and the $54.9 million increase in the wsip project -- in the wsip budget will not have any further impacts on rates. this is because the water enterprise will make some adjustment to its 10 year capital program to compensate for this increase in the wsip budget. also, as todd reported in multiple presentation in recent years, we have realized some very significant cost savings in our borrowing rates and these savings will result in lower than otherwise needed future rates to repay the wsip [speaker not understood]. >>> when you approved the revisions to the calaveras dam project back in january, bawsca made 10 different recommendations that were added to the commission resolution. the [speaker not understood] of assessment that led to today's march 2013 revised wsip addresses a great number of these recommendations, however, there are a few recommendations we plan to address separately in amendments to the commission that will be forthcoming. this slide here shows the three topics this memo will address. >>> now, in closing here in summary are the actions that we are asking -- seeking your

and as a whole, these revisions are referred to as the march 2013 revised wsip. your packet today includes several documents that support our request to revise the program, and also included in the commission packet is a letter from bawsca dated april 17th, which includes comments on our proposed wsip provisions. so, why is it that we have to revise the program? it is not unusual for a program of this complexity to go through revisions periodically. as project moves through the various phases of pre-construction and then into construction, new information becomes available and new challenges are also oftentimes encountered in the field. revisions to our schedule and budgets then need to be done to incorporate this latest knowledge understanding and analysis. these revisions also allow us to identify some of the project savings that can be used to compensate for project overruns. and despite the fact that we have identified a number of savings on several projects, the current approved wsip budget is inadequate. so, with revisions to that budget must be made so we

and the first of those issues was about wsip scope. i think what we heard today is that there is no abandonment of any project that's in wsip. there is no change of scope to any project in wsip that would impact the level of service provided by that project. >> yes. >> and that the only impact to levels of service is that some of them -- because the project is delayed, some of them are are available to us later than previously planned. >> yes. >> the process is the same, but the plan is a unavoidable some of the benefit will be delayed. the last piece of that logic is that we are not in the reprogramming of things proposing that any of those level of service projects be delayed more than is physically necessary. >> absolutely. >> okay. >> so, there is no change to the level of service ultimately to be derived. there is some delay in some elements of the level of service . >> right. >> do you have any quantification of that? >> we started quantifying those. specifically, there were two memos sent to the commission. one on the calaveras

and it also is less than 1% of the funding for the wsip, a pretty modest amount. so, please keep that intact. then i also wanted to address the project that was -- the alameda creek recapture project which was called out as probably the last wsip project to be completed on alameda creek. we've been interacting with that project for about 10 years or no longer than that, probably about 13 years. i've come here a couple times before you. we've been in pretty constant communication with your staff. we see some good things industry wise, project particularly the new design. there will be no infrastructure in the creek. it's passive infiltration to a quarry pit and simply requires a pump. we like that element of it. we also see some potential problems with the goal of the project recapturing bypass [speaker not understood]. we absolutely support recapture of the flows that are released from calaveras reservoir for fishery restoration. those are summer flows, the very low flow. it's cold water that would not make it all the way down alameda creek anyhow. and there's no

wsip, we are towards the maturity stage of where these types are being completed. we can't swap out a partner. i think that would be very difficult. it would be actually mission uncritical to do so. it will actually jeopardize the o & r program to do so. i think what we can do is take -- if [speaker not understood] select the partner, this particular contract, maybe if they came in with the lowest bid, but made the low bid did not account for the fact there would be other challenges. but given the public bidding environment, that may be a challenge how we actually do that. nonetheless, i think the answer is we need to take those lessons and a reapply them especially since csip is fundamentally larger and more extensive program than wsip. >> can i add something? one of the things that we did really take in consideration, we did pre-qualification where we looked at, you know, claims and things like that. although you identify, you know, a contractor that you feel through the pre-qualifications, they actually -- you entertain the most responsive -- responsible bid --