Planning Committee February 10, 2015

Transcription

1 Leland Reservoir Replacement Planning Committee February 10, 2015

2 Open-Cut Reservoir Projects Permanently out of service Completed Next five years (FY ) Construction beyond FY2020 LELAND RESERVOIR 2

3 Open-Cut Reservoir Projects Permanently out of service Completed Next five years (FY ) Construction beyond FY2020 LELAND RESERVOIR 3

4 Project Location and Scope Leland Reservoir Replacement 19.5 MG open cut to 2 x 8 MG tanks LAFAYETTE 36 Diameter Pipeline Relocation 900 feet with 1,300 feet WALNUT CREEK

5 Leland Reservoir Deficiencies Roof structurally unsafe for personnel Rainwater ponding Aging electrical and mechanical equipment California Division of Safety of Dams restricted water level Trees on earthen dam Leland Reservoir Construction c Cracks in roof beams above the columns at Leland Reservoir 5

6 Project Benefits Improves water service reliability and efficiency Improves maintenance and repair access Eliminates monitoring, permitting, and other operational costs from dam Leland Reservoir, Lafayette 6

7 Project Site

8

9 Project Site Existing 36 Diameter Critical Transmission Pipeline

10 Leland Reservoir Replacement Demolish roof & lining Construct tanks and restore site Construct pipeline Remove trees, construct access road, and breach dam

11 Design Alternatives Estates Reservoir construction, Oakland 11

12 Highland Reservoir, Lafayette Recreation Area 12

13 Relocate 36 Diameter Critical Transmission Pipeline 1,300 feet 4,400 feet 13

14 Environmental Considerations Visual quality Tree removal and restoration Biology Drainage Temporary construction Estates Reservoir construction, Oakland 14

15 Estimated Cost Reservoir Replacement $ 29M Pipeline Relocation $ 2M Total $ 31M Estates Reservoir construction, Oakland 15

16 Next Steps Award EIR Contract May 2015 Mail Notice of Preparation July 2015 Publish Draft EIR January 2016 Board Approval of EIR & Project June 2016 Design FY Construction FY

17 17

18

19 Provision of Water Service Within and Outside of the Service Area Board Planning Committee February 10, 2015

20 Agenda 1. Delineation of Service Area, Ultimate Service Boundary, Urban Limit Line 2. Overview of Relevant Policies 3. Summary of Requirements for New Service 4. Regulations for Hydrant Meters

21 Service Area, Ultimate Service Boundary, Urban Limit Line

22 Overview of Policies Policy Highlights Sets conditions for any annexation, i.e., expansion of EBMUD service area, e.g.: (not a complete list) a) Territory must lie within USB b) Need for water must be immediate c) Territory must include any parcels to make a logical boundary d) Annexation must be economically sound, technically feasible e) Calls for approval by USBR & LAFCO as needed 2. Calls for Board to oppose annexations outside the USB unless either: a) Annexation is a small boundary adjustment meeting several conditions. Max 100 units in any two years. b) Annexation mitigates health risks, established by appropriate agency, associated with existing water supplies.

23 Overview of Policies (cont d) Policy Highlights 3.05 Sets conditions for expansion of USB: any such expansion must not lessen quality or quantity of water for existing customers nor pose increased costs 3.07 Establishes hierarchy of priorities for provision of new water service during times of shortage: 1. Existing customers 2. New customers within service area 3. New customers outside service area Calls for advisory election for proposed annexations of 200 or more units outside ULL 2. For lesser annexations outside ULL, if not covered by Policy 3.01, Board is to oppose and consider advisory election.

24 Requirements for Water Service Condition of Property Requesting Water Service Within Current Service Area Outside of Current Service Area Outside Ultimate Service Boundary Outside County Urban Limit Line X X X X X X X X X X Action and Approval Required Application for water service through EBMUD USBR approval per Article 35 of the CVP contract LAFCO approval for annexation X X X SWRCB approval X Advisory election (may require)

25 Regulations Governing Use of Hydrant Meters per Section 7 Hydrants may not be used: 1. To supply water outside the District service area 2. To supply water for domestic consumption 3. For any use other than specified in the permit 4. For any use that s not temporary 5. For any continuous use This slide is a partial summary of regulations, not a comprehensive list.

26

27 Wet Weather Consent Decree Implementation Update Planning Committee February 10, 2015

28 Agenda Background Regional Technical Support Program Capital Projects Regional Private Sewer Lateral Ordinance Next Steps 2

29 Background Consent Decree Status Consent Decree effective date: September 22, 2014 Cease Wet Weather Facility (WWF) Discharges by December 31, 2036 Annual work requirements WWF discharge reduction targets in 2022 and 2030 Failure to meet check-in targets results in a prescribed process with significant EPA discretion on potential additional requirements 3

30 Regional Technical Support Program (RTSP) - Overview Requires $2M/yr to identify sources of infiltration and inflow Cumulative spend ability to front-load EBMUD identifies specific sources of infiltration and inflow Satellite communities pursue source elimination 4

31 RTSP Program Significance Critical to meet Consent Decree check-in targets and discharge elimination date Supplements satellite mainline sewer rehabilitation and Regional Private Sewer Lateral Program Understand system response to storms 5

32 RTSP Implementation Approach Consent Decree requires submittal of first five years of work under RTSP Coordination with Satellite communities Significant data management element 6

33 RTSP Implementation Approach Initial field work occurring concurrent with RTSP Plan development Flow and level monitors deployed in satellite sewers December dry season smoke testing, CCTV, etc. 7

34 RTSP Program Evolution Use results of initial year of investigations to develop approach for Year 2 Where to look Which data and field tools to employ Maintain flexibility to adapt as we learn Continue to learn from others I/I investigative programs across the country Panel of national experts in sewer system management to support RTSP Plan development 8

35 Consent Decree Capital Projects 1) Urban Runoff Diversion Project Required by Consent Decree as mitigation for continued WWF discharge Divert dry weather flow from Alameda County Stormwater pump station in Oakland (~500,000 gal/day) Treat flows at wastewater treatment plant Operational by Sep

36 Consent Decree Capital Projects, continued 2) Pump Station Q Forcemain Reversal Project Modify existing facilities to reduce discharges from Point Isabel WWF ~1600 feet of new pipe in Berkeley Operational by Dec

37 Regional Private Sewer Lateral (PSL) Program Board of Directors approved CD-required amendments to ordinance in October 2014 Albany and Alameda joined program effective January 1, 2015 Ordinance compliance remains high Approx. 14,000 certificates issued since 2011 (9% of laterals in service area) Met new Key Performance Indicator of 90% compliance in 2014 at 93% 11

38 Next Steps Continue to develop initial Consent Decree deliverables RTSP Plan Flow Model Calibration Plan and Annual Updates PSL Outreach Plan Continue to Implement RTSP Data analysis Field work Evaluation of technologies and resources 12

39 Next Steps, continued Implement Consent Decree requirements via District Staff and Contractors Estimate average of $2M/yr in contract support during initial years RTSP Hydrologic and Hydraulic Modeling Evaluate future needs and recommend staff, equipment, and contracting approach for long-term implementation Keep Board apprised of key activities 13

40