Citizens' Advisory Committee
Water Subcommittee

MINUTES 

September 26, 2007
1155 Market Street, San Francisco
4th Floor Conference Room
5:00 - 7:00 p.m.

Members

Jennifer Clary – Chair	Art Jensen
Tim Colen	Richard Hansen
David Dawdy	Robert Varni
	Staff: Michele Liapes

ORDER OF BUSINESS 

Roll Call
Present:  Clary, Colen, Hansen, Jensen, Varni
Absent:  Dawdy

1.Call to order
Jennifer Clary, Chair, called the meeting to order at 5:10 p.m.

2. Approval of minutes
Minutes from June 27, 2007 and July 25, 2007 were approved

3. Announcements by members and reports on other meetings
Jennifer Clary called the members’ attention to the handouts, including the collection of the most recent reports for the 7 WSIP projects the committee had identified as those to watch. She suggested the title for the Lake Merced Water Level Restoration Project draft Alternatives Analysis Report should be shorter. She also noted that all CAC members should receive Commission agendas and asked staff to follow up on that request.

Art Jensen announced that the risk analysis report had been completed, but the budget and schedule alignment were not complete.  He said that a series of upcoming workshops in October would offer subcommittee members the opportunity to be more fully informed.

4. Public comment—matters within Subcommittee’s scope, not on today’s agenda5. Presentations

a. Alameda Siphon #4 Project, Annie Li, Project Manager

i. Main Points
  a) The project is at the 65% design stage.
  b) The project is a new fourth siphon between the Alameda East Portal at the Coast Range Tunnel and
   the  Irvington Tunnel.
  c) The purpose is to provide a seismically reliable transmission system between the two points. 
  d) The project’s new facilities will include: Siphon 4; an overflow pipeline; chemical injection facilities;
  valves, vaults, flow meters, and a mixing chamber; two pre-engineered electrical buildings; an improved
  access road; an Alameda Creek Bridge retrofit; a Coast Range Tunnel ventilation upgrade; a valve house
  seismic upgrade.
  e) The next steps are the 95% design, scheduled for February 2008, and the 100% design, June 2008.
  The NTP is expected in December 2008.

In response to subcommittee member questions, Ms. Li made the following additional points.  The project is on schedule and within budget. The fourth siphon would be more protected than the other three because it would be aligned at a different angle. Reliability or quality will not be sacrificed to save money, and the goal is to meet the Level of Service. The level of environmental review will be a mitigated negative declaration, meaning that there would be no significant impacts of the project. In the event that trees were disturbed, they would be replaced, three to one. Environmental review is scheduled for completion in May 2008.

Steve Lawrence asked questions about the thickness of the steel on the pipes, the depth of the trench, protection from corrosion, the cost of the project, and whether flooding was a concern.  Ms. Li answered that the steel  would be one inch in some sections, ¾ inch in others, and all sections would be welded.  The trench depth would be at least 20 feet at the creek crossing, and approximately four feet plus 66 inches elsewhere. Corrosion protection would be cathodic protection; a valve system prevents water from flowing back, and there are shut-off valves at both ends. The estimated cost is still $79 million.  In response to the final question on flooding, Dave Rogers, SFPUC, said that flooding would not impact siphon 4, because of its depth.

b.  New Irvington Tunnel Project, Dave Rogers, Sunol Region Project Manager
  i. Main Points
   a) The proposed new tunnel would provide reliable water delivery in the event of a major earthquake on
    the Hayward or Calaveras faults.
   b) It would enable the existing tunnel to be taken out of service for inspection and upgrade so that its
    design life will be lengthened.
   c) The proposed new tunnel would be much deeper than the existing one.
   d) Because the SFPUC has the construction records of the existing tunnel, it is in a much better position
   to anticipate any bad ground that could be encountered.  
   e) A strong SFPUC objective is to avoid impacts to the groundwater wells that some nearby residents rely on.
   f) Spoils would be conveyed to a site on already disturbed SFPUC property. The spoils, which would be   
   from three WSIP projects, would be placed so that they serve as a buffer and scenic barrier to existing
   and future quarries. 
   g) A tunnel boring machine would be used from the east end of the proposed new tunnel but this
   operation would be supplemented by conventional mining procedures from the other end to compress the
   schedule. 
   h) The 65% design phase is beginning, the final design is scheduled for June 2009, and the NTP is
   schedule for November 2009. 

In response to Subcommittee member questions, Mr. Rogers made the following additional points. The project is expected to finish on schedule. Though there was a possibility of groundwater being drained by the project, it could also be recharged by the proposed tunnel. The SFPUC was in the process of informing the public in advance of the rising costs of materials, and the budget realignment would be available to the public later this year. Effects on groundwater when the water was turned off would not be a problem; groundwater impacts would be more likely in the event of very extended dewatering periods, but such extended periods of a year or more were not anticipated for dewatering of the present tunnel.  The proposed tunnel would be 18,500 feet in length, about 3-1/2 miles.

In response to a question from Lurilla Harris, Mr. Rogers said that meetings with the community had been held, and more were planned for the future.

6. Water Enterprise Business Plan Update, David Behar, Water Enterprise

Mr. Behar said that the plan would be a catalyst for change in the way the Water Enterprise does business. It is intended to affect the next two years of operations, and would identify 10 key goals.  The next workshop will be on October 25. 

In discussion with the subcommittee members, the following points were also made: The plan is scheduled for completion at the end of this calendar year, or possibly January 2008. The Water Enterprise is coordinating with the Wastewater Enterprise, which is also doing a business plan. The General Manager and the Commission will receive the draft plan for review and corrections. The plan will not directly address WSIP in detail. Important projects that the Water Enterprise has more direct impact on are Recycled Water, Groundwater, and Water Conservation. Maintenance will be dealt with under the asset management goal. The budget for the plan is $111,000 exclusive of staff time. 

The Subcommittee members and Mr. Behar also discussed the timing of the plan so that it could inform the budget process.

The Subcommittee members agreed to support the asset management portion of the plan and will communicate its importance in correspondence to the Mayor and the Supervisors. Robert Varni will lead the effort.

The Subcommittee further agreed that the Protection of System Assets would be a standing agenda item.

In public comment, Emeric Kalman said that business plans were a waste of money.  Joan Girardot said that the framework for replacement and reconstruction of assets was already set forth in the old charter.

7. Review of Subcommittee’s priority projects in the Water System Improvement Program Quarterly Report (Fourth Quarter 2006/07):

   Jennifer Clary asked the members to review the quarterly reports, and bring their comments to the next meeting. 

8. Additional Discussion Items 

   Jennifer Clary said that proposed future agenda items included presentations on the operations and management plan for WSIP, the Crystal Springs/San Andreas Pipeline project, recycled water, financing projects, WSIP risk assessment, the Water Enterprise operations budget, repair and restoration of the distribution system, WSIP projects that had been moved into the Hetch Hetchy operations budget, climate change and the disaster plan.  Clary asked Subcommittee members to prioritize the items and bring their lists to the next meeting. 

Ms. Clary introduced new Water Subcommittee member Tim Colen. Mr. Colen said that he was trying to understand how the subcommittee could have a useful role. It was proposed that a useful start point would be to focus on selected issues within specified topics.  Mr. Jensen and Mr. Colen will develop an initial list of issues. 

In public comment, Emeric Kalman said that a presentation on water conservation was needed, and Lurilla Harris raised the issue of gray water systems for every household. 

9. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m.