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
------- |