city and everybody else behind me. in making this decision. >> commissioner vietor has words of wisdom. >> one thing that we have been talking about and moving at and moving toward implementation off is using recycled water because a lot of the potable water, currently goes to non-potable necessary uses like watering of the parks and golf course and whatnot. and my understanding is that there might be some opportunity, especially at city hall, because i brought this up at the last meeting as well, and i think that it has been quite interesting in sacramento has done to allow portions of their lawn to go brown to use that as a message to talk about the drought and pay attention to the issue. and i am wondering if we could hear if there is any progress made on the recycled water, because even to do something like that, and put a sign up, that says... >> totally. >> because of the drought and the conditions that we are facing, we are making a commitment as a city, to move more grasses to the recycled

water space. and you know, to short of going brown, or what you have. because you we to in the beautiful city or what have you, could you speak to that mr. general manager? >> yes, thank you. i think that your comments are right on point. one of the things that we want to take advantage of this opportunity to work with the rec and park, and to help them with their investments. and i think that in front of city hall, instead of allowing the grass to go brown and basically, indicate that don't use the fresh water in a time of drought to water your lawn, a better message is that we need to expand our water supply because this may be the norm, so we need to look at alternative water usage. and so i think that a better message is have the grass, and have the grass green but use the recycled water, because we have plenty that we can utilize and so one of the things that we are working with rec and

park to provide the recycled water so that we can continue to water the lawns and post them and let them know that we are using the recycled water and i think that is a better message that we want to utilize or you know, or don't know, a couple of the golf courses that we used the water from daily city, to water. and so, we really want to expand that, because we are really facing limited amount of water in the future and, that i think this is a step forward for not only the puc but all of the wholesale customers >> absolutely and i just want to add that i called to see if we could use recycled water, and i was told that we are not able to because it is not available in our portion of the city, and i said, could we get it or a water truck if it came out and get it and could we bring it. no. that is not, an option, and so, again, totally, great, but how do i impose that as you know, someone who is trying to learn from you guys? >> well, i think that what you,

and we can talk off line but i think that one of the challenges of recycled water is to make it affordable. and you need to actually find the source of where you can treat it and then you have to put it or bring it to where you can actually use it. and if you just used like, a one lot mere, and then a line over there and that is why we are looking for the golf course and large impactful areas and so we can probably talk to you about your specific situation. but we are looking at golden gate park, and you know, lincoln park and you know the large landscape where we can actually and because we have to bring it from wherever we are looking beside us and so right now we are looking at prosiding a recycle at ocean side treatment plant. and so, we would have to provide, some type of transmission to where we want

to use it and it gets expensive. >> commissioner? >> there is also been some movement at the state level, you know, even before the drought, around glen water regulations and i think that is really the promise for the residential, at this point. and it is to really start to, you know, not only regulate, but potentially for the puc to help subsidize and go to the water systems and i think that already there is, you know, opportunities to have someone come out to your house and see what the hook up would look like and whatnot. and so, you know, on a smaller version of looking at recycled programs, and projects i think that is kind of the next frontier, and you know, whatever we can do as an agency, to really help to facilitate that, and i think that is really going to need to happen, pretty quickly because i think that we are all recognizing that these drought years are going to be coming closer and closer together. and so whatever we can do to you know, support the gray water systems for the residential and you know the recycled water and you know, piping for the new developments and the other things that we have been talking about that we need to look at accelerating now and so i just want to thank you for bringing all of this up

because it is important for us to hear, what is going on, and i think that we are all dealing with it as residents of san francisco. and trying to figure out what we can do to save water, short of, you know, letting our lawns go brown, or you know having to really be, you know, mandated to restrict our water use. so i really appreciate that. and we want to be creative with you on how we can really, help get recycled water to you as well. >> thank you, very much. >> thank you, for being here, thank you very much. >> commissioners any other comments? >> at the risk of upsetting one or more of my colleagues i am going to go ahead and entertain a motion. >> so i just would... if i may, there is two parts of what is presented here, the first part which we would like a vote on, is the ten percent mandatory on irrigation. and so that is the first part, the second part is the

excessive use, and that we didn't and we could present it to you and we could bring it and that portion to you, at the next meeting. >> so there are two motions in order? >> yeah, they are bundled. >> and one motion. >> no, we will take... >> actually one motion today which will be for imposing the mandatory ten percent reduction and that is outside of the irrigation. >> so moved. >> that is the first motion. >> the excess charges for discussion today, would take that up as an action, and next meeting so representing the thoughts on the excess use klargs to guide the staff in bringing back that recommendation. that will be useful. >> okay. >> that does not require a motion. >> so i move that... >> second. >> seconded by vietor. any other public comment on this item? >> seeing none, public comment is now closed. commissioners any further discussion? >> i will go ahead and call the vote. all of those in favor, signify by saying aye. >> aye. >> and the ayes have it and the

motion carries, commissioner vietor. so on the excessive charge conversation, i mean that i think that some of the issues that are developed around the appeals process that it would be important that the next meeting to hear about what that would really look like and what that would mean and maybe even to get a better sense of this 1600 irrigation users who are and don't have, sort of the city agencies of have that as a quarter of that and sort of that a rec and park and how does that break out and i don't know if you can do this in the next couple of weeks, is there going to be any real hard issues with some of these users that you would anticipate, by an excessive charge, you know, mandatory, reduction. you know, and is that potential for them to go over the usage? as far as you know, and who would that be? is it the most, is the rec and park or what have you, so to get a little bit more

information on what it will look like from an appeals perspective as well as who we are talking about that might get affected. >> thank you, commissioner. >> anything else? >> so, we did call for your recollection, we called item ten out of order. and so long as there are no objections, i am proposing that we go back to item number 8. and madam secretary, will you please read number 8? >> item 8 is a south east plant bio solids digesters facilities project update. >> good afternoon, cruz. >> good afternoon, members of the commission, assistant general manager of the infrastructure.

moving from water to the waste water sides of the organization. we would like to present to you the status of the bi. o solids replacement facilities project. as part of the over all project, we set some objectives for what the project will do and we wanted to make a modern treatment facility that will meet the reliability goals of service and meet the present and projected regulatory requirements to the extent that we could project them, and we wanted to change our product from the class b, product to a class a, product and we wanted to achieve the beneficial readings of 100 percent of the bio solid, and 100 percent of the bio gas and in addition to the technical goals, we want to be sure that we have to transform the community asset by doing a contribution, to the

surrounding community, and minimizing odors and noise and traffic and during the construction to promoting training and opportunity of jobs for that community. >> we went through a, and we were in the middle of a process that started with planning in january of 2013. and takes us through the planning phase, and through september of 2015, and at which point, we will enter into the design of the project and that the goals of meeting and slightly in the construction of january of 2018 and we have the general anticipated construction value of in the neighborhood of 800 million dollars on just the construction side. >> and to again, review what sfip goals and in order to provide a compliant reliability and flexible system to manage the storm water, and to be able to adapt to climate change, and to achieve economic and environmental sustainability in

the plant and to make sure that whatever we do maintains repair and affordability. we looked at evaluation criteria, and we looked up technical considerations and we want them tied to our goals and adaptability, and the new and the energy, generation and we looked at greenhouse gas emissions and we looked up financial considerations and we looked up the cost of construction and the over all schedule and the operation and maintenance and the technology and we tested the value of alternatives and the net energy pro-ducks of alternatives and finally in the other side of the triple analysis, we looked up considerations and obviously odor control being a huge factor and the stake holder acceptable of the final design and the greenhouse gas emissions as a result of the project and over all air quality and safety and noise and traffic use and the odor, control and we definitely are looking at a state of the art

system and we have not landed on one and here is an example of something that exists in bright water, which have been able to achieve the zero odors behind the fence line which is our goal as well. to walk you through the analysis process, we started with the world of opportunities, and the options and we looked at everything that was out there in the bio solid world today and there, narrowed that down to four to five valuable alternatives. and we then took those four alternatives, and one subset, and then, we did a further detailed analysis and got it down to two and then put them against each other to come up with a recommendation that we are moving forward with deeper analysis in order to conclude our alternative and analysis report. >> did you say scrub? >> yeah. >> so, we wanted to walk you through the alternatives that were considered. and but not advanced and in that kind of opening world of options.

and we did look at aeroibic digestion, being the process that happens in an oxygen ated environment and we took that off of the table because it is an expensive process and uses a lot of energy and the generation of the oxygen necessary for the process and we looked at stabilization and the lines stabilization and we took that one off of the table because we do not know yet what the impacts of the final product would be formed to line the introduced into this, and again, we wanted to make sure that we will achieve 100 percent of the reuse of the bi.. o solid and we looked at insin ration as an option and we looked at it because of the impacts to the community and did not want to pursue that option any further and we even looked at something called our super critical water oxidation, which is something that exists only in one plant, and i believe in florida. and what we will consider to be not the cutting edge but the bleeding edge, working through that technology and they had an

explosion while we were considering that option and so it became fairly easy to take it off of the table. >> so what did we consider? we considered, four alternatives that we, that are what we say state of the art, and that would meet our goal and one of of our primary goals that is to make sure that we have a class a, bio solid at the end of the process, and the first was digestion, with drying, and from the mechanical drying. and the digestion is what we currently do at our plant and it is an operationally, and it happens at around 100 degree temperature, and where they are familiar with that. and it produces a class b product by itself and you get to class a by post treatment after digestion, through a mechanical drying system. and not all of the different from your clothes dryer at home and you put the product in the machine and it dries it and comes out in a pellet format and the heat kills all of the

bad passage in there and you come out with a class a product and it is a good product and it has the most reuse options of all of the items that we considered and it creates a product that is very easy to transport. and so the benefits of this one were the highest reuse options and the easiest format of the product itself. the challenge that is very expensive and the cost associated with the mechanical drying were very high on the operation's side and both in the form of energy consumption, to one, and to actually power the mechanical driers, but also in the form of operation staff. we did visit plants and found that the mechanical drying was two to five times more expensive for the staff to safely one these dryers and that was one of the optionses and i walked through the four. them. and alternative two, started with the... >> sir?

>> yeah, on that point, did you compare what revenue could be obtained by the sale of the fertilizer supplement and pellets >> we did. >> and offset the cost? >> it did not offset the cost in any measurable way. >> thank you. >> alternative to with starting with the same, and the digestion and non-oxygen environment and the oxygen free environment and then accomplishing the transition from class b to class a through composting and this is what the city of chicago does, they have a massive composting operation as part of the process and the challenge is twofold, one is that you need, i am sorry, i didn't transfer. >> my apologies. >> you need a lot of land because you need to spread out the bio solid over a large area of land to get a thin enough layer in order for the composting to be accomplished and so we looked at two options one will be us buying the land and outside of the city and

county of san francisco. because we would not be able to acquire enough land to have a successful composting operation and as the staff, this obviously had a high capitol cost of acquiring land and then the additional cost of transportation of the sledge, to the composting site. and we also looked at the option of contracting of the composting, and the county of los angeles which is just finishing the construction of a large composting site, and it has far more capacity than they need and has expressed interest if we were to go this route to contract with them for our composting and our concerns not only that the transportation from here down to the county and across to the environmental impacts, but also, the long term cost and why we might be able to lock in a ten or a 15 year contract with the la county, what would those costs look like, 15 years on. and it was more unknown, and so

we also saw this option as viable, but more sensitive, than some of the alternatives that we considered, which i will explain further. >> alternative three, is the temperature, phased anaerobic digestion, process, and it is a process, where you basically go through the digestion process and then goes through a second digestion process and this is similar to what the los angeles plant does and so they run through a single batch, and send it through a secondary batch and then the secondary process, the last of them are killed, and you are coming out with a class a product and the disadvantage over this alternative is are that it requires a lot more land because you have to be able to built two sets of digesters on your plant in order to go through a second batch process, and again, a process that does produce a class a product. >> and then finally the fourth alternative is a new alternative to the united states. and this alternative exists in

europe and has for a decade, successfully, and it is viewed in the united states, washington, d.c. has opted to go this route, about 4 years ago, they opted to go this route, they have just firning construction. and the commissioning in this next month. and in addition, hamp on roads in virginia has decided to go this route as well, and stanford, is considering this option and it is called a they are mal hydrolysis process and this differs from the other three in the sense that it is a pretreatment before the digestion, rather than a post treatment after the digestion, and this particular process, you enter, and you put the sledge into this pretreatment process in the pretreatment it is introduced to high temperature and high pressure primarily induced by steam and it is once through a series of tanks and during that process,

it is effectively acting like an autoclave, killing all of the pathogens, so that what comes out of the process is already clean and it comes out as a very high temperature and it has been cooled and entered into the digestion, and there are two primary advantages to this particular technology. and one, is that by virtue of the pretreatment process, it actually reduces the volume necessary in the digesters and because it starts to break down the product in the pretreatment, and the second, is that as a result of that, your final bio solids ral value is also reduced and so it can reduce, the capacity needs, by 30 to 50 percent, and reduce your over all bio solids product at the end of your process by ten to 15 percent and not only produces a class a product, but it produces it and makes it more manageable for us to accomplish the 100 percent

reuse. >> we did identify all potential reuses of the bio solids, and alternative and while, alternative one, offered the most options, also, alternatives offer all of the many options within the commercial market and we are comfortable that under any of the four alternatives we will have accomplished 100 percent bio solid reuse and, this slide simply shows the examples of what that product looks like, as a class a product at the end and some applications. and over land applications for the product. >> so, in summary, we looked at the four alternatives, and we analyzed them for greenhouse gas emissions and net energy and annual operating costs over all safety, and traffic odor and air quality impacts to the neighborhood. and we found that alternatives three and four, performed substantially better than alternatives one and two. and generally, while they all performed well enough in traffic order and air quality,

the areas of operating costs, energy, consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions definitely moved us away from the alternatives one and two into alternative threes and four. and we then took a second analysis and more deeper than the alternatives three and four and looked at deeper analysis as to with regard to the robustness of the industry, trends and which way the industry is going as it related to the two alternative and over all operations and maintenance of the type of technology. and reuse of the end product, and the reuse of the bio gas. and adaptability to the regulatory changes, and ability to insure that there will be not be regrowth of pathogens in the bio solid and the construction schedule and the digester volume, looking at the two alternatives three performed well enough that alternative four was clearly the winner in all of these alternative and all of these

selection criteria. then we made sure that we went back and compared that analysis to the initial goals that were set and you can see that in every goal category, alternative for the positively allows us to move to the goals that were set by the commission. in summary wha, we do today is that we have a gravity belt thickener for our sludge and we enter it at about five percent solid, by volume, and into our die geters. and then, what comes out is a class b, product that we put into the interfudges and it is a class b product and it the new technology will add the pretreatment. and a couple of changes and, one is that we would further craoen and include the cost of this and further screen the sludge to be sure that we had taken out all of the

non-organic and the sandy grit that we get in the system before turning into the sandy or the hydrolysis process. and once, the process, again, it is sterilized and reaches 300 degrees in the tanks and then we need to cool it off before it goes into the digesters perform at 100 percent and so we include the cost and the technology considerations for the cooling and the heat transfer system that brings it down to the 100 degrees and once it comes out of the digestion, then we go through a thickening process and come out with our cake. the other benefit of the process is that it does generate energy. and energy, that between that, and the digesters which we will then reuse, we will reuse on the site, and plan to use them reuse on the site and the energy necessary to generate all of the steam to recirculate

back into the thermal process and so that it in fact, will be self-containing and generate enough energy to generate enough steam to keep a circular loop and we will have the gas that would be converted to cng and electricity and which will offset s costs associated with the over all operations of the plants. in a very simple analysis, after spending many and it will

be a lot east tore eat, but it will be raw in your stomach and hard to digest, but your body will digest it, and take the same and boil it and mash it and then eat it and it is easy consume and it is easy to digest, that is basically what the process does, and it pretreats this sludge, so that when it gets to the digester and the bacteria have a very easy time digesting, and it breaks it down, but virtue of the temperature and the pressure at the mow molecule level and it takes fewer bugs and they eat it more completely

and we get less bio solid and so it is a pretreatment for the typical digester that makes that job that much easier. it is a technology as a said, that exists in europe and has for ten years and successfully, and we did, do due diligence and go and visit three plants one in ireland, where it first went in ten years ago when it went in it had the challenges and the company that owns this technology came back in and modified the plant and to the own satisfaction everything from on door control and maintainbility. and we also visited, london's crio plant and manchester's yet's room plant, and the other major thing and then finally we ended the tour, actually going to oslow where this technology exists to meet with the ceo and the chief of this particular

technology to go over the company's due diligence, and one of the things that i will say and i was impressed with is that the company has clearly taken its profits and put them back into the research and development and they continue to make the product better and we continue to make it more affordable *fbility to the point that washington, d.c. if we did decide to go with it and it took two years to construct the thp part of their four billion dollar expansion, at blue plains in washington, d.c., and the technology now that they have advanced to the newer operations are 60 percent smaller and 40 percent more efficient, and they were installed in manchester in three weeks and so they have gone from a two year installation to a three week because they continue to make the product better, smaller and more efficient and more reliable and every operator that we spoke to had nothing

but good things to say and they were all completely satisfied that they had made the right decision and talked about taking other plants that they currently had and retrofitting them to this particular technology. and so we feel comfortable moving forward with this, this is an informational presentation, and to let you know that this is the direction that we are going. if we do move continue to move forward in this direction we will continue to have the alternative analysis report by the end of this year and bring back to you, a report, asking for permission to move forward into the environmental phase and into the conceptual entering phase to move project forward and i would like to commend the staff on the puc side as well as the other side and they have been working on an aggressive and he would and they said that it would take six months longer than where we are today to get to where they are and i challenged them to cut that schedule by six months

and they have worked at a very fast, but diligent pace to do so and so we are six months ahead of where we would likely be, if not for all aggressive work by both our staff and the consultant staff. >> and with that, i would like to conclude my presentation. >> commissioners? >> yes. >> commissioner torres. >> the technology that you cited and alternative number for, when you said that the waste is consumed before it goes into the final drawing. >> yeah. >> is it consumed by what? >> what it is is it is broken down. so it is not consumed but it is by virtue of being introduced to the high pressure and the high steam, the sludge is broken down at a moleculer level and so when it enters into the digester, the bacteria that we typically use for the digestion process has an easier time to consume it.