AgdaPkt 2020-11-09 Joint SA PFA - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

6.13. - Page 24 of 39 !( � KennedyJenks Task 1: Reservoir Water Augmentation (RWA) Analysis 1.1 Develop Key Decision Metrics Key decision metrics will be developed to compare RWA and DPR alternatives. Criteria, numeric scoring and weightings will be based on input from PREP Parties to rank alternatives considered. Metrics may include capital/O&M costs, regulatory oversight, health safeguards, monitoring, implementation timing, social and environmental considerations and other risks and benefits, etc. Criteria would be qualitative in nature, and may be "scored" based on the degree to which the alternative meets each metric. Scoring will be mostly qualitative in nature. Quantitative metrics will include items such as capital costs, unit costs, water delivered and energy. Weightings may represent themes or priorities (i.e. low cost option or maximize new supply). The decision metrics will be defined as part of this task and applied consistently to RWA and DPR alternatives evaluated in Tasks 1 and 2, respectively. Existing metrics and definitions from other Bay Area programs, like the Bay Area Regional Reliability (BARR) ARR Drought Mitigation Measures, will be used as a guide where appropriate. Assumptions: Costs for RWA alternatives will be based on the engineer's opinion of probable costs developed for Phase 2. Costs will remain at a Class 5 level', representing planning to feasibility level information with an estimated accuracy range between -30 percent and +50 percent. Refinements will be made, as appropriate. Assumptions and omissions in the cost will be clearly identified for all alternatives. Selection of decision criteria will be discussed with the Parties during Webinar #1. Deliverable: Summary tables describing criteria, scoring guidelines, weighting factors to be applied to rankings alternatives in Task 1.7 and Task 2.4, for RWA and DPR respectively, which will be incorporated into the Phase 3 Study in (Task 3). 1.2 Define Flow Regime Scenarios This task will identify potential flow regime scenarios to reflect a range of hydrologic conditions and implications on project yield. A 6 -year hydrologic period will be selected to showcase a range of normal to critically dry operations. Initial discussions will look at up to 5 scenarios for selecting what year types to include. Two scenarios will move forward that includes wet and dry years (but may not represent consecutive historic years) and will represent modeling years to use throughout the analysis. Bookend scenarios may include, but not be limited to the following: 1) A 6 -year drought, which would show maximum benefit 2) A 5 -year normal/wet period with 1 year dry, which would show the minimum benefit The scenarios will incorporate reduced purified water production assumptions to dial down operations in wet and normal years and determine implications on project yield. ' Based on the AACE cost estimated classification system. A Class 5 estimate represents concept screening level using methodologies based on factored capacities, judgement or analogy. For further description see https://www.costengineering.eu/Downloads/articles/AACE CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM.pdf Page 2 46 ATTY/AGR.2020.216/MOA- SVCW, SFPUC, BAWSCA, Cal -Water, City of San Mateo (Page 21 of 36)