DRAFT

Recommendations to Encourage Replacement of

Plumbing Fixtures and Fittings

as Required by

the Energy Policy Act of 1992

Energy Analysis Program

Energy and Environment Division

Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory

Berkeley, California 94720

Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

:" . 

~ t:' - (C E cfi~ I 5' - ! (j ( 

DRAFT 

Recommendations to Encourage RepIo.cement of 

Plumbing Fixtures and Fittings 

as Required by 

the Energy Policy Act of 1992 

Energy Analysis Program 

Energy and Environment Division 

Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory 

Berkeley, California 94720 

Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy 

! 

::rt:: I 0 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (LBL) has prepared this report for the Secretary of the U.S.

Department of Energy (DOE) to meet the requirements of Section 123 of the Energy Policy Act of

1992 (EPACT). Section 123 requires the Secretary to issue recommendations to the States for

establishing State and local incentive programs to encourage acceleration of voluntary replacement,

by consumers, of existing water closets, urinals, showerheads and faucets by water-saving products

that meet the standards.

This report encourages the States to investigate the cost-effectiveness of voluntary

replacement of aforesaid plumbing fixtures and fittings as an effective component of a water efficiency

incentive program.

The first section recommends five critical points to consider when developing a cost-effective

water conservation program. These points provide a general structure for program development that

can be utilized by water conservationists in any region of the country. Whether replacing toilets or

showerheads or utilizing other water conservation programs, it is important to know what is the most

cost-efficient water conservation program to implement. In order to select the program that will yield

the greatest water savings for the least cost, a number of factors should be analyzed: (1) water

consumption by the community, (2) the history of local water conservation programs; (3) the program

objectives and target audience; (4) the cost-effectiveness of different water conservation methods;

and (5) the potential results of any instituted program.

The second section details three case studies where water conservation efforts have been

successful. These examples are included not because they are unique but because they are

representative of many other conservation programs around the country. They are by no means the

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 ii

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (LBL) has prepared this report for the Secretary of the U.S. 

Department of Energy (DOE) to meet the requirements of Section 123 of the Energy Policy Act of 

1992 (EPACT). Section 123 requires the Secretary to issue recommendations to the States for 

establishing State and local incentive programs to encourage acceleration of voluntary replacement. 

by consumers, of existing water closets, urinals, showerheads and faucets by water-saving products 

that meet the standards. 

This report encourages the States to investigate the cost-effectiveness of voluntary 

replacement of aforesaid plumbing fixtures and fittings as an effective component of a water efficiency 

incentive program. 

The first section recommends five critical points to consider when developing a cost-effective 

water conservation program. These points provide a general structure for program development that 

can be utilized by water conservationists in any region of the country. Whether replacing toilets or 

showerheads or utilizing other water conservation programs, it is important to know what is the most 

cost-efficient water conservation program to implement. In order to select the program that will yield 

the greatest water savings for the least cost, a number of factors should be analyzed: (1) water 

consumption by the community, (2) the history oflocal water conservation programs; (3) the program 

objectives and target audience; (4) the cost-effectiveness of different water conservation methods; 

and (5) the potential results of any instituted program. 

The second section details three case studies where water"conservation efforts have been 

successful. These examples are included not because they are unique but because they are 

representative of many other conservation programs around the country. They are by no means the 

DRAFT. January 27,1995 n 
only successful programs, but have been selected because they are characteristic of programs that are

well-documented, use methodology translatable to many other regions of the country, and

successfully save water.

The report does not provide a spreadsheet or detailed account of the exact steps to take when

developing a water conservation program . That has already been done. The American Water Works

Association (AWWA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and others have generated

accessible and thorough instruction guidebooks that take the reader step by step through the

components of a water conservation program . AWWA has excellent water conservation guides that

approach program development from the perspective of the needs of conservation managers, and

small and medium utilities. EPA has produced literature detailing customer incentives for water

conservation. State agencies, such as Washington State Department of Ecology and Connecticut

Department of Public Health, have produced guidebooks that provide blueprints for creating water

conservation programs relevant to using the methods in their own states. After reviewing the critical

points to consider when devising a water conservation program, those guidebooks provide the next

steps for designing a program that is cost-effective.

This preliminary report focuses on applications of water closets, showerheads, and faucets.

Information on urinal replacement programs and studies is still being sought.

DRAFr, January 27, 1995

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

only successful programs, but have been se1ected because they are characteristic of programs that are 

well-documented, use methodology translatable to many other regions of the country, and 

successfully save water. 

1be report does not provide a spreadsheet or detailed account of the exact steps to take when 

developing a water conservation program. That has already been done. The American Water Works 

Association (A WW A), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and others have generated 

accessible and thorough instruction guidebooks that take the reader step by step through the 

components of a water conservation program. A WW A has excellent water conservation guides that 

approach program development from the perspective of the needs of conservation managers, and 

sman and medium utilities. EPA has produced literature detailing customer incentives for water 

conservation. State agencies, such as Washington State Department of Ecology and Connecticut 

Department of Public Health, have produced guidebooks that provide blueprints for creating water 

conservation programs relevant to using the methods in their own states. After reviewing the critical 

points to consider when devising a water conservation program, those guidebooks provide the next 

steps for designing a program that is cost-effective. 

This preliminary report focuses on applications of water closets, showerheads, and faucets. 

Infonnation on urinal replacement programs and studies is still being sought . 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 iii 
TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................... ii

INTRODUCTION .......................................................... 1

CONSIDERATIONS FOR A SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM ............................ 6

Calculating Water Usage ................................................ 6

Determining Past Practices ............................................... 7

Setting Program Objectives and Target Audience .............................. 7

Choosing the Most Appropriate Method .................................... 9

Evaluating Results .................................................... 11

RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................... 13

New York City's Rebate Program ........................................ 14

Profile of the New York City Area ................................... 14

Development of the program ...................................... 15

Program Goals ................................ ...............15

Choice of an Appropriate Program .................................. 16

Description of Program .......................................... 16

Program Evaluation ............................................. 17

Los Angeles Community/Utility Coalition .................................. 18

Profile of the East Los Angeles Area ............... ................. 18

Development of the program ...................................... 18

Program Goals ................................................. 19

Choice of an Appropriate Program .................................. 19

Description of Program .......................................... 19

Program Evaluation .......................................:.....21

Low Cost Programs -- Portland, Connecticut .................................23

Profile of the Portland Area ........................ . .............. 23

Development of the program ...................................... 23

Program Goals ................................................. 24

Description of the Program ........................................ 24

Results of the program ......................... ................ 25

Appendix A ............................................................... 27

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 iv

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

EXECUTNE SUMMARY .................................................... ii 

INTRODUCTION .......................................................... 1 

. CONSIDERATIONS FOR A SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM ............................ 6 

Calculating Water Usage ................................................ 6 

Detennining Past Practices ............................................... 7 

Setting Program Objectives and Target Audience .............................. 7 

Choosing the Most Appropriate Method .................................... 9 

Evaluating Results .................................................... 11 

RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................... 13 

New York City's Rebate Program ........................................ 14 

Profile of the New York City Area .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 

Development of the program ...................................... 15 

Program Goals ................................................. 15 

Choice of an Appropriate Program .................................. 16 

Description of Program .......................................... 16 

Program Evaluation ............................................. 17 

Los Angeles CommunitylUtility Coalition .................................. 18 

Profile of the East Los Angeles Area ................................ 18 

Development of the program ...................................... 18 

Program Goals ................................................. 19 

Choice of an Appropriate Program .................................. 19 

Description of Program .......................................... 19 

Program Evaluation ....................................... ~ ..... 21 

Low Cost Programs -- Portland, Connecticut ................................ ·23 

Profile of the Portland Area ....................................... 23 

Development of the program' ...................................... 23 

Program Goals ................................................. 24 

Description of the Program ........................................ 24 

Results of the program ............................................. 25 

Appendix A . . . . . . . . . . ..................................................... 27 

DRAB, January 27, 1995 IV 
INTRODUCTION

There are many ways that water . conservation can benefit a community. The need for

conservation is obvious in areas where water is in short supply . Efficient use of water helps

communities meet current supply needs in times of drought and when expanding population places

increased pressure on existing supplies. Reducing demand can also protect future water resources by

drawing more slowly upon reservoirs and aquifers.

Installing low-flow fixtures and fittings , thereby reducing water demand, can have additional

advantages for a community . Less water passing through the system , for instance, means less water

and wastewater to treat. Studies have shown that the benefits from residential retrofit programs

include: "reduced energy, chemical, and other costs associated with the treatment and distribution of

water; reduced energy, chemical, and other costs associated with wastewater treatment and disposal;

deferred costs associated with new or expanded water supply and distribution facilities; and

residential savings from reduced energy bills."' The greatest energy savings will be due to decreased

hot water use. With the installation of low-flow showerheads and faucets, national hot water use

reduction is estimated at 560 million gallons per day by 2010, 9% less than the level of hot water use

forecasted without the standards.' This could translate into a net national energy savings of 4.3 billion

'Babcock, Thomas M., Mary Ann Dickinson , Thomas E. Pape, and David Schultz. 1993.

The Water Conservation Manager 's Guide to Residential Retrofit. American Water Works

Association. p. 24.

2 Koomey, Jonathan, C. Dunham, and J.D. Lutz. 1994. The Effect of Efficiency Standards

on Water Use and Water Heating Energy Use in the U.S.: A Detailed End-use Treatment.

Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory. LBL-35475. May. p. 10.

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 1

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

INTRODUCTION 

There are many ways that water conservation can benefit a community. The need for 

conservation is obvious in areas where water is in short supply. Efficient use of water helps 

communities meet current supply needs in times of drought and when expanding population places 

increased pressure on existing supplies. Reducing demand can also protect future water resources by 

drawing more slowly upon reservoirs and aquifers. 

Installing low-flow fixtures and fittings, thereby reducing water demand, can have additional 

advantages for a community. Less water passing through the system, for instance, means less water 

and wastewater to treat. Studies have shown that the benefits from residential retrofit programs 

include: "reduced energy, chemical, and other costs associated with the treatment and distribution of 

water; reduced energy, chemical, and other costs associated with wastewater treatment and disposal; 

deferred costs associated with new or expanded water supply and distribution facilities; and 

residential savings from reduced energy bills."l The greatest energy savings will be due to decreased 

hot water use. With the installation of low-flow showerheads and faucets, national hot water use 

reduction is estimated at 560 million gallons per day by 2010, 9% less than the level of hot water use 

forecasted without the standards.2 This could translate into a net national energy savings of 4.3 billion 

IBabcock, Thomas M., Mary Ann Dickinson, Thomas E. Pape, and David Schultz. 1993. 

The Water Conservation Manager's Guide to Residential Retrofit. American WaterWorks 

Assoc:iation. p. 24. 

2 Koomey, Jonathan, C. Dunham, and J.D. Lutz. 1994. The Effect of Efficiency Standards 

on Water Use and Water Heating Energy Use in the U.S.: A Detailed End-use Treatment. 

Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory. LBL-35475. May. p. 10. 

DRAFT, January 27, t 995 1 
dollars per year3 if the country responds quickly to EPACT and replaces high-flow fixtures and

fittings with models that conform to the low-flow national standard.

In some residential environments, faucets, showerheads and toilets account for as much as 56

percent of water usage.4 Exchanging high-flow fixtures and fittings with low-flow models. makes a

considerable reduction in the water usage of those communities and could reduce the water

consumption level of the nation by as much as three billion gallons per day by the year 2010, 17% less

than the residential plumbing water used in 1993.5 In addition to energy cost savings for hot water,

substantial consumer savings would also be seen in water bills.

Background

The impetus for national plumbing standard legislation arose from local activities around the

country. Local efforts began in the early 1970s with the increase of oil prices. Electric and gas utilities

began programs to decrease hot water usage. One of many examples of effective electric and gas

programs to reduce hot water usage can be found in Osage, Iowa.

Osage Municipal Utilities developed an energy reduction program to delay the construction

of an electrical generating plant. After implementing the energy savings program, which included the

distribution of 2300 low-flow showerheads and 2000 low-flow faucet aerators to its community of

3500 residents, Osage Municipal Utilities reduced its annual growth of energy consumption from

3Energy savings = (specific heat of H2O) (OT) ( gallons/day saved) (density of H2O) 0/2

price of electricity/electrical water heater efficiency + V2 price of gas/gas water heater efficiency )

Electricity = $0.08/kWh; Gas = $0.60; 1.09 X 109 gall ons/day projected savings with new

efficiency standards

4Koomey, QR .t*ii, p. 10.

5Koomey, Dp. di.. p. 10.

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 2

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

dollars per year3 if the country responds quickly to EP ACT and replaces high-flow flXtureS and 

fittings with models that confonn to the low-flow national standard. 

In some residential environments, faucets, showerheads and toilets account for as much as 56 

percent of water usage.4 Exchanging high-flow flXtures and fittings with low-flow models. makes a 

considerable reduction in the water usage of those communities and could reduce the water 

consumption 1evel of the nation by as much as three billion gallons per day by the year 2010,17% less 

than the residential plumbing water used in 1993.5 In addition to energy cost savings for hot water, 

substantial consumer savings would also be seen in water bills. 

Background 

TIle impetus for national plumbing standard legislation arose from local activities around the 

country. Local efforts began in the early 1970s with the increase of oil prices. Electric and gas utilities 

began programs to decrease hot water usage. One of many examples of effective electric and gas 

programs to reduce hot water usage can be found in Osage, Iowa. 

Osage Municipal Utilities developed an energy reduction program to delay the construction 

of an electrical generating plant. After implementing the energy savings program, which included the 

distribution of 2300 low-flow showerheads and 2000 low-flow faucet aerators to its community of 

3500 residents, Osage Municipal Utilities reduced its annual growth of energy consumption from 

3Energy savings = (specific heat of H20) (aT) (gallons/day saved) (density of H20) (Yl 

price of electricity/electrical water heater efficiency + Yl price of gas/gas water heater efficiency) 

Electricity = $0.08IkWh; Gas = $0.60; 1.09 X 109 gallons/day projected savings with new 

efficiency standards 

4Koomey,.up cit, p. 10. 

5Koomey,.up. cit .. p. 10. 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 2 
7.2% down to 3%.6

Water utilities initiated water conservation programs in the early eighties. The California

drought inspired numerous water utilities to encourage consumers to conserve water in order to

reduce demand on a decreasing water supply. The public was introduced to low-flow fixtures, fittings,

and activities that would extend the life of the area's water. Goleta, California, is credited as one of

the first communities to substitute conservation for the traditional approach of expanding supply to

solve their shortage. The water utility gave rebates to customers who replaced older toilets with ultralow flush toilets. More than 35,000 low-flow showerheads were also distributed by the Goleta Water

District. The utility managed to slow the annual rate of water consumption growth to their targeted

7%. Other communities in the area not participating in water conservation activities fared less well

when their annual water consumption increased between 13 and 15% in the same period of time.

On the state level in March of 1989, Massachusetts became the first state to require

installation of 1.6 gallons per flush (gpf) toilets to extend its water supply. Connecticut initiated

conservation efforts to forestall expenditures for projected water supply development because of

population growth. In 1989, the Connecticut legislature passed a law "requiring a statewide

residential retrofit program, more efficient plumbing fixtures, and uniform water conservation

planning " 7

As more State legislatures passed maximum flow requirements, Congress began considering

maximum flow rates for the nation as a whole. By setting national maximum flow rates for

'Birdsall, Weston. Energy Efficiency -- The Osage Experience. Osage Municipal Utilities

Box 207 Osage, Iowa 50461. (515) 732-3731.

7Ruzccka, Denise, Connecticut State Department of Health Services, Environmental

Health Division. (Denise Ruzicka 203-566-1253)

DRAFr, January 27, 1995 3

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

7.2% down to 3%.6 

Water utilities initiated water conservation programs in the early eighties. The California 

drought inspired numerous water utilities to encourage consumers to conserve water in order to 

reduce demand on a decreasing water supply. 1be public was introduced to low-flow fIXtureS~ fittings, 

and activities that would extend the life of the area's water. Goleta, California, is credited as one of 

the first communities to substitute conservation for the traditional approach of expanding supply to 

solve their shortage. TIle water utility gave rebates to customers who replaced older toilets with ultralow flush toilets. More than 35,000 low-flow showerheads were also distributed by the Goleta Water 

District. 1be utility managed to slow the annual rate of water consumption growth to their targeted 

7%. Other communities in the area not participating in water conservation activities fared less well 

when their annual water consumption increased between 13 and 15% in the same period of time. 

On the state level in March of 1989, Massachusetts became the ftrst state to require 

installation of 1.6 gallons per flush (gpO toilets to extend its water supply. Connecticut initiated 

conservation efforts to forestall expenditures for projected water supply development because of 

population growth. In 1989, the Connecticut legislature passed a law "requiring a statewide 

residential retrofit program, more efftcient plumbing fixtures, and unifonn water conservation 

planning. II 

7 

As more State 1egislatures passed maximum flow requirements, Congress began considering 

maximum flow rates for the nation as a whole. By setting national maximum flow rates for 

6Birdsall, Weston. Energy Efficiency -- The Osage Experience. Osage Municipal Utilities 

Box 207 Osage, Iowa 50461. (515) 732-3731. 

7Ruzicka, Denise, Connecticut State Department of Health Services, Environmental 

Health Division. (Denise Ruzicka 203-566-1253) 

DRAFf. January 27.1995 3 
showerheads, toilets, faucet aerators and urinals, national water usage is reduced as the more efficient

products gradually replace the existing stock. Additional savings are derived from wastewater flow

reduction, increased sewage treatment plant capacity, delays in construction of new treatment plants,

improved performance of septic tanks, and soil absorption systems."

In October of 1992, the Energy Policy Act (EPACT) established the first national legislation

determining maximum flow rates for showerheads, faucets, toilets and urinals in the United States.

Maximum flow rates for showerheads and faucets are 2.5 gallons per minute (gpm), 1 gallon per flush

(gpf) for urinals, and 1.6 gpf for toilets (excluding flushometer type and those for commercial use).

To increase the water saving benefits of the lowered flow rates more quickly, Section 123 of EPACT

required the Department of Energy (DOE) to issue recommendations to the States to encourage the

establishment of State and local incentive programs designed to motivate people to voluntarily replace

their older plumbing fixtures and fittings with newer, more efficient showerheads, toilets, faucets, and

urinals.'

EPACT is not specific as to what kind of incentive program to encourage since there are many

kinds of successful incentive programs. Effective programs vary according to area and must take into

account the age of the housing stock, the type of water supply, the environmental conditions, the rate

of population and industrial growth, and the type of water supplier. The program should be

customized to produce the greatest results for the least cost. States must compare water conservation

"Hearing setfor water-saving toilets. Delaware River Basin Commission. PR Newswire,

March 8, 1989 (Jeff Featherstone 609-883-9500)

9Amrein, Diana L., 1990. Water matters: water conservationists, plumbing industry still

at odds over National Plumbing Products Efficiency Act of 1989. Contractor v37: nlp30(2),

January.

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 4

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

showerheads, toilets, faucet aerators and urina1s, national water usage is reduced as the more efficient 

products gradually replace the existing stock. Additional savings are derived from wastewater flow 

reduction, increased sewage treatment plant capacity, delays in construction of new treatment plants, 

imprQved perfonnance of septic tanks, and soil absorption systems.8 

In October of 1992, the Energy Policy Act (EPACT) established the fIrSt national legislation 

detennining maximum flow rates for showerheads, faucets, toilets and urinals in the United States. 

Maximum flow rates for showerheads and faucets are 2.5 gallons per minute (gpm), 1 gallon per flush 

(gpt) for urinals, and 1.6 gpf for toilets (excluding flushometer type and those for commercial use). 

To increase the water saving benefits of the lowered flow rates more quickly, Section 123 of EPACT 

required the Department of Energy (DOE) to issue recommendations to the States to encourage the 

establishment of State and local incentive programs designed to motivate people to voluntarily replace 

their older plumbing fixtures and fittings with newer, more efficient showerheads, toilets, faucets, and 

EP ACf is not specific as to what kind of incentive program to encourage since there are many 

kinds of successful incentive programs. Effective programs vary according to area and must take into 

account the age of the housing stock, the type of water supply, the environmental conditions, the rate 

of population and industrial growth, and the type of water supplier. The program should be 

customized to produce the greatest results for the 1east cost. States must compare water conservation 

8Hearing setJor water-saving toilets. Delaware River Basin Commission. PR Newswire, 

March 8, 1989 (Jeff Featherstone 609-883-95(0) 

9 Amrein, Diana L., 1990. Water matters: water conservationists, plumhing industry still 

at odds over National Plumbing Products Efficiency Act of 1989. Contractor v37: nlp30(2), 

January. 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 4 
programs to determine which is most cost-effective for them. What may be appropriate for one part

of the country, may be counter productive for another.

The information included in this report is in no way inclusive of the amount of quality

literature that exists. In an effort to assist people with information regarding water conservation, the

American Water Works Association with a grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

established an information distribution service called WaterWiser -- The Water Efficiency Clearing

House. Available to the public via a toll-free number, WaterWiser provides assistance with planning,

implementing and evaluating water efficiency programs and activities. 10

10WaterWiser, 6666 West Quincy Avenue, Denver, CO 80235-9913, 800-559-9855.

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 5

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

programs to detennine which is most cost-effective for them. What may be appropriate for one part 

of the country, may be counter productive for another. 

The information included in this report is in no way inclusive of the amount of quality 

literatUre that exists. In an effort to assist people with information regarding water conservation, the 

American Water Works Association with a grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

established an information distribution service called WaterWiser -- The Water Efficiency Clearing 

House. Available to the public via a toll-free number, WaterWiser provides assistance with planning. 

implementing and evaluating water efficiency programs and activities. 10 

lOWaterWiser, 6666 West Quincy Avenue, Denver, CO 80235-9913,800-559-9855. 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 5 
CONSIDERATIONS FOR A SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM

Calculating Water Usage

Water demand projections should be broken into major categories of water use. Those

categories could be residential , commercial, industrial, or agricultural. When seeking to reduce

residential water consumption , a residential retrofit program should be considered. "Me following

factors that affect residential water use should be taken into account when projecting demand:

number and type of households; family size ; income; lot size; current conservation practices; price

of water and wastewater service ; climate; regulations or plumbing codes that require water efficient

fixtures in new construction; landscape ordinances; and population and housing growth in the service

area."" Differentiating between indoor and outdoor water use is important.

In 1991, East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) contracted with Stevens Institute of

Technology to undertake a residential end-use study. Twenty-five homes were chosen and toilet and

showerhead connections were metered. From that study, EBMUD learned what water savings could

be expected from ULF toilets and what the consumers' acceptance of the 1.6 gpf units would be. The

results of that study along with other research contributed to the EBMUD program that is currently

(1994-95) offering water customers a $50 rebate for the purchase and installation of an ultra-low

flush (ULF) toilet.

Another end-use study produced different results for a different region , showing that in some

areas reducing indoor residential water consumption may not be as significant as reducing outdoor

residential water consumption. In Tampa, Florida, in a study funded by the Southwest Florida Water

"Babcock, Thomas; Mary Ann Dickinson; Thomas Pape; David Schultz, eds. 1993. The

Water Conservation Manager's Guide to Residential Retrofit. American Water Works

Association. pp. 3-4.

DRAFT, January 27,1995 6

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

CONSIDERATIONS FOR A SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM 

Calculatin~ Water Usage 

Water demand projections should be broken into major categories of water use. Those 

categories could be residential, commercial, industrial, or agricultural. When seeking to reduce 

residential water consumption, a residential retrofit program should be considered. "The following 

factors that affect residential water use should be taken into account when, projecting demand: 

number and type of households; family size; income; lot size; current conservation practices; price 

of water and wastewater service; climate; regulations or plumbing codes that require water efficient 

fixtures in new construction; landscape ordinances; and population and housing growth in the service 

area.

nll Differentiating between indoor and outdoor water use is important. 

In 1991, East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) contracted with Stevens Institute of 

Technology to undertake a residential end-use study. Twenty-five homes were chosen and toilet and 

showerhead cormections were metered. From that study, EBMUD learned what water savings could 

be expected from ULF toilets and what the consumers' acceptance of the 1.6 gpf units would be. The 

results of that study along with other research contributed to the EBMUD program that is currently 

(1994-95) offering water customers a $50 rebate for the purchase and installation of an ultra-low 

flush (ULF) toilet. 

Another end-use study produced different results for a different region, showing that in some 

areas reducing indoor residential water consumption may not be as significant as reducing outdoor 

residential water consumption. In Tampa, Florida, in a study funded by the Southwest Florida Water 

llBabcock, Thomas; Mary Ann Dickinson; Thomas Pape; David Schultz, eds. 1993. The 

Water Conservation Manager's Guide to Residential Retrofit. American WaterWorks 

Association. pp. 3-4. 

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 6 
Management District, a water audit indicated that outdoor water use accounted for 50-60% of

residential water use. In a Dade County potential water conservation and supply options study,

estimated savings from installation of ultra-low volume fittings and fixtures in Dade and Monroe

Counties was approximately 7.6 million gallons per day. A modified irrigation schedule and

installation of rainfall sensor switches were estimated to reduce water consumption by 30 to 40

million gallons per day.

Determining Past Practices

By checking the plumbing codes, it can be determined what fixture and fitting standards were

required in new construction. Targeting older housing yields greater water savings than retrofitting

homes that were constructed when plumbing standards were more stringent.

By metering water usage, EBMUD determined that pre-retrofit flush volume was 4.0 gallons

per flush and 1.8 gallons per flush post-retrofit -- producing a water savings of 5.3 gallons per person

per day. (The average number of flushes per person per day increased from 3.2 to 3.7 after the

retrofit.) EBMUD also discovered that penetration of low-flow showerheads was greater than they

had anticipated. Twenty-one of the 31 original showerheads were rated less than or equal to 2.5 gpm.

Replacing showerheads became less of a priority for the utility.

Setting Program Objectives and Target Audience

Programs are not wholly transferrable from one area to another. Developing objectives for

a water efficiency program requires understanding the water service area. In Evaluating Urban Water

Conservation Programs: A Procedures Manual, a number of questions are suggested to help the

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 7

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

Management District, a water audit indicated that outdoor water use accounted for 50-60% of 

residential water use. In a Dade County potential water conservation and supply options study, 

estimated savings from installation of ultra-low volume fittings and fixtures in Dade and Monroe 

Counties was approximately 7.6 million gallons per day. A modified irrigation schedule and 

installation of rainfall sensor switches were estimated to reduce water consumption by 30 to 40 

million gallons per day. 

Determinin~ Past practices 

By checking the plumbing codes, it can be detemmed what fIXture and fitting standards were 

required in new construction. Targeting older housing yields greater water savings than retrofitting 

homes that were constructed when plumbing $tandards were more stringent. 

By metering water usage, EBMUD determined that pre-retrofit flush volume was 4.0 gallons 

per flush and 1.8 gallons per flush post-retrofit -- producing a water savings of 5.3 gallons per person 

per day. (The average number of flushes per person per day increased from 3.2 to 3.7 after the 

retrofit.) EBMUD also discovered that penetration of low-flow showerheads was greater than they 

had anticipated. Twenty-one of the 31 original showerheads were rated less than or equal to 2.5 gpm. 

Replacing showerheads became less of a priority for the utility. 

Setting program Objectives and Target Audience 

Programs are not wholly transferrable from one area to another. Developing objectives for 

a water efficiency program requires understanding the water service area. In Evaluating Urban Water 

Conservation Programs: A Procedures Manual, a number of questions are suggested to help the 

DR.AFT, January 27,1995 7 
reader set water conservation program objectives:

"(1) Is there a short-term (e.g., drought-related, source contamination , or other emergency

condition) or long-term (e.g., inadequacy of long -term supplies or storage capacity) water

supply problem?

(2) Is there a distribution system problem (e.g., excessive sewer flows, water/wastewater

treatment plant capacities)?

(3) Is the problem localized (e.g. capacity problems of a single water or wastewater treatment

plant) or systemwide?

(4) Is the problem a seasonal issue (e.g., summer demands, maximum daily demands , or average

annual demands)?""

The target audience can be defined on the basis of the following characteristics: type and age

of housing, household income, water usage, water use type, geographic location, meter size.13

12Planning and Management Consultants, Ltd. (PMCL) 1993. Evaluating Urban Water

Conservation Programs: A Procedures Manual. American Water Works Association. p. 67.

'PPMCL, ,Qp cit, p. 82.

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 8

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

reader set water conservation program objectives: 

"(1) Is there a short-term (e.g., drought-reiated, source contamination, orother em.ergency 

condition) or long-term (e.g., inadequacy of long-term supplies or storage capacity) water 

supply problem? 

(2) Is there a distribution system problem (e.g., excessive sewer flows, water/wastewater 

treatment plant capacities)? 

(3) Is the problem localized (e.g. capacity problems of a single water or wastewater treatment 

plant) or systemwide? 

(4) Is the problem a seasonal issue (e.g., summer demands, maximum daily demands, or average 

annual demands)?"12 

The target audience can be defined on the basis of the following characteristics: type and age 

of housing, household income, water usage, water use type, geographic location, meter size.13 

12Planning and Management Consultants, Ltd. (PMCL) 1993. Evaluating Urban Water 

Conservation Programs: A Procedures Manual. American WaterWorks Association. p. 67. 

13PMCL, Q.P.cit, p. 82. 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 8 
Choosing the Most Appropriate Method

A water conservation program should be reflective of an area's needs in order to be

successful. In the table below, water conservation methods are categorized under type of water user.

For residential retrofits, information regarding market penetration for the potential retrofit

products is important to have. Replacing showerheads when the area's consumers have already

purchased low-flow showerheads is not cost-effective. The American Water Works Association

(AWWA) calculated the market penetration for the plumbing products.

Device Consumption Savings

(gallons per capita daily)

Estimated Market

Penetration

Estimated Overall Savings

(gpcd)

Ultra-low flush toilets 16.0 5% 0.8 .

Low-flow showerheads 7.2 15% 1.1

Low-flow faucets 0.5 15% 0.1

Retrofit kits for

showerheads and toilets

6.5 35% 2.3

Leak detection programs 6.0 15% 0 914

14Chansler, James M. and Victor J. Pujals.1993. Conserv `93 Conference Proceedings.

American Water Works Association. December. p. 1383.

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 9

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

Choosing the Most Appropriate Method 

A water conservation program should be reflective of an area's needs in order to be 

successful In the table below, water conservation methods are categorized under type of water user. 

For residential retrofits, infonnation regarding market penetration for the potential retrofit 

products is important to have. Replacing showerheads when the area's consumers have already 

purchased low-flow showerbeads is not cost-effective. The American Water Works Association 

(A WW A) calculated the market penetration for the plumbing products. 

Device Consumption Savings Estimated Market Estimated Overall Savings 

(gallons per capita daily) Penetration (gpcd) 

Ultra-low flush toilets 16.0 5% 0.8 

Low-flow showerheads 7.2 15% 1.1 

Low-flow faucets 0.5 15% 0.1 

Retrofit kits for 6.5 35% 2.3 

showerheads and toilets 

Leak detection programs 6.0 15% 0.914 

14Chansler, James M. and Victor 1. Pujals. 1993. Conserv '93 Conference Proceedings. 

American WaterWorks Association. December. p. 1383. 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 9 
TYPICAL LONG-TERM WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES

BY WATER USE TYPE

Area of Application Conservation Method

General Public information

In-school education

Metering

Pressure reduction

Pricing policies

(1) Uniform commodity rates

(2) Increasing block rate

(3) Seasonal rates

Leak detection and repair

System rehabilitation

Interior residential use

Power generation

Industrial use

Landscape irrigation/design

Low-flow showerheads

Shower-flow restrictors

Toilet-tank inserts

Pipe insulation

Faucet aerators

Water-efficient appliances

Ultra-low-flush toilets

Recirculation of cooling water

Reuse of treated wastewater

In-system treatment

Recirculation of cooling water

Reuse of cooling and process water

Reuse of treated wastewater

Efficient landscape irrigation

Low-water-using fixtures

Process modification

Efficient landscape design

Low-water-use plant material

Scheduled irrigation

Efficient irrigation systems

Tensiometers

Reduction or limitation of high water use plant

materials such as turf

Source: Maddaus, W.O. 1987. Water Conservation . American Water Works Association. Denver, CO.

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 10

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

TYPICAL LONG· TERM WATER CONSERV A nON MEASURES 

BY WATER USE TYPE 

Area of Application 

General 

Interior residential use 

Power generation 

Industrial use 

Landscape irrigation/design 

Conservation Method 

Public infonnation 

In-school education 

Metering 

Pressure reduction 

Pricing policies 

(1) Unifonn commodity rates 

(2) Increasing block rate 

(3) Seasonal rates 

Leak detection and repair 

System rehabilitation 

Low-flow showerheads 

Shower-flow restrictors 

Toilet-tank inserts 

Pipe insulation 

Faucet aerators 

Water-efficient appliances 

Ultra-low-flush toilets 

Recirculation of cooling water 

Reuse of treated wastewater 

In-system treatment 

Recirculation of cooling water 

Reuse of cooling and process water 

Reuse of treated wastewater 

Efficient landscape irrigation 

Low-water-using fixtures 

Process modification 

Efficient landscape design 

Low-water-use plant material 

Scheduled irrigati~n 

Efficient irrigation systems 

Tensiometers . 

Reduction or limitation of high water use plant 

materials such as turf 

Source: Maddaus, W.O. 1987. Water Conservation. American Water Works Association. Denver, CO. 

DRAFT. January 27. 1995 10 
Evaluating Results

Evaluating the program will show whether or not the program has accomplished its objectives.

Data is key to a thorough evaluation. Data should be collected throughout the course of the program,

as well as the beginning and the end. Evaluations of pilot studies can contribute to the success of a

larger program. Initial assumptions about program elements can be confirmed or amended on the

basis of pilot study results, as shown by the EBMUD study. How much water was actually saved by

the water conservation program is a key element for evaluation. Additional aspects for evaluation are

the extent of program penetration, energy savings, and customer satisfaction.

(1) Data Collection on the utility level. Utilities gather information on total usage levels. For

accurate baseline figures, many water utilities suggest collecting customer consumption information

for at least two years prior to the beginning of the program. Drought years are not accurate

reflections of consumption ; therefore, gathering baseline figures may require going back more than

two years if drought has been a factor in the area. Weather information for the same time period

should be compiled. Socioeconomic information assists targeting the consumer base for future

programs.

(2) Data Collection on the consumer level. A bottom -up approach to consumer data collection

is important when focussing programs on specific end-use products. Water usage separated by

household and then averaged over all households with different appliances "provides no guidance as

to what impact different conservation measures might have on that usage."" The EBMUD study

monitored the toilet flush rates by time in order to catch double flushing . Showerhead flow rates were

monitored together with temperature and pressure variables.

15Koomey, Qg sit, p. 1.

DRAFT, January 27 ,1995 11

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

Eyaluating Results 

Evaluating the program will show whether or not the program has accomplished its objectives. 

Data is key to a thorough evaluation. Data should be collected throughout the course of the program, 

as well as the beginning and the end. Evaluations of pilot studies can contribute to the success of a 

larger program. Initial assumptions about program elements can be confirmed or amended on the 

basis of pilot study results, as shown by the EBMUD study. How much water was actually saved by 

the water conservation program is a key e1ement for evaluation. Additional aspects for evaluation are 

the extent of program penetration, energy savings, and customer satisfaction. 

(1) Data Collection on the utility level. Utilities gather information on total usage levels. For 

accurate baseline figures, many water utilities suggest collecting customer consumption information 

for at least two years prior to the beginning of the program. Drought years are not accurate 

reflections of consumption; therefore, gathering baseline figures may require going back more than 

two years if drought has been a factor in the area. Weather information for the same time period 

should be compiled. Socioeconomic information assists targeting the consumer base for future 

programs. 

(2) Data Collection on the consumer level. A bottom-up approach to consumer data collection 

is important when ~ocussing programs on specific end-use products. Water usage separated by 

household and then averaged over all households with different appliances "provides no guidance as 

to what impact different conservation measures might have on that usage."lS The EBMUD study 

monitored the toilet flush rates by time in oriler to catch doub1e flushing. Showerhead flow rates were 

monitored together with temperature and pressure variables. 

15K • 1 oomey, .up gt, p. . 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 11 
The evaluation will disclose whether or not the program has met its stated goals. An

evaluation of a pilot study can determine how a larger program can be cost-effective. What will work

in the varied regions of this country can be determined by calculating water usage, determining past

water conservation practices of the area, setting program objectives and target audience, and

choosing the most appropriate method.

DRAFT, January 27 ,1995 12

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

The evaluation will disclose whether or not the program has met its stated goals. An 

evaluation of a pilot study can detennine how a larger program can be cost-effective. What will work 

in the varied regions of this country can be determined by calculating water usage, determining past 

water conservation practices of the area, setting program objectives and target audience, and 

choosing the most appropriate method. 

DRAFT. January 27.1995 12 
RECOMMENDATIONS

In the following section , three different programs are described : a rebate program in New

York City; an East Los Angeles community/utility coalition effort; and a low-cost retrofit program

in Portland, Connecticut. The incentive used in New York to replace toilets took the form of a $240

rebate to the building owner, funded by the New York City Water Board. The two water utilities in

Los Angeles funded a rebate program in the neighborhood of East Los Angeles , which paid a

subcontractor $ 110 per toilet. The subcontractor purchased toilets and administer all aspects of the

program. The subcontractor paid an East Los Angeles neighborhood organization $25 to assist in the

publicity and installation of the toilets. Portland Water Supply Division used water conservation

education as an incentive to enlist retrofit kit delivery volunteers. The Connecticut water utility paid

for the cost of the retrofit kits. The methodology used in each city resulted in successful initiatives

for plumbing product replacement. The cities used as examples are representative of many other

successful and creative programs from all parts of the United States. These programs highlight

different techniques for replacing plumbing fixtures and fittings and are well documented, enabling

water conservation efforts to be duplicated by parties in other regions. It is recommended that states,

after determining from the previous section that they would benefit from a similar water conservation

program, study these three initiatives and consider implementing comparable programs to achieve

water conservation goals in their areas.

New York City is included as an example because of the water supply shortage it faces, its

high volume of residential indoor water use, and the careful way it constructed its toilet rebate

program. Water savings from the water conservation program to date are estimated between 29 - 68

gallons per participating household per day.

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 13

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

RECOMMENDATIONS 

In the following section, three different programs are described: a rebate program in New 

York City; an East Los Angeles community/utility coalition effort; and a low-cost retrofit program 

in Portland, Connecticut. TIle incentive used in New York to replace toilets took the form of a $240 

rebate to the buikling owner, funded by the New York City Water Board. The two water utilities in 

Los Angeles funded a rebate program in the neighborhood of East Los Angeles, which paid a 

subcontractor $110 per toilet The subcontractor purchased toilets and administer all aspects of the 

program. The subcontractor paid an East Los Angeles neighborhood organization $25 to assist in the 

publicity and installation of the toilets. Portland Water Supply Division used water conservation 

education as an incentive to enlist retrofit kit delivery volunteers. The Connecticut water utility paid 

for the cost of the retrofit kits. The methodology used in each city resulted in successful initiatives 

for plumbing product replacement. The cities used as examples are representative of many other 

successful and creative programs from all parts of the United States. These programs highlight 

different techniques for replacing plumbing fixtures and fittings and are well documented, enabling 

water conservation efforts to be duplicated by parties in other regions. It is recommended that states, 

after determining from the previous section that they would benefit from a similar water conservation 

program, study these three initiatives and consider implementing comparable programs to achieve 

water conservation goals in their areas. 

New York City is included as an example because of the water supply shortage it faces, its 

high volume of residential indoor water use, and the careful way it constructed its toilet rebate 

program. Water savings from the water conservation program to date are estimated between 29 - 68 

gallons per participating household per day. 

DRAFT. January 27.1995 13 
The Los Angeles water conservation program was initiated due to drought decreased water

supplies. The public utility paid, on a per toilet basis, community organizations to replace toilets,

showerheads, and faucet aerators in low-income neighborhoods. Water savings were estimated at 58

gallons per household per day.

Portland, Connecticut, is included as an example of a low budget plumbing retrofit program.

Costs were kept to a minimum through a water conservation education program that resulted in

community volunteers delivering showerheads, displacement bags, and faucet aerators. The program

saved an estimated at 11.6-18.3 gallons per household per day and reduced the number of new wells

the city needed to drill from seven to two.

New York City's Rebate Program16

1. Profile of the New York City Area

The majority of New York City's population of 7,323,000 live in multi-family buildings that

average 50 years in age. Water is supplied by a public utility from upstate reservoirs. The supply

system is gravity driven; no pumping is needed to move the water downstate.

For more than a decade, drought conditions have persisted for New York City. "A

combination of system demands that exceed the safe yield and erratic precipitation patterns have

caused four drought periods on the New York City system since 1980."17 Unless New York City is

able to reduce its demand for water, it will have to spend billions to expand the water supply and

"For more information contact, Warren Liebold, Director of Conservation, Bureau of

Water and Energy Conservation, Department of Environmental Protection. 59-17 Junction

Boulevard, Elmhurst, New York, 11373-5107 (718) 595-6656

17Nechamen, William S. 1993. New York State Policy: In Accordance with Local Needs

and Conditions Proceedings of Conserv '93. American Water Works Association. December. pp.

975-982.

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 14

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

The Los Ange1es water conservation program was initiated due to drought decreased water 

supplies. The public utility paid, on a per toilet basis, community organizations to replace toilets, 

showerheads, and faucet aerators in low-income neighborhoods. Water savings were estimated at 58 

gallons per household per day. 

Portland, Connecticut, is included as an example of a low budget plumbing retrofit program. 

Costs were kept to a minimum through a water conservation education program that resulted in 

community volunteers delivering showerheads, displacement bags, and faucet aerators. The program 

saved an estimated at 11.6-18.3 gallons per household per day and reduced the number of new wells 

the city needed to drill from seven to two. 

New York City's Rebate Program16 

1. Profile of the New York City Area 

The majority of New York City's population of 7,323,000 live in multi-family buildings that 

average 50 years in age. Water is supplied by a public utility from upstate reservoirs. The supply 

system is gravity driven; no pumping is needed to move the water downstate. 

Por more than a decade, drought conditions have persisted for New York City. "A 

combination of system demands that exceed the safe yield and erratic precipitation patterns have 

caused four drought periods on the New York City system since 1980."17 Unless New York City is 

able to reduce its demand for water, it will have to spend billions to expand the water supply and 

16Por more information contact, W men Liebold, Director of Conservation, Bureau of 

Water and Energy Conservation, Department of Environmental Protection. 59-17 Junction 

Boulevard, Elmhurst, New York, 1l373-5107 (718) 595-6656 

17Nechamen, William S. 1993. New York State Policy: In Accordance with Local Needs 

and Conditions Proceedings ofConserv '93. American WaterWorks Association. December. pp. 

975-982. 

DRAfT, January 27,1995 14 
wastewater treatment infrastructure . An average apartment uses approximately 335 gallons per day.

The amount can vary, however, between 40-2000 gallons per day.18

2. Development of the program

In order to delay or avoid expanding its water and water treatment infrastructure, New York

City joined a statewide water efficiency effort. In New York State, water systems that have

populations greater than 5,000 must develop conservation programs that include metering all

connections within five years, water supply auditing, and replacement of plumbing fixtures.

New York City is one of the last cities in the country to install meters . With meter installation,

billing will be based on consumption and will encourage water conservation . "(M)ull-family buildings

will be the primary users of the rebate program in New York City as they are being hit the hardest

by increased water and sewer charges and the transition to metering in high-consumption buildings."19

In New York City's transition to metering, almost half ofthe multi-family buildings experience annual

water and sewer charges of $300 or more per apartment.

3. Program Goals

'The goal of the three-year, $270 million program is to reduce citywide water use by about

90 million gallons per day or 7% of the city total water consumption."20 As an alternative to

constructing another water treatment plant, New York City chose to reduce its water demand by

replacing up to 1.5 million toilets in the next three years.

'8National Association of Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors (NAPHCC) Educational

Foundation. 1994. Draft Recommendations for EPA CT, Section 123. November. p. 7.

19NAPHCC, Qp. sit., p.7.

20Levin, Sondra. 1994. Flush of Success: Bronx First to Get New Water-Saving Toilets

Bronx Press Review. April. p. 5.

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 15

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

wastewater treatment infrastructure. An average apartment uses approximately 335 gallons per day. 

The amount can vary, however, between 40-2000 gallons per day.18 

2. Deyelopment of the pro~ram 

In order to delay or avoid expanding its water and water treatment infrastructure, New York 

City joined a statewide water efficiency effort. In New York State, water systems that have 

populations greater than 5,000 must develop conservation programs that include metering all 

connections within five years, water supply auditing, and replacement of plumbing fixtures. 

New York City is one of the last cities in the country to install meters. With meter installation, 

billing will be based on consumption and will encourage water conservation. n(M)ulti-family buildings 

will be the primary users of the rebate program in New York City as they are being hit the hardest 

by increased water and sewer charges and the transition to metering in high-consumption buildings. II 19 

In New York City's transition' to metering, almost half of the multi-family buildings experience annual 

water and sewer charges of $300 or more per apartment. 

3. Program Goals 

'The goal of the three-year, $270 million program is to reduce citywide water use by about 

90 million gallons per day or 7% of the city total water consumption.,,20 As an alternative to 

constructing another water treatment plant, New York City chose to reduce its water demand by 

replacing up to 1.5 million toilets in the next three years. 

18National Association ofPlumbing:Heating-Cooling Contractors (NAPHCC) Educational 

Foundation. 1994. Draft Recommendations for EPACT, Section 123. November. p. 7. 

l~APHCC, .QP • .cit" p. 7. 

2OUvin, Sondra. 1994. Flush of Success: Bronx First to Get New Water-Saving Toilets 

Bronx Press Review. ApriL p. 5. 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 15 
4. Choice of an Appropriate Program

Eighty percent of the existing toilets have a flush rate of 5 .0 gpf. Initial metering tests

performed in tenement buildings showed that total water consumption dropped by 50% after

replacing the 5 .0 gpf toilets with 1 .6 gpf toilets. New York City chose a toilet rebate program to save

water, reduce excess flow to sewage treatment plants, provide rate relief for consumers , and adopt

the least-cost solution.

"In 1989 , New York City's Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and Housing

Preservation and Development -- along with the Plumbing Foundation in the City of New York

undertook a demonstration program in city-owned buildings. Three similar apartment buildings in

Manhattan were metered to measure water usage , but only one building had water efficient fixtures

(low-flow toilets, low-flow showerheads, low-flow-restricting faucet aerators) installed. Later, four

additional buildings in the Bronx were added as nonconserving "control " buildings. Since monitoring

began in February 1989, water usage in the retrofitted buildings consistently has been 40% lower than

in the control buildings.""

5. Description of Program

(a). Rebate Level

DEP offers $240 for first bathroom in dwelling unit and $150 for each additional unit. For

non-residential units, DEP offers $ 150 per toilet. At least 70% of the toilets in a multi-family or

commercial building must be replaced to qualify for the rebate. Building owners must go through an

application process before qualifying for a rebate. Installation of the toilet must be done by a licensed

plumber.

21NAPHCC, Dp. sit. P. 12.

DRAFT, January 27 ,1495 16

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

4. Choice of an Appropriate Proiram 

Eighty percent of the existing toilets have a flush rate of 5.0 gpf. Initial metering tests 

performed in tenement buildings showed that total water consumption dropped by 50% after 

replacing the 5.0 gpf toilets with 1.6 gpf toilets. New York City chose a toilet rebate program to save 

water, reduce excess flow to sewage treatment plants, provide rate relief for consumers, and adopt 

the least-cost solution. 

"In 1989, New York City'S Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and Housing 

Preservation and Development -- along with the Plumbing Foundation in the City of New York --

undertook a demonstration program in city-owned buildings. Three similar apartment buildings in 

Manhattan were metered to measure water usage, but only one building had water efficient fixtures 

(low-flow toilets, low-flow showerheads, low-flow-restricting faucet aerators) installed Later, four 

additional buildings in the Bronx were added as nonconserving "control" buildings. Since monitoring 

began in February 1989, water usage in the retrofitted buildings consistently has been 40% lower than 

in the control buildings. 1121 

5. Descriptjon of Program 

(a). Rebate Leyel 

DEP offers $240 for first bathroom in dwelling unit and $150 for each additional unit. For 

non-residential units, DEP offers $150 per toilet. At least 70% of the toilets in a multi-family or 

commercial building must be replaced to qualify for the rebate. Building owners must go through an 

application process before qualifying for a rebate. Installation of the toilet must be done by a licensed 

plumber. 

21NAPHCC,.Qll. cit. p. 12. 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 16 
(b). Outreach

The Bureau of Water and Energy Conservation, part of the Department of Environmental

Protection, hired a contractor to process the applications, perform the inspections (guaranteeing that

the plumbing products are correctly installed), issue rebate checks to budding owners, design program

materials, and do press work. The media campaign consists of mailings, radio public service

announcements, newspaper ads, and slide shows. DEP employs two full time staff people to oversee

the progress of the program.

In October of 1993, the DEP kicked-off the borough-wide rebate program in Jacob Javits

Convention Center. Plumbers, building owners, housing associations and manufacturers attended.

Packets and briefings are regularly provided to plumbers, manufacturers, building owners, and co-op

boards.

(c). Budget

Funding for the DEP administered project is provided by New York City Water Board from

receipts from water and sewer customers. The majority of the project funds are allocated for rebates.

Fifteen million dollars have been paid out to date and DEP has $250 million available for rebates. The

contracting company is paid on a unit basis. If one million toilets are replaced, the contractor could

receive up to $12 million. Press work and printing costs have reached $2 million.

6. Program Evaluation

DEP monitored buildings for water consumption rates before the rebate so a comparison can

be made after the program has ended. As of the beginning of 1995, 85,000 toilets have been replaced.

DEP has paid 65-66,000 rebates. Water savings are estimated between 2.45 - 5.8 million gallons per

day. Consumer reaction to the low-flow toilets will be gauged by a survey.

DRAFT, January 27 , 1995 17

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

(b). Outreach 

The Bureau of Water and Energy Conservation, part of the Department of Environmental 

Protection, hired a contractor to process the applications, perform the inspections (guaranteeing that 

the plumbing products are correctly instaI1ed), issue rebate checks to building owners, design program 

materials, and do press work. The media campaign consists of mailings, radio public service 

announcements, newspaper ads, and slide shows. DEP employs two full time staff people to oversee 

the progress of the program. 

In October of 1993, the DEP kicked-off the borough-wide rebate program in .Jacob Javits 

Convention Center. Plumbers, building owners, housing associations and manufacturers attended. 

Packets and briefings are regularly provided to plumbers, manufacturers, building owners, and co-op 

boards. 

(c). . Budget 

Funding for the DEP administered project is provided by New York City Water Board from 

receipts from water and sewer customers. 1be majority of the project funds are allocated for rebates. 

Fifteen million dollars have been paid out to date and DEP has $250 million available for rebates. The 

contracting company is paid on a unit basis. If one million toilets are replaced, the contractor could 

receive up to $12 million. Press work and printing costs have reached $2 million. 

6. Pto~ram Eyaluation 

DEP monitored buildings for water consumption rates before the rebate so a comparison can 

be made after the program has ended. As of the beginning of 1995,85,000 toilets have been replaced. 

DEP has paid 65-66,000 rebates. Water savings are estimated between 2.45 - 5.8 million gallons per 

day. Consumer reaction to the low-flow toilets will be gauged by a survey. 

DRAFT, January 27. 1995 17 
Los Angeles Community! U ill . Coalition22

1. Profile of the East Los Angeles Area

East Los Angeles occupies an area of 10 square miles with approximately 100,000 residents,

living in single family homes. Since the early 1980s, drought conditions have prevailed in southern

California and an increasing population reduces an already low water supply. The water supplier is

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP), a municipal utility. It buys its water from

Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) and sells to retail customers. Both of

those organizations work together on water efficient practices.

Continuing drought conditions prompted LADWP to continue its water conservation efforts.

Because the California communities of Goleta and Santa Monica both experienced reduced residential

water consumption with the installation of ultra-low flush toilets, LADWP, with the support of MWD

planned an extensive city-wide toilet rebate program. Low flow showerheads had already been

distributed in the area as a result of a 1988 Los Angeles city ordinance requiring LADWP to replace

showerheads and install toilet displacement bags. MWD studies had shown that toilet replacement

could yield significant water savings. MWD's support included sharing half the financial costs of the

program.

2. Development of the program

Participants in the LADWP toilet replacement program presented proofs of purchase of ultralow flush toilets (ULFT) in order to receive rebates of $110. Low-income residents could not afford

the purchase of the toilet and therefore could not participate in the program. Working through the

22For more information contact Matt Puffer, Metropolitan Water District, 350 South

Grand Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90054

DRAFT, January 27,1995 18

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

Los Angeles Community/Utility Coalition22 

1. Profile of the East Los Angeles Area 

East Los Angeles occupies an area of 10 square miles with approximately 100,000 residents, 

living in single family homes. Since the early 1980s, drought conditions have prevailed in southern 

California and an increasing population reduces an already low water supply. The water supplier is 

Los Ange1es Department of Water and Power (LADWP), a municipal utility. It buys its water from 

Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) and sells to retail customers. Both of 

those organizations work together on water efficient practices. 

Continuing drought conditions prompted LADWP to continue its water conservation efforts. 

Because the California communities of Goleta and Santa Monica both experienced reduced residential 

water consumption with the installation of ultra-low flush toilets, LADWP, with the support of MWD 

planned an extensive city-wide toilet rebate program. Low flow showerheads had already been 

distributed in the area as a result of a 1988 Los Angeles city ordinance requiring LADWP to replace 

shower heads and install toilet displacement bags. MWD studies had shown that toilet replacement 

could yield significant water savings. MWD's support included sharing half the fmancial costs of the 

program. 

2. Deyelopment of the program 

Participants in the LADWP toilet replacement program presented proofs of purchase of ultralow flush toilets (ULFf) in order to receive rebates of $110. Low-income residents could not afford 

the purchase of the toilet and therefore could not participate in the program. Working through the 

22For more information contact Matt Puffer, Metropolitan Water District, 350 South 

Grand Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90054 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 18 
Mothers of East L.A. (MELASI), a community-based organization, LADWP and MWD provided

the ultra-low flush toilets to the low-income area of East Los Angeles. An incentive of $25 per toilet

installation was paid to MELASI.

3. Program Goals

The goal of the one year city-wide program was to distribute and install 7500 ultra-low flush

toilets as an alternative to continued mandatory rationing. In East Los Angeles, the goal was to

retrofit 1000 toilets in a ten-week time frame.

4. Choice of an Appropriate Program

LADWP wanted a program that would yield high water savings and would require little

supervision from the utility. The consumer "would select, buy, and install an approved ULFT, and

provide the necessary documentation; then LADWP would provide a rebate.s23 A low flush toilet

replacement needs no conscious water saving action from the user. Water conservation is built into

the mechanism.

5. Description of Program

The rebate program was customized for the East Los Angers area. In order to maintain a low

supervisory role and reach into neighborhoods that were not participating in the toilet rebate program,

LADWP and MWD agreed to channel funds designated for rebates to a subcontractor who would

work with MELASI. The community-based organization had a respected reputation within the East

L.A. community. MELASI proposed to work together with LADWP and MWD to promote water

conservation. From money generated from the utilities, MELASI would fund community projects it

23Fiske, Gary S. and Ronnie Ann Weiner, Barakat & Chamberlin, Inc. 1994. Customer

Incentives For Water Conservation: A Guide. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of

Water. EPA 230-R-94-001. February. p. 7-3.

DRAFT, January 27 , 1995 19

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

Mothers of East L.A. (MELASI), a community-based organization, LADWP and MWD provided 

the ultra-low flush toilets to the low-income area of East Los Angeles. An incentive of $25 per toilet 

installation was paid to MELASI. 

3. Program Goals 

The goal of the one year city-wide program was to distribute and install 7500 ultra-low flush 

toilets as an alternative to continued mandatory rationing. In East Los Angeles, the goal was to 

retrofit 1000 toilets in a ten-week time frame. 

4. Choice of an Appropriate Program 

LADWP wanted a program that would yield high water savings and would require little 

supervision from the utility. The consumer "would select, buy, and install an approved ULFf, and 

provide the necessary documentation; then LADWP would provide a rebate.,,23 A low flush toilet 

replacement needs no conscious water saving action from the user. Water conservation is built into 

the mechanism. 

5. Description of Program 

The rebate program was customized for the East Los Ange1es area. In order to maintain a low 

supervisory role and reach into neighborhoods that were not participating in the toilet rebate program, 

LADWP and MWD agreed to channel funds designated for rebates to a subcontractor who would 

work with MELASI. The community-based organization had a respected reputation within the East 

L.A community. MELASI proposed to work together with LADWP and MWD to promote water 

conservation. From money generated from the utilities, MELASI would fund community projects it 

23Fiske, Gary S. and Ronnie Ann Weiner, Barakat & Chamberlin, Inc. 1994. Customer 

Incentives For Water Conservation: A Guide. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of 

Water. EPA 230-R-94-001. February. p. 7-3. . 

DRAFT, JaDUary 27,1995 19 
would otherwise be unable to do.

(a). Rebate Level

LADWP and MWD shared the program costs, paying a subcontractor a total of $110 per

toilet which included the purchase and distribution of a toilet and administration of all other aspects

of the neighborhood program . The subcontractor paid MELASI $25 per toilet to publicize the

program in East Los Angeles and assist with toilet installations.

(b). Outreach

MELASI walked door-to-door in the East L.A. section of Los Angeles explaining the toilet

rebate program. The community organization provided services that included : bilingual installation

instructions, instructional videos, tool kits, and back -up installation assistance. MELASI distributed

the toilets from a central location to those residents who provided their water bill and photo

identification. The old toilet was returned to the central depot for recycling . MELASI employed eight

previously unemployed residents to publicize the program in the neighborhood and assist with the

installations when necessary.

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 20

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

would otherwise be unable to do. 

(a). Rebate Level 

LADWP and MWD shared the program costs, paying a subcontractor a total of $110 per 

toilet which included the purchase and distribution of a toilet and administration of all other aspects 

of the neighborhood program. The subcontractor paid MELASI $25 per toilet to publicize the 

program in East Los Angeles and assist with toilet installations. 

(b). Outreach 

MELASI wa1ked door-to-door in the East L.A. section of Los Angeles explaining the toilet 

rebate program. The community organization provided services that included: bilingual installation 

instructions, instructional videos, tool kits, and back-up installation assistance. MELASI distributed 

the toilets from a central location to those residents who provided their water bill and photo 

identification. The old toilet was returned to the central depot for recycling. MELASI employed eight 

previously unemployed residents to publicize the program in the neighborhood and assist with the 

installations when necessary. 

DRAFT. January 27. 1995 20 
(c). Budge^

The following table gives budget information for fiscal year 1992-1993 for the city-wide

program.

Number of ULFTs installed 65,167

Rebates to customers $5,545,700

Payment to MWD for CBO Program (since June 1993) $ 86,405

Payment to the contractor (program administration ) $ 846,789

LADWP expenses ( 1 FTE, printing brochures, etc.) $ 80,000

Subtotal $6,558,894

Reimbursement from MWD (@ 50% /ULFT) ($2,772,850

Total $3,786,044

6. Program Evaluation

After one year in operation, MELASI oversaw the installation of 8000 toilets. The city-wide

program goal exceeded its target number and retrofitted 230,000 toilets during the first eighteen

months. Some areas have reached a 30% saturation point.' LADWP estimates that for every retrofit

toilet 29 gallons/day have been saved. This translates into 10,585 gallons/household/year.

In Ultra Low Flush Toilet Programs: Evaluation of Program Outcomes and Water Savings,

water savings in the East Los Angeles area were estimated at 58.6 ± 14 gallons per day. "Not only

did this program replace ULF toilets in households unlikely to do so otherwise, the evidence also

suggests a higher level of water saved from each replaced ULF toilet.""' The greater number of

24Fiske, ap six, p. 7-9.

25Mousseau, Cathy. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. Phone contact.

26Chestnutt, Thomas W., Casey N. McSpadden, and Anil Bamezai. 1994. Ultra Low Flush

Toilet Programs: Evaluation of Program Outcomes and Water Savings. Prepared for The

Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. November. p. viii.

DRAFT, January 27,1995 21

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

(c). Budget 

The following table gives budget infonnation for fiscal year 1992-1993 for the city-wide 

program. 

Number of ULFfs installed 65,167 

Rebates to customers $5,545,700 

Payment to MWD for CBO Program (since June 1993) $ 86,405 

Payment to the contractor (program administration) $ 846,789 

LADWP expenses (1 FIE, printing brochures, etc.) $ 80,000 

Subtotal $6,558,894 

Reimbursement from MWD (@ 50% I ULFT) ($2,772,850~ 

Total $3,786,044 

6. Program Eyaluation 

After one year in operation, MELASI oversaw the installation of 8000 toilets. The city-wide 

pro gram goal exceeded its target number and retrofitted 230,000 toilets during the first eighteen 

months. Some areas have reached a 30% saturation point. 25 LADWP estimates that for every retrofit 

toilet 29 gallons/day have been saved. This translates into 10,585 gallons/householdlyear. 

In Ultra Low Flush Toilet Programs: Evaluation of Program Outcomes and Water Savings, 

water savings in the East Los Angeles area were estimated at 58.6 ± 14 gallons per day. "Not only 

did this pro gram replace ULF toilets in households unlikely to do so otherwise, the evidence also 

suggests a higher level of water saved from each replaced ULF toilet."26 The greater number of 

24Fiske,.o.p.cit, p. 7-9. 

25Mousseau, Cathy. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. Phone contact. 

26Chestnutt, Thomas W., Casey N. McSpadden, and Anil Bamezai. 1994. Ultra Low Flush 

Toilet Programs: Evaluation of Program Outcomes and Water Savings. Prepared for The 

Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. November. p. viii. 

DRAFT. January 27,1995 21 
persons per household attributed to the higher water savings in East Los Angeles as compared with

the water savings in Los Angeles as a whole.

With funds received from LADWP for their retrofit work, MELASI has financed other

community programs. "One of these has been the development of a community scholarship program

in East L.A., working with students from two local high schools. A child immunization program has

also been established in conjunction with Community Health Foundation, with the goal of raising

immunization levels from less than 20% up to 80%, for local children up to two years of age. A third

program, the Youth Graffiti Abatement Program, employs high school students to continually clean

up the graffiti in their community. 6427

27Hamilton, Fiona and James P. Craft, CTSI Corporation. 1993 . Dynamic Community

Programming for Water Efficiency. Conserv `93 Conference Proceedings. American Water

Works Association. December. p. 92.

DRAFr, January 27,1995 22

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

persons per household attributed to the higher water savings in East Los Angeles as compared with 

the water savings in Los Angeles as a whole. 

With funds received from LADWP for their retrofit work, MELASI has fmanced other 

community programs. ''One of these has been the development of a community scholarship program 

in East L.A, working with students from two local high schools. A child immunization program has 

also been established in conjunction with Community Health Foundation, with the goal of raising 

immunization 1evels from Jess than 20% up to 80%, for local children up to two years of age. A third 

program, the Youth Graffiti Abatement Program, employs high school students to continually clean 

up the graffiti in their community. ,,27 

27Hamilton, Fiona and James P. Craft, CTSI Corporation. 1993. Dynamic Community 

Programming for Water Efficiency. Conserv '93 Conference Proceedings. American Water 

Works Association. December. p. 92. 

DRAFT. January 27. 1995 22 
Low Cost Programs -- Portland, Connecticut's

1. Profile of the Portland Area

Connecticut is a water rich state with a median annual rainfall from 41.65 inches to 53.17

inches that supplies its reservoirs and ground water system. One of Connecticut's 78 water suppliers,

Portland Water Supply Division, services a community of 8400 residents. The utility has 2200 water

customers who consume 272,477 gallons of water annually. In 1986, Portland began planning for the

development of new water sources. A groundwater exploration program was conducted and a well

field was identified that would produce 2.2 MGD from seven wells. While Portland researched

alternative, less expensive solutions to increase its water supply , the State of Connecticut also sought

to reduce its water demand to delay or avoid developing additional supply sources . In 1989, the

Connecticut legislature passed three bills: (l)low-flow fixtures and fittings in new construction were

required; (2) utilities must conduct a residential retrofit program; and (3 ) state agencies must develop

uniform water conservation planning.

2. Development of the program

According to the new legislation, public water supply companies had to notify its consumers

of pending water saving programs by January 15, 1991. Portland joined the state -wide water

conservation effort to reduce its water demand.

"A phased-in approach to the program with separate distribution and kit installation

requirements depending on utility size and supply status was recommended by a state advisory board

For more information contact Denise Ruzicka , Water Supplies Section , State of

Connecticut Department of Health Services, 150 Washington Street, Hartford, CT 06106

DRAFT, January 27 , 1995 23

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

Low Cost Proirams -- Portland, Connecticuf8 

1. Profile of the Portland Area 

Connecticut is a water rich state with a median annual rainfall from 41.65 inches to 53.17 

inches that supplies its reservoirs and ground water system. One of Connecticut's 78 water suppliers, 

Portland Water Supply Division, services a community of 8400 residents. The utility has 2200 water 

customers who consume 272,477 gallons of water annually. In 1986, Portland began planning for the 

development of new water sources. A groundwater exploration program was conducted and a well 

field was identified that would produce 2.2 MGD from seven wells. While Portland researched 

alternative, less expensive solutions to increase its water supply, the State of Connecticut also sought 

to reduce its water demand to delay or avoid developing additional supply sources. In 1989, the 

Connecticut :legislature passed three bills: (1) low-flow fixtures and fittings in new construction were 

required; (2) utilities must conduct a residential retrofit program; and (3) state agencies must develop 

uniform water conservation planning. 

2. Deyelopment of the proiram 

According to the new :legislation, public water supply companies had to notify its consumers 

of pending water saving programs by January 15, 1991. Portland joined the state-wide water 

conservation effort to reduce its water demand. 

"A phased-in approach to the program with separate distribution and kit installation 

requirements depending on utility size and supply status was recommended by a state advisory board 

28For more information contact Denise Ruzicka, Water Supplies Section, State of 

Connecticut Department of Health Services, 150 Washington Street, Hartford, cr 06106 

DRAFT, IBl1uary 27, 1995 23 
composed of state agencies and water utility representatives ."" Kits contained one low-flow

showerhead, two faucet aerators, leak detection tablets, and a toilet dam.

Two methods for retrofit kit distribution were employed. Utilities in areas of short supply

needed to distribute the kit aggressively over a two year period . All other utilities sent cards to

customers offering the retrofit kit on a request basis within a five year period. Two free kits were

available per dwelling unit.

3. Program Goals

The Portland Water Supply Division goals were to reduce water demand and promote a water

conservation ethic for a small financial cost. "(R)etrofitting was intended to be an interim measure

until minimum plumbing fixture efficiency standards resulted in acceptance of water saving fixtures,

and to achieve immediate water savings should drought conditions develop.""

4. Description of the Program

(a) Outreach

The key to keeping costs down was to emphasize customer installation. For those individuals

needing assistance, utilities were asked to provide phone instruction or on-site service. "Depending

on utility size, the utility either had to offer free direct installation upon request to only elderly and

handicapped customers, or to any requesting customer. Only the very smallest non-priority utilities

did not have to offer any direct installation.""

29Ruzicka, Denise. 1993. Connecticut Residential Retrofit Program: Interim Program

Results, Analysis of 1991 and 1992 Data . March. p. 5.

30Ruzicka, .Qp sit, p. 1.

31Ruzicka, Qp. sit., p. 5.

DRAFT, January 27 , 1995 24

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

composed of s,tate agencies and water utility representatives. ,,29 Kits contained one low-flow 

showerhead, two faucet aerators, leak detection tablets, and a toilet dam. 

Two methods for retrofit kit distribution were employed. Utilities in areas of short supply 

needed to distribute the kit aggressively over a two year period. All other utilities sent cards to 

customers offering the retrofit kit on a request basis within a five year' period. Two free kits were 

available per dwelling unit 

3. Pro~ram Goals 

TIle Portland Water Supply Division goals were to reduce water demand and promote a water 

conservation ethic for a small financial cost. "(R)etrofitting was intended to be an interim measure 

until minimum plumbing fixture efficiency standards resulted in acceptance of water saving fixtures, 

and to achieve unmediate water savings should drought conditions develop.,,30 

4. Description of the Program 

(a) Outreach 

The key to keeping costs down was to emphasize customer installation. For those individuals 

needing assistance, utilities were asked to provide phone instruction or on-site service. "Depending 

on utility size, the utility either had to offer free direct installation upon request to only elderly and 

handicapped customers, or to any requesting customer. Only the very smallest non-priority utilities 

did not have to offer any direct installation.,,31 

2~uzicka, Denise. 1993. Connecticut Residential Retrofit Program: Interim Program 

Results, Analysis of 1991 and 1992 Data. March. p. 5. 

3ORuzicka, .up cit, p. 1. 

31R . k . 5 UZIC a,.up. gt., p. . 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 24 
For Portland 's small budget, the retrofit program represented a financial burden. Looking for

ways to reduce costs of implementing the program , the utility employed the help of the local high

school and the League of Women Voters for distribution of retrofit kits and publicity.

As part of the school's conservation program, Portland High School students delivered 2126

retrofit kits over a period of three years. The students also performed the telephone surveys to

determine the effectiveness and acceptance of the program . The utility developed a demonstration

device called "Walter the Water Saver." This device was used in the schools to help promote

understanding and awareness of water conservation. The League of Women Voters helped to get out

the word on the retrofit program by co-sponsoring a poster contest.

(b). Budget

The Portland water utility spent a total of $12,135 on their retrofit program. The majority of

the funds were spent for the retrofit kits. A total of 2126 kits were delivered. Including the costs of

publicity, the kits cost the utility $5.71 per unit.

5. Results ofthe program

The utility credits Portland's water conservation program with reducing the need for wells

in the well field. "Our successful water conservation program played an instrumental role in the

acquisition of that permit, which downsized the plan from seven wells to two wells and utilized the

existing reservoir."32

For the entire Connecticut program , 62 percent of water customers sent in a kit request card

and installed all or part of the kit. Fifty per cent of the water customers receiving a retrofit kit

32Kuzminski, David. 1993. Retrofitting on a Budget. Conserv `93 Proceedings. American

Water Works Association. December. p. 1646.

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 25

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

For Portland's small budget, the retrofit program represented a fmandal burden. Looking for 

ways to reduce costs of implementing the program, the utility employed the help of the local high 

school and the League of Women Voters for distribution of retrofit kits and publicity. 

& part of the school's conservation program, Portland High School students delivered 2126 

retrofit kits over a period of three years. The students also performed the telephone surveys to 

determine the effectiveness and acceptance of the program. The utility developed a demonstration 

device called ''Walter the Water Saver." This device was used in the schools to help promote 

understanding and awareness of water conservation. 1he League of Women Voters helped to get out 

the word on the retrofit program by co-sponsoring a poster contest. 

(b). Budget 

The Portland water utility spent a total of $12,135 on their retrofit program. The majority of 

the funds were spent for the retrofit kits. A total of 2126 kits were delivered. Including the costs of 

publicity, the kits cost the utility $5.71 per unit 

5. Results of the program 

The utility credits Portland's water conservation program with reducing the need for wells 

in the well field. "Our successful water conservation program played an instrumental role·in the 

acquisition of that permit, which downsized the plan from seven wells to two wells and utilized the 

existing reservoir. ,,32 

For the entire Connecticut program, 62 percent of water customers sent in a kit request card 

and installed all or part of the kit. Fifty per cent of the water customers receiving a retrofit kit 

32Kuzrninski, David. 1993. Retrofitting on a Budget. Conserv '93 Proceedings. American 

Water Wodes Association. December. p. 1646. 

DRAFr, January 27,1995 25 
delivered to them without the initial request card installed all or part of the kit. Water savings data

was not available for the entire program . Estimated water savings for one of the five major water

distributors in the state, Bridgeport Hydraulic Company , are reported below.

"The total water savings achievable from retrofit kit devices were estimated to be 18 . 3 gallons

per capita per day (gcd) for pre- 1980 households and 11.6 gcd post-1980 households based on

assumptions developed by the Connecticut Department of Health Services (DOHS). These savings'

estimates may be higher than those actually achieved since they presume that all kit devices are

installed and do not incorporate variations in fixture use rates within a household. Based on the

DOHS per capita savings' assumptions, Bridgeport Hydraulic Company's total estimated system water

savings range from approximately 255, 000 to 323,100 gd for the 1991 program. These savings will

increase or decrease depending on such factors as future device usage, retention, installation, and

customer household size.i33

"Vickers, Amy. 1993. Achieving a High Customer Participation Rate with a Bulk Mailout Retrofit Program. Conserv '93 Conference proceedings. American Water Works Association.

December. p. 1655.

DRAFT, January 27 , 1995 26

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

delivered to them without the initial request card installed all or part of the kit Water savings data 

was not available for the entire program. Estimated water savings for one of the five major water 

distributors in the state, Bridgeport Hydraulic Company, are reported below. 

"The total water savings achievab1e from retrofit kit devices were estimated to be 18.3 gallons 

per capita per day (g~d) for pre-1980 households and 11.6 gcd post-1980 households based on 

assumptions developed by the Connecticut Department of Health Services (DOHS). These savings' 

estimates may be higher than those actually achieved since they presume that all kit devices are 

installed and do not incorporate variations in fIxture use rates within a household. Based on the 

DOHS per capita savings' assumptions, ~ridgeport Hydraulic Company's total estimated system water 

savings range from approximately 255, 000 to 323,100 gd for the 1991 program. These savings will 

increase or decrease depending on such factors as future device usage, retention, installation, and 

customer household size."33 

33Vickers, Amy. 1993. Achieving a High Customer Participation Rate with a Bulk MaUout Retrofit Program. Conserv '93 Conference proceedings. American Water Works Association. 

December. p. 1655. 

DRAFT. January 27.1995 26 
Appendix A

Table of Contents

Using a Water Conservation Manual and Other Resources ............................ 28

Calculating Water Usage ...................................................... 30

Audits and Leak Detection .............................................. 30

End-Use Studies .....................................................33

Demand-Side Management ............................................. 36

Choosing the most appropriate method .......................................... 38

Rate Structures ...................................................... 38

Shared Costs -- Utility Coalitions ......................................... 39

Rebates ............................................................ 41

Retrofit program for showerheads ........................................ 43

Retrofit programs for toilets ............................................. 47

Low-Income Programs ................................................ 49

Legislation Incentives .................................................. 50

Education Programs ................................................... 52

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 27

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

Appendix A 

Table of Contents 

Using a Water Conservation Manual and Other Resources ............................ 28 

Calculating W ater Usage ................................................. ' .... 30 

Audits and Leak Detection .............................................. 30 

End-Use Studies ..................................................... 33 

Demand-Side Management ............................................. 36 

Choosing the most appropriate method .......................................... 38 

Rate Structures .................................•.................... 38 

Shared Costs -- Utility Coalitions ......................................... 39 

Rebates ............................................................ 41 

Retrofit program for showerheads ........................................ ;43 

Retrofit programs for toilets ............................................. 47 

Low-Income Programs ................................................ 49 

Legislation Incentives .................................................. 50 

Education Programs ................................................... 52 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 27 
1. Using a Water Conservation Manual and Other Resources

The water efficiency clearing house and the five guides mentioned below are designed to assist a

community or utility with the design of a water conservation program . Entries after this section cite

reports addressing specific types of programs.

Customer Incentives For Water Conservation: A Guide. Fiske, Gary S. and Ronnie Ann Weiner,

Barakat & Chamberlin, Inc.

Soup: California Urban Water Agencies, California Urban Water Conservation Council and U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 1994. EPA 230-R-94-001

Contact: Barakat & Chamberlin, Inc., 1800 Harrison, Oakland, CA 94612 (510) 893-7800

Abstract: As urban water conservation programs grow and mature, there is strong interest in many

communities in providing incentives, monetary and other types, to stimulate further involvement of

consumers. But the questions of which types of incentives to offer, and how to manage and optimize

incentive programs have remained largely unanswered. This report provides solid information on a

variety of water conservation incentive programs to help water agencies design and evaluate

programs on a more rational, thoughtful basis.

Evaluating Urban Water Conservation Programs : A Procedures Manual. Planning and

Management Consultants, Ltd.

Source: American Water Works Association, 1993. ISBN 0-89867-676-2.

Contact: Planning and Management Consultants, Ltd. (PMCL), P.O. Box 1316, Carbondale, IL

62903 (618) 549-2832

Abstrac : At some time or other, virtually all water managers will find it necessary to assess their

ability to meet the existing and future demands of their customers. The situations leading to this

evaluation are as varied as the individual circumstances of each water provider. Whether the cause

is continued growth of the service area, depletion of supplies, water quality concerns, or increased

regulation, managers need a solid information base to analyze the available alternatives. This manual

was prepared to assist managers in developing the information needed to analyze the role of water

conservation in meeting growing demands.

The Water Conservation Manager's Guide to Residential Retrofit. Babcock. Thomas M., Mary

Ann Dickinson, Thomas E. Pape, and David Schultz, eds.

Surce: American Water Works Association 1993

Contact: AWWA Customer Service, 6666 West Quincy Avenue, Denver, CO 80235, (800) 926-7337

Abstract: This handbook is designed to provide water conservation administrators with an awareness

of retrofit alternatives in the residential sector and the pros and cons of each alternative . Each water

provider should adapt the alternatives to achieve the best retrofit management strategy for the local

community.

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 28

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

1. Using a Water Conservation Manual and Other Resources 

The water efficiency clearing house and the five guides mentioned below are designed to assist a 

community or utility with the design of a water conservation program. Entries after this section cite 

reports addressing specific types of programs. 

custOmer Incentives For Water Conservation: A Guide. Fiske, Gary S. and Ronnie Ann Weiner, 

Barakat & Chamberlin, Inc. 

Source: California Urban Water Agencies, California Urban Water Conservation Council and U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1994. EPA 230-R-94-001 

Contact: Barakat & Chamberlin, Inc., 1800 Harrison, Oakland, CA 94612 (510) 893-7800 

Abstract: As urban water conservation programs grow and mature, there is strong interest in many 

communities in providing incentives, monetary and other types, to stimulate further involvement of 

consumers. But the questions of which types of incentives to offer, and how to manage and optimize 

incentive programs have remained largely unanswered. This report provides solid information on a 

variety of water conservation incentive programs to help water agencies design and evaluate 

programs on a more rational, thoughtful basis. 

Evaluating Urban Water Conservation Programs: A Procedures Manual. Planning and 

Management Consultants, Ltd. 

Source: American Water Works Association, 1993. ISBN 0-89867-676-2. 

Contact: Planning and Management Consultants, Ltd. (PMCL), P.O. Box 1316, Carbondale, IL 

62903 (618) 549-2832 

Abstract: At some time or other, virtually all water managers will find it necessary to assess their 

ability to meet the existing and future demands of their customers. The situations leading to this 

evaluation are as varied as the individual circumstances of each water provider. Whether the cause 

is continued growth of the service area, depletion of supplies, water quality concerns, or increased 

regulation, managers need a solid information base to analyze the available alternatives. This manual 

was prepared to assist managers in developing the information needed to analyze the role of water 

conservation in meeting growing demands. 

The Water Conservation Manager's Guide to Residential Retrofit. Babcock. Thomas M., Mary 

Ann Dickinson, Thomas E. Pape, and David Schultz, eds. 

Source: American Water Works Association 1993 

Contact: A WW A Customer Service, 6666 West Quincy Avenue, Denver, CO 80235, (800) 926-7337 

Abstract: This handbook is designed to provide water conservation administrators with an awareness 

of retrofit alternatives in the residential sector and the pros and cons of each alternative. Each water 

provider should adapt the alternatives to achieve the best retrofit management strategy for the local 

community. 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 28 
Water Conservation Guidebook for Small and Medium -Sized Utilities. Pacific Northwest

Section of the American Water Works Association.

Source: American Water Works Association 1993

Conti: Cynthia Dietz, Conservation Program Manager, Portland Water Bureau, 1120 SW 5th

Avenue, 6th floor, Portland, OR 97204, (503) 823-6133

Abstract: This guidebook is written for the small and medium-sized water utility (1,000 to 25,000

connections) thinking about starting a water conservation program It is intended to provide a general

overview of water conservation planning, and to describe the specific steps you can follow to design

the best plan for your utility. The guidebook offers a "menu of possible conservation techniques and

approaches from which you can choose. In this way, it can be used by utilities in all parts of the

country, operating under various circumstances.

Water Conservation Planning Handbook for Public Water Systems. Yelton, Tiffany and Jerry

Parker, Water Resources Program

Source: Washington State Department of Ecology and Washington State Department of Health 1991

Contact: Washington State Department of Ecology Water Resources Program, Mail Stop PV-11,

P.O. Box 47600, Olympia, Washington 98504-7600

Abstract: This Handbook is provided to assist public water systems in the development of a

conservation plan.It is hoped that this Handbook will encourage public water systems to consider the

creative ways conservation measures can be used to reduce new facility development costs and to

correct system inefficiencies.

WATERWISER. Water Efficiency Clearing House

Sponsor: American Water Works Association and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Contact: 666 West quincy Avenue, Denver, CO 80235-9913, 800-559-9855

Objective: WaterWiser is developing information services that will help with planning, implementing

and evaluating water efficiency programs and activities.

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 29

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

Water Conservation Guidebook for Small and Medium-Sized Utilities. Pacific Northwest 

Section of the American Water W orIes Association. 

Source: American Water Works Association 1993 

Contact: Cynthia Dietz, Conservation Program Manager, Portland Water Bureau, 1120 SW 5th 

Avenue, 6th floor, Portland, OR 97204, (503) 823-6133 

Abstract: This guidebook is written for the small and medium-sized water utility (1,000 to 25,000 

connections) thinking about starting a water conservation program. It is intended to provide a general 

overview of water conservation planning, and to describe the specific steps you can follow to design 

the best pIan for your utility. The guidebook offers a "menu of possible conservation techniques and 

approaches from which you can choose. In this way, it can be used by utilities in all parts of the 

country, operating under various circumstances. 

Water Conservation Planning Handbook for Public Water Systems. Yelton, Tiffany and Jerry 

Parker, Water Resources Program 

Source: Washington State Department of Ecology and Washington State Department of Health 1991 

Contact: Washington State Department of Ecology Water Resources Program, Mail Stop PV -11, 

P.O. Box 47600, Olympia, Washington 98504-7600 

Abstract: This Handbook is provided to assist public water systems in the development of a 

conservation pIan.It is hoped that this Handbook will encourage public water systems to consider the 

creative ways conservation measures can be used to reduce new facility development costs and to 

correct system inefficiencies. 

W ATERWISER. Water Efficiency Clearing House 

Sponsor: American Water Works Association and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Contact: 666 West quincy Avenue, Denver, CO 80235-9913, 800-559-9855 

Ob_t%tjye: WaterWiser is developing information services that will help with planning, implementing 

and evaluating water efficiency programs and activities. 

DRAFT. January 27,1995 29 
2. Calculating Water Usage

a. Audits and Leak Detection

Home Water Survey Program. Long, Mariann S. Water and Power Department, Pasadena, CA.

Source: Conserv 90 The National Conference and Exposition Offering Water Supply Solutions for

the 1990s Phoenix, Arizona August 12-16, 1990 p 11-14, 1990 American Water Works Association

Abstract: The Pasadena Water and Power Department performed interior and exterior water audits

on 3200 single-family detached dwellings (homes) between 1988 and 1989. Auditors installed water

conservation devices, adjusted toilets, measured the precipitation rate of the home's irrigation system,

and created a custom irrigation schedule. The auditor gave each customer a report containing

recommendations and projected water savings based on the recommendations. This paper describes

efforts to market the program, details of administration and carrying out the program, what specific

areas were covered (meter leak detection, for example ), program costs, benefits, and how the data

collected in the survey will be used. The department will use the data in evaluating this program and

in planning future water conservation programs.

Low-flow showerheads, family strife, and cold feet. Meier, A.

Source: Home Energy (USA) v 7:1. Jan-Feb 1990 p 37-38

Contact: Home Energy, 2124 Kittredge Street, No. 95, Berkeley, CA 94704, (510) 524-5405

Abstract: It is a fact that low-flow showerheads often save less energy than a simple change-in-flow

calculation would indicate. The problem is that laboratory measurements are performed without

confirming field studies. One must remember that people use showers, not buckets and stopwatches.

Two reasonable situations are outlined, where energy savings will be less than predicted by simple

calculations. Auditors must recognize these situation and make adjustments in their estimates of

energy savings.

The Impact of Water Conserving Fixtures on Residential Water Use

Characteristics in Tampa, FL Anderson, Damann L.; Mulville-Friel, Diane; Nero, Wendy L. Ayres

Associates Consulting Engineers, Tampa, FL; Tampa Water Department, Tampa, FL

Source: Proceedings of Conserv 93; The New Water Agenda Las Vegas, NV; December 1993; p

611-628, American Society of Civil Engineers; American Water Resources

Association ; American Water Works Association

Contact: Wendy Nero, Water Conservation Manager, Tampa Water Department, 306 East Jackson,

Street, #5E, Tampa, FL 33602

Abstract: The objectives of the Tampa water use project were to determine the fixture specific water

using characteristics of typical single family residences in Tampa and to measure the same water using

characteristics after retrofitting with water conserving fixtures. An additional objective of the study

was to evaluate user acceptance and changes in fixture use characteristics of the new plumbing

fixtures. To accomplish these objectives, an extensive water use monitoring network was installed

in a selected sample of 25 single family residences in Tampa. Monitoring included total water use,

exterior water use, hot water use, shower use, toilet flushing, static pressure and drainline pressure.

Measurements were made on a real time basis and data collected utilizing a computerized data

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 30

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

2. Calculating Water Usage 

a. Audits and Leak Detection 

Home Water Survey Program. Long, Mariann S. Water and Power Deparunent, Pasadena, CA. 

Source: Conserv 90 The National Conference and Exposition Offering Water Supply Solutions for 

the 1990s Phoenix, Arizona August 12-16, 1990 P 11-14, 1990 American Water Works Association 

Abstract: The Pasadena Water and Power Department performed interior and exterior water audits 

on 3200 single-family detached dwellings (homes) between 1988 and 1989. Auditors installed water 

conservation devices, adjusted toilets, measured the precipitation rate of the home's irrigation system. 

and created a custom irrigation schedule. The auditor gave each customer a report containing 

recommendations and projected water savings based on the recommendations. This paper describes 

efforts to market the program, details of administration and carrying out the program. what specific 

areas were covered (meter leak detection, for example), program costs, benefits, and how the data 

col1ected in the survey will be used. The department will use the data in evaluating this program and 

in planning future water conservation programs. 

Low-flow showerheads, family strife, and cold feet. Meier, A. 

Source: Home Energy (USA) v 7:1. Jan-Feb 1990 p 37-38 

Contact: Home Energy, 2124 Kittredge Street, No. 95, Berkeley, CA 94704, (510) 524-5405 

Abstract: It is a fact that low-flow showerheads often save less energy than a simple change-in-flow 

calculation would indicate. The problem is that laboratory measurements are performed without 

confirming field studies. One must remember that people use showers, not buckets and stopwatches. 

Two reasonable situations are outlined, where energy savings will be less than predicted by simple 

calculations. Auditors must recognize these situation and make adjustments in their estimates of 

energy savings. 

The Impact of Water Conserving Fixtures on Residential Water Use 

Characteristics in Tampa, FL Anderson, Damann L.; Mulville-Friel, Diane; Nero, Wendy L. Ayres 

Associates Consulting Engineers, Tampa, FL; Tampa Water Deparunent, Tampa, FL 

Source: Proceedings of Conserv 93; The New Water Agenda Las Vegas, NY; December 1993; p 

611-628, American Society of Civil Engineers; American Water Resources 

Association ; American W ater Works Association 

Contact: Wendy Nero, Water Conservation Manager, Tampa Water Deparunent, 306 East Jackson, 

Street, #5E, Tampa, FL 33602 

Abstract: The objectives of the Tampa water use project were to determine the fixture specific water 

using characteristics of typical single family residences in Tampa and to measure the same water using 

characteristics after retrofitting with water conserving flXtures. An additional objective of the study 

was to evaluate user acceptance and changes in fixture use characteristics of the new plumbing 

fixtures. To accomplish these objectives, an extensive" water use monitoring network was installed 

in a selected sample of 25 single family residences in Tampa. Monitoring included total water use, 

exterior water use, hot water use, shower use, toilet flushing, static pressure and drainline pressure. 

Measurements were made on a real time basis and data collected utilizing a computerized data 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 30 
acquisition system so that water use could be evaluated as a function of fixture use and time. The

major emphasis in the study was placed on water closet and shower use, as these fixtures were

targeted for a potential retrofit program as part of the City of Tampa water conservation plan. Water

use and fixture use were monitored for 30 days at each home prior to retrofitting the homes with low

consumption showerheads and ultra-low volume (ULV) toilet fixtures. Once these water conserving

fixtures were installed, the monitoring equipment was recalibrated and water use and fixture use were

monitored at each home for an additional 30 days.

Water Audit Encourages Residents to Reduce Consumption. Nelson, J. 0., North Marin County

Water District, Novato, CA.

Source: Journal of the American Water Works Association JAWWA5, Vol. 84, No. 10, p 59-64,

October 1992. 2 fig, 4 tab, 6 ref., Journal Announcement: SWR.A2604

Abstract: The North Marin (California) Water District (NMWD) conducted a free home water audit

for randomly-selected customers from single-family detached homes. All were in the upper quartile

of water use; i.e., residents used approximately 41% more water than was used in the average

single-family home in the service area. At the time of the study, because of publicity about drought

in the region, most households had reduced water consumption. For this reason, NMWD used a

control group so it could isolate water saved by the audit program. The audit included an interview

about patterns of water use, leak identification and repair, installation of low-flow shower heads and

toilet tank displacement devices, evaluation of lawn irrigation practices and recommendation of an

irrigation schedule, and distribution of free publications and promotional items. Average annual use

declined significantly after the audit, approximately 16% for the sample group and 11% for the

control group. The difference, or 4.6% (9,188 gal), could be attributed to the audit project. Of this

amount, 7,270 gal were estimated as being saved inside the home as a result of leak repairs and newly

installed low-flow shower heads and toilet displacement devices. Only 1,918 gal (less than 21%) were

calculated as being saved outside the home, far less than NMWD had expected. Actual dollar saving

experienced by the homeowner was calculated at $22.62 per year, including hot water saving of

$13.90 per year. Actual simple payback for the homeowner, assuming the homeowner were to pay

the actual cost of the audit is two years. The simple payback for the utility--considering only the

saving to NMWD for energy and chemical costs--is 30 years.

Water Reductions from Residential Audits. Whitcomb, John B., Brown & Caldwell Consultants,

Palo Alto, CA

Source; Water Resource Bulletin October 1991 . v27, n5 pp. 761-67.

Contact: Barakat & Chamberlin, Inc., 1800 Harrison, Oakland, CA 94612 (510) 893-7800

AA multivariate regression model was applied to measure the water reductions resulting from

a residential water audit program performed in Contra Costa Water District , CA, in 1989. The

scheme depicts metered residential water use as a function of both conservation and other household

parameters. Installation of low-flow showerheads reduced indoor water consumption by 9.7%, or by

7.8 g/d per capita. The outdoor portion of the audit reduced irrigation needs by 18.7%. However,

automatic irrigation timers appear to be used inefficiently, as homes with these devices are using 50%

more outdoor water than homes with manual hose-based irrigation systems.

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 31

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

acquisition system so that water use could be evaluated as a function of fixture use and time. The 

major emphasis in the study was placed on water closet and shower use, as these fIxtures were 

targeted for a potential retrofit program as part of the City of Tampa water conservation plan. Water 

use and fixture use were monitored for 30 days at each home prior to retrofItting the homes with low 

consumption showerheads and ultra-low volume (UL V) toilet fixtures. Once these water conserving 

fixtures were installed, the monitoring equipment was recalibrated and water use and fixture use were 

monitored at each home for an additional 30 days. 

Water Audit Encourages Residents to Reduce Consumption. Nelson, J. 0., North Marin County 

Water District, Novato, CA. 

Source: Journal of the American Water Works Association JAWWA5, Vol. 84, No. 10, p 59-64, 

October 1992.2 fIg, 4 tab, 6 ref., Journal Announcement: SWRA2604 

Abstract: The North Marin (California) Water District (NMWD) conducted a free home water audit 

for randomly-selected customers from single-family detached homes. All were in the upper quartile 

of water use; i.e., residents used approximately 41 % more water than was used in the average 

sing.le-family home in the service area. At the time of the study, because of publicity about drought 

in the region, most households had reduced water consumption. For this reason, NMWD used a 

control group so it could isolate water saved by the audit program. The audit included an interview 

about patterns of water use, 1eak identifIcation and repair, installation of low-flow shower heads and 

toilet tank displacement devices, evaluation of lawn irrigation practices and recommendation of an 

irrigation schedule, and distribution of free publications and promotional items. Average annual use 

declined signifIcantly after the audit, approximately 16% for the sample group and 11% for the 

control group. The difference, or 4.6% (9,188 gal), could be attributed to the audit project. Of this 

amount, 7,270 gal were estimated as being saved inside the home as a result of leak repairs and newly 

installed low-flow shower heads and toilet displacement devices. Only 1,918 gal (less than 21 %) were 

calculated as being saved outside the home, far less than NMWD had expected. Actual dollar saving 

experienced by the homeowner was calculated at $22.62 per year, including hot water saving of 

$13.90 per year. Actual simple payback for the homeowner, assuming the homeowner were to pay 

the actual cost of the audit is two years. The simple payback for the utility--considering only the 

saving to NMWD for energy and chemical costs--is 30 years. 

Water Reductions from Residential Audits. Whitcomb, John B., Brown & Caldwell Consultants, 

Palo Alto, CA 

Source: Water Resource Bulletin October 1991. v27, n5 pp. 761-67. 

Contact: Barakat & Chamberlin, Inc., 1800 Harrison, Oakland, CA 94612 (510) 893-7800 

Abstract: A multivariate regression model was applied to measure the water reductions resulting from 

a residential water audit program performed in Contra Costa Water District, CA, in 1989. The 

scheme depicts metered residential water use as a function of both conservation and other household 

parameters. Installation oflow-flow showerheads reduced indoor water consumption by 9.7%, or by 

7.8 gld per capita. The outdoor portion of the audit reduced irrigation needs by 18.7%. However, 

automatic irrigation timers appear to be used inefficiently, as homes with these devices are using 50% 

more outdoor water than homes with manual hose-based irrigation systems. 

DRAFf, January 27,1995 31 
b. End-Use Studies

A Laboratory and Field Evaluation of 1.6 GPF Water Closets in a Commercial Setting.

Chouthai, Anand, Bhargav Vijapur and Thomas Konen.

Source: Stevens Institute of Technology for Denver Water Department, No. 246. August 1992.

Contact: Denver Water, 1600 West 12th Avenue, Denver, CO 80254

Abstract: A field laboratory has been established at Stapleton International Airport consisting of four

restrooms, two for men and two for women. Each of the 29 water closets in the facilities has been

equipped with a flow switch on the supply line to indicate and record individual fixture use. A pulsed

output water meter monitors the consumption of each group of fixtures. Pressure and temperature

measurements complete the instrumentation. All measurements are gathered in a PC based data

acquisition system where they are stored and transmitted on demand to our main laboratory on the

Stevens campus for study. The report found that the ultra-low flush toilets did save water yet required

significant maintenance.

Development of a Water Use and Conservation Monitoring Program for the

City of San Diego: Software Demonstration. Opitz, Eva M. ; Strus, Craig A. -Planning and

Management Consultants, Ltd., Carbondale, IL

mouse: Proceedings of Conserv 93; The New Water Agenda Las Vegas, NV December 12-16, 1993

p 1229-1237, 1993

Contact: Eva Opitz, Planning and Management Consultants, Ltd., P.O. Box 1316, Carbondale, IL

62903, 618-549-2832

Abstract: The initial steps have been taken to develop a long-term monitoring program for the City

of San Diego. A partnership has developed a Water Use and Conservation Data Base that could

provide insights into the characteristics of the San Diego water customer population. One goal is to

provide a means for water conservation planners to obtain information on utility customers.

Components of the database include: water billing records; customer survey response data; aggregate

water sales data by customer classes; total water deliveries to the city; weather-related parameters;

and water conservation program tracking data. Reports can be generated in the following areas: water

billing data; water sales by premise code; customer survey data; retrofit data; ULF toilet rebate data;

customer survey with water billing data; customer survey with retrofit data; customer survey with

ULF data; billing with sales data; water delivery data; weather data; and water sales with water

delivery data.

East Bay Municipal Utility District Water Conservation Study . Aher, Abhay, Anand Chouthai,

Lalitha Chandrasekar, Wendy Corpening, Laurence Russ, and Bhargav Vijapur.

duce: Stevens Institute of Technology Report No. R219 prepared for East Bay Municipal Utility

District of Oakland California.

Cntact: Richard Bennett East Bay Municipal Utility District, 375 11th Street, Oakland, CA 94607

(510) 287-0590

Abstract: East Bay Municipal Utility District as part of its long-term water conservation program

identified the need to: determine the actual savings achieved in the field by installing Ultra Low Flush

water closets and low flow shower heads, investigate the impact of the ULF on the transport of waste

DRAFr, January 27 , 1995 32

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

b. End-Use Studies 

A Laboratory and Field Evaluation of 1.6 GPF Water Closets in a Commercial Setting. 

Chouthai, Anand, Bhargav Vijapur and Thomas Konen. 

Source: Stevens Institute of Technology for Denver Water Department, No. 246. August 1992. 

Contact: Denver Water, 1600 West 12th Avenue, Denver. CO 80254 

Abstract: A fiekllaboratory has been established at Stapleton International Airport consisting of four 

restrooms, two for men and two for women. Each of the 29 water closets in the facilities has been 

equipped with a flow switch on the supply line to indicate and record individual fixture use. A pulsed 

output water meter monitors the consumption of each group of fIXtures. Pressure and temperature 

measurements complete the instrumentation. All measurements are gathered in a PC based data 

acquisition system where they are stored and transmitted on demand to our main laboratory on the 

Stevens campus for study. 1be report found that the ultra-low flush toi1ets did save water yet required 

significant maintenance. 

Development of a Water Use and Conservation Monitoring Program for the 

City of San Diego: Software Demonstration. Opitz, Eva M. ; Strus, Craig A.-Planning and 

Management Consultants, Ltd., Carbondale, IL 

Source: Proceedings ofConserv 93; The New Water Agenda Las Vegas, NY December 12-16, 1993 

P 1229-1237, 1993 

Contact: Eva Opitz, Planning and Management Consultants, Ltd., P.O. Box 1316, Carbondale, IL 

62903, 618-549-2832 

Abstract: The initial steps have been taken to develop a long-term monitoring program for the City 

of San Diego. A partnership has developed a Water Use and Conservation Data Base that could 

provide insights into the characteristics of the San Diego water customer popUlation. One goal is to 

provide a means -for water conservation planners to obtain information on utility customers. 

Components of the database include: water billing records; customer survey response data; aggregate 

water sales data by customer classes; total water deliveries to the city; weather-related parameters; 

and water conservation program tracking data. Reports can be generated in the following areas: water 

billing data; water sales by premise code; customer survey 3ata; retrofit data; ULF toilet rebate data; 

customer survey with water billing data; customer survey with retrofit data; customer survey with 

ULF data; billing with sales data; water delivery data; weather data; and water sales with water 

delivery data. 

East Bay Municipal Utility District Water Conservation Study. Aber, Abhay, Anand Chouthai, 

Lalitha Chandrasekar, Wendy Corpening, Laurence Russ, and Bhargav Vijapur. 

Source: Stevens Institute of Technology Report No. R219 prepared for East Bay Municipal Utility 

District of Oakland California. 

Contact: Richard Bennett East Bay Municipal Utility District, 375 11th Street, Oakland, CA 94607 

(510) 287-0590 

Abstract: East Bay Municipal Utility District as part of its long-term water conservation program 

identified the need to: determine the actual savings achieved in the field by installing Ultra Low Flush 

water closets and low flow shower heads, investigate the impact of the ULF on the transport of waste 

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 32 
in drain lines and assess customer reactions to low flow fixtures in a single family residential setting.

The average savings achieved with ULF water closets was 5.3 gallons per person per day. The

average savings achieved by installing low flow shower heads is 1 .7 gallons per person per day.

Residential Water Use Characteristics and the Potential for Conservation in Tampa , Florida.

Anderson, Damann L.; Nero, Wendy L.; Konen, Thomas P.; Ayres Associates Consulting Engineers,

Tampa, FL ; Tampa Water Department, Tampa, FL ; Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, NJ

Source: 1992 Conference Proceedings; American Water Works Association; Management and

Regulations Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada June 18-22, 1992 p 721-729, 1992

Contact: Wendy Nero, Water Conservation Manager, Tampa Water Department, 306 E. Jackson

Street, #5E, Tampa, FL 33602, 813-223-8665

Abstract: The City of Tampa Water Department conducted a study of residential water use

characteristics to evaluate the water savings potential of specific fixtures. An extensive water use

monitoring network was installed in a selected sample of 25 homes in Tampa. Monitoring included

total water use, exterior water use, hot water use, shower use, toilet flushing, static pressure, and

drainline pressure. Major emphasis was on toilets and showers, because these fixtures were targeted

for a residential retrofit program. Tables and figures back up the discussion of the study's results.

Results from an Energy-Efficient Showerheads Field Study. Warwick, W.M. and S.A. Bailey.

Source: Bonneville Power Administration. June 1993

Contact: Curtis Hickman, BPA, P.O. Box 3621-RPEB, Portland, OR 97208

bstract: In 1991 the Bonneville Power Administration initiated research to determine the energy

savings potential of energy-efficient showerheads, including a two phase study by Pacific Northwest

Laboratory. (PNL). The PNL study focused on 154 homes monitored with end-use metering

equipment. In the first phase of the study, PNL recruited participants from the homes, installed

energy efficient showerheads, and collected occupant and site characteristics data. The second phase

of the study. is an analysis of the end-use load data to estimate energy use and savings from

showerheads over a two year period. This report presents the results from the first phase field study.

Water Use in Eight Central Pennsylvania Homes. Seaker, E. M.; Sharpe, W. E. Pennsylvania

State Univ., University Park. Environmental Resources Research Inst.

Source: Water-Use Data for Water Resources Management. Proceedings of a Symposium. American

Water Resources Association, Bethesda, Maryland. 1988. p 283-294, 5 tab, 36 ref. EPA Contract

CR807115-01.

Abstract: The water use of eight central Pennsylvania homes was intensively monitored during spring

and summer 1980 as part of a study to determine the impact of water conservation devices on waste

flow volumes. Key water using features and appliances, outside hose bibbs and total household water

use were monitored for a 28 day period in each home. Mean daily per capita water use for toilet

flushing, showering and bathing and clothes washing were higher than literature values; and mean per

capita water use for all water use activities combined were higher than that for any study reporting

comparable data. As expected, outdoor water use for homes without swimming pools was small

relative to other uses. Assessed home value was strongly correlated with water use, but family size

was not.

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 33

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

in drain lines and assess customer reactions to low flow fixturps in a single family residential setting. 

The average savings achieved with ULF water closets was 5.3 gallons per person per day. The 

average savings achieved by installing low flow shower heads is 1.7 gallons per person per day. 

Residential Water Use Characteristics and the Potential for Conservation in Tampa, Florida. 

Anderson, Damann L.; Nero, Wendy L.; Konen, Thomas P.; Ayres Associates Consulting Engineers, 

Tampa, FL; Tampa Water Department, Tampa, FL; Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, NJ 

Source: 1992 Conference Proceedings; American Water Works Association; Management and 

Regulations Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada June 18-22, 1992 p 721-729, 1992 

Contact: Wendy Nero, Water Conservation Manager, Tampa Water Department, 306 E. Jackson 

Street, #5E, Tampa, FL 33602,813-223-8665 

Abstract: The City of Tampa Water Department conducted a study of residential water use 

characteristics to evaluate the water savings potential of specific flXtures. An extensive water use 

monitoring network was installed in a selected sample of 25 homes in Tampa. Monitoring included 

total water use, exterior water use, hot water use, shower use, toilet flushing, static pressure, and 

drainline pressure. Major emphasis was on toilets and showers, because these fixtures were targeted 

for a residential retrofit program. Tables and figures back up the discussion of the study's results. 

Results from an Energy-Efficient Showerheads Field Study. Warwick, W.M. and S.A. Bailey. 

Source: Bonneville Power Administration. June 1993 

Contact: Curtis Hickman, BPA, P.O. Box 3621-RPEB, Portland, OR 97208 

Abstract: In 1991 the Bonneville Power Administration initiated research to determine the energy 

savings potential of energy-efficient showerheads, including a two phase study by Pacific Northwest 

Laboratory. (PNL). The PNL study focused on 154 homes monitored with end-use metering 

equipment In the first phase of the study, PNL recruited participants from the homes, installed 

energy efi;icient showerheads, and collected occupant and site characteristics data. The second phase 

of the study. is an an.alysis of the end-use load data to estimate energy use and savings from 

showerheads over a two year period. This report presents the results from the first phase field study. 

Water Use in Eight Central Pennsylvania Homes. Seaker, E. M.; Sharpe, W. E. Pennsylvania 

State Univ., University Park.. Environmental Resources Research Inst 

Source: Water-Use Data for Water Resources Management Proceedings of a Symposium. American 

Water Resources Association, Bethesda, Maryland. 1988. p 283-294, 5 tab, 36 ref. EPA Contract 

CR807115-01. 

Abstract: 'The water use of eight central Pennsylvania homes was intensively monitored during spring 

and summer 1980 as part of a study to determine the impact of water conservation devices on waste 

flow volumes. Key water using features and appliances, outside hose bibbs and total household water 

use were monitored for a 28 day period ~ each home. Mean daily per capita water use for toilet 

flushing, showering and bathing and clothes washing were higher than.literature values; and mean per 

capita water use for all water use activities combined were higher than that for any study reporting 

comparable data. As expected, outdoor water use for homes without swimming pools was small 

relative to other uses. Assessed home value was strongly correlated with water use, but family size 

was not. 

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 33 
c. Demand-Side Management

Balancing Water Demands with Supplies: The Role of Management in a World of Increasing

Scarcity. Frederick, K. D.

Source: International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Washington, DC.

Corp. Source Codes: 063877000, Report No.: WORLD BANK-TP-189; ISBN-0-8213-2290-7

c1993 83p

Contact: Paper copy available from World Bank Publications, P.O. Box 7247-8619, Philadelphia, PA.

19170-8619. Phone: (201) 225-2165.

Abstract: The paper deals with the increasingly important topic of how to balance'water demands

with supplies. It examines the experience of Organization for Economic Cooperation and

Development (OECD) countries in influencing the behavior of water users, and draws lessons from

attempts to manage demand by imposing water use regulations and employing economic incentives.

The paper points out that there can be no blueprint for applying demand management practices as

most countries and communities differ in their response to regulations, encouragement and incentives.

Nevertheless the guiding principles described should be of considerable value to those wishing to

introduce demand management techniques into their nation's water equation.

Emerging Demand-Side Era in Water Management. Vickers, A. Vickers and Associates, Boston,

MA.

Source: Journal of the American Water Works Association JAWWA5, Vol. 83, No. 10,

p 38-43, October 1991. 1 fig, 3 tab, 17 ref.,

Contact: Amy Vickers, Amy Vickers and Associates, Water Planning and Policy, 100 Boylston

Street, #1015, Boston, MA 02116-4610 (617) 728-9112

Abstrac t: Decreasing sources of supply are resulting in a trend toward demand-side alternatives in

water management and toward striking a balance between new source development and conservation.

The energy conservation initiatives begun in the late 1970s in California provide a useful model for

today's burgeoning water conservation drive. In August 1990, Conserv 90, the first nationwide water

conservation conference of its kind, marked a major milestone in water supply management. The total

estimated annual household water savings from a retrofit of conventional toilets, showerheads, and

faucets ranged from 13.5 to 33.5 gallons per capita per day. Water used for irrigating grass and other

plants accounts for as much as half of total urban demand. Improved irrigation practices and

technologies in recent years have helped to increase the efficiency of water applied to turf and

landscaping, usually reducing outdoor demand between 30 and 60 percent. Among industrial and

commercial conservation measures, replacement of once-through cooling processes with recirculating

systems has been shown to provide some of the largest savings and the most rapid investment

payback. In the agricultural arena, the efficiency of irrigation systems averages less than 40 percent.

Conservation activities include canal rehabilitation, on-farm conservation research, farmer education,

and farm water measurement.

Water Demand Management in Melbourne. Duncan, H.P., MMBW, Water Resources Planning

Water, vol.18, no.3, p 26-28, 31, June 1991

Source: Australian Water and Wastewater Association

DRAFT, January 27 , 1995 34

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

c. Demand-Side Management 

Balancing Water Demands with Supplies: The Role oCManagement in a World oCIncreasing 

Scarcity. Frederick, K. D. 

Source: International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Washington, DC. 

Corp. Source Codes: 063877000, Report No.: WORLD BANK-TP-189; ISBN-0-8213-229O-7 

cl99383p 

Contact: Paper copy available from World Bank Publications, P.O. Box 7247-8619, Philadelphia, PA. 

19170-8619. Phone: (201) 225-2165. 

Abstract: The paper deals with the increasingly important topic of how to balance' water demands 

with supplies. It examines the experience of Organization for Economic Cooperation and 

Development (OECD) countries in influencing the behavior of water users, and draws lessons from 

attempts to manage demand by imposing water use regulations and employing economic incentives. 

The paper points out that there can be no blueprint for applying demand management practices as 

most countries and communities differ in their response to regulations, encouragement and incentives. 

Nevertheless the guiding principles described should be of considerable value to those wishing to 

introduce demand management techniques into their nation's water equation. 

Emerging Demand-Side Era in Water Management. Vickers, A Vickers and Associates, Boston, 

MA. 

Source: Journal of the American Water Works Association JAWW A5, Vol. 83, No. 10, 

p 38-43, October 1991. 1 fig, 3 tab, 17 ref., 

Contact: Amy Vickers, Amy Vickers and Associates, Water Planning and Policy. 100 Boylston 

Street, #1015, Boston, MA 02116-4610 (617) 728-9112 

Abstract: Decreasing sources of supply are resulting in a trend toward demand-side alternatives in 

water management and toward striking a balance between new source development and conservation. 

The energy conservation initiatives begun in the late 1970s in California provide a useful model for 

today's burgeoning water conservation drive. In August 1990, Conserv 90, the first nationwide water 

conservation conference of its kind, marked a major milestone in water supply management. The total 

estimated annual household water savings from a retrofit of conventional toilets, showerheads, and 

faucets ranged from 13.5 to 33.5 gallons per capita per day. Water used for irrigating grass and other 

plants accounts for as much as half of total urban demand. Improved irrigation practices and 

technologies in recent years have helped to increase the efficiency of water applied to turf and 

landscaping, usually reducing outdoor demand between 30 and 60 percent. Among industrial and 

commercial conservation measures, replacement of once-through cooling processes with recirculating 

systems has been shown to provide some of the largest savings and the most rapid investment 

payback. In the agricultural arena, the efficiency of irrigation systems averages less than 40 percent. 

Conservation activities include canal rehabilitation, on-farm conservation research, fanner education, 

and farm water measurement. 

Water Demand Management in Melbourne. Duncan, H.P., MMBW, Water Resources Planning 

Water, vol.18, no.3, p 26-28,31, June 1991 

Source: Australian Water and Wastewater Association 

DRAFT. January 27.1995 34 
Abstract: The broad objective of a water supply authority is to match supply and demand , with a level

of service acceptable to the community. Water demand management has now been used successfully

in many Australian towns and cities, and is increasingly recognized as an effective and acceptable

alternative to supply augmentation . In Melbourne, the Board of Works introduced a demand

management campaign in 1983 , at the end of a year of water restrictions. Initially this was based on

advertising, education, and appliance redesign. In 1987, a pay-for-use charging system for water was

introduced. A sustained reduction of 16% of pre-drought annual consumption has been achieved.

Winter use has averaged 6% below the expected level. Summer use has averaged 26% below the

expected level, and peak day consumption shows a similar reduction. The resulting deferral of

headworks and distribution works has a present value of up to $75M. The demand management

campaign has been highly cost effective. The cheapest water available in the future may well be the

water which was wasted in the past.

DRAFT, January 27 , 1995 35

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

Abstract: The broad objective of a water supply authority is to match supply and demand, with a level 

of service acceptab1e to the community. Water demand management has now been used successfully 

in many Australian towns and cities, and is increasingly recognized as an effective and acceptable 

alternative to supply augmentation. In Melbourne, the Board of Works introduced a demand 

management campaign in 1983, at the end of a year of water restrictions. Initially this was based on 

advertising, education, and appliance redesign. In 1987, a pay-for-use charging system for water was 

introduced. A sustained reduction of 16% of pre-drought annual consumption has been achieved. 

Winter use has averaged 6% below the expected level. Summer use has averaged 26% below the 

expected level, and peak day consumption shows a similar reduction. The resulting deferral of 

headworks and distribution works has a present value of up to $75M. The demand management 

campaign has been highly cost effective. The cheapest water available in the future may well be the 

water which was wasted in the past. 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 35 
3. Choosing the most appropriate method

a. Rate Structures

Full-Cost Water Pricing Goldstein , James, Energy Systems Research Group

purse: Journal American Water Works Association, voL78, no.2, p 52-6 1, February 1986. Denver,

Colorado.

Contact: American Water Works Association (303-794-7711)

Abstract: One essential component of a financial management policy to ensure adequate funds for

operating, maintaining, and improving water utilities is appropriate water pricing , i.e., charging rates

that reflect the full cost of providing water. Methods of structuring rates reviewed in this paper

include declining block rates, flat or uniform rates, increasing block rates , seasonal or peak rates, rates

for unmetered service, and rates for new users. Benefits of full-cost pricing and the effects of pricing

on water conservation are addressed. Obstacles to implementing full-cost pricing identified include

lack of metering, historical underpricing, limitations of existing accounting systems, political concerns

relating to rate-setting processes, and institutional constraints. Benefits of separating expenditures

and revenues of the water utility from municipality general accounts to allow funds to accrue for

capital improvements and benefits of full-cost pricing are cited, with reference to the Massachusetts

experience. Considerations for calculating the full cost of water include valuation of fixed assets and

determination of depreciation. The importance of increased use of meters, increasing public awareness

concerning the full cost of water service, and improving the rate-making process are addressed. A

case study of the recent restructuring of water and sewer services in Boston, Massachusetts, by

establishing a commission and through the adoption of full-cost pricing is provided as an example of

how a municipality can improve financial and operational management.

Marginal Cost Pricing -- Is Water Different? Boland, John J.

ource: The Role of Social and Behavioral Sciences in Water Resources Planning and Ma_n_a m n ,

Baumann, Duane D., Haimes, Yacov Y. eds. American Society of Civil Engineers, 1988 pp. 126-137.

Contact: Duane D. Baumann, Dept. of Geography, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL

Abstract: "The objectives of public utility pricing are not easy, to articulate or to define, but they are

generally acknowledged to include a desire for efficient allocation of community resources, equity

in allocating cost shares, stable revenues adequate to operate the utility effectively and to insure

continuity of service, simple and easily understood rates, and appropriate conservation of scarce

resources. Among the policies required to achieve these goals is the adoption of marginal cost pricing,

where all prices set by the utility reflect the marginal cost of the service offered. The central role of

marginal cost pricing can be illustrated by reviewing some specific policy goals."

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 36

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

3. Choosing the most appropriate method 

a. Rate Structures 

Full·Cost Water Pricing Goldstein, James, Energy Systems Research Group 

Source: Journal American Water Works Association, vol78, no.2, p 52-61, February 1986. Denver, 

Colorado. 

Contact: American Water Works Association (303-794-7711) 

Abstract: One essential component of a financial management policy to ensure adequate funds for 

operating, maintaining, and improving water utilities is appropriate water pricing, i.e., charging rates 

that reflect the full cost of providing water. Methods of structuring rates reviewed in this paper 

include declining block rates, flat or uniform rates, increasing block rates, seasonal or peak rates, rates 

for unrnetered service, and rates for new users. Benefits of full-cost pricing and the effects of pricing 

on water conservation are addressed. Obstacles to implementing full-cost pricing identified include 

lack of metering, historical underpricing, limitations of existing accounting systems, political concerns 

relating to rate-setting processes, and institutional constraints. Benefits of separating expenditures 

and revenues of the water utility from municipality general accounts to allow funds to accrue for 

capital improvements and benefits of full-cost pricing are cited, with reference to the Massachusetts 

experience. Considerations for calculating the full cost of water include valuation of fIxed assets and 

determination of depreciation. The importance of increased use of meters, increasing public awareness 

concerning the full cost of water service, and improving the rate-making process are addressed. A 

case study of the recent restructuring of water and sewer services in Boston, Massachusetts, by 

establishing a commission and through the adoption of full-cost pricing is provided as an example of 

how a municipality can improve financial and operational management 

Marginal Cost Pricing -- Is Water Different? Boland, John J. 

Source: The Role of Social and Behavioral Sciences in Water Resources plannin& and Mana&ement, 

Baumann, Duane D., Hannes, Yacov Y. eds. American Society of Civil Engineers, 1988 pp. 126-137. 

Contact: Duane D. Baumann, Dept. of Geography, Southern lllinois University, Carbondale, IL' 

Abstract: "The objectives of public utility pricing are not easy to articulate or to define, but they are 

generally acknowledged to include a desire for efficient allocation of community resources, equity 

in allocating cost shares, stable revenues adequate to operate the utility effectively and to insure 

continuity of service, simple and easily understood rates, and appropriate conservation of scarce 

resources. Among the policies required to achieve these goals is the adoption of marginal cost pricing, 

where all prices set by the utility reflect the marginal cost of the service offered. The central role of 

marginal cost pricing can be illustrated by reviewing some specific policy goals." 

DRAFT. January 27.1995 36 
b. Shared Costs -- Utility Coalitions

A Collaborative Approach to Water Conservation. DeJong, Leendert T. ; Koss, Eugene M.

Bridgeport Hydraulic Company ; State of Connecticut

Source: Conserv 90, The National Conference and Exposition, Offering Water Supply Solutions for

the 1990s Phoenix, Arizona, August 12-16, 1990 p 899-892

stract: The state of Connecticut requires water purveyors to oversee distribution of residential Ab

retrofit kits. The Bridgeport Hydraulic Company worked with several state agencies to design a water

conservation program. The kits contained toilet dams, leak detection dye tablets, low flow

showerhead, faucet aerators, an instruction sheet, and a customer survey. Marketing was via direct

mail and telemarketing. A total of 537 customers asked for retrofit kits, with an average of 2 kits per

customer. The least used item in the kit was the dye tablet, the most used was the toilet dam. Costs

were $46.76 per customer, most of which were the cost of the product and shipping. In the future

the BHC and a state agency will offer water conservation workshops for. teachers.

Comparison study of energy savings methodologies Ecker, L.; Parti, M.; Dion M.

Source: Demand-side management strategies for the 90s. Proceedings, Volume 2, Corporate Source:

Electric Power Research Inst., Palo Alto, CA (USA), Synergic Resources Corp., Bala-Cynwyd, PA

(USA), 1989 p 46.1-46.8

Abstract: Central Maine Power Company uses both two-stage PRISM (PRInceton Scorekeeping

Method) and Conditional Demand analyses to determine energy savings attributable to its energy

management programs. A comparison study is presented of the results of a two -stage PRISM analysis

using annual data with the results of a one-stage conditional demand analysis using monthly data.

These results are then compared with the initial engineering estimates used for Central Maine Power

Company's Bundle-Up program for electric water heating customers. The study uses data from a

sample of participants in the Bundle-Up Program Data from participant surveys, installation records,

billing records, and Company load research were used in the analysis of electricity savings attributable

to the program. The program offered the following five measures: R-10 insulation wrap, temperature

setting turndown, low flow shower head, two faucet aerators, and sediment removal. The preliminary

engineering estimates indicated an annual electricity savings of 1,077 kilowatt-hours if all the

measures are installed. Both methodologies used in this comparison study indicate savings of

significantly fewer kilowatt hours than the original engineering estimates.

Shared Savings Through Energy and Water Conservation: Developing a Local Conservation

Plan Bourg, Joseph D. ; Nelson, Guy R., NEOS Corporation, Lafayette, California ; Western Area

Power Administration, Sacramento, California

Source: Conserv 90 The National Conference and Exposition Offering Water Supply Solutions for

the 1990s Phoenix, Arizona, August 12-16, 1990, p 829-833

Abstract: Energy and water utilities share many common goals, such as curbing customers' wasteful

practices, promoting efficient use of natural resources, and ensuring that conservation strategies are

understood so that a fair comparison can be made between conservation and increased supply as

demand increases. The author presents a four-step methodology for developing integrated

water/energy conservation plans. A north California municipality (which owns the gas, water, and

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 37

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

b. Shared Costs -- Utility Coalitions 

A Collaborative Approach to Water Conservation. Dejong, Leendert T. ; Koss, Eugene M. 

Bridgeport Hydraulic Company; State of Connecticut 

Source: Conserv 90, TIle National Conference and Exposition, Offering Water Supply Solutions for 

the 1990s Phoenix, Arizona, August 12-16, 1990 p 899-892 

Abstract: The state of Connecticut requires water purveyors to oversee distribution of residential 

retrofit kits. TIle Bridgeport Hydraulic Company worked with several state agencies to design a water 

conservation program. The kits contained toilet dams, leak detection dye tablets, low flow 

showerhead, faucet aerators, an instruction sheet, and a customer survey. Marketing was via direct 

mail and telemarketing. A total of 537 customers asked for retrofit kits, with an average of 2 kits per 

customer. TIle least used item in the kit was the dye tablet, the most used was the toilet dam. Costs 

were $46.76 per customer, most of which were the cost of the product and shipping. In the future 

the BHC and a state agency will offer water conservation workshops for. teachers. 

Comparison study of energy savings metbodologies Ecker, L.; Parti, M.; Dion M. 

Source: Demand-side management strategies for the 90s. Proceedings, Volume 2, Corporate Source: 

Electric Power Research Inst., Palo Alto, CA (USA), Synergic Resources Corp., Bala-Cynwyd, PA 

(USA), 1989 p 46.1-46.8 

Abstract: Central Maine Power Company uses both two-stage PRISM (pRInceton Scorekeeping 

Method) and Conditional Demand analyses to determine energy savings attributable to its energy 

management programs. A comparison study is presented of the results of a two-stage PRISM analysis 

using annual data with the results of a one-stage conditional demand analysis using monthly data. 

These results are then compared with the initial engineering estimates used for Central Maine Power 

Company's Bundle-Up program for electric water heating customers. The study uses data from a 

sample of participants in the Bundle-Up Program Data from participant surveys, installation records, 

billing records, and Company load research were used in the analysis of electricity savings attributable 

to the program. The program offered the following five measures: R-I0 insulation wrap, temperature 

setting turndown, low-flow shower head, two faucet aerators, and sediment removal. The preliminary 

engineering estimates indicated an annual electricity savings of 1,077 kilowatt-hours if all the 

measures are installed. Both methodologies used in this comparison study indicate savings of 

significantly fewer kilowatt hours than the original engineering estimates. 

Shared Savings Through Energy and Water Conservation: Developing a Local Conservation 

Plan Bourg, Joseph D. ; Nelson, Guy R., NEOS Corporation, Lafayette, California; Western Area 

Power Administration, Sacramento, California 

Source: Conserv 90 The National Conference and Exposition Offering Water Supply Solutions for 

the 1990s Phoenix, Arizona, August 12-16, 1990, P 829-833 

Abstract: Energy and water utilities share many common goals, such as curbing customers' wasteful 

practices, promoting efficient use of natural resources, and ensuring that conservation strategies are 

understood so that a fair comparison can be made between conservation and increased supply as 

demand increases. The author presents a four-step methodology for developing integrated 

wa.ter/energy conservation plans. A north California municipality (which owns the gas, water, and 

DRAFT. January 27.1995 37 
electric utilities) was analyzed to demonstrate the benefits of integrated conservation management

programs. Five strategies were defined: low-flow showerheads, residential and commercial

Xeriscaping, irrigation guides, and self-closing faucets. Most of the energy savings are due to

decreased pumping and reduced energy use at water and wastewater treatment plants. Some savings

accrue from the use of low-flow showerheads. Finally, because peak demand periods for water and

energy often coincide, an integrated water/energy conservation program controls peak demand on

the electrical grid by controlling peak demand for water.

Water, Water Everywhere... Do We Really Need to Reduce Water Use in British Columbia?

Stephens, K.A. ; Johnston, C.M. Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd., Consulting Engineers, North

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Source: Proceedings of Conserv 93; Las Vegas, NV, December 12-16, 1993, p 1319-1337

Abstract: One purpose of the following paper is to provide an overview on the forces that are

beginning to fundamentally reshape the approach to water management in British Columbia. To this

end, the paper focuses on three regions of the province in which water use is among the highest in

North America on a per capita basis. The main purpose of the paper, however, is to underscore the

need for an integrated strategy to considerably reduce total water use by eliminating wasteful water

use. The three elements of this strategy are tools, incentives, and ethics. The paper answers the

question Why is British Columbia water short? The author then goes on to discuss the potential of

water savings in terms of universal metering, water saving devices (including toilets), and integrating

tools, incentives, and ethics. Finally, case studies are offered to show how this strategy can work..

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 38

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

electric utilities) was analyzed to demonstrate the benefits of integrated conservation management 

programs. Five strategies were defmed: low-flow showerheads, residential and commercial 

Xeriscaping, irrigation guides, and self-closing faucets. Most of the energy savings are due to 

decreased pumping and reduced energy use at water and wastewater treatment plants. Some savings 

accrue from the use of low-flow showerheads. Finally, because peak demand periods for water and 

energy often coincide, an integrated water/energy conservation program controls peak demand on 

the electrical grid by controlling peak demand for water. 

Water, Water Everywhere ..• Do We Really Need to Reduce Water Use in British Columbia? 

Stephens, K.A. ; Johnston, C.M. Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd., Consulting Engineers, North 

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada 

Source: Proceedings ofConserv 93; Las Vegas, NV, December 12-16, 1993, p 1319-1337 

Abstract: One purpose of the following paper is to provide an overview on the forces that are 

beginning to fundamentally reshape the approach to water management in British Columbia. To this 

end, the paper focuses on three regions of the province in which water use is among the highest in 

North America on a per capita basis. The main purpose of the paper, however, is to underscore the 

need for an integrated strategy to considerably reduce total water use by eliminating wasteful water 

use. The three elements of this strategy are tools, incentives, and ethics. The paper answers the 

question Why is British Columbia water short? The author then goes on to discuss the potential of 

water savings in terms of universal metering, water saving devices (including toilets), and integrating 

tools, incentives, and ethics. Finally, case studies are offered to show how this strategy can work .. 

DRAFT. January 27.1995 38 
c. Rebates

New York City toilet rebate program unveiled. (New York, New York Department of

Environmental Protection approves rebates to building and home owners for low flow toilet

installation)

Source: Gerard, Eric R., Real Estate Weekly v40 ISSUE: n12 PG: pl(2), Oct 27, 1993

Contac t: William Nechamen, Water Program Specialist II, NY State Dept. of Env. Conservation, 50

Wolf Road, Room 308, Albany, NY 12233-3504, 518-457-8681

Abstract: In 1994, New York City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) will engage in a

toilet rebate program. The target community is any homeowner and apartment building or commercial

building owners. A rebate of $240 for the first toilet and $150 for each additional toilet covers

installation costs by licensed plumbers as required by the program. Low-flow showerheads and faucet

aerators will be installed at the same time. The DEP's goal is to exchange 1.4 million toilets before

the programs end. The water savings are calculated at about 120 million gallons of water each day.

News of the Field--California Drought Prompts Increase in Conservation Effort

Source: Journal American Water Works Association, vol.82, no.7, p 4, July 1990, Publisher:

American Water Works Association (Denver, Colorado 303-794-7711)

Contact: Matt Puffer, Metropolitan Water District, 350 South Grand Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90054

Abstract: In response to continuing drought conditions, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern

California has launched a special $10 million rebate program designed to encourage retail water

agencies to cut water use during the summer. The program is part of a major effort by Metropolitan

and other Southern California agencies to reduce water consumption by 10 percent. Other

drought-related actions taken by Metropolitan include agreeing to provide, when possible, water to

drought-stricken portions of Ventura and Santa Barbara counties, participating in a program to

retrofit homes with low-flow showerheads and other water-saving hardware, and doubling the

district's financial participation in local water reclamation projects.

North Wales Water Authority introduces rebate program for customers who install low flush

toilets.

Source: PR Newswire, April 24, 1990, North Wales Water Authority, Pennsylvania

Contact: Peter Lukens of North Wales Water Authority, 215-699-4836, North Wales Water

Authority, Pennsylvania

Abstract: North Wales Watex Authocit^ ^co^cdlo^x-tilushtsail,tsa^ts lZYJcsmvti^

through a rebate program called "Operation Low Rush." The utility gave customers a rebate of$75

for each toilet installed.

Ultra-Low-Flush Toilet Rebate Programs in Southern California: Lessons for Water Managers

and Planners. Chestnutt, Thomas W.; Moynahan, Michael D.; Bamezai, Anil; A&N Technical

Services, Inc., Santa Monica, CA ; Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, State Water

Project and Conservation Division, Los Angeles, CA

Source: 1992 Annual Conference Proceedings; American Water Works Association;

Management and Regulations; June 18-22, 1992; p 739-746, AWWA

DRAFT, January 27 , 1995 39

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

c. Rebates 

New York City toilet rebate program unveiled. (New York, New York Department of 

Environmental Protection approves rebates to building and home owners for low flow toilet 

installation) 

Source: Gerard, Eric R., Real Estate Weekly v40 ISSUE: nl2 PG: pl(2), Oct 27,1993 

Contact: William Nechamen, Water Program Specialist IT, NY State Dept. of Env. Conservation, 50 

Wolf-Road, Room 308, Albany, NY 12233-3504,518-457-8681 . 

Abstract: In 1994, New York City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) will engage in a 

toilet rebate program. TIle target community is any homeowner and apartment building or commercial 

building owners. A rebate of $240 for the ftrst toilet and $150 for each additional toilet covers 

installation costs by licenced plumbers as required by the program. Low-flow showerheads and faucet 

aerators will be installed at the same time. The DEP's goal is to exchange 1.4 million toilets before 

the programs end. The water savings are calculated at about 120 million gallons of water each day. 

News of the Field--Califomia Drought Prompts Increase in Conservation Effort 

Source: Journal American Water Works Association, vo1.82, no.7, p 4, July 1990, Publisher: 

American W ater Works Association (Denver, Colorado 303-794-7711) 

Contact: Matt Puffer, Metropolitan Water District, 350 South Grand Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90054 

Abstract: In response to continuing drought conditions, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern 

California has launched a special $10 million rebate program designed to encourage retail water 

agencies to cut water use during the summer. The program is part of a major effort by Metropolitan 

and other Southern California agencies to reduce water consumption by 10 percent. Other 

drought-related actions taken by Metropolitan include agreeing to provide, when possible, water to 

drought-stricken portions of Ventura and Santa Barbara counties, participating in a program to 

retrofit homes with low-flow showerheads and other water-saving hardware, and doubling the 

district's financial participation in local water reclamation projects. 

North Wales Water Authority introduces rebate program for customers who insialilow flush 

toilets. 

Source: PR Newswire, April 24, 1990, North Wales Water Authority, Pennsylvania 

Contact: Peter Lukens of North Wales Water Authority, 215-699-4836, North Wales Water 

Authority, Pennsylvania 

Abstract. Nartn Wa1e~ Wa~t t\.\ltl\.Q~~ ~t.Q~1,.<.\,«-\l..\Mh\k~~~'-ts.. \.."t~~~~~~~ 

through a rebate program called "Operation Low Flush. " The utility gave customers a rebate of $75 

for each toilet installed. 

Ultra-Low-Flush Toilet Rebate ~ in Southern California: Lessons for Water Managers 

and Planners. Chestnutt, Thomas W.; Moynahan, Michael D.; Bamezai, Anil; A&N Technical 

Services, Inc., Santa Monica, CA ; Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, State Water 

Project and Conservation Division, Los Angeles, CA 

Source: 1992 Annual Conference Proceedings; American Water Works Association; 

Management and Regulations; June 18-22,1992; P 739-746, AWWA 

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 39 
Cwt: Matt Puffer, Metropolitan Water District, 350 South Grand Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90054

Abst y ract: Previous attempts to evaluate the effectiveness of water conservation programs have often

yielded ambiguous and unconvincing results . The lack of empirical support for the effectiveness of

water conservation programs has undermined the rationale for their need and impaired the ability of

water planners to design better programs. This paper summarizes what water managers and planners

can learn from a detailed evaluation of ultra -low-flush (ULF) toilet rebate programs in Southern

California.

DRAFT, January 27 , 1995 40

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

Contact: Matt Puffer, Metropolitan Water District, 350 South Grand Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90054 

Abstract: Previous attempts to evaluate the effectiveness of water conservation programs have often 

yielded ambiguous and unconvincing results. The lack of empirical support for the effectiveness of 

water conservation programs has undennined the rationale for their need and impaired the ability of 

water planners to design better programs. This paper summarizes what water managers and planners 

can learn from a detailed evaluation of ultra-low-flush (ULF) toilet rebate programs in Southern 

California 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 40 
d. Retrofit program for showerheads

An Analysis of Seattle's Multifamily Retrofit Pilot Program Flory, Bruce E. ; Dietemann, Allan,

Seattle Water Department, Seattle, WA

Sum: 1992 Annual Conference Proceedings; American Water Works Association;

Management and Regulations; June 18-22, 1992, p453-478

Contact: Allan Dietemann, Conservation Office, Dexter Horton Building, 11th Fl., 710 2nd Avenue,

Seattle, WA 98104

Abstract: Several years ago a set of circumstances combined to provide the Seattle Water Dept. with

an excellent opportunity to statistically quantify multifamily retrofit savings. Low flow shower heads

and faucet aerators were installed and toilet leaks repaired in five Seattle Housing Authority

apartments. Another SHA apartment was given a complete toilet retrofit. Residents were surveyed

to determine customer satisfaction. Water consumption before and after the retrofit was obtained for

each apartment retrofitted, as well as for a control building. The retrofit produced definite reductions

in water consumption. However, the impact of the retrofit on water consumption was highly variable

from building to building. The study results indicate that a multifamily retrofit program should be

highly cost effective, measured either from the point of view of the apartment owner or the water

department. Almost three years of consumption data since the retrofit was completed reveal that

water savings attributable to toilet repair and retrofit have persisted over time. However, showerhead

and faucet aerator savings could not be documented three years after the retrofit.

Does low-flow still mean low satisfaction. Katzev, R. (Reed College, Portland, OR (USA) Public

Policy Research Inc., Portland, OR (USA))

Source: Home Energy (United States) v 8:4. Coden: HOENE ISSN: 0896-9442; Jul-Aug 1991 p

22-24

Abstract: Are the leading low-flow showerheads less enjoyable then the standard showerheads Will

people remove them like they did with flow restrictors ten years ago To answer these questions,

Bonneville Power Administration hired us to investigate the reactions of individuals who were given

an opportunity to install one of twelve different low-flow showerheads in their residences. This

in-home methodology was selected over other alternatives because it provided a more natural,

non-intrusive setting in which to determine how individuals reacted to low-flow showerheads.

Field measurements of low flow showerheads. Robison, D.

Source: ACEEE 1990 summer study on energy efficiency in buildings: Proceedings. Volume 1,

Building equipment and appliances; American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy 26 Aug - 1

Sep 1990 p. 1.185-1:187 (256 p)

Abet: This paper reports on a Pacific Power product placement study of low flow showerheads.

The purpose of the study was to identify consumer reactions strictly to amenity and quality issues.

Overall reaction was quite positive, with improvement in consumer satisfaction level. Water usage

was directly measured before and after changing the showerhead. Water savings averaged 1.4 gallons

per minute. This is less savings than expected - residential water pressure appears to be lower than

is often assumed. The old showerheads were not delivering excessively large flow, apparently due to

low residential water pressure and partially clogged orifices. Consumers were surveyed before the

DRAFF, January 27, 1995 41

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

d. Retrofit program for showerheads 

An Analysis of Seattle's Multifamily Retrofit Pilot Program Flory, Bruce E. ; Dietemann, Allan, 

Seattle Water Department, Seattle, W A 

Source: 1992 Annual Conference Proceedings; American Water Works Association; 

Management and Regulations; June 18-22, 1992, P 453-478 

Contact: Allan Dietemann, Conservation Office, Dexter Horton Building, 11th Fl., 710 2nd Avenue, 

Seattle, W A 98104 

Abstract: Several years ago a set of circumstances combined to provide the Seattle Water Dept. with 

an excellent opportunity to statistically quantify multifamily retrofit savings. Low flow shower beads 

and faucet aerators were installed and toilet leaks repaired in five Seattle Housing Authority 

apartments. Another SHA apartment was given a complete toilet retrofit. Residents were surveyed 

to determine customer satisfaction. Water consumption before and after the retrofit was obtained for 

each apartment retrofitted, as well as for a control building. The retrofit produced defmite reductions 

in water consumption. However, the impact of the retrofit on water consumption was highly variable 

from building to building. The study results indicate that a multifamily retrofit program should be 

highly cost effective, measured either from the point of view of the apartment owner or the water 

department. Almost three years of consumption data since the retrofit was completed reveal that 

water savings attributable to toilet repair and retrofit have persisted over time. However, showerhead 

and faucet aerator savings could not be documented three years after the retrofit. 

Does low-flow still mean low satisfaction. Katzev, R. (Reed College, Portland, OR (USA) Public 

Policy Research fuc., Portland. OR (USA)) 

Source: Home Energy (United States) v 8:4. Coden: HOENE ISSN: 0896-9442; Jul-Aug 1991 P 

22-24 

Abstract: Are the leading low-flow showerheads less enjoyable then the standard showerheads Will 

people remove them like they did with flow restrictors ten years ago To answer these questions. 

Bonneville Power Administration hired us to investigate the reactions of individuals who were given 

an opportunity to install one of twelve different low-flow showerheads in their residences. This 

in-home methodology was selected .over other alternatives because it provided a more natural. 

non-intrusive setting in which to determine how individuals reacted to low-flow showerheads. 

Field measurements of low Dow showerheads. Robison, D. 

Source: ACEEE 1990 summer study on energy efficiency in buildings: Proceedings. Volume 1, 

Buikling equipment and appliances; American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy 26 Aug - 1 

Sep 1990 p. 1.185-L187 (256 p) 

Abstract: This paper reports on a Pacific Power product placement study of low flow showerheads. 

The purpose of the study was to identify consumer reactions strictly to amenity and quality issues. 

Overall reaction was quite positive. with improvement in consumer satisfaction level. Water usage 

was directly measured before and after changing the showerhead. Water savings averaged 1.4 gallons 

per minute. This is less savings than expected - residential water pressure appears to be lower than 

is often assumed. The 01d showerheads were not delivering excessively large flow, apparently due to 

low residential water pressure and partially clogged orifices. Consumers were surveyed before the 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 41 
change and after one week with the new showerhead. They were asked questions regarding their level

of satisfaction with the old and new showerheads. In general, customers were very positive about the

feel or level of quality of the new showerhead. Several customers indicated that their previous

experience with energy-conserving showerheads had. been negative. The new showerhead

demonstrated a significant improvement in the level of satisfaction. The value of the water savings

should be considered. Assuming that showers last 10 minutes and house-holds average two showers

per day, one estimates savings of over 10,000 gallons per year. At a marginal cost of $2 per 100 cu.

ft., the savings to the water and sewage system are worth $27 dollars per year. This value is in

addition to the energy savings. Although energy savings were not directly measured, they are

estimated at about $60 per year. Programmatic cost of the showerheads and their installation is

estimated at $15, proving very cost-effective.

Field study of energy-e

fficient showerheads. Bailey, S.A.; Warwick, W.M.; Lauhala, A.J. (Pacific

Northwest Lab., Richland, WA (United States)); Hickman, C.H. (USDOE Bonneville Power

Administration, Portland, OR (United States)); Dent, C.L. (Pacific Science and Technology (United

States))

ource: Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA Sep 1992 (15 p), PNL-SA-21094 CONF-920828--19;

Order Number: DE93001550

Contact: Curtis Hickman, BPA, P.O. Box 3621-RPEB, Portland, OR 97208

Abstract: In August 1991, the Bonneville Power Administration (Bonneville) initiated an

energy-efficient showerhead performance assessment project. Approximately 98 homes are

participating in this study. All are metered under the Regional End-Use Metering Program (REMP),

which is operated by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) for Bonneville. Hourly pre- and

post-retrofit electrical water heating consumption data will be analyzed using the REMP data archive.

The goal of this study is to identify factors affecting energy savings from retrofit of energy-efficient

shower heads which will be used to develop an algorithm" to credit participants in retrofit programs

with savings. This algorithm must be easy to apply, credible, and adoptable to conditions which may

vary among utilities in Bonneville's Pacific Northwest service area. This field data collection project

was designed to collect information about site and occupant characteristics that may affect

participation and performance. These data are used to verify or modify assumptions used in

engineering models to project energy savings. Estimates of measure performance based on

comparisons of energy use are not included in this paper because sufficient post-retrofit data is not

yet available. Field data failed to confirm several critical assumptions used to project energy savings.

Showerhead water flow rates and anticipated reductions from the retrofit measures were less than

expected. Participation in this voluntary study was relatively low considering its risk- and cost-free

design. Finally, barriers were encountered that prevented retrofits at some participating sites. The

cumulative effect of all factors could reduce projected savings 70% over initial engineering estimates,

if 100% participation is assumed.

Low Flow Showerhead Program: Analysis of Persistence, Flow Rates, Energy Savings, and

Customer Satisfaction

Source: Martin, J.C., Wiggins, D.C., Boutwell, B.F., Marketing Information & Planning, Evaluation

& Analysis Section San Diego Gas & Electric, June 1992.

DRAFT, January 27 ,1995 42

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

change and after one week with the new showerhead. TIley were asked questions regarding their level 

of satisfaction with the 01d and new showerheads. In general, customers were very positive about the 

feel or level of quality of the new showerhead. Several customers indicated that their previous 

experience with energy-conserving showerheads had. been negative. The new showerhead 

demonstrated a significant improvement in the level of satisfaction. The value of the water savings 

shou1d be considered. Assuming that showers last 10 minutes and house-holds average two showers 

per day, one estimates savings of over 10,000 gallons per year. At a marginal cost of $2 per 100 cu. 

ft., the savings to the water and sewage system are worth $27 dollars per year. This value is in 

addition to the energy savings. Although energy savings were not directly measured, they are 

estimated at about $60 per year. Programmatic cost of the showerheads and their installation is 

estimated at $15, proving very cost-effective. 

Field study of energy-emcient sbowerheads. Bailey, S.A; Warwick, W.M.; Lauhala, AI. (pacific 

Northwest Lab., Richland, W A (United States»; Hickman, C.H. (USDOE Bonneville Power 

Administration, Portland, OR (United States»; Dent, C.L. (pacific Science and Technology (United 

States» 

Source: Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA Sep 1992 (15 p), PNL-SA-21094 CONF-920828--19; 

Order Number: DE93001550 

Contact: Curtis Hickman, BPA, P.O. Box 3621-RPEB, Portland, OR 97208 

Abstract: In August 1991, the Bonneville Power Administration (Bonneville) initiated an 

energy-efficient showerhead performance assessment project. Approximately 98 homes are 

participating in this study. All are metered under the Regional End-Use Metering Program (REMP), 

which is operated by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) for Bonneville. Hourly pre- and 

post-retrofit electrical water heating consumption data will be analyzed using the REMP data archive. 

TIle goal of this study is to identify factors affecting energy savings from retrofit of energy-efficient 

shower heads which will be used to develop an algorithm" to credit participants in retrofit programs 

with savings. This algorithm must be easy to apply, credible, and adoptable to conditions which may 

vary among utilities in Bonneville's Pacific Northwest service area. This field data collection project 

was designed to collect information about site and occupant characteristics that may affect 

participation and performance. These data are used to verify or modify assumptions used in 

engineering models to project energy savings. Estimates of measure performance based on 

comparisons of energy use are not included in this paper because sufficient post-retrofit data is not 

yet available. Field data failed to confirm several critical assumptions used to project energy savings. 

Showerhead water flow rates and anticipated reductions from the retrofit measures were less than 

expected. Participation in this voluntary study was relatively low considering its risk- and cost-free 

design. Finally, barriers were encountered that prevented retrofits at some participating sites. The 

cumulative effect of all factors cou1d reduce projected savings 70% over initial engineering estimates, 

if 100% participation is assumed. 

Low Flow Showerhead Program: Analysis or Persistence, Flow Rates, Energy Savings, and 

Customer Satisfaction 

Source: Martin, lC., Wiggins, D.C., Boutwell, B.F., Marketing Information & Planning, Evaluation 

& Analysis Section San Diego Gas & Electric, June 1992. 

DRAFT. January 27.1995 42 
Contact: San Diego Gas & Electric, P.O. Box 1831, San Diego, CA 92112, (619) 696-2000

Abstract: Based on engineering estimates, 1.25 million therms were saved annually due to the

combined 1990 and 1991 programs. Retention and flow rates data from this study were used to

develop this energy estimate. One key assumption not addressed by this study was the percent of total

household hot water used for showers (assumed to be 30%)...

Program participants were most satisfied with the installers' work and the showerhead distribution

method. They were least satisfied with the shower comfort and rise time. In general, program

participants were more satisfied with the 2.5 GPM LFS (low flow showerhead) with respect to

shower temperature control, shower comfort, and rinse time.

Low-flow showers save water - Who cares . Manclark, B. (Delta-T Inc., Eugene, OR (USA))

Source: Home Energy (United States) v 8:4. Coden: HOENE ISSN: 0896-9442 Jul-Aug 1991 p

27-29

Abstract: The retention rate of low-flow showerheads by homeowners is obviously key to their ability

to conserve energy and water. Much has been written about such design features as on-off switches,

atomizing or non-atomizing designs, spray width, noise level, visual appeal, and non-clogging designs,

and the effects of those factors on shower satisfaction levels. Pacific Power sought a better

understanding of these issues and commissioned a product placement study of low-flow showerheads

in Yakima, Wash. The study sought to assess the level of public acceptance of low-flow showerheads

without reference to their water - or energy - saving abilities. While potential participants were told

that Delta-T Inc. was an independent research and consulting company test-marketing a new type of

showerhead, they were not informed that Pacific Power sponsored the test. They were offered $10

per household for their participation in the study. This article reports the results of the study.

Persistence of Energy-Efficient Showerheads: Field Study Results

Source: Bailey, S.A., Warwick, W.M., Prepared for Bonneville Power Administration by Pacific

Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington 99352, May 1993

Co ntact: Curtis Hickman, BPA, P.O. Box 3621-RPEB, Portland, OR 97208

Abstract: Puget Sound Power & Light (Puget Power) and the Bonneville Power Administration

(Bonneville) are collaborating on a study of the persistence of energy-efficient showerheads

distributed to Puget Power customers as part of Puget Power's energy-efficient showerhead program.

This persistence study includes a field study that was performed by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory

(PNL) in the spring of 1992. In this study, gram persistence is defined as finding at least one

installed Puget Power showerhead in a home whereas measure persistence refers to the IQia1 number

of energy-efficient showerheads in a home visited during the site visits.

Bonneville's three main objectives for the PNL field study are 1 ) to see if the showerheads have

remained in operation, 2) to compare the number of showerheads that were actually installed with

the number reported in an earlier telephone survey conducted by Puget Power, and 3) to measure

water flow rates through showerheads at the sample sites. Puget Power's objectives for this

showerhead program are to determine initial installation rate, persistence rate, customer satisfaction

with showerhead performance, reliability of the telephone survey responses to questions about

DRAFr, January 27, 1995 43

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

Contact: San Diego Gas & Electric, P.O. Box 1831, San Diego, CA 92112, (619) 696-2000 

Abstract: Based on engineering estimates, 1.25 million therms were saved annually due to the 

combined 1990 and 1991 programs. Retention and flow rates data from this study were used to 

develop this energy estimate. One key assumption not addressed by this study was the percent of total 

household hot water used for showers (assumed to be 30%) ... 

Program participants were most satisfied with the installers' work and the showerhead distribution 

method. They were least satisfied with the shower comfort and rise time. In general, program 

participants were more satisfied with the 2.5 GPM LFS (low flow showerhead) with respect to 

shower temperature control, shower comfort, and rinse time. 

Low-flow showers save water - Who cares. Manclark, B. (Delta-TIne., Eugene, OR (USA» 

Source: Home Energy (United States) v 8:4. Coden: HOENE ISSN: 0896-9442 Jul-Aug 1991 P 

27-29 

Abstract: The retention rate of low-flow showerheads by homeowners is obviously key io their ability 

to conserve energy and water. Much has been written about such design features as on-off switches, 

atomizing or non-atomizing designs, spray width, noise 1evel, visual appeal, and non-clogging designs, 

and the effects of those factors on shower satisfaction levels. Pacific Power sought a better 

understanding of these issues and commissioned a product placement study of low-flow showerheads 

in Ya.kima. Wash. The study sought to assess the level of public acceptance of low-flow showerheads 

without reference to their water - or energy - saving abilities. While potential participants were told 

that Delta-T Inc. was an independent research and consulting company test-marketing a new type of 

showerhead, they were not informed that Pacific Power sponsored the test. They were offered $10 

per household for their participation in the study. This article reports the results of the study., 

Persistence of Energy-Efficient Showerbeads: Field Study Results 

Source: Bailey, S.A., Warwick, W.M., Prepared for Bonneville Power Administration by Pacific 

Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington 99352, May 1993 

Contact: Curtis Hickman, BPA, P.O. Box 3621-RPEB, Portland, OR 97208 

Abstract: Puget Sound Power & Light (Puget Power) and the Bonneville Power Administration 

(Bonneville) are collaborating on a study of the persistence of energy-efficient showerheads 

distributed to Puget Power customers as part of Puget Power's energy-efficient showerhead program. , 

1bis persistence study includes a field study that was performed by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory 

(PNL) in the spring of 1992. In this study, pro~ram persistence is defined as finding at least one 

installed Puget Power showerhead in a home whereas measure persistence refers to the mtal number 

of energy-efficient showerheads in a home visited during the site visits. 

Bonneville's three main objectives for the PNL field study are 1) to see if the showerheads have 

remained in operation, 2) to compare the number of showerheads that were actually installed with 

the number reported in an earlier telephone survey conducted by Puget Power, and 3) to measure 

water flow rates through showerheads at the sample sites. Puget Power's objectives for this 

showerhead program are to determine initial installation rate, persistence rate, customer satisfaction 

with showerhead performance, reliability of the telephone survey responses to questions about 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 43 
program persistence, and customer satisfaction with Puget Power's showerhead program.

Single Family Pilot Residential, Retrofit Project for Water Conservation

Source: Seattle Water Department, December 1990

Contact: Allan Dietemann, Conservation Office, Dexter Horton Building, 11th Fl., 7-10 2nd Avenue,

Seattle, WA 98104

Abstract: As part of the Seattle Water Department's (SWD) 1990 Comprehensive Water Plan

(COMPLAN), a study was conducted to test effective distribution methods of water-efficient

showerheads, toilet displacement bags and other similar devices, document water savings achieved,

and provide cost estimates for a full-scale program for the SWD service area.

DRAFT, January 27, 1995 44

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

program persistence, and customer satisfaction with Puget Power's showerhead program. 

Single Family Pilot Residential, Retrofit Project for Water Conservation 

Source: Seattle Water Department, December 1990 

Contact: Allan Dietemann, Conservation Office, Dexter Horton Building, 11th Fl., 7-10 2nd Avenue, 

Seatt1~, W A 98104 

Abstract: As part of the Seattle Water Department's (SWD) 1990 Comprehensive Water Plan 

(COMPLAN), a study was conducted to test effective distribution methods of water-efficient 

showerheads, toilet displacement bags and other similar devices, document water savings achieved, 

.and provide cost estimates for a full-scale program for the SWD service area. 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 44 
e. Retrofit programs for toilets

Critical Review of Research and Long-Term Experience With Minimum Flow

Toilet Fixtures. Anderson, Damann L. ; Siegrist, Robert L; Ayres Associates, Tampa Florida; Ayres

Associates, Madison, Wisconsin

Source: Conserv 90 The National Conference and Exposition Offering Water Supply

Solutions for the 1990s; August 12-16, 1990; p 189-193; AWWA

Abstrac : This paper summarizes two studies of performance of alternative and ultra-low-flow toilets.

The first study, performed by the University of Wisconsin in the 1970s, was a field evaluation of

several low-flow toilet systems, as well as reuse of gray water for flushing conventional toilets in

single-family homes. This was a limited study: nine toilets in five homes to evaluate ultra-low-flow

fixtures (0.4-1.6 gal per flush); two homes for the gray water recycling systems. The second study

evaluated the performance of low-flow toilets in two residential subdivisions in Phoenix, Arizona.

One subdivision used conventional 3.5 gal per flush toilets, while the other subdivision used 0.8 gal

per flush toilets. Data showed, among other things that ultra-low-flow toilets clogged LESS than

conventional toilets, required fewer instances of multiple flushing to clear the bowl than conventional

toilets, but had to be cleaned more often.

Economic and Social Benefits of Low-Consumption Toilets in the Delaware River Basin.

Featherstone, Jeffrey P.; Delaware River Basin Commission, West Trenton, NJ

Source: 1991 Annual Conference Proceedings; American Water Works Association;

Resources, Engineering and Operations for the New Decade Philadelphia, PA; June 23-27, 1991; p

763-772; AWWA

Contact: Jeff Featherstone, Delaware River Basin Commission, P.O. Box 7360, West Trenton, NJ

08628

Abstract: In May of 1989, the Delaware River Basin Commission amended its water conservation

performance standards for plumbing fixtures and fittings to require low-consumption toilets in new

construction and renovation. This action followed considerable research on the economic and social

benefits of such a requirement. This paper describes that research.

Effectiveness of an Ultra-Low-Flush Toilet Program. Tarquin, Anthony J. ; Sutton, John T.; Chan,

Peter; Vagwala, Srinivasa; The University of Texas at El Paso, Civil Engineering, El Paso, TX ; El

Paso Water Utilities, El Paso, TX ; Parkhill, Smith, and Cooper, El Paso, TX

Source: Proceedings of Conserv 93; The New Water Agenda Las Vegas, NV; December 12-16,

1993; p 885-893, American Society of Civil Engineers; American Water Resources

Association ; American Water Works Association

Abstract: In 1991, the city of El Paso, Texas, began one of the strictest water conservation programs

in the United States. In addition to a three-tier pricing system, a new plumbing code, severe

restrictions on lawn watering and car and pavement washing, and requiring large water users

(>10,000 GPD) to submit a water conservation plan, a project to encourage installation of

ultra-low-flush toilets in existing houses was undertaken. This paper is a report on the outcome of

the toilet replacement portion of the City of El Paso's water conservation program.

DRAFT, January 27 , 1995 45

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

e. Retrofit programs for toilets 

Critical Review of Research and Long. Term Experience With Minimum Flow 

Toilet Fixtures. Anderson, Damann L. ; Segrist. Robert L.; Ayres Associates, Tampa Florida; Ayres 

Associates, Madison, Wisconsin 

Source: Conserv 90 The National Conference and Exposition Offering Water Supply 

Solutions for the 1990s; August 12-16, 1990; P 189-193; AWWA 

Abstract: This paper summarizes two studes of performance of alternative and ultra-low-flow toilets. 

The first study, performed by the University of Wisconsin in the 1970s, was a field evaluation of 

several low-flow toilet systems, as well as reuse of gray water for flushing conventional toilets in 

single-family homes. This was a limited study: nine toilets in five homes to evaluate ultra-low-flow 

fixtures (0.4-1.6 gal per flush); two homes for the gray water recycling systems. The second study 

evaluated the performance of low-flow toilets in two residential subdivisions in Phoenix, Arizona. 

One subdivision used conventional 3.5 gal per flush toilets, while the other subdivision used 0.8 gal 

per flush toilets. Data showed, among other things that ultra-low-flow toilets clogged LESS than 

conventional toilets, required fewer instances of multiple flushing to.clear the bowl than conventional 

toilets, but had to be cleaned more often. 

Economic and Social Benefits of Low.Consumption Toilets in the Delaware River Basin. 

Featherstone, Jeffrey P.; Delaware River Basin Commission, West Trenton, NJ 

Source: 1991 Annual Conference Proceedings; American Water Wodes Association; 

Resources, Engineering and Operations for the New Decade Philadelphia, P A; June 23-27, 1991; P 

763-772; A WW A 

Contact: Jeff Featherstone, Delaware River Basin Commission, P.O. Box 7360, West Trenton, NJ 

08628 

Abstract: In May of 1989, the Delaware River Basin Commission amended its water conservation 

perfonnance standards for plumbing fixtures and fittings to require low-consumption toilets in new 

construction and renovation. This action followed considerable research on the economic and social 

t>enefits of such a requirement. This paper describes that research. 

Effectiveness of an Ultra·Low·Flush Toilet Program. Tarquin, Anthony J. ; Sutton, John T.; Chan, 

Peter; Vagwala, Srinivasa; The University of Texas at EI Paso, Civil Engineering, EI Paso, TX ; EI 

Paso Water Utilities, El Paso, TX ; Parkhill, Smith, and Cooper, El Paso, TX 

Source: Proceedings of Conserv 93; The New Water Agenda Las Vegas, NV; December 12-16, 

1993; P 885-893, American Society of Civil Engineers; American Water Resources 

Association; American Water Works Association 

Abstract: In 1991, the city ofEI Paso, Texas, began one of the strictest water conservation programs 

in the United States. In addition to a three-tier pricing ~ystem, a new plumbing code, severe 

restrictions on lawn watering and car and pavement washing, and requiring large water users 

(>10,000 GPD) to submit a water conservation plan, a project to encourage installation of 

ultra-low-flush toilets in existing houses was undertaken. This paper is a report on the outcome of 

the toilet replacement portion of the City of EI Paso's water conservation program. 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 45 
Survey of Purchaser Opinions About Ultra -Low-Flash Toilets. Martin, George, Los Angeles

Department of Water and Power, Los Angeles, CA

Source: Proceedings of Conserv 93; The New Water Agenda Las Vegas, NV; December 12-16,

1993, p 1057-1064, American Society of Civil Engineers ; American Water Resources

Association ; American Water Works Association

Contact: Department of Water and Power, City of Los Angeles, Rm 1348, 111 North Hope Street,

Los Angeles, CA 90012

Abstract: Like many other agencies, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (Department)

began its Ultra-Low-Flush (ULF) Toilet Rebate Program with concerns about the customers'

acceptance of these ULF toilets. How do customers like their new ULF toilet compared to the old

toilet that was replaced? Do some brands or models work better than others? In developing the list

of approved toilets should some be excluded because of inferior quality or performance? To answer

these questions and assure Department management that continued expenditure of several million

dollars was providing the anticipated customer satisfaction, the Department contracted with the

Wirthlin Group to obtain purchaser opinions about their ULF toilets. This paper summarizes the

report done by Wirthlin titled "A Survey of Purchaser Opinions About Ultra-Low-Flush Toilets."

Copies of the report can be obtained by writing the Department. The report summarized the

purchasers' opinions regarding ULF toilets in general as well as rating responses of the performance

of twelve specific ULF toilet models that generated enough responses for statistical validation.

Ultra Low Flow Water Closets. Steele, Alfred ; McCarty, Bernard J; Kauffman, George Consulting

Engineer, Orlando, Florida; B. J. McCarty Assoc., N. Scituate, Massachusetts

Source: American Society of Plumbing Engineers Research Foundation, Report 202, August 1990

Contact: ASPE Research Foundation, 3617 Thousand Oaks Boulevard, Westlake Village, CA 91362

Abstract: This paper offers a very brief overview of research carried out by the American Society of

Plumbing Engineers Research Foundation into ultra low flow toilets. Purposes of the research are

listed: determine ULF functional performance and compare it to performance of 3.5 gpf units;

establish a field laboratory to observe performance and user acceptance; determine transport

characteristics; identify or develop mathematical transport models; and survey field sites where ULF

toilets were installed to explore transport of wastes in drains and sewers.

DRAFT, January 27 ,1995 46

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

Survey of Purchaser Opinions About Ultra-Low-Flush Toilets. Martin, George, Los Angeles 

Department of Water and Power, Los Angeles, CA 

Source: Proceedings of Conserv 93; The New Water Agenda Las Vegas, NV; December 12-16, 

1993, P 1057-1064, American Society of Civil Engineers; American Water Resources 

Association; American Water Works Association 

Contact: Department of Water and Power, City of Los Angeles, Rm 1348, 111 North Hope Street, 

Los Angeles, CA 900 12 

Abstract: Like many other agencies, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (Department) 

began its Ultra-Low-Flush (ULF) Toilet Rebate Program with concerns about the customers' 

acceptance of these ULF toilets. How do customers like their new ULF toilet compared to the old 

toilet that was replaced? Do some brands or models work better than others? In developing the list 

of approved toilets should some be excluded because of inferior quality or performance? To answer 

these questions and assure Department management that continued expenditure 'of several million 

dollars was providing the anticipa~ customer satisfaction, the Department contracted with the 

Wirthlin Group to obtain purchaser opinions about their ULF toilets. This paper summarizes the 

report done by Wirthlin titled itA Survey of Purchaser Opinions About Ultra-Low-Flush Toilets." 

Copies of the report can be obtained by writing the Department. The report summarized the 

purchasers' opinions regarding ULF toilets in general as well as rating responses of the performance 

of twelve specific ULF toilet models that generated enough responses for statistical validation. 

Ultra Low Flow Water Closets. Steele, A1fred ; McCarty, Bernard J; Kauffman, George Consulting 

Engineer, Orlando, Florida; B. J. McCarty Assoc., N. Scituate, Massachusetts 

Source: American Society of Plumbing Engineers Research Foundation, Report 202, August 1990 

Contact: ASPE Research Foundation, 3617 Thousand Oaks Boulevard, Westlake Village, CA 91362 

Abstract: This paper offers a very brief overview of research carried out by the American Society of 

Plumbing Engineers Research Foundation into ultra low flow toilets. Purposes of the research are 

listed: determine ULF functional performance and compare it to performance of 3.5 gpf units; 

establish a field laboratory to observe performance and user acceptance; determine transport 

characteristics; identify or develop mathematical transport models; and survey freld sites where ULF 

toilets were installed to explore transport of wastes in drains and sewers. 

DRAFr. January 27.1995 46 
f. Low-Income Programs

Conservation Assistance Program for Low Income Customers. Pollyea, Margaret A., Los

Angeles Department of Water and Power, Los Angeles, CA, December 12-16, 1993

p 1895-1898, 1993

Source: American Water Works Association

Contact: Peggy Pollyea, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power; Room 1348, 1111 North

Hope Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012

Abstract: The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power discovered through surveys that its

poorer customers were more receptive to low flow showerheads than wealthier customers, although

it was the wealthier customers who had taken advantage of distribution programs so far. The

department changed its target customer group to low income and older customers. Since it was

already known that the department had previously been unsuccessful in reaching this group of

customers, a method had to be devised to get their attention. They used the tried and true method of

three contacts--in this case, mailings--and an offer of help to install the devices. This project appears

to have been successful in reaching the target customer group, with over 50% of the shower heads

installed. One of the inherent problems for a utility as large as the Los Angeles Department of Water

and Power is that due to sheer numbers, almost any project undertaken will be on a large scale.

Hopefully the Department's experience in implementing this project will be helpful to those planning

similar types of outreach programs.

Dynamic Community Programming for Water Efficiency. Craft, James P., CTSI Corporation,

Irvine, CA, Proceedings of Conserv 93; The New Water Agenda Las Vegas, NV, December 12-16,

1993, p 91-94, 1993

Source: American Water Works Association

Contac Fiona Hamilton, CTSI Corp., 1881 Kaiser Avenue, Irvine, CA 92714 (714-253-2050)

Abst,r : What happens when water agencies, municipal utilities and private companies work with

the communities they service in order to develop community based.conservation programs? The

Mothers of East L.A. (MELASI) ultra low flush toilet retrofit program has more than demonstrated

that it can produce highly effective programs, with additional value-added benefits, which cost no

more than centrally managed rebate programs.

DRAFT, January 27 , 1995 47

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

f. Low-Income Programs 

Conservation Assistance Program for Low Income Customers. Pollyea, Margaret A .• Los 

Angeles Department of Water and Power. Los Angeles. CA. December 12-16.1993 

p 1895-1898, 1993 

Source: American Water Works Association 

Contact: Peggy Pollyea, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power; Room 1348. 1111 North 

Hope Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012 

Abstract: The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power discovered through surveys that its 

poorer customers were more receptive to low flow showemeads than wealthier customers, although 

it was the wealthier customers who had taken -advantage of distribution programs so far. The 

department changed its target customer group to low income and older customers. Since it was 

already known that the department had previously been unsuccessful in reaching this group of 

customers, a method had to be devised to get their attention. They used the tried and true method of 

three contacts--in this case, mailings--and an offer of help to install the devices. This project appears 

to have been successful in reaching the target customer group, with over 50% of the shower heads 

installed. One of the inherent problems for a utility as large as the Los Angeles Department of Water 

and Power is that due to sheer numbers, almost any project undertaken will be on a large scale. 

Hopefully the Department's experience in implementing this project will be helpful to those planning 

similar types of outreach programs. 

Dynamic Community .Programming for Water Efficiency. Craft, James P., CTSI Corporation. 

Irvine, CA, Proceedings ofConserv 93; The New Water Agenda Las Vegas, NV. December 12-16, 

1993, P 91-94, 1993 

Source: American Water Works Association 

Contact: Fiona Hamilton, CTSI Corp., 1881 Kaiser Avenue, Irvine, CA 92714 (714-253-2050) 

Abstract: What happens when water agencies, municipal utilities and private companies work with 

the communities they service in order to develop community based.conservation programs? The 

Mothers of East L.A (MELASI) ultra low flush toilet retrofit program has more than demonstrated 

that it can produce highly effective programs, with additional value-added benefits, which cost no 

more than centrally managed rebate programs. 

DRAFr. January 27.1995 47 
g. Legislation Incentives

Connecticut Residential Retrofit Program Ruzicka , Denise

Source: State of Connecticut Dept of Health Services, Environmental Health Division. March 1993.

Contact: Denise Ruzicka State of Connecticut, Department of Health Services, 150 Washington

Street, Hartford, CT 06106

Abstrac t: This report was prepared to update the Residential Water Savings Advisory Board on the

current status of Connecticut's Residential Retrofit Program enacted pursuant to Public Act 89-266.

This report should be viewed as a companion and continuation of Retrofitting in a Wet State (May,

1992) which briefly summarizes the legislative history and program requirements. Both reports are

Connecticut's mandatory residential retrofit program. This program has generated a lot of national

interest as it is the first and only statewide retrofit program. This program requires utilities to annually

make available free water saving retrofit kits to all residential customers.

Lessons Learned : San Diego's Retrofit Upon Resale Ordinance. Steirer, Marsi A., City of San

Diego, Water Utilities Department, San Diego, CA

Source: Proceedings of Conserv 93; The New Water Agenda Las Vegas, NV, AWWA, December

12-16, 1993, p 895-906, 1993

Contact: Marsi Steirer, Water Conservation Supervisor, San Diego Water Utilities, 600 B Street,

Suite 1210, San Diego, CA 92101-4227

Abstract: In 1990, the San Diego City Council adopted a five-year water conservation plan that

consisted of eight integrated and complementary water conservation programs. This five-year

conservation strategy was comprehensive in its scope, contained proven measures that would

generate permanent water savings, and included the staff and financial resources necessary to

accomplish such an ambitious undertaking. The development of a local ordinance requiring the

installation of ultra-low flush toilets (ULFI's) in all new construction was a provision of the

conservation plan. This ordinance went into effect on May 1, 1991. During discussion of the New

Construction Ordinance, the City Council requested that a similar ordinance be written that would

require the installation of ultra-low flush toilets upon change of property ownership and bathroom

remodeling.

Massachusetts Law Requires Water-Saving Fixtures

urce: Mainstream (AWWA), vol.33, no.1, p 1, 10, January 1989 American Water Works

Association, Denver, Colorado

intact: American Water Works Association (303-794-7310)

Abstract: Effective March 1, 1989 Massachusetts will become the first state to require ultra-low-flow

toilets for all new construction and replacement of fixtures. Other states are following suit. Other

methods of water conservation being addressed across the country include landscaping issues, reuse,

and rate structures.

Environment conservation by way of official notice or recommendations. Ossenbuehl, F.

Original Title: Umweltpflege durch behoerdliche Warnungen and Empfehlungen

Source: Series/Collection Title: Recht - Technik - Wirtschaft. Vol. 44 Publisher: Heymanns,Koeln,

DRAFT, January 27 ,1995 48

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

g. Legislation Incentives 

Connecticut Residential Retrofit Program Ruzicka, Denise 

Source: State of Connecticut Dept of Health Services. Environmental Health Division. March 1993. 

Contact: Denise Ruzicka State of Connecticut, Department of Health Services. 150 Washington 

Street. Hanford. cr 06106 

Abstract: This report was prepared to update the Residential Water Savings Advisory Board on the . . 

current status of Connecticut's Residential Retrofit Program enacted pursuant to Public Act 89-266. 

This report shoukl be viewed as a companion and continuation of Retrofittin& in a Wet State (May. 

1992) which briefly summarizes the legislative history and program requirements. Both reports are 

Connecticut's mandatory resi~ntial retrofit program. This program has generated a lot of national 

interest as it is the first and only statewide retrofit program. This program requires utilities to annually 

make available free water saving retrofit kits to all residential customers. 

Lessons Learned: San Diego's Retrofit Upon Resale Ordinance. Steirer, Marsi A., City of San 

Diego, Water Utilities Department, San Diego, CA 

Source: Proceedings ofConserv 93; The New Water Agenda Las Vegas, NV, AWW A, December 

12-16, 1993, P 895-906, 1993 

Contact: Marsi Steirer, Water Conservation Supervisor, San Diego Water Utilities, 600 B Street, 

Suite 1210, San Diego, CA 92101-4227 

Abstract: In 1990, the San Diego City Council adopted a five-year water conservation plan that 

consisted of eight integrated and complementary water conservation programs. This five-year 

conservation strategy was comprehensive in its scope, contained proven measures that would 

generate permanent water savings, and included the staff and financial resources necessary to 

accomplish such an ambitious undertaking. The development of a local ordinance requiring the 

installation of ultra-low flush toilets (ULFJ's) in all new construction was a provision of the 

conservation plan. This ordinance went into effect on May 1, 1991. During discussion of the New 

Construction Ordinance, the City Council requested that a similar ordinance be written that would 

require the installation of ultra-low flush toilets upon change of property ownership and bathroom 

remodeling. 

Massachusetts Law Requires Water.Saving Fixtures 

Source: Mainstream (A WW A), vo1.33, no.l, p 1, 10, January 1989 American Water Works 

Association, Denver, Colorado 

Contact: American Water Works Association (303-794-7310) . 

Abstract: Effective March 1, 1989 Massachusetts will become the first state to require ultra-low-flow 

toilets for all new construction and replacement of fixtures. Other states are following suit. Other 

methods of water conservation being addressed across the country include landscaping issues, reuse, 

and rate structures. 

Environment conservation by way or official notice or recommendations. Ossenbuehl, F. 

Origmal Title: Umweltpflege durch Pehoerdliche Wamungen und Empfehlungen 

Source: Series/Collection Title: Recht - Technik - Wirtschaft Vol. 44 Publisher: Heymanns,Koeln, 

DRAFI'. Juuary 27.1995 48 
Germany, F.R. 1986 p 115

Abstrac : The book is developed from legal expertise of the German Federation of Toilet Articles and

Detergents Producers and is intended to show that the increasingly used informal administrative

instruments of official notice or recommendations ought to be integrated into the system of

administrative law.

RECOs: when state and local governments mandate energy conservation.

Sourc : Energy Auditor Retrofitter (United States) v 4:1. Jan-Feb 1987 p 31-39

Abstract: Several US cities and state have passed residential energy conservation ordinances

(RECOs) that require investments in certain energy conservation measures before a home is sold.

Attic, water heater and duct insulation, weatherstripping and low flow showerheads are among the

measures which must be in place at the time of sale of residential single-family and multi-unit homes.

RECOs differ from standard building energy standards because they apply strictly to existing housing

rather than strictly to new home construction.

The Evolution of State Water Conservation Policy in Texas. Personett, Mike Texas Water

Development Board, Local and Regional Assistance Division, Austin, TX

Source: Proceedings of Conserv 93; The New Water Agenda, AWWA, Las Vegas, NV, December

12-16, 1993, p 957-965, 1993.

Sb` t: Mike Personett, Assistant Director, Planning Division, Texas Water Development Board,

P.O. Box 13231, Capitol Station, Austin, TX 78711

Ate: Over the past 20 years, water policy in Texas has evolved from its historical focus on water

supply development to a much more balanced approach that includes an emphasis on water efficiency

and other water demand management strategies. Prompted by economic, environmental,

technological, demographic, and social forces, state policy-makers have responded with new laws and

regulations that promote and, to a significant degree, mandate water conservation. State

policy-makers have also provided significant state resources to aid individuals and local water

agencies in the transition to a more water efficient future. Although progress has been incremental,

the State of Texas has made great strides in water conservation over the past decade. This paper

provides an overview of the history of state law and policy in Texas relating to water conservation

and provides a brief summary of the key components of current state policy.

DRAFT, January 27 , 1995 49

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

Gennany, F.R. 1986 P 115 

Abstract: The book is developed from 1egal expertise of the Gennan Federation of Toilet Articles and 

Detergents Producers and is intended to show that the increasingly used infonnal administrative 

instruments of official notice or recommendations ought to be integ~ted into the system of 

administrative law. 

RECOs: when state and local governments mandate energy conservation. 

Source: Energy Auditor Retrofitter (United States) v 4:1. Jan-Peb 1987 p 31-39 

Abstract: Several US cities and state have passed residential energy conservation ordinances 

(RECOs) that require investments in certain energy conservation measures before a home is sold. 

Attic, water heater and duct insulation, weatherstripping and low flow showerheads are among the 

measures which must be in place at the time of sale of residential single-family and multi-unit homes. 

RECDs differ from standard building energy standards because they apply strictly to existing housing 

rather than strictly to new home construction. 

The Evolution of State Water Conservation Policy in Texas. Personett, Mike Texas Water 

Development Board, Local and Regional Assistance Division, Austin, TX 

Source: Proceedings of Conserv 93; The New Water Agenda, A WW A, Las Vegas, NY, December 

12-16, 1993, P 957-965, 1993. . 

Contact: Mike Personett, Assistant Director, Planning Division, Texas Water Development Board, 

P.O. Box 13231, Capitol Station, Austin, TX 78711 

Abstract: Over the past 20 years, water policy in Texas has evolved from its historical focus on water 

supply development to a much more balanced approach that includes an emphasis on water efficiency 

and other water demand management strategies. Prompted by economic, environmental, 

technological, demographic, and social forces, state policy-makers have responded with new laws and 

regulations that promote and, to a significant degree, mandate water conservation. State 

policy-makers have also provided significant state resources to aid individuals and local water 

agencies in the transition to a more water efficient future. Although progress has been incremental, 

the State of Texas has made great strides in water conservation over the past decade. This paper 

provides an overview of the history of state law and policy in Texas relating to water conservation 

and provides a brief summary of the key components of current state policy. 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 49 
h. Education Programs

Casa Del Agua:. A Residential Water Conservation and Reuse Demonstration Project in

Tucson, Arizona. Foster, K. E.; Karpiscak, M. M.; Brittain, R. G., Arizona Univ., Tucson. Office

of Arid Lands Studies.

Source: Water Resources Bulletin WARBAQ, Vol. 24, No. 6, p 1201-1206, December

1988. 12 fig, 5 ref.

Abstract: A typical single family residence (Casa del Aqua) in Tucson, Arizona, was retrofitted to

incorporate low-water-use fixtures and water reuse systems. Casa del Agua consists of architectural

modifications, low-water-use landscaping and fixtures, and other modifications to accommodate

rainwater harvesting and graywater reuse. Graywater was treated in water hyacinth holding tanks and

stored for drip irrigation use in the summer months. Low water use toilets that used graywater for

flushing were installed. The use of municipal water was reduced by 53% to 53 gallons per capita per

day and total water use at the home was reduced by 33% to 74 gallons per capita per day. To date,

use of municipal groundwater at Casa del Aqua is about 47% of that used in average Tucson homes.

Total water use at Casa including municipal, rain, and graywater is about 33% less than that used in

the typical single-family home in Tucson. The quantity of water used for toilet flushing at Casa is

about 25% of that used by conventional fixtures. Based on data from Casa del Agua , an annual

savings of approximately 25,000 acre-feet of water could be generated by using low-flow,

one-gallon-per flush toilets on a community wide basis by the year 2025. Casa del Aqua was opened

for public touring to allow.community residents to learn more about domestic water conservation.

(See also W89-07561) (Geiger-PTT)

Social Acceptability of Water Conservation in Springfield, M. Lant, C. L., Southern Illinois

Univ., Carbondale. Dept. of Geography.

Source: Journal of the American Water Works Association JAWWA5, Vol. 85, No. 8, p 85-89,

August 1993. 6 tab, 11 ref.

Abstrac : Water-conservation initiatives are more likely to succeed if they are socially acceptable. A

survey of 2700 residential customers of Springfield (Illinois) City Water, Light and Power was

conducted to assess the acceptability of 12 possible conservation measures and the relationship

between demographic and attitudinal factors and overall acceptance of conservation. Lawn watering

restrictions, education, home water-saver kits, low-flush toilet rebates, and a low-flow fixtures

ordinance for new construction were most acceptable. Overall acceptance of conservation was

strongly related to attitude regarding importance of water conservation and was also related to age,

income, and type of residence. (Author's abstract)

Water Conservation in Los Angeles. Harasick, R. F., L. A. City Dept. of Water and Power, CA.

Source: Hydraulics/Hydrology of Arid Lands (H2AL). American Society of Civil Engineers, New

York. 1990. p 131-136.

Contact: Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, Room 1348, 1111 North Hope Street, Los

Angeles, CA 90012

abstract: The Department of Water and Power (DWP) has implemented an aggressive outdoor water

conservation program, with a multi-faceted array of projects in several areas. Residential programs

DRAFr, January 27, 1995 50

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

h. Education Programs 

Casa Del Agua:. A Residential Water Conservation and Reuse Demonstration Project in 

Tucson, Arizona. Foster, K. E.; Karpiscak, M. M.; Brittain, R. G., Arizona Univ., Tucson. Office 

of Arid Lands Studies. . 

Source: Water Resource's Bulletin W ARBAQ, Vol. 24, No.6, p 1201-1206, December 

1988. 12 fig, 5 ref. 

Abstract: A typical single family residence (Casa del Aqua) in Tucson, Arizona, was retrofitted to 

incorporate low-water-use fixtures and water reuse systems. Casa del Agua consists of architectural 

modifications, low-water-use laridscaping and fixtures, and other modifications to accommodate 

rainwater harvesting and graywater reuse. Graywater was treated in water hyacinth holding tanks and 

stored for drip irrigation use in the summer months. Low water use tOilets that used graywater for 

flushing were installed. The use of municipal water was reduced by 53% to 53 gallons per capita per 

day and total water use at the home was reduced by 33% to 74 gallons per capita per day. To date, 

use of municipal groundwater at Casa del Aqua is about 47% of that used in average Tucson homes. 

Total water use at Casa including municipal, rain, and graywater is about 33% less than that used in 

the typical single-family home in Tucson. The quantity of water used for toilet flushing at Casa is 

about 25% of that used by conventional fIXtures. Based on data from Casa del Agua, an annual 

savings of approximately 25,000 acre-feet of water could be generated by using low-flow, 

one-gallon-per flush toilets on a community wide basis by the year 2025. Casa del Aqua was opened 

for public touring to allow. community residents to learn more about domestic water conservation. 

(See also W89-07561) (Geiger-P1T) 

Social Acceptability or Water Conservation in Springfield, m. Lant, C. L., Southern Dlinois 

Univ., Carbondale. Dept. of Geography. 

Source: Journal of the American Water Works Association JAWWAS, Vol. 85, No.8, P 85-89, 

August 1993. 6 tab, 11 ref. 

Abstract: Water-conservation initiatives are more likely to succeed if they are socially acceptable. A 

survey of 2700 residential customers of Springfield (Dlinois) City Water, Light and Power was 

conducted to assess the acceptability of 12 possible conservation measures and the relationship 

between demographic and attitudinal factors and overall acceptance of conservation. Lawn watering 

restrictions, education, home water-saver kits, low-flush toilet rebates, and a low-flow fixtures 

ordinance for new construction were most acceptable. Overall acceptance of conservation was 

strongly related to attitude regarding importance of water conservation and was also related to age, 

income, and type of residence. (Author's abstract) 

Water Conservation in Los Angeles. Ha~ick, R. F., L. A City Dept. of Water and Power, CA. 

Source: HydraulicslHydrology of Arid Lands (H2AL). American Society of Civil Engineers, New 

York. 1990. p 131-136. 

Contact: Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, Room 1348, 1111 North Hope Street, Los 

Angeles, CA 90012 

Abstract: The Department of Water and Power (DWP) has implemented an aggressive outdoor water 

conservation program, with a multi-faceted array of projects in several areas. Residential programs 

DRAF!', January 27,1995 50 
focused on the ultra-low flush toilet rebate program. Lastly, public information programs included

advertising, Water Awareness Month, water bills and bill inserts with a water consumption

comparison between the current and the immediately prior year to encourage water use efficiency;

portable water conservation exhibits; the Speakers' Bureau; and school education programs. Lastly,

the DWP has adopted a seasonal pricing structure under which water is priced at a higher rate during

the higher demand summer periods than during the winter.

Water Conservation in Small Communities: Selected Case Studies (Technical rept). Brogan,

J. A., Washington Univ., Seattle.

So ur P: Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. Office of Cooperative Environmental

Management. Report No.: EPA/101/F-90/030,1989 24p

Abstract: The report is part of the National Network for Environmental Management Studies under

the auspices of the Office of Cooperative Environmental Management of the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency. Four cities, Lorena, Texas, Bern, Kansas, Tolleson, Arizona, and Sanibel, Florida

were selected as case studies for water conservation in small communities. The city of Lorena plans

to build an additional well because it faces increased growth and water demands. Also, through

education and conservation it hopes to reduce per capita daily usage. Bern incurred serious water

shortages during the summer months of 1988 and 1989. Subsequent conservation steps implemented

included toilet kits, low-flow shower heads, car-wash and irrigation restrictions and water rate hikes.

Tolleson has had to react to mandate by the Arizona Department of Water Resources to decrease

water usage. Ordinance 285 amended the city charter establishing water conservation policy and

guidelines. The city's primary goal over the next year is to educate its residents. Seasonable rainfall

and a hundred year supply of groundwater has done little to instill a sense of urgency in the minds of

Tolleson's residents, though. Sanibel, Florida is a barrier island situated in the Gulf of Mexico. Tourist

traffic in the winter months swell the population to 18,000 from 5,000. Increased demand, decreased

yield and increasing salinity of the mainland water source have prompted water conservation. Changes

include expansion of the reverse osmosis plant in 1990 and again in 1992 to increase capacity and a

water shortage plan for peak consumption months.

Water Watching Pays off for Students and Customers. Harmon, R. Birmingham Water Works

Board, AL.

Source: Water Environment & Technology WAETEJ, Vol. 5, No. 1, p 30, January 1993.

Abzstra t: A program called Water Watchers' was implemented in Birmingham, AL to employ local

students and educate residents about water conservation. Students went door-to-door showing

customers how simple measures like repairing leaking faucets can save money. They also distributed

conservation kits that contained flow restrictors for faucets and shower heads, leak detection tablets

for toilets, and toilet tank water displacement bags. Besides educating customers, Water Watchers

also participated in cleanup efforts at a lake that serves as the area's primary source of drinking water.

DRAFr, January 27, 1995 51

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

focused on the ultra-low flush toilet rebate program. Lastly, public information programs included 

advertising, Water Awareness Month, water bills and bill inserts with a water consumption 

comparison between the current and the immediately prior year to encourage water use efficiency; 

portable water conservation exhibits; the Speakers' Bureau; and school education programs. Lastly, 

the DWP has adopted a seasonal pricing structure under which water is priced at a higher rate during 

the higher demand summer periods than during the winter. 

. . 

Water Conservation in Small Communities: Selected Case Studies (Technical rept). Brogan, 

J. A., Washington Univ., Seattle. 

Source: Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. Office of Cooperative Environmental 

Management. Report No.: EPAl1011F-90/030, 1989 24p 

Abstract: 1be report is part of the National Network for Environmental Management Studies under 

the auspices of the Office of Cooperative Environmental Management of the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency. Four cities, Lorena, Texas, Bern, Kamas, Tolleson, Arizona, and Sanibel, Florida 

were selected as case studies for water conservation in small communities. The city of Lorena plans 

to build an additional well because it faces increased growth and water demands. Also, through 

education and conservation it hopes to reduce per capita daily usage. Bern incurred serious water 

shortages during the summer months of 1988 and 1989. Subsequent conservation steps implemented 

included toilet kits, low-flow shower heads, car-wash and irrigation restrictions and water rate hikes. 

Tolleson has had to react to mandate by the Arizona Department of Water Resources to decrease 

water usage. Ordinance 285 amended the city charter establishing water conservation policy and 

guidelines. The city's primary goal over the next year is to educate its residents. Seasonable rainfall 

and a hundred year supply of groundwater has done little to instill a sense of urgency in the minds of 

Tolleson's residents, though. Sanibel, Florida is a barrier island situated in the Gulf of Mexico. Tourist 

traffic in the winter months swell the population to 18,000 from 5,000. Increased demand, decreased 

yiekl and increasing salinity of the mainland water source have prompted water conservation. Changes 

include expansion of the reverse osmosis plant in 1990 and again in 1992 to increase capacity and a 

water shortage plan for peak consumption months. 

Water Watching Pays ofT for Students and Customers. Harmon, R. Birmingham Water Works 

Board, AL. 

Source: Water Environment & Technology W AETEJ, Vol. 5, No.1, P 30, January 1993. 

Abstract: A program called Water Watchers' was implemented in Birmingham, AL to employ local 

students and educate residents about water conservation. Students went door-to-door showing 

customers how simple measures like repairing leaking faucets can save money. They also distributed 

conservation kits that contained flow restrictors for faucets and shower heads, leak detection tablets 

for toilets, and toilet tank water displacement bags. Besides educating customers, Water Watchers 

also participated in cleanup efforts at a lake that serves as the area's primary source of drinking water. 

DRAFT, January 27,1995 51 
References

A & N Technical Services, Inc. and W.L. Corpening & Associates. 1994. Ultra-Low Flush

Toilets in Commercial Installations. California Urban Water Agencies and California

Urban Water Conservation Council. February.

A & N Technical Services, Inc.. 1994. Ultra-Low Flush Toilet Programs: Evaluation of

Program-Outcomes and Water Savings. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern

California. November.

Aher, Abhay, Anand Chouthai, Lalitha Chandrasekar, Wendy Corpening, Professor Laurence

Russ and Bhargav Vijapur. 1991. East Bay Municipal Utility District Water Conservation

Study. Steven Institute of Technology. October.

Amrein, Diana L. 1990. Water matters: water conservationists, plumbing industry still at odds

over Nation Plumbing Products Efficiency Act of 1989. Contractor v37:nlp3O(2).

January.

Babcock, Thomas M., Mary Ann Dickinson, Thomas E. Pape, and David Schultz. 1993.

The Water Conservation Manager's Guide to Residential Retrofit. American Water

Works Association.

Birdsall, Weston. Energy Efficiency -- The Osage Experience. Osage Municipal Utilities.

Chansler, James M. and Victor J. Pujals. 1993. Conserv `93 Conference Proceedings. American

Water Works Association. December.

Chouthai, Anand, Bhargav Vijapur and Thomas Konen. 1992. A Laboratory and Field

Evaluation of 1.6 GPF Water Closets in a Commercial Setting. Stevens Institute of

Technology. August.

Dziegielewski, Benedykt, Eva M. Opitz, Jack C. Kiefer, Duane D. Baumann. 1993.

Evaluating Urban Water Conservation Programs: A Procedures Manual. American

Water Works Association.

Ernst & Young. 1992. Water and Wastewater 1992 Rate Survey. Ernst & Young.

Fiske, Gary S. and Ronnie Ann Weiner, Barakat & Chamberlin, Inc. 1994. Customer Incentives

For Water Conservation: A Guide. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of

Water. EPA 230-R-94-001. February.

Featherstone, Jeff. 1989. Hearing set for water-saving toilets. Delaware River Basin

Commission. March.

DRAFT, January 27,1995 52

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

References 

A & N Technical Services; Inc. and W.L. Corpening & Associates. 1994. Ultra-Low Flush 

Toilets in Commercial Installations. California Urban Water Agencies and California 

Urban Water Conservation Council. February. 

A & ~ Technical Services, Inc .. 1994. Ultra-Low Flush Toilet Programs: Evaluation of 

Program·Outcomes and Water Savings. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern 

California. November. 

Aber, Abhay, Anand Chouthai, Lalitha Chandrasekar, Wendy Corpening, Professor Laurence 

Russ and Bhargav Vijapur. 1991. East Bay Municipal UtiUty District Water Conservation 

Study. Steven Institute of Technology. October. 

Amrein, Diana L. 1990. Water matters: water conservationists, plumbing industry still at odds 

over Nation Plumbing Products Efficiency Act of 1989. Contractor v37:nlp30(2). 

January. 

Babcock, Thomas M., Mary Ann Dickinson, Thomas E. Pape, and David Schultz. 1993. 

The Water Conservation Manager's Guide to Residential Retrofit. American Water 

W orles Association. 

Birdsall, Weston. Energy Efficiency -- The Osage Experience. Osage Municipal Utilities. 

Chansler, James M. and Victor J. Pujals. 1993. Conserv '93 Conference Proceedings. American 

Water Works Association. December. 

Chouthai, Ahand, Bhargav Vijapur and Thomas Konen. 1992. A Laboratory and Field 

Evaluation of 1.6 GPF Water Closets in a Commercial Setting. Stevens Institute of 

Technology. August 

Dziegielewski, Benedykt, Eva M. Opitz, Jack C. Kiefer, Duane D. Baumann. 1993. 

Evaluating Urban Water Conservation Programs: A Procedures Manual. American 

Water Works Association. 

Ernst & Young. 1992. Water and Wastewater 1992 Rate Survey. Ernst & Young. 

Fiske, Gary~. and Ronnie Ann Weiner, Barakat & Chamberlin, Inc. 1994. Customer Incentives 

For Water Conservation: A Guide. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of 

Water. EPA 230-R-94-001. February. 

Featherstone, Jeff. 1989. Hearing set for water-saving toilets. Delaware River Basin 

Commission. March. 

DRAFI', January 27,1995 52 
Hamilton, Fiona and James P. Craft, CTSI Corporation. 1993. Dynamic Community

Programming for Water Efficiency. Conserv `93 Conference Proceedings. American

Water Works Association. December.

Jones, Andrew P. 1993. High-Efficiency Showerheads and Faucets: Water Efficiency

Technology Report #2. Rocky Mountain Institute Water Program.

Koomey, J.G., C. Dunham and J .D. Lutz. 1994. The Effect of Efficiency Standards on Water

Use and Water Heating Energy Use in the U.S.: A Detailed End-Use Treatment.

Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory. DE-AC03 -76SF00098. May.

Kuzminski, David. 1993. Retrofitting on a Budget. Conserv `93 Proceedings. American Water

Works Association. December.

Liebold, Warren. 1994. Making the Most of the Toilet Rebate Program. New York City

Department of Environmental Protection. May.

Levin, Sondra. 1994. Flush of Success: Bronx First to Get New Water-Saving Toilets Bronx

Press Review. April.

National Association of Plumbing -Heating-Cooling Contractors (NAPHCC) Educational

Foundation. 1994. Draft Recommendationsfor EPACT, Section 123. November.

Nechamen, William S. 1993. New York State Polity: In Accordance with Local Needs and

Conditions Proceedings of Conserv'93. American Water Works Association. December.

Ruzicka, Denise. 1992. Connecticut Residential Retrofit Program: Retrofitting in a Wet State.

State of Connecticut, Department of Health Services, Water Supplies Section. May.

Ruzicka, Denise. 1993. Status Report, Connecticut Residential Retrofit Program: Interim

Program Results. State of Connecticut, Department of Health Services, Water Supplies

Section. March.

Seattle City Light. 1990. Water Savings and Related Energy Savings in the Multifamily

Conservation Program.

Vickers, Amy. 1993. Achieving a High Customer Participation Rate with a Bulk Mail-out

Retrofit Program. Conserv '93 Conference proceedings. American Water Works

Association. December.

DRAFT, January 27 , ]995 53

EE-DET-94-003 COMMENT 16.10

Hamilton, Fiona and James P. Craft, crSI Corporation. 1993. Dynamic Community 

Programming for Water Efficiency. Conserv '93 Conference Proceedings. American 

Water Worlcs Association. December. 

Jones, Andrew P. 1993. High-Efficiency Showerheads and Faucets: Water Efficiency 

Technology Report #2. Rocky Mountain Institute Water Program. 

Koomey, 10., C. Dunham and J.D. Lutz. 1994. The Effect of Efficiency Standards on Water 

Use and Water Heating Energy Use in the U.S.: A Detailed End-Use Treatment. 

Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory. DE-AC03-76SF00098. May. 

Kuzminski, David. 1993. Retrofitting on a Budget. Conserv '93 Proceedings. American Water 

Worlcs Association. December. 

Liebold, Warren. 1994. Making the Most of the Toilet Rebate Program. New York City 

Department of Environmental Protection. May. 

Levin, Sondra. 1994. Flush of Success: Bronx First to Get New Water-Saving Toilets Bronx 

Press Review. Apri1. 

National Association of Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors (NAPHCC) Educational 

Foundation. 1994. Draft Recommendations for EPACT, Section 123. November. 

Nechamen, William S. 1993. New York State Polity: In Accordance with Incal Needs and 

Conditions Proceedings of Conserv '93. American Water Works Association. December. 

Ruzicka, Denise. 1992. Connecticut Residential Retrofit Program: Retrofitting in a Wet State. 

State of Connecticut, Department of Health Services, Water Supplies Section. May. 

Ruzicka, Denise. 1993. Status Report, Connecticut Residential Retrofit Program: Interim 

Program Results. State of Connecticut, Department of Health Services, Water Supplies 

Section. ·March. 

Seattle City Light 1990. Water Savings and Related Energy Savings in the Multifamily 

Conservation Program. 

Vickers, Amy. 1993. Achieving a High Customer Participation Rate with a Bulk Mail-out 

Retrofit Program. Conserv '93 Conference proceedings. American Water Works 

Association. December. 

DRAfT. January 27. 1995 53