CEI has recently developed a new Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) protocol for creating a water balance that provides a more realistic comparison of various alternatives' impacts on streamflow and aquifers. Our IWRM approach is one that will advance the most cost-beneficial options for sewering, water supply provision, and stormwater handling, essentially blending intelligent infrastructure planning with environmental and resource protection. The protocol also finds and measures the impact of 'offsets' to water losses so that these can be more effectively built into the plan if desired.

Summary

Wastewater facilities planning does not typically consider today's issues related to stormwater, water supply and controlling/guiding growth through Smart Growth and Low Impact Development. Instead, wastewater facilities planning is a 'single-media' approach that arose in the old days of construction grants and federal funding of 90% of the costs of wastewater facilities. Sad to say that those days are long gone and not likely to reappear, so it's time for a new, more cost-effective approach to wastewater and other facilities planning -- one which recognizes the interrelationships between wastewater expansion, development intensity, water supply demand and stormwater generation. This new approach can reduce overall infrastructure costs by considering local regulatory and land use issues, water supplies and stormwater more comprehensively in concert with wastewater planning. The new approach is called Integrated Water Resources Management Planning and it holds great promise for communities interested in balanced growth, economic development and moderating tax bills. Instead of just wastewater planning, it also incorporates significant consideration of the community's future water supply and stormwater infrastructure.

Background

Today's typical wastewater facilities planning sometimes results in excessive sewering and facilities expansion that are costly and sometimes unnecessary. This is because the core methodologies were developed when large wastewater facilities were considered state-of-the-art, and because the impacts of widespread sewering on growth and sprawl were not known at that time over 30 years ago. There was also an understandable tendency to take advantage of the 90% federal funding that existed then, including as much as possible in projects while the money was available. Those funds mostly dried up many years ago, but the same style of wastewater facilities planning persists today.

The new, more comprehensive approach seeks to provide a program that promotes cost-effective public health protection; infrastructure for planned, high quality future growth and the protection and improvement of water supplies and environmental quality. Instead of wastewater being a single instrument of growth control, the approach embodies and orchestrates engineering, science and planning together to address comprehensive infrastructure and growth issues to produce a more cost-effective and balanced outcome that meets the community's desired future vision.

Overview of Approach

The approach begins with the development of a baseline existing or current condition and builds from there. This is very traditional facilities planning. However, unlike traditional facilities planning, this approach relies more heavily on reasonable buildout scenarios that compare what would happen under various conditions, including rezoning and regulatory options, traditional sewering, and more innovative up-to-date options that incorporate Smart Growth and LID principles. Additionally, water supply sources and withdrawal levels, and stormwater generation and disposal or reuse are considered more equally with wastewater facilities planning. Other innovative elements may also be incorporated if desired.

Alternatives Assessment

Unlike traditional wastewater alternatives that usually consider several variations of the same program with a few "straw' alternatives that are actually infeasible, this alternatives assessment considers only viable, feasible best options. Each alternative is the best in its class with no alternatives that are infeasible, although some may be politically unpalatable, and the list should include:

No Action or baseline/No Change option
Regulatory option where zoning/other regulatory changes are used to address identified needs as much as possible
Traditional sewer option with maximum amount of sewering and wastewater facilities expansion
Decentralized sewering and wastewater disposal facilities option
Regionalized option where other communities or entities provide much of the infrastructure and services
Progressive option that includes viable, innovative methods such as LID, Smart Growth, decentralized recharge facilities and other methods

One central element of the new approach is a comparison of the water balance of each alternative. This helps to identify local hydrologic issues that may result from affecting groundwater recharge or streamflows that can in turn affect public Comprehensive Environmental Inc. and private wells and wastewater discharges, as well as flooding levels. A second central element is a cost-benefit analysis of each of the major alternatives. Each of the various scenarios projecting wastewater and stormwater flows and water supply demands are considered jointly, and presented so that community's decision-makers can consider the most appropriate scenario(s) for that locality, its desired economic development strategy, local environmental resources, political structure and existing demographics and infrastructure.

The purpose of these central elements is to circumvent the traditional tendency to look at wastewater, stormwater and water supply as if they are completely separate and unrelated media, and to provide realistic future scenarios that consider costs and the environment, thereby promoting Smart Growth and LID since these are likely going to be more cost-effective and of greater benefit to the community's residents in the long-term. The approach consists of seven main components, including:

Zoning and regulatory analysis
Needs analysis (sewer, water, stormwater)
Alternatives description (sewer, water, stormwater)
Alternatives assessment of cumulative/synergistic impacts
Water balance/flow assessment of alternatives
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Recommended Program

In short, the program will outline:

How many people will potentially live in the community or service area?
What is the community's desired 'vision' for the future?
To support this future, where will water supply come from and how much will be needed?
How much wastewater will be generated and where will it be discharged?
How much stormwater will be generated and where will it be disposed/reused?
What water, wastewater and stormwater capacity will need to be reserved for economic development and in what locations in the community or service area?
How can future costs be minimized while maximizing benefits to the community and the environment?

	CEI Publications \|
Home About CEI CEI's Mission In the News Workshops & Conferences Publications Careers Directions Contact Us Videos CEI Services Civil Engineering Water Supply Brownfields & Hazardous Waste Stormwater Wastewater Low Impact Development / LEED / Green Design Construction & Management / Design-Build Inspection Facility Audits / SPCC Solid Waste Engineering Master Planning / Peer / Regulatory Review Lake / Pond / Wetland Management Industrial / Air Permitting Recreation Planning & Design Helpful Links Site Map	Integrated Water Resources Management Programs (IWRM)
	CEI has recently developed a new Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) protocol for creating a water balance that provides a more realistic comparison of various alternatives' impacts on streamflow and aquifers. Our IWRM approach is one that will advance the most cost-beneficial options for sewering, water supply provision, and stormwater handling, essentially blending intelligent infrastructure planning with environmental and resource protection. The protocol also finds and measures the impact of 'offsets' to water losses so that these can be more effectively built into the plan if desired. Summary Wastewater facilities planning does not typically consider today's issues related to stormwater, water supply and controlling/guiding growth through Smart Growth and Low Impact Development. Instead, wastewater facilities planning is a 'single-media' approach that arose in the old days of construction grants and federal funding of 90% of the costs of wastewater facilities. Sad to say that those days are long gone and not likely to reappear, so it's time for a new, more cost-effective approach to wastewater and other facilities planning -- one which recognizes the interrelationships between wastewater expansion, development intensity, water supply demand and stormwater generation. This new approach can reduce overall infrastructure costs by considering local regulatory and land use issues, water supplies and stormwater more comprehensively in concert with wastewater planning. The new approach is called Integrated Water Resources Management Planning and it holds great promise for communities interested in balanced growth, economic development and moderating tax bills. Instead of just wastewater planning, it also incorporates significant consideration of the community's future water supply and stormwater infrastructure. Background Today's typical wastewater facilities planning sometimes results in excessive sewering and facilities expansion that are costly and sometimes unnecessary. This is because the core methodologies were developed when large wastewater facilities were considered state-of-the-art, and because the impacts of widespread sewering on growth and sprawl were not known at that time over 30 years ago. There was also an understandable tendency to take advantage of the 90% federal funding that existed then, including as much as possible in projects while the money was available. Those funds mostly dried up many years ago, but the same style of wastewater facilities planning persists today. The new, more comprehensive approach seeks to provide a program that promotes cost-effective public health protection; infrastructure for planned, high quality future growth and the protection and improvement of water supplies and environmental quality. Instead of wastewater being a single instrument of growth control, the approach embodies and orchestrates engineering, science and planning together to address comprehensive infrastructure and growth issues to produce a more cost-effective and balanced outcome that meets the community's desired future vision. Overview of Approach The approach begins with the development of a baseline existing or current condition and builds from there. This is very traditional facilities planning. However, unlike traditional facilities planning, this approach relies more heavily on reasonable buildout scenarios that compare what would happen under various conditions, including rezoning and regulatory options, traditional sewering, and more innovative up-to-date options that incorporate Smart Growth and LID principles. Additionally, water supply sources and withdrawal levels, and stormwater generation and disposal or reuse are considered more equally with wastewater facilities planning. Other innovative elements may also be incorporated if desired. Alternatives Assessment Unlike traditional wastewater alternatives that usually consider several variations of the same program with a few "straw' alternatives that are actually infeasible, this alternatives assessment considers only viable, feasible best options. Each alternative is the best in its class with no alternatives that are infeasible, although some may be politically unpalatable, and the list should include: No Action or baseline/No Change option Regulatory option where zoning/other regulatory changes are used to address identified needs as much as possible Traditional sewer option with maximum amount of sewering and wastewater facilities expansion Decentralized sewering and wastewater disposal facilities option Regionalized option where other communities or entities provide much of the infrastructure and services Progressive option that includes viable, innovative methods such as LID, Smart Growth, decentralized recharge facilities and other methods One central element of the new approach is a comparison of the water balance of each alternative. This helps to identify local hydrologic issues that may result from affecting groundwater recharge or streamflows that can in turn affect public Comprehensive Environmental Inc. and private wells and wastewater discharges, as well as flooding levels. A second central element is a cost-benefit analysis of each of the major alternatives. Each of the various scenarios projecting wastewater and stormwater flows and water supply demands are considered jointly, and presented so that community's decision-makers can consider the most appropriate scenario(s) for that locality, its desired economic development strategy, local environmental resources, political structure and existing demographics and infrastructure. The purpose of these central elements is to circumvent the traditional tendency to look at wastewater, stormwater and water supply as if they are completely separate and unrelated media, and to provide realistic future scenarios that consider costs and the environment, thereby promoting Smart Growth and LID since these are likely going to be more cost-effective and of greater benefit to the community's residents in the long-term. The approach consists of seven main components, including: Zoning and regulatory analysis Needs analysis (sewer, water, stormwater) Alternatives description (sewer, water, stormwater) Alternatives assessment of cumulative/synergistic impacts Water balance/flow assessment of alternatives Cost-Benefit Analysis Recommended Program In short, the program will outline: How many people will potentially live in the community or service area? What is the community's desired 'vision' for the future? To support this future, where will water supply come from and how much will be needed? How much wastewater will be generated and where will it be discharged? How much stormwater will be generated and where will it be disposed/reused? What water, wastewater and stormwater capacity will need to be reserved for economic development and in what locations in the community or service area? How can future costs be minimized while maximizing benefits to the community and the environment?	Case Studies
	64 Dilla Street, Milford, MA 01757 21 Depot Street, Merrimack, NH 03054 Toll Free: 800.725.2550 FAX: 800.331.0892

Summary

Background

Overview of Approach

Alternatives Assessment

Case Studies