June 1977 Massachusetts Conference on Water Conservation Proceedings WATER Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region I New England River Basins Commission ------- Contents 1 Introduction 1 Summary of Proceedings 5 Acknowledgments 6 A Word About the Massachusetts Water Conservation Program Proceedings: 9 WELCOME AND INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Gov. Michael S. Dukakis 12 THE SITUATION IN MASSACHUSETTS Evelyn F. Murphy, Secretary Executive Office of Environmental Affairs 20 WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES: AN OVERVIEW Richard K. Schaefer, Economist Office of Air, Land and Water Use, EPA 31 LEARNING FROM A SUCCESSFUL EXPERIENCE John M. Brusnighan, Assistant Manager Washington (D.C.) Sanitary Commission 36 WATER CONSERVATION AS PART OF GOOD WATER WORKS PRACTICE Thomas W. Knowlton Salem-Beverly Water Board 4 7 A RESIDENTIAL VIEWPOINT Florence Carver League of Women Voters 52 WHAT CAN BE DONE IN INDUSTRY TO CONSERVE WATER James K. Rogers, Director Environmental and Ecology Conservation Raytheon Corporation 61 WHAT CAN BE DONE IN THE FUTURE TO CONSERVE WATER Victor DiChristina Lynnfield Center Water District 65 DISCUSSION ------- Introduction As part of a comprehensive water conservation program being developed by the Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs (EOEA), the first day-long water con- servation conference in New England was held June 29, 1977. Its purpose was primarily to stimulate citizens and decision- makers to think about possible solutions to critical water problems identified in EGEA's MASSACHUSETTS WATER SUPPLY POLICY STUDY, published in January of 19 77. The conference sponsors EOEA, the New England River Basins Commission (NERBC), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region I -- were especially interes- ted in bringing together water superintendents and commis- sioners, conservation commissioners, and other local officials, League of Women Voters, watershed association representatives and others who could take positive actions to conserve water. The following pages are a record of this conference and should help decision-makers understand key Commonwealth water concerns, the array of conservation measures now available, and examples of successful conservation efforts. This document should also serve as a valuable educational resource. The 200 conference participants heard remarks by speakers on a variety of issues covering water conservation problems, policies and programs. NERBC Chairman PRANK GREGG, who moderated the conference, emphasized that water conservation was the key to the Carter Administration's Summary of Proceedings V. i ------- r \ water policy and that the states themselves needed strong, comprehensive programs based firmly on conservation for planning and managing their own water resources. Gregg introduced GOVERNOR MICHAEL S. DUKAKIS who noted that Massachusetts was the first eastern industrial state to address the issue of water conservation and stressed its importance in light of the region's still-abundant water supply. He indicated that high quality plentiful water supplies were fundamental to sound economic develop- ment and provided a great attraction to the region for business and industries. Dukakis urged close collabora- tion in New England between federal and state agencies and increased public sensitivity to water conservation issues. EOEA Secretary EVELYN F. MURPHY described the Commonwealth's water problems, including temporary short- ages, inadequate storage and distribution, pollution, and population imbalances. Murphy's remarks stressed the need for serious attention by both state and local entities to recycling, conservation, water-saving devices, leakages, metering and a consideration of alternate local sources of water. She urged that the State and region take con- structive leadership in weaving conservation into the fabric of water resource planning and management. RICHARD K. SCHAEFER, EPA Economist, Office of Air, Land and Water Use (Washington, D.C.), provided an exten- sive survey of water conservation measures which ranged from mechanical devices to watershed management. He illustrated the cost-effectiveness of water conservation by providing economic analysis of water use and added statistics on the potential savings that water conservation could bring. Schaefer described several water conservation methods designed to either reduce demands on water supply or increase the supplies. His remarks were directed y 2 ------- A specifically to efforts which can be made at the local level and included existing laws and policies in Massachu- setts which are designed to preserve water quality. He described methods for sound watershed management, precipitation augmentation ("weather modification"), desalinization, reuse and reallocation, and multi-uses of water. He particularly stressed the need for public education and the need for the public to develop a "conservation ethic on which to base conservation techniques." Luncheon speaker JOHN M. BRUSNIGHAN, Assistant Manager of the Washington (D.C.) Suburban Sanitary Commis- sion, described his agency's successful water conservation program and indicated that its goals were to reduce waste and use water wisely. He said that education of users was a primary tenet of the program. Efforts by the WSSC had produced an immediate four percent reduction in water use and the commission was trying to reduce water use even further» A key point in his remarks was that while water conservation does not replace the need to augment water supplies, it does essentially buy time during which other measures could be considered and implemented. THOMAS W. KNOWLTON, of the Salem and Beverly (Massachusetts) Water Supply Board, said that sound water- works management was a means towards safeguarding public health and safety. He emphasized the need for recognizing the increasing costs of providing water, and said that conservation was a tool for balancing the need for water against the cost of supplying for non-essential or wasteful purposes. Knowlton, too, stressed the need for public education on water use. FLORENCE CARVER, of the League of Women Voters, used the town of Amherst as an example to explain from a residential user's point of view why conservation was essential and what measures were needed to strengthen conservation efforts. She suggested ways of reaching home- y 3 ------- r A owners and concluded that water conservation must become a daily habit for all residents. JAMES K. ROGERS, Director of Environmental and Ecology Conservation for Raytheon Corporation, had prepared an address which was delivered during the conference by WILLIAM BLATCHLY of the Honeywell Corporation. Rogers' remarks focused on the industrial user's concerns with water use: availability, quality and cost. Conservation measures for industry could include water audits, recycling, sub-metering, and water rate-setting based on cost of ser- vice. A common misconception, he said, was that large users waste more water. The facts indicate that they are in a special position to institute good conservation measures. VICTOR DiCHRISTINA, Lynnfield Center Water Commissioner, suggested that longer-range conservation measures should be taken in Massachusetts and the region, including installation of residential water pressure regulators, waterless toilets, low water use landscaping, revision of current codes, zoning and protection of groundwater and surface supplies, wetlands and rivers, and controlling of water run-off. The presentations were followed by an open discussion led by Secretary Murphy, a record of which appears starting on Page 65 of this publication. V. y 4 ------- Acknowledgments The preparation and coordination of the Water Conservation Conference was accomplished in an amazingly short time: two months. Its tremendous success was due to the assistance of several extremely capable people: From EOEA: Evelyn F. Murphy, Secretary Elizabeth Kline, Assistant to the Secretary Fletcher Pyle, Division of Water Resources From EPA: Steve Lathrop, Water Supply Division Steve Ells, Director, Congressional & Inter- governmental Relations, Region I, EPA Gail Homer, Program Analyst, Water Programs Division, Region I, EPA From NERBC: R. Frank Gregg, Chairman Barbara Hart Julie Lichtenberger Irv Waitsman Thanks must go also to the staff of the New England Aquarium for helpful assistance in serving food and handling audio-visual equipment; to Louise Stokar (EOEA) and Lynne Newman (NERBC) for typing transcripts and final copy; and to Elizabeth Kline (EOEA) and Francie King (NERBC) for editing assistance. V y 5 ------- A A Word About the Massachusetts Water Conservation Program... The Executive Office of Environmental Affairs began its comprehensive water conservation efforts in March 1977 by focusing on the development of conservation measures which could be implemented in the State. Rather than a temporary, crisis-oriented facet of water planning often the case in other areas of the country -- conserva- tion is now considered to be an integral, institutional, long-term aspect of the State's water resources program, and is the essential foundation of the Commonwealth's broader planning and management program. Massachusetts liberally interprets the term "water conservation" to include methods for decreasing demands and needs as well as increasing water supplies through non-structural measures. Decreasing demand can mean implementing water-saving devices, public education efforts to change wasteful habits, and new pricing strategies. Increasing supplies can mean more effective watershed management, protection of water supplies, and acquisition of future well or reservoir sites. These measures are inter-related, and each community must consider the con- servation methods appropriate to its political, economic, social, and technical situation. The State's role in assisting communities and individuals in conserving water is two-fold: 1. To provide leadership and guidance State officials have an obligation to initiate changes in the State Sanitary Code (Article 11) and in the State Plumbing Code. Such changes will not only help direct local responses, but will also indicate where the State stands on different issues. J 6 ------- A The State must also be responsible in arbitrating many greater-than-local concerns. For example, considera- tion of diversions from the Connecticut River to provide water for metropolitan Boston is currently of special con- cern to the Commonwealth. 2. Provide technical assistance Numerous State agencies now assist communities in answering technical questions, providing implementation funds, and conducting studies. Emphasis in the statewide water conservation program is on (1) seeking federal funds and (2) developing new state laws and policies. The federal monies would be used to give selected communi- ties small grants to undertake specific conservation measures. The State laws would be geared towards helping communities detect and fix leaks, discover and protect water supplies, and require conservation equipment. Specific subjects and language will come from a two-year Legislative Commission Study. The first six months of the statewide water conser- vation program were very active and productive ones. Progress was made in providing education, changing laws, policies and regulations, and in seeking demonstration grants. Major accomplishments have included: The June, 1977 Massachusetts Water Conservation Conference, which stimulated many persons to write for educational kits. A brochure listing distributors of water-saving devices. Over 500 copies were issued. Proposed changes in the State Sanitary Code, including holding an initial public hearing. An administrative bulletin issued by Governor Michael S. Dukakis and development of an implemen- y 7 ------- r \ tation program directing all state facilities to conserve water. A joint project agreed upon by EOEA and EPA (Region I) to produce a series of brochures detailing different conservation measures. A major proposal submitted to EPA requesting $200,000 for local conservation projects. A guide for local governments and the creation of a New England Water Policy, spearheaded by Massachusetts, were also in progress during 1977. The statewide water conservation program is well underway. The next phase will include translation of general policies into specific local programs and measures. y 8 ------- Proceedings WELCOME AND INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Governor Michael S. Dukakis It gives me great pleasure to welcome you today to the first Water Conservation Conference to be held in New England. As I stated in the June 21st press conference announcing this new state program, I wholeheartedly endorse the con- cept of water conservation. In Massachusetts we are fortunate in having a seeming abundance of water. The annual average amount of 41 inches should supply sufficient water for our people, businesses and industries. Yet, like parts of California, Arizona and other states, some Massachusetts communities are ex- periencing temporary and severe water shortages. Massachusetts is certainly not facing a water crisis. However, significant supply and distribution problems exist which must be dealt with now through concerted federal, state and local actions. All indications are that the Carter Administration will make water policy its next major priority after energy: The President's efforts to cancel disasterous water projects serve very effectively to focus public and press attention on the importance of the wise use of water re- sources. This makes excellent environmental and fiscal sense. His recent environmental message also shows the direction of future federal policy. Executive orders were issued prohibiting federal involvement in construction damaging to wetlands and floodplains. Secretary Cecil Andrus (Department of Interior) recently distributed a policy statement recommending that water conservation become the cornerstone of a national V y 9 ------- A water policy. EPA, under Doug Costle, is beginning to incorporate water conservation measures in its sewage treatment program requirements. Massachusetts is also moving ahead rapidly to promote a comprehensive state water policy. Conservation begins at home: An Executive Order recently directed all state facilities, including colleges and universities, to review water use in assigned buildings; recommend the most econ- omical water conservation measures; as funding permits, implement all water conservation measures which pay back initial costs within one year; install water conserving toilets, showers, faucets and other water conservation equipment as replacements are needed; and take appropriate measures during the design of all future buildings to insure water conservation. The State Legislature is considering a bill introduced by John Cusack (D-Arlington), Chairman of the House Urban Affairs Committee, to fund a two-year Legislative Commission on water resources. The Executive Office of Environmental Affairs applied to EPA for a $200,000 demonstration grant to assist the Massachusetts Association of Conservation Commissions in helping communities develop and implement local water conservation measures. At the local level, a number of communities, businesses and industries have instituted water conservation measures. For example, the Ipswich Selectmen, with guidance from the League of Women Voters and the Water Commissioners in the Lynnfield Center Water District, have begun active conser- vation programs. In addition, I propose that NERCOM and the New England River Basins Commission undertake a joint study to deter- mine the efficiency and feasibility of recycling industrial water as a first step in helping businesses cut water costs V J 10 ------- "\ and insuring sufficient future supplies. All these efforts will decrease unnecessary waste, pro- vide additional water supplies, and save money. Incredible savings are possible. Holy Cross College, for example, installed water saving showerheads and saved 35 million gallons of water and $20-25,000 in energy costs in the first year alone. Let me conclude by stressing the vital importance of water to Massachusetts' economy, the necessity of promoting water conservation as a key aspect of an over-all water planning and management program, and the responsibility which we all face to develop useful conservation measures in our own community. We are all going to have to work at it now to make conservation the rule rather than the exception. This work is essential without it we're going to see the headlines of the West repeated here. Or, we'll be confronted with resorting to large diversions of the Connecticut River to supply metropolitan Boston's needs. This alternative, which is being vigorously opposed by our southern neighbor, Connecticut, cannot be the only choice. Other solutions including a variety of conservation measures must be tried first. y 11 ------- A THE SITUATION IN MASSACHUSETTS Evelyn F. Murphy, Secretary Executive Office of Environmental Affairs This morning, I wish to discuss a subject of considerable interest to the consumer, the homeowner, and the industrial user. And that is, the need to develop a state water policy that will insure the continuance of a plentiful low-cost water supply for all our cities and towns. It is appropriate that the decision-makers at the local level receive the opportunity today to discuss common water- related problems and also to give the Dukakis Administra- tion some input into what a state water conservation policy should be. A dozen communities, in trouble with their own supplies, want to tie into the already overburdened Metropolitan District Commission (MDC) reservoirs. Some communities have already actually experienced shortages and have had to take strong measures in response. For example, Stoughton's five town wells became inadequate to satisfy demand several years ago. Partial bans on water use have reduced per capita consumption from 96 gallons per day (GPD) in 1968 to 81 GPD in 1974. But the shortage persists. As of June 1st in Stoughton, there will be a ban on the use of automatic lawn sprinklers and the filling of swimming pools. Franklin tried, with little success, to institute a voluntary ban on water use, finding its inadequate supply and storage capacity at a potential crisis point. Last summer, they implemented a state-approved water ban, citing the need for stronger enforcement. And you are only too familiar with the fact that last summer, Lynnfield Center had to institute a moratorium on the building of new homes that are not equipped with a private well capacity. Lynn- field Center has also placed a ban on the use of all water outside the home and is even contemplating action to halt y 12 ------- ¦\ construction of new swimming pools. So, while we do not know what it is like to cope in a Marin County, California, at least half the residents of Massachusetts, whether they realize it or not, use water from supplies that strain to accommodate their demands. The issue of water quantity aside for the moment, there are other signs of strain in the Commonwealth's water supplies. Some of these have to do with development that has already taken place. For example, cities such as Leominster find their entire recharge areas lying within city limits, thereby subjecting their water supplies to a variety of pollutants. Lawrence has chronic problems with its water supply from the Merrimack River. Industrial development along the river has prompted considerable discharges of industrial pollu- tants. Towns like Lexington that once relied on wells and then turned to the MDC now find development has ruined the possibility of relying ever again on these supplies. So we find not only rather widespread imbalances be- tween the amount of water desired and that amount readily supplied, but we also find increasing complications in augmenting supplies in that development constricts nearby options. Whether municipalities look beyond their boundaries for water because their own is poor by nature or polluted by development, the prevailing tendency has been to look elsewhere to augment their supplies. This phenomenon is reinforced by climatic, demographic and geologic features of the State. Put simply, most people are where the water is not. Eight-five percent of our residents live in metro- politan areas; two-thirds live in the eastern third of the State. Yet only the Connecticut and Merrimack Rivers, some distance from the bulk of residents, have the size and stream flows to accommodate the residential and economic activity of a major metropolitan area. V. y 13 ------- A So there has been a natural need in Massachusetts to go afar for water. The MDC moved westward, building reservoirs of the Sudbury, Wachusett, then Quabbin. Springfield has laid pipes considerable distances to the Knightsville and Cobble Mountain Reservoir. New Bedford brings its water down from the Assowompset Pond and then distributes to Acushnet, Fairhaven, and Dartmouth. We tend to think only about the MDC's extended pipe- lines, but the fact is that there is considerable piping throughout the State, tapping distant water supplies and bringing this water to where people and business are. Unfortunately, the prevailing mentality has been that: It is cheaper to run a new pipe than install extensive cleaning and recycling technology It is cheaper to let the flow run longer through an existing pipe than recycle or build new pipeline. It is cheaper to run a new pipe than patch up old water mains in heavily congested urban areas. Moreover, the short-term economics of water supply have been right in keeping with our society's insatiable appetite to consume energy, fancy equipment and gadgets, big cars, and the like. But that was yesterday. The 1970's brought the vivid realization of limitations, especially to non-returnable resources. The 1970*s also brought a grim recognition that when we are not careful, commodities always deemed abundant and cheap can quickly become expensive items of subsistence. The parallels between national energy shortages and water shortages have been recently demonstrated in the western part of the United States. We in Massachusetts can pro- bably avoid the plight of western states with some good fortune of average rainfalls -- if we act now. So, what needs to be done? V J 14 ------- r First, we must recognize that the situation wherein each municipality pursues ad hoc, independent solutions to water shortages cannot continue. Massachusetts has come into an era as a mature industrial state -- in which the economies of one public unit acting solely on its own behalf with regard to water supply no longer add up to over- all public good. We must deal with this resource as a State and eventually, more wisely, as a region. This is not to say that State government ought to impose solutions on municipalities. But State government must play a role pointing out where one municipality's solution to water shortages may cause serious problems elsewhere; promoting a flexible statewide system without over-reliance on any single source of supply; and establishing equity among the various, ever-increasing, often-conflicting demands on our water resources. Second, we must look at recycling and reuse rather than once-through use. While water recycling has superficially seemed more expensive, that may not necessarily hold. Already, we can point to instances of industrial recycling that have had crucial economic payoffs. For instance, Raytheon has been a real leader. Its plant in Tewksbury, on the brink of closing several years ago, now recycles water three or four times, saving 40 million gallons. And at the Waltham Raytheon plant, the recirculating water system has reduced water consumption by 85 percent. Hermatite Corporation in Avon cut its water use in half over two years. Each company is acutely aware that simple water con- servation measures have saved money. Finally, and most importantly, we can conserve. People in Massachusetts have perceived an abundance of water for generations. As a consequence, we have not begun to curb silly, wasteful practices. Let me point out some simple arguments about the economic merits of water conservation that apply to J 15 ------- r \ practically everyone: 1. Typically we pay twice for water use on water bills and on sewer bills or property tax equiva- lents . 2. Typically we pay three times for the hot water we use on electric bills to heat the water as well as water and sewer bills. 3. Finally, to the extent that we continue to consume water at ever increasing rates, we pay two more ways: the costs of constructing water systems (more reservoirs and water mains) and the costs of constructing sewers and treatment facilities. According to modern environmental wisdom, a powerful message should be evident to all of us. That is, the absence of protection of our natural resources in the present will mean significant costs to us in the future whether they be in threats to our public health from foul air or im- purities in our water supply. And while the struggle for clean air and pure water may require additional sacrifices, we can begin now to conserve a most precious resource water without a change in our accepted lifestyles. The water conservation program advocated by the State implies conservation, not sacrifice. By just eliminating our wasteful habits, we can take the initial step in preserving a quality water supply for the Commonwealth. And as you will witness later in today's program, there are several measures that individuals can practice to aid our efforts. At the local level, there are several things that can be done. Since 75 percent of the water used in residences goes for toilet flushing and bathing, considerable savings can be realized if people use restricter showerheads, toilet inserts and aerater faucets. In addition, to meet water conservation goals, you will realize financial savings V y 16 ------- r by using less energy to heat a smaller amount of water. City and town water officials can also inspect their water supply systems to check for leaks in pipes and water mains. For example, Fitchburg discovered that it was losing 300,000 gallons of water per day due to leaks in its supply system. Communities can also strive for more accurate metering of their water supply. Hanover, for instance, began this operation and found one year later that water use decreased 2 5 percent. And most importantly, each city or town should examine its groundwater and surface supplies to determine if a less costly water supply system is possible. Both the Governor and I strongly believe however that it is the State's responsibility to clearly define and en- force policies whose objectives are water conservation. Let me summarize for you our initial administrative actions and legislative proposals of our water conservation program. As the Governor explained earlier, his directive to all State buildings and facilities concerning the adoption of water conservation measures is an important first step in the recognition of water as a precious natural resource. And through the efforts of Representative John Cusack, Urban Affairs Chairman, we are working toward the funding of a two-year $200,000 legislative study which will outline the necessary components of a water resource management program. I have also directed the MDC to encourage com- munities to develop local water supplies rather than relying on the existing MDC system. In addition, the Dukakis Administration is vigorously supporting Senate Bill 1725, which bars cities and towns from joining the MDC water system or increasing their intake from the MDC unless they adopt conservation measures. The MDC will spend $140,000 to improve the accuracy of the 154 meters which monitor water delivered to cities and towns. The MDC will now also V. J 17 ------- r "\ offer limited technical assistance to MDC communities inter- ested in employing conservation measures. We are also actively pursuing a change in the State Plumbing Code, which would require new buildings and homes to have water-saving toilets, showerheads, and faucets as standard equipment. Let me not forget the importance of the conservation commissions in this venture. Through the efforts of George Wislocki, President of the MACC, we have applied to EPA for monies that will enable the local conservation commissions to assist communities in practicing water con- servation . Whether it be stricter enforcement of the Wetlands Restriction Law or the sponsoring of local floodplain, wetland, and aquifer recharge zoning, it's important to remember that water conservation also enables the non-structural augmentation of supplies. In addition, conservation commissions must emphasize the need for sound management of our forests that lie within city or town watersheds so that we can maximize the potential for water run-off into our reservoir systems. Let no one assume that our actions constitute the only dimensions of a water conservation policy. Your presence here today and the suggestions that accompany this conference will enable our state policy to encompass the unique needs facing your community. The real test, however, is whether Massachusetts and New England as a region can initiate constructive leader- ship in the area of water conservation. A true measure of government's effectiveness is its ability to negate crisis through positive action. We at the state level J 18 ------- look forward to assisting our cities and towns in imple- menting a water conservation program that satisfies their needs and objectives. 19 ------- r WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES: AN OVERVIEW Richard K. Schaefer, Economist Office of Air, Land and Water Use, EPA (with editing assistance by Elizabeth Kline, Mass/EOEA) My major task today is to describe a number of ways people can conserve water. There are a large variety of techniques which can effectively either reduce demands or increase water supplies. Most are cost-effective, saving not only water for future needs, but saving dollars as well. Some can have a substantial impact, especially in communi- ties experiencing water shortages. Most of the methods which I will describe must be im- plemented on the local level. Each community needs to select the technique(s) most suited to its political, economic, and social situation. "Water conservation" as I use the term means using this natural resource at a sJower, more efficient rate than it is currently used. It does not mean non-use nor does it imply tremendous sacrifices to the users. Why Conserve Water? When total costs present and future, economic and environmental are accounted for water conservation is clearly the least socially costly procedure to follow. It is not really a question of having enough water since water can always be retrieved from rivers and oceans. However, economic costs vastly increase if supplies are distant or badly polluted and environmental, political and social costs vary with each supply source. So, the preferred solution is to use our existing sources more wisely and efficiently, thereby accommodating some of our future needs. Economic savings from water conservation can be achieved in five different ways: reduced water bills; less water- related construction; reduced heating bills (for hot water); smaller sewage bills (sewage costs are usually a percentage of water costs); and less sewer-related construction (since sewage is 99 percent water). V J 20 ------- Conservation Measures The first series of measures deal with increasing water supplies from existing sources. 1. Maintain and Increase Quality of Water Supplies In Massachusetts, there are a number of laws, regulations and policies which preserve water quality: landfill and salt storage and distribution. The location, storage area, and maintenance of land- fill sites and salt piles are regulated to pro- tect current and future water supplies. Good quality water can easily become contaminated if salts, heavy metals, and chemicals seep in. wetlands, floodplains, aquifers, streams, rivers. Zoning ordinances, enforcement of the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, implementation of the Massachusetts Wetlands Restriction Act, open space acquisition, and protection of banks along designated "scenic" rivers can help prevent pol- lution from reaching water supplies. critical areas. The Massachusetts Secretary of Environmental Affairs has the power to designate "an area of critical environmental concern" re- moving exemptions from public review of a pro- posed project. Cedar Swamp in Westborough which contains the headwaters of the Sudbury River has been so designated. 2. Watershed Management Wise land use management can augment supplies without much construction needed: selective removal of plants and trees can quicken run-off into a supply area and diminish loss to groundwater and/or vegetative use. Careful planning and execution are required to prevent increased contamination. tap into natural storage aquifers. Instead of building over and polluting these sources, people need to identify the locations, quality and capa- cities of aquifers and then protect and use them. delayed snow melt. In states like California, where a large percentage of water supplies are derived from mountain snows, delayed snow melt can level off natural supply variation and provide new supplies over a longer time period. The major advantages of this conservation method are ^ ^ 21 ------- that it keeps future land use options open, main- tains current supplies, and may reduce supply variability. 3. Precipitation Augmentation This technique is more commonly known as weather modi- fication. It is a relatively inexpensive way, from a monetary viewpoint, for increasing precipitation. To be effective, adequate water retention areas need to be available over a widespread area; otherwise, the increased water may not be stored or absorbed properly. Before any experiments are tried, potential social and environ- mental impacts need to be analyzed and weighed. 4. DeSalinization A number of projects are underway to try to develop less expensive methods to remove salt from water or vice versa. At present, this method is technically sound, but high in economic and energy costs. 5. Re-Use and Re-Allocation Water once captured and transported is not discarded in this technique. Industries such as Raytheon and Honey- well have already changed their equipment and/or pro- cesses so that water can be re-used for the same activity or else re-allocated the next time to a use which demands less high quality water. 6. Multi-Use In areas where water must be purified anyway, multi-use of water supplies may prove desirable. Non-contact sports, for example, might be permitted in storage lakes and ponds so that additional recreational waters are not necessary. Many water purveyors, particularly in New England, are hesitant or opposed to multi-use because they fear contamination. So, caution is recommended before opening up water supply areas to people-oriented J 22 ------- r ¦\ activities. 7. Dual Systems In a few places in the United States people are experi- menting with separating potable (drinking) water from non-potable uses. Additional pipes, pumps, and equip- ment are required. If the mechanics can be arranged properly, extensive water can be saved by not using such high quality water for washing, gardening, lawn care, etc. Some golf courses and parks in Colorado are irrigated with treated wastewater. The second series of water conservation techniques deals with strategies to decrease demands. People do not have to use as much water as they do. Often, because water is so cheap people waste it by letting water run when brushing teeth, for example. 1. Education Because of people's tendancy to waste water, millions of gallons per year are used unproductively. Such simple habits as using the dishwasher or washing machine half- full or running tap water until it turns cold instead of keeping a bottle of water in the refrigerator un- necessarily waste water. For water conservation programs to be successful on a long-term basis, people need to develop a conservation ethic. At first this may mean consciously eliminating wasteful habits. Eventually, most people will change their practices and conservation will become natural and unconscious. Educational programs must be tailored to specific audiences and user types. Typically, inner city residents use less domestic water (40-45 gallons per capita per day) than suburbanites (60-70 gpcd). The national average V J 23 ------- domestic water use is 45-65 gpcd. Outside the residence, easterners use between 10-100 gpcd and westerners 100- 200 gpcd. (The major increase is for irrigation and lawn care). Some other differences in water use are summarized in the following chart: CAUSES FOR RANGE AND VARIANCE DOMESTIC: Income - Family Size - As per capita income increases, water use increases (e.g. dishwashers, garbage disposals, automatic washing machines, extra bathrooms.) As number of persons per residence or dwelling unit increases, per capita water use decreases. Age - Education and Profession Very young (babies) - laundry increases; Teenage - bathing increases. Each cause variance to some degree (e.g. need for bath, laundry - water or dry clean, etc.) IRRIGATION: Rain Prospect - Area/Dwelling Unit - Regions with little summer rain irrigate more than those with summer rain. Areas or regions with inter- mittent droughts (two weeks or so) will irrigate less than physically required. As irrigatable area per dwelling unit increases, water use decreases: Slightly for West Much for East Income - As income increases, water use in- creases - partially a function of lot size or area. V 24 ------- In addition, education should focus first on the major use of water. As the next chart illustrates, toilet flushing and bathing can average up to 75 percent of water used in a house or apartment. TYPICAL RANGE OF DOMESTIC USE BY FUNCTION Percent Range 40 G/C/D 50 6 0 70 Toilet 35-45 14-18 18-22 21-27 24-32 Bathing 25-30 10-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 Laundry 15-20 6- 8 8-10 9-12 10-14 Culinary & Misc. 15-20 6- 8 8-10 9-12 10-14 Thus, an educational program for residents might best em- phasize ways to decrease the number of times toilets are flushed and long showers/baths are taken. Some pamphlets, for example, suggest that people throw away tissues and cig- arettes in the wastebasket rather than flushing them down the toilet. 2. Water-Saving Equipment and Devices A relatively simple, inexpensive, and effective way to reduce water use is to install either mechanical devices on existing toilets, showerheads, and faucets or replace them with new, water-saving models. The three largest distributors in Massachusets (American Standard, Eljer, Kohler) sell these water-saving models at approximately the same cost as the traditional types. This equipment is extremely cost-effective, easily paying for its initial cost within a short time. Holy Cross College installed water-conserving showerheads. Within one year, they saved 35 million gallons of water and approximately $25-30,000 25 ------- in heating costs. There is no reason why new construction and renovation should not reduce water use by approximately 2 3 percent. Local by-laws and/or the State Plumbing Codes could re- quire the installation of water-conserving equipment only, thus insuring these savings. Existing equipment can easily be retrofitted with devices which reduce water flow without sacrificing quality and efficiency. A one-quart plastic bottle placed in the toilet tank can save 500,000 gpd for a community of 500,000 people or 182,500,000 gallons per year. At a total per capita demand of 100 gallons per day a one- percent increase in population could occur, using this conservation technique, without additional water supply or wastewater treatment capacity investment. Toilet dams or inserts (which save more water than the plastic bottle) cost from less than $1.00 to $10.00 and can save up to 8,000,000 for the same community. Showerhead restrictors are equally effective. Marin County in California and the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission in Maryland distribute plastic restrictors free to their customers. Each device reduces water use by 30-75 percent and pays for itself within a few months. The following chart lists common devices, their costs, water use, and potential savings: WATER CONSERVING DEVICES COSTS AND RELATIVE SAVINGS Device Cost Water Use Potential Savings METER with flat rate to average cost pricing $150-500 + O&M 20-30% J 26 ------- Device Cost Water Use Potential Savings TOILET -Regular -Water Saver -Variable Flush -Displacement Plast. Bottles etc. "Dams" $60 + $60 + $5-15 $.50-510 5-6Gal/Flush 3-5Gal/Flush 5-6Gal/Flush 4.5-5.5Gal/Flu 3.5 Gal/Flu 30-40% 10-25% sh 8-10% sh 30-40% SHOWERHEADS Regular Low Flow Inserts $5-25 $5-25 $ . 50-$l.5 3-8 (15)gpm 2.3 gpm ) 2.3 gpm 30-75% 3. Metering Metering each residence (home or apartment), industry or business encourages conservation in several ways. First, people become conscious of the amount of water they use if they can see the numbers increase on the meter. Towns such as Fitchburg, Massachusetts, locate meters on the outside of buildings not only to facilitate meter reading, but also to let people gauge how much water they use in lawn sprinkling or gardening. Meters also provide an excellent management tool. Major water users can be identified and conservation programs tailored to their needs. Also, water distribu- tors can charge for water actually used, thereby re- warding conservationists and charging heavy users. In a few places where shortages are acute, water is rationed at a relatively reasonable cost and people are charged progressively more for water use beyond that limit up to a certain cut-off point. Without meters such admin- istrative action would be impossible. 27 ------- >v 4. Leak Detection and Repair Many, many communities have leaky water systems. Even the tightest, so-called leak-proof system (such as in Denver) loses approximately six percent. Some areas lose 20-40 percent of the water which enters distribution pipes. Such waste can be extremely costly. Technical equipment is available to pin-point the leaks without disturbing the subsurface. Leak detection must be con- nected to a comprehensive program of detection-repair- maintenance to be really effective. In many cases, leak detection is cost-effective, paying for itself in water saved. Fitchburg invested in a leak detection and repair program in the 1960's and found that the program paid for itself within three years in water savings. Communities which are either short of water or considering additional sources might satisfy immediate needs by decreasing leaks. 5. Regulations A variety of local conservation-oriented by-laws, ordin- ances, and administrative regulations are in effect throughout Massachusetts. They range from odd/even lawn watering days to gutter laws (directing storm water to gardens or storage tanks) to re-cycling car wash to landscaping requirements. Each of these controls is geared towards eliminating unnecessary waste and using existing supplies wisely. 6. Water Audits A thorough review of the entire water system in a res- idence, industry or business can often lead to modifi- cations which reduce water use. A water audit is perhaps a necessary first step in developing a water conservation program. Like metering, it helps locate problem areas and focus on areas where changes can be most effective. J 28 ------- ¦\ 7. Alternative to Sewers Sewers, unlike septic tanks, often remove water from groundwater supplies and thereby increase the amount of new water required. The federal and state governments realize this problem and are beginning to encourage alternatives to sewers, where feasible. The revised Title 5 of the State Sanitary Code now permits humus toilets. The Environmental Protection Agency's 201 sewage treatment program now allows funding of public subsurface septic systems. 8. Pricing Water costs are usually extremely low and include little or no incentive for conservation. In fact, many communi- ties subsidize large users with a decreasing block rate policy: the more water used the cheaper the rate per unit. Others hide real costs in property taxes. For pricing to encourage conservation water bills have to reflect real costs including sewage and water construction. The next step increased block rate pricing is difficult to assess because (1) since water is cheap, costs would have to be raised substantially to have any effect on consumption; and (2) high water costs might force industries and businesses to leave Massachusetts, thereby diminishing the State's economy $/unit water Amt./water used J 29 ------- A and job market. Techniques such as increased block rate pricing and rationing may be necessary if voluntary and other regula- tory efforts do not work. They certainly should be analyzed as possible future conservation measures. 9. Water Bans A temporary and carefully conceived water ban can be very effective in immediately decreasing water use and alleviating a crisis. It brings public attention to the problem and may provide a psychological incentive for people to act quickly. The ban, whether adopted locally by the water board, water district commissioners, select- men or through state (Department of Environmental Quality Engineering) approval, should state clearly which uses are permitted/prohibited, hours, and penalties for vio- lations. Also, the ban should be tied into longer planning and management strategies so that additional supplies can be made available in the future. Conclusion Several important points have been made in this dis- cussion : planning must include water resources conservation in developing a comprehensive program; conservation influences supply; it is essential to conserve what is presently available; it is possible to reduce variability, maintain quality, maximize options; conservation economically reduces demand; there are many ways to conserve water: water conservation devices, metering, regulations, etc. work and are cost- effective ; pricing policies should be efficient and equitable; each community needs to develop its own water conserva- tion program suitable to its particular situation V J 30 ------- LEARNING FROM A SUCCESSFUL EXPERIENCE John M. Brusnighan, Assistant Manager Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission Dr. Lawrence J. Peter, author of the Peter Principle: Why Things Go Wrong, has written a sequel, The Peter Prescription: How To Make Things Go Right. While speed reading my way through this publication, I came across a chapter on using words to mystify rather than clarify. Peter goes through a simple procedure in explaining how to construct a "Jargon Phrase Indicator" with words fre- quently used in journals, lectures, and documents on the selected subject. The words are to be arranged in three columns, with the third column used as nouns. The first and second columns are composed of left-over words. Using one word from each column to form phrases, seasoned with a few common Anglo-Saxon words, here and there, the speaker can quickly compose answers to questions, speeches, letters to government agencies, rebuttals to notable authorities, and silencers to the not-so-explicit heckler. It seems the object in using this bureaucratic official- ese is to have everyone understand the words but to have no one understand the sentences. It is, at the same time, hard to understand and easy to misunderstand. Consequently, persistent seeKers of truth usually retreat in utter con- fusion or, in officialese, the perceptual cognitive concept becomes responsive transitional utilization, giving way to the protocol promulgation proposition. Unlike "Jargon Phrase Indicators," we at the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC) have tried in the past seven years to make on thing perfectly clear: WE ARE SERIOUS ABOUT WATER CONSERVATION. I am not here to overly impress you with cumulative V J 31 ------- r ~\ statistical data or bore you with the minute details of our water conservation program methodology. I can report to you, however, that our program has been well received by the nearly 1.3 million customers in Suburban Maryland and has been highly successful in reducing overall water consumption, according to our keeper of the revenues. By way of background, the Washington Metropolitan area suffered severe droughts in the late '60s. The WSSC, at one point, was reduced to placing sandbags in the Potomac River to insure adequate intake of water. Additionally, a severe building moratorium was placed on the Suburban Maryland jurisdiciton to provide lead time to upgrade al- ready overloaded sewage treatment plants. Thus, the one- two combination of water saving and waste reduction was introduced. It is not often that a business enterprise in this case, a non-profit bi-county water and sewer agency -- launches an all-out PR program to reduce the sale of its product. We did it! For the sake of a better environment, free of overloaded sewage treatment plants and improperly treated sewage, for the sake of our customers who, by nature, need time to adjust to the reality that natural resources are not necessarily a life-time thing -- we did it. Our revenues may be down a dollar or two; but our public and the publics of many of these United States know what we're about, the job we are trying to do. We have learned form our experience that educational preparedness is a prerequisite to survival. We have indeed set about doing just that. We have spent seven years, hundreds of man-hours and thousands of dollars to educa- tionally prepare our customers for the on-coming problems. In clear, concise language, we have written water saving publications, press releases, public service announcements, radio and TV spots, quarterly bill inserts and information V 32 ------- A sheets. We have developed a 20-minute water saving and waste reduction film jointly with Stuart-Finley, Inc., one of the East Coast's top makers of water resources motion pictures. Our on-going conservation program, which stresses the values of saving water to reduce waste, to cut customer bills as a result of lower consumption, and to generally get the consumer into the habit of being resource-conscious, has been successful in accomplishing the direct involvement of its customers in a pioneering effort which has received national recognition. The Commission's "Water Saving Idea Contest" yielded more than a thousand entries and produced conservation ideas that were incorporated into the WSSC Water Saving and Waste Reduction Handbook, "It's Up To You." Delivered by direct mail to more than 220,000 customer services, the first printing was so well received that we have reordered several times to fill requests. A similar handbook was developed for apartment managers and initially distributed to an additional 150,000 customer units. Along with the organization of water-saving workshops for property managers within its 1,000-square-mile service area, the WSSC added water saving to its speaker series for presentation to schools, civic and service organizations, on the average of from 125 to 150 times a year. Our first general proof that water saving can be cost effective that shower flow controls, pressure reducing valves and toilet-insert devices do, in fact, reduce con- sumption significantly came by way of the Cabin John Drainage Basin Test Program. The program involved 2,400 customer units over a six-month period and provided detailed information on plumbing problems, customer service require- ments, and costs in time and money for the purchase and installation of water saving appliances. The WSSC was one of the first utilities in the nation y 33 ------- A to adopt changes in its Plumbing Code making water saving fixtures mandatory in new construction and for replacement. We proudly take credit for having contributed to the mobili- zation of water-saving toilet production. In 1973, the WSSC launched its "Bottle-Leak Detection Kit" program. Operating on the displacement principle, the one quart plastic bottle was a variation of the brick-in- the-toilet minus the hydraulic problems associated with brick flake-off. Distribution began with one million bottles and 600,000 dye pills for toilet leak detection. As with the Water Saving Handbook, the bottles were reordered. Although the WSSC fully realized that there are many variables which most certainly effect the credibility of flow data, an approximate four-percent reduction was achieved in average daily consumption following the "Bottle Kit" pro- ject and other facets of the water-saving and waste- reduction program. There have been many positive actions implemented by the WSSC in an effort to keep its water conservation program on the minds of its customers. After all, they represent the most important variable. It is the user, the paying cus- tomer, who must be convinced, through educational promo- tions and persuasive reasoning that water conservation pays off environmentally, hydraulically, financially, and emotionally: environmentally, by meeting and surpassing effluent quality standards; hydraulically, by reducing the rate of flow to and from treatment facilities; financially, by reducing the amount of consumption and therefore the total customer bill; and emotionally, by providing the customer public with positive feedback for a job well done. We owe our customers thanks and gratitude for their acceptance of and active participation in the WSSC's on- going water-saving program. Their positive attitudes have led us to believe we must have done it right the first time. Although we practically criss-crossed the 1,000-square-mile J 34 ------- r \ sanitary district by foot to deliver conservation face to face, we wouldn't have had it any other way. Through the years, we have strived to present a clear and understandable picture outlining the importance of water conservation to our customer population. We add no shadows, no frills, no splendifferous captions, no official- ese from the "Jargon Phrase Indicator." We have aimed to get the point across. It may be difficult to quantify; but we feel success. We talk success. We save water no translation necessary. For those of you who are in need of Water Conservation information reports from test projects for any and all of the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission Water Conservation Program materials, please feel free to contact Mr. Arthur P. Brigham, Public Affairs Officer, WSSC, at 4017 Hamilton Street, Hyattsville, MD 20781. The telephone number is area code 301-277-7700, extension 224. Before I close, I extend my apologies to Dr. Lawrence J. Peter, author of The Peter Prescription. If there are any questions from the participants here, I will be glad to try to answer them. y 35 ------- A WATER CONSERVATION AS PART OF GOOD WATER WORKS PRACTICE Thomas W. Knowlton Salem-Beverly Water Board I have been asked to speak on the subject of water con- servation practices from the point of view of the water utility manager. To many of you this may seem like asking the mouse to guard the cheese and you have a point because water conservation has been less than a pressing concern with New England water utilities. It has been only re- cently, as a result of the severe drought in northern Calif- ornia, that water conservation has been separated in the public mind from the need to increase supplies, the trad- itional answer to a water crisis. However, to redeem my vocation in the eyes of this audience, I want to quickly point out that the water works profession has never lacked voices for conservation. Many, both famous and not so well known have seen "conserva- tion measures" as the key to good water works practice and they have abhorred the waste and ineffeciencies of distri- bution and use which have always plagued public water supply. Two such men were Sextus Julius Frontinus and Joseph G. Dennett. Frontinus was one of the greats of the Roman Empire. He capped a career as mathematician, soldier, politician, diplomat and agronomist by serving from 97 A.D. until his death as water commissioner for the city of Rome. We know him through two books which he wrote concerning the water supply of that city. These were translated into English in 1896 by the great American hydraulic engineer Clemens Herschel and were recently re-published by the New England Water Works Association.^ The problems faced by Frontinus were not too different from those faced by the present day water works superinten- dent. When Frontinus took office, Rome's water supply was in very poor condition. It was old, in poor repair and suffering from years of indifferent management. Water 36 ------- r shortages, particularly in the poorer sections of the city, were frequent. To properly assess the situation, Frontinus conducted a hydraulic survey of the entire system. By comparing the flow of water into the aquaducts supplying the city with the flow that he could account for in the city itself, he quickly realized that his basic problem was not one of inadequate supply but one of excessive distribution system losses. To correct this, he began a major campaign to curb these losses. The first step in this campaign was to repair the aquaducts. He notes that, because of poor management the men assigned to this duty spent much of their time doing private work. This problem was corrected and the maintenance was put back on a regular schedule. His second step involved removing the numerous illegal connections to the system. This program, which recovered large quantities of lead pipe, required an extensive survey of the system and also turned up many faulty or tampered- with metering devices. These situations were corrected by regular inspections and the imposition of heavy fines for stealing water. We are never told what the final result of all these efforts was, but it is significant that Frontinus never did get to start construction of a new aquaduct, although sev- eral were built after his time. The lesson to be learned from this history is that when planning for water supply, where the water is going must be considered along with where it is coming from. Joseph G. Dennett was the chief pumping station opera- tor for the city of Salem from 1873 to 1896. His one apparent claim to posterity was that he kept a diary of his work. What follows are a few excerpts from that diary: January 12, 1883 - Pumping all day to make up for excessive waste V J 37 ------- January 19, 1884 - Both engines at work to keep up supply owing to excessive waste and drought. June 17, 1891 - At lake pumping with both engines, only gained one inch in the last 24 hours in the reservoir. January 18, 1892 - Very low water... the superintendent had better attend to business and find the leaks. October 2, 1895 - A great waste of water is going on with no very apparent effort to stop it. This past winter I was in that same pumping station talking to the present operator. He has newer and larger pumps and a larger supply, but he remarked that he was pumping around the clock and had no idea where all that water was going. After nearly 100 years, the situation in that station has not changed all that much. Good water works management: what is it? Is it just keeping the pimps running or does it involve something more? Of course it involves something more! I think that we can all agree that it means safeguarding the public health. This is the prime responsibility of every water works manager. A safe water supply is probably the foremost reason for the high standard of public health in this country. When we realize that in 1890 the death rate from typhoid fever in the major cities of this country was about 47 deaths per 100,000 people while by 1930 it had 2 been reduced to 1.61 deaths per 100,000 people, we know that the water works profession and its state regulators have reason to be proud, particularly in this state where the Lawrence Experiment Station was the first state labora- tory in the country devoted to the understanding and control of water borne disease. But neither the water supply profession nor its regula- tors can afford to be smug. As the Environmental Protection Agency and the Center for Disease Control remind us most 38 ------- recently the paper Waterborne Disease Outbreaks in the U.S. - 3 1971-1974 waterborne disease is still too commoa This has been recognized at the federal legislative level. If all water supplies in this country were living up to high public health standards, there would have been no need for the Safe Drinking Water Act, the provisions of which took effect on June 24, 1977. Therefore, we must emphasize at this conference that the prime responsibility of water works management is to protect the public health. Any rule or program which compromises this goal cannot be supported. Topics such as the recreational use of water supplies, the covering of open distribution reservoirs, the full treatment of surface water supplies and chronic water shortages must first be considered from this standpoint. Conservation measures must also be considered in the light of this concern. The second major consideration in good water works management is insuring the public safety. In almost every Massachusetts community good engineering practice requires sizing the supply and distribution system to meet the fire fighting requirements determined by the National Board of Fire Underwriters (now called the Insurance Services Offices) and not by the normal demands placed upon the system. People are very much aware of this requirement. Nothing spurs water development like a dis- asterous fire. Two good examples of this syndrome are the major distribution system improvements made in 1917 in the city of Salem which were a direct result of the great Salem fire in 1914 and the present work in Chelsea following its recent disasterous fire. A third major consideration, the one often forgotten, is the topic of this conference, water conservation. This consideration does not relate as much to the health and safety of the public as it does to its welfare, particularly to its financial welfare. For some reason the idea has 39 ------- been developed that water is free; that it is unlimitedly abundant and receiving it is a right. If it runs short, more can be brought in. It is a gift of nature and there- fore we need feel no personal responsibility for its use. Although we all sense the fallacy of this position, it has been fostered both by policy and practice. The time has come to recognize that there are definite costs attached to water supply. In this State water is abundant, although it is poorly distributed with regard to population. Most of the available water is in the western part of the state while most of the population is in the coastal region. However, the money needed to develop this water supply is not unlimitedly abundant. Conservation thus becomes a tool to balance the actual need for water for health and safety against the cost of supplying water for non- essential functions or pure waste. Those of us who manage public water systems have a responsibility to judiciously superintend the expenditure of public funds. When we treat large quantities of water paid for at the public expense as if they had no value, we are not doing our job. To control the money entrusted to us, we must control both the supply and distribution of the water that we produce. When we encourage conservation of water, we are encouraging the conservation of public funds. How can we do this? There are a number of ways, a few of which I want us to consider in the remaining time. The simplest, quickest and cheapest place to begin a conservation effort is with public education. Public awareness campaigns are being carried out by all the large utility companies and these can serve as examples for water utilities. Such programs include putting fliers in with the water bills after the example of the telephone company, running advertisements in the newspapers as the power and J 40 ------- r A oil companies do and cooperating in getting articles pub- lished in local newspapers. (Incidently, cooperation and buying an occasional ad can greatly increase your rapport with your local paper and your chances of getting favorable publicity.) Conservation can be stressed at the numerous local meetings (Rotary, Lions, Chamber of Commerce, etc.) at which water officials are asked to speak. It can also be stressed to the communities' school children and their help can be enlisted in the program. When I see these children involved in events such as walk-a-thons, I realize how much energy they have to be mobilized for a good cause. They can make signs and posters, hold events to which many parents come and can deliver fliers door-to-door. Such efforts are relatively inexpensive, but they are not automatically successful. For example, two stammers ago, we had to impose water restrictions. At that time we prepared a booklet of water saving tips in cooperation with the Essex Agricultural and Technical Institute. We made this booklet available for distribution with good news- paper coverage. From the population of 80,000 people we serve we received only three requests for this book. Another tool which is more expensive but with which we have had better success is metering. Metering is both an essential management tool and when properly used, a good conservation tool. Without metering, you have no idea where your water is going. As a result, both you and the consumer take water for granted. To use metering effectively, you should meter 100 percent; this means all residences and businesses, but it also means all schools, hospitals, churches, and municipal buildings, users who generally do not pay water rates. This is not an easy or inexpensive operation. Resi- dential water meters cost $35-$4 5 each and installation V J 41 ------- costs can double this cost. Industrial sized meters can cost many thousands of dollars. These meters must then be read at least bi-monthly and maintained. Residential meters should be rebuilt and recalibrated at least every ten years and industrial meters, owing to the high revenue they pro- duce, should be recalibrated at least every year. This is expensive, whether done by the local water department or by contract. But it is done by most private water companies, such as the Portland Maine Water District, and is not an impossible task. Conservation results when water bills are sent out often and speedily collected. The annual or semi-annual water bill usually is not taken seriously and it does not aid good cash flow. Even non-billed accounts, such as schools and hospitals can institute conservation programs when they know how much water they actually use. If they were billed, they would be even more serious about conservation. Our experience with metering has been as follows: In 1920, the city of Salem used an average of 5.7 MGD (million gallons per day). At this time they began to meter the city. Water usage fell rapidly and did not reach its 1920 peak again until 1963 although population remained al- most constant. In 1908, the city of Beverly had a per capita water use of 100 GPD (gallons per day). They began to meter in 1912 and by 1927, with 85 percent of the city metered, the per capita usage had dropped to 61 GPD. The 1908 per capita usage was not reached again until 1963 despite a large in- crease in the population. The above tools encourage public conservation. But a water system must also keep its own house in order. A distribution system maintenance and leak detection program is an essential, though costly and often frustrating, part of this task. All distribution systems leak, but some leak more than J 42 ------- "\ others. If a comiriunity is 100 percent metered, it is fairly easy to determine the condition of the distribution system by comparing the volume of water pumped to the volume billed for (or recorded on non-billed meters). The difference is called "unaccounted-for water" and a record should be kept of this value. A usually acceptable number is about 15 per- cent, particularly in New England with its older systems using calked lead joints between pipes. Larger values for unaccounted-for water, wide and unaccounted for fluctuations in usage, high Sunday night flow or a marked change in water pumpage when compared against sewerage flow are signs of trouble; they can mean leaks, breaks, or illegal connections, usually to an unmetered fire service. It is usually much easier to realize that you are losing water than to find where it is going. Leak detection, ex- cept in the case of the rupture of a major pipe, can be tedious and expensive, frequently requiring the services of contractors with the skills, electronic equipment and/or petometers not usually available to the smaller utilities. But leak detection should be a part of an ongoing distribu- tion system maintenance program. Unfortunately, maintenance is the least glamorous or visable municipal function so it is the first thing that gets dropped when the budget gets tight. It is not missed until things get out of hand. For example, last Memorial day weekend, the main 36- inch water line into the city of Salem broke. This was an inconvenience, but not a disaster. The city was also fed by two smaller pipes and the reservoir was full. All that was required was to close the two valves, one on each side of the break, isolate it, and then repair it. These valves had been installed in 1917 and never maintained. Naturally, they would not close. Twelve hours later, the reservoir was empty and much of Salem was without water. One week and $225,000 later the break was repaired. The water depart- ment had gone as far as Chicago to get needed parts. Luckily, V J 43 ------- r there were no major fires. This waste of water and re- sources could probably have been prevented by a maintenance program similar to the one conducted by the city of Cam- bridge . Incidently, we have found our fluoridation program to be of great benefit in leak detection. Streams, catch basins and surface water can be checked quickly and cheaply for fluoride. If it is found, we know that the water came from our distribution system and we can trace it back to the leak. Several major leaks and numerous smaller ones have been found in this way. We have also convinced many homeowners that the water in their basements is ground water and not a leak. Lastly, regulations and their enforcement can be used to control illegal water use. They can also be used to control the huge peaks in demand, often 40 percent above base demand, that can occur on hot summer days when everyone wants to water the lawn, wash the car and fill the swimming pool at the same time. These peaks cost money in that capacity must be provided to handle demands that occur only a few days out of the year; if they can be controlled by daytime sprinkling bans, summer pool filling bans and the like, money can be saved. What can the State do to assist in local conservation efforts? It is in a good position to provide printed material, fliers and publicity for conservation efforts. This con- ference is a good example. The State can also provide policy and regulations, such as statewide conservation or water use policy, and changes in the plumbing and sanitary codes which will encourage or require the use of water saving devices like low flow toilets and showerheads that are available; and it can ban such water wasting devices as water cooled industrial air conditioners and once-through industrial cooling water uses. The State can also properly fund and staff the regional engineering offices and the J 44 ------- r ¦\ Lawrence Experiment Station so that they can provide the inspection and technical assistance the cities and towns require to execute water policies. Probably the biggest role the State could play in a water conservation effort would be to encourage legislation requiring all public water suppliers to meter all their customers and then fund all of their water operations, both operating and capital, from water rates rather than putting these costs on the property tax rate as is now the common practice. As we said earlier, water service is a service not a right; it is a business with definite and identifiable costs attached to it. These costs should be borne by the persons receiving the service. If my neighbor wants to fill his pool three times a year or grow cat-o- nine tails in this front yard, he will pay for it, not me. Only when the user pays for the actual cost of water will there be an incentive to conserve, to plan just how much water is actually needed and is then paid for. This includes so-called "public users" as well. At a local church, the young people recently held a car wash. They were told to make sure they connected their hoses to the church building and not to the parsonage be- cause the church was unmetered and if they let the hoses run, it would make no difference. This is neither good religious training nor good water works practice. In the past few minutes, we have considered some of the attitudes and actions which water utilities should take regarding water conservation programs. Given time, much more could be added and much which has been mentioned, expanded. Let us conclude by remembering the two men we began with. Sextus Julius Frontinus worked to understand and correct the problems he encountered. Mr. Dennett complained bitterly about the waste he saw, but was unable to abate it. These two can serve as examples to us and we can choose J 45 ------- r whom we will emulate. Remember, good water works management is not forcing a water shortage or a water crisis on a community for this would endanger its health and safety. Encouraging and im- plementing sensible conservation measures in concert with State and local planners and officials simply makes good economic sense. 1. The Two Books on the Water Supply of the City of Rome, Sextus Julius Frontinus, trans. Clemins Hershel, New England Water Works Assoc., Boston, 1973 2. Water Quality and Treatment, Second Edition, American Water Works Association, New York, 1950, pg. 37 ff. see also: Third Edition, 1971, pg. 37ff for a discussion of the importance of bacteriological control for im- proving public health. 3. Journal of the American Water Works Association, Vol. 68, No. 8, pg. 420, August 1976. Bibliography 46 ------- A RESIDENTIAL VIEWPOINT Florence Carver League of Women Voters Water shortage, sewer crisis, recycling: these are the phrases that are here to stay. Reduction of water usage has become a necessary facet of good water management. In Amherst, this need for reduction is a current fact of life. In the early 1970's the State placed a sewer ban on the town, prohibiting any new building until a new sewage treatment plant was in operation. It also necessitated a reduction in water use by both residents and the three "industries": University of Massachusetts, Amherst and Hampshire Colleges. The requirement, plus the need for additional water, led to a townwide water conservation pro- ject. Its aim was to at least stabilize and, hopefully, decrease water use. Groups such as the League of Women Voters and the Sierra Club were asked to meet with Selectmen to initiate such a program. Several proposals were im- plemented : 1. The Amherst Record (a bi-weekly paper) agreed to run a page and a half photo story with hints on how to reduce water use. 2. Local plumbing contractors agreed to advertise water- saving showerheads, faucets, and toilets. Rather than take time today to discuss these I would recommend the report by the Old Colony Planning Council on Water Conservation (copies are available from EPA, Region I, JFK Federal Building, Boston, MA 02203 or from EOEA, 100 Cambridge Street, Boston, MA 02202). A plumbing contractor also served on the committee. 3. Packets of materials from the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission were made available in the local library. Apartments were checked for leaks by volunteers. 4. One-minute radio spots were aired on local stations. y 47 ------- 5. A special letter was mailed to all dentists requesting them to turn off water in rinse bowls except when needed. 6. Special information was made available to the schools. 7. Restaurants were asked to serve water only when requested. 8. Letters were sent to educational institutions asking their help; a fact sheet and copies of their water usage figures were included. 9. A special flyer was enclosed in the water bills of all residential users who consumed more than 3,000 cubic feet per quarter. In addition, a letter was sent to the 30 to 40 highest residential users pointing out their con- sumption and asking their cooperation. At the same time the town made a concerted effort to find leaks in the system and repair them. A study of other towns demonstrated that leaks could mean substantial losses of water. Clinton, for example, was shown to be losing through leaks approximately half of the total water supplied to it by the Metropolitan District Commission (MDC). (This waste has since been corrected.) The Curran Report, com- missioned by the MDC, recommends that the 43 communities within the MDC water district reduce leakage to 3,000 gallons per mile of main. This reduction could decrease demands for water by as much as 76 million gallons per day or approximately 33 gallons per capita per day. (I might add that this is the amount being suggested for a diversion of the Connecticut River to the Quabbin Reservoir system.) The homeowner's first awakening to his dependence on water is when he turns on the faucet and no water appears. Fortunately, this seldom happens. More frequently the water is discolored because of a broken main in the system, hydrant flushing, or possibly pollution from a nearby industrial or construction site. Suddenly, the homeowner or apartment dweller is on the telephone because this colorless, odorless, V J 48 ------- tasteless liquid is far from that. Unfortunately, the great majority of people return to their usual wasteful habits once the problem has been corrected. Somehow we must make the resident think about this precious natural resource. Conservation in Massachusetts can make a large difference in supply since 40 percent of the water used is for public supplies (30 percent for thermo- electric cooling; 27 percent for industrial processing and only three percent for farming). This is unlike California where 80 percent of the water is used for irrigation. How much can conservation influence water use? Let us look at several situations. Two months a year I live on Lake Champlain and use a septic tank. There I notice a change in attitude and habit: I use less water than at home in Amherst. I checked through some records to see if my impression was accurate it was. A recent study by the League of Women Voters of Ipswich shows that people who are on sewers tend to use more water than those on septic systems. National water use: 389 gallons/day/dwelling Eastern metered water using public sewer: 310 GPD Eastern metered water using septic tank: 245 GPD I am not suggesting that we abolish all sewers. Rather, I am pointing out how attitudes about water use change when septic systems ars replaced by sewers. People with a septic system are concerned about prolonging its life. Obviously, the less water used, the greater the life of the septic system. There is substantial evidence that metering discourages water use. Studies found that per capita consumption of water in metered areas averaged 123 gallons per capita per day (GPCD) in unmetered areas. In the town of Hanover water use decreased by 25 percent in the first year of meter- ing. Metering is effective in making people aware of how 49 ------- r much water they really use and in locating the largest water users. Conservation programs can then be targeted to this identified group. However, metering alone has only a tem- porary effect. It must be accompanied by a suitable water charge. Water pricing seems to have little effect on conserva- tion in private households, primarily because it is such a small cost in the average budget. Several suggestions have been offered to use pricing more effectively: 1. Two rate schedules, one for winter and a substantially higher one for summer. This plan presents some inequities because apartment owners and industries tend to have a fairly uniform annual use. But, the concept is worth pur- suing . 2. A surcharge for summer use in excess of winter use. This would have its greatest impact on lawn watering, golf course irrigation and other peak summer uses. Fairfax County, Virginia, has instituted such a surcharge: $0.60/ 1,000 gallons plus a surcharge of $2/1,000 gallons in excess of 1.3 times each customer's winter quarter (defined as any quarterly billing period based on meter readings between February 1 and April 1). A similar goal may be accomplished by surcharges for excess use anytime of the year. This concept increases equity by assessing excessive peak users the extra cost of maintaining capability to meet their peak requirements. It also effects conservation by reducing peak demands. Otherwise, this cost is borne by all customers. During the 1960's we faced a severe drought in Massachu- setts. Restrictions were placed on outside water use and emphasis was on reuse and recycling where practical and on general public effort to reduce normal consumption. This resulted in a period of no substantial increase in per capita consumption among the MDC communities from 196 3 to 1967. With the end of the drought per capita consumption in member communities rose from 124 GPCD to 141 GPCD. It V J 50 ------- ¦\ would appear that such restrictions should be mandatory on a statewide basis with a penalty for non-compliance. Otherwise, measures are not taken seriously for any length in time. Zoning codes should be studied and revised to encourage water conservation. Water for car washes can be recycled. Porous pavements should be encouraged or required in floodplains, wetlands and recharge areas. Communities should be encouraged to acquire reservoir and well sites. These sites should then be utilized rather than relying on out-of-basin transfers for extra water. Building and plumbing codes should be studied and changed. Water-conserving showerheads, faucets and toilets are no more expensive to the resident and should be required for all new construction. As plumbing fixtures in older build- ings need replacement they should be replaced with water- conserving fixtures. In public buildings faucets and shower- heads might have an automatic shut-off valve. Residential water from washing machines (the so-called gray water) may be used for flushing toilets, and all appliances should be required to use less water. When gardening, watering should be done only when necessary. The ground should then be soaked and mulch used to retain as much water as possible. Grass can be left uncut a little longer to two or two and a half inches (aren't you glad to hear that?) Plants or shrubs which require less water should be planted instead of the water dependent varieties. Until a concerted effort such as that with water pollution control is made, with needed funding and legis- lation, we will not solve our water problems. Until restrictions on use are mandatory, with penalties for non-compliance, we will not solve our water problems. And until conservation becomes part of our daily habit and we use this resource not as wanted but as needed we will not solve our water problems. V y 51 ------- >1 WHAT CAN BE DONE IN INDUSTRY TO CONSERVE WATER James K. Rogers, Director Environmental and Ecology Conservation, Raytheon Corporation Industry has come to realize that water, like oil and natural gas, is a limited resource which must be used wisely if our productive capacity is to continue. Most industries, in fact, place water (and sewage) in the category of utili- ties alongside oil, electric power and natural gas. Managers of most progressive industries believe that a good water conservation program will result in a net savings without adversely affecting production. The areas where these savings result will be described later in this talk. Major Concerns Massachusetts industries have three concerns about water. They are availability, quality and cost. To some extent the three are interrelated because new sources of water are generally more expensive than existing sources and result in lower quality. Availability tops the list of industry's concerns about water because even with conservation a certain quantity is required for industry to operate. For this reason Chambers of Commerce and state development agencies emphasize the availability of water wherever they can as an attraction to businesses. Quality is important particularly for economic reasons. Many industries must filter and remove minerals and other contaminants from processing water. The cost of this water purification gets higher as the quality gets lower. High quality water, such as MDC water from Quabbin Reservoir, requires very little purification and can in many instances be used without further purification, ) 52 ------- \ The cost of water is of increasing concern to industry. Most businesses believe that water rates should be based on the cost-of-service concept, that is, each user should pay what it costs to provide him with water. This cost consists of all expenses of the supplier including main- tenance of pipes, pumps, meters, valves, etc., as well as such operating costs as electric power to run the pumps. Both operating and maintenance expenses have increased drastically due to escalating labor, material and energy costs. To this must be added the cost of amortizing the capital investment in the system. In many older systems the amortization costs are not high; but most modifications, additions or expansions of water supply systems result in very high amortization costs as the result of high project costs and high interest rates. For industries which discharge to municipal systems, a sewer charge is usually added which often nearly doubles the water bill. And where wastewater treatment facilities are required in industry, their costs are directly related to the amount of water treated. For example, programs at Raytheon (Andover, Lowell and Wayland), Digital Equipment Corporation (Maynard), Western Electric (North Andover) and General Electric (Lynn) include water reduction measures which minimize the amount of wastewater which must undergo treatment to meet local, State or EPA requirements. Major Water Users Not all industries consume large quantities of water from public supplies. Some of the thirstiest industries chemical and paper manufacturers, for example usually try and locate where they can satisfy their water needs from sources such as rivers or wells. Electric utilities are large consumers of public water supplies because of the need for good quality boiler feed water. They do not, however, use public supplies to satisfy their massive V. J 53 ------- cooling water requirements. Metal finishing operations do not generally consume large quantities of water but as a group they represent the largest water-consuming operation in Massachusetts. The term "metal finishing" includes electroplating, printed circuit board manufacturing, metal treating and chemical milling and etching. The many processing steps in these operations necessitate rinsing the parts with water prior to each processing step. Cooling water needs are common to nearly all industries. Machines, air compressors, furnaces, chillers and numerous other pieces of equipment require cooling water in order to function. The good supply of water in Massachusetts relative to the other regions of the U.S. is an asset for our State which helps to attract industry. Bear in mind, however, that the industries which require the most water are also the most energy-intensive and our high energy costs relative to the rest of the U.S. tend to discourage the same indus- tries that want good water resources. Conservation Measures In any utility conservation program, the first step is a water audit. You must know where and how water is being used before you can effectively act to conserve it. The water audit will help establish priorities for con- servation measures and may identify areas of waste which were previously unknown. Each water use identified in the audit is evaluated to determine what can be done to reduce consumption and the costs of making the change. Some measures will be simple and will cost very little, such as where operating changes, spring loaded valves and flow restrictors can be quickly installed to eliminate waste. Hematite Corporation in Avon used these techniques to cut their consumption by 54 ------- r~ a 50 percent. Other measures will require extensive process changes at considerable cost and impact on production. Most recycle or reuse systems such as those installed at Western Electric, Atlantic Gelatin, General Electric, Hollingsworth and Vose, USM, Digital Equipment, Raytheon and Data General require a substantial capital investment that will take years to pay off in savings. Some water conservation measures will have costs which exceed the benefits. Recycling It must be understood that water is used to remove a contaminant from a process. This contaminant can be heat or a waste from a process. If water is recycled the contaminant must be removed or it will reach a high enough concentra- tion where the water cannot perform its function. Heat can be removed with a cooling tower or cooling pond, or it can be run through a heat exchanger and the heat recovered for another use in the facility. There are some examples where cooling water provides heat for portions of buildings. One must keep in mind, however, that cooling water needs are greatest in the summer months when the need for space heating is negligible. Limited technology does exist for removing chemical contaminants from water so it can be recycled. Suspended and insoluble contaminants can often be filtered out or removed in settling tanks or ponds so the water can be recycled. Dissolved contaminants are more difficult to remove, however. Ion exchange, evaporative recovery and reverse osmosis have been successful in a few applications but their energy requirements, along with high capital and maintenance costs, have prevented wide acceptance in indus- try. Recycling of water with dissolved contaminants is used more often to reduce a water pollution problem rather than to conserve water. V J 55 ------- A Reuse Reuse differs from recycling in that the same water is used two or more times for different purposes. Usually, the first use of the water is that requiring the highest quality. In that first use a contaminant (heat, chemical, etc.) is added which makes it unfit for recycling. The contaminant may not affect another use of the water. There are many examples of reuse. Cooling water can be used as feed for other processes such as boiler feed water or metal finishing where the heat may actually be a benefit rather than a contaminant. Raytheon's Lowell Plant uses cooling water as feed to its plating area. Water contaminated with a waste substance may be entirely suitable for flushing toilets. Water from a rinse tank following a chemical process is often suitable for the rinse tank preceding that process. Digital Equipment Corporation in Maynard is a pioneer is using this technique. Even treated wastewater may have secondary uses, such as for air exhaust scrubbers or flush toilets. There are no set rules for reuse of water; rather, the water leaving an operation should be studied to determine whether it is of a quality suitable for another operation in the plant. Although water reuse does require more extensive piping within the plant, it can often be justified by the savings in water, sewage, energy and wastewater treatment costs. As with any water conservation project a cost/benefit analysis is recommended for each proposed water reuse ap- plication . Equipment Modification Processes and equipment which consume water can be designed or modified to use water more efficiently. Waste- water treatment requirements have caused most industries to carefully examine their processes to determine how to minimize wastewater. Notable studies have been made in the 56 ------- r food and paper industries which have resulted in continual reductions in water use per unit of production for those industries. Hollingsworth and Vose, a paper company in East Walpole, has cut its daily consumption from four million gallons per day (mgd) to 1.8 mgd in the past seven years. After its program has been completed it will use only 1 mgd, a reduction of 75 percent. Many other industries show similar results. I am most familiar with light manufacturing industries where the largest user operations involve cooling or metal finishing. Cooling water which had previously gone down the drain is now being recycled or reused for other pro- cesses. Only in the oldest facilities, where piping changes would be prohibitively expensive, is once-through cooling water a continued practice in progressive companies. Metal finishing operations offer many opportunities for water conservation. Whenever a single rinse tank is changed to a two-tank, counterflow rinse the water require- ment for that rinsing operation drops 90 percent. A three- tank counterflow rinse uses less than five percent of the water of a single tank. Addition of a "stagnant rinse" further reduces water consumed because less contaminant remains on the part when it enters the flowing rinse. Spray rinses or fog nozzles can sometimes rinse parts using far less water than an immersion rinse. Flat products such as printed circuit boards can be "squeegied" nearly free of contaminants prior to rinsing. Flow restrictors can be installed in pipes to rinse tanks. In order to reduce water consumption when a process is not in use, conductivity controls are often installed. They measure the level of contaminant in water and automatically shut off water in rinse tanks not in use. Some operations have foot pedals which turn on water only when the operator is using the rinse tank. Hoses used for floor washing are equipped with spring loaded valves J 57 ------- 1 so they are off when not in use. One of the best ways to keep water cost down is to hold all major users accountable for their consumption. This is the same as submetering an apartment house. Once an apartment dweller or a department manager in industry is charged for his consumption he will find ways to eliminate waste. The responsibility must lie with the ultimate user. Submetering also provides useful information as to where potential savings are most likely to occur. It is a valuable tool for the water audit. Private Supplies There are instances when private supplies from local wells or surface water sources are available for a portion of an industry's water requirements. Rarely, if ever, can the public supply be completely eliminated, however, because there are potable water needs at every facility. Providing potable water for employees from private sources can be difficult and expensive. Some industries do tap private sources for cooling water, non-critical process needs and for watering of lawns and other landscaping. But this is not the answer by any means since private supplies must sometimes share water resources with public sources of supply, It is important that industries examine their water requirements and use their own supplies whenever they are available at reasonable cost; the quality is adequate and there will be 'no adverse impact on the total water resources of the area. Most "wet" industries depend heavily on their own supplies; in fact they locate on rivers particularly for that reason. But even "dry" industries can benefit from using private sources. Two Raytheon plants in Massachusetts water their landscaping from adjacent ponds or rivers. Many industries along rivers and streams use manmade ponds ) 58 ------- r A for their supply of process and cooling water. USM in Beverly gets much of its water from its own pond. Since the cost of water from public supplies is rising rapidly, more industries are going back to providing some or all of their own water needs. Pricing Policies I stated earlier that water rates should be based on "cost of service." To assume that larger water users waste water because the per-unit cost for them is lower is a common misconception. The facts show that the largest users are the most ardent practitioners of conservation. If demand (rate of use) is considered, as it should be, the industrial user is a blessing to water suppliers. Industrial water demand, especially for "wet" industries, is more constant both daily and seasonally. The extremely high demand on public supplies comes during summer months when homeowners douse their lawns and gardens with potable water, city dwellers open the hydrants, and swimming pools need regular filling. Since seasonal demand places great strain on public supplies, I believe it should be included in the pricing. Water rates should be highest during the summer months when demand (and cost) is the greatest. Partial water bans do not work effectively because homeowners learn to "water like crazy" during the allowable watering periods and much waste occurs. "Time of year" pricing makes great sense as a conservation incentive and would satisfy the cost-of- service concept. The problem with flat or inverted water rates is that they violate the cost-of-service concept and they provide more incentive for the small, seasonal consumer to waste even more. They don't consider where the waste occurs. Whenever you deviate from cost-of-service pricing one group of customers ends up subsidizing another group. The group V. y 59 ------- A being subsidized has no incentive to conserve. Suggestions State programs should allow industry to continue their voluntary water conservation programs without the obstacles of dealing with restrictive regulations. Efforts should be made to educate those industries not aware of the poten- tial benefits from a water conservation program. Local communities should discuss their water resource problems with businesses so that supply and quality decisions can be reached in a way that uses community funds wisely, avoids adverse economic impacts, and maximizes conservation incentives for all users. SUMMARY Industry believes water conservation is good business practice and entirely consistent with a balanced utility cost reduction program. Water and sewage rates based on cost- of-service would provide the optimum incentive for savings. Seasonal pricing would help to reduce the high summer demand and should be investigated. V J 60 ------- r WHAT CAN BE DONE IN THE FUTURE TO CONSERVE WATER Victor DiChristina Lynnfield Center Water District Lynnfield has received some notoriety in the press lately for having a water shortage which has forced a ban on new home construction (except for those with private wells). It was not that Lynnfield was not farsighted in anticipating its future needs; expansion plans have been in existence since 1966 for a reservoir and treatment facility. But the people of Lynnfield rejected these plans because of the proposed facility's estimated $7 million cost; they hope to pursue less costly alternatives. One of the cheapest alternatives is conservation. Con- servation and effective water management would reduce our water needs by 20 percent and provide us with the critical time needed to plan and implement future water supplies. Whether a community has a water shortage or not, it makes good sense to conserve and protect this precious natural resource. We have already heard of the many ways to effectively conserve and recycle water. The statistics are clear, the techniques and devices are at hand, and, as Governor Dukakis has mentioned, the time to act is now. Any future water conservation benefits will be a result of current measures taken by both state and local governments, motivating and working with water boards, commissions, DPW's and private companies. We want to know that we're not alone and that there is help available to promote public education and publicity, enact new laws and policies, and revise ordinances and regulations. In our own small way in Lynnfield we are trying to implement various aspects of these measures to solve our problems. We are trying to inform and educate our residents. V y 61 ------- With the help of interested groups, such as our Conservation Commission and local EPA representatives, we recently held a public awareness night which featured an address by Senator Edward Brooke; public response was excellent. Our local Women's Club has held water device demonstrations and has helped make available at wholesale cost water-saving toilet dams and showerhead devices. We provide information and assistance on the location andoperation of private wells for outside watering. We are considering a new water rate schedule which would provide conservation incentives by allowing a baseline per person guota of water at a nominal cost, with a rapidly escalating cost scale for amounts in excess of the quota. Cost and tax incentives will motivate the general public psychologically towards conservation measures. Our current goal should be conversion to low-cost toilet dams and re- strictor showerheads. For the longer range we should provide guidance and incentives for exploiting waterless composting toilets, water-saving appliances, special faucets, low water use landscaping, and residential pressure regulators. The latter item is currently being evaluated by the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission in a pilot test program for conservation purposes. In Lynnfield the recently measured pressure range of water service varied from 24 to 80 PSI. Laws and building codes can also be revised to require the use of water conservation fixtures in residential, commercial and industrial construction. One way to insure significant water conservation in new homes would be to re- quire installation of water-saving toilets and showerheads. In the absence of state legislation setting standards for fixtures and appliances sold in Massachusetts, local author- ities should impose standards on local plumbing regulations. Fairfax County in northern Virgini.a in 19 72 added water- saving requirements to its plumbing code; reports are that the requirements have saved both water and energy. Several V J 62 ------- r \ counties in California have also adopted similar measures. For commercial and industrial users, such as car washes, restaurants, and certain industries, graywater recycling pays off for both supplier and consumer, especially if water cost economics favor conservation and not increased usage. State and local governments should take the initiative in converting municipal buildings, schools and institutions to water-saving devices. Currently toilets in industrial and government buildings operate on direct line pressure and use about ten gallons per flush. Toilets which use half this amount are available. In addition, schools could convert their showerheads to the water-saving types which pay for themselves in energy savings alone. Holy Cross University using showerhead restrictors reports saving 35 million gallons/year and $25-30,000 in heating costs. All buildings should also be metered and have a leak detection and repair program in place. Finally, the issue of zoning and the protection of ground and surface water supplies from development should be evaluated and acted upon. In many communities, land development proposals for both residential and commercial buildings are approved without consideration of the potential impact on local water systems. It is usually after the fact that serious problems are identified. Builders could be required to estimate the amount of water consumption anticipated for a structure especially important for commercial and industrial buildings. Similarly, protection and good management of our wet- lands, streams, rivers and watersheds are all-important since these are the sources of our water. Increasing development pressure and our limited conservation land acquisition budgets deny us the complete preservation of these environments. An example was the recent case of the Lynnfield Conservation Commission against a local land developer in which the latter wished to develop a 2.3-acre y 63 ------- natural storage pond; the Commission said the pond clearly fell under the protection of the Wetlands Act of Chapter 131, Section 40 of the General Law. The State Department of Environmental Quality ruled in favor of the developer. Although the approved land use by the developer may have indeed been satisfactory in this case it was difficult for Conserva- tion Commission members, unskilled in hydrology, to prove otherwise. Only time will tell whether the decision was a right one. In Maine, environmental laws place the burden of proof on developers to show, prior to development approval, that environmental guality will not be altered. Our state should critically review the existing laws for consistency and adequacy, and protective restrictions should be imposed for critical wetlands, future well sites, and reservoirs under the Massachusetts Wetlands Restriction Program. Future control of water run-off and surface drainage is important and could be used effectively to replenish our groundwater supplies. Recent developments, such as use of porous pavements, can significantly increase the residence time of surface water to help recharge groundwater supplies. These are only a few ideas. In the next hour we will all have an opportunity to suggest ways the State can assist us in promoting water conservation and in developing a State Water Conservation Program. V y 64 ------- r ~\ DISCUSSION Following their formal presentations, the speakers part- icipated with the audience in a discussion moderated by Secretary Evelyn Murphy. The text of the discussion has been reconstructed from audio tapes and comprehensive notes; how- ever, it should not be considered a verbatim transcript. Person in the audience: I am a member of the Water Resources Commission which is authorized by the Legislature to develop water policies. It is time for the state water plan to get off the drawing boards. Secretary Murphy: (Agreement) Person in the audience: My concern is with the 201 (sewage treatment) program. It is beyond the control of NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act). Yet, many communities are giving up their chance of becoming self-sufficient in water resources once they are sewered. We need to stop the mill of 201 project approvals which occur even before the 208 planning process has been completed. Do you think we can come down hard on the 201 program? Secretary Murphy: (Agreement) Same person: Good, thanks. Can you at least suggest that the Water Resources Commission look at the implications of deciding between piping/sewers versus septic tanks? J 65 ------- A Secretary Murphy: Yes . Person in the audience: I'm Dick Miller, Executive Director of the Lake Cochi- tuate Watershed Association. I'm interested in the same problem. I'm looking for a way for the people at this meeting to move forward on this issue. I hope more people will speak on this 201 issue and will try to find some action steps to take. Perhaps Massachusetts could put pressure on EPA to resolve some of the problems which are basically not state but national problems. The 201 facilities lean so heavily toward a regional depletion of local groundwater, and 201 money, thus far, has been used for everything but reducing the depen- dency on sewage treatment, sewer collection and treatment plants. This seems to me to be a serious problem. I'd like to find out how we, not just you, Evelyn, as we know you are already interested in the problem, can help get a coordinated comment to EPA. We want to use more wisely the billions of dollars being spent nationally this week, next month on 201 planning. It seems to me that the Facilities Plan is the first step in the 201 process and there is where water conservation should be studied. I've heard of a few special cases where something other than a big pipe has been funded. But, these are special cases. I think that they are a cop-out on the main issue and how to get to that issue effectively remains a problem. I'm hoping that some of the people on the panel can comment on whether now is a good time to press EPA for policy changes in the 201 program or is now inappropriate because of the big rush to spend funds by September 30, 1977. Richard Schaefer (Speaker): I personally agree with what Dick has said and pri- vately I've tried to encourage EPA to view water conservation V, J 66 ------- A as cost effective. Although I am not a lawyer, I personally believe that the law and cost effective guidelines permit the use of funding water conservation devices for 201 pro- jects. In terms of your other suggestion about the use of septic tanks, there has been some policy change and recently septic tanks were funded by EPA if they had suf- ficient 0 & M (operation and maintenance) associated with them. I believe that we will see more changes. The best thing to do is write to Tom Jorling (EPA, Assistant Admin- istrator for Land, Water and Hazardous Materials) and say that this type of action is desired. That is what it is really going to take...a lot of people writing in, saying we believe that you can do this, and would you please do it. Bart Hague, EPA, Region I: 201 facilities planning regulations and cost effective guidelines require consideration of all feasible alterna- tives, which can include evaluation of water conservation programs as a basis for calculating water consumption fig- ures. It is a question of the State (Division of Water Pollution Control) supporting these requirements. It is essentially supporting the kind of work your wetlands office, Food and Agriculture Department and your water conservation program are trying to do. It is the issue of cranking in the protection of groundwater supplies from the densities induced by new sewer lines through wetlands, recharge areas, and prime agricultural areas. These densities are increased at the expense of groundwater and stream flow. So, I think that EPA and the State, particularly the Division of Water Pollution Control, have to work together to make the changes. It's so easy for buckpassing to occur. EPA construction grants people say "yes," but the Division of Water Pollution Control doesn't want it that way and vice versa. This is a great opportunity for you, Evelyn. V J 67 ------- A Secretary Murphy: (Agreement) Frank Gregg, NERBC Chairman: There is something which must be acknowledged here and that is the kind of advice the federal government is getting from states on how to deal with this issue. The state water pollution control people, who are directly in charge of the construction grants program, feel great pressure to obligate all their funds. They have been under pressure from EPA for years to build regional facilities -- the bigger the better. So, we have a whole system operating which is designed to obligate money as fast as possible for regional assistance. Later on, we got this critical view of what the 201 program is doing to an overall water management system. Most of the advice that Tom Jorling and Doug Costle (EPA Administrator) are getting is still from the people who are directly involved in administering the construction grants program. I think that there is a real dichotomy within state government not just in Massachusetts, but elsewhere between people who view the overall environmental management system and people who are administering the construction grants aspect. I can assure you that Tom Jorling wants to hear from you. He is anxious to modify the rules of the program, but he's got to receive support for any changes. Secretary Murphy: I've got to comment so that you'll understand where I am at on this issue. There are conflicting signals being heard. EPA has just promulgated a change in administrative policy which takes a close look at cost effectiveness in lateral collective sewer projects. There is no doubt that V J 68 ------- A Massachusetts is under extreme pressure to spend all the money by the end of September of this year. It's a hard call. We don't want to lose what could be $100 million. There's also no doubt that once the deadline has gone by all of us will want to take a different look at the pro- gram. The real issue now is whether we want to look at it before the deadline. I feel politically that over the last two years environmental issues in Massachusetts have been greatly strengthened and the political base broadened by some support from labor groups. Labor support for the 201 pro- gram has carried over into support for the environmental statutes, regulatory programs, and the budget. It's use- ful and nice to have the state building trade lobby for the environmental budget, as they did a couple of weeks ago. I agree with Bart's suggestion that states should join with EPA to promulgate new regulations. The State and EPA could work hand in hand. I'd love to do that. Person in audience: There are two proposals presently before Congress: 1. The Step 3 grant (construction of the system) would be amended to require that communities in- stitute water conservation programs. 2. EPA's percentage of funds would be increased from 7 5 percent to 80 percent if a community had an appropriate water conservation program in place. What do you think about these proposals? Richard Schaefer (Speaker): Personally, I cannot support the second proposal because a number of studies have shown that the problem with water pollution nowadays is not so much with construc- tion grant money, but with operation and maintenance aspects of water treatment. Local people are worried about O & M. If more emphasis were placed on 0 & M, the preliminary V. J 69 ------- A studies we have indicate that the capital expenditures could be substantially reduced. So, I think that it is too narrow a viewpoint to increase capital funds only. As an economist, I would say that adding five percent to a grant just to get water conservation implemented would cost the government probably more than if they paid for all the water conservation efforts directly. If there is to be a change in the law (PL 92-500) I hope that the entire structure is changed to permit funding of a combination of capital grants and 0 & M. Evelyn Murphy; This discussion point is illustrative of a general theme that I see coming out of Washington: to tie more and more federal funding to water conservation efforts. Secretary Andrus (Department of Interior) wrote in a policy statement for President Carter that federal funds for water supply and perhaps for housing should be tied to water conservation actions. I think that we are beginning to see a conserted effort to tie federal monies with some fair weight. Person in the audience; Industries have a problem because they are given tax incentives to abate pollution, but not to decrease water used in their operations. So, the economic incentives are avail- able only after the water is polluted and not in conserving water in the beginning of the process. Bill Blatchley, Honeywell; I agree that this is a particular problem. Industry does not get a tax write-off if we change upstream the process itself to make it more economical and to reduce copper, nickel or zinc. At the end of the line, there's no tax write-off at all. I recognize the problem, but as I'm not a tax lawyer I don't know how to resolve it. J 70 ------- r ~\ Richard Schaefer: I would say that the best way to change the law is for industry to lobby with congressional representatives. Now is the time to offer suggestions on how industry can help clean up the environment. Person in the audience: (Lengthy description of a wetlands case where the local conservation commission's Order of Conditions was superseded by the Department of Environmental Quality Engineering. The speaker was very concerned about the overruling because he felt DEQE's Superseding Order was more permissive and environmentally damaging). What is DEQE's policy on supporting conservation commissions which take a hard-line stance on protecting the environment? Evelyn Murphy; It has been the Commissioner's policy and position, for the last couple of years, to support to every extent possible the rulings of the local conservation commissions. Now, I hear often that this is not happening. We need to hear quickly when this is the case so that we can do something about it. Certainly, Commissioner Standley (in charge of DEQE) supports this policy. I think that the only way to achieve wetlands protection is to support conservation commissions when they take a hard line. So, I hope that this is going to happen very consistently. To get to the basics of the problem: some conservation commissions are very good and some are very poor. I don't know what makes a good one or why certain towns attract particularly good commissioners. The conservation commis- sioners are volunteers. I think that this is a major problem. If the town refuses to back up its conservation commission with monetary fees, for example, then the com- V. J 71 ------- r ¦\ missioners are working with their hands tied behind their backs. Person in the audience: I think this subject goes beyond conservation commis- sioners. It is true of all town boards. There is a great need, I think, on the state level to look at how the boards and various towns are staffed. There has to be some place where we can go for assistance in interpreting the laws and in making judgements and decisions. In many cases the opposition is well organized. The state should recognize those handicaps and provide some aid to voluntary groups whose interest is in protecting the environment. Evelyn Murphy; (Agreement) Super idea. Person in the audience: Given the MDC's (Metropolitan District Commission) current over-withdrawal from the Quabbin Reservoir system, are voluntary water conservation measures enough? Evelyn Murphy: As we all know, the MDC has a short-term problem. If we can conserve through encouragement, that would be nicer. However, if we don't start seeing substantial change water saving devices in homes, for example then we will have to require water conservation. Dick Miller: I'd like to speak in favor of requiring conservation. I think that the whole purpose of changing policies is to bring in that portion of society which is unwilling to help, and to stop putting all the load on the people who are al- V y 72 ------- ready contributing to water conservation. The question I have which is related to this dis- cussion of voluntary vs. required action deals with pricing policy. The only controversy between speakers today was on the issue of price structure recommendations. Several people said that increased pricing was more fair, but wouldn't result in adequate incentives. I'd like to find out what might be an industrial position that would maintain economic incentives to conserve. Too often, wasting water is cheaper than installing conservation measures. Now, that's the exact opposite of what we ought to be talking about today. It is very important to figure out an escala- ting price structure that affects industry, but does so fairly. One such price structure was mentioned today: cost- of-service price. That's what I'm asking for also as long as sewers and reservoirs are included in calculating water supply costs. How do we detail this policy? Bill Blatchley: You're asking me to suggest an incentive for industry. I hope you are not asking me to cut my throat in doing so. I recognize that there is a problem. We can talk about water conservation, pollution control, energy conservation. The difficulty is how to revise the use of natural resources without too adversely affecting your constituents. I don't really know the answer to the question. Per- haps it lies with communication and the different level on which we are communicating with each other now. People at a high eschelon within industry must be involved. Per- haps one way to do this is by having presidents talk with regional administrators. Perhaps it means public policy officials going out and selling their positions to presi- dents, general managers, or to whichever person signs for expensive equipment and is responsible for the profit or loss of his division. It has been my experience that most V. J 73 ------- \ industrial leaders at the vice-presidential level are ex- tremely bright, sensitive, and can appreciate problems and support economically viable solutions. In summary, the question you raised fits into a larger one; the answer to the larger question is communication at a higher level than what we are doing now. Evelyn Murphy: On that note, let me bring this conference to a close. However, let me briefly summarize this discussion and con- ference in terms of future directions: I get a clear sense of an impatience for action. The discussion about legislation and policy changes are timely. I get the sense that there are a lot of people who are interested in moving both to take our water supply policy study off the boards and get on with it as well as push for state and federal legislation. I also hear a constant theme -- both outside in coffee breaks and here around public education. It has to do with kids and with information exchange. The state could learn who is doing what conservation measure; which is most effective, and why. There's another theme concerning how water conservation fits into a larger problem. Water conservation should not be taken out of context; it is connected to 201, 208, and other aspects of water resources planning and management. Another issue I keep hearing over and over again is the need to beef up the organizational structures whether it is the Water Resources Commission, some other state agencies, or the conservation commissions. We really are serious about doing this. The final point, which we have ducked intentionally, is the issue of pricing. It seemed important to me that we proceed with conservation without raising the J 74 ------- A spectre of increased prices to see whether some volunteer and less sustained efforts could work. The advice about upping the level of dialogue to people who are making the decisions on technologies and construction budgets is well worth doing at this time. We thank the panel members very much today for the time and effort that went into their presentations. We thank you all for coming and the New England Aquarium staff for their marvelous support all day. I really do see this conference as the beginning of a process. I would like to continue to have these seminars over a period of time in order to check on how well the state is doing, how well you're doing. The next step will then be to figure out some device by which we start to measure our progress in water conservation. Thank you. U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1 9 7 77 0 2-7 8 3/6fi V. J 75 ------- OCLC Connexion Page 1 of 1 OCLC 84315431 Held by EHA - 4 other holdings Rec stat c Entei Type a ELvl K BLvl m Form Entered 19790713 Replaced 20200302 Srce d Audn Ctrl Conf 1 Biog MRec Lang eng Ctry mau Cont Desc i Ills a GPubf LitF 0 Indx 0 Fest 0 DtSt s Dates 1977 040 M *b eng *c HLS *d FLL *d OCLCF *d OCLCO *d OCLCQ *d OCL *d OCLCO *d OCLCQ *d OCLCA *d EHA 050 4 TC425.M66 *b M486x 088 EPA 901-R-77-019 099 EPA 901-R-77-019 049 EHAD 111 2 Massachusetts Conference on Water Conservation +d (1977: *c Boston, Mass.) 245 1 0 Massachusetts Conference on Water Conservation proceedings / *c Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region I, New England River Basins Commission. 264 1 [Boston, MA]: *b U.S. Environmental Protection Agesncy Region I, *c 1977. 300 75 pages : *b illustrations ; *c 28 cm 336 text txt +2 rdacontent 337 unmediated *b n +2 rdamedia 338 volume *b nc *2 rdacarrier 500 Cover title. 500 "June 1977." 500 Sponsored by the Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, the New England River Basins Commission, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region I. 650 0 Water conservation *z Massachusetts *v Congresses. 650 7 Water conservation. *2 fast *0 (OCoLC)fstO1171608 651 7 Massachusetts. *2 fast *0 (OCoLC)fstOI204307 655 7 Conference papers and proceedings. *2 fast +0 (OCoLC)fst01423772 710 1 Massachusetts. *b Executive Office of Environmental Affairs. *e sponsor. 710 2 New England River Basins Commission, ^e sponsor. 710 1 United States. *b Environmental Protection Agency. *b Region I. *e sponsor. Delete Holdings- Export- Label- Submit- Replace-C Report Error- Update Holdings-C Validate-C 043 n-us-ma Workflow-In Process about:blank 3/2/2020 ------- |