Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Seismic Vulnerability Study <br /> <br />Results from Task 2 for pipelines will be input to Task 5, Pipe Replacement Program. <br /> <br />Task 3 Seismic Improvement Program and Final Report <br /> <br />Based on the fmdings from Task 2, we will develop an updated Seismic Improvement <br />Program (SIP) to address the vulnerabilities in the Redwood City water system. This SIP <br />will then be factored into the overall Capital Improvement Program (CIP) that will be <br />prepared by West Yost. <br /> <br />To develop the SIP, we will create four levels of possible improvement, each affording <br />incremental seismic protection. We will call these SIP-l (highest priority, lowest cost), <br />SIP-2 (next highest priority, moderate cost); SIP-3 (third highest priority, higher cost); <br />SIP-4 (upgrade everything to the latest codes, all feasible pipe improvements, highest <br />cost). <br /> <br />For each SIP, we will perform benefit cost analyses (BCAs) to establish the cost- <br />effectiveness of the upgrades. We will perform these BCAs following the same <br />procedures used by FEMA. G&E wrote much of the FEMA BCA software, and is keenly <br />aware ofFEMA requirements. For example, if the BCA for SIP-l is 5, then <br />implementation is highly worthwhile for the citizens of Redwood City. As another <br />example, if the BCA for SIP-4 is 0.6, we would not likely recommend SIP-4, as the <br />benefits would only be 60 cents for every dollar of capital investment. While there are <br />other factors in deciding whether or not to implement various levels of seismic upgrade, <br />we believe that the BCA test is a very useful tool for the City of Redwood City to sort <br />through what is the "right" amount of upgrade. <br /> <br />As a side benefit to Redwood City, these BCAs are required and can be re-used for <br />purposes of asking FEMA to give Redwood City seismic mitigation grant money (up to <br />$3,000,000 per request) (see optional Task 4). <br /> <br />We will also rank the draft Performance Goals versus each SIP. For example, with SIP-O <br />(do nothing), Redwood City might meet 3 of the 10 draft goals, whereas with SIP-4, <br />Redwood City might meet all ten goals. <br /> <br />Included in the SIPs will be the following: <br /> <br />· For each project, provide basic construction cost ($2009), contingency and <br />design, proj ect management and construction inspection cost estimates. Provide <br />outline of the work to a sufficient level of detail so that a designer can proceed <br />with the design process. <br /> <br />· Provide a year-by-year implementation schedule for each SIP element. We will <br />provide a rational ranking for each reservoir, tank, pump station and pipeline <br />element. We will provide a time line (over 10, 15 or 20 years) to implement the <br />entire program, as well as annual costs. <br /> <br />October 9,2009 <br /> <br />Page 5 <br />