water exceeds our capacity and our treatment capacity, that is when we have something have dis. ccsd throughout the presentation is when the system needs hydraulic relief. on the screen now, we have a map with several members along the side. those are the criteria established collaborative labor with the regional water quality control board of the 1970's. we did our capital improvement program to be able to achieve them. from the lower right, and the middle, we have 10 occurrences. that is where the channel basins are. getting to the north and south on the eastbound side, there is very good performance. the side with 10 occurrences is

challenged because of the large size of that area. to the west, where we have eight occurrences, when that -- when a cfc occurs we have another challenge. that can occur in a public beach. it can affect recreation. this has a lot going on. it is important that you have background on this. prior to the elastic capital program, we had over 7.6 billion gallons of combined discharge is occurring. we had 58 occurrences to the west every year in the beach

area. we had 44 in the north. the southern and central portions, we have 46. those are highlighted there in the box. now, if we look to the middle part of the chart, the design criteria established by the regional board is that first left-hand column. where we are challenged, the only basin where we are challenged for that divine criteria is the central area. once again, that is due to the performance in the creek. there is a huge basin with a lot of runoff. it has been reduced quite a bit, but it is still the biggest contributor to cfd that we have. you will be hearing much about the projects for those areas today. our programmer manager ran at an

calibrated the hydraulic model. it was found to be consistent with performance expectations in every single location, which was once again due to the creek performance. now, i am going to step into the strategies for the first roll. the reason that these are up here is because of what i was just speaking about. we were looking to decrease the occurrence in the central basin. we were looking to get those into our compliance factor. that requires reducing volume going towards this location. so that we can observe the number of times that this location is just charging flow. on the west side we are looking for support to reduce the volume and occurrences that

happened out on ocean beach and public beaches. ok. the second strategy is constructing redundancy for several of our critical forces. they were able to know after seismic events that things would be reliably running. later on in the program he will hear the bayside improvement program. we will talk about different options for meeting this goal. now we will move to gold, which at present is integrated with in green and gray infrastructure. we still do have that metric there, commissioner, which says control and manage flow for 3 hour durations on 1.3 inches of rain. that is our design storm. so, green or gray, we are

looking for any collection system asset that we have to meet this requirement and accommodate that. that is not the case now. we have areas that are sufficient. the second collection system strategy under rule #2 is to maximize protection of the city during a level low service storm, tying it back to the 1.3 inches over three hours. the third is to incorporate green infrastructure and cover it with past -- [laughter] sorry, have to page back now. if i have eyes. develop and incorporate the infrastructure into collection system projects where feasible. i am sorry that it is blocked by the text. the first one is to incorporate

green infrastructure into the projects where feasible. the second strategy is to develop standards for green infrastructure. we have been talking to you a lot about green infrastructure. later you will hear our approach for how we can jump- start this with a working knowledge and training staff to take these projects on, building them to deliver and meet their performance level of service. >> a couple of things before we move on. back to the design store, and i do not want to start a discussion about the design storm, except as follows. my understanding is that these particular words, while the concept was clear from a technical standpoint, were misleading? as long as we are not changing the concept, if there is a better set of words you would like to put in there? >> the words that most engineers

would like to put in there is the five-year storm. my belief is that no one but engineers know what that might mean in san francisco. most people would understand something about the amount of rain over how many hours, but clearly there is not just a flat amount of rain at the same exact point. it goes up and down and there can be a lot of diagrams, if you like. >> which is why i do not want to get into it. >> it seems like a sprinkler. >> when it rains? >> purple rain? [laughter] >> if there is some understanding that this means that as well, if there is a footnote someplace, that will take care of that. these kinds of doctors do have multiple audiences. we can be clear about that. i liked the words here.

2.1 was good. maximizing protection. >> on the next? >> i like that. anyway, that is my comment. yes, sir? >> we have two wordsmiths. >> well, we are making progress. >> would like us to go on? >> i will try to be responsive for the next meeting. today we will be talking a lot about green infrastructure. this chart lays out the infrastructure against the levels of service and goals. for the most part, they scored very well. we did see higher rankings for greg infrastructure when we talked about compliance flexibility. once something is built, we can add pumps and do a lot of different things.

once a piece of green infrastructure is built, it is sized based on certain storm events. we anticipate storms increasing in intensity, so we do have more flexibility with gray. on the other hand, greene offers us a unique opportunity to have public benefits. much of what we build is below the ground. much of it people do not even know is really there. green infrastructure can be on the surface, incorporate storms, screenings, and change neighborhoods, potentially. when we look at green infrastructure, we will also be considering the ancillary benefits. that is why the triple bottom line discussed earlier today is a big deal for us. as we progress through the project concept, we will be coming up with different alternatives for solving these specific problems.

those alternatives will be run through a triple bottom line analysis. if you look at the slides, they did extremely well when they talked about habitats, traffic, and even the potential for groundwater recharge in certain areas of the city. >> ok. >> when we talk about a wider audience, it is always the challenge in my other job to transfer -- translate scientific knowledge into plain english. i think that i want to do dovetail on the comments made by others. we might know what green and gray is, or a five-year storm, but the audience out there that needs to be educated -- we will do the same thing on the digester as to what is it taking so long, which is take -- totally understandable given the reality of what has occurred.

but how do we make it more accessible to the average voter out there? the average sees it -- senior out there does not know the difference between gray and green. how can we make it understandable? that is a challenge. >> it is a challenge, and we do have ideas that will be presented in the infrastructure portion. to have exposures in public areas where people can actually see how we collect storm water and actually perform. we do have ideas that hands on the technology policy. that will be discussed in a little bit. >> also, comparatively, what does it mean when you say gray? >> yes, regret -- yes, yes. >> my understanding is that we will talk about framing at the next workshop on communications, because part of this says that

rates will be going up as a result of this. we need to figure out a way to talk about this that is understandable and acceptable, something where we will be able to get the public at large on board. i wanted to echo that and ask, as we move along, to keep thinking about at. to see that there is enough time at our next workshop to frame this conversation. >> and we are expected to have a conversation about communication, education, and outreach at the next meeting. >> when we recently held the focus groups that reorganized, it was the same thing, spotted buyer commissioners, triple bottom line in green infrastructure does not always integrate with the public. >> the challenge of translating that into language, especially the rules.

>> exactly. we may need to do other details with focus groups. >> the irony of that is that the designation of green and gray was in part an attempt to make it more accessible. although more obscure. [laughter] >> it certainly will be helpful for the discussion. >> the first inning right now, goal no. 3 is to provide benefits to impacted communities. our strategy here would fit nicely with our discussion, the slaying infrastructure in areas where multiple benefits can be achieved. traffic, infiltration. modifying the system to adapt to climate change. the idea is that we would be looking to adapt existing

infrastructure so that it would be able to function to its useful life. we expect that during the course of these things that we are building, we will be seeing climate change, definitely, but also changes to rain storms, intensity, and duration. we need things that can adapt and work well in the future as well. so, now, i just want to check in. if we are comfortable, i think that we had a good discussion on the goals of level service and we got some direction. if we would be comfortable moving to the next section of the workshop? >> commissioners? >> carry-on. >> the next section is program validation. i want to bring up marty, our program adviser. he presented at the treatment workshop and he will be presenting the results of the program management validation

efforts. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you, karen. good afternoon, commissioners. in the treatment workshop, i discussed our intensive nine month foundation effort. the validation process for collections is to sustain rearrest techniques and standards. we identify necessary rehabilitation improvements, like pump stations, and other operational improvements to help us predict the reaction of our system to rainfall. on the screen over here is the picture of the repairs from 2008. i would like to remind the commissioners that we're working under additional repairs for the same force.

karen mentioned the redundancy issue. later we will talk more about the channel enforcement. validation did not just look at the proposed program, but the program operations for maintenance to make sure that everything works together. that the recommendations being brought today are integrated. you may recognize this cost table from the first workshop. the left side summarizes the treatment recommendations from 2010. the right side will summarize the recommendations from current efforts. the numbers outlined in red are a sneak peak of the total cost for collection projects that we will be discussing today, totaling $2.7 billion over 20 years. $3.9 billion is what we talked about at the treatment workshop,

about 20 days ago. we will continue to fill in the blanks. on the upper right-hand side you have your budget scorecard. we will ask you to concentrate on the red, gold, and blue numbers. our goal was not to exceed the $7 billion. during our validation, we continued to have hydraulic models within the system that allowed us to accurately predict response to various rainfall flow conditions. this information helps us to collect the right projects to meet the unique conditions of the structure, like the boxes around the city. the key drivers point of the recommendations are reliability, redundancy, and regulatory

compliance. there is an emphasis on maintaining the excellent record of combined sewer discharge compliance. but we also look at potential regulatory requirements, like less frequent discharges so that we do not have to adapt more stringent requirements for the compliance with in your first goal. condition assessment was once again the foundation of the effort to make sure -- maintain system reliability and remove seismic of vulnerability. we conducted inspections of iraqi systems, including waste water pumps and combined sewer discharge outfalls. those are the pipes leading from the boxes to the ocean base or creek. one example is shown here, in the upper right-hand corner. the condition assessment effort

resulted in 22 out of 24 total pump stations in need of repair rehabilitation, also requiring rehabilitation. you may want to know what that is. these are preventions of the end of the pipes in the outfall. duckbills. it is covered right there. they will go out through the motion of the bay, but they do not allow water during high tides. this is a map that shows the location of the project, which you can see better in the back. of the 35 outfalls, the east side had 29, the west side had seven. of the 24 pump stations, the

east side had 18, the west side had sex. we also looked at operational improvements, like rent control, of which we talked about in the first workshop. preparing your system for storms. we talked about venting the nasal receptors above the nose. picture the embarcadero down there. chemicals and improving velocity within the sewer, so that they carry plants that can be removed. referring to the picture on the left, we can be provided with more detailed rain forecast within the san francisco area. this helps to more accurately predict oncoming rain patterns and react using real time controls. real-time controls allow us to remote readjusts the system to maximize storage and help us reduce overflows.

again allowing flexibility and utilizing the system. compliance with gold number-one. >> i am interested to determine the odor vent stack. so what, it is above our nose. we will smell it anyways, right? >> essentially it goes above your nose, preventing what is objectionable to pedestrians. >> what about people living in the bay view? >> those are still in play. we are talking about today's collection system. i said it at the last workshop. we have talked about the control techniques on the collection side, and this is just one example. >> that is currently the system within the embarcadero?

>> yes, i think. >> you have tested it? >> i have not, but others have. >> i have, and i thought -- big deal. but they did, it made a big difference. >> it disperses? >> it is diluted and you cannot smell it. >> dilution is the solution. [laughter] >> i am sorry. >> given all of this, here is the summary of what we recommend for optional improvements. it is prioritized overtime. the total cost is $838 million. the pump station outfall repairs total about 752. these are essential to the reliability of the system and are similar in urgency to the

base projects that we talked about in the first workshop for treatment. the condition is bad and it needs to be repaired within the first 20 years. the operational odor project falls into the conceptual project category that karen described. we described a place holder wearing these projects would be brought back to that mission. so, we can talk more about the specifics of each project, their cost, and their value. leslie will see a green bar at the bottom for the third decade. this is a place holder for structural improvements and storage boxes. we think that we are ok now, but we will continue to inspect them over the next few years. this is all part of the prioritization process. as promised, here we are filling

in the first row of the scorecard with your recommended projects for reliability and operation. >> a couple of questions. the material that was sent to us, $100 million last, i take it? >> the total was correct on this slide, here. but moving up into that line, it was wrong. >> ok. some of the stuff that we had from the last workshop, before we got to this slide, there were apparent choices. you would have options for triple bottom line. was that the kind of analysis that led to a decision process? this does not have that. why? >> we made will be would call a

presentation of tactical decision. you will see more of that kind of decision making in the next few sessions. these are essential condition projects that we decided to roll into the first part of the presentation. the options that you have are that we have created recommendations for the threshold the spending. the options that have more to change those thresholds. but we would do is go back and prioritize a reaction to that change threshold. if it was lower, we would bring back the projects that would not be included within that threshold and discuss the consequences of what that means. >> commissioners, recall that the last time we did that grouping, it was like the base repairs. that did not really bring a lot of options. then there was -- what do you want to do about digesters?

this was similar to repairing those pump stations. they're just old and you need to fix them. the next idea about green infrastructure and what you do on the base side in the west side, those are all options and there you have the exact same kind of thing. this does not lend itself, this is a pump station or you are done and it seems like a base discretion. if you say there is some $600 million to do it, it is a pump station. >> it does make it less transparent. >> and we can give you a list of all of the individual pump stations, for example, or the individual discharge points. >> which probably would not help. >> the next thing about where it applies is that it gives you that sense of -- so, but it in,

what gets better, what gets worse? >> this keeps you going. >> ok. all right. >> that is the end of my part of the presentation. any more questions or discussions? >> no, thank you very much. >> with that, i would like to introduce my colleague, who will take you through the urban watershed in green infrastructure approach. i would like to recognize that she was recently recognized for her leadership in the bay area clean water association. [applause] >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am going to be covering the

green infrastructure portion of the process today. first, the context and how validation fits into the multiple ways that dream infrastructure is being implemented throughout the city and the larger community. then i will introduce the next efforts in our project and briefly describe green infrastructure technologies and how they have been analyzed within the potential benefits. that i will recommend early presentation projects to the budget. the green infrastructure portion of the validation is part of a larger set of strategies we have been gauging within to encourage green infrastructure throughout the city. in 2010 the commission approve the storm water maintenance ordinance, approving projects > 3000 square feet that are redevelopments or new projects, which are required to manage storm water on site. currently there are more than 6000 projects, with 48 located

on the base side alone. residents and businesses can take advantage of our program and we have been pursuing other projects within. puc is also promoting green infrastructure as part of each project, integrating it into our programs to continue our community incentive grants programs as feasible. this chart shows you the impact of the ordinance and a large environmental protections and savings that we have approved overtime. today we are looking at the top two layers for the recommended layers. as we finish the validation process, staff began the urban water assessment mentioned earlier. this will find