pipes.

From the relationship 6/Rg = 2 (Jl/dp) (dp/dg) the corresponding Jl/dg

values of the solids can be determined from the figures 9-13. For example, for values of 6/dp = 0.1, s = .02, dp/dg = 2, the size of solids

which are at the breakaway from the rest in 50 mm and 100 mm diameter

pipes are shown in table 2. For the same water depth and other parameters as shown for each pipe, the listed values of body fineness ratio

£,/dg, represents the upper limit of sizes at breakaway.

Table 2. Body Sizes and Water Flow Requirements (from figures 9-13)

s = .02, 6/dp = 0.1, d

p

/d B

= 2, 6/Rb = .4

a y

f l/d B

50 (mm) diameter

5 d B

I V Q

(mm) (mm) (mm) (m/s) (£/s)

100 (mm) Diameter

6 dB

I V Q

(mm) (mm) (mm) (ms) (Jl/s)

1

1 .9

1.1

20.7

2.5

1.8

25 50 .3 .04 10 50 100 .84 .21

17.5 .3 .04 35 .84 .21

62.5 .3 .04 125 .84 .21

45 .3 .04 90 .84 .21

Design charts (intended to serve as a guide for pipe sizing) over a wide range of variables, based upon the breakaway condition, are to be

prepared and published as a part of the continuing research program.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

A simplified model for the forces acting on a rigid cylindrical

solid in partially-filled transient pipe flow was developed. The

experimental results provided guidance and insights to understand the

hydraulic/solids interactions in deriving the force model. Results of

computations for effects of the parameters of pipe pitch, assumed wall

friction factors for stationary body conditions and lubricated film con- ditions, the water depth the solid body fineness ratio and specific

gravity are physically consistent. An application of the results illustrates a technique to construct pipe sizing tables or charts. Further

development of the method to establish a comprehensive set of design

charts is to be undertaken. Additional research is required to accurately define the values of friction coefficients, yf, of lubricated

flow conditions; that can be accomplished by computing yf from equation

[7] with experimental input for constant solid velocity conditions with

the depths adjacent to the body precisely measured. The application of

308
the model to obtain the simultaneous solutions for partially-filled

time dependent surge flow equations of momentum and continuity with the

equation of motion for the solid, following the technique in (3) logically follows. The computer program for the numerical method of solution to determine flow properties and velocity of the solid was modified

to include the model presented. The "exact" solutions for the general

problem of the transport mechanisms throughout the range of solid velocities thereby eliminates the restrictions to the breakaway or constant

velocity set of conditions.

REFERENCES

1. Kamata, M., Matsua, Y., Tsukagoshi, M., Studies on Flow and

Transport of Feces in Horizontal Waste Pipes, CIB W62 Seminar,

Paris, France, November 1979.

2. Swaffield, J. A., An Initial Study of the Application of the

Numerical Method of Characteristics to Unsteady Flow Analysis in

Partially-Filled Gravity Drainage Sized Pipes, NBS Report, 1981.

3. Swaffield, J. A., Application of Method of Characteristics to Model

the Transport of Discrete Solids in Partially-Filled Pipe Flow, NBS

Report, 1981.

4. Swaffield, J. A. and Wakelin, R. H. M., A Study of the Transport of

Solids in Internal Drainage Systems, CIB W62 Seminar, Oslo,

May 1977.

5. Mahajan, B. M., Unsteady Water Depth Measurement in a PartiallyFilled 7.6 cm Diameter Horizontal Pipe, NBSIR 81-2249, April 1981.

6. Mahajan, B. M. , Experimental Investigation of Transport of Finite

Solids in a 76 mm Diameter Partially-Filled Pipe, NBSIR 81-2246,

April 1981.

7. Nielsen, 0. I. and Nielsen, V., Drainage Systems for Buildings with

Water Closets with 3 Liters of Flushing Water, CIB W62 Seminar,

Paris, November 1979.

8. Swaffield, J. A., Application of the Method of Characteristics to

Predict Attenuation in Unsteady Partially-Filled Pipe Flow, NBS

Report, 1981.

9. Nelson, J., Study of Post Drought Conditions, North Marin County

Water District - Private Communication, September 1980.

10. Baker, L., Experiences and Benefits of the Application of Minimum

Flow Water Conservation, Denver, April 1981.

11. Galowin, L. S., A Solid Transport Mechanisms Model with

Applications to Drain Pipe Sizing (NBS report in preparation,

1981).

309
12. Mahajan, B. M., Experimental Investigation of Unsteady Water Flow

and Finite Solids Motion in 100 mm Diameter Partially-Filled Pipe

(NBS report in preparation, 1981).

13. Swaf field, J. A. and Marriott, B. S. T., An Investigation of the

Performance and Effects of Reduced Volume Water Closets on the

Transport of Solids in Above Ground Drainage Systems, CIB W62

Symposium, Brussels, May 1978.

14. Swaf field, J. A., Bridge, S., and Galowin, L. S., Wave Attenuation

in Long Drainage Pipes, A Numerical Solution to the Unsteady

Partially Filled Pipe Flow Equations, CIB W62 Seminar, Technische

Fachhochschule , Berlin, September 21-23, 1981.

310
Figure 1-A. Cylindrical solid body in partially filled pipe flow

311
Weight Component in Direction of Motion

F^.jfl Normal Weight Component

F Hu Hydraulic Force Upstream

^HD Hydraulic Force Downstream

Fg Buoyancy Force

F£ Friction Force = u (F - F ) f

v WN b'

u Coefficient of Friction

F Surface Shear Force

s Sum of Forces in Direction of Motion

ZF = Fw + FRU - FUD - F

f + F

g

Figure 1-B. Body force system

312
1 1—I

1 1 Pipe gradient set to 0.02

diameter = 0.1m

Manning coeff. assumed = 0.012

Observed, x = 0.64 m

Predicted, x = 0.55 m

Time , s 20 24

A Observed, x Predicted, x

0.95 m

1.10 m

Time , s —

A Observed, x _ Predicted, x 4.63 m

4.40 m

Time , s

A Observed, x Predicted , x 4.90 m

4.95 m

Time , s

Figure 2. Comparison of observed and predicted water depth

vs. time profiles

313
CM vO H

COwH

H

CL,

O

C/3 O

CM zr— omum

oo

fa<M

cn

CMHWH ex.

co

II

•> • 6 CM e

v£> IIpa

II T3

o* erf oV3 o s

cd

0)

4J

CO

XI

•H . o

to

H

00

Q

MM

Q

O

W 00

CM II CMCM vO 05 e

OJM

4J

CO 5

t-5 oBHW

00

H • .—i II 00 H w PQ H II <^

•t QH

-Jo

00

CO

53

..

Q

as

q<.:

Ho CM

CO

O• 4->

II

O

CO 4J •H3 CDa

•HaM

•H cu u

co s

0) cO iH •H

•H'WO s u o

43 o

•ua,

cu T3 COM

OJ 0) &6 •u U OJ

CO 6

.Co CM w • •H •o- X)M o

OJ •H

4-> 4-1 •H cd <H 4-1 CO o

4-1 CO

314
CM

CO

IIPQ

CO

CM

II PQ A-s.

PC

CMw

COMH >

cn r»

T3

CO

CN

so

V V. o

PC 6

cd

CDm

•u

COp.

•rl i—

o / e . O CDM 0) op

w

wHo5 HW

!4

..V

ll m

CM o

CO

II

PQ

PQ -a

CO

O

S3

COMD

•U

CD6 O

0)

Cs| CO • CO

1-1 c <D 0 4-1 •rl •rl

4-1 1—

cd

4-1 lO

CO • O

•u

co CM

CO

O

0) • rH

•H II m0 CO Ma *« ai .e a.

•u •rl a a,

0) T3

M

0) 3 4-1 O

rHm CO|

•rl T3

CO

CD •u

CO

O

M rH

CO

01

C 2 •rl u3

00

•H

315
< o4 • DO

O • < « O

fit

CO

•H

!>s. jj *H li Ow wN > Om

•H _J • M1 m

O)M3

60

•r( fa

<» « o a s»o o

i< o

•4

O< OO o

0)00u

fl .co

in

0)U)M3W

•H CMO

>, • •U •H II UO CO rH

CD

u > o

4-1

•H

i—

o O

U-l • <!m

a)

•H

fa

316
o < > >

txoo

< o

•

J

CO* * mo ceH

II o < o t> w

CMO

II • «

i— o

m

m

CN O

' U1 o

X X X X X m u"» />

,J cj m CO Xo

i—

1*N s

*H o

CO iH

4H

<D D

O 00 O, u •H

ft m CO o l-i

1 dj 4J 4J

CJ A

0) o 1

4H 4J

4-1 •H •H W a, h3

•4

•4 <

< < 4< „ L

a» o

• do•

J

-4

o <

bC

0) l-i a

60 D •H M 10 a

03

>-i CJ X aj

CO o 4J •H 0) Q •H E

aj IW H

o X)

4J 0)

CJ i

0) 3

4H H O

m O o

w > rH

317
«

o < < o <

0« <

6 -ho

o>

43

CO rH

4-1 0)

CO

•H

COc a

•rta.

5-1 0)

s

•H

XI

<x <

43 „

•Ha o

W t« H

o «<

CDu

60

» s

o a

• O Q

o« a

o* ma

o •> > rH

43 II CO3 D

0)a

T3

•H H

CU O -M

co ajs

(3 CO ° 3

43 _

+J o I O +J B

4-1 CX o

4-4 O

o

I

cu

60

318
A A

s - .02

8

Ao

8

Solids Flow Rate

d(mm) S. (mm) 0.54(H/8 ) 0.33(H/8 ) 37 76 o •

25 76 o

25 50 A A

25 25 O

oo

A

o i

1.2 1.6 _l I 2.0 2.4 STATION (m)

2.8 3.2 3.6 4.0 4.4

Figure 7-A. Solid velocity in 100 mm diameter pipe, near steady flow

Vel. (m/s)

1.2 r

1.0- AO

O

?

.2.

s = .04

A

8

o

Ao

JL

2

B

A

Solids Flow Rate

d (mm) £(mm) 0.54U/8

) 0.33U/8 ) 37 76 O •

25 76 25 50 A A

25 25 o

4 .8 1.2 1.6 2.0 '2.4 2.8 3.2 3.6 4.0

STATION (m)

Figure 7-B. Solid velocity in 100 mm, diameter pipe, near steady flow

4.4

319
cn

>

CO

01a

c

CO w

w

•HQ

60C

0) (JH

PL,

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

Solid Size

d(iran), I (mm) Symbol

25 25 .a

i n zzz£

37 51 O

f- -jCt- -i!*- -

/

/A

A

.*o —o- —

-L-J L I I I I l~J

0.5 1.0 1.5

Flow Volume (Liters)

2.0 3. 785

Figure 8. Distance traversed by solids in drain pipe

a=i

Figure 9. Figure 10. Figure 11.

Effect of Effect of Effect of

pipe pitch friction specific gravity

coefficient

320
0)0

nj

>-i COa,

u

<D »rl CJ > M cfl O 00 m

CJ

m o *h O -rl m H -H

•U 3 cj

cj CO CU

QiU

4-1 T3 cn W £ i3

0)MM

-3" O in

i-i 0)

4-> 1

cdft

4-1O >•> u

4-1 e o CO

0)

4-1 o3 W

CN<—

0)MM

•rl

321
322
APPENDIX

The model adopted for the large body analysis (3) was developed for

consistency with the laboratory experiments with sanitary napkins con- ducted at Brunei University which, due to their flexibility, tend to

adopt their contour to the curved pipe wall and cause a relatively large

blockage factor. Those deformable solids are composed of materials

which become saturated with water and therefore will tend to provide an additional degree of lubrication which reduces the surface to pipe wall

friction as compared to a rigid cylindrical solid. The upward lifting

force with buoyancy force term is difficult to estimate due to the angle

of attack and curvature of the solid and pipe wall boundaries. The

extensive test series conducted in the laboratory of Brunei University

(13) showed that for bodies with large base areas the flow obstruction

causes the depth to build up to a large extent behind the body thereby

increasing the hydraulic pressure force on the body; the flow streaming

past the body (termed "leakage past the body") is low. Consequently,

the shear stress force term due to the relative flow velocity with

respect to the body is assumed to be negligibly small and neglected in

the force balance for the body. That simplifying hypothesis results in

elimination of a major theoretical difficulty for formulation of the

force due to the shear stress between the liquid and body surface.

Figure A-l presents "napkin" solid velocity results plotted against the

Zl/G term for pipe slopes from 1/40 to 1/300, where L is length along

the pipe and G the gradient. The predicted results from the computer

program for the large solids/hydraulic interactions are shown in figure

A-2 and figure A-3 and indicate that the solid velocity in each case

is linearly dependent on /L over the major portion of the pipe length.

The dependence on the pipe gradient term is present and would have an index greater than -1/2 in the theoretical model. Probably the differences between experiments and predictions are due to such factors as the

uncertainty of the friction coefficient and the lifting force. The com- puted results show the general trends of the experimental solid velocity

curves

323
4J

CO

CT) OMOO>

C3 •H

•PMOawd

!-< u

X)

cd fx

'H

•HcH

(U +J

cde M

0) u

0)6

cd

•rl oo

4,

a)M

•H

P4

324
CO

CM CM CSI O < r-l

II II II

CO

CM CN O O

II II

co o m

O rH st

CO m o

o\ oCO

II II II

4) i—

•Ho

CO T3 4-) cu *h S cj 3 o <r

co h

co cu II co >

4J

CU w e

(03 IN. O CN

4J

CO X

3

cr +j

a; co

COcO

•H

•U

CJ

QJCO00 S

(3 B

•HU O

@ m cn H S O O O II i—I • o

• o

o o

II LO CO

II c M m 0 *rl CU <4-l cu un O iH o

0)

t-l 3

CO

CO

0)Ma

CxO CJ O CO o <u

II CM 3 CU CO T3

4-1 cus

CO •HT3

cua.

•rl

60

COc

"H O

T3 CN

4J T3

00 "H C H CU O

i-J W

» 4-1 1 & H

cu

QJ

4-1

ct) 3

T3Os

cu m

CJ O

i-> M-4 CO O

C/3 pt4

O

o

o

c o o

cu o o o o m •rl <f VO 00 H H

73 ^ \. \ CO r—I i—I i—I i—( H

o o < a • 4

/

/

/ / /

/

oo

o

o <

a • «

< D

3 >

s

8

o

O

CN

O

COo d o

m

o d

COO

CNd

325
S a) co O 4J\ i—I cO oi

Ejh S-i

w

Ol

0J i—

•H

4-1OUao o• CN

4—

4-J C c cu

<D •H H 13

T3 CO

>-i &c o O o

<r rH rH rH 0 <

13

01

=1 iHuC

•rl

CO

QJ

CJ

rJ

O om

II CD 03 !-i c 0>O CO

II

Uo oj

u

n

cn

a 3

CJ a;

X

C

u

•u rd aj c >^ m O n3 Q pq 00

HC• o • ex

II 3o

CO •H

1X1 4-1 OJ CJ c o> Xi cn

OJj 3 fcC o C

•H

4JD

B

i* o o

rH o o om

II u

G

0) u

0) 1—

6

CO II •HX) ,3U

0) &c

a. c H 0)

1-J

'S " G 3 • T3 II (N

Td o

•H VjU || rH 4-1 O fi 4-1 X

CO -H CO

cf

cf

cf

OQO

cT

oQ

oQ

cf

V<<

<r

CP' <3<<f

4-1 •H

CJO

rH

0)>

XIO

CO

Xo

•H

CJO Cfl H \0) & > ^ c

rH

CNo

4J •H

CJO

t-Ho>>

•HrHO

CO T3

<u

4-) CJ •HT3

0)

rJa

0) 43

cui

OJ

CJ

r4o

IH

M-lO

QJ

CJ

E3

QJ3

rH

<4HcH

a)

r4

•H

Pn

326
Demonstration Projects/ Data Collection

DEVELOPING DATA FOR RESIDENTIAL WATER SAVINGS

William 0. Maddaus and Jerome H. Rothenberg

HOW TO IMPLEMENT A WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAM - THE DENVER EXPERIENCE

John J. Wilder

MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS FOR WATER RESOURCES

Frank J. Smith

DEVELOPING DATA FOR RESIDENTIAL WATER SAVINGS

Willi an 0. Maddaus

Brown and Caldwell

Walnut Creek, California

Jerome H. Rothenberg

Office of Policy Development and Research

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

Washington, D.C.

ABSTRACT

Demonstration projects are being conducted for the U.S. Department

of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to document water savings in

actual homes. Arrangements to conduct demonstration projects have been

made with the City of Atlanta Bureau of Water, Denver Water Board, Los

Angeles Department of Water and Power, and the Washington Suburban

Sanitary Commission. Projects were selected on the basis of estimated

water savings, need for field data, cost, and other factors.

The following demonstration projects were selected: studies of

contemporary and advanced low-water-using bathroom fixtures; a study of

water- and energy-efficient homes; the effect of retrofitting on hot

water and energy use; the effect of metering; the effect of a pressure

change; a nationwide leak detection survey; nationwide surveys of

water-using fixture use and shower water use characteristics; and the

long-term effectiveness of retrofitting in various cities. Each

project involves a test group of dwelling units, equipped with the

water conservation device, and a control group for comparison. Results

will be published in 1982 and 1983.

INTRODUCTION

In early 1980 the Office of Policy Development and Research,

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, funded a $500,000

project to collect data on water- saving devices in actual homes. In

September 1980, after a competitive procurement process, Brown and

Caldwell was authorized to proceed on a 3-year project. This paper

reviews previous demonstration projects, describes how projects

to be conducted under this contract were selected, and summarizes the

purpose of those projects which are now under way.

RESULTS OF PREVIOUS RESEARCH

Although there have been a large number of water conservation

studies, those which have documented water savings are limited. Some

data has been collected on devices for new homes, retrofitting, low329
water-use landscaping, water- use characteristics, metering, public

education, pressure reduction, leak detection, and response to drought.

Availability of data is summarized below.

Devices for New Homes

Although several demonstration projects have been completed,

they have not been scientifically designed. Most projects have

involved more than one device, making it difficult to isolate savings

from individual devices such as a low-flow showerhead or a low-flush

toilet. The largest study to date has involved only 15 homes and in

general the sample sizes have not been large enough to establish

statistical significance. Recent and ongoing projects funded by the

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have primarily studied

conservation as it relates to failing on-site disposal systems. EPA

is currently funding a number of rather small studies involving

installation of minimum-flow fixtures (air-assisted showers and

toilets) in homes with failing on-site systems (1) .

Retrofitting

There have been two major landmark demonstration projects involving

retrofitting. The California Department of Water Resources' "Pilot

Water Conservation Program" yielded much information regarding methods

of device distribution and installation rates(2). Water savings

resulting from the program, however, are estimated and there is no documentation of a use reduction resulting from the program. The

other major retrofit program was the Washington Suburban Sanitary

Commission's (WSSC) "Cabin John Project "(3). This program involved

installation by the utility of retrofit devices in over 2,000 homes,

with distribution of devices to the rest of the service area. The

project has been reviewed and interpreted differently by a number

of authors. In addition to these two major programs, a number of

smaller programs have been implemented which have ranged from single

installations to mandatory retrofitting by utilities.

The primary limitation in all of the retrofitting projects,

however, has been that the results have been influenced by other

factors. The California project was implemented shortly after the

worst drought on record and was undoubtedly influenced by lingering

drought consciousness. WSSC's project was accompanied by rate

increases and an extensive public education program. As a result, it

is impossible to attribute benefits directly to retrofitting. The key

pieces of missing information regarding retrofitting are long-term

effectiveness and public acceptability.

Low-Water-Use Landscaping

Although several guides to low-water-use landscaping have been

written, very little work has been done which quantifies water savings

with this type of landscaping.

330
Water Use Characteristics

Studies to determine water use characteristics are limited. The

work of Linaweaver, et al., published in 1967 (4), is the major landmark

study of residential water use and is still widely referenced. As part

of water utility planning, a number of more recent studies have

investigated factors affecting water use, ranging from climate to

socioeconomic effects. Although total use and the factors affecting it

have been well defined, assumptions regarding how the water is used are unsubstantiated. Key questions concern how much water is used for

flushing toilets, bathing, laundry, etc. Although estimates abound,

there is no documentation, and accurate numbers are critical to

projecting water savings through conservation practices.

Metering

The fact that metering results in an initial water use reduction in areas with outside water use is well accepted. Estimates of water

savings ranging from 20 to 45 percent on a community-wide basis have

been measured after meter installation. Long-term reductions from

metering, however, have been questioned. The basic controversies

surrounding metering regard its cost-effectiveness and political

feasibility.

Public Education

A wealth of water conservation education materials have been

prepared by a number of organizations, notably the East Bay Municipal

Utility District, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, the

Denver Water Board, the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, and

the American Water Works Association. Although these materials have

been widely distributed, resultant water use reductions have not been

documented.

Pressure Reduction

Pressure reduction is a widely accepted water conservation method.

Unfortunately, the savings from pressure reduction have not been

measured. Building codes specify minimum and maximum water pressures

for new homes and once an area has been built out, there has been little

incentive to reduce pressure on an experimental basis.

Leak Detection

Published studies of leak detection programs adequately describe

the procedures, costs, and water savings. However, these studies have

been specific to the utilities where the programs were implemented.

The costs and benefits of leak detection have been highly variable

between particular utilities.

331
Response to Drought

Reductions of water use during drought are probably the best

documented aspect of water conservation. Unfortunately ,' little of this

information is transferable to long-term water conservation programs.

SCREENING POTENTIAL DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS

From the onset it was clear that there were many more good

demonstration projects than could be funded. A list of 37 potential

projects were defined, evaluated, and ranked in order of priority. The

ranking enabled the worth of the data to be optimized subject to

funding limitations. The complete screening process is described in

Reference 5.

Potential Demonstration Projects

The list of demonstration projects included many applicable

to new construction or rehabilitation. Projects focused on new

water- and energy-saving measures, low-water-using appliances, and

drought-tolerant landscaping.

Retrofitting of existing dwelling units was also investigated and

projects proposed to focus on the methods of retrofitting and the

long-term water savings. Projects isolating changes in water pressure,

pricing, metering, public education, leak detection, and other

community scale programs were proposed. Surveys on frequency of

use for certain water-using fixtures and on shower use characteristics

were developed.

Screening Criteria

In deciding which projects to implement, the following questions

were asked:

1. Does the project have nationwide applicability?

2. Is the cost of the project reasonable?

3. How practical is the water conservation method to be tested?

4. What magnitude of water savings are expected?

5. Is the measure cost-effective when implemented on a large

scale?

6. Will the results be useful to others?

7. Will the project provide new data?

332
8. Does the project also document energy savings?

9. Is the measure publicly acceptable?

10. Can the demonstration project be implemented relatively easily?

Project Ranking

The 37 projects fell into three groups after they were subjected

to the above questions. Projects were ranked high, medium, or low

priority. Available monies from HUD could only fund the highly ranked

projects described below.

SELECTED DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS

Projects were selected which dealt with installation of watersaving devices in new homes, retrofit of old homes, and community scale

projects.

Projects Applicable to New Homes

Three projects applicable to new homes were selected. One of the

projects will be repeated in three locations because of its importance.

1. Low-Flush Toilets and Low-Flow Showerheads and Lavatory

Faucets ; A comparison of water use in homes equipped with low-flush

toilets and low-flow showerheads and lavatory faucets (in accordance

with new plumbing codes) with similar homes not equipped with these

devices will be made. Test and control groups of houses within the same city have been selected. Tests will be conducted on comparable

single-family subdivisions, garden-type apartments, and high-rise

apartment buildings in different cities. The cities of Atlanta and

Los Angeles, and the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission have

identified housing units that will be tested.

Monthly water use records will be compared for test and control

groups during the winter when outside water use is minimal. Sample

size for the groups has been selected so that water use reductions will

be statistically significant at more than the 90 percent confidence

level.

2. Water- and Energy-Efficient Homes ; This study will compare

total water use and energy use from a subdivision in Denver that is

completely equipped with water- and energy-saving devices, fixtures,

and appliances, and also are heavily insulated, with an older subdivision of similar homes without these devices but constructed by the same builder. Included are low-flush toilets, low-flow showerheads,

low-flow lavatory faucets, and water-efficient dishwashers. The new

333
subdivision is a part of Denver's ECH2ONERGY rating program for the

energy and water efficiency of new homes. The program is described in

Reference 6.

«

3. Comparison of Toilet, Shower, and Lavatory Devices: A new

120-room dormitory at the Stevens Institute of Technology in Hoboken,

New Jersey, will be constructed and occupied by June 1982. Each room will have two beds and its own bathroom. It is proposed that 10 rooms with currently available water-saving fixtures be compared with another

10 rooms fitted with Microphor toilets, Minuse showerheads, and very

low-flow lavatory faucets. Monthly water use data and frequency of

fixture use data will be collected for each group of rooms over a 1-year period.

Retrofit of Existing Homes

Three projects applicable to existing homes were selected.

1. Effect of Residential Water Audits : The Los Angeles Department

of Water and Power has started making water and power audits for

customers who request it. They visit homes, advise customers how to

reduce water use, and give them a retrofit kit and encourage them to

install it. There is already a waiting list for this service. In the

later part of 1981, there should be enough customers who have had this

service to allow an evaluation of water use reductions.

2. Retrofit Case Studies : Compilation of statistics on all major

retrofit programs conducted in the U.S. will be made. Several will be

selected as case studies. Each program will be described in detail

and, if necessary, a limited follow-up survey made to determine longterm effectiveness. On the order of ten case studies will be done to

achieve a broad geographical representation, covering the different

types of devices (i.e., toilet dams versus bags), and the different

methods of distribution (mass mailing, door-to-door, or depot).

Programs will be selected from those that have been conducted in

California, Missouri, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland.

3. Detailed Study of Shower-Use Characteristics: Data will be

developed on average shower duration, frequency, desired temperature,

and average flow rate using flow restrictors and low-flow showerheads. Water and energy savings will be monitored. The project

will be conducted with a group of volunteers in cities across the

country.

Community-Scale Projects

Four projects were selected as applicable to the community as a whole and three of them involve action that a water utility could

take.

334
1. Effect of Meteri ng: Water-use records for specific

subdivisions before and after water meters were installed will be

analyzed. Short-term and long-term reductions should be identified.

Denver is currently identifying test and control groups which can be

monitored.

2. Effect of Water Pressure: The Atlanta Bureau of Water has

identified a subdivision for which they will install a pressure

reducer. For these 80 homes pressure will be reduced from 100 pounds

per square inch (psi) first to 80 psi then to 60 psi in two steps.

Changes in water use will be measured. The City of Los Angeles has

several hillside developments for which pressure was increased by

installation of a water tank at a higher elevation. Data on changes in

water use after pressure increases is available and will be analyzed

and compared with the pressure reduction data from Atlanta to develop a curve of relative change in water use versus change in pressure.

3. Survey Frequency of Fixture Use : Groups of volunteers will be

used to obtain data on the average number of laundry loads, dishwasher

loads, and toilet flushes in a household. A sample of approximately

1,000 households will be used, drawn from various areas of the country.

The survey will be conducted over a several month period noting

specific appliance model, number of adults and children in the household, number of people working or in school, general income level, and

other relevant factors that could be used in correlating results.

This data can then be used to estimate water savings from use of more water-efficient appliances.

4. Leak Detection : A nationwide survey of leak detection in a large number of different water systems across the U.S. will be made.

The amount of water saved will be statistically related to the

leak detection method, the miles of pipe surveyed, the age of the

pipes and type of material, and other relevant factors. Six water

agencies, which have demonstrated expertise in this area, will develop

transferable information on leak detection methods.

DEMONSTRATION PROJECT DESIGN

The principal design parameter in setting up a demonstration

project is the sample size. That is, how many homes should be in the

test and control groups so that the measured water savings have

statistical validity? The Students' t-test can be used to establish

the sample size for a stated confidence level. This technique assumes

a normal distribution of per capita water use data in both sets of

homes and prior knowledge of the mean and standard deviation. The

parameters of the distribution are usually not known ahead of time but

335
can be estimated. Review of residential water use data in Brown and

Caldwell's files revealed that water used inside the hone is usually in

the range of 60-70 gallons per capita per day (gcd) with a standard

deviation of about 15-20 gcd. \

For water conservation measures that produce a water savings on the

order of 20 percent, a sample size of approximately 100 test homes and

100 control homes is appropriate for a 90 percent confidence level. If

the projected savings is only 5 percent then the sample size should be

at least 500 homes in each group.

Once the sample size was determined for each selected project,

efforts were directed at locating suitable homes. This was a timeconsuming process requiring several months in each city. After the

homes were selected, arrangements to collect water -use data for a 2-year period were made with the participating water utility. In

cities where a significant amount of water is used for outside irrigation, monthly water-use data will be collected from the customers'

water meter. The evaluation of the data at the completion of the

project will include a formal statistical data analysis with assignment

of a confidence level associated with the measured water savings.

CONCLUSIONS

A research project designed to collect data from actual homes

requires a considerable amount of advance planning. In this case,

6 months was required to develop the project, line up the test groups

and control groups, and make arrangements with participating water

utilities to collect the data.

Data from actual homes subjected to a water conservation program

has been limited in the past. This project funded by HUD promises

to provide a large amount of worthwhile data on a number of water

conservation measures. The results from the selected projects will be

published in 1982 and 1983.

REFERENCES

1. Cohen, S. and Wallman, H., "Demonstration of Waste Flow Reduction

from Households," Environmental Protection Technology Series, U.S.

EPA-670/ 2-74-071, 1974.

2. California Department of Water Resources, "A Pilot Water Conservation Program," Bulletin 191, March 1978.

3. Sharpe, W.E., "The Impact of Water Saving Device Installation

Programs on Resource Conservation," Research Publication 98

Institute for Land and Water Resources, the Pennsylvania State

University, University Park, Pennsylvania, July 1977.

336
4. Linaweaver, F.P., et al. , "A Study of Residential Water Use," Johns

Hopkins University, prepared for FHA and HUD, Baltimore, Maryland,

February 1967.

5. Brown and Caldwell, "Proposed Residential Water Conservation

Demonstration Projects," Contract H-5230, Task 2 Report submitted

to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, January

1981.

6. Miller, W. H. . "Denver's ECH2 ONERGY Program: A Boon to Home

Buyers, a Boost for Housing," Journal American Water Works

Association, Vol. 73, No. 2, February 1981.

337

HOW TO IMPLEMENT A WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAM - THE DENVER EXPERIENCE

John J. Wilder, Conservation Officer

Denver Water Department

Denver, Colorado

The need for Water Conservation in the Denver metropolitan area

is nothing new.

We have experienced water scarcity problems with all of the

other semi-arid states of the West throughout our history.

The average yearly precipitation for the Denver area is about

fifteen inches a year. Some areas of our country would consider

that amount only a reasonable monthly average. Another important

point to keep in mind is that most of our moisture comes in the late

spring before the irrigation season really starts. Summer, fall and

winter are usually extremely dry. Therefore, the foundation of our conservation program in the West is construction of dams and

reservoirs so that spring snow melt can be captured and stored for use throughout the year.

Denver residents receive high-quality water from a complex,

well-planned system. Some of the water travels as far as 120 miles

through tunnels by gravity flow under the Continental Divide before

reaching our treatment plants.

This vast and complex mountain system does not deliver a major

amount of the State's water to Denver; on the contrary, the entire

metro Denver area uses only 1-1/2 percent of the total annual State

yield. But, just collecting that small amount requires engineering

skill and long-range planning often not required in other sectors of

the country and, of course, considerable expenditure in dollars.

Even though Denver has expanded this excellent water system

through the years to increase the supply, water conservation has

been a watchword through the years as residents struggled to create

some of the amenities of an urban environment — every tree, bush

and blade of bluegrass had to be planted. You can get a good feel

of what Denver would be like without our landscaping by observing

339

I
the natural flora as you travel back from this conference to your

homes. Observe the natural vegetation 25 miles out of Denver in

most any direction. This was done, even though Denverites have

lived under water-use restrictions for more years than they have not.

During the Dust Bowl days of the 1930's, trolley cars in Denver

carried big signs saying: "Water is Denver's Greatest Natural Asset — Please Don't Waste It."

So, when the Denver Water Board decided about five years ago to

step up its conservation program, it was building on a firm

foundation of water-saving programs that had been advanced for more

than half a century.

Working on the theory that "preaching" water conservation may

fail because people don't respond to a long list of "do's and

don'ts," the Denver Water Department produced a 7-minute animated

film aptly named "Water Follies^" The colorful animation with a catchy sound track, using no words, has proved universally popular.

Judging from the agencies and utilities from all over the world that

have acquired a print, the best decision made during production was

to avoid a script. The sound of a flushing toilet or a dripping

faucet is universally recognized. Since there is no conversation

during the entire film, no translation is required for foreign

countries. To date, about 750 prints of this film have been

distributed throughout the United States and in many foreign

countries. "Water Follies" won four national awards.

As a companion piece to the film, Denver produced a colorful

brochure listing 44 ways to "be water wise." Most of the worthwhile

water conservation ideas for the semi-arid West are listed. It has

been furnished on request to areas far beyond our service area.

Three years ago, the Department's Public Affairs Department

hired a certified teacher and now offers a complete classroom

program for any fifth or sixth grade and high school class in the

metro area. The youngsters enter wholeheartedly in discussion and

experiments on water.

A speakers' bureau prepares programs for civic groups, garden

clubs, service clubs and neighborhood associations utilizing the

film, brochures and a speaker with a conservation message.

Actually, it would be difficult for any of the one million

people served not to be water wise — or at least water conscious.

This is the fourth summer irrigation season they have been on water

restrictions due to a short fall in treatment capacity.

Customers, divided into three parts according to the last two

digits of their street addresses, are allowed to water only every

340
third day from May through September. During the drought year of

1977, the watering time was limited to three hours every third

day. Since then, there are no hourly rules, but everyone is urged

to water no more than necessary. Due to this year's drought, we may

again be forced to implement hourly restrictions in conjunction with

the every- third-day program.

A water calendar designating all water users as diamonds,

squares or circles is now in its fourth year of use. Sometimes,

social events and outings are determined by watering days, with two

couples of squares finding it easier to socialize the same evening

than trying to mix with another symbol that may be busy watering the

yard

Residents with addresses ending zero-30 are designated

"diamonds"; those with addresses ending with 61-99 are "circles."

The same symbols are now in their fourth year. Once a square,

always a square. One never becomes a scintillating diamond —

without moving to another house.

Customers are cooperative; most understand that treatment

capacity fell behind through no fault of the Denver Water

Department. Voter approval was obtained for the new Foothills Water

Treatment Plant in 1973 - that was seven years ago - and it was expected to be on line in 1977. Instead, construction has been

delayed five years because of environmental issues, Federal permit

requirements and lawsuits. These have been resolved, the project

has been bid, is under construction, and should be completed in

1982. I would be remiss if I did not point out that the five-year

delay experienced increased the costs to our customers for the

project over 100 percent, from $70 million to $170 million, and didn't

change a thing.

The history of the Department's attempts to begin construction

of the Foothills treatment complex is a long and involved one. It's

a story of the frustration and problems that grow out of yesterday's

philosophies of the water utility trying to serve its customers in a timely way and the more recent philosophies or attempts on the part

of a few to utilize Federal requirements to frustrate plans to meet

the customer demands of a rapidly growing area. But the Denver

Water Department had to pay a price, other than construction

dollars, for this badly needed treatment plant. Our customers who

actually pay the costs for these delays will have to pay tremendous

project cost increases to obtain the water they agreed to pay for in

1973. This often makes them irritable when talking conservation.

Arguments put forth by some against water works development

because of costs seldom equate the costs of unnecessary delays such

as we experienced when arguing the dollar benefits that may be

realized through conservation.

341
To obtain the necessary permits, the Department had to agree to

many conditions including a formalized water conservation program.

The conservation program has a goal of reducing average annual

consumption within the Department service area from 209 gallons per

capita per day to 203 gallons per capita per day by January 1, 1982,

and to 199 gallons per capita per day by January 1, 1984; the five

subsequent years call for a further reduction of 3 to 5 percent from

the goal of 199 gallons per capita per day and, after 1989 and over

the following 10-year period additional reductions in the range of 5

to 10 percent. This and other mandated stipulations make the Denver

Water Department and its customers unique citizens in our Nation.

We know of no other city in the United States with these federally

imposed requirements, especially when not one Federal dollar is

involved.

Building on its existing conservation program, the Department

will attempt to meet these goals through a program that will include:

An expanded public education and information program

utilizing electronic and printed news media.

Expansion of the highly successful school program, carrying

the conservation story directly into the classrooms to our customers of tomorrow.

Affixing of water consumptive use indices to all plumbing

fixtures and water-using appliances sold in the Denver

Water Department Service Area. I would like to point out

that it is almost impossible to purchase a water closet

that uses more than 3-1/2 gallons per flush from local

plumbing supply houses in the Denver area. The plumbing

industry deserves tremendous credit for these efforts to

reduce water consumption.

Identifying water requirements of landscape nursery stock

sold in the Denver Water Department Service Area and

indicating that water requirement to purchasers. I would

like to point out that most Denverites do not want to part

with their gardens and lawns as a means to conserve water.

They consider the vegetation around their homes as psychologically necessary, as well as important in dust and

air pollution control and an important factor in reducing

the costs of energy necessary for air-conditioning.

Developing an informational bar graph for television to

inform the public of lawn and garden irrigation needs on a daily basis in various areas of Denver.

Using Water Bills sent to customers to advise them of water

consumption on an individual basis for comparison with the

342
same period the year before. It is important, however, to

be aware that dryer-than- normal years could alter the value

of these comparisons significantly.

Promoting with the Denver metro area home builders and the

Public Service Company of Colorado, a demonstration "energy

saving" show home that opened in September of 1979 for 5-6

months. The home demonstrated techniques on how customers

could inexpensively retrofit their homes. Over 40,000

people toured the home. The program won the national award

from the Home Builders of America.

The Echonergy Home, as we called it, was so successful as a teaching aid that all three of the sponsors, i.e., the

Metropolitan Home Builders, the Public Service Company of

Colorado, and the Denver Water Department, created a follow-up program called the Echonergy Builder Tie Inn

Program. Over 85 percent of the metro area builders are enrolled in the program at present.

The Tie Inn Program utilizes a rating sheet based on the

house footprint or configuration and profile. Points are accumulated for energy- and water-saving features. These

points are totaled on a rating sheet verification form that

is given to the potential home buyer; thus the purchaser

can compare the utility efficiency of one builder's home

against that of another builder. These points are then

applied to a rating graph. The more points, the less cost

the purchaser will pay in utility costs. This program

received approval from the Federal National Mortgage Association, the Veterans Administration, and the Department of

Housing and Urban Development.

The home buyer can qualify for home purchase of an Echonergy Home more easily than that of a home with a lesser energy and water efficiency rating since he will

have less costs in utility bills and can more easily afford

the debt service on the home. We have noticed this

phenomenon carrying over to the used home market to some

extent. Our feeling is that with the ever-increasing costs

for utilities, the home-owning public as well as the rental

market will see the practical savings in dollars that can result from a new home purchase of an energy- and waterefficient home as well as the advantages to the home owner

that retrofits his home. The landlord certainly is aware

of the necessity to reduce operating overhead since he is

interested in increasing after-cost cash flow. The program

is designed to appeal to the public rather than legislating

to the public.

343
Expanding the use of the widely acclaimed "Water Follies" film,

including showings by indoor and outdoor motion picture

theaters. \

Considering a retrofit program for showers, toilets,

lavatory and kitchen sinks to reduce water flows.

Working with architects, builders, reraodelers and the

plumbing and real estate industries to effect plumbing code

changes directed toward conserving water.

Instituting a formalized leak detection program to further

reduce leaks in the system and finding and eliminating

leaks in privately and publicly owned structures.

Continuing our investigation of the feasibility of a selective pressure equalization program in various

geographical areas but not risking the very favorable fire

insurance rates Denver customers enjoy. This is a research

program.

Resolving the $20 to $30 million problem of

requiring water meters for existing 1- and 2-family

residential structures and customers on flat rates,

possibly through the use of Federal rehabilitation grants

for low- and moderate- income customers.

Persuading all levels of government to retrofit their own leased and owned structures as an example of public concern

for water conservation and calling for attention to this

concern in their future bids.

Proceeding with design, construction, and operation of a 1

million-gallon-per-day reuse demonstration plant. Within

10 years this plant will be expanded to 100-mgd capacity,

increasing the water supply for domestic purposes.

Reviewing traditional rate-setting policies to determine

how rates can fit in with conservation goals without undue

cost, penalty or change of life-styles to customers.

I would say, however, we feel it is ultimately selfdefeating to impose severe increased rates on our customers

as a penalty for trying to maintain a pleasant urban

environment

We want to eliminate unnecessary waste of water but not

drastically alter life-styles as surveys indicate this is

perceived by the general public as totally unrealistic and

unnecessary.

344
We believe a water conservation program must be dedicated to

the elimination of water waste and the wise use of water and not to

forcing customers to lowering their standard of living through

harsh, unrealistic and unnecessary restrictions.

The Denver Water Department and water utilities in general have

always been willing to pay for their water development projects with

rates charged for water.

Our industry likes its independence and consistently resists

efforts of the Federal Government to reduce that independence

through the insidious means of Federal financing which results in

Federal control. Does avoiding Federal financing guarantee our continued independence? I don't believe so. Let's examine the

regulatory nightmare that our sister utilities in the gas and

electric energy fields have been subjected to with the passage in

1978 of the National Energy Conservation Policy Act. The act sets

forth a national policy for bringing energy conservation into the

homes of 100 million Americans and utilities are required—not

asked—to go beyond their traditional roles of merely being the

supplier.

Final rules and regulations are scheduled to be adopted by the

Department of Energy in the near future, but already gas and

electric utilities have to:

1. Inspect customers' homes to determine the type of energy

conservation improvements that are most effective.

2. Inform customers of recommended improvements and estimate

costs of energy savings likely from these improvements.

3. Arrange, at the customers' request, financing for such

installations

4. Who really pays for all of these requirements?

If water utilities were faced with these requirements, they

would share the fears of gas and electric utilities—reduced

revenues, liability for damages caused by installation of faulty

equipment, services and materials and utilization of financial resources for such activities.

Water utilities are in a position, through adoption of

realistic conservation programs on their own initiative, to avoid

this type of Federal mandate.

That is our challenge. That is our opportunity.

We must recognize the conflicting and frustrating demands being

placed upon us. We must understand that our customers want quality

345
water but modest rates. We must realize that some segments of our society are demanding that water utilities act as instruments of

social change while other segments argue vehemently that role can only be played by our duly-elected public officials as provided for

in the Constitution.

We must understand that we are caught squarely in the middle,

but that it would be fatal to sit on the sidelines and watch the

struggle.

The water industry should view this as an opportunity to

demonstrate that we, better than Federal bureaucrats, elected

officials or opportunistic environmentalists, know the water

business and can meet these challenges.

We will devise excellent and practical water conservation

programs because we know it is in our best interest and the best

interest of the customers we serve, and we will do it as efficiently

and as economically as possible.

What works in one area of the country as a conservation measure

will not necessarily work in another sector of the country. What

one customer living in a humid climate with a relatively constant

supply of water from a large river will accept and understand as an acceptable conservation technique is quite often not acceptable or practical in an arid climate.

All water used in Colorado, as an example, originates here

since we are the top of the Nation. The people of Colorado are becoming increasingly aware that severe conservation requirements

that may be imposed on them, thus letting water they are rightly

entitled to use flow downhill out of the State to be put to

beneficial use by Lower Basin States, are unfair and not acceptable.

We can and will address our own problems, develop our own supplies of water, handle our own financing and, in doing so, will

win public support and understanding.

Therefore, it is essential that we view conservation not as a philosophy being forced on us but as an opportunity to demonstrate

our expertise in providing our citizens with a continuing, safe

supply of water at the lowest possible cost.

This has always been our mission.

It continues to be our mission and our charge. Conservation is

part of it. That has been and will continue to be the Denver

experience

346
MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS FOR WATER RESOURCES*

Frank J. Smith, Associate Professor

North Carolina State University

Raleigh, North Carolina

I'm pleased to join this select panel and discuss briefly some of

the continuing research and development that I am directing on management information systems for water resources. As I reflect on the

remarks of earlier conference presenters, I note the frequent reference

to the concepts of equity, efficiency, fairness, need, public education,

and conservation. As a social scientist I welcome the new attention to

these concepts but suggest that there is still much confusion and conflict over the application of these concepts in water resource management. Part of the problem is the lack of necessary data and information.

Water utility managers are confronted repeatedly with difficult

decisions which require a good information support base. Attempts to

increase efficiency in water resource utilization through conservation

will generate even further demands for information to track program

efforts in consumer education, leak detection, regulation and enforcement, pricing, emergency allocation, and comprehensive planning to name

only a few. Unless we are prepared to meet these informational prerequisites of management on a broad scale, efforts to boost efficiency

through conservation will surely fizzle.

Several large metropolitan and suburban water systems have led the

way in development of sophisticated information systems, computer models,

and information specialists. Reports of their experiences suggest that

the payback to systems in reduced cost of development and operations is

attractive. Yet most large systems have not followed this lead and con- servation remains the stepchild of water management activities. Furthermore, for smaller water systems these models are simply not applicable given their special information needs and their severe constraints

of system resources. With this in mind, we have surveyed water agency

personnel to identify efficient sets of information for water systems

(large, medium, and small) on which water management can confidently

^The author gratefully acknowledges the cooperation and assistance

in this research by our 54 sample communities, the North Carolina Departments of Human Resources, Natural Resources and Community Development, the North Carolina Water Resources Research Institute, and his

staff. This research was supported in part by grants from the U.S.

Department of Interior and N.C. Water Resources Research Institute

(OWRT Contract #14-34-0001-9127). Correspondence should be directed to

Dr. Frank Smith, P.O. Box 5096, North Carolina State University,

Raleigh, NC 27650. Dr. Smith is also President of REMTEC, a Raleighbased management consulting firm specializing in water and community

planning

347
develop and operate programs including water conservation—at minimum

cost.

Two major objectives guide our research program which' are particularly relevant to this conference.

1) identify management problems from the different perspectives

of local water utility, industry, and citizens—as a first step

toward targeting management information to State and local

problems;

2) identify an efficient set of information elements—to support

water utility management and their affiliated consultants in

planning, operations, rate setting, allocation, public participation, staff training, and conservation programs.

Perceptions of Water Problems

Needs for water are shaped by the patterns of living and development of the area—the result in North Carolina is a perceived need

somewhat less than the mean per capita consumption, 150 gd, and com- pares with as little as 5 gd for many less developed countries.

Identification of local water problems is similarly affected by

point of view. In our research we have conducted over four hundred

interviews with water management and their residential and industrial

users in 54 communities across North Carolina. Communities were

stratified by size and region so we could look at any possible differences as a function of hydrological conditions and population demographics .

We have found that water management, residential, and industrial

users have somewhat different concerns about their local water systems

(see Table 1). The highest ranking problem for both residential and

industrial water users was quality . Management, however, was more

concerned with water supply expansion and difficulties in relating with

State and Federal water authorities. For management, quality concerns were considered along with costs of water, office management, planning,

waste treatment expansion, supply system maintenance, and general supply

problems but without special priority consideration. While it is not

entirely surprising that water professionals have a different view of

water problems than water users, it is important that water management

understand those differences. Our evidence suggests that such understanding is lacking and that management would benefit from community

relations training with particular focus on appraisal of community

goals, needs, and problems.

The following examples illustrate the need for this kind of

training:

1) We asked management what percent of their residential and

industrial customers have taken actions in their homes and firms to con- serve water. Management predicted only 31 percent of residents and 56

348
Table 1. Biggest Problems Facing Water Systems

Residential

N=269

Industrial

N--122 Management

N-47 Problems Percent Rank Percent Rank Percent Rank

Cost of water 7.06 5 2.46 8 4. 65 7 Demand for treatment 16. 5 .82 13 14.5

Demand for supply 1.49 11.5 16 14.5

Land use 1.49 11.5 . 82 1 J 14 .

Management (local) . 74 14 1. 64 10 4. 65 7 Management (State, Federal) . 37 15 4. 10 6 20. 93 2

P lannlng 2.23 10 1.64 10 4.65 7

ljual 1 ty 22.68 2 12.30 2 4.65 7 Waste treatment expansion 3. 35 7.5 . 82 1

4. 65 7

Water supply expansion 7.44 4 10.66 3 30. 23 1

Waste system maintenance 16.5 16 14. 5

Supply system maintenance 3. 35 7. 5 1 . 64 10 4.65 7

(ienernl supply problems 4.46 6 5.74 5 4.65 7

General treatment problems 2.60 9 3.28 7 14.5

None 26. 77 1 46.72 1 13.95 3

Don't know 14.87 3 7.38 4 14.5

Other (not applicable) 1.12 13 16 2.33 U

percent of industries had taken actions to conserve water. In fact, 66

percent of residences and 68 percent of industries report having so conserved. This represents a significant underestimate of the willingness

of water users to adopt conservation practices.

2) We also asked management to rate the effectiveness of various

incentives to control water use for both residential and industrial

groups. Price was consistently over-valued as an incentive and

community involvement consistently under-valued. Earlier we heard about

the benefits in Orange County of having customers read their own meters

and the importance of citizen involvement on community boards in the

Washington Suburban Sanitary District. We also have found these and

other community-spirited activities to have a positive effect on water

usage beyond the expectation of most water managers and consequently we recommend their use.

3) Another unexpected result was the extent to which residential

and industrial consumers accepted responsibility for contributing to

problems of water shortage. Managers predicted both groups would attribute water shortages to the vagaries of the weather, when in fact

responsibility was assigned rather evenly to industrial excesses, public

excesses, poor planning, and poor management of local resources and

weather. It is encouraging to find citizens and industries accepting

their appropriate responsibility for excesses in water use. 349
4) Finally, management overestimated residential and industrial

desire to build and pay for more water and waste treatment capacity.

When given a choice among several development options, a .plurality of

both user groups preferred a strategy of conservation so that present

facility capacities could accommodate new growth and development.

In sum, misper ceptions of community interests on some fundamental

issues of water management are the basis of many local problems. With

better information and training, managers can identify the priorities

and preferences of citizens and industries and therefore be better prepared to deal with problems when they arise.

Management Informat ion

Most communities across the country have limited informational

resources. Managers of these community systems are not going to pursue

water conservation if they perceive implicit risks to revenue or severe informational requirements. With this in mind, we have sought to identify an efficient set of information on which water management can confidently develop and operate a modern water management system including a water conservation component—at minimum cost.

While the fundamental dependency of management on information is

generally accepted, presently there exists no systematic approach in

North Carolina or elsewhere, except as represented in our research, to

develop information systems appropriate to the new and emerging water

management problems of the 1980' s and beyond. What information is

available now reflects the past concerns and priorities of the local

water utility. These traditional systems vary tremendously from

community to community. They are systems that are familiar but unsuited

to the demands of a modern management approach including conservation.

Our first steps toward systematic development of a modern water

management information system (WMIS) included:

1) Enumeration of all information elements potentially relevant

to water system planning and operations. Staff were guided in this

task, by information elements identified by review of community records,

information inventories, model systems, e.g., Washington Suburban

Sanitary Commission, East Bay Municipal Utility Districts, Dallas Water

Utility, and Atlanta Regional Commission among others.

2) Categorize information elements according to general systems

concepts—inputs, throughputs, outputs, feedback, environment, etc.

3) Submission of categorized information elements to our sample

of 54 water system managers for evaluative ratings. In particular,

ratings were made for each information element on importance (I)

,

primary use (P) , frequency of use (F) , updating requirements (U) , and

current adequacy (A)

350
I = ±

2

> i

3

. . . 1 } X

p =

r P2' P 3

. . . p /

F = tfl, f 2> f 3

. . . r x

!

U = {u1? u

2

, u

3 ... ux

)

A = (a 1} a2> a

3 ... ax

)

From these data, a detailed picture of management information needs

(N) was revealed where:

N = f (I n A).

A summary of information needs by general system categories is presented

in Table 2. Overall information to support comprehensive planning is

most needed. Other high-ranking information needs relate to technical

assistance, regulation and enforcement, and water conservation. Small

water systems also singled out waste treatment as a most needed information category.

Table 2. Measured Need for Water Management Information by Category

Overall

Category Category (Small, Medium, Large) Small Medium Large Number Name Systems Syst ems Sy stems _ ix

Mean

s terns Mean Rank Mean Rank Mean " Rank Rank

1 Water service population .407 12 .197 12 . 715 11 .289 12

2 Treatment service population .515 10 .504 9 .770 9 .329 11

3 Water supply system .439 11 .350 11 .595 12 .420 9

4 Water treatment system .589 9 .702 1 .708 10 . 380 10

5 Supportive information systems .821 5 .590 7 1.034 5 .780 7

6 Emergency preparedness .786 7 .418 10 1.016 6 .872 4

7 Comprehensive planning practices .937 1 .678 2 1.167 1 .927 1

8 Pricing practices .695 8 .521 8 1.088 4 .486 8

9 Billing practices .322 13 .184 13 .616 13 .158 13

10 Technical assistance .898 2 .638 3 1.110 3 .884 3

id Regulation and enforcement .873 3 .591 6 1.128 2 .845 5

12 Water use .806 6 .593 5 .957 8 .833 6

13 Water conservation .843 4 .630 4 .964 7 .898 2

X .687 SD .208

X .507 SD .171 X .912 SD .204

X .623

SD .281

351
The same information on information needs was also categorized by

discipline to identify the professional specialties best prepared to

assist with regard to the needed information. As seen in Table 3, the

greatest needs can be addressed best by consulting specialists in

planning, management, water law, and social sciences. Clearly then, if

priority information needs are to be met> community and regional water

systems must not be the exclusive turf of the consulting engineers.

A multidisciplinary approach will best serve the goal of effective

water resource management.

Table 3. Mean Need Value of Information Elements by Professional Areas

Professional Areas Need Value

Planning .968

Management .919

Legal .873

Sociology .835

Engineering .644

Hydrology .608

Economics .603

Accounting .564

Finally, the data were used to identify information sets where

information need (N) was minimized subject to cost constraints (C)

where

C = f (U).

Similarly information waste (W) was minimized subject to need con- straints N where

W = f (Afl I).

These results, too extensive to report here, will be forthcoming in our final technical report.

Future generation projects now beginning will develop further some

of the most promising ideas gained from this research experience. In

particular we are working with industries as they plan for various

water shortage contingencies, consider water reuse, process modifications, employee training, and modernization. Also, we are working with

local municipalities as they assess their current management practices

and consider improvements. We are to a point now where conservation

is a proven management option—many more can benefit by its adoption.

352
Keynote Address

KEYNOTE ADDRESS

Major General E. R. Heiberg, TIT

Director of Civil Works

Department of the Army

Office of the Chief of Engineers

Washington, D.C.

INTRODUCTION

It is a pleasure to be here to discuss this very important and

timely topic of water conservation and to present to you some of the

Army's initiatives in water supply and conservation.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is not a novice in the

business of providing water supply for municipal and industrial (M&I) use. The first general authority for inclusion of water supply storage

in Corps projects was enacted in 1958. However, storage for water supply was authorized in projects prior to 1958 on the basis of individual

project proposals. The Water Supply Act of 1958 (Public Law 85-500,

Title III) introduced a period of joint-venture development of water

resources by federal and non-federal interests. Development for traditional federal purposes, such as flood control and hydroelectric power, was teamed with development of M&I water supplies at non-federal ex- pense. The Water Supply Act of 1958 carefully avoided a shift of

responsibility from non-federal interests to the federal level of

government. Corps reservoir projects included substantial amounts of

storage for water supply. Approximately 8 million acre-feet (10 billion cubic meters) of storage in 94 projects is under contract. An

additional 12 million acre-feet (15 billion cubic meters) of storage in

84 projects is either included in existing projects or will become

available if all authorized projects are constructed. The existing

contracts obligate non-federal interests to repay more than $400

million of federal investment costs.

Title I of Public Law 89-298, October 27, 1965, authorized a federal and non-federal cooperative study to prepare plans to meet the

long-range water needs of the Northeastern United States. The legislation also authorized federal construction, operation, and maintenance

of certain major facilities that had previously been the responsibility

of non-federal interests. This study has produced several water supply

proposals; however, the appropriate federal role in implementation of

these plans has not yet been established.

355
Water supply continues to be

studies by the Corps. The fiscal

about 58 feasibility studies that

purposes to be studied.

an important part of water resources

year 1981 budget included funds for

have M&I water supply, as one of the

WATER CONSERVATION - A CHANGE

A new phase began with President Carter's announcement in May 1977

that water conservation would be the cornerstone of his revised water

policy. A comprehensive review of water policy was initiated during

the summer of 1977 that culminated in the President's Water Policy

Message of June 6, 1978, and by a series of directives to the federal

agencies in July 1978.

The focus on changes to national water policy is not expected to

end. The new administration is acutely aware of the physical and

financial impediments to a water policy focusing solely on development,

when conservation and demand management may be equally cost efficient.

The Corps of Engineers is expected to continue to focus on a balanced

approach to water supply and demand management under our new Assistant

Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, Bill Gianelli. His experience

(Director of the California Department of Water Resources, private

consultant in a state hit hard by the 1977 drought, and being on the

front line of western water issues) will be a great asset to the Nation

in the years ahead.

Why is water conservation an objective worthy of emphasis as a national objective? The basic reason is that new supplies often place

demands on other scarce resources that are not adequately reflected in

the evaluation of, and price for, water. These scarce resources

include energy, environmental resources, agricultural land, ground

water resources, capital, and the beneficial uses of instream flows.

Policy reforms are not designed to preempt state or local responsibilities. On the other hand, the thesis of a new water policy should be

that federal programs will not foster inefficient use of the water

resources of the Nation.

Rationally applied conservation measures provide the opportunity

for increased local action reducing the need for Federal cost-sharing

and reducing the overall cost of meeting water demands.

Water is an essential resource. It is an important ingredient in

all of the major challenges we face—production of food and fiber,

energy, pollution control, transportation, and environmental quality.

The growing scarcity of water is well documented. Our ingenuity and

skills will be tested to find ways to satisfy the increasing demand for

water. Water conservation has to be a key element in addressing these

demands.

In March 1978, the Corps initiated efforts to integrate water con- servation into its activities. The strategy called for the Corps to:

356
1. define water conservation within the context of the Corps

program;

2. develop a plan of action for integrating water conservation into

all aspects of the Corps program; and,

3. develop principles and specific procedures for evaluation of

water conservation as part of M&I water supply.

DEFINITION OF WATER CONSERVATION

Water conservation is not a new term; however, its use has been so varied that a universal definition has not evolved. Water conservation

is different from other forms of conservation. Energy conservation is

usually thought of in terms of nonuse, so that the resource will be

available at a future time. Fish and wildlife conservation provides for use of the resource, but in a manner that preserves and protects the

regenerating capability of the resource. Nonuse of water does not automatically ensure its availability at a later time, and the regenerating

process (hydrologic cycle) is pretty much beyond our ability to manage at

this time. The challenge was to develop a water conservation definition

and evaluation process that will permit us to make a consistent trade-off

between increments of new supplies and measures that result in more

efficient use of existing supplies.

The temptation to adopt the "wise use of resources" definition of

water conservation was avoided. Such a definition would be comprehensive, but open to varying interpretations. Perspectives would range

from not using the water resource unless it is essential, to using the

water resource as many times as possible between the time it falls as rain until it is lost or flows into the ocean.

To be helpful, the definition of water conservation must possess two

attributes: it must be precise, and it must be practical. Review of

numerous publications on conservation lead to the conclusion that the

only way that water conservation can be separated from water supply in a precise and practical manner is to consider conservation as management of

the demand function. The required attributes can be satisfied on this

basis via the following definition:

"Water Conservation is any beneficial reduction in water use or in

water losses."

Based on this definition, water management practices constitute

conservation only when they meet two tests:

1. Their purpose is to conserve a given supply of water through

reduction in water use (or water loss); and

2. Their total national economic and environmental benefits

outweigh their total national economic and environmental costs.

357
Water use is the withdrawal of water from a supply or other action

which denies the availability of that water to another user. Uses range

from human consumption to support of fish and the natural . environment

associated with streams. A reduction in water use is beneficial if the

aggregate of all beneficial economic and environmental effects resulting

from implementation of the water management practice exceeds the aggregate of all adverse economic and environmental effects occasioned by such

implementation. Recognizing that, just as in the case of augmenting

supply, conservation measures may deplete other scarce resources (such as energy), the above definition of beneficial reductions will assure that

all scarce resources are conserved.

Water supply and water conservation, as defined above, have much in common. Neither can be implemented without making demands on other

scarce resources, and the merits of both must be evaluated using the same basic criteria. In addition, the fact that not all new supplies should

be considered desirable is also applicable to water conservation measures. The evaluation of the adequacy of existing water supplies and the

measures needed to address future water needs requires an assessment of:

1. demand reduction practices;

2. more efficient utilization of existing supplies; and

3. need for new supplies.

IMPLEMENTATION - PLAN OF ACTION

The national emphasis on water conservation can be separated into

two major categories with respect to the Corps water resources program.

Sound conservation principles must be applied to the use of water in

Corps activities, and water conservation must be an integral consideration in Corps planning to satisfy future water supply needs. This second

category translates primarily into an assistance role to state and local

governments as a part of studies addressing the adequacy of existing

supplies and the need for additions to those supplies.

The Corps issued its first plan of action on May 8, 1978, and a revised edition was issued in May 1980. The plan addresses the relationship of water conservation to the planning of projects and their subsequent construction, operation, and maintenance, as well as the regulatory

program. There are five major activities that constitute the water

resources program of the Corps.

PLANNING

The planning role of the Corps represents the greatest opportunity

to reduce the demand for additional supplies of water through water con- servation practices. While the immediate purpose of water conservation

is to better utilize existing supplies, the ultimate effect is to alter

water supply planning and use practices. The fact that existing supplies

358
are utilized more efficiently has the effect of either postponing or reducing the scale of projects designed to augment supply, or both.

A consistent and balanced approach to trade-offs between water con- servation and new supply results in changes in the scope of the Corps

planning role. Urban areas have been considered traditionally as a unit

in water supply studies. Past trends of water use on a per capita or production basis have been projected into the future using general growth

predictions. Consideration of water conservation requires a thorough

analysis of water supply, treatment distribution, use, and wastewater

treatment process for the study area. Greater effort and more precision

in forecasting demands are required. It will be necessary to separate

forecasts into the components of domestic, commercial, and industrial

sectors so that conservation measures may be evaluated accurately. It

will also be necessary to estimate seasonal water uses separately, and to

forecast use in all sectors in terms of several explanatory variables,

including price. The Corps should therefore become much more familiar

with the interworkings of urban water sy terns than has been the case in

the past. This increased involvement will be accomplished through cooperation with non-federal interests rather than federal usurpation of

local prerogatives.

The procedures manual discussed earlier in the conference describes

the concepts, procedures, and measurement techniques for evaluating water

conservation proposals applicable to M&I uses of water. Efforts are un- derway to improve this manual and to complete several case studies using

these procedures.

Non-federal interests will be asked to implement conservation measures incorporated into water supply /conservation plans proposed for construction. The past administration directed that development of water

conservation programs will be a condition of contract for storage or delivery of M&I water supplies from federal projects. The new administration has indicated that it will be reviewing the extent to which the

federal government will require (rather than urge) such a condition.

DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

The potential for water conservation associated with design and

construction is expected to be project and site specific to the point

that generalized standards or techniques will not be appropriate. This

potential breaks down into two categories: (1) measures that reduce the use of water; and (2) measures that influence the availability of water

(location and/or time).

All Corps field agencies have developed procedures to implement

water conservation in the design and construction of Corps projects. A

review of the design and construction features of projects will be accomplished during pre-authorization studies, post-authorization planning,

and design. The water conservation review will be made by an interdisciplinary team of involved professionals with expertise in planning,

359
design, construction, and operations. The objectives are to determine

whether changes in the design or construction of the project would

produce:

1. additional beneficial water savings; and

2. beneficial improvements in the availability of water.

DROUGHT CONTINGENCY PLANNING

Corps projects provide storage for purposes other than water supply. In fact, only a small percentage of the 263 million acre-feet (324

billion cubic meters) of storage in existing Corps projects is dedicated

to water supply. Flexibility associated with this storage represents a valuable resource for responding to short-term water shortages in the areas where the projects are located.

The Chief of Engineers has adopted a policy that Corps projects

should respond to public needs during droughts to the extent possible

under current administrative and legislative authorities. To accomplish

this, a two-step approach will be taken to pre-drought planning. The

first step will evaluate and establish the limits of flexibility under

existing authorities to modify project operations and to use existing

storage to respond to short-term periods of water shortages. During

droughts, the Corps is asked for information about how its projects can

be more responsive to the needs of the public. The second step will

establish options for modification of project authority that would permit

a progression of additional measures to increase a project's capability

to respond to droughts.

The Corps commitment to this advanced planning to deal with drought

has already been effectively used in the Delaware River Basin and is

ready for implementation should the need arise in the New England states.

In FY 1982, studies will be undertaken on seven of our reservoirs.

The selected projects will provide study experience for a range of

drought conditions from the far Southwest, through the Plains Region, to

the Northeast. Experience gained from this sample will permit better

definition of the review program with regard to both program costs and

expected results. This could be a significant investment for the future,

and the cost will be relatively low.

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

All Corps field agencies are developing a. water conservation plan

which addresses each project, shop, floating plant, and other separate

facilities operated and maintained by the Corps. The plan will be directed toward reductions in water use or water losses. The objectives of

the plan are to produce beneficial water savings and beneficial improvements in the availability of water. Consumptive uses will be examined,

360
and conservation measures that can be implemented will be analyzed.

Modifications to facilities or methods of operation found to meet the two

tests associated with the definition of water conservation will be

programmed for accomplishment.

REGULATORY

Water conservation is a part of the public interest review for the

regulatory program. The question of how water conservation is to be

considered in the public interest review is incorporated into the revised

regulation, 33 CFR 320 thru 329, that will be published as a draft for

comment. Water supply and conservation has been included as one of the

specific factors relevant to the public interest review. It recognizes

the need for efficient use of water resources in all actions that involve

the use of water or that affect the availability of water for alternative

uses. Full consideration will be given to water conservation as a factor

in the public interest review, including opportunities to reduce demand

and improve efficiency in order to minimize new supply requirements. The

detailed procedures for evaluating water conservation in Corps planning

activities will be available for use in any evaluation required to

support the public interest review.

FUTURE CHANGE?

The Corps is a unique organization that was established during the

Revolutionary War. Its water resources responsibilities have evolved

over a long history of service. The technical expertise of the Corps has

been used in the broadening federal interest in water resources, natural

disaster and emergency activities, and special missions. There is no reason to believe that the role of the Corps in water resources will

remain static, but the exact nature of future change is uncertain.

Potential changes related to the federal role in water supply are under

active consideration in both the executive and legislative branches.

Certainly, the Corps, with its nationwide organization accustomed to

dealing with water resources problems which cross state boundaries, can offer its expertise to coordinate the resolution of water resources problems, to provide the technical assistance to transfer successfully applied technologies from one area of the country to another, and to lend a consistency of approach to the continuing resolution of complete water

supply and conservation issues.

President Carter's Water Policy Message of June 6, 1978, called for

the creation of an Intergovernmental Water Policy Task Force as a means

of continuing the review of water-related problems. Three problem areas were identified by the task force for special study: (1) cost sharing;

(2) advanced funding for waste treatment plants; and (3) urban water

supply. A subcommittee, under the leadership of the Secretary of the

Army, was established to address the problems of urban water supply. The

subcommittee was directed to: (1) inventory existing federal programs

that have potential for assisting urban water systems rehabilitation or 361
new construction; (2) evaluate the institutional and financial problems

surrounding the supply and distribution of municipal water; and (3) assess policy or program changes that might be indicated at the federal,

state, or local level in order to address the problem. The subcommittee

completed its report in June 1980.

On the basis of the subcommittee findings, the following five possible policy approaches were set forth for consideration in response to

the problems:

1. Status Quo - This approach would retain existing financial,

regulatory, and institutional relationships to continue full

local responsibility for water supply.

2. Modified Policies and Programs - Modify existing policies and

programs to increase federal technical and planning assistance

and condition existing direct federal, grant, and loan programs

(used for urban water supply) on state review of urban water

system utility rate and investment policies.

3. Federal/State Water Banks - Create federal/state water banks to

make capital investment funds more easily accessible to urban

water systems. Conditions could be attached loans requiring

conservation to reduce future capital investment practices.

Interest subsidies also could be provided for particularly

distressed urban areas.

4. Financial Assistance - Implement increases in existing programs

or add new programs of federal financial assistance providing

grants, loans, or loan guarantees, conditioned upon the

establishment of conservation programs to reduce future capital

investment needs and establishment of self-sustaining rate and

investment practices.

5. Single-Purpose Water Supply - Remove existing policy

prohibitions against single-purpose water supply in federal

water projects and allow direct federal construction of

single-purpose water supply projects. Change federal policy to

permit the inclusion in federal projects of wellfields,

purification and distribution facilities, as well as reservoir

source development and major conveyance projects. Change

federal policy to permit repair and rehabilitation as well as major reconstruction of such facilities. States would

determine, with local input, water supply priorities, and costs

would be repaid over time in accordance with the Water Supply

Act of 1958.

The subcommittee indicated that selection and implementation of any one or combination of policy approaches by policymakers should occur in

conjunction with a more detailed study of urban water resource problems

to reduce uncertainties as implementation proceeds. Such a study should

be designed to: (1) relate urban water supply problems and solutions to

362
other urban infrastructure problems; (2) inventory, on a case-by-case

basis, urban water system needs; and (3) provide a basis for review of,

and "mid-course" correction to, the approach or approaches selected.

Because of the broad inputs from representatives of states and

cities as well as federal agencies, the study should prove highly useful

to the Administration, Congress, and other interested parties as present

policies are reassessed.

The Congress has also taken a special interest in the water supply

problems facing the Nation. Numerous bills have been introduced to the

96th Congress that would, if enacted, modify the Corps role related to

water supply /conservation.

The impact of such changes would be to extend the direct federal

assistance role into all facets of water supply augmentation, treatment,

and distribution. The Reagan Administration has already expressed a deep

interest in examining any such provisions.

SUMMARY

The water resources program of the Corps of Engineers has made a tremendous amount of water supply storage available to non-federal

interests. About 8 million acre-feet (10 billion cubic meters) of

storage is under contract, and another 12 million acre-feet (15 billion

cubic meters) is part of existing and authorized projects. The President's declaration of a national emphasis on water conservation has

resulted in changes in water supply planning that will improve the

Nation's economic welfare and enhance its environment. The Corps has set

forth a definition, principles, and procedures for evaluating water con- servation that will ensure consistent and balanced treatment of water

conservation and supply augmentation. The Corps is implementing a plan

of action that will integrate water conservation into all aspects of its

civil program. The water resources program is seldom static, and active

consideration is being given to potential changes in the federal role in

water supply/conservation. The pressures to expand the federal role are being met with strong resolve by others to retain or even reduce the present federal role. Additional time will be required before the complex

critical issues associated with this question can be resolved and the

federal role of the future established.

We stand ready to provide the necessary planning, engineering, and

construction expertise to assist states in providing comprehensive

solutions to regional water supply problems.

363

JS1

Publicly J, conservation

'8*1 A NATI0NAL conference

Federal PerspectivesPrograms/Incentives

COMPARISON BETWEEN WATER CONSERVATION PRACTICES IN THE

UNITED KINGDOM AND THE UNITED STATES

D.G. Jamieson and G.S. Million

FEDERAL WATER RESOURCES AGENCY PLANNING REQUIREMENTS AND

IMPLICATIONS FOR WATER CONSERVATION

Gerald D. Seinwill

PLUMBING CODES - ESSENTIAL IN WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAMS

Lawrence S. Galowin

COMPARISON BETWEEN WATER CONSERVATION PRACTICES IN TFE UNITED KINGDOM

AND THE UNITED STATES

D.G. Jamieson and G.S. Million

Thames Water Authority

Reading, England

INTRODUCTION

During recent years, there has been a growing awareness, on both

sides of the Atlantic, for the need to conserve resources. In the

specific case of water conservation, there has been little exchange of

information and, as a result, ideas have largely developed independently. The purpose of this paper is to draw comparisons between con- servation activities as practiced in Britain and in the United States.

Its intention is to cover both aspects of water conservation; namely,

demand management and supply management, with a view towards acquainting

the readership with British practices as adopted by the Thames Water

Authority, and to suggest reasons for the differences between the

United Kingdom and the United States in terms of attitude, emphasis,

and outcome.

Obviously, any comparison of this nature is bound to be superficial; in this particular instance, the tenuity is compounded by our limited knowledge of American culture and practices. Nevertheless, the

apparent difference in terms of per capita consumption is so marked

that the lack of precise detail should be incidental.

DEMAND MANAGEMENT

Policy

Bearing in mind that water resources are renewable and assuming

they are not overexploited , the objective of demand management is to

suppress, rather than restrict, the demand on the system, thereby not

only reducing operational costs but also deferring the need for capital

expenditure and other scarce resources such as land. However, most demand management options will incur some expenditure, and it is essential

to ensure that such measures are cost-effective and not pursued for

their own sake.

367
This, of course, begs the question as to whether water undertakings should have any direct involvement in demand management. It

could be argued that matters related to demand should be left entirely

to consumers and water authorities should meet those demdnds in the

most efficient way they can, taking into account cost, environmental

considerations, and so on. However, in reality, it would be hard for

water authorities to avoid at least some degree of involvement, since

dividing lines between waste, misuse, and extravagance are not clear

cut and waste prevention regulations have been enforced since the last

century. The question is perhaps not whether demand management should

be exercised but to what extent. This argument is liable to come under

public scrutiny whenever there is an inquiry into proposals to develop

a new resource.

Pricing Structure

In the United Kingdom, the present method of charging for domestic

water services is closely akin to a property tax. Charging by meter is seen as more equitable but, at least up to now, too expensive. Without

domestic metering, the scope for introducing a pricing structure that

encourages prudent use of water is limited to industrial and some com- mercial consumers who are currently metered. However, these represent

a small percentage of the total supplied. Moreover, the sensitivity of

demand to the existing pricing structure appears to be small.

Bylaw Legislation

Under relevant United Kingdom legislation, water undertakings are empowered to enforce local bylaws to prevent waste, undue consumption,

misuse, or contamination of water supplied. The nature of these bylaws

is such that they are directed at the users of water rather than at the

manufacturers of pipework, fittings, and appliances. However, under

more recent legislation, a national scheme has been established for the

assessment and testing of water fittings to asscertain whether they

comply with bylaw regulations.

As a result of bylaw legislation, 9-liter flush toilets have been

standard in Britain for many years. Similarly, in many areas, a storage tank is required in the roof space to feed nonpotable supplies

such as toilets, hot-water cisterns, etc., thereby reducing the effects

of peaking on the distribution network. These and other such measures

have effectively either reduced or smoothed the demand for water without most consumers even being aware.

Leakage Prevention

It is difficult to be precise about losses from a distribution

network, particularly without universal metering. Leakage in the

United Kingdom is thought to average about 25 percent of the total put

into supply, with isolated instances in excess of 50 percent. Not sur- prisingly, the reduction of leakage has a high priority in most water

authorities where more effort and improved leak-detection equipment are being employed. o^o
Education

In times of crisis, the public has always shown its willingness to

cut back on water use when appeals have been made: the difficulty is

sustaining that reduction for more than a few weeks. One of the

weaknesses of the present method of charging is that the benefits from

using less water do not accrue to the individual apart from any incidental saving on heating costs. Even though it is always possible to

put more effort into educational campaigns aimed at schools, it is re- garded as an ongoing, long-term proposition.

SUPPLY MANAGEMENT

Policy

The traditional aim of water undertakings in Britain and elsewhere

has been to provide the consumer with an adequate supply of wholesome

water at minimum cost. More recently, with the growing awareness of

environmental issues, this objective has been tempered to minimize both

visual and ecological impact. For instance, Thames Water has deliberately pursued a policy of seeking less controversial sites for the inevitable new resources. This has included derelict industrial areas

such as disused gravel workings, noise-polluted areas surrounding an international airport, etc. Similarly, ground water has been exploited

for both direct supply and river regulation on the basis that it is not

only economic but it also has minimum visual impact on the landscape.

Assessment of Resources

In recent years, a more realistic approach has been adopted for

the assessment of water resources. Instead of sizing single reservoirs

to withstand a hypothetical "design drought," water resource systems

are now objectively designed on an integrated basis to meet specific

performance criteria that depend on tolerable frequency of restrictions

on demand. The techniques developed take into account conjunctive use

of resources, which in many instances has resulted in uprating the

reliable output of the system, thereby enabling further capital investment to be deferred.

Alternative Resources

For many years, a significant portion of Thames Water's potable

supply has come from indirect effluent reuse: conurbations including

Swindon, Oxford, and Reading all abstract water for local use and re- turn treated effluent to the river for subsequent use downstream.

Strict catchment control and robust water treatment systems ensure that

high-quality water is supplied throughout the Thames basin.

Artificial recharge of aquifers is being practiced on a pilot

scale, utilizing surplus water treatment capacity during winter

369
months. If successful, the expectation is that recharge will make an increasing contribution to the water resources of the London area.

Water Distribution *

Faced with the problem of supplying increasing quantities of water

in the London metropolitan area, Thames Water has decided in principle

to base its future distribution network on a ring-main concept. Tn all

probability, this will take the form of a low-pressure, wedge-block

tunnel, supplied by the more efficient of the existing water treatment

works. Water will be pumped out and distributed locally by a conventional high-pressure network. However, with bulk supplies of treated

water being conveyed by a low-pressure tunnel in impervious clay, overall losses from the distribution network are expected to be significantly lower than at present.

COMPARISON WITH THE UNITED STATES

Objectives

It would seem that the underlying motives of water conservation

are similar on both sides of the Atlantic: The aim of demand management is to influence consumer habits, thereby encouraging more prudent

use of water; the aim of supply management is to provide adequate quantities of wholesome water at minimum overall cost to the consumers and

to the environment. There are, however, differences in climate, culture, and standard of living that would suggest that there is no unique

combination of measures that is universally optimal.

For example, in Britain where rainfall is usually plentiful

throughout the year, garden watering forms a small portion of domestic

consumption. Secondly, when it comes to personal hygiene, bathing is more common than showering. Although this may involve a larger quantity of water, the relative frequency of showering is liable to make

the latter more expensive in overall water usage. Thirdly, the standard of living, as reflected in the ownership of water-using appliances,

is higher in the United States, and automatic equipment is invariably

harder on water use than are manual methods.

Institutional Aspects

The water industry in England and Wales was reorganized in 1974 to

form 10 regional water authorities responsible for all aspects of water

supply and sewage disposal. Consequently, it is probable that the introduction of model bylaws and the adoption of national standards for

fittings/appliances are easier to achieve than in the United States

where water services are more fragmented. Similarly, with sewage

treatment and pollution control being charges of the same organization

responsible for water supply, it must be easier to contemplate effluent

reuse in Britain.

370
Procedural Aspects

Although Government imposes certain restrictions and fixes the

capital expenditure ceiling, water authorities are financially

independent of Government. With no prospect of attracting central

funds, the initiative for water conservation tends to be regional

rather than national. As a result, procedures for water conservation

would seem to be less formal than in the United States, with each

region pursuing what it believes to be the more effective measures.

Effectiveness

Results of domestic metering experiments carried out by various

water authorities thoughout England and Wales suggest that, in 1978,

the typical household demand was approximately 120 liters per head per

day, comprising:

Liters/ Head/Day

Toilet flushing 40

Personal hygiene 30

Laundry 14

Washing up 12

Outside use 4

Drinking, cooking, 20

cleaning, etc.

Total 120

When the total amount of water put into supply is averaged over

the whole population, the corresponding figure is 301 liters per head

per day, comprising:

Liters/Head /Day

Household demand 120

Nonmetered 20

commercial use Miscellaneous demand 1 Unaccounted-for water 71

Metered industrial 89 use

Total 301

CONCLUSION

Current Progress

Although consumption rates in Britain are significantly lower

than in the United States, there is no room for complacency. Consequently, all water authorities now have, or will soon have, bylaws that

371
make dual-flush mandatory for the washdown type of toilet in all new

dwellings. Similarly, some water authorities have ongoing programs of

research to establish the effectiveness of variable-flush toilets,

pressure-reducing valves, flow-limiting valves, automatic flushing

control, etc.

Prospects

It has been recognized for some time that there is a need to

review the whole framework of model bylaws in England and Wales with

the aim of promoting more prudent use of water. In the near future,

the expectation is that proposals will be put forward to the National

Water Council and the Department of the Environment for consideration

on a national basis. Although the potential savings from the measures

proposed in the new model bylaws cannot be quantified with any certainty, they will provide a climate conducive to creating a water-conscious

society.

372
FEDERAL WATER RESOURCE AGENCY PLANNING REQUIREMENTS AND IMPLICATIONS

FOR WATER CONSERVATION

Gerald D. Seinwill, Acting Director

U.S. Water Resources Council

Washington, D.C.

ABSTRACT

The 1978 executive water policy reform message was not a radical

departure from earlier policy directives. However, its specificity

about the role of conservation in water planning and management, its

applicability to wider ranges of water activities, and its urgency for

immediate response have differed from previous water policy statements.

Federal agencies dealing with water-related programs or projects

were mobilized to initiate prompt action to address water program

issues. Federal agencies have responded with a variety of changes and

proposed measures. The Principles and Standards were revised by the

Water Resources Council to integrate water conservation into project

and program planning and to widen the range of options considered to

include alternatives that Federal, State, or local entities might

implement

The Water Resources Council's State Conservation Planning Guide

(October 1980) reflects the increased emphasis on State responsibility

to implement conservation measures. State grant applications to

support water conservation- actions reflect a wide range of conservation

measures that are planned or currently being implemented.

The Federal Government has created incentives for and obviated

disincentives for water conservation. Instead of a monolithic pattern

of resource management and planning, States can work with the Federal

Government to tailor measures to meet local needs and economies.

During the past 80 years, our national concept of water conserva- tion has shifted focus to reflect current economic conditions and

contemporary attitudes toward environmental resources. Distinctions

in political philosophies have often blurred when the Government takes

action on water conservation. Economic conditions, national emergencies, or natural disasters such as droughts frequently play a greater

role in public evaluation of resources than does any specific partyline attitude. The definition of water conservation and the role it

plays in water resource planning generally changes with the changing

times, particularly when there is a drastic change in the economy.

373
The 1901-191^ progressive movement had for its theme the "wise use of natural resources." Led by Theodore Roosevelt, this conservationist attitude set the stage for ensuing water resources programs

and policies. During that era, however, conservation of natural

resources was viewed as a way of preserving the great outdoors for

the enjoyment of future generations. Later, however, the New Deal

planners of 1933-^3 saw conservation primarily as a way to stimulate

economic recovery, even though planners insisted that all water

projects be coordinated with plans for the comprehensive development

of an entire river basin. The "new deal" multiple-purpose public

works projects were hailed as experiments in democracy. They shifted

water power development from "power trust" monopolies to the public,

and they combined regional economic growth with widespread distribution of benefits among the people. The projects introduced benefitcost analyses and eventually added social benefits as evaluation

criteria.

During the next 20 years water policy generally supported con- struction projects that were to guarantee water supply for beneficial

uses. Federal agencies supporting water construction projects

expanded and water projects multiplied. After World War II, the

growing leisure class forced attention on environmental issues, but

again these were chiefly to support recreational opportunities. Along

with recreation, however, municipal and industrial water supplies for

the growing metropolitan areas were introduced as valid purposes in

water resources planning. Slowly but surely, the objectives of . planning shifted. The question was no longer how the Federal Government could equitably distribute funds to foster regional development.

The emerging question was how it could equitably apportion a scarce natural resource. In 1955, President Eisenhower's Advisory Committee

on Water Resources Policy reported:

The basic elements of a sound policy are clear. That policy

must look toward an adequate water supply for our people,

prevent waste of water, provide for a greater reuse of water,

reduce water pollution to the lowest practicable level,

provide means for the useful and equitable distribution of

available water supply and take steps to check the destructive

forces of water which threaten to injure or destroy land, property, and human life.

In the 1970's, water conservation per se earned a more central role

in water policy. The 1978 Executive water policy reform message put

water conservation equal to and in some ways more important than con- struction in water planning. In the 13 followup Executive memoranda to

Federal agencies, seven dealt directly with water conservation measures.

On June 6, 1980, precisely 2 years after the 1978 reform message,

the Secretary of the Interior reported on the first phase of Federal

agency followup to the Executive mandate. His report lists an array of

specific changes to underpin water conservation in the agency program

374
objectives and to induce non-Federal entities to adopt conservation plans

and practices. The actions range from intensified conservation research

to technical on-site assistance with specific conservation measures. The

preliminary report, issued November 9, 1978, listed 18 agency research

programs that could enhance conservation research. The final report,

however, indicated that agency research is reaching out in two ways:

Federal agencies are cooperatively developing information on common areas

of conservation applications and are integrating and supporting research

by non-Federal entities. For example, Housing and Urban Development,

Veterans Administration, and Farmers Home Administration cooperatively

evaluated 50 possible ways to reduce residential water use, and scheduled

seven for prompt program implementation as a condition of Federal financial assistance.

Five agencies—Farmers Home Administration, Economic Development

Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,

Environmental Protection Agency, and Department of Housing and Urban

Development—examined their legal authority to promote conservation

in water supply and wastewater treatment grant programs. All five

agencies have one or more of the following common prerequisites to

grants: installation of meters, increased leak detection programs,

modified rate structures to promote conservation, consideration of flow

reduction measures rather than facility expansion, public education

programs;, and conservation design in new sewer and supply systems.

The Bureau of Indian Affairs is using the Soil Conservation Service's

technical assistance to identify conservation measures for Reclamation

and Indian irrigation projects. The Department of Agriculture, the

Department of the Interior, and the Environmental Protection Agency

set up a cooperative plan to improve irrigation efficiencies.

Agencies are also extending their use of non-Federal groups. For

example, Agriculture is using the Hatch funds for university research on improved irrigation timing and water application, reduced soil moisture

losses, and increased moisture absorbency and retention in soils. It is

also using State Cooperative Extension Services and Land Grant Colleges

to develop and to disseminate water conservation technology and management practices.

Agencies have also stepped up their own internal coordination in

conservation research and applications. The Corps of Engineers has

introduced and is pursuing an across-the-board focus on conservation.

Efforts include: (l) a synopsis of general conservation literature and

case-study measures for Corps planners and field personnel use; (2) an interdisciplinary-team is developing procedures to implement conservation

measures in civil works during the preauthorizat ion , planning, and design

phases: (3) a proposed Engineer Regulation to improve reservoir regulation, including drought contingency plans and possible storage reallocation, has been sent to all field operating agencies for review; and

CM conservation planning will be developed by all Corps field offices

for each project, shop, floating plant, or any separate facility operated

by the District.

375
In addition to the increased agency cross-pollination and the intensified internal coordination of conservation activities, agencies have

also widened their support of non-Federal conservation activities. These

include: cost-effectiveness studies for a range of conservation

measures; cost-sharing of efficiency improvements; technical assistance

in specific conservation technologies; educational materials, revised

handbooks, and training to promote conservation values; and priorities

in grant monies to encourage conservation plans and projects.

In the reform message, the President also directed the Water

Resources Council to modify the Principles, Standards ? and Procedures

for water resource planning so that conservation would he fully integrated into the economic development and environmental quality objectives

of planning. As a result, the revised Principles and Standards and

supporting Procedures were published in the Federal Register as final

rules in December 1979 and September 198O.

The revised Principles and Standards lists three elements of conservation: (l) reduced demand for water, (2) improved efficiency in use and/or reductions in losses and waste, and (.3) improved land management

practices to conserve water. The rule also states that conservation

planning may consist of ". . . a range of measures that over time can balance water demands with water availability. ..."

This revision shifts emphases and authorities in water resources

planning, some of which directly affect water conservation planning.

Conservation is now on par with supply augmentation; environmental quality

is an objective equal with national economic development; nonstructural

alternatives must be considered along with any structural approach; and

plans that may be implemented by other Federal agencies, State and local

government, and nongovernmental entities are to be included among the

alternative plans.

These changes are to stimulate water conservation planning, provide

a role for regional and local authorities to work with Federal authorities, and encourage Federal agencies to cooperate with other Federal

agencies in the planning stages. The principle is cooperative planning

that supports national and regional economic benefits and enhances

environmental qualities.

In March 198l, the Water Resources Council published a Bibliography

of Water Conservation giving references on water use, conservation planning, institutional/legal considerations, public education and participation, energy savings, wastewater reuse, emergency/contingency planning,

and water conservation impacts.

In October 1980, the Council also published the State Water

Conservation Planning Guide . The purpose of the guide is to help States

develop water conservation programs and prepare applications for planning

grants that include water conservation. It summarizes information on Federal, State, regional, and local policies, programs, and experiences

376
and it describes procedures for integrating conservation planning into

the State water management planning. It also provides sources of useful

information for planning.

The introduction states:

The procedures described in the guide should have broad

applicability throughout the country. The value and

usefulness will vary among the States. Some States

have completed water supply and water conservation

planning programs. Others have undertaken specific

conservation measures. The Council recognizes that

each State program will have a somewhat different

orientation and is in a different stage of development or implementation. It is expected that the

guide will be used selectively by each State to apply

those elements which are appropriate to its specific

conditions and needs. The one common emphasis is that

almost all existing water use practices can be made

more efficient, and that the maximum efficiency will

result from a set of water conservation priorities

that are developed as part of a statewide planning

process

The diversity of conservation measures proposed in State grant

applications to the Council illustrates the soundness of a flexible

approach to the support of water conservation planning.

A sampling of State responses shows the range of varying conservation needs or problems. One State (Arizona) is studying urban conservation methods, including effluent reuse. Another (Maryland) is

investigating selective consumptive users to determine demand reduction

criteria and procedures while simultaneously working to establish

interstate and intrastate water conservation task forces. Another

(..Colorado) is identifying ways to increase yield and efficiency in

existing facilities by improving allocation and distribution. One

northeastern State (New Jersey} has a long list of conservation plans,

including identification of systems for mandatory rationing during

emergencies, daily tracking of water diversions, reservoir levels,

precipitation, and demand reduction; distributing of shower and faucet

flow restrictors in "rationing" areas; and field testing of retrofitted

water closets.

A southwestern State (New Mexico) is passing on program funds to

local and regional political subdivisions for water research, conservation, and demonstration projects. A midwest ern State (Kentucky) plans

to develop individual basin water budgets. A western State (Idaho)

plans to technically assist local water users and groups in evaluating

water systems design for more effective and efficient surface and

groundwater use. Another (Georgia) is developing conservation criteria

for surface and groundwater allocation permit programs.

377
A southeast State (Alabama) plans to test components of traveling

irrigation systems and develop new simulations to decrease water and

energy requirements. An eastern State (Virginia) is developing a minigrant program and yearly progress and status reports of water conservation

throughout the State.

Many States are developing educational materials on conservation

for use by schools, media, or both. Another common element is a cost

analysis of various conservation measures.

The Council handbook and State responses in grant requests illustrate two overall changes in water policy. The emphasis has shifted

from centralized Federal planning to a broader involvement of non-Federal

groups and from Federal control to Federal support of such planning.

Non-Federal entities can work with the Federal agencies to tailor

measures to meet local needs and economies. In turn, Federal agencies

are also to include non-Federal plans among their alternative plans, as required by the Principles and Standards . But regardless of where the

planning originates, conservation considerations are to be included

in the planning process. By encouraging State and local conservation

measures—or by withholding funds for programs that do not include con- servation—the Federal Government is supporting the water conservation

officials who often must compete with other State or local goals or special interest group pressures when program priorities are being

established.

Conservation planning is not, however, an end in itself. It is a part, not the whole, of water planning and management. Theodore Roosevelt

pushed for conservation to guarantee preservation of the resources for

future generations. That long-range view of water conservation is particularly significant in light of the recent energy resource crisis. Oil

supplies have dwindled faster than our appetite to use them. Similarly,

water supplies in many parts of the country are also dwindling. If the

Nation continues to treat water like an inexhaustible resource as it did

with oil, the water will not be there for future generations.

The prospective drought has boosted water conservation into national

consciousness, and some shortoterm emergency measures to mitigate

drought effects are educating people to the importance of conservation.

But once the emergency is over, people tend to forget the value placed

on the resource during the crisis. Water planners—at Federal, State

and local levels—must look at the long-term values and must reduce

disincentives to conserve water. Federal water policy has been moving

slowly in just that direction, and will, I trust, continue.

378
PLUMBING CODES - ESSENTIAL IN WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAMS

Lawrence S. Galowin

Senior Engineer, Building Equipment Division

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C.

ABSTRACT

The development and implementation of water conservation programs

requires acceptance of low water usage plumbing fixtures and devices.

The installation of innovative components or modifications to existing

plumbing systems for reduced water consumption are controlled by local

jurisdictions through the plumbing codes.

A review of the developments leading to current plumbing code re- quirements is presented. The basis for development of revisions to

codes and supporting standards from current research projects is discussed. Requirements are indicated for (a) current data based upon

real water demand loads to update water supply pipe sizing (Hunter's

Curve) and (b) the necessity to consider the impact of deterioration of

performance from reduced wastewater flows in the building drainage system with expanding water conservation practices. Examples of laboratory

research and field demonstrations of water conservation programs are provided.

INTRODUCTION

Recent efforts to investigate methods to conserve water available

from municipal potable supply systems result from recognition of the

limits for continuing expansion and development of water resources.

The reasons for concern about excessive use of treated water are due to:

• limits on the availability of the water resources with continuing industrial/population growth and expanding real estate

development

• the high costs of plant construction, distribution and

collection networks for both input and output phases;

• the extensive problems of pollution and the efforts required to

return water to nature in approximately the same condition it was withdrawn;

379
• the regional experiences of severe water droughts or normally

arid conditions with rapidly increasing populations (which can

be alleviated by more judicious use of available supplies)

• increasing confrontations among competing segments of society

with demands for more water allocations from available supply sources

It is against this background that the federal cosponsors of this

conference recognized the need to focus upon the wide range of issues

specifically surrounding the topic of the processed potable water supply. Related issues of primary importance to the agricultural interests, industrial requirements, recreational purposes and power or fuels

production have been extensively recognized at other forums; e.g., Needs

and Implementing Strategies (1) . The purpose of this meeting is to ex- amine the interaction between local and state water management with

federal programs that support or provide assistance and incentives for

water conservation. This conference continues the efforts and themes

which focus on water conservation initiated at the 1978 National Conference - Water Conservation and Municipal Wastewater Reduction (2)

Water has traditionally been viewed as an unlimited resource whose

use was restricted only by legal or engineering constraints. Legal is- sues associated with environmental concerns complicate both water con- servation and the related area of water pollution abatement. In recent

years, state and federal statutes have taken preeminence in water re- source questions and common law water use doctrines are still prevalent

as issues in both water conservation and pollution control policy. Two

main doctrines, riparian rights, which relate generally to Eastern

states, and prior appropriation, which is applied in the West, have

considerable influence on water resource decisions.

The Water Pollution Control Act amendments of 1972 and the Safe

Drinking Water Act of 1974 have established requirements for potable

and effluent processed water. Benefits of water conservation at the

tap were recognized in the Clean Water Amendments of 1977; regulations

now require the implementation of water conservation measures by all

recipients of grants for the construction of wastewater facilities.

Water conservation clearly has a direct impact on the volume of wastewater produced in a community. If each consumer uses less water, proportionately less wastewater will require treatment, and treatment

plants can then serve more consumers with no increase in total capacity.

The single issue of the relationship between water usage and wastewater

treatment indicates that the benefits of conservation can extend beyond

the question of water supply to issues of growth, development, and

local public investment (2) . The Environmental Protection Agency has

identified the infiltration of groundwater into sewers as a major

problem. As infiltration is reduced, the advantages of saving water

in homes and industrial and commercial buildings will take on greater

significance in lowering the volume of wastewater requiring treatment.

Increased demand for water has strained the existing capacity of

330
public water systems making them more vulnerable to drought. The series

of recent droughts have demonstrated that there are limits of storage,

stream flows, surface water, groundwater and deep aquifers to provide

and maintain delivery of quantities of safe, clean water in many com- munities. Local water systems have exploited fully the most accessible

supplies, necessitating the development of more distant or difficult

sources with increasing costs being passed on to consumers. Crisis

response in recent droughts imposed significant changes in water use patterns (some voluntary and others mandatory) for residential and

non-residential customers alike. However, the persistence of changes in

consumption is unknown since water usage can be affected by a large

number of factors; several studies on this subject are presented in

other sessions of this conference. Water managers have introduced

planning for normally reduced water supply (including rationing) due

to drought situations and limits placed on watershed expansion. That

represents a significant departure from the concept of supplying as much water as customers desired with declining block rates which

encouraged increased water usage. However, a disincentive for water

conservation has resulted from (the positive responses to the need for)

reductions in water usage because increased rates were required in

order for water utilities to meet the costs of bonded indebtedness

and operating costs as total water revenues decreased as consumption

declined

The more efficient use of water is generally what is meant by water

conservation; it includes the utilization of both devices and practices

which reduce consumption of water supplies, limits waste and seeks to

reuse, reclaim or recycle water. Conservation techniques of this sort are applied "at the tap," as persons, businesses and industry draw

water. Also, in particularly arid areas conservation can mean landscaping for minimal water needs as well as large scale preservation of

water in reservoirs, canals and lakes so that it will not be lost by

evaporation or transported away. Broadening national concern for water

conservation as a normal water management practice (as compared to

drought crisis situations) has caused numbers of state and local jurisdictions to incorporate water-saving regulations in their local and

state plumbing codes. Effective reductions in water usage requires implementation through the local building regulatory system to assure minimum requirements for health, safety and sanitary purposes. The re- quirements for satisfactory performance of innovative, new or retrofit

devices are not necessarily the same as for conventional larger water

consuming equipment. Therefore, research for test evaluation methods

is essential for revisions to outdated standards. Automatic regulation

with installed hydraulic control mechanisms in water devices to maintain

efficient performance with low flows reduces the dependence and range of

variability of other parameters in water savings programs which are normally assumed to be governed by strongly subjective influences, e.g.,

changes in load patterns by users. The issue of conserving water as well as energy in building water supply and distribution systems

(plumbing) was a subject of the International Symposium (3) of

September 1976 sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences. The

theme developed in six national issue papers was to define the needs

381
for wide ranging plumbing research and to place those needs in perspective with other building and utility research. There, R. Benazzi

et al . reported (relative to peak demand flow rates):

"In today's plumbing systems, one startling fact has become increasingly more evident; within the plumbing industry, very little

is known about current water requirements and the procedure for

estimating the demand for water. Methods used today in the design

and sizing of water supply systems are based upon guidelines that were established many years ago with few subsequent changes. On

the basis of experience, engineers have tried to modify existing

sizing techniques, but they have met with only limited success

even though recent studies indicate that most supply systems are oversized by a large margin, thereby providing excess capacity

with waste of water as well as material, labor and time. A meaningful policy on water conservation and related energy requires

current quantitative data for actual levels of usage as a basis

of improved computational design procedures,"

The process by which water supply distribution and wastewater effluent collection systems for buildings in the United States are planned, designed, constructed, and operated is highly regulated by

prescriptive (as contrasted with performance) codes and standards.

Those documents comprise the building regulatory system for the specifi

cation, assembly and installation of materials and equipment offered

by a diversity of manufacturers. For the plumbing industry, the

process revolves about products — fixtures, fittings, or trim (often

referred to as brass), specialty items, and piping. Product oriented

technological advances are the result of proprietary research and development activities of manufacturers. Those proprietary activities

benefit from plumbing systems research in the public sector performed

in furtherance of the development of plumbing codes and standards. The

broad and more basic research has traditionally been centered at the

National Bureau of Standards and limited programs at universities; e.g.

Stevens Institute of Technology, the University of Iowa, the University

of Illinois, Pennsylvania State University, Massachusetts Institute of

Technology, Johns Hopkins University, and Virginia Polytechnic Institute, supported by both public and private funds.

In this paper a limited historical perspective of plumbing code

developments and supporting research for codes/standards is provided.

A brief review of current water conservation programs at the National

Bureau of Standards (NBS) and the Department of Housing and Urban

Development (HUD) is then presented

PLUMBING

What Is "Plumbing?"

The definition of "plumbing" is simple and essentially set forth

as the water supply system and drainage system for buildings. However,

the various model plumbing codes, the trades and construction industry

382
and other special interests have constrained, specified or extended the

definition to meet their own needs. The definition can include all

requirements against contamination by use of cross-connection control

and backflow prevention to the point of connection to the supply mains.

Understanding the basis for requirements of installed water systems in

buildings is required for successful water conservation programs and

the need for changing plumbing codes has been recognized in most

successful demonstrations.

The potable water supply and distribution systems are required to

provide the essential health and sanitary services for building

occupants and to provide for adjacent land improvements for lawns and

gardens and/or recreational purposes. The evolution of plumbing regulations of current use began approximately 100 years ago as a result of

water supply under pressure becoming available, initially for fire

fighting and then for waterborne wastes removal. The burden of water

quality and sanitary disposal enforcement originally was placed upon

the local health officers by the local governing bodies. The early

plumbing codes merely mentioned that water supply piping "must be

there and adequate" - no provisions for sizing and occupant patterns

of load demand; waste systems were the priority for protection against

filth and disease. Through the first quarter of this century,

plumbing codes were rewritten purely on the basis of demonstrated

practical experiences with small impacts from manufacturers of plumbing

products

Plumbing Codes

Usage of potable water regularly occurs in buildings and is

primarily governed by the design of plumbing fixtures and appliances

and trim and by capability for the supply system to provide adequate

design flow rates and pressures (which may require large pumping

capacities for high-rise buildings). The costly infrastructure for the

water processing plant connecting pipe network and the corresponding

waste pipe collection network and waste treatment plant are all

integral in the considerations for water conservation programs. The

building plumbing extending to the connections to the above systems

with protection by cross-connection control and backflow prevention are

the usual limits of applicability of plumbing codes,

A review of texts, conferences, and meetings on water conservation

or bibliographies shows a limited understanding of the relationship

between reducing water consumption and plumbing systems research, the

structures of the model plumbing codes and standards, and the local

implementation process that depends on the cooperation of the trades

and construction industry. Considerable emphasis has existed on improvisation with non-approved devices, as well as other disciplinary

investigations for economic and sociological issues, conceptual and/or

strategic approaches to saving water. Publicity has oftentimes been

gained by inventors of low flow devices or by authors of guidelines on strategies and implementation of reduced flow practices although such

383
devices or recommendations may violate the applicable plumbing codes.

In many cases the requirements of the codes and other building regulations which are applied for review, inspection, and approyal of plumbing

systems installations are not followed. Because limited levels of re- search for plumbing are customary, very often rational methods for testing and evaluation of new or innovative devices and systems have not

been established. Plumbing codes accept "standard" items; it is

important, therefore, that standards be developed for new items. The

application of the performance (functional) concept in developing such

standards and gaining acceptance expeditiously as compared to traditional experience is based on the prescriptive approach.

Recognition of the need to incorporate requirements for water use reductions through the legislative process was shown, for example,

by the states of California, New York, and Maryland; and the need to

mandate plumbing code changes, as in the case study reported for

Elmhurst, Illinois (2) and by the Washington Suburban Sanitary

Commission (1). A detailed description of plumbing codes, their

structure and standardization in the United States was presented by

Snyder (5) . Consensus standards are prepared under sponsoring organizations and the use of the standards is voluntary on the part of

individual manufacturers other than Federal standards for use by the

government in buildings for their own account. For assistance in

seeking further information, a number of organizations in the plumbing

codes and standards activities are listed in Appendix A.

• Minimum Requirements for Plumbing

The major change in plumbing guidelines and practices was initiated under the Secretary of Commerce, Herbert Hoover, in the early

1920 's. The first exhaustive report "Recommended Minimum Requirements

for Plumbing in Dwellings and Similar Buildings" was issued in 1923 by

the National Bureau of Standards (A). That was the first organized

thrust at assembling the physical and hydraulic data applicable to

plumbing, results of tests and other information related to standardization of materials culminating in a recommended plumbing code. The

impact of that document persists since all currently derived codes

remain as prescriptive specification types that reflect only detailed

specifics; the author's intent, however, was that it was only a beginning and subsequent efforts to get performance type codes have

failed. Since that effort, the National Bureau of Standards has pursued research in plumbing with major contributions and impacts upon

codes and standards which have utilized the results reported over the

past five decades.

The final report of the Subcommittee on Plumbing, "Recommended

Minimum Requirements for Plumbing," revised 1931 (6), known as the

"Hoover Code" was widely utilized by state and local regulatory bodies.

That document was the forerunner of the later widely accepted American

Standard National Plumbing Code, ASA A40. 8-1955 (7). The recommended

code was purely a specification-type code. The inclusion in the

384
Hoover Code of the research data and discussions concerning the physics

of plumbing systems indicates the authors felt that this was only a beginning and that much additional work was needed. However, until

almost the present time, plumbing codes in the United States reflect

only detailed changes and little if any change in the concept for a plumbing code (i.e., no definitive performance parameters for function

which could allow engineered solutions instead of the prescriptive

specification and materials constraints) . The details of the plumbing

materials for use in installations were provided. Detailed references

were made to the various piping materials then in common use for

installed plumbing and a listing of the specifications of the American

Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) , included for the various pipes

and fittings. The specifications or standards listed for the various

pipe and fittings involved the details of the manufacture and testing,

as well as the base materials used in the construction, with practically no listing or discussion of their use or adaptability in the

installation of plumbing systems.

• Plumbing Manual

In 1940 the National Bureau of Standards published Report BMS 66

entitled "Plumbing Manual" (8) , the result of the work of a government

committee. Although this "Plumbing Manual" was intended primarily for

federal plumbing work, it was anticipated that it would also be helpful

in bringing about greater uniformity and reduction of costs in all

plumbing work. The far-reaching forward look in sections on pressure

and nonpressure drainage and specification of different capabilities

for primary and secondary branches of the building drain were never picked up by model or local codes; that forward step is still not

looked upon favorably. The BMS 66 also contained the famous "Hunter's

Curve" for estimating water-supply demands and pipe sizing information

which were also discussed in BMS 65 (9) and BMS 79 (10). The fact that

these 35-year-old reports are still in widespread use (as indicated by

continuing requests for the reports) indicates a lack of progress due

to insufficient support for broadly based research required to provide new plumbing information for code writing.

• A40 Committee - National Plumbing Code

The American Standards Association (now known as the American

National Standards Institute, ANSI) appointed a committee, known as the

A40 Committee, to prepare "Minimum Requirements for Plumbing and

Standardization of Plumbing Equipment" in 1928. The A40 Committee was reorganized with a broader-based membership in 1941 with approval

obtained for their work as an American Standard in 1949. Very shortly

after the acceptance of the 1949 report another A40 Committee with an extremely broad base of membership was formed to attempt to prepare a more modern updated plumbing code, "Minimum Requirements for Plumbing."

This work produced the A40. 8-1955 (7), published in 1955. For many

years in most places (still in some places) this was known as the

National Plumbing Code. Because of the continuing need for updated

385
plumbing codes, and because of various political factions in the field

of code writing which prevented the approval of a new version, A40.8-

1955 became obsolete and was officially withdrawn as an American

Standard on January 20, 1972. There is, at the present time, a current

ANSI A40 Committee at work preparing a new version of this plumbing code.

Four organizations are in competition to have their model codes

accepted as a national code after the withdrawal of ANSI A40. 8-1955.

These organizations are the National Association of Plumbing-HeatingCooling Contractors (NAPHCC) jointly with the American Society of

Plumbing Engineers (ASPE) , the International Association of Plumbing

and Mechanical Officials (IAPMO) , the Building Officials and Code

Administrators International, Inc. (BOCA), and the Southern Building

Code Congress International (SBCCI) . Their published code documents

may be purchased; addresses are listed in Appendix A. The need for

water conservation requirements in the codes has recently been recognized and some amendments have been introduced relating to reduction in

water usage. At the level of local government it is possible to adopt

one of the several model plumbing codes, although some local governments

prepare their own codes. Mandatory plumbing codes at the national level

exist in other countries but not in the United States.

PERSPECTIVES ON PLUMBING SYSTEMS - WATER SUPPLY AND DRAINAGE IN

BUILDINGS

Illustrative of the theme at this conference of federally derived

information broadly applicable and useful at state and local levels of

concern are the past plumbing research accomplishments. The broad

range of research impacts resulting from the varied investigations have

been cited extensively in six reports on continuing national issues for

plumbing research (3). The subject matter in each issue paper identifies concerns appropriate to planners, developers and implementors of

water conservation programs which require defining and retaining

satisfactory performance for acceptable water supply and waste removal

service. The papers address the following subjects:

• Water Requirements and Procedures for Estimating the Demand

for Water in Buildings

• Protecting Water Quality in Buildings

• Water and Water Related Conservation in Buildings

• Hydraulics of Gravity Drainage Systems

• Performance Concepts for Water Supply and Drainage Systems

in Buildings

• Alternative Concepts for Transporting and Treating Wastes

Within Buildings

Water Supply Demand - Pipe Sizing

The emergence of rational design for estimating peak hydraulic

waste loads for pipe sizing involved the fixture-unit concept and the

theory of probability appeared in the "Hoover Code." It was not until

386
many years later (1940) that the full development of the fixture-unit

concept to determine the demand on the water supply system was carried

out by Dr. Roy B. Hunter (8,9,10). The most difficult task in determining the conditions of flow in a plumbing system is to predict the

number of fixtures most likely to be operating simultaneously out of the

total number of fixtures in the design. Knowing that the fixtures in a plumbing system are used intermittently, i.e., the operation of each

fixture is a random event, it was theorized that the actual loading

effect of a single fixture was dependent upon the frequency of use of

the fixture, the length of time that the fixture was in use, and the

peak flow rate of the fixture.

The mathematical modeling introduced a level of performance with

the criterion that, for an adequate system, the demand should not

exceed the design value more than one percent of the time. Because of

the computation limits at the time Hunter developed his methodology, he

did not generalize the model to encompass several fixture types.

Alternatively, Hunter fully developed the fixture unit concept which

provided an empirical computation procedure for estimating the demand

of mixed systems. This concept utilizes the assumption that the design

factor for different fixtures is independent of the demand. To determine the number of fixtures that could be in operation an expression

was derived from the binomial probability theory for predicting the

system requirements consisting of the same type of fixtures. The

method was soon adapted to the prediction of peak loads for the sanitary

drainage system, and was utilized to develop pipe-sizing tables for

drainage and vent piping. This was reflected in design manuals and

code recommendations of the late 1940' s and the early 1950 's and has

been carried over into most of the present model codes.

The fixture unit approach has led to overdesign because of paucity

of field measurements as input data to Hunter's technique. Currently,

practicing engineers use design guides generally based upon adjusted

usage parameters because of the lack of field data from comprehensive

research on actual usage. Projections of refinements to the method

indicate that smaller diameter pipes would result. With the need for

energy conservation it should be recognized that significant benefits

could be derived, since the sizing of hot water tanks and heating

elements of hot water service systems are also affected (1) . For the

most part, building codes in the United States recommend Hunter's

method for estimating the demand of water in buildings, but engineers

may be allowed to vary from this method and substitute (with justification) their own methods. For drainage systems, although inflow is

assumed equal to outflow, there are slight differences in the tables

from one code to another. Comparisons with practices in other countries were shown in References 12, 13, and 14. Recently an evaluation of

effects of peakload reductions, associated with water saving water

closets, in the Hunter method was shown in Reference (11) showing the

potential for reductions in pipe sizes.

387
Drain-Waste-Vent Systems

The function of a plumbing drainage system is to collect and trans

port wastewater from the fixtures to the building sewer. The principal

driving force in gravity drainage waste systems is the potential energy

resulting from the water supply pressure, depth of water in fixtures

and slope of the drainage piping. Kinetic energy contribution to waste

transport is made in the immediate region following the change in pipe

direction from vertical to horizontal. The waste system flow is non- uniform and unsteady, a complex combination of three components (water,

solids and air) flow. Over the years, laboratory and field data have

been obtained to provide design loading tables for use in limiting the

flow through the drainage piping to levels which will not cause failure

of the water seal in the traps. Water-sealed traps are used to protect

the interior of the building from hazardous or noxious gases that may

be produced in the drainage sytem or sewer. Traps are essentially

water seals which permit the passage of water and waste solids into the

drainage system while blocking gaseous return into the building. The

wastewater does not generally fill the horizontal drains, with the

occasional exception of the piping immediately adjacent to the trap and

fixture. Main horizontal drainage lines are sized to run half full at

the expected peak flow rate; this safety factor, applied to protect

trap seals, accounts for uncertainties in design methodology with

multiple fixture loads, and installation variables (e.g., pitch of

pipes, smoothness of pipe surfaces, alignment of fittings). The full

understanding and development of solutions to the governing equations

of the fluid mechanics of partially filled pipe flow interactions with

solids and trap seals at fixtures within the interconnecting network of

pipes which comprise the vents and waste drainlines is still being

developed

Reductions in water usage may reduce the transport velocities in

horizontal drains below the generally accepted velocities of 0.6 m/s

(2 ft/s) minimum in drainage piping and impair the effectiveness of the

system. A 25 percent reduction in the velocity of the wastewater in

the piping immediately adjacent to the water closet was reported (15) as the result of changing from a customary water closet using 19 liters

(5 gallons) per operation (this includes water used to restore the trap

seal as well as the excess that may be wasted by overfill of the trap

seal) to a water-saving water closet using 11 liters (3 gallons) . The

increasing use of very low-volume water closets, because they reduce

the flow in sewers, might cause increased solids deposition and

septicity in sewers under some circumstances (16)

Detailed investigations which have established the basis of

generally accepted theory for current design criteria are reflected in

present model plumbing codes; they treat the specific requirements for

trap self -siphonage , stack venting, wet venting, and capacities of

stacks and horizontal drains (17,18,19,20). Improved design and

evaluation methods leading to reduced pipe sizes for water conservation

would provide other benefits for energy savings to the extent that

388
significant reductions in quantities of material required for con- struction provides corresponding savings for raw materials, manufacturer, transportation and handling. Resources conservation and

associated cost reductions that might be realized by the proper sizing

of piping to accommodate representative loads are significant.

Estimates of the cost savings from innovative designs (single-stack

or self-venting drainage) and reduced-size venting have been expressed

(21) as "up to 40 percent of the DWV piping cost," "potential savings

of the order of $60 per bathroom," and "up to $150 per living unit."

Estimates of the annual national reduction in construction costs from

an across-the-board 10 percent savings in the cost of water supply and

drainage systems, that might be possible from research on loads alone,

have approximated $500 million.

RESIDENTIAL WATER CONSERVATION - LABORATORY AND DEMONSTRATION PROGRAMS

The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is currently

sponsoring water conservation programs for laboratory research and

national demonstrations. The development and implementation of that

program was supported by the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) and the

Stevens Institute of Technology (SIT). The projects are responsive to

the national concerns for reduction in water usage and address many

issues identified in the position papers on future requirements for

plumbing and water conservation at the symposium of 1976 (3) . The

demonstration projects are being performed by Brown and Caldwell (22)

and the laboratory-based research conducted at NBS and SIT.

The goals of the water conservation programs are to establish the

basis for performance requirements and criteria to support acceptance

of low water usage fixtures, devices and plumbing systems that provide

acceptable levels of quality for health and safety and sanitary functions for water supply of quality for health and safety and sanitary

functions for water supply and wastewater drainage in residential

buildings. The plumbing investigations include the total building

water system, i.e., demonstrations and laboratory research for the

requirements of water supply distribution, devices, fixtures and

appurtenances, waste drainage branches, soil stacks and connections to

either sewers or on-site treatment facilities. Studies of incentives

for use and acceptance of water savings practices and economic analyses

for guidance in community decisions to implement water conservation

are included in the program. A user's manual to assist in achieving

lower water usage is being prepared. The objectives of the HUD

program includes.

a) Establish the essential technology measures (criteria) for water

conservation performance and determine realistic levels of water

consumption required for satisfactory operation of the installed

system. These measures and performance levels must relate the

functions and properties of the system and components to the

essential characteristics of the services needed by the user.

389
b) Develop reproducible, reliable test procedures, model laws and

mathematical models involving the key measures of -performance.

c) Provide recommendations for consensus performance standards

derived from laboratory test validations to gain acceptance by

appropriate regulatory bodies.

d) The development of acceptance protocols for submission of supporting data to approval authorities, including guidelines for interpretation of results to determine conformance with requirements.

e) Establish methodologies for acceptance inspection procedures and

installation standards for use by approval authorities.

f) Prepare rating system criteria for reducing water usage applicable

to HUD Minimum Property Standards requirements for extending the

existing available water supplies for dwellings.

g) Determine the effect on domestic water use of new reduced flow

rate requirements which were legislatively established for low

flow devices. Evaluate the economic and human factor impacts of

reduction on water requirements in residential applications.

h) Provide guidelines and information resources based upon objective

testing and derived results applicable to the legislative and

regulatory officials promulgating water reduction regulations.

i) Establish incentives for acceptance and continuation of water re- duction through use of education and feedback regarding potential

costs and resource benefits.

j) Provide the economic evaluation methods for decisions on water re- duction requirements through utility, community and consumer cost

benefits

Demonstration Projects

The three-year demonstration program is intended to develop field

data in different sections of the country from installations involving

water efficient devices and water system changes (such as reduction in

supply pressure, metering, etc.) in single and multifamily residences.

The demonstration in any category requires a sufficient number of

dwelling units/residences and connections to provide a suitable data

base for detailed evaluation as well as occupant behavior/satisfaction

and safety. The test demonstrations are designed to provide results

demonstrated locally with potentials for widespread application

throughout the municipalities and local jurisdictions of the U.S.

The installed plumbing products include new fixtures and devices

and/or retrofit components to existing buildings generally compatible

with existing plumbing systems. They are:

390
(i) Conventional - typically acceptable (higher) levels of water

usage fixtures and devices installed as components of the

plumbing systems in dwellings as a baseline for comparisons.

(ii) Currently available low water usage fixtures and devices

either currently marketed "accepted" water-saving components

or recognized within plumbing codes or HUD-MPS.

(iii) Innovative (available) advanced development products and

fixtures ready for introduction into the commercial market.

Appraisals are to be made for clarity and understanding of

installation instructions, durability, maintainability, repair,

cleanliness related to usage and appearance and requirements for

skilled plumber repairs or handyman repairs.

Other variables in water conservation measured to be evaluated

include:

At the building level -

• Installation of water meters

• Storage of rain water and special usage

• Dual piping for reuse of partially processed wastewater

• Landscaping with reduced water requirements

• Effluent flow quantities entering sewer connections

At the community level -

• Concepts, strategies for educational information and

dissemination thereof

• Demonstrations within subdivisions of reduced size water

supply distribution and waste sewer collection piping

(without violating fire protection water pressure and

supply requirements)

• Subsidized vs. nonsubsidized water savings incentives

• Evaluations of benefits on effluent load reductions with

respect to on-site treatment and public wastewater sewer systems

• Water supply and wastewater rate structures with incentives

for low water usage

• Economic benefit analyses of new practices

• The influence of regional and climatic condition representative of normally arid or normally adequate water areas

Laboratory Research Projects

The plumbing laboratory research investigations provide data, test

procedures and predictive modeling for design applications. The re- sults are expected to provide the basis for recommendations for plumbing standards, codes and rating systems for performance of low water

usage devices. Supporting investigations for acceptance or motivation

for reduced water usage and economic studies are included to evaluate

391
the impacts of water reductions. The establishment of a uniform basis

of performance requirements provides an incentive for manufacturers in

supplying plumbing products for low water usage in a national market

across the United States.

The scope of the projects are as follows:

1. Water Efficient Fixtures Technology - The investigations include

conventional and innovative fixture devices and components. The

laboratory results are to be applied in development of recommended

performance standards, test evaluation procedures (with specifications for accurate laboratory instrumentation) and draft guidelines for codes and practices.

2. Efficiency of Drainage Systems - Development of the detailed

analysis and test validation of the dynamics of transient multicomponent fluids/solids waste transport mechanisms (water, air

and solids) for conveying wastes through low flow fixtures,

branches and soil stacks. Prepare recommendations for new design

procedures and tables for reduced pipe sizing to provide adequate

wastewater sweeping velocities with reduced water flows.

Establish the basis for engineering solutions for installations

of pressurized drains, vacuum drainage and grey water sweep

Carrier transport.

3. Drainage, Waste, Vent Systems - Determine the impacts of reduced

water usage and provide compatibility requirements for maintaining

functional performance of existing plumbing/sewer connections with

expanded water conservation practices. Develop hydraulic design

relationships for horizontal and vertical stack interactions of

low-flow gravity drainage systems.

4. Demand for Water - The investigation is intended to provide a limited update of the binomial probability design/demand procedures based upon the "Hunter" model established four decades

ago (currently the accepted method as the basis of water supply

pipe sizing with adjustment by empirical factors) . The revisions

are to demonstrate effects of updated data base information and

load variability due to increased use of water consuming

appliances in dwellings which reduce flow rates.

5. Usage and Acceptability Factors - Evaluate the user (human factor)

requirements for acceptance of water conservation, implementation

strategies and utilization of equipment with low water flows.

Provide criteria for incentives and stimuli for maintaining

lowered water usage. Develop methods for economic decisions with

emphasis upon the cost parameters for potential benefits

associated with owner and community incentives.

Presentations from results of several projects on low-flow water

closets, solids waste transport mechanisms and decisions from economic

392
evaluations were made at workshop sessions of this conference. A re- duced flow water closet standard appears to be close to approval in the

Vitreous China Plumbing Fixture Panel (ANSI A112.19.2) and a recommen- dation for standard requirements for two-step flush mechanisms was made

to the Plastics Water Closet Committee (ANSI Z124.4) for their con- sideration.

CONCLUSIONS

The need for development of plumbing codes and standards which

advocate water conservation innovations requires continuing efforts.

Almost no industrial research efforts are focused on the "plumbed

system." The plumbing industry looks to government agencies to provide

the resource basis for technical information related to the performance

of systems. The diverse interests of the manufacturers involved in

proprietary research related to product developments generally inhibits

detailed data from becoming available to the voluntary standards

committees

Historically, most efforts in writing of plumbing codes have

emphasized design and installation of drainage-waste-vent systems with

reliance upon the occupant water supply requirements that have become

obsolete for water savings equipment and user demand loads. The re- search developments from laboratory and demonstration projects are expected to have impacts on revisions to the existing standards and

codes. Hydraulic performance levels gained by automatic control or hydraulic regulation of flow on devices and fixtures which can be

incorporated in manufactured products and required by plumbing codes

provides an effective means of implemeting community water conservation.

REFERENCES

1. Engineering Foundation Conference, Water Conservation - Needs and

Implementing Strategies, Franklin Pierce College, Rindge, New

Hampshire (July 1979)

2. National Conference - Water Conservation and Municipal Wastewater

Flow Reduction, Chicago, Illinois (November 1978), EPA

3. Galowin, L.S. and Debelius, J.R. (Editors), Water Supply and

Drainage in Buildings, National Bureau of Standards, NBS SP 553

(August 1979)

4. Recommended Minimum Requirements for Plumbing in Dwellings and

Similar Buildings. Report of Subcommittee on Plumbing of Building

Code Committee, National Bureau of Standards BH2 (1923)

5. Snyder, M. , Code Structure and Standardization in the United

States, pp. 193-205, in Proceedings Document (3) NBS SP 553,

(August 1979)

393
6. Recommended Minimum Requirements for Plumbing, National Bureau of

Standards BH13 (1928, revised 1931)

7. American Standard National Plumbing Code ASA A40. 8-1955, Minimum

Requirements for Plumbing, American Society of Mechanical

Engineers, New York, New York

8. Plumbing Manual, Report of Subcommittee on Plumbing. Central

Housing Committee on Research, Design and Construction, National

Bureau of Standards BMS 66 (1940)

9. Hunter, R.B., Methods of Estimating Loads in Plumbing Systems.

National Bureau of Standards BMS 65 (1940). (COM 73-10967/LK)

10. Hunter, R.B., Water-distributing Systems for Buildings. National

Bureau of Standards BMS 79 (1941) . (COM 73-10971/LK)

11. Konen, T. , Critical Review and Proposed Modifications of Hunter's

Model for Water Distribution System Design, ASPE Seventh Biennial

Plumbing Convention, Atlanta, Georgia (October 1980)

12. Wise, A.F.E., Croft, J., Investigation of Single Stack Drainage

for Multistory Flats. Journal Royal Sanitary Institute,

74 (9), pp. 797-826 (1954)

13. Wise, A.F.E., Drainage Pipework in Dwellings: Hydraulic Design

and Performance, DSIR, Bldg. Res. Station, London, England (1957)

14. Lillywhite, M.S.T., and Wise, A.F.E., "Towards a General Method

for the Design of Drainage Systems in Large Buildings," Building

Research Station (England) , Current Paper 27/69 (1957)

15. Konen, T. , and DeYong, R. , An Investigation of the Performance

and the Effects of Reduced Volume Water Closets on Sanitary

Drainage, Sewers, and Sewage Treatment Plants. Conference of

Water Conservation and Sewage Flow Reduction with Water-Saving

Devices, April 8-10, 1975, J.L. Keller Conference Center, The

Penn State U. , University Park, PA

16. Cole, C.A. , Impact of Home Water Saving Devices on Collection

Systems and Waste Treatment. Conference on Water Conservation

and Sewage Flow Reduction with Water-Saving Devices, April 8-10,

1975, J.O. Keller Conference Center, The Penn State U.,

University Park, PA

17. French, J.L., Stack Venting of Plumbing Fixtures, National Bureau

of Standards, BMS 118 (1950). COM 73-11014/LK

18. French, J.L., Eaton, H.N. and Wyly, R.S., Wet Venting of Plumbing

Fixtures, National Bureau of Standards, BMS 119 (1950).

COM 73-11016

394
19. Wyly, R.S. and Eaton, H.N., Capacities of Stacks in Sanitary

Drainage Systems for Buildings, National Bureau of Standards

Monograph 31 (1961) . COM 75-10045/LK

20. Wyly, R. S., Investigation of Hydraulics of Horizontal Drains in

Plumbing Systems; National Bureau of Standards Monograph 86 (1964)

COM 75-10046/LK

21. Wyly, R.S., Benazzi, R.V. , et al , Hydraulics of Gravity Drainage

Systems, p. 41 of (3)

395
APPENDIX A

NAPHCC National Association of Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors

1016 20th Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036

NBS National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

RMR Required Minimum Requirements

BH 13 - July 1923

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials

1916 Race Street

Philadelphia, PA 19103

ANSI American National Standards Institute

1430 Broadway

New York, New York 10018

ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers

345 E. 47th Street

New York, New York 10017

ASPE American Society of Plumbing Engineers

16161 Ventura Boulevard - Suite 105

Encino, California 19316

IAPMO International Association of Plumbing and Mechnical

Officials

5032 Alhambra Avenue

Los Angeles, CA 90032

BOCA Building Officials and Code Administrators Int., Inc

1313 E. 60th Street

Chicago, IL 60637

SBC Southern Building Congress

1116 Brown Marx Building

Birmingham, AL 35203

ASSE American Society of Sanitary Engineering

228 Standard Building

Cleveland, OH 44113

396
AWWA American Water Works Association

521 Fifth Avenue

New York, NY 10017

CS Commercial Standards, Commodity Standards Division

Office of Industry and Commerce

U.S. Department of Commerce

Washington, D.C. 20230

FSS Federal Supply Service

Standards Division- General Services Administration

Washington, D.C. 20405

NSF National Sanitation Foundation

Ann Arbor, MI 48106

PDI Plumbing and Drainage Institute

1018 N. Austin Boulevard

Oak Park, IL 60302

UL Underwriters' Laboratories, Inc.

207 E. Ohio Street

Chicago, IL 15420

MSS Manufacturers Standardization Society

420 Lexington Avenue

New York, N.Y. 10017

SPR Simplified Practical Recommendations

U.S. Department of Commerce

Washington, D.C. 20234

APPENDIX B

Commonly mentioned names of the model plumbing codes and standards

bodies are:

ANSI American National Standards Institute

ASPE American Society of Plumbing Engineers

ASSE American Society of Sanitary Engineers

ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials

IAPMO International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical

Officials

AWWA American Water Works Association

CS Commercial Standards

FSS Federal Supply Services

NSF National Sanitation Foundation

PDI Plumbing and Drainage Institute

UL Underwriters' Laboratories, Inc.

ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers

MSS Manufacturers Standardization Society

SPR Simplified Practical Recommendations

397

Local Perspectives-Programs/Initiatives

WATER CONSERVATION IN CALIFORNIA

Ronald B. Robie

THE NEED FOR A NEW FEDERAL WATER POLICY

Francis X. McArdle

LOCAL RESPONSE FOR OFFICIALS AND CONSUMERS

William H. Miller

WATER CONSERVATION IN CALIFORNIA

Ronald B. Robie, Director

Department of Water Resources

The Resources Agency, State of California

Sacramento, California

ABSTRACT

California's resource planning includes water conservation as a source of supply. By the year 2000, the State expects water savings

of about 1.5 million cubic dekameters per year. Department of Water

Resources (DWE) conservation activities are centralized in its Office

of Water Conservation (OWC) . Programs are in three major categories —

agricultural, urban, and in-school education. The largest urban program

is distribution of residential water conservation devices. By the end of

1982 all those living in homes built before water conserving fixtures became mandatory will be given devices. The Department works with other

state agencies to save water, develops water conserving landscape gardens, encourages water conserving pricing, has a grant program for

water system leak detection and works to build water conservation into

local planning. Elementary school programs train teachers and make

curriculum materials available. Education activities include a newsletter, drought and water conservation related reports and brochures.

The Department reports on comparative water conservation performances

of selected communities in the State.

Water conservation has been made an integral and vital element

of water resources planning by the State of California. We see it as our most economical source of additional supply, and one that almost

invariably results in savings of energy.

When I became director of the Department in 1975, I issued a water

management policy which included these points:

- Water resources already developed shall be used to the maximum

extent before new sources are developed.

- To maximize beneficial use, optimum application techniques and

processes for water conservation shall be used and waste shall be

avoided

- Water shall be reused to the maximum extent feasible.

401
This policy is buttressed by the State Constitution, which re- quires that "waste or unreasonable use... of water be prevented."

We have had an active conservation program since 1976, before

the 1976-77 drought — the most severe drought in the State's history.

The program is steadily increasing in importance and visibility.

During the past three years, we've spent more than $5 million

on conservation, and in broad terms we expect that by the year 2000

the State can have water savings that amount to about 1.5 to 1.8 million cubic dekameters (1.2 to 1.5 million acre-feet) of water per year.

This reflects our conviction that water conservation must become part

of our lives and must be practiced conscientiously in wet years as well as dry.

Because of our increasing levels of activity, about 16 months

ago I created the Office of Water Conservation (OWC) in the Department

to consolidate work in three major areas of conservation — urban,

agriculture, and education. The Office budget this fiscal year is

about $6 million and we now have about 30 persons on the staff.

One important step we've taken is to create an advisory committee

for our water conservation efforts made up of representatives of various constituencies in each area (water, industry, agriculture, education, and environmental interests).

We have found this committee very useful in keeping our thinking

and programs closer to reality. It now has 24 members and functions

both as a whole and in three subcommittees.

We have also created a local government advisory group to help

us tailor programs that can help planners incorporate water conser- vation practices on the city, county, and regional levels.

This 10-member group, which includes representatives of cities

and counties, regional water supply agencies, elected local government

officials and others, is helping compile a guidebook to help build

conservation goals and methods into the planning process.

While we have a number of programs to encourage the efficient

use of agricultural water in California, my focus today is on our urban

water conservation programs.

URBAN CONSERVATION

Our most heavily funded urban program is providing households

with water-saving devices for toilets and showers. We have made these

available to about a tenth of the State's 8 million households, and

plan by the end of 1982 to make them available to every residence built

before 1979. That was the year California laws and regulations re- quiring low-flush toilets and low-flow showerheads in new construction

402
went into effect. The Chief of our Office of Water Conservation will

discuss this particular program in depth this afternoon at the Case

Studies panel.

Under a July, 1980 executive order of Governor Edmund G. Brown,

Jr., each State agency must save water in its operations and help spread

the word about conservation where appropriate. The OWC works with

major water-using or water-use-influencing State agencies to cut down

on excessive water use. We have focused on the Department of Parks

and Recreation to reduce water use in park facilities, the Department

of Transportation on freeway landscaping and irrigation, the Office

of the State Architect on landscaping of new State buildings, and the

Department of General Services which is responsible for leasing many

State buildings and grounds. When major public agencies show their awareness of the need to use water wisely, it sets a good example for

the public. Needless to say, when a State agency appears to be wasting

water, it seriously damages our credibility.

LANDSCAPE SAVINGS

Nearly half of all residential water use in California is used

outdoors, mostly for landscape watering. We have created, with com- munity support, six model water conserving demonstration gardens in

the State to help show the possibilities and techniques.

The gardens are designed by our staff, the land is donated, and

the plants are provided free by nurseries. The gardens are built and

planted by members of the California Conservation Corps, a dynamic

group of young Californians whose accomplishments have ranged from

firefighting to distributing water conservation kits.

We place the gardens in heavily traveled areas such as near the

Rose Bowl in Pasadena, or at community centers. We have recently

joined forces with a major builder to plant low water use landscaping at

model homes to expand public education in this vital area.

In the next several months we will be commissioning field research

into the labor, energy, and water savings of low water-using landscapes

compared to conventional landscaping. We will also be supplementing

our very popular Bulletin 209 on low water-using plants with four more

publications — a commercial source book on low water-use plants, a guidebook for landscape architects on low water-use landscape designs,

curriculum material on drought-tolerant landscaping for California

universities and colleges, and a brochure entitled "The Nonthirsty

Book of Seeds," which will include seeds of drought-tolerant flowering

plants

One of our problems is convincing Californians that lush tropical

or eastern-style landscapes are not appropriate in arid and semiarid

climates such as ours. We are trying to show that low water-using

403
landscapes can be beautiful.

Complementary programs have included a symposium on the use of

rain storage cisterns as a supplementary water supply in high rainfall

areas, as well as discussions and reports on possibilities of fog catchments and the use of gray water — household water other than toilet

water — for landscape irrigation. While some of these measures may

seem unusual, we have found great interest in some parts of the State

that suffer chronic supply problems, and of course during drought and

dry year periods. A report on the symposium is in the Department's

Bulletin 213, "Small Scale Water Supply Systems," which will soon be

off the press.

PRICING AND METERING

We are analyzing water pricing structures and encouraging the

water supply industry to adopt policies that encourage conservation.

Many California consumers pay for their water either on a flat rate

(regardless of quantity used) or even on a declining block rate which

reduces the price as quantities increase. Neither of these offers

any incentive to reduce consumption and may, in fact, encourage waste.

While it is generally agreed that water meters encourage water

conservation, some parts of California are still unmetered.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT COOPERATION

As I mentioned earlier, we are — with the help of a steering

committee — writing a guidebook for local agencies that will include

model codes and ordinances to help planners integrate conservation

into city, county, and regional planning and enforcement processes.

Our conservation staff will take the guidebook — and an accom- panying slide show — on the road in a series of workshops to acquaint

planners and planning commissioners with the need and the methods.

In a sense, this is a continuation of a series of conferences

we held throughout the State during the 1976-77 drought to gain the

views of local agencies and local interests about conservation in both

government and industry.

From a State viewpoint, this illustrates a point that cannot be

stressed too strongly: Without the direct and continuing advice and

information from the local level, no program can be successful.

LEAK DETECTION AND REPAIR

This year we are beginning a multi-year $2 million grant program

for small and medium-sized publicly owned utilities for detecting leaks

in water distribution systems. This program, funded by our State Water

Resources Control Board (SWRCB) from $50 million in bonds approved

404
by California voters in 1978, will be split into two phases. The first

is research to determine the best method of leak detection, with two

cooperating agencies serving as experimental models to test approaches.

An advisory panel of water utility managers will help us with this

phase

Based on this effort we will set criteria for giving grants to

utilities to carry out leak detection programs; the grants will be

conditioned on agreement by participants to repair a certain percentage

of the leaks found.

This can be a significant conservation program. In California,

we estimate about 4 to 6 percent of water in urban systems is lost

through leaks. That would be as much as about 370,000 cubic dekameters

(300,000 acre-feet) of water per year.

IN-SCHOOL EDUCATION

Our in-school water conservation education program is another

important and long-range part of an attempt to develop a water con- serving ethic in the State. Targeted right now at the elementary

grades, the program attempts to develop an awareness of water as a resource and to show the importance of conservation. We have already

reached about 10 percent of the kindergarten through eighth grade population. By 2000 we expect to have fully integrated the information

and philosophy of water conservation into the State's public education

system and to be providing support for local agencies and schools on

a broad scale.

PUBLIC EDUCATION

I believe it is important to have a ready supply of sound information materials available to the public. We get our materials out

through fairs, exhibits, and cooperating water industries and associations. We have bumper stickers, brochures on a variety of subjects,

and, of course, our "save water" (dhowe agua3 en espanol) button.

I wear mine through good and bad weather. In fact, in 1978 — a wet

year — a TV commentator remarked that he saw "rust on it."

We also have a number of drought-related reports. Our mainstay

is Bulletin 198, "Water Conservation in California," published in 1976

and which we hope to update in the next year or so. In addition, we have a comprehensive report on our 1977 pilot residential water con- servation program, Bulletin 191; three reports on the 1976-77 drought,

a basic review and two updates; Bulletin 206, "Impact of Severe Drought

in Marin County, California," and reports of proceedings of a January

1976 conference on urban conservation, a June 1976 conference on agricultural water conservation, and a July 1977 conference on industrial

water allocation and conservation.

405
We also produce a conservation newsletter about every two months

for about 4,000 readers, and have specifically targeted pamphlets and

leaflets and public service announcements for television and radio.

Over the next several months we will send a special mailing to

all water purveyors in the State, supplying each of them with a package of sample materials which they can order from us at cost. We will

also have a lending library of public service announcement tapes and

examples of utility bill stuffers for use by the water industry.

We have recently reported on the results of conservation efforts

of 17 California cities and communities in the immediate post-drought

years to show the public which cities are doing well and which are not doing so well. Making comparisons is often tricky, because variables such as weather can strongly influence the amount of water used

from year to year. We try to eliminate those variables in our analyses, and I think it is important to let the public know where they — and their water agencies — stand in relation to others.

GOVERNOR'S EXECUTIVE ORDER ON CONSERVATION AND RECLAMATION

In July of last year Governor Brown signed a bill authorizing

construction of new water storage and conveyance facilities for the

State Water Project. At the same time, he issued an executive order

requiring our Department to develop a water management plan for the

State Water Project that includes ways in which water can be conserved

and reclaimed. The order also requires the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to impose water conservation measures on all water

rights holders and agencies receiving grants for clean water treatment plants.

We teamed up with the SWRCB to jointly take major new conservation

initiatives, including these:

The SWRCB will condition new wastewater facilities planning

grants on the development, public disclosure, and implementation

of a water conservation plan. DWR will provide technical assistance in preparing the plan.

DWR and SWRCB will investigate cases of "waste and unreasonable

use of water," which is illegal under the State Constitution.

Enforcement will be taken administratively, and judicially where

appropriate

— The SWRCB will require water conservation plans of certain water

rights holders and new applicants for water rights. DWR will

provide technical assistance to those required to prepare such

plans

SWRCB and DWR will prepare guidelines for urban and agricultural

406
water conservation plans and a water conservation reference manual documenting water conservation measures, examples of implementation, anticipated costs and benefits.

DWR is conditioning all grants and loans provided through our Safe Drinking Water Program on water conservation measures such

as distribution of devices. Also, where cost effective, we are requiring installation of water meters.

CONCLUSION

Much of what we have been learning about water conservation in

California is exportable, and, as the water shortages along the East

Coast worsened this year, we have shared information and advised on problems where we have some knowledge.

Obviously, some of our programs and materials are geared to the

semiarid climate characteristic of much of California, but many of

them — particularly those dealing with urban and industrial conser- vation — can be applied broadly across the country.

We are eager to share our knowledge with others, and also eager

to learn from you as we all increase our emphasis on conservation.

407
-

-
THE NEED FOR A NEW FEDERAL WATER POLICY

Francis X. McArdle, Commissioner

New York City Department of Environmental Protection

New York, New York

Federal water policy, such as it has been, has addressed the supplydemand nexus very narrowly, focusing almost exclusively on developing new

supplies for agricultural and natural resource exploitation in the South

and the far West. That policy must change focus to meet national needs

as well as regional needs. And it must address the demand side of the

equation as well as the supply side. Most cities haven't had the advantage of a near-by federal project to help them reduce their own new

supply costs. And there has been no help with demand-side issues.

Systematic replacement and rehabilitation can offset new supply needs.

Conservation management is another tool that must be exploited along

with reuse approaches. There has been little federal help here. There

must be a new federal water policy. It must meet all urban needs as well

as rural ones. But ultimately it must be a program that focuses program

implementation and direction at the local level. Any other program focus

will result in delays in implementation; will result in a failure to

develop maximum local consensus; and will ignore the critical expertise

at the local level.

There is a drought affecting most of this nation today. It spreads

from the Northeast to the West. It affects Florida as well as Colorado.

This drought presents us an opportunity to discuss and debate national

water policy in the most appropriate context, the time when all of us must do with less. The drought presents us an opportunity that we cannot

miss. So often in the past at the end of droughts we have relaxed. We

have not gone forward to build upon those experiences. Today we must

build rational policies and programs for all America to deal with our water problems.

The need for such a rational, national approach to water policy is

most clearly evident at the federal level. We have had four years of

debate and difference. We have had task force approaches, attempts at consensus building, and studies of specific issues with a narrow focus.

Now we must build policies that contribute, through both planning and

implementation, to what must be our common goal, a goal that must always

be restated: national excellence in the use of our water. That is what

we must strive for and our efforts must focus both in the Congress as

409
well as in the executive. We cannot attempt to change water policy by

administrative fiat.

The debate in the efforts of many agencies over the last four years

must move forward. The issues that must be addressed are clear. First

of all, there must be a national program. If we cannot build programs

that satisfy all regions in the differing elements that affect their

supply/demand equations for both quantity and quality, then there will

be little progress made. There will be no movement towards our goal of

national excellence in water use. There can no longer be sectional

discrimination in our policies, no more emphasis on development in one part of the country, be it sunbelt or snowbelt, to the exclusion of

others

Secondly, there can no longer be sectoral discrimination in federal

water supply programs in both the development and the pricing of new

supply. There is no longer a rationale for treating agricultural water

development differently than one treats the development of new supply

for municipal and industrial uses. There should be full cost pricing so that real economic cost/benefit analyses can be undertaken. I was some- what surprised to find the Department of Agriculture was not actively

represented at this conference. They have a vital role in national

water policy both through their focus on agricultural development and the

very active programs that they operate through Farmers Home Administration for the smaller communities in this country.

Thirdly, the focus of any national water policy must be local and

cooperative. The need for continuing effort to develop new technology

and to further our national education about water policy was made very

clear at this conference. It is in conferences like these that the

exchange of information and ideas makes improvement in the efficient use

of our water possible. But that can only happen when local political

institutions and local elected officials believe enough to build a local

consensus. They must be satisfied that it is worth their while to participate actively on these issues. And they will do so only if their

interests are satisfied and their participation is real. Ultimately

siting decisions, local financial participation, and the web of opposition and support must be resolved in local political institutions. It

is impossible for any distant government, be they federal or state, to

impose in this day and age choices upon localities that cannot be supported by that locality. By necessity that means the giving up of much

control and authority and power to local government. That is not bad

when it results in projects that really do have a broad local consensus.

And finally in any national water policy the supply and demand sides

of our equation must be treated equally in both focus and financing.

The tendency in the past has been to deal only with new supply, to see new supply as the only solution to our dilemma. That is, by the very

existence of this conference, no longer satisfactory to everyone. The

needs of older cities for help in rehabilitating systems, saving water

to be used for additional supply, should be treated equally with a need

for additional supply for new urbanizing areas throughout the country.

410
Saving water through a rehabilitation of the system can be just as powerful a solution to the problem as the development of a new dam or reservoir. There clearly should not be any financial bias in any

national water policy towards new supply solutions alone.

Ultimately conservation of such a vital resource must be at the

heart of any program. It is implicit in the need to rehabilitate

systems as much as it would be in structuring new supply. It is very

clear that conservation is more than just fixtures and education for

demands side management. We have to look at and aggressively pursue:

land use issues, end use management through technology and thematic

education, and increasingly match end use needs with quality objectives.

Conservation really means system and resource management and it has to

be a cornerstone of any national policy. We can no longer afford to

waste such a precious resource.

I would like to take a minute to speak specifically of one area

that national policy has neglected too often in the past and that is

urban water supply needs. I was proud to serve as a staff aide to the

Mayor of the City of New York when he sat on President Carter's Urban

Water Supply Subcommittee. The research efforts which were undertaken

by that group have brought the needs of urban water supply much more in

focus. It is very clear that over the next decade $80 billion must be

invested in urban water supply systems to provide adequate replacement

of existing systems, to meet new supply needs, and to provide for en- hanced water quality. If one were to double the rates the people now

pay for water over that period, it would still leave 20 percent of the

water urban systems unable to meet their capital financing needs. As I have often said, when 20 percent of our housing stock was in trouble we

saw the need to craft a federal housing program. I think if we fail to

deal with this issue, most assuredly in a decade or two many Americans

will have lost what is one of the most precious resources this country

provides today—an adequate supply of potable, healthful water. If we

fail to deal with the issues of urban water supply, particularly in

those systems where local financing cannot make all of the difference at

this time in raising capital needs, then all the end use conservation

efforts that we have made in recent years, and hope to make through

conferences such as this, will be lost.

There is one clear federal role that must be preserved. I am

most disappointed to see the Reagan administration reducing one of the

most important elements of any national water policy, the federal leadership role for research and development. Without aggressive leadership

and financing of research and development, we will not be able to reach

our goal of national excellence. It is difficult for individual water

systems to finance the kinds of research in conservation system management in use matching with quality that is needed to maximize the use of our resource people. I am very happy with the efforts that have been

made in the past by such organizations as the Office of Water Research

and Technology (OWRT) , even though I may have disagreed with the specific

direction in which they went, because the very process of research and

development raises questions that lead to answers that will benefit

411
us all. This is one area I believe where the Reagan administration's

policies have failed. \

In the coming months there will be much ferment about national

water policy. The forums for discussion will come. I urge everyone

at this conference and throughout this country to participate actively

in the development of a national water policy. We cannot let another

four years go by without programmatic direction that can lead us into

the next decades.

412
LOCAL RESPONSE FOR OFFICIALS AND CONSUMERS

William H. Miller, Manager

Denver Water Department

Denver, Colorado

As chairman of the Water Utility Council of the American Water

Works Association and by association with other water utility managers from around the country, I have learned that conservation is perceived differently in various parts of the nation. In the Rocky Mt.

West, the goal is to catch runoff from the mountains in the Spring and

"conserve" it by storing it in reservoirs for use the rest of the

year. In some Coastal states, the goal is to conserve fresh ground

water by preventing saltwater intrusion. In some older Eastern sea- board cities, a key conservation concern is renovation of antiquated,

deteriorating underground piping systems. In major river basins and

the Great Lakes area, where supply is no problem, demand for water

conservation might well be countered with the question, "Why?" Therefore, it is difficult to mount a nationwide, federally endorsed con- servation program. Perhaps the common denominator is an economic one:

does it make dollars—as well as sense—to conserve?

MR. CHAIRMAN, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: As Manager of the Denver Water

Department and a native of this rapidly growing city, it is my privilege to add my welcome to this vibrant city to those of you who have

come from around the nation to discuss the very vital question of water

conservation. I am also fortunate in serving as chairman of the Water

Utility Council of the American Water Works Association, a position

that brings me into contact with other water utility managers across

the country

In this position, I have come to appreciate the problems and the

differences in problems faced by the various water utilities. There

are some very large differences in the nature and charge given to the

60,000 water utilities that supply the human needs of the nation. Of

those 60,000 water utilities, 50,000 of them serve populations of 2,500

or less. Thirty-eight thousand of these water utilities are private,

investor-owned entities serving some 20 to 25 percent of the nation's

population. Seventy-five to 80 percent of the nation's population re- ceives its water service from 8 percent of the nation's water utilities,

the majority of them publicly owned.

413
From this wide divergence of sizes, varying conditions under which

each of these systems operates, and the diverse nature of raw water

supply systems, it is easy to understand the different meanings given

to the term "water conservation" by these utilities. All 'of them,

however, historically have urged wise or careful use of the water they

supply to their customers.

Into this mix of differences we can also add the climatological

variations from one region of the country to another. The 100th meridian, the traditional dividing line between the Eastern and Western

United States, serves to illustrate these climatological differences.

Sixty percent of the nation's land mass lies west of the 100th meridian,

but it receives only 25 percent of the precipitation that falls on the

nation. In many of the major cities of the Midwest and East, 40 to 50

inches of precipitation annually is not uncommon. Here in Denver precipitation is limited to less than 15 inches annually.

The very light precipitation we experience here, coupled with the

seasonal nature of that precipitation, requires a specialized approach

to water conservation. Because the water we use throughout the year

is available only during the few, short weeks of runoff from melting

snows in the mountains, we must capture and store that water in res- ervoirs with sufficient capacity to meet year-round demand with wide

safety margins to compensate for wet and dry year cycles. It is often

said here in the semi-arid West that the greatest conservation device

known to man is a reservoir.

In Western cities such as Denver there is a unique characteristic

of our life style that is manifested in the unusually great pride we

take in the lawns, gardens, trees and parks that set most of our cities

apart from the arid or semi-arid land that surrounds them. There are many reasons for this. Western cities were settled and developed by

people who came from the lush and verdant East. They brought with

them the amenities of greenery that are characteristic of cities in

the East and elsewhere. Another reason is more practical in nature.

Higher altitude and summertime afternoon relative humidities down in

the 5 to 15 percent range require our cities to be "green oases" offering some escape from the relentless, searing sun. Recently, some horticulturists in Denver calculated significant increases in both

daytime and nighttime temperatures plus increases in the amount of

dust in the air, if our area were to adopt a total "dryscape" urban

environmental plan.

The reasons for the inordinate pride taken by Westerners in their

lawns and gardens may be as old as mankind itself. In Isaiah, 40, verses 18 and 19, reference is made to man's need of water in dry

places. The verses read, "I will make rivers flow on barren heights,

and springs within the valleys. I will turn the desert into pools of

water, and the parched ground into springs. I will put in the desert

the cedar, the acacia, the myrtle and the olive." This Biblical description may have been the origin of the Western Pioneer's passion

414
for making the desert bloom and transforming it from a hostile environment to one that is hospitable, productive and livable.

Because nearly 40 percent of the average Denver household's annual

water use is in outside irrigation, this is a primary area of conser- vation efforts. The challenge here is finding an acceptable balance

between the legitimate needs of maintaining a pleasing and livable

urban environment and the legitimate needs of conserving precious

water resources. As a result, the Denver Water Department, in its

Institutionalized Water Conservation Program , is recommending a com- promise in future landscape design between traditional plantings and

those requiring little or no water. We have been interested in re- cent research conducted on the question of how much water is required

to sustain a bluegrass lawn in our semi-arid climate.

In other areas of the country, where precipitation is considerably

heavier than here, other forms of conservation take on a greater significance. Shower and sink flow restrictors, toilet tank dams, and

more water-efficient appliances take on a relatively greater importance in those places where the outside use of water for irrigation

requires a far lesser share of typical annual household consumption

than it does here. While these techniques are important in an overall conservation program, even in Western cities, the water savings

from their use is relatively less than from those techniques addressed

to Western outside irrigation.

In Coastal cities of the nation, "conservation" can take on entirely different meanings. With some of these urban areas depending on

underground water supplies, conservation of groundwater may mean

development of systems to prevent the intrusion of saltwater into the

freshwater supply. In Orange County, California, for example, advanced

treatment is given to wastewater before it is injected into the ground

to form a barrier against the intrusion of saltwater from the

Pacific

On the Eastern seaboard, many great urban centers see the repair

of aging water distribution systems, some of them a century or more

old, as an important element in conservation. In some places it has

been reported that as much as 40 to 50 percent of the water that

passes through treatment plants is lost before reaching customers'

taps. The tightening up of these systems would amount to a significant reduction in demand on raw water resources and treatment

facilities

The majority of America's great inland urban centers are located

on or near large sources of water supply. The industrial cities of

the Great Lakes Region and centers of commerce and trade along the

Ohio and Mississippi River Systems are good examples. These cities

owe their origins to the availability of an abundant supply of water.

Conservation programs undertaken in these cities, in the name of con- servation only, would probably be met with the legitimate question,

415
"Why?"

There is a vast difference between developing a conservation ethic

for energy supplies and water. Unlike oil, natural gas and coal, water

is generally a renewable resource. It is being pointed out with increasing frequency that the world's supply of water is still the same

as it was during the time of Christ. It's a matter of location.

Where groundwater is "mined" from underground aquifers, there is a growing concern about the amount of water taken from these supplies

and the inability of the aquifers to recharge through natural means.

In these areas, the term water conservation takes on still another

meaning and is accompanied by a sense of deep concern and urgency

among those whose lives depend on this source of water.

All of these factors, the differences in sizes and missions of the

60,000 water utilities throughout the nation, the differing nature of

precipitation patterns between East and West, the different ways individual communities use water, the abundance of water resources available to many large urban centers, require individual approaches to

water conservation. A program designed to save water in Denver may

be meaningless in Hackensack or Seattle because of the different ways

people use water. A conservation program may not be needed at all in

Milwaukee or Minneapolis. These differences add a great deal of com- plexity to attempts to declare a uniform, national water conservation

policy. They will hobble attempts to implement a uniform nationwide

program, and they run the risk of creating a credibility gap for those

utilities serving areas with abundant water supplies.

An effective national water conservation program, it seems, must

be based on a common denominator that is understood by all water users.

In the face of the great diversity of situations, the common denominator of economics may be the one that offers a universal incentive for

water conservation. In addressing the nation's water users with a call to conserve water, invoking conservation simply for conservation's

sake or "because it's the thing to do" will produce meager results.

Lately, it seems, even a crisis may not produce great enough voluntary

water savings to overcome the crisis. The emergency regulations,

heavy fines and strict enforcement needed in some areas to force con- servation illustrates the nature of the problem.

Development of an effective, voluntary conservation program in

those areas where such a program is indicated is basically a communications and marketing challenge. The consumer must first understand

and agree with the need to conserve. The economic incentive of con- servation must address the question, "what's in it for me?" If the answer is real dollar savings on the water bill, then an incentive for

water conservation exists. In this regard some water utilities will

have a difficult time demonstrating sufficient savings to make con- servation efforts worthwhile. Despite the effects of rampant inflation over the past few years, water remains a relatively inexpensive

416
commodity in most communities. Many major utilities are collecting,

storing, treating and delivering water to their customers' taps for

around 15 to 20 cents a ton. Under these circumstances, large water

savings are needed to produce moderate dollar savings for the customer.

If inflationary pressures continue to mount and those water utilities which must support themselves through customer charges only are forced to raise rates, then the economic incentive becomes stronger.

But the use of rates as a tool to force conservation, especially in areas with adequate water supplies, raises still many more questions

about the fairness of that approach to a water utility's customers.

We are meeting at a time when national concern about water is high.

Some national figures are likening the dry conditions we have been

experiencing to the energy crisis. There are dire predictions of a major shift in our weather patterns from a relatively stable situation

to one of radical changes from dry to wet cycles. We are viewing with

alarm the rapid depletion of ground water supplies in several areas

of the nation and the toxic waste contamination found in other areas.

In these problem areas there is no question about the need of effective conservation practices and long-range planning and programs to

overcome specific problems.

These, however, are localized or area problems requiring individual solutions and should be pursued by the people who are closest to

the problem. In some of these areas, the failure to develop effective

conservation practices and programs needed to assure adequate

future water supplies could drastically affect the economies of

these areas

In these situations, it does make both dollars and sense to con- serve rapidly depleting water supplies. It also makes sense and dollars to develop the water resources needed to strengthen, maintain

and improve local economies. However, there is no universal program

that can be all things to all people throughout the nation. The needs

of water-short areas are not the same as those areas blessed with abundant supplies.

While conservation can be an important step in reducing demand on some municipal systems for specific periods of time, it cannot, in

the long run, serve as a substitute for the development of adequate

water supplies to meet the needs of the people served by these systems.

Possibly the best conservation practice would be better utilization of the water the nation receives in the form of precipitation.

According to a recent Newsweek article, 92 percent of the precipitation that falls on the nation either evaporates immediately or runs off to the oceans unused. Putting some of this water to beneficial use may represent one of the great conservation challenges of the future.

417

Case Histories-Experiences

with Solutions

A FUTURE LOOK - WHAT ARE THE UNKNOWNS?

Jerome B. Gilbert

APPRAISAL OF 1978 CONFERENCE CASE HISTORY:

DO THE BENEFITS ENDURE?

John M. Brusnighan

CONSERVATION IN A NONCRISIS ENVIRONMENT - TOWNSHIP OF

EAST BRUNSWICK, NEW JERSEY

L. Mason Neely, Michael J. Opaleski, Theodore B. Shelton, Ph.D., and Dennis Palmini, Ph.D.

CASE STUDY - IN-SCHOOL WATER CONSERVATION EDUCATION

PROGRAM

Suzanne Butterfield

CASE STUDY - DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDENTIAL WATER SAVING

DEVICES

Suzanne Butterfield

RESULTS OF A PEAK MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR TUCSON, ARIZONA

Gene E. Cronk

WATER CONSERVATION EFFORTS IN RURAL AREAS

A.R. Rubin

WATER CONSERVATION/FLOW REDUCTION IN FACILITIES PLANNING

FOR SALT LAKE COUNTY

Gerald H. Kinghorn

A FUTURE LOOK - WHAT ARE THE UNKNOWNS?

Jerome B. Gilbert, President, American Water Works Association

General Manager, East Bay Municipal Utility District

Oakland, California

WHAT ARE THE UNKNOWNS?

f As a born-again utility manager, 1 will try to reflect some of my

renewed opinions and experiences as they relate to water conservation.

Being a president of AWWA has given me a chance to see a wide variety

of utility practices and to talk to many different people in the

utility, consulting, and manufacturing sectors, as well as in

government

1 was doing my duty for the AWWA on the Island of Kaui , where

there was a meeting of the Hawaiian Water Works section. They were discussing safe yield and, as most of you probably know, the average

annual rainfall on portions of that island, which i s at the western

extremity of the United States, is about 120 inches. Yet there are areas that have very significant water shortages either due to the

lack of capital investment or to treatment and quality problems.

When 1 think about the national crisis that Frank McCardle and

others are facing in the media and in reality during the last few

months, 1 was reminded of a call 1 received from a major network TV

program. They said, "Tell us what we are going to do about this

national water crisis. For the first time we are experiencing a shortage throughout the country and it is obviously a problem of

national proportion." 1 said, "What do you mean for the first time?

We have been facing water crises that, although not perceived on a national scale, have been in existence since we developed this

Nation." This is nothing new. If you look at the history of water

development in all of the great cities, particularly in the arid

Southwest, everything was done in crisis, and we approach all our water problems that way. However, this crisis mentality in the long run makes it hard to achieve water conservation and efficient use.

The character of, and attitudes toward, water use vary throughout

the country. Each one of you tends to have a water-use concept or attitude, the correct one, which should be applied everywhere. There

421
are, however, many factors that affect efficient use, including eco- nomic conditions, geographic conditions, lifestyles, desires, attitudes, environmental conditions, environmental preferences, and

willingness to sacrifice. This wide range is reflected in the

activities of the AWWA, particularly its preparation of a water

conservation handbook.

All of us are trying to change attitudes toward water use, attitudes that have developed over a long period of time and ones that are essentially institutionalized. The great water resource development

projects of the last century have been built into our laws and customs

and have created a preference for water use or, rather, priority for

water use, which is accompanied by a low-cost water system. This is

particularly true in irrigated agriculture, but also exists in other areas where we built the great urban water systems with very dear

dollars, and today are repaying that debt with very cheap dollars.

The water rates, therefore, are low by definition. We now have this

built-in "subsidy" that we are working against because we believe that resource use should be based on today's costs and today's attitudes.

These water systems are very long lived, although we would have liked

some of them to have more capacity and to have lasted longer than they

have. Our objective has been to build nearly permanent water systems

and yet we are demanding instantaneous response to changing the

public's attitudes toward water conservation and the use of water.

As we moved into the environmental era of the 1960's, faced with

this rather rigid system of water supply and development that affected

our use patterns, we adopted new sets of rules. These grew out of the

environmental impact process, which caused us to look at efficient use

of water for its own sake and not because it really saved any money.

Then the energy crisis hit and that launched us into what one might

refer to as "the Great Water Conservation Crusade of the late 1970' s,"

in which the Federal Government tried to apply some national standards

through a variety of techniques such as permit conditions, treatment

plant grants, and water supply development projects. This met with

the disapproval by local government and industry because, unlike the

national sewer program that was relatively new and could adjust to new

rules, the water systems are all run by established entities with

established revenue programs and methods of doing things. It was very

hard for them to accept national standards, particularly when they

perceived their local situations as being unique. They recognized the

dramatic changes in cost and sometimes the need for prudent use, but were restricted by established rules, procedures, and cost allocation

methods.

In 1977, 1978, and 1979, politicians and officials tried to solve

the problem in the context of impending doom. We had many local water

shortage problems, with the Federal Government desiring an immediate

maximum regulatory effect. This led to the counterreaction that we

are beginning to witness in the new administration. At the risk of

speculation in this area, I would say that it is unfortunate that we go between these extremes when it applies to water conservation or any

422
other resource matter. Conservative and liberal conservationists show

a sensible and justified concern for efficient water use, and we all

want to achieve our goals just as rapidly. But the crash program

approach of the last decade, using maximum regulations and employing

all the tools available, inevitably provoked the current counterreaction. The philosophy that the role of Federal and State governments should be minimized, or eliminated, in these areas and that the

local people should decide what to do is a reality that we must come

to grips with. We want to move ahead in providing the tools and

technology that local utilities can recommend to their users as viable

water-saving devices. We want to achieve some progress in the

efficient use of water, without necessarily requiring that progress by

law.

This conference has been addressing the need for information. We

need more information about effective pricing and its effect on water

use, particularly for nonresidential uses such as agriculture and

industry. They have tended to become more efficient in their water

use because of the pollution control regulations, but we need to know

a lot more about the cost and water quality factors that affect the

quantity used. We need to share the information that is being developed on specific residential water uses. This is the most expensive

form of use we have, even though its quantity is small. In fact, we spend more resources in trying to manage and deliver residential water

effectively than we do for any other use. We have had some excellent

studies done at Johns Hopkins, and there are studies underway now,

such as the HUD demonstration program, which will hopefully, within

the next 3 or 4 years, provide us with additional information on this

subject

The AWWA, through its Research Foundation, which is a semi

independent arm of the Association, is trying to put together the

first continuing scientific and technical information exchange among

utilities. Initial sponsorship was given by the Washington Suburban

Sanitary Commission. We have four or five other major utilities,

hopefully including the East Bay Municipal District, that are also

going to contribute. Even though we have not yet instituted the new Foundation dues structure that we are proposing, and we have not

received any major Federal assistance, we are moving ahead with a major program designed to share technical information among utilities.

We have a lot of institutional problems that need to be overcome. The best way to do this is by encouraging local utilities to

acquire the information on their system usage so that they can make

their own decisions to improve efficiency. Any implicated threat of a requirement will reduce the chance of success, particularly with an investor-owned utility that has an established rate schedule subject

to approval by a State utility commission. You can imagine the

response they would receive if they were to approach that utility

commission, saying that they anticipated a reduction in per capita use and wanted an increase in the unit cost of water in order to offset

423
it. This fact should be considered when utilities are criticized for

not doing their fair share in implementing water conservation: Adequate revenues must be assured first; then, partly as a result of

increased rates, less water will be wasted. v

I previously mentioned the AWWA handbook. It reflects the

institutional problems that we have had in getting utilities comfortable with the idea of giving a priority to water conservation. In

California we do not have that problem, and on the Eastern Seaboard

the problem is certainly less than it was; but the problem still

exists. The handbook is in final draft and is being evaluated by the

review committee. We hope to have it available at the time of the

Centennial Conference in St. Louis; if not, then shortly thereafter.

AWWA publishes many items, and if everybody had to agree with everything we published, we probably would not publish anything. For

example, there are people who object to a pipe standard for asbestos

cement or PVC pipe and would never use it in their system, yet we have

standards for those things. Despite our diverse membership, AWWA must

put water conservation in the same category.

As we look at the effect of these educational efforts, we must

evaluate how a utility arrives at a water management decision. It is

essentially a part of water resources planning and not a separate

issue. AWWA's policies emphasize this. The way to ensure the success

of a program with the utility is to incorporate the conservation techniques into the water management program, rather than identifying them as a separate effort. In that way, new water supplies (including the

risks involved in developing them, and their resultant yields) as well

as new water conservation efforts are measured against the risks

involved in taking a shortage and the resulting public's response. At

East Bay we have had what we hope is a permanent savings of about 12

percent, resulting from our conservation measures during the drought.

We are reasonably confident that we can increase that figure by 3 or 4

percent without any major effort, simply by emphasizing public education. We probably can get up to 25 percent with some additional

effort, particularly in landscape irrigation. Beyond that point,

particularly in a nondrought period, there will be difficulties; the

key issue in our future planning is determining where the balance

point is. The sooner this concept is recognized, the more likely

that, on a nationwide basis, we can improve the efficiency of water

use.

Let me just emphasize a few things in closing. The emphasis on

the regulatory approach should be limited. I hope it will be limited

in the future because I think we will make more progress that way.

There need to be more meetings of this type and perhaps regional in

character. An increased emphasis on the regional sharing of existing

water supplies is vital, with less emphasis being placed on certain

fixed or standard objectives for water conservation. We need to continue to expand water research. This is an initial effort, and others

who have had occasion to be associated with the Reagan administration,

while in office in California, know that in the early phases their

424
emphasis was on a comprehensive type of economy without selective

analysis. Within a relatively short period of time, however, that

attitude gave way to a more practical and pragmatic approach; T hope

this will happen in this case as well. The AWWA will be working on

its expanded research program, as will others. There was a bill last

year, introduced by a Congressman from New York, designed to set up an independent water research institute. AWWA hopes that it will be

allowed to take on that task.

In regard to pricing and subsidies for water conservation, it is

generally believed that the cost of water is the key factor in providing for efficient use. We can employ new technologies, educate the

public, etc., but in the end, if the cost is high, as is currently the case with energy, the result will be a substantial reduction in con- sumption. I think we need to move toward a more realistic cost situation. I was reminded of the different philosophies when the East Bay

board members were trying to get the new members of the community to

carry a heavier burden for the cost of water system improvement. This

is a struggle that takes place within all systems. The idea was to

increase the charges to new developers and to reduce the water rates

or to reduce the connection charges within the interior of the

system. Which is more important though, to price for water conservation, or to make new development carry its own weight? If you have

different sets of objectives, you have to decide what your ultimate

goal is. I think that that becomes a local decision and not one that

is absolute on a national scale. We need to sponsor more research in

these areas but, more importantly, we must have an increase in the

exchange of information. I am convinced that many of the utilities

have the data available in their files that could be analyzed to

acquire further understanding of such subjects as: pressure and water

use, water use by different economic classes, and acceptable water use levels.

As I have mentioned previously, water savings in the utility context must be evaluated on a geographical basis. We have to develop

long range plans and not accept short-cut solutions.

The balance between achieving efficient use through rates or policies is a critical factor. When we can promote policies that will

reduce water use and, at the same time, price it realistically, we will have achieved more efficient use on a national basis. The outcome, however, should we continue the crisis mode of operation, will

probably be to weaken the water conservation movement and perpetuate

the inefficient use of resources. Rather, we should try to resolve

these issues by working together.

In conclusion, I would urge the utilities and government officials to attempt to develop State and Federal programs that recognize

the local needs and encourage localities to intelligently plan their own water conservation programs.

425

APPRAISAL OF 1978 CONFERENCE CASE HISTORY: DO THE BENEFITS ENDURE

John M. Brusnighan

Assistant General Manager

Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission

Washington , D . C

In 1978, Bob McGarry, General Manager of the Washington Suburban

Sanitary Commission (WSSC) , appeared at this conference and presented

the story of the WSSC's water and sewer conservation-oriented rate

structure. I am here today to update WSSC's experience and answer the

question, "Do the benefits endure?" To set the response in proper perspective, I would like to give you some background on who we are, tell

you what we have done, give you my answer to the question, and, equally

as important, let you draw your own conclusion regarding our success.

The WSSC is an independent water and sewer authority set up by the

State of Maryland. We provide service to the two Maryland Counties,

Montgomery and Prince George's, immediately adjacent to the Nation's

Capital. We serve a population of about 1.2 million, which represents

240,000 accounts. We are currently supplying an average of about 130

million gallons of water a day and operate and/or share seven sewage

treatment plants.

In the early 1970's, there were three reasons why a water conser- vation program was essential for the WSSC: a pending water/sewer shortage, a developing "conservation ethic," and a planning stalemate over future water demands and resultant sewer capacities.

The first reason is obvious; the other two are more subtle but

equally as important. These three reasons for our decision are interrelated and will be discussed in that order.

A series of local and Federal studies were initiated as a result

of the droughts in the 1960's and revealed that in the Washington, D.C.,

metropolitan region, water consumption and population were increasing,

but the dependable water supply was limited. There were many projections as to how serious the problem would be. Serious water shortages

by the 1980 's were predicted. The following chart shows a typical

proj ection.

427
Washington, D.C. , Metropolitan Region

Potomac River Supply Versus Demand

Year

Projected

Population

(million)

Per Capita

Consumption

(gallons/day)

Potomac River

Demand vs Flow

(mgd)

1980

2000

2020

2.9

3.7

5.2

134

141

142

415

635

855

535

535

535

To make matters worse, WSSC was faced with a very serious shortage

of sewage treatment and transmission capacity. A State- imposed mora- torium on new hookups impacted the majority of our service area.

A successful water conservation program could alleviate both

problems. Year-round conservation is essential to relieve sewage

treatment limitations, while a reduction in seasonal peak demands would

resolve the short-term water supply problem.

At the same time our water and sewer capacity problems were becoming serious, a very real conservation ethic was emerging. Up until

the 1970' s, the WSSC was like the auto manufacturers and petroleum

suppliers — proud of our record of providing service to meet the public's demand, regardless of how wasteful. Luxurious bath facilities,

lawn irrigation systems, and car washes were the water utility equivalents of gas-guzzling cars and total electric homes. In the seventies,

this wasteful use of resources was challenged (the energy crisis intensified the challenge, but it existed before the Arab oil embargo), and

conservation of all natural resources, including water, became a vigorous

theme that prevailed in our jurisdiction. WSSC responded to our public.

We altered our entire thinking to encourage water conservation in every

way. A serious major objective of the "Corporate WSSC" is to conserve

water, because not to conserve is wasteful.

Once we adopted our conservation ethic, the third problem—the

planning stalemate over future demand—began to resolve itself . The

major reason that a potential water supply problem existed was inability

of the region to agree upon a solution. A basic reason for disagreement

was the conflict between the traditional water supply approach that would

ensure plenty of water for the most unregulated use vs the financial*

environmental, and social impacts of facilities to meet such large demands.

We had developed feasibility plans to meet our water and sewer needs

through reservoir expansions, pumping stations, and massive pipelines.

With the expansion of water and wastewater treatment capacities, the

traditional demands could be met. The costs and impacts of these plans

were simply not acceptable. As time went on, it became apparent that

WSSC's public insisted that water supply and sewage treatment planning

be based on a far more "conservative" need than had been practiced.

Accepting this directive, we have modified our planning to present a

428
series of vastly reduced water/sewer needs, developed through a conser- vation and risk analysis. A consensus has been achieved on these sets

of reduced needs and the planning stalemate has been resolved. A midrange water supply (and sewage) plan is approved and under design. Had we not changed our philosophy from "abundant" to "conservative," we would still be studying and debating.

Having adopted conservation as our strategy, we developed a threephase conservation program to make it work.

• Publicity and education

• Plumbing Code revisions requiring water

saving fixtures

• A conservation-oriented rate structure.

A publicity and education program is essential to achieve two results: first, to encourage customers to save; and second, to continuously reinforce our image as a conservation-oriented agency. WSSC seldom

misses an opportunity to discourage waste, to point out the savings our customers can achieve by using less water, and to explain how reduced

demand benefits the region.

The Plumbing Code for the WSSC jurisdiction was changed in 1972.

The revised code required 3.5 -gallon toilets, 3.5-gpm showers, and

pressure-reducing valves where the pressure is greater than 60 psi. In

1979, the Maryland General Assembly made WSSC's standards applicable

Statewide. There have been absolutely no problems with these revisions

and they do save water. It appears that there is no reason not to re- quire these water-saving measures in all new construction.

The third major element in our conservation program was a rate

structure that would encourage water conservation. Up until 1977, the

WSSC had experimented with some pricing elements to reduce peak comsumption, such as a summer surcharge, but essentially the structure was a flat rate applicable to all water consumed. In making a major modification to support our water conservation efforts, two primary objectives

were defined:

1. Customers making increased demand should be required to pay for

the extra capacity required.

2. The price structure should encourage all customers to conserve.

In its final form, we recommended the elimination of all other elements

of the billing structure, such as the summer surcharge and meter service

charge, and adopted an increasing schedule applicable to water as well

as sewage service. Implementation with respect to single-family residential users, which represent about 90% of WSSC customers, was relatively easy. One unique feature that was added to the structure was a separate billing system for multifamily residential units, which would pla

them on an equal footing with our single-family customers; that is, an

429
additional factor was added into the billing formula that placed these

multifamily units on a similar unit basis defined by average daily

consumption.

The rate schedule had the desired effect; namely, accounts using

100 gpd had their bills cut in half. Customers using up to 350 gpd

would remain essentially the same, and customers with high water con- sumption, which represented approximately 28% of all single-family

accounts, would be billed at gradually increasing rates. Seasonal peak

demand was also discouraged by the rate structure. A customer using

200 gpd would be billed $23.22 per quarter; however, if the average

daily consumption doubled to 400 gpd during the summer, the unit charge

would increase, resulting in a quarterly bill of $73.44 or about 3 times

the charge for more conservative use. With the added element in the

rate structure for multifamily unit accounts, a similar impact was produced; that is, well-managed residential units were rewarded for conservation.

At the 1978 conference, it was reported that the new rate structure

as an element in our total water conservation program did begin to show

dramatic results after one year. These results were in the quarterly

accounts (single-family residential units) as opposed to our commercial

and governmental accounts. The initial report between distribution from

June 1977 to June 1978 reflected an almost 13% reduction in residential

water consumption. This method of comparing distribution of the average

daily consumption groupings was continued through the fall and winter

quarters. During the peak demand periods, the same results were experienced; however, in the winter quarter, it showed some easing back to

prerate structure patterns. In the first year, we labeled the program

a success.

However, the question is, "Have the benefits endured?" The following is information relative to 3 full years after adoption of the increasing rate structure. At this juncture, it appears that the effect

of an increasing rate structure has been not only to shave peak demands,

which, as I said earlier, alleviates short-term water supply problems,

but to reduce consumption year-round as well. This latter element

favorably impacts on sewage treatment limitations. The following chart

compares the average daily consumption (ADC) patterns of over 200,000

WSSC residential customers for the spring and summer quarters combined

and the fall and winter quarters combined.

430
Single-Family Residential : ADC 1977 1978 1979 1980

Spring & Summer (April-Sept) 101 10.9 12.5 13 . 1 13.

101-200 38.6 43.9 45 .3 46.3

201-300 64.7 70.5 71 .9 74.0

301-400 80.4 84.7 85 .4 87.8

401-500 88.6 91.3 91 .5 93.5

501-1000 98.

98.5 98 .5 98.8

1000 100% 100% 100% 101

Fall & Winter (Oct-March) 101 11.6 13 .6 13.0 14 .7

101-200 43.5 47 .9 47.0 52 .3

201-300 72.0 75 .6 75.2 79 .6 301-400 87.0 88 .9 88.6 91 .4

401-500 93.3 94 .3 94.0 95 .8

501-1000 98.8 98 .9 98.7 99 .2

1000 100% 100% 100% 10

The statistics shown in the chart above represent the cumulative

percentage of customers falling within the various average daily con- sumption (ADC) categories who are consuming at that ADC rate or less.

For example, during the spring and summer period of 1977, 38.6% of our residential customers used 200 gpd or less, and 80.4% used 400 gpd or less. Similarly, in 1980, 46.3% used 200 gpd or less, while 87.8% used

400 gpd or less. Clearly, a very marked shift to lower ADC patterns is

discernible not only during the spring and summer period in which

discretionary water (lawn care, car washing, etc.) is used, but also

during the fall and winter months. This is exactly the effect anticipated from an increasing rate structure. These results were also

achieved at the full range of a very wet and a very dry year.

The following chart, reinforcing the shift in downward consumption

usage, shows actual usage in 1977 consumption vs. 1980.

ADC

101

101-200

201-300

Actual

1977

10.9%

27. 7 26.1 64.7%

Increased

(Deferred

)

2.2%

5.5

1.6

Actual

1980

13. 1%

33.2

27.7 74.0%

9.3%

301-400

401-500

500-1000

1000

15.7%

8.2

9.5

1.9 35.3

100%

(1

(2

(4

9)%

5)

2)

11

(9.3%)

13.8%

5.7

5.3

1.2 26.0

100%

431
As can be seen in the chart, below 300 gallons per unit there was an increase of 9.3% in the various categories, while a corresponding de- crease occurred in the higher consumption groupings.

As in our 1978 results, the commercial accounts surveyed showed

virtually little measurable reduction. This has generally been the

pattern over the full 4-year period also.

In summary, and to answer the question, do the benefits originally

experienced under the WSSC's water conservation program endure, the answer is emphatically and resoundingly yes. Water utility managers

have had to change their thinking to realize that managing a natural

resource means shifting from an "all you want" to an "all you need"

philosophy. A successful publicity and education program supported

by changes in the plumbing fixtures and innovative pricing techniques

can change customer consumption patterns and produce lasting benefits.

432
CONSERVATION IN A NONCRTSTS ENVIRONMENT - TOWNSHIP OF EAST BRUNSWICK,

NEW JERSEY

L. Mason Neely, Michael J. Opaleski,

Theodore B. Shelton, Ph.D., and Dennis Palmini, Ph.D.

Township of East Brunswick, New Jersey

THE TOWN AND SYSTEM

East Brunswick Township is a suburban community of 38,000 located

midway between New York City and Philadelphia. East Brunswick's

socioeconomic standing is the highest in the county and ranks No. 4 in

the United States based on the standard metropolitan statistical area

as reported in the 1980 Sales & Marketing Management Magazine . Its

government is professional and progressive.

The municipality's water system consists of many parts incorporated into one major system. The facility consists of one ground

treatment plant, a pumping lift station for purchased supply, and

three elevated and one ground storage tank connected through 200 miles

of pipe ranging from 4 inches to 30 inches. Currently, the system

treats and delivers an average of 4.5 million gallons per day

(Mgal/d). The distribution system is relatively new, and the majority

of the piping has been installed within the last 40 years. Some

piping installed over 80 or 90 years ago is still being used. The

Township is 21 square miles and 60 percent developed. The present

system service base consists of 9,608 residential and 807 industrial

accounts, for a total of 10,415. Most are residential accounts and

account for 92 percent of use. Water conservation directed at the

industrial/commercial enterprises would be shortsighted. Our Conservation Program was developed for residential use. The system is 100

percent metered, and the unaccounted-for water is incurred by theft

(unauthorized hydrant use by road contractors) and water main breaks.

All nonrevenue usage such as main flushing, street sweeping, and

normal everyday activities by the municipality (hydrant repair, sewer main cleaning, storm sewer cleaning, and street sweeping) are metered

or calculated. The unaccountable loss of water within the distribution system is 8 percent. A system is considered tight if loss is in

the range of 10 to 15 percent.

Why would a community such as East Brunswick want to formulate a water conservation program? During the early 1970' s, East Brunswick's

daily usage and peak demand started outstripping its supply and unac433
countable water ranged from 12 to 17 percent. At that time, 80 percent of the accounts were metered. Relief was being sought through

the State, which controls ground water diversions and negotiations

with surrounding communities for additional surface water supply.- The

Township was in a sharp growth pattern, and it was determined that

additional water supply would be needed by the year 1990.

THE PROGRAM

To change the habits of individuals, institutions, and government

in a noncrisis environment is considered difficult, if not impossible.

In 1976, a water conservation ethic was not strongly held by the people

in the State of New Jersey. The last major drought of any significance

that impacted upon the State and region was in 1960. Adequate water

for industrial and residential use had been available. The cost of

water was inexpensive and the quality bigh. Per capita usage increased

yearly in the suburban community of East Brunswick. The net indebtedness of the Township was approximately 1.3 percent of its assessed

valuation. The municipal budget was less than 20 percent of the local

property tax dollar, and the water utility operated with a positive

fund balance.

Against this backdrop, the mayor, the Governing Body, and the

professional staff of East Brunswick held a 2-day re treat /planning

session during the spring of 1976. The purpose was to address the

issues of water supply—past, present, and future—and water quality.

It is good to report that heightened awareness by the Governing Body

to the principles of conservation resulted in the conservation com- mitment. In 1976, the Township was 40 percent undeveloped. The mayor

and council realized that conservation was morally correct, economically sound, and politically wise. The concept of conservation and

the implementation of such a program would impact new construction

that did not immediately require a change on the part of the existing

population. The Staff Retreat gave impetus to the development of a Water Master Plan, adopted in November 1977.

The Water Master Plan provided for a planned approach to capital

investment in both the distribution system and the treatment facilities. Contained within that Master Plan was a commitment to water

conservation. That planned capital program held a major assumption of

15 percent reduction in per capita water consumption through construction regulation and educational programming to the existing population. In 1978, the mayor appointed "The Water Conservation Committee"

consisting of two Rutgers University staff and three municipal staff.

The five were charged with the responsibility of obtaining the 15

percent reduction.

A Heath Sonic Leak Detector was purchased to locate leaks and the

system was fully metered. Substantial water savings resulted. Leak

detection is a fairly new science within the water field. The sonic

detector is an excellent piece of equipment. The only drawback it may

434
have, if it is a drawback, is that the individual using it must do so on a continuous basis. If the instrument is to be used haphazardly or

by different individuals, there is no clear-cut way an individual can

become familiar with the "expertise" that is needed to fine-tune the

instrument and pinpoint leaks. A meter survey was the next major area

of concern. Schools, other public buildings, and charitable organizations were unmetered. Many reasons were given for this nonmetering

and nonbilling. The current standard operating procedure is that all

accounts must be metered, billed or not.

There are two general ways to reduce water consumption: One is

through public education, causing the public to become conservation

minded. This would result in a conscious reduction of water and the

installation of water-saving devices that have become readily available. A second method is to price the product sufficiently high

enough to encourage conservation. Both of these approaches were taken

by the Township of East Brunswick.

WATER RATES

Prior to 1976, East Brunswick had a declining water rate that

encouraged water consumption. The initial rate was 12i per thousand

gallons declining to 50<t per thousand gallons. After the Staff Retreat, the water charges were amended to provide a flat rate, regardless of use. This was our first step towards conservation. In 1977,

the rate was raised from 111 to 94^ per thousand gallons, and the concept of a flat rate was continued. This step (a 30 percent increase),

we believed, would result in a decrease in water consumption, but the

elasticity of demand was small. Elasticity of demand is defined as "that percentage of change in the rate of consumption when divided by

the percentage of change in the price of water." If a 30 percent in- crease in price gives rise to a 5 percent decrease in consumption,

then the elasticity is 0.16. The greater the elasticity value, the

more responsive consumption is to price change.

The 30 percent rate increase in East Brunswick did not result in

conservation. The normal upward consumption patterns continued. In

fact, outdoor water demand increased significantly. People began new

landscaping, and the number of outdoor swimming pools installed increased dramatically. During 1977, the average daily demand for water

was approximately 3.4 Mgal/d. But the peak demand, if continued on a 24-hour basis, reached points of 25 Mgal/d. The high peaks reflected

outdoor water use and caused real problems to our pumping stations and our ability to deliver water and maintain adequate pressure.

A third step to deal with peaking was to restrict most outside

water usage between the hours of 11:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Swimming

pool filling, carwashing in driveways, and lawn sprinkling could not occur during restricted hours. A fourth measure was an ascending

water rate. The base rate of 94^ per thousand gallons was maintained,

435
and added on top of the base rate was a surcharge that Increased from

14^ to 44^ per thousand gallons. The new rate was called a surcharge

and was earmarked for capital items only.

TABLE 1. Surcharge Rates

Annual

Use

Base Rate

Per 1000 Gallons

Conservation

Surcharge

Total Charge

Per 1000 Gallons

And Up .94 .44 $1.38

37b, 000 .94 .42 $1.36

350,000 .94 .40 $1.34

32t>,000 .94 .38 $1.32

300,000 .94 • 3b $1.30

275,000 .94 .34 $1.28

250,000 .94 • 32 $1 .26

225,000 .94 .30 $1.24

200,000 .94 .28 $1 .22

175,000 .94 .26 $1 .20

150,000 .94 .24 $1.18

1^5,000 .94 .22 $1.16

100,000 .94 .20 $1.14

75,000 .94 .18 $1. 12

50,000 .94 .16 $1.10

25,000 .94 .14 $1.08

There is a 214 percent increase from the lower rate to the highest rate. The surcharge applies to every gallon of water used depending upon annual consumption. This means that rates are not

gradual stepping increases but are pronounced. If annual consumption

is 225,000 gallons, then the 30{( surcharge on top of the base rate is

applied to all gallons. This represents a surcharge of 32 percent.

If the annual use is 325,000 gallons, then the surcharge is 38^, which

reflects 40 percent.

436
We experienced approximately an 8 percent decrease in water con- sumption during 1978 and the reduction has held. The 8 percent

decline in water demand has not been taken up, as the service base

increased by 550 homes. It is safe to say that outside water use will

respond to increased rates. We have not calculated the elasticity of

demand by surcharge int erval but this could be done.

The conservation-oriented rate structure also had a very positive

effect on the local industry. Premium Plastics is a manufacturing industry whose average annual consumption was 34 million gallons. After

the revised rate, they installed water recycling, which reduced their

annual consumption to 3 million gallons. Continental Bakery implemented water conservation into their manufacturing process and reduced

their water demand by 35 percent. DAK Foods, Inc., imports Danish

hams, which they cut, process, and distribute from their plant. The

escalating rates encouraged them to completely repipe their systems

and install thermostatically controlled shutoff valves on all

water-cooled equipment. Their average monthly consumption dropped

from 330,000 gallons to 98,000 gallons, or a decrease of 70 percent.

These are three of the dramatic examples. Their cooperation was motivated by the conservation-oriented rates, and their participation

in conservation was encouraged by the Town.

During the time East Brunswick was moving forward with its water

conservation program, the State of New Jersey changed its Uniform Construction Code. On January 1, 1978, a new State Energy Code became

effective. Part of the State Energy Code was a revision of the

Plumbing Code, and the Plumbing Inspector rigorously enforces the

revised code.

The final part of our Water Conservation Program may be considered educational. Rutgers University cooperated by providing staff to

work with the Water Conservation Committee on a three-phase approach

to reach the residents of the community. The educational process also was supported by the local media and the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA), and videotapes were shown on closed-circuit television.

Approximately 50 percent of the households in East Brunswick subscribe

to closed-circuit television. In addition, local programming was developed, and the water utility budget was aired over closed-circuit

television. On each water bill, customers received conservation

tips. Also, conservation devices to refit home plumbing were offered

for sale at cost over the revenue counter.

THE RESULTS OF THE RESIDENTIAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM

The goals of the water-saving devices program were to (a) measure

the extent to which households cooperated and installed the watersaving devices that were distributed; (b) measure the resulting reduction in water consumption (increase in water supply); and (c) evaluate

the cost-effectiveness of the program. The overall goal was to cut

437
demand by 15 percent and thereby demonstrate the feasibility of

installation of water-saving devices during noncrisis situations.

A pilot study scheduled for the first months of the year was conducted with a small group of households. A variety of problems

delayed the start of the program and distribution of the conservation

packets until June. Savings of indoor water consumption could not be

determined because of outdoor use masking the effects. The packets

contained toilet dams, faucet aerators, and, in some packets, a showerhead. Separate instructions for installing each of the devices,

a booklet of water-saving tips, and a lengthy article explaining in

detail the social and private benefits of conservation were also

included. In retrospect, there were too many separate pieces of paper

and the article required too much time to read. The message had to be

nonambiguous and concise.

In the fall of 1979, a broader conservation program was to be

conducted in phases to extend the program. The benefits could be

achieved progressively while water revenues would be maintained

through the growth of population. An advantage of the phase program

was avoidance of a large initial budgetary commitment. If at any

point in the program the Council felt that the Township was not getting its money's worth, it could terminate the program and cut its

losses to a figure that would be less than the cost of a full Townshipwide program.

The phased program consisted of the free distribution of water

conservation packets to water customers along two meter-reading

routes. Each packet contained the following:

• Three toilet dams (capable of saving 0.5 gallon each)

• A low-flow faucet aerator

• A flow-reducing aerator button (2 gallons/minute)

• A plastic shower flow control device for insertion into the

shower water line (3 gallons/minute)

• An instructional brochure on how to install the devices

• A booklet of water-saving tips to be used inside and outside

the home: "Water Conservation at Home."

The selections were purchased by the Township. Teenagers were

hired to assemble the packets, which were distributed to selected

routes by the meter readers.

The professionally prepared instructional brochure on how to

install the devices strongly emphasized both the potential available

water savings by installing the devices and the dollar savings on water and energy bills. It succinctly stated the reasons for the

438
program, the expected water savings from using each device, and

provided diagrams and instructions for installing each of the

devices. A telephone number was provided so that people could call

for installation assistance if desired.

The brochure informed water customers about two kinds of

specially designed water-saving showerheads (an inexpensive version

and a moderately priced version) available at cost from the Township.

This brochure thus had the distinct advantage of presenting all the

needed information on one handy piece of paper.

In late November, a letter signed by the Township's mayor was

sent to 564 households on two selected water routes, informing them of

the forthcoming distribution of water conservation packets and urging

them to make use of the devices. The packets were distributed during

the first week in January 1980. A followup letter was sent by the

water utility to these households in February, again urging them to

install the water-saving devices.

In addition to the two meter-reading routes chosen for the water

conservation experiment, two other routes were selected as statistical

control routes. Each of the control routes was matched with one of

the conservation routes. Both groups had approximately the same mean

annual water consumption per household and the same variance. There were 392 accounts on the control routes, giving a total of 956 residential accounts.

A letter was sent to all 956 households at the beginning of

January 1980, explaining the nature and purpose of the water con- servation research program and requesting their assistance. Each

household was asked to provide a water meter reading in January and

again at the end of March. Residents were also asked to complete a questionnaire on their use of the water-saving devices and on the

water-using characteristics of their families. A preprinted card was enclosed with this letter, showing the dial face of a water meter;

customers were asked to fill in the card with the numbers on their

water meter and the date of the reading, and to return the card.

There were 256 cards returned, a response rate of 26.7 percent.

These same households were asked to fill out a mailed questionnaire on their use of devices, the number of people in the house,

household income, and other information about home water-using characteristics. Statistical analysis on these data was performed to

estimate the effectiveness of the water conservation program on the

average daily rate of water use per household after allowing for the

effects of other variables.

Because those households cooperating in the statistical analysis

program were much more likely to have used the water-saving devices, a telephone survey (Table 2) was conducted on an unbiased sample of the

households receiving the packets to estimate the percentages of households that installed each of the devices. About 19 percent of the

households were surveyed.
From the telephone survey:

Table 2 . Installation Rates for Water-Saving Devices

(Statistical Projection)

Toilet Dam (1 or more installed) 58%

Faucet Aerator (low-flow) 45%

Faucet Volume Reducer (plastic button) 21%

Shower Flow Control (plastic) 24%

Showerhead Sales (3-month record) 2.5%

These figures do not include removals after initial installations

because no followup survey was performed. One-third of the homes

surveyed did not install any of the devices.

Table 3, based on statistical analysis, gives the daily water

savings to be expected by installing each device.

Table 3. Water Savings Per Household as a Function of WaterSaving Device Installed (Statistical Projection)

Toilet Dam (2 installed) 8.6 gal/day

Faucet Aerator 4.9 gal/day

Shower Flow Control 19.5 gal/day

All Devices 33 gal/day

All Devices 12,000 gal/year

An average household that installed two dams, an aerator, and the

shower flow control would reduce its daily water use by 33 gallons per

day or by 12,000 gallons per year. The annual water savings per

household, averaged over all the homes that received the conservation

packets, was 5,010 gallons per year.

Table 4 presents an analysis of the cost-effectiveness of the

program. The current East Brunswick rate is $1.16/1,000 gallons, or 94^ base and 22^ average surcharge.

Table 4. Analysis of Cost-Effectiveness of the East Brunswick

Township Water Conservation Program

Total Cost of Program

(excluding $2,650 for student

help and computer services in

monitoring the program)

Total Projected 1-Year Water Saved

Yearly Conservation Program Costs

Water Cost (amortizing over 5 years)

Water Cost (amortizing over 10 years)

$5,606

2,825,640 gal

$1.98/1000 gal

39.6^/1000 gal

19.8^/1000 gal

440
The conservation program cost the Township $5,606, giving a cost

per 1,000 gallons saved per year of $1.98. This should more reason- ably be amortized over the lifetime of the water-saving devices, about

10 years, giving a cost per 1,000 gallons saved of 19.8^.

If these results remain valid when the program is extended to the

entire Township, the aggregate annual savings in water consumption

would be about 42.5 million gallons per year or 116,600 gallons per

day. This is 3.4 percent of the average daily water production during

the first 3 months of 1979. The average home in East Brunswick consumes about 105,000 gallons of water per year, including both winter

and summer usage. The annual projected savings of water from a Townshipwide conservation program could then support more than 400 new

homes without an increase in water production.

As a postscript to this study, severe drought conditions began

just as this research was completed. East Brunwick went from a non- crisis to a crisis situation with mandatory conservation measures

imposed by New Jersey's Governor by Executive Order in February 1981.

As part of many banned activities, the Executive Order prohibited the

watering of all plant growth except commercially grown crops, the use

of water for all outdoor recreational purposes, and restricted indoor

usage to 50 gallons per person per day. It is of interest to note the

response of the citizens of the Township to the Executive Order. The

sale of water conservation devices skyrocketed: low-flow aerators

went from a rate of 10 per week to over 180, shower flow control

devices from 20 to a projected 340, toilet dams from 5 to 180, and

showerheads from 3 to 75 per week. Because the Township and citizens

were familiar with water conservation techniques, they were able to

respond almost immediately with a 19 percent drop in consumption noted

after the Governor's Executive Order.

REFERENCES

1. Shelton, T.B. and Sharpe, W.E., A Guide to Designing a Community

Water Conservation Program , N.E. 244, Published by the Cooperative

Extension Services of the Northeastern States, Cook College,

Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, 1981.

2. Shelton, T.B., Editor, Water Conservation with Water Saving

Devices, Extension Bulletin 421, Publications Distribution Center,

Cook College, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, 1976.

3. Sharpe, W.E., Water Conservation and Wasteflow Reduction in the

Home, Special Circular 184. The Cooperative Extension Service,

The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania,

1975.

4. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Conference on Water

Conservation and Municipal Wastewater Flow Reduction, November

CASE STUDY - IN-SCHOOL WATER CONSERVATION EDUCATION PROGRAM

Suzanne Butterf ield, Chief

Office of Water Conservation

Department of Water Resources

The Resources Agency, State of California

Sacramento, California

ABSTRACT

California's in-school water awareness and conservation program

for kindergarten through eighth grade students offers special curriculum materials and teacher training. Children are the greatest re- source of the future and must learn to be wise consumers and citizens

in order to make informed decisions when adults. The program teaches

water's vital role in life, and that this resource is limited. A sec- ondary benefit occurs when children carry water conservation messages

home. Materials are available for the entire kindergarten through

eighth grade spectrum, and as a result of evaluations, 4-6 grade materials are now emphasized. The program is continuous, not just a one-time informational campaign. With a small budget and staff, 10

percent of the total elementary grade population has been reached in

the last three years.

One of our most successful water conservation programs and the one that has been around the longest is our in-school education program. It is a water awareness and conservation program for kindergarten through eighth grade students throughout the State that offers

curriculum materials and teacher training.

Why The "In-school Program"?

With a small budget and staff, this program has managed to reach

300,000 kindergarten through eighth grade students in the last three

years, or 10 percent of the total K-8 grade population. We have about

$450,000 budgeted, a permanent staff of five and two student positions.

Why should we spend this money on water conservation education?

California has always been a leader in education because we believe

children are our greatest resource of the future. We sometimes forget

that sixth graders will be voting in seven years. We believe that

students must start learning to be wise consumers and citizens when

they are young in order to make informed decisions when adults.

443
Our program teaches students about water's vital role in human,

animal, and plant life, and that we have just so much of this precious

resource. After all, California's population is increasing by

400,000 a year, and we must make our water supply stretch.

You'd be surprised at the enthusiasm these children have when

it comes to learning about water conservation. And there's a secondary benefit: they tend to carry the water conservation message home

to the rest of their families.

In The Beginning

Actual operations of the program began in September 1977, but

preliminary work began even before our severe drought of 1976-77.

Materials were chosen and developed, and the endorsements of

the State Secretary for Resources and the State Superintendent of

Public Instruction were obtained.

The program was originally designed for fourth through sixth

graders because they were judged to be the most effective in spreading

the word about water conservation.

In early fall 1977, promotional work began with news releases

and mass mailings of promotional material. The Department sent letters to water agencies asking them to join with their schools to fi- nance the materials and to develop local supplements. The response

was a tremendous showing of interest from schools and water agencies

throughout the State.

The Department, realizing the teachers' need for local information, developed seven Regional Teacher's Guide Supplements. These

supplements provide regionalized educational resource data for K-8,

plus regional and State water supply information. The water supply

information was developed along the lines of the Department's hydrologic study areas to help teachers relate the materials to the major

water supply features of their areas. In addition, the supplements

contain teaching strategies and customized projects and problems for

the various workbooks used in the program.

Kindergarten through third grade materials were added in 1978,

and seventh and eighth grade materials were added in 1979. The cost

for the whole package of curriculum materials in the average classroom

is about 40 cents per pupil, including tax and shipping charges.

Teacher training is vital to the program. Our limited staff

would find it impossible to train the almost 120,000 California public

school teachers individually. Therefore, free workshops throughout

the State are given to train "masters" how best to use the materials.

These "masters" are sometimes environmental teachers or school principals. They go back to their schools and show the classroom teachers

444
how best to use the materials. This has been an efficient way to reach

a large number of teachers.

The Present

We now have written curriculum materials, including workbooks,

teachers' guides and supplements, and films and slides for the entire

K-8 spectrum.

Our education program works hand in hand with our urban device

distribution program. The areas chosen to receive free water saving

kits also receive free curriculum materials . The education program

complements the device program by going into an area first. Teachers

are asked to mention the device distribution program in their classrooms before the parents actually receive the water saving kits in

the mail. Thus, the education program and the device distribution

program reinforce each other.

The Future

With hard work, adequate funding, and a little luck, we plan to

reach every 4-6 grade student in the State by December 1983. In addition, we are now beginning to develop materials for high school students because we strongly believe that the need for water conservation

should be reinforced before the students are cut from the umbilical

cord of home. In high school they become "real" consumers and can begin to appreciate the adage "a penny saved is a penny earned."

They can more closely relate to the fact that saving water, particularly hot water, saves energy and this means extra dollars in their

pockets. These "cold, hard" economic facts as well as environmental

considerations begin to jell in their minds.

Evaluations

Each year we hire an outside contractor to do an independent evaluation of the program and materials. Results have indicated that children who participate in the program are more fully aware of water and

the need to conserve it than children who have not, and that the greatest effect on students seems to be at the 4-6 grade level. In addition, as mentioned earlier, children carry the conservation message

home to their parents and siblings.

Evaluations also show that teachers think the materials and programs are useful, and teachers involved in the more intensive teacher

training presentations tend to use the materials longer and in better

ways

The evaluations also tell us that coordination of the program

with the county schools offices has been a great strength of the program. In other words, our program does not just go into a county and

445
say, "Here we are." We must have the cooperation of the county su- perintendent of schools, the school district offices, the principals,

and the teachers for an effective program.

Improvement For The Future

As a result of evaluations, we are now emphasizing 4-6 grade

materials. By the time children reach this grade level, they have

the skill to handle the fairly difficult water concepts contained in our curriculum materials.

Teachers are finding their own time more and more limited, with

little time left for training. This has placed us in a real dilemma,

since our materials work best with trained teachers. We hope part

of the problem will be solved by a teacher self-training module now

being developed. This module will enable the teacher to learn about our program in free time either at school, at home or even in the park,

by using a branched learning program. This program consists of film

strips, printed materials, and tape cassettes. Preliminary testing

has been favorable.

Southern District Office

The Department has four district offices around the State, but

the one with the largest in-school education program is our Southern

District office in Los Angeles. This is not surprising when one re- alizes that most school children live in Southern California.

The Southern District has recently finished in-service training

of school staff in Ventura County and our curriculum material has

reached 25,000 4-6 graders in that county. This accompanied a device

distribution program. The staff is now working in Orange County,

which has a very large population. It is a real challenge to reach

the almost 80,000 4-6 graders in the area, but the Southern District

staff has already given in-service training to almost all the staff

for 4-6 grades, and soon materials will be in the classrooms.

Our Southern District staff has also been very innovative in developing and carrying out new and creative educational projects. They

have been working with the Los Angeles Parks and Recreation Department

to develop an Inner City Student Summer Program. Children from the

Los Angeles area will be bused to Castaic Lake, a Department-owned

reservoir 48 miles from downtown Los Angeles in the Tehachapi Mountains, where they will learn about water conservation and ecology.

It will be a learning experience sprinkled with fun, including fishing

and hiking. We are very excited about this program, since many of

these inner city students have never experienced nature first hand.

And what better place to learn about the natural environment, including

the water cycle and water conservation, than at a lake. We expect

2,000 students can be reached through this program every summer.

446
We have found that a successful education program can best be

carried out through cooperation with area environmental groups.

Therefore, the Southern District staff has tried to put together en- vironmental education coalitions to share ideas and carry out programs

in area schools. For instance, following the in-school program in

Ventura County, we are now working with county school representatives

to set up a permanent environmental education coalition for that area.

One final note about our Southern California efforts. School

children there are finding out that education is not all work and no

play. We are coordinating water awareness contests in Ventura and

Orange Counties, sponsored by local water agencies. Each class must

conduct a water project of its choosing, such as building a weather

station, tracing the source of water to a school, or planting lowwater-using plants. In Ventura County, the winning class is spending

one day at an outdoor environmental education facility. In Orange

County-} the winning class is going to Knott's Berry Farm.

Conclusion

We believe education should continue through a lifetime. Therefore, our water awareness program is continuous, not just a one-time

informational campaign. We do not merely fly over a school yard with

some booklets, dump them out, and leave. We go into the area, get

to know the administrators and teachers, train them on the best use

of the curriculum materials, and then distribute the materials. We

also try to get permanent environmental education programs set up in

these areas. And then, of course, we are always available to help.

447

CASE STUDY - DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDENTIAL WATER SAVING DEVICES

Suzanne Butterf ield , Chief

Office of Water Conservation

Department of Water Resources

The Resources Agency

Sacramento, California

ABSTRACT

A state-wide program of distributing water conservation devices

to residents of the State is to be completed by 1983, and to result

in annual savings of about 58,000 acre-feet of water and the energy

equivalent of 1.3 million barrels of oil. Savings pay for program

costs in about three months. Distribution programs began in 1977 with

pilot studies resulting in the present program configuration that

is based on mass mailing of kits containing displacement bags and shower flow restrictors. All programs are cooperative with local agencies

and tailored to local situations, and are accompanied by an advertising

campaign and in-school education programs. Detailed reports on past

programs are available.

California has about eight million households. We began our program in 1977 and by June of this year we will have made water-saving

toilet and shower devices available to about 30 percent of those households .

By 1983, we hope to have offered free devices for every California residence built before 1979, when laws requiring low-flush toilets

and low-flow showers went into effect.

Based on the voluntary installation rates so far, we expect this

will save about 58,000 acre-feet of water a year and energy equivalent

to 1.3 million barrels of oil. Costs are remarkably low. We find

that these retrofit programs pay for themselves in about three months.

Since the devices last at least five years — and probably more — they are a great bargain as water and energy supplies go.

We began device installation programs in 1977 with seven pilot

projects funded by a special $750,000 appropriation. The largest project was in San Diego, and six others were conducted in smaller com- munities. We were trying to determine not only which devices worked

best and were most likely to be installed by householders, but which

delivery methods were most efficient and cost-effective. (DWR Bul449
letin 191, "A Pilot Water Conservation Program," October 1978.)

We tried — and evaluated — a variety of devices and' methods,

and finally concluded that the most effective combination was direct

delivery of the simplest devices: plastic displacement bags for toilets, plastic inserts for showers, and dye tablets to test toilets

for leaks.

Our pilot programs covered about 455,000 households. Last year we began an extension of the program, this time financed by $2.2 million from California's new Renewable Resources Investment Fund.

It is important to note that this funding was provided during

above-normal water conditions in California, and represents the State's

commitment to water conservation as a regular part of doing business.

It was not a response to drought, or even to the expectation of one.

With the new funding, we have extended the program to Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties on the south coast, and to Humboldt Bay on

the north coast. By June we will have conducted similar programs in

Santa Clara and Orange Counties, the City of Los Angeles, and the City

of Fresno.

These are all cooperative programs, and in some cases cost-sharing.

We are, for example, paying for 50 percent of the cost in Los Angeles,

and in Santa Clara we are sharing the costs with local agencies to

add a second displacement bag to the conservation kits. Santa Clara

County is particularly important because existing sewage treatment

plants are overloaded and the device distribution program is being

counted on to reduce sewage flows.

In addition to these large areas, we are beginning a parallel

program targeted at low-income families. One reason for this — as

it is for so many things these days — is the cost to individuals for

energy. We estimate that an average family can save upwards of $60

per year in water heating bills through the use of shower flow restrictors and, through adoption of other water conservation measures, can

do even better. In the low-income program, we work through community

action agencies to get the devices not just delivered to low-income

homes, but actually installed. This is possible because these agencies

contract with the federal government to "weatherize" low-income homes

through the federal low-income energy assistance program.

As I mentioned, in the pilot programs we experimented with several

approaches. In delivery, for example, we tried hanging kits on people's doorknobs, delivering them door-to-door, and setting up depots

where householders could pick them up.

Our evaluations showed that, considering costs and installation

rates, the best way was to get them to each household, and the most

450
effective way to do that was through direct mail.

The kits themselves are simple — an envelope containing a plastic

displacement bag and a two-piece plastic clip along with a hook to

hang it inside the toilet tank. The envelope also contains a pair

of flow restrictors for two shower sizes, leak-detecting dye tablets,

and a brochure explaining water conservation measures and how to use

the kits.

For several weeks before the mailing, we conduct an advertising

campaign using newspapers, radio, and television, to announce and ex- plain the program. After distribution, the campaign is shifted to

urge installation of the devices.

A parallel water awareness program is conducted in the schools.

Basically we try to increase the level of interest in water and water

conservation through an in-school education program aimed primarily

at fourth, fifth, and sixth graders. This often begins well in advance of the actual device distribution program.

What happens after we've got the kits to the households?

We're finding — based on post-project interviews by independent

evaluators — that about 35 percent of the householders install the

displacement bags in the toilets and around 17 percent put the re- strictors in the showers.

We think we can increase that installation rate with more emphasis

on local public relations campaigns, and by involving local groups

interested in conservation. We are working in that direction with

our spring campaigns, and that will probably become part of our re- gular program design.

Some other things we have learned during these program operations:

There are benefits beyond the actual savings in toilets and showers. The existence of the program, the public awareness that

is generated, and the other intangibles related to it, appear

to affect water-using habits and create a sort of induced con- servation.

If a householder is going to install a kit, it will most likely

be done within two weeks of delivery. While newer homes (in California, at least) will already have water-saving toilets and showers, it is more efficient to mail kits to them than to try to

exclude them from mass mailings. We use the "simplified mailing

address system" — that is, we don't use addresses; we simply

mail to "Residential Customer." In this way, postage only costs

us 6.7C per kit. This brings the total cost per kit to 59c.

The kit manufacturer assembles the kits and delivers them directly

to the U. S. Postal Service, which takes care of delivering to

451
each residential customer in each zip code area. If there is an argument for longer zip codes, by the way, this may be one -

- we should in theory be able to define smaller units and thus

at least eliminate new subdivisions from mailing. — Local support for a water-saving program may come from several

areas, and advertising campaigns should take advantage of all

of them. For example, in our Santa Clara County campaign we will

emphasize water saving to reduce the load on a sewer system that

is stressed to capacity.

Local funding is important, at least from our viewpoint. It tends

to get local officials more deeply involved in the program and,

of course, it allows a more extensive program, perhaps with se- cond bags in the kits or a broader public information campaign. — Second bags and a second set of restrictors can be offered on request as an alternative to including two in the kit. Another

option is to set up a depot where those who don't want — or can't use — the kits can return them, and those wanting another can pick one up.

Quality control is important in selecting a kit manufacturer.

We had one bitter experience where at least 12 percent of the

kits contained defective components and where we are offering

replacements. We are now writing the quality control segments

of our bid proposals more tightly and hope that such defects won't

recur

— Timing is important in the advertising, education, and kit delivery systems. Since it all hinges on the actual delivery, in

mail-out programs it is well to work closely with postal authorities to make the delivery period as short and precise as possible. In at least one case, we had kits arriving before the

advertising campaign, a circumstance we suspect may have puzzled

some residents.

The Department's Office of Water Conservation staff in Sacramento

will be happy to discuss details with anyone planning a program. We

don't pretend to have all the answers, and each of our programs teaches

us a bit more. But we will be glad to share what we do know with anyone.

You can write to us at P. 0. Box 388, Sacramento, CA 95802 or phone (916) 322-4327.

452
RESULTS OF A PEAK MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR TUCSON, ARIZONA

Gene E. Cronk

Tucson Water

City of Tucson

Tucson, Arizona

INTRODUCTION

Prior to the summer of 1974, the prevailing water service philosophy of the Tucson Water Utility had been to anticipate, and meet, the

unmanaged peak demand requirements of the system by increased capital

expenditures for expansion of the water system. The peak demand period

of the summer of 1974, however, proved to be one of the driest and

hottest periods on record in Tucson. The City well system proved to be

incapable of consistently meeting the prolonged peak periods. This

resulted in localized disruptions in service and chronic low pressures

throughout the system. The experience of that summer convinced the

staff of Tucson Water and their engineering consultants of the need to

evaluate and reassess the original service philosophy regarding meeting future unmanaged peak demand requirements.

In the summer of 1976, the City Council adopted a new water rate

structure designed to reduce peak period use through an inverted rate

structure. They also adopted a controversial "System Development

Charge," intended to recover the capital costs created by new connectees to the system. The new rates and charges proved to be very con- troversial and unacceptable to a large segment of the Utility's customers. These problems as well as other factors involved with commu- nity growth led to the recall of four members of the Council and repeal

of controversial lift and system development charges.

An analysis of the increased groundwater level decline, potential

land surface subsidence, increased energy costs, and lower quality were

initial concerns. However, the large capital demands, reflected in

rate increases, created by the high peak demands were unacceptable. It was determined that the capital improvement program could be reduced

from $150 million to under $100 million if the peak demands could be

reduced. This potential capital cost savings was the primary reason

for the formulation of the "Beat the Peak" program in the summer of

1977. "Beat the Peak" has proven to be a major success. It has become

one of the primary factors in the substantial reductions in peak summer water use as well as reduced per capita water use by the single family

residential user class supplied by Tucson Water.

453
COMMUNITY GROWTH FACTORS

The City of Tucson is located in south central Arizona in what is

geographically termed the northern Sonoran Desert. As a result Tucson

enjoys a relatively mild climate with cool, mild winters and' generally

hot summers. Mean minimum temperatures during the winter range from

30°F while during the summer temperatures often exceed 100°F. It is

the water use associated with these summertime temperature extremes

which create our peak demand water requirements.

Precipitation plays a minor role in terms of climate relief from

the semi-arid environment surrounding Tucson. In fact, precipitation is

so minimal throughout the northern Sonoran Desert that it is not a factor in providing a water source for Tucson Water's service population.

The Tucson area receives about 11 inches of rainfall per year with

approximately one half of this amount occurring during the winter

monfhs. When one recognizes that the average annual evaporation rate

in the area is 72 to 84 inches per year, it is apparent that rainfall

does not and cannot provide any appreciable part of the area's water

supply. As a result, Tucson Water develops its entire supply from

local, stored groundwater sources. Tucson is one of the largest com- munities in the country obtaining its entire supply from underground

sources.

Collectively, the positive factors of climate, recreational opportunities, and local scenic beauty have combined to foster a phenomenal

growth rate for the area. Tucson remains to be one of the fastest

growing communities in the United States.

Table 1 has been prepared to show recent historic population

figures as well as population projections for the Tucson Water service area to the year 2000, assuming an average annual growth rate of three

percent

WATER USE PATTERNS

The patterns of water use for several of the various user classes

supplied by Tucson Water are seasonal in nature. Water Utility records

indicate that water use during the winter months tends to be generally

low and relatively constant while the summer months experience larger

demands which usually peak in direct response to air temperatures and

local precipitation patterns.

To analyze the overall impact which these fluctuating demands have

on the operation of Tucson's water system, it is necessary to establish

and verify the peaking factors appropriate to our system. Table 2 shows the tabulation of the ratio of peak day pumpage to average daily

pumpage for the most recent 10 years of record for the Tucson Water

Utility.

Data presented (Table 2) indicates the ratio of peak day pumpage

to average day pumpage is around two. Historically, the ratio of peak

454
day pumpage to the average daily winter pumpage has been between three

and five. It is anticipated that the peaking factor of two for the

ratio of peak day pumpage to average day pumpage will decline somewhat

as the demand management program "Beat the Peak" receives a wider

acceptance and understanding by the service population.

Similarly, a review of past ratios for the average day of the peak

month to the average day of the year indicates a relatively constant

relationship. Figure 1 illustrates this by a comparison of the peaking

characteristics of the Water Utility for the years 1928 and 1978, a 50-year time span.

Although the actual quantity of groundwater pumped during 1928 was significantly less than that produced during 1978, the peaking factor

for each year is remarkably consistent. Also note in each year the

peak monthly water usage occurred during the month of June with a sec- ondary peak period in September. This fact is interesting in that

lifestyles are now quite different than they were in 1928, and there

has been a tremendous growth in both Water Utility service area and the

population served. The relationship between the average day of the

peak month to the average day of the year, however, remains very close

to the value of the 1.5 as presently used by the Tucson Water Planning

staff.

SEASONAL WATER USE

The data plotted on Figure 1 illustrates the seasonal variability

in water use for the Tucson Water Utility as a whole. During the

months of December, January and February, water use is at its lowest

point of the year. With the coming of summer, however, water usage

climbs to the peak demand period which is usually experienced during

the month of June with the peak day of the year generally occurring

between June 20 and July 20. However, not all water users demonstrate

the extreme seasonal fluctuation in usage as shown by the system-wide

averages plotted in Figure 1.

The water use characteristics for each of the five principal cus- tomer classes served by Tucson Water is shown in Figure 2. Analysis

of average daily water use indicates that each user class has a varying

impact on any given peak demand period.

PEAK DEMAND WATER USE

That the greatest proportion of water required during peak demand

periods occurs outside the home is shown in Figure 3. The estimated

monthly volume of sewage flow relates principally to that quantity of

water which supplies inside household uses such as bathing, laundry,

dishwashing, etc. Historically, metered sewer flows tributary to the

treatment facilities have shown little increase through the summer months (May through September) indicating that it is outdoor water use which is the primary contributing factor to our peak demand periods.

455
For the single family residential user group, this corresponds to

the watering of lawns and decorative plantings, and it is this segment

of water use which has been significantly changed by the implementation

of the "Beat the Peak" demand management program.

"BEAT THE PEAK"

Early in 1977, the consultant firm of Black and Veatch, together

with the Water Utility staff, initiated a study of the potential

effects peak management programs might have on various capital improvement programs required to meet anticipated peak demand requirements.

Developing two demand projections, Black and Veatch (1) demonstrated

that a properly coordinated demand management program could significantly lessen the need for immediate system expansion. Results could

be realized in reducing projected increases to rates then in existence

as well as forestalling the need for additional capital construction to

meet larger use conditions. Rate payers would be the direct beneficiaries of such a program.

With no peak management program it was projected that the required

well system capacity would be 200 million gallons (757,576 m^) per day

by 1983. If a reduction of 25 percent in the outdoor water use could

be effected on the peak day, well capacity requirements could be re- duced to 166 million gallons (628,434 m3) per day. Further, projections assuming no reduction in peak demands indicated the need for a substantial increase in system well capacity prior to 1979.

Providing for the additional well system capacity as required in

these projections would have involved a massive capital spending program. Additional supplies were best obtained from Avra Valley some

12 miles (19.35 km) west of Tucson and separated from the City by the

Tucson Mountains. Black and Veatch (1) estimated a six—year capital

improvement program at a cost of $140 million for projected needs based

on the status quo. By effecting a 25 percent reduction in peak outdoor

watering demands, the required capital program was estimated to cost

only $100 million. Under these circumstances, the City of Tucson initiated a public information and education program entitled "Beat the

Peak."

The program was initiated with public appearances by the Mayor and

City Council Members on June 1, 1977, prior to the anticipated peak

demand period of the summer season. The essential elements of this voluntary program are simple. We request outdoor watering be limited to

alternate days between 4:00 p.ni. and 8:00 p.m. Excellent media

coverage of the program was afforded by daily news reporting of reservoir levels, total pumpage, and per capita consumption during June,

July, and August compared with similar system parameters experienced

during the same time periods for the previous year.

That the "Beat the Peak" program continues to be a success is evidenced in Figure 4 which provides a comparison between 1974 and 1980

456
metered water usage for all customer classes in the aggregate and the

single family residential class, individually. In 1974 the total

single family residential usage amounted to about 66 percent of the

total system water use. For the total system, average daily water use during the peak month fell from 100 million gallons in 1974 to 83

million gallons in 1980, while the average daily water use during the

peak summer months for the single family residential class continues

to show a 23 percent reduction over the same time period.

PROGRAM RESULTS

The success of the "Beat the Peak" program has far exceeded the

expectations of either the consultant or Tucson Water staff. As a result of changed water usage patterns, total pumpage of groundwater for

urban water users has been significantly reduced. However, since urban

use represents only 12 percent of the total use in the Tucson metropolitan area, the reduction has not provided a solution to the area's

overall water resource problem.

Table 3 indicates system-wide pumpage for the utility during the

past several years. The figures presented indicate that system-wide

pumpage for the Utility during fiscal year 1978-79 was comparable to

that experienced in fiscal year 1972-73 in spite of the sustained

growth rate of about three percent during that time frame. Although

the "Beat the Peak" program was not originally devised as a conservation program, our service customers have significantly reduced their

overall per capita consumption. This reduction may be explained in

part by increased awareness of the local water resource problems on

the part of the consumer and by newly adopted rate-making philosophies

incorporating an inverted rate feature.

Table 4 shows the degree to which our various customer classes as

a whole have altered their usage habits to effect the marked reduction

in per capita pumpage figures observed since fiscal year 1974-75. From

the figures shown in Table 4 it can be seen that the per capita pumpage

for the system has been reduced from a high of about 205 gpcpd during

fiscal year 1974-75 to about 146 gpcpd during fiscal year 1979-80.

This reduction would be significant on its own merits considering a static service population but with the realization that the service

area population has shown an increase of 84,767 people during that

interval the impact becomes even more significant.

Analysis of the data contained in Tables 3 and 4 also reveals that

Tucson Water through the success of the "Beat the Peak" demand management program has been able to initiate the management of its presently

available water resources in answer to major concerns for land surface

subsidence, cost of water production, and water quality. Tucson Water

is beginning a major source shift to more effectively manage its available supplies and to prepare the system for major imported water

supplies. The "Beat the Peak" program has allowed pumpage of the interior wellfield to be reduced while pumpage from Avra Valley has been

increased. Such an option would not have been possible without a 457
developed alternative supply if per capita demands had continued to

increase as anticipated prior to initiation of "Beat the Peak."

CONCLUSION

Collectively, individual user classes have modified their usage

patterns principally in their outdoor watering habits. Substantial

numbers of multifamily living units and single family residences have

removed lawns and plantings and replaced them with low water use desert

landscaping. These are permanent changes in lifestyle and indicate a permanent reduction in peak usage and in daily per capita use. Living

units with these low maintenance, low water consumption features have

become prime selling points to the local real estate market which further encourages individual users to cooperate with the program. The

City of Tucson has done much to promote the program by serving as an example. Street medians, formerly planted in grasses and other high

water use plantings, have been replaced with attractive and low waterconsuming desert vegetation. Also, the local building industry has

made greater use of low-flow water fixtures in many new developments

as well as making these fixtures available for voluntary retrofitting

at the individual homeowners option.

The success of the "Beat the Peak" program cannot be completely

ascribed to a one-time public education effort on the part of the City.

The awareness of the individual user has been enhanced by increased

media understanding of the problem and increased involvement by interested community groups. These efforts, coupled with changes in water

rate philosophies incorporating increased unit rates for water, have

done much to perpetuate customer support for the program. Deferral

of capital projects has allowed the Water Utility time to resolve

numerous technical and institutional problems associated with the

establishment of a long-term water supply plan for Tucson. The com- plex variables involved with such a plan are difficult to resolve. It

is believed that continuing the "Beat the Peak" management program will

allow rational, planned solutions to these problems.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The assistance rendered by Tucson Water staff: R. Bruce Johnson,

Stephen E. Davis, and Frank Brooks, during the preparation of this

paper is gratefully acknowledged.

REFERENCES

(1) Black and Veatch Consulting Engineers, 1977. Report on Capital Improvement Program, Revenue Requirements, and Water Rates,

City of Tucson Water Utility.

458
Table 1. Tucson Water Service Area Projections

End of

Year

CI)

PitTiri J- -L 1 L I CI Coiint"v vUULl L. y Pomil ation

(2)

Rptail 1\C (_ a J—L Sprvlrp JCi. V XLC

Poniil J. V_/ L/ (_± J- pCI tinn 1— -L- *—' L L

(3)

Ac t ive

1 > \ 1. V -1- '— '— o

1978 502.700 427, 295 115, 485

1979 521,300 443,105 119,758

1980 539,800 458,830 124,008

1985 606,300 515,355 139,285

1990 655,500 557,175 150,588

1995 727,100 618,035 167,036

2000 818,600 695,810 188,057

(1) From Arizona Department of Economic Security, May 1979.

Adopted by PAG, September 27, 1979, through the year 2000.

(2) Assumed to be 85 percent of County population.

(3) Assumed to be 3.7 persons per active retail service.

Table 2. Historical Average and Peak Day Pumpage

Fiscal Average Day Pumpage Peak Day Pumpage Peak/

Year (MG)

' (MG) Average

70-71 54.1 110.2 2.04

71-72 57.8 112.3 1.94

72-73 60.1 118.8 1.98

73-74 75.4 130.4 1.73

74-75 67.6 115.2 1.70

75-76 70.0 117.6 1.68

76-77 60.5 131.1 2.17

77-78 59.4 112.1 1.89

78-79 60.8 113.2 1.87

79-80 66.2 110.0 1.66

459
Table 3. Annual Pumpage by Wellfield (Acre-Feet)

17 T OP q1 Oa.llL.Cl U L OVJU. LIIdIUL nkxiTzi v j. d Vxi v a. j1—1lcpvy Trt fpri rvr lcdl Well J- 1C1U WClll 1C1U ni c 1 1 i 1C1U WpI 1 f iel

X \J U Cll

71-7? IS-L J> 1 7ft 5, X / O S ("HO 1lj 449 447 43 282 64U4 j 939 7 J7

1 _J 5 U J H J } J J J 3 248 42 828 67\J 1 j 244"-r *-r ID j J/H / jUIO 55 498 84 452

74-75 16, 614 4,846 7,245 47,041 75,745

75-76 15,031 4,919 8,715 49,916 78,580

76-77 14,397 2,737 9,623 41,043 67,800

77-78 14,593 2,868 9,703 39,293 66,457

78-79 15,209 2,192 15,382 35,305 68,088

79-80 14,198 1,738 15,236 43,149 74,321

Table 4. Service Area Per Capita Pumpage Per Day

Fiscal Average Daily Active Service Pumpage

Year Pumpage (MG) Services Population Per Capita/Day

69-70 51.2 71,241 263,592 194.2

70-71 54.1 78,177 289,255 187.0

71-72 57.8 84,816 313,819 184.2

72-73 60.1 95,105 351,889 170.8

73-74 75.4 99,604 368,535 204.6

74-75 67.6 102,813 380,408 177.7

75-76 70.0 105,595 390,702 179.2

76-77 60.5 109,480 405,076 149.4

77-78 59.4 113,105 418,489 141.9

78-79 60.8 117,777 435,775 139.5

79-80 66.2 122,514 453,302 146.0

460
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

YEAR 1928

AVERAGE DAY PEAK MONTH 93.3

AVERAGE DAY OF YEAR 61.1

1.53

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

YEAR 1978

FIGURE I

461
METERED WATER USE BY CUSTOMER CLASS 1980

ioo -h

90- -

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~TJAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH OF YEAR

FIGURE 2

462
METERED WATER USE VS SEWER FLOW 1980

463
464
WATER CONSERVATION EFFORTS IN RURAL AREAS

A. R. Rubin

Biological & Agricultural Engineering Department

North Carolina State University

Raleigh, North Carolina

North Carolina is predominantly a rural State. Recent census

figures indicate that the rural counties in the eastern and western

parts are growing at a more rapid rate than are the more urbanized

counties in the central part of the State. Nonetheless, major population centers do lie along the interstate highway routes tbat link

Charlotte in the west with the Raleigh-Durham area in the east. Almost half of the State's population reside in this area known as the

Piedmont Crescent. Historically, the water resources base that supports these areas has been adequate; however, with increasing population pressures, rapid industrial development, concomitant industrial

development pressures, agricultural water uses, and commercial uses of

water, the future availability of these once plentiful water resources

is now being questioned. Many of the large urban areas are engaged in some form of water conservation program that has two primary aims:

raising the level of consciousness and awareness of the local residents regarding potential drought emergency plans, and focusing on a series of educational programs, mailings, slide tapes, public meetings, exhibits, etc., on routine residential, commercial, industrial,

and institutional demand reduction.

The problems in the rural areas of the State are somewhat different from those encountered in the urban areas. Often, rural

counties do not have the engineering or planning staffs necessary to

examine potential water supply problems, and water conservation plans

are more akin to "putting out the fire" rather than to preventive fire

protection programs. The need was emerging throughout the State to

provide both leadership and semitechnical support to those rural

communities experiencing water supply problems. The Agricultural Extension Service at North Carolina State University saw this emerging

need to provide both safe sanitary water and safe sanitary wastewater

treatment disposal systems for these rural areas. Working cooperatively with the Water Resources Research Institute of the University

of North Carolina, the Agricultural Extension Service sought a Title V

grant from the Rural Development Panel to establish a pilot water con- servation, water supply, and wastewater management program, general

water resource educational program, and to incorporate such a program

465
into the

Carolina

administrat

Cooperative

ive and operational structure of the North

Extension Service.

The major goals of this program were to facilitate the development, implementation, and evaluation of cost-effective water supply

and wastewater management systems for both individuals and small rural

communities. The reasons for creation of this position are manifold.

Paramount among them, however, were concerns for the escalating

capital costs associated with developing water supply and wastewater

systems, increased operations and maintenance costs for keeping the

systems operating, and the general lack of assistance available to

these small communities in solving their water resource problems. A

two-part work plan emerged. One major program area was water supply

and water conservation, and the second major area of concern was wastewater treatment and disposal. Gradually, there emerged a program

that could satisfy the water-related needs of the rural population.

The first phase of the program was to establish a framework upon which

to focus efforts and to establish goals.

Three areas of concern emerged in the area of water conservation: technical, institutional, and behavioral concerns. A demonstration water conservation effort then began in the State with which

both the urban and the rural residents could identify. This program

focused on the technical (hardware) and the behavioral aspects of a water conservation program. This initial effort was directed at

determining the hardware and determining individual water-using

behaviors and habits. This was done by (1) gathering information

regarding other water conservation programs operating elsewhere and

selecting those conservation practices that appeared to yield the most

significant results; (2) canvassing hardware and plumbing supply

companies; and (3) questioning homeowners and renters. Once this was accomplished, several areas of the State were identified and pilot

efforts were attempted. Demonstrations were undertaken in both rural

and urban settings, and the results of these demonstrations were widely publicized through Extension communications channels such as news bulletins, workshops, television and radio programs, and the

Statewide series of Extension training programs. Significant results

were obtained in these pilot efforts, and average residential water

savings amounted to over 1,500 gallons per month for a family of four.

Greater conservation figures were achieved in the larger residential multifamily housing units. As a result, we did achieve one of our major institutional objectives: to get the Building Code modified

to encourage or actually to require low-volume plumbing fixtures in

all future construction in the State. A second benefit was retrofit

of some State-owned buildings. This is currently proceeding on many

of the university campuses.

Demonstration projects and pilot programs, such as those we undertook, are critical to the establishment of any such program. It

is imperative that residents of a State or other geographic area feel

that the results of a demonstration are applicable to them. Something

466
that was done in Washington, D.C., may not be applicable to somebody

living in a rural community in North Carolina. Something that was

done in Fresno, California, may not be applicable to someone who is

living in Polk County, North Carolina. There is nothing, however,

like a real, felt need to bring a program to some fruition. Such was

the case in a rural western North Carolina county.

Polk County in North Carolina is a predominantly agricultural

county. It is located in the extreme southwestern corner of the State

and borders on South Carolina. Major population centers are located

in the southwestern corner of the county. About 75 percent of the

county lies in what is called the Piedmont Plateau, while the

northwestern portion of the county is considered a part of the Blue

Ridge physiogeographic province. Topography in the Piedmont portion

of the county is gently undulating, while the Blue Ridge portion is

decidedly hilly, with two peaks reaching over 3,200 feet above sea level. Ground water supplies are limited, while rainfall and surface

supply in the county are usually abundant. Recently, however, the area has been plagued by drought. Water supply for the small municipalities is surface water. The intake structure is located near one

of the small towns on the South Carolina border. The existing system

was just adequate to support the existing development on the small

county system and was inadequate to support any significant increase

in residential development, and industrial development was considered

out of the question. The dilemma then arose: "How do we attract

industry to our area and improve our low standard of living with an inadequate water supply system?" One possible answer was to simply

allow for no growth. That option was quickly discarded because of the

relatively low standard of living of many of the long-time county

residents. Another option was to build another intake structure on

the river and to improve the existing distribution system. This

option proved to be quite costly, and the county decided that the cost

for such a system would be prohibitive given the current revenue- producing activities in the county. It was imperative that additional revenue-producing activities be present in the county before

the system could be improved.

The County Agricultural Extension Chairman was a member of the

local rural development committee. He was cognizant of these local

problems and had recently attended the Statewide extension agent

training program and was made aware of the recently created program

concerning water supply and wastewater treatment for individuals and

small rural communities. The county chairman contacted the extension

water supply and wastewater specialist and arranged for exhibit space

in an upcoming county fair for the demonstration of water-conserving

devices. Soon after the county extension chairman contacted the

Agricultural Extension Service water and wastewater management

specialist, the fair was conducted and was well attended. Local

officials, both elected and appointed, were impressed by the benefits

a water conservation program could produce. County officials

discussed some of the potentially immediate benefits of such a program. Following the energy fair, the county officials concluded

467
that a community-based water conservation program could extend the

available supply of water and might provide some of the necessary

reserve for expansion of their system. This would serve to help

attract a small, relatively dry industry to the county, which would

improve the financial position of the county. County Commissioners

moved to install water-conserving devices in all county buildings.

Once the County Commissioners were convinced of the efficacy of such a program, business and commercial establishments were then involved. A

local Chamber of Commerce was contacted and agreed to participate and

to encourage the sale of water-conserving devices to interested

businesses, homeowners, and the one industry that was planning to

locate in the county. Sale of the devices has been a successful

money-making venture for the local Chambers of Commerce, and according

to several information sources in the county, the local response has

been that the sale of water-conserving showerheads "sure has beat the

heck out of candy bars." The industry that did locate in the county

was a very small, very dry industry. Extreme water conservation

measures were required in the building, such as the very low-volume

water closets, spring-loaded faucets, and low-volume faucet aerators.

The slight increase in county revenue that resulted from the siting of

the industry in the county has provided the county with some incentive

to begin planning for expansion of its water resource base. This is now considered a viable option because of the increase in revenues and

the interest in industrial development that has been fostered. Water

conservation is by no means a complete solution to the county's

dilemma. It did, however, provide a means to attract a small industry

and thereby increase the county's revenue, tax base, and standard of

living

Water conservation programs do have a place in the rural county,

just as they do in the large urban areas throughout the country. In

North Carolina, the Agricultural Extension Service was involved in the

delivery of such a program. The Agricultural Extension Service is a nationwide organization composed of specialists, researchers, and

technicians at major land-grant universities nationwide, and local

county extension staffs. There is an extensive outreach program in

each county, and the potential for information exchange, technology

transfer, and behavior change is real. Programs in water conservation

can help extend available resources in a community and provide a channel for a plethora of community development activities that might

follow. Resource-centered community development programs are an effective means of mobilizing a community. Recently, units of local

governments throughout the State have expressed interest in working

cooperatively with the Extension Service to promote a water-conservation program. Initial concerns for reduced revenues resulting from

decreased sales have been replaced by enthusiastic support. Support

for the conservation effort in North Carolina has been strong. On

February 2, 1981, approval was given for retrofitting the Governor's

Mansion with water-conserving plumbing, and with time other State

buildings will be retrofitted. We are a rural State. Communication

between Murphy in the extreme west and Manteo in the extreme east is

difficult. The Extension Service has implemented a series of programs

468
to facilitate this communication. Water conservation messages have

received thousands of requests over the "Teletip" toll-free number,

and Extension publications on water conservation are again exhausted

after their second printing. There is interest and there have been

changes in water-use patterns. A number of benefits have resulted

from the water conservation effort in the rural areas of the State of

North Carolina.

469
-
WATER CONSERVATION/FLOW REDUCTION IN

FACILITIES PLANNING FOR SALT LAKE COUNTY

Gerald H. Kinghorn

Principal, Legal Futures Research Institute

Partner, Kapaloski, Kinghorn & Alder

Salt Lake City, Utah

INTRODUCTION

Salt Lake County is an urban county in Utah with a 1980 population of 620,000. Twelve municipalities are incorporated within Salt

Lake County including over 40 public water systems (as defined under

the Safe Drinking Water Act standards). Fourteen wastewater collection entities, ranging from municipal systems to dual-purpose improvement districts, to single-purpose "county service area" entities,

collect wastewater for disposal at nine treatment facilities and one dual-purpose lagoon.

An areawide plan was completed in 1978 that provided for consolidation of seven treatment facilities into two larger "regional"

facilities. The remaining treatment facilities were projected for

further planning. The 1977 amendments to the Federal Water Pollution

Control Act introduced a new requirement into the facilities planning

process required by Title II of the Federal Water Pollution Control

Act (hereafter cited with the 1977 amendments as the Clean Water

Act). The new requirement was an amendment to Section 204(a)(5) and

provided that reserve capacity designed into treatment works would be

approved after the assessment of possible flow reductions resulting

from water conservation efforts approved under regulations to be

developed by the administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) .

Local officials from one of the treatment entities in Salt Lake

County, the South Valley Water Reclamation Facility Board, had contracted for engineering services prior to receiving the policy of EPA

on the water conservation/flow reduction issue, and a water conservation/flow reduction plan was not part of the contract. EPA, through

the Region VIII office, adopted the policy that a Step I facilities

plan could not be approved for grant funding until regulations were developed and in place providing detailed law guiding engineering and

grant approval. The problem was complicated further by the fact that

flows for treatment plant design were approved as part of the 208

471
planning process and no historical data were available to predict the

flow reduction that could be achieved by a water conservation program.

Faced with a potential delay in grants for construction planning,

overloaded treatment plants, a rapidly growing population, and recordhigh construction costs, local officials were disappointed and angry.

This article describes how the Regional EPA staff, Utah State officials, and local officials worked together to plan a water pollution

improvement project in compliance with the water conservation mandate

of the 1977 amendments to the Clean Water Act. The selected program

is also described together with the process for planning the selected

program.

BEFORE STEP I

The water conservation/flow reduction problem was presented to

local officials representing the South Valley Reclamation Facility

Board (SVB) and the Salt Lake County Department of Water Quality and

Water Pollution Control (SLCo) during a pregrant application conference in the summer of 1978. The SVB and SLCo are two separate

entities; SVB is the management agency designated for wastewater

treatment in the Upper Jordan Planning Area of Salt Lake County, and

SLCo is the designated areawide planning agency for the Salt Lake

County Geographic Area. The water conservation problem was one of a series of issues that was to be addressed in the facility planning

process for the regional treatment works. EPA Region VTTT personnel

advised the SVB and SLCo that resolution of the issue was a prerequisite to a construction grant and that regulations were under development in EPA for guidance on the issue. Personnel of the SLCo office

were aware of the potential time involved in the development of regulations and of the limited legal authority of some of the SVB member

entities; three of the entities are single-purpose Improvement Districts with very limited or no authority to influence the political

entities, water companies, etc., that are certainly necessary participants in a successful water conservation/flow reduction program. In

addition, the scope of work for engineering consultants had been

defined and a contract was in force.

Time and regulatory uncertainty threatened to delay the project,

escalate costs, and create a water pollution crisis in view of the

rapid growth of the member entities and the overloaded condition of

existing facilities.

After consultation between SVB and SLCo, the county agency agreed

to assume the responsibility for the development of the water conser- vation/flow reduction program and to amend the Management Agency

Agreement between the parties to reflect the shared responsibility in

the planning process. Other environmental issues that were required

to be addressed because of Clean Water Act amendments or regional EPA

policy were also included.

472
A proposal was made to the State of Utah and to the EPA Regional

Office articulating the work that could be done by SLCo and the steps

SLCo would follow to ensure that the flow reduction program would fit

within the regulations under development. SLCo personnel recognized

the risk and assumed the responsibility after evaluating alternatives

ranging from lawsuits and formal administrative actions to simply

delaying the project. Since delay would result from any challenge to

the EPA policy, a strategy was developed to propose a planning

process. The issue was critical not only to SVB but also to a second

regional facility board entering the planning and construction process.

The planning process proposal that developed involved using a countywide public participation-technical resource group formed under

the County Water Quality office enabling ordinance. Under the county

enabling ordinance, a Water Supply Policy Committee was formed

consisting of representatives of all entities, public and private,

.involved in the wholesale and retail distribution of potable water.

The planning of a countywide water conservation/flow reduction

program was technically outside the scope of responsibility defined

for the group, but the Water Supply Policy Committee working with the

staff of the Water Quality office coordinating with the regional

Wastewater Treatment Boards proved to be the only institutional

planning vehicle available.

The State of Utah quickly approved the proposal and encouraged

the EPA Regional Office to do so. EPA then approved the proposal,

demonstrating a willingness to assume some risk and to trust the local

officials. Reserve capacity in the regional treatment plants would be

reduced in the first phase of construction, and a second phase, which

would include flow reduction program experience, would be considered

after 1990. Planning the actual flow reduction program started in

earnest after everyone involved understood the proposal and became

committed to the completion of the work. The overall program development would be conducted within the conceptual framework of the Step

T-TI-III process used in the preparation, analysis, and approval of

engineering plans and the actual construction of the physical plant.

A countywide program would be planned and the Water Conservation Program details would be acceptable to wastewater treatment entities

entering the 201 process and to major public and private entities res- ponsible for distribution of potable water in Salt Lake County. Institutional and technical planning, and physical mapping of entities

and geographic service areas would confirm that the water conservation/flow reduction concept plan (Step T), implementation plan (Step

II), and execution of the implementation plan (Step III) would be

successful

Advising each potential local participant of the need for the

water conservation/ flow reduction program and gaining a commitment to

participate in terms broader than meeting a "federal mandate" required

a careful approach with continued reassurance of opportunities to

participate, criticize freely, and make additional studies if initial

473
results were unsatisfactory. Consulting with local entities in the

earliest stages of plan development and listening to each perspective

on the issue of water conservation, generally, and flow reduction to

sewage treatment plants, specifically, proved later to be the most

valuable part of the planning process—not only from a political

standpoint but from a technical feasibility perspective. Everyone

familiar with the political conflict in planning knows that a tour of

meetings with each affected entity is necessary, but very few

consultants and planners take the time to question tactfully and

listen carefully to the answers and then use the information gained in

the interview in a positive way. As we moved into the actual process

of evaluating water conservation programs and techniques to develop a Step I, or conceptual plan, the interviews with water supply entity

managers, water wholesalers, plumbing code inspectors, and wastewater

collection and treatment entity managers proved to be a valuable

source of the possible and rational elements of the selected program.

THE STEP I CONCEPTUAL PLAN

In the EPA grant-funded construction of a wastewater treatment

plant, three definite, separate steps are followed that permit review

and approval by State and EPA construction grant managers. The first

step is the conceptual plan, which includes determining the initial

and subsequent capacity or size of the plant, the treatment process to

be used, and the site for construction of the plant. Step II is the

preparation of detailed design, including all drawings and specifications for construction; and Step III is the actual construction of

the physical facility. The Salt Lake County water conservation/flow

reduction program plan was developed in a parallel sequence.

All water conservation programs developed in the last 5 years

that were directed at indoor water uses, as distinguished from outdoor

or irrigation uses, were collected and reviewed. Based on the results

of earlier efforts in other areas, as well as in Salt Lake County, we concluded that economic incentives or increased water and sewer rates

provided the only meaningful results. Increased sewer rates, creating

a demand for easily installed and more efficient water-conserving devices, provided a conceptual dynamic process inherent in our planning. The 1977 experiences in Utah and in California were particularly

helpful. Although articles on treatment works problems did not begin

to appear until our work was substantially complete, we were able to

collect some of the basic data verbally through telephone conversations. Draft copies of evaluations were also made available to us by some authors. Typical indoor-use data for cooking, clothes washing,

bathing, and general sanitation were available in published material.

We were also able to estimate reductions in average uses that could be

achieved with flow reducers, low-flush toilets of various designs, and

recycling options. In reviewing the technical materials, it became

obvious that technical innovation is limited only by the inventiveness

of the human mind and by economic demand factors. The design of

collection systems and treatment plants presented what appeared to be

474
significant barriers, but management options such as line flushing and

pump station retrofits are possible to overcome the in-place system

obstacles.

After rapidly surveying the theoretical limits, the staff recom- mended to the Water Supply Policy Committee that a processoriented

program be considered with a low per capita day use target of 60

gallons. The effect of the 60-gallon/person/day target would be to

construct in place a permanent water conservation/flow reduction

program.

Actually, a far lower target of 40 gallons per capita per day was initially considered and rejected because it had a demoralizing effect

on everyone who heard the proposal.

After consultation with the Regional Wastewater Treatment Boards

and the Water Supply Policy Committee of SLCo, a Step 1 proposal was circulated for comments. The proposal articulated a policy of establishing a permanent water conservation/flow reduction effort targeted

to a 40 percent reduction from a 1976 base of 100 gallons/person/day.

The proposal recommended an initial public education program

effort that would focus on the avoidance of future tax expenditures

for developing new water supplies, controlling treatment costs, and

preventing the need for sewer treatment plant expansion after 1985

when the first phases of the regional plants would be complete.

If the public education effort failed to reach the target (as we

suspected), a new phase would be added to the program relying totally

on economic incentives. Lower sewer-use fees would be offered to individuals with pressure regulators installed and set at 45 psi, the

lowest pressure that will operate most outdoor sprinklers.

An additional economic incentive would be created under the third

and most complex phase of the program, requiring that sewer-use fees

be implemented based on metered water deliveries during November,

December, January, and February when no outdoor use occurs in Salt

Lake County. The winter months' readings would be extrapolated for 12

months, and sewer-use fees would be based on per gallon estimates of

flow. The Third Phase program would require detailed information

transfers with virtually no errors between many different entities

with varying capabilities. After the proposal was circulated, we received several well-reasoned comments generally approving the concept plan, but reserving final approval until specific costs were developed, roles defined, and dates for the length of each program

proposed

Since the specific details were Step IT tasks, our Step I work

was essentially complete. In fact, the largest water supply entity in

the county, Salt Lake City, went directly to the Phase III program

within 18 months of the proposal. Salt Lake City was motivated to do

so by economic considerations related to a need to accumulate a 475
reserve for system repairs and upgrades. But the rapid implementation

of the Phase ITT program by Salt Lake City provided an opportunity to

evaluate public acceptance, technical issues related to meter accuracy

and computation problems, as well as beginning a period of record to see how consumers would react over time. In the case of Salt Lake

City, a computer analysis of sewer fees based on previous years' use

of water showed that the fee structure actually saved 52 percent of

the consumers money, while 48 percent, mostly large, commercial users

such as hotels, restaurants, and office buildings, would pay higher

charges. Apparently, the lack of a rational fee structure with con- servation incentives had produced a relatively wild, unmanaged system

in the commercial sector. When the first bills began to go out, plumbers were in demand to reduce flush-valve settings and install various

conserving devices that reduce consumption and flows to treatment

plants but have no effect on the quality of service. It is still too

early to fully evaluate the Salt Lake City experience, but the early

results are encouraging.

and forwarded to the State of Utah and EPA

With the completion of Step I, we experiunpleasant problem. We could not start Step

STEP II AND BEYOND

Step I was approved

for review and approval,

enced an unpredicted and

IT.

Toward the end of Step I, an enormous amount of momentum was created to move forward with the program. Each participant was interested in resolving the remaining questions; in fact, we wanted to

modify Step T almost as quickly as we completed it. But in the

step-by-step process, local officials cannot go on to Step IT until

Step I has been reviewed and approved by the State of Utah and EPA.

State officials who were close to the local momentum quickly reviewed

the materials, made rational comments, and approved Step I with the

condition that some further work and slightly new directions be considered. EPA's Region VIII simply was not organized and staffed to

respond rapidly. Everything stopped. Almost 5 months passed before

we began to receive comments verbally. We did not receive written

approval or comments until grant applications for Step IT were

approved, and then our approval with conditions appeared as conditions

of a Step IT grant to the South Valley Board.

Recovering lost momentum is a time-consuming process that

requires the participants to return to materials and plans laid aside

months before. A subcommittee of the Water Supply Policy Committee

was formed to evaluate costs, respond to comments, propose changes,

assign roles, and set timetables. After several meetings, the Water

Supply Policy Committee and the subcommittee finished their work. The

pressure regulator program would be substituted for a broader program

of incentives for retrofits of water-conserving devices in plumbing

and new devices tied to the plumbing code provisions of the Uniform

Building Code. The 1979 version of the Code had been written in a way

476
that could require water-conserving devices as they became available

at the discretion of the building official. Economic incentives would

provide the basis for demand for better devices, management agency

agreements between Salt Lake County, and each political entity with a building inspection system—and each water supplier would provide the

institutional vehicle to tie the process together. Early in 1979,

funds were identified and made available to Salt Lake County in 1981

for a public education project; the public education portion of the

water conservation program would be conducted using those funds.

The final Step IT submittal retained the policy of Step I: to

make water conservation a permanent component of water supply and

wastewater management. The target figure of 60 gallons/person/day

remained, and the program would start with public education. Daily

and weekly newspapers would be provided with advertising identifying

devices and encouraging retrofits. Saving future tax dollars and

future user fee increases would be emphasized. Public education is a permanent feature of the selected program, along with plumbing code

enforcement requiring the use of the latest approved water-conserving

devices. The plumbing wholesalers in the State would be consulted and

advised of the strong policy shift toward water-conserving devices,

since we were all sensitive to the problems of suppliers who may be

caught unaware with stocks of unsalable items. If public education

and plumbing code enforcement failed after a 4-year period, economic

incentives would be implemented in the form of sewer-use fees tied to

metered water delivery in winter months. Economic incentives, public

education, plumbing code enforcement, and continuous program evaluation by 1990 should provide enough use and flow- reduction experience

to evaluate when or if future reserve capacity will be exhausted.

Detailed cost studies and effectiveness evaluation will be

necessary if Step II is approved by EPA Region VTTI and if the program

is deemed appropriate for implementation in view of current administration statements downgrading conservation as a resource management

tool. Developing the program in a very fragmented local government

framework was a product of hundreds of person-hours contributed by

water supply entities, city officials, wastewater management entities,

and private citizens.

Today our local officials are confronted with reductions in the

budget for construction grants and with a philosophical shift in the

administration away from conservation as a resource management tool.

At this point in time, abandonment of plans for treatment works and

the resulting water pollution problems seem possible.

Separate and apart from our efforts to develop a water conservation/flow reduction program, I believe that the need to develop new supplies and replace systems that have heen in place for many years

will inevitably confront our local government officials with the need

for rate increases in the future. If we are forced to pay the real

cost for systems and supplies, a water conservation program will

become a reality simply because of our needs to reduce personal

expenditures as consumers.

A NATIONAL CONFERENCE

Summary

PROGRAM QUALITY AND PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT IN NATIONAL WATER

CONSERVATION CONFERENCE - PUBLICLY SUPPLIED POTABLE WATER

Stephen S. Light, Visiting Scholar

Kyle E. Schilling, Chief, Policy Studies Division

Institute for Water Resources

Water Resources Support Center

Fort Belvoir, Virginia

INTRODUCTION

From its inception, the Planning Committee for the National

Water Conservation Conference held in Denver, Colorado, was concerned about program quality and participant involvement.

These concerns prompted the incorporation of two data-gathering mechanisms designed to assist conference planners in progressing toward these objectives.

The purpose of this paper is to summarize results of data

gathering and provide some feedback to participants at the

National Water Conservation Conference on three aspects of

the conference: who attended the conference; what issues were participants most concerned about; and how well did the

conference meet the expectations of the attendees.

WHO ATTENDED THE CONFERENCE?

A total of 359 persons attended the conference; 294 had

preregis tered and the remaining 64 registered onsite. Table

1 and Figure 1 present a summary of each conference attendee's

affiliation and place of residence, respectively:

Over half (52 percent) of the conference attendees indicated

that they worked for some level of government (Federal, State, or local). Private industry representatives accounted for the

largest single cohort —25 percent of the total attendance.

479
Most of the regions of the country were rather evenly represented at the

conference (between 8 and 14 percent) with the exception of the Rocky

Mountain region (37.5 percent). People from Colorado comprised the

majority of attendees from this region of the country. The Pacific

Northwest had relatively few representatives. Most of the people from

the Pacific Coast were from California. »

TABLE 1. Affiliations of Conference Attendees

Affiliation No. of Persons Percentage

Private industry 90 25%

Federal Government 80 22%

Local Government 56 16%

State Government 51 14%

Academia 23 6%

Utility 18 5%

Association 16 4%

Public advisory 13 4%

Other 6 2%

Unknown 6 2%

TOTAL 359 100%

FIGURE 1. Residences of Conference Attendees

480
TABLE 2

QUESTIONS FROM REGISTRATION QUESTIONNAIRE TO BE DIRECTED

TO FEDERAL AND STATE/LOCAL PANELISTS DURING THE

INITIAL PORTION OF THE DISCUSSION PERIOD

Generic Questions Recurring Between State and Local Interests

1. How can assistance be obtained? — What kind of technical assistance is needed? — What kind of financial assistance and incentives are needed? — To what level of government should such assistance be directed?

2. What is the effect of conservation on rate structures and outstanding

committed financial responsibilities, bonds, construction projects,

engineering studies, etc.?

3. How does conservation relate to the need for retrofitting existing, old,

and deteriorating water supply and distribution systems?

4. How can Federal programs be adapted to meet local needs?

Generic Questions Recurring Between Federal and State Interests

1. What kind of new legislation and codes might be required?

2. Is a new definition of Federal, State, and local roles required to

implement conservation?

3. How can existing water resource projects and water supply facilities be

used more effectively?

Generic Questions Recurring Across the Group

1. How do you deal with the need to conserve in conflicting and competing

uses such as agriculture, self-supplied industrial, recreation, etc.? — How can and should priorities be set? — What are the effects on waste loads and treatment?

2. Is more centralized authority and direction needed to manage droughts

when conservation is a part of supply management? — Where and what is needed? — What functions should be included?

3. What impact will the change of administrations have on water

conservation?

481
WHAT ISSUES WERE PARTICIPANTS MOST CONCERNED ABOUT?

Participants were asked to fill out a brief questionnaire as they

registered for the conference. Forty-two percent (151 of 359) of the

attendees completed the form. *

A preliminary analysis was conducted prior to the Plenary Session

Wednesday morning. The results of the analysis are presented in Table 2 as a generic list. This list asked questions most frequently raised by

State and local interests, Federal and State interests, and across all

groups attending. These recurring generic questions were used by the

moderators for the Plenary Sessions to stimulate initial discussion after

the brief presentations by the panelists.

Subsequent to the conference, the questionnaires were analyzed in

depth. The discussion that follows includes the most pivotal issues

gleaned from the handwritten responses.

The conference attendees perceived a lack of clearly defined roles

and/or policies regarding water conservation among all levels of government. In the eyes of some respondents, the Federal role in water conservation seemed nonexistent. They expressed the need for stronger Federal

roles—incentives for water conservation relative to demand as well as supply. Two respondents specifically mentioned the need for Federal

technical assistance—and there may be a larger latent demand for such

assistance based on the nature of some of the narrative responses. The

respondents also were concerned about shifts in National Water Policy

that might occur under the Reagan Administration. Respondents complained

about the lack of Federal commitment to water conservation.

Moving to local level concerns, the respondents wanted to know what

policy options were available at the local level that address water con- servation problems (e.g., rate structures, plumbing devices, and tax

incentives). Particularly, respondents wanted to discuss the rationale

and mechanics of various pricing structures that would induce water con- servation and what impacts the various options would have on local water

supply economy and how to evaluate their effectiveness.

Respondents complained about the need for coordination and the

problem of water-use conflicts arising from the interface of municipal/residential with other water uses such as agriculture, industrial,

etc. Many of the respondents acknowledged that water conservation was a political problem as well as a technical one that required overcoming

entrenched interests and rights in water allocation.

Finally, there were several respondents that were primarily con- cerned with older city infrastructure decay and the need for Federal

assistance for reconstruction.

As part of the preconf erence qu

identify what major issues other than

they wanted to have addressed at the

482

estionnaire, attendees were asked to

publicly supplied potable water

conference. The responses produced
a litany of issues. Agriculture, self -supplied industrial, and ins t ream

uses were at the top of the list. These three topics comprised 67 percent of the total response. The tally of responses is shown in Table 3.

HOW WELL DID THE CONFERENCE MEET THE EXPECTATIONS OF THE ATTENDEES?

On several occasions during the proceedings, attendees were asked

to participate in an evaluation of the conference. Approximately 10 percent of those who registered completed the forms. The questionnaire was divided into two parts. The first part broke the conference program into

three sections (panel discussion, workshops, case studies). Respondents

were asked to indicate whether each particular session "exceeded expectation," was "acceptable," or "did not meet expectations." The focus was on program content and not personalities. The second part of the questionnaire asked five questions that probed the attendees, feelings about

issues not covered, adequacy of the program, opportunities of participation, suggestions for future conferences, and overall impression of the

conference.

TABLE 3. Issues Attendees Wanted Addressed

Category No. of Responses Percentage

Agriculture 17 30.9%

Self-supplied industrial 12 21.8%

Tnstream uses 8 14.5%

Multiple uses 5 9.1%

Energy conservation 3 5.4%

Methods of analysis 3 5.4%

National policy 2 3.6%

Reuse 2 3.6%

Sewage treatment 1 1.8%

Mi scellaneous _2 3.6%

TOTAL 55 99.7%

Evaluation of Panel Discussions and Workshops

The respondents indicated that approximately 75 percent of the

panel discussions and workshops met or exceeded their expectations. Of

those respondents indicating that the program content did not meet their

expectations, dissatisfaction with the content and tenor of Federal positions were most frequently mentioned. The remainder of comments covered

a variety of concerns including quality of audiovisual equipment, degree

of audience participation, and selection of topics covered in the

sessions

483
There appeared to be four major issues that were not adequately

addressed at the conference:

Implementation—how to do it . Respondents who fell into this

category were concerned about the problems of implementing water

conservation. What political obstacles might they encounter? People

appeared to have a real need to hear about the "war stories" of others

who had tried and succeeded or learned from their experiences.

Rehabilitation of infrastructure . There were two positions on this

issue. There were those who wanted to know how to eliminate water losses,

and there were those who wanted to know how to avoid the problems that

have arisen in many older urban water systems.

Economics of water conservation . Not enough attention was paid to

this aspect of the problem. However, this may be indicative of the fact

that economists, in general, have not paid much attention to water con- servation. One person compared the economics of water conservation to

the position the economics of energy conservation was in 10 years ago.

People also expressed a need for evaluation techniques to measure the

efficiency of conservation methods already in place.

Agriculture . It is generally recognized that agriculture is one of

the heaviest consumers of water. Respondents were interested in agricultural advances and what "hi-tech" solutions might contribute to solving

water supply problems. Also, respondents wanted to know how urban and

agricultural sectors could work more cooperatively in the future.

Program Evaluation

Sixty-eight percent (24 of 35) of the respondents indicated that

the conference met or exceeded their expectations. Of those who thought

the conference exceeded their expectations (7 of 35), they felt this con- ference was an improvement over the 1978 conference. They were impressed

with the speakers and the substance of the conference (mix of practical

applications and theory). Of those who thought the conference did not

meet their expectations (6 of 35), they expressed criticism over the lack

of audience participation and the fact that there were too many speakers

from Washington. Those who indicated a lack of ample opportunity for

participant involvement complained about the lack of time for questions

and answers. It should be noted, however, that 57 percent (20 of 35) of

the respondents indicated that the conference provided ample opportunity

for participant involvement.

Sixty-five percent (23 of 35) of the respondents indicated that the

conference provided a sufficient cross-section of regional issues and

personages. Those who responded in the negative suggested that

Washington was overrepresented and that the Southwestern States were

under re pre sented

484
Suggestions for the Next Water Conservation Conference

Suggestions for the next conference (e.g., new panel discussions,

workshops, and case studies) were clustered into three categories:

The integrated view of water conservation problems . The

interrelationships of potable water conservation and agriculture

industry, mining wildlife, etc., should be more fully considered.

Respondents appeared to be concerned about shifts in the interface among

the various sectors of water use that would occur as various water con- servation techniques were put into place.

More opportunities for interaction on specific problems . The

concern over lack of opportunity to interact with speakers and panelists

appeared widespread. Although audience participation was considered satisfactory for the format of program chosen for this conference, several

respondents asked for a change in the structure of the conference to

permit more interaction (e.g., roundtable discussions, poster sessions,

and smaller audiences).

Expand discussion of new technological solution . Respondents were interested in "technological breakthroughs" that might have an influence

on future water supply management. People were also interested in grand

schemes that may help eleviate water supply problems (e.g., recycling,

desalination, and interbasin transfers).

CONCLUSION

The Conference Planning Committee appreciated the time and effort

taken by attendees to voice their opinions on various water conservation

issues. The results of these data-gathering activities will provide

valuable input for future endeavors of a similar nature.

485

Speaker and Staff Roster

Baker, Larry K., Civil Engineer, Weatherby Associates, Inc., 206 Peek

St. , Jackson, CA 95642

Barnett, Jack A., Secretary-Treasurer, Board of Trustees, Water & Man,

Inc., 220 S. 2nd East, Suite 320, Salt Lake City, UT 84111

Baumann, Duane D., Professor, Dept. of Geography, Southern Illinois

University, 808 W. Main St., Box 927, Carbondale, IL 62901

Betchart, Will B., Senior Environmental Engineer, INTASA, Inc.,

1030 Curtis St., Menlo Park, CA 94025

Brusnighan, John M., Assistant General Manager, Washington Suburban

Sanitary Commission, 4017 Hamilton St., Hyattsville, MD 20781

Burgess, James A., President, Canadian Standards Association,

178 Rexdale Boulevard, Rexdale, Ontario, Canada

Butterfield, Suzanne, Chief, Office of Water Conservation, CA Dept.

of Water Resources, 1416 9th St., Rm. 816, Sacramento, CA 95814

Campbell, John, Office of Water Resources and Technology, U.S. DOI

,

Washington, DC 20240

Chaussee, Dean, Office of Drinking Water, U.S. EPA, 1860 Lincoln St.,

Denver, CO 80203

Cioban, Gail E. , Manager, Communications Support Services, Dynamac

Corporation, 11140 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852

Craft, George L. , Resources Engineer, American Water Works Association,

6666 W. Quincy Ave., Denver, CO 80235

Cronk, Gene E. , Director, Tucson Water, City of Tucson, P. 0. Box 27210

Tucson, AZ 85726

Darby, William P., Associate Professor, Technology and Human Affairs

Dept., Washington University, Box 1106, St. Louis, MO 63130

Davis, John, Vice President, Jefferson Associates Inc., 414 Gough St.,

San Francisco, CA 94102

DiGiano, F. Michael, Program Manager, Water Supply/Conservation

Program, New England River Basins Commission, 141 Milk St.,

Boston, MA 02109

Elder, Jacqueline, Research Psychologist, NBS, Bldg. 226, Rm. A313,

Washington, DC 20234

Farrell, David, IL Dept. of Commerce and Community Affairs,

222 S. College St., Springfield, IL 62706

489
Fisher, Denzel L. , Acting Director, State Programs Div. U.S. WRC

,

2120 L St., N.W. , Washington, DC 20037

Foxen, Robert J., Chief, Engineering and Economic Policy Section,

U.S. EPA, 401 M St., S.W., Washington, DC 20852

Frank, Albert, Planner, Howard County Dept. of Public Works,

3430 Courthouse Dr., Ellicott City, MD 21043

Galowin, Lawrence S., Senior Engineer, Building Equipment Division,

NBS, Washington, DC 20234

Gilbert, Jerome B., General Manager, East Bay Municipal Utility

District, 2130 Adeline St., Oakland, CA 94623

Gillum, Delores M. , Municipal Program Specialist, AZ Dept. of Health

Services, 1740 W. Adams, Phoenix, AZ 85007

Heiberg, Major General E. R., Ill, Director of Civil Works, Dept. of

the Army, Office of the Chief of Engineers, 20 Massachusetts Ave.

N.W., Washington DC 20314

Holycross, Frank R. , Manager, Manufacturing Engineering, Delta Faucet

Co., P. 0. Box 47, Greensburg, IN 47240

Jamieson, Derek G. , Thames Water Authority, Reading, England

Kinghorn, Gerald H. , Partner, Kapaloski, Kinghorn, and Alder,

10 Exchange PI., Suite 1000, Salt Lake City, UT 84111

Knox, Polly C. , Program Coordinator, Seattle Water Dept.,

1015 3rd Ave., Seattle, WA 98104

Konen, Thomas P., Chief, Building Technology Research Div.,

Davidson Laboratory, Stevens Institute of Technology,

Castle Point Station, Hoboken, NJ 07030

Koyasako, Jimmy S., Senior Engineer, CA Dept. of Water Resources,

P. 0. Box 388, Sacramento, CA 95802

Light, Steven, U.S. CE, Kingman Bldg. , Ft. Belvoir, VA 22060

Linsky, Helen S. , Wallace, Floyd, Ellenzweig, Moore, Inc.,

65 Winthrop St., Cambridge, MA 02138

Lussier, Denis, Center for Environmental Research Information,

U.S. EPA, 26 W. St. Clair St., Cincinnati, OH 45268

Lyon, James S. , Research Associate, Environmental Policy Institute,

327 Pennsylvania Ave., S.E., Washington, DC 20003

490
Maddaus, William 0., Supervising Engineer, Brown and Caldwell,

1501 N. Broadway, Walnut Creek, CA 94507

Males, Richard M. , Vice President, W.E. Gates and Associates,

1515 Batavia Pike, Batavia, OH 45103

Marshall, Sheri E. , Conference Coordinator, Dynamac Corporation,

11140 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852

Mayo, Francis T. , Director, Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, U.S. EPA, 26 W. St. Clair St., Cincinnati, OH 45268

McArdle , Francis X., Commissioner, New York City Dept. of Environmental Protection, 2358 Municipal Bldg., New York, NY 10007

Miller, William H. , Manager, Denver Water Dept., 1600 W. 12th Ave.,

Denver, CO 80254

Neely, L. Mason, Finance Director, Township of East Brunswick,

One Jean Walling Civic Center, East Brunswick, NJ 08816

Nelson, John 0., General Manager, N. Marin County Water District,

P. 0. Box 146, Novato, CA 94948

Opaleski, Michael J., Water Superintendent, Township of East Brunswick,

One Jean Walling Civic Center, East Brunswick, NJ 08816

Pascoe, Monte, CO Dept. of Natural Resources, 1313 Sherman St.,

Denver, CO 80203

Postel, Sandra L. , Resource Economist/Analys t , INTASA, Inc.,

1030 Curtis St., Menlo Park, CA 94025

Preston, David B., Executive Director, American Water Works

Association, 6666 W. Quincy Ave., Denver, CO 80235

Robie, Ronald B., Director, CA Dept. of Water Resources,

P. 0. Box 388, Sacramento, CA 95814

Rondon, Joanne D., Consultant, City of Aurora, Water Conservation

Office, 1470 South Havana, Aurora, CO 80012

Rothman, Torsten, Program Manager, Dynamac Corporation,

11140 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852

Rubin, A. R., Professor, Biological & Agricultural Engineering Dept.,

NC State University, Box 5906, Raleigh, NC 27650

Sanders, Welford, American Planning Association, 1313 E. 60th St.,

Chicago, IL 60637

491
Schechter, Barry, Pabon, Sims, Smith and Associates, 1435 G St., N.W.,

Suite 603, Washington, DC 20005

Schilling, Kyle E. , Chief, Policy Studies Division, Institute for Water

Resources, U.S. CE, Kingman Bldg. , Ft. Belvoir, VA 22060'

Schmidt, Nicholas M. , Vice President, Marketing, Sanford Homes, Inc.,

6851 S. Holly Circle, Englewood , CO 80112

Seinwill, Gerald D., Acting Director, U.S. WRC , 2120 L St., N.W.,

Washington, DC 20037

Shelton, Theodore B., Associate Professor, Dept. of Environmental

Resources, Cook College, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ

08903

Smith, Frank J., Associate Professor, Psychology Dept.,

NC State University, P. 0. Box 5096, Raleigh, NC 27650

Spitzer, Elroy F. , Deputy Director, American Water Works Association,

6666 W. Quincy Ave., Denver, CO 80235

Standley, David, Director, Water Division, U.S. EPA, 1860 Lincoln St.,

Denver, CO 80295

Tiemens, Myron F. , Deputy Director, Facility Requirements Division,

U.S. EPA, 401 M St., S.W., Washington, DC 20460

Vlachos, Evan, Governor's Front Range Committee, CO State University,

Ft. Collins, CO 80523

Walker, William R., Director, VA Water Resources Research Center,

617 N. Main St., Blacksburg, VA 24060

Weber, Stephen F. , Economist, Center for Building Technology, NBS,

Bldg. 226, RM A319, Washington, DC 20234

Wilborn, David P., Vice President, Metropolitan Watersaving Co., Inc.,

4701 Sangamore Rd. , Washington, DC 20016

Wilder, John J., Conservation Officer, Denver Water Dept.,

1600 W. 12th Ave., Denver, CO 80254

Williams, Roger L., Regional Administrator, Region VIII, U.S. EPA,

1860 Lincoln St., Denver, CO 80295

Yeaman, Barbara, Public Education Consultant, Facility Requirements

Division, U.S. EPA, 401 M St., S.W., Washington, DC 20460

492
NBS-114A (REV. 2-8C) U.S. DEPT. OF COMM. !• rUbLILA 1 IUIN UK 2. Performing Organ. Report No. 3. Publication Uate

RIR1 IfiGRAPHIP DATA

REPORT NO.

SHEET (See instructions) NBS SP 624 June 1982

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Proceedings of the National Water Conservation Conference on Publicly Supplied

Potable Water, held in Denver, CO, April 14-15, 1981.

Edited by:

Dynamac Corpor at ion

6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION (If joint or other thon NBS. see instructions)

Dynamac Corporation

11140 Rockville Pike

Rockville, MD 20852

7. Contract/Grant No.

8. Type of Report & Period Covered

Final

9. SPONSORING ORGANIZATION NAME AND COMPLETE ADDRESS (Street. City, State, ZIP)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); National Bureau of Standards (NBS);

U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) ; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (CE)

;

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); and U.S. Water

Resources Council (WRC)

10. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 82-600551

]] Document describes a computer program; SF-185, FlPS Software Summary, is attached.

11. ABSTRACT f A 200-word or less factual summary of most significant information. If document includes a significant

bibliography or literature survey, mention it here)

This "Proceedings" is a complete compilation of the papers presented April 14 and 15,

1981, at the National Water Conservation Conference - Publicly Supplied Potable

Water in Denver, CO. The Conference was primarily directed toward elected and

administrative officials of local governments, the individuals who are responsible

in some part for the quantity and quality of water available to their communities.

Techniques for, and analysis of, potable water conservation and wastewater flow reduction were presented. The topics addressed included:

o Water-Saving Technology: Plumbing fixtures, testing and performance of low-flow

devices, leak detection and repair, potential problems in wastewater flow

reduction, and landscaping with native vegetation

o Public Education and Motivation

o Economics: Water pricing systems, analysis of cost/benefits, and development

and management of data

o Planning: State and local urban planning efforts for conservation, and Federal

programs and incentives

o Case Studies: From California, Washington, Utah, Arizona, North Carolina,

Maryland, New Jersey, and Massachusetts

12. KEY WORDS (Six to twelve entries; alphabetical order; capitalize only proper names; and separate key words by semicolons)

municipal water systems; potable water reduction; water conservation.

13. AVAILABILITY

|~X~1 Unl imited

| | For Official Distribution. Do Not Release to NTIS

f | Order From Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402.

Era! Order From National Technical Information Service (NTIS), Springfield, VA. 22161

14. NO. OF

PRINTED PAGES

467

15. Price

USCOMM-OC 6C43-P80

*U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICEi 1982-360*997/21 28





NBS TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS

PERIODICALS

JOURNAL OF RESEARCH—The Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards reports NBS research and develop- ment in those disciplines of the physical and engineering sciences in which the Bureau is active. These include physics, chemistry,

engineering, mathematics, and computer sciences. Papers cover a broad range of subjects, with major emphasis on measurement

methodology and the basic technology underlying standardization. Also included from time to lime are survey articles on topics

closely related to the Bureau's technical and scientific programs. As a special service to subscribers each issue contains complete

citations to all recent Bureau publications in both NBS and non- NBS media. Issued six times a year. Annual subscription: domestic

$18; foreign $22.50. Single copy, $4.25 domestic; $5.35 foreign.

NONPERIODICALS

Monographs—Major contributions to the technical literature on

various subjects related to the Bureau's scientific and technical activities. Handbooks—Recommended codes of engineering and industrial practice (including safety codes) developed in cooperation with in- terested industries, professional organizations, and regulatory

bodies. Special Publications—Include proceedings of conferences sponsored by NBS, NBS annual reports, and other special publications

appropriate to this grouping such as wall charts, pocket cards, and

bibliographies.

Applied Mathematics Series—Mathematical tables, manuals, and

studies of special interest to physicists, engineers, chemists,

biologists, mathematicians, computer programmers, and others engaged in scientific and technical work.

National Standard Reference Data Series—Provides quantitative data on the physical and chemical properties of materials, compiled from the world's literature and critically evaluated. Developed under a worldwide program coordinated by NBS under

the authority of the National Standard Data Act (Public Law

90-396).

NOTE; The principal publication outlet for the foregoing data is the Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data (JPCRD)

published quarterly for NBS by the American Chemical Society

(ACS) and the American Institute of Physics (AIP). Subscriptions,

reprints, and supplements available from ACS, 1 155 Sixteenth St., NW, Washington, DC 20056.

Building Science Series—Disseminates technical information developed at the Bureau on building materials, components,

systems, and whole structures. The series presents research results,

test methods, and performance criteria related to the structural and

environmental functions and the durability and safety characteristics of building elements and systems.

Technical Notes—Studies or reports which are complete in themselves but restrictive in their treatment of a subject. Analogous to monographs but not so comprehensive in scope or definitive in treatment of the subject area. Often serve as a vehicle for final reports of work performed at NBS under the sponsorship of other government agencies.

Voluntary Product Standards—Developed under procedures

published by the Department of Commerce in Part 10, Title 15, of

the Code of Federal Regulations. The standards establish nationally recognized requirements for products, and provide all concerned interests with a basis for common understanding of the

characteristics of the products. N BS administers this program as a supplement to the activities of the private sector standardizing

organizations. Consumer Information Series—Practical information, based on NBS research and experience, covering areas of interest to the con- sumer. Easily understandable language and illustrations provide

useful background knowledge for shopping in today's tech- nological marketplace. Order the above NBS publications from: Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington. DC 20402. Order the following NBS publications—FIPS and NBSlR s—from

the National Technical Information Services. Springfield. VA 22161

Federal Information Processing Standards Publications (FIPS

PUB)—Publications in this series collectively constitute the Federal Information Processing Standards Register. The Register

serves as the official source of information in the Federal Govern- ment regarding standards issued by NBS pursuant to the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 as amended,

Public Law 89-306 (79 Stat. 1127), and as implemented by Executive Order 11717(38 FR 12315, dated May II, 1973) and Part 6 of Title 15 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations).

NBS Interagency Reports (NBS1R)—A special series of interim or

final reports on work performed by NBS for outside sponsors

(both government and non-government). In general, initial dis- tribution is handled by the sponsor; public distribution is by the National Technical Information Services, Springfield, VA 22161,

in paper copy or microfiche form.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Bureau of Standards

Washington. D.C. 20234

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

Penalty for Private Use. $300

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE COM-2I5

SPECIAL FOURTH-CLASS RATE

BOOK