national multiple family submetering and allocation billing program ...

LIST OF TABLES
Table ES.1.1 Breakdown of each billing method for all properties identified ............................ xxi
Table ES.1.2 Number of properties included in each analysis, by billing type.......................... xxii
Table ES.1.3 Summarized water use analysis results, submetering ..........................................xxiii
Table ES.1.4 Summarized water use analysis results, RUBS.................................................... xxiv
Table ES.1.5 Summarized water use analysis results, hot water hybrid..................................... xxv
Table ES.1.6 Model #2 summary statistics, coefficient of determination, and significance.... xxvii
Table ES.1.7 Model #2 coefficients and significance of independent variables ....................... xxix
Table ES.1.8 Avoided costs from submetering, utility perspective........................................... xxxi
Table ES.1.9 Cost and benefit per unit analysis for owners who chose to submeter ..............xxxiii
Table ES.1.10 Cost and benefit for owners who choose to allocate....................................... xxxiv
Table ES.1.11 Elasticity values, analysis #1 (utility rates)...................................................... xxxvi
Table ES.1.12 NSUAA Summary of State Regulatory Policies.................................................... xl
Table 1.1 Multi-family plumbing configurations and the possibilities for submetering ............... 9
Table 2.1 Chronological summary of selected price and elasticity studies .................................. 16
Table 2.2 Chronological summary of selected multi-family water savings studies. .................... 26
Table 3.1 Water billing data provided by each participating utility ............................................. 36
Table 3.2 Postcard survey response rates ..................................................................................... 40
Table 3.3 Manager survey properties identified through service companies and a Texas web site
registry.................................................................................................................................... 41
Table 3.4 Manager survey response rate....................................................................................... 43
Table 3.5 Resident survey response rate....................................................................................... 44
Table 3.6 Number of site visits conducted in each study city ..................................................... 48
Table 3.7 Postcard survey statistical significance tests – survey respondents vs. sample frame . 51
Table 3.8 Comparison of annual water use per unit in manager survey respondent properties and
postcard survey respondent properties ................................................................................... 53
Table 4.1 Water and wastewater rates charge by utilities at participating study sites.................. 66
Table 4.2 Average seasonal temperature and precipitation in the study cities. ........................... 67
Table 4.3 Breakdown of each billing method for all properties identified................................... 68
Table 4.4 Average number of units from all identified properties* ............................................. 70
Table 4.5 Breakdown of each billing method for all units identified ........................................... 70
Table 4.6 Average 2001 annual water use per unit for postcard survey respondents................... 71
Table 4.7 Reason billing method was chosen, manager survey respondents ............................... 81
Table 4.8 Issues considered before converting to a separate billing system ................................ 82
Table 4.9 Other services for which residents are billed................................................................ 82
Table 4.10 Who bills residents for water, manager survey respondents ...................................... 83
Table 4.11 Type and frequency of complaints about billing methods.......................................... 84
Table 4.12 Administrative difficulties reported with separate billing programs .......................... 85
Table 4.13 Annual water use per unit (kgal) for properties built before 1995 by fixture changeout
rate.................................................................................................................................... 87
Table 4.14 Reported resident action taken to conserve water ...................................................... 93
Table 4.15 Reported property owner action taken to conserve water........................................... 94
Table 4.16 Reported water billing method, resident survey respondents..................................... 95
Table 4.17 Residents reasons for dissatisfaction with water billing method................................ 97
Table 4.18 Ownership and rental rates, resident survey respondents........................................... 98
vii