Recycled Water Master Plan

1
Recycled Water Master Plan
WORKSHOP 3 SCENARIO PRIORITIZATION January 27,
2005 6pm 9pm
2
Why Are We Here Tonight?

• The City is in the process of updating the 1996
  Recycled Water Master Plan
• This is third in a series of four workshops
• WE NEED YOUR INPUT

3
Workshop Objectives and Agenda
610 640

• Report Back on Workshops 1 and 2
• Present Ranking and Preliminary
• Recommended Scenarios
• Recap/Next Steps/Closing Remarks

640 720
720 730
4
Recycled Water is Part of Our Sustainable Water
Management Approach
Sierra Watershed
Local Watershed
Groundwater
Future Supplies
Pie chart is for illustration purposes only
5
Recycled Water 101

• It is highly treated wastewater distributed
  separately from drinking water
• Its production and use is strictly regulated
• It is commonly used in California for irrigation,
  industrial cooling, toilet flushing, etc.
• It offers many benefits such as
• Helping reduce the demand on our valuable
  drinking water supplies
• Helping keep things green during times of drought
• Reducing wastewater discharges to the Bay and
  Ocean

6
Master Planning 101

• Project Planning and Implementation is a Dynamic
  Process. For Example
• Recycled Water Market Identified Today Can Change
• Treatment Technologies Are Improving
• Additional Funding Can Become Available
• The Master Plan is
• A Necessary Starting Point
• A Working Document to Be Refined and Updated

7
What Did We Do Before?
Workshop 1 October 21, 2004
Workshop 2 December 7, 2004
Refine List of Potential Users Evaluation
Criteria
Review Potential Users Evaluation
Criteria Present Long-Term Scenarios
Perform Recycled Water Market Facilities
Assessment Develop Recycled Water Scenarios
Present Scenarios Evaluation Screening Process
8
Workshop 1 ObjectiveGet Feedback on Potential
Users

9
Workshop 1 ObjectiveGet Feedback on Proposed
Evaluation Criteria

• Benefits
• Water supply, community enhancement,
  environmental enhancement, etc
• Implementation
• Flexibility for future phases, funding,
  permitting
• Costs
• Infrastructure (capital cost), operation and
  maintenance cost, unit cost(/AF)

10
Workshop 1 Key Results

• Potential Recycled Water Users
• Many suggested users already in Market Assessment
• SFPUC will add/investigate some potential users
  (e.g. downtown commercial buildings)
• SFPUC will work on specific implementation issues
  (e.g. coordination with Green Street projects)
• Evaluation Criteria
• List was Expanded and Refined

Refer to Workshop No. 1 Feedback Report for
Additional Details
11
Workshop 2 ObjectiveReport on Workshop 1
Workshop 1 October 21, 2004
Workshop 2 December 7, 2004
Refine List of Potential Users Evaluation
Criteria
Review Potential Users Evaluation
Criteria Present Long-Term Scenarios
Perform Recycled Water Market Facilities
Assessment Develop Recycled Water Scenarios
Present Scenarios Evaluation Screening Process
12
Workshop 2 ObjectiveFurther Develop Criteria
Long-Term Scenarios for Service Areas A, B, C

Step 2 Apply Criteria Each Scenario gets a Score
Step 1 Develop Criteria

• Review Revised Criteria and Sub-Criteria
• Get Input on Criteria Weighting

Step 3 Rank ScenariosRelative to One Another
Short List of Long-Term Scenarios to Be Refined
13
Workshop 2 ObjectiveIllustrate the Scoring
Process
WeightedBenefit Criteria Sub-Criteria
Total Benefit Score for Each Scenario
14
Workshop 2 ObjectiveIllustrate the Ranking
Process
RANKING 1 Scenario 3 2 Scenario 2 3
Scenario 1
15
Draft Workshop 2 Feedback Report

• Workshop 2 Content Summary
• Questions and Answers Summary
• Input Received and SFPUC Responses

Public Input is an On-Going Process
16
Workshop 2 Key Results

• Market Assessment Clarifications

• Potential Recycled Water Use ?
• 17 mgd specifically identified as of October 2004

• 2030 Planned or Target Use ?
• Currently being determined
• Basis for recycled water facilities identified in
  Draft Master Plan

Future Recycled Water Opportunities
Addendum to Market Assessment TM Will Be Prepared
17
Workshop 2 Key Results

• Review Revised Evaluation Criteria and
  Sub-Criteria
• List of Criteria Was Not Changed
• Questions on How Scenario Performance Will Be
  Measured ? Information on Performance Data and
  Cost To Be Provided during Tonights Workshop
• All Suggested Criteria Were Recorded for Future
  Evaluation of More Specific Recycled Water
  Projects

Refer to Feedback Report for Additional Details
18
Workshop 2 Key Results

• Input on Criteria Weighting
• Weights from Public Were Used to Exemplify Impact
  on Benefit Scores and Ranking
• Weights Were Varied to Assess Impact on Benefit
  Scores and Ranking (Sensitivity Analysis)

Refer to Feedback Report for Additional Details
19
Where Are We Now?
Tonights Workshop
Workshop 2 December 7, 2004
Present Ranking and Preliminary Recommended
Scenarios
Present Scenarios Evaluation Screening Process
Evaluate Scenarios
Refine List of Potential Users Evaluation
Criteria
20
Workshop Objectives and Agenda
610 640

• Report Back on Workshops 1 and 2
• Present Ranking and Preliminary
• Recommended Scenarios
• Recap/Next Steps/Closing Remarks

640 720
720 730
21
Evaluation/Screening Process
Long-Term Scenarios for Service Areas A, B, C

Step 2 Apply Criteria Each Scenario gets a Score
Step 1 Develop Criteria
Step 3 Rank ScenariosRelative to One Another
Short List of Long-Term Scenarios to Be Refined
22
Example
Refer to Long-Term Scenarios Evaluation and
Prioritization Report for Additional Details
23
Long-Term Scenarios to Be Ranked

• 15 Long-Term Scenarios Identified

• Focused on Matching Treatment and Target Users
  within Each Service Area
• 4 to 6 Main Scenarios for Each Service Area
• Main Scenarios To Be Combined to Serve Entire
  City

24
Long-Term Scenarios - Service Area A
Potential Users

Treatment (potential location)
Baseline Storage (potential location)
Baseline Pipe Route (potential location)
25
Preliminary Recommendations Service Area A

• Recommended Long-Term Scenario A2
• Description Treatment at/near Oceanside,
  sidestream advanced treatment
• Major Users Served
• Golden Gate Park
• Lincoln Park
• SF Zoo
• Harding Park
• Lake Merced

26
Recommended Scenario Service Area A A2
Potential Users

Treatment
Baseline Storage (potential location)
Baseline Pipe Route (potential location)
27
Step 1 Define Criteria

• Benefit Criteria
• Water Supply Reliability
• Community Enhancement
• Environmental Enhancement
• Wastewater Discharge Reduction
• Synergies with Other Projects
• Implementation
• Cost Criteria

28
Step 2 Apply Criteria

• SFPUC Developed Total Benefit Score for Scenarios
  A1 through A6 and Performed Sensitivity Analysis

WeightedBenefit Criteria Sub-Criteria
Total Benefit Score for Each Scenario
29
Step 2 Apply Criteria

• For Example

these are the benefit scores
Given these weights
1 Least Important 6 Most Important
Sensitivity Analysis Showed that the Ranking
for Service Area A Remained the Same with
Changes in Weights
30
Step 3 Rank Scenarios

• SFPUC Estimated the Costs for Scenarios A1
  through A6

Conceptual Costs Estimated Accuracy -30/50
Costs Will Be Refined for Recommended Scenarios
and Presented at Workshop 4
31
Step 3 Rank Scenarios

• SFPUC Compared Total Benefit Score vs. Cost for
  Each Scenario

TOTAL BENEFIT SCORE
1.00
Recommended Scenario
COST PER ACRE-FOOT
0.00
0
2,000
2,500
3,000
32
Preliminary Recommendations Service Area A

• Comments
• Refined recycled water yields and cost may have
  impact on unit costs and benefit scores for A2
  ? Adjustments might be required in the
  near-term on whether A1 or A2 is preferable
• Adjustments are feasible since A1 can be defined
  as Phase 1 of A2

33
Preliminary RecommendationsOther Service Areas
and Entire City

• Same Process was Applied to Service Area B and
  Service Area C
• Identified One Non-AWSS and One AWSS Scenario
  for Each Service Area
• Combined Identified Scenarios into City-Wide
  Scenarios and Repeated the Same Process

34
Preliminary RecommendationsService Area B

• Recommended Long-Term Scenario B2
• Description Satellite Treatment at Presidio
• Major Users Served
• Marina Green
• Fort Mason
• Palace of Fine Arts
• Scenario B1 (Treatment at/or near Oceanside and
  Distribution via AWSS) Part of AWSS City-wide
  Scenario

35
Recommended Scenario Service Area B B2
Potential Users

Treatment
Baseline Storage
Baseline Pipe Route (potential location)
Extent of Service Area for Scenario B2 based on
Satellite Plant Production Capacity
36
Preliminary RecommendationsService Area B

• Comments
• Refined recycled water yields (to include
  downtown commercial buildings) will impact B1, B3
  and B4 costs and benefit scores ? Adjustments
  required in the near-term not anticipated to
  impact recommendation
• B3 and B4 costs to be adjusted based on Clean
  Water Master Plan (CWMP)? Recommendation might
  need to be adjusted in the long-term

37
Preliminary Recommendations Service Area C

• Recommended Long-Term Scenario C2
• Description Treatment at/near Oceanside
• Major Users Served
• Candlestick Park
• Mission Bay
• Hunters Pt. Shipyard
• Waterfront Develop.
• Scenario C1 (Treatment at/or near Oceanside and
  Distribution via AWSS) Part of AWSS City-wide
  Scenario

38
Recommended Scenario Service Area C C2
Potential Users

Treatment
Baseline Storage(potential location)
Baseline Pipe Route (potential location)
39
Preliminary RecommendationsService Area C

• Comments
• C3, C4 and C5 costs to be adjusted based on
  CWMP? Recommendation might need to be adjusted
  in the long-term

40
Preliminary Recommendations Entire City

• Recommended Long-Term Scenario A2B2C2
• Scenario A2B1C1 (AWSS) also Recommended for
  Further Evaluation

The scenario yields are currently limited by
supply from Oceanside and Presidio could
increase in the future with Eastside supply.
41
Preliminary Recommendations Entire City
Recommended Scenario Entire City A2B2C2
Potential Users
Treatment
Baseline Storage(potential location)
Baseline Pipe Route (potential location)
42
Recommended Scenario Entire City A2B1C1
Potential Users
Treatment
Baseline Storage(potential location)
Baseline Pipe Route (potential location)
43
Preliminary RecommendationsEntire City

• Refine Two Recommended Scenarios
• A2 B2 C2
• A2 B1 C1 (AWSS)
• Define Scenarios with Alternatives as Well as
  Phasing So That Future Adjustments (e.g., Based
  on the CWMP and Recycled Water Market
  Refinements) Will Be Possible

44
Workshop Objectives and Agenda
610 640

• Report Back on Workshops 1 and 2
• Present Ranking and Preliminary
• Recommended Scenarios
• Recap/Next Steps/Closing Remarks

640 720
720 730
45
Recap
Workshop 1 October 21, 2004
Workshop 2 December 7, 2004
Refine List of Potential Users Evaluation
Criteria
Review Potential Users Evaluation
Criteria Present Long-Term Scenarios
Perform Recycled Water Market Facilities
Assessment Develop Recycled Water Scenarios
Present Scenarios Evaluation Screening Process
46
Recap and Next Steps
Workshop 4 April 19, 2005
Tonights Workshop
Complete Draft RWMP
Evaluate Scenarios
Develop Recommended Scenario(s) with Alternatives
Present Ranking and Preliminary Recommended
Scenarios
Present Recommended Scenario(s) with Alternatives
47
Please Stay Involved!

• Use blue comment cards
• Make sure you are on the mailing list
• Attend Workshop 4, Tuesday April 19, 2005
• Check the web site (http//recycled.sfwater.org)
  for feedback reports, fact sheets, and other work
  products
• Contact project staff

48
Thank You and See You at Workshop 4 on April 19,
2005!