senior from san francisco -- [indiscernible] i want make sure on sunset area. peace. >> my name is kunan long. >> my name laf fontaine. >> [indiscernible] >> today most of seniors not

speak english. not even me, not speak fluent english, why we join the hearing, someone help me. >> can we have the overhead display. >> the picture and the tv? can you do that? >> he's putting it up. they called for it. can you put it back -- don't worry, we'll fix it. >> there it is. >> no, she's doing a good job. thank you, yeah. can you add a minute to her time, please?

(speaking native language) >> thank you. >> my name is siuay.

>> thank you. >> okay. there it is. we saw the picture. yeah, we saw it. >> you saw the picture already. okay. now san francisco has lots of social problems, like this picture, almost in the city. according to health san francisco health department update report, because people take marijuana and use the health services, it increase 138%. and also, people use marijuana need emergency, increases it

88%. these are san francisco report. we don't want san francisco social problem to increase user of marijuana. most the young generations, they need to go to work. (please stand by) feature.

>> like salmonella, e.coli, such like that, that cannabis can be something that can be controlled pretty simply with e implementing things such as locks, separate indoor equipment, and then, rooms within the commissary shared spaces. we already have those processes and procedures in -- with our -- with our current setup, and we hope to be able to continue to do so. i'd also like to advocate that

there should be permits for pop up shops and vendor permits for special events, and yes, thank you for your time. >> thank you. zoe polk -- it's whatever, so there's zoe polk, and ace, whatever you want to take it in. >> good morning. i'm honored to be here before you speaking on this issue. as you may recall in 2012, the human rights commission did a human rights hearing of the impact on the war on drugs. we had over 100 members of the public who talked about the war on drugs, and about what the consequences are. we were delighted to work with nicole elliott and the department of public health and hope that really laid out a sense of

equity and it's crucial and needs to happen as as soon as as the program is laid out. i also just want to talk about thinking about the report and intersecti intersectionality, we were thinking that people's identities and multiple intersection of identities, so we're taurki we're talking about incarcerated people, for example, which includes veterans who were particularly after the vietnam war experienced high rates of mental disorders, ptsd. it's also in the lgbt community, people are more likely to experience discrimination and harassment, and that is the reason that 16% of transgender identified difficulties are more like

adults are more likely to be incarcerat incarcerated. we know that women are often leveraged to get the male kind of king pin in the drug industry, and they are facing harsh sentences in order to maybe rat out their partners, and they are disproportionately affected by the war on drugs, as well, and i just want you to think about people's identities. thank you. >> thank you. ace, come close us out. >> i'll close it out in two minutes. thank you, supervisors. i'm here specifically something, for everybody giving titles and founders, i'm the founder of case, community assisted enterprise. i'm speaking for the black

community. now, you talk about the unfairness, you talk about the war on drugs, you talk about how many of us down in that building down there, because of a bag of weed, the people been serving their families -- not serving, but providing for their families, all these dispensaries -- everybody's got a great start, everybody's connected, but what about us african -- no, i'm not african, i'm blacks. i want to know how many blacks are in the city prisons, jails right now for an ounce of weed. if anything, you supervisors, release them, and put them in these dispensaries and they'll be millionaires. they put people like me in jail. the war on drugs, you know what

it did to the western edition? it wiped us out. all the black men, it just wiped us out. president's wife just said, just say no to drugs, and now, all of a sudden you want to let these millionaires becomes billionaires? by the way, my name is ace, and i'm on the case. we need places like this, just like you drink your wine and beer, we need to go somewhere so we can be somewhere. so my name is ace, i'm on the case, and i will be finding out who's on the board. thank you very much. >> i don't have anymore speaker cards, but if you'd like to come and does thaddress this committee, please step forward. >> thank you, supervisors. my name is stephanie tucker, and i'm here to speak in support of

the cash compassion program. i think compassion was basically the founding principles of cannabis, and it's really, really important that we honor it and more important that san francisco take a leadership role in it so that the state will follow suit. i'd also like to just bring up the ownership right now is at 20%. if you guys might consider bringing that up to 35, i think in addition, if you can identify other places that, you know, businesses can get funding, liking making available small business loans and -- and things of that sort prior to limiting the way that people can raise cap pital, th would be really thoughtful, and i just want to just also make sure that everybody realizes that on-site consumption is also a tool, a tool that's used to get people off the streets, and that we spoke to the head of dph for the state, who said

that he understood that, and that he would follow suit of the local municipalities, so i hope that you take that into consideration as you move forward. exami and lastly, i just want to express my strong support for the equity program. i want to thank supervisor cohen for taking the lead on that, and that is all. i hope you have a wonderful day, supervisors. >> thank you. next speaker. >> hello. my name is brandon brown. i'm with the equity working group. i'm a retailer, as well. i'll be real quick. appreciate you guys on these long -- these long hauls for public comment. i just want to touch on the consumption lounges as forcing the elderly, as well as lower income housing to break the law, like a man said earlier,

is a fine outside. if you don't have lounges, you're forcing our elderly -- so basically, you have to own your own home in this current circumstance. it's an issue that's been going on for years with existing patients that i have over the years, and so i'd just like to put that talking point in your mind that without consumption lounges, you're forcing people to break the law, either smoking inside, inside their home, where they might lose their home, or outside, where they might get a fine. obviously, you're heard the thousand feet in front of a daycare is inequitiable. i believe 500 away is enough away from a school, and the 300 feet radius. thank you very much. >> any other members of the public wish to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed.

okay. so do we need deputy city attorney pearson back here? you're good? okay. so i think we have a couple of things on the agenda. we have amendments proposed by supervisor sheehy. can we take those without objections? supervisor sheehy's amendments that were proposed without objection on the program and on-site consumption? >> i'm okay. >> yes. >> without objection those items are moved and ordered. you want to make a formal amendment, supervisor fewer, on the -- regarding medicinal -- i just want to reiterate again what you were looking for so they can draft that up? >>supervisor fewer: sure. i think that city attorney givner will have language drafted for tomorrow, is that correct? >> yes. you just want to reiterate what it is. >>supervisor fewer: yeah. it's just adding into the amendment strengthening the

integrity of our medicinal cannabis offering, making sure that medicinal patients have access to the loose product, medicine. >>supervisor safai: is that clear, anything else, deputy city givner? >> yeah, let me just make sure i'm capturing what you want. it would be -- the amendment would say something along the lines of the director of the office of cannabis shall adopt rules that ensure that customers purchasing medicinal cannabis, or that -- >>supervisor fewer: medical patients have access to -- direct access to physical product or something like that. >> right, to a variety of different types of product. >>supervisor fewer: exactly. thanks. >>supervisor safai: is that good? >>supervisor fewer: yes, and then, i also wanted to mention i think that miss elliott --

>>supervisor safai: has done some research quickly? so you want to mention that before we make a motion. >> i wanted to clarify my suggested amendments that i was asking you guys to propose. >>supervisor safai: okay. >> page 58, line 12, for cannabis retailers this is one that we did officer, striking authorizes and did -- >>supervisor safai: oh, no, wait. >> page 58 first -- >>supervisor safai: can we dale with just ensuring that we're talking about that there's language in there that says the operators shall have loose product made available to medicinal patients on-site? >>supervisor fewer: yes. >> yes. >> so that's something the board can vote on tomorrow. >>supervisor safai: so we'd -- we don't need to vote on that. we're just giving you direction. okay. clear. and then, with regard to page 58, line 14, where it says a

cannabis retailer permit authorizes the permitee, i think we want to strike the word authorizes and replace it with requires. okay. we'll do that and what's the next one? >> page 60, line 19. >>supervisor safai: page -- oops, why is this going backward? >> you would do the same thing, strike authorizes and replace with requires. >>supervisor safai: so those two areas. so motion to strike the word authorizes on page 14 -- on line 14, page 58, and strike the word authorizes on page 60, line 19. >> moved. >>supervisor fewer: moved. >>supervisor safai: without objection, that is ordered. and then, the direction that i gave you guys earlier, in terms

of the good neighbor policy and the management and security plan, that they must be approved by the director of office of cannabis, in consultation with the local police captain and the office of the supervisor, so if you could have that drafted for tomorrow, that would be great. >>mr. givner: we will the ordnance can't require the director to consult with the supervisor's office, but within her discretion, she can -- >> i wanted to get on the record what the intent was, and then, you can draft it legally so that there's no overstep of powers. okay. >>supervisor safai: so for the individuals that we're talking about commissary spaces, my office is drafting language of

commissary locations in retail. we're working out -- there's an institutional language conflict between the department of public health and the planning department, so we're in the process of working on that now, and we will infuse into that conversation the idea of -- of commissary spaces for he hadible hadib hadible -- edible, we'll have that conversation and see what we can do. there's some very strict processes that have to be in place. it's not as easy as saying, this is already used as a bakery, there are zones ordinances in terms of how spaces with used. it's called an accessory use, so zoned for a limited restaurant, and then, you want to come in and do an accessory

use, and you want to come in and do a commissary kitchens. they're not necessarily in the places you might think intuitively. they're not always on neighborhood commercial corridors, and so it's something that we're tackling, but now that i heard that multiple times as a way to kind of foster this conversation, we're happy to infuse -- that's not going to dealt with this language today in this legislation. the other piece that we have heard about is the idea of deliveries. there's been a lot of conversation about all of the retail, but we haven't spent a lot of time talking about the business of delivery and delivery permits. we have 16 delivery permits. there's individuals in the industry that are trying to do predictable delivery. we have a -- i have heard, and i -- i will speak for myself, generally, i have a problem with there being unlimited amounts or excessive amount of product in a car or in a vehicle. i understand the idea of

getting it to the doorstep in a fast manner, but i also understand that you have security issues that arise with that. i also understand that from that, there arises the concern for -- how should i say this delicately? for abuse of the system because if someone is intended to have, and the way that this is -- predictable delivery works, is you're supposed to have an alfiatifiln of a brick and mortar retail, but from what we have from talking to individuals in the industry, that predictable delivery are going directly to the manufacturers and distributors and cutting out the brick and mortar, so that presents some issues. we'll have to come back to that. so what i appropriates is we split the file. make a motion to send the entire -- the edited version with the amendments that we made today

with recommendation to the board tomorrow. >>supervisor fewer: yes, i agree. i also concur, that i think that the issue of delivery, we can speak about that at a later date, and -- and also, just get updated on where state legislation is and blah, blah, blah on that. >>supervisor safai: right. in terms of w-2 employees, labor piece, we just don't have time to daeal with that right now. and then, the last thing we heard from a lot of folks is the concern, 20% amount of ownership, and we said this to a lot of you privately, and i've had conversation with my colleagues, and i know they have with you, addres well. we understand the industry, and we understand there's barriers, but we don't want these licenses to become a commodity. we need to revisit that conversation, so we're going to leave the threshold at 20%.

that's why we split the legislative file. this file will remain here and here can continue do hato have conversa about this, but the goal is to be ready for january 1, so splitting the file and sending the file with full recommendation to the board from this body. without objection that's ordered. >> can i clarify that order? >>supervisor safai: yes. >> the matter is amended. the matter will be duplicated. one version of that duplicated file will be referred to the board of supervisors meeting at community report as amended for tomorrow's meeting. >>supervisor safai: with full recommendation. >> clerk: and the other portion will remain in committee. >>supervisor safai: yes, correct. >> clerk: correct. >>supervisor safai: any other matters before us today, mr. clerk? >> clerk: that completes the agenda. >>supervisor safai: so moved, and this committee is now closed. thank you. you.

>> today, i wanted to kickoff and welcome you to the first every family well forum (clapping.) >> compromising is carmen chu currently which this of the family forum we put this event dough went to a lot of community meetings and we're he and she about families worries and

troubles aaron planning for the future and ahsha safai for buying a home and college and retirement and for many of the seniors how to passing on their prompts to their kids. >> the family forum benefits throughout san francisco i'm supervisor norman yee representing district 7 people are homeowners fritter buyers and they don't thinks the planning. >> what you'll notice if you walk around today's activities multiple languages transactions available for people in the seminars and 101 counseling and the today, we not only have vendors that have come here the seminars where people are lining about important topics was of most unique pieces we have one-on-one free counseling for people so important that people understand about taxes and how

you transfer your assets to our next generation because we do it wrong as you may know to lose much money. >> we did if grassroots on the radio and worked with all nonprofit and partners to get the word out we personally went to community meeting to tell people about this event we'll have a whole line of people that will wait to ask skews i'm thinking about passing on my property or so glad i can speak but i cannot speak english well we created in first every family forum and hope that will bring a lot of people good information to plan for their future three hundred people signed up for 101 counterand we so hope that is a model for success for the future and hope to do more if we learn from this one to be better

>> good afternoon, everyone. madame secretary, will you take the roll? [roll call] and we have a quorum. >> we'll not have closed session today as an announcement and we'll review or approve the minutes of

october 24. commissioners do i have a motion? >> so move. >> second. >> there any public comment unrelated to the agenda today? >> mr. president, can we call for public comment on the minutes? >> yes, i'm sorry. public comment on the minutes. forgive me. ok. all in favor -- >> aye. >> opposed? >> ok. passes. ok. public comment unrelated to the agenda. welcome. >> my name is steve yetzer and i wanted to speak. i'm a resident and native of san francisco on the issue of privatization of public spaces. i believe that the people of san francisco have had enough of privatization of public resources. the drive in san francisco to build more million dollar condominiums has to end. we have to stop it. working-class people are being

driven out of san francisco. they can't afford to live here. their children can't grow up here and public spaces should be for the public. so we believe that we have to stop the transfer of all public resources to private entity, private developers wherever they are and also we have to build working class housing for working people. and the city should do that. we've had enough evictions, we've had enough workers being told they have to drive two or three hours to get to work. that is destroying san francisco. and the people of san francisco are fed up with it and angry. we have gridlock in the city. all these uber cabs, people come in from hundreds of miles into san francisco. it's like blockaded and this is a social crisis. it is a political crisis. and the boards that represent the city of san francisco, the public boards have to take a stand that the interests of san francisco working people are first before the developers, the billionaires and speculators who want to turn every location into a condo. they would like to close the

streets and build condos. that is where they're and we have to put a stop to that to protect the working people of san francisco, the future of san francisco. right now working people, there is signs up for working people to come. they can't even come to san francisco and work here because of the cost of commuting. it is time we take a strong stand and say enough is enough. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. any other general public comment unrelated to the agenda? ok. next item. >> wireless communications. >> ok. we'll go through the advanced calendar. >> no, it's the commission has any comments and we do have a comment for a public comment. ok. all right. any public comment related to communications? ok. with that, next item.

>> i believe you have a card. >> video actually here. this is for item number five. and it is mr. mike ferreira. are you here? welcome. >> thank you, commissioners. i'm the conservation chair for the loma chapter of the sierra club. and we, in unison with the san francisco bay chapter have been following this ridge trail program for a few years now. and i do want to start by saying that all of us, sierra club, audobon society, native plant society, committee for green foothills, they're involved in unison on this. have a great appreciation for

the transparency that we've been getting from your staff. it is exemplary. i did want to say that. we're also pleased with the level of personnel that we're assigned to do the e.i.r. for this. ok? we feel like san francisco has put forward some of its very best minds for that. >> $50. [phone ringing] >> oh, ok. there have been several outreach meetings about this. and as you are aware, there is the existing road north of highway 92 and a proposed new trail south of highway 92. and the e.i.r. that is in process now is trying to deal with that. we are quite concerned that it's -- that there isn't a discussion about how you get across highway 92. it would seem that to have the

two trails, without answering that, is equivalent to an atractive nuisance. i commuted can on highway 92 for 25 years. i'm a former member of the planning commission and council, etc.,etc. that road can't be a surface crossing from one trail to another. there has to be some better solution, go under it, go over it, whatever. and that really should be understood before we create this new trail to the south. i can understand some resistance to want to do that because that is a big problem with big dollars associated with it. i would pass the information to you that about 14 years ago, the county took a look and cal trans at an overpass at the intersection of 35 and highway 92.

i don't think it encompass -- or it thought of bicycles or pedestrian, but going back to whatever that is, and modifying it might solve that problem. it would also direct the trail to highway 35, which is yet another consideration -- i'm running out of time, sorry -- but we also support the idea that the study should look as much as possible at an alignment closer to highway 35. thank you. >> all right. thank you. any other public comment related to this item? >> i'm curious about -- is that alternate being analyzed and where are we with that? thank you. or i guess steve. or steve. [laughter] sorry. hi, steve. >> thank you. natural resources and lands management.

the short version is we agreed that that highway crossing is particularly troublesome. it has been a big problem for cal trans for a number of years and there's been confusion about our proposed project and how it relates to the current situation. we're not proposing to solve that problem or to build anything to cross the highway. but we are planning to have enough of a staging area on the south side so people can use the trail we're planning to build and not have to worry about trying to get across the highway. that will be clear, i think, in the document when it comes out. all the work that is being done now still needs to support the potential for risk that would be created by having more people going up to our new trail and using the highways and that is what's made it a little more complicated and taken more time. >> great. thank you. i appreciate that. >> any other public comment related to this item? moving on. other commission business. any other public comment -- yes, sir. >> thank you, commissioner. i just wanted to make a comment

about the number or the amount of paper that we just received that we try to get, you know, electronic versions of the agenda out on thursday before the meeting so we have a chance to look at it. >> i think it would be much more respectful to our time if staff can make a point of getting the final version of the materials to the commission secretary on time for her to distribute it with a regular package on thursdays. thank you. >> any other commission business? ok. next item. >> item seven's report of the general manager. >> good afternoon. i definitely agree with you on making sure that we get that

package together so i'll work with donna to make sure that that happens. the first item is clean power s.f.f.. >> thank you. barbara hill, assistant general manager for power. it is our usual time for an update on where things are for clean power s.f. we're continuing to serve 80,000 customers. i'm happy to say that our opt out rate remains a low 3.2%. we have 3.9% of our active, enrolled customers signed up for super grain. that is all great news. we're cutting another set of customers over to our service in january so we wiped the waiting list clean a few weeks bag and we already have a waiting list of 62 in that short amount of time. later on the agenda, we'll be talking about our growth plan and it would be useful to take a moment to talk about what else is going on in the c.c.a.

space in california just to give you some context. you know, we're not alone out there with the program that is trying to expand and we are all in the same market so i thought it would be helpful to take a look at some slides if folks could put the slides up. we have california -- if i could get the slides, please. there we go. oh. well. imagine the shape of california. [laughter] what you see here is the state. there are a number of colored portions and there are some that show gray. hopefully they show appropriately gray on the screens that you have on your desks, commissioners or in the paper handouts. there is paper handouts on the table for the folks in the room. i'm sorry that the visual doesn't come out as intended. but the main point here is san francisco is a little spot near the bay there. and all that other color are

communities, counties, collections of communities who are actively pursuing community choice agregation. the communities that are actually serving customers are noted one through nine on the right-hand side there. and if we just go from the top of the state down, you see humboldt county and served by the redwood coast energy authority. you see mendocino and sonoma counties served by sonoma clean power. you see napa and marin and parts of solano served by m.c.e. you see san francisco. clean power s.f. then you see san mateo county -- no, san mateo county is the next big color there.

showing in yellow and that is by beautiful clean energy. santa clara county is being served by silicon valley clean energy with the exception of the city of san jose. who is exploring community choice. they have an implementation plan. certification is under review with the california p.c. and they have designate add new director, a former member of our staff. and then we have the -- go a little inland to lancaster, the city of lancaster, serving customers through lancaster choice energy and the cities of apple valley and pico rivera served by apple valley choice energy and prime pico rivera innovative municipal energy. those are the communities actively serving customers through a community choice

agregation business structure. unfortunately what you can't see because of the presentment on this slide screen are counties that are gray, which are a number of inland coins where they are activically exploring and exploring the feasibility study and pursuing the idea pretty aggressively. the other colored counties in areas that i didn't specifically call out, like st. louis obispo, they are actively pursuing it at a higher level. so, maybe they have their implementation plan, like east bay community energy. serving alameda county. they have their implementation plan certified they just haven't started serving customers yet. but they are out in the market, making the arrangements they need to make to be providing service to customers as early as next spring. so we'll be expanting our program at the same time and

that means we're in the market at the same time. that means it is challenging but also means there's all those communities with their voice in front of the california public utilities commission, in front of the legislature. side by side with us with like interests, like perspectives and that is the upside of that. to put our program in a little bit of context, the next slide gives you the information about where we are today relative to the bigger operating c.c.a.s. as i reported, 80,000 accounts, 65 megawatts average demand, our annual revenue is about 38 million and our supply costs about $25 million. and then you see the m.c.e., sonoma peninsula and silicon valley figures. as we grow, that 80,000 accounts becomes 360,000. and that average demand goes from 65 to 420. that puts us on par with these

other larger operating programs. so that is the -- that is the growth that we are talking about. that is the item later on in the agenda. where you'll get a little bit more of a chance to talk about the supply issues. but this puts it in some context for you. with that, i'm happy to take any questions you may have. >> to the chair. >> this is great. thank you. very exciting. i would love in one of our future updates, and maybe you have this, but to understand in total in california, how many customers are being served currently. and maybe what the gray area of what is projected to be online. along the line of what you just did, which is great. it would also be great to have some jobs data in here and i don't know how you want to break it down, maybe in the same way you've done it by county or by state. it would be interesting as far

as jobs that are serving just the c.c.a. as well as the local build out projects that are either coming online or online. >> i would be happy to provide that information, commissioner. i know that not all the c.c.a.s collect the job data. because we have gone through this exercise before of trying to put this information together. i'm not sure all of them collect the jobs data for indirect jobs. they do for their own employees. >> even that would be helpful. thank you. >> you're welcome. >> commissioner? >> thank you, mr. chairman. it would also be interesting to know, or just to see the numbers on -- when this is done, what the breakdown is between c.c.a.s, municipal owned utilities and investor-owned utilities. because we don't list on there the major municipals or t.i.d.

it looks as though the investor-owned share is decreasing significantly. >> yes, it is. i can definitely put together a slide. i'm guessing you are looking for total customers being served, number of megawatts. when you say breakdown -- >> yeah. >> ok. great. >> basically a market share. >> got it. >> thank you. >> you're welcome. >> commissions, any other comments? >> thanks much. >> thank you. >> open for public comment on this item for clean power s.f. anyone here for public comment? >> thank you. president kwon and congratulations. and thank you, commissioners. so lt hosman, representing 350 bay area. just wanted to make a few comments. first of all, really appreciate

this data from staff. i think, as you can see, this was originally a bay area thing and is now spreading south and in the next phase spreading a inland. as c.c.a.s spread south, that is going to increase the political power behind community choice as a model, in terms of statewide regulatory proceedings where there is a lot of back and forth, i would say, between c.c.a. and the monopoly investor and utilities for regulatory power, i guess, who has primacy as the california rate payer. as this spreads south, given the makeup of our state, this will increase the political power of c.c.a. and the normalcy of c.c. a. as it spreads inland, that will go to the next level. so as your staff sometimes makes you aware, there are repeated efforts yearly for the last fours years running in both the legislature and cpuc

to either hamstring or kill the opportunity of these communities to actually affect this. so, really hope that you continue to support the city's strong position against any and all efforts that will continue to come up. to the costs and revenues, i just wanted to point out that when you look at clean power s. fully operating city-wide, you can see that as far as costs, revenues and the amount of energy that we're talking about it is right in line with our neighbors and it is not just san jose or, you know, oakland that isn't even here yet or operating yet. big cities that we consider to be our peers but even just the peninsula is already operating at basically the level that we need to get to. so just to drive the point that this is not a radical thing, this is not a crazy program

that is massively out sized, this is totally in line with everything that everyone has been doing around us at a much faster pace and we really need to get city-wide without worrying about it. lastly, the thing that came up, i think it would be great if the p.u.c. or cal c.c.a. could make the collection of such jobs data, indirect jobs, construction jobs for a new project just a policy so going forward we can use this as a metric and currency for success. thanks. >> thank you. any other public comment on clean power s.f.? i tip my hat to barbara hale for their great work on this. madame secretary, next item, please. >> my next item is an update on mountain tunnel, dan way. >> mr. wade, how are you today? >> doing well, thank you. [applause]

>> good afternoon, commissioners. dan wade. i'm pleased to be here today to give an update on mountain tunnel. by now, everybody knows that the mountain tunnel is located between kirkwood terrace and the priest reservoir. about 19 miles long. in this location, in our system. and the tunnel was constructed 1917 to 1925 and has been in service since that time. it conveys water about 19 miles from early intake right at the end of the kirkwood winstock powerhouse [inaudible] to the priest reservoir, which is the forebay for markets and pen

stocks and includes both lined and unlined sections and deterioration has been noted in past inspections in the portion of the lining section of the tunnel. in this slide, the blue portion downstream of addit 56 is the line section. the purple shown in the slide is the unlined predominantly unlined section of the tunnel. and so as you know in january of this year, we completed the major shutdown to do an inspection and interim repairs of the tunnel. it was completed at the end of january and the good news is the tunnel is in very good condition overall. and it validated the feasibility of going forward with the rehabilitation al terntive for the tunnel. we took all of that data and

evaluated in full the these major alternatives that have been considered and dotted is and crossed our ts to look at the rehabilitation alternative t reline alternative and the alternative that we have been carrying in the previous 10-year c.i.p., which is the bypass alternative. and in july and august, just this last summer, we met with our management oversight committee, the m.o.c. and technical advisory pan, and they concurred with the recommendation from the team to go about with the alternative. and so that alternative meets the 95% of the water capacity standard that was established by the management oversight committee. it meets all the other performance criteria. the recommendation for

downstream control is due to erosion in the tunnel and uld two include one 60-day outage and one 400-day outages to complete the in-tunnel repairs as well as the downstream control. i'll talk about downstream control in just a moment. this al term tiff is fridayer from 550 to $3 million less expensive than the bypass alternatives with downstream controls so it is very attractive from that standpoint. this table shows the costs and i don't expect you to read everything on the slide, other to show you that when you look at the rehabilitate alternative, we've considered three different options within that alternative. on the left hand side of the slide, we have the rehabilitate alternative without downstream control, can we called the base project. that comes in, including construction and soft costs with delivery costs at $147 million.

the rehabilitate alternative with downstream control is $227 million. that is the recommended alternative. the rehabilitation alternative with downstream control and invert smoothing, which would be essentially smoothing by lining the invert of the tun fell or the bottom of the tunnel all the way from 56 up to kirkwood would come in at $292 million. that is not recommended. and so the key elements of the rehabilitate alternative include repairing the defects within the lining system, doing contact grouting which is essentially filling the space between the existing liner with grout to form an integral structural lining system to perform 4,000 feet of in birch smoothing and the existing line portion of the tunnel to

improve access for operations and maintenance. to do road improvements at various locations, to perform the south bypass and for the downstream control it would require a shaft at the priest reservoir location to install isolation valves and steel lining in low-covered areas. if you look at what we plan to do for the paving and the unlined portion of the tunnel from adit 5/6, we line the bottom of the tunnel to improve access. some of the holes when you walk through the tunnel are very deep. you can easily break an ankle or trip while accessing this portion of the tunnel.

then at both the kirkwood bypass and at the south forks siphon, we would remove debris, existing debris that has been trapped in the tunnel and we would also extend the south fork siphon to eliminate the inflow of seepage causing water quality issues in the existing tunnel. so, we would extend the siphon upstream as shown in this slide and develop a new shafts for access and convert the existing tun fell and widen it for improved access to the tunnel at that location. so what is downstream control? downstream control is essentially installing new volume vs at the downstream end of the tunnel, such that we can control the flow of water out of the tunnel from the downstream end as opposed to the upstream end where the control is currently provided. downstream control works as long as your outflow at the downstream of the tunnel is less or equal to the inflow at

the upstream end of the tunnel. now in order to do this, it's a little bit difficult to see on the screen there, but you would essentially construct new -- a new portal at priest reservoir using tunneling methods and a new access shaft into the portal to install two new flow control valves as well as four isolation valves that would allow you to have that flow control at the downstream end of the tunnel. now what that would mean is that your tunnel would be pressurized on a regular basis as opposed to just that certain times of the operational cycle. and so, therefore, we would want to install some steel lining at critical locations at addits as well as low cover areas where we have low cover of rock or soil above the tunnel in order to prevent seepage out of the tunnel as a

result of this work. so the hydraulic and operational characteristics for downstream control mean that erosion would be reduced because when the tow is maintained full, you are able to reduce turbulence, minimize flow velocities, your cyclic running and draining of the tunnel is eliminated, your service fluctuations are minimized, and ground water intrusion is minimized because you have a pressurized tunnel all the time. from an operational standpoint, it would also allow changes of flow rate to be implemented much faster than they are currently. and then lastly the tunnel could be dewatered for entry without draining priest reservoir, which has a substantial benefit for both people and fish during critical outages of the tunnel. and so the benefits of downstream control include water quality benefits,