This document provides background on the author's interest and education in water conservation and management. It then examines urban municipal water use in Boston and Los Angeles as case studies. For Boston, it discusses the early water supply systems from the 17th century onwards and the various infrastructure projects over time to increase supply as population grew. It also covers Boston's sewage treatment history. For Los Angeles, it describes how the initial water source was improperly managed, leading William Mulholland to build the Los Angeles Aqueduct in 1913. Both cities still face challenges in reliably supplying water to growing populations.

1. 1
Urban Municipal Water Use in the United States: Examining Boston and Los Angeles
Casey Ciapciak
My passion for water conservation and management began many years ago, in my first
year of high school. I took a lead role in a debate over which was more important: water versus
oil. Growing up in a suburb outside Boston, I had never given much thought to the importance of
water—there simply was no reason to as I was blessed with an endless supply at my fingertips
for drinking. Assigned the task of defending the importance of water, I encountered in my
research the documentary, Blue Gold: World Water Wars. Sitting on the couch watching with my
dad, I had my first epiphany about water and about the environment in general. I learned how
water covers 70% of our planet, but that only a very small fraction is fresh water and an even
smaller amount is available for drinking. Add to those facts that only a small fraction is not
polluted, and it hit me. I realized that many conflicts center around the availability of water
because unlike oil, humans simply cannot survive without water. There is no alternative. The
more I learned, the more I wanted to know.
Digging much deeper into my research than I had ever done, I won the debate. What my
teacher didn’t realize is that this debate changed my life’s focus. Instead of only increasing my
education, I discovered my passion. My hunger for knowledge steadily increased and I needed to
know everything I could learn about what I could do to change things (especially how to
preserve clean water before the little we have runs out). Continuing through high school, AP
Environmental Science was my favorite course and set me on my track that I continue on today.
I entered St. Michael’s College in August 2012 as an Environmental Studies major and
Biology minor. Experiences I’ve had over the past several years of study have confirmed my
deep interest and motivation to pursue further education and a career in this field.

2. 2
Possibly the last to do so in the St. Michael’s Environmental Studies program, I have
worked with faculty to develop my own self-designed concentration (rather than choose a set
track): Water Conservation and Management. My concentration has been developed around four
main classes (at my home college as well as abroad at Stirling University in Scotland), including
The Geography of Water, Ecosystem Ecology, Drainage Basins, and Community Ecology.
I have learned from and been inspired by my courses at Saint Michael’s College as well
as co-curricular activities. Over the past four summers, I’ve taken on independent environmental
projects for an internship with The Trustees of Reservations (a Massachusetts land conservation
organization). Among various conservation projects, this work included testing water both
independently and later with a Horsley Witten Group staff member, working on a waterway
reconstruction project in my local park. I’ve had similar inspirational experiences on Lake
Champlain, Vermont, and beyond, testing water and analyzing sediment and invertebrates.
Recently, while in Stirling, Scotland (Spring 2015), I took a step further during a senior
level lab called Drainage Basins. During this hydrochemistry lab, we tested water in a local loch
as well as in its inlet and outlet. Teamwork and individual work included determining the
chemistry of the water, statistical analysis and explaining the results.
These highly inspirational and educational experiences have greatly added to my major,
minor and concentration over my college career. Considering my interest and background
knowledge, I have decided to research water in a familiar setting (urban) and continue to increase
my passion for the topic.
Introduction
Water is vital to the survival of civilization. As populations along with water demand
continue to exponentially increase in cities, urban municipal water sources and systems in the

3. 3
United States have faced obstacles. Water has been poorly managed due to pressures and a lack
of knowledge. Yet, along with population and demand, engineering and education/consciousness
about water use have been increasing. Urban systems have created both problems and solutions
in managing water. Today and looking into the future, new awareness and conservation practices
are being applied. In this thesis paper, I have examined municipal water use in Boston and Los
Angeles. As urban examples in the U.S., both have dealt with problems and solutions in
supplying residents with an adequate supply of potable water. Considering Boston and Los
Angeles as case studies, urban municipal water use in the United States has faced many
problems, yet applied many solutions. Yet there is more work to be done as we look into the
future.
Urbanization typically has negative impacts on water sources overall. Effects can include
altered temperature regimes, increased sediment pollution, elevated concentrations of nutrients
and other contaminants, higher algal biomass and consequently bloom events, reduced species
richness, and a higher proportion of invasive species. These harmful impacts often additionally
lead to the loss of wetlands and ecosystem services (Meyer, 2009).
Many of these water quality issues are the result of not only land-use but also water
management and treatment. Quality can even deteriorate while in distribution systems (Deb,
2000). The way in which water systems are designed and managed (while taking factors like
finance and local geology into account) often reflects the culture of a city, as well as its values
and goals. Water is essential to the survival of any life. Thus, the success of a city’s water system
can be correlated to the city’s general success and sustainability (Smith, 2013). Success of a
water system can be measured by hydraulic, structural, water quality, and customer perception
aspects (Deb, 2000).

4. 4
In managing water (including creating projects, programs and policies), both supply and
demand of water must be analyzed (Islam and Susskind, 2012). Water supply systems in major
U.S. cities were generally established during the industrial revolution, when populations and thus
the need for systems exponentially increased (roughly from the 1790s to the 1860s). In 1790,
only five major U.S. cities had populations of 10,000 or more. By 1870, 168 cities surpassed this
number (Smith, 2013). With populations, interest in water quality increased, especially in the
1980s.
Today, water distribution systems are facing problems due to aging. Older systems are
more susceptible to breaks and malfunctions. These common issues increase disruption of
services and public health vulnerability while decreasing customer satisfaction. The reliability
and quality of municipal water is extremely important to any urban area. In urban systems, many
quality issues arise. The water can change while in the distribution system due to the chemistry
of the treated water, interactions with pipe materials, the age of the water, and external
contamination. This affects public health as well as satisfaction. In addition to satisfaction and
aesthetics, problems with water systems can be chemical or microbial. In addition to quality
issues, reliability issues must be addressed, often involving dealing with valves, hydrants, main
breaks, pressure, meter, and cross-connection issues.
While water utility systems often repair and replace parts of the system following a
problem, it is important to identify and fix potential problems before they occur. This increases
the reliability and quality of the water system. Unfortunately, maintaining water quality often
falls second priority to providing adequate pressure and flow to customers. (Deb, 2000).

5. 5
With the pressures of aging infrastructure, increased urbanization and climate change, the
threats to urban water utilities to provide safe, secure, and reliable water are increasing. Urban
water systems must adapt and mitigate (Diaz and Yeh, 2014) proactively, reactively, and in
emergency situations (Deb, 2000). Flint, Michigan is the perfect example we can see over the
past months. The pressures of climate change are increasing the vulnerability of urban water
systems—including stormwater, drinking water and wastewater utilities. Climate change threats
to these systems include (but are not limited to) extended heat waves, changes in precipitation
patterns, frequency and intensity of storms, and sea level rise. These threats have a direct effect
on the supply and function of infrastructure essential to the health and even survival of any
community. Adaptation measures must be taken. Fortunately, U.S. cites have been planning and
implementing solutions. A few response strategies analyzed in this paper and beyond include
incentives, green rooves, stormwater harvesting, aquifer storage and recovery, and saltwater
intrusion barriers (Diaz and Yeh, 2014).
Boston and Los Angeles provide excellent examples to analyze when considering urban
municipal water use in the United States. Both systems have succeeded and failed in different
ways throughout history and the present day.
Boston
Boston’s first reservoir, Conduit, was constructed in the seventeenth century. This
shallow basin was only about twelve feet deep. Water was piped from close wells and streams
for domestic uses as well as fighting fire. In 1785, the Boston Aqueduct Company was
established. Wooden pipes carried water to Boston residents from Jamaica Pond. However,
population continued to grow, reducing and degrading this natural supply of water. In the mid-
1820s, Boston began building its first successful water system. Built a bit later than in other

6. 6
major U.S. cities, the engineers in Boston were able to take advantage of previous progress made
in hydraulic engineering and build a successful system on the first try. The decision was made
for a city-owned system (Smith, 2013). In 1845, the Lake Cochituate Water System constructed
a reservoir and aqueduct, completed in 1848. This system municipal water supply flowed to Frog
Pond in Boston Common (Islam and Susskind, 2012). In 1884, the Boston Main Drainage
System was completed (MWRA, 2015).
By 1900, Boston’s population tripled. Demand along with indoor plumbing increased.
Engineers were forced to increase the water availability. Sources progressively moved west from
Boston, from urban areas to more rural areas. In the 1900s, water supply projects began to
involve creating huge storage reservoirs increasingly west of the city (Islam and Susskind, 2012).
During this time, sewage was pumped directly into Boston Harbor. In 1905, the Wachusett
Aqueduct was created (filled by 1908) and The Quabbin Reservoir was built 1936 to 1946. These
two sources are the sources Boston uses today. The Quabbin Reservoir is about fifty miles west
of Boston and is a 412 billion gallon reservoir. Displacing four towns, this was the largest man-
made reservoir in the world. Cochituate was eventually abandoned in 1951. In 1950, the
Chicopee Valley Aqueduct was constructed for west-flowing water (previously-built
infrastructure flowed east towards Boston).
In 1968, the Deer Island sewage treatment plant was finally built. Previously, sewage had
become a major problem in Boston as well as other urban centers. In 1972, the Clean Water Act
created stricter requirements. By 1991, dumping of raw sewage in the Boston Harbor ceased.
Throughout the 90s, the Deer Island and Boston systems improved (MWRA, 2015). The Boston
Water and Sewer Commission, established in 1977, practices preventative maintenance of

7. 7
Boston’s over-100-years-old distribution system (New England’s oldest and largest water and
sewer systems).
Even with an aged and limited budget, BWSC has developed programs for increased
water quality and reliability, reducing water loss (proactive maintenance can be hard given the
age and size of the system). BSWC has many programs in place, including: a valve maintenance
and repair program; implementing more costly and time-consuming directional flushing (when a
system is flushed less frequently, there are better and longer-lasting results); a water main
clearing and lining system; main replacement program; management practices such as contractor
supervision (the number of main breaks have been reduced by forty per year); an unaccounted-
for water reduction program; and a leak detection and reduction program. This has reduced
unbilled water usage from fifty percent in 1977 to twenty-three percent in 1997 (Deb, 2000)
As time has gone by, Boston has become increasingly conscious of best management
practices. In the 1980s, planners for a treatment plant in Boston Harbor (meeting federal/state
pollution standards) took projected sea level rise throughout 2050 into account and decided to
elevate the plant about two feet (Diaz and Yeh, 2014).
The Massachusetts Water Resource Authority (MWRA) was established in 1985. This
public authority provides drinking water and sewage services to municipalities and industries in
the Boston area (MWRA, 2015). Today, the MWRA provides water to 2.5 million users in 46
cities/towns around the Boston area (Islam and Susskind, 2012). Water is received from the
Quabbin and Wachusett Reservoirs and the Ware River in central and western Massachusetts. A
sewage tunnel operates in Boston Harbor for treated sewage and the Deer Island treatment
system sits at the mouth of the harbor. $3.8 billion dollars have been invested over time into the
Deer Island treatment facility. The MWRA works with the Department of Conservation and

8. 8
Recreation (DCR). Together, both own and operate Boston municipalities (including the
collection, treatment, distribution, and storage facilities for water) (MWRA, 2015). Water
demand has recently decreased due to the MWRA’s intensive leak detection and demand
reduction program and water price increase (Lettenmaier et al., 1999).
The story of Boston harbor is a success story. Over the past twenty-plus years, the
harbor’s water quality has gone from extremely polluted (due to the constant dumping of raw
sewage) to an environmental success story. The Boston Harbor Project has been one of the
largest public work projects of this time. Public policy approaches (including multi-agency
collaboration, regional governance, the role of courts, and the enlistment of academia and
professionals for technical insight) have helped lead to the success of the Boston Harbor clean
up.
These practices must continue and although there will always be improvements to be
made to the local municipal water system, Boston has greatly improved their urban municipal
water use since the seventeenth century.
Los Angeles
Examining Los Angeles’s municipal water use is a great second urban case study to
compare to Boston. While both have faced water use obstacles, Boston’s history has much to do
with infrastructure while discussing Los Angeles has much more to do with the geology/water
availability of the urban location.
The Los Angeles settlement was originally supported by the Los Angeles River. It is
estimated that this source in its original condition could have supported a town of about 250,000.
However, the source was improperly managed. In a semi-arid climate, there were no regulations
or thought on sustainable water use. Consequently, this supply began to decrease while the

9. 9
population increased. In the 1820s and 40s, the industrial revolution increased water pressure and
use, correlating with the exponentially growing population (Blake, 1999).
William Mulholland, who was the head engineer of the Los Angeles Water Department
(which later became the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power), is credited with bringing
water to L.A. Around 1903, Mulholland and others bought land adjacent to the Owens River,
which comes from the Eastern Sierra Nevada Mountains. This department built and operated the
Los Angeles Aqueduct (called the “Owen’s Valley Aqueduct”), completed in 1913. This
aqueduct provided L.A. with four times as much water as previously. From the time it was built
through the present day, this aqueduct has been controversial concerning the environmental
impacts (Mulholland, 2000). The Owen’s River Aqueduct was the city’s first abundant water
supply. It delivered water from about 233 miles away (Smith, 2013).
From its earliest days to the current day, Los Angeles has always faced an ongoing water
shortage problem. This can be attributed to the climate and geology (including drought in a semi-
arid environment and other problems associated with climate change), a lack of original water
sources, and growing population (Feldman, 2009).
The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) currently provides L.A.
residents with water from three main sources: local groundwater, water imported through the
State Water Project, and the Colorado River Aqueduct. The State Water Project includes a
system of reservoirs, pump stations, storage facilities, power plants, and 660 miles of pipes and
canals which span two thirds the length of California. Most of this water is collected as runoff
and snowmelt from Northern California and the Sierra Nevada Mountains. Although the quality
of this water is originally pure, sediments and organic pollutants are gathers and must be treated
before delivered to municipalities. The imported water is treated using conventional treatment

10. 10
methods. The Colorado River Aqueduct stretches 240 miles. It runs from Lake Havasu on the
California-Arizona border to Lake Mathews. California is entitled to take 4.4 million acre feet of
water from the Colorado River per year. Yet, the state is currently taking over 5 million acre feet
(LACWD, 2016).
Los Angeles’s main water sources (the Los Angeles Aqueduct, Colorado River,
California Aqueduct, local groundwater, and reclaimed groundwater) will all be affected by
climate change, water quality, energy and cost limitations. Yet, there is still a growing demand
for water (due to the population and economy) and a desperate need for increased climate
adaptation strategies (Ashoori et al., 2015).
The LADWP utility has implemented large scale operation and management programs to
deal with these issues—improving water system reliability and water quality. LADWP has a
large distribution system that operates reservoirs, storage facilities, and water sources. L.A. is
facing complex issues given their current situation. However, the LADWP is fighting to maintain
acceptable water quality through multiple methods, including utilizing operation and
management procedures such as source blending, continuous monitoring, and chlorine treatment
in reservoirs.
In 1987, the company was forced to stop flushing their system due to drought conditions.
Flushing ceased in the 1990s. During this time, the company had much higher rates of customer
complaints. By 1996, the company began flushing in the areas with the most complaints. By the
2000s, LADWP was flushing a few hundred miles of mains per year. This re-flushing not only
improved customer satisfaction, but brought the company to a better level of compliance with
secondary water treatment standards (measuring turbidity, iron, color and odor) enforced in

11. 11
California (treatment standards vary by state). The flushing also has enhanced microbiological
reliability of the system due to removing biofilm and sediment.
The LADWP has also implemented progressive management practices such as the
comprehensive productivity improvement program. This involves crew size optimization,
implementation of a productivity measurement system, supervisor/personnel training, an
enhanced discipline program, active tools and equipment study, a safety awareness program, and
development of field standards. The Department uses continuous monitoring; this has led to a
significant reduction in chlorine application to open reservoirs. Chlorine is typically added to
open reservoirs to prevent the overgrowth of algae/blooms. Yet, after installing monitoring
devices, the Department now only adds as much Chlorine as is needed. This has decreased costs
as well as chemical trihalomethane formation (chemical compound) (Deb, 2000).
Los Angeles has developed and is practicing best management practices in order to
preserve the small amount of potable water with which they have to work. Water is stored and
recovered in aquifers. In regions that experience wet and dry seasons, especially near large urban
centers (Los Angeles, for example) it is beneficial to store excess water underground in order to
supply water to municipalities during dry seasons. In addition to problems relating to a lack of
water, Los Angeles faces coastal threats to their water system. Specifically, L.A. is battling
saltwater intrusions into their coastal aquifers. Considering future sea level rise, seawater barrier
walls have been installed. Slurry walls were poured to physically prevent seawater from
travelling horizontally and contaminating Los Angeles’s source of groundwater. Another method
being applied involves capturing stormwater in order to decrease drinking water demands. It is
estimated that this practice, properly managed, has the potential to capture two-thirds of the
water used by Los Angeles each year (Diaz and Yeh, 2014).

12. 12
There has been effort to increase environmental awareness and education programs in
Los Angeles. For example, demonstration gardens were set up in the city to show L.A. residents
how they could maintain a garden without using excess water (Islam and Susskind, 2012).
Today, with a population of about four million people living in the heart of Los Angeles,
about 90 percent of the water is imported from outside the city. Water importation will be
effected in the near future (and is already being effected) by climate change, competing
demands, water quality concerns, and environmental restoration projects (Ashoori et al., 2015).
Conclusion
Boston and Los Angeles stand as excellent examples to analyze the state of urban
municipal water use in the United States. Both have dealt with problems on many different levels
and are currently implementing solutions. Yet, there are still looming issues.
In order to enhance the reliability and quality of potable water, urban systems must
understand how these problems have developed. Problems can result from internal practices by
the municipality/inhabitants or from external factors such as geology and climate change.
Mitigation and adaptation practices must be applied to improve the situation of our systems
(Deb, 2000).
Analyzing the current state of U.S. urban municipal water use, we must implement
integrated urban water management (Diaz and Yeh, 2014). Water is being used, polluted and
disposed. We can address water quality and availability issues at the same time by integrating
water sources and processes in a sustainable management way (Islam and Susskind, 2012). This
means closing the loop. The solution is water reuse/recycling. Reclaimed water increases potable
water supply. This management of water can occur around wastewater treatment plants. The
recycled water can be used for irrigation, minimizing pollution discharges into urban water. Only

13. 13
2.5 percent of the United States’ wastewater is reclaimed. This is a hugely missed opportunity
due to a lack of public acceptance as well as additional infrastructure and funding. Water
reuse/recycling can be especially beneficial during times of drought, relieving pressure on
potable water used for industrial practices in urban areas. Pressure on drinking water and
overexploitation of natural resources (an alternative for groundwater augmentation) would also
be reduced. Pollution would be reduced and water quality improved (Diaz and Yeh, 2014).
Examining Boston and Los Angeles as examples, a few operation and maintenance
practices that have helped improve water systems include a flushing program, valve
management, cross connection control, source water blending, and unaccounted for water
reduction programs. Successful design and infrastructure practices include water main cleaning,
lining and replacement, minimization of dead-ends and resident times, construction standards
and practices, storage tanks, and sustainable energy supplies (Deb, 2000). When evaluating
technological solutions, urban municipalities should analyze the costs and benefits for the city.
For example, a few solutions include harvesting rainwater, or reusing grey-water and liquid
waste. Urban municipal water systems must balance competing technical, economic,
environmental, and social goals (Islam and Susskind, 2012). Currently, about 69 percent of
North American water utilities have system water quality monitoring programs that go beyond
regulatory requirements (Deb, 2000). Urban municipal water systems are making efforts to
conserve and properly manage their systems
Examining Boston and Los Angeles as examples, urban centers for municipal water use
in the United States have grappled with failure and success in managing water. In order to
analyze the current state of water management in the United States, my thesis research included
digging into the history of Boston and Los Angeles’s history of managing their water supply. I

14. 14
explored their problems and solutions and what the next steps should be for our nation as we face
future threats to the source without which we cannot exist. Considering the issues of these urban
municipal water systems, we can learn much from past failure as well as success. Looking into
the future, it is important to bring together economic and environmental goals. Each resident
must remember that water is vital to life and that this natural resource is becoming exponentially
threatened as populations continue to grow and pressures to our way of life continue to increase.
I wish I had realized this before my freshman year of high school, but now I have my life’s
passion.

15. 15
References
Adams, G., & Witherspoon, J. (2004). Identifying And Controlling Odor In The Municipal
Wastewater Environment Phase I.
Adidjaja, E. (2012). The demographics of the largest 25 U.S. cities in relation to their online
sustainability reporting and sustainability performance. International Journal of
Interdisciplinary Social Sciences, 6(8), 191-200.
Ashoori, N., Dzombak, D. A., & Small, M. J. (2015). Sustainability review of water-supply
options in the Los Angeles region. Journal of Water Resources Planning and
Management, 141(12).
Blake, G. (1999). The Los Angeles River: It's Life, Death, and Possible Rebirth. Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins University Press.
Connor, M., Werme, C., & Rex, A. (2007). Management Case Study: Boston
Harbor/Massachusetts Bay, Massachusetts. Boston, MA, USA: Elsevier.
Deb, A. K. (2000). Guidance for management of distribution system operation and maintenance.
American Water Works Association.
Diaz, P., & Yeh, D. (2014). Water Reclamation and Sustainability: Adaptation to Climate
Change for Water Utilities. Tampa, Fl, USA: Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, USF.
Elkind, S. (1994). Regionalism, politics and the environment: metropolitan public works in
Boston, Massachusetts and Oakland, California, 1840 to 1940 and beyond. University of
Michigan.
Feldman, D. L. (2009). Preventing the repetition: Or, what los angeles' experience in water
management can teach Atlanta about urban water disputes. Water Resources
Research, 45(4).
Islam, S., & Susskind, L. E. (2012). Water diplomacy: A negotiated approach to managing
complex water networks.
Joskow, P. (2007). Regulation of Natural Monopoly. Handbook of Law and Economics,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2, 1227–1348.
Lettenmaier, D. P., Wood, A. W., Palmer, R. N., Wood, E. F., & Stakhiv, E. Z. (1999). Water
resources implications of global warming: A U.S. regional perspective. Climatic
Change, 43(3), 537-579.

16. 16
Los Angeles County Waterworks Districts. Retrieved February 25, 2016, from LACWD,
https://dpw.lacounty.gov/wwd/web/YourWater/WaterSources.aspx.
Lund, J. R. (1990). The location of closed watersheds for urban water supplies: A theoretical
and historical analysis. Environment & Planning A, 22(5), 667-682.
Meyer, J. L. (2009). Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences: Urban Aquatic Ecosystems.
Athens, GA, USA: Academic Press.
Mulholland, C. (2000). William Mulholland and the rise of Los Angeles. Berkeley : University of
California Press.
MWRA Home. (2015, December ). Retrieved February 25, 2016, from Massachusetts Water
Resources Authority, http://www.mwra.state.ma.us/.
Smith, C. (2013). City Water, City Life: Water and the Infrastructure of Ideas in Urbanizing
Philadelphia, Boston, and Chicago. University of Chicago Press.