national multiple family submetering and allocation billing program ...

the base cost can be spread over many units, than at smaller properties. In all of the cases, the
owner is assumed to pay the monthly service fee. In addition, because recommendations from
this report include mandatory fixture upgrades when converting to a billing program, the analysis
includes the cost of retrofitting a dwelling unit. All calculations assumed that the utility
commodity charge for water and wastewater was $5.27 per thousand gallons. 30 In this study,
commodity charges for water and wastewater ranged from $2.82 to $10.11 per thousand gallons,
and any benefit/cost ratio is going to greatly depend on the utility charges for a specific property.
Submetering in new construction yielded the highest benefit/cost ratio of 5.1.
Retrofitting submeters in an existing property had benefit/cost ratios that varied from 3.1 to 4.0,
depending on whether or not fixtures needed to be upgraded. Installing POU meters on all of the
end uses in a unit resulted in a benefit/cost ratio from 1.9 to 2.1 depending on whether or not the
fixtures needed to be upgraded. A common practice in POU metering involves only installing a
single POU meter on the toilet and then a standard submeter on the hot water line, which, in
terms of cost, is more comparable to the estimates for submetering.
Resident non-payment of water bills was not included in this cost/benefit analysis, as it
was assumed that most owners collect a utility deposit to cover unpaid water bills. It should also
be noted that many owners would not stay with a property for the life cycle of submeters, rather
most only own a property for an average of 7 – 10 years (Urban Land Institute 2003). If one
looks at the simple payback for owning a property for five years, using the same assumptions
from Table 6.2, the simple payback is less than one year for all cases.
RUBS Properties
Unlike submetering, converting to allocation requires almost no up front fees. Because
most water and wastewater billing programs are introduced at lease signing and renewal, rental
prices are often not lowered (but are arguably less likely to increase in the long term). By
keeping the rent the same, all water bills paid by the residents will result in reduced operating
costs. Table 6.3 shows a cost benefit analysis for a property owner who implements a RUBS
system. In this analysis, the owner is assumed to pay the monthly service fee. In addition,
because recommendations from this report include mandatory fixture upgrades when converting
to a billing program, the analysis includes the cost of retrofitting a dwelling unit. Benefit/cost
ratios range from 4.9 to 7.6. It should be noted that resident non-payment of water bills was not
30 This was the average of the water and wastewater commodity charges for the thirteen study sites.
187