HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-02-06 Utilities Advisory Commission Agenda PacketAMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA)
Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services or programs or who would like information on the City’s compliance with
the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact (650) 329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance.
NOTICE IS POSTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54954.2(a) OR 54956
I. ROLL CALL
II. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Members of the public are invited to address the Commission on any subject not on the agenda. A reasonable time
restriction may be imposed at the discretion of the Chair. State law generally precludes the UAC from discussing or
acting upon any topic initially presented during oral communication.
III. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
Approval of the Minutes of the Utilities Advisory Commission Meeting held on January 9, 2019
IV. AGENDA REVIEW AND REVISIONS
V. REPORTS FROM COMMISSIONER MEETINGS/EVENTS
VI. GENERAL MANAGER OF UTILITIES REPORT
VII. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
VIII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None
IX. NEW BUSINESS
1. Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation that the City Council Adopt a Resolution Action
Approving the November 2018 Amended and Restated Water Supply Agreement Between
the City and County of San Francisco Wholesale Customers in Alameda County, San Mateo
County, and Santa Clara County and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Amended
and Restated Water Supply Agreement
2. Staff Presentation on Utilities Workforce Update: Succession Planning, Recruitments Discussion
and Vacancies
3. Upcoming Home Energy and Water Reports Program Discussion
4. Staff Presentation on Preliminary Rate Changes for Electric, Gas, Wastewater Collection Discussion
and Water Utilities for FY 2020
5. Staff Update and Discussion of Fiber and AMI Planning Discussion
6. Selection of Potential Topic(s) for Discussion at Future UAC Meeting and Potential Action
Designation of UAC Ad Hoc Subcommittee(s)
NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING: March 6, 2019
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - The materials below are provided for informational purposes, not for action or discussion
during UAC Meetings (Govt. Code Section 54954.2(a)(2)).
12-Month Rolling Calendar Public Letter(s) to the UAC
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2019 – 7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Palo Alto City Hall – 250 Hamilton Avenue
Chairman: Michael Danaher Vice Chair: Judith Schwartz Commissioners: Arne Ballantine, Lisa Forssell, A. C. Johnston, Lauren Segal and Terry Trumbull Council Liaison: Tom DuBois
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: Page 1 of 9
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING
MINUTES OF JANUARY 9, 2019 SPECIAL MEETING
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Danaher called the meeting of the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) to order at 7:00 p.m.
Present: Chair Danaher, Vice Chair Schwartz, Commissioners Forssell, Johnston, Segal, and Trumbull
Absent: Commissioner Ballantine
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
Commissioner Segal moved to approve the minutes from the December 5, 2018 meeting as presented.
Commissioner Johnston seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0 with Commissioners Forssell, Johnston,
Segal, and Trumbull voting yes, Chair Danaher and Vice Chair Schwartz abstaining, and Commissioner
Ballantine absent.
AGENDA REVIEW AND REVISIONS
None.
REPORTS FROM COMMISSIONER MEETINGS/EVENTS
Vice Chair Schwartz attended a meeting and webcasts of the Low-Income Community Solar Working and
GridWise Alliance's annual GridConnext conference. The Low-Income Community Solar Working Group
would be publishing a paper soon. She hoped to put information about this on the UAC agenda. She had
talked to the ex-CEO of PepCo about undergrounding. He confirmed that pad-mounted transformers in
newer underground areas are the standard. He said the standards documents for transformers in
underground districts needed work. Commissioner Schwartz said the DOE should work on standards.
Chair Danaher attended the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) and learned about a device that allows an
electric vehicle (EV) to power a home and act as backup power. It was only available in Japan at the moment
but the intent was to bring it to the US.
GENERAL MANAGER OF UTILITIES REPORT
Dean Batchelor, Interim Utilities General Manager, delivered the General Manager’s Report.
Natural Gas Prices Spiked in December, Normalized in January Natural gas prices spiked in the month of
December, but have now decreased to what we would normally anticipate for this time of year. City of Palo
Alto Utilities (CPAU) purchases natural gas for its customers from the market, and any monthly fluctuations
in market pricing are passed along to our residents and businesses with natural gas service. Palo Alto is not
unique; other utilities like PG&E that purchase natural gas from the market are also affected by rate changes.
Staff proactively reached out to community members in December to inform people of the increased rates,
DRAFT
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: Page 2 of 9
encouraging them to conserve gas where possible in order to avoid higher bills. However, customers may see
higher than usual costs on their January utility bills for gas use in December. We have highlighted tips and
links to other resources to improve energy efficiency, such as through a Home Efficiency Genie assessment,
on our home webpage at cityofpaloalto.org/Utilities.
Upcoming PG&E Work in Palo Alto PG&E is planning to begin work later this month on one of their large gas
transmission pipelines that runs through Palo Alto. This is to replace areas of pipe that are in need of
maintenance to ensure safety and reliability. Over the next five to six months, there will be a number of sites
throughout the City where PG&E will be trenching in streets to accommodate the work. The first major
construction area will be on Loma Verde Avenue near the intersection of Kipling. Staff is working with PG&E
to provide advance notification to all affected parties and ensure safe conditions for all who travel through
the construction areas. Our Engineering and Operations teams will also be coordinating with PG&E
throughout duration of the project to provide continuity of service and safety for customers. When additional
project details are available, we will update our website at cityofpaloalto.org/UtilityProjects.
Palo Alto Turns 125 This year marks the 125th anniversary of the City of Palo Alto’s founding. We will be
celebrating this milestone throughout the year in our promotions and at special events. Stay tuned as we
identify ways to highlight our many accomplishments over time and celebrate our great community.
Upcoming Events:
• On Saturday, April 13, the City is once again hosting the Great Race for Saving Water, a family-friendly
fun run & walk at the Baylands, plus Earth Day Festival. Join us for a special time this year as the City is
also celebrating its 125th anniversary. After the 5K, 10K or 1K kids fun run, enjoy a free festival with
electric vehicle ride & drive, nature activities, live music, arts & crafts, raffle prizes, and community
booths with activities and demonstrations, environmental and public safety resources. Visit
cityofpaloalto.org/EarthDay to register and view the schedule of activities.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Commissioner Trumbull hoped Mayor Filseth would continue to attend UAC meetings, even though the
Mayor typically does not fill a Council liaison role. Mayor Filseth remarked that the Mayor could substitute
for a designated Council liaison.
Vice Chair Schwartz said she had not been at the previous UAC meeting, but noted discussion of the resiliency
workshop that night. The minutes had seemed to reflect a negative attitude toward having experts at
meetings. She suggested that experts who have information that staff does not have should be invited to the
upcoming resilience workshop, but the experts should be used effectively. Commissioner Trumbull remarked
that experts should speak in terms that workshop participants can understand. Vice Chair Schwartz added
that the experts at the first workshop were not given any guidance regarding their presentations. When
inviting the experts to the August workshop, she posited to them that they would be answering questions.
Chair Danaher noted there would be an opportunity to discuss the topic at a subsequent meeting.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None.
NEW BUSINESS
ITEM 1: DISCUSSION: Update on Activities to Facilitate Distributed Energy Resources Adoption and Next
Steps.
Jonathan Abendschein, Assistant Director of Resource Management, reported staff has taken a number of
actions discussed in the draft Distributed Energy Resources (DER) Plan. In preparing the staff report, staff
realized many of the actions around DERs are actually encompassed in other plans and, rather than creating
yet another plan, staff decided to present an overview of all the actions planned around DERs and the plans
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: Page 3 of 9
in which those actions are memorialized. Not all actions are memorialized in plans that have been adopted.
The UAC's feedback will be incorporated into the relevant plans.
Shiva Swaminathan, Senior Resource Planner, advised that in April 2018 the UAC discussed the Distribution
System Assessment. The UAC approved the Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) and Technology Plan in
September 2018 and the Electric Integrated Resources Plan (EIRP) in October 2018. Also, in October 2018,
the UAC reviewed the customer survey results. DER planning focuses on five areas: business strategic and
operational planning; electric supply planning and operations; and distribution planning and operations
including facilitating implementation of customer-owned microgrid projects. Staff is collaborating with
VMware to explore a microgrid project. Abendschein added that VMware wants to implement a campus-
wide microgrid project. The project is in the early conceptual stage, and staff will present the UAC with
information when more details are known. Swaminathan continued with the fourth focus area of customer
retail rate design. Staff is exploring many rates, two of which are an all-electric home retail rate and a
discount for homes with EVs. Staff is also exploring ways that retail rates can facilitate DERs. The fifth focus
area is customer program design. Staff has analyzed the customer survey results and is seeking input from
commercial customers. Staff will return to the UAC in the spring with a customer program plan.
Vice Chair Schwartz remarked that a power strip is not considered a smart appliance. The terms carbon
neutral, carbon free, and zero carbon are used incorrectly, which confuses people. Switching from a gas
appliance to an electric appliance is not beneficial if gas-powered plants generate the electricity to operate
those appliances. Terms need to be clear and used consistently. The City Council is making decisions based
on misinformation.
Commissioner Forssell understood the Utility will explore customer retail rate design as part of the plan. The
report mentions time-of-use rates, but it's unclear whether staff plans to explore time-of-use rates in the
future. Abendschein explained that time-of-use rates are a part of long-term plans, but CPAU cannot fully
implement them until the Smart Grid system is available. Commissioner Forssell remarked that if the goal is
to lower carbon, cheaper nighttime rates appear to be directly at odds with the behavior CPAU is trying to
encourage. In response to Commissioner Forssell's query regarding staff's thoughts about time-of-use rates,
Abendschein indicated traditionally time-of-use rates have been a pure cost calculation. PG&E's time periods
have been shifting because the peak period is shifting from the middle of the day to the evening. Time-of-
use rates across the state are responding to those price shifts. If staff updates time-of-use rates or
implements a targeted time-of-use rate program in the next few years, staff will update the time periods and
ensure the time periods align with the prices of the wholesale market. In answer to Commissioner Forssell's
question regarding including the cost of carbon that may or may not be reflected in the wholesale market at
present in the calculation of time-of-use rates, Abendschein related that to some extent a carbon price signal
is built into the prices because of cap-and-trade. That is not necessarily the carbon price that reflects the
long-term impact of carbon on the environment. The one barrier is rates have to reflect the cost of service.
If there is not a direct carbon cost to the Utility, staff has to consider carefully its ability to include a carbon
price signal. Messaging about the most effective time of day to save carbon might be an effective alternative.
Commissioner Forssell was pleased with CPAU policies that do not incentivize EVs for single-family homes
but focus on multifamily homes and workplaces. She was not interested in providing extra incentives for a
population that staff previously identified as well served by the current policies and discounts.
Vice Chair Schwartz commented that predictable rates are important for some people. People who care
about carbon impact can choose a rate that meets their goals but is not necessarily the lowest rate. The UAC
needs a more nuanced look at the use of price signals and the use of interval meters to allow people to
choose a program appropriate for them.
In reply to Chair Danaher's question regarding whether staff summarized the topics listed in Exhibit A or
whether staff will focus on the five areas over the next year, Swaminathan related that staff narrowed the
broader scope of topics to five major work areas that interact with the public. Chair Danaher suggested
including charging networks and the long-term strategy for them so that CPAU networks are future proof.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: Page 4 of 9
Providing discounts for all-electric homes or EVs will not necessarily change behavior. If the goal is to reduce
the use of fossil fuels and increase the use of carbon-neutral resources, programs that facilitate the use of
EVs will have more impact than giving discounts to people who already own EVs. Swaminathan explained
that staff mentioned the discount because customers request a discount, because staff can utilize the
program to learn the address of the EV, and the existing billing system can accommodate the discount. Staff
struggled with the network aspect because smart chargers tend to be more expensive than dumb chargers.
CPAU can provide incentives for installation of charging infrastructure in multifamily dwellings, but the
property owner decides whether to install a smart or dumb charger. Chair Danaher also suggested staff study
the type of incentives that would change behavior. Abendschein added that comments on EVs indicate a
piece is missing from staff's overview. The Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) specifically focuses
on EVs, and that information should be summarized in the overview. The primary focus of the work plan is
to expand the public charging network and to reduce barriers to more installation of private chargers.
Collecting UAC feedback on the priorities in the EV section of the S/CAP is going to be important going
forward. Chair Danaher stated it would be nice if the statement of actions over the next few years is put in
the context of the longer-term goal so that people understand the importance of them.
In answer to Commissioner Johnston's query regarding the purpose of a connection fee for residential
customers who install electrical panels larger than 200 volts and who the customers might be, Swaminathan
clarified that a 200-amp connection may not be sufficient for an all-electric home with one or two EVs. The
standard fee covers panels up to 200 amps. If a property owner wants to install a panel with more than 200
amps, an engineering study has to be conducted, and the cost can vary between $695 to $15,000 depending
on whether the incremental amperage requires CPAU to upgrade a transformer. That variation causes a lot
of cost uncertainty for customers. An established connection fee could provide greater cost certainty.
Commissioner Johnston reiterated that the connection fee could make it possible for more people to install
an electrical panel with more than 200 amps at a specific cost. He was interested in learning more about the
potential to integrate smart inverter capabilities into the City's distribution system and the advantages of
that. Swaminathan reported the inverters currently have a power factor of one, which means the rest of the
CPAU system tends to deteriorate. Staff is considering a requirement for inverters to inject some of the
capacity power into the system as part of the permitting process. Commissioner Johnston understood that
would mean changing the specifications required for installing solar systems.
Vice Chair Schwartz related that with a municipal utility everybody receives benefits, and everybody pays
into the system. With DERs, entities other than the city make an investment and receive the benefits. It
might be that somebody makes an investment, and other citizens enjoy the benefit or maybe it costs other
citizens more. An exploration of who wins and who loses has been missing from the discussion. The way
staff frames the problem and the discussion needs to include that. Who pays and who receives the benefits
will vary. ATS has been working on managing inverters to support the wider community, which provides a
community value. Abendschein indicated Vice Chair Schwartz is talking about a wide range of potential
cost/benefit mismatches, and that is an important point. Vice Chair Schwartz added that cost/benefit
mismatches come into play in the State context of cost of service. It may be a different way to look at demand
charges so that they're proportional. Part of the rate design problem is demand charges. That has to be part
of the context, so staff does not initiate cross-subsidies from lower income people to higher income people.
Commissioner Forssell stated storage systems offer enormous greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction potential,
but at the current price points they are not feasible. The value of storage systems will be continually
reevaluated until hopefully they are more feasible from a price standpoint. If cheap storage is available, heat
pump water heaters will make a lot of sense. The right course of action for the time being is to continue to
remove barriers and help people obtain heat pump water heaters, if they want them, but not to push them
aggressively. Power strips and smart lights are not really DERs. They are energy efficient and a fine idea, and
rebates are fine. A staff investigation of whether more nuanced messaging regarding customer awareness
of CPAU's carbon-neutral electricity supply may be warranted. The City should consider whether the current
carbon accounting system meets its goals or if it wants to redefine the meaning to be more of a real-time
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: Page 5 of 9
balancing act, even if it means the City can no longer say its electric supply is 100 percent carbon neutral.
Abendschein indicated the UAC will have those conversations within the next six months.
In answer to Commissioner Segal's question regarding the timing of VMware's smaller microgrid project and
VMware's willingness to share information with other commercial customers, Swaminathan reported
VMware hopes to complete the small project before the end of the year. VMware is motivated to share their
story. Commissioner Segal commented that the UAC's Charter allows the UAC to take action if it believes
something should be changed at a legislative level. The provisions of Proposition 26 prohibit CPAU from
varying price incentives. Periodically, that comes up as a barrier to all kinds of innovative programs. With
the State increasing its goals to decrease GHG emissions, maybe it is time to revisit the provisions of
Proposition 26. AMI feedback may not be available until 2023 or 2024. It would be nice initiate creative
programs in the interim without the benefit of AMI feedback to incentivize behavior.
Vice Chair Schwartz remarked that having solar resources visible in the community is more meaningful than
solar resources hundreds of miles away. Depending upon where solar resources are placed, they can also
increase resilience and utilize land that is considered unusable. The Marcus Garvey Village in Brooklyn is an
example of a building where many DER technologies have been grouped together. The utility was willing to
help fund this project because the utility avoided the cost of investing $1.2 billion in another substation. The
community may support a project in order to experiment with technologies because the project has a
locational value. The Worcester Regional Transit Authority's is attempting attempts to use solar on a large
building that will charge electric buses, which can have value for transit and other things. The purpose of the
project is to generate some revenue to support programs for low-income consumers. Community solar
becomes more logical when it provides some larger value. Setting up charging stations that allow people to
charge during the day when excess solar power is available allows the utility to do some things that are locally
based, which provides locational value and a value beyond simply having community solar. If staff can
develop projects and programs that make sense and provide value, then people can buy a subscription and
take over some of the cost of the projects and programs. This is an opportunity to be creative and to be
leaders in the State of California about how to do projects effectively. Even though these projects are not
the cheapest way to get solar, they have other values that are important.
ACTION: No action
ITEM 2: DISCUSSION: Staff Request for Feedback on Recommendations Regarding the City's Fiber-Optic,
Wireless and Advanced Meter Infrastructure Planning.
David Weiss did not understand why the City does not have high-tech communications. Fiber optics is the
future of communications. Chair Danaher indicated the City is working on plans for Fiber to the Node (FTTN),
but more analysis is needed. Mr. Weiss' sentiment is shared by many people.
Jeff Hoel felt it was a mistake for staff to consider sunsetting the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) for Fiber
to the Premises (FTTP) and Wireless. The CAC has a reasonable role in the process. Staff's memo emphasizes
that the UAC has a role to play in the discussion. If the UAC is absent, the lack of oversight will be clear. The
original Option 2 that the Council supported on August 21, 2017 included an option for designing an entire
FTTP network. Changing the scope to eliminate that option would be a disaster. Apparently, Staff thinks
none of the bids for the original Request for Proposals (RFP) were good enough and wants to rewrite the RFP.
He expressed concern that the public may not learn why the bids are not satisfactory and may not see a
rewritten RFP.
Herb Borock remarked that the UAC should exercise its appropriate role under the Municipal Code and make
a recommendation to the Council as an action item. The present item has not been agendized as an action
item; therefore, the UAC should have an action item on the agenda for its February meeting. Staff has been
holding the RFP responses since June 2018 and has recommended issuing a new RFP. Staff is not the awarding
authority for a contract of this dollar amount; the City Council is the awarding authority. The City Council
makes the decision whether to reject all bids or to award a bid. The City Council does so upon the UAC's
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: Page 6 of 9
recommendation. When this is an action item, staff should present their proposal, and the UAC should make
a recommendation to the Council. The project is being presented as FTTN with some future action, which is
another reason the City Council should review the draft RFP. Staff is designing a project that will fail if
everyone has to be connected for everything and is trying to have the standards and goals of a profit-making
company. The City should consider fiber a service to residents and design the project on that basis and with
that criteria.
Dean Batchelor, Chief Operating Officer, reported staff is considering reissuing the RFP to expedite the
network planning and construction to better align with business cases and AMI implementation. Staff
received only one qualified response to the RFP. That vendor may not be interested at the current time.
CPAU, the City Attorney's Office, and the Purchasing Division have deliberated the recommendation to
reissue the RFP. If the one qualified vendor decides to bid on the RFP, the vendor will not able to issue a
subsequent bid for new design work and construction management. From a legal standpoint, the vendor
would have an advantage because they would be preparing the business plan and reviewing the proposed
ordinances. The design included in the RFP was not detailed. Reissuing the RFP could cause a delay in the
project, but it could also accelerate the engineering design and cost portion of the process. The UAC will
provide a broader view than the CAC. AMI will get fiber to the node, and then fiber can be extended to
collectors, which will be needed for AMI. Cellular or fiber can connect the collectors. In presenting the AMI
concept to the Council in November, staff planned to use existing fiber, drop bigger bundles of fiber at the
node, and then expand fiber to FTTP.
Chair Danaher reiterated that the reasons for reissuing the RFP are no qualified vendors submitted bids,
expanding the scope for a detailed design will accelerate the timeframe, expanding the scope could cause
more vendors to bid, and the expanded scope could include AMI. Chair Danaher requested staff explain why
the scope does not include FTTP. Batchelor clarified that reissuing the RFP will allow staff to review nodes
throughout neighborhoods and determine which nodes are the logical points to drop large amounts of fiber.
Fiber could then move to more nodes within neighborhoods to serve residents. In response to Chair
Danaher's query as to whether staff is asking for more detail on the FTTN but not necessarily enough to cover
all neighborhoods and all houses, Batchelor replied that staff would ask for that detail. Perhaps 80-90 nodes
could take care of the whole City. The proposed design would show the future of those 85-100 nodes
throughout the City, and CPAU would not have to issue another RFP for another design. The idea is to get a
full detail design for everything in the City, including the design to spur off to the collectors needed for AMI.
Chair Danaher requested staff respond to Mr. Borock's question regarding connecting to the premises or
doing a study on that. Batchelor advised that the new RFP would include funding plans, ordinances, and a
business plan. Staff presented three options to the Council: seek funding for 100-percent build-out at a cost
of $50-$75 million; build to the node; and phase it out and seek a third-party vendor. The UAC and Council
decided to build to the node. If staff reissues the RFP with a full design, they will have a better understanding
of the true costs. Chair Danaher reiterated that the RFP would essentially be for FTTN with some details for
FTTP, such as options, cost, technology.
In reply to Commissioner Segal's request for additional clarification of the RFP and FTTP, Dave Yuan, Strategic
Business Manager, indicated the near-term focus is FTTN, but part of the RFP will show the flexibility or
scalability of the project for FTTP. Staff is still evaluating whether to include a detailed design for FTTP in the
RFP.
Vice Chair Schwartz commented that a study of FTTN will provide a business case that is larger than FTTP
only. The business case for the value of FTTN to AMI may provide greater value. Comparing the use of cellular
or fiber to bring that last piece of data from the collector adds value to the project. Yuan added that the
second RFP will provide a better cost estimate of the FTTP network.
Commissioner Segal stated in addition to including details about AMI, a second RFP will provide details for
more nodes and information about the viability and economics of FTTP. In response to Commissioner Segal's
inquiry regarding security tradeoffs between fiber and wireless to AMI and back to the collectors, Batchelor
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: Page 7 of 9
advised that the City will own and operate the security portion if it is fiber to the collectors. To achieve FTTN,
staff would drop large amounts of fiber at one node and then splice from that one node to reach the
collectors. At that point, fiber can move further into the neighborhoods.
In reply to Chair Danaher's question about staff returning to the UAC with a redesigned RFP to seek the UAC's
recommendation, Batchelor reported the next step would be obtaining Council's approval to reissue the RFP.
Following Council approval, staff would return to the UAC with the second RFP. The Council approved a
design to the node, and now staff wants to add the design phase and the AMI component. The Council may
prefer to retain the existing RFP. Chair Danaher supported withdrawing the existing RFP and issuing a second
RFP that would have more value.
Commissioner Johnston did not believe the UAC has a choice if no vendors are interested in the existing RFP
and the RFP does not cover everything needed. In answer to Commissioner Johnston's query regarding staff's
confidence that a second RFP will cover everything needed and attract more bidders, Batchelor related that
staff has spoken to other cities in the same situation, and those cities have successfully received multiple bids
to an RFP similar to the one staff is proposing.
In answer to Commissioner Forssell's inquiry of whether the bidder to the original RFP was supposed to
prepare a business case or a high-level FTTN design, Yuan clarified that the vendor was supposed to prepare
a business case and a conceptual design for FTTN. The second RFP will seek an engineering design.
Commissioner Forssell supported an actual engineering design with the more detail the better, including fiber
to the collectors. In reply to Commissioner Forssell's query regarding the reality of a private partner emerging
that would help with the project, Yuan reported staff with an engineering design can set realistic expectations
of what the City can provide in a public-private partnership. Staff should receive better responses from
potential partners once the potential partners see the design of the network. In response to Commissioner
Forssell's question about the vendors indicating their willingness to participate as a private partner or
providing a business case and design and letting the City find a private partner, Batchelor reported that the
existing RFP requested the vendor help staff review potential third parties who would build fiber from the
node into the neighborhoods. The same language is in the new RFP. Yuan added that there have not been
many successful public-private partnerships.
Batchelor reported the second recommendation is discussion of the UAC assuming the advisory role for AMI
implementation and fiber and wireless planning and of sunsetting the CAC. Because the fiber piece is within
the UAC's purview, staff feels the UAC should assume the advisory role and the CAC should be sunsetted.
In reply to Chair Danaher's queries regarding Jonathan Reichental, Chief Information Officer, running the CAC
and staff receiving value from the CAC, Batchelor advised that Mr. Reichental was responsible for the CAC.
The CAC provided valuable input regarding the FTTP Master Plan, the Wireless Network Plan, the potential
co-build with Google Fiber, an FTTP public-private partnership, and the RFP for an FTTN business case. By
adding the AMI component, FTTN becomes a Utility issue, and the UAC should fill the advisory role. Chair
Danaher inquired whether the CAC is comprised of more individuals with technical credentials than the UAC.
Yuan indicated the CAC has a mix of expertise.
In response to Commissioner Segal's request for the names of CAC members and their skills or experience,
Yuan listed Bob Harrington, Jeff Hoel, Andrew Kau, Don Lee, Oliver Matthey, Christine Moe, Andy Poggio, and
Loren Smith. He was not aware of the members' experience. Commissioner Segal next requested the
frequency of CAC meetings and the number of times the CAC met in 2018. Yuan related that the CAC
generally meets every other month. In 2018, a couple of meetings were canceled and a couple were
rescheduled.
Commissioner Trumbull remarked that the UAC would need to weigh in no matter what. If the UAC is the
only entity providing advice, it would need a lot more information than it has received.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: Page 8 of 9
Chair Danaher did not have any insight as to which option would be the most useful for staff and the Council.
CPAU has been understaffed in so many activities that fiber has languished somewhat over the last three or
four years. He was most interested in whatever structure would allow the UAC to help CPAU accelerate the
pace of analysis and decision-making on fiber.
Commissioner Johnston wanted to ensure a second RFP would meet the needs of staff and the project. Staff
needed to consider whether the CAC can provide useful input on the next iteration of the RFP. He did not
know that any of the Commissioners would qualify as experts in the fiber area. Yuan reiterated that the CAC
does offer valuable input, but involving the CAC could delay the RFP. Batchelor reported staff would utilize
the components of the existing RFP but substitute a full design for the high-level design and add the
construction management component. Staff will have to issue a separate RFP for construction. The City
Attorney's Office advised against including all components in one RFP because knowing the design and
construction costs provides the vendor with a distinct advantage. With a separate construction RFP, the
selected vendor could hold a contractor to the tasks of the design the vendor created.
Chair Danaher suggested staff provide the UAC with a brief status report of the fiber project at each meeting,
whether or not the CAC is retained. Yuan could encourage the CAC members to provide input during UAC
meetings.
Commissioner Segal was confused by the recommendation to sunset the CAC if it has provided valuable input.
Staff could set a schedule of meetings and proceed with them whether or not all members are present. She
did not know if the CAC's value has been exhausted.
Commissioner Forssell suggested the UAC may not have the technical expertise that the CAC has. She
expressed interest in hearing from the CAC. If the UAC is going to dive into FTTN and FTTP in the near term,
perhaps the UAC should form a subcommittee and, if appropriate, the subcommittee could interact with the
CAC.
Vice Chair Schwartz agreed that the CAC could form a fiber subcommittee. She questioned whether
informing the CAC about AMI or informing the UAC about fiber would be more efficient. Batchelor explained
that staff wants to move quickly with fiber and AMI. The Customer Information System (CIS) upgrade is
scheduled to occur in the next three years, and building the fiber system will require another two years. The
focus should be building to AMI, but the CAC has focused on FTTP.
Mayor Filseth suggested the CAC may or may not have fulfilled its mission. If the CAC has fulfilled its mission,
then it should sunset. The crucial question is whether the CAC has fulfilled its mission or whether the CAC's
mission is no longer needed. Yuan related that the initial mission of the CAC was to develop the FTTP Master
Plan, which has been completed. Now, staff is focusing on FTTN, which is the basis for staff's
recommendation for switching to the UAC. Mayor Filseth remarked that if the CAC's mission is critical to
obtaining a correct answer and the CAC has not fulfilled its mission, sunsetting the CAC in order to move
faster is not necessarily a good idea.
Vice Chair Schwartz suggested encouraging members of the CAC to apply for a seat on the UAC could be
worthwhile.
ACTION: No action
ITEM 4. ACTION: Selection of Potential Topic(s) for Discussion at Future UAC Meeting.
Chair Danaher requested a presentation on the organizational structure of CPAU. Dean Batchelor, Chief
Operating Officer, advised in February staff will present an item about the workforce, the organization's
structure, the number of vacant positions, and the challenges of filling some of the vacant positions. Chair
Danaher requested staff include an organizational chart with names.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: Page 9 of 9
Commissioner Johnston expressed interest in following up on the resiliency discussion.
Vice Chair Schwartz requested a discussion of subcommittees that could be useful to the UAC and a discussion
of methods, that do not impact staff and that are transparent, through which Commissioners can share
information and educate themselves on various topics. Perhaps the City Attorney's Office can attend the
discussion to advise regarding the Brown Act.
Commissioner Segal requested an item regarding CPAU succession planning. Dave Yuan, Strategic Business
Manager, reported staff is gathering information, but it may not be complete by the UAC's February meeting.
Batchelor noted another 20 employees could retire from CPAU in the next few years. Staff may seek
independent guidance to develop a short-term succession plan.
ACTION: No action
NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING: February 6, 2019
Meeting adjourned at 9:06 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Rachel Chiu
City of Palo Alto Utilities
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: March 6, 2019 Page 1 of 11
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING
FINAL MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 6, 2019 REGULAR MEETING
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Danaher called the meeting of the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) to order at 7:00 p.m.
Present: Chair Danaher, Vice Chair Schwartz, Commissioners Forssell, Johnston, Segal, and Trumbull
Absent: Commissioner Ballantine
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
Vice Chair Schwartz corrected her comments in the minutes as follows: (page 1) "She had talked to a Vice
President of PepCo about undergrounding. She confirmed that pad-mounted transformers in newer
underground areas are standard. Standards documents for transformers in underground districts in D.C.
needed work. Vice Chair Schwartz has encouraged colleagues at DOE to document best practices and
alternatives for undergrounding." (Page 5) "Vice Chair Schwartz remarked that having solar resources visible
in the community can be more meaningful … ." "The Worcester Regional Transit Authority is using solar on
a large building that will charge electric buses, which can have value for transit and other things." (Page 8)
"Vice Chair Schwartz agreed that the UAC could form a fiber subcommittee again. She asked if informing the
CAC about AMI or informing the UAC about fiber would be more efficient." "Vice Chair Schwartz suggested
encouraging members of the CAC to apply for a seat on the UAC. Being informed and responsible for a range
of issues could be worthwhile."
Commissioner Trumbull moved to approve the minutes from the January 9, 2019 meeting as amended.
Commissioner Segal seconded the motion. The motion carried 6-0 with Chair Danaher, Vice Chair Schwartz,
and Commissioners Forssell, Johnston, Segal, and Trumbull voting yes, and Commissioner Ballantine absent.
AGENDA REVIEW AND REVISIONS
None.
REPORTS FROM COMMISSIONER MEETINGS/EVENTS
None.
GENERAL MANAGER OF UTILITIES REPORT
Dave Yuan, Strategic Business Manager, and Jonathan Abendschein, Assistant Director of Resource
Management, delivered the General Manager’s Report.
Hydrologic Conditions – Recent storms have resulted in reservoir conditions that are average or slightly
above-average compared to historical levels. Cumulative precipitation in the Central Sierras for the 2018-19
water year is currently at 116% of average for this date, and 105% of average in the Northern Sierras. And
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: March 6, 2019 Page 2 of 11
statewide snowpack levels are currently 125% of average for this date. If the rest of the winter stays dry from
here on the water year precipitation could still end up below average, but the year is off to a good start.
Upgrade Downtown Project Nears Final Stages of Construction – The Upgrade Downtown project along
University Avenue and neighboring streets of downtown is moving toward the final stages of construction.
Construction on the final block of University Avenue between High Street and the ‘on and off’ ramps at Alma
Street is expected to begin later this week or the first part of next week, depending upon weather conditions.
City staff have developed a traffic control plan with the contractor to alleviate traffic congestion and ensure
the safety of motorists, pedestrians and cyclists. Drivers are encouraged to detour to roads such as Lytton,
Forest, or Hamilton to enter downtown. The major utility infrastructure work in downtown is expected to be
complete by the end of March 2019. Project details, including maps, traffic control plan and construction
schedule are available at upgradedowntownpa.com.
Upcoming PG&E Gas Pipeline Work in Palo Alto – As part of its gas pipeline safety and maintenance program,
PG&E will be replacing sections of its gas transmission pipeline running through Palo Alto. Construction will
occur in several locations and is expected to begin around mid-February and continue through July. City staff
are communicating project details with affected stakeholders, including residents, schools and businesses,
and confirming that PG&E has proper traffic controls in place to ensure safe routes around the construction
areas for bicyclists, pedestrians and motorists. Project details, including construction schedule and maps, are
posted in a news item on our home webpage, and will be updated as more information becomes available.
PG&E is also proposing to remove 11 trees that are close to the pipeline which the utility views as
problematic. Most of these trees are located on private property. Urban Forestry staff continues to meet
with PG&E to coordinate the process for outreach, permitting, notification, and tree replacements.
New Stanford Hospital Marks Final Project of Business New Construction Program – Stanford Hospital
recently completed a set of major efficiency upgrades installed under the utility’s Business New Construction
program. Stanford installed high efficiency lighting and controls, variable speed drives on fans and water
pumps, energy efficient glazing on windows and hot aisle containment for the data center. The hospital was
built 21% more efficient than the baseline and will result in a continuing savings of over 4.2 million kWh/year,
enough to power over 7000 homes. This one project is equivalent to approximately 70% of CPAU’s electric
efficiency savings for FY 2017. This is the last project to go through the Business New Construction program,
which officially stopped taking applications in 2017.
New BAWSCA Video Highlights Accomplishments – I would like to make you aware of a new video titled “15
Years of BAWSCA: Representing Your Voice,” which highlights the value BAWSCA has provided to the 26
member agencies that purchase water from the SFPUC. BAWSCA, as a joint action agency, delivers critical
operational support and advocacy on behalf of the Bay Area SFPUC wholesale customers that none of us
could effectively deliver on our own. Some notable achievements featured include: its critical oversight role
in the $4.8 billion Water Supply Improvement Projects; saving member agencies $40M over the past 15 years
by ensuring the SFPUC allocates costs properly to wholesale customers, saving members $62M over 21 years
by issuing bonds to prepay debt owed to the SFPUC for capital projects; negotiating the 25-year Water Supply
Agreement; and saving 2.9 billion gallons of water through conservation programs, helping to make the Bay
Area’s per capita water use some of the lowest in the state. I encourage you to view the video if you want to
understand the important role BAWSCA plays on behalf of Palo Alto water customers. The video can be found
on Vimeo, and we will forward you a link. I also want to note that BAWSCA’s General Manager, Nicole
Sandkulla, is here this evening to speak to the WSA amendments on your agenda.
In response to Commissioner Forssell's question regarding the portions of Stanford University served by the
Water Utility, Abendschein advised that Stanford Research Park, Stanford Hospital, and the Stanford
Shopping Center were located within the City of Palo Alto.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: March 6, 2019 Page 3 of 11
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
None.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None.
NEW BUSINESS
ITEM 1: ACTION: Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation that the City Council Adopt a Resolution
Approving the November 2018 Amended and Restated Water Supply Agreement Between the City and
County of San Francisco and Wholesale Customers in Alameda County, San Mateo County, and Santa Clara
County and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Amended and Restated Water Supply Agreement.
Jonathan Abendschein, Assistant Director of Resource Management, introduced Nicole Sandkulla, General
Manager of Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA), who was instrumental in achieving
the negotiated amendments.
Chair Danaher requested Ms. Sandkulla share information regarding BAWSCA.
Nicole Sandkulla reported BAWSCA is a special district, which was enabled in 2002 through special legislation
sponsored by the 26 wholesale water customers of the San Francisco Regional Water System (System).
BAWSCA's 26 member agencies, also known as wholesale customers, serve 1.8 million residential customers
and more than 40,000 businesses and community organizations across three counties. The wholesale
customers rely on the System for some to all of their water supply. The wholesale customers are connected
through a Water Supply Agreement (WSA), which is a unique structure in a wholesale/retail relationship for
water. The contract resulted from a lawsuit filed by the City of Palo Alto against the City and County of San
Francisco (San Francisco) in the 1970s. The contract exists to protect the financial and water supply interests
of the wholesale customers. BAWSCA has a staff of eight and an office located in San Mateo. The Board of
Directors is comprised of one representative from each member agency. BAWSCA focuses its efforts on the
goal of a reliable supply of high-quality water at a fair price. The WSA was renegotiated most recently in 2009.
BAWSCA administers the WSA on behalf of the wholesale customers and ensures each agency pays its fair
share in proportion to its use. In administering the contract, BAWSCA discovered some provisions that
needed amending. BAWSCA proposed some amendments, and San Francisco proposed some amendments.
Negotiations have produced a solid set of amendments that do not stray from policy positions embedded in
the contract.
In answer to Commissioner Trumbull's inquiry regarding audits of BAWSCA by an agency similar to the Local
Agency Formation Commission of Santa Clara County (LAFCO), Sandkulla advised that the San Mateo and
Santa Clara LAFCOs reviewed BAWSCA in 2005 to ensure efforts were not duplicated and boundary issues
had been resolved. The reviews found no issues.
Abendschein indicated staff requests review of the contract so that the item can be placed on the City
Council's March 4 Consent Calendar. Adoption needs to occur quickly.
Lisa Bilir, Resource Planner, disclosed that in September the City authorized BAWSCA to negotiate with San
Francisco to amend the WSA, and the negotiations led to the proposed amendments. Importantly, the
amendments do not change the basic contract structure of the WSA or the City's fundamental rights.
Amendment 1 concerns oversight of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) Capital
Improvement Program (CIP). SFPUC has an ongoing CIP to maintain the integrity of the System. Wholesale
customers are responsible for a portion of capital projects with an estimated cost of $2 billion over ten years.
Amendment 1 establishes a formal process for SFPUC and BAWSCA to engage in development of a 10-year
CIP and to comment on proposed changes to the water supply and delivery targets. Under the amendment,
BAWSCA and wholesale customers will have the ability to oversee and scrutinize SFPUC's capital program,
which is a major factor in rate setting. Amendment 2 concerns the Tier 1 Drought Plan, which is the formula
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: March 6, 2019 Page 4 of 11
SFPUC uses to allocate water between retail and wholesale customers during drought. If the Tier 1 formula
had been applied during the most recent drought, retail customers would have been allocated more water
during the drought than during non-drought years. The Tier 1 formula was not applied during the recent
drought because of state-mandated drought reductions. Amendment 2 will correct the Tier 1 Drought Plan
to require retail customers conserve at least 5 percent of water during a drought. Amendment 2 benefits
Palo Alto by ensuring a more equitable allocation of water during a drought. Amendment 3, an administrative
amendment, extends the time for SFPUC to make water supply decisions from 2018 to 2028 so that SFPUC
can gather information regarding future water supplies. System costs are allocated one-third to retail
customers and two-thirds to wholesale customers based on usage of the customer groups. In addition,
System costs for facilities known as the Hetch Hetchy Enterprise are allocated 55 percent to power customers
and 45 percent to water customers. Because of the cost allocation, proper designation of assets as water,
power, or joint is very important.
In answer to Vice Chair Schwartz's query regarding use of the formula to calculate the proportional annual
water usage when reviewing rate design, Abendschein reported the concept may be raised in future
discussions of electric financial forecasts and rate studies and electric cost of service and rate adjustments.
Vice Chair Schwartz felt the concept of proportional usage could be an equitable method for setting rates.
Bilir continued the presentation, stating in fiscal year 2010-2011 the SFPUC unilaterally changed the
classification of a small number of Hetch Hetchy Enterprise assets from power to joint, which would have
added $50 million in obligations to the wholesale customers. BAWSCA disputed the changes and has been
trying to resolve it. Amendment 4 resolves the dispute and the issue more broadly by documenting and fixing
the asset classification for each asset in the Hetch Hetchy Enterprise. The amendment reflects SFPUC and
BAWSCA's agreement for a specific cost allocation for seven capital projects that are very important to SFPUC
and wholesale customers, even though the underlying asset may have a different classification than the
project. Amendment 4 fixes the asset classifications of 500 assets, prevents any future unilateral changes,
mitigates the financial risk for two high-risk and possibly very expensive projects, eliminates the need for an
expensive new pipeline, and ensures power customers pay toward critically needed projects that maintain
and enhance system reliability. Overall, Amendment 4 ensures wholesale customers pay only their fair share
for upcoming capital work.
In response to Commissioner Segal's inquiry about the unilateral change being a change in the use of the
assets or a mistake, Sandkulla reported the use of the asset and the asset's function did not change. The
assets were older and had been paid off. The SFPUC accounting department determined the assets were new
because they had been paid off, and the classification could be changed because the assets were new. In
addition, water runs through the asset; therefore, the classification could be changed from power to joint.
The change was made administratively, and BAWSCA staff questioned it. Commissioner Segal understood the
amendment would prevent a unilateral change of an asset classification, and the process to jointly change a
classification could take five years. In answer to her question about BAWSCA's ability to change a
classification to benefit wholesale customers, Sandkulla explained that BAWSCA agreed to reclassify projects
rather than assets because the projects would benefit the wholesale customers. That consideration may be
employed again used in the future.
In reply to Commissioner Forssell's request for descriptions of the two high-risk and possibly very expensive
projects, Sandkulla reported one project involved installing a valve at the end of the Mountain Tunnel to
maintain greater control of flow. SFPUC wanted to designate the project as a water project, but BAWSCA
wanted it to remain a joint project. The second project proposed interim repairs to the Moccasin Dam.
BAWSCA accepted the classification of the project as water in order to have repairs performed quickly, but
the dam remains a joint project.
Bilir further reported the Wholesale Capital Fund is a fund for revenue collected from wholesale customers
for a set of capital projects funded by revenues. The balance is currently reconciled every five years.
Amendment 5 provides for annual reconciliation, which will match the SFPUC's budget requirement,
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: March 6, 2019 Page 5 of 11
appropriation process, and project spending needs. Regardless of the frequency of reconciliation, wholesale
customers continue to be responsible for actual revenue-funded capital expenditures. This amendment
ensures SFPUC has the necessary resources for capital improvements that benefit Palo Alto without holding
an excessive amount of wholesale customer funds. Amendment 6 will update the Water Supply Improvement
Program completion date from December 31, 2015 to an estimated date of December 31, 2021. Amendment
7 more accurately describes the operational details of the Regional Groundwater Storage and Recovery
Project (RGSRP), which benefits the region. Palo Alto is not a party to this project. On December 11, 2018,
the SFPUC approved the Amended and Restated WSA pending approval by wholesale customers. BAWSCA
recommends member agencies adopt the amendments by March 31, 2019.
In answer to Commissioner Trumbull's inquiry regarding environmental analysis, Bilir advised that the City
Attorney's Office has approved a statement indicating this is not considered a project.
In response to Commissioner Johnston's question about the number of wholesale customers that have
approved the amendments and about the possibility of wholesale customers raising questions, Sandkulla
reported five member agencies have approved the amendments. The remaining agencies have scheduled the
amendments for consideration and anticipate taking action prior to March 31. She did not expect any
wholesale customers raising questions or concerns. Commissioner Johnston understood the amendments
provide BAWSCA some ability to get insight into the CIP and asked if BAWSCA or wholesale customers could
object to capital improvements. Sandkulla remarked that BAWSCA and wholesale customers could do very
little to influence capital improvements. SFPUC does not report to anybody, but a public process has been
effective in obtaining SFPUC cooperation.
In reply to Commissioner Forssell's query regarding SFPUC's allocation increasing under the Tier 1 Drought
Plan in small drought conditions, Sandkulla explained that the percentages in the table are not as effective
as anticipated in 2001. Changes in water conservation and differences in demand make determining the right
number for future use difficult. The easier approach is to retain the table, but at a minimum require SFPUC
to cut back water use by 5 percent. If the table overcomes it, there would be more of a cutback. The
amendment includes language for a future discussion of the issue. With respect to Commissioner Forssell's
question about the 5-percent being a reduction of the previous year's use or a reduction of the total,
Sandkulla advised that the cutback is based on water use just prior to the drought. The calculation is not
perfect, and San Francisco ultimately accepted a minimum cutback. In response to Commissioner Forssell's
request for information about the need for an expensive new pipeline, Sandkulla reported in January 2018
SFPUC included a project for a new water-only pipeline in its CIP. The new pipeline would parallel the existing
Moccasin pipeline. The Moccasin pipeline is a power facility, but water and power use it. SFPUC proposed a
new pipeline because Moccasin may not be a cost-effective power operation. If the new pipeline was
eliminated from the CIP, SFPUC was not willing to invest in repairing the Moccasin pipeline; therefore, it
probably would fail. BAWSCA supported a repair project because repairs to a pipeline cost considerably less
than constructing a new pipeline. The pipeline will remain a joint asset, but water and power will share the
repair cost.
ACTION: Commissioner Trumbull moved to recommend the City Council adopt a resolution approving the
November 2018 Amended and Restated Water Supply Agreement between the City and County of San
Francisco and Wholesale Customers in Alameda County, San Mateo County, and Santa Clara County and
authorize the City Manager to execute the Amended and Restated Water Supply Agreement. Commissioner
Johnston seconded the motion. The motion carried 6-0 with Chair Danaher, Vice Chair Schwartz, and
Commissioners Forssell, Johnston, Segal, and Trumbull voting yes, and Commissioner Ballantine absent.
ITEM 2: DISCUSSION: Staff Presentation on Utilities Workforce Update: Succession Planning, Recruitments
and Vacancies.
Herb Borock noted slides 2 and 3 reflect 42.5 vacancies, but slide 5 reflects 43.5 vacancies. Slide 7 reflects
two management positions that are not highlighted in the previous charts. Graphs of vacancies and
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: March 6, 2019 Page 6 of 11
retirement eligibility by bargaining unit would be interesting. He suspected the number of management
employees eligible for retirement is high.
Dave Yuan, Strategic Business Manager, reported the 2018 Utilities Strategic Plan identifies workforce as one
of four priorities. The objective for workforce is to ensure long-term staffing in order to continue to provide
essential utility services.
In response to Vice Chair Schwartz's inquiry regarding the Assistant City Manager/Utilities General Manager
position, Yuan advised that the position will be reclassified as Utilities General Manager in the fiscal year (FY)
2019-2020 budget.
Yuan further reported wastewater, gas, water, and electric operations has the highest number of vacancies
at 26. The number of vacancies in electric operations may begin affecting daily operations and emergency
response times. Staff is actively recruiting for 32 of the total 42.5 vacant positions. Eight positions are hard
to fill because they require unique skills and the market is quite competitive.
Tomm Marshall, Assistant Director of Utility Operations, indicated one of the key positions in electric
operations is Lineperson/Cable Splicer. The position has not been fully staffed in the last ten years, and
currently six positions are vacant. The position of Compliance Technician requires the same skills as a
Lineperson, and two positions are vacant. The position of System Operator has also had ongoing vacancies
for a number of years. Currently, two positions are vacant. The Assistant Director of Engineering position has
been vacant for two years. The Assistant Director of Operations, Manager of Electric Operations, and Electric
Supervisor positions will be vacant in the next two to three years due to retirement. Retirement is a concern
industry wide. Recruiting and retaining staff is a particular problem in the Bay Area due to the high cost of
living and commute time. Lineperson wages have escalated faster in other cities than in Palo Alto. At the end
of a five-year training period, an apprentice Lineperson is not ready to work on his own. Another five years
of training is needed before a Lineperson can lead a crew or work alone. Staff is able to recruit persons for
entry-level positions but not mid-level positions. In addition, staff is having difficulty finding people with the
skills needed for senior-level positions. Employees are working out of class, rotating through jobs, and being
promoted in order to fill needed positions. Labor negotiations are underway with Service Employees
International Union (SEIU) and will begin in June with Utilities Management and Professional Association of
Palo Alto (UMPAPA). When an employee's retirement date is known, another employee will work with the
retiring employee to learn his duties and responsibilities prior to his departure. Staff is utilizing contract
services and recently retired persons to fill vacant positions. Long-term strategies to increase staffing include
explore market-based compensation for critical and hard-to-fill positions; hire more resources for
recruitment; evaluate retention pay options; develop and implement succession strategies such as
professional development and training, recruitment, and market-based compensation; and assess
department reorganization.
In reply to Commissioner Johnston's queries regarding negotiation of salaries for union jobs, Marshall
explained that increasing salaries or implementing market-based compensation has to be negotiated with
unions. Yuan added that the City has the right to meet and confer with a union regarding compensation for
at-risk positions, which means negotiations may occur outside regular contract negotiations. As the City
negotiates pay increases, other cities are negotiating pay increases as well.
In answer to Commissioner Forssell's question regarding the potential length of negotiations, Marshall
related that negotiations typically take months, not years. Sandra Blanch, Assistant Director of Human
Resources, added that the labor agreement reached in December required about six months of negotiations.
The last three labor contracts have addressed Lineperson compensation, but the market rate changes rapidly.
Staff is exploring the possibility of retention pay.
In response to Chair Danaher's inquiries about training and education for Lineperson, Marshall explained that
applicants are high school graduates and sometimes graduates of "colleges" that teach basic skills. An
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: March 6, 2019 Page 7 of 11
apprentice linesman will alternate between training and working in the field over the five-year apprenticeship
period.
In answer to Commissioner Forssell's queries regarding a cost comparison of contract services and
employees, Marshall reported an employee is less expensive in the current market. Contract services may
cost as much as 25-50 percent more than an employee. Yuan added that CPAU recently awarded a contract
for services on an as-needed basis at a cost of $1.5 million per year for three years. The contract will provide
four to six people to work as needed. Jonathan Abendschein, Assistant Director of Resource Management,
clarified the contract as also including equipment, overhead, etc.
In reply to Vice Chair Schwartz's question about recruiting PG&E workers given the possibility of PG&E seeking
bankruptcy protection, Marshall advised that staff has contacts at PG&E and attempts to recruit their
employees. The challenge with recruiting employees from other cities or companies is the employee has to
leave one union, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), for SEIU. Vice Chair Schwartz
remarked that the City should consider offering unusual benefits, such as housing, that will attract workers.
Recruitment needs to be more systemic. Yuan indicated staff has been attending job fairs.
In response to Commissioner Segal's inquiry regarding reasons employees leave, Marshall stated employees
typically leave for higher pay and a more affordable cost of living. Housing is critical because employees need
to live close enough to Palo Alto to respond in an emergency situation. If employees need hours to travel to
the City, the recovery period may be extended. Commissioner Segal suggested the City may need to consider
housing at least during the week for regular employees or on-call employees. In answer to her question
regarding implementation of long-term strategies, Marshall related that CPAU has a succession strategy. The
challenges are the number of employees facing retirement and the few employees with experience between
entry-level and retirement-age.
Vice Chair Schwartz commented on staff not attending conferences where they could become acquainted
with colleagues who could benefit CPAU. CPAU needs to recruit senior management who will attract
additional employees. Staffing challenges cannot be resolved with entry-level people. Blanch related staff's
efforts to recruit from other agencies. A couple of candidates from Long Beach and Hawaii began work for
CPAU in 2018.
In answer to Chair Danaher's query regarding the salary range for Lineman and equivalent positions, Yuan
indicated the salary for Linesman and Compliance Technician at the journeyman level is $125,000-$130,000
per year. Chair Danaher remarked that staffing is one step away from an emergency situation, and the City
Council should ensure financial restrictions are not an issue for hiring.
Commissioner Forssell did not understand why a union would not agree to a pay increase. The situation may
be similar to increasing construction costs in that CPAU may simply have to pay the prevailing wage for
employees because utilities have to be safe and reliable. She concurred with making the Council aware of the
challenges.
Vice Chair Schwartz recalled the Council's direction to keep utility rates below PG&E's rates. That would be a
silly goal if Utilities cannot operate due to the lack of staff. The UAC needs to support staff in challenging that
goal.
Chair Danaher disagreed with the need to challenge the goal because staffing costs could increase
measurably without increasing the overall budget measurably. In response to his question regarding union
representation, Marshall stated SEIU represents trade jobs and UMPAPA represents management
employees.
ACTION: None
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: March 6, 2019 Page 8 of 11
ITEM 3: DISCUSSION: Upcoming Home Energy and Water Reports Program.
Lacey Lutes, Utility Program Manager, reported the Home Energy Reports Program began in 2010, and the
Home Water Reports Program was added in 2013. In 2015, the program accounted for 22.3 percent of electric
savings and 64.9 percent of gas savings.
In reply to Chair Danaher's question about overall gas usage, Lutes explained that the program accounted for
1.46 percent of residential gas savings. Jonathan Abendschein, Assistant Director of Resource Management,
clarified that citywide residential gas usage decreased 1.46 percent because of this program. Vice Chair
Schwartz believed 22 percent and 65 percent are misleading numbers because 65 percent of 1 percent is
really different from 65 percent.
Lutes continued her presentation, stating of all the programs CPAU is mandated to operate in order to
provide energy savings for the City, this program accounted for a significant percentage of savings.
Abendschein related that energy efficiency generates small savings year after year, but the savings add up to
big savings over time. CPAU judges itself on overall savings. These numbers reflect the contribution of the
program to CPAU's portfolio of savings.
In answer to Chair Danaher's question of whether this program was CPAU's best efficiency promotion
program, Abendschein responded yes.
Lutes further reported the reports program was one of CPAU's most cost-effective programs for the total
dollar amount spent versus the energy savings. The program ended in 2015, but staff intends to relaunch the
program and has issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for a single sign-on solution for customers. The new
platform will include best practices and clear statements about the assumptions used for each household.
In response to Vice Chair Schwartz's query regarding demographic data for a home office, Lutes advised that
the program addresses electric vehicle (EV) ownership and solar power. She is negotiating a contract for a
reporting program that can adjust comparisons for factors such as solar power, EVs, and electrification. Vice
Chair Schwartz expressed concern that the household comparison may be outdated and suggested
comparisons include some of the newer concepts. Perhaps the UAC could see a demonstration of the portal.
Lutes clarified that the comparisons are not new but have solid results. The new program will have energy
challenges, which have not been used in Palo Alto previously. Abendschein indicated staff will provide a portal
demonstration in March. Staff has created flexibility in the contract to implement best practices, to generate
comparison reports, and to implement additional concepts as they become accepted. Chair Danaher
remarked that more data and comparisons will be available once advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) is
implemented.
In response to Commissioner Trumbull's query regarding staff obtaining results from the program, Lutes
disclosed staff will work with the consultant to launch the program, and then the consultant will run the
program. Under the prior program, most customer complaints were caused by a lack of understanding of the
comparisons. In response to those complaints, staff has developed a separate cohort for solar customers.
Vice Chair Schwartz commented that staff may not have received all customer comments because, based on
her experience, the vendor removed customers who asked questions from the program.
Abendschein related the ability of this program to serve as an outreach and marketing channel. It will be tied
to other programs and features that allow people to take action. It can also be a channel for positive
interaction between staff and customers.
ACTION: None
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: March 6, 2019 Page 9 of 11
ITEM 4: DISCUSSION: Staff Presentation on Preliminary Rate Changes for Electric, Gas, Wastewater
Collection, and Water Utilities for FY 2020.
Eric Keniston, Senior Resource Planner, noted the projections include refuse rates for information only. Staff
will complete gas and water cost of service adjustment (COSA) updates in 2019, and wastewater COSA
updates are planned for 2020. Staff projected a 5-percent overall residential rate increase for fiscal year 2019.
The projection has changed based on ending reserves for FY 2018. For FY 2020, staff projects a 9-percent rate
increase for electric, a 10-percent increase for gas, a 7-percent increase for wastewater, a 4-percent increase
for water, and no increase for refuse.
Jonathan Abendschein, Assistant Director of Resource Management, recalled staff talking with the Finance
Committee about ways to contain costs in each budget cycle without sacrificing service. Staff has advanced
the preliminary rate forecast so that division heads can understand the rate outlook for the next year and
focus their efforts on efficiencies prior to submitting their proposed budgets. In addition, staff continues to
review personnel actions in order to operate efficiently and handle vacancy issues and to regularly review
performance metrics and expenditures.
Keniston further reported the Supply Operations Reserve balance is currently below the minimum guideline.
Staff can utilize the Hydroelectric Stabilization Reserve or the Special Projects Reserve to raise the balance
above the minimum guideline. Staff projects 3-5 percent rate increases beyond FY 2020. All utilities are facing
declining sales as usage moves into the historical long-term decline. The Distribution Operations Reserve
balance is projected to remain around the minimum guideline and increase over time.
In reply to Chair Danaher's query about increasing the Supply Operations Reserve balance by $20 million over
the next few years, Keniston indicated that is staff's intent.
In response to Commissioner Johnston's questions about the reason the projection jumped from 3 to 9
percent, Keniston explained the increases in electric commodity costs and capital project costs caused the
projection to increase. When sales decrease, rate increases are spread over fewer and fewer units. Within
the projection for gas rates, a 15-percent distribution rate increase equates to about a 10-percent overall bill
impact. The projection increased based on plans to resume annual water main replacement projects, cross-
bore contingency costs, and regional backbone transportation cost increases.
In answer to Vice Chair Schwartz's inquiry about the effect of PG&E seeking bankruptcy protection or selling
its gas operation, Abendschein indicated staff continues to explore the possibilities. Staff is less concerned
about CPAU's direct exposure and more concerned about indirect exposure such as loss of privileges on the
transmission pipeline or PG&E passing costs via the transmission access charge. The Northern California
Power Agency (NCPA) is assisting staff with a response on that front.
Keniston continued the presentation, stating Electric Utility revenues are below costs and projected costs;
therefore, 10-percent rate increases will be needed for the next two or three years. With the rate increase,
the Operations Reserve balance will fall within the minimum and maximum guidelines. The minimum
guideline level is $6 million, so the Operations Reserve will provide only a small cushion. For wastewater,
staff proposes a 7-percent rate increase. Staff anticipates an increased amount of capital work on the Palo
Alto distribution system and the Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP). Wastewater collection does not have
much debt service, but most of the WQCP capital expense will be related to debt service. Operations Reserves
are small and will draw down quickly such that staff expects the balance will reach the minimum guideline
balance by FY 2022. A 7-8 percent increase will cause a $2.50-$3.00 per month bill impact. Staff proposes a
4-percent overall water rate increase and plans to create a separate commodity rate component for pass-
through. This is a good time for a separate component as the SFPUC does not appear to be planning rate
increases until 2022 or 2023. In the water COSA, staff is evaluating a merger of all residential meter charges
into one charge for all residential customers. Currently, SFPUC has a $4 billion project for seismic
improvements to the Hetch Hetchy system. In future years, many capital improvements will be needed. The
cost of water accounts for about 40 percent of the utility's costs. From 2014-2024, staff projects average
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: March 6, 2019 Page 10 of 11
overall 4-percent cost increases. Capital investments account for slightly more than 50 percent of
distribution-related costs. Over the last five years, distribution costs have been increasing slowly, but staff
believes they will increase faster to 2024. If a project to install backup generators at pumping stations does
not materialize, near-term costs could decrease. The cost of underground construction has increased
precipitously since 2010. Palo Alto's median bill is approximately 12 percent higher than the average bill of
comparable cities.
Chair Danaher commented that a comparison of median monthly residential bills is not meaningful if lots and
yards vary greatly in size. A comparison based on cost per cubic foot could be more meaningful.
Commissioner Forssell interpreted the chart as a comparison of bills for usage of 4 ccf, 8 ccf, and 18 ccf.
Keniston further reported water costs increased due to reservoir infrastructure in the Foothills. Cost
containment strategies could include reducing the number of reservoirs in the Foothills or instituting an
elevation surcharge.
In response to Vice Chair Schwartz's query about reallocating some of those resources to fire prevention,
Keniston advised staff does allocate a portion of costs to fire protection rates and can consider allocations to
other funds.
Keniston continued the presentation, stating over the last five years, rates have increased on average 6.5
percent per year. Rates for comparable cities have increased by 9 percent per year. For FY 2020, CPAU will
probably have an 8-percent cost decrease due to one-time capital decreases. If other revenues such as
interest income or capacity fees decrease, staff may have to increase rates more. Staff anticipates overall
costs will decrease slightly over the next few years. When the SFPUC rate increases take effect, CPAU's costs
will begin to rise. The Operations Reserve balance currently falls well within the minimum and maximum
guidelines.
In response to Chair Danaher's question regarding UAC action on rate proposals, Keniston explained the
Proposition 218 notice requirement for water and wastewater rates. Staff will present the water and
wastewater rate proposals to the UAC in March and the Finance Committee in April. Electric and gas rates
will be presented in the next two to three months.
Commissioner Johnston recommended staff communicate the cost drivers for rate increases to the Finance
Committee.
Vice Chair Schwartz suggested staff also illustrate the fixed costs versus variable costs based on usage. In
reply to her question about the concentration of EVs in Palo Alto not affecting electric revenue, Keniston
reported EVs do not use a lot of energy on a kilowatt per hour (kW h) basis. EVs do create demand issues,
which could drive up costs because of the need to replace transformers. The increase in residential usage has
been countered with a decrease in commercial usage of electricity.
Chair Danaher agreed with Vice Chair Schwartz's point about illustrating costs. He commended staff for
including the overall percentages, cost containments, and the chart showing the cost of undergrounding.
CPAU should have a list of capital projects it can accelerate if staff anticipates a recession such that costs
might decrease.
ACTION: None
ITEM 5: Discussion: Staff Update and Discussion of Fiber and AMI Planning.
Dave Yuan, Strategic Business Manager, reported staff met with the Citizens Advisory Committee in January
and provided an update regarding the Fiber to the Node (FTTN) RFP. Staff continues to meet with the City
Attorney's Office to review the RFP. CPAU will host the NorCal Water AMI consortium meeting the following
Wednesday. A Council update is tentatively scheduled for March 2019.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: March 6, 2019 Page 11 of 11
ACTION: None
ITEM 6: ACTION: Selection of Potential Topic(s) for Discussion at Future UAC Meeting and Potential
Designation of UAC Ad Hoc Subcommittee(s).
Vice Chair Schwartz requested a discussion around citizens' misperceptions about their bills tracking usage.
Catherine Elvert, Utilities Communications Manager, reported staff investigated a customer's complaint on
Nextdoor about his high water bill. The high water bill occurred four or five months prior to the message
appearing on Nextdoor. Staff encouraged the customer to contact customer service immediately when he
noticed a spike in the water bill. The resident seemed to recall construction work in front of the house, and
staff determined the work was not performed by City crews. Given the length of time that had passed, staff
could not do much more to aid the resident.
ACTION: None
NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING: March 6, 2019
Meeting adjourned at 9:31 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted
Tabatha Boatwright
City of Palo Alto Utilities
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: February 6, 2019 Page 1 of 9
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING
FINAL MINUTES OF JANUARY 9, 2019 SPECIAL MEETING
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Danaher called the meeting of the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) to order at 7:00 p.m.
Present: Chair Danaher, Vice Chair Schwartz, Commissioners Forssell, Johnston, Segal, and Trumbull
Absent: Commissioner Ballantine
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
Commissioner Segal moved to approve the minutes from the December 5, 2018 meeting as presented.
Commissioner Johnston seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0 with Commissioners Forssell, Johnston,
Segal, and Trumbull voting yes, Chair Danaher and Vice Chair Schwartz abstaining, and Commissioner
Ballantine absent.
AGENDA REVIEW AND REVISIONS
None.
REPORTS FROM COMMISSIONER MEETINGS/EVENTS
Vice Chair Schwartz attended a meeting and webcasts of the Low-Income Community Solar Working and
GridWise Alliance's annual GridConnext conference. The Low-Income Community Solar Working Group
would be publishing a paper soon. She hoped to put information about this on the UAC agenda. She had
talked to the ex-VP of PepCo about undergrounding. She confirmed that pad-mounted transformers in newer
underground areas are standard. She said the standards documents for transformers in underground districts
needed work. Commissioner Schwartz said she has encouraged colleagues at DOE to document best practices
and alternatives.
Chair Danaher attended the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) and learned about a device that allows an
electric vehicle (EV) to power a home and act as backup power. It was only available in Japan at the moment
but the intent was to bring it to the US.
GENERAL MANAGER OF UTILITIES REPORT
Dean Batchelor, Interim Utilities General Manager, delivered the General Manager’s Report.
Natural Gas Prices Spiked in December, Normalized in January Natural gas prices spiked in the month of
December, but have now decreased to what we would normally anticipate for this time of year. City of Palo
Alto Utilities (CPAU) purchases natural gas for its customers from the market, and any monthly fluctuations
in market pricing are passed along to our residents and businesses with natural gas service. Palo Alto is not
unique; other utilities like PG&E that purchase natural gas from the market are also affected by rate changes.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: February 6, 2019 Page 2 of 9
Staff proactively reached out to community members in December to inform people of the increased rates,
encouraging them to conserve gas where possible in order to avoid higher bills. However, customers may see
higher than usual costs on their January utility bills for gas use in December. We have highlighted tips and
links to other resources to improve energy efficiency, such as through a Home Efficiency Genie assessment,
on our home webpage at cityofpaloalto.org/Utilities.
Upcoming PG&E Work in Palo Alto PG&E is planning to begin work later this month on one of their large gas
transmission pipelines that runs through Palo Alto. This is to replace areas of pipe that are in need of
maintenance to ensure safety and reliability. Over the next five to six months, there will be a number of sites
throughout the City where PG&E will be trenching in streets to accommodate the work. The first major
construction area will be on Loma Verde Avenue near the intersection of Kipling. Staff is working with PG&E
to provide advance notification to all affected parties and ensure safe conditions for all who travel through
the construction areas. Our Engineering and Operations teams will also be coordinating with PG&E
throughout duration of the project to provide continuity of service and safety for customers. When additional
project details are available, we will update our website at cityofpaloalto.org/UtilityProjects.
Palo Alto Turns 125 This year marks the 125th anniversary of the City of Palo Alto’s founding. We will be
celebrating this milestone throughout the year in our promotions and at special events. Stay tuned as we
identify ways to highlight our many accomplishments over time and celebrate our great community.
Upcoming Events:
• On Saturday, April 13, the City is once again hosting the Great Race for Saving Water, a family-friendly
fun run & walk at the Baylands, plus Earth Day Festival. Join us for a special time this year as the City is
also celebrating its 125th anniversary. After the 5K, 10K or 1K kids fun run, enjoy a free festival with
electric vehicle ride & drive, nature activities, live music, arts & crafts, raffle prizes, and community
booths with activities and demonstrations, environmental and public safety resources. Visit
cityofpaloalto.org/EarthDay to register and view the schedule of activities.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Commissioner Trumbull hoped Mayor Filseth would continue to attend UAC meetings, even though the
Mayor typically does not fill a Council liaison role. Mayor Filseth remarked that the Mayor could substitute
for a designated Council liaison.
Vice Chair Schwartz said she had not been at the previous UAC meeting, but noted discussion of the resiliency
workshop that night. The minutes had seemed to reflect a negative attitude toward having experts at
meetings. She suggested that experts who have information that staff does not have should be invited to the
upcoming resilience workshop, but the experts should be used effectively. Commissioner Trumbull remarked
that experts should speak in terms that workshop participants can understand. Vice Chair Schwartz added
that the experts at the first workshop were not given any guidance regarding their presentations. When
inviting the experts to the August workshop, she posited to them that they would be answering questions.
Chair Danaher noted there would be an opportunity to discuss the topic at a subsequent meeting.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None.
NEW BUSINESS
ITEM 1: DISCUSSION: Update on Activities to Facilitate Distributed Energy Resources Adoption and Next
Steps.
Jonathan Abendschein, Assistant Director of Resource Management, reported staff has taken a number of
actions discussed in the draft Distributed Energy Resources (DER) Plan. In preparing the staff report, staff
realized many of the actions around DERs are actually encompassed in other plans and, rather than creating
yet another plan, staff decided to present an overview of all the actions planned around DERs and the plans
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: February 6, 2019 Page 3 of 9
in which those actions are memorialized. Not all actions are memorialized in plans that have been adopted.
The UAC's feedback will be incorporated into the relevant plans.
Shiva Swaminathan, Senior Resource Planner, advised that in April 2018 the UAC discussed the Distribution
System Assessment. The UAC approved the Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) and Technology Plan in
September 2018 and the Electric Integrated Resources Plan (EIRP) in October 2018. Also, in October 2018,
the UAC reviewed the customer survey results. DER planning focuses on five areas: business strategic and
operational planning; electric supply planning and operations; and distribution planning and operations
including facilitating implementation of customer-owned microgrid projects. Staff is collaborating with
VMware to explore a microgrid project. Abendschein added that VMware wants to implement a campus-
wide microgrid project. The project is in the early conceptual stage, and staff will present the UAC with
information when more details are known. Swaminathan continued with the fourth focus area of customer
retail rate design. Staff is exploring many rates, two of which are an all-electric home retail rate and a
discount for homes with EVs. Staff is also exploring ways that retail rates can facilitate DERs. The fifth focus
area is customer program design. Staff has analyzed the customer survey results and is seeking input from
commercial customers. Staff will return to the UAC in the spring with a customer program plan.
Vice Chair Schwartz remarked that a power strip is not considered a smart appliance. The terms carbon
neutral, carbon free, and zero carbon are used incorrectly, which confuses people. Switching from a gas
appliance to an electric appliance is not beneficial if gas-powered plants generate the electricity to operate
those appliances. Terms need to be clear and used consistently. The City Council is making decisions based
on misinformation.
Commissioner Forssell understood the Utility will explore customer retail rate design as part of the plan. The
report mentions time-of-use rates, but it's unclear whether staff plans to explore time-of-use rates in the
future. Abendschein explained that time-of-use rates are a part of long-term plans, but CPAU cannot fully
implement them until the Smart Grid system is available. Commissioner Forssell remarked that if the goal is
to lower carbon, cheaper nighttime rates appear to be directly at odds with the behavior CPAU is trying to
encourage. In response to Commissioner Forssell's query regarding staff's thoughts about time-of-use rates,
Abendschein indicated traditionally time-of-use rates have been a pure cost calculation. PG&E's time periods
have been shifting because the peak period is shifting from the middle of the day to the evening. Time-of-
use rates across the state are responding to those price shifts. If staff updates time-of-use rates or
implements a targeted time-of-use rate program in the next few years, staff will update the time periods and
ensure the time periods align with the prices of the wholesale market. In answer to Commissioner Forssell's
question regarding including the cost of carbon that may or may not be reflected in the wholesale market at
present in the calculation of time-of-use rates, Abendschein related that to some extent a carbon price signal
is built into the prices because of cap-and-trade. That is not necessarily the carbon price that reflects the
long-term impact of carbon on the environment. The one barrier is rates have to reflect the cost of service.
If there is not a direct carbon cost to the Utility, staff has to consider carefully its ability to include a carbon
price signal. Messaging about the most effective time of day to save carbon might be an effective alternative.
Commissioner Forssell was pleased with CPAU policies that do not incentivize EVs for single-family homes
but focus on multifamily homes and workplaces. She was not interested in providing extra incentives for a
population that staff previously identified as well served by the current policies and discounts.
Vice Chair Schwartz commented that predictable rates are important for some people. People who care
about carbon impact can choose a rate that meets their goals but is not necessarily the lowest rate. The UAC
needs a more nuanced look at the use of price signals and the use of interval meters to allow people to
choose a program appropriate for them.
In reply to Chair Danaher's question regarding whether staff summarized the topics listed in Exhibit A or
whether staff will focus on the five areas over the next year, Swaminathan related that staff narrowed the
broader scope of topics to five major work areas that interact with the public. Chair Danaher suggested
including charging networks and the long-term strategy for them so that CPAU networks are future proof.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: February 6, 2019 Page 4 of 9
Providing discounts for all-electric homes or EVs will not necessarily change behavior. If the goal is to reduce
the use of fossil fuels and increase the use of carbon-neutral resources, programs that facilitate the use of
EVs will have more impact than giving discounts to people who already own EVs. Swaminathan explained
that staff mentioned the discount because customers request a discount, because staff can utilize the
program to learn the address of the EV, and the existing billing system can accommodate the discount. Staff
struggled with the network aspect because smart chargers tend to be more expensive than dumb chargers.
CPAU can provide incentives for installation of charging infrastructure in multifamily dwellings, but the
property owner decides whether to install a smart or dumb charger. Chair Danaher also suggested staff study
the type of incentives that would change behavior. Abendschein added that comments on EVs indicate a
piece is missing from staff's overview. The Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) specifically focuses
on EVs, and that information should be summarized in the overview. The primary focus of the work plan is
to expand the public charging network and to reduce barriers to more installation of private chargers.
Collecting UAC feedback on the priorities in the EV section of the S/CAP is going to be important going
forward. Chair Danaher stated it would be nice if the statement of actions over the next few years is put in
the context of the longer-term goal so that people understand the importance of them.
In answer to Commissioner Johnston's query regarding the purpose of a connection fee for residential
customers who install electrical panels larger than 200 volts and who the customers might be, Swaminathan
clarified that a 200-amp connection may not be sufficient for an all-electric home with one or two EVs. The
standard fee covers panels up to 200 amps. If a property owner wants to install a panel with more than 200
amps, an engineering study has to be conducted, and the cost can vary between $695 to $15,000 depending
on whether the incremental amperage requires CPAU to upgrade a transformer. That variation causes a lot
of cost uncertainty for customers. An established connection fee could provide greater cost certainty.
Commissioner Johnston reiterated that the connection fee could make it possible for more people to install
an electrical panel with more than 200 amps at a specific cost. He was interested in learning more about the
potential to integrate smart inverter capabilities into the City's distribution system and the advantages of
that. Swaminathan reported the inverters currently have a power factor of one, which means the rest of the
CPAU system tends to deteriorate. Staff is considering a requirement for inverters to inject some of the
capacity power into the system as part of the permitting process. Commissioner Johnston understood that
would mean changing the specifications required for installing solar systems.
Vice Chair Schwartz related that with a municipal utility everybody receives benefits, and everybody pays
into the system. With DERs, entities other than the city make an investment and receive the benefits. It
might be that somebody makes an investment, and other citizens enjoy the benefit or maybe it costs other
citizens more. An exploration of who wins and who loses has been missing from the discussion. The way
staff frames the problem and the discussion needs to include that. Who pays and who receives the benefits
will vary. ATS has been working on managing inverters to support the wider community, which provides a
community value. Abendschein indicated Vice Chair Schwartz is talking about a wide range of potential
cost/benefit mismatches, and that is an important point. Vice Chair Schwartz added that cost/benefit
mismatches come into play in the State context of cost of service. It may be a different way to look at demand
charges so that they're proportional. Part of the rate design problem is demand charges. That has to be part
of the context, so staff does not initiate cross-subsidies from lower income people to higher income people.
Commissioner Forssell stated storage systems offer enormous greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction potential,
but at the current price points they are not feasible. The value of storage systems will be continually
reevaluated until hopefully they are more feasible from a price standpoint. If cheap storage is available, heat
pump water heaters will make a lot of sense. The right course of action for the time being is to continue to
remove barriers and help people obtain heat pump water heaters, if they want them, but not to push them
aggressively. Power strips and smart lights are not really DERs. They are energy efficient and a fine idea, and
rebates are fine. A staff investigation of whether more nuanced messaging regarding customer awareness
of CPAU's carbon-neutral electricity supply may be warranted. The City should consider whether the current
carbon accounting system meets its goals or if it wants to redefine the meaning to be more of a real-time
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: February 6, 2019 Page 5 of 9
balancing act, even if it means the City can no longer say its electric supply is 100 percent carbon neutral.
Abendschein indicated the UAC will have those conversations within the next six months.
In answer to Commissioner Segal's question regarding the timing of VMware's smaller microgrid project and
VMware's willingness to share information with other commercial customers, Swaminathan reported
VMware hopes to complete the small project before the end of the year. VMware is motivated to share their
story. Commissioner Segal commented that the UAC's Charter allows the UAC to take action if it believes
something should be changed at a legislative level. The provisions of Proposition 26 prohibit CPAU from
varying price incentives. Periodically, that comes up as a barrier to all kinds of innovative programs. With
the State increasing its goals to decrease GHG emissions, maybe it is time to revisit the provisions of
Proposition 26. AMI feedback may not be available until 2023 or 2024. It would be nice initiate creative
programs in the interim without the benefit of AMI feedback to incentivize behavior.
Vice Chair Schwartz remarked that having solar resources visible in the community can be more meaningful
than solar resources hundreds of miles away. Depending upon where solar resources are placed, they can
also increase resilience and utilize land that is considered unusable. The Marcus Garvey Village in Brooklyn
is an example of a building where many DER technologies have been grouped together. The utility was willing
to help fund this project because the utility avoided the cost of investing $1.2 billion in another substation.
The community may support a project in order to experiment with technologies because the project has a
locational value. The Worcester Regional Transit Authority's is using solar on a large building that will charge
electric buses, which can have value for transit and other things. The purpose of the project is to generate
some revenue to support programs for low-income consumers. Community solar becomes more logical
when it provides some larger value. Setting up charging stations that allow people to charge during the day
when excess solar power is available allows the utility to do some things that are locally based, which provides
locational value and a value beyond simply having community solar. If staff can develop projects and
programs that make sense and provide value, then people can buy a subscription and take over some of the
cost of the projects and programs. This is an opportunity to be creative and to be leaders in the State of
California about how to do projects effectively. Even though these projects are not the cheapest way to get
solar, they have other values that are important.
ACTION: No action
ITEM 2: DISCUSSION: Staff Request for Feedback on Recommendations Regarding the City's Fiber-Optic,
Wireless and Advanced Meter Infrastructure Planning.
David Weiss did not understand why the City does not have high-tech communications. Fiber optics is the
future of communications. Chair Danaher indicated the City is working on plans for Fiber to the Node (FTTN),
but more analysis is needed. Mr. Weiss' sentiment is shared by many people.
Jeff Hoel felt it was a mistake for staff to consider sunsetting the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) for Fiber
to the Premises (FTTP) and Wireless. The CAC has a reasonable role in the process. Staff's memo emphasizes
that the UAC has a role to play in the discussion. If the UAC is absent, the lack of oversight will be clear. The
original Option 2 that the Council supported on August 21, 2017 included an option for designing an entire
FTTP network. Changing the scope to eliminate that option would be a disaster. Apparently, Staff thinks
none of the bids for the original Request for Proposals (RFP) were good enough and wants to rewrite the RFP.
He expressed concern that the public may not learn why the bids are not satisfactory and may not see a
rewritten RFP.
Herb Borock remarked that the UAC should exercise its appropriate role under the Municipal Code and make
a recommendation to the Council as an action item. The present item has not been agendized as an action
item; therefore, the UAC should have an action item on the agenda for its February meeting. Staff has been
holding the RFP responses since June 2018 and has recommended issuing a new RFP. Staff is not the awarding
authority for a contract of this dollar amount; the City Council is the awarding authority. The City Council
makes the decision whether to reject all bids or to award a bid. The City Council does so upon the UAC's
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: February 6, 2019 Page 6 of 9
recommendation. When this is an action item, staff should present their proposal, and the UAC should make
a recommendation to the Council. The project is being presented as FTTN with some future action, which is
another reason the City Council should review the draft RFP. Staff is designing a project that will fail if
everyone has to be connected for everything and is trying to have the standards and goals of a profit-making
company. The City should consider fiber a service to residents and design the project on that basis and with
that criteria.
Dean Batchelor, Chief Operating Officer, reported staff is considering reissuing the RFP to expedite the
network planning and construction to better align with business cases and AMI implementation. Staff
received only one qualified response to the RFP. That vendor may not be interested at the current time.
CPAU, the City Attorney's Office, and the Purchasing Division have deliberated the recommendation to
reissue the RFP. If the one qualified vendor decides to bid on the RFP, the vendor will not able to issue a
subsequent bid for new design work and construction management. From a legal standpoint, the vendor
would have an advantage because they would be preparing the business plan and reviewing the proposed
ordinances. The design included in the RFP was not detailed. Reissuing the RFP could cause a delay in the
project, but it could also accelerate the engineering design and cost portion of the process. The UAC will
provide a broader view than the CAC. AMI will get fiber to the node, and then fiber can be extended to
collectors, which will be needed for AMI. Cellular or fiber can connect the collectors. In presenting the AMI
concept to the Council in November, staff planned to use existing fiber, drop bigger bundles of fiber at the
node, and then expand fiber to FTTP.
Chair Danaher reiterated that the reasons for reissuing the RFP are no qualified vendors submitted bids,
expanding the scope for a detailed design will accelerate the timeframe, expanding the scope could cause
more vendors to bid, and the expanded scope could include AMI. Chair Danaher requested staff explain why
the scope does not include FTTP. Batchelor clarified that reissuing the RFP will allow staff to review nodes
throughout neighborhoods and determine which nodes are the logical points to drop large amounts of fiber.
Fiber could then move to more nodes within neighborhoods to serve residents. In response to Chair
Danaher's query as to whether staff is asking for more detail on the FTTN but not necessarily enough to cover
all neighborhoods and all houses, Batchelor replied that staff would ask for that detail. Perhaps 80-90 nodes
could take care of the whole City. The proposed design would show the future of those 85-100 nodes
throughout the City, and CPAU would not have to issue another RFP for another design. The idea is to get a
full detail design for everything in the City, including the design to spur off to the collectors needed for AMI.
Chair Danaher requested staff respond to Mr. Borock's question regarding connecting to the premises or
doing a study on that. Batchelor advised that the new RFP would include funding plans, ordinances, and a
business plan. Staff presented three options to the Council: seek funding for 100-percent build-out at a cost
of $50-$75 million; build to the node; and phase it out and seek a third-party vendor. The UAC and Council
decided to build to the node. If staff reissues the RFP with a full design, they will have a better understanding
of the true costs. Chair Danaher reiterated that the RFP would essentially be for FTTN with some details for
FTTP, such as options, cost, technology.
In reply to Commissioner Segal's request for additional clarification of the RFP and FTTP, Dave Yuan, Strategic
Business Manager, indicated the near-term focus is FTTN, but part of the RFP will show the flexibility or
scalability of the project for FTTP. Staff is still evaluating whether to include a detailed design for FTTP in the
RFP.
Vice Chair Schwartz commented that a study of FTTN will provide a business case that is larger than FTTP
only. The business case for the value of FTTN to AMI may provide greater value. Comparing the use of cellular
or fiber to bring that last piece of data from the collector adds value to the project. Yuan added that the
second RFP will provide a better cost estimate of the FTTP network.
Commissioner Segal stated in addition to including details about AMI, a second RFP will provide details for
more nodes and information about the viability and economics of FTTP. In response to Commissioner Segal's
inquiry regarding security tradeoffs between fiber and wireless to AMI and back to the collectors, Batchelor
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: February 6, 2019 Page 7 of 9
advised that the City will own and operate the security portion if it is fiber to the collectors. To achieve FTTN,
staff would drop large amounts of fiber at one node and then splice from that one node to reach the
collectors. At that point, fiber can move further into the neighborhoods.
In reply to Chair Danaher's question about staff returning to the UAC with a redesigned RFP to seek the UAC's
recommendation, Batchelor reported the next step would be obtaining Council's approval to reissue the RFP.
Following Council approval, staff would return to the UAC with the second RFP. The Council approved a
design to the node, and now staff wants to add the design phase and the AMI component. The Council may
prefer to retain the existing RFP. Chair Danaher supported withdrawing the existing RFP and issuing a second
RFP that would have more value.
Commissioner Johnston did not believe the UAC has a choice if no vendors are interested in the existing RFP
and the RFP does not cover everything needed. In answer to Commissioner Johnston's query regarding staff's
confidence that a second RFP will cover everything needed and attract more bidders, Batchelor related that
staff has spoken to other cities in the same situation, and those cities have successfully received multiple bids
to an RFP similar to the one staff is proposing.
In answer to Commissioner Forssell's inquiry of whether the bidder to the original RFP was supposed to
prepare a business case or a high-level FTTN design, Yuan clarified that the vendor was supposed to prepare
a business case and a conceptual design for FTTN. The second RFP will seek an engineering design.
Commissioner Forssell supported an actual engineering design with the more detail the better, including fiber
to the collectors. In reply to Commissioner Forssell's query regarding the reality of a private partner emerging
that would help with the project, Yuan reported staff with an engineering design can set realistic expectations
of what the City can provide in a public-private partnership. Staff should receive better responses from
potential partners once the potential partners see the design of the network. In response to Commissioner
Forssell's question about the vendors indicating their willingness to participate as a private partner or
providing a business case and design and letting the City find a private partner, Batchelor reported that the
existing RFP requested the vendor help staff review potential third parties who would build fiber from the
node into the neighborhoods. The same language is in the new RFP. Yuan added that there have not been
many successful public-private partnerships.
Batchelor reported the second recommendation is discussion of the UAC assuming the advisory role for AMI
implementation and fiber and wireless planning and of sunsetting the CAC. Because the fiber piece is within
the UAC's purview, staff feels the UAC should assume the advisory role and the CAC should be sunsetted.
In reply to Chair Danaher's queries regarding Jonathan Reichental, Chief Information Officer, running the CAC
and staff receiving value from the CAC, Batchelor advised that Mr. Reichental was responsible for the CAC.
The CAC provided valuable input regarding the FTTP Master Plan, the Wireless Network Plan, the potential
co-build with Google Fiber, an FTTP public-private partnership, and the RFP for an FTTN business case. By
adding the AMI component, FTTN becomes a Utility issue, and the UAC should fill the advisory role. Chair
Danaher inquired whether the CAC is comprised of more individuals with technical credentials than the UAC.
Yuan indicated the CAC has a mix of expertise.
In response to Commissioner Segal's request for the names of CAC members and their skills or experience,
Yuan listed Bob Harrington, Jeff Hoel, Andrew Kau, Don Lee, Oliver Matthey, Christine Moe, Andy Poggio, and
Loren Smith. He was not aware of the members' experience. Commissioner Segal next requested the
frequency of CAC meetings and the number of times the CAC met in 2018. Yuan related that the CAC
generally meets every other month. In 2018, a couple of meetings were canceled and a couple were
rescheduled.
Commissioner Trumbull remarked that the UAC would need to weigh in no matter what. If the UAC is the
only entity providing advice, it would need a lot more information than it has received.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: February 6, 2019 Page 8 of 9
Chair Danaher did not have any insight as to which option would be the most useful for staff and the Council.
CPAU has been understaffed in so many activities that fiber has languished somewhat over the last three or
four years. He was most interested in whatever structure would allow the UAC to help CPAU accelerate the
pace of analysis and decision-making on fiber.
Commissioner Johnston wanted to ensure a second RFP would meet the needs of staff and the project. Staff
needed to consider whether the CAC can provide useful input on the next iteration of the RFP. He did not
know that any of the Commissioners would qualify as experts in the fiber area. Yuan reiterated that the CAC
does offer valuable input, but involving the CAC could delay the RFP. Batchelor reported staff would utilize
the components of the existing RFP but substitute a full design for the high-level design and add the
construction management component. Staff will have to issue a separate RFP for construction. The City
Attorney's Office advised against including all components in one RFP because knowing the design and
construction costs provides the vendor with a distinct advantage. With a separate construction RFP, the
selected vendor could hold a contractor to the tasks of the design the vendor created.
Chair Danaher suggested staff provide the UAC with a brief status report of the fiber project at each meeting,
whether or not the CAC is retained. Yuan could encourage the CAC members to provide input during UAC
meetings.
Commissioner Segal was confused by the recommendation to sunset the CAC if it has provided valuable input.
Staff could set a schedule of meetings and proceed with them whether or not all members are present. She
did not know if the CAC's value has been exhausted.
Commissioner Forssell suggested the UAC may not have the technical expertise that the CAC has. She
expressed interest in hearing from the CAC. If the UAC is going to dive into FTTN and FTTP in the near term,
perhaps the UAC should form a subcommittee and, if appropriate, the subcommittee could interact with the
CAC.
Vice Chair Schwartz agreed that the UAC could form a fiber subcommittee again. She and Chair Forssell and
Commissioner Ballantine participated in one several years ago. She questioned whether informing the CAC
about AMI or informing the UAC about fiber would be more efficient. Batchelor explained that staff wants
to move quickly with fiber and AMI. The Customer Information System (CIS) upgrade is scheduled to occur
in the next three years, and building the fiber system will require another two years. The focus should be
building to AMI, but the CAC has focused on FTTP.
Mayor Filseth suggested the CAC may or may not have fulfilled its mission. If the CAC has fulfilled its mission,
then it should sunset. The crucial question is whether the CAC has fulfilled its mission or whether the CAC's
mission is no longer needed. Yuan related that the initial mission of the CAC was to develop the FTTP Master
Plan, which has been completed. Now, staff is focusing on FTTN, which is the basis for staff's
recommendation for switching to the UAC. Mayor Filseth remarked that if the CAC's mission is critical to
obtaining a correct answer and the CAC has not fulfilled its mission, sunsetting the CAC in order to move
faster is not necessarily a good idea.
Vice Chair Schwartz suggested encouraging members of the CAC to apply for a seat on the UAC. Being
informed and responsible for a range of issues could be worthwhile.
ACTION: No action
ITEM 4. ACTION: Selection of Potential Topic(s) for Discussion at Future UAC Meeting.
Chair Danaher requested a presentation on the organizational structure of CPAU. Dean Batchelor, Chief
Operating Officer, advised in February staff will present an item about the workforce, the organization's
structure, the number of vacant positions, and the challenges of filling some of the vacant positions. Chair
Danaher requested staff include an organizational chart with names.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: February 6, 2019 Page 9 of 9
Commissioner Johnston expressed interest in following up on the resiliency discussion.
Vice Chair Schwartz requested a discussion of subcommittees that could be useful to the UAC and a discussion
of methods, that do not impact staff and that are transparent, through which Commissioners can share
information and educate themselves on various topics. Perhaps the City Attorney's Office can attend the
discussion to advise regarding the Brown Act?
Commissioner Segal requested an item regarding CPAU succession planning. Dave Yuan, Strategic Business
Manager, reported staff is gathering information, but it may not be complete by the UAC's February meeting.
Batchelor noted another 20 employees could retire from CPAU in the next few years. Staff may seek
independent guidance to develop a short-term succession plan.
ACTION: No action
NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING: February 6, 2019
Meeting adjourned at 9:06 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Rachel Chiu
City of Palo Alto Utilities
Page 1 of 7
1
MEMORANDUM
TO: UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION
FROM: UTILTIES DEPARTMENT
DATE: February 6, 2019
SUBJECT: Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation that the City Council Adopt a
Resolution Approving the November 2018 Amended and Restated Water
Supply Agreement Between the City and County of San Francisco Wholesale
Customers in Alameda County, San Mateo County, and Santa Clara County and
Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Amended and Restated Water
Supply Agreement
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the UAC recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution approving the
Amended and Restated Water Supply Agreement with the City and County of San Francisco
(Attachment A).
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On September 10, 2018 The City of Palo Alto (City) passed Resolution No. 9791 authorizing the
Bay Area Water Supply And Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) to negotiate with the City and
County of San Francisco to amend the 2009 WSA. All BAWSCA member agencies provided
similar negotiating authority to BAWSCA.
BAWSCA and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) identified seven issues to be
addressed in the WSA. These proposed amendments are consistent with the spirit of the 2009
WSA and are reflected in the Amended and Restated Water Supply Agreement (Amended and
Restated WSA) in Attachment B. A redlined version of the document is included as Attachment
C. The SFPUC approved the Amended and Restated WSA on December 11, 2018, and the
Wholesale Customers, including the City, must approve the amendments to put them into
effect.
BACKGROUND
The City purchases water from the San Francisco Regional Water System (System) and is one of
the twenty six members of BAWSCA, also known as the “Wholesale Customers.” In June 2009,
the City entered into the WSA, which sets forth the terms under which the Wholesale
Customers purchase water from the System.
The WSA built upon the 1984 "Settlement Agreement and Master Water Sales Contract
between the City and County of San Francisco and Certain Suburban Purchasers in San Mateo
County, Santa Clara County and Alameda County" (1984 Agreement).
Page 2 of 7
Pursuant to Section 2.03 of the WSA, the WSA may be amended by a minimum of two-thirds of
the Wholesale Customers representing at least 75 percent of the quantity of water delivered by
San Francisco to all the Wholesale Customers during the fiscal year immediately preceding the
amendment.
DISCUSSION
Some sections require amendment to address substantive and important issues that have
arisen during implementation of the WSA. The seven proposed amendments are described
below and are included in Attachment D.
1. Oversight of SFPUC's Capital Improvement Program (2009 WSA new Section 6.09): The
Water System Improvement Program (WSIP) is a multi-year capital program to upgrade and
make seismically sound major parts of the System. SFPUC adopted the WSIP in 2002 and
the program is ongoing, and amendment number six addresses the completion date. The
Wholesale Customers have had some oversight of the WSIP, both through the enactment of
AB 1823 (2002), and also through quarterly meetings and public reporting. The WSIP did
not eliminate the need for an ongoing Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to maintain the
integrity of the System. As the WSIP nears completion, the SFPUC’s CIP is expanding to
achieve a sustainable rate of repair and replacement consistent with overall asset
management of the System and SFPUC’s water supply and delivery targets (water quality,
drought reliability, etc.). SFPUC establishes a CIP on a 10-year rolling basis. This
amendment adds a new section to the WSA obligating SFPUC to formally engage with
BAWSCA on its 10-year CIP development. This amendment ensures that BAWSCA and the
Wholesale Customers are involved in the development of the 10-year CIP, have the
opportunity to comment on proposed changes to the water supply and delivery targets,
requires the SFPUC to create an asset management policy applicable to the System by
December 31, 2020, and commits the SFPUC to quarterly reporting and meetings on CIP
implementation.
2. Tier 1 Drought Allocation Plan (2009 WSA Attachment H Section 2.1): The 1984 Agreement
required the SFPUC and the Wholesale Customers to develop a Shortage Allocation Plan
during droughts. The plan was approved in 2000 for average System-wide shortages of up
to 20%. Under the plan, the available water supply during droughts is allocated according
to a pre-established formula between Retail and Wholesale Customers (the "Tier 1
allocation") for shortages of 5, 10, 15 and 20 percent. The water allocated to Wholesale
Customers is then allocated between those customers according to a second pre-
established formula (the "Tier 2 allocations").
Various factors that affect this formula have changed since 2009, particularly the
proportionate purchases from the System from San Francisco Retail and Wholesale
Customers. As a result, if the Tier 1 allocation had been applied during the 2014-2017
drought, San Francisco Retail Customers would have been allocated more water than they
are allocated during normal, drought-free years. Both the SFPUC and the Wholesale
Customers recognize that this is not a reasonable way to allocate water during a shortage,
Page 3 of 7
so the proposed WSA amendments include an amendment to the Tier 1 Drought Allocation
Plan that makes a modest change to the existing formula to ensure that, in the event of a
shortage, San Francisco Retail Customers will need to reduce consumption by a minimum of
5%. Under this new formula, more water would be available to Wholesale Customers
during a shortage than would be available under the existing formula, and the amendment
also provides that some of the water conserved by San Francisco Retail Customers will
remain in storage for use in subsequent dry years. This amendment benefits the City by
ensuring a more equitable allocation of water during a water shortage resulting from
drought.
3. 2018 Decisions (2009 WSA Sections 3.13, 4.01, 4.05, 4.06, 9.06, Attachment Q): The 1984
Agreement memorialized the perpetual 184 million gallon per day "Supply Assurance" to
the Wholesale Customers which survives the expiration or termination of the 2009 WSA.
The Supply Assurance is subject to reduction due to drought, emergencies and system
maintenance/malfunction. The Wholesale Customers have allocated shares of the Supply
Assurance called "Individual Supply Guarantees."
The cities of San Jose and Santa Clara have a different contractual relationship with the
SFPUC. The SFPUC delivers water to the northern portions of the cities of San Jose and
Santa Clara on a temporary and interruptible basis in accordance with individual contracts
with these cities. To date, the SFPUC has not exercised its contractual right to terminate or
reduce water supply to San Jose and Santa Clara, nor has it agreed to make either of the
cities a permanent customer. Accordingly, San Jose and Santa Clara do not have Individual
Supply Guarantees.
The 2009 WSA required that by December 31, 2018, the SFPUC was to decide whether to
make San Jose and Santa Clara permanent customers and whether to offer additional
supply to other existing permanent Wholesale Customers. New water supply projects
would be needed for the SFPUC to make Santa Clara or San Jose permanent Wholesale
Customers. To date, no new viable supply projects have been identified. Additionally,
system usage is currently projected to be below contract levels through 2040. It is
therefore premature for the SFPUC to make these decisions at this time. This amendment
will extend the deadline for the SFPUC to decide from December 2018 to December 2028
and will obligate the SFPUC to provide annual updates to its commission regarding
developing permanent supply for San Jose and Santa Clara. The amendment also expands
the area to which Santa Clara can deliver SFPUC water to be consistent with Santa Clara’s
service area boundary.
4. Asset Classification (2009 WSA new Section 5.11 and definitions and Attachment R;
revisions to Section 4.07): A basic principle of the 1984 Agreement involved the
classification of System assets used to serve Retail and Wholesale Customers. Asset
classification is critical to allocating costs associated with System facilities in the Sierras that
are used for both water and power purposes (the “Hetch Hetchy Enterprise”). System assets
located in the Tuolumne, Stanislaus, and San Joaquin counties, are classified as “Water”
assets, “Power” assets, or “Joint” assets. Classification of Hetch Hetchy Enterprise assets
Page 4 of 7
determines the allocation of capital and operating costs of the facilities by function. For
Joint assets, which have both power and water benefits, costs are split 55% to the Power
Enterprise and 45% to the Water Enterprise. Wholesale and Retail Customers then pay for
the water portion based on their proportional purchases of water. Power related costs are
not paid by Wholesale Customers. The 1984 Agreement was a legal settlement that
included a partial list of Hetch Hetchy asset classifications. These classifications were
incorporated into the 2009 Agreement without change, though the list was not specifically
replicated in the 2009 Agreement.
In FY 2010/2011, SFPUC unilaterally changed the classification and the related cost
allocation of a small number of assets of the System from Power to Joint. This
reclassification would have added $50 million in obligations to Wholesale Customers.
BAWSCA disputed this decision and, rather than submit the dispute to arbitration, the
parties negotiated this contract amendment. This amendment documents and fixes the
classification of all significant Hetch Hetchy Enterprise assets. The amendment also
reclassifies seven specific, known major projects on five assets, without changing the
classification of the underlying asset. This amendment immediately removes $50 million as
an obligation of the Wholesale Customers associated with SFPUC’s unilateral reclassification
of assets from FY 2010/2011. Additionally, going forward this amendment makes the
contract clearer with respect to the classification of 500 assets, which will ensure that the
Wholesale Customers pay only their fair share of upcoming capital work. This amendment
facilitates efficient contract administration and limits and mitigates Wholesale Customer
exposure to financial risks on certain specified projects.
5. Wholesale Capital Fund (2009 WSA, Section 6.08 E and Attachment M-3): Under the 2009
WSA, funds for capital projects are appropriated and placed into the Wholesale Capital
Fund upon appropriation. The balance of the fund is reviewed at 5-year intervals beginning
in FY 2014-15, and any excess balance (unexpended, unencumbered amount in excess of
10% of appropriation) is transferred to a balancing account to return to Wholesale
Customers.
In implementing the reconciliation of the Wholesale Capital Fund, SFPUC discovered that
the reconciliation timing did not conform to the SFPUC's budget requirements,
appropriation process, and project spending needs. For instance, if funding is appropriated
for a project in year four of the 5-year review period, it may result in return of funds after
only 1 year even though the project may take several years to complete.
This amendment provides for an annual reconciliation of costs to ensure that SFPUC has the
necessary resources for capital improvements, without holding an excessive amount of
Wholesale Customer funds in the Wholesale Capital Fund.
6. WSIP Completion Date (2009 WSA Section 3.09): The WSA contained an outdated WSIP
completion date of 12/31/2015. This amendment updates the WSIP completion date to
December 30, 2021, as adopted by the SFPUC's Commission in March of 2018. This
amendment keeps WSA current and better protects the City from the potential loss of
contract claim for failure to enforce the outdated completion date.
Page 5 of 7
7. Regional Groundwater Storage and Recover Project (RGSRP) (2009 Agreement, Section
3.17): This amendment updates the RGSRP contract provisions to better reflect how the
RGSRP will be operated and to outline the cost-allocation responsibilities shared by the
RGWRP's partner agencies. Through this program, groundwater pumpers in the southern
portion of the Westside Basin (City of Daly City, City of San Bruno, and California Water
Service Company) reduce groundwater pumping in exchange for receiving additional
surface water through the System, thus increasing storage in the groundwater system.
SFPUC may then recover the stored groundwater from the basin during water shortages
using new SFPUC Regional Program wells operated by Daly City, San Bruno, California Water
Service Company and the SFPUC. This project benefits all customers of the System by
making use of available groundwater storage capacity. The language in the WSA describing
the details of how the project is operated following its construction is outdated and does
not correctly reflect how the project will be operated. This amendment is necessary for the
WSA to accurately reflect how the regional groundwater storage and recovery project will
be operated.
In addition to the substantive amendments set forth above, the proposed Amended and
Restated WSA includes a number of non-substantive updates and "clean-up" revisions, as set
out below:
1. Updated WSA Attachment A, reflecting new and revised definitions.
2. Updated WSA Attachment C, reflecting recent Individual Supply Guarantee transfers.
3. Updated WSA Attachment K, reflecting the updated Wholesale Customers' share of Net
Book Value of Existing Assets and share of Revenue-Funded Capital Expenditures;
4. New section 3.18, reflecting the Hetch Hetchy Amendment approved in 2013.
5. Revised section 8.04, reflecting the authority previously delegated by the Wholesale
Customers to BAWSCA in 2014 to initiate, defend, and settle arbitration for matters
subject to arbitration under the WSA.
6. Updates reflecting Cal Water's acquisition of Skyline County Water District.
7. Updates to the addresses for both BAWSCA and SFPUC.
San Francisco, acting by and through its Public Utilities Commission, approved the Amended
and Restated WSA, as negotiated by BAWSCA, on December 11, 2018, pending approval by the
requisite number of the Wholesale Customers.
RESOURCE IMPACT
By clarifying the classification of major facilities, the Asset Classification amendment will
immediately remove $50 million as an obligation of the Wholesale Customers associated with
SFPUC’s unilateral reclassification of assets from FY 2010/2011. Additionally, going forward this
amendment makes the contract clearer with respect to the classification of 500 assets. This
clarification will ensure that Wholesale Customers pay only their fair share of upcoming capital
work currently estimated at $2 billion over 10 years.
Page 6 of 7
Under the Wholesale Capital Fund amendment, Wholesale Customers will continue to be
responsible for the actual revenue-funded capital expenditures irrespective of whether the
true-up mechanism is on a five-year or annual basis while providing SFPUC with adequate funds
for revenue-funded capital projects. It is in the Wholesale Customers’ interest to provide
SFPUC the revenue needed to fund these annual repair and maintenance projects while
ensuring the Wholesale Capital Fund is kept at a reasonable level. The proposed amendment
achieves those goals.
The CIP-related amendment will give BAWSCA and the Wholesale Customers the ability to
oversee and scrutinize the SFPUC’s capital program. The CIP program is a major factor in the
resulting water rates.
The proposed amendments will have no impact on the FY19 and FY20 budgets.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The execution and administration of the Amended and Restated WSA reaffirms the water
reliability and quality requirements in the WSA and is consistent with the spirit of the 2009
WSA.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Prior to approval of the WSIP, San Francisco prepared a program environmental impact report
(PEIR) for the WSIP in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the
San Francisco Planning Commission certified the WSIP Final PEIR in Planning Commission
Motion No. 17734. The City reviewed the Final PEIR and CEQA findings and adopted them to
the extent the findings were relevant to its decision to approve the WSA.
At this time, the City need not take any further action to comply with the requirements of CEQA
as the amendments are not a "project" for the purposes of the CEQA. The amendments at
issue involve an administrative activity that does not result in a direct change to the
environment (see 14 CCR Section 15378(b)(5)), and would not result in a direct or reasonably
foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment (see 14 CCR Section 15060(c)(2)).
PREPARED BY: LISA BILIR, Resource Planner
REVIEWED BY: JONATHAN ABENDSCHEIN, Assistant Director, Resource Management
APPROVED BY: ___________________________
DEAN BATCHELOR
Interim General Manager of Utilities
Page 7 of 7
Due to the size of the file, attachments B and C will not be printed but available to be
downloaded for viewing in the links below.
Attachments
A. Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Approving the Amended and Restated
Water Supply Agreement
B. 2018 Amended and Restated Water Supply Agreement (with Attachments)
C. 2018 Amended and Restated Water Supply Agreement Redlined Against the 2009 Water
Supply Agreement
D. The Seven 2018 WSA Amendments
1
Resolution No. ____
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Approving the Amended and Restated Water
Supply Agreement Between the City and County of San Francisco and Wholesale Customers in
Alameda County, San Mateo County, and Santa Clara County
R E C I T A L S
A. Water supply agencies in Alameda, San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties
have purchased water from the City and County of San Francisco (San Francisco) for many
years.
B. The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC or Commission)
Water Enterprise operates the Regional Water System, which delivers water to communities in
Alameda, San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties, as well as to customers within San Francisco
(collectively, “the Parties”).
C. The Parties entered into the “Settlement Agreement and Master Water
Sales Contract between the City and County of San Francisco and Certain Suburban Purchasers
in San Mateo County, Santa Clara County and Alameda County” in 1984.
D. In April 2003, water supply agencies in Alameda, San Mateo and Santa
Clara Counties established the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA), as
authorized by Water Code Section 81300 et seq.
E. Upon expiration of the 1984 “Settlement Agreement and Master Water
Sales Contract,” the Parties entered into the “Water Supply Agreement between San Francisco
and Wholesale Customers in Alameda County, San Mateo County, and Santa Clara County”
("Water Supply Agreement") on July 1, 2009, authorized by SFPUC Resolution No. 09‐0069.
F. On September 10, 2018 this Council, by Resolution No. 9791, delegated
authority to BAWSCA to act as its authorized representative in discussions and negotiations
with San Francisco to amend the Water Supply Agreement.
G. Each of the other 25 entities which are members of BAWSCA similarly
delegated negotiating authority to BAWSCA.
H. BAWSCA has submitted periodic reports to the City on progress during
the negotiations and has provided detailed briefings on all significant elements of the
amendments.
I. The Parties now desire to adopt an amended and restated Water Supply
Agreement in order to:
(1) require the SFPUC to adhere to a formal program to engage with BAWSCA on its 10‐
year CIP development;
ATTACHMENT A
2
(2) adjust the provisions of the Water Shortage Allocation Plan regarding the initial
allocation of water during shortages between San Francisco Retail and Wholesale water
customers;
(3) extend the December 31, 2018 deadline for the SFPUC to complete a water supply
planning process and decide whether or not to (a) grant permanent customer status to
the cities of San Jose and Santa Clara, dedicating a permanent share of the SFPUC water
supply to these two wholesale customers, who currently have temporary, interruptible
status, and (b) increase the 184 million gallon per day (mgd) Supply Assurance created
as a permanent dedication of water supply in the 1984 “Settlement Agreement and
Master Water Sales Contract” and carried forward into the 2009 Water Supply
Agreement (collectively "the 2018 Decisions");
(4) change the classification of certain Hetch Hetchy Water and Power capital projects,
adjusting the amount of capital funding to be provided towards these projects by the
Parties and the SFPUC Power Enterprise through the term (June 30, 2034) of the Water
Supply Agreement;
(5) modify provisions related to the SFPUC’s administration of the Wholesale Capital
Fund to more closely align with the historic rate of capital project spending by the
SFPUC and prevent volatility in the annual determination of the Wholesale Revenue
Requirement;
(6) extend the estimated timing of the completion of the WSIP to reflect the currently
adopted program completion date;
(7) clarify the cost allocation and water accounting provisions used for the Regional
Water System's Groundwater Storage and Recovery Project; and
J. In addition to the substantive modifications set forth above, the
amended and restated Water Supply Agreement also includes a number of non‐substantive
updates and revisions to incorporate previously approved modifications, such as the First
Amendment to the Water Supply Agreement, adopted in 2013 as new Section 3.18, prohibiting
San Francisco from draining Hetch Hetchy Reservoir or decommissioning O'Shaughnessy Dam
without securing Wholesale Customer approval in the form of an amendment.
K. In 2008, through SFPUC Resolution No. 08‐0200, San Francisco approved
the Water System Improvement Program (WSIP) to upgrade San Francisco's regional and local
water system and achieve Level of Service Goals and Objectives, which include meeting average
annual water demand of 265 million gallons per day (mgd) through 2018; reevaluation of
forecasted 2030 Regional Water System demand projections and water supply options by 2018,
and SFPUC’s decision in 2018 regarding Regional Water System deliveries after 2018; and
meeting dry year delivery needs while limiting rationing to a maximum of twenty percent
system wide during droughts.
(1) Prior to approval of the WSIP, San Francisco prepared a program environmental
impact report (PEIR) for the WSIP in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) and the San Francisco Planning Commission certified the WSIP Final
PEIR in Planning Commission Motion No. 17734.
3
(2) The Wholesale Customers reviewed the Final PEIR and CEQA findings and, in
conjunction with approval of the Water Supply Agreement in 2009, the Wholesale
Customers also adopted CEQA findings that were relevant to each Wholesale
Customer's decision to approve the WSA.
(3) The amendments considered now are not a "project" for the purposes of CEQA as
they involve an administrative activity that does not result in a direct change to the
environment (see 14 CCR Section 15378(b)(5)), and would not result in a direct or
reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment (see 14 CCR Section
15060(c)(2)).
(4) In the event the amendments are considered a "project," they would be subject to
the categorical exemption for operation, repair, and maintenance of existing facilities
(see 14 CCR Section 15301) and the amendments do not implicate substantial changes
that involve a new significant environmental effect (see 14 CCR Section 15162(a)).
L. The Parties recognize that, both before and after the most recent
statewide drought, after meeting drought‐related conservation mandates, several BAWSCA
member agencies were unable to meet their respective minimum purchase requirements
described in Article 3.07 of the Water Supply Agreement, which requires payment for water
below the required minimum purchase level even if such water is not delivered and used.
(1) BAWSCA and San Francisco have identified intra system water transfers in general as
one potential solution to long‐term water reliability needs among the Wholesale
Customers, and Section 3.04 of the Water Supply Agreement provides a simplified
process for permanent Individual Supply Guarantee (ISG) transfers among certain
Wholesale Customers.
(2) Several of the Wholesale Customers with minimum purchase requirements might be
interested in transferring water within their respective ISGs, if doing so would also
reduce their minimum purchase requirements and corresponding financial impact of
paying for water that is not used.
(3) The Parties to the Water Supply Agreement have a collective interest in working to
promptly identify a resolution to this as part of a future contract amendment.
(4) BAWSCA and San Francisco will begin discussions to address this issue commencing
in January 2019.
M. San Francisco's currently adopted WSIP program completion date is
December 30, 2021.
4
N. One of the remaining final projects in the WSIP, the Alameda Creek
Recapture Project, is the subject of a revised environmental impact report that has not yet
been published for public review and comment.
(1) On April 3, 2018, the Wholesale Customers provided formal comment to the SFPUC,
as part of its action to adopt the most recent WSIP completion date, that the proposed
WSIP completion date and accompanying construction schedule extension date for the
Alameda Creek Recapture Project to December 30, 2021, may not be sufficient to
accommodate any project modifications that might be necessary as a result of the
ongoing revised environmental analysis, increasing uncertainty associated with the
adequacy of the Project schedule as proposed by the SFPUC.
(2) The SFPUC has indicated that it's Hetch Hetchy Local Simulation Model (HHLSM)
hydrologic modeling identifies the supply yield anticipated by the Alameda Creek
Recapture Project as critical to achieving and maintaining drought year reliability and
achieving the WSIP Water Supply Level of Service Goal.
(3) The Wholesale Customers acknowledge that the Alameda Creek Recapture Project
cannot proceed to construction until environmental review under CEQA is successfully
completed, and the past practice of BAWSCA has been to support extensions of
individual WSIP project schedules and overall WSIP scheduled completion, including
past extensions for the Alameda Creek Recapture Project, if supported by technical and
other analysis as necessary to successfully complete the project and achieve project
objectives.
(4) BAWSCA intends to act in a manner that represents the best interests of all of its
member agencies’ water supply while avoiding any harm alleged by any one member
agency’s water supply as a result of any future action by SFPUC.
O. The Wholesale Regional Water System Security and Reliability Act (AB 1823,
Water Code Section 73500 et seq.) continues the Legislature's oversight of SFPUC’s
implementation of the regional projects included in WSIP through January 1, 2022.
P. BAWSCA intends to ask the Legislature again to extend its oversight of the WSIP
program in anticipation of the SFPUC’s need to extend the WSIP completion date to
accommodate individual project schedules with reasonable delays, such as the Alameda Creek
Recapture Project.
Q. An amended and restated Water Supply Agreement, in the form negotiated by
BAWSCA, was presented to and approved by the Commission on December 11, 2018.
The Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows:
SECTION 1. The analysis contained in the WSIP PEIR, and the CEQA findings
adopted by the City in connection with the adoption of the Water Supply Agreement in 2009
5
remain adequate for purposes of this approval action because there are no substantial changes
proposed in the WSIP that was approved in 2008, and there are no substantial changes in
circumstances that would require major revisions to the WSIP PEIR due to the involvement of
new significant environmental effects or an increase in the severity of previously identified
significant impacts, and there is no new information of substantial importance that would
change the conclusions set forth in the WSIP PEIR.
SECTION 2. The City Council approves the modifications included in the attached
amended and restated "Water Supply Agreement Between the City and County of San Francisco
Wholesale Customers in Alameda County, San Mateo County, and Santa Clara County" dated
November 2018 (Amended and Restated Water Supply Agreement).
SECTION 3. The City Manager is authorized and directed to sign the Amended and
Restated Water Supply Agreement, in the form previously approved by the San Francisco Public
Utilities Commission and attached hereto.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
__________________________ _____________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
__________________________ _____________________________
Assistant City Attorney City Manager
_____________________________
Director of Utilities
_____________________________
Director of Administrative Services
Amendment 1:
Oversight of SFPUC's
Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
(Sec. 6.09)
ATTACHMENT D
1
15118379.1
6.09 SFPUC Adoption of Regional Water System 10-Year Capital Improvement Program
A. Established Level of Service Goals and Objectives. In approving the WSIP, the
Commission adopted Level of Service Goals and Objectives that are, in part, used to
develop capital programs related to water, including the 10-Year Capital Improvement
Program for the Regional Water System (“10-Year CIP”). BAWSCA and the Wholesale
Customers shall have the opportunity to review and provide written or oral comments on
any changes to the Level of Service Goals and Objectives that may be submitted to the
Commission for approval.
B. Submittal of an Asset Management Policy. Prior to December 31, 2020, the
SFPUC shall develop and submit to the Commission for approval an Asset Management
Policy applicable to the Regional Water System.
C. Coordination of 10-Year CIP and SFPUC Budget Meetings. The Commission
annually reviews, updates, and adopts a 10-Year CIP pursuant to Section 8B.123 of the
San Francisco Charter. At two-year intervals, the Commission holds two budget
meetings concerning the 10-Year CIP. Over the course of the two budget meetings, the
SFPUC reviews its budget priorities, potential changes to projects in the previously
adopted 10-Year CIP, and the potential financial implications of such changes. In the
event that Charter amendments are placed on the ballot that could alter or amend the
City’s budget preparation and adoption efforts, BAWSCA shall be notified in advance of
any proposed change that could result in a less robust CIP development effort, and
BAWSCA and the SFPUC shall meet to consider BAWSCA’s comments on maintaining
a robust CIP development effort.
D. Mid-cycle Changes to the 10-Year CIP. The SFPUC shall include within the
Water Enterprise Capital Improvement Program Quarterly Projects Reports that it
provides to the Commission (“CIP Quarterly Projects Reports”) discussion of any
material changes proposed to projects that are included in the most recently adopted 10-
Year CIP. The SFPUC defines a material change as a change that applies to a CIP
project whose approved CIP budget is equal to or greater than $5,000,000 that results in
one or more of the following:
2
15118379.1
1. Increases the cost of the CIP project by more than 10%.
2. Increases the schedule of the CIP project by extending said schedule
by 12 calendar months or greater.
3. Affects the SFPUC’s ability to meet the Level of Service Goals and
Objectives.
The SFPUC shall also include within the CIP Quarterly Projects Reports discussion of
any new capital project that is not included in the most recently adopted 10-Year CIP if
the SFPUC has 1) begun spending on the project and 2) anticipates that it will require
total funding in excess of $5,000,000. For such projects, the parties recognize that the
work may be of an urgent nature and that details of those projects may be developing
quickly to address a critical need. The SFPUC commits that, for these projects, an
expanded discussion will be provided in quarterly reports generated 6 months following
the creation of the project in the City’s finance and accounting system. At a minimum,
the discussion will include: 1) a detailed scope of work, 2) schedule, 3) cost breakdown,
and 4) proposed source of funding. This level of detail shall continue to be included in
subsequent quarterly reports through either the completion of the work or until the work
is included as part of an adopted 10-Year CIP.
E. BAWSCA and Wholesale Customer Notice and Review. Beginning in 2020, at
least 30 days before the first budget meeting, the SFPUC shall provide BAWSCA and
the Wholesale Customers with written notice of the dates of the two budget meetings. At
least 30 days before the first budget meeting, the SFPUC shall also provide BAWSCA
and the Wholesale Customers with a draft of the 10-Year CIP and meet with those same
parties to review potential candidate projects that it is considering for inclusion in the 10-
Year CIP. Final materials for the first budget meeting will be made available to
BAWSCA and the Wholesale Customers no less than 14 days prior to that budget
meeting. Final materials for the second budget meeting will be made available to
BAWSCA and the Wholesale Customers on the same date that they are made available
to the Commission. Prior to the Commission’s adoption of the 10-Year CIP at the
second budget meeting, San Francisco shall respond, in writing, to all written comments
by BAWSCA and the Wholesale Customers on the 10-Year CIP that were submitted
prior to the date of the first budget meeting.
3
15118379.1
F. Contents of Draft 10-Year CIP – Projects in Years One and Two of 10-Year
Schedule.
The SFPUC’s CIP projects generally fall into three categories: defined projects,
placeholder concepts that could become projects, and programmatic spending for
expenses likely to be made but for which there is no schedule. Projects in the near-term
years of the 10-Year CIP have more definition than those in the outer years, and as a
result more detailed information is available for them. For each project listed that has
significant expected expenditures identified in the first two years of the 10-Year CIP, the
draft 10-Year CIP made available to BAWSCA and the Wholesale Customers shall
include the following elements:
1. Project name.
2. Project description and justification.
3. Description of the project’s relationship to the Level of Service Goals
and Objectives.
4. Project asset classification for cost-allocation purposes, pursuant to
Attachment R for Hetch Hetchy Enterprise assets, or as Regional or
Retail for Water Enterprise assets.
5. Project schedule where applicable, broken down by phase, through to
completion.
6. Total project budget estimate including a proposed inflation rate.
G. Contents of Draft 10-Year CIP – Projects Listed After First Two Years of
10-Year Schedule. For each project that is listed in years three through ten of the 10-
Year CIP, the draft 10-Year CIP made available to BAWSCA and the Wholesale
Customers shall include the following elements:
1. Project name.
2. Project description and justification.
3. Description of the project’s relationship to the Level of Service Goals
and Objectives.
4. Project asset classification for cost-allocation purposes, pursuant to
Attachment R for Hetch Hetchy Enterprise assets, or as Regional or
Retail for Water Enterprise assets.
5. Project schedule information that forms the basis for project planning if
available.
4
15118379.1
6. Total project budget estimate.
H. Additional Contents of Draft 10-Year CIP. The draft 10-Year CIP made
available to BAWSCA and the Wholesale Customers shall also include the following:
1. A discussion of any changes to projects in the previously adopted 10-
Year CIP, the reasons for such changes, any impact of the proposed
changes on the SFPUC’s ability to achieve the Level of Service Goals
and Objectives, and the SFPUC’s proposal for meeting the specific
Level of Service Goals and Objectives in question.
2. A discussion of factors that have influenced the 10-Year CIP budget or
identified projects, or have the potential to influence the overall budget
or the number, cost and scale of identified projects, such as rate
increase considerations, local rate setting policies, etc.
3. A discussion of how the CIP will be staffed.
4. A cash flow estimate for each project included as part of the first five
years of the 10-Year CIP that considers historical spending and
changes in the amount of work to be done.
5. Project spreadsheets that separate new projects from existing
projects.
6. A summary roll-up for Regional costs, including all programmatic costs
budgeted in the 10-Year CIP.
I. Quarterly Reporting and Meetings.
1. CIP Quarterly Projects Reports. The SFPUC shall include within the
CIP Quarterly Projects Reports a detailed status update of each Regional
project in the 10-Year CIP that has an estimated cost greater than $5
million and a summary of the work completed to date for such projects.
The CIP Quarterly Projects Reports shall focus on the first two years’
projects in the 10-Year CIP, but shall also demonstrate a connection to
the 10-Year CIP asset classification and the Level of Service Goals and
Objectives. The CIP Quarterly Projects Reports shall identify any
Regional project in the 10-Year CIP with an estimated cost greater than
$5 million that is behind schedule, and, for each project so identified, shall
describe the SFPUC’s plan and timeline for either making up the delay or
5
15118379.1
adopting a revised project schedule. In each fourth quarter of the fiscal
year CIP Quarterly Projects Report, the SFPUC will also address the
status of Regional projects in the 10-Year CIP that have an estimated
cost of less than $5 million, noting any such projects that are behind
schedule and describing the SFPUC’s plan and timeline for either making
up the delay or adopting a revised project schedule.
2. Quarterly Meetings. If requested by BAWSCA, the SFPUC shall hold
quarterly meetings with BAWSCA to review each CIP Quarterly Projects
Report, during which the SFPUC shall present information and detail
about the individual projects and overall implementation of the 10-Year
CIP, as well as the need for re-prioritization and/or the proposal of new
candidate projects for consideration as part of the next update of the 10-
Year CIP. As part of the meeting held in each fourth quarter of the fiscal
year, the SFPUC shall provide additional information and detail regarding
the CIP development schedule and associated coordination proposed
with BAWSCA.
Amendment 2:
Tier 1 Drought Allocataion Plan
(Attachment H; Sec. 2.1)
1
ATTACHMENT H
WATER SHORTAGE ALLOCATION PLAN
This Interim Water Shortage Allocation Plan (“Plan”) describes the method for allocating water
between the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (“SFPUC”) and the Wholesale
Customers collectively during shortages caused by drought. The Plan implements a method for
allocating water among the individual Wholesale Customers which has been adopted by the
Wholesale Customers. The Plan includes provisions for transfers, banking, and excess use
charges. The Plan applies only when the SFPUC determines that a system-wide water shortage
due to drought exists, and all references to “shortages” and “water shortages” are to be so
understood. This Plan was adopted pursuant to Section 7.03(a) of the 1984 Settlement
Agreement and Master Water Sales Contract and has been updated to correspond to the
terminology used in the June 2009 Water Supply Agreement between the City and County of
San Francisco and Wholesale Customers in Alameda County, San Mateo County and Santa Clara
County ("Agreement").
SECTION 1. SHORTAGE CONDITIONS
1.1. Projected Available SFPUC Water Supply. The SFPUC shall make an annual
determination as to whether or not a shortage condition exists. The determination of projected
available water supply shall consider, among other things, stored water, projected runoff, water
acquired by the SFPUC from non-SFPUC sources, inactive storage, reservoir losses, allowance
for carryover storage, and water bank balances, if any, described in Section 3.
1.2 Projected SFPUC Purchases. The SFPUC will utilize purchase data, including volumes of
water purchased by the Wholesale Customers and by Retail Customers (as those terms are used
in the Agreement) in the year immediately prior to the drought, along with other available
relevant information, as a basis for determining projected system-wide water purchases from the
SFPUC for the upcoming year.
1.3. Shortage Conditions. The SFPUC will compare the available water supply (Section 1.1)
with projected system-wide water purchases (Section 1.2). A shortage condition exists if the
SFPUC determines that the projected available water supply is less than projected system-wide
water purchases in the upcoming Supply Year (defined as the period from July 1 through June
30). When a shortage condition exists, SFPUC will determine whether voluntary or mandatory
actions will be required to reduce purchases of SFPUC water to required levels.
1.3.1 Voluntary Response. If the SFPUC determines that voluntary actions will be sufficient to
accomplish the necessary reduction in water use throughout its service area, the SFPUC and the
Wholesale Customers will make good faith efforts to reduce their water purchases to stay within
their annual shortage allocations and associated monthly water use budgets. The SFPUC will not
impose excess use charges during periods of voluntary rationing, but may suspend the
2
prospective accumulation of water bank credits, or impose a ceiling on further accumulation of
bank credits, consistent with Section 3.2.1 of this Plan.
1.3.2 Mandatory Response. If the SFPUC determines that mandatory actions will be required
to accomplish the necessary reduction in water use in the SFPUC service area, the SFPUC may
implement excess use charges as set forth in Section 4 of this Plan.
1.4. Period of Shortage. A shortage period commences when the SFPUC determines that a
water shortage exists, as set forth in a declaration of water shortage emergency issued by the
SFPUC pursuant to California Water Code Sections 350 et seq. Termination of the water
shortage emergency will be declared by resolution of the SFPUC.
SECTION 2. SHORTAGE ALLOCATIONS
2.1. Annual Allocations between the SFPUC and the Wholesale Customers. The annual
water supply available during shortages will be allocated between the SFPUC and the collective
Wholesale Customers as follows:
Level of System Wide
Reduction in Water Use
Required
Share of Available Water
SFPUC Share Wholesale Customers
Share
5% or less
6% through 10%
11% through 15%
16% through 20%
35.5%
36.0%
37.0%
37.5%
64.5%
64.0%
63.0%
62.5%
The water allocated to the SFPUC shall correspond to the total allocation for all Retail
Customers.
Customers. In the event that the SFPUC share of the available water supply in the above table
results in Retail Customers having a positive allocation (i.e., a supply of additional water rather
than a required percentage reduction in water use), the SFPUC’s percentage share of the
available water supply in the table shall be reduced to eliminate any positive allocation to Retail
Customers, with a corresponding increase in the percentage share of the available water supply
allocated to the Wholesale Customers. For any level of required reduction in system-wide water
use during shortages, the SFPUC shall require Retail Customers to conserve a minimum of 5%,
with any resulting reallocated supply credited to storage for inclusion in calculation of projected
available water SFPUC water supply in a subsequent year (Section 1.1).
The parties agree to reevaluate the percentages of the available water supply allocated to Retail
and Wholesale Customers by May 1, 2028.
2.2 Annual Allocations among the Wholesale Customers. The annual water supply allocated
to the Wholesale Customers collectively during system wide shortages of 20 percent or less will
3
be apportioned among them based on a methodology adopted by all of the Wholesale Customers,
as described in Section 3.11(C) of the Agreement. In any year for which the methodology must
be applied, the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency (“BAWSCA”) will calculate
each Wholesale Customer’s individual percentage share of the amount of water allocated to the
Wholesale Customers collectively pursuant to Section 2.1. Following the declaration or
reconfirmation of a water shortage emergency by the SFPUC, BAWSCA will deliver to the
SFPUC General Manager a list, signed by the President of BAWSCA’s Board of Directors and
its General Manager, showing each Wholesale Customer together with its percentage share and
stating that the list has been prepared in accordance with the methodology adopted by the
Wholesale Customers. The SFPUC shall allocate water to each Wholesale Customer, as
specified in the list. The shortage allocations so established may be transferred as provided in
Section 2.5 of this Plan. If BAWSCA or all Wholesale Customers do not provide the SFPUC
with individual allocations, the SFPUC may make a final allocation decision after first meeting
and discussing allocations with BAWSCA and the Wholesale Customers.
The methodology adopted by the Wholesale Customers utilizes the rolling average of each
individual Wholesale Customer’s purchases from the SFPUC during the three immediately
preceding Supply Years. The SFPUC agrees to provide BAWSCA by November 1 of each year
a list showing the amount of water purchased by each Wholesale Customer during the
immediately preceding Supply Year. The list will be prepared using Customer Service Bureau
report MGT440 (or comparable official record in use at the time), adjusted as required for any
reporting errors or omissions, and will be transmitted by the SFPUC General Manager or his
designee.
2.3. Limited Applicability of Plan to System Wide Shortages Greater Than Twenty
Percent. The allocations of water between the SFPUC and the Wholesale Customers
collectively, provided for in Section 2.1, apply only to shortages of 20 percent or less. The
SFPUC and Wholesale Customers recognize the possibility of a drought occurring which could
create system-wide shortages greater than 20 percent despite actions taken by the SFPUC aimed
at reducing the probability and severity of water shortages in the SFPUC service area. If the
SFPUC determines that a system wide water shortage greater than 20 percent exists, the SFPUC
and the Wholesale Customers agree to meet within 10 days and discuss whether a change is
required to the allocation set forth in Section 2.1 in order to mitigate undue hardships that might
otherwise be experienced by individual Wholesale Customers or Retail Customers. Following
these discussions, the Tier 1 water allocations set forth in Section 2.1 of this Plan, or a modified
version thereof, may be adopted by mutual written consent of the SFPUC and the Wholesale
Customers. If the SFPUC and Wholesale Customers meet and cannot agree on an appropriate
Tier 1 allocation within 30 days of the SFPUC’s determination of water shortage greater than 20
percent, then (1) the provisions of Section 3.11(C) of the Agreement will apply, unless (2) all of
the Wholesale Customers direct in writing that a Tier 2 allocation methodology agreed to by
them be used to apportion the water to be made available to the Wholesale Customers
collectively, in lieu of the provisions of Section 3.11(C).
4
The provisions of this Plan relating to transfers (in Section 2.5), banking (in Section 3), and
excess use charges (in Section 4) shall continue to apply during system-wide shortages greater
than 20 percent.
2.4. Monthly Water Budgets. Within 10 days after adopting a declaration of water shortage
emergency, the SFPUC will determine the amount of Tier 1 water allocated to the Wholesale
Customers collectively pursuant to Section 2.1. The SFPUC General Manager, using the Tier 2
allocation percentages shown on the list delivered by BAWSCA pursuant to Section 2.2, will
calculate each Wholesale Customer’s individual annual allocation. The SFPUC General
Manager, or his designee, will then provide each Wholesale Customer with a proposed schedule
of monthly water budgets based on the pattern of monthly water purchases during the Supply
Year immediately preceding the declaration of shortage (the “Default Schedule”). Each
Wholesale Customer may, within two weeks of receiving its Default Schedule, provide the
SFPUC with an alternative monthly water budget that reschedules its annual Tier 2 shortage
allocation over the course of the succeeding Supply Year. If a Wholesale Customer does not
deliver an alternative monthly water budget to the SFPUC within two weeks of its receipt of the
Default Schedule, then its monthly budget for the ensuing Supply Year shall be the Default
Schedule proposed by the SFPUC.
Monthly Wholesale Customer water budgets will be derived from annual Tier 2 allocations for
purposes of accounting for excess use. Monthly Wholesale Customer water budgets shall be
adjusted during the year to account for transfers of shortage allocation under Section 2.5 and
transfers of banked water under Section 3.4.
2.5. Transfers of Shortage Allocations. Voluntary transfers of shortage allocations between the
SFPUC and any Wholesale Customers, and between any Wholesale Customers, will be permitted
using the same procedure as that for transfers of banked water set forth in Section 3.4. The
SFPUC and BAWSCA shall be notified of each transfer. Transfers of shortage allocations shall
be deemed to be an emergency transfer and shall become effective on the third business day after
notice of the transfer has been delivered to the SFPUC. Transfers of shortage allocations shall be
in compliance with Section 3.05 of the Agreement. The transferring parties will meet with the
SFPUC, if requested, to discuss any effect the transfer may have on its operations.
SECTION 3. SHORTAGE WATER BANKING
3.1. Water Bank Accounts. The SFPUC shall create a water bank account for itself and each
Wholesale Customer during shortages in conjunction with its resale customer billing process.
Bank accounts will account for amounts of water that are either saved or used in excess of the
shortage allocation for each agency; the accounts are not used for tracking billings and
payments. When a shortage period is in effect (as defined in Section 1.4), the following
provisions for bank credits, debits, and transfers shall be in force. A statement of bank balance
for each Wholesale Customer will be included with the SFPUC’s monthly water bills.
5
3.2. Bank Account Credits. Each month, monthly purchases will be compared to the monthly
budget for that month. Any unused shortage allocation by an agency will be credited to that
agency’s water bank account. Credits will accumulate during the entire shortage period, subject
to potential restrictions imposed pursuant to Section 3.2.1. Credits remaining at the end of the
shortage period will be zeroed out; no financial or other credit shall be granted for banked water.
3.2.1. Maximum Balances. The SFPUC may suspend the prospective accumulation of credits
in all accounts. Alternatively, the SFPUC may impose a ceiling on further accumulation of
credits in water bank balances based on a uniform ratio of the bank balance to the annual water
allocation. In making a decision to suspend the prospective accumulation of water bank credits,
the SFPUC shall consider the available water supply as set forth in Section 1.1 of this Plan and
other reasonable, relevant factors.
3.3. Account Debits. Each month, monthly purchases will be compared to the budget for that
month. Purchases in excess of monthly budgets will be debited against an agency’s water bank
account. Bank debits remaining at the end of the fiscal year will be subject to excess use charges
(see Section 4).
3.4. Transfers of Banked Water. In addition to the transfers of shortage allocations provided
for in Section 2.5, voluntary transfers of banked water will also be permitted between the SFPUC
and any Wholesale Customer, and among the Wholesale Customers. The volume of transferred
water will be credited to the transferee’s water bank account and debited against the transferor’s
water bank account. The transferring parties must notify the SFPUC and BAWSCA of each
transfer in writing (so that adjustments can be made to bank accounts), and will meet with the
SFPUC, if requested, to discuss any affect the transfer may have on SFPUC operations.
Transfers of banked water shall be deemed to be an emergency transfer and shall become
effective on the third business day after notice of the transfer has been delivered to the SFPUC.
If the SFPUC incurs extraordinary costs in implementing transfers, it will give written notice to
the transferring parties within ten (10) business days after receipt of notice of the transfer.
Extraordinary costs means additional costs directly attributable to accommodating transfers and
which are not incurred in non-drought years nor simply as a result of the shortage condition
itself. Extraordinary costs shall be calculated in accordance with the procedures in the
Agreement and shall be subject to the disclosure and auditing requirements in the Agreement. In
the case of transfers between Wholesale Customers, such extraordinary costs shall be considered
to be expenses chargeable solely to individual Wholesale Customers and shall be borne equally
by the parties to the transfer. In the case of transfers between the SFPUC and a Wholesale
Customer, the SFPUC’s share of any extraordinary transfer costs shall not be added to the
Wholesale Revenue Requirement.
3.4.1. Transfer Limitations. The agency transferring banked water will be allowed to transfer
no more than the accumulated balance in its bank. Transfers of estimated prospective banked
credits and the “overdrafting” of accounts shall not be permitted. The price of transfer water
originally derived from the SFPUC system is to be determined by the transferring parties and is
not specified herein. Transfers of banked water shall be in compliance with Section 3.05 of the
6
Agreement.
SECTION 4. WHOLESALE EXCESS USE CHARGES
4.1. Amount of Excess Use Charges. Monthly excess use charges shall be determined by the
SFPUC at the time of the declared water shortage consistent with the calendar in Section 6 and in
accordance with Section 6.03 of the Agreement. The excess use charges will be in the form of
multipliers applied to the rate in effect at the time the excess use occurs. The same excess use
charge multipliers shall apply to the Wholesale Customers and all Retail Customers. The excess
use charge multipliers apply only to the charges for water delivered at the rate in effect at the
time the excess use occurred.
4.2 Monitoring Suburban Water Use. During periods of voluntary rationing, water usage
greater than a customer’s allocation (as determined in Section 2) will be indicated on each
SFPUC monthly water bill. During periods of mandatory rationing, monthly and cumulative
water usage greater than a Wholesale Customer’s shortage allocation and the associated excess
use charges will be indicated on each SFPUC monthly water bill.
4.3. Suburban Excess Use Charge Payments. An annual reconciliation will be made of
monthly excess use charges according to the calendar in Section 6. Annual excess use charges
will be calculated by comparing total annual purchases for each Wholesale Customer with its
annual shortage allocation (as adjusted for transfers of shortage allocations and banked water, if
any). Excess use charge payments by those Wholesale Customers with net excess use will be
paid according to the calendar in Section 6. The SFPUC may dedicate excess use charges paid
by Wholesale Customers toward the purchase of water from the State Drought Water Bank or
other willing sellers in order to provide additional water to the Wholesale Customers. Excess use
charges paid by the Wholesale Customers constitute Wholesale Customer revenue and shall be
included within the SFPUC's annual Wholesale Revenue Requirement calculation.
SECTION 5. GENERAL PROVISIONS GOVERNING WATER SHORTAGE
ALLOCATION PLAN
5.1. Construction of Terms. This Plan is for the sole benefit of the parties and shall not be
construed as granting rights to any person other than the parties or imposing obligations on a
party to any person other than another party.
5.2. Governing Law. This Plan is made under and shall be governed by the laws of the State of
California.
5.3. Effect on Agreement. This Plan describes the method for allocating water between the
SFPUC and the collective Wholesale Customers during system-wide water shortages of 20
percent or less. This Plan also provides for the SFPUC to allocate water among the Wholesale
Customers in accordance with directions provided by the Wholesale Customers through
BAWSCA under Section 2.2, and to implement a program by which such allocations may be
voluntarily transferred among the Wholesale Customers. The provisions of this Plan are
7
intended to implement Section 3.11(C) of the Agreement and do not affect, change or modify
any other section, term or condition of the Agreement.
5.4. Inapplicability of Plan to Allocation of SFPUC System Water During Non-Shortage
Periods. The SFPUC’s agreement in this Plan to a respective share of SFPUC system water
during years of shortage shall not be construed to provide a basis for the allocation of water
between the SFPUC and the Wholesale Customers when no water shortage emergency exists.
5.5. Termination. This Plan shall expire at the end of the Term of the Agreement.. The
SFPUC and the Wholesale Customers can mutually agree to revise or terminate this Plan prior to
that date due to changes in the water delivery capability of the SFPUC system, the acquisition of
new water supplies, and other factors affecting the availability of water from the SFPUC system
during times of shortage.
SECTION 6. ALLOCATION CALENDAR
6.1. Annual Schedule. The annual schedule for the shortage allocation process is shown below.
This schedule may be changed by the SFPUC to facilitate implementation.
8
6.1.1
In All Years Target Dates
1.SFPUC delivers list of annual purchases by each Wholesale
Customer during the immediately preceding Supply Year
November 1
2.SFPUC meets with the Wholesale Customers and presents water
supply forecast for the following Supply Year
February
3.SFPUC issues initial estimate of available water supply February 1
4.SFPUC announces potential first year of drought (if applicable) February 1
5.SFPUC and Wholesale Customers meet upon request to exchange
information concerning water availability and projected system-
wide purchases
February 1-May 31
6.SFPUC issues revised estimate of available water supply, and
confirms continued potential shortage conditions, if applicable
March 1
7.SFPUC issues final estimate of available water supply April 15th or sooner if
adequate snow course
measurement data is available
to form a robust estimate on
available water supply for the
coming year.
8.SFPUC determines amount of water available to Wholesale
Customers collectively
April 15th or sooner if
adequate snow course
measurement data is available
to form a robust estimate on
available water supply for the
coming year.
In Drought Years Target Dates
9.SFPUC formally declares the existence of water shortage
emergency (or end of water shortage emergency, if applicable)
under Water Code Sections 350 et. seq.
April 15-3130
10.SFPUC declares the need for a voluntary or mandatory response April 15-3130
11.BAWSCA submits calculation to SFPUC of individual Wholesale
Customers’ percentage shares of water allocated to Wholesale
Customers collectively
April 15- 3130
12.SFPUC determines individual shortage allocations, based on
BAWSCA’s submittal of individual agency percentage shares to
SFPUC, and monthly water budgets (Default Schedule)
April 25—May 10
13.Wholesale Customers submit alternative monthly water budgets
(optional)
May 8-May 24
14.Final drought shortage allocations are issued for the Supply Year
beginning July 1 through June 30
June 1
15.Monthly water budgets become effective July 1
16.Excess use charges indicated on monthly Suburban bills August 1 (of the beginning
year) through June 30 (of the
succeeding year)
9
17.Excess use charges paid by Wholesale Customers for prior year August of the succeeding year
Amendment 3:
2018 Decisions (Sec. 3.13, 4.01, 4.05,
4.06, 9.06, Attachment Q)
(i) 15076185.1
3.13 Limits on New Customers
New Wholesale Customers Prior to December 31, 20182028. Until December
31, 20182028, San Francisco will not enter into contracts to supply water to any entity other
than a Wholesale Customer (whether permanent or temporary, firm or interruptible) unless:
It completes any necessary environmental review under CEQA of the
proposed new wholesale water service obligations as provided in Section 4.07;
It concurrently completes any necessary environmental review under
CEQA as provided in Section 4.07 and commits to make both San Jose and Santa Clara
permanent customers with Individual Supply Guarantees equal to at least 9 MGD; and
This Agreement is amended to incorporate any commitments to proposed
new wholesale customers and to San Jose and Santa Clara, and to address the effects, if any,
of the new customer(s) on water supply reliability, water quality and cost to existing customers
of the Regional Water System.
New Wholesale Customers After December 31, 20182028. As of January 1,
20192029, San Francisco will not enter into contracts to supply water to any entity other than a
Wholesale Customer (whether permanent or temporary, firm or interruptible) unless:
It completes any necessary environmental review under CEQA of the
proposed new wholesale water service obligations as provided in Section 4.07;
It concurrently completes any necessary environmental review under
CEQA as provided in Section 4.07 and commits to make both San Jose and Santa Clara
permanent customers with Individual Supply Guarantees equal to at least 9 MGD;
Doing so increases the reliability of the Regional Water System; and
This Agreement is concurrently amended (a) to reflect that increased
reliability by means of an increased commitment by San Francisco to deliver water during
Droughts and (b) to address the effects, if any, of the new customer(s) on water supply, water
quality and cost to existing customers of the Regional Water System.
New Retail Customers. San Francisco may enter into new retail water service
obligations outside of the City and County of San Francisco:
(i) 15076185.1
Only in Alameda, San Mateo, Santa Clara, San Joaquin and Tuolumne
Counties;
That are within or immediately adjacent to areas in which it currently
serves other Retail Customers; and
Until the aggregate additional demand represented by the new retail
customers reaches 0.5 MGD.
The limitations on serving new Retail Customers described in this subsection do not
apply to historical obligations to supply water that may be contained in prior agreements
between the SFPUC or its predecessor the Spring Valley Water Company, and individual users
or property owners located adjacent to Regional Water System transmission pipelines.
Water Exchanges and Cost Sharing Agreements with Other Water
Suppliers. Subject to completion of necessary environmental review under CEQA, San
Francisco may at any time enter into water exchanges or cost sharing agreements with other
water suppliers to enhance dry year or normal year water deliveries, provided that San
Francisco cannot incur new water service obligations to such other water suppliers unless the
requirements for taking on new wholesale customers in subsections A and B above are met.
15076188.1
4.01 Interim Supply Limitation Imposed by SFPUC
In adopting the WSIP in Res. No. 08-0200, the Commission included full implementation
of all proposed WSIP capital improvement projects to achieve level of service goalsLevel of
Service Goals and Objectives relating to public health, seismic safety, and delivery reliability,
but decided to adopt a water supply element that includes the Interim Supply Limitation. This
article describes how the parties will implement the Interim Supply Limitation imposed by the
SFPUC between the Effective Date and December 31, 2018. , and how the SFPUC will
conduct water supply planning after December 31, 2018.
(1) 15076192.1
4.05 San Jose/ Santa Clara Interim Supply Allocation and Process for Reduction/
Termination.
San Francisco will supply a combined annual average of 9 MGD to the cities of San
Jose and Santa Clara through 20182028. Water supplied by San Francisco may only be used
in the existing defined service areas in the northern portions of San Jose and Santa Clara
shown on Attachment Q-1 and Q-2, respectively. San Francisco may reduce the quantity of
water specified in this section when it establishes the Interim Supply Allocations for Wholesale
Customers in Section 4.02. The establishment of Interim Supply Allocations for San Jose and
Santa Clara shall not be considered a reduction of supply within the meaning of this section,
provided that the Interim Supply Allocations assigned to San Jose and Santa Clara do not effect
a reduction greater than the aggregate average reduction in Individual Supply Guarantees for
Wholesale Customers that have such guarantees. The application of Interim Supply Allocations
to San Jose and Santa Clara is, and water supply planning after December 31, 2018, are
subject to the following provisions:
A. In December 2010 and in each December thereafter through 20172027, the
SFPUC shall prepare and the Commission shall consider, at a regularly scheduled public
meeting, a Water Supply Development Report detailing progress made toward (1) meeting the
Interim Supply Limitation by June 30, 2018 and (2) developing additional water supplies that will
allow the Commission to designate San Jose and Santa Clara as permanent Wholesale
Customers of the Regional Water System with a combined Individual Supply Guarantee of up to
9 MGD by the end of the Term on June 30, 2034.
B. The annual Water Supply Development Report shall be based on water purchase
projections and work plans for achieving the Interim Supply Limitation in the Retail and
Wholesale Service Areas. The projections and work plans will be prepared by the SFPUC for
the Retail Customers and by BAWSCA for the Wholesale Customers, respectively, and
submitted to the Commission in June of each year beginning in 2010.
C. If the Commission finds that the projections in the Water Supply Development
Report show that (1) the Interim Supply Limitation will not be met by June 30, 2018, as a result
of Wholesale Customers' projected use exceeding 184 MGD, or (2) the purchases of the
Wholesale Customers, including San Jose and Santa Clara, are projected to exceed 184 MGD
(1) 15076192.1
before June 30, 2028, the Commission may issue a conditional five-ten year notice of
interruption or reduction in supply of water to San Jose and Santa Clara.
D. Upon issuance of the conditional notice of interruption or reduction, the SFPUC
will prepare a new analysis of water supply that will be utilized by the San Francisco Planning
Department in its preparation of any necessary documentation under CEQA pursuant to
Section 4.07 on the impacts of interrupting or reducing service to San Jose and Santa Clara.
E. Such notice of interruption or reduction will be rescinded if the Commission finds,
based upon a subsequent annual Water Supply Development Report, that (1) sufficient
progress has been made toward meeting the Interim Supply Limitation, or (2) projections show
that the Interim Supply Limitationprojected purchases of the Wholesale Customers, including
San Jose and Santa Clara, will be metnot exceed 184 MGD by June 30, 20182028.
F. In no case shall any interruption or reduction of service to San Jose or Santa
Clara pursuant to this section become effective less than two years from the completion of the
CEQA process (not including resolution of any appeals or litigation) or fiveten years from the
notice, whichever is longer. If the five-ten year notice is issued after 20132018, such
interruption or reduction would occurbe effective after 20182028.
G. If deliveries to San Jose and Santa Clara are interrupted, existing turnout
facilities to San Jose and Santa Clara will remain in place for possible use during emergencies.
H. San Francisco and the cities of San Jose and Santa Clara will cooperate with
BAWSCA and the Santa Clara Valley Water District in the identification and implementation of
additional water sources and conservation measures for the cities’ service areas that are
relevant to the water supply and the possible offer of permanent status for the two cities by the
SFPUC.
(1) 15076198.1
4.06 San Francisco Decisions in 20182028 Regarding Future Water Supply
A. By December 31, 20182028, San Francisco will have completed any necessary
CEQA review pursuant to Section 4.07 that is relevant to making San Jose and Santa Clara
permanent customers of the Regional Water System and will decide whether or not to make
San Jose and Santa Clara permanent customers of the Regional Water System. with a
combined Individual Supply Guarantee of 9 MGD allocated equally between the two cities, as
well as how much water in excess of 9 MGD it will supply to San Jose and Santa Clara. San
Francisco will make San Jose and Santa Clara permanent customers only if, and to the extent
that, San Francisco determines that Regional Water System long term water supplies are
available. In the event that San Francisco decides to afford permanent status to San Jose and
Santa Clara, this Agreement will be amended pursuant to Section 2.03.
B. By December 31, 20182028, San Francisco will have completed any necessary
CEQA review pursuant to Section 4.07 and will decide how much water, if any, in excess of the
Supply Assurance it will supply to Wholesale Customers from the Regional Water System to
meet their projected future water demands until the year 20302040, and whether to offer a
corresponding increase in the Supply Assurance as a result of its determinationthese
determinations.
15076205.1
9.06 City of San Jose and City of Santa Clara
Continued Supply on Temporary, Interruptible Basis. During the term of the
1984 Agreement, San Francisco provided water to the City of San Jose (“San Jose”) and the
City of Santa Clara (“Santa Clara”) on a temporary, interruptible basis pursuant to SFPUC
Resolution No. 85-0256. Subject to termination or reduction of supply as provided in Section
4.05 of this Agreement, San Francisco will continue to supply water to San Jose and Santa
Clara on a temporary, interruptible basis pending a decision by the Commission, pursuant to
Section 4.05.H, as to whether to make San Jose and Santa Clara permanent customers of the
Regional Water System. San Francisco will furnish water to San Jose and Santa Clara at the
same rates as those applicable to other Wholesale Customers pursuant to this Agreement.
Water delivered to San Jose and Santa Clara after July 1, 2009 may be limited by the SFPUC’s
ability to meet the full needs of all its other Retail and Wholesale Customers. The service areas
of San Jose and Santa Clara set forth in their Individual Water Sales Contracts may not be
expanded using the procedure set forth in Section 3.03. The combined annual average water
usage of San Jose and Santa Clara shall not exceed 9 MGD. The allocation of that total
amount between San Jose and Santa Clara shall be as set forth in their Individual Water Sales
Contracts.
Reservation of Rights. In signing this Agreement, neither San Jose nor Santa
Clara waives any of its rights to contend, in the event that San Francisco (1) elects to terminate
or interrupt water deliveries to either or both of the two cities prior to 20182028 using the
process set forth in Section 4.05, or (2) does not elect to take either city on as a permanent
customer in 20182028, that it is entitled to permanent customer status, pursuant to the Act or
any other federal or state law. Santa Clara's reservation of rights is limited to its existing
Service Area A, as shown on Attachment Q-2. Service Area B, south of Highway 101, was
added in 2018 solely for the operational convenience of Santa Clara. Santa Clara waives its
right to make claims described in this Section 9.06.B and Section 8.07.B.3 with respect to
Service Area B. In signing this Agreement, San Francisco does not waive its right to deny any
or all such contentions.
Legend f: 21] Service Area
- Streams/Rivers
Attachment Q-1
i l: ;=--,,----------+---�c;s ......... ;.... ______ ,.,-
Maximum Service Area -North San Jose Municipal Water
\\oakland-01\data\GISIBAWSCA\Project\2018_07 _ServiceAreas\Attach_ Q-1_SantaClara-ServiceArea.mxd 9/14/2018 11 :45:29 AM
Legend L rn M Service Area A: Existing service area
Attachment Q-2
(Z2I Service Area B: Expanded service area, for operational purposes only . , .
-Streams/Rivers
" .. '!
·1 " .:;
>lh•h It.th
•.11•1
11 :,
GI ., ,, ,,
(I ,•
� ..
•,t ··�
Ji ,1 l1,;.q11(r. 1,\1,,1;
,\
Cup 0 •1li110
l\lVt!:,0
\',' 'dll I
J
··'·t
.... "'------!.' \ ,.,
t �!,....i;'��--..... �::-:T���::1--"'"'."'."""',.,:r,�ol/,j,,iliol,..Q.; ..... �-.:_:.,-,� ... T ... , .. ,.
,, . ,, I· I
(
\
,,,,,., 'h .,'"'' '; li•I
r..:..-,yr,'4111 llttlt
f I ®
Maximum Service Area -City of Santa Clara
\\oakland-01\data\GISIBAWSCA\Project\2018 _07 _ ServlceAreas\Attach_ Q-2_ SantaClara-ServlceAreaExisting.mxd 9/27/2018 3:49:40 PM
I I
i ·','
Amendment 4:
Asset Classification (Sec. 5.11)
1
15118377.1
Section 5.11. Classification of Existing System Assets.
Existing System Assets of the Regional Water System include the water storage, transmission,
and treatment systems owned and operated by San Francisco in Tuolumne, Stanislaus, San
Joaquin, Alameda, Santa Clara, San Mateo and San Francisco Counties. These assets are
managed by either the Water Enterprise or the Hetch Hetchy Enterprise and the assets have
been classified for purposes of cost allocation.
A. Water Enterprise Assets.
Water Enterprise assets are currently managed, operated, and maintained by the Water
Enterprise and are generally located west of Alameda East Portal, in addition to the treatment
facilities located at Tesla and the Thomas Shaft Emergency Disinfection Facility. These assets
are classified as Direct Retail, Direct Wholesale, or Regional.
B. Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Assets.
Hetch Hetchy Enterprise assets are currently managed, operated and maintained by the Hetch
Hetchy Enterprise and are generally located east of the Alameda East Portal of the Coast
Range Tunnel in Sunol Valley, Alameda County. These assets are classified as Power-Only,
Water-Only, or Joint, in accordance with Sections 5.08 and 5.09. Through the Wholesale
Revenue Requirement, the Wholesale Customers pay Existing System Asset capital costs and
operating expenses in accordance with Section 5.02.F and do not pay capital costs or operating
expenses associated with assets classified as Direct Retail, Power-Only, and the Power-
Related portion of Joint assets.
C. Attachment R Documents Classifications.
To facilitate WSA administration, Attachment R documents the classification of major Existing
System Assets operated by the Hetch Hetchy Enterprise. Attachment R consists of three
documents: R-1 Introduction, R-2 Special Classification of Discrete Projects for 2018
Amendment Purposes, and R-3 Major Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets.
Attachment R may be modified as specified in Section 5.11.D and in the manner set forth in
Section 2.03.C.
D. Attachment R-3, Major Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets, is Not
Exhaustive.
Existing System Assets include, but are not limited to, land; fixed infrastructure such as dams,
tunnels, buildings, water treatment plants and pipelines; equipment such as pumps and
vehicles; and related appurtenances. Major Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets,
and their classifications, are listed in Attachment R-3. Attachment R-3 does not include all
assets of the Regional Water System, but represents the parties' best efforts to document major
Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets that would incur capital costs and operating
expenses subject to cost allocation. The classification of assets listed on R-3 may not be
2
15118377.1
changed during the Term, any Extension Term, and any renewal of the Agreement, however,
Attachment R-3 may be modified by mutual agreement in accordance with Section 2.03.C to (1)
add an asset that was inadvertently omitted, (2) to add a new asset, and (3) remove a destroyed
or obsolete asset. In the event that the parties cannot agree on the classification of any omitted
or new assets, the dispute shall be subject to arbitration under Section 8.01.
E. Attachment R-3, Major Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets,
Classifications are Fixed.
The classification of the major Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets is fixed and
shall control the allocation of capital costs and operating expenses for the remainder of the
Term, any Extension Terms, and any renewal of the Agreement. However, changes may be
proposed in accordance with subsection G below. Capital costs and operating expenses are
meant to be inclusive of all costs related to assets, including, but not limited to, any alterations,
additions, improvements, rehabilitation, replacement of assets, and equipment that is
appurtenant thereto. Since asset classifications are fixed in Attachment R-3, asset
classifications may not be modified by mutual agreement in accordance with Section 2.03.C.
F. Attachment R-2, Special Classification of Discrete Projects for 2018 Amendment
Purposes.
Past, ongoing and future capital projects involving five Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System
Assets defined in Attachment R-2 have classifications that differ from the underlying asset
classifications. These project-related classification changes shown on Attachment R-2 are part
of the 2018 amendments to the Agreement and are not precedential for any other asset-related
capital cost or operating expense. With the exception of the defined projects related to the five
assets listed on R-2, the capital projects for all assets follow the asset classifications. Capital
projects listed on Attachment R-2 must be approved by the SFPUC following necessary CEQA
review.
G. Five Year Notice of Intent to Renegotiate Cost Allocation.
In the event San Francisco or the Wholesale Customers, which may be represented by
BAWSCA, wish to propose and negotiate a change in Existing System Asset classifications, or
a change in the Water-Related portion (45 percent) of Joint expenses, for the next Water Supply
Agreement, such party must provide the other at least 5 years' written notice prior to the
expiration of the Term or Extension Term, or the renewal of the Agreement. At a minimum, the
noticing party must provide a comprehensive analysis of the financial and rate impacts of the
proposed change at least two years prior to the expiration of the Term or Extension Term, or the
renewal of the Agreement.
To meet this requirement, the parties may agree to jointly analyze, under a separate agreement,
system capacity and usage, and/or new assets, as well as other possible alternative cost
allocation methodologies. Either party may also unilaterally initiate such studies by consultants
of their choice and bear all their own costs.
ATTACHMENT R – CLASSIFICATION OF EXISTING SYSTEM ASSETS
1
15049417.1
ATTACHMENT R-1
INTRODUCTION TO ATTACHMENT R
Attachment R is composed of three documents (1) this R-1 Introduction to Attachment R, (2)
R-2 Special Classification of Discrete Projects for 2018 WSA Amendment Purposes, and (3)
R-3 Major Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets. These R series attachments
provide a record for purposes of maintaining the historical basis for the allocation of capital costs
and operating expenses associated with Existing System Assets generally, with greater detail
provided for major Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets due to the complexity of
tracking the Water-Only, Power-Only, and Joint classifications as inputs to the Wholesale
Revenue Requirement under Sections 5.08 and 5.09 of the Agreement.
Attachment R-2, Special Classification of Discrete Projects for 2018 WSA Amendment
Purposes defines a limited number of capital projects involving five Hetch Hetchy Enterprise
Existing System Assets where the parties have agreed to classify defined capital project costs
separately from the assets’ underlying classification listed on Attachment R-3. The classification
listed in Attachment R-3 will continue to control the allocation of capital costs and operating
expenses once the defined capital projects described in Attachment R-2 are complete.
Attachment R-3, Major Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets is a record of
major assets at the "facility group" level (see below) as of January 1, 2019. The table contains
six columns and 578 rows. The facility groups are broken down into individual facilities or
assets. The facility group name and classification are provided for each asset. Assets listed on
Attachment R-3 are classified as Joint, Water-Only, or Power-Only. Each asset is also assigned a
unique identification ("ID") number for ease of reference. Attachment R-3 is not a complete
record of all Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets.
General Explanation of Classification.
A “facility group” is a location where a group of facilities is located. A single facility may
constitute a facility group. A “facility” is a primary asset in a facility group whose function
determines its classification and the classification of appurtenances or sub-assets. An
appurtenance is an asset or sub-asset that supports the function of the facility to which it is
appurtenant. In most cases the classification of the appurtenance is determined by the
classification of the facility to which the appurtenance belongs. The function of the
appurtenance may not necessarily control its classification.
The classification of appurtenant assets generally follows the classification of the facility group
served. These appurtenant assets include security, offices/housing, and utilities serving the
facility group such as domestic water, wastewater, communications and solid waste disposal.
Power distribution assets that provide power to a facility group (e.g. lower voltage power
distribution lines) generally carry the classification of the facility group served, but do not
include power generation or higher voltage transmission lines for export of power elsewhere,
which remain classified as Power-Only. With limited exceptions for roads exclusively accessing
Power-Only facilities, roads and bridges are classified as Joint because most roads serve multiple
facilities or Joint facilities. Equipment and rolling stock are generally classified as Joint unless
the asset has a specialized purpose serving the Power function. Capital costs and operating
expenses related to Camp Mather are charged to Power in order to segregate these costs from the
Wholesale Revenue Requirement.
1
15048734.1
ATTACHMENT R-2
SPECIAL CLASSIFICATION OF DISCRETE PROJECTS FOR
2018 WSA AMENDMENT PURPOSES
Asset Asset
Classification
Project Project
Classification1
Lower Cherry
Aqueduct
Joint Lower Cherry Aqueduct Project Water2
Mountain Tunnel Joint Mountain Tunnel Interim Work Water3
Mountain Tunnel Joint Mountain Tunnel Long Term
Repairs
Water3
Mountain Tunnel Joint Mountain Tunnel Flow Control
Facility (FCF) Project
Joint5
Kirkwood Penstock Power Kirkwood Penstock Project Joint4
Moccasin Powerhouse
Penstock
Power Moccasin Penstock Project Joint4
Moccasin Lower Dam Water Moccasin Dam Interim Repairs Joint5
Moccasin Lower Dam Water Moccasin Dam Long-Term
Improvements
Joint5
These Project Classifications are Exceptions to the Fixed Asset Classifications in
Attachment R-3
Attachment R-3 lists major Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets and their agreed-
upon classifications (Power, Joint or Water). The classification for all Existing System Assets is
fixed and applies to all related expenditures, including capital, regulatory, operating and
maintenance expenses, and whether the expenditure alters, rebuilds or replaces the asset, and
any appurtenances.
1 Expires June 30, 2034
2 Project capital costs may include costs incurred in FY 2013-14 and subsequent Fiscal Years
until project is complete
3 Project capital costs may include costs incurred in FY 2011-12 and subsequent Fiscal Years
until project is complete
4 Project capital costs may include costs incurred in FY 2009-10 and subsequent Fiscal Years
until project is complete
5 Project capital costs may include costs incurred in FY 2017-18 and subsequent Fiscal Years
until project is complete
2
15048734.1
In 2018, the parties agreed to classify certain capital projects (but not the underlying asset
classifications shown on Attachment R-3) for a select number of Hetch Hetchy Enterprise
Existing System Assets. These projects are defined below. These project-related classification
changes, shown on this Attachment R-2, are part of the 2018 amendments to the Agreement
and are not precedential for any other asset-related capital cost or operating expense.
The capital costs for the projects defined below shall be allocated in accordance with the project
classifications shown on this Attachment R-2 so long as the projects are approved by the
SFPUC following necessary CEQA review. Once the project, as defined below, is complete and
the Commission adopts a project administrative closeout resolution authorizing final payment to
the contractor(s), the separate project classification expires and all subsequent capital costs and
operating expenses related to the asset will follow the existing asset classification shown on
Attachment R-3. The project classification exceptions will expire on June 30, 2034 and all future
capital and operating costs and expenses will follow the asset classification, even if a project
has not been completed by the SFPUC by that date.
Unless specified otherwise, the capital costs for each project specified below includes costs
incurred by the SFPUC for the construction of the project using debt or revenue funding, along
with all project-related planning costs, engineering costs, engineering services, costs to obtain
project-related regulatory permits, fees for environmental consultants, mitigation costs, legal
fees, and other costs that are required to construct and place the project in operation as a water
conveyance or power generation facility, or to serve both functions. The allocation of project
capital costs includes expenditures incurred in fiscal years prior to FY 2018-19 where noted.
Project Classification Descriptions6
1. Lower Cherry Aqueduct Project means repairs along the Lower Cherry Aqueduct system
from and including the Cherry Creek Diversion Dam downstream to and including a
connection to the pool behind Early Intake Dam, including expenditures incurred in FY 2013-
14 and subsequent fiscal years until the project is complete.
2. Mountain Tunnel Interim Work means the investigations, interim repairs to the tunnel as
well as improvements to access roads and adits for Adit 5/6 and Adit 8/9 already funded or
included in the FY 2017-18 ten-year CIP, including expenditures incurred in FY 2011-12 and
subsequent fiscal years until the project is complete.
3. Mountain Tunnel Long Term Repairs means repair or replacement of tunnel lining not
performed as part of the Mountain Tunnel Interim Work, contact grouting of the entire tunnel
lining, completion of hydraulic improvements, installation of steel lining in sections of the
tunnel to accommodate increased pressure, extension of the siphon crossing under the
South Fork of the Tuolumne River, an enlarged concrete portal and bulkhead at Early
Intake, and roadway access improvements to tunnel entry points at the South Fork
Tuolumne River crossing, Adit 8-9 and Adit 5-6. Project capital costs include costs incurred
in FY 2011-12 and subsequent fiscal years until the project is complete.
6 SFPUC and BAWSCA discussed and agreed to omit the following projects from this special
project classification: 1) Early Intake Diversion Dam and Reservoir, 2) Moccasin Power Tunnel,
and 3) Kirkwood Generator Bypass and Moccasin Generator #1 & 2 Bypasses. All capital costs
and operating expenses related to these assets will follow the existing asset classification
shown on Attachment R-3.
3
15048734.1
4. Mountain Tunnel Flow Control Facility (FCF) Project means construction of a FCF at the
downstream end of Mountain Tunnel to reduce lining damage by eliminating the daily
cycling between open channel and pressurized flow conditions inside the tunnel, and to
allow access to the tunnel when the elevation of the water surface in Priest Reservoir is
higher than the elevation of Priest Portal. The project consists of constructing a bypass
tunnel, a FCF access shaft and related appurtenances, installing flow control valves and
associated mechanical, electrical, and instrumentation as well as construction of a new
Mountain Tunnel adit at Priest Reservoir, and a new access road to the FCF. The bypass
will be fully steel lined to accommodate higher operating pressures, and a concrete plug will
be constructed at the upstream end where water is diverted into the FCF. Project capital
costs include costs incurred in FY 2017-18 and subsequent fiscal years until the project is
complete.
5. Kirkwood Penstock Project means repair, rehabilitation or replacement of the penstock
between the Canyon Portal Valve House and the outside of the northern wall of the
Kirkwood Powerhouse. The Joint classification for this project would exclude valves,
electronic controls and other appurtenances needed for power operations but not for
delivery of water to the Bay Area. Project capital costs include costs incurred in FY 2009-10
and subsequent fiscal years until the project is complete.
6. Moccasin Dam Interim Repairs means repairs and improvements related to damage
caused by the March 22, 2018 storm with the goal of returning the reservoir to service at a
restricted water pool elevation. The interim measures include repairs and improvements to
the Moccasin Creek Diversion Dam and Bypass, Moccasin Reservoir, access and
automation improvements at Gate No. 3 Tower, the Lower Moccasin Dam Auxiliary Spillway,
and the downstream channel of Moccasin Creek. Project capital costs include costs incurred
in FY 2017-18 and subsequent fiscal years until the project is complete.
7. Moccasin Dam Long-Term Improvements means upgrading the Moccasin Reservoir
facilities to meet long-term operational and dam safety needs, including the Lower Moccasin
Dam, Moccasin Creek Diversion Dam, spillways, outlet works, and other appurtenant
facilities, excluding the Moccasin Low Head Hydropower Plant and appurtenances. The
work consists of repairs and upgrades to restore the capability to accommodate changes in
flow associated with water delivery and power generation, provide hydraulic control for
delivery of water to the Bay Area, permit the discharge of excess water downstream to Don
Pedro Reservoir, and satisfy State regulatory requirements and guidelines. The Joint
classification for this project would include all work, regardless of whether or not specific
elements are required by the State of California. Project capital costs include costs incurred
in FY 2017-18 and subsequent fiscal years until project is complete.
8. Moccasin Penstock Project means the repair, rehabilitation or replacement of the
Moccasin Penstocks to ensure reliable water delivery to the Bay Area and support power
generation at Moccasin Powerhouse. Project facilities would extend from the western end of
the Moccasin Power Tunnel to the eastern wall of the Moccasin Powerhouse. The Joint
classification for this project would exclude valves, electronic controls and other
appurtenances needed for power operations but not for delivery of water to the Bay Area.
Project capital costs include costs incurred in FY 2009-10 and subsequent fiscal years until
the project is complete.
Major Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets Attachment R-3
Maximo
Record
Number
Maximo ID
Location SFPUC Facility Group Facility Classification
Maximo
Record
Number
1 CPSCADA Canyon Tunnel CANYON PORTAL SCADA RTU (FUT.)Joint 1
2 OSHCANTNL Canyon Tunnel OSHAUGHNESSY CANYON POWER TUNNEL Joint 2
3 CV Cherry and Eleanor Dams/Compounds CHERRY VALLEY DAMS AND BUILDINGS Joint 3
4 CVBLDGS Cherry and Eleanor Dams/Compounds CHERRY VALLEY BUILDINGS Joint 4
5 CVFUEL Cherry and Eleanor Dams/Compounds CHERRY VALLEY FUELING STATION Joint 5
6 CVPS Cherry and Eleanor Dams/Compounds CHERRY VALLEY PUMP STATION Power 6
7 ELBAT Cherry and Eleanor Dams/Compounds ELEANOR BATTERY BANK Joint 7
8 ELCOT Cherry and Eleanor Dams/Compounds COTTAGE, LAKE ELEANOR Joint 8
9 ELDORM Cherry and Eleanor Dams/Compounds DORM, COOKHOUSE, GARAGE LAKE ELEANOR Joint 9
10 ELDWSCT Cherry and Eleanor Dams/Compounds LAKE ELEANOR WATER TANK Joint 10
11 ELEANOR Cherry and Eleanor Dams/Compounds LAKE ELEANOR EQUIPMENT Joint 11
12 ELWHSE Cherry and Eleanor Dams/Compounds WAREHOUSE, LAKE ELEANOR Joint 12
13 CVPSPRORLY Cherry and Eleanor Dams/Compounds CHERRY VALLEY PUMP STATION PROTECTIVE RELAYS Power 13
14 CVDM Cherry and Eleanor Dams/Compounds CHERRY VALLEY DAM Joint 14
15 CVDWS Cherry and Eleanor Dams/Compounds CHERRY VALLEY DOMESTIC WATER SYSTEM Joint 15
16 CVVH Cherry and Eleanor Dams/Compounds CHERRY VALLEY VALVE HOUSE Joint 16
17 ELNCHRTNL Cherry and Eleanor Dams/Compounds ELEANOR - CHERRY TUNNEL Joint 17
18 ELNRDM Cherry and Eleanor Dams/Compounds ELEANOR DAM Joint 18
19 ICP Early Intake Dam and Reservoir INTAKE CAMP EQUIPMENT AND GROUNDS Joint 19
20 ICPCT Early Intake Dam and Reservoir INTAKE CAMP COTTAGES Joint 20
21 ICPFUEL Early Intake Dam and Reservoir INTAKE CAMP FUELING SYSTEM Joint 21
22 ICPLINERIGSH Early Intake Dam and Reservoir INTAKE CAMP LINEMENS RIGGING SHED BUILDING NA 22
23 ICPMAIL This row not included by SFPUC INTAKE MAIL SHACK NA 23
24 ICPSAND Early Intake Dam and Reservoir INTAKE CAMP SAND STORAGE BUILDING Joint 24
25 ICPSEW Early Intake Dam and Reservoir INTAKE CAMP SEWAGE SYSTEM Joint 25
26 ICPTV Early Intake Dam and Reservoir INTAKE CAMP TV SYSTEM Joint 26
27 ICPWSTN Early Intake Dam and Reservoir INTAKE WEATHER STATION Joint 27
28 IWSSCADA Early Intake Dam and Reservoir INTAKE DOMESTIC WATER SYS RTU Joint 28
29 ICPEL Early Intake Dam and Reservoir INTAKE CAMP ELECTRICAL SYSTEM Joint 29
30 ICPDWSBFP Early Intake Dam and Reservoir INTAKE DOMESTIC WATER BACK FLOW PREVENTERS, ICP Joint 30
31 ICPPOOL Early Intake Dam and Reservoir INTAKE CAMP SWIMMING POOL Joint 31
32 ICPWTS Early Intake Dam and Reservoir INTAKE CAMP WATER SYSTEM Joint 32
33 ICPDM Early Intake Dam and Reservoir INTAKE CAMP DAM Joint 33
34 INTRES Early Intake Dam and Reservoir INTAKE RESERVOIR Joint 34
35 GPL Holm Powerhouse 22.9KV-GRANITE PORTAL LINE Power 35
36 H1 Holm Powerhouse HOLM UNIT #1 Power 36
37 H1PRORLY Holm Powerhouse HPH UNIT #1 PROTECTIVE RELAYS Power 37
38 H2 Holm Powerhouse HOLM UNIT #2 Power 38
39 H2PRORLY Holm Powerhouse HPH UNIT #2 PROTECTIVE RELAYS Power 39
40 HAX Holm Powerhouse HPH EXCITERS, GOVERNORS, TAIL RACE AND OTHER Power 40
41 HL2TTGE Holm Powerhouse HPH LINE #2 TRANSFER TRIP GE Power 41
42 HPH Holm Powerhouse HOLM POWERHOUSE Power 42
43 HPHBATTERY Holm Powerhouse HPH BATTERY SYSTEM Power 43
44 HPHPEN Holm Powerhouse HOLM POWERHOUSE PENSTOCK Power 44
45 HPHPRORLYTMP Holm Powerhouse TEMP HOLING SPOT FOR PRO RLYS Power 45
46 HPHRF#1 Holm Powerhouse HOLM POWERHOUSE ROOF FAN #1 Power 46
47 HPHRF#2 Holm Powerhouse HOLM POWERHOUSE ROOF FAN #2 Power 47
48 HPHWW Holm Powerhouse HPH TSOV, SLIDE GATES AT TAILRACE, ETC Power 48
49 HPRORLY Holm Powerhouse HPH PROTECTIVE RELAYS Power 49
50 HSPARES Holm Powerhouse ALL HOLM POWERHOUSE SPARES Power 50
51 HVH Holm Powerhouse HOLM VALVE HOUSE Power 51
12/21/2018 15118437_1.xlsx 1
Major Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets Attachment R-3
Maximo
Record
Number
Maximo ID
Location SFPUC Facility Group Facility Classification
Maximo
Record
Number
52 CVPWRTNL Holm Powerhouse CHERRY POWER TUNNEL Power 52
53 GPSCADA Holm Powerhouse GRANITE PORTAL SCADA RTU (FUT.)Power 53
54 H1ASCADA Holm Powerhouse HPH UNIT 1 ANNUNCIATOR RTU Power 54
55 H2ASCADA Holm Powerhouse HPH UNIT 2 ANNUNCIATOR RTU Power 55
56 HPHSCADA Holm Powerhouse HOLM POWERHOUSE SCADA RTU Power 56
57 HPHVMS Holm Powerhouse HPH VIBRATION MONITORING SYSTEM Power 57
58 KPH2SCADA Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH PENSTOCK MONITORING SYS RTU Power 58
59 KPH Kirkwood Powerhouse KIRKWOOD POWERHOUSE Power 59
60 KPHB Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH BATHROOM Power 60
61 KPHOFFICE Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH OPERATOR OFFICE Power 61
62 KVH Kirkwood Powerhouse KIRKWOOD VALVE HOUSE Joint 62
63 K1 Kirkwood Powerhouse KIRKWOOD UNIT #1 Power 63
64 K1PRORLY Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH UNIT #1 PROTECTIVE RELAYS Power 64
65 K2 Kirkwood Powerhouse KIRKWOOD UNIT #2 Power 65
66 K2PRORLY Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH UNIT #2 PROTECTIVE RELAYS Power 66
67 K3 Kirkwood Powerhouse KIRKWOOD UNIT #3 Power 67
68 K3PRORLY Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH UNIT #3 PROTECTIVE RELAYS Power 68
69 KAX Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH EXCITERS, GOVERNORS, TAIL RACE AND OTHER Power 69
70 KAXBKR5211 Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH BREAKER LOCATION 52-11 MATHER / ICP LINE Power 70
71 KAXBKR5212 Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH BREAKER LOCATION 52-12 CANYON PORTAL LINE Power 71
72 KAXBKR5221 Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH BREAKER LOCATION 52-21 MATHER / ICP LINE Power 72
73 KAXBKR5222 Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH BREAKER LOCATION 52-22 MATHER 22KV LINE Power 73
74 KAXBKR52S1 Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH1 BREAKER LOCATION 52-S1 STATION SERVICE Power 74
75 KAXBKR52S2 Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH2 BREAKER LOCATION 52-S2 STATION SERVICE Power 75
76 KAXBKR52S3 Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH3 BREAKER LOCATION 52-S3 STATION SERVICE Power 76
77 KAXBKRBT Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH BREAKER LOCATION 52-BUS TIE Power 77
78 KAXBKRBT23 Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH BREAKER LOCATION 23-BUS TIE Power 78
79 KAXBKRBT32 Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH BREAKER LOCATION 32-BUS TIE Power 79
80 KAXBKRSS1 Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH1 BREAKER LOCATION 52-SS1 STATION SERVICE Power 80
81 KAXBKRSS2 Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH2 BREAKER LOCATION 52-SS2 STATION SERVICE Power 81
82 KAXBKRSS3 Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH3 BREAKER LOCATION 52-SS3 STATION SERVICE Power 82
83 KAXBREAKERS Kirkwood Powerhouse KIRKWOOD POWERHOUSE BREAKERS Power 83
84 KPHBATTERY Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH BATTERY SYSTEM Power 84
85 KPHDCV Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH DELUGE CONTROL VALVE Power 85
86 KPHGENBRK Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH SPARE GENERATOR BREAKER Power 86
87 KPHOILFLT Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH PORTABLE XFMR OIL FILTER Power 87
88 KPHPEN Kirkwood Powerhouse KIRKWOOD POWERHOUSE PENSTOCK Power 88
89 KPHRF Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH RECIRCULATING FAN Power 89
90 KPRORLY Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH PROTECTIVE RELAYS Power 90
91 KSPARES Kirkwood Powerhouse ALL KIRKWOOD POWERHOUSE SPARES Power 91
92 KPHAXWPV Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH AUX WHEEL PIT VENT Power 92
93 KPHBYPSYS Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH GENERATOR BYPASS Power 93
94 KPHWW Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH TSOV, SLIDE GATES AT TAILRACE, ETC Power 94
95 K1ASCADA Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH UNIT 1 ANNUNCIATOR RTU Power 95
96 K2ASCADA Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH UNIT 2 ANNUNCIATOR RTU Power 96
97 KPH1SCADA Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH SCADA RTU Power 97
98 VIBMONSYS Kirkwood Powerhouse ALL VIBRATION MONITORING SYSTEMS & EQUIPMENT Power 98
99 KPHVMS Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH VIBRATION MONITORING SYSTEM Power 99
100 KPHTRBMTR Kirkwood Powerhouse KPH TURBIDIMETER Water 100
102 RAKERLANDS Support Systems, Utilities and Other RAKER ACT LANDS & US LAND APPLICATIONS Joint 102
103 SJLANDS Support Systems, Utilities and Other SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY LANDS Joint 103
12/21/2018 15118437_1.xlsx 2
Major Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets Attachment R-3
Maximo
Record
Number
Maximo ID
Location SFPUC Facility Group Facility Classification
Maximo
Record
Number
104 STANISLANDS Support Systems, Utilities and Other STANISLAUS COUNTY LANDS Joint 104
105 TUOLUMNELAN Support Systems, Utilities and Other TUOLUMNE & MARIPOSA COUNTY LANDS Joint 105
106 CC Lower Cherry Creek Aqueduct CHERRY CREEK EQUIPMENT AND BUILDING Joint 106
107 CCAQ Lower Cherry Creek Aqueduct CHERRY CREEK AQUEDUCT Joint 107
108 CCDDM Lower Cherry Creek Aqueduct CHERRY CREEK DIVERSION DAM Joint 108
109 CHDIVTUN Lower Cherry Creek Aqueduct CHERRY DIVERSION TUNNEL Joint 109
110 CVDIVCANAL Lower Cherry Creek Aqueduct CHERRY TO INTAKE DIVERSION CANAL Joint 110
118 MLSSCADA Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN LIFT STATION RTU Joint 118
119 MPHWS Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN WEATHER STATION Joint 119
120 MWSSCADA Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN DOMESTIC WATER SYS RTU Joint 120
121 EQP-HH Moccasin Administrative Compound NON-AUTOMOTIVE EQUIPMENT Joint 121
122 ETESTEQUIP Moccasin Administrative Compound ELECTRONIC TEST EQUIPMENT Joint 122
126 MCPARC Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN ARCHIVES / RECORDS OFFICE Joint 126
127 MCPBH Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN BUNKHOUSE Joint 127
128 MCPBLPRK Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN CAMP BALL PARK Joint 128
129 MCPCARP Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN CARPENTER SHOP BUILDING Joint 129
130 MCPCARPORT Moccasin Administrative Compound SHOP AREA CAR PORTS Joint 130
131 MCPCH Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN CLUBHOUSE/ADMIN. BLDG.Joint 131
132 MCPCM Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT OFFICES, MOCCASIN Joint 132
133 MCPCOT10 Moccasin Administrative Compound COTTAGE 10 Joint 133
134 MCPCOT13 Moccasin Administrative Compound CMB SURVEY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE Joint 134
135 MCPCOT14 Moccasin Administrative Compound ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE Joint 135
136 MCPCOT15 Moccasin Administrative Compound GUEST COTTAGE 15 Joint 136
137 MCPCOT16 Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN FINANCE OFFICE Joint 137
138 MCPCOT17 Moccasin Administrative Compound TRAINING OFFICE Joint 138
139 MCPCOT18 Moccasin Administrative Compound EXERCISE BUILDING Joint 139
140 MCPCOT36 Moccasin Administrative Compound WATERSHED ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE Joint 140
141 MCPCOT41 Moccasin Administrative Compound GUEST COTTAGE 41 Joint 141
142 MCPCRDBRD Moccasin Administrative Compound MCP CARDBOARD COMPACTOR Joint 142
143 MCPCT Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN CAMP COTTAGES Joint 143
144 MCPELEC Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN CAMP ELECTRIC SHOP Joint 144
145 MCPENG Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN ENGINEERING OFFICE Joint 145
146 MCPFIREGAR Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN FIRE TRUCK GARAGE Joint 146
147 MCPFLDOFF Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN FIELD OFFICE BUILDING Joint 147
148 MCPFUEL Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN CAMP FUELING STATION Joint 148
149 MCPGARD Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN GARDENERS SHOP Joint 149
150 MCPGREENHS Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN GREENHOUSE Joint 150
151 MCPLINE Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN POWER LINE SHOP BUILDING Power 151
152 MCPMACHSP Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN MACHINE AND AUTO SHOP BLDG Joint 152
153 MCPMERC Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN EMERGENCY RESPONSE CENTER Joint 153
154 MCPMNTFAC Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN MAINTENANCE FACILITY Joint 154
156 MCPOMPH Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCC CAMP OLD MOCCASIN POWERHOUSE: Long term storage Joint 156
157 MCPPAINTSP Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN CAMP PAINT SHOP Joint 157
158 MCPPLAN Moccasin Administrative Compound PLANNING AND SCHEDULING BUILDING Joint 158
159 MCPPLUMB Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN PLUMBERS SHOP Joint 159
160 MCPPOOL Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN CAMP SWIMMING POOL Joint 160
161 MCPRECFAL Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN RECREATIONAL FACILITY Joint 161
162 MCPSAWMIL Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN SAWMILL FACILITY Joint 162
163 MCPSCADATRLR Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN SCADA TRAILER, MOCCASIN Joint 163
164 MCPSCHOOL Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN SCHOOL BUILDING Joint 164
165 MCPSEWLIFT1 Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN CAMP SEWAGE LIFT STATION 1 Joint 165
12/21/2018 15118437_1.xlsx 3
Major Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets Attachment R-3
Maximo
Record
Number
Maximo ID
Location SFPUC Facility Group Facility Classification
Maximo
Record
Number
166 MCPSEWSYS Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN CAMP SEWAGE SYSTEM Joint 166
167 MCPTECH Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN CAMP TECH SHOP Joint 167
168 MCPTGSTMPFAC Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN TEMPORARY GUEST ACCOMMODATIONS Joint 168
169 MCPTOOLRM Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN TOOL ROOM BUILDING Joint 169
170 MCPUEB Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN Bldg 57 Joint 170
171 MCPWHSE Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN WAREHOUSE & SHOPS BLDG Joint 171
173 MCPSL Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN CAMP STREET LIGHTS Joint 173
174 MCPDWS Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN DOMESTIC WATER SYSTEM Joint 174
175 MCPDWSBFP Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN DOMESTIC WATER SYSTEM BACK FLOW PREVENTER Joint 175
176 ELECTDVCS Moccasin Administrative Compound SMALL ELECTRONIC DEVICES AND EQUIPMENT, MOCCASIN Joint 176
177 MCPWQ2 Moccasin Administrative Compound MCP WATER QUALITY BUILDING 2 Water 177
178 MCPWQLABS Moccasin Administrative Compound MCP WATER QUALITY LABS Water 178
179 MPFLOSCADA Moccasin Powerhouse MPH PENSTOCK FLOW MTRING SCADA RTU Power 179
180 MPH Moccasin Powerhouse MOCCASIN POWERHOUSE Power 180
181 MPHAUXCMP Moccasin Powerhouse MPH AUX. AIR COMPRESSOR Power 181
182 MPHCR Moccasin Powerhouse MPH MAIN CONTROL ROOM Joint 182
183 MPHHWT Moccasin Powerhouse MOCCASIN POWERHOUSE HOT WATER TANK Joint 183
184 MPHOILROOM Moccasin Powerhouse MPH OIL TREATMENT ROOM Power 184
185 MPHSTOR Moccasin Powerhouse MOCCASIN PH STORAGE BUILDING Power 185
186 M1 Moccasin Powerhouse MOCCASIN UNIT #1 Power 186
187 M1PRORLY Moccasin Powerhouse MPH UNIT #1 PROTECTIVE RELAYS Power 187
188 M2 Moccasin Powerhouse MOCCASIN UNIT #2 Power 188
189 M2PRORLY Moccasin Powerhouse MPH UNIT #2 PROTECTIVE RELAYS Power 189
190 MAX Moccasin Powerhouse MPH EXCITERS, GOVERNORS, TAIL RACE AND OTHER Power 190
191 MAX52BT Moccasin Powerhouse 52-BT BUS TIE CIRCUIT BREAKER LOCATION Power 191
192 MAXBRK Moccasin Powerhouse MOCCASIN POWERHOUSE CIRCUIT BREAKERS Power 192
193 MAXBRKSS1 Moccasin Powerhouse 52-SS1 STATION SERVICE CIRCUIT BREAKER LOCATION Power 193
194 MAXBRKSS2 Moccasin Powerhouse VILLAGE XFMR 52-SS2 STATION SERVICE LOCATION Power 194
195 MBRK52S1 Moccasin Powerhouse 52-S1 CIRCUIT BREAKER LOCATION Power 195
196 MBRK52S2 Moccasin Powerhouse 52-S2 CIRCUIT BREAKER LOCATION Power 196
197 MPHBATTERY Moccasin Powerhouse MPH BATTERY SYSTEM Power 197
198 MPHDELVAL Moccasin Powerhouse MPH DELUGE VALVE SYSTEM Power 198
199 MPHMCB Moccasin Powerhouse MPH MAIN CONTROL BOARD Power 199
200 MPHPEN Moccasin Powerhouse MOCCASIN POWERHOUSE PENSTOCK Power 200
201 MPRORLY Moccasin Powerhouse MPH PROTECTIVE RELAYS Power 201
202 MSPARES Moccasin Powerhouse ALL MPH SPARE EQUIPMENT Power 202
203 MSY Moccasin Powerhouse MOCCASIN SWITCHYARD Power 203
204 MSYLIGHTS Moccasin Powerhouse MSY MERCURY VAPOR LIGHTS Power 204
205 PWRSCHED Moccasin Powerhouse MPH POWER SCHEDULING COMPUTERS Power 205
206 MOCCPWTUS Moccasin Powerhouse MOCCASIN POWER TUNNEL SURGE SHAFT Power 206
207 MPHBYPSYS1 Moccasin Powerhouse MPH GENERATOR BYPASS #1 Power 207
208 MPHBYPSYS2 Moccasin Powerhouse MPH GENERATOR BYPASS #2 Power 208
209 MPHWW Moccasin Powerhouse MPH TSOV, SLIDE GATES AT TAILRACE, ETC Power 209
210 BNVMSCPU Moccasin Powerhouse BENTLY-NEVADA VIBRATION MONITORING SYS CENTRAL PRO Power 210
211 MPHSCADA Moccasin Powerhouse MOCCASIN POWERHOUSE SCADA RTU Power 211
212 PMBSCADA Moccasin Powerhouse PG&E MAIL BOX SCADA RTU Power 212
213 MLHSCADA Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN LOW-HEAD PWR STA SCADA RTU Power 213
214 MLHVMS Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCC. LOWHEAD VIBRATION MONITORING SYSTEM Power 214
215 MPHVMS Moccasin Administrative Compound MPH VIBRATION MONITORING SYSTEM Power 215
216 MLH Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN LOW HEAD POWER PLANT Power 216
217 MLHPEN Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN LOWHEAD PENSTOCK Power 217
12/21/2018 15118437_1.xlsx 4
Major Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets Attachment R-3
Maximo
Record
Number
Maximo ID
Location SFPUC Facility Group Facility Classification
Maximo
Record
Number
218 M3 Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN LOWHEAD UNIT Power 218
219 MLHBATTERY Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN LOW-HEAD BATTERY SYS Power 219
220 MLHMCB Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCC LOWHEAD MAIN CONTROL BOARD Power 220
221 MLHPRORLY Moccasin Administrative Compound MLH PROTECTIVE RELAYS Power 221
222 MLHTS Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN LOW HEAD TELEPHONE SYSTEM Power 222
223 MPHRESBYP Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN RESERVOIR BYPASS Water 223
224 MLHPRGCTRL Moccasin Administrative Compound MLH PROGRAMABLE CONTROLLER Power 224
225 MCPFHDWM Moccasin Administrative Compound DOMESTIC WATER METERS / HATCHERY Joint 225
226 MCPBR Moccasin Administrative Compound MCP TIMBER BRIDGE / TRASH RACK Water 226
227 MCPCANAL Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN CANAL Water 227
228 MCPRES Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN CAMP RESERVOIR Water 228
229 MOCCLDM Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN LOWER DAM, MOCCASIN Water 229
230 MOCCUDM Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN CREEK UPPER DIVERSION DAM , MOCCASIN Water 230
231 MG3SCADA Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN GATE NO. 3 RTU NA 231
232 FTHTNLJACPU Moccasin Administrative Compound MOCCASIN RESERVOIR TURBIDITY SUPPLY JACK PUMP SITE Water 232
233 KBP Mountain Tunnel KIRKWOOD/INTAKE BYPASS SYSTEM Joint 233
234 MTNTNLDIV Mountain Tunnel MOUNTAIN TUNNEL AND ADITS Joint 234
235 SF Mountain Tunnel SOUTH FORK EQUIPMENT & BUILDINGS Joint 235
236 SFFUEL Mountain Tunnel SOUTH FORK FUELING STATION Joint 236
237 SFOFF Mountain Tunnel SOUTH FORK OFFICE BUILDING Joint 237
238 MT1-2AD Mountain Tunnel MTN TNL DIV 1-2 TUNNEL ACCESS Joint 238
239 MT3-4AD Mountain Tunnel MTN TNL DIV 3-4 TUNNEL ACCESS Joint 239
240 MT5-6AD Mountain Tunnel MTN TNL DIV 5-6 TUNNEL ACCESS Joint 240
241 MT8-9AD Mountain Tunnel MTN TNL DIV 8-9 TUNNEL ACCESS Joint 241
242 MTBIGCRSH Mountain Tunnel MTN TNL DIV BIG CREEK SHAFT,Joint 242
243 MTDSFC Mountain Tunnel SOUTH FORK CROSSING Joint 243
244 MTEIAD Mountain Tunnel MTN TNL DIV ACCESS AT EARLY INTAKE Joint 244
TBD Mountain Tunnel Flow Control Facility Joint TBD
245 MTPROUT Mountain Tunnel Mountain Tunnel Priest Outlet Joint 245
246 MTSECGROT Mountain Tunnel MTN TNL DIV SECOND GARROTE SHAFT,Joint 246
247 SFDWS Mountain Tunnel SOUTH FORK DOMESTIC WATER SYSTEM Joint 247
248 OSHSCADA O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSHAUGHNESSY DAM RTU Joint 248
249 OSHSG O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSHAUGHNESSY STREAM GAUGE Joint 249
250 OSHWSTN O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSHAUGHNESSY WEATHER STATION Joint 250
251 OSH O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSHAUGHNESSY DAM AND AREA BLDGS.Joint 251
252 OSHCT O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSHAUGHNESSY COTTAGES Joint 252
253 OSHEL O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSHAUGHNESSY CAMP ELECTRICAL Joint 253
254 OSHEQP O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundALL OSHAUGHNESSY EQUIPMENT Joint 254
255 OSHDIVTNL O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSHAUGHNESSY DIVERSION TUNNEL Joint 255
256 OSHDM O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSHAUGHNESSY DAM Joint 256
257 OSHDMWELLAU O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSH DOMESTIC WELL AUXILIARY BUILDING Joint 257
258 OSHDWS O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSHAUGHNESSY DAM DOMESTIC WTR SYS Joint 258
259 OSHDWSBFP O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSH DOMESTIC WATER BACK FLOW PREVENTERS, OSH Joint 259
260 OSHDWW O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSHAUGHNESSY DOMESTIC WATER WELL SYSTEM, OSH Joint 260
261 OSHFUEL O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSHAUGHNESSY FUELING STATION Joint 261
262 OSHG1 O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSH DAM GALLERY #1 Joint 262
263 OSHG2 O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSH DAM GALLERY #2 Joint 263
264 OSHGAR5 O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSHAUGHNESSY GARAGE #5 Joint 264
265 OSHGAR7 O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSHAUGHNESSY GARAGE #7 Joint 265
266 OSHRCKSCRN O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundROCK SCREENING PLANT NA 266
267 OSHSEWSYS O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSHAUGHNESSY SEWAGE SYSTEM Joint 267
12/21/2018 15118437_1.xlsx 5
Major Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets Attachment R-3
Maximo
Record
Number
Maximo ID
Location SFPUC Facility Group Facility Classification
Maximo
Record
Number
268 OSHSTORE3 O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSHAUGHNESSY STORE HOUSE 3 Joint 268
269 OSHSTORE6A O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSHAUGHNESSY STORE HOUSE 6-A Joint 269
270 OSHWDSHD3A O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSHAUGHNESSY WOODSHED 3-A Joint 270
271 OSHWH12 O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSHAUGHNESSY WAREHOUSE #12 Joint 271
272 OSHWLHSE O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSHAUGHNESSY WELL HOUSE Joint 272
273 OSHWTRSHED O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundHETCH HETCHY RESERVOIR WATERSHED water quality activities NA 273
274 OWQSCADA O'Shaughnessy Dam and Reservoir/CompoundOSHAUGHNESSY WATER QUALITY RTU Water 274
275 OLDOAKYD Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower 120/240V-OLD OAKDALE YARD LINE Joint 275
276 OAKCT Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower OAKDALE EMPLOYEE COTTAGE Joint 276
277 OAKDALE Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower OLD OAKDALE YARD Joint 277
278 OAKGAR Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower OAKDALE GARAGE Joint 278
279 OAKLINE Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower OAKDALE LINE SHOP BUILDING Joint 279
280 OAKOFFICE Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower OAKDALE OFFICE BUILDING Joint 280
281 OAKWHSE Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower OAKDALE WAREHOUSE BUILDING Joint 281
282 CPL Support Systems, Utilities and Other 2.4KV-CANYON PORTAL LINE Joint 282
283 CRL Support Systems, Utilities and Other 22.9KV-CHERRY RIDGE LINE Joint 283
284 CRLC Support Systems, Utilities and Other 22.9KV-CHERRY COMP TO RISER AC CROSS DAM LINE Joint 284
285 CRLCH Support Systems, Utilities and Other 22.9KV-CHERRY COMPOUND LINE Joint 285
286 HL Support Systems, Utilities and Other 22.9KV-HOLM LINE Joint 286
287 ICL Support Systems, Utilities and Other 22.9KV-INTAKE CAMP LINE Joint 287
288 INTCMP Support Systems, Utilities and Other (OLD) INTAKE CAMP LINE NA 288
289 INT-OSH Support Systems, Utilities and Other 22.9KV-INTAKE TO OSH LINE Joint 289
290 IRL Support Systems, Utilities and Other 22.9KV-INTAKE RADIO SITE LINE Joint 290
291 KRT Support Systems, Utilities and Other (OLD) KPH TO RIDGE LINE TIE LINE NA 291
292 MATA Support Systems, Utilities and Other MATHER "A" LINE Power 292
293 MATB Support Systems, Utilities and Other 2.4KV-MATHER "B" LINE Power 293
294 MCPA Support Systems, Utilities and Other 2.4KV-MOCCASIN CAMP "A" LINE Joint 294
295 MCPB Support Systems, Utilities and Other 2.4KV-MOCCASIN CAMP "B" LINE Joint 295
296 MPL Support Systems, Utilities and Other 2.4KV-MOCCASIN PEAK LINE Joint 296
297 OAKPORT Support Systems, Utilities and Other 120/240V-OAKDALE PORTAL LINE Water 297
298 POLES Support Systems, Utilities and Other DISTRIBUTION POLE LINES Joint 298
299 PRL Support Systems, Utilities and Other 2.4KV-PRIEST RESERVOIR LINE Joint 299
300 PRLN Support Systems, Utilities and Other PRIEST RESERVOIR COMM/SIGNAL LINE Joint 300
301 RLT Support Systems, Utilities and Other (OLD) RIDGE LINE TIE LINE NA 301
302 RRLINE Support Systems, Utilities and Other 120/240V-ROCK RIVER LINE Water 302
303 SJVHLN Support Systems, Utilities and Other 120/240V-SAN JOAQUIN VALVE HOUSE LINE Water 303
304 MAXBRKVT1 Support Systems, Utilities and Other VILLAGE XFMR 1, CIRCUIT BREAKER, MPH1 LOCATION Joint 304
305 MAXBRKVT2 Support Systems, Utilities and Other VILLAGE XFMR 2 CIRCUIT BREAKER LOCATION Joint 305
306 TESLP Support Systems, Utilities and Other 12KV-TESLA PORTAL LINE Water 306
307 INTHSFPWLACV Support Systems, Utilities and Other TOP INTAKE HILL/ SOUTH FORK RIVER TOWER LINE ROADS Joint 307
308 ISYL Support Systems, Utilities and Other 22.9KV-INTAKE SWITCHYARD LINE Power 308
309 ISYOILFLT Support Systems, Utilities and Other TRAILER MOUNTED OIL FILTER Power 309
310 ISYPLCCOMM Support Systems, Utilities and Other ISY POWER LINE CARRIER EQUIP Power 310
312 ISY Support Systems, Utilities and Other INTAKE SWITCHYARD Power 312
313 ISYB Support Systems, Utilities and Other ISY BOGUE UNIT Power 313
314 ISYBUSTIE Support Systems, Utilities and Other INTAKE SWITCHYARD H.V. BUS TIE Power 314
315 ISYCRB Support Systems, Utilities and Other INTAKE SWITCHYARD CONTROL ROOM/BUILDING Power 315
316 ISYLIGHTS Support Systems, Utilities and Other SWITCHYARD LIGHTS Power 316
317 ISYLINE1 Support Systems, Utilities and Other INTAKE SWITCHYARD H.V. LINE 1 Power 317
318 ISYLINE10 Support Systems, Utilities and Other INTAKE SWITCHYARD H.V. LINE 10 Power 318
319 ISYLINE11 Support Systems, Utilities and Other INTAKE SWITCHYARD H.V. LINE 11 Power 319
12/21/2018 15118437_1.xlsx 6
Major Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets Attachment R-3
Maximo
Record
Number
Maximo ID
Location SFPUC Facility Group Facility Classification
Maximo
Record
Number
320 ISYLINE2 Support Systems, Utilities and Other INTAKE SWITCHYARD H.V. LINE 2 Power 320
321 ISYLINE2.4 Support Systems, Utilities and Other INTAKE CAMP LINE 2.4KV Power 321
322 ISYLINE5 Support Systems, Utilities and Other INTAKE SWITCHYARD H.V. LINE 5 Power 322
323 ISYLINE6 Support Systems, Utilities and Other INTAKE SWITCHYARD H.V. LINE 6 Power 323
324 ISYLINE9 Support Systems, Utilities and Other INTAKE SWITCHYARD H.V. LINE 9 Power 324
325 ISYPRORLY Support Systems, Utilities and Other ISY PROTECTIVE RELAYS Power 325
326 LINE11TWR Support Systems, Utilities and Other TRANSMISSION TOWERS, LINE 11 Power 326
327 LINE1-2TWR Support Systems, Utilities and Other TOWERS FOR TRANSMISSION LINES 1 & 2 Power 327
328 LINE3-4TWR Support Systems, Utilities and Other TRANSMISSION TOWERS, LINES 3 & 4 Power 328
329 LINE5-6TWR Support Systems, Utilities and Other TRANSMISSION TOWERS, LINES 5 & 6 Power 329
330 LINE7-8TWR Support Systems, Utilities and Other TRANSMISSION TOWERS, LINES 7 & 8 Power 330
331 LINE910TWR Support Systems, Utilities and Other TRANSMISSION TOWERS, LINES 9 & 10 Power 331
333 MSYLINE3 Support Systems, Utilities and Other MSY H.V. LINE 3 Power 333
334 MSYLINE4 Support Systems, Utilities and Other MSY H.V. LINE 4 Power 334
335 MSYLINE5 Support Systems, Utilities and Other MSY H.V. LINE 5 Power 335
336 MSYLINE6 Support Systems, Utilities and Other MSY H.V. LINE 6 Power 336
337 122OSS Support Systems, Utilities and Other OAKDALE SUBSTATION (TID)Power 337
338 CSPRORLY Support Systems, Utilities and Other CALAVERUS SUBSTATION PROTECTIVE RELAYS Power 338
339 CSSPARES Support Systems, Utilities and Other ALL CAL SUB SPARE EQUIPMENT Power 339
340 MID_TID_SUBS Support Systems, Utilities and Other NON HETCH HETCHY SUBSTATIONS Power 340
341 ROP Support Systems, Utilities and Other ROP SWITCH ROOM Power 341
342 STSUB Support Systems, Utilities and Other STANDIFORD SUBSTATION, MODESTO Power 342
343 DAVISSUB This row not included by SFPUC DAVIS SUB STATION NA 343
344 WDCALSUB Support Systems, Utilities and Other CALAVERAS SUBSTATION Power 344
345 ISYSCADA Support Systems, Utilities and Other INTAKE SWITCHYARD SCADA RTU Power 345
346 CALSCADA Support Systems, Utilities and Other CALAVERAS SUB SCADA RTU Power 346
347 ROPREVMTR Support Systems, Utilities and Other JEM TWO ELEMENT METER Power 347
348 ROPREVREC Support Systems, Utilities and Other ROP REVNUE METERING RECORDER Power 348
349 TISSCADA Support Systems, Utilities and Other TREASURE ISLAND SCADA RTU Power 349
350 REVMETERS Support Systems, Utilities and Other PROJECT BILLABLE REVENUE METERS Power 350
351 PRSTSCADA Priest Regulating Dam and Reservoir PRIEST RESERVOUR SCADA RTU Power 351
352 WPVSCADA Priest Regulating Dam and Reservoir WEST PORTAL VALVEHOUSE RTU Power 352
353 PRBYPASS Priest Regulating Dam and Reservoir PRIEST BYPASS SYSTEM FROM MTN TUNNEL TO GATE TOWER Joint 353
354 PRCANAL Priest Regulating Dam and Reservoir PRIEST CANAL Power 354
355 AUXBUIER Priest Regulating Dam and Reservoir PRIEST RES. AUXILIARY BUILDING ELECTRICAL ROOM Joint 355
356 AUXBUIGR Priest Regulating Dam and Reservoir PRIEST RES. AUXILIARY BUILDING GENERATOR ROOM Joint 356
357 AUXBUIMR Priest Regulating Dam and Reservoir PRIEST RES. AUXILIARY BUILDING MECHANICAL ROOM Joint 357
358 PRGTTWRMN Priest Regulating Dam and Reservoir PRIEST GATE TOWER MAIN , PRIEST Power 358
360 PRMCPWLCRDCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other PRIEST TO MOCCASIN POWER LINE ROADS Power 360
361 PRSRES Priest Regulating Dam and Reservoir PRIEST RESERVOIR Power 361
362 WESTPORTAL Priest Regulating Dam and Reservoir WEST PORTAL EQUIPMENT Power 362
363 MOCCPWTUN Priest Regulating Dam and Reservoir MOCCASIN POWER TUNNEL Power 363
364 PRIESTCOTT Priest Regulating Dam and Reservoir PRIEST COTTAGE Joint 364
365 PRIESTDM Priest Regulating Dam and Reservoir PRIEST DAM Power 365
366 PRWT1 Priest Regulating Dam and Reservoir PRIEST DOMESTIC WATER TANK Joint 366
367 MCPSTORE MOCCASIN GENERAL STORE BLDG 367
368 KPHASS KIRKWOOD P.H. AUTO SPRINKLER SYSTEM 368
369 ELSURVCAB ELEANOR-MIGUEL MEADOW SURVEY CABIN 369
370 GRP (OLD) GRANITE PORTAL LINE 370
371 JONESPOINT JONES POINT MICROWAVE COMMUNICATION SITE 371
372 JPCSBATA JONES POINT BATTERY BANK *A* (3-12 VOLT GELL CELL 372
12/21/2018 15118437_1.xlsx 7
Major Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets Attachment R-3
Maximo
Record
Number
Maximo ID
Location SFPUC Facility Group Facility Classification
Maximo
Record
Number
373 JPCSBATB JONES POINT BATTERY BANK *B* (3-12 VOLT GELL CELL 373
374 JPCSBLDG JONES POINT COMM SITE EQUIP BUILDING 374
375 JPDISH1 JONES PIONT ANTENNA DISH PATH 1 TO DUCKWALL REPEAT 375
376 JPDISH2 JONES PIONT ANTENNA DISH PATH 2 TO INTAKE SWITCHYA 376
377 JPPVCTRLA JONES POINT PHOTOVOLTAIC CHARGER CONTROL BATTERY B 377
378 JPPVCTRLB JONES POINT PHOTOVOLTAIC CHARGER CONTROL BATTERY B 378
379 JPSOLPNLA JONES POINT SOLAR PANNELS *A*379
380 JPSOLPNLB JONES POINT SOLAR PANNELS *B*380
381 JPTOWER JONES PIONT TOWER STRUCTURE 381
382 JPTXALARM JONES POINT REPEATER TRANSMIT ALARM UNIT 382
383 MCPTV MOCCASIN CABLE TELEVISION SYS 383
384 OAKLAND OAKLAND EQUIPMENT AND BUILDINGS 384
385 BMIS MAINFRAME COMPUTER IN S.F.385
386 HH-RRAS ASSETS THAT ARE RETIRED OR NO LONGER IN SERVICE 386
387 SANFRAN SAN FRANCISCO EQUIPMENT & BUILDINGS 387
388 VALDIV VALLEY DIVISION EQUIPMENT 388
389 1155MKT 1155 MARKET STREET 389
390 COLLEGE SF CITY COLLEGE 390
391 MOSCONE MOSCONE CENTER 391
392 TESCT TESLA COTTAGE 392
393 TESGAR TESLA GARAGE 393
394 TESLAFUEL TESLA PORTAL FUELING STATION 394
395 MOCCPENSRDCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other MOCCASIN CAMP PENSTOCK SOUTH SIDE ROAD CULVERT Joint 395
396 PRIESTAUXBUI Support Systems, Utilities and Other PRIEST RES. AUXILIARY BUILDING, CONTROL ROOM, SUBS Joint 396
397 PRIESTDIRDCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other PRIEST DIRT ROADS PRIEST CULVERT Joint 397
398 PRIESTDIRTRD Support Systems, Utilities and Other PRIEST AREA DIRT ROADS, PRIEST Joint 398
399 PRIESTPARDCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other PRIEST AREA PAVED ROADS, PRIEST CULVERT Joint 399
400 PRIESTPAVERD Support Systems, Utilities and Other PRIEST AREA PAVED ROADS, PRIEST Joint 400
401 PRIESTRDS Support Systems, Utilities and Other PRIEST AREA ROADS, PRIEST Joint 401
402 OSHBR Support Systems, Utilities and Other OSHAUGHNESSY TIMBER BRIDGE Joint 402
403 OSHROADS Support Systems, Utilities and Other OSH AREA ROADS Joint 403
404 CSTRGTNACRCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other PIPELINE TUNNEL RD. - CULVERTS Joint 404
405 CSTRGTNLACCR Support Systems, Utilities and Other PIPELINE TUNNEL RD. - BIRD RD TO ALAMEDA EAST Joint 405
406 DRDTOEEMRD Support Systems, Utilities and Other POWER LINE ACCESS RD - DIRT ACC. RD TO 2 TOWERS Joint 406
407 EMRYRDACCRD Support Systems, Utilities and Other PIPELINE & PWRLINE ACCESS RD (EMERY RD - BIRD RD)Joint 407
408 EMRYRDACRDCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other PIPELINE & PWRLINE ACCESS RD CULVERTS Joint 408
409 FRHYPWLACCRD Support Systems, Utilities and Other FERRETTI ROAD TO HWY 120 TOWER LINE ROADS Joint 409
410 FRHYPWLACRCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other FERRETTI ROAD TO HWY 120 TOWER LINE ROADS Joint 410
411 FTDMPRACC Support Systems, Utilities and Other MARSHES FLAT TO MOCCASIN PEAK RADIO SITE ROAD ,Joint 411
412 FTDMPRACCCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other MARSHES FLAT TO MOCCASIN PEAK RADIO SITE ROAD ,Joint 412
413 HYMRPWLACCR Support Systems, Utilities and Other HWY 120 TO MERRELL ROAD TOWER LINE ROADS Joint 413
414 ICPCHEL Support Systems, Utilities and Other CHERRY OIL TO ELEANOR ROAD, INTAKE /ELEANOR Joint 414
415 ICPCHELCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other CHERRY OIL TO ELEANOR ROAD CULVERT Joint 415
416 ICPCHERRY Support Systems, Utilities and Other ROAD FROM INTAKE TO CHERRY VALLEY, EARLY INTAKE Joint 416
417 ICPCHERRYCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other ROAD FROM INTAKE TO CHERRY VALLEY, EARLY INTAKE CULV Joint 417
418 ICPHILLRD Support Systems, Utilities and Other ROAD-INTAKE HILL FROM RED HILLS TO INTAKE Joint 418
419 ICPHILLRDCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other ROAD INTAKE HILLFROM RED HILLS TO INTAKE, CULVERTS Joint 419
420 ICPHPHRD Support Systems, Utilities and Other CHERRY OIL TO HPH ROAD,INTAKE/HPH ROAD Power 420
421 ICPHPHRDCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other CHERRY OIL ROADTO HPH ROAD,INTAKE/HPH ROAD CULVERT Power 421
422 ICPMATHER Support Systems, Utilities and Other ROAD FROM TOP OF INTAKE HILL TO CAMP MATHER Joint 422
423 ICPREDHILL Support Systems, Utilities and Other ROADWAY-HWY120 TO INTAKE HILL EARLY INTAKE Joint 423
12/21/2018 15118437_1.xlsx 8
Major Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets Attachment R-3
Maximo
Record
Number
Maximo ID
Location SFPUC Facility Group Facility Classification
Maximo
Record
Number
424 ICPREDHILLCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other ROADWAY-HWY120 TO INTAKE HILL EARLY INTAKE Joint 424
425 ICPROADS Support Systems, Utilities and Other INTAKE/CHERRY/MATHER/ELEANOR AREA ROADS Joint 425
426 J59RRRPLACRD Support Systems, Utilities and Other POWER LINE ACCESS RD - RD J59 TO ROCK RIVER ROAD Joint 426
428 MCDIRTRDSCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other MOCCASIN DIRT ROADS CULVERTS Joint 428
429 MCPAVERDS Support Systems, Utilities and Other MOCCASIN AREA PAVED ROADS Joint 429
430 MCPAVERDSCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other MOCCASIN AREA PAVED ROADS CULVERTS Joint 430
431 MCPROADS Support Systems, Utilities and Other MOCCASIN AREA ROADS Joint 431
433 MCPRRGCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other MOCCASIN TO PRIEST RAILROAD GRADE , MOCCASIN Joint 433
434 MOCCPENSTSRD Support Systems, Utilities and Other MOCCASIN AREA ROADS PENSTOCK SOUTH SIDE MCP Joint? 434
435 MOCTOMARSFL Support Systems, Utilities and Other MOCCASIN TO MARSH FLAT TOWER 239S TOWER LINE Joint 435
436 MRPCPWLACCRD Support Systems, Utilities and Other MERRELL ROAD TO PRIEST TOWER LINE ROADS Joint 436
437 MRPCPWLACRCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other MERRELL ROAD TO PRIEST TOWER LINE ROADS Joint 437
438 MSJPWLACCRD Support Systems, Utilities and Other POWER LINE ACCESS RD - BIRD RD TO MISSION SAN JOSE Joint 438
439 MT5-6ACRO Support Systems, Utilities and Other MOUNTAIN TUNNEL ACCESS ROAD TO 5-6 ADIT Joint 439
440 MT5-6ACROCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other MOUNTAIN TUNNEL ACCESS ROAD TO 5-6 ADIT CULVERT Joint 440
441 RMBWPLACCRD Support Systems, Utilities and Other PIPELINE ACCESS RD - RMB TO EMERY RD Joint 441
442 RMBWPLACRDC Support Systems, Utilities and Other PIPELINE ACCESS CULVERT RD - RMB TO EMERY RD Joint 442
443 RMBWPWLACCR Support Systems, Utilities and Other POWER LINE ACCESS RD - RMB TO J59 Joint 443
444 RRRLIMPTWLRD Support Systems, Utilities and Other POWER LINE ACCESS RD - ROCK RIVER ROAD LIME PIT Joint 444
446 SFRFRPWLACV Support Systems, Utilities and Other SOUTH FORK RIVER TO FERRETTI ROAD TOWER LINE ROADS Joint 446
447 WESTPORTALRD Support Systems, Utilities and Other WEST PORTAL AREA ROADS Joint 447
448 WILRDTODACRD Support Systems, Utilities and Other POWER LINE ACCESS RD - WILMS ROAD TO DIRT ACC. RD Joint 448
449 WPPAVERDSCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other WEST PORTAL AREA PAVED ROADS CULVERT Joint 449
450 INTHSFPWLACC Support Systems, Utilities and Other TOP INTAKE HILL/ SOUTH FORK RIVER TOWER LINE ROADS Joint 450
451 MARSFLDONPCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other MARSH FLAT TO DON PEDRO TOWER 243S TO TOWER 258S Joint 451
452 MARSFLTODONP Support Systems, Utilities and Other MARSH FLAT TO DON PEDRO TOWER 243S TO TOWER 258S Joint 452
453 MOCMARSFLCCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other MOCCASIN TO MARSH FLAT TOWER 239S TOWER LINE Joint 453
454 MOCMARSFLCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other MOCCASIN TO MARSH FLAT TOWER 239S TOWER LINE Joint 454
455 PRMCPWLACCRD Support Systems, Utilities and Other PRIEST TO MOCCASIN TOWER LINE ROADS Joint 455
456 VDPLACCRD Support Systems, Utilities and Other ALL PIPELINE ACCESS ROADS Joint 456
457 ICPMATHERCV Support Systems, Utilities and Other ROAD FROM TOP OF INTAKE HILL TO CAMP MATHER CULVER Joint 457
458 V-HH-EQP Support Systems, Utilities and Other HEAVY EQUIPMENT Joint 458
459 DWTXALARM Support Systems, Utilities and Other DUCKWALL REPEATER TRANSMIT ALARM UNIT Joint 459
460 MPRRALMRX Support Systems, Utilities and Other MPR REPEATER ALARM RECEIVER Joint 460
461 MPRSCADA Support Systems, Utilities and Other MOCCASIN PEAK RADIO SITE RTU Joint 461
462 SCADA Support Systems, Utilities and Other HHWP SCADA SYSTEM Joint 462
463 SCADAMSTER Support Systems, Utilities and Other NEW L&G 6800 SCADA MASTER NA 463
464 SCADAMSTR Support Systems, Utilities and Other SCADA MASTER STATION A & B NA 464
465 SCADAMSTR-TG Support Systems, Utilities and Other SCADA MASTER, NEW TG8000 EMS SCADA NA 465
466 HHMOCCNET Support Systems, Utilities and Other PROJECT NOVELL 386 NETWORK NA 466
467 BLKNGCARR Support Systems, Utilities and Other BLOCKING CARRIER SYSTEMS Power 467
468 BORCS Support Systems, Utilities and Other BURNOUT RIDGE COMMUNICATION SITE Joint 468
469 BORMICROWAV Support Systems, Utilities and Other BURN OUT RIDGE MICROWAVE COMMUNICATION SITE Joint 469
470 COMM Support Systems, Utilities and Other HHWP COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS Joint 470
471 COMPTREQP Support Systems, Utilities and Other COMPUTER EQUIP, ELECTRONIC DEVICES & SECURITY KEYS Joint 471
472 CTSMICROWAVE Support Systems, Utilities and Other CHERRY MICROWAVE COMMUNICATION SITE Joint 472
473 CVCS Support Systems, Utilities and Other CHERRY VALLEY COMMUNICATION SITE Joint 473
474 DATACOMM Support Systems, Utilities and Other DATA COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS Joint 474
475 DUCKWALL Support Systems, Utilities and Other DUCKWALL MICROWAVE COMMUNICATION SITE Joint 475
476 DWCSBATA Support Systems, Utilities and Other COMM SITE BATTERY BANK *A* (5-12 VOLT GELL CELL BA Joint 476
477 DWCSBATB Support Systems, Utilities and Other COMM SITE BATTERY BANK *B* (5-12 VOLT GELL CELL BA Joint 477
12/21/2018 15118437_1.xlsx 9
Major Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets Attachment R-3
Maximo
Record
Number
Maximo ID
Location SFPUC Facility Group Facility Classification
Maximo
Record
Number
478 DWCSBLDG Support Systems, Utilities and Other DUCKWALL COMM SITE EQUIP BUILDING Joint 478
479 DWDISH1 Support Systems, Utilities and Other DUCKWALL ANTENNA DISH PATH 1 TO JONES POINT REPEAT Joint 479
480 DWDISH2 Support Systems, Utilities and Other DUCKWALL ANTENNA DISH PATH 2 TO MOCCASIN PEAK REPE Joint 480
481 DWPVCTRLA Support Systems, Utilities and Other DUCKWALL PHOTOVOLTAIC CHARGER CONTROL BATTERY BANK Joint 481
482 DWPVCTRLB Support Systems, Utilities and Other DUCKWALL PHOTOVOLTAIC CHARGER CONTROL BATTERY BANK Joint 482
483 DWSOLPNLA Support Systems, Utilities and Other DUCKWALL SOLAR PANNELS *A*Joint 483
484 DWSOLPNLB Support Systems, Utilities and Other DUCKWALL SOLAR PANNEL*B*Joint 484
485 DWTOWER Support Systems, Utilities and Other DUCKWALL TOWER STRUCTURE Joint 485
486 ICPRAD Support Systems, Utilities and Other ICP RADIO BUILDING Joint 486
487 ICPRADIOSITE Support Systems, Utilities and Other EARLY INTAKE RADIO SITE Joint 487
488 IRSMICROWAVE Support Systems, Utilities and Other INTAKE MICROWAVE COMMUNICATION SITE Joint 488
489 MCPMICROWAV Support Systems, Utilities and Other MOCCASIN CAMP MICROWAVE COMMUNICATION SITE BUILDING Joint 489
490 MCPRADST Support Systems, Utilities and Other OLD MOCCASIN RADIO STATION BLDG NA 490
491 MICROCOMM Support Systems, Utilities and Other MICROWAVE COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS Joint 491
492 MPR Support Systems, Utilities and Other MOCCASIN PK. RADIO SITE Joint 492
493 MPRBLDG Support Systems, Utilities and Other MOCCASIN PK. RADIO SITE BUILDING Joint 493
494 MPRFRBBA Support Systems, Utilities and Other MPR FLOTROL RECTIFIER BATT BANK A Joint 494
495 MPRFRBBB Support Systems, Utilities and Other MPR FLOTROL RECTIFIER BATT BANK B Joint 495
496 MPRGEN Support Systems, Utilities and Other MOCCASIN PEAK RADIO SITE STAND-BY GENERATOR / LP Joint 496
497 MPRGENCU Support Systems, Utilities and Other MPR STNBY GENERATOR CTRL UNIT Joint 497
498 MPRHAL Support Systems, Utilities and Other MOCC PEAK RADIO BUILDING HALON SYS Joint 498
499 OPTICCOMM Support Systems, Utilities and Other OPTICAL FIBER COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS Joint 499
500 PPPCS Support Systems, Utilities and Other POOPENAUT PASS COMMUNICATION SITE Joint 500
501 PPPMICROWAVE Support Systems, Utilities and Other POOPANAUNT PASS MICROWAVE COMMUNICATION SITE Joint 501
502 RADIOCOMM Support Systems, Utilities and Other RADIO COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS Joint 502
503 TELCOMM Support Systems, Utilities and Other TELEPHONE COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS Joint 503
504 TRANFTRIP Support Systems, Utilities and Other TRANSFER TRIP SYSTEMS Power 504
505 WESTPORTCS Support Systems, Utilities and Other WEST PORTAL COMMUNICATION SITE Joint 505
506 PWRLNCARR Support Systems, Utilities and Other POWER LINE CARRIER SYSTEMS Power 506
507 HHKEYS Support Systems, Utilities and Other HETCH HETCHY SECURITY KEYS, MOCCASIN Joint 507
508 WSBSCADA Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower WARNERVILLE SHOP BLDG RTU Joint 508
509 WSYSCADA Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower WARNERVILLE SWITCHYARD SCADA RTU Joint 509
510 WSYCRB Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower WSY CONTROL ROOM/BUILDING, WSY Power 510
511 WSYCT Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower WARNERVILLE COTTAGES Joint 511
512 WSYDWS Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower WARNERVILLE DOMESTIC WATER SYSTEM , WARNERVILLE Joint 512
513 WSYFUEL Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower WARNERVILLE FUELING STATION Joint 513
514 WSYSHPS Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower WARNERVILLE SHOPS/OFFICE BUILDING Joint 514
515 WSY Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower WARNERVILLE SWITCHYARD/SUBSTATION Power 515
516 WSY115KVT1 Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower 115KV NUMBER 1 TRANSFORMER BUS Power 516
517 WSY115KVT2 Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower 115KV NUMBER 2 TRANSFORMER BUS Power 517
518 WSY115KVT3 Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower 115KV NUMBER 3 TRANSFORMER BUS Power 518
519 WSYBUSTIE Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower WARNERVILLE SW YARD BUS TIE 230KV Power 519
520 WSYDELG Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower WARNERVILLE SUB DELUGE SYSTEM Power 520
521 WSYLINE5 Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower WARNERVILLE SWITCHYARD H.V. LINE 5 Power 521
522 WSYLINE6 Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower WARNERVILLE SWITCHYARD H.V. LINE 6 Power 522
523 WSYLINE7 Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower WARNERVILLE SWITCHYARD 115KV LINE 7 Power 523
524 WSYLINE8 Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower WARNERVILLE SWITCHYARD 115KV LINE 8 Power 524
525 WSYPGEL2BG Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower WSY PGE LINE 2 BELLOTA GREGG Power 525
526 WSYPRORLY Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower WSY PROTECTIVE RELAYS Power 526
527 WSYSUMP Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower WARNERVILLE SWITCH YARD SUMP PUMP Power 527
528 WSYTB1 Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower 230KV NUMBER 1 TRANSFORMER BUS Power 528
12/21/2018 15118437_1.xlsx 10
Major Hetch Hetchy Enterprise Existing System Assets Attachment R-3
Maximo
Record
Number
Maximo ID
Location SFPUC Facility Group Facility Classification
Maximo
Record
Number
529 WSYTB2&3 Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower 23OKV BUS FOR NUMBER 2&3 XFMR Power 529
530 WSYDWBFP Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower WARNERVILLE BACK FLOW PREVENTERS, WSY Joint 530
531 OPVSCADA Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower OAKDALE PORTAL VALVEHOUSE RTU Water 531
532 ARVHSCADA Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower ALBERS RD VALVE HOUSE SCADA RTU Water 532
533 101PJ4VH Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower SJPL3 and SJPL4 JUNCTION VALVEHOUSE Water 533
534 ALBERVH Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower ALBERS RD VALVE HOUSE Water 534
535 ALMPORTAL Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower ALAMEDA EAST PORTAL Water 535
536 AVH Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower ALAMEDA VALVE HOUSE #2 Water 536
537 CASHCRVH Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower CASHMAN CREEK VALVE HOUSE Water 537
538 CSTRNGTNL Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower COAST RANGE TUNNEL / TESLA - SUNOL Water 538
539 EMERYCOAUX Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower EMERY ROAD CROSSOVER AUX CONTROL BUILDING Water 539
540 EMERYCOVH Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower EMERY ROAD CROSSOVER VALVE HOUSE Water 540
541 FTDBRNAD Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower FOOTHILL TNL BROWNS TUNNEL ACCESS Water 541
542 FTDRMBE Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower FOOTHILL TUNNEL RED MNTN BAR EAST Water 542
543 FTDRMBSIPH Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower RED MNTN BAR SIPHON , RED MOUNTAIN BAR Water 543
544 FTDRMBSS Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower RED MNTN BAR EAST SURGE SHAFT , RED MOUNTAIN BAR Water 544
545 FTHTNLDIV Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower FOOTHILL TUNNEL DIVISION Water 545
546 OAKPORTAL Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower OAKDALE PORTAL VALVE HOUSES Water 546
547 PELICANCOVH Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower PELICAN CROSSOVER VALVE HOUSE Water 547
548 PELICANXOAUX Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower PELICAN CROSSOVER AUX CONTROL BUILDING Water 548
549 PL2THSEAUX Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower SJPL2, THROTTLING STATION #1, AUXILIARY Water 549
550 PL2THSWAUX Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower SJPL2, THROTTLING STATION #2, AUXILIARY Water 550
551 RMBGATHOU Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower RED MOUNTAIN BAR WEST GATE HOUSE, RMB Water 551
552 RMBSCADA Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower RED MTN. BAR SLIDE GATE RTU Water 552
553 ROSELCOAUX Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower ROSELLE AVE CROSSOVER AUX BUILDING Water 553
554 ROSELCOVH Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower ROSELLE AVE. CROSSOVER VALVE HOUSE Water 554
555 RR Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower ROCK RIVER Water 555
556 RRLSCADA Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower ROCK RIVER LIME PLANT RTU Water 556
557 SJCSCADA Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower SAN JOAQUIN PIPELINE CROSS-OVER RTU Water 557
558 SJPL Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY PIPELINES Water 558
559 SJPL2THSE Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower SAN JOAQUIN PIPELINE 2, THROTTLING STATION #1 Water 559
560 SJPL2THSW Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower SAN JOAQUIN PIPELINE 2, THROTTLING STATION #2 Water 560
561 SJPL3THS Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower SAN JOAQUIN PIPELINE 3,4 THROTTLING STATION Water 561
562 SJVH Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower SAN JOAQUIN VALVE HOUSE Water 562
563 SJVHAUXBLDG Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower SAN JOAQUIN VALVE HOUSE AUXILLARY BUILDING Water 563
564 SJVSCADA Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower SAN JOAQUIN VALVEHOUSE RTU Water 564
565 TESCHLOR Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower TESLA CHLORINATION BUILDING Water 565
566 TESGENHSE Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower TESLA GENERATOR HOUSE Water 566
567 TESLA-HH Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower TESLA PORTAL EQUIPMENT AND BLDGS Water 567
568 TESPORTAL Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower TESLA PORTAL VALVE HOUSES Water 568
569 TESPUMPHSE Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower TESLA PUMPHOUSE Water 569
570 TPVSCADA Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower TESLA PORTAL VALVEHOUSE RTU Water 570
571 TSLDWS Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower TESLA DOMESTIC WATER SYSTEM Water 571
572 TSLSEWSYS Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower TESLA PORTAL SEWAGE SYSTEM Water 572
573 TUTF Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower TESLA ULTRAVIOLET TREATMENT FACILITY Water 573
574 TUVH Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower TESLA ULTRAVIOLET VALVE HOUSE Water 574
575 VDHHSHAFT Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower HETCH HETCHY SURGE SHAFT Water 575
576 VDOAKOVR Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower FTHL TNL OAKDALE PORTAL OVERFLOW SHAFT Water 576
577 VDPEDROADT Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower FOOTHILL TNL PEDRO ACCESS Water 577
578 VDRMBW Facilities West of Moccasin Gate Tower RED MNTN BAR WEST Water 578
12/21/2018 15118437_1.xlsx 11
Amendment 5:
Wholesale Capital Fund
(Sec. 6.08.E; Attachment M-3)
(i) 15076207.1
E. In order to prevent the accumulation of an excessive unexpended and
unencumbered surplusbalance in the Wholesale Capital Fund, the status of the fund balance
will be reviewed through the annual Compliance Audit at five-year intervals, commencing in FY
2018-19. The FY 2018-19 Compliance Audit and the Wholesale Customer/BAWSCA review
under Section 7.06 shall include Wholesale Capital Fund appropriations, expenditures and
interest earnings for FY 2014-15. Any excess fund balance (i.e., an accumulated unexpended,
through 2017-18 for the purpose of determining whether a Balancing Account transfer is
required. If the June 30 unencumbered amount in excess of ten percent (10%) of the wholesale
share of total capital appropriations for New Regional Assets during the five preceding years)
willbalance of the Wholesale Capital Fund exceeds the lesser of the following: (i) the Target
Balance; (ii) the unencumbered remaining cumulative appropriations, the amount of such
excess shall be transferred to the credit of the Wholesale Customers to the Balancing Account
described in Section 6.05.
In order to avoid funding delays for New Regional Asset capital projects resulting from
prior year transfers of excess Wholesale Capital fund balances to the Wholesale Customers, if
the June 30 unencumbered balance of the Wholesale Capital Fund is below the lesser of the
following: (i) the Target Balance; (ii) the unencumbered remaining cumulative appropriation,
such deficiency shall be posted to the Balancing Account described in Section 6.05 as a charge
to the Wholesale Customers. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no such charge to the Wholesale
Customers shall exceed $4 million annually.
Amended Attachment M-3 illustrates the operation of this review process, covering FY
2009-10 through FY 2013-14 and FY 2014-15 through 2018-19. for determining the Wholesale
Capital Fund balance as of June 30, 2019.
Amended Attachment M-3
Wholesale Capital Fund and Balancing Account Adjustment
Reference Amended Section 6.08E
A.Cash Flow in Wholesale Capital Fund
FYE 2010 FYE 2011 FYE 2012 FYE 2013 FYE 2014 FYE 2015 FYE 2016 FYE 2017 FYE 2018 FYE 2019 FYE 2020 FYE 2021 FYE 2022 FYE 2023
1 Beginning Total Balance (1)- 8,818,323 12,404,275 15,761,658 16,268,065 9,084,304 17,243,583 32,251,212 29,842,765 33,698,785 41,548,944 47,366,205 36,848,850 21,206,239
2 Annual Appropriation (2)10,476,724 8,636,920 21,737,468 11,285,643 18,668,585 15,432,451 21,138,051 11,184,265 17,847,379 26,424,000 26,420,000 13,210,000 13,210,000 13,210,000
3 Annual Expenditures (3)(1,778,695) (5,202,897) (18,553,119) (10,916,349) (5,758,565) (7,331,312) (6,245,954) (13,892,649) (14,361,409) (18,089,498) (16,723,232) (28,485,215) (33,563,793) (22,018,000)
4 Interest Earnings (4)120,294 151,929 173,034 137,113 180,672 58,140 115,532 299,936 370,050 475,153 664,783 757,859 711,183 409,280
June 30 Balances Before Balancing Account Transfers
5 Total Balance (5)8,818,323 12,404,275 15,761,658 16,268,065 29,358,756 17,243,583 32,251,212 29,842,765 33,698,785 42,508,440 51,910,495 32,848,850 17,206,239 12,807,520
6 Amount Encumbered as of June 30 (6)(1,927,466) (1,000,000) (1,000,000) (1,000,000) (2,000,000) (2,000,000)
7 Unencumbered Balance (7)n/a n/a n/a n/a 27,431,290 n/a n/a n/a n/a 41,508,440 50,910,495 31,848,850 15,206,239 10,807,520
8 Transfer From/(To) Balancing Account (8)n/a n/a n/a n/a (20,274,452) n/a n/a n/a n/a (959,496) (4,544,290) 4,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000
Ending Balances After Balancing Account Transfers
9 Ending Total Balance (9)8,818,323 12,404,275 15,761,658 16,268,065 9,084,304 17,243,583 32,251,212 29,842,765 33,698,785 41,548,944 47,366,205 36,848,850 21,206,239 16,807,520
10 Unencumbered Ending Balance (10)n/a n/a n/a n/a 7,156,838 n/a n/a n/a n/a 40,548,944 46,366,205 35,848,850 19,206,239 14,807,520
B.Calculation of Target Balance
11 Target WCF Balance (11)7,156,838 40,548,944 46,366,205 40,559,076 34,346,800 29,062,000
C.Calculation of Remaining Cumulative Appropriation
12 Cumulative Appropriation Since FYE 2010 (12)10,476,724 19,113,644 40,851,112 52,136,755 70,805,340 86,237,791 107,375,842 118,560,107 136,407,486 162,831,486 189,251,486 202,461,486 215,671,486 228,881,486
13 Cumulative Expenditures Since FYE 2010 (13)(1,778,695) (6,981,592) (25,534,711) (36,451,060) (42,209,626) (49,540,938) (55,786,891) (69,679,540) (84,040,949) (102,130,447) (118,853,679) (147,338,893) (180,902,686) (202,920,686)
14 Total Remaining Cumulative Appropriation (14)28,595,715 36,696,854 51,588,951 48,880,567 52,366,537 60,701,040 70,397,808 55,122,593 34,768,800 25,960,800
15 Amount Encumbered as of June 30 (15)(1,927,466) - (1,000,000) (1,000,000) (1,000,000) (2,000,000) (2,000,000)
16 Unencumbered Remaining Cumulative Appropriation (16)n/a n/a n/a 26,668,249 n/a n/a n/a n/a 59,701,040 69,397,808 54,122,593 32,768,800 23,960,800
17
D. Lesser of Target Balance and Unencumbered Remaining Cumulative Appropriation
Lesser of Target Balance (line 11) and Unencumbered Remaining Appropriation (line 16) (17)40,548,944 46,366,205 40,559,076 32,768,800 23,960,800
E. Calculation of Excess Fund Balance and Refund to Wholesale Customers Through Balancing Account
18 Is Unencumbered Balance (line 7) more than line 17? (18)Yes Yes No No No
19 Excess WCF Balance (applied as a negative entry on line 8) (19)959,496 4,544,290 - - -
F. Calculation of Deficiency Fund Balance and Charge to Wholesale Customers Through Balancing Account (This Section is Only Applicable in Any Year When Line 18 is No)
20 Is Unencumbered Balance (line 7) less than line 17? (20)Yes Yes Yes
21 Tentative Amount Before Application of $4 million cap (21)8,710,226 17,562,561 13,153,280
22 Is line 21 more than $4,000,000 maximum? (22)Yes Yes Yes
23 Balancing Account Charge (applied as a positive entry on line 8):4,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000
Original 5 Year True-up Method FYEs 2010-2018 Amended Annual True-Up (FYE 2019 and Beyond)
See Notes on Page 2 Page 1 of 2
Notes:
(1) Beginning Total Balance (encumbered and unencumbered). Equal to the prior year ending total balance after balancing account transfers (line 9).
(2) Wholesale Share of Revenue Funded Appropriations for Regional capital projects, adjusted for de-appropriations which have been factored into a wholesale revenue requirement, if applicable. FYE 2015 and forward are subject to compliance audit and 7.06 review.
Detail by Regional project in the format used in the 2010 - 2014 true-up to be separately provided.
(3) Wholesale Share of actual Regional capital expenditures funded from Revenue Funded Capital, determined based on proportionate water use in the year of expenditure. Figures from FYE 15 and forward are subject to 7.06 and compliance audit review.
Detail by Regional project in the format used in the 2010 - 2014 true-up to be separately provided.
The figures in line 3 for FYE 18 and on are for illustrative purposes only.
(4) Line 1 times the assumptions below for the SFPUC pool rate. FYE 2010 - 2014 figures are actual and tie to the first 5 year review.
Pool rate assumptions:0.640%0.670%0.930%1.240%1.410%1.600%1.600%1.930%1.930%
(5) Total encumbered and unencumbered balance of the Wholesale Capital Fund before Balancing Account adjustments: Line 1 + line 2 + line 3 + line 4.
(6) Wholesale Share of the encumbrances for purchase orders or contracts in connection with revenue-funded Regional capital projects; calculated using the proportional annual use of the true-up year. Entered as a negative number.
Not applicable in years with no true-up (FYEs 2010-13 and 2015-18). FYE 2014 figure is actual. FYE 2019 and forward are plug numbers included for illustration.
(7) Unencumbered Balance Before Balancing Account transfers: Line 5 + line 6. FYE 2014 figure is actual. Not applicable (n/a) in years with no true-up (FYEs 2010-13 and 2015-18).
(8) Negative entries represent refunds to the Wholesale Customers through the Balancing Account and are calculated per Section E below, except for 2014 which is actual pursuant to the original 6.08E.
Positive entries represent charges to the Wholesale Customers through the Balancing Account and are calculated per Section F below.
(9) Total Ending Balance After Balancing Account Transfers = Line 5 + line 8.
(10)Unencumbered Ending Balance After Balancing Account Transfers = Line 7 + line 8. Must not exceed the amount on line 17, which is the lesser of the Target Balance (line 11) and the Unencumbered Remaining Cumulative Appropriation (line 16).
(11)Starting in FYE 2019, the Target Balance is calculated by the formula below, where CY represent the Current Year (for which the transfer is being calculated), CY-1 is the prior year, CY-2 is 2 years prior, etc.:
[line 2: CY]*(4/5) + [line 2: CY-1]*(3/5) + [line 2: CY-2]*(2/5) +[line 2: CY-3]*(1/5); rounded to the nearest dollar. The FYE 2014 figure is the actual target balance under the original section 6.08E.
(12)Cumulative Appropriations Since FYE 2010 = prior year line 12 + current year line 2.
(13)Cumulative Expenditures Since FYE 2010 = prior year line 13 + current year line 3. Does not include encumbrances.
(14)Total Remaining Cumulative Appropriation (encumbered and unencumbered) = line 12 + line 13.
(15)Amount encumbered as of June 30 = line 6. Encumbrances are not cumulative.
(16)Unencumbered Remaining Cumulative Appropriation = line 14 + line 15.
(17)Lesser of Target Balance (line 11) and Unencumbered Remaining Cumulative Appropriation (line 16). Used in formulas in line 19 (Section E) and line 21 (Section F), as applicable.
(18)If Yes, go to line 19 for calculation of the excess unencumbered balance. If No, go to line 20.
(19)Calculation of Excess Balance: If line 18 = Yes, then line 7 minus line 17. The result appears as a negative amount on line 8.
(20)If yes, then go to lines 21-23 for calculation of charge to Wholesale Customers.
(21)Initial step in calculating charge: If line 20 = Yes, then line 17 minus line 7; go to line 22.
(22)If the result on line 21 is greater than $4,000,000, then the charge to the Wholesale Customers is capped at $4,000,000.
(23)Equal to the lesser of line 21 or $4,000,000. The result appears as a positive number on line 8.
See Notes on Page 2 Page 2 of 2
Amendment 6:
WSIP Completion Date
(Sec. 3.09; 4.07)
15075974.1
3.09 Completion of WSIP
San Francisco will complete construction of the physical facilities in the WSIP by
December 31, 201530, 2021. The SFPUC agrees to provide for full public review and comment
by local and state interests of any proposed changes that delay previously adopted project
completion dates or that delete projects. The SFPUC shall meet and consult with BAWSCA
before proposing to the Commission any changes in the scope of WSIP projects which reduce
their capacity or ability to achieve adopted levelsLevel of service goalsService Goals and
Objectives. The SFPUC retains discretion to determine whether to approve the physical
facilities in the WSIP until after it completes the CEQA process as set forth in Section 4.07.
15076202.1
4.07 Retained Discretion of SFPUC and Wholesale Customers
A. This Agreement contemplates discretionary actions that the SFPUC and the
Wholesale Customers may choose to take in the future that could result in physical changes to
the environment ("Discretionary Actions"). The Discretionary Actions include decisions to:
1. Develop additional or alternate water resources by the SFPUC or one or
more Wholesale Customers;
2. Implement the physical facilities comprising the WSIP by December 31,
2015; 30, 2021;
3. Approve wheeling proposals by Wholesale Customers;
4. Approve new wholesale customers and water exchange or cost sharing
agreements with other water suppliers;
5. Provide additional water to San Jose and/or Santa Clara;
6. Offer permanent status to San Jose and/or Santa Clara;
7. Reduce or terminate supply to San Jose and/or Santa Clara;
8. Provide additional water to Wholesale Customers in excess of the Supply
Assurance to meet their projected future water demands; and
9. Offer a corresponding volumetric increase in the Supply Assurance. ; and
10. Implement the Hetch Hetchy Water and Power projects listed in
Attachment R-2.
The Discretionary Actions may require the SFPUC or Wholesale Customers to prepare
environmental documents in accordance with CEQA prior to the SFPUC or the Wholesale
Customers determining whether to proceed with any of the Discretionary Actions. Accordingly,
and notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, nothing in this Agreement
commits the SFPUC or the Wholesale Customers to approve or carry out any Discretionary
Actions that are subject to CEQA. Furthermore, the SFPUC’s or Wholesale Customers’
decisions to approve any of these Discretionary Actions are subject to the requirement that San
Francisco and each Wholesale Customer, as either a “Lead Agency” (as defined in Section
21067 of CEQA and Section 15367 of the CEQA Guidelines) or a “Responsible Agency” (as
defined in Section 21069 of CEQA and Section 15381 of the CEQA Guidelines) shall have
completed any CEQA-required environmental review prior to approving a proposed
Discretionary Action.
15076202.1
B. In considering any proposed Discretionary Actions, the SFPUC and Wholesale
Customers retain absolute discretion to: (1) make such modifications to any of the proposed
Discretionary Actions as may be necessary to mitigate significant environmental impacts;
(2) select feasible alternatives to the proposed Discretionary Actions that avoid significant
adverse impacts; (3) require the implementation of specific measures to mitigate the significant
adverse environmental impacts as part of the decision to approve the Discretionary Actions;
(4) balance the benefits of the proposed Discretionary Actions against any significant
environmental impacts before taking final actions to approve the proposed Discretionary Actions
if such significant impacts cannot otherwise be avoided; or (5) determine not to proceed with the
proposed Discretionary Actions.
Amendment 7:
Regional Groundwater Storage
and Recover Project (RGSRP)
(Sec. 3.17)
A. 15076183.1
3.17 Westside Basin Conjunctive Use ProgramGroundwater Storage and Recovery
Project
Subject to completion of necessary CEQA review as provided in Section 4.07In August
2014, the SFPUC may approved a WSIP project called the Groundwater Storage and Recovery
Project (“Project”), which authorized the SFPUC to enter into an agreement governing the
operation of the Project with the citiesParticipating Pumpers entitled “Agreement for
Groundwater Storage and Recovery from the Southern Portion of the Westside Groundwater
Basin by and among the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, the City of Daly City and ,
the City of San Bruno, and the California Water Service Company, South San Francisco Service
Area ("Participating Pumpers") governing the operation of the South Westside Basin
Conjunctive Use Program (“Program”), a WSIP Project.” (“Project Operating Agreement”), which
became effective on December 16, 2014. The Program would produceProject produces
Regional benefits for all customers of the Regional Water System by making use of available
groundwater storage capacity in the Southern portion of the Westside Basin through the supply
of additional surface water (“In Lieu Water”) to the Participating Pumpers from the Regional
Water System, in exchange for a corresponding reduction in groundwater pumping at existing
wells owned by the Participating Pumpers. The new groundwater supply that would
accrueaccrues to storage as a result of delivery of In Lieu Water would thenwill be recovered
from the SFPUC basin storage accountStorage Account during water shortages using new
SFPUC Regional Program wellsProject Facilities or Shared Facilities operated by the
Participating Pumpers and the SFPUC. Program Project mitigation capital costs and annual
Project operations and maintenance expenses and water supplies are expected toshall be
allocated as follows:
A. All In Lieu Water delivered to the Participating Pumpers shall be (1) temporary
and interruptible in nature and (2) at the sole discretion of the SFPUC based on the total volume
of water available to the Regional Water System.
B. All In Lieu Water delivered to the Participating Pumpers shall be considered a
delivery of water to storage and shall not be construed to affect or increase the Individual
Supply Guarantees of these wholesale customersWholesale Customers or to otherwise entitle
them to any claim of water in excess of their Individual Supply Guarantees or their Interim
Supply Allocations. Furthermore, Environmental Enhancement Surcharges authorized under
Section 4.04 will not be applied by the SFPUC to any quantity of In Lieu Water that is delivered
A. 15076183.1
to the Participating Pumpers, but will instead be based solely on Participating Pumper water
deliveries in excess of their respective Interim Supply Allocations..
B.C. In the event that it is necessary to reduce the Participating Pumpers’ aggregate
designated quantity of groundwater production allocation pursuant to Section 4.7 of the Project
Operating Agreement, the SFPUC may supply an annual maximum of up to 500 acre feet of
Participating Pumper Replacement Water from the Regional Water System at a price
comparable to the Participating Pumpers’ then-current groundwater cost, as may be adjusted
annually as provided for in Section 4.7 of the Project Operating Agreement. Each of the
Participating Pumpers may elect to take delivery of its share of Participating Pumper
Replacement Water either as interruptible surface water deliveries from the Regional Water
System or as a transfer of storage credits from the SFPUC Storage Account. All revenue
received from such water sales or transfers shall be considered revenue related to the sale of
water and allocated between Retail Customers and Wholesale Customers on the basis of
Proportional Water Use. All volumes of Participating Pumper Replacement Water delivered
shall not be construed to affect or increase the Individual Supply Guarantees of these
Wholesale Customers or to otherwise entitle them to any claim of water in excess of their
Individual Supply Guarantees.
C.D. Any operation and maintenance expenses incurred by the Participating Pumpers
and the SFPUC that are related to the operation of Regional Program wellsProject Facilities and
related assetsShared Facilities for Project purposes shall be included as Regional pumping
expenses under Section 5.05.B of this Agreement and included as part of the Wholesale
Revenue Requirement. For rate setting purposes, estimated Regional ProgramProject
operation and maintenance expenses shall be used as set forth in Section 6.01. of this
Agreement. Operation and maintenance expenses associated with the Participating Pumpers'
existing wellsExisting Facilities that do not provide Regional benefits shall not be included in the
Wholesale Revenue Requirement. On a case-by-case basis, the SFPUC may include
Participating Pumper existing well operation and maintenance expenses associated operation of
the Participating Pumpers’ Existing Facilities in the Wholesale Revenue Requirement provided
that such expenses (1) are solely attributable to Regional ProgramProject operations for a
Regional benefit and (2) are not caused by the Participating Pumper's failure to operate and
maintain its existing wells in a reasonable and prudent manner consistent with water utility
industry standards. The SFPUC shall provide the Wholesale Customers with copies of Project
A. 15076183.1
Operation and Maintenance Expenses documentation provided by the Participating Pumpers
under Section 9.2 of the Project Operating Agreement.
E. The Project Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) adopted by
the SFPUC included mitigation measure HY-6 to prevent well interference impacts to the
Irrigation Well Owners. In mitigation measure HY-6, the SFPUC agreed to provide standby
supplies of Irrigation Well Owner Replacement Water from the Regional Water System, to alter
Project operations, and implement other actions (e.g., well replacement) to avoid well
interference impacts that require the consent of the Irrigation Well Owners. The SFPUC’s
Project mitigation and other obligations to the Irrigation Well Owners are memorialized in
substantially identical “Groundwater Well Monitoring and Mitigation Agreements” with one or
more of the Irrigation Well Owners. For purposes of this Agreement, water supplies, and the
capital costs and operations and maintenance expenses associated with providing Irrigation
Well Owner Replacement Water and implementing other mitigation actions identified in the
Project MMRP, shall be allocated as follows:
Irrigation Well Owner Replacement Water shall be limited to a cumulative
maximum of 1.76 mgd and shall be delivered only in volumes necessary for mitigating well
interference impacts as provided in the Project MMRP. The supply of Irrigation Well Owner
Replacement Water by the SFPUC shall not be considered a new water supply commitment to
Retail Customers or Wholesale Customers under Section 3.13 of this Agreement. The annual
volume of Irrigation Well Owner Replacement Water supplied shall be metered and allocated as
water from the Regional Water System during shortages between Retail Customers and
Wholesale Customers in proportion to and consistent with the provisions of the Shortage
Allocation Plan. All revenue received from Irrigation Well Owners for metered deliveries of
Irrigation Well Owner Replacement Water shall be considered revenue related to the sale of
water and allocated between Retail Customers and Wholesale Customers on the basis of
Proportional Water Use.
All Project capital costs incurred by the SFPUC in complying with the
mitigation measures in the Project MMRP shall be considered Regional capital costs under
Section 5.04 of this Agreement.
Operations and maintenance expenses incurred by the SFPUC in
maintaining Project mitigation assets described in the Project MMRP shall be considered
A. 15076183.1
Regional transmission and distribution expenses under Section 5.05.D of this Agreement. Well
pumping expenses that are required to be paid by the SFPUC in the agreements with the
Irrigation Well Owners shall be considered Regional pumping expenses under Section 5.05.B of
this Agreement.
Any wheeling charges imposed by California Water Service Company for
delivery of Irrigation Well Owner Replacement Water shall be considered Regional transmission
and distribution expenses under Section 5.05.D of this Agreement.
D.F. The SFPUC will audit (1) operation and maintenance expenses submitted by the
Participating Pumpers, and (2) well pumping expenses submitted by the Irrigation Well Owners,
for reimbursement to confirm that such costs were incurred, respectively, as a result of (1)
operating Regional Program wells and related assets.Project Facilities and Shared Facilities for
a Regional benefit and (2) complying with mitigation obligations in the Project MMRP. Costs
associated with the use of Program facilitiesProject Facilities or Shared Facilities for Direct
Retail or Direct Wholesale purposes, or that do not otherwise provide Regional benefits, shall
not be included in the Wholesale Revenue Requirement. The SFPUC is responsible for
resolving disputes with the Participating Pumpers and Irrigation Well Owners concerning
expense allocations. ProgramProject expense documentation, including documentation of
negotiation and settlement of disputed costs, will be available for review during the Compliance
Audit described in Section 7.04. of this Agreement. The Wholesale Customers may dispute the
SFPUC’s resolution of expense allocations through the arbitration provisions in Section 8.01 of
this Agreement.
E.G. The SFPUC may direct the Participating Pumpers to recover water from the
SFPUC basin storage accountStorage Account for any type of shortage referenced in Section
3.11. of this Agreement. Water recovered from the SFPUC basin storage accountStorage
Account using Regional Program wellsProject Facilities and Shared Facilities may be used for
(1) the benefit of all Regional Water System customers; (2) Retail Customers; or (3) one or
more of the Participating Pumpers. The Wholesale Revenue Requirement shall only include
operation and maintenance expenses incurred due to the operation of Program wells for
Regional benefitsProject Facilities and Shared Facilities for Regional benefits, including
expenses incurred due to compliance with mitigation measures in the Project MMRP.
A. 15076183.1
F.H. All water recovered during shortages caused by drought from the SFPUC basin
storage accountStorage Account for Regional benefit, by the Participating Pumpers and by the
SFPUC for delivery to Retail and Wholesale Customers during Shortages caused by Drought,
shall be used to free up a comparable volume of surface water from the Regional Water System
for allocation in accordance with the Tier 1 Shortage Plan.
G.I. If the ProgramProject is terminated for any reason, including breach of the
Program agreementProject Operating Agreement by one or more of the Participating Pumpers
or the SFPUC, a force majeure event as specifically defined by the Project Operating
Agreement, or due to regulatory action or legal action, then:
Any water remaining in the SFPUC Regional storage accountStorage
Account shall be used for the benefit of all customers of the Regional Water System;
Outstanding eligible operation and maintenance expenses, including
costs incurred during recovery of remaining stored water, will be allocated as provided in this
sectionSection 3.17 of this Agreement; and
TheIf Project Facilities are no longer capable of being used for a Regional
benefit, the Wholesale Customers will be credited with their share of proceeds from disposition
of Program facilitiesProject Facilities or reimbursed their share of such capital costs for any
Program facilitiesProject Facilities which are retained by the SFPUC for Direct Retail benefit and
not used for the benefit of the Wholesale Customers, on the basis of (a) original cost less
depreciation and outstanding related Indebtedness or (b) original cost less accumulated
depreciation for revenue funded Regional Program facilitiesProject Facilities.
J. In the event that a Participating Pumper establishes the occurrence of a force
majeure event as defined in the Project Operating Agreement, the SFPUC may enter into
negotiations with the Participating Pumper to take over the operation of the portion of any
Shared Facilities used for Project purposes for continued Regional use. If the SFPUC cannot
reach agreement regarding the continued use of Shared Facilities for ongoing Regional benefit,
the Participating Pumper shall reimburse the SFPUC and the Wholesale Customers for their
respective shares of previously incurred Project capital costs used to upgrade the Shared
Facilities on the basis of (a) original cost less depreciation and outstanding related
Indebtedness or (b) original cost less accumulated depreciation for revenue funded Shared
A. 15076183.1
Facilities. In the event that the SFPUC seeks to take over the operation of Shared Facilities for
Direct Retail use, or one or more Wholesale Customers seeks to negotiate with a Participating
Pumper to take over the operation of Shared Facilities for individual use or Direct Wholesale
use, the party or parties benefiting from such transfer of Shared Facilities shall reimburse the
other parties to this Agreement with their respective shares of previously incurred Project capital
costs on the basis described in the previous sentence, or as the parties may otherwise agree.
Page 1 of 5
3
MEMORANDUM
TO: UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION
FROM: UTILTIES DEPARTMENT
DATE: February 6, 2019
SUBJECT: Upcoming Home Energy and Water Reports Program
RECOMMENDATION
This is an informational report and no Utility Advisory Commission (UAC) action is requested.
This report is provided to inform the UAC of the upcoming contract negotiation and eventual
launch of a new Home Energy and Water Reports program and is agendized to enable the UAC
to discuss the upcoming program and ask questions.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU) energy efficiency portfolio has included Home Energy and
Water Reports for residential customers intermittently over the past decade. When
implemented, these programs contribute a substantial amount of cost effective energy savings
to the portfolio, serve as an engagement tool and can increase customer satisfaction with the
Utility. Staff published an RFP for energy efficiency services in July 2018, evaluated many
qualified proposals, and is negotiating a contract for a new Home Energy and Water Report
program. The program is part of a broader “Efficiency Action Platform” that includes an online
customer portal, the home energy and water reports, and an online energy efficiency
marketplace. The platform has the capability to support additional enhancements like smart
meter data reporting and future efficiency innovations like competitions, lotteries, or other
game-like efficiency incentive programs.
BACKGROUND
From 2010 through 2015 CPAU ran a Home Energy Reports Program for the residential sector. In
2013 CPAU added a water component called the Home Water Reports Program. These programs
are highly effective at encouraging customers to reduce energy and water consumption through
education and awareness of load reduction programs, measures, and actions. When
implemented, the Home Energy Report Program accounted for over 50% of the total natural gas
savings portfolio for the City 1. In 2015, the last year in which the program was fully
implemented, the program accounted for 22.31% of CPAU’s total electric savings and 64.9% of
CPAU ’s total gas savings. The gas and electric energy component and the water component
were hosted by two separate companies. CPAU ended the program s to seek a new provider
1 CPAU publishes an annual Demand Side Management report detailing the gas and electric savings City-wide. The
most recent report representing the findings after a full year of an energy action program implementation is the
2015 DSM- Final Updated
Page 2 of 5
whose platform would enable CPAU to respond to concerns customers had expressed about the
previous program. Through a competitive RFP process, staff has now identified the best-in-class
vendors for both water and energy comparison reports and plans to integrate these services
into CPAU ’s new My Utilities Account online platform. This will enable the customer to have a
single portal where they can find all of their online utility resources. The new platforms will also
enable staff to implement a variety of best practices as described below.
Staff has presented to the UAC the Ten Year Energy Efficiency Plan and an Electric Integrated
Resource Plan (EIRP) (October 2018). These reports recommit the City to making energy
efficiency a priority over procuring new energy resources, and set out an ambitious set of ten
year efficiency goals. This program also fulfills the two main concerns of the City’s Sustainability
Implementation Plan (SIP)- carbon emissions and water conservation- by addressing two key
areas of activity: energy and water. Existing housing stock accounts for 46% of total City natural
gas usage. This program is explicitly designed to serve both multi-family and single-family
customer segments and therefore should have a significant impact on the City’s overall
greenhouse gas emissions.
As CPAU continues to focus on the importance of the greenhouse gas reduction benefits of
reducing natural gas usage, this program will be a major factor in achieving natural gas savings.
DISCUSSION
In implementing this program, staff has incorporated a number of industry best practices and
has built in flexibility for future program enhancements.
Best Practices Implemented
Staff has designed its new program to take advantage of lessons learned through its previous
program and the best practices identified by other utilities and researchers in the industry for
maximizing customer satisfaction and program effectiveness.
Transparent Comparison Algorithm: The new platform for Home Energy and Water Reports will
have the ability to customize comparison modules and messaging to more accurately compare
neighbors (for example, by adjusting for the number of people in the household), to more
Page 3 of 5
clearly communicate that improved comparison to customers (with a clear statement on the
report about the assumptions used for each household), and will allow customers to adjust
those parameters through an online portal. In the previous Home Energy Reports, some
customers voiced concern at the lack of transparency in with the method of comparison
between customers. Some customers did not believe the comparison took into account the
unique dimensions of their household, or could not tell how the algorithms worked. All
customer data is kept completely confidential in the program platform. “Neighbors” in the
neighborhood comparisons are anonymous accounts with similar demographics.
Proper Accounting for EVs and Electrification: The new platform will be able to properly
account for the higher electric usage of customers who have EVs or have adopted other
electrification measures. These customers will have their comparison basis adjusted to account
for their increased electric usage. The previous reports did not account for this difference. This
understandably led to dissatisfaction among customers with these vehicles and devices.
Customers who take actions that reduce carbon but increase electric usage should receive
reports that take into account their higher electric usage when determining how efficient their
energy use is.
Comparison Option for PV Customers
The new platform will allow PV customers to do an annual comparison to their previous year’s
usage. In the previous program, customers with PV were unable to access Home Energy Reports
at all. This caused them frustration as they generally tended to be the green early adopters who
wanted to be in the program and did not want to be left out.
Single Sign-on for Online Content: The new Home Energy and Water Reports will be integrated
into the new My Utilities Account online portal under a single sign-on, meaning one username
and password gives access to all online services at once. CPAU is a unique utility in that it
provides gas, electricity and water. It has been difficult to find qualified vendors to provide a
single platform for all three commodities that can be delivered cost-effectively and in a manner
that will enable CPAU to report savings to the California Energy Commission (CEC). Because of
these challenges, in the past customers have had to use as many as four separate online portals:
one for bill pay, one for their gas and electric comparisons, another for their water comparison,
and, for customers in the Customer Connect pilot, a fourth portal for their smart meter data.
This has understandably been a barrier to participation.
Additional Functionality for Long-term Program Flexibility
Staff plans to work with a vendor with a platform capable of enabling the program to improve
over time. Below is some functionality that may not be used immediately, but will be available
to staff for future program enhancements:
Interval Data Capability: The new platform is capable of incorporating hourly interval data. This
functionality was included in anticipation of the AMI system as described in the Utilities Smart
Grid Assessment and Utilities Technology Implementation Plan. Interval data will allow real-time
water leak reporting and more granular energy consumption analysis, and may enable other
enhancements for the Home Energy and Water Reports.
Page 4 of 5
Energy Challenge Module: The industry is in the process of exploring “gamification” as a way to
improve customer engagement with energy efficiency. Gamification is the inclusion in a non-
game context of features normally seen in games, such as competition between players or
rewards such as badges, progress meters, or prizes. The new platform is capable of hosting
energy challenges that would incentivize customers to reduce energy use using game-like
features such as prizes or other rewards. This will allow CPAU to run programs that are cost-
effective, positive, and voluntary, and could encourage customers to reduce commodity use
through methods other than neighborhood comparisons.
Online Marketplace Module: Staff is referring to its integration of the traditional customer
portal with the Home Energy and Water Reports and an Online Marketplace as its “Efficiency
Action Platform.” The synergy between these different services has been used at other utilities
to increase customer engagement and participation in utility programs. For example, when the
Home Energy or Water Report informs customers of their energy use, they will also provide a
direct pathway to the Online Marketplace, where customers can sign up for programs and
educational workshops, as well as purchase energy and water saving products or smart-home
devices (with instant rebates if applicable) to help decrease energy consumption and/or
decrease carbon footprint. This Online Marketplace also has the potential to expand offer
services such as contractor matching, financing options, best-practice tips for installing and
operating home equipment, and other functionality. This will make it easier for customers to
engage with the Utilities and complete home energy improvement projects.
Cost and Benefits
The forthcoming program contract is estimated to cost less than $200,000 per year, and it is
projected to provide more than one million kilowatt hours of electricity savings, as well as over
100,000 therms saved. This makes it one of the most cost-effective programs in the CPAU
energy efficiency portfolio. Additional benefits of this program include high social equity since it
is accessible to all residential customers, regardless of financial or other constraints. It also
allows for extensive customer contact and engagement, and it serves as a helpful tool to
increase utility consumption awareness. The program also assists customers with taking energy
and water saving actions and improving their home’s carbon footprint.
NEXT STEPS
Staff expects to take contracts for these programs to City Council in March 2019 and initial
reports are expected to be published by fall 2019.
RESOURCE IMPACT
This program is estimated to cost roughly $200,000 per year for the electric and gas component
of the reports, with additional costs for the water reports and the online marketplace, which
are still under negotiation. The entire set of services will be highly cost-effective under
traditional energy efficiency cost-effectiveness measures. CPAU will implement this program
with existing staff resources and budgets.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The programs referenced here contribute to various plans, including the Utilities Strategic Plan,
the Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP), the Electric Integrated Resource Plan (EIRP),
the Ten Year Energy Efficiency Plan, and the Sustainability Implementation Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Utilities Advisory Commission's discussion of this informational report does not meet the
definition of a project under Public Resources Code 21065 and therefore California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review is not required.
PREPARED BY: LACEY LUTES, Utility Program Manager
REVIEWED BY: JONATHAN ABENDSCHEIN, Assistant Director, Resource Manage
APPROVED BY:
AN BATC LOR
Interim General Manager of Utilities
Page 5 of 5