groundwater recharge and provide opportunities for faculty and students to develop educational outreach programs. in summary, we are recommended -- recommending investing in the second decade for a total of $400 million, including the efp project. this is an increase from the 2010 recommendation and is an exciting new chapter. these projects will improve the performance of our system over time and potentially create an enduring legacy. i will break for questions or discussions. >> on the early implementation projects, there is a total of $57 million. what is the status of that?

these are being proposed? >> you would be approving the funding. >> you would have seen the funding in the 10-year capital program. >> is that all within the 110 of the first decade? >> yes. >> so, in terms -- these are of a tight end scale that is designed to help us understand what we can do and how we can make those larger objectives? >> yes. >> the idea was that there was something green we had not done that much. we wanted to try out the projects, but we wanted enough money to pick the ones that worked. that is why we have money that

is still sitting there after we have found the ones that work the best. >> that is very much the same kind of concept we have in the technology policy assignment before we go full scale. the $400 million, that would save the $60 million in order to get answers to things. this will make us smarter, to figure out how we will really deal with that? >> the assessment process would come back to was based on the final modeling and the more time we would have to go through each phase and. >> so, has the urban -- the urban water management process is a secret process? you would have to pick how to go forward on these. >> so, that is a place holder some at the moment?

>> yes. >> any questions? >> one of the benefits that you listed, a beautification peace, goes back to the framing. we will do is bring the entire project online. by putting these pilots out there, it shows we can beautify the city and create jobs with ancillary benefits. really educating the public as to what green is and what it means. i wanted to flag that in the reflection of these people as f program. >> i have seen this in other places. a lot is accomplished just by sine id. someone notices that something is cool, then they find out the

reason it is there. so, that can be a vague part of it as well. whenever is going on at turkey and franklin, there are a couple of around their, and there is a war conservation. -- water conservation. >> thank you. >> now i will call upon them, from the science team. >> thank you, rosie. commissioners, it is a pleasure to be with you again today. back here.

and this afternoon we will go through the options in two sections. first, the bill go through the base side, which consists of 65% of the city. then we will look at the west side. on the base side. this area conveys a flow to the southeast plant. these are currently undergoing the watershed assessment process, to be completed at the end of next year. we do have a series of homs visions in the late 1970's it

friday hyatt of in terms of the vases side it in the -- the bass site itself, there are many creeks that go to the bag. many of which are part of the combined sewer system. rosie mentioned that some of the green opportunities are to possibly daylight some of these creeds. also of inches on the base and, which creates seismic vulnerability issues that we will talk about in a few minutes. there are 29 locations that discharge collectively about 1.5

billion gallons in the five watershed areas. now, as we look at existing conditions, we have four areas of concern to us. one, lack of redundancy. this is primarily focused on the talk earlier mentioned in the channel. the channel for a week inveighs 70% of the flow that gets to the se land for treatment. constructed in 1978, essentially we have had four failures of that pipeline in the 30 years it has been in existence. it is vulnerable and because it is a single line, it is something that is important. i mention of vulnerability needed, which factors into how we provide redundancy. we also have issues of operational constraints which,

because of complexity, the operators have a lot of options in terms of sending the flow southeast. a lot of decisions that the system itself helps to maintain and we need to protect that. regulations rate compliance is to hold you are on the channel on this list. we are reporting greater than the design criteria within the permit. this is not a violation of the permit, however, as we are looking to improve the situation and we look at this redundancy, we want to make sure that this can give us to the 10 and has the flexibility to give us lower so, the project drivers are forced to maine redundancy. to put something in place that but get us to the area.

to be flexible in the future regarding production. this will play out in the short- term. the south park -- se permit expires in march of next year. the city will be submitting its renewal application of that time, when we enter into negotiations with the target of 10 being reduced in the area. last month, i wanted to remind you, you gave a notice to proceed to look at how we will solve this risk redundancy issue you are from mission creek and they channel -- issue. you are from mission creek.

the red line shows one of many potential options for either a redundant forest or a possible tunnel. reasons to look at a tunnel or threefold. in terms of reliability, it will also put the facility into much more resilient earthquake occurrences. it would provide flexibility, because the tunnel itself would provide a degree of storage, as well as managing those flows, using the system to contain the flow is, minimizing the discharges to the overall structures. the last one was the added stories that date, would provide to the existing storage.

so, we put together a series of options for the treatment plants. in this case we identify current conditions, focusing on the channel, with 1.3 billion gallons of discharge. this is a significant amount of low, given total affinity. our model projects 13 occurrences that they provide for. the do nothing option would maintain things as they are today. option number two looks at providing a redundant force, and putting in a new force on line to go into the existing forest to realign its and wind up with two means of conveying flow from channel to southeast.

now, that would cost about $400 million and does not change the existing amount of discharging occurrences on the volume discharged to the receiving arms. the three tunnel options don't are shown here. there are many other sizes that we could look at in future studies, but when we see the 23 foot tall, it does reduce discharge and volume by 200 million gallons, which is significant, but it only knocks off one occurrence. if we look at the 35, we do get to attend. we continue to reduce volume. you are looking at a situation that says the target, if you recall the level of service, was to get to 10 with this project,

that would be done with something larger. each of these options was to be looked at against the level of service. we have had a couple of issues with this. looking at the regulatory compliance, what we are kind of saying is that we are in compliance now, however the do nothing option does not give us to the target and discharges options 1 and two do not let us do that. all the tunnel sides give us the flexibility as it in half the general area and gives the operator flexibility.

another point is that with the redundancy of catastrophic events, we have seen the tunnels performing better. when we look at the target of getting to attend this charges and the various options we had here, we would get option #4 as being an option that would get us to the desired objective and provide redundancy and reliability. there is a price tag. when we step back from that -- remember, one of our drivers was also green infrastructure. so, we look back at 23 foot diameter tunnel and say -- what if we took part of the money that rose he was talking about

and what if we were to practice green infrastructure in the tunnels? these other types of analyses that will continue to play out during the watershed process and central basin project. various sized tunnels will be looked after to get us to first, the 10, in the one that point so, -- in the one point. so, that gives us a 1-2 budget, but as we continue our studies that we look at, tunnel size, in my not being -- it might wind up being a, not shown here. when we look at this in terms of

how we place it in the schedule, because we definitely want to resolve redundancy issues with a price in place that would guess fan. you are in compliance with of the discharge and you had the option to go lower, if possible. >> that is the approach that we considered for the baseline. >> commissioners? any questions? >> i guess this is an observation. the placeholder in green infrastructure is out there. when we come to this one, we

also had a place holder for the more expensive version. in this plan we have not said it be believe, so i guess a couple of questions. one, is the timing of this such an important thing? what would be the impact of making the timing such that you could -- basically, polled $300 million out of the program as a whole? people figure that they are only going to spend money once. is that process? -- and none reasonable process? what am i missing?

>> the 340 was my is the early implementation stuff. what's the difference between them on this particular project, the difference between the price tag that is not in front of you is about $60 million. so, the discussion was -- you would go ahead and budget the amounts that would raise 1.2. if he wanted to do the green, you would take 60 out of that 340. one of the other options that you might get is a 27 or 28 foot tunnel. as we hired the engineers to look at it, that will come back to you with maximum options that they think work. we do not know what that is yet. if we took it out of one or the other, if we took all of that

money out, you would have no green for anything else. >> i was thinking if it was -- one amount of money was in their unspecified. the idea was that money went through the early implementation projects and we would figure out if it was better. >> we are looking at what you're talking about, using the early implementation projects to basically give us information that says -- if we put this kind of project in place, it will be monitored and we will accept performance. then we look through the watershed characteristics to kind of say -- where else can we put additional green projects or technologies? and then we can be assured, more so than today, that that technology will perform in we will actually get volume reduction in activation

reduction needed for compliance. the idea at that point in time would be to say that we can afford to downsize a tunnel because we were implementing and getting to the same benefit. but i believe that the way it is set up, commissioners, is that we are carrying the $1.2 million in the tunnel because it gives us a lot of flexibility. and it will work long term, if we have to go through reductions. >> just to make it easier, can you go back to the slide and with different options? i am trying to make sure i understand the question period between options three and four, you need $350 million. are you talking about putting that into a different pocket? >> i am suggesting that maybe we have -- >> i will get there in just a

second. on the next line you have a footnote regarding the 23 foot tunnel. >> the price tag for that would be $1.3 billion. >> ok. do the math again. >> the price tag for the 20 foot green tunnel, plus the green to get to the same level of currency would be $1.3 billion. in total. to get to the 23 foot tall, you have $255 million to get to that option. with another $60 million on top of that. >> ok, we have the same thing in

the next section as well. what we show in here is a place holder for the 1.2 and the 400. >> here there is a 1.2, where you need to take $60 million out of that pocket. >> what you have not included is the inflationary costs, correct? >> actually, these are all escalated through filming over the next couple of years. >> one way of raising what i am getting at is -- i have been thinking, and there is a lot of talk about gray and green, solving these different problems there are different ways that you can go, choosing one over the other. the way this makes it sound, it

makes it sound like it is great plus green. -- grey plus green. those are different concepts. i think earlier you said you might consider the grey plus green as those things that green cannot simply accomplish. it feels like we are double counting. we are patting it with extra money is because of the uncertainty around the performance of the green projects. if there is a way of getting, a staging this so that we can make certain decisions -- >> the schedule that we have now for the finished project, we finished the assessment for the end of next year. the planning for the central bayside project is three years. then it goes into two years of

design. during that timeframe, we are hopeful to get some of the results from the early implementation projects. we hope to get the regulatory determination so we know what the ultimate target is at the end of the day. one of the other things not to decide on is one of the other reasons that we pick the 30-foot tunnel is because we know we will get it to 10. and in order to be in compliance with existing requirements we can do this, and to be in a stronger negotiating position with the regulators, that we are doing a project that will get us to meet that. the balance is the reality that says in this process, if there are ways to lower the investment in the gray, bring in some green and has other multiple benefits up in the system, and we can get

to that same end target cost effectively, we can do it and spend the same amount of money, or close. >> and my question is whether it could be less. we that forward to the next workshop and whether we will have to balance these increases against the rate increases and we explore these -- the way in which these decisions could be integrated in order to manage the cost. also, just an observation, any guesses as to what the ceiling height is of this room. -- of this room? somewhere in the 18 to 20 ft., maybe? >> more than that. i would say 30. >> he would say 30? >> yes. >> four point of reference,

these are huge tunnels. what is the height -- the diameter of those things? >> 30 by 40? >> close. >> the one out at ocean beach is about 60 ft. wide and about 40 ft. deep. >> sometimes we forget how large the stuff is that we talk about another point of reference is on the bayside. the existing boxes provide about 126 million gal. worth of storage. this 40 ft. tunnel would increase that by 55 million. it would almost be a 40% increase in a storage volume that gets added protection of the 400 million gal. reduction. >> this is in addition to the

current ones that we have now. >> yes. >> at what point do we reach the maximum -- the maximum before we encourage your logic is used? this city rests on a very delicate balance where the will earthquakes that we may not even feel are occurring. and that is one of the benefits of being in rock. but these tunnels will be in rocket? >> yes. -- >> these tunnels will be in rock? >> yes. gregg's and there may be limitations geologically as to the size of the tunnel as well. >> any other questions? all right, let's proceed. >> go back in the slide, please.

>> we are going to continue now with the west side. the west side can this of the three watershed's shown, sunset, and lake merced. these are part of the ongoing sunset process. we have presented this slide to orient you. what is shown here is the block that tommy just referred to under the highway. a. basically drains to the ocean and it is conveyed to the oceanside plant. we have a video that basically shows how the west side system operates in dry weather and did what whether -- and in wet weather and how it occurs to the beach. we have three examples of how it charges to the ocean beach. in dry weather, you can see the daly city down to the right. you see the sunset area.

as it comes closer to the great highway, they are conveyed in a great storage blocks down to the website punt station. the first little circle -- the west side pump station. the first little circle. when rain occurs, will we see is, again, this same process. the combined sewage flows the same way. an increase through the box on the west side and an increase in the tunnel prepared -- in the tunnel. when higher rains occur, the box system cannot contain the rest of the flows, and that -- and what happens is that three locations to the west of the beach, we have three discharges. now we are going to look at the lincoln way out fa