project is completed. it is the alameda west portal with the project connects to the coast range tunnel. the contractor will be installing the piping across the calaveras fault zone, and will start tunneling under alameda creek. we have completed three of the shutdowns required for the project, which includes a lot of our scheduling risk, and we are on track to essentially complete this project by september 2011. this shows the installation of the 72-inch baking division pipeline 5. that segment is now 27% complete as it makes its way through the residential area. work on that project this summer has focused on completing improvements across schoolyards and creeks, and we are actually conducting worked on that

segment at 12 different sites simultaneously to facilitate the work. similar work is taking place on the peninsula as we go across a number of residential neighborhoods, parks, schools, and key intersections, you can see that we are literally digging trenches at residents; front doors -- residents; front doors. it is a very tight right away, which makes our work very challenging, and we anticipate that the pipeline installation on both sides of the day will be completed in the spring and summer of next year. on the peninsula side, we are 15% complete. the new crystal springs bypass project is truly a success story in my view. we have completed now the tunnel excavation as well as the installation of lining.

what you see here is a 96-inch pipe that is used for the lining being lower in the tunnel, and that was actually completed in half the time that was planned. we are now 80% complete on that tunnel project, and we are right now doing major planning for a shot down in early 2011. the university retrofit is now 55% complete. this is the second largest reservoir in the city. what i would like to point out here is that the contractor for this project has been a leader in apprenticeships hiring, and we have also done very well on citizen complaints for a project of this size in an urban area. we have only received two complaints, and that is pretty amazing, i think. it reflects the great work by our team and contractor. substantial completion on the project is only seven months away.

the last two slides on my presentation in response to a recommendation by the independent review panel, which wanted us to track milestones at the program level. what you see on the second and third column is a comparison of what we had planned to do and what we had completed. for this reporting quarter, we completed nine of our milestones. the two environmental approvals we missed were for hunters point reservoir and the, station, and in both cases, small amounts of asbestos at the project site required that we do additional work, but this delay will not impact in any way our construction.

we also had one final completion milestone that was missed, and that was for the pump station, and that was due to requirements imposed by the fire department for our emergency generator. we are going to be completing that work in the next week, and the pump station is operational, it is just a matter of the closeout phase being the lead here -- being delayed. we did better on the regional program. only milestone missed was the big advertisement that have the attached reserve program, and there were research agency, that required we modeling, lead an advertisement for that project is now forecasted for august 14, and that completes my

presentation. commissioner moran: some comments. first of all, this is the first quarter with a new format, and i found it greatly improved. wanted to pass that on to you. i am a total ban [inaudible] they make life a whole lot easier. i think the underlying report, especially with the graphics, is clear enough that the project level detail really is not necessary. that is one commissioner's opinion. but i thought the rest of it was so clear and easy to get through that it did not really need the treatment of the cover memo. the kind of thing that i think would benefit in the cover memo is very much the discussion you just went through in terms of from your level what the issues

are that you are wrestling with at the moment, and i think if there was a place for that in writing, that the cover memo might help you with that. subsequently, one thing that really, i guess, presented itself more clearly than it has before, just the way in which some of the project schedules are bunching toward the end. both of the reports really portrays that quite vividly. that would seem to present some management challenges that in the original challenges were not present o. i ask julie about this earlier, and she gave me a great response. i would like to tell the commission what you need to do and are doing to manage that kind of circumstance that might not have been present if things were scheduled going normally.

>> i think, of course, the activities that take place at the end of the program are construction activities. what is key here is to have a very robust construction management program, and as you know, we have spent a lot of time and resources putting together a program that we feel is scalable and that will promote consistency, and what we have done is we are basically dividing up the work in the region and in some cases, on the big projects, it is even broken down at the project level, so by bringing in these 10 individual teams with the help of consultants, we are breaking down the work. i think i would be a little more worried if we had the same team trying to handle all the work, but by breaking it down by region and project, the issue then becomes an issue of consistency, and that is where the pcm program manager is

silky. in my view, i think we have put in place something that can handle that. so far, as we have progress, i have not seen a decrease in performance, and we will be monitoring that very carefully. with that said, we will be, by the end of the year, having an audit team that is going to look at our construction management performance, and we will bring them back probably two more times -- every nine months or so -- to make sure that we are not slipping back. just by the nature of the system we put together and the way we organize the program, i think we are well positioned to be able to get through the ramp up without any major impacts. i am now co-located with the cm team and personally attending a lot more of the field meetings.

by paying more attention to it, at least i can probably catch any potential issues earlier than if i was not focused as much. commissioner moran: the good news is that in the latter stages of the project, we have a better set of tools to deal with construction management issues. the bad news is that we need them because we have run out of slack and really need those systems to operate effectively. one of the things that just drives me is just an observation -- i do not think there is any particular follow-up -- but it does appear that it creates a personal continuity issue. if you have a nice, normally shaped construction schedule, you can afford for people to

leave later on in the project cycle and not suffer much from that. in this circumstance, we need to keep our best talent as long as we possibly can. if they are looking at that club as well -- frankly, i ended up thinking that the ssip might be really helpful in that respect. that does present a different set of issues. >> yes, well, i'm trying to retain a large step. it is already starting, and i think it is to keep some of our strong this people.

president crowley: colleagues, anything? commissioner: it is stunning how we impact so many lives. there is one place where we went through a barbecue pit. we own the right of way through there, so we have a lot of impact, and i have not seen and heard people up in arms. through much of the bay area. a project management team, our construction true, our communication group has been doing an amazing job of letting folks know what we're trying to

minimize disruption and that we are trying to do this for everyone's good, and people have been various understanding. i would be happy to take any of you out to these facilities. good news. president crowley: next item, mike cambell. >> good afternoon. often, it is called clean power sf. the big news is that last week, we did issue a request for proposals, and on the july 9 meeting, you were all getting

feedback and some comments on the earlier situation and you had seen, so i am just going to take a brief moment to talk about this and incorporate those comments and in touch base on the schedule and answer any questions any of you may have. so from the feedback we received, the cleanup, in my opinion, it makes it much more readable. also for the layperson. as you all probably understand, this is a big challenge with the rfp. the first place that was changed regards the oil interview. it will be directly tied to the

same areas that are being scored in the written areas. the second is related to the use of recs. in terms of allowing you to provide the portfolios, there are benefits associated with this. there are some policy perspectives on that, so we limited those with a standard amount, which, right now, is currently 20%, with a goal of 51%. as you recall, the state requirements do not allow the use of these, so that 20% would be about them, and the difference between the 20% in the 15%i(.&m8zu2zñi, half of thg from it, at most 15.5%.

a figure that way, we can split the difference and it the value of the reduce costs for the portfolio but also giving a clear message that we're trying to seek the development of new resources. commissioner vietor: could i ask a question? >> the difference, 15.5%. is a 31% gap that could be made up. . we have limited that to 15.5%. >commissione: that means --

>> that is a number. they are of percentages. it is the 51% we're looking for in total. the 20% is gone. what is best left -- half of the remaining part can be used for this. that goes to 33%. vñiat that point, you are down o only 18%. that is a shrinking portion. commissioner vietor: and will there be a consideration for bids that have lower -- >> yes, the designation clearly

states that a portfolio with more will get less. >> and the trade-off is costs. if we can get that. commissioner vietor: good, i went to go on record again. i am not a big fan. i would hope the bill would include those in the proposal, if possible. >> quickly, for those out there, ,xw ++% energy

credits," so if you could just say that for people who do not know.

>> ok, and another element was commissioners wanted to have the posers clearly described what has made in their mind the program's success. so we have had that be part of what they have required. and getting feedback, just a moment on that. we are hoping to get energy efficient demand response through one or two w vehicles. one is the basic portfolio that the proposal is going to be providing, and the second is, if you recall, when you're planning to have a request for offers, or an rfo process. egwe will be able to get creatie ideas from the main supplier of the program as well is -- as others. there is also altering minimum contract term from five years to three years with the discussion i and particularly how that might relate to the2q rfo process, and that could have something to do with resources. obviously, we are open to longer terms if that is whatqb proposas want to provide, but we did not want to potentially closed doors to good thinking that might be out there. in terms of the schedule moving

forward, the rfp was advertised last week. we will be going in in learning about the program as well as making connections with one another, because a lot of what we are looking for -- creating a consortium. consortium.the deadline for prot to have questions for us, september 15, and we are happy this is a very significant program. we went to make sure that the proposed errors have a chance to get some creative thinking and make connections, to have the full two months. after proposals, will be moving

to the shortlist, so we will try to conclude negotiations with the intention of trying to serve customers in the spring of 2011. that is all but i have prepared, and i will be happy to answer any questions. president crowley: commissioners? thank you. public comment? 3t>> excuse me. conservation. i cannot tell you the please i am to watch the progress on this program. in fact, this is under budget and under schedules, and are some challenges, as the commissioner noted. there are a lot of challenges behind you. .this is gratifying to see.

thank you. president crowley: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon again, commissioners. eric brooks, and we have been working in san francisco over the last few years, and furs, i want to make a quick point to clarify that. when i say i am representing these groups, like the ones that were in the letter, it means i have gone through a careful process of contacting them all. there was one of those groups that seemed to be indicating --

a leader of the coalition, and specifically, after the meeting was open, they were not supportive of the coalition, and i verified with them that they are still supportive of the coalition, so that leads me into where we aren't at with regard to the process. is very important that you know that coalition is not in agreement with how this is rolling out, at all. from the beginning of this process, we have been organizing to make sure about the plan, which of believe you have all right now, that this has all been one project, that pieces of it are not separated out. elastic holders meeting, we a little aggressively made clear to staff that we did not agree with this process going forward this way, and we should take a

few more months to nail it down, so please understand that at this point, they are in a complete disconnect on strategy moving forward. as to specifics, the big issue we have is dividing this up in pieces, what we specifically need to make sure of, now the we are in a better process, is that when the rfo process begins, it needs to move one rfo for the entire package of renewables, efficiency, and solar, installations, and not be divided up into pieces. the project is not going to have the economies of scale. if we do not retain the integrity, so now the we are in will be considered a sort of a

mess, we went to an least make sure that the are of a process is started immediately so we can get up to speed as quickly as possible and get that rfo is one big rfo. you, commissioner vietor, those rec's, we want them zero-fied as quickly as possible. president crowley: next. commissioner: i would like to hear about another program and how the sfpuc is connected to that. i would like some update on where the state is it.

>> and just to be clear, you are talking about the pg&e smart meter program. commissioner vietor: yes, and i do understand. a brief conversation about the status. >> we can do that at the next meeting. >> ok. president crowley: mike, can we do that? >> yes. president crowley: next item. clerk: all items under the consent calendar are considered to be routine and will be acted upon by a single vote, unless an item is requested to be separated. public -- to be separate.

a, staff recommendations. this is for a memorandum of agreement with the city of san bruno. b, staff recommendation to approve an amendment to power enterprise project funded agreement, with no time necessary no time extension necessary, in order to continue to accommodate design projects to improve power system reliability and meet western electricity coordinating council and north american electric reliability corp. regulatory requirements. c, approving a water and a

prize water system improvement program, with urs/soha jv, to provide additional engineering services for design, bid, awards, and construction support, necessary to address the geotechnical and structural deficiencies found under amendment 1 and authorize the general manager of the san francisco public utilities commission to execute this amendment, increasing the amount by over $1 million. d, a staff recommendation to increase a contract not to exceed 1 million to one to $25,000 for a total not to exceed two years -- $1,225,000.

e, general engineering san francisco, a peninsula, east bay to hetch hetchy, an enterprise funded contract, for a total contract duration of three years. f, staff recommendation. accept work performed by kj woods for water enterprise, water system improvement program, a funded contract duration of 360 consecutive calendar days and authorized final payment. g, a staff recommendation to advise the general manager of the san francisco public utilities commission with a three-year renewal option for the san francisco headstart at