March 14, 2013

1,330 views
859 views

Published on

Published in: Real Estate
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,330
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

March 14, 2013

  1. 1.  The Master Plan is the Water Authority’s roadmap for capital investments through 2035 Previous Master Plan completed in 2003 Includes Programmatic EIR to assess regional impacts ◦ Climate Action Plan Used to identify future CIP Budget appropriations 2
  2. 2. January 10- Special Water Planning Meeting Legislative/regulatory requirements associated with climate change Overview of developing a Climate Action PlanFeb 28 - Water Planning Committee Reviewed 2010 Urban Water Management Plan supply and demand assumptions Reviewed key recommendations from 2003 Facilities Master Plan • Twin Oaks valley WTP • Carlsbad Desalination • Raw water capacity enhancementsProvided Preliminary modeling results of system performance under BaselineScenario (2010 UWMP) • Sufficient treated and untreated capacity prior to 2025 • Considers only weather related effects on demands and supplies • Assumes verifiable mix of imported and local supplies implemented per 2010 UWMPBegan discussing stress scenarios and facility portfolios to address futureuncertainty 3
  3. 3.  Respond to questions/comments from February 28th Committee Meeting • What if the 2010 UWMP doesn’t happen as planned? • Estimating available MWD supplies • Effects beyond weather • SWP reliability • MWD shortage allocation • What local supplies are contemplated 4
  4. 4.  Continue discussion on system capacity needs, constraints and operation • Seasonal variations in demand • Baseline System performance • Performance under Stress Scenarios  Constraints, bottlenecks and potential shortages 5
  5. 5. ‣ The Role of Water Authority Storage  Enhancing supply reliability  Flexibility in addressing peak demand Opportunities for energy production ◦ Aqueduct hydroelectricity generation ◦ Pumped Storage beyond Hodges-Olivenhain 6
  6. 6. Water Use WaterDemand Water Scenario Efficiency ReliabilityForecast Supplies Planning Target AssessmentEconometric Process to Water Resource mix Model Retail manage Authority to meet utilizing Compliance supply and member demands in SANDAG with SBX7-7: uncertainties agency normal and Regional 20% savings associated verifiable dry water Growth by 2020 with resource supplies years Forecast mix 7
  7. 7.  Assess normal, single dry, and multiple dry water years Assumptions under dry-year conditions ◦ Local supplies (groundwater, surface water) based on lowest historic dry-year yield ◦ Single dry-year: Adequate carry-over supplies in storage, no shortages anticipated ◦ Multiple dry-year: MWD allocates water under preferential rights in accordance with MWD Act  Unknown how MWD will allocate in the future - reliable planning assumption  1.8 MAF available (consistent with supplies available during FY 2010 allocation period) 8
  8. 8.  No shortages 2020 Water Resources Mix anticipated ◦ Supplies developed as Local Surface Recycled Seawater Water Water Desalination 6% planned by member Groundwater 6% 9% 2% agencies, Water Conservation Authority, and MWD 13% MWD 30% ◦ Member agencies achieve SBX7-7 savings Canal Lining Transfer target 10% IID Transfer 24% 9
  9. 9. 900 Potential Shortage Carryover 800 Storage  Supplies developed as planned and 700 MWD SBX7-7 savings 600 Allocation achieved 500 (P.R.)  MWD is allocating suppliesTAF 400 Member  Drought (1.8 MAF 300 Agency available) Supplies 200  Potential shortages 100 Carlsbad  Handled through Seawater management actions 0 Desalinatio 2026 2027 2028 n 10
  10. 10.  A decision support planning method to incorporate uncertainty into supply planning assumptions Develop small but wide-ranging set of future scenarios based on key uncertainties  Not predictions, but “what-if” scenarios for planning purposes  May be qualitative, quantitative, or both  Assess reliability of water resources mix Provides for more comprehensive planning 11
  11. 11. Growth SWP Reliability Recurring Droughts Local Projects Climate ChangeDevelopment Risk 12
  12. 12. Recurring Local Project Droughts Development Risks SWP ReliabilityFuture “Stress” Scenarios 13
  13. 13.  MWD supply availability ◦ Dry-year plus further supply limitations  SWP – delivery restrictions with no delta fix  CRA – assume shortages with limited program supplies (e.g. storage and transfer supplies)  Storage – supplies limited due to multi-year drought ◦ Estimated 1.5 MAF available for allocation  Not prediction, but “what if” scenario used to stress resource mix ◦ MWD is allocating supplies under preferential rights Local projects fixed at current level (2009) 14
  14. 14. Scenario 3: Limited MWD and Member Evaluated 6 Agency Local Supplies scenarios TAF 1000 ◦ Developed based on Supply Gap Carryover Storage uncertainty variables 900 ◦ Quantitative and 800 MWD (P.R. allocation qualitative of 1.5 MAF) ◦ Scenario 3 provides 700 greatest supply 600 SBX7-7 Savings uncertainty 500 Identified strategies 400 Local Supply (2009 to fill gap 300 levels) ◦ Additional planned projects 200 Carlsbad Seawater Desalination  IPR, Pendleton Seawater 100 Desalination 0 Colorado River Transfer Programs 2030 (dry year) 15
  15. 15.  Provides comprehensive evaluation of annual supply reliability for the San Diego region Includes reliability assessment taking into account hot and dry weather Incorporates scenario planning to further “stress” the resource mix ◦ Effects beyond weather (e.g. SWP reliability, local supply development risks) ◦ Identifies strategies (additional planned projects) that could fill any supply gap Results utilized in Facilities Master Plan Update
  16. 16.  Master Plan “Baseline Scenario” is the UWMP resource mix (w/variation in weather) Evaluates impacts of UWMP scenarios on system conveyance, treatment and storage facilities Analyzes responses to variations in daily, weekly and seasonal member agency demands Identifies problems, constraints and risks Identifies strategies that are robust and respond to an array of future supply/demand conditions 17
  17. 17.  Baseline System includes: • Existing aqueduct system of pipelines, treatment plants, and storage reservoirs • Ongoing construction projects funded through FY14/15 Appropriation • Remaining ESP facilities, including:  North County ESP Pump Station  San Vicente PS 3rd VFD and Power Supply • Completion of Carlsbad Desalination Project by 2016 Treated/Untreated split Seasonal and Daily Peaking 18
  18. 18. Untreated WaterDelivery System Future System Capacity Constraint - Pipelines 3 and 5 (beyond 2025) Weese Twin Oaks Valley 100 MGD Escondido/Vista ID Olivenhain Poway Badger Miramar Levy Alvarado Existing System Capacity Constraint - Pipeline 3 and 4 Intertie Perdue Otay 19
  19. 19. 800.00 700.00 95% of Untreated Capacity Historic Daily 600.00 Untreated Flow 500.00CFS 400.00 300.00 200.00 100.00 0.00 20
  20. 20. 800.00 800.00 750.00 750.00 700.00 700.00 650.00 650.00 CFSCFS 600.00 600.00 550.00 550.00 500.00 500.00 Peaking August 2007 Peaking August 2010 21
  21. 21. Untreated WaterDelivery Systemwith Reservoirs Weese Twin Oaks Valley 100 MGD Escondido/Vista ID Olivenhain Olivenhain Lake Hodges Poway Badger San Vicente Miramar El Capitan Levy Alvarado Sweetwater Perdue Lower Otay Otay 22
  22. 22.  Regional Capacity ◦ 590,000 AF ◦ Member Agency planned reservoir operations needed to alleviate peak demands San Vicente Dam Raise ◦ Increases capacity by 152,000 acre feet ◦ Provides seasonal and carryover storage ◦ Provides important storage buffer against potential near- term shortages while IID and QSA supplies ramp up 23
  23. 23. Benefits of Regional andMember Agency Storage• Local runoff fills reservoirs during winter season• During dry years, storage capacity is available for imported seasonal deliveries• Reservoirs are drawn down Total Member Agencies Storage Monthly Average Jan 2015–Dec 2035 during peak season Hydrology Period 1988-2007 250,000• Avoids need to increase pipeline capacity 200,000• May create a winter peak on pipeline capacity 150,000 af• Reservoirs buffer both 100,000 treated and untreated demand on the aqueduct 50,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 24
  24. 24. Treated Water North County ESPDelivery System PS Expand Twin Oaks Valley TOVWTP 100 MGD Service AreaCarlsbad Seawater Desal Plant 25
  25. 25. Steep increase in untreated water deliveries 500000 will require additional capacity 450000 400000 350000 300000Acre Feet 250000 200000 150000 100000 50000 0 2005 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 MWD Untreated MWD Treated Untreated includes MWD purchases and QSA supplies 26
  26. 26.  Test Performance of Baseline Aqueduct System against Master Plan Scenarios ◦ Determines project implementation date ◦ Assures optimization of existing infrastructure Identify Alternatives that Address Performance Gaps ◦ Facility related constraints ◦ Supply related constraints (MWD, local projects) Initial Strategies for Crafting Portfolios ◦ Maximize conveyance (imported water) ◦ Expand regional desalination ◦ Maximize storage options ◦ Assume member agency local supply development 27
  27. 27.  Address Capacity Constraints ◦ Maximize conveyance (imported water)  Pipeline 6 – 500 cfs  Pipelines 3 / 4 Switch - 200 cfs moved to untreated conveyance  Colorado River Conveyance – 400 cfs Address Capacity and Supply Constraints ◦ Expand regional desalination (local water production)  Camp Pendleton – 77 to 232 cfs ◦ Rely on Member Agency local projects to reduce demand on Water Authority  IPR  Rosarito or other desalination project  Non-potable recycling 28
  28. 28. Alternative InfrastructurePortfolios 11. Pipeline 6 (Pipelines P3/P4 switch) 42. Camp Pendleton Desalination3. Colorado River Conveyance 2 8Infrastructure Common to each 9Portfolio4. ESP North County Pump Stations5. ESP San Vicente Pump Station 3rd 5 VFD and Power Supply6. Mission Trails Flow Regulatory 3 Structure7. Lake Murray Control Valve 68. Second Crossover Pipeline 79. System Regulatory Structure10. Pipeline Replacement and Relining 29
  29. 29.  How does energy fit into long range planning? Energy demand will increase with completion of recent capital projects Generating capacity includes hydroelectric, solar and Hodges Pumped Storage Master Plan Goal ◦ Maximize energy development ◦ Mitigate greenhouse gas emissions Identified potential hydroelectric locations 30
  30. 30.  15 potential hydroelectric generation locations identified Uses excess aqueduct pressure for energy recovery Evaluate economic viability ◦ Acceptable payback period Consider as possible mitigation strategy for Climate Action Plan 31
  31. 31. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) • Program EIR will address regional impacts • Used in future project-specific EIRs • Releasing Notice of Preparation for the Program Environmental Impact Report – starts the CEQA process  30-day public review period  Public scoping meeting to be held at the Water Authority within 30-day review period  Comments received will be considered in preparation of the Program EIR 32
  32. 32.  Mar/Apr 2013 Member Agency TAC Mtgs. to further analyze and refine alternatives Apr/May 2013 Water Planning Committee • Committee Review, Comment and Select of Master Plan Draft Preferred Alternative Summer 2013 Public Release of Draft Master Plan, Draft Climate Action Plan and Draft Program EIR End of 2013 Board Mtg. to Consider EIR Certification 33
  33. 33. 34

×