All right, we will reconvene the Board of Public Utilities. Item 4.1 is the approval of the minutes. They'll be approved and filed. Item 5.1 is a staff briefing on the microgrid update project. Interim Director Burke. Yes, thank you. So this item is a staff briefing on our microgrid project and Tasha Wright, Sustainability Coordinator Energy, and Joe Schwal, Interim Deputy Director of Regional Operations will be giving the briefing. Welcome to you both. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman Galvin and members of the Board. I am Tasha Wright, Energy and Sustainability Coordinator and I am joined here today with Joe Schwal, Interim Deputy Director of Utilities Operations. So we're here today to provide the Board with an update on the administration project out at Santa Rosa Laguna Treatment Plant.  Yes, there we go. So though you've had staff come before you to provide the Board with updates throughout the time of construction and do different presentations as well as director's reports, today is particularly important and exciting because we're actually nearing end of the year. We are close to completing final testing and commissioning. So for this presentation, I'm going to go through a few things here. The background to remind you a little bit about the project, specifics about the project and current status and then I'll end with what remains to be done and future benefits. So back in June of 2017, the city signed an agreement of a microgrid as a demonstration project at Santa Rosa Laguna Treatment Plant. This project was funded through a CEC grant that was ordered to train nearly, for nearly $5 million and the grant was intended to accomplish two things. One was fund the development and testing of a microgrid that utilizes battery storage and renewable energy. And then two show how a microgrid can enable energy users to participate in the energy marketplace. So in other words, for us, it would be the opportunity to sell our ability to alter our demand on the grid. So why is this important? Microgrid technology is being used to help communities continue to install renewable energy sources because microgrids can help moderate the dramatic daily swings and electrical production that has resulted from intensive solar energy production that has now come on the grid. So the CEC offered this grant as an effort to see how well microgrids can help balance out the grid and particularly could work with wastewater facilities which are large, local energy loads in California. Train identified Santa Rosa's Laguna Treatment Plant as an ideal demonstration site for this opportunity and then started to build the microgrid. The city agreed to participate and here we are today nearing completion of the installation of the microgrid. Oops, we're back. Sorry, my slides messed up here. So what exactly is a microgrid and what does a microgrid demonstration consist of for our sense and purposes? So let's start with the grid. The microgrid throughout California includes power lines, different owners of power lines and you can think of that as the microgrid or the macrogrid so the whole part of it. If you were to zoom in, you can see where we are at here and then there's our plant. We're a microgrid but we're unique in that we almost have like a little sub microgrid and that's this demonstration project. We have the ability to be connected to the centralized grid and we have electrical demands and we have the ability to generate power onsite to meet our own electrical needs. So what does this microgrid demonstration project consist of? First of all, there's two SCRs. These are selective catalytic reducers. They are basically units that provide post combustion exhaust treatment enabling more thorough removal of pollutants from the exhaust so that we can run our engines with less restrictions. So you can think of them as basically the exhaust treatment units that you find in a car. The next piece of the project is our 2.2 megawatt battery system. It's been installed and it's in its final stages of testing and commissioning. This battery can help to serve to supply power to the grid so that we can run all of the plants load on the utility. Next we have the 126KV solar array. This has been installed and helps produce renewable energy every sunny day and it's a nice addition to our two current existing solar systems which are almost about 100KW. And then finally is the microgrid controller. Now this is the proprietary part of the project. It interfaces with our SCADA system. It integrates with the grid and it has the ability to communicate to the California independent system operator also known as CALISO. This connection to CALISO can demonstrate how we might participate in the day ahead market and how we could also have the opportunity to generate revenue through curtailing our energy usage. And then we have the program of testing and more testing in preparation for final commissioning. Last week the system was inspected by PG&E and we received a temporary and interconnection approval and power was supplied to the system so we could begin that initial testing. This week testing has continued and trainings are in progress. And then the program of testing and more testing will be completed. Then engine number 3 which has the second SCR that's just being finalized it will be started up and that system will be commissioned and completed. I'm going to go back because I'm not quite done here. So for the month of April we will have a no cost time extension with PG&E's the extension of time has been made possible by the delegation of authority to the department director as part of the grant agreement resolution 1143. So during this time in April the system will go live and the data will be collected on the operation of the system and reported back to the CEC. Then assuming we can secure the final permanent interconnection approval from the CEC. We're still working on a required piece which is the final telemetry system so it's a communication system between our micro grid and their interface. As long as we do that we'll continue for testing over the next several months where we can continue to gain understanding of the system's capacity and what our options are for participating in the electric and also the benefits. And what is Santa Rosa getting out of this project? Well in the end we have two SCRs for the price of one. We originally had approved the installation purchase and installation of one during the 2015 to 2016 CIP budget process and then the other is being paid for by the grant. The next piece is that we're going to have a 126KW and we'll be receiving energy from that ongoing. And then the final piece is financial savings and revenue. Once the system is fully operating at the end of March there will be various opportunities which we will continue to investigate. These opportunities include financial savings through shaving peak load costs and this can be done in several ways. We can utilize the energy that is stored in the battery system with the newly installed SCRs. We've got the production of energy from the PV system and then we can also utilize the energy stored in the battery system and then use it during the times when the energy is most expensive. Next we have the revenue generation opportunity. This may become possible through participating in Cal ISOs but we offer power to Cal ISO and they pay us for it. And as has been mentioned before in the past, since this is a demonstration project and we don't know exactly what the possible outcomes are and the benefits for the various options and what they will look like, we will continue to run the system through the various scenarios that we have in front of us and we'll determine which options are best suited for this project. We also have the opportunity to optimize the micro grid. So finally and not insignificantly, another benefit of participation in this project is that it holds up Santa Rosa Waters dedication to protecting the environment and it supports our interest in thought leadership. It also gives us the opportunity to collect data to better understand the micro grid project and be an example to others as part of this project for future implementation of these types of programs. And this concludes my presentation now and for if you have any questions, Joe and I might be able to answer for you, we would love to entertain those. Thank you very much. Board member questions or comments? Well, I would like to thank you very much. And I would like to gather by your presentation that there's still a lot of work to do on this to really determine the cost and the benefits and where we'll go and how we use the power generated and all those. So I'm sure we'll see future presentations as we move forward and you move forward and we'll see future presentations that kind of the cost benefit and ratio just so our repairs can see that we're creating here something that can be cost beneficial to them. Absolutely. And we'll learn more as we collect that data and can make comparisons and really understand what's the best way to operate. So I'm sure you're excited about that project. I just had sort of in the weeds question on the, you know, in terms of selling our ability to moderate our demand on the grid, what does that look like? In terms of monetization, you're selling like a curve leveling service essentially, right? So what is that rate? What's the widget that that is called? And how is it monetized? So Cal ISO controls the marketplace and they'll offer kilowatt hours for different prices. So what we would do on a day ahead basis, one way we could participate in the marketplaces on a day ahead basis by nine o'clock in the morning I could say that I could offer up a megawatt or 500 kW of power for an hour or for two hours or for four hours. The by the end of the working day Cal ISO would accept or not, but if they accept that nomination and I perform or the plant performs and produces that 500 that we promised then we're paid the going rate on that day at that time. So normally our rates are about 11 cents a kilowatt hour, but at six o'clock in the evening on a summer's day that could easily be 40 cents a kilowatt hour that we would be paid for that power. And is that in terms of Cal ISO and the marketplace and CCAs and all the different brokers that I know do this and I still have no idea how that all works, but it's amazing. I guess does that go into a clean energy pool that you purchased at those times that you're maintaining renewable energy through periods of high use where they would normally have to rely on like natural gas and other forms of power especially when you have obviously a lot of solar during the day and high uses right after sunset or whatever. So does it go into a clean energy pool that's then a different I don't really know. I think of it more as we're acting as a peaking plant. Right. But I don't believe they're asking us how we're generating that power. For one thing, some of the power that we're providing isn't necessarily power generation, but it's taking load off. We didn't really talk about it, but one of our options is to divert water internally in the plant to take the load off the plant during that period of time and then bring the water back at a later time in the day when rates are cheaper and the Cal ISO doesn't need the offload and so I don't know if you can consider that renewable energy or not. That's why it occurred to me that there's, for instance in a CCA's portfolio from what I understand they have different rates of power, like for snowmobiling power has their going rate for snowmobiling power and if that opt out of it you don't want to do it. But then they have their Evergreen program which is all renewables, right? And in that portfolio of power sources it does seem that ours is either solar or methane generation. We have so many renewable sources it just seemed to me that it should go into a pool that is going back into the grid as if it were like any other power source generation even when it's stored capacity in the 2.2 megawatt battery it does seem to me that the origin of that is well to wheel is still renewable. For the SCR's if the engines that have the SCR's on them would not be using renewable fuel they would be using natural gas and the battery source is taking is being charged by whatever is on the grid at the time. The 126kw that the PV array is providing, that's renewable but that's coming every day. And for instance like the methane from the high strength with... That is renewable. Yeah. Yeah. And Board Member Batenfort. Thank you and appreciation. I know that this project has not been without its complexities and thank you and appreciation to staff and to Director Burke for carrying it up and over the finish line. Thank you. I just wanted to clarify the 30 day extension you said was at no cost and has that been approved and so we're good to go until the end of April? Yes, we're actually in the process of completing a letter. That's going to be sent via email today that allows that 30 day extension. Great. So just to add on a little bit to that we're in discussions with train and this is what we're putting forth to them so they will need to also act and agree to sign on to the letter agreement but I think we on both sides have a desire to make sure that they can complete the data gathering that they need to be in compliance with what's required in their CEC grant and so we're doing what we can to work together on this to get this through the process. Thank you very much. Thanks for the update and we'll look forward to hearing something probably the first part of May that everything was done and it's all up and operational so great. Great. Thank you very much. Thank you. We have one item on the consent calendar item 6.1 which is a contract award to Mike Brown electric. I would support approval of this. We'll entertain a motion to approve the consent calendar. Second. We have a motion and a second to approve item 6.1 all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Very good. Thank you. We have I believe two report items. Item 7.1 is report on the adoption of a mitigation and monitoring program and mitigated negative declaration and project approval on the North trunk sewer replacement. Director Burke. Yes, so we have supervising engineer Tracy Dwaynes as well as a consultant that's going to present this project for us. Good afternoon Chairman Galvin members of the board. My name is Tracy Dwaynes and with capital projects engineer I'm here with Christine Gaspar of GHD. Today bring before you report item 7.1 for the recommendation of adoption for various items including an approval for a project for North trunk sewer replacement. Today I'll briefly go over the project background which will entail feasibility analysis that was performed. Pursuant to that analysis I'll go over the proposed improvements for the project. Also discuss the findings and recommendations of an initial project that was completed by GHD and I'll follow up with staff recommendations moving forward. So the project essentially is within the corridor of Shnate Road. It is between Mendocino Avenue and Terralinda Drive and encapsulates Lamedas Avenue and Lamedas Lane and a short section of Plum Drive. In the primary focus of the project essentially is a existing sewer trunk system between Lamedas Avenue and Shnate Road within the Pollen Creek corridor. Now this system was built in the mid-1950s and it has an alignment that more or less follows parallels if you will the flow line of Pollen Creek. Now given the location of the sewer it's been it presents the following challenges. One primarily is the limited access. Most of the sewer manholes are only accessible by foot and this presents a challenge for response. It also increases operation and maintenance cost. Two primarily the age is over 60 years old. Some of the sections of the existing main are exposed and the service life is exceeded. So with these existing constraints the risks involved with potential overflows, potential environmental impacts and subsequent regulatory fines staff has recognized the need to either A. Rehabilitate the main or B. Relocate the main. One challenge that exists is the high point that is along Shnate Road corridor. It's at the intersection Murdoch Drive. That high point creates another 514 feet of cover really of already if for a design or for a gravity system. So it's a challenge. So staff recognize these various challenges. It acquired the service as a professional consultant to perform a feasibility analysis and with the support of a few geotechnical evaluations as seismic vulnerability study constructability and completeness review study. Those all supported the findings of the feasibility analysis options, which are three. One is to rehabilitate it in place which is a technology via trenchless CIPP cured in place pipe. This method would be from Lomitas to Shnate Road. The methodology essentially involves inserting a soft liner within the existing pipe.  It cures. It has a 50 feet of cover plus warranty on it. That operation involves bypass pumping as well. So looking at the photos you could see the extensiveness and what is involved in this operation and doing that in a creek corridor would be extremely challenging. Moreover, to negate the issue with access, it would be recommended to provide some access along the corridor. And if you see in this picture the existing topography, the challenge is there to install an access road adjacent to the flow line of the creek. And more over the effort of removing a public sewer's facility out of the waterways this option was deemed infeasible. Another option that was entertained was installing two pump stations. The intersection of Sinait and Paulin Creek, another smaller pump station at Strawberry Drive. These would convey flows via force main over the high point of Sinait and transition to a traditional gravity main. The larger pump station serves a large tributary area that exceeds as far east as Fountain Grove. It's estimated that pump station would be located in the lower part of the creek. And so with that, pump stations similar to this picture here involve a wet well, a dry well, or a structure of some sort, backup power, electronics, and an access driveway. But as you can tell, the site of which these pump stations would be located, there's a lot of construction work to be done and the proximity to the creek itself poses as an environmental risk. With that, this option was deemed infeasible. Which leads us to the preferred option. It's more or less to relocate all of the trunk in Sinait corridor with a deep gravity main. To do this and to deal with traffic, the proposed technology would be boring for a certain section of Sinait until it can convert into a traditional gravity main. Boring operations for this project due to the existing geotechnical parameters and existing conditions was proposed for microtunneling operation. That would entail installing deep cylinder shafts like this picture for boring receiving and sending pits. The shafts would provide a safe mechanism for the boring operations. The boring operation for this project is considered a front-steer boring system. We would push a vitrified clay pipe with steel casing from one pit to the next. Once that operation is done, these shafts would be converted to deep manholes. With that, this is the preferred option with all considerations to basically physical site constraints, environmental risk, environmental impacts, construction technology, construction and life cycle costs have all been considered as the preferred option. Having said this, the proposed improvements are then done. Install a deep main via trenchless technology until it can be picked up with the traditional gravity trunk main. The point of connection would be Mendocino Avenue. This point of connection is more appropriate and more viable than reconnecting to the Lemitas Avenue intersection. It would be picked up as well with a long chenet to pick up homes along there. It's much higher than the main trunk. Lemitas portions of Lemitas Avenue and Lemitas Lane would also be rehabilitated because of this design. Those would be standard trunk, excuse me, standard main systems. With that to improve system water system reliability and improve fire flow capabilities. A portion of Lemitas Lane, Lemitas Avenue and Chenet Road water system will be upgraded as well. Depending on where you are with the project there will be various road reconstruct methods. Once these improvements are installed the system within the creek corridor will be abandoned per standards and the whole project itself would eliminate two creek crossings from the creek corridor. This photo here depicts the extent of the proposed improvements. In 2018, GHD completed the proposed MND. It identified certain environmental protection actions that would be incorporated into the documents and ordering construction. The construction documents would adhere to geotechnical recommendations specific to excavation, dewatering specifications for the pipe material, the back materials. There would be protocols for air quality control measures to minimize basically dust and pollutants and precursor emissions during construction. This project would be in accordance with the Santa Rosa Action Plan and there would be best management practices for the waterways of Paul and Creek during the sewer abandonment. In addition to the environmental protection actions there has been a detailed mitigation and monitoring plan that articulated other various mitigated measures. Some measures include but not limited to a nighttime construction plan that would be required of the contractor along with fencing and screening to address and minimize static impacts to address and minimize biological resource impacts. There will be nesting bird and bat assessment studies done before and during construction. The restoration of the vegetation and the riparian ways of Paul and Creek would be conducted along with a certified arborist on staff during construction to provide recommendation for a route and tree pruning. There will be protective protocols in the event of any archeological or paleontological resources are encountered. Procedures for groundwater and soil management and event hazards and materials are encountered as well as procedures for dealing with storm water measures will be included in the documents to mitigate water quality impacts. To mitigate noise impacts there will be certain noise limits for vibration of the equipment as well and to address traffic impacts. There will be a registered traffic engineer that will be required from the contractor to submit traffic control plans that will articulate rerouting detouring of the like. There will also be measures to be implemented to be sure there's acts for emergency responders, pedestrians, bicyclists, transit all to address and minimize traffic impacts. Notification letters were sent to Grayton and Lighten Rancheria, California in accordance with Assembly Bill 52 protocols. And in August 17th the public review of the document was circulated. It was also sent to State Clearing House, local other local resource agencies and posted to the city website as well. And a notice of intent was published to the press democrat as well as mailings were to the project owners within the vicinity. Excuse me. And with that I would like to recommend the following. One adopt the mitigated negative declaration north trunk sewer replacement Mendocino Avenue to terror Linda and the project approve the project adopt the mitigation and monitoring program for the project and for direct staff to file a notice of determination. And with that I would like to take any questions if needed. Thank you. Any board member questions or comments? Board member doubt. Mr. Dwaynes, could you give us a little background on the research done with the project? Yes. We have been able to achieve with the trenchless type proposal that's included in this either within our city system or other cities. Just so we're sure that there isn't difficulties that haven't been analyzed and also on the maintenance side if there's anything that's hanging out with the project. I would like to share with you a little bit about the type of system which is not something I think most of us are familiar with. I know that this technology is recommended by the consultant has been performed in other states to this magnitude. It was preferred mainly because of the trench depth and the geotechnical and the interconnect in the late 2000s. This technology we have not done. But we have based off the case studies that the consultant is providing this is the preferred option. In the spec it's written in such that they have the option for a front guided steer method so it doesn't limit any other particular contractors it's a fair bid for multiple contractors to bid on. But in terms of the city this effort has not been done before. I'm sorry I got to the question sooner but this has not been done to this order. Thank you. Any other board member questions or comments? If not we have a resolution. I would recommend that we approve items 1, 2, 3 and 4 on page 26 of 26 if that's an appropriate motion rather than read the entire attention. And I'll just say that all of those items are addressed in the proposed resolution as staff is prepared and presented to the board today. I'll second. And I'll now ask the board member to approve item 7.1 and authorize the resolution that's before us. All in favour say aye. Any opposed? Thank you. Item 7.2 is another report item regarding the professional services agreement for Black and Veatch. Deputy Director Walton and Shabon. I'm joined by Deputy Director Shaboni to present to you today a professional services agreement with Black and Veatch for the 2019 water system reliability study. So a little background on this professional services agreement. As we all are aware in October of 2017 our community was hit by the Tubbs Fire. Subsequent to that occurring to a contract with Black and Veatch to do an in-depth evaluation of how our water system responded during the fire. This evaluation was focused on the Fountain Grove area and our water system in the Fountain Grove area. A number of recommendations came out of that report that is basically the impetus for this kind of follow-on evaluation. Black and Veatch had a series of recommendations that required further investigation or recommended further investigation for the city to consider looking at their water system, our water system citywide and that's where this professional services agreement originated. So we had this discussion in October 30th of last year. We issued this RFP as a professional services agreement as opposed to a project work order that would limit our selection of consultants to those only on our master professional services agreement. We did receive proposals were submitted on November 20th. We did receive two proposals. Black and Veatch was selected as the preferred proposer by a selection panel of three individuals. I apologize the staff report inadvertently left out one of our review panel members. The review panel consisted of a superintendent of local operations as well as the associate civil engineer of the project manager. Black and Veatch was selected as the preferred consultant because they expressed in their proposal innovative strategies for looking at our water system new, more thoughtful processes for providing opportunities to add resiliency to our system as well as the references they provided were very strong and staff felt confident in moving forward with Black and Veatch as the preferred consultant. The base fee that was proposed by Black and Veatch was $277,000. This base fee represents the tasks that were specifically asked for in the RFP. In addition to those base services or the original tasks that the city asked for, Black and Veatch did provide a number of additional or optional services that are around $126,000 worth of work for a total work order of $403,000. So just to be clear, staff intends to move forward with all of the base services, optional services would be done by the direction of staff and only as authorized by staff, but we're asking the board today to approve the entire contract for $403,000 and allow staff the leniency to approve the additional services or the optional services. In addition to that, staff should also include the recommendations that the original Black and Veatch study outlined in their report. All of these base services, except for the last bullet point there, the Proctor Heights evaluation or the Proctor Tanks did come out of Black and Veatch original study. Staff chose to include that in this study as well and I'll get into a little bit of why we chose to include that as a base service. So the first base service is the SCADA system reliability and redundancy task. We did lose SCADA during the fire and it really inhibited our ability to operate our system and we really want to investigate that. So the second bullet point there, flow control opportunities for hardening our SCADA system and allowing for more redundancy and a more resilient system so that we don't find ourselves without SCADA in the future. And the second bullet point there, flow control opportunities. During the fire, the SCADA system and the SCADA system and all those structures were left to just openly flow and basically allow our water system to bleed water onto the ground and which inhibited our ability to keep it pressurized and operate the system. So this task is focused around this openly flowing service lines or fire lines to help prevent depressurization of the system. Backup power generation this task is to help us evaluate best practices for sizing generators and providing the most resilient backup power generation that we can. We are going after a grant opportunity to replace our backup generators at a number of our lift stations and pump stations. This task would be in support of that effort as well. System wide fire flow evaluation and recommendations so it's again just looking at our entire city at the fire flow that we are realizing through the city and making recommendations to improve the fire flow that we are seeing or that we are achieving within the city. System reliability opportunities to look at our system for opportunities to loop the system or further provide resiliency to our system and redundancies to our system. Offline storage is a task that will look at whether or not it makes sense to provide a redundant or secondary source or distribution system that would be used exclusively for fire flow. It would be a non potable storage and distribution system that would allow us the ability to provide even additional storage on top of what we already have in the event of a fire. It would be a very costly alternative so it's something that we would not take and it's something that the original Black and Veatch study did suggest that we consider so we are including this scope in this study. And then Black and Veatch will prioritize each of the recommendations that come out of this study and supply us with costs and benefits and drawbacks for each of the recommendations that would come out of this study. The Proctor Heights evaluation which I'll get into a bit more detail because it is a little different from the rest of these tasks as it was not part of the original Black and Veatch study. But I'll go through the optional services before I get into that task. So the optional services were recommended or proposed by Black and Veatch not necessarily recommended but proposed by Black and Veatch where they had the opportunity to offer us additional services that might be beneficial. Each of these services would have to be really thought through before we moved forward with any of them but we did want to include them in case we did find the ability or a benefit from any of them. So the first is fire department coordination. This is something that we are already doing very closely prior to the fires but to the fires we work closely with our fire department and communication. We have bolstered those communications since then but if we needed them or they had ideas for additional work that would be done under that task. Redundant communications studies this is one that we likely will be interested in just given how impacted our SCADA and our communication systems were during the fire and how impacted they were and how that impacted our ability to operate our system. So this would just look at further not only hardening the system but creating redundancy within the system so that if one portion went out we'd have backup. A coffee park investigation this is a task that would be similar to the original investigation that Black and Veatch did for the fountain grove area. They would do a similar kind of in-depth analysis of the operation of the water system in the coffee park area during the fires. The fire damage probability this is not something that we would take on lightly it has implications beyond the water department but if we were to take it on this would look at the probability of a fire or the tendency for there to be impacts from a fire for specific locations throughout the city would use that information to make decisions about where to increase fire flow and really be kind of strategic about where we're providing additional fire flow given that there may be a higher probability in certain areas for fire. Water quality, water age impacts this would just look at our tanks and storage and look for opportunities for additional storage and what those implications might be on water age and the ability to maintain water quality and then finally presentations to governing boards if we wanted Black and Veatch to come and present to this board or to city council they did include an optional task for that. So I'm going to talk a little bit about the proctor tanks. The proctor tanks are two tanks that are located behind the fountain grove the flamingo hotel in our 1989 and 1994 master plans our water system master plans identified a need for additional storage in our aqueduct zone to provide drinking water in the event of severance from the aqueduct. So if there were a large earthquake or a spill in the river where we no longer had the ability to the Sonoma County water agency or Sonoma water this storage would supply emergency drinking water in an event like that. So in January of 2004 the board adopted the MND and authorized the design and construction and bidding of the project. In April of 2006 the board awarded the construction contract for a base value of 6.3 million and in February of 2008 the tanks were brought online and the final construction costs including change orders for that work came to 6.75 million dollars. Unfortunately 10 months later in October of 2008 we had to take the tanks offline because we were unable to achieve adequate turnover in the tanks and maintain water quality. In order for a tank to be part of your operation it has to have a cyclical filling and draining of the tank in order to get turnover of the water so the water doesn't age and lose its chlorine residual and through attempts we tried to incorporate them into our operation and tried to get the turnover and unfortunately we're just not successful in achieving turnover. So as a precautionary measure until we could figure out how to address the water quality issues they were taken offline and have been offline since October 2008. So as I mentioned the Proctor Tanks are behind the Flamingo hotel they're kind of right in the central part of our city they are 2.6 million gallons each and they were designed to provide drinking water during an interruption of the aqueduct supply so the red lines there are the Sonoma County Water Agency Aqueduct it's where we receive the majority of our water the blue area there is pressurized by the aqueduct and everyone that lives in that light blue area receives the pressure at their home from the pressure that is in the aqueduct to get water up the hills into the hillside areas of the city the city pumps water and then stores it in reservoirs that are shown in blue there and all the multicolored areas are just different pressure zones that the city operates and the blue rectangles that the city operates so to kind of put these tanks in perspective there are two of 24 reservoirs that the city has citywide and through our reservoirs we have about 23 million gallons of storage in the hillside area so the colorful areas are pressure zones that those tanks supply storage and pressure to those areas if we were able to bring the proctor tanks online we would have an additional 5.2 million gallons in storage that would supply storage to the aqueduct zone so the light blue zone in addition to what the city has in storage the Sonoma County water agency operates eight reservoirs within the city that could be used by water to the city in the event of an emergency those eight reservoirs total around 61 million gallons for emergency planning purposes the city counts on 40% of that storage to be used in an emergency so our contract with the water agency is for about 40% of what they deliver so we count on and plan to use 40% of their storage in the event of an emergency and that's what our master plans all assume the most recent master plans assume so for emergency storage needs the 2014 master plan which is our most recent water master plan we do count on that 24.6 million gallons of storage from the agency in addition to that storage we have 8.8 million gallons that could be supplied by our city emergency wells that is assuming two days of emergency supply so our wells pump about half of that 8.8 but over two days we get the 8.8 million gallons and for emergency planning we do use a benchmark of two days of drinking water supply so that gives us a total of 33.4 million gallons of emergency water supply that we have available for the aqueduct zone we have additional storage on top of that to provide water to the pressurized or the hillside zones as well but that's what we have available for the aqueduct zone our current master plan recommends that we have 32 million gallons of storage in the event of an emergency that is 1.4 less than what we have so we actually have a surplus of 1.4 million gallons of storage based on our current configuration, our current water uses our current demands the master plan does recognize that at build out we could potentially have around a 3.1 million gallon of water and that's a deficit in emergency storage and that's where the proctor tanks could provide additional storage if we were able to figure out a way to incorporate them into our operation and that's exactly what the task as part of this professional services agreement is trying to achieve to evaluate these tanks the current configurations to bring them into our system and get the turnover that we need in these tanks in order to use them so as I mentioned previously our 1989 and our 1994 master plans did recommend additional aqueduct storage and did anticipate the need for additional aqueduct storage but contrary to our current master plan which says we actually have a surplus of aqueduct storage so what changed between 1994 and today? One of the biggest factors is that our actual water demand was less than what we had projected so I can show you kind of graphically here back in 2005, right when these tanks were starting to be considered for construction our actual water demand and what we had projected in our 2005 urban water management plan was substantially higher than what we actually realized in water usage so you can see that in 2005 we were on an upward trend our population was on an upward trend but what actually happened through water conservation efforts through new construction standards we actually saw a decrease in water demand as opposed to an increase so subsequent to those 2005 projections we have been incrementally adjusting our projections to account for this decrease in water demand we don't we choose not to have our demand projections kind of go down as what our actual demand is doing because we always plan conservatively so we want to make sure that we are planning for a most conservative effort but still within reason so this is actually one of the reasons we think that we may have not gotten the turnover in the tanks that we had anticipated getting as well we anticipated more demand which in turn is which in turn helped drain our tanks more frequently we have been one of the contributing factors that we weren't getting the turnover in the proctor tanks that we originally anticipated getting another thing that happened around that time and may have also contributed to not getting the turnover that we needed in the tanks was that the city added a pressure zone R6, R7 it's a pressure zone that's just below the proctor tanks which are R1 and AR2 those are the proctor tanks R6, R1 is a pressure zone that was added because operations realized that they threw a little bit of reconfiguration they could increase the pressure that the homeowners were realizing in that area so they created another pressure zone to increase the pressure for our customers but what it also did is it took away some of the demand in the project zone so that pinkish area used to be a light blue when we created the pressure zone it took away the demand in that area which could have further kind of exacerbated why we weren't getting the turnover in the tanks that we anticipated the city has you know we don't plan for emergencies just by with one route and with one focus we look for many opportunities to make our system resilient and it's really a balancing effort of adding resiliency in a lot of different manners so another thing that the city has done since the 1994 master plan is we did add additional storage to the hillside zones to increase resiliency in addition we added groundwater supply to increase resiliency and the Sonoma County Water Agency also developed additional storage to increase resiliency in the event of an emergency so as I mentioned we take this balanced approach of trying to look for opportunities to make our system as resilient as possible and Deputy Director Shavoni is kind of going to go over some of the other things that we've been doing to further harden and make our system more reliable good afternoon Chair Galvan members of the board as with any distribution system it's essential to take a balanced approach when creating the highest level of resiliency this requires us to think about resiliency from many angles and to consider the factors that contribute to a safe and resilient system our most recent water master plan identified areas needing fire flow improvements and by early 2017 we had completed all the suggested improvements in the Fountain Grove area which included upgrades to a pump station and up sizing of portions of our water mains in that area all the other areas that were identified as part of that master plan are either currently in construction or in the design phase to have those areas completed as well and the improvements made that were suggested center was a water and center was a fire continue to work collaboratively and have developed additional forms of communication that improve our resiliency and response to emergency situations starting with the recommendation of increased communication during red flag events we have taken advantage of available technology and developed notification forms for all items that affect the water system and contribute to help with fire response this is a valuable tool for large events and it allows a quick response for water staff to help support fire personnel should there be an issue the need for water storage is always a balance between storage volume and operational efficiency we strive to meet the necessary demand while operating pumps during the least expensive time of day water storage time can have a significant impact on water quality and we adjust our reservoir levels throughout the year to meet the seasonal demands such as fire irrigation while also maintaining the necessary level of water turnover we continue to fill our reservoirs to max capacity during red flag events and we are monitoring the impacts that this practice will have on our water quality and water turnover as time goes on our automated systems along with historical data allow us to adjust reservoir level set points throughout the year to meet these demands while maintaining operational efficiency we essentially fill our reservoirs to the highest level that will allow for necessary turnover during the time of the day when it's the cheapest to fill them or to operate our pumps the energy costs are the cheapest to achieve a proper balance it requires constant monitoring of our distribution system and we anticipate these times of day will change when the new time of use rates are fully implemented and we may need to shift the time of day that we fill our reservoirs to maintain maximum energy efficiency in 2003 the water department started a seismic retrofit program to upgrade the seismic resiliency of our reservoirs this program included several capital improvement projects three of which have already been completed one which is currently underway and is in the final stages and there's one final project that is in the design phase and I should mention that we are currently seeking grant funding to complete this final project and we are working with Cal OES on the application project right now we're hoping to get the application completed this year and have word back whether we will receive grant funding or not along with seismic resiliency our distribution system has been designed with a high level of system redundancy for example our pressure zones are all connected by pressure regulating valves this allows us to share water from one zone to another this allows us to take a reservoir offline without system interruption and also if for some reason a reservoir should go down for a reason we can use a neighboring zone to provide water into that into the zone without a reservoir we have the ability to pump from the west side of fountain grove up over the hill to the east side and we can also move water from the east side of fountain grove to the west side of phone grove we can also use water from the south side of the fountain to pump perhaps from Sanomo water storage tanks or from the farmers lane wells our farmers lane wells allows us to use groundwater supplies to supplement the water supply we receive through the Sanomo water aqueduct as well as provide emergency supplies during a disaster such as an earthquake will improve our water treatment facility at that location. The treatment facility will begin after we have monitored the productivity due to the increase and improvement of the of the well project and the improvements to our treatment facility will increase our productivity and our efficiency. In addition to the resiliency and redundancy built into our system it is important that our water provider have the same items items built into theirs and to ensure Sonoma water has a reliable system they are starting a resiliency and reliability study that will that will analyze their entire system. The information that is gathered from this effort will surely help guide us as we continue to improve our system. And with that it brings us to the recommendation we have before you today. This recommendation is recommended by the water department and the contract review committee and we would be happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you board member questions or comments? I will. So the contract review subcommittee met on Tuesday and saw this presentation and gave its input and was unanimous in its support for the motion that is before the board to approve the professional services agreement with Black and Veatch. Board member down. And one of the comments that we made during that contract review subcommittee meeting was this is obviously a large undertaking and none of the members of the board should be surprised if in fact additional items of work are brought back for additional approval by this by the board and we shouldn't be surprised by that because this is quite an undertaking and quite valuable. With that I will entertain a motion to approve the professional services agreement. I think we need to wait for our quorum. Oops pause. Thank you. I just I know that if should some of these optional services come back to us if the item is approved today. I just wanted to bring up task 604 the fire damage probability task. I just have some questions around the process. I know it will be staff driven and staff decided but it just it seems to really run into other departments and other lanes especially it appears to just kind of be a stretch for what our core function is and at the very least involves the significant coordination with others. It could already be happening in other project areas in planning and in transportation through the manager's office and so it just struck me as this kind of one suggested caveat that didn't actually quite suit just to our departments and I'm hoping you can kind of just share a little bit. Yeah I'd be happy to just so just to clarify first if we do choose to undertake any of the optional services that will have already been approved by the board today in this action so we wouldn't be coming back for further approval of moving forward with those optional services but you're right that particular that task in particular does seem a bit broad. We would only undertake it if we decided as staff that it was to the benefit of the ratepayers and that information would be used to influence or impact or affect how we prioritize fire flow projects in particular. If we were generating data that would be useful for others in the city we'd be happy to share that but we would only take that task on for the benefit of the ratepayers and for the benefit of the water system and if those efforts to kind of gather that data have already been done we would certainly already if we chose to move forward with that task we would utilize that those previous efforts. Board Member Grebel. Yeah I would reiterate what Board Member Battenford said and I think part of her intention is also mine to say that you know in optional services I see redundant communication studies right and to me there are some I think redundancies with our own abilities and expertise within those optional services and I understand that that'll be at staff's discretion if we approve this and I know that you need to be able to be nimble about these things but I would say that it looks like in the base services you know the SCADA system reliability and redundancy other things in that base services agreement those seem to me to be all you know great things that I know would take a load off you guys and also give us some some needed expertise and cover and you know not cover in the sense of lack of accountability but in more due diligence right and so I agree with that but it seems like outside of the base services the optional services there's yeah to me just a lot of potential redundancies with other departments existing expertise that maybe we even have more of than Black and Beech at this point from our experiences both with them in the in last year's and and just from staff's you know amazing response and resiliency and and innovative kind of in-house response to the fires is that I mean is that a fair characterization of the what it what it you know the optics to me when I look at the baseline which all are just yes and then the optional it just seems like well you know do we really need that do we really need that I mean it's you know it's a chunk of change yeah so I think that's a fair characterization and we do utilize an internal expertise to the greatest extent possible but we don't always think of everything a new set of eyes a new perspective is always helpful and these dollars would not be spent unless we really felt like we wanted to move forward with any of those tasks or if there was something that Black and Beech had a perspective that we didn't necessarily have the expertise to further investigate or consider and just a reminder all of our professional services agreements are done on time and materials basis so we have the ability to stop their work at any time and you know for for a lack of a better term cut our losses and we would be really thoughtful before moving forward with any of these optional tasks as they weren't envisioned by city staff and they were kind of suggestions by by Black and Beech and that's great for me to know I mean especially since you know if this is staff's recommendation you would like to have this tool available to you to you know for your due diligence because capacity issues in our own department I know you guys don't have a whole lot of free time on your hands to you know play with you know probably in risk modeling or whatever you know I would agree with that but I would say that if you ever feel like you're either your toes are being stepped on you could do it better or you know it's a redundancy of some kind that even might might even take credit away from our staff like oh our consultant came up with this brilliant thing it's like we've been doing that for the last three months and it was actually so-and-so our deputy director what you know I would you know I would love for you guys to make that call and be like nope we're cutting it off there you know that would give me a lot you know more peace of mind to just know that you're going to take that sort of hard-line authority when you feel it's necessary if we approve this absolutely we will I was just going to add on if I could and I think the benefit too is that they also can bring some broader bench and expertise where we may have some more you know general understanding and knowledge if we want to drill down into something specific and use some of their expertise that provides us with that opportunity too so that that is a helpful thing by having these optional scope of services available if we want to take advantage of them thank you any further board questions or comments if not I'll entertain a motion to approve the professional service agreement black and beach to provide professional engineering services for the 2019 water system reliability study in the amount not to exceed 403 890 dollars second motion by board member grable seconded by board member baden-fort to approve item 7.2 all in favor say aye aye any opposed great thank you very much thank you for your time item 8.1 is a public hearing regarding the new and increased miscellaneous fees and charges and change of name for certain fees this is atha welcome thank you good afternoon chairman galvin members of the board i'm here today to present information and recommend some proposed changes to the water department miscellaneous fees and charges so what is a miscellaneous fee fees and charges to reimburse the water department for specific services they're charged to the customers who receive the service not spread to the entire rate payer base some examples of miscellaneous fees include initiating water or sewer service deposits for construction meters installation of a new water meter and fees for one-time groundwater discharges miscellaneous fees are calculated using a fully burdened billable labor rate that was developed by a consultant study in 2013 and it's updated whenever there is a change to salaries most recently updated in august of 2018 it also includes time and materials and data from our asset management and work order system new fees being added include a broken lock so that is to replace only a broken lock not a box and that's related to a water meter it's based on time and materials installation of a new 10 inch water meter this is also based on time and materials a cost recovery for collection agency fee on past due invoices so when we send a miscellaneous invoice not a water or sewer bill but a miscellaneous invoice to a collection agency they charge a 22% fee on top of what they collect so this would then reimburse us for the total amount of the invoice including that fee water audit validation staff receive certification as a california water audit validator and can provide services to examine water loss inputs by utilities to consider audit accuracy and characterize the quality of a reported data to comply with senate bill 555 this fee is based on the staff person's fully burdened billable rate and finally for the new fees a low strength hauled waste per 1000 gallons this applies to discharges that are accepted as a treatment plant that are basically water for example ground water and wine tank rinse water since the impact to the treatment process is lower than that of other discharges the fee is one half of the existing fee for the high strength hauled waste a few fees being increased a charge for damage valve box lock lock off service pull and plug meter and water service taps greater than two inches and less than 12 inches and water service taps 12 inches the first two fees are increasing slightly due to increased labor and material costs the fees for the larger water service taps also called hot taps are increasing based on increased labor costs and actual average work order costs from the previous three years one fee is proposed to be decreased installation of a new three-quarter inch water meter this is being reduced to match that of a five eighths inch meter based on similar material costs and a new type of water meter that's being used we're proposing to eliminate a few or move a few fees the backflow inspection fee is being eliminated because water department staff no longer provides the service the water efficiency landscape ordinance plan review fees have already been moved to the planning and economic development department and the hydraulic model assessment to your fees is being eliminated because water staff no longer provides that service they're all done by outside consultant i won't go through all of these um but we're just changing the names of several fees just to provide better clarity and description and then a few more a complete list of the water department and water billing miscellaneous fees and charges including the proposed changes is included in the resolution for consolidation and easier reference the budget review subcommittee reviewed this item on february 27th and recommended unanimous support for approval by the full board at a future meeting which is happening today this is a public meeting of the bpu of course public hearing because they are rates and fees and charges the cost data was available on march 6 we published two times in the press democrat and if approved today the fees would be effective 60 days from today which would be may 20th with that is recommended by the santa rosa water department and the budget review subcommittee that the board of public utilities adopted a resolution revising the santa rosa water miscellaneous fees and charges scheduled as proposed i'm happy to answer any questions thank you at this point i'll open up the public hearing if there's any members of the public that wish to comment or ask questions now is the time see no one rise i will close the public hearing any board member questions or comments board member bannon fort thank you i just have some i'm hoping you can maybe touch on the specifics on some of the on the new the newly proposed fees specifically just quite the on the 10 inch new water meter installation on undamaged service there's quite the difference between the six and the 10 inch i'm sure there's a reason why but if you could drill down a little bit on that for me that would i would and that's why i have my team behind me the difference between if you know if we take it in increments of inches the jump from six inches to 10 inches proportionally is is much larger than jumps from one to two to three to four before good afternoon you're right as as meters start to increase what it actually takes to install those meters is is significantly more time and effort you know this is a much larger meter it oftentimes creates additional staff that have to be there we can we can send one person out or one one utility system operator out to replace a standard residential meter the equipment and the staff that are needed as these meters get larger is where you'll see that significant increase come into play and up until this point for 10 inch meters were we either not providing the service or charging at the six inch rate we would have been charging at a at a lesser rate all right that that's why the adjustment was needed for the the fee it makes sense of and a similar similar question around the cost recovery for collection agency fees moving from not currently charging a fee to the 22 percent of the total invoice and also the water audit validations moving from not currently charging to $1500 plus $150 per hour are those both those are both seemingly services that we provided for regularly for some time that are now just coming online or are they new both all that call and answer may be on the water audit validation but that staff person was just recently certified as a water audit validator so that's a new service that we're able to provide from staff on the cost recovery for collection agency fee we've never recovered that 22 percent that the collection agency charges so this is trying to just make that invoice whole when somebody's not paying it I think that's it for me thank you any other board member questions if not we have a resolution before us happy to move that the board of public utilities adopt a resolution revising the Santa Rosa water miscellaneous fees and charges schedule as proposed second motion by a board member bennford seconded by a board member grable to approve item 8.1 all in favor say aye aye any opposed passes unanimously thank you very much thank you item nine is public comments on non-agenda matters seeing no one rise we have no referrals no written communications subcommittee reports we've already reported on the contract for you subcommittee and that met earlier this week and the budget review committee was involved in that last agenda item we're continuing to meet we have one more meeting for sure and we have a tentative in case it's needed and most likely won't be and then we'll be coming to the board with our the presentation and our recommendation great any other subcommittee reports any board member reports directors report thank you i'll make this relatively quick since i know it's been a long meeting one of the things i just wanted to provide a brief update on at the last budget subcommittee we did do an informational item to let the subcommittee know about three contracts that staff has put into place to assist us with the discussions with renewable sonoma regarding the organics um processing facility option those three contracts include a contract for legal services with downy brand a contract for some sequel support services with ghd and a contract for some in engineering support services with brown and callable a couple other things just to let the board know um we had previously provided some brief updates to the board regarding the city's need to replace our asset management software currently we have um hands in which is um needs to be replaced and we had gone through a very robust process to look at other options and had chosen city works approximately i think about a year ago it's been a very um uh staff intensive um process to work on this new software and it's a great option going forward and city works is going to allow us to integrate with dis and also have mobile applications and really will give our staff the ability to update information in the field including doing um inspections and service orders and work orders which is great we're really excited about this new software and all the potential that it's going to have um and so that process again has been a really big effort by the asset management team and they are currently on schedule within budget and we anticipate that the first department will go live in about a year um uh in a little more than a year in june of next year so it's really exciting just wanted to let the board know that we're continuing to move down that process um and hopefully we'll have something to report as the year comes the other thing I wanted to let the board know is that you will be um as part of our normal process we do a audit of our biosolids management system every year and then we develop our performance report and so um you will be getting an email with that performance report um secretary Perez is going to send that out to the board for your information and it will give an update on our biosolids management program and um and sort of the performance for 2018 and then last I just wanted to briefly mention um that during the recent storms uh like everyone else um we did receive record breaking rainfall during the atmospheric rivers and it did also have um an impact to our sanitary sewer system um during that time we did have two sanitary sewer overflows for a total of a little over 8200 gallons um the good news is in looking at and putting this into perspective running a report of storms from that same time period in the north coast region um which is the region we're in it's one of nine regions in california um that 13 agencies in the region also had uh sanitary sewer overflows during that period and um uh that spill volume for the region was over 501,000 gallons so putting it into perspective of how we fared through it versus the rest of the region um our system is in really good shape and if you also kind of look at that same time frame for the state uh there was a total of um over 6.8 million gallons of um sanitary sewer overflows so again putting it into perspective our system is in really good shape and we just wanted to share that information thank you any questions for the interim director hearing none we'll be adjourned thank you