OOOR78103
&EPA Water Use And Conservation
At Federal Facilities
In The
Washington, DC
Metropolitan Area
I Li.El'A Region III
s'r;-i :inl Center for Environraejita!
1, ;/ A:-. b Street (OPMS2)
TD
388
.W38 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
]978 Region III -6th & Walnut Sts.
copy 2 Philadelphia, Pa. 19106
-------
/^rx
.f f^ \
^ih
.S3ZZ,
^^^^^^^^^i
XP*
Regional Center for F n\ ironmental Information
US EPA Region III
1650 Arch St.
Philadelphia, PA 19103
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 111
6TH AND WALNUT STREETS
PHILADELPHIA. PENNSYLVANIA 19106
May 3, 1978
TO ALL INTERESTED AGENCIES, PUBLIC GROUPS AND CITIZENS:
Enclosed for your Information and action is a copy of the EPA
special study report concerning Water Use and Conservation at
Federal Facilities in the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Area.
All comments should be submitted to the above address for the
attention of the EIS Preparation Section - 3IR60.
I welcome your interest and participation in the implementation
of the recommendations included in this report.
Sincerely yours,
George D. Pence, Jr.
Chief, Environmental Impact Branch
Enclosure
U.S. EPA Region III
Regional Center for Environment.
Information
1650 Arch Street (3PM52)
Philadelphia, PA 19103
-------
PROJECT No. 572
APRIL 1978
WATER USE AND CONSERVATION
AT
FEDERAL FACILITIES
IN THE
WASHINGTON, D.C. METROPOLITAN AREA
CONTRACT NO. 68-01-4616
DIRECTIVE OF WORK NO. 2
PREPARED FOR:
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION III, CURTIS BUILDING
6TH & WALNUT STREETS
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106
PREPARED BY:
WAPORA, INC.
6900 WISCONSIN AVENUE, N.w.
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20015
APPROVED BY
SUBMITTED BY
PH.CT.--
RESIDENT
KENNETH G. BARNHILL
PROJECT MANAGER
-------
WAPORA, INC. PROJECT TEAM
KENNETH G. BARNHILL
STEPHEN M. CALDWELL
WILLIAM D. DITMAN
JACQUELINE S. RUSSELL
EPA, REGION III, PROJECT MONITOR
JOSEPH T. PIOTROWSKI
REPORT REVIEWED BY:
RAYMOND/.
VICE PRESI
GERALD Q. PETERS
PROJECT ADVISOR
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
List of Tables ii
List of Figures ii
Synopsis iii
Section
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA 3
III. STUDY TECHNIQUE 15
IV. WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAMS — CASE STUDIES 24
V. WATER CONSERVATION LEGISLATION — LOCAL, REGIONAL,
AND FEDERAL 27
VI. INVENTORY OF WATER SAVING DEVICES 31
VII. PRICING AS A MEANS OF REDUCING FEDERAL WATER
CONSUMPTION 47
VIII. MANAGEMENT 52
IX. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 58
General Bibliography 61
Appendices
I. Water Use Data
II. Adjustment of DES Data
III. I D Coding System - Documentation
IV. Regression Analysis of Water Use in GSA-Operated Buildings
V. Classification of Building Types
VI. Harry Way's Letter, 15 November 1977
VII. Water Rates
VIII. Project Contacts
-------
LIST OF TABLES
No. Page
1. Water Use Data iii
2. Present and Predicted Population Trends 5
3. Potomac River Flows, Demands, and Deficits ..... 8
4. Major Water Suppliers 9
5. Per Capita Water Use in Selected U.S. Municipalities 10
6. Estimated Wastewater Flows (Shares Attributable to Federal
Offices, Federal Households and Infiltration/Inflow, and
Total Federal Flows) at 9 Major Plants in NCR—1976 13
7. Estimates of Federal Share in the Washington, D.C.,
Metropolitan Area 20
8. COG Estimates of Federal Share of Wastewater Load 21
9. Federal Wastewater Load by Treatment Plant 21
10. Maximum Water Usage Rates for Fixtures 28
11. Water Saving Devices 33
12. Quarterly Water and Wastewater Charges at Various
Consumption Levels ..... 48
LIST OF FIGURES
No. Page
1. The Study Area 4
2. Major Water Suppliers 7
3. Service Areas of Major Wastewater Treatment Systems 11
-------
SYNOPSIS
A general awareness and interest in the subject of water conservation
was found throughout the Federal establishment. This was apparent from the
cooperativeness of all who were contacted to provide data and information
concerning this study.
The task of determining water use and conservation in Federal buildings
in the study area met with some difficulties. Matching the data received
from water purveyors with the addresses of record was not always successful.
Getting data for leased space was another problem. Approximately 40% of the
space used by the Federal Government in the study area is leased. Where
data was not available, estimates were made using regression analysis.
Since the Federal Government is not using as much water as was expected
at the study's outset, changes in use patterns will not have as great an
impact as was expected. However, the Federal Government should set the
example and provide leadership in water conservation efforts. The percent-
age of water used by the Federal Government in the various purveyor
territories is as follows:
Table 1
WATER USE DATA
Purveyor Percent
DES1 15.0
WSSC2 3.6
FCWA3 7.8
Rockville 1.2
Falls Church 3.9
Arlington 13.7
Alexandria 3.1
City of Fairfax 0.14
In general, water conservation is receiving little attention in the
management of Federal buildings It needs the same emphasis which has been
given to conservation of energy, and a change in attitude on the part of many
building managers who consider water a free commodity. Building managers in
the District of Columbia do not see water bills; consequently, they have no
idea of what their water usage is. The D.C. Department of Environmental
Services receives a lump sum appropriation from Congress rather than
reimbursement from each agency or Federal building.
A good data base is the necessary starting point for a water conserva-
tion program. Meters will have to be read more often than once a year to
'•D.C. Department of Environmental Services
Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission
3Fairfax County Water Authority
111.
-------
determine use patterns and seasonal variations. Although some Federal agen-
cies have made water conservation efforts, there is no overall strategy. The
good points of such efforts should be pooled and acted upon by a task force
of key Federal agencies with Mr. Sydnor Hodges of NCPC as Chairman.
Water must be managed and budgeted, as energy is, if conservation is to
be achieved. Decisions reached at top level must eventually reach the build-
ing manager's level where final responsibility and accountability for water
use will be realized. Maintenance programs deserve a high priority and
should be included in operating budgets.
The findings and recommendations of this report will be implemented in
conjunction with the Federal Regional Council (Region III).
IV
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
On September 15, 1977, Region II of the U.S. EPA directed WAPORA,
Inc., to prepare a special study report concerning water use and water
conservation activities at Federal facilities in the Washington, B.C.,
metropolitan area. This study reflects the concern of the Administration
for the establishment of a sound national water resources management
policy with stricter conservation a key part of the policy. It is hoped
that the report will provide useful information for making decisions on
water resource policy. Pertinent information from the study is also to
be used in the review of environmental assessments and impact statements
for projected major wastewater treatment facilities in the D.C. metro-
politan area.
The Directive of Work called for performing the following tasks:
1. Inventorying all Federal facilities, either owned or
leased;
2. Collecting water consumption data for each facility;
3. Determining the breakdown of water use at each
facility;
4. Inventorying available conservation programs of local
and regional jurisdictions;
5. Evaluating potential water conservation devices, including
rate structures;
6. Integrating and analyzing the data with conclusions.
In the course of the study, many organizations were contacted.
A complete list of the agencies and organizations contacted is included
in Appendix VIII. Mr. Sydnor Hodges and Mr. Robert H. Cousins, of the
National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) were especially cooperative
and helpful. The assistance received from others at the Washington Area
Council of Governments (COG) and the Washington Suburban Sanitary Com-
mission (WSSC) is also acknowledged.
Several problems have arisen in carrying out the study tasks,
requiring several major modifications in the tasks. Determining the
breakdown of water use was the first problem encountered. Data to permit
such a breakdown was not available. In addition, some compromises were
necessary to allow beneficial use of the data. For many facilities, it
was not possible to find water use data. In some instances, addresses
could not be correlated with water accounts by the serving utilities.
In many cases, principally in the District of Columbia, the water for
certain facilities was not metered or no figures were available. No
water use data was available for oostal service facilities or for the
-------
space leased by the GSA for various Federal agencies. Approximately 40%
of all Federal space in the metropolitan area is leased.
Some questions may arise regarding the definitions of "Federal"
buildings or facilities. Obviously, those buildings under the direct
control and operation of the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches
of the Federal Government are included. In addition, U.S. Postal Service
facilities, as well as those of the Smithsonian Institution, were included
for consideration, since their policies and management are to some degree
under the direct control of the Federal Government. During the course
of the investigation, it was learned that the Federal Government pays
the water bills for other operations, such as Howard University, Gallaudet
College, and the District of Columbia parks system. These operations have
been excluded from consideration in this study because it is unlikely that
these water management policies could be affected by Federal policy. They
are not included in the statistical analysis of Federal water use in
Section III; however, total water use by these facilities is presented in
that Section. With regard to other functions of the District of Columbia
Government, in many cases their offices are housed in the same buildings
as Federal agencies, and water use of the D.C. Government is included
in the Federal water use totals.
-------
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA
The study area, as shown in Figure 1, is defined as the region included
within the boundaries of the District of Columbia; the Counties of Arlington,
Fairfax, Loudon, and Prince William, as well as the Cities of Alexandria,
Fairfax, and Falls Church in Virginia; and the Counties of Prince Georges
and Montgomery in Maryland. The region, which totals about 2,500 square
miles, coincides with the area of the various city and county jurisdictions
participating in the NCPC and COG. Population, water resources and usage,
and wastewater treatment characteristics of the study area are presented
below.
Population
According to COG figures, population trends in the Washington Standard
Metropolitan Statistical Area show rapid growth and spread of high density
development into the suburbs and surrounding areas. Table 2 displays the
present and predicted populations of the various jurisdictions in the
Washington metropolitan area. The 1977 population for the area was estimated
at 3,100,000 persons. Projections by the COG indicate a short-term decline
in population for the most developed central areas (the District of Columbia
and Arlington County), with a reversal of that trend toward the end of this
century. Population growth is expected to be greatest in the outlying areas,
both on short-term and long-term bases. Employment growth, on the other hand,
is expected to be greatest in the central part of the region, with job
opportunities in the outer areas failing to keep pace with population growth
(COG, 1976). With regard to water resources, these projections would
indicate expanded commercial/institutional demand, with fairly constant
household demand in the central areas and rapid expansion of both commercial/
industrial and household demand in the outlying areas.
Water Resources Demand
Despite the region's location in an area of abundant precipitation
(about 40 inches per year), recurring droughts have led to concern over
existing water supplies. In the metropolitan area the Potomac River is both
the major source for drinking water and the primary receiver of wastewater.
Secondary resources are the Potomac tributary system (Occoquan Creek, Goose
Creek, and Broad Run) in Virginia, and the Patuxent River in Maryland.
A small portion of the total area water supply is derived from local wells
(COG, 1976). The Potomac River watershed covers 14,670 square miles in
Virginia, Maryland, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania. Of the total basin
area, 11,580 square miles are upstream from Georgetown, D.C., which is at
the head of the Potomac estuary (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1973).
Occoquan Creek (570 square miles) and the Patuxent River (930 square miles)
occupy much smaller drainage basins (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1973).
The water supply problems are, in large part, a result of inadequate
local storage capacity, as there are no impoundments on the Potomac. Annual
-------
-------
CM
CU
rH
o
CO
C/J
a
z
os1
H
Z
O
H
2j
S3
0
0-1
Pd
B
M
a
§
Cu
Q
J2
^
z
CO
M
as
Cu
ON
ON
rH
M«— ^
*— /
TJ ON
C ON
CO rH
CO
3
O
f* tO
»X* U 1
JJ CO
V- • ON
rH
C.4
2J
s o
JH 00
O ON
1-4 rH
fe
§
w
.0
pi
ON
rH
ON
ON
r-4
x«%
co
C ON
cfl ON
CO rH
3
O
•C
s_x 00
ON
Z .H
0
H
i-3 oo
a ON
CU r-l
o
cO
ON
rH
2-
O
IH
C-4
CJ
M
Q
CO
M
erf
^
ON
r^
ON
r«^
rH
d
PN»
1.
00
r^
rH
CN
O
r-4
00
rH
SO
en
en
ON
m
,4
£
CM
d
in
PX
P*
ON
CM
P-
m
so"
m
r-.
cfl
•H
Cl
e
3
rH
O
CJ
U-l
O
^j
O
•H
^4
U
CO
•H
Q
sr
P^
ON
en
ON
^.
m
en
m
en
CM
en
m
00
00
CM
1 —
ON
r-4
CM
p-
f^
in
r<^
sO
sO
rH
co
r».
p-
sO
00
O
^O
oo
CM
CN
m
^
4J
C
3
3
^
j^
cu
g
O
SO
•U
i
CN
sO
O>
en
so
CM
^f
en
m
CO
f^»
CM
O
CM
en
CM
sO
r-4
ON
•*
00
CN
O
rH
sO
en
en
ON
en
CM
rH
oo
sO
f^
rH
p*^
sO
0
sO
sO
^^
4J
C
3
O
CJ
Cfl
w
CU
00
j^
o
CU
a
CU
CJ
C
•H
CU
rH CM
so en
ON 00
rH
m rH
so sr
^^ r^s
rH
00 sr
oo P">
m so
rH
en so
rH rH
m so
rH
en P-.
O so
sr sr
rH
en ao
CM ON
ON m
r-l rH
in rH
CM 00
co sr
rH rH
en en
sO P»
so en
rH rH
-3- sO
co -a-
sr CM
rH rH
en O
sr o
^^ ^H
rH rH
^^
4J
C
3
O
CJ
CO
C Tt
O rl
•U -O
CO C
C cO
•H >j
rH CU
i-l rH
r~
p*
r~-
en
**
ON
rH
en
CN
m
f^^
CM
cn
m
en
CM
CJ
00
en
p^»
rH
so >
3 u
O -H
CJ CJ
X r5^
co cO
M-4 U-i
U *-4
•H -H
CO 03
O
en
CM
'
m
ON
rH
ON
SO
rH
SO
^
rH
O
d
i— i
m P»
ST r-4
-H O
r-4
O sO
sr oo
rH 00
m m
en en
rH P»
0 0
en rH
r-l SO
CO CM
O P~
rH cn
j- j*
o c
H 3
3 0
J2 CJ
CJ
C
CO 0
rH TJ
r-l 3
CO O
(£4 -4
m o
O CM
r^» sr
en
CM
CM sr
O r-I
SO ON
rH
CM
P^ 00
CN r-4
in rH
ON
rH
ON sr
in rH
sr en
iH
oo o
CM en
en en
rH
CD P*
sO 00
en en
CN CM
sr
sO O
p~ P-
rH ST
CN ON
en
sr r*«
co en
ON O
rH sO
en
00 ON
co sr
p»- m
rH CM
en
r-4 rH
rH rH
rH SO
rH CO
CN
^^
U
j— ,
3
0
CJ
=
03
•H
g—^
r-l
•H
3
CU Z
0 O
C M
•H U
W rTj
^3
a ^
rJ CJ
'•n Ui
«J rH
a 3
3 —
JZ sj
u co
CO rH
CU rH
t. frt
P4 ^U
03 to
CU CO
a 3 T3
ca c
o a co
u cu
o >%
T3 JJ
CU 4J iH
•a c cj
C cu
3 e x
O >> CO
r-l O UH
rH S-I
- CU T-l
CO S CO
3 Cx3 &&4
co
C O co
cu O cu
cj cj -a
3
• CM rH
cn p- a
• ON C
3 i— 1 M
cO -O CJ
m
fT\
w»
o\
r-l
•S
m
00
(T\
W »
^
•%
O
oo
ON
_ J
r™i
• •
CO
U
C
1
fS
CO
CO
CU
ca
Cfl •
< CJ
Q
i j
•^J
CJ «
CO C
0. 0
e u
M 00
C
1-4
• jr.
J3 CO
r^ co
P* 3
ON
^H
•
ca
* u
ca co
•U CO
C o
A) rt\
\i/ ^U
S r4
C O
U b
CU
> J3
0 3
0 g
y-4 i-i
O O
rH 4-1
•H 0
C CO
3 C
O O
CJ -H
fi CO
O CJ
U.-J
•*^
00 rH
C O.
•H 2
"co
cO co
3 V
0
e i-i
CO 3
JJ O
•H ca
rH CU
O P^
a
O S-i
S4 CU
CU 03
~S 3
,.
cu
CJ
3
Q
-------
flow in the Potomac exceeds demand many times over, but without adequate
storage the possibility exists for water demands in excess of supplies in
dry periods. Table 3, prepared for the Army Corps of Engineers Northeastern
U.S. Water Supply (NEWS) Study, gives projected Potomac River flows, demands,
and deficits. Note the qualification that a 1-MGD incremental reduction in
demand per year due to water conservation devices is factored into demand
projections, and that the Bloomington Dam and Lake are assumed to be on line
in 1979. This projection indicates the potential for serious water supply
problems in the future, and offers justification for Federal water conser-
vation efforts in the Washington area.
Figure 2 outlines the boundaries of the major water suppliers.
Table 4 lists the major water suppliers, areas served, water source,
and system capacity.
The major portion of water used by local jurisdictions is withdrawn
by the Washington Aqueduct Division (WAD), Army Corps of Engineers, and
wholesaled to Arlington County, the cities of Falls Church and Vienna in
Virginia, and to the District of Columbia (Department of Environmental
Services) for distribution. One of the major reasons for water supply
problems in the region may be the large number of independent water systems,
each with its own policies regarding pricing, water conservation efforts,
and future sources of supply. One recent study indicates that greater
cooperation between jurisdictions, aimed at keeping impoundments on the
Occoquan and Patuxent full during higher flows of the Potomac, might
alleviate most of the region's water supply problems (Sheer, 1977).
In looking at water use characteristics of the region, fairly low
average per capita (GCD) requirements would be expected. There is an
absence of major industrial water users, with 1972 industrial consumption
placed at less than 0.5% in all the major service areas (U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, 1975b). Furthermore, the moderate climate does not require
the heavy irrigation of lawns characteristic of the western United States.
Table 5 below gives comparative water use data for major service areas in
the region, as well as data for other selected cities. Two things stand
out in reviewing the comparative water use figures: the average for the
study area (134 GCD) is fairly low, and the average for the areas served
by the Washington Aqueduct is rather high (196 GCD). A reasonable
explanation for the high usage in the WAD area is that, relative to the
resident population, there is a high concentration of employment in
Arlington and the District of Columbia. There is also a concentration
of hotels and motels in these areas which meet the needs of Washington's
sizable tourist industry. Federal employment is also very high in those
areas, and much of the water use can be attributed to the Federal buildings
located there (see Section III).
Wastewater Treatment
Major wastewater service areas for the Washington metropolitan area
are given in Figure 3. Actually there are over 90 domestic wastewater
treatment facilities in the Washington metropolitan area. Of these, the
nine largest account for approximately 93% of the region's 560-MGD
-------
-------
en
CO
r-t
,£>
CO
H
cn
H
M
CJ
M
W
Q
a
^
cfl
Q
J2
g
H
Cfl
§
U
^
M
OS
CJ
o
2
O
CM
0
CN
O
O
O
CM
4-1
^J
^^
a
•H
14-4
cu
Q
•M
3
o
r-t
En
C
CO
g
2
4-1
-^
*t"1
a
•H
<4_l
£
S"
0
5
^
Q
U
S
•>— '
a*
CD
•S
~
s
a
S
v-/
M
O
r-t
p&4
^*^
a
u
s
N^/
«4
73
C
cfl
g
s
^_^
Q
O
S
s-x
O
co
ON
1— I
*J
T-1
a
•H
U-l
Q
O
S
N
3
0
1— j
fr
x""s
Q
0
s— /
— 1
13
C
g
3
T3
o
1-t
H
CO
PU
ij
C
Q
2
^^
a
5-
O O m
r— t P** ON
CM -3" m
O o m
vO -31 «3-
0 0 O
CO ^^ ^^
00 CN O
iH
r m m
1 CM CM
CM en
o o m
vO -^ -^
o m o
m ON r-»
**o vo r**
i i m
I i m
o o m
\o ^* -*3"
o o o
CM m o
•*3" *3" m
J3 >, >^
c -a -o
£ri^
^
3
O O
CM O
en in
m m
en 03
m •*
m m
m oo
00 ON
o m
o 3-
m in
r-l f-
-3- >3-
JS *
4-1 CO
C "0
S r—
si
3
m
^f
vO
0
m
^»
m
O^
o
r-l
m
\Q
en
o
m
^j-
m
r-i
00
o
00
o
m
>3"
0
en
m
^
CO
-a
i
o o
^" VO
CM en
m o
(~* en
m m
m o
r-t O\
oo oo
o m
en CM
r-l
m o
r» en
m m
m m
o m
i i
i t
m o
r^ en
m m
O m
CTi CM
en sr
J. '^
U CO
a T3
5 i
zfa r^
a.
CO
C/3
0
^T
m
^^
m
ON
m
o
CM
m
ON
^4«
O
o
r--
1
1
m
ON
^3*
O
^3-
^
CO
T3
1
moo
^3" CO ^O
CM en en
O o m
-3- sr sr
mom
en *«o ON
fx« r««. f^.
mom
mom
r-l r-l
o o m
ON vo en
*3" *3" *»3"
m o o
m m m
i i t
t i I
o o m
ON ^O en
*3" "^" ^3"
O O O
m \o co
en en en
JS >> >>
G T) "3
Q 1 1
^f^ r^* ^H
4-1
O
O
0
oo
1-1
o
CN
m
o
o
p^
i
i
o
CM
m
m
r-t
m
I
I
o
CM
m
m
en
en
r-i
TJ
c
o
,
o
&
m m
ON cn
e» en
m m
en r-t
0 O
en m
r** r*^
m o
o > >>
*^ *^
I I
:hly averages. A seven day figure is the maximum average demand of any
:he month. A one-day figure is the highest one-day demand that month.
Q
6
CO
03
CO
CO
•^
3>
—I
U-l
rf
4-1
G
fSu
(
o
<2
Si
a
i—*
•H
cn
>»
CO
>
4-1
3
U
co
C
o
a
j^-
N^
C
cu
>
U
CO
CO
-a
CO
a,
o
•H
G
3
(H
4-1
C
CO
S
CU
o
1-t
Q
U
s~*
r-\
^^
CO
c
0
CO
CO
CO
3
tH
U
c
1-t
CO
-a
T3
5-1
CO
otomac RJ
p^
i
c
z
CO
3
i-t
CJ
G
•H
4-1
O
13
cn
0)
S
Ly averages. A seven-day figure is the minimim average flow of any
•
CO
CJ
CJ
•H
CU
00
C
*>
CO
CO
M
CJ
*J
03
3
0
i-l
4J
C
o
s
eu
M
CO
cn
u
3)
—4
'-w
r^
4J
C
£
i
3
0
_1
h
04
. -0
x: c
4J CO
C
O "
g CJN
4-1 ON
CO r-l
4-1 G
•H
O CO
3 Tt
O rH
^4 rt
0
>>
CO 00
73 e
§1
o a
4J CO
ca ^i
CU CO
3 rJ
O
Is
CO CO
•LJ S
co Q
C
CO O
M 4-1
3 00
00 G
U-4 g
O
?N 0
CO r-l
T3 «
1
CO «
C CO
0 ^
o
< 0
J3 O
4J
d 4J
0 G
et
CO Oi
JS
1-1
cn
cfl*
13
CU
>
4-1
a
co
22
Q
a
^
^^y
c
aj
>
cu
co
CO
CO
3
0
1— I
U-l
^4
0)
>
oi
a
^
g
Q
JJ
o
r-4
ca
CO
13
3
*— t
CJ
^
t— i
) the estuary.
w
1-t
3
O
U-l
j,j
O
OJ
33
O
Q
r-H
rH
CO
•o
ishington Metropolitan Area withdrawing from the Potomac River, present
^j
0)
JS
U-4
O
c
0
4-1
o
4J
cO
^ ^
4J
35
CO
SO 13
S
o
o
r-t
3
rM
CJ
G
M
oo
.
rU
iJ
3
4—1
CJ
TJ
c
•H
"O
C
CO
r-l
iH
0
>»
T3
3
_i
Cfl
>>
,^l
a
w
53
3
a,
o
u
r*N
g
-
A
',-4
o
>*
CJ
z
•
C5
F^
OJ
c
r;
<
-------
Table 4
MAJOR WATER SUPPLIERS
Water Purveyor
Washington Suburban
Sanitary Commission
Washington Aqueduct
Division
Fairfax County Water
Authority
City of Rockville
City of Bowie
Town of Leesburg
Town of Manassas
City of Fairfax
Area Served
Prince Georges &
Montgomery Cos. MD
Arlington Co., Falls
Church, Vienna,
Washington, DC
Fairfax and Prince
Wm. Cos., VA & City
of Alexandria
Rockville, MD
Bowie, MD
Leesburg, VA
Manassas, VA
Fairfax, VA
Water Source
Potomac River
Patuxent River
Potomac River
Occoquan River
Potomac River
Local wells
Local wells
Broad Run
Goose Creek
1976 (mgd)
System Capacity
75b
65
371
98
8
5
1.2
6
15
Source: Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, 1977b. Impact
Assessment: 1980, 1985, 1995 Water Resources Implications of Growth
Forecasts. Washington, DC.
Completion of a weir being planned will add 165 mgd.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
-------
Table 5
PER CAPITA WATER USE IN SELECTED U.S. MUNICIPALITIES
GALLONS PER DAY (GCD)
Service Area/City Year Water Use Source
WSSC 1972 110 C°rps °*
WAD 1972 196 Engineers, 1975b
FCWA 1972 100 "
Washington Metro. Area 1972 134 "
Metcalf and Eddy,
New York 1976 196e 1972
Baltimore 1976 188e "
Atlanta 1976 138e "
Chicago 1966 23 le
Los Angeles 1966 185e "
Oakland 1976 177e "
Sacramento 1976 250e. "
estimated
10
-------
u u u u u ii a u ii
sq^a^asS^^S:
ao
cn
11
-------
wastewater treatment capacity. Over half the region's wastewater is treated
at the District of Columbia's Blue Plains facility. Blue Plains services
the District of Columbia and parts of Fairfax, Montgomery, and Prince Georges
Counties. Other major wastewater treatment facilities are Piscataway (30 mgd),
Parkway (7.5 mgd), and Western Branch (30 mgd), operated by WSSC; Lower
Potomac (36 mgd), by Fairfax County Mooney Potomac (12 mgd), in Prince
William County; Upper Occoquan Sewage Authority (15 mgd), operated jointly
by Fairfax and Prince William Counties; and the Arlington County (30 mgd)
and City of Alexandria (54 mgd) systems. The tendency within the region is
to merge and upgrade the systems, in line with recent legislation to control
and eventually eliminate water pollution (COG, 1972). The upper Potomac
estuary continues to be polluted with insufficiently treated wastewater and
urban stormwater runoff. This condition is expected to continue into the
foreseeable future (U.S. House of Representatives, 1976).
As the largest employer in the Washington metropolitan area, the Federal
Government is also the biggest single user of water, and the largest waste-
water generator. Employment is especially concentrated in the Federal
Triangle area of Washington, D.C., and in Arlington, Virginia, which are
serviced by Blue Plains. Other smaller groups of Federal buildings include
Walter Reed and Bethesda Hospitals, Goddard Space Flight Center, National
Institutes of Health, and the USDA centers. Large military installations
include the Pentagon, Boiling and Andrews Air Force Bases, Ft. Belvoir and
Ft. Myers Army Bases, the Washington Navy Yard, and Quantico Marine Base.
The Federal Government operates its own wastewater treatment plants servicing
some of the biggest facilities, including the NIH center at Poolesville, the
Naval Surface Weapons Center, USDA's Beltsville center, part of Andrews Air
Force Base, the Quantico Marine Base and the FBI Academy, and certain
Arlington buildings, including the Pentagon (COG, 1977a). Table 6 gives
estimates developed by COG of the Federal contribution to wastewater loads
attributed to Federal households in the service area, as well as Federal
shares of infiltration and inflow. Section III includes a discussion, based
on meter readings and estimates using floor space and employment data, of
the wastewater loads generated by Federal facilities.
12
-------
Table 6
ESTIMATED WASTEWATER FLOWS
(SHARES ATTRIBUTABLE TO FEDERAL OFFICES, FEDERAL HOUSEHOLDS
& INFILTRATION/INFLOW AND TOTAL FEDERAL FLOWS)
AT 9 MAJOR PLANTS IN NCR- 1976 (mgd)
Treatment Plant
Blue Plains
Arlington
Alexandria
Lower Potomac
Piscataway
Western Branch
Parkway
Upper Occoquan
Mooney Potomac
Federal
Offices
8.5
1.8
*
0.4
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Federal
Household
Population
60.6
6.4
11.7
12.5
7.4
3.1
1.0
1.8
2.5
Federal
Share of
Infiltration/
Inflow
16.9
*
*
*
0.7
0.4
0.3
0.9
3.3
Total
Federal
Share
86.0
8.2
11.7
12.9
8.4
3.5
1.3
2.7
5.8
Calculated
Total
Flow
292.4
21.8
33.0
31.1
18.1
10.7
5.3
12.2
20.2
* Denotes jurisdiction whose flow generation factor combines Infiltration/
Inflow and/or Commercial/Industrial with Domestic
Source: Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. 1977a. Draft
study, The Federal Government and Wastewater Treatment in the NCR.
Washington, DC.
13
-------
REFERENCES
Metcalf and Eddy, Inc. 1972. Wastewater Engineering. McGraw-Hill Book
Company.
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. 1977a. Draft study, The
Federal Government and Wastewater Treatment in the NCR. Washington, DC.
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. 1977b. Impact Assessment;
1980, 1985, 1995 Water Resources Implications of Growth Forecasts.
Washington, DC.
Sheer, D. P. 1977. A Perspective on the Washington Metropolitan Area Water
Supply Prohlem. Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin,
Bethesda, MD.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1973. Potomac River Basin Water Supply, Interim
Report, Vol. 1. Baltimore, MD.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1975a. Northeastern United States Water Supply
Study, Interim Report: Critical Choices for Critical Years. New York, NY.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1975b. Washington Metropolitan Area Water
Supply Study, Volume I, Annex D. New York, NY.
U.S. House of Representatives. 1976. Potomac River, Hearings and Markup
before the Subcommittee on Bicentennial Affairs, the Environment, and the
International Community and the Committee on the District of Columbia, H.R.
15434. Washington, DC.
14
-------
III. STUDY TECHNIQUE
Methodology
In order to ascertain Federal water usage, information on each building
or facility was sought from the water purveyors. This method was selected
instead of simple estimation based on total employment or some other facil-
ity characteristics because it was considered the most accurate method. Only
three of the region's water purveyors, WSSC, Rockville, and DES, have
established accounting procedures which allow for relatively easy separation
of Federal water accounts from other customers. Thus it was generally
necessary to obtain lists of buildings and facilities as a starting point for
the investigation.
Facility Information
The majority of the Federal buildings, including both owned and leased
space, are under the management of GSA. Data on names, addresses, internal
space, and employment were obtained from Quarterly Report on Assignment and
Utilization of GSA Controlled Space in the National Capitol Region (GSA, 1977)
This was supplemented by a second list of Federal buildings acquired from
NCPC (NCPC, 1977) which included information on some Post Offices and
Federal buildings not under GSA control. Further information on Postal
Service buildings was gathered from U.S.P.S.'s 20 Year Facility Expansion
Plan (1975). A few buildings were probably missed, but the overwhelming
majority of Federal buildings have been included in this study.
There are certain inconsistencies among the various data sources on
Federal facilities. GSA figures for space and employment are broken down
into the categories of "office," "storage," and "special." These offered a
means of modeling water usage by building type and were useful in estimating
water use for buildings where meter readings could not be obtained. Neither
the NCPC nor Postal Service information included such categories- GSA em-
ployment data represents duty stations (space assigned to an employee) as
opposed to actual number of employees in a building. Employment information
received from NCPC was derived from both GSA and Civil Service Commission
(CSC). The CSC and Postal Service data each count the number of Federal em-
ployees instead of duty stations. Also, the USPS data are for 1975, and a
portion of the NCPC data are for 1974, not 1976. Thus there are some unavoid-
able inconsistencies in employment data. The list of Federal buildings and
facilities is reproduced along with water usage and wastewater data for each
in Appendix I. A total of 599 Federal buildings or groups of buildings was
found in the study area.
Water Usage Data
Each of the water purveyors was contacted for information on the Federal
customers in his service areas. Water and wastewater data for the period of,
15
-------
approximately, October 1976-Septemfaer 1977 were requested. Responses varied
considerably in type, format, and quality of data. Therefore, each purveyor
is discussed individually in the following paragraphs.
The District of Columbia's Department of Environmental Services (DES)
provides more water to the Federal Government than any other purveyor. Since
the Federal water bill in Washington, D.C., is paid by Congressional appro-
priation as part of the overall D.C. budget, DES maintains a special list of
Federal accounts. The fiscal year 1977 water use figures for the Federal
accounts represent meter readings from May-June 1976 to September-October
1977. Thus, it was necessary to adjust the amounts to estimate one year's
usage. It is estimated (see Appendix II) that one year's usage, after adjust-
ing for higher simmer water use, would be about 69 percent of the amount in
the DES figures. The table in Appendix I giving usage per building contains
these estimates rather than the 16-month amounts supplied by DES. It should
be noted that DES offered estimated water use for many of the accounts be-
cause quite a few buildings were not metered, or DES did not read the meters,
or the meters were broken. Hence, the validity of some of the DES data is
open to question.
The Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, which uses a computerized
billing and information retrieval system, has a special key for Federal ac-
counts. A listing of these accounts was obtained along with water use for
each. However, comparison with the GSA and NCPC lists of Federal buildings
showed that many Federal buildings were not included on WSSC's list. This
problem was also noted in the 1977 Bi-County Water Supply Task Force study
(Ecological Analysts, Inc., 1977). Upon receipt of a list of Federal build-
ings, WSSC was able to supply most of the needed information. Some of the
accounts are billed monthly, while others are billed quarterly. In a number
of cases, the water use figures for WSSC include estimates, but on the whole
the data are of high quality. The City of Rockville also supplied a comput-
erized listing of accounts for the small number of Federal buildings located
there.
The various water purveyors in Virginia do not have a means of separa-
ting Federal accounts from the others so they were given lists of buildings
within each jurisdiction. Data on Federal buildings in Virginia were
received from the Virginia American Water Company (Alexandria), Fairfax
County Water Authority, Arlington County, City of Falls Church, and City of
Fairfax, City of Manassas, Town of Leesburg, and Town of Vienna. In addition,
data were received from Quantico Marine Base, Sterling Research and Develop-
ment Center (NOAA), Manassas National Battlefield Park, and the FAA Air
Traffic Center (Leesburg). Meter reading periods varied from monthly to
annual. These data were supplemented with information from Water Resources
Engineers, Inc., which is conducting a water supply study for the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers.
Several things must be kept in mind when examining water use data. First,
water meters are subject to wear and breakdown. Representatives of all the
purveyors stated that water meters frequently were found to be giving
incorrect readings, usually showing less than the actual amount used.
Thus, the data in the aggregate may be somewhat less than the actual water
16
-------
use figures. No attempt was made to adjust for this factor in the absence
of concrete information. Several buildings show water use of less than 10
gallons per employee per workday. It is probable that the meters in those
buildings were functioning improperly. Second, usage is dependent on a
number of variables such as weather, personal inclinations, habits, and
socioeconomic factors (Milne, 1976). Thus, it may be inappropriate to
extrapolate from a study such as this to estimate future water demands or
the usage of water in buildings in another region.
A third characteristic of the data was that there was considerable
variation among data sources on names and addresses assigned to the same
buildings. For example, GSA lists the Forrestal Building at 1000
Independence Avenue, S.W., while DES lists Federal Office Building #5,
located on Independence Avenue between Ninth and Twelfth Streets, S.W.
Both of these designations apparently refer to the same building, but in
other cases there was some question that water usage figures were
attributed to the correct buildings.
Fourth, in some groups of buildings in the same area, the service
addresses listed on the water accounts were insufficient to assign accounts
to specific buildings. In those situations, the water usage was totalled
and treated as a single facility. Examples of this are the Suitland Federal
Center and National Institutes of Health in Maryland.
A fifth complicating factor was that among the leased buildings are
some which are only partially leased. GSA was not able to identify partially
leased buildings without a search of the files on individual buildings.
Thus, there arose the question of inadvertently including the usage of non-
Federal occupants of leased buildings in the total usage for those buildings.
Taking into account the types of space and employment at those buildings
where usage seemed unusually high for the number of employees (over 80
gallons per employee per workday), the metered water data were rejected in
favor of estimates of water usage.
In spite of the above shortcomings, it is believed that the approach
selected gives the best possible estimates of Federal water consumption for
the study region. Furthermore, the errors that may have been included in
the inventory in Appendix I are likely to be minor in relation to the data
as a whole.
Analysis of the Data
As a first step in the analysis, the data were entered into a
computerized information retrieval system. An 11-character identification
code was assigned to each building, allowing for retrieval and processing
of data by jurisdiction, building or facility type (office, laboratory,
hospital, museum, etc.), water purveyor, management (GSA/other), holding
type (owned/leased), and wastewater service district. Details on how
these codes were assigned are given in Appendix III.
Water usage data were received and tabulated for a total of 274 out of
599 observation points (buildings/facilities), Water data were received on
92 out of 131 observations in Maryland, on 103 out of 263 in the District
17
-------
of Columbia, and on 79 out of 205 in Virginia. In general, it can be said
that the majority of the buildings for which no data were received are
relatively small, and that data were received on all of the largest build-
ints or facilities. It is estimated' that 60% of all possible data were
obtained.
The next step in the analysis of the data was to compute water usage
per employee. The statistic, gallons per employee workday (GED), was
developed to make this readily comprehensible. In computing the GED for
each building, an average of 240 workdays per year was used. Thus:
_ annual water use
(number of employees) x (240)
Since the water purveyors were unable to supply information on a large
number of smaller buildings in the study area: it was necessary to estimate
water use for the remainder. In the case of buildings under GSA control,
employment and floor space data are broken down into office, storage, and
"special" categories. It was felt that by using these breakdowns, accurate
estimates of water use could be obtained for GSA-controlled buildings. It
was hypothesized that the "special" space and employee data would be closely
linked with high water usage, since laboratories, cafeterias, and other high-
usage activities would fall under that classification. To use these data,
multivariate statistical analysis was necessary. Multiple regression was
performed on the data for those GSA-controlled buildings for which water
use data were received. Taking water use as a dependent variable, and
office space, office employment, storage space, storage employment, special
space, special employment, total space, and total employment as independent
variables, the following relationship was described:
Y = 205.22481 + (9.895694 Xx) - (.0687365 X2) + (172.154572 X3)
Where Y = water use x 1,000 gal.
X » office employees
X = storage space
X = special employees
n = 145 buildings
R - 0.94
F-level = 14.2
Standard error of Y = 23,511
There appears to be a very close relationship between water use and the
amounts and types of employment and space. Accordingly, water use was
computed on the basis of the above regression equation for those buildings
under GSA control for which no actual water use data were available. These
estimates are presented in Appendix I (note that an "E" in the final position
of the identification code indicates water data are estimated). Taken in the
aggregate, the water use estimates are tkane to be ±5% of true values. Even
in the case of individual buildings the above equation should be useful in
estimating an ideal or expected water usage level, except in the case of
warehouses. As indicated in the equation, with a warehouse having no office
18
-------
or special employment, estimated water use varies inversely with size. Thus,
on sizable warehouses (over 30,000 square feet) negative water use estimates
were obtained. For the purpose of estimating water and wastewater totals,
these negative estimates were included in the sums, under the assumption that
underestimated cases would be offset by overestimated cases. In fact, they
represent less than 5% of the total water use figures. Negative estimates
are represented by the numeral 0 in Appendix I. Further details on the
regression analysis are given in Appendix IV.
Where less detailed space and employment data were available, the
results of regression analysis were somewhat less satisfactory. In the
case of Postal Service facilities, a large negative constant was encountered
in the regression equation. The relationship is described below:
Y - -172.99 + 0.01053 Xi + 5.0659 X2
Where Y = water use x 1,000 gal.
X} = total space
X2 = total employees
n = 33 buildings
R = 0.98
It was found that many of the water use estimates would be negative using
this model. Thus regression was rejected in favor of estimating water use
on the basis of gallons per employee. It should be noted that these estimates
of 25 gallons per employee workday are identical to those used by the Postal
Service to project water use in developing facility expansion plans.
After completion of the above estimates, there remained five buildings
(non-GSA, non-Postal Service) for which no water use data were available.
Regression analysis was performed on a similar class of buildings, but again
the results were unacceptable. Estimates based on average usage per employee
(221 GED) were used for estimating purposes on three of the buildings. For
the remaining two, on which no employment data were available, no estimates
were performed.
Analysis of Federal Water Use Data
Water use data, including estimates, were totalled for each of the
purveyors in the region. These are given in Table 7. As was mentioned
earlier, Federal water use expressed as a percentage of the total regional
use for the purveyor is greatest in the Arlington County and DES service
areas. Some differences can be seen between these estimates and some
estimated sewage flows developed by the COG (1977). The COG's estimates
are presented in Table 8.
Approximate Federal wastewater flows for major treatment plants, as
well as percentages of each plant's capacity, are given in Table 9.
Arlington and Blue Plains bear the bulk of the wastewater load. The
category listed as "other" is largely made up of Fairfax County treatment
plants; however, it was very difficult to determine which plants served
each building. Also, with the addition of new plants in the Fairfax and
Prince William Counties systems, changes will be occurring in the near
19
-------
Table 7
ESTIMATES OF FEDERAL SHARE IN THE
WASHINGTON, D.C., METROPOLITAN AREA
Water
Purveyor
Total Water
Supplied
mgd (1976)
Federal Water
Used
(mgd)
Federal
Percentage
DES 160.7
WSSC 138.1
FCWA 42.2
Rockville 4.1
Falls Church 11.3
Arlington 22.0
Alexandria 14.9
City of Fairfax 3.6
24.12
4.98
3.31
0.048
0.45
3.01
0.46
0.005
15.0
3.6
7.8
1.2
3.9
13.7
3.1
0.14
Sources:
Federal water use data are derived from totals of estimates and actual data
from water purveyors, and regression estimates, given in Appendix I.
Data under "Total Water Supplied" are from "Summary of Current Water Use in
the Washington Metropolitan Area," a draft paper prepared by Water Resources
Engineers, Inc., under contract to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore
District.
20
-------
Table 8
COG ESTIMATES OF FEDERAL SHARE OF WASTEWATER LOAD (MGD)
Calculated
Treatment Plant Federal Offices Total Flow
Blue Plains 8.5 292.4
Piscataway 0.3 18.1
Western Branch 0.0 10.7
Parkway 0.0 5.3
Arlington 1.8 21.8
Alexandria (no data) 33.0
Source:
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. 1977. The
Federal Government and Wastewater Treatment in the NCR.
Draft paper.
Table 9
FEDERAL WASTEWATER* LOAD BY TREATMENT PLANT
Estimated Percentage
Treatment Plant Flow (mgd) of Capacity
Blue Plains 22.684 7.3
Piscataway 1.080 3.6
Western Branch. 0.196 0.7
Parkway 0.005 0.1
Arlington 2.875 9.6
Alexandria 0.547 1.0
Other '2,865
Federal Plant/Septic Tank 5,719-
*These flows, except in the WSSC service area, are based simply
on 100% of water usage, with no attempt at further estimation.
Metcalf and Eddy (1972) suggest using 80% of water use to esti-
mate wastewater flow. WSSC does meter wastewater and outside
water use for some of its larger customers. These figures were
used rather than water use totals in those cases.
21
-------
future. One surprising factor was the large amount of wastewater,
approximately 5.7 mgd, going to independent wastewater plants operated
by the Federal Government.
One suggestion based upon these data is that Federal agencies take
into consideration present wastewater load factors in planning future
construction, and that they attempt to locate in areas where there is
surplus treatment capacity.
Analysis of water use by building type, based on cases where usage
data were received from water purveyors, was also performed. (The method
for defining building types is given in Appendix V). Office workers
averaged 71 GED, a surprisingly large amount of water. This compares with
estimates from Metcalf and Eddy (1972) of 10-15 gallons per day, or, con-
verted to a 240 working-day year, 15-23 GED. Several reasons are suggested
for this large discrepancy. First, Metcalf and Eddy's estimates may be
rather low. Based on a survey of toilet flushing habits alone, within
WAPORA, it was found that office employees would average about 10-15 gallons
per day for toilet flushing, using flush-valve toilets. Another reason is
that since the GSA employment data represent "duty stations" rather than
employees, the total number of employees used to compute GED may be too
low. Finally, the mean number of employees per office building is 1,585
among the buildings used in computing office GED. This is probably several
times the size of a "typical" office building. Thus, other non-office
functions, such as food service and irrigation of lawns, are more likely
to be included. This suggested that the averages of GED be used mainly as
relative figures for comparison among building types.
Other functional building types were also analyzed. Postal facilities
averaged 25 GED, while laboratories averaged 164 GED. For warehouses, the
figure was 98 GED. Hospitals averaged 236 GED. Museums showed a surpris-
ingly low figure of 197 GED, in spite of the expectation that large numbers
of visitors would have inflated the water use per employee. Military
installations averaged 245 GED, probably due to on-base housing and irriga-
tion. One obvious suggestion drawn from the data is that new military
installations or laboratories are not as appropriate as new post offices
and office buildings in areas having water supply or wastewater treatment
capacity problems.
One of the study's initial goals was to ascertain whether water use
varies from one State to another. Average usage for all building types for
each State and the District of Columbia are as follows: Maryland, 168 GED;
Virginia, 172 GED; District of Columbia, 137 GED. These averages do not
necessarily indicate that the Federal buildings in D.C. do a better job of
conserving water. Probably they indicate a different mix of building types;
most of the major laboratories and military installations are located
outside the District of Columbia.
22
-------
References
Ecological Analysts, Inc. 1977. Water Supply Study for Montgomery and
Prince Georges Counties. Report prepared for Washington Suburban Sanitary
Commission under the auspices of the Bi-County Water Supply Task Force.
General Services Administration. 1977. Quarterly Report on the Assignment
and Utilization of GSA Controlled Space in the National Capitol Region.
June 30.
Metcalf & Eddy, Inc. 1972. Wastewater Engineering. McGraw-Hill Book Com-
pany.
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. 1977. The Federal Govern-
ment and Wastewater Treatment in the NCR. Draft report, revised 11-9-77.
Milne, M. 1976. Residential Water Conservation. California Water Resources
Center, Report No. 35, University of California, Davis.
National Capitol Planning Commission. 1977. Existing and Projected Employ-
ment/Space on Federally-Owned Sites in Maryland/District of Columbia/
Virginia. Tables 1-6. Draft paper.
United States Postal Service. 1975. 20 Year Facility Expansion Plan. Book
II.
23
-------
IV. WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAMS ~ CASE STUDIES
FEDERAL AGENCIES
Department of the Navy
In 1968, due to limitations on wastewater treatment in Montgomery Coun-
ty, the U.S. Navy began a comprehensive water conservation program at the
National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, Maryland. From 1968 to 1973, the
Navy reduced water consumption from 728,100 gpd to 621,000 gpd, a water sav-
ings of 14.7 percent. Wastewater flows decreased from 687,800 gpd to 580,700
gpd. Additional water reduction measures have been incorporated into the
design of a new hospital, into improvements for the utility plant, and into
the design of a new Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
(USUHS). Water consumption and the resulting wastewater flow are not expected
to increase, according to the Navy's projections, through 1984.
The Navy estimated that water conservation measures incorporated into
the hospital design, including flow-limiting devices for lavatory faucets and
showers, recovery of condenser water for commercial refrigeration systems,
and recovery of cooling water from air compressors would save 27,951 gpd. It
was estimated that automated cooling tower blowdown controls, reuse of cooling
tower blowdown for compressed air system cooling, and automated boiler blow-
down controls for increased recycling of makeup water would save an estimated
23,660 gpd in the heating/cooling plant. The combination of flow-limiting
devices for lavoratory faucets, and a central vacuum system which negates the
requirement for water aspirators would save an estimated 33,780 gpd in the
USUHS. These measures have resulted in a projected 1932 wastewater estimate
of 528,970 gpd which is 158,830 gpd less than the wastewater flow in 1968, and
51,730 gpd less than the flow in 1973-
Department of Defense
The Department of Defense, through the U.S. Corps of Engineers, has
initiated a water conservation program at Ft. McNair, Ft. Meyer, and Cameron
Station. Worn-out fixtures are being replaced with modern water saving
devices. Meters are being read weekly. Results of the program reveal that
although both population and activity have increased at the facilities, there
has been practically no increase in water use from 1976 to 1977. During the
water shortage in the summer of 1977, these posts cut their water use by 15%.
However, the Army has stated that it could not cut consumption any further
without curring personnel or closing the facilities.
Government Printing Office
In 1976, the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO) initiated an energy
and water conservation program. Total water consumption dropped by over 190
million gallons from fiscal year 1975 to fiscal year 1977. This reduction
24
-------
was achieved by eliminating once-through air conditioning units, eliminating
once-through chilled water systems on the presses, and installing water-
conserving devices on all fixtures. The GPO also has a maintenance program
of repairing fixtures and devices.
National Institutes of Health
During the period of March through November, 1977, the National Insti-
tutes of Health (NIH) began a water and energy conservation program in a wing
of its General Office Building. Seventy spray mixing faucets (Unatap 24A,
manufactured by Richard Fife, Inc.) set to deliver .5 gallons of water per
minute were installed in the lavatories. During the period March through
July, 1977, NIH monitored hot and cold water consumption in the lavatories,
and found a water usage of 24 gallons of hot water per faucet per week and
7.8 gallons of cold water per faucet per week. The faucets were installed
during August and September, and the meters were read again in November.
The readings indicated that in the first four weeks, hot water consump-
tion had dropped to 4.6 gallons per faucet per week and the cold water con-
sumption had dropped to 2.3 gallons per faucet per week. In a follow-up five
week period ending February 16, 1978, the hot water consumption had further
dropped to 3.1 gallons per faucet per week and the cold water consumption to
1.8 gallons per faucet per week. This was a savings of 87 percent and 27
percent, respectively.
Andrews Air Force Base
Although Andrews Air Force Base has not instituted a water conservation
program, it has taken a preliminary step by reading the meters on a monthly
basis. This gives them the data base necessary for a water management pro-
gram.
Quantico Marine Base
Plastic flow control insert devices were installed several years ago in
shower heads at the Quantico Marine Base. The Base has no information, how-
ever, on the effectiveness of these devices. After a number of leaks in the
main system were repaired, water consumption was cut by 25 percent.
THE PRIVATE SECTOR
It is believed that the water conservation activities of the private
sector can also provide helpful information. An example is included.
Charles E. Smith Company
The Charles E. Smith Company, a property management and construction
firm in Washington, D.C., recently instituted a water conservation program in
14,000 of their apartment units. The company installed "NOVA" flow control
shower heads with a fixed maximum flow of 2.5 gpm, "Fluidmaster" improved
ballcock assemblies, and faucet aerators. In a 940 unit high rise in Falls
Church, water consumption during the period from October 1976 to October 1977
dropped by 21,600 gallons per unit from the same period the previous year.
25
-------
This was a total savings of $32,000. The company stated that the incentive
for its program was the high cost of water in the district of Virginia where
the apartments are located. The company reported that the costs of the water
conservation program were paid for in a few months by the reduced bills.
26
-------
V. WATER CONSERVATION LEGISLATION ~
LOCAL, REGIONAL, AND FEDERAL
In September, 1977, the District of Columbia City Council passed D.C.
Law 2-21, The Water Conservation Act of 1977. The law states that "all plumb-
ing fixtures and devices installed in a building, structure, or premise in the
District of Columbia shall be of a water-saving design approved by the Mayor."
The law mandates water usage rates for fixtures installed in buildings
located in the District of Columbia. The law requires that aerators be in-
stalled on all newly installed lavatory and kitchen sink faucets. Faucets in
public restrooms must be self-closing. Cooling towers, ornamental fountains,
and car-wash installations must be equipped with a water recycling system
before July 1, 1978. The maximum allowable water usage rates are charted in
Table 10.
These regulations will appear in the 1978 version of the District of
Columbia Plumbing Code. Buildings owned by the Federal Government, however,
are not legally bound to comply with the law. The Federal Government has,
however, stated its intention to voluntarily comply with "certain portions"
of the law, and, according to the District of Columbia City Council, is
reported to be setting up a task force to study the matter. Executive Order
11752, December 19, 1973, supports such efforts, but still maintains the
principal of Federal supremacy.
The 1976 Plumbing and Gasfitting Regulations of the WSSC contain regula-
tions concerning the construction and operation of water closets, flushing
devices, urinals, lavatories, bathtubs, showers, and sinks. Many of these
regulations require the installation of water saving devices and mandate
minimum water use rates. The code states that, with regard to water cooled
air conditioning, an installation cannot use a rate of water greater than .08
gpm per ton of refrigeration. The code recommends the installation of an
economizer to meet this standard. Again, buildings owned by the Federal
Government do not legally have to conform. However, the WSSC has stated that
it can refuse to furnish water connections to serve a building until it com-
plies. Table 10 contains the maximum allowable water usage rates in both new
construction and replacement of existing fixtures.
In accordance with Principle No. 4 of the 1973 BOCA (Building Officers
and Code Administrators International, Inc.) Basic Plumbing Code, adopted by
the State of Virginia, both Fairfax and Arlington Counties and the Town of
Vienna have passed regulations which require restrictions on flow rates from
water using fixtures in new, repaired, or remodeled construction. Principle
No. 4 states that "water conservation plumbing shall be designed and adjusted
to use the minimum quality of water consistent with proper performance and
cleaning." Table 10 contains the maximum flow rates listed in the Fairfax
County/Arlington County, and Vienna plumbing codes.
Car wash installations must be equipped with a recycling system, and any
27
-------
w
a
o
u o
o
r-*
CU
r-l
_£l
cd
H
C/3
p^
3
H
ix!
r-l
fe
cs
0
fn
w
Cd
H
^
P4
O
<
en
3
Pi
Cd
H
<
3
0
C_J
^9
3
< H4
fn «
•<
W
w
3
o
Hr^
O (33
H i-3
en o
au
m
•
en
en
m
•
en
•
en
en
0)
en js
o en
33
EH
M ' —
CU r^
4-1 fl
C8 O
3
1
m
en
1
I
en
CU A
4-1 en
cu 3
S rl
O CS4
,c "•*
en rH
3 f3
P*
O
*
en
0
en
O
•
en
O
•
H
[_/ (J) cJ^^
Tj^C? w1**1*.
r-l O Ojr-4
O XJ Ed* C!3
t>*^ O
«&
-------
fixture with a continuous flow of 5 gpm or more must be equipped with a re-
cycling device. Lavatory faucets in public restrooms must be self-closing.
Although these restrictions will obviously have a large impact on water
consumption, the water use rates established are still somewhat higher than
what is possible with many of the new water conservation devices. If the
Federal Government were to require more stringent restrictions on its water
using fixtures, especially on lavatory faucets, greater savings could be
achieved.
In February of 1974, the COG adopted the Water Conservation and Coordina-
tion Agreement, consisting of a model regional plumbing code and a water
shortage emergency plan. The COG Model Plumbing Code amends the existing
code by establishing water usage rate standards in all repairs or replacements
of existing fixtures.
The code mandates the installation of aerators on all lavatory and sink
faucets. A water connected device which has a flow of 5 gpm or more must be
equipped with an approved water recycling system. The COG believes that these
measures would create an overall water reduction of approximately 20 percent.
The Water Shortage Emergency Plan calls for voluntary and mandatory cur-
tailments of nonessential water use during the "Alert," "Restriction," and
"Emergency" states of a water supply shortage. Signatories would agree to
legislate ordinances in their jurisdictions to enforce the mandatory curtail-
ments. As of November 1977, 12 of the 16 jurisdictions had signed the agree-
ment.
In 1977, the COG released an updated Water Supply Emergency Implementa-
tion Plan, consisting of a guide for the curtailment of water use and other
emergency actions during a water shortage or water outage. The plan describes
the responsibilities of local government, agencies, and water suppliers dur-
ing the three progressive stages of a water shortage and during a possible
water outage. The plan also details water conservation procedures, both
voluntary and mandatory, to be adhered to in the event of a shortage or outage.
Many of the emergency water conservation measures listed in the plan serve a
dual purpose by saving water and energy and by reducing wastewater loads.
On September 28, 1977, a water conservation bill was introduced into the
U.S. House of Representatives. The stated purpose of H.R. 9361 is "to estab-
lish minimum water efficiency standards for public buildings and to provide
for the procurement and installation of efficient water supply and removal
equipment in public buildings." If passed, the bill would become the Public
Buildings Water Conservation Act. The Act would establish a water conserva-
tion program which would attempt to "reduce water usage by Federal Government"
and to "develop program performance data to support policy decisions on future
programs with respect to water conservation." The bill would amend the Public
Buildings Act of 1959 by establishing standards for the minimum amount of wa-
ter necessary for the normal operation of public buildings. Water supply and
removal equipment must meet these standards in all new construction, in any
additions to existing public buildings, and in cases of major repair or im-
provement. No action has yet been taken on the bill.
29
-------
Montgomery and Prince Georges County Chambers of Commerce
In August, 1977, the Metropolitan Washington Board of Trade, in coopera-
tion with the Montgomery and Prince Georges County Chambers of Commerce, pre-
pared the Water Shortage Contingency Plan for the WSSC. One of the stated
reasons for the plan was to present an alternative to previous crisis measures
considered questionable by the business community, such as business closings
that resulted in loss of work hours and tax revenue.
The plan consists of four sufaplans, each of which, if implemented, would
effect a different degree of water use reduction, depending on the severity
of the crisis. Restrictions of water use would be put on toilets, sinks, air
conditioning units, dishwashers, and sprinklers. Enforcement of the emergency
measures would be implemented by warnings, fines, or termination of water
services.
It is not known whether any of these regulations have in fact had any
impact upon water use in Federal buildings. The Federal Government is not
obligated to abide by these regulations, but many do so in accordance with the
spirit of Executive Order 11752.
30
-------
VI. INVENTORY OF WATER SAVING DEVICES
Many studies have been conducted in recent years on the utility and
cost-effectiveness of devices and technologies designed to reduce water flow
in water using fixtures. Water saving devices have been successfully used to
reduce water consumption in research programs sponsored by government agencies,
water suppliers, and universities, and in projects instituted by private
corporations interested in saving water. A review of the literature on the
subject reveals that most of the projects and studies conducted thus far which
test these devices have focused on household water use rather than commercial,
institutional, or industrial water use. Since this study is concerned with
water conservation in Federal facilities, most of which are office buildings,
interpretations are made on the applicability of the devices to office build-
ing installation.
Various studies have shown that water use in the home can be reduced
between 32 percent and 35 percent by using water saving devices on toilets,
faucets, and showers. (Bailey et al., 1969, and Howe, 1971). The COG believes
that adoption of measures identified in its Model Plumbing code would bring
about an overall water use reduction of 20 percent (COG, 1974). These are
highly significant reductions, in terms of the resulting reduced flows to
wastewater treatment plants, lower water and sewer costs, energy conservation,
and reduced pumping and building costs in future construction.
The cost-effectiveness of flow reduction devices must be evaluated along
with actual water savings. There is some disagreement in the literature on
whether the capital costs of these devices would be offset by decreased water
costs. Several studies have concluded that water conservation measures pay
for themselves over time and can actually save money. In a Pennsylvania State
study, author William Sharpe determined that net yearly savings of $46.50 for
a family of four could be achieved by using a combination of water conserving
devices (Sharpe, undated). In a 1969 EPA study it was concluded that various
bathroom water saving devices would bring about net yearly savings as measured
over the life of a particular device (Bailey, et al., 1969). A 1974 EPA study
stated that "when compared with typical water and sewer rates, all of the bath-
room flow reduction devices listed were shown to be economically acceptable in
terms of cost savings." (Cohen and Wallman, 1974).
User acceptance of water saving devices is another parameter which must
be considered. Commercial establishments such as motels, hotels, and restau-
rants have not reported significant user acceptance problems. (Sharpe, un-
dated). It is thought that user rejection would be especially slight when
devices are installed in new construction.
The following sections contain a survey of flow-reducing devices and
technology, an evaluation of their operability and performance, and an evalu-
ation of their applicability to office building installation. The survey
does not attempt to be all inclusive, but tries to give a general perspective
31
-------
of the devices and the research conducted on them. Any manufacturer mentioned
regarding a particular device does not imply endorsement by the EPA. Survey-
ed are: tank toilet insert devices, a water saving device for flush valve
toilets, water saving toilets and urinals, faucet flow controls, shower flow
controls, air conditioner controls, and pressure reducing valves. The devices
can be regarded in two categories: devices suitable for new installation and
replacement and devices designed for retrofit into existing fixtures. Table
11 presents a list of these devices, the amount of water they save, their
costs, and their advantages and limitations.
Tank Toilet Devices
Tank toilet insert devices are for use in existing conventional tank
toilets. They operate by reducing the amount of water used to flush the toi-
let and to effectively remove the wastes. The various devices include water
displacement inserts, water damming inserts, dual flush adaptors, and new
toilet valve assemblies. They can reduce the flush volume of a toilet by
from .5 to 2.5 gallons from a conventional-flush of between 5 and 7 gallons.
Because most Federal facilities are equipped with flush valve toilets, the
tank toilet insert devices will be surveyed here only briefly.
The simplest of tank toilet insert devices is the "brick-in-the-toilet"
method of reducing water closet flush volume. Two plastic quart bottles or
bricks can be used to take up space in the toilet, thereby displacing a small
amount of water not needed for flushing. Under ideal laboratory conditions,
the use of two-one quart plastic bottles gives a 10 percent savings per flush
(Sharpe, undated). A ten gallon per day savings has also been estimated
(Sharpe, undated). The WSSC found a net minimum saving of 5.4 million gallons
per day or 4.42 percent of overall sewage flow after distributing plastic
bottles and instruction handbooks to 215,000 single family units and 100
apartment units in its service area (WSSC "Bottle Kit" Project, 1974).
Water damming devices operate by sectioning off a portion of the tank
in order to reduce the amount of water used for flushing. Savings can range
as high as two gallons per flush. The WSSC found a 12-16 percent savings
over a conventional flush in apartment units and a 16-20 percent savings in
single family homes in its 1972 Cabin John Drainage Basin Test Program (WSSC,
1972). In a Pennsylvania State University study which evaluated the WSSC
program, it was found that water use for a sample of 100 homes decreased from
an average of 45,864 gallons per day before the project to 34,144 gallons per
day after the project (Sharpe and Fletcher, 1977). The only problem encoun-
tered was the occasional need to double flush, a condition which negated the
potential savings.
Dual flush adaptors convert a conventional single flush tank toilet to
a toilet with one short flush for liquid wastes and a normal longer flush for
solid wastes. The device exploits the lower flushing requirements of liquid
wastes. It operates by releasing approximately 50 percent of the water from
the tank for the "light flush." The handle flush must be held in a certain
way to achieve the desired flush. In one study, two thirds of the respondents
to a questionnaire on the device found that the reduced flush was also effec-
tive in removing solid wastes (Cohen and Wallman, 1974).
Float assemblies of new designs replace the tank's ballcock, float, and
32
-------
en
u
cj
r-4
^^
H
fH ft
^S
CD
cu s:
i-4 M
r2 J5^
fl3 J
CO
01
00
a
e
(8
^
•a
4J
03
O
CJ
.c
m
3
fa
01 '
00 l-i
C CU
•H a
^
CO 01
en c
o
1— 1
fH
O
03
01
CJ
•H
^
0)
o
00
c
^4
^
(Q
CO
u
(U
f"4
•f^
0
H
00
e
•H
£
03
3
rH
"4-1
O)
iH
J9
3
0
•a
a)
fH
^3
•H
CO
0)
o
1
1-1
o
^
m
CO
0)
*
Q)
^
*4
CO
C
O
o.
X
01
e
M
O
CO
•
.
CO CU JJ
JJ fH -H
JJ t-l
C W -H
ft "H Jl
i-3 co
•a a
0) ft
CO • fH
3 >s 0.
fH a.
c a
• o
§00
co e
0) JJ iH
iH 0) t>
J3 fH fH
0 -H -H
U O 3
C. 4J Jl
•
fH
rH
CO
CO
J
J
-
JJ
,
JJ
2
•
* fj
0) 03 0)
fH (4 CO
00 0) 3
at M
fH 3 >,
i-l JJ Ji
CO CJ
*^ CO T3
<1 *M 0)
3 fH
C fH
• 8J Cfl
o) S JJ
> 03
•H Ss C
03 C -H
e §
fr »O
r^ S
01 o c
c w eg
H «w CJ
m
PO
•
m
w
i
m
«M
•
•H
O
*
(N
1
in
*
rH
0)
u
•H
>
01
a
00
c
•H
CO
a
^4
0)
jj
3
•
>,
1—1
2
O SO
2
CD "*"^
^j T3
0) fH
^— i ^^
i-l 3
O ^
jj
01 >>
J^ U JJ
e -H it
CO U-l fH
JJ U-l i-t
e co
•H 0) CJ
fH i-l
•0 JJ fH
0) JJ Q*
CO ft CU
D i-3 eg
IU
O
•
0) JJ
x M e
CO 0) 01
3 co E
fH 03 01
u-i 01 W
iH i-l •
0 3 CO
3 <« cr a)
JJ O 01 JJ
W 03
U-i 0) CQ
O 03 00 3
3 S
o) i-t -a
CJ CO f. -H
•H 01 W 3
0^30-
j: « fH 1-1
U S «« fH
O
o
•CO-
4J
"oo •
1 fH
e
!-i O
o
"a
in 3
pH
c4 «w
W
0
JJ
a.
CO
^
M
CO
3
rH
Cb
rH
C8
a
2
s
r
5
2
-
1
1 fH
cu 5
o a
•H 3
JJ
CJ U-l
01 -i C
«M 3 3
O JJ u-i
O
m
t-fA
^O*
1
o
o
f*^
•co-
iH
1
O
>s
^1
J3
S
01
CO
CQ
JJ
C9
O
i— 1
Eb
T3
01
>
O
I-*
i"
h- 1
1
co
CO «H
•o
C
o o n
jj e
•0 0
0) 01 i-l
.i ^^ 11
CO CO CO
01 U JJ
JJ CO i-l
s
e js IH
0) 00 rH
» 3 ^
J2 O >v
c e
jj 01 CO
o
C CU !-i
00 0)
CO V« >
c3 a o
rr fH
CO JJ CO
CO -H >
I- O JS
01 W 03
JJ JJ 3
CO 01 S U 00
fH O 6
C U- -H
O JJ
CU CO
0) CJ -H
JS -H X
H > 0)
o
o
00
•CO-
r-l
:
4J
•H
^
U
01
a)
to
i
0)
CO
3
0
M
jj
01
?
00
0) e!
00 -H
M -O
fH -H
3
co*"0
fH 0)
a u
•H
^J ^4
iH vw
s a
0
e
to
•
co e
jj i-i
0)
fH 01
•H iH
O 0
•
a
M
00
O
O.
e
o
ft
a
£4
01
03
e
0
CJ
^4
01
JJ
C8
01
00
a.
XJ
^
X
fll
w
C
0
•o
-------
^\
TJ
CD
3
i-l
jj
d
o
CJ
^WX
CO
0)
o
•H
>
S
00
c
•H
>
tfl
co
Vj
0)
4J
CO
3
1
rH
rH
0)
rH
42
tfl
H
42
CO
3
rH
U-l
M
CU
Cu
CO
d
o
rH
iH
CO
00
P-.
1
in
E
O
h
U-l
CO
01
CO
3
JJ
01
rH
•H
O
JJ
X,
CO
JJ
rH
tfl
c
0
•H
jj
d
§
u
<
• •
01
JJ
o
z
CO
d
o
•H
JJ
ca
jj
1-1
e
•H
rJ
CO
0)
00
CO
JJ
d
to
>
TJ
tfl
CO
M
,
H
d •
•H CO
CO JJ
E -H
C
TJ 3
0>
CO rH
3 cfl
•H
01 JJ
43 d
01
TJ TJ
rH 1-1
3 CO
O CU
3 H
I-l
O CO
U-l 03
01
d rH
00
•H 43
CO JJ
01 ft
13 U
TJ 00
01 d
> ft
0 43
r-l CO
Cu 3
E rH
M U-l
O
O 0
• -3-
m -co-
01 i
o
i fi
o
o
• CO
in 3
00 rH
•CO- CL,
in
CO
jj
cu
iH
ft
O
H
CO
rH
fa
JJ
o
^J
h
o
cu
CO
^
H
jy
Q
rH
rH
CO
43
CO
0)
rH
43
fj
0
•9
U-4
O
CO
JJ
u
o
a.
0)
u
u
o
d
ft
S
•
M
0)
jj
CO
d
o
•H
JJ
CO
rH
rH
Cfl
JJ
CO
d
•H
•
m
g
01
rH
43
0
>-i
CU
00
d
•H
»-*
"a
3
rH
14J
>,
TJ rH
C CU
CO CU
3
cu cn
CO
CO I*
43 01
U 00
r-l 5-4
3 ca
CurH
»J U-l
0 0
U-4
d
CO O
JJ f(
co jj
o SB
0 rH
rH
-a co
0) JJ
•O co
•o d
< ft
•
CO
d oo
•H d
•H
•a -a
0) rH
rH ft
IH 3
Cfl 43
JJ
CO CU
d u
•H ft
U-4
^U-4
TJ 0
eg
CU JJ
h co
rH O
< S
>,
rH CO
01 3
JJ rH
CO CU
E
•H O
K 0
0 •
U ro
CU CN
CurH
< -CO
O
««r
i
m
•
rn
JJ
0)
rH
•H
0
H
0)
>
ft
tfl
>
--
co
3
rH
fa
0
•H
JJ
tO
Q
O
JJ
3
<
'
•
01
d
i-i
rH
TJ
d
cfl
JJ
d
cu
•H •
U 0)
•H H
U-4 43
U-l CO
0) 13
d
o) cu
M a
O 01
S 13
d
0
ft
JJ
CO
rH
H
CO
JJ
CO
d
ft
d
ft
>,
rH
d •
ft CO
CO JJ
E -H
•O 3
CU
CO rH
3 CO
ft
CU JJ
43 d
01
TJ TJ
rH ft
3 CO
O 0)
S u
•
CO
01
43 K
CO 01
3 JJ
rH JJ
U-l 0)
43
O
3 u-i
JJ O
U-4 0)
O CO
3
01
U CO
ft CU
O 44
43 CO
U S
>-,
rH
0)
JJ
CO
a .
ft O
x o
o •
M O
a ro
a rH
•< -co-
in
*
tN
1
in
CN
•
rH
JJ
0)
rH
•H
O
H
CU
rH
U
>,
CO
rH
cfl
3
O
JJ
d
o>
e •
0) CO
W 01
ft JJ
3 CO
cr cfl
oi >
^
TJ
00 ft
d 3
ft cr
4S ft
CO rH
rH U-(
U-4 O
d
o
ft
00 JJ
d to
ft rH
TJ fH
3 cfl
rH JJ
O CO
d d
•H ft
i-4
01
JJ
CO
3
01
I-i U
O ft
1-1 U-l
Cfl U-l
E 0
o) d
43 1-1
TJ I-l
rH 01
3 >
O cfl
2 CO
X
iH CO
0) 3
JJ rH
cfl a
•H 0
x o
o •
I-l LO
aio
a >H
<
o
•
rH
rH
CO
ft
V4
D
00
ft
>
CO
C/3
i-i
01
JJ
CO
JJ
01
•-J
d
o
43
a
•H
CO
TJ
01 00
> d
O ft
I-i 43 •
a co i-i
6 3 oi
H rH JJ
U-l CO
2
• I-l
co O co
oo u-4 ra
d oi
ft d rH
TJ 00
rH ft 43
ft CO JJ
3 0) i-l
43 TJ 3
CQ
3
4= rH
co a
3 d
r* ^* O
14-1 O i-l
m jj
IW -CO- Cfl
O ^ rH
rH
01 01 CO
U > JJ
•H rH CO
I-l CO C
a > ft
CD
00
to
cu
jj
X
0)
d
e
o
d
0
o
34
-------
91
Q
a
•H
41
U
3
la
4)
a.
03
O
at
oo
i
m
co
41
33
41
U
3
03
at
§
31
41
00
at
u
C
91
O
CJ
3
C
|
I
00
f
41
u
O
o e
a
CJ
T-l
I
<4-i
O
=5
3
«
41
O O CO
a cu 41
4) 01 -H
"^•g.
0
_ «§•
f4 CD
2 S u
r* *^ 3)
§ a u
;; * i-
s i-2
41 3 J3
1 CJ U
O CJ i-t
cn at 3
I
co •
at u
ft 41
O. w
co at
£1 1-t ft
u 0 ft
0 at
to
91
91 -U
41 CO O
CJ 4-1
3 «
"O 01 >»
O 03 aa
M ^U fft
Pu ft W
•u x
at so
3 o e
O VJ 41
ft 3
tJ^4 gj ^J
91 fi
jj 41 at
e u
at Cu b
u
co <4-i
fi O at
a 3
CJ 91
CO 4J
01 CU O
M ft JS
41 TJ
> M CO
i-l at 41
ft 00 >
41 41 a)
Q W M
41
O
O
O
I
CN
I
in
u
p
at
u
41
a
o
u
a
3
93
O
4J
at
a
i-t
^
50
41
00
at
C
at
j»
^3
-
i-t
ft
2
CO
3
ft
a.
m
m
*
er*
*f
m
CN
1
m
o
4J
41
U
3
r3
1—4
O
I-"
...
^
U
3
3h
•
CU
M
3
CO
(0
41
!-
0.
^
O
03
93
41
ft
fj
U
at
00
41
fi
O
•rt
4J
at
ft
at
4j
co
fi
•
>,
60
41
e
41
*O
§
M
4)
at
3
AJ
a
*s
CO
4)
>
at
CA
*
>s
a)
M
03
00
e
4» CUi-t
^j
•H
ft
1
14
41
|
93
41
•rt
3
9)
41
U
3
^3
Q
m
ft
•
<••)
00
CO
>.
00
41
e
41
^3
fi
at
M
41
0$
3
4J
o
33
41
U
fi
41
i-t
C
O
o
1-1
e
a)
41
-Q
O
*""
•o
o
U4
e
41
iw
O
CJ
1-t
ft
iQ
3
fi
•H
41
91
3
^4
0
144
ft
at
u
i-t
4J
CJ
at
(U
91
S
i-H
O.
•
ft
rn
^
41
CO
9}
S
o
o
Jj
4J
3]
41
fi
0
•rt
4^
a)
ft
ft
at
91
e
•H
•
41
i-t
Cu
O
41
CU
4)
00
a]
O.
41
e
g
41
3
O
CJ
-------
T3
cu
CU
4-1
3
rl
CU
co
O
cfl
&0
§
co
cu
cn
3
•o
CU
3
rH
CJ
O
U
CO
CU
0
•H
I
eo
C
•H
cn
1-1
cu
u
cfl
CO
o
CU
H*
O
O
cu
4-1
O
ctj
£3
CO
£
o
•H
4-1
tO
4-1
•H
e
•H
^4
CO
CU
00
«
4J
e
J>
TJ
4J
co
O
CJ
s
su
a
•H
cn
^j
r™i
0
1-1
II
c
o
CJ
g
rH
(i4
M
"J
3
Q
cn
^
cu
CO
3
4J
CO
rf
4J
^
4-1
•H
tH
•H
.a
•H
CO
CO
0
H
rH
(0
4J
CO
C
•rl
O
4J
^
cn
cfl
CU
*
cu
^
•H
co
C
cu
a.
X
cu
M
O
0
iri
ov
I
O
•
0
*
en
cu
a
•H
CU
Q
O
l-i
•W
c
o
CJ
1
r^
[•£4
U
CU
3
O
Q
O
O
4-1
CO
}^
cu
Q
1-^
co
rl
CU
00
o
iH
CU
CO
w
•
^
00
rl
cu
e
CU
T3
C
CO
rl
CU
4J
CO
^
4J
a
^
co
cu
*>
CO
cn
.
5
Q
r-t
U-l
TJ
CU
a
3
T3
CU
M
^
O
14-1
CU
4-1
CO
CO
c
CU
a.
2
™
-
1
CJ
3
4-1
cn
c
o
CJ
^
cu
c
^4
0
(U
rH
•3
CJ
r-4.
a
o.
<
o
0
^
cO
cn
I
rH
tO
CO
e
•H •
cn o
rH 4J
a.
cu
Q
rH
r-l
a)
4J
CO
C
•H
O
ij
^
cn
CO
CU
M
CU
•H
CO
c
cu
a.
X
cu
c
r-l
O
o
CN
CU
rH
CO
*"
14-4
U-4
O
1
4J
3
CJ
r-t
0)
J2
«
rl
CU
CO
3
CU
JS
4-1
H |
O
•o
c
tO
rl
CU
4J
CO
4J
O
QJ
3
0
co
ca
CU
^
CO
cn
^
^N
00
CU
e
cu
cn
cn
36
-------
rod, and have adjustable water-level settings. The device either sounds a
warning noise or shuts off in the event of a leak and the water closet valve
shuts off quickly after the tank has filled.
Flushometer Water Saving Device
The Sloan Valve Company has recently developed a water saving device for
installation in toilets equipped with Sloan Royal diaphragm-type flush valves
(see section on flush valve toilets). The "Retro Water Saver Kit" saves
approximately one gallon of water every time the toilet is flushed. This re-
duces the flush volume from the 4.0 gallons per flush for a conventional
flush valve toilet to 3.0 gallons per flush, a 25 percent reduction. The kit
is installed by substituting the existing guide assembly inside the valve with
a new guide assembly containing a disk which restricts the amount of water
passing through the valve. The "Retro Water Saver Kit" costs $8.00.
Installation of the "Retro Water Saver Kit" is more complicated than that
of the tank toilet insert devices. It should be installed by a registered
plumber and takes no more than 25 minutes. The device can only be used on
Sloan Royal flush valves made since the company's inception in 1906. Tests
conducted by the manufacturer reveal that the device effectively removes all
wastes and does not impair toilet functioning.
This device would play a major role in a water conservation program in-
volving office buildings. It has been ascertained that approximately 70 per-
cent of toilets in Federal facilities are equipped with Sloan Royal flush
valves. The "Water Saver Kit" is the only device found during this study
which reduces the water flow of these toilets. The GSA is currently testing
the devices in one of the buildings under its operational control.
Water Saving Toilets, Urinals, and Systems
Water saving toilets are primarily of an innovative design which is more
suitable for a reduced volume flush.
Shallow Trap, or Low Flush Toilet
The shallow trap toilet has a redesigned bowl and a noticeably smaller
tank, but is otherwise identical in appearance and function to a conventional
tank toilet. It could be used in place of an existing tank toilet or in new
construction. A shallower trap elevation allows less water to be used to
create the required siphon action for evacuating the bowl. The toilet uses
approximately 3.5 gallons per flush, saving 1.5-2.0 gallons per flush over a
conventional toilet. One study found that flush volumes from the shallow trap
toilet represented a water savings of 24 percent over conventional tank
toilets (Cohen and Wallman, 1974). Some sanitary engineers have speculated
about an increased incidence of clogging in sewer laterals due to these toi-
lets, but studies have shown that the solids transporting capacity of sewers
would not be substantially changed until the flush was reduced to two gallons
per flush or less (Blum, 1977).
Automatic Flush Valve Water Closets
Flush valve toilets, or flushometers, operate directly from a water supply
37
-------
line and do not require a tank. Flushometers are either of a piston-type or
diaphragm-type and use approximately 3.5-4.0 gallons per flush. Piston-type
flushometers can be adjusted down to a minimum water level. These toilets
are usually installed in office buildings, hotels, commercial facilities, and
apartment buildings. Most Federal facilities are currently equipped with
flushometers.
Dual Cycle Water Closets
A dual cycle toilet, manufactured originally in England and now being
developed in the U.S., operates with two separate flush cycles, one for liq-
uid wastes and one for solid wastes. The liquid waste cycle uses 1.25 gallons
per flush, while the solid waste cycle uses 2.50 gallons per flush. Tests in
low-income flats in Britain revealed that use of the toilet produced a 27 per-
cent water savings over the normal amount of water used (2 Imperial gallons
per flush) (Bailey, et al., 1969).
Water-Saving Urinals
The Kohler Company has designed a siphon jet water saving urinal which
flushes with approximately 1 gallon of water when installed with specific
flush valves. This is a water savings of 50-75 percent over conventional
urinals which flush with 2-4 gallons of water. The urinal resembles conven-
tional urinals but has modified flushing characteristics. Wash-out type
urinals also use between 1 and 1.5 gallons per flush, but are not considered
as sanitary as the siphon jet type. The water saving siphon jet urinal costs
approximately $155.00 plus $50.00 for the flush valves. A conventional urinal
(bowl plus flush valve) costs between $150.00 and $180.00. These urinals
would be a major water saver in Federal facilites and could be installed when
replacement of existing urinals is necessary.
Specialty Toilet Systems
Vacuum Flush Toilets
Vacuum flush systems transport sewage by vacuum, eliminating most of the
water used in toilet flushing. A vacuum pump transfers the wastes in small
diameter pipes from the toilet into a hold tank, from which they are then fed
into the sewer. The system uses only 10 percent of the water of a conventional
tank toilet (Sharpe, undated).
These systems have been recommended for use in hotels or large housing
developments where many toilets can be connected to one central vacuum net-
work. They have been successfully used in these kinds of facilities in Europe.
The effects of vacuum systems on sewage treatment plants have not yet been
determined. The Electrolux Company of Sweden has developed a vacuum system
which has been installed in a 273-home community, in passenger railway cars
of the Swedish State Railway, and in a camping site with 83 toilets (Bailey,
et al. , 1969).
Incinerator Toilet
This system provides a sanitary, waterless method of destroying human
38
-------
wastes. A non-toxic, clean, clear, and odorless oil transports the wastes
into a holding tank, where the oil is separated from the wastes, chlorinated,
filtered, and returned to the toilet (Reid, 1976). It consists of a bowl with
a combustion chamber below. A liner absorbs the liquid wastes. Incineration
usually takes between 30 and 40 minutes. During incineration, fumes are
vented to the outside. The residue consists of ashes which must be periodic-
ally removed. The source of power of the incinerator toilet is either elec-
tricity or gas.
Swedish authorities have reported that some nuisance is caused by the
odor of the smoke produced during incineration (Reid, 1976). The toilets are
not allowed in homes less than 640 feet apart. Ashes must be cleaned from the
unit approximately once a week. Results have shown that some systems have a
limited capacity to absorb repeated loads. Fuel costs may prohibit the every-
day use of these systems, since operating costs per visit can be between 4 and
8 cents, (Swedish). Their use is recommended in second-home communities used
only on weekends.
Wastewater Recycling Systems
This system is designed to collect waste wash water from sinks and laun-
dry facilities and to use it for toilet flushing. The EPA designed and tested
such a system for households (Cohen and Wallman, 1974). The wastewater was
piped from sinks and showers and collected in a storage tank. It was then
disinfected, filtered, pressurized, and finally pumped to the toilets. The
water usually used for toilet flushing was saved. One study estimated a net
savings of 100 gpd for a family of four through the use of this system (Sharpe,
undated). No studies have tested the feasibility of such a system on as large
scale as would be warranted in big Federal office buildings.
Tests have shown no impairment of toilet operation due to the use of the
disinfected wastewater (Reid, 1976). The system provides an adequate supply
of water, but does require some maintenance. Bacterial growth is inhibited
by the chlorination. Periodic cleaning of the toilet bowl has been found
necessary for removal of stains produced by residual suspended matter in the
water. Some users have found the system objectionable and disapproved of the
water's appearance. In a. recent public opinion survey, only five percent of
a population sample in California opposed the reuse of wastewater for toilet
flushing. Recycled wash water can also be used for lawn watering. In an EPA
test, no significant adverse or beneficial effects were found on lawn growth
or appearance during a lawn-watering test period or during the following grow-
ing season (Cohen and Wallman, 1974). The possibility of long-term sodium
buildup was noted, however. The system also presents a possible health hazard
due to greater accessibility to the recycled wastewater. This can be amelio-
rated by disinfecting the water or by a suitable underground discharge system.
Although this system would save a considerable amount of water that is now
used by the Government on its lawns, parks, and cemeteries, further study is
needed to evaluate its large-scale feasibility.
The reuse of gray water for each individual household creates a most dif-
ficult maintenance problem. Water reuse has great potential, but it is
probably more appropriate when done on a community basis rather than building
by building or house by house.
39
-------
Lavatory and Sink Faucet Water Saving Devices
Lavatory and sink faucets are a major water provider in office buildings.
Various devices have been developed which reduce the amount of water flowing
from faucets. Delivery rates made p'ossible with these devices range from
1/2 gpm to 4 gpm (North Marin County Water District, 1977). A conventional
faucet will use between 5-6 gallons per minute of water. New water saving
devices include faucet aerators, faucet flow control devices, spray unitaps,
and spring and time faucets.
Faucet Aerators
Faucet aerators, already common in many buildings, are installed on the
end of faucets. The aerator consists of a fine mesh screen, mounted on the
end of the faucets, which breaks up the water into fine droplets (North Marin
County Water District, 1977). Aerators were designed many years ago to pro-
duce a smooth, splashless, and aesthetically pleasing stream of water. By
mixing air with the water, they reduce water flow without making the stream
appear weak. Although the rate of flow with aerators depends upon the water
pressure, some tests have shown aerators to reduce the water flow by approxi-
mately 25 percent (Reid, 1976). Two aerators cost approximately $3.00.
Studies have shown that the aerated stream helps to remove objectionable
tastes and odors and is more satisfying to the user (Bailey, et al., 1969).
Some maintenance, particularly on hard water supplies, is required to remove
accumulated mineral deposits. The devices are easy to install in existing
faucets. Several manufacturers furnish aerators as standard equipment on
their models.
Faucet Flow Controls
A faucet flow control is a device which is either incorporated into the
faucet or is added "in-line," upstream of the faucet (North Marin County Wa-
ter District, 1977).
Flow control faucets resemble conventional faucets, but they are equip-
ped with an orifice which delivers a constant flow rate regardless of water
pressure (North Marin County Water District, 1977). The faucets cost approx-
imately 10 percent more than conventional faucets. The faucets use between
.5 and 2.5 gallons per minute. The latter figure represents the rate most
often used.
Faucet flow control inserts are devices placed ahead of the faucet. They
are either pipe fittings which screw onto the faucet lead-in pipe or orifice
inserts which are placed into the pipe (North Marin County Water District,
1977). The devices cost between $.70 and $6.00.
It should be noted that significant savings can also be realized in
energy and reduced heating costs with these devices. It has been estimated
that in the home, approximately 50-75 percent of the water saved would be
heated water (North Marin County Water District, 1977). A significant amount
of hot water would also be saved in office buildings.
40
-------
Spray Mixing Faucets
Spray unitaps generally use between 0.5 and 2 gallons of water per min-
ute, (gpm) an approximate 50 percent reduction over conventional faucets.
They produce a fine, wide aesthetically pleasing spray, and are often de-
scribed as "hand showers." The control knob operates from "off" through the
complete range of temperatures from hot to cold. Full flow is produced with-
in a few degrees of turn. The flow is constant regardless of pressure (Field,
1973).
The 80-story Standard Oil building in Chicago was equipped in 1973 with
spray taps set to deliver 0.5 gallons of water per minute (Glaum and Anderson,
1974). This flow rate resulted in a yearly savings of approximately three
million gallons of water. Projected building operating costs were reduced.
Major reductions would also be realized in the building's wastewater loads.
It has been found that users take less time washing their hands with the
spray unitap. With an effective sprayhead design, a minimum water flow rate
of 3-5 pints per minute has been deemed satisfactory (Field, 1973). The study
cites a test conducted in a men's washroom where water use was reduced from
an average of 19,000 gallons of water in a seven-month period to 1,800 gallons
in the same period the following year after the installation of spray taps.
Spring and Time Faucets
Spring and time faucets contain a mechanism which automatically cuts off
the water supply after a designated amount of time. These are especially use-
ful in preventing waste in large public restrooms, although users often find
them to be an inconvenience. The faucets must be held to keep the water
flowing. When released, they spring back to the closed position, stopping
the flow. Users are prevented from leaving the faucets on, and are thus dis-
couraged from using too much water. Metered, self-closing faucets, which
close automatically after a few seconds, cost approximately $31.00. A slower
self-closing faucet, which can be adjusted to shut off after a certain amount
of time is also available.
Insulation of Hot Water Lines
Hot water pipe insulation is said to reduce the wait between the time
the tap is turned on and the time the hot water arrives. One study has made
a rough estimate of a water savings of 2 gpcd (gallons per capita per day).
The energy savings aspect is also thought to be important (North Marin County
Water District, 1977).
Shower Flow Controls
Although showers make up a small percentage of Federal facility water
use, except on military bases, water saving devices that can be installed in
shower heads will be briefly reviewed. Shower flow controls come either as
part of a shower head assembly or as a device which is fitted in the flow
line behind the shower head. Plastic inserts are also available. Shower
flow controls reduce water use by 50-75 percent over a conventional shower
which uses approximately 5-15 gpm.
41
-------
Flow Control Shower Heads
A new water saving shower head replaces an existing shower head and re-
duces the water flow 2.5-3.5 gpm. The device is similar to a conventional
shower head, but is fitted with an integral flow limiting orifice which gives
a constant flow rate regardless of pressure. A flow control shower head costs
approximately $15.00.
A Pennsylvania State University project reported highly significant re-
ductions in total water and energy use as a result of its shower flow reduc-
tion program. Used in the project were flow control shower heads and
thermostatic mixing valves. (See section on mixing valve.) The study recom-
mended installing shower control devices on all Pennsylvania State University
dormitories (Sharpe and Fletcher, 1977). In a test involving dormitory and
gym facilities at Gettysburg College, total yearly water consumption after
the installation of flow control shower heads dropped from 22,893,750 gallons
to 15,552,000 gallons, a decline of 32 percent. Estimated first year savings
were $13,500. The cost of buying and installing the devices was $5,000
(Sharpe and Fletcher, 1974).
External Shower Flow Control Devices
These devices, similar to flow controls for faucets, are retrofit devices
which are placed ahead of the shower head and reduce the water flow while al-
lowing sufficient water pressure for the shower head. They are either pipe-
fittings which screw onto the shower lead-in pipe or orifice inserts which
are positioned in the lead-in pipe (North Marin County Water District, 1977).
Flow is usually limited to 3.0 gpm. Shower flow reduction devices vary in
price, depending on their design and materials from $.90 to $5.00.
The Marin County study estimated the following savings with shower flow
controls, given certain assumptions (North Marin County Water District, 1977):
Shower flow control rate - 3 gpm
Average shower length - 5 minutes
Shower frequency - 1 every other day
Flow rate without restriction - 6 gpm
Per capita savings - 7.5 gpcd
As with the faucet controls, significant savings also occur in energy
and in reduced heating costs.
Thermostatic Mixing Valve
The thermostatic mixing valve is a shower control handle and valve which
mixes hot and cold water to constant temperatures. It consists of a bimetalic
coil which inaintans the selected temperature level, even at different pres-
sures (North Marin County Water District, 1977). Water is not wasted while
its temperature is being adjusted and sudden temperature changes which might
scald the bather are prevented. One study estimated water savings to be
2 gpcd (Blum, 1977) a 20 percent, reduction over a conventional shower. The
device must be installed by a plumber, and is considerably more expensive
than a conventional shower handle (North Marin County Water District, 1977).
-------
Shower Cut-Off Valve
This device is an on/off retrofit valve fitting which is installed ahead
of the shower head on the lead-in pipe. It allows the bather to turn the
flow on and off without readjusting-the temperature setting and wasting water.
Shower cut-off valves cost approximately $2.00 and can be adapted to existing
shower heads (North Marin County Water District, 1977). The only limitation
of this device is that it is dependent on the action of the user to cut the
water off while lathering.
Other Flow Reducing Alternatives
Air Conditioner Controls
Air conditioning units are a major water user in large buildings. In
most cases, these units are closed systems equipped with recycling systems.
A further refinement can be effected by automatically controlling the blow-
down or bleed from a recirculated cooling system. A conductivity meter may
be used to position the bleed control valve. In this way, the bleed will
vary with the amount of evaporation and drift. The amount of water and con-
trol chemicals wasted will be reduced.
Pressure Reducing Valves
A number of manufacturers are making pressure reducing valves (PRV's)
for use in both homes and larger buildings where pressure at the tap is higher
than 80 pounds per square inch (psi). Pressure of an entire zone or of
individual homes can be regulated. This device automatically adjusts the
incoming pressure to approximately 50 psi. Since the flow rate through an
orifice is proportional to the square root of the pressure, lowering the pres-
sure reduces the flow and yields water savings (North Marin County Water
District, 1977).
Water savings with PRV's can vary dramatically. In tests conducted by
the WSSC, it was found that the use of PRV's set at 50 psi resulted in a
37 percent savings for the month of December over water use the same month of
the previous year (WSSC Cabin John Report. 1973). (The PRV's were used in
combination with toilet insert devices.) Pressure reducing valves cost
approximately $65.00 including installation fee, depending on the size of the
valve.
Maintenance of PRV's involves cleaning the strainer once a year and
checking the pressure every five years. Before installation it is often nec-
essary to replace worn washers. The existing washers often become contoured
to the existing valve opening and therefore do not let the water flow through
at a reasonable rate at the lower pressure. Clogged orifices also have to be
opened to allow an unrestricted flow (WSSC Cabin John Report, 1973). The
principal water saving applications for PRV's would be in the shower, lava-
tory and kitchen sinks, and to reduce plumbing or service line leaks (Blum,
1977).
Pipe Crimping Tool
A device which restricts the flow of water from pipes in office buildings,
43
-------
apartments, and motels has been developed by a company in Ohio. The device
pinches 1/2 inch or 3/4 inch copper piping leading to a faucet or shower and
is used in conjunction with a rate-of-flow meter so that the restriction is
conducted in a controlled situation. Significant water savings have been
achieved in a fifteen-story office Building in Sacramento. The tool is still
in the developmental stage, and is not yet available to the public. However,
another Ohio company has a similar tool on the market and will probably work
with the other company to see a package of the crimping tool and flow meter.
There is generally a shutoff valve ahead of a faucet or shower which can
be partially closed to introduce a pressure loss and restrict flow. The
handwheel may be removed during times of emergency. After an emergency
passes, the valve may be reopened. This option is not available if the pipe
is crimped.
44
-------
References
Bailey, J. R., Benoit, Richard J., James M. Rob, John L. Dodson, and Harold
Wallman. 1969. A Study of Flow Reduction and Treatment of Waste Water
from Households. Water Pollution,Control Research Series 11050FKE. Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Bailey, J., and H. Wallman. 1971. Flow Reduction of Waste from Households.
Water and Sewage Works. March.
Blum, Robert G. 1977. Water Conservation Strategy for the Orange Water and
Sewer Authority (OWASA) Service Area, Chapel Hill - Carrboro, North Caro-
lina. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, School of Public Health.
Unpublished master's thesis.
Cohen, Sheldon, and Harold Wallman. 1974. Demonstration of Waste Flow Re-
duction From Households. General Dynamics Corporation. National Environ-
mental Research Center. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Howe, Charles W., Clifford S. Russell, Robert A. Young, and William J. Vaughan.
1971. Future Water Demands - The Impacts of Technological Changing Market
Conditions on the Water Use Patterns of Selected Sectors of the United
States Economy; 1970-1990. Resources for the Future in the National Water
Commission.
Field, A. A. 1973. Spray Taps - A Means of Energy and Water Conservation.
Heating and Ventilating. September.
Flamm, Lois E. and Swiki A. Anderson. 1974. The User-Manipulated Water
Fixture: A New Target for Water Conservation. Mechanical Engineering. De-
cember .
North Marin County Water District. 1977. North Marin's Little Compendium of
Water Saving Ideas. March.
Reid, George W. 1976. An Exploratory Study of Possible Energy Savings as a
Result of Water Conservation Practices. Office of Water Resources Research
and Technology Project A-061-OKLA. University of Oklahoma.
Sharpe, William. Undated. Water Conservation and Wasteflow Reduction in the
Home. Institute for Research on Land and Water Resources. Special Circu-
lar 184. Pennsylvania State University.
Sharpe, W. D. and P. W. Fletcher. 1977. The Impact of Water Saving Device
Installation Programs on Resource Conservation. Institute for Research on
Land and Water Resources. Research Publication 98. Pennsylvania State
University.
U.S. House of Representatives Committee on the District of Columbia. 1976.
Hearings and Markup on the State of the Potomac River, 1976, as to Water
Supply and Water Pollution. Serial No. 94.20.
Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission. 1973. Cabin John Drainage Basin
Water-Saving Customer Education and Appliance Test Program.
45
-------
Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission. Water Conservation/Waste
Water Reduction Customer Education and Behavioral Change Program - 1973-
1974 Bottle Kit Project.
46
-------
VII. PRICING AS A MEANS OF REDUCING
FEDERAL WATER CONSUMPTION
One recent trend in water utilities management is the increasing atten-
tion given to manipulation of water demands through pricing policies. The
relationships between prices and rates of water use have not been clearly
established. However, a number of water purveyors in the United States are
considering various pricing policies aimed at cutting water use (Department
of Water Resources, California, 1976). The section examines present prices
and pricing structures in the study area as well as potential impacts of price
policies on Federal water use.
Water and wastewater pricing structures for the Washington Metropolitan
region can be divided into three distinct types. The first and simplest is
a uniform commodity charge under which a user pays the same amount per unit
of water (or wastewater) regardless of total amount used. This system is
used in the District of Columbia and Arlington County. A second charge type
incorporates a minimum charge per billing period or a service charge per
connection or both in addition to the commodity charge. This system is used
by Virginia American Water Company (Alexandria and Dale City), Fairfax County,
Falls Church, and the City of Fairfax. This charge type has the effect of
lowering unit costs of water consumption at higher levels. A third type, the
block rate, assigns different unit costs at different consumption levels.
Declining block rates, where large users are charged lower unit costs for
larger amounts are fairly common for both water and electric utilities nation-
wide. This type of structure was used until several years ago in Fairfax
County. The WSSC adopted, effective January 1, 1978, an increasing block
rate schedule. This new schedule, which charges small users as little as
36 cents per 1,000 gallons and large users as much as $1.05, was instituted
as a means of conserving water. Preliminary indications are that at least
some commercial water users are planning to install water conservation devices
as a direct result of this new rate structure and WSSC believes that house-
holders will also be motivated to conserve water. Some critics, including
some members of the Prince Georges County Council, have objected to the new
rates, saying that they are unfair to large families and employers who use
large amounts of water (Washington Post, November 17, 1977).
One other type of water charge, the summer surcharge or peak-use charge
is also in effect in the Metropolitan area. Fairfax County Water Authority
(FCWA) customers pay an additional $2.00 per 1,000 gallons for any water
above 130 percent of the average winter consumption. A similar summer sur-
charge was in effect for the WSSC service area but has been replaced by the
increasing block rates. Summer surcharges tend to bring about reductions in
usage during peak demand periods and are thus considered by many to be a
water conservation measure.
Charges for water and sewage service at various usage levels are given
in Table 12. Combined water and wastewater prices in the region range from
47
-------
J3
03
H
u
z
0
M
H
i!
cn
z
o
CJ
cn
p
o
H
Si
^J
^
H
WJ
U
PS
CJ
PS
w
EH
^
is
w
H
cn
3
Q
2
"^
pi
a
H
"^
3
2
05
U
H
O*
Combined
co
03
i-t
_j
r^n
O
M
CO
an
£?
CO
Si
CJ
j-i
01
4J
03
5
0)
iJ
CO
oj
3
co
J-i
rH
rH
a
co
0)
00
oj
J3
^4
CU
^J
CO
3
M 0
flS O
3 m
cr
H
03
00
O
o m
i
CM
r*l
O
o
o
J-4 fH
rH
^3"
CM
M
CO O
3 O
cr m
rH
CM
•-I
•
r-l
03 0
OOO
m
CM
O
O
O
•0
rH m
cn
rH
O
en
o
o
o
J-I rH
o
en
^O
(U
JJ
^
C3 O
3 O
crm
cn
en
cn
•
rH
flj Cl
000
f-H
rH
CO
o
o
o
« o
rH m
cn
-31
o
rH
CM
rH
03
•H
£4
H -0
O C
f"" ^
01 0)
a- in
rH
C
o
50
g
•H
rH cn
u a
o .
rH
O
rH
CM
00
CM
A
^.J
*-< CO
M U
•H as
fn
O
A
rH
rH
rH
en
CM
^
rH
CM
v£3
CM
cn
rH
r-
\^
CM
CM
en
00
00
cn
<"
^3*
cn
00
^o
rH
rH
03
IH
U
W
0)
Cj
&
O
CJ
vO
O
A
rH
rH
rH
CO
en
CM
,_}
CM
CM
-------
a low of $0.81/1,000 gal. for the lowest use category of WSSC to $2.11/1,000
gal. (plus minimum use charge) in the City of Fairfax. Large users of WSSC
water can pay as much as $2.36/1,000 gal. Water users in Washington, D.C.,
pay $1.13 per 1,000 gallons. As can be seen from the table, comparative
water and wastewater costs for the various systems vary with different usage
levels (full information on rates for major water purveyors in the regions is
given in Appendix VII).
Combined water and wastewater charges for 50,000 gallons and 500,000
gallons per quarter are given in the right-hand columns of Table 12. These
would represent usage levels for typical office buildings having approximate-
ly 15 and 150 employees, respectively. For larger buildings, annual costs
would range between a low of $1,816 in Alexandria to a high of $4,720 in the
WSSC service area.
In addition to the variation in prices and price structures within the
study area, there are also widely differing methods of billing the Federal
Government for water service. In Virginia and Maryland, the Federal Govern-
ment is billed directly for water just as any other commercial or private
customer. In some cases, the bills go directly to the GSA or occupying agency
building manager, but the largest number are sent to GSA Region III Public
Building Service. The District of Columbia is unique in that water service
for Federal buildings is included as part of the District's budget request to
Congress. Since the budget request is forwarded prior to the actual use of
water, estimates based on previous usage are compiled in preparing the budget
request. According to the budget presentations for fiscal year 1976, the
amount requested for water and sewer service totalled $7,682,000, including
water service to some defense facilities outside the District such as Andrews
A.F.B. and the Pentagon. In view of this situation many of the region's
building managers never see the water bills for their buildings. Thus the
effects of price increases on the policy of many local building managers
would probably be minimal.
An extensive review of the literature on manipulating water demands
through pricing policy has been presented by M. H. and E. N. Chiogioji (1973).
While some researchers contend that higher water prices bring about only
short-term reductions in consumption, the majority feel that pricing can be
an effective tool in the management of water demands.
Three methods have been used to quantitatively evaluate effects of
prices on water consumption patterns. Comparisons of consumption before and
after price increases on case by case bases have indicated lower consumption
or a lower rate of increase in consumption in most instances (Gottlieb, 1973;
American Water Works Association, 1973). Howe and Lineweaver performed re-
gression analysis on residential water use, both household and outdoor. They
found that the quantity of household water used in areas having water meters
and public sewers is a function of property value (a surrogate for income)
and water price, with property value having the greater explanatory power of
the two. For outdoor uses, similar results were found. Water prices affect-
ed outdoor consumption (irrigation) much more than indoor household consump-
tion (Howe and Linaweaver, 1967).
The studies cited above are specifically for residential use. None of
49
-------
the studies of the effect of water prices on usage deal with the question of
office building usage, which accounts for a large share of the water used by
the Federal Government in the Washington Metropolitan area. The remainder of
this section deals with the anticipated effects of price increases on Federal
water use patterns.
Given the lack of empirical analysis on the responsivaness of Federal
water use to price changes, it is still possible to develop some reasonable
assumptions. Since Federal employees do not personally pay the bills for
water they use on the job, pricing alone could be expected to provide little
or no incentive for conservation to most Federal employees. Furthermore, as
discussed earlier, those building managers who do not see the bills would be
unresponsive. On the other hand, management decisions which could affect
water use, such as decisions to install water conserving fixtures, might be
responsive to price changes. GSA has indicated that such decisions are based
on cost/benefit analysis (H.R., 1976). Thus higher prices could encourage
installation of water conserving fixtures or, perhaps, employee education
programs.
In fact, price increases are not necessary to effect such decisions. Con-
gress has in the past considered legislation requiring such fixtures wherever
practical. It would also be possible for the Executive office to issue a
directive mandating such actions. In addition, the agencies with management
responsibility over Federal facilities, that is GSA, the Defense Department,
and others could probably change their policies without such specific mandates.
Executive order 11752 dated December 19, 1973, supports measures which control
pollution at Federal facilities and controlling water use is part of the prob-
lem. This support is tempered by the fact that the principle of Federal
supremacy must be maintained.
50
-------
References
American Water Works Association. 1973. American Water Works Association
Journal, Vol. 65. May.
Blum, Robert G. 1977. Water Conservation Strategy for the Orange Water and
Sewer Authority (OWASA) Service Area, Chapel Hill - Carrboro, North Caro-
lina. University of North Carolina Department of Environmental Sciences
and Engineering, School of Public Health, Chapel Hill, NC. Unpublished
master's thesis.
Chiogioji, M. H., and E. N. Chiogioji. 1973. Evaluation of the Use of Pric-
ing as a Tool for Conserving Water. Water Resources Research Center,
Washington Technical Institute, Washington DC.
Gottlieb, Manual. 1963. Urban Domestic Demand for Water A Kansas Case Study.
Land Economics. Vol. 39. May.
Howe, C. W., and F. P. Linaweaver, Jr. 1967. The Impact of Price on Resi-
dential Water Demand and Its Relation to System Design and Price Structure.
Water Resource Research. Vol. 3.
U.S. House of Representatives. 1976. Potomac River. Hearings and Markup
before the Subcommittee on Bicentennial Affairs, the Environment, and the
International Community and the Committee on the District of Columbia, H.R.
15434. Washington, DC.
51
-------
VIII. MANAGEMENT
Good management of water is based on three conditions: the degree of
control over the resource; the incentive to control the resource; and the
available data on which to base decisions. Ideally, decisions are in the
form of a program to accomplish the desired goal. Most studies of water con-
servation have focused on the management of water in the home where these
three conditions are sharply defined. The homeowner receives a monthly or
quarterly invoice for service and based on his interpretation of this infor-
mation, he has the control to make any changes he deems necessary to change
the use pattern. However, in the Federal Government, only a few individuals
are in this position; the quality of their management decisions and the
depth of their interest is directly related to the same factors of control,
incentive, and data that influence the homeowner's decisions. Therefore, in
order to assess the Government's potential for water conservation, it is
essential to understand the relative exposure of facility managers to these
three conditions.
As these points are examined in detail, it must be kept in mind that
approximately 60 percent of the space occupied by the Federal Government is
owned and the rest is leased. This information is based on data from the
NCPC and the GSA.
Data
The foundation and essential element of any program is an accurate and
complete data base. In the case of water this base can be divided into two
components: information on the gross amount used by a facility, as supplied
by the water purveyor; and detailed information on the use of water within
the confines of the facility, information that must be developed by the
facility manager. Without this information realistic goals cannot be set and
the achievement of such goals cannot be prescribed.
Unfortunately, in the study area the data base is incomplete, inadequate,
inaccurate, and deceptive.
Consumption
The Federal establishment does not receive any data on leased facilities.
Most of its leases carry a provision that the owner pay all utilities. WAPORA,
Inc., tried to obtain information about leased facilities but could not for
two reasons. First, it was difficult to determine in what instances a build-
ing was fully leased or partially leased. This information was not available
from NCPC and would require a building by building review of the record to
determine the extent of each lease. Second, concern over the Privacy Act is
a fundamental barrier. In Arlington, a jurisdiction where there is a signif-
icant amount of leased property, the representative for the County stated
that there is real sensitivity over the release of information on privately
52
-------
owned property. This barrier is reinforced by the fact that the records kept
by water purveyors do not cite tenants by name or cite the amount of space
occupied.
For owned facilities there is a data base but there is no uniformity in
the manner in which it is supplied. In the suburban areas, the water pur-
veyors provide the facility manager with a monthly or quarterly invoice. The
facility managers have some gauge of performance and a base point from which
to plan. If a manager is instructed to reduce consumption of water 10 per-
cent, he knows how many gallons that is and can make any necessary adjust-
ments. Later he can make a judgment of the success of his efforts.
In the District, water bills are handled differently. Water consumption
by Federal agencies either is estimated or meters are read for a certain time
period. This information is then placed in the District's annual request for
funds from Congress. This information is not sent to the facility managers
and is not provided to the various Federal agencies. Consequently, the fa-
cility managers do not know how much water is used annually, seasonally, or
daily.
This arrangement is a carry-over from the days when the Washington Aque-
duct Commission of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers was responsible for the
water distribution sytem in the District. With the advent of home rule, this
responsibility was accrued to the District government but the basic method
of funding the water supply was retained.
The only data now available from the District is based on a period of
May - June 1976 through September - October 1977. Even these figures are not
all actual consumption figures. Estimates were made where broken meters were
found and there is difficulty in reconciling the addresses supplied by GSA
and NCPC with the locations indicated on the District report.
For the five year period prior to May - June 1976, the data submitted to
Congress was apparently based on estimates.
The salient point is that in the District if a facility manager were
instructed to reduce consumption 10 percent for either a curtailment program
or a long-term conservation program, he would not know how many gallons that
represented and he could not evaluate any actions he might take. There is
nothing to base action on.
Use
In leased facilities, there is no information on the manner of water use.
The Federal Government has no data on the ways in which water is used or in
what quantities.
In owned facilities, facility managers generally know how water is being
used but there is no clear definition of the various uses.
The GSA has requested each facility manager to inventory all water using
devices and systems in the facilities for which each is responsible. This
has been done in response to the Guide Water Supply Emergency Implementation
Plan: Metropolitan Washington Area. However, there is no indication that the
53
-------
consumption of each device or use has been determined. Government Printing
Office and Bureau of Printing and Engraving are two of several .agencies which
have initiated efforts to evaluate and inventory uses.
Special use facilities such as"military bases or multi-building facili-
ties present a significant problem in developing a data base. Each post has
a meter at the service point but the water is not metered internally. Man-
agers of these facilities generally try to estimate how water is used.
Control
Leased
The GSA is responsible for obtaining leased space for various agencies,
for monitoring the contractual arrangements, and for negotiating the condi-
tions of the lease based on the needs of the agency to be served. However,
once the lease is signed, the GSA does not manage the property and it cannot
directly control or influence the use of water. Therefore, this portion of
the Federal work force cannot be factored in when making projections on the
reduction of wastewater flows based on the total Federal establishment.
Each lease is a unique contract reflecting the needs of the agency to
be served, budgetary constraints at the time the lease was negotiated, and
the attitudes of the owner. All of these factors can cause variations from
the standard method of obtaining a lease. Although there are exceptions to
every rule, there is an overall policy that can be outlined and that serves
as a basis for discussion. This general policy was outlined by representa-
tives of Region III, GSA, and the central office.
The owner's control of the facilities includes providing such basic
services as utilities. The owner, who must maintain the physical plant,
retains the right to make changes and adjustments; however, the leases do
require the owner to be in compliance with local codes.
The leases do not allow the GSA to make changes in building systems.
Such changes can be negotiated at the time the lease is being obtained, but
the basic system cannot be unilaterally altered by the Federal establishment
without consent of the owner and payment of the cost by the Federal
Government.
The Economy Act, U.S. Code 2782, discourages the expenditure of Federal
funds on privately owned property. A representative of GSA stated that
although the Economy Act limited the amount of money that could be spent
for modifications, improvements, and maintenance it does not prohibit
such expenditures. The Act permits the expenditure of 25% of the amount
of the first year's lease as the amount that can be spent over the life of
the project. Under certain conditions, variances can be granted.
An interview with a member of the property management firm of Smith
Management Company confirmed this information. This person indicated that
the management firm would make any modifications desired by the Federal
Government, but that it was the obligation of the Government to pay for
them.
54
-------
Owned
There is no question that the Federal establishment has the necessary
control to implement programs and to install water saving fixtures and de-
vices in owned facilities once a policy decision is made to conserve water.
For the GSA, this control is tempered by the tenant/landlord relation-
ship. GSA is, in essence, the official landlord for approximately 50 percent
of Federal property. Most of this is office space to house the administrative
staffs of a wide variety of Federal agencies and each staff has its own feel-
ings of what its needs are and what services should be supplied by the GSA.
This situation makes unilateral changes in programs difficult. Although GSA
has the authority to make such changes, it does so more slowly than is pos-
sible in situations where the Federal agency services its own needs.
The other 50 percent of Federally owned space is managed by such agen-
cies as Department of Defense (DOD), National Institutes of Health, Smith-
sonian Institution, St. Elizabeth's Hospital, National Park Service, Govern-
ment Printing Office, and the U.S. Postal Service. Most of this space can
be termed special use — hospitals, military posts, and industrial space.
Much of this special use space is managed to serve public needs for recreation
and health. It should be noted that in all cases the number of employees has
no bearing on the number of people served by the facility. For instance,
facilities of the Smithsonian Institution may have traffic of 25,000 people
per day.
The degree of control that can be exercised is influenced by the annual
budget for operations and maintenance. This emerged most clearly in an inter-
view with representatives of GSA but was established with other agencies as
well. At one time, GSA carried out an active program of inspecting fixtures
and devices on a weekly -basis and performed the necessary repairs as problems
were found. Under new priorities this program has been abandoned and the
GSA now has a passive program of response to the reports of leaks and breaks
submitted by employees of the tenant.
Incentive
Leased
There is no real incentive for Federal workers or Federal agencies to
initiate water conservation programs in leased facilities, as the private owner
in most cases pays the bills and has control over water use. The owner's in-
centive is to control the cost of water so that these costs do not increase
beyond what was provided for in the leasing arrangement. However, because
the leases are opened every three years, the owner can request additional com-
pensation for increased utility costs as part of the negotiations.
The Federal Government's incentive is to hold the line on rental costs
and moderation of increased water cost would be useful in this effort.
55
-------
Owned
In suburban areas, the facility managers are responsible for budgets and
the cost of water comes out of this budget. These budgets are watched very
closely, as attested to by the Vice-President of the Virginia-American Water
Company who gave both good and bad examples of water management. His first
example was an apartment building in which occupany dropped 16 percent while
water consumption increased 10 percent. He attributed the increase to a lack
of good management because the building was in receivership; no one was in
charge, therefore there was no incentive to manage the resource. The tenants
do not pay the water bill and have little or no interest in the condition of
the water fixtures and devices. He contrasted this with the management of
Cameron Station, a U.S. Army installation, where the manager was on the tele-
phone at least once a month to discuss the water bill. His observation on
reviewing the record of use was that water was being properly managed at this
installation.
In the District, the attitude of managers can be summed up by an obser-
vation offered by one of them, "I know water is not free but how can I get
excited about something that does not really cost me anything when I have
lots of other problems to deal with?" Another manager commented, "How can I
develop an intelligent approach to water management when I do not know how
much I am using to start with?" Finally, a manager stated, "Right now, I am
putting my money into an energy conservation program, I have a deadline to
meet and I do not have the same problem with water."
Such statements highlight another aspect of the problem of incentive.
All managers interviewed were concerned with the energy conservation program
and meeting the goals that have been set. They see energy as the first pri-
ority given limited funds and resources. There is a mandate on energy in the
form of an Executive order while there is no such order on the use of water.
The Federal Government's commitment to water conservation has not been
clearly defined for the people who must implement and enforce such a program.
Programs
Despite variations in data, control, and incentive, the Federal Govern-
ment is increasingly interested in better water resource management. The
local water shortage during the summer of 1977 and a growing awareness of
conservation in all areas have sparked scattered efforts to develop water
management programs.
The GSA has formed a committee to obtain information on water saving
fixtures and devices. This information will be reviewed and studied to
determine what should be used in GSA operated facilities. The GSA's decisions
will offer a guide to many communities across the U.S. who are also in the
process of selecting water fixtures and devices for public buildings.
Indirect impacts are also under consideration in the organizing of a
water management program. The facilities managed by the GSA range in age
from new to over 100 years old and it is recognized that plumbing systems
may be drastically affected if buildings are completely retrofitted with
water saving fixtures and devices or if pressures are manipulated. There may
56
-------
also be an impact on the waste transport system if flows are drastically re-
duced by a very successful water conservation effort. GSA personnel cited
the situation in San Francisco where a problem of solids deposition developed
during California's drought as a result of sharply reduced flows in the mains.
Although that is probably an extreme situation the solids deposition problem
must be reviewed before initiation of a water conservation program.
Two themes concerning the development of water management program were
expressed by all who had given thought to this subject. First, the consensus
view is that the only way to manage water is through involuntary methods. As
one manager stated, "Simply asking the employees to use less water is of no
value and will not achieve any reductions; the water must be saved without the
employee having to think about it." He was referring specifically to the use
of posters and other educational devices which may increase awareness but it
is the installation of water conservation devices and fixtures or a good
maintenance program that conserves water.
Second, all of the managers cited the introduction of a good program of
inspection and maintenance as the primary action to effectively conserve
water.-
These principles have been demonstrated by programs initiated by the
Government Printing Office. A committee study of the GPO building was con-
ducted during which all uses of water were identified. A program was suc-
cessfully implemented to reduce the use of water — water consumption dropped
from approximately 240 million gallons to approximately 47 million gallons
annually. Original fixtures and devices were replaced with water conserving
fixtures and devices, cooling units were changed from once through cooling
to recirculating systems, quick drying inks were chosen and a regular program
of inspection and maintenance was initiated. This facility is within the
District but the meter is read monthly by the employees of GPO.
The Bureau of Engraving and Printing has initiated a program that in-
cludes the monitoring of every piece of equipment to determine water consump-
tion. From this program improvements in conservation will be made.
In the U.S. Army Military District of Washington, the Director of
Engineering and Housing has initiated monthly meetings to discuss conservation
efforts and goals with his facility managers The meters within the District
are read weekly, and records are kept on water consumption. Only water con-
serving devices and fixtures are stocked in the supply system; a broken or
defective fixture or device is automatically replaced with a more efficient
one. The program includes an educational device: a newsletter to all
employees at local posts. As a result of this effort, and. despite increased
activity on the posts, the actual annual consumption of water has leveled
off after a period of annual increases on the order of 10%.
The National Institutes of Health has initiated a program to study the
impact of water conserving fixtures and devices in rest rooms. This program
was initiated to ensure compliance with their waste release permit
All of the programs studied, although varying in style, have at their
cores an effort to develop information about water consumption and use in
each particular facility. They share an effort toward maximum conservation
results with limited resources and an effort to monitor the results of those
actions.
57
-------
IX. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The contribution from Federal facilities, owned and leased, to wastewa-
ter flows is not as large as the size of the Federal establishment would
suggest. To put this in perspective, a uniform 10 percent reduction in flows
from Federal facilities would result in a reduction of approximately 3.0 mgd
or less than one percent of the total daily flows as estimated by COG. Un-
fortunately, the data base is inadequate for making definitive statements
concerning either the total contribtuion or the potential reductions that
could be achieved through a broad-based conservation program.
Although the estimated potential impact on flows from a conservation
effort can be described as modest, local concern for water resources makes it
incumbent upon the Federal Government to lead development of a water manage-
ment program. In general, managers of Federal facilities are cognizant of
both the need to conserve water and the value of having an organized conser-
vation program. This awareness is apparent in the initiative that several
managers have taken to develop water conservation programs and to have
sufficient data to evaluate the success of their efforts.
In order to strengthen past accomplishments and to avoid future dupli-
cation of efforts, a task force should be formed to give guidance and direc-
tion to the water conservation effort. At a minimum, this committee should
have representatives from the following agencies:
1. National Capital Planning Commission
2. Department of Defense
3. General Services Administration
4. Government Printing Office
5. National Institutes of Health
This list is suggested by the particular experience and expertise each
member could bring to the task force. The NCPC should be the lead agency
and the designated representative of this agency should be named chairman of
the task force. This is suggested because NCPC is responsible for leading
the Federal effort to develop water curtailment plans for implementation
during water supply emergency situations and because there is no apparent
bias concerning the management of facilities. In addition, NCPC's informa-
tion concerning the area and the nature of the Federal establishment would
be invaluable to the task force.
DOD is a major operator of facilities and each of the Services is con-
ducting some study of water conserving devices. In addition, some of the
post managers have implemented water conservation programs.
GSA is the largest manager of space in the study area with particular
experience in managing adminiatrative-type facilities, primarily office
space. This agency has developed a water conservation plan and has formed a
53
-------
committee in the National office to catalogue and evaluate all commercially
available technology related to water conservation.
The GPO is an industrial-type installation and its comprehensive water
management program has resulted in significant savings of water.
The NIH is an area- or post-type facility. A water conservation pro-
gram is being developed there to reduce wastewater flows. In order to achieve
the goals set, a detailed study of all water uses throughout the post is
being conducted.
The task force should be empowered to make recommendations to the Presi-
dent of the United States concerning the management of water by the Federal
Government in the Metropolitan Area of Washington, D.C. The task force would
establish realistic goals, make recommendations on how to achieve those goals,
disseminate information, carry out additional studies, insure development of
an adequate data base, focus available expertise on problem areas, retain
essential support services, evaluate and measure management efforts, and re-
port to the President on the results of their efforts. NCPC should be made
the administrative agency of the~~task force and should be provided with the
necessary funds to carry out this mission.
The task force will not be a useful instrument without some basic changes
in existing policies. Within the District of Columbia, where the largest
block of Federal space is sited, managers of Federal facilities look at water
as a free commodity because there is no charge to their operating budgets for
the use of this resource and they do not receive any data on consumption from
the purveyor.
In order to change this attitude, water use should be made a line item
of all operating budgets and Federal facilities should be billed in the same
manner as any other user of water would be. Someone should be assigned
responsibility for this item and held accountable for the manner and quanti-
ties in which water is used.
Because payment from the water service has been handled through a lump
appropriation from Congress to the District of Columbia, estimates of water
use have been made rather than notations of figures from meter readings;
consequently, in the District of Columbia, the data base is inadequate for
the purpose of developing reliable estimates of the impact of water conserva-
tion efforts on the consumption of water and on the volume of wastewater
released to the wastewater treatment plant.
An adequate data base can be developed only if all meters are read on a
regular basis, monthly or quarterly. All meters must be in good operating
order and all uses of water must be metered. These readings must be sub-
mitted to the individual facility managers in order to provide for effective
management of the water conservation program.
Most of the facility managers have a general knowledge of how water is
used in their facilities but they have no idea nor information on the rela-
tive amounts of water used for each purpose. Cost effective decisions can
not be made without some knowledge of how water is used once it passes the
59
-------
meter: how to get the greatest reduction in wastewater flows over the longest
span of time per dollar invested.
Therefore, in order to achieve,maximum benefit from available resources,
facility managers must inventory all uses of water and should, insofar as
possible, determine the relative amounts used for each purpose.
In spite of the general recognition that water conservation programs are
desirable, some traditional programs for achieving this have been downgraded
over the years. Because of other pressures and demands, routine inspection
and maintenance programs have been either abandoned or deemphasized.
The first step, or perhaps the most important, in establishing a water
management program should be reestablishment of a thorough and continuing
program of inspection and maintenance of water using devices. This should
be supported by an active repair program, fixing leaks immediately and re-
placing broken devices with water conserving devices when necessary. This
program should be clearly identified in each annual request for funds. There
is a general consensus that massive retrofitting of devices and fixtures is
not practical but a program of replacing fixtures and devices with more
efficient water using devices is practical and has been initiated by several
agencies.
The recommendations so far have primarily concerned owned facilities;
the Federal Government has little or no control over the management of water
in leased facilities. However, some control can be exercised at the time a
lease is negotiated or renegotiated.
Therefore, future leases should require the leased facility to be out-
fitted with water conserving devices on a basis similar to that recommended
in the Federal program above. When existing leases are renegotiated, no
increases for increased costs of water should be granted without the demon-
stration that all reasonable good faith efforts have been made by the owner
to conserve the water resource.
In the final analysis, good programs are based on the attitudes of the
people responsible for managing them. Most facility managers believe water
conservation is important but they have limited resources available to ad-
dress all of their problems and they do not now perceive water conservation
as having the same priority as energy conservation. Saving water will save
energy and the two issues should be of equal concern to the facility manager.
It is also axiomatic that good programs are the derivative of policies clearly
defined by the top of the management structure — the chief executive.
Thus, a key step in developing a water conservation program may be the
issuance of an Executive Order similar to the one concerning energy conserva-
tion. An Executive Order would set the tone, establish the necessary priority
and clearly signal the responsible Federal managers, as well as the private
sector, that water conservation is indeed a priority of the Federal govern-
ment and the Nation. Due to the regional and intergovernmental nature of
these findings and recommendations, this report will be implemented through
the Federal Regional Council (Region III).
60
-------
GENERAL BIBLIOGRAPHY
Blackburn, A. M. 1977. Dealing with Drought Towards Management Strategies.
Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin, ICPRB General Publication
77-3, September.
Boland, John J. and Steve H. Hanke. 1976. Water and Wastewater Rate-Making
Policy in the District of Columbia; A Report to the People's Counsel.
September 27.
Brigham, Arthur P. 1975. WSSC Public Education Campaigns to Cut Water Use
(Waste Reduction) Paper No. 8-3a. American Water Works Association Confer-
ence, Minneapolis, Minnesota. June 8.
Building Officials & Code.Administrators International, Inc. 1977 The
BOCA Basic Energy Conservation Code, 1977.
Callegari, R., T. Maynard, and P. Shaw. 1976. Water Conservation Measures
for the New York Metropolitan Area. Northeastern United States Water Supply
Study, Special Studies Branch, U.S. Army Engineer Division, North Atlantic.
January.
Carroll, J. Raymond. 1976. Memo to George M. White, Architect of the Capi-
tol: Testimony on Water Consumption. September 15.
Cousins, R. H. 1977. The Federal Government and Wastewater Treatment in
the NCR. Unpublished report. November 9.
Dedrick, C. T., E. G. Brown Jr., and R. B. Robie. 1976. Water Conservation
in California. State of California, the Resources Agency, Department of
Water Resources. Bulletin No. 198, May 1976, Reprinted, March 1977.
District of Columbia. 1977. D.C. Law 2-21 Water Conservation Act of 1977.
Council of the District of Columbia. October 4.
Ecological Analysts, Inc. 1977. Long Range Demand Reduction Techniques,
excerpt from draft final report on Task 2-C Demand Reduction Technique, for
Bi-County Water Supply Task Force. October.
Fairfax County, Office of Public Affairs. 1973. Water Saving Tips That Can
Save You Money. October.
Fairfax County Water Authority. 1976. Staff Report re: Excess Use Change.
April 21.
General Services Administration, Public Builidng Service. 1976. Quarterly
Report on Assignment and Utilization of GSA Controlled Space in the National
Capital Region. December 31.
61
-------
Guerrini, 0. Gerald. 1977. Water Conservation - A Talk. Paper presented
to: New England Water Works Association. December 15.
Grear, M. H. 1974. Final and Comprehensive Report Washington Suburban Sani-
tary Commission's Water Conservation Wastewater Reduction Customer Education
and Behavioral Change Program. Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission,
November 22.
Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin. 1972. Potomac Potomac
Potomac ... Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin.
Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin. 1977. Potomac Issues.
Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin, No. 2. Fall.
Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin. 1977. Potomac Basin Re-
porter, Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin, Vol. 33, No. 11.
November.
Kokak. 1973. Water Conservation in Photographic Processing. Motion Picture
and Education Markets Division. Rochester, NY. Pamphlet No. S-39. July.
Milne, Murray. 1976. Residential Water Conservation. California Water Re-
sources Center, Report No. 35, University of California, Davis, CA. March.
Metropolitan Washington Board of Trade. 1977. Water Shortage Contingency
Plan. Prepared for Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission. August.
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. 1977. Guide Water Supply
Emergency Implementation Plan. Metropolitan Washington Area, September
15. Draft.
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. 1975. Water Comsumption
Federal Buildings, Parks and Reservations, Fiscal Year 1976.
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. 1977. The Metropolitan
Growth Policy Program and Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments
Impact Assessment: 1980, 1985, 1995, Water Resources Implications of
Growth Forecasts Financed by The Environmental Protection Agency. May.
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. 1973. Report on the Use of
Regional Plumbing Codes to Effect Water Conservation. Financed by the
Department of Housing and Urban Development. June.
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. 1978. Guide Water Supply
Emergency Implementation Plan; Metropolitan Washington Area. Prepared by
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. January 11.
Reilly, R. P. 1976. Staff Paper No. 4, Flow and Waste Reduction Measures,
Areawide Clean Water Planning, Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission.
August.
Schaefer, R. K. Undated. Water Supply and Demands - Economics Applied to
Water Conservation. Office of Research and Development, Environmental
62
-------
Protection Agency.
State of California. 1977. Community Water Management for the Drought and
Beyond: A Handbook for Local Government. Prepared for Resources Consul-
tants in Resource Management for the Office of Emergency Services, the
Governor's Office of Emergency Services. May.
State of California. 1976. Water Conservation in California. Department
of Water Resources, Bulletin No. 198. May.
U.S. House of Representatives. 1976. State of the Potomac River, 1976 Sta-
tus Report on Water Supply and Water Pollution Problems and Programs for
the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Area. Findings and Recommendations of
the Sub-committee of Bicentennial Affairs, the Environment, and the Inter-
national Community of the Committee on the District of Columbia, 94th Con-
gress, Second Session, December 13. Serial No. S-14.
United States Postal Service. 1976. Book I, 20 Year Facility Expansion Plan,
U.S. Postal Service for Washington, D.C.; Montgomery County, Maryland;
Prince Georges County, Maryland; Arlington County, Virginia; Alexandria,
Virginia; Fairfax County, Virginia; Loudoun County, Virginia; and Prince
William County, Virginia. January.
United States Department of the Army, Baltimore District, Corps of Engineers
for (A) Northeastern United States Water Supply Study (B) Department of the
Army, North Atlantic Division, Corps of Engineers. 1973. Potomac River
Basin Water Supply, An Interim Report. Volume No. 1, Volume No. 2. April.
U.S. Department of the Navy. 1977. Addendum to Final Environmental Impact
Statement for the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences,
National Naval Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, on the Proposed USUHS
Interim Wastewater Treatment Facility. January.
U.S. Congress, 95th Congress, 1st Session, H.R. 9361. 1977. A Bill to Es-
tablish Minimum Water Efficiency Standards for Public Buildings and to
Provide for the Procurement and Installation of Efficient Water Supply and
Removal Equipment in Public Buildings. September 28.
Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission. 1976. Water Conservation Fixture
List. September.
Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission. 1976. The Plumbing and Gasfitting
Regulations of the Washington Suburban Sanitary District. Washington Su-
burban Sanitary Commission. April 7.
Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission. 1977. Effective January 1, 1978
WSSC Adopts Conservation-oriented Water/Sewer Rates. Washington Suburban
Sanitary Commission. November.
Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission. 1976. The Wastewater Laundry.
Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission. Rev. May.
Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission. 1977. Water Shortage Contingency
Plan. Prepared for WSSC by the Metropolitan Washington Board of Trade in
63
-------
Cooperation with the Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce and Prince Georges
County Chamber of Commerce. August.
Wong, S. T. 1972. A Model on Municipal Water Demand: A Case Study of North-
eastern Illinois Land Economics. 48, 34-44.
Youngman, W. H. 1975. Keeping the Garden Green, A Water Conservation Hand-
book. Issued as a public service to the customers of the Washington Subur-
ban Sanitary Commission.
Zwick, D. R., and L. Silverman. 1977. Clean Water Action Project. Before
the House Committee on Public Works and Transportation concerning amendments
to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. September 19.
64
-------
Appendix I
Water Use Data
1-1
-------
o p4 ** f PI f>- p- •+ i>- PI 11 pi PI o» in >i>aintnao»«aaoa'.of»-aini>insj'-*a~ir-aapif«}a3'W3>.*f*)f.i'aawr'-in
!3< •Oa-fl»l»»W!|-5;>-a'Ca-* 3"J .3- i-4i-lin-O.3-^3>»»WO P- U1 p» ^ a a B a PI M »» 1^ PI a PI « > <*• 3-
0 "O in M M a- « 0» •* "I 11 fl P4 a > « in r- >0 > .1 a PI
3 a i PI CM >0»aininao»!n-O-4aPir»ooPlr*)a3>?*>3'31'F'JF1f<)a93'3'aafin
as r-3ii-iao.Mo r- in r- -o a a a a PI w ^ r- M a PI in ;>. i— 3-
id a -«in a 3- * a r*i r*j PI * PI * ~4 r- PI -o -o in M PI * n a» 11 M »« n M a -o UT w r- -o i«- r«i a M
H- a -i N w -I a -* n w PI n at in PI M «-o n n « UT
3- P> "43- 3- •< •«
0. Z
cn ui
UUI inaininaaaasnaoinainaaaaaaaaaainaoaainoinoaainaaa'nsnaiflinaaiflaoa
uiU!na3-ria>af^PiP>- •* pia^apis-n^o* r- a PJ "* -o am
x ind>oonn a Pi-oaain- w^pina aa
sn a. # •« PI 3- i o* -o > -o in PI FI m ••o r- sj PI w n n -o 3-
11
ac _;
33. saeaa3aao!naa>3>aa3eaaaaaainaoaoooaoaoaaaaaaac»aooaaas
r- Z rt »H *4 PI PI
tn ui
a UI aaaUlainmminaaaoaaaoaininaaoainoinaaauiQaaaaaaaoaaaaoainaoo
ac u 3* a *•* *c *a cs ^* *o ^^ a p^ rt p) ^r c-i 3* P5 ^^ ^ r^ PS in a pi P? ^i a
["•a. pii^* PJa ps3^ ^ cS apj*o P'i*^ PJ pi 11^4 5* r*a
•jita -< in -o in PI PI PI ft -4 ** ~
Ui
u —
u. z « 3- ** -i -4 ~ " PJ PI ~ PI i-i a PI P-I PI PJ a " PI
U. Ui
3
111 UI
u u
u. a. J"j PI pi i> " pi a in -o o» S sr 3111 PI «•• ui p) 3- -o ii pi PI a PI > PI cs pi PI r- PJ -o ui PI cs PJ in
3 « PI ' »» •*
3
u
>-
F-
M
u
iu
z
z
-^
a
•* c-i n * 'ft -o r- a o a -« PI
- a ^ c-i n a- in sj r» a > a « -i n a- n -o r^ a
MnWj-3'3-3>3>
sosaaaaaaoaaao
aaeasasaaoaooaaaaaaooCaosaoaaas
333E3333333333333a:333333333333a!33333333333333333333
a a
ui.JUi a.xcno.ui
zza
_! 3 3 o- _;
3.0.3.2
cn a_ji->< ui Z -taa _szacn3»>f-— •— > s a
3U K a
a a > ^ x j a LU co r- ui z i—
ui a > e x a.
a u3£Ui«33Q33X 3 U)
«sa >-<£>-a3>-iui at
i— — wx>-
au. _jzaa5 n in *i a» <£ a -« x ~o 3 in >• ui a "» a a
-------
LU
a
* n a o -« •-* r-4 a ss -o * 3
03 as r-i yi r-4 -» « [». r-i a M .
r-i * a P-
in oo .* r-4 a
•< in
»* > sj in sj M ^ r-4 o> sj a» ' '• i •••i-osjsaf
in CM w * -< -i o» -o n s: i i i in -a « a-
»« »* i i i CM « r-4
r-i a a- a« «
-4 n ~ r-4 .*
O •«
« a
30
LU a
ca =
in sj a .* -^
n * a- 1>- in
a .*
11 r-4
»* in .
..
o c-i « -< -o in a a o w a» o r-4 > 3- a r»- a- ^ r- M a r-4 o» = in r-4
r-i ss .* in- ss sj M -i * r«- r- w
-H S3 a ~«ri-3*>CMins3caao
^ CM «-< n •<
ui a
r-a
n o> o in
* i M r- i
*i i lam^r-oir-r-i
-^i i i M n n 11 d* i a CM i
P4 f-t * »« CM -O
aaaininaaminaaaamaaaaaaaaaoa;nainaaaa i
>-* r4M a- in w a -r* OKMS-^JP * ' riasia
CM
r*l *• l l l I I i I I l I l l l I l I l l
1 ««a.. l l i I l I l I | l | I | l | l | |
•* a i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i
3 3.
03 Ui
Ui
U J
u! r
u. ui
3
UI Uj
u u
LU 3.
U. 10
3
> a a a a n a a~ 1s-
t< M -
i a S3 -i r>. a ro a a ON r-i »* i
i r-4 1s- S3 n S3 ^ a r-i -< »< i
1 1 1 1 1 1
i i i
i i i i i i i i i i
1 1 1 1
1 ! 1 t 1 I 1 1 1 1
in a S3 -* r-4 a- S3 ri i i i i
a o 1s- r-i a ss («- a
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 i i 1
1 i 1
1 1 1 1 1
i i
i i
i i i
3
u
U3
C3
-J
•s
3
-------
a
Ui
a
30
iao
en a
a» n if- PI >a
PI ••• PI -< n i
PI
-o 3- 1 o
r- 3-
Ul-I -4
PI o o N
•» M M «•«
----
3- PI a- -o -H 3- Q * 3- M in CM a- in PI *
M »» PI •* f i -* -o M n •*
ON PI -«
e> M PI
CM -o
pj PI
-o
a- 3- -o
o
x
ri
a 3-
n
.
PI PI M ui M ui > 3- a n >o in (•- r~- -o PI r>- a -o * -o i < f* -o ui •* o -o
-o »« * a- PI -o n «•« o o PI -o ui M ea -* r- ui -» o -4 ^- -« M o 33 PI o»
»•« r- M -* ui «o r» M o a r-i i r*- •** ui »* o n r*- a
-« « CM ui M PI 11 * >•
Z
30
PI o o r- 3- PI
n M M T* M
-o
••• * a a- 3- M in PI a- in PI * PI PI •*> in M n a» *
.1 PI -< PI 11 -o w 11 n -o .1 a- o» PI «o -ii
»i > M n
* N «o in r- r» -o PI p» o vj 3- *o ^ -o p- -o ui •» ~ -o o»
o o a PI -a in M ca »* r- ui *•< a PI ^ »* M a a PI i> M
** in ~o F- M a o n -4 r»- -< ui i a PI r^ a
«< "i in M PI .1 3- p-
out
a> PI i o 3- os PI as i
in r* i o .< ao -< -« i
M i r- i
-o -o ui a-
>*ioa3ii i
o o os -« i
PI 03 •» V) M O CO 3-
.*> O P» M
r-
O S>
JUI
u
oo.
H- a
i c-i a a- o i r«- ». ui ui r- a a a PI o a> ui ui ui -o
i pio»of-oMMiOQ»aM«Opiinosa>
n r«- p- -o p-pipip-3iii«ipiPi*< in ^
x 3- a -H 0-4
u J
ui a.
a ut
V W
3. M !
i i i M p- -o M M ^ s3 PI ui in «
•• •* O PI O
«o j
ui ui in ui
-* M -<
! M O PI
P- -« ~* UI
-a M
C X
i-£
a ui
a u*
z :j
3 PI -O a- 3- PI a 31 -O 3" SJ !
n PI a ~ M -H 1-4
M a
a M
M
I t I
I I I
as
M
> P- PI
r-P- n
•Q
i M PI o ** a
» a M 3-
i i i a a in ui in o in ui ui a in ui o m ui ui o ui o
i i i n PI co P- ui ui i PI M M -c 3- sa a- a-11 -3 n
i i i P- P- o PI PI M PI M a- ui w o 3- Hi -t PJ a- *<
PI * ~* o- PI a pi M M a a- ui ui ui P- o -<
M S3 M 3- PI a S3 P- - "13- >-i
Ui
a
u
a
: a -• PI n a- ui ui sj p-
I i-« -4 PI PI PI PI PI PI PI PI PI
a > a -H PI M 3- ui x3 p- a o> o -<. PI M a- ui -o >• a
PI PI 3- 3- a- a> a- a- 3- 31 a- a1 ui ui ui ui ui ui ui ui ui
• a
Q 3
03
3 3
X X
£ £
a o a
>- x x ui
a a a -j c
~ z z a a
_; ui ui z >- ui
t- > ~> Ui UI S
x _i j > zj-
u a ea z 3 a
<£ 2
UI
ui ui
> >
UI z
ui Ui
z>
-J Ui
z
I 3
i a
i a _
: z £ oj
• ui «ui z _j
; a s x m x
I <£ Z3 X £
: U <£3 x uJ
t a ^i a 3 •••
ui
3 a
a z
a aa
z z —a
«9 a «
i z £ a
ui a o 3- a
aaaaaxaaaaaa
_i_;_j_;_!_iJ.ja3O3
333333333333
XXXXXXXXXMMM
££££££££££££
a
> r- !- 3
:t- a a • :
:- MXr-Uii—Ul
a ^-
z a
: i- Z
>»
H- 3
az
Zi-a
: Q a >
a a
z z
a
I2«
>-a a
z 3 a
a z
Z B Z
Z H- > 3
I- Ui _! _! at
x a eu M a
an _j
_ > i-
: S s* ^+ ^ S* f^ s* ff
3 a
a x 3
z 3 ui ui ui z
z a
ui z a z ui
3 > 3 UI Z M >
3 - ^ uiar
33
a
•«
3 a
x.
<£
il -.1 U
i Z '
z a
3 3
. n a- >
3
3 X
X
z
3 3 a
3 -1
aa a -i
Z X _] _!
3 Z >i
a s: - J3 :
x
! 3 »5
. 2 X
t > z a
: x ~ a
> « a <£
ii a »*
a o a u o
PI * jl <£ 3
> > -0 £ jl
Z sea
u x i >
2 3
3 a u. > u. =a
3-1 a UI Z _J 2
fc- o- fl U1 M a z -4 — z
u. ii ~- •> a- PI PJ 3 > a r-i —
-» ii i PI M 3- U 3- UI n P-
^J Ui u
: 3 <£ 3!- > "-
• z z a a a1 PI PI ?l3N»a '23333333 —
1-4
-------
a •
ui
.
o in •« r>- -a M PI »< > sj *•«
.
n r*i re PI in n CM « CM -< -a
p- in S3 .* no PI in
S3 a
ui _]
CD C
ss in -H s
p- o «•> n f-t i-i f-t ~* »j P- PI oa n ft in in
s- as a o -o sj a w a -* p -i a ** a *•> ** -~> P-
CM in PI » o p» »* »* *•« caw 3 > w -* M
M ^ CM ** in « »•« -< as »* ••» o CM
ex a> ss S3 w S3 P4 PI in ;>> si .4 »< o
M a a- PI
CM
in PJ -a e»» a « -a
e>«.'"i
aa M
r» ffl n »«
co
03 n •» »i
o in
o« o o o» 99 o i-< M »<
n in
vi w «-> in n
i ui
as. ^
KOI w-o ^
-ow
-o -< r -J
« -o -<
u J
m a.
a. £
en ui
u ui
m u
a. oa>ooo I oo
SJ »•« P- -« S3 1^3-
•4 P- I
ooooooo3inin3inoininpioooooo3!n3303oooino3inoininpino3inin!n3a>i 33
»» * P- r» ss o a o CM o CM n o •» P-I ri S3 ^ »« *H P- in a- ^osj^a-p-a-pjsjo p» P- p- w -4 i M a
~«p»3iiiPii**piP4pia3Oiniiia>33Pia'a''.n in *•* Pip-OMpi^aoiiia* PS PS e> f* ** i a a1
p- in pi e>> c>» 3 pi > a1 a t> P4 a> r*> PI P- a- a- a a in o» e> in in n 3 a a «•« a «•<•••« p- PI a a- PI
PI o in ss P4 PI a- P4 P4 PJ PI P4 p- o ji iii pj •» -4 « •* a M in a> a M -• M
P4 ,* ,* .4 ,4 M CM .4 PI
in
i "i n a o i
i -4~» PI
n •
I 3 3 O 3 .
• O O P-
a
; 3 3 I 39
ill '
t>> 3 PI I
CM PI
P4 P4
i !ii in in P- in o in iii o a o i-i p- ji m 9 ^ —•
»«.4a!nsjr4-*p-p4-»>s3a>r<-s3-a
-c a r i -» p.
P4 CM I
P4 f-t
CM PJ
S3 a
f-t
• P- P4 M a S3 .
a
CM
SJ P4 f*3 a1 3 ill
a1 PI PI CM a- P4
-4 •-< o« -<
r 111 111 3 il 9 3 ill 3 P4 3 111 PI 111 ul ill > O 3 UI t I
• PI o iii PI ui 1-1 a* 3 P- P- a- 3 sj s3 M ss o m a- PI i
i n p-4 P4 n a- -4 > > PI > a- S3 9 a a- 9 S3 a- •* i
o M iii n iii S3 PI o o 9 •** a- ss -4 cj.
p- a- PI ss a p-4 t*i f-t ** pi P4 pi **
P4 -• P4 -4
IOOP-- M a-o -OP-^ MI
S3 in ar ss a PI -»^ a a* ui o* PI *-» i
^ .* -< M -^ M in
3 111
a. o.
P4 111
a p-
si a
PI
UI UI
u u
M «
u. a.
u. en
a
ui in in 3 -• in in -< 3 3 » in
a a- a p-4 o ej« CM 9 f PI a CM
a- n n PI PI o PI PI 3 a a -4
i ui o PI o m a> CN in iii o ui n 3 m o ui o in iii «4 o ui 3 3 n P- in 3 o o o o in n i in in
>as3ina99orie>>oa>'*>in!ii3tnaie>>s3Opi-»9inpi rt«Ma--< i -^a
ie>»s3Of333»»»«^»> n S3 P-
• a* a* a* *a >n S3 ^a ej^ ^ CM PI PI p* PI *^ r^ *^ pi PJ
ui
a
o
u
M aaaegxesaaasaa 33 33333333033359333033333x93
uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu uu
a
a
iii
a:
a
aMmMatayautmtStStayi'JiStaauiScaSSv^^^SStaatasSM^aaiStAtaZtaSiaaM^Sta
> ui
a: 3
>
r a z z OT z « zzz^zzzzzzi-i-- zuu— uwuuaaaa z M u. c
—
z
a _: -•
<- _'
— — —
a
a -j w
i at
,
Z2• Uiauiz^.cjJ3a. 3 « — z
— ai w _; a, -i r — ~-uu — C3 — i;
1-5
-------
*•• «dw i — ••* *» -^* * « i * -^ i * u * -^* •** v *«•- * « w v « ••" J * i * ww i* i _T :;:*• w J > i * "•» i ~ *•» ' —* w T-I ** ^ w •*•* MI* •••* *• *>^ i J ^^ *^ *•* j
ui a-« •« a- PJ in in a- in n -«M in a « in in o a1 in a PJ « a- a a- a- -o a- a a- M > > PI a- »• a
a a- a- PI -< *•« PJ •» a- in
11
ui j a^a>a-ai>xjpitoa'or>!npittTinaa.i3aooPiiji>a!no>o9»a>in"»sj»*oa(>oar*)>*a'.ap>»'
a Pip-p-in •-"'•iiiT'^u'ja'MPJa a n a PI ea CM a a P-J >MP- ao
PI p- a M P- o» o cj PI PJ -i *• > -^ r-j a a- P- P- r- M a o & o> >o o r-j •* -> in -o M n PJ a
Ui o n ii ' ' t-i •« r-j
tn a
2-a'a'> a'Pir^r-m ^wsn^iiTa'MPia a nap-iapiaa PI O-WP* ao jo
ui a PI P- a « P- > o n PJ r-j »< a> > -i PJ a •> p- P- P- « a o a- > -o a PI ** -4 in -o ro n PI a a- M
H* ® ^** *** ^ **4 w ^^ *o M v** r*^ ^3 M r*^ *••* c*'4 •** o* "*o ^^ r^ i/3 cs *^
3 a J **
_i _j aaaaino>-oaaa>>a-inPipiai>ininPJ>aa'»piap-inpjamr<)a>aa>oni>>>ao>aa-a-opia
^o.^^inapiap-a*^ jno»op» -«flp*-cN!ninPiW'
H-z«4<-><-t<->a -a -«>o PI n rt -o i
o ui •* ••
f-
^cj aao*api*cinNoaai™iPtoma ao^nmp—p— in"CataiiT*^i^inpjo*M^i*a>wa''*5'^p*'O'^'^ P* a PI -o ^ ^ *^ PJ M
H*^ a>Pio*r*jaii'3inaa'^'r*iPMp-i'C pja«H*c*oinp*PJainp*f|ip4^i»*^p-p**o o*in-O"oart-ca'inap*»pj?atMo—4p—
aa. pja>a>ncvia>p4ina a p- in PI -t^or-^-^a-uiM-oo r*) r- »< PJ in -4 m « n « o PI r-i M n^a*
uia.-^ Mt^*"4p*» p*3
a. z —
a LU
UUl aininaiilaaooeananaaainaaaoaaaonaooaaaaainaaaao/jaulaaaaaa
LU u p-aaa-M^anp- •on-o P- a1 ^--o^r-ao" o^ PI a -c OM PJ Pia-Pi
a. o «—-oo e CM -o •« 11 r>i P-w
a i M « PJ M
ae _;
3 i. aaoaaaooaaaa>aaaaaPJaa3>oaaaaao>oaaaaaooaaoP*>^oaaaoa>opja
i— Z « CM n ii *+
a ut
a uJ uioiilP»ooooaaaaoaainoooo!>-ooinoaooljioooooaainii'}osi'3'jH)iilinaaiiloii')« « -o a a « -o a
3 o p» in a- in in a in > it n •* in M a1 a> P- PI n •-< P- u- * n -« PI M
*—o. in^^^a p*^oa* ^^ 'O p* piar-jiiap- n f*ja',iia*P4a *o^o a^^p*
aa PI a in in a -o en •* n •*• n & ** * \n •** 3-
w a. «4 n ^ PJ a r- a -» w > a i>- -a p- fi ui o PJ o> a- tn o a1 •« PJ > M -a ** n o •« r -j
ik £ «• ^ -to -o T-I-OCM na--«a-*- PJ > ui ui -* sj > r» a PI -^ in o> > -o o in PI a- r- o a- PJ M a- r-i «•« a o M a- a- -o > a a n a
•-(•« 3«aeB3»-$\n f- r» C3aiCio>.fli>iiToMaiUTO«a'aia>aM a-« «-jar.j>-o
'j. 3. » a> sn a- a MUT n a r- p- r>- M
i vi PJ ro a- PJ a- PJ in o PJ a in PJ -« <•« r» --i -« PI r- PJ a r*. n -c «» PJ n x > PJ
3 PJ-< -«i-(WM--<-H-< -»
UJUUUIUULUCl^UlU<£UUIUJULuUJUUIUllJU
ui a o>. o rt pj n a- n -a P- a > o -» PJ M a1 n -o f- a a> o -« r-j m a- ui -o > a o« a rt r -i M a- ai -o P- a CN o -< PJ M a- ui sj >
a o o -* »•» ^ «•« •-< -< -i -< — 1-4 c-.j PI r-j PJ r-i PJ PI PI r j PJ M M M M M M M M M M a> a- a- s- r a- a- a- a- a- « in n n in in in n
C PJ CM CM PJ PJ PJ PI PJ PJ PJ PJ PJ ci PJ PI PI PJ PI PI PI PI PJ PI CM. PI n PI PI PI r i PI PI PI PI PI PI PI PI n PI PI n ri fi n PI PI f i ri PI
w 3x0x0033000303303330303033333303333003003x33x33333
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaafiaaaaaaaaaaaaaia
uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu uuuuuuuuuuuuuuu
3333333333333333333333333333333333 333333333333333
111 O UJ UI 3 3
1-3 Z33 a a: 3 LU :n 2: 2: 3
3 ui aaz i- 3 z ui ui ui 3 ui z
> as 3 ta v- zz a >3ZZ »- oi _: z
z <£ at)- u w _s 3Zui - « > a.
3 Ui 3 3UI3CJ3333Z3-233 3 3 UI Ul 3 3 3 33 « 3 Ui CH LU ^- CD <£ h-
•> 1-H-t-o.j i- r » i- i->zuiui>-«aui>:>-jj_jztn
si z«(-3Z03uizza>-aezzz!-za.zzi-zz>ca»-i-r-zz^- — u.f-aj»-i-at-ca zaca >• cja5-^• a in Ui ui -t r- z r a z P- ui o en 3 r- -» r n Ui3a'>— jaauiisuJ^ieMX^a.a.oxZzcnjszz --oui^u<
! ' azo.'r-Zi-i'_;
oo a. r- o o o ~> ifi n 11 o in -^ ai o in PI ji JT -o a o -o o n o > j o o a- >n o o M a /j o a > -» o
o o o •* PI o o o o f a» •« c j M «» PI — • PI n n ci n n r» o f j o .•» a a n n -< a1 n o o P- o o o n m ai r< ~i -» »<
a'-ooor-o«-Hn*iriPi,"in?^a'a'iiTinrs-i>-'<-r-r"r»ffl3>i>>ooooon««»Hai-<'^o-<3ori--a'5>oc'io
n -1 -o -H ^ rt i-i ** 1-1 « <4 •« ••* -i -M •« ^ 11 *4 •« -t »< i-t « -p^ T^ •« -. « ci n PI PJ n n M PI M ^ a- j- ^ JT u~3 i~2 ji -a -o r»
Ul 333
a K 3 Z 33 a =e Ut ZZ3
3 3 Ui as « z K 3 Z ui 3 Ul 2 Ul
Ul > 33Jr-ZZ a>3Z— 'JJ-JZ
E 3 z z - en a j a z -r z a.
« -
Zui > — — ;- 3 _; t- 2 >> *- -• u«ui — a_jsa
as-j 3a:zzz!-z3.z — zz«>a-.- u;j:~i• a a a «a a a a acnzzaa_:a a a 3 a «n at z — 3 — 3 a — •_; z -i 3
a 3:2 f-2-*>ui 3a-< > 3 n — ji c — 2 a z ~- -jj = a 3 — -> 2 PI _iaa>i-_:33Ui5ea5a6aeMZs«!3.3.as6Zsa_jzaesz'*»ioinfi'.n:rt*3oo-oo'j'3O3*-jooa'.no 0^3 j*o33-*^o
a 1 ~z o PI o o o o # > -« r-i M -^ n n PI n .-•; PI li"3 UT "- o n o -* a o ri PI a f fi o o P- o o o rj n fi r< "^ i ~
1-6
-------
a- M r-4 i
Ul rt^ Z ~
3 -< -rt
a 33 r^ a a- > M n sj r-<
^ a1 f
CM w ri a- c> r-i ^ PI w » r- a- w s
^ > 3 3
in a- N
ui_J
"4 a a-
pio-oasjM3UTwoan!^-a-oa>oc-4in!s'M^ai-iiiTsjr5a>.c''4si'5'sc'4>» > ui a M r-i a- »*
w o» r-4 a- o» sj a- a- a r-i » in M sj o» in w in a- a* in *•< sj r-i » M w a » in r-4 r*J ss r4 p- a r-i 3 m a- > ** ^- a > a sj M
a* 3'l^^^i-»C*4C*4OM-^ls- M a*~« S3 !*J*^*^*^0*i-» *i P4U1a 3 *-*SjS3a*SjCMinOs
oe u^ w sj a* in w in a-
3 »< »* r- « CM CM o M 11 r- M
** <^ ^ CN M -r-t r«i a > •< 1-1 a- o a* o» »H ri a a a" CM 3 r*i CM in > o» CM
i''-r«5i-ia» ui CM M S3 CM r>- a CM 03 w a- 1s- «•* (*• o i>- o S3
- n sj M-I«^O>^ -4 nno 33 ^•o~oa>-ofjwa»
»< aa
a-
r- in r-i M a* o o« N
r- -o ^ i-»
«»* -o
-< a- r-i -o « •-«
n
a »-i
-o •<
-1UJ
00.
i- to
m n m -<
ai n o PI o « ]
n m -< r- M iiT a* -• -o w
-o^-^offlsa a-a->
** -o a- in -< -« w o
-O n
i n a a a in in ill <
n a- o« x a-
a- iii
CM 3
pa.
02 Uj
xu
c in n o n in •
> « a- UT M »*
M
sj n p-
0* l>»
in ^
CM
r-4
CM !
M r- a> a-
o a- M »<
> 03 o>
n r-
in
03 '
03 r> in M n « o «
r- r- "i > o r- as
on Is- in in r-j
-« -i a-
03 M >• UT T4 ft O O T4
a- aB'-t«s3'-«o»
a- > -O -1 03 T4 O M a- a1 O f4 "1 -I a- > UT f-4 -< a- in O S3
O •* T4 a- S3 f-4 -< UT S3 i
«o -a«rta--i>s3(s--<3M3r^r>-aa-:>'0,~-^>r>-a«Mot^ oaiinaa-o-aa-iiTM
w'j~>ii^aapjc'4sjMCMMr*'»Maaa'inia'.>-UT >uiM3a3a^a">
u. a. M 3 rt w i-« p-4 a- o« -rf •« 3 M in t^ r-4 P4 3 a- * n a a n sj M M -rt >o r-4 r4 ,n iii f4 a 3 > -< M r-4 in -« > sj fJ a- r*>
u. 33 a ,-i in CM -» r- *+ a- a- a w o» r-4 o M > i -< r* -4 w a- a p-4 n -o > in 3 fa r a- n 3 a- w a-
o >H i-« M r-4 n n i i ••« i r-4 o «•« »< n «
u
c
U
LU Ul UJ W U LU Uj LJ lJj 'oi « UJ ' J ijj !J
aa a> o »< c-4 M a- in -o > aa > o ** r-i
w r-i r-i w pj n n f4 CM M r-4
a- a- «
il>-r-4i>-
f 4 a n CM CM M r-i
!xl Uj ijj UJ :xl LU m UJ UJ ' J LU
-o p» o 3» o -i r-i M a- UT sj > oa o o ~* w n a1 UT >o r- oa ;> = ** c-4 w a- n -o
>'p»i>"r^a3C3C3caa3a}a33303>>o>a»a«i>>>>a>ooo3ooo
ft ci P4 n CM r4 n r-4 r-4 M CM r-4 CM n CM -4 c-i r4 M CM CM CM CM M M w M ,•«? w w w
ca
en
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCJUUUUUU
acaenen^cn^enaenencnenoJenoseacaenosaenen^cnaenc^enencncnenencncnenojene^
33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333
3 Z Z
!—
03 3UI
33 3
ZZ Z
Ul 3
ZZ 3
333 -i 3 3
31— :* 3 Z 3
-i ZZZ 03 3 Z Ul 3Z3
i-ZOC Z-3Z3U1 033UI3
03 h-03 031-Z •> i- h- ZZ >
> 3 3 > « Z «
i— — _Ji— c
a a. .-• > f"
X i
-
3zz uauz ui in ui
U3 ~> •> 3 > >
z:— i— <£«)— -!
a-z zsnsr- c uo
ca
X 03 Z 3
. r- z _: z
Ul
.
i- Z 3 -« -« X I -- u. -< Ul ^ 3 3 Ul — r- a.
a in n z c*4 c rj o a n ** a n > »* a ^ , i>» »s n u~ « a ;n f- ••< a
•n »" •-» CM a ."» PI o !M a a — a r- -^ a ^- -< a a1 ss a- a- a •»: > a [»• n r<
"'" " ""
Z 3
— -_j as - u
UKSZ3 -3! 3_
OS _i 3£ 03 11 M a Z Z X
i. x ui a: Ul i w
1-7
-------
a
ui
a
* ca
n M
in -a
o co
-o CM .* M in
— ui
i in in r- i M M
i « ir «•« -o
ui -I
a •«
N r-4 M M »< r- n -< c-i -H r» r-i o» a -o « 120 M
-* PI CM ••« o PI «•« -< i-» in -o ft a in a- in ca in * r- o a>
n PI * o r- ea n ~o M >o M r- o» o> *i PI e>> PJ o a
ft P4 CM
- M f i M S3 O» >•« -O in **
ri i-« 11
ri 33
at <
ui
..
-o in r- > ca PI r- * »• r-4
r-i »< o ft »« »< -« »•) «o
PI
r>- -< -< n »< -< N »> SB -o « as
in a w * r>- e * oa M * p- M
.
* ca
r-i w
Is- if> aa ra n
o r- a w •«
.
iii -< a 33 in PI >
-o w r~- o- »• w rj
_j _i
o -»
j- ci ui co a w
ri r-i -o 01 o
n M wo
CN
a o« -< c-i
co
_J lit
oaoa OJ = ffl -< CJ o 1^- T4 > CO UT 03 ~O O> 03 UT -« SlT Is-
-i a w w a r- o o » a 03 03 .3- o m ao M in r i w 03 r- r-i in r- .
'
I !
i i
-o -a o>
OB s» »<
in n
OS
I 1 I I I I I I I I l
i i i i i i i i i i i
lxl
i es i
* OB
•» «<
MM
i i
I I
i i
U-I
ui a.
a. z
ta w
U UI
UI U
a. xjaCNaCKo
~* arj xi-rt ina-xjpjcsxj
> a a xj M PJ
caxj!»-Miiaf«to»ainf»-aeK>p4MxjincB^-«-«P4
PJ « a- M M M M XJ P4 M a- PI in
PI M o PI N » >o UT p-
r- ri PI i a- *i -• -« x> n •*
x» a-x»a i^Maina
0 PI —
n
ca PI a-
P4 PI a-
VH«
000
in CK in
S? ****
in
PJ
n as"
* a> o
in in n
o xj o r-4 o o
a- a in -< -«
00000=
a ill a o in o
•o p^ M
i*- PI
«• PI x» a- 1>- xj
n xj a- cs in
11
•ji a o PJ ;n a
o a n a a I I
PI I I
I I
ri a- r» cs i i
« XJ XJ -t
n
a a in a a I I
I i
I i
a o > o o l I
M » 0 II
03 a- f- I I
PI a
PI '
M o (v. a a- i i
n PJ a it
M
b> a- PI a xi i i
1 l l 1 t l 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 l 1 l l
l l l i l l i l i i l i l i l 1 i
i l l i l i i i i i l i i i i i i
i i i i i i i i i i i i i i l i i
1 1 1 i ! 1 i 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
i i i i i i l i i i l i i i i i i
i i i i i i i i i i ! i i i : i i
1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 i 1 1 1 1
i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i
i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i
t i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i
i i i i i i i ; i i i i i i i i i
1 1 1 I 1 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i
1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 l
i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i
1 1 I 1 1 1 1 > 1 1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 1
i ! 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ! 1
> PI e> PI o c- ~o > *4 a- a PI > M -< ~ -a in
sj j- is- * > ca n co -* r-i r» ca PI n M ri
a- ** PI i i •< in
ui
a
O
u
p- CB
o ^ r-i
-i r-i r-i
n -a r^ 03 a*
r-i ri n n r-i
n
CD
w
aaaaaaa
aaaaaaaa
aonaacaas
aaaaaaaaa
- in
r- 03
-< r-i
in uT
in
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
i-
u
e
z
uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
333333333333333333333333333333333333333333
Ui
>
3-»
ea
en
ui
a i-i-i ae
a
Z
-I
eo
t-i
r-ui
wai
3
zz
ui
3
z
>-
U3 u
^ UI
i—> _!_:>»!- >3H-« zui>- «EUI z_i
r-a.a.j a. M j
en s M a a. a. U33en cc a i— -za3 a z -i>z
z o -3 a o i -- ennjui— ruii-»a«i--j-i
>a.-H^naouuurienM»« r-i
j > •«
->
a; oa )-<£
3 ui en
aui>- %
i.'3>uia.li!
a z i—
-i x ta z
jii3>ji>-t«;ui>-<:3J^ a
—
3.3
,___ .
_;_; C3 = a-'XU.Z-iJ-ia3U.-«:e ae^a:
zzz_i_:_: _:3aj = zau.Z33X3a_;i— u.j.-jt-3«s«as«
-<-i-«- v a a. Z x. 33-33=2 >>3azzui — u^
-------
a * ca •* »« in n w 0 to o CM o o « « f«5 « in i i i \ i i sj * « ss in « in in in « in n n « n « in ifi in « in CM o o o o
ui * o» -a « x *i CM <*• a- ~i w PJ oj o .3- in 04 r- i i i i i ! n CM CM <•« f-i CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM n n CM CM CM pi
a «i «4 N <-» CM M n •* ••• •< -M i i i i i i n « OB CM
*4 ^* >O
u _i xi i-i •* o -o o> n 1-1 r»- "i n a sn ^ > in r» CM > a CM ±- 03 i a a a ea a n -o in j- -a to CM in * CM s in * CD ** * o -< in CD o
O •« N CM « * 00 M -43 * CM « « III OS 33 CM M -fl M uJ ffl "5 33 CD I 9> d- o 03 ro CM jl o -f •«] a* CM n n n CM i- CM -<3 -fl M 9> a o
^M*iiiM(<^sjcai>"i>i-icaM'-o<-ioinrt-inin CM os to n rt <* **
ui o a> CM »* i»- •* in in in -> ^ in CM « r- CM M in M -a sa ^
ui o CM r j N n « a- «
1-*
j -4 »-i -i o m o M »* > fi in o n i- > in r- f 4 > ca w J- a i ca sa o ea o « yj in ^ >a n •< n s- n o « * o> -< * o -< in a o
CM r-i in * o r-) >o * "•< w n in 03 as w M yj M ji 03 « CB OB i > j- o o M w in o jc M o> r4 M •*! M "j j- r-4 -a ^o M > ss o
iiTin n > con
CM -« c- •-< n « n -< * sn CM •< r«- CM w 10 n ~o o
f -I CM CM M CM * i*
nn'HC*iooo
CM
UI
u _j
t-t X
u. z
U. UI
UI Ul I I I I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
UU I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I
w - aa zzzzz
i- aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaccocs
-< i uuuuu
u szsszzzssszrszrszxrzrszrszrsszs-jisszrrsssszsrszzzzz
w a ta 01 ca en ca w as 03 as 01 en ca w -jj a ca so en m a a sn a a ui 01 a ui 01 <£ ca M ca ta uj 05 to ^T co 'Ji 01 tn en o -< CM M * in -o f- 3 > o •< -i n * in ^o r» a > a -< CM n a- in -o r- a > o ^ n n * -ji sj > a > cs *• CM -« CM n
3333333333333333333333333333333 3333333333333U.U.U.U.J-
t- 3Z 3 > 33 3 »
utut ui azo a 3 a » 3 '.3 > I- J a ex LJ LU Z 3 UIZUI <£ 3Z
iz 3 -* 3 3 a ui > > x o z ui z> > z > z -> aaui >z a es>axzzz
a as>-a cn*~aa3 z *— c a a ^^ 3 ^^
-x— — z — r_;z.— — ~ a a 5 i
-«— J >• 3 a C3ZZ;jj 01 as z as 3 ae _ ot a z _i •- —— z 333
z u > — > a3x — xSaz'j. x v 3 ^ ^ ^ — a 3 ^ 3s a 3 3 j x z ^ • *• a a a a a
z LU ^ w u a '_LJ ^ a ^"^ z z z a _u « z _m u* *•• ^^ z ^ ^ \i < ^ *
— 3_!Z_j—'ja_:u3z3s5a:36 "'""333Z3 — i: z 3-«35^szj.z3a~33J''zaaa'iia,
3 >w33 -^^S2"" — r —^
-------
Ui a- x P) -x 3* CM ill SI « P- a- i-> > 3 a- C3 a- S3 CM a- O UI S3 r< -(
a oa -« n r-4 x n -« * 11 a-
u j oo«^-otfjaotfior.iajiioi>jinna!i~3ao!3i>.oa3aad-c3>r>-j-aoc3f*ji3ii'io»>r-riO'Hy~osiT
a r- x o« M M n a- i c-j ui a- •« n "•) -o
30 S3 a* w 11 > r-) t-i -4 **
Ui a ill a *-> •<
CO o CO
X
j a a r-4 p- a in o a w o r-4 a -« a > a- in ji o ui 3,3 33t>3ajeaaia:»-r-a'3aea^cBu'jo>>CMs-r-4aii;n:au'3
as « ca o o n in o 03 x r>- n e* es ui a- r-4 oa ca o o CM FI a- a r-4 « r-4 ss w s: -a ri w r-4 o
ui a •« f 4 »* n ci s> «»<(*. -oo>r-) cs > ii!>(*i M Ma-i-tr-4aii-» U"3 UT W o a UT W = iJl 3 ill n o a = 13 in ill al
JU1 o
p--<- u> r» n o p- -i M j 1-1
.1 M
U-l aeoaaoooa^sjeooac-4aa^9>aO9O9eo>ooc>aooaa«3aaonaooo9or-40(9
Ui a. si fi ui CO
a. s r4 «
ca lu n
UUJ oaoaaaoaoui3inoao-4s] (••)!)') X) aaasasoaaaoassoaoeaoaeaoaaaa in ill n
lil U "4 a K T4 "4 * > M CN W ft FJ S5 a W S) T4 i> 5B
a.. urn -o r- coosa
wa. -> a-a-a-eoM^-
ta >-»n»H.»HCO
r» r-
a: _i
xM -on MX
w u n
3Ui aaaaulaaaalilaMaaasj-oaoasaoaauiamaiiimaaa'.fimoinaaaiilaaa
a: w a a a w r> 3 a a c~4 rl a sn «• a- ro n ") M f-4 CO in S3 sj p- ui a M r-4 eo r^ a « x
a« aaa^ca caco ««M auia-ci i-» SJOMO on ^-a- ai»-./j r»- ^sj-oa
>-o. a>3ica'a> MO»r-4 n-^sj n >waa- »< 03> S)>M M co.icosj
en w w •< »« m n n cj n CM «* * •• •* •« w •*«
V4 *4
ut
U _J aaaaaaaaaCOn-OaaaaT-4a>s}0>aaa«ao>-Oav4«>4
wa. a-cor"- a«Mulu~ n CM n n »* M CM aa-
u.s eo M w o» M »« NX
u. u a- a»
UJ Ui aaaaaaaaaaa»<^aoC9O''iii!i'}aaaaaii']aaaa3maa3aa
uu an-ocNaMiiiaa-r^ xiiaia x»a ass
M s> a M a- n
U. 0) f 4 f-4 1 W SJ x n S3 x C4 M x x X 0> •
s sj so r- x a-
CM
a x x x x rj r4 r4 r4 r-4 r-4 r-4 ct r-4 n w w w M w w w M M n a- a- a- * a- a- * a- a- a- '/> in ui in UT n sn a- :n in sj sj yj -o >o -o
a ******3>***a'***a>*#***a>*.s>****a'a'a-***at3'*»*.s'a'a>in.s>3'3'a>.3>a'a>311
u
a
- zzzzzzzzz»-a aa t-a H-I- — .— i-i-i-i-r- i-aauf-zsi- — a-iuaaaaa a x t- i— 3 ae a: i— as h- >
- >- ca >ui >- x a i— utouji— t-cna:>
u M x u a a ut ~ j t- _j a as M •« ui a a ^ *-ui ui at u
3 Z a.-Jui uiu<:!j.acaui!aauia Ui i— i— ozu.>-i:a.- 03 en >- ae>ua3Mi— H-xuuik-a>-
cn atas^aeatasatatat^ at>-uiZzZ
'ji z a. »j aaatz-«uiz ^ac at — ae. ~ r3->ci— ^«4~.ujauic,oixicaa.zuiUiea^>su. ca u u a. ej ui — en
at ri^e,'3MM-_i ai-a.aB3a2u.Mu._:ii._3«>-^» u. veac.— -«-i en ui M ca u. j
a ZZMZZZZZZMM uix a c.o atoscauiea n_: uiZ3
- >— i- i- —
aj "i u, a si;-.iatazaz>z>ai >• a M u» ji ea i -- ea
E ~ij- -c^-es>ana c-i<: --•— a i— u.>-ej
-
. . _
aaaaaaaaaa as LJ a Lu
es saaiaaaaa — »-iii_i er ~enz ^~ zreziQ s —G«zx<£aj a:a-Ha- c -ec ej en — a a. ej
-• aaaaaaaaa •cascwazaasa — 3 ^3_:2_;-ea-i— — -« a iu -< a z
i -j^ c zc^CCa-e3-.ci-«a:3icc3_;rj s a ea -» a. a. a .ja-^j
_: eres3tatata;eza:ez- ii
1-10
-------
a r»- a r*i in CM * w o wo ~ o a o o PI > M o> 53 a 1-1 a in 03 ~i a CM o> ~t r*- in o as * * a * i»- r-j in o * o PI ~o >• in «* a
LU CM in * .* * * i-osM in ;n in e> CK * C3 * i» a o in M r» •-» M CM •»• -o in ai <-> ;n o * -o a * * w M 3- PI
S3 •* i-l •-< »* CM M r-! M -4 CM ^ «
30
LU _J ^oon*nis--
3 c a in 3- in -c e ca 3- !> a —i w a- w PI SB ft <-« in PI r*5 -« PI M s3 uj m r*i w *< M m -o ai 3- PI -o r~ ca !•- P- o» > -o ca a
* o M r» ex in w •« vj PI M PI 3- w e> .•*> > c*> w PI o> CM -* * -o PI > »•< in f i * a PI
M n 3- 3- »* PI o» o PI a* r>- in -• CM ci m CM n -» r* n n n -o
»< 3- .-« r-i CM »t p-l 3- N PI 0» i
u is M 11 o i«- r* ^ ^ o M r» > n M -o -o r-j M N * n > M (^ o» M M a« w *< * -Q c-j r- »< CD r4 3
-o « M * * •« n o» o rj o. r- ui ^ f-i CM sn f -i »< *•« r-
a *• in p* in
f%--o-iMr)-oo«oBin-c-cp)--««^ « -» r>-o -or«-o «M r-iw
o LU ** *• * — m « M M -i -<
o in ui ^ ^ in in o m ui a o m in a in o in in o o a o o n o iii o in s o it? o in in a o s in a a hi o ii^ s ui o iii a
QOMoaj>^M^^aaf>-*in'-i!iTWd>ioinr>--^«aa*>r-)^>Mo»i'op-i-iM>r»s»-<»«ss>O'O-3>Mv><
»-o-o>>jra.rtr-4inM3''OMinoa3U'5ini>*f'io>Min'r-ii>-tii>-t*ia-nC4UT-<<-iinwn9>o «M(aina3r-'-»r»o*wr-»Ha<.p->*r-i
QO. e»P* m»H iiC8MO«*ao^-0 CM a CD «4
i—cn
U -J o
Uia. »< «-•«-» in «*3-i-i in •» in * r- n « n
a. r -• a
03 LU x
U LU aaina-oaaaauioaasinnainmaininaaaaoaaaaaaoaineaxininaanaaainiila
LU tj w a o« r- ui r-t M as > w a- in w n in a -a a an i>- a > w -j r- a -* ~> a n « in ca «<
o.« *3-a-f-4a>n •«*in»***cocBWcs fi r- caj CK CD a-« « -tpiawsj Ma- ^i-^a
cna. as--ica* •• * -o,"om>--HWOB 031*- -a -<^- 13^- c-jin-aaaaaaaaaao3ar-<9aaar-aaar^aao
i- a: -i CM
ui LU
C2LU aaa-oaauiaoaaain^aiiliiiaaaaaaaaaaaaaoainaajlaacoaaasoirsaaaaa
a:u •< N o •« rj-<3 -c-< f-aca ca* a ^- ^ CNacor- p>-ss3aa- UT 3- r*-
a •« caa^-i>o«'^ innrjai-i WCN P4 > n >a>i^*^i>ca-ouir-4-4ri
v-a. Dfiri * in-in i* n M »< Mai-t aror- M ^ >* CB
uitA -* n<->in ^,40^^
^^
LU
U— aaaJM3'WC3aC3>U'5a^i-aMrjl*-CB'Ca-4a-Crir-in!n-*^aaMS)O>CBCar)a
MO. ~* > CK -i o M a -« D r4o>cMCM PI »t in PJ a n ~i ca »« > -a r- > UT > in > -o cs *i a n in > * o > *i « p» r-i o« a > f- a > in -o M a > a * n M r-j •* *
«Mae^o»ea^ac^apl M in »« « o> PI *is-»3>rtca i^-i-iiflp-i*- fOa-co-acsa
ik a. IH a * r» in o» a cain»cavjaa!n-«MinMfM n in in ^ n w > o -n « a > >o p- P< * PI PI in y r-i
ik ca cai-ipjrisjr- in ca eNain-ai>!>-in*<-»Pi PI * PI> r-iHcana -»~o o>ca
Q »l i-« ••* T4S3*<» |