Page 54 - Water Loss Control

36 Cha pte r F o u r

the water suppliers are identified as irrigation districts since they were originated to
provide water for agricultural irrigation. There are several large water wholesalers,
providing bulk volumes of water to small suppliers. The organizational and manage-
ment structure of water utilities varies widely with many systems operated by local
governments; either as municipalities or authorities; and many large and small pri-
vately operated systems existing as well. System boundaries usually coincide with
political boundaries rather than natural (watershed) boundaries.
Typically, water accountability practitioners are distribution system operators and
water conservationists are public affairs or policy professionals. Lacking a national
awareness and consensus on the overall water loss problem, these two camps histori-
cally did not interact widely or integrate their efforts under a single water conservation/
efficiency mission. Fortunately, this has begun to change as stakeholders from both dis-
ciplines are now coordinating on a number of important initiatives.
Establishing standards amid this wide array of conditions is complex but as dem-
onstrated by the implementation of complex water quality mandates under the U.S.
Safe Drinking Water Act (1974, 1996 amendments), not insurmountable.
4.2.4 Environmental Perspective
The United States’ environmental consciousness has grown steadily over the past sev-
eral decades and is now a balancing force in planning and development decisions in the
country. The establishment of the USEPA confirmed that consideration for the environ-
ment must be part of the decision-making process.
High water losses indirectly result in oversized infrastructure, excess energy usage
and unneeded withdrawals or abstractions, from source water supplies; all of which exert
a potentially unnecessary—and sometimes damaging—impact to the environment.
It is likely that a notable number of new source water abstractions and infrastruc-
ture expansions could be avoided if loss reduction was achieved, that is, water loss
reduction could possibly represent one of the largest components of untapped water
resources and potential for energy reduction currently existing in the United States.

4.2.5 The Current Regulatory Structure for Water Loss Management
The structure of the U.S. drinking water industry is highly fragmented, both in owner-
ship and organizational oversight. The regulatory structure varies from state to state,
with many water utilities falling under the auspices of two or more regulatory agencies
that may include government environmental agencies, public utility commissions, river
basin commissions, water management districts; as well as one or more federal agen-
cies. Other important stakeholder organizations, such as county conservation districts,
planning commissions, and watershed associations may also be party to the input and
discussion about water resources management. 1
In the late twentieth century, significant federal governmental involvement created
extensive water quality legislation and rules for clean streams and drinking water. Con-
versely, federal requirements for auditing water delivery and customer consumption
have historically existed with only minimal structure and degree of impact.
Considerable concern has grown for the need to replace aging infrastructure and
identify appropriate funding mechanisms. Yet the scope of infrastructure needs is often
based on projections that don’t include improvements from loss reduction. A more
modest estimate of national infrastructure needs might be derived if realistic loss reduc-
tion and conservation were consistently included in the analysis.