02/08/2012 - Packet Intergovernmental Water Board Agenda
SERVING TIGARD,KING CITY,DURHAM AND TIGARD WATER DISTRICT
MEETING DATE: Wednesday, February 8, 2012, 5:30 p.m.
MEETING LOCATION: Tigard Public Works Building
8777 SW Burnham Street
Tigard, OR 97223
1. Call to Order, Roll Call and Introductions
2. Approval of Minutes — December 14, 2011
Action: Motion to approve the December 14, 2011 minutes.
3. Public Comments
Call for comments from the public.
4. Water Supply Update -John Goodrich
No action required.
5. David Guardino Credit for Leak Request
Action: Motion to issue a credit in the amount of$1,403.91.
6. Election of Chair and Vice-Chair—Dennis Koellermeier
Action: Motion to appoint the Chair and Vice Chair.
7. Update on Member-At-Large Position Recruitment— Dennis Koellermeier
No action required.
8. Briefing on a Grant Application to Partially Fund ASR Well Head Improvements -John
Goodrich
No action required.
9. Update on the Lake Oswego-Tigard Water Partnership —Dennis Koellermeier
No action required.
10. Informational Items
Update from Commissioner Buchner on Lake Oswego/City of Tigard Oversight Committee
activities.
11. Non-Agenda Items
Call for non-agenda items from the Board.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL WATER BOARD AGENDA— February 8, 2012
City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-718-2591 1 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1 of 2
12. Next Meeting:
March 14, 2012 at 5:30 p.m.
Public Works Auditorium, 8777 SW Burnham Street,Tigard, Oregon
13. Adjournment
Action: Motion for adjournment.
Executive Session
The Intergovernmental Water Board may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to
order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute. All discussions
are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news
media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(4), but must not disclose
any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or
making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL WATER BOARD AGENDA— February 8, 2012
City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-718-2591 1 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 2 of 2
Agenda Item No.:
IWB Meeting Date: $ B Intergovernmental Water Water Board Minutes
no
SERVING TIGARD,KING CITY,DURHAM AND TIGARD WATER DISTRICT
MEETING DATE: Wednesday, December 14, 2011, 5:30 p.m.
MEETING LOCATION: Tigard Public Works Building
8777 SW Burnham Street
Tigard, OR 97223
Members Present:
Gretchen Buehner Representing the City of Tigard (Arrived 5:37 p.m.)
Ken Henschel Representing the Tigard Water District
Keith Jehnke Representing the City of Durham
Dick Winn Representing the City of King City
Mike Stone Member-At-Large
Members Absent: None
City of Tigard Staff Present:
Dennis Koellermeier Public Works Director
John Goodrich Utility Division Manager
Greer Gaston Intergovernmental Water Board (IWB) Recorder
1. Call to Order, Roll Call and Introductions
Commissioner Winn called the meeting to order at 5:34 p.m.
2. Approval of Minutes —November 9, 2011
Commissioner Henschel moved to approve the November 9, 2011 minutes.
Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The motion passed by unanimous vote of
the Commissioners present, with Commissioners Henschel,Jehnke, Stone and Winn
voting yes.
3. Public Comments
Bradley Anderson, 13788 SW Fernridge Terrace, Tigard, complained about the water rate
structure, advocating it should be based more on consumption and less on capacity, i.e.
the size of water meter. Mr. Anderson acknowledged he had already discussed the rate
structure with Mr. Goodrich.
Commissioner Buehner arrived at 5:37 p.m.
Mr. Anderson asserted the rate structure created an unfair burden on water customers
who have meters larger than the standard 5/8-inch meter.
The commissioners and staff made the following comments in response to Mr.
Anderson's complaint.
■ The rate structure is the same for all water customers within the Tigard Water
Service Area.
■ The rate structure was prepared by experts to meet bonding requirements and
generate revenue to pay for Tigard's share of projects resulting from the Tigard-
Lake Oswego Water Partnership.
■ There are approximately 1,000 1-inch water meters served by Tigard. This makes
up seven-percent of Tigard's residential customers.
■ The 1-inch meter is sized appropriately for the number of fixtures in Mr.
Anderson's home.
■ Meter size is dictated by the number of fixture units the meter serves and reflects
the ability to consume based on the maximum demand for the structure.
■ One-inch meter rates were determined using an equivalency calculation based on
the standard 5/8-inch meter.
• Sixty percent of water revenue is generated by fixed charges; forty percent is
generated by consumption. In placing a greater emphasis on fixed charges,
revenue is more predictable.
4. Water Supply Update
Mr. Goodrich reported:
■ Average water use for the month of November was about 3.87 million gallons
per day (mgd). This is .1 mgd less than November 2010 demand.
■ Currently, 48 million gallons are stored aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) well 1
and 128 million gallons are stored in ASR well 2. Injection will begin in January
to ASR well 2.
■ Tigard doesn't anticipate any water quality issues with the Portland water supply.
Mr. Koellermeier discussed weather patterns and how they might affect the quality of
Portland water and Portland's use of its wells.
5. Briefing on West Linn Emergency Water Proposal
Mr. Koellermeier updated the board on the Tigard-Lake Oswego Water Partnership's
siting of a pipeline and water treatment plant in West Linn. The partnership has
experienced some resistance from the West Linn community regarding these projects.
West Linn's water treatment plant is located in Oregon City. Water is transmitted from
Oregon City to West Linn via a line under the Highway 205 bridge. West Linn's
reservoir, constructed in 1918, is nearing the end of its useful life. Given the route of the
supply line and the aging reservoir, West Linn's water supply is somewhat vulnerable.
The partnership expects to have some extra capacity in its new water system and may
offer this capacity to West Linn in the form of an emergency back-up supply, should the
West Linn system fail. The extra capacity would be available until such time as Tigard or
Lake Oswego need the water, and West Linn would pay for any water used. This would
enable West Linn to delay millions of dollars in upgrades to its water system.
Representatives from the partnership presented this proposal to West Linn's Utility
Advisory Board at a recent meeting. The board was receptive to the proposal. Mayors
from Tigard and Lake Oswego will soon brief the West Linn City Council on the
proposal.
Since West Linn stands to benefit from partnership projects, Mr. Koellermeier said he
hoped the West Linn community will look more favorably on the siting of the pipeline
and water treatment plant.
6. Briefing on 5-Year Strategic Plan for the Regional Water Providers Consortium
Mr. Koellermeier informed the board that Tigard was a member of the Regional Water
Providers Consortium. The consortium heads up the region's water conservation plan.
Consortium members, including Tigard, are in the process of developing a 5-Year
Strategic Plan. A draft of the plan is on file in the IWB packet.
Tigard City Councilor Nick Wilson represents Tigard's interests on the consortium. He
advocated a change to the consortium's messaging by placing a greater emphasis on
peaking and water conservation in summer and the overall value of water at other times
of the year. Councilor Wilson's suggestions have been incorporated into the plan.
7. Discussion Regarding the Member-At-Large Position
Mr. Koellermeier reported that the IWB's member-at-large, Mike Stone, had been hired
as the Tigard's city engineer. Mr. Koellermeier provided the board with a legal memo
regarding the possible ramifications of Mr. Stone remaining on the board, given his
employment with the City of Tigard.
Despite the expertise Mr. Stone brought to the board, Commissioner Winn
acknowledged the possible ethical conflicts noted in the memo. He suggested the board
should accept Mr. Stone's resignation. The board discussed ways in which Mr. Stone
could continue to work with the board; it was suggested he could serve as an ex officio
member with no voting privileges.
The board discussed how it wanted to advertise and recruit for the member-at-large
position. Rather than wait for the spring edition of Know H2O, the board directed staff
to recruit candidates through a press release sent to local newspapers, citizen
participation organizations. The press release will also be sent to various IWB
jurisdictions to post on their respective web sites. Board members will subsequently
review and rank member-at-large applications individually and provide their rankings to
staff. Staff will arrange for top candidates to be interviewed at an IWB meeting.
8. Informational Items
■ Update from Commissioner Buehner on Lake Oswego/City of Tigard Oversight
Committee activities.
— Commissioner Buehner and Tigard Mayor Dirksen meet with state
legislators and Clackamas County commissioners to promote Lake
Oswego-Tigard Water Partnership projects.
— As mentioned under agenda item 5, there is a meeting with the West Linn
City Council next Monday at 6 p.m.
— A joint meeting between Tigard and Lake Oswego City Councils occurred
last month.Joint meetings will occur more frequently as partnership
projects get underway.
— Design is underway on partnership projects such as the raw water intake,
raw water pipeline, treatment plant, finished water pipeline, reservoir and
Bonita pump station. Designs should be at 30 percent by March 2012. This
will allow better cost estimates to be prepared.
— Tigard is proceeding with a resolution of necessity in the event it needs to
condemn property for the Bonita pump station.
— Project designs need to be between 10- and 30-percent complete in order
for them to be submitted for federal permitting.
— The committee is addressing issues related to energy conservation and art.
— The committee will begin reviewing the fiscal year 2012-2013 budget in
January.
9. Non-Agenda Items
There were no non-agenda items.
10. Next Meeting
January 11, 2012 at 5:30 p.m.
Public Works Auditorium, 8777 SW Burnham Street, Tigard, Oregon
11. Adjournment
At 6:39 p.m. Commissioner Henschel moved to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner
Buehner seconded the motion. The meeting adjourned by unanimous vote of the
commissioners present, with Commissioners Buehner, Henschel,Jehnke, Stone and
Winn voting yes.
Dick Winn, IWB Chair Greer Gaston, IWB Recorder
Date: Date:
Agenda Item No.: E
IWB Meeting Date: FeZ3. 8
MEMORANDUM
TIGARD '�
TO: Intergovernmental Water Board
r
FROM: Jamie Greenberg, Sr. Accounting Assista
RE: David Guardino
DATE: January 5, 2012
The attached credit for leak request is being forwarded to you for your approval at the next
scheduled meeting on February 8, 2012. The method used in calculating the amount of the credit is
based on existing policy and there are no extenuating circumstances to this particular request. The
credit in the amount of$1403.91 was calculated for the billing period of November 30,2011 to
December 29, 2011 requires your Board approval before processing.
If you have any questions regarding this request,please feel free to call me directly at 503-718-2492.
Attached is a history of meter consumption and all documentation of the leak being repaired
submitted by the customer. The customer has been notified of the next scheduled
Intergovernmental Water Board meeting so they may attend if they so desire.
City of Tigard
" UTILITY BILLING
i
Request for Adjustment Due to a Leak
The City of Tigard has a practice of issuing partial credits for leaks that are repaired in a timely manner. The city expects leaks
to be repaired within ten days of discovery. Credits are based on your average usage for the same period in previous years.
This average is deducted from the total consumption used during the time of the leak. The excess usage is charged at the
wholesale mark up credit rate based on customer type classification. This credit amount is applied to the next billing invoice
as the Credit for Leak adjustment. Please fill the form out completely.Please allow 30 days for your adjustment to appear on
your utility bill. No adjustment may be given on delinquent accounts,or if a previous credit was given at the same
address. If you have any questions,call our Utility Billing office at 503-718-2460. Return form to: Tigard Utility Billing,
13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223.
NAME v t t t 1. u c,rA ACCOUNT NO. ' 000
ADDRESS uo l0 r e. C)-4 Lf-
BILLING ADDRESS (if different)
PHONE NO. 6q I - 55 u- -�0-
CAUSE OF LEAK(Explain): C ^ ,� C\
DATE LEAK FOUND: 12——
DATE LEAK REPAIRED: 12- so-- ( ovide Plumb r Bills or Receipts)
HAVE ANY WATER CREDITS BEEN GIVEN IN PAST 3 YEARS?
I acknowledge that the information given above is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I have read and understand
the City's Cre Leak Adjustment practice.Understanding that I am not eligible for another leak credit until three years
fro b,e nting of s credit,I still wish to make this application for a credit. If this is a rental the owner must also sign that
/e'is aw. e no fur � ' ktment for a water leak would be given for three years.
Signature Date
Owner.signature if Rental Date
YOU T S PIES OF PLUMBER'S BILLS AND/OR RECEIPTS FOR PARTS,
9r� _..aAS E �`" REQUIRED TO FIX THE LEAK.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I I
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
t i t:; E - ` ' e Credit Rate-January 2011
$1.71 $1.42 $1.94 $1.62 $2.30
RES
CMUR COM IND IRR
Previous year's usage:
#periods used
Average,ccf Leak Period,ccf Leak,ccf Leak Credit Rate Credit Adjustment
Total Credit: $ 0.11 Date Issued: I I L Issued By:
Dec.31, 2011
City of Tigard
Utility Billing
13125 SW Hall Blvd,
Tigard,OR 97223
To whom it may concern,
I am filing this Request for Adjustment Due to a Leak form,seeking the maximum leniency from your
office.The leak that was discovered before Christmas was not one that revealed itself in a manner that
would have resulted in quick identification or due to any negligence on our part as property owners.
Once I identified,the source of water was located and stopped,and the repair handled by me personally.
Days before Christmas, I noticed water running out of the drain in the curb in front of our house. I
thought it odd,since we had not had considerable rain until recently. I then opened our main water
meter at the street and saw the meter running wildly. Previously, I had shut off the water supply to the
exterior hoses and covered the spigots. I had also shut off the main valve in the backyard to the
sprinklers and drained the lines as I normally do before the first frost. Unbeknownst to me there was a
second valve for the sprinkler line in front of the house from the main street valve.When I noticed the
water running from the curb drain, I rechecked the hose lines,the sprinkler system in the back, and then
found the covered wooden box in the front. I opened that box and turned that valve and that stopped
the water.Once confirmed by rechecking the main water meter and it being still,I then looked for a
possible source. Finding nothing and knowing that the water source to the leak had been stopped, I
moved forward with the holidays knowing I would fix it after Christmas.Given the time of year and the
limited time spent outdoors, it was difficult to tell the extent of the leak.At that time, I had no idea how
much water or for how long the leak was running before I noticed the water in the street. In addition to
the time of year,things have been very challenging to say the least for my family recently.
Since the beginning of December, my family and I have been in the process of putting our house on the
market and downsizing our material possessions in preparation for relocation to Fairfax,Virginia,where
I begin a new job at the end of January.As you can imagine,the past month has been very hectic,selling
our home(at significantly less than it was purchased for in 2007), reducing the items we have to ship
across country, researching locations and apartments in Virginia,wrapping up my current position,and
dealing with the holidays.While having a new job is something we are very grateful for,the company is
not paying for any relocation expense and the move is projected to cost us over$7,000.The resulting
water bill of$2,863 dollars is unimaginable to me, and could not have occurred at a worse time
emotionally and financially for our family.
With no noticeable erosion or seepage in our yard, I turned to a leak location company to help
determine the location of the leak.While they were at the house preparing to find the source and had
turned the water back on, I was walking to the backyard to show them where the sprinkler system was
located and heard a deep rushing water sound at the corner of the house down by the foundation. I
immediately told them this was the likely source and that 1 appreciated them coming out.After paying
the$95.00 service fee, I proceeded to dig up the line. I have taken pictures and am providing them here
of the problem once located,and the repair done on the same day.The problem was that the glue on a
45 degree elbow joint had given way.The water had managed to run under the house and made its way
to the storm drain.With it being winter and the location being in a corner of the house we do not spend
any time in,we were completely unaware of the leak for who knows how long.
I appreciate you taking the time to read this letter and hope you can appreciate the situation we find
ourselves. For the various reasons listed here,we seek the maximum leniency your office can provide.
Sincerely,
The Guardino family—David, Minkyung,Jade and Zoey
. -
P.O. BOX 190 A'
WEST HILLSBORO, OR 97123 INVOICE# 02202
503-522-2727 DATE
SIDE503-359-4930 FAX JOB#_ TECHNICIAN fj���
(503)
CUSTOMERc�ADDRESS � S Z S r•-� f�7 `' r f
�} DRAIN
CITY1-rr - ' STATE- OR ZIP522-2 /727 HOME PHONE#
CONTACT# ) TIME IN f /0 fI�MI�M
TIME OUT .//' 70 AM/PM
❑ YES DAYS GUARANTEE NO ❑
DRAIN NEED FLAT( $ AUTH. WORK PERFORMED DRAIN CLEANING
SURV. HOURLY
ADD.DRAINS
MAIN LINE HOURLY DIAGNOSIS FEE
KITCHEN SINK FLAT ,A• p r SEPTIC PUMP
LAUNDRY LINE FLATS d. , r /.�.- WATER JETTING
BATH SINK FLAT A ! VIDEO INSPECTION
BATH TUB FLAT , .., c - a LINE LOCATE
SHOWER FLAT f 4 ,� c, < EXCAVATION
URINAL FLAT . LABOR
TOILET FLAT ROOF/2ND FLOOR
FLOOR DRAIN FLAT PLUMBING
AREA DRAIN HOURLY PRODUCTS
RAIN DRAIN HOURLY PARTS
SEPTIC GAL.
CC(CHECK# EXP. CODE.
PARTS RECOMMENDATIONS _
QTY. PART# DESCRIPTION PRICE ❑ ENZYME TREATMENT ❑VIDEO INSPECTION
❑ ROOT KILLER ❑ PIPE REPAIR/REPLACEMENT 5%C.C.FEE
,
ElANNUAL MAINTENANCE ElCLEANOUT/INSTALLATION TOTAL PAYMENT RECEIVED epW
C7
El WATER JETTING ElT BALANCE DUE -
ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS CONTAINED ON '
THE REVERSE SIDE OF THIS SHEET �� ! 7—)
rf. J l
WWW.WESTSIDEDRAIN.COM A C 1 _EST4MAfEANDTERMSANDCONDITIONS "'A6NOWLEDG MENT OF COMPLETION
Utility Billing
Account History Report
User Name: Jamie
City Name: CITY OF TIGARD
Printed: 01/05/2012- 9:59:AM
Account Status: Active Total Acct Balance: 0.00
Connect Date: 04/02/2007 Final Date: Deposits: 0.00 Refunds: 0.00
Customer Name: GUARDING,MINKYUNG&DAVID Owner name: GUARDINO,MINKYUNG&DAVID
Customer Address: 16352 SW 107TH CT Service Address: 16352 SW 107TH CT
TIGARD,OR 97224
Home Phone: (541)554-0712 Ext.
Business Phone: (541)510-7160 Ext.
Customer Number: 038650 000 Reference Number: 9007009
Tran Date Tran Type Amount Description Water Sewer SWM Penalty Misc StrMnt Sery 7 Sery 8
Current Balance By Service 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
12/27/2011 Payment -82.64 -39.94 -31.32 -7.25 -4.13
12/07/2011 Balance 82.64 39.94 31.32 7.25 4.13
12/07/2011 Billing 82.64 39.94 31.32 7.25 4.13
11/23/2011 Payment -70.72 -28.02 -31.32 -7.25 -4.13
11/02/2011 Balance 70.72 28.02 31.32 7.25 4.13
11/02/2011 Billing 70.72 28.02 31.32 7.25 4.13
11/01/2011 Payment -79.66 -36.96 -31.32 -7.25 -4.13
10/05/2011 Balance 79.66 36.96 31.32 7.25 4.13
10/05/2011 Billing 79.66 36.96 31.32 7.25 4.13
09/26/2011 Payment -100.95 -58.25 -31.32 -7.25 -4.13
09/07/2011 Balance 100.95 58.25 31.32 7.25 4.13
09/07/2011 Billing 100.95 58.25 31.32 7.25 4.13
09/09/2011 Payment -91.54 -48.88 -31.28 -7.25 -4.13
08/03/2011 Balance 91.54 48.88 31.28 7.25 4.13
08/03/2011 Billing 91.54 48.88 31.28 7.25 4.13
07/26/2011 Payment -68.90 -28.02 -29.99 -6.76 -4.13
07/06/2011 Balance 68.90 28.02 29.99 6.76 4.13
07/06/2011 Billing 68.90 28.02 29.99 6.76 4.13
07/01/2011 Payment -73.34 -31.00 -31.46 -6.75 -4.13
06/01/2011 Balance 73.34 31.00 31.46 6.75 4.13
06/01/2011 Billing 73.34 31.00 31.46 6.75 4.13
05/27/2011 Payment -73.34 -31.00 -31.46 -6.75 -4.13
05/04/2011 Balance 73.34 31.00 31.46 6.75 4.13
05/04/2011 Billing 73.34 31.00 31.46 6.75 4.13
04/26/2011 Payment -67.23 -25.98 -31.46 -6.75 -3.04
UB-Account History List(Printed: 01/05/2012- 9:59:AM) Page: i
Customer Number: 038650 000 Reference Number: 9007009
Tran Date Tran Type Amount Description Water Sewer SWM Penalty Misc StrMnt Sery 7 Sery 8
04/06/2011 Balance 67.23 25.98 31.46 6.75 3.04
04/06/2011 Billing 67.23 25.98 31.46 6.75 3.04
03/22/2011 Payment -67.20 -25.98 -31.46 -6.75 -3.01
03/02/2011 Balance 67.20 25.98 31.46 6.75 3.01
03/02/2011 Billing 67.20 25.98 31.46 6.75 3.01
02/25/2011 Payment -65.16 -23.94 -31.46 -6.75 -3.01
02/02/2011 Balance 65.16 23.94 31.46 6.75 3.01
02/02/2011 Billing 65.16 23.94 31.46 6.75 101
01/25/2011 Payment -99.98 -33.17 -48.61 -12.18 -6.02
01/05/2011 Balance 99.98 33.17 48.61 12.18 6.02
01/05/2011 Billing 99.98 33.17 48.61 12.18 6.02
11/24/2010 Payment -129.16 -45.77 -63.43 -13.94 -6.02
11/03/2010 Balance 129.16 45.77 63.43 13.94 6.02
11/03/2010 Billing 129.16 45.77 63.43 13.94 6.02
10/05/2010 Payment -161.05 -79.22 -62.16 -13.65 -6.02
09/01/2010 Balance 161.05 79.22 62.16 13.65 6.02
09/01/2010 Billing 161.05 79.22 62.16 13.65 6.02
08/03/2010 Payment -92.22 -22.94 -53.45 -11.47 -4.36
07/07/2010 Balance 92.22 22.94 53.45 11.47 4.36
07/07/2010 Billing 92.22 22.94 53.45 11.47 4.36
05/18/2010 Payment -111.86 -33.66 -60.52 -13.32 -4.36
05/05/2010 Balance 111.86 33.66 60.52 13.32 4.36
05/05/2010 Billing 111.86 33.66 60.52 13.32 4.36
03/30/2010 Payment -108.14 -39.02 -53.08 -11.68 -4.36
03/03/2010 Balance 108.14 39.02 53.08 11.68 4.36
03/03/2010 Billing 108.14 39.02 53.08 11.68 4.36
02/26/2010 Payment -111.14 -36.34 -57.73 -12.71 -4.36
02/12/2010 Letter 0.00 Urgent Notice
01/06/2010 Balance 111.14 36.34 57.73 12.71 4.36
01/06/2010 Billing 111.14 36.34 57.73 12.71 4.36
11/23/2009 Payment -118.46 -43.29 -58.02 -12.77 -4.38
11/04/2009 Balance 118.46 43.29 58.02 12.77 4.38
11/04/2009 Billing 117.66 42.86 57.73 12.71 4.36
09/14/2009 Payment -160.00 -86.36 -58.13 -11.17 -4.34
09/02/2009 Balance 160.80 86.79 58.42 11.23 4.36
09/02/2009 Billing 160.80 86.79 58.42 11.23 4.36
07/21/2009 Payment -106.96 -41.61 -51.81 -9.18 -4.36
07/01/2009 Balance 106.96 41.61 51.81 9.18 4.36
07/01/2009 Billing 106.96 41.61 51.81 9.18 4.36
05/26/2009 Payment -107.06 -34.08 -58.29 -10.33 -4.36
05/06/2009 Balance 107.06 34.08 58.29 10.33 4.36
05/06/2009 Billing 107.06 34.08 58.29 10.33 4.36
03/23/2009 Payment -87.55 -26.55 -48.11 -8.53 -4.36
03/04/2009 Balance 87.55 26.55 48.11 8.53 4.36
03/04/2009 Billing 87.55 26.55 48.11 8.53 4.36
UB-Account History List(Printed:01/05/2012- 9:59:AM) Page: 2
Customer Number: 038650 000 Reference Number: 9007009
Tran Date Tran Type Amount Description Water Sewer SWM Penalty Misc StrMnt Sery 7 Sery 8
01/27/2009 Payment -113.93 -36.59 -61.99 -10.99 -4.36
01/07/2009 Balance 113.93 36.59 61.99 10.99 4.36
01/07/2009 Billing 113.93 36.59 61.99 10.99 4.36
11/25/2008 Payment -127.75 -54.77 -58.29 -10.33 -4.36
11/05/2008 Balance 127.75 54.77 58.29 10.33 4.36
11/05/2008 Billing 127.75 54.77 58.29 10.33 4.36
10/21/2008 Payment -166.87 -93.00 -59.02 -10.49 -4.36
10/10/2008 Letter 0.00 Urgent Notice
09/03/2008 Balance 166.87 93.00 59.02 10.49 4.36
09/03/2008 Billing 166.87 93.00 59.02 10.49 4.36
07/22/2008 Payment -96.33 -29.55 -53.41 -9.01 -4.36
07/02/2008 Balance 96.33 29.55 53.41 9.01 4.36
07/02/2008 Billing 96.33 29.55 53.41 9.01 4.36
05/27/2008 Payment -105.43 -29.55 -61.19 -10.33 -4.36
05/07/2008 Balance 105.43 29.55 61.19 10.33 4.36
05/07/2008 Billing 105.43 29.55 61.19 10.33 4.36
03/25/2008 Payment -106.63 -31.90 -60.21 -10.16 -4.36
03/05/2008 Balance 106.63 31.90 60.21 10.16 4.36
03/05/2008 Billing 106.63 31.90 60.21 10.16 4.36
01/22/2008 Payment -103.32 -34.25 -55.36 -9.35 -4.36
01/02/2008 Balance 103.32 34.25 55.36 9.35 4.36
01/02/2008 Billing 103.32 34.25 55.36 9.35 4.36
11/27/2007 Payment -157.94 -80.94 -62.15 -10.49 -4.36
11/07/2007 Balance 157.94 80.94 62.15 10.49 4.36
11/07/2007 Billing 157.94 80.94 62.15 10.49 4.36
09/28/2007 Payment -153.76 -71.66 -66.72 -11.02 -4.36
09/05/2007 Balance 153.76 71.66 66.72 11.02 4.36
09/05/2007 Billing 153.76 71.66 66.72 11.02 4.36
07/30/2007 Payment -100.70 -36.46 -52.54 -7.34 -4.36
07/04/2007 Balance 100.70 36.46 52.54 7.34 4.36
07/04/2007 Billing 100.70 36.46 52.54 7.34 4.36
05/16/2007 Payment -39.78 -12.26 -22.51 -3.15 -1.86
05/02/2007 Balance 39.78 12.26 22.51 3.15 1.86
05/02/2007 Billing 39.78 12.26 22.51 3.15 1.86
Route Sequence Serial 0090-3740-10968 Read Date Reading Consumption Meter Status Active
12/29/2011 3,332 826
11/30/2011 2,506 10
10/27/2011 2,496 6
09/30/2011 2,490 9
09/01/2011 2,481 16
07/25/2011 2,465 13
06/27/2011 2,452 6
UB-Account History List(Printed: 01/05/2012- 9:59:AM) Page: 3
Customer Number: 038650 000 Reference Number: 9007009
Route Sequence Serial 0090-3740-10968 Read Date Reading Consumption Meter Status Active
05/27/2011 2,446 7
04/27/2011 2,439 7
04/01/2011 2,432 5
02/23/2011 2,427 5
01/26/2011 2,422 6
12/22/2010 2,416 9
10/28/2010 2,407 14
08/26/2010 2,393 27
06/25/2010 2,366 6
04/30/2010 2,360 10
02/24/2010 2,350 12
12/29/2009 2,338 11
10/28/2009 2,327 14
08/27/2009 2,313 32
06/25/2009 2,281 14
04/30/2009 2,267 11
02/26/2009 2,256 8
01/05/2009 2,248 12
10/30/2008 2,236 20
08/28/2008 2,216 37
06/25/2008 2,179 10
05/01/2008 2,169 10
02/28/2008 2,159 11
12/28/2007 2,148 12
11/01/2007 2,136 33
08/29/2007 2,103 30
06/21/2007 2,073 14
04/26/2007 2,059 3
UB-Account History List(Printed: 01/05/2012- 9:59:AM) Page: 4
f
i'
t�
"i
i
w�
E,w a
IV aft
3 - 0
(503) 522 2727
in Cleaning*Septic Pumping*Vidt
:er Jetting•Septic Systems•Sewer
CCB-19240
Commercial&Resi
6
x -
pr.
r
i
z
..t
_war
px
lo� 44
x r
cr ` d M N tD lD co Lf)O T)Ln
tiV'm h �J". N NONN O
lzr
O Lu
m O tD0 O O 0000 L`1�1cr
'V p co H N Z W LL-
Cl) ui
C)
iMO Z X D1 H(1)V)
Q1 Q M T-f LO O W N 1= W
C C ID CD A A �� .H-+ �>M W H O
QQ Q Q 7C. v }< Z H O f-W V)
LyL F' N t V Y V C'S tf) -t C �� W W CL N
V Lo 5 d ¢F- > u)
O O U ~r- Z cr U W O cn_!E- \ O d_V)Z
W-1d F--W¢H N > WZCSH
3Cs O mWU U U mJt--co �� UV) V)CCH<Y
W > } >p WO(I)t-
U¢ V=iV�a �" r J4a) fit- W
E Cl) U f1.D_ Q V N 00 d 0 n
H W OMO f=j d.--�r� M C`\7 co
LOO �,� 4?-J
ci r` �a Wzo
d d Y-J M-+tD Ir 07 nX LSA O H O ui C1
3C Q LLQ W Go N LLQ 'T Lf) to LLIL3!>.-a W Z
O OVMC7NNNtD XD O H O O
O C1 CO-- -LD -lDCD
O O H Lf')00 QJ LLJO a-+O.-�O X U — 'T -i S i--F-
NH CO0C)(N00 m (N 04 XH 2H�
ct U n 00 O O X e¢
Agenda Item No.• &
IWB Meeting Date: FL-0. Qa 2D111-
01
D1Z" City of Tigard
Memorandum
To: Intergovernmental Water Board Commissioners
From: Office Manager Greer Gaston
Re: Election of the IWB Chair and Vice-Chair
Date: February 1, 2012
The IWB bylaws call for the election of a chair and vice-chair during the board's February
meeting. The chair and vice-chair serve one-year terms. There are no term limits, so the chair
and vice-chair may be appointed to serve successive terms.
An excerpt of the relevant bylaws is attached.
INTERGOWATER BOARD BYLAWS
REVISED DECEMBER 14, 1994
ARTICLE I: Name of Organization
• Intergovernmental Water Board
ARTICLE II: Mission
• The Cities withdrew from the original District
with intent to take a more active role in
planning and operating a domestic water supply
system for the Southeast Washington County
area in order to provide the residents of that
area with the highest quality water service at
the lowest possible cost. in keeping with
that intention, the Parties to this
Intergovernmental Agreement commit to working
together to provide all of the residents and
undeveloped property in the original District
with a clean, economical water supply. The
Parties further commit to working together and
with other agencies and jurisdictions in a
cooperative effort to plan for the future long
term water supply needs of the area.
ARTICLE III: Members
• The Intergovernmental Water Board (IWB) will
consist of five members. Members of the Board
will be appointed by the respective governing
bodies as follows:
Tigard - One Member
King City - One Member
Durham - One Member
District/unincorporated Area - One Member
At Large - One Member selected by a majority
vote of the Other Members.
ARTICLE IV: officers
• The Intergovernmental Water Board shall elect
a Chair and Vice-Chair from its' members.
Election of the Chair and Vice-Chair shall be
held the first meeting in February of each
calendar year.
In the event of a resignation of the Chair,
the standing Vice-Chair shall become Chair on
the effective date of the resignation of the
Chair. The new Chair shall serve the
remainder of the vacating Chair's term. The
new Chair's one year term shall commence at
the first meeting of the next calendar year.
In the event of a resignation by the
Vice-Chair, an election to fill the unexpired
term shall be held at the next available
meeting.
Duties of the Chair:
• Presides over the deliberations of the Board.
• He/She votes on all questions brought before
the Board.
• Has the authority, with consent of Board
Members in attendance, to place time limits on
visitor comments.
• Is recognized as the spokesperson for Board
actions and activities.
• Reviews and approves meeting agendas set by
Board prior to the meeting.
Duties of the Vice-Chair:
• Presides over the Board in the absence of the
Chair.
• Performs other duties assigned to the Chair in
the absence of the Chair.
ARTICLE V: Meetings:
• Meetings of the Intergovernmental Water Board
shall be held at a regular time and place set
by the members. Meetings of the
Intergovernmental Water Board are subject to
the open meetings law and are open to the
public. Only issues covered under ORS 192.660
may be discussed in Executive session.
Quorums:
• A majority of 3 members shall be considered a
quorum to conduct business. Duly appointed
Alternates count as Members for purposes of
establishing a quorum. In the event that the
elected Chair and 'Vice-Chair are both absent,
the Members in attendance shall elect a
Pro-Tem Chair for that meeting.
Agendas:
• At the end of each Board meeting agenda,
sufficient time shall be allocated to set the
agenda for the next meeting. Agendas shall be
reviewed and approved by the Chair prior to
mailing. Agendas and supporting material
shall be mailed to Board Members one week
prior to meetings. Information for last
minute agenda items shall be distributed to
Agenda Item No.: S
IWB Meeting Date: FE.B. 8 20/Z
-
if City of Tigard
Memorandum
O -
To: Intergovernmental Water Board Commissioners
From: Office Manager Greer Gaston
Re: Briefing on a Grant Application to Partially Fund ASR No. 3 Well Head
Improvements
Date: February 1, 2012
In fiscal year 2007-2008, the City of Tigard successfully drilled its third ASR well. The 1,000-
foot-deep well was capped until well head improvements could be constructed. The
improvements, scheduled to take place in 2012 and 2013, include the installation of a pump,
motor, piping and a chlorination system. The well has the storage capacity to provide 2.5 million
gallons of water per day during periods of dry weather.
Tigard has requested a $750,000 grant, (the maximum funding level available), to partially fund
the well head improvement project. This project is included in Tigard's 2011-2016 Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP), and the total project is $2.74 million.
Any cost savings resulting from the grant would be re-allocated to other projects identified in
the 2010 Water System Master Plan, including the Lake Oswego-Tigard Water Partnership.
The Tigard City Council is scheduled to consider a resolution in support of the grant application
at its February 14 meeting.
f ` Submitted at the IWB Meeting
By: Urn rn 1Ss 1 Uk1 e-r Lc A yLl.e"
Date: 2 "8"1Z, Agenda Item No.: �Q
Smd&oodles Inc.
n�ta�f'tS MnGrS 1215.11?SAmnn,Suite 900 o Pd1and,oreg4m 97204=2919 PIRNE 503225.9010* FAX503.225X22
MEMORANDUM
DATE: January 16, 2012
PROJECT: Regional Water Providers Consortium (RWPC) Interconnections Map and
Evaluation Project Phase 3
TO: Rebecca Geisen, Project Manager
Portland Water Bureau—Regional Water Providers Consortium
FROM: Brian Ginter, P.E.
Heidi Springer, P.E.
Murray, Smith&Associates, Inc.
RE: RWPC Geodatabase Refinement, Data Model Development and
Recommendations for Geodatabase Update and Use
Introduction
The Regional Water Providers Consortium(Consortium) is a group of 23 water providers in
the Portland metropolitan area of Oregon. These water providers serve approximately 90
percent of the urban metropolitan area from five (5) major water sources: the Bull Run
watershed,the Trask&Tualatin River system,the Clackamas River,the Willamette River
and groundwater. The Consortium's Strategic Plan identifies the need to encourage
partnerships between providers and facilitate and support reliable back-up water supplies for
all water providers should one (1) or more sources or transmission facilities become
unavailable due to an emergency or natural disaster. In order to develop a tool to aid the
Consortium's evaluation of emergency water supplies through existing water system
interconnections; the Portland Water Bureau (PWB) authorized Murray, Smith&Associates,
Inc. (MSA)to conduct the Regional Water Interconnections Map and Evaluation project.
The project was funded by the Department of Homeland Security.
Prior Work
The first two (2)phases of this project resulted in the creation of an ArcGIS geodatabase of
all existing water system facilities within the region including existing water system
interconnections and a pipe network overlay that may be used to:
• Identify pathways for routing water in emergency situations
09-1086.503 Page 1 of 15 Interconnections Map and Eval.Phase 3
January 2012 Portland Water Bureau
• Identify system vulnerabilities
• Develop emergency operational strategies
Phase 1 of the project focused on data collection and development of the geodatabase
mapping layers needed to allow for more detailed analysis of system interconnections. Phase
2 work involved incorporation of water provider system review comments as well as
exploratory use of the geodatabase for evaluating regional connectivity.
Phase 3 Objectives
Phase 3 of the Regional Interconnections project was funded by a grant from the Urban Areas
Security Initiative (UASI). This grant required that Phase 3 work be completed by October
31, 2011, approximately one (1) month after MSA was directed by the PWB to begin work.
With such a narrow project window, Phase 3 objectives focused on refining existing data.
Major objectives of the Phase 3 work include:
• Meet with Consortium providers and participating water systems to clarify specific
discrepancies in their system data which could not be resolved in prior phases
• Organize the geodatabase developed in prior phases into a standard ArcGIS data
model to improve data handling and quality
• Conduct staff training for Consortium members on the components and potential
applications of the regional database
Phase 3 also included a feasibility study to assess development of a regional hydraulic model.
This work is documented in independent separate technical memorandum.
Map Corrections and Data Refinement
Geographic Information System(GIS) data quality control completed in Phase 1 relied on
general water provider comments to ArcGIS maps created using the provider's water system
data. The level of detail provided in Phase 1 comments varied and left unresolved
discrepancies in the geodatabase such as overlapping facilities and pressure zones between
systems as well as incomplete facility information. Through meetings with each water
provider, work under Phase 3 endeavored to correct and complete existing GIS data and to
obtain GIS data from Consortium providers who did not participate in prior phases.
Map and Documentation Review
In order to correct and complete the existing geodatabase information in Phase 3, each water
system's facilities were reviewed and compared with available planning documents to
identify specific questions for system managers and operators. Each water system was
provided with a map of their system's GIS data and tables showing the associated
information for each pressure zone, source facility,reservoir and intertie on the map.
Inconsistencies and missing information were highlighted to elicit input from the water
09-1086.503 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Eval.Phase 3
January 2012 Page 2 of 15 Portland Water Bureau
GAPDX Projects\09U0861503-Enhanced geodatabaseThase 3 Merm\RWPC Geodatabase Phase 3 Memo.doc
provider's staff. Data tables were e-mailed to each provider in advance of a scheduled
meeting and maps were made available on MSA's flap site.
Provider Meetings
MSA met with water provider staff throughout the region to discuss and resolve incomplete
data and overlapping facilities within the Regional Interconnections geodatabase.
Participating water system meetings are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1
Water Provider Data Review Meetings
Beaverton, City of10/7/2011 Sandy, City of 10/10/2011
Boring Water District 10/17/2011 Sherwood, City of 10/12/2011
Clackamas River Water 10/7/2011 South Fork Water Board 10/25/2011
Gresham, City of 10/6/2011 Sunrise Water Authority 10/12/2011
Hillsboro, City of 10/17/2011 Tigard, City of 10/13/2011
Joint Water Commission 10/17/2011 Tualatin Valley Water 10/13/2011
District
Lake Oswego, City of 10/7/2011 Tualatin, City of 10/11/2011
Milwaukie, City of 10/14/2011 West Linn, City of 10/25/2011
Oregon City, City of 10/12/2011 West Slope Water District 10/12/2011
Portland Water Bureau 10/19/2011 Wilsonville, City of 10/10/2011
Rockwood Water PUD 10/6/2011 Wood Village, City of 10/13/2011
The non-Consortium member water systems Boring Water District, Rivergrove Water
District, Valley View Water District and the City of Wood Village, contributed data to the
Regional Interconnections geodatabase. Boring and Wood Village also participated in
meetings to review their system data. For Palatine Hill Water District, a non-Consortium
member, pressure zones are included in the regional geodatabase. This District did not
provide any additional water facility information.
Consortium member City of Gladstone did not provide GIS data for inclusion in the Regional
Interconnections geodatabase. Pressure zone GIS data was not available for Consortium
members City of Fairview and City of Sandy. Consortium members City of Fairview and
Oak Lodge Water District did not respond to meeting requests.
Provider Feedback and Geodatabase Editing
Information and comments provided by water system staff in response to MSA's map and
documentation reviews were manually incorporated into the geodatabase using ArcGIS 10
software. In addition to comment, the Cities of Milwaukie, Oregon City, Sandy and Tualatin
09-1086.503 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Eval.Phase 3
January 2012 Page 3 of 15 Portland Water Bureau
GAPDX_Projects\09\1086\503-Enhanced geodatabase\Phase 3 Metno\RWPC Geodatabase Phase 3 Memo.doc
provided new or updated GIS shapefiles to replace facilities incorrectly shown or missing
from the geodatabase developed in Phases 1 and 2.
The following general procedures and assumptions were used for adjusting service area and
pressure zone boundaries. It is recommended that the Consortium ultimately come to
consensus on how service areas and pressure zones should be represented in the geodatabase.
• Due to Phase 3 time constraints, areas where adjacent water providers indicated
conflicting service area boundaries were left to be resolved in future work
• Pressure zone boundaries were adjusted to reflect the water system that is physically
serving an area rather than the water system within whose political boundary the area
lies.
The geodatabase service area boundary data should not be relied upon as an accurate
representation of the legal boundary of each water system.
Potential Database Enhancements
Feedback from water provider meetings indicated that the following additional information
would be beneficial if collected and appended to the existing data. Phase 3 provided
insufficient time to collect these additional data items and add them to the geodatabase
region-wide. It is recommended that the Consortium reach consensus on which of these
additional data fields should be included in the geodatabase as well as collecting and
appending the data.
1. Intertie valve exercise date
2. Intertie condition rating (i.e. 1=Excellent, 2=Satisfactory, 3=Poor, 4=Unknown)
3. Links to detailed facility maps, such as vault details or intersection cards
Data Model
The geodatabase developed in Phases 1 and 2 was adapted into a standard Esri Water
Utilities Data Model. A Data Model is a pre-defined geodatabase template that helps to
streamline and standardize data acquisition while accommodating all existing data. The
spatial and non-spatial information for type of water facility was reorganized as described in
this section.
Featurg Classes,Attributes and Domains
The data model is composed of feature classes(also called object classes)that define a type
of water facility, such as storage reservoirs or water mains, as well as that facility's spatial
information. Each feature class is composed of a specific set of attributes that describe that
feature. For example the wMain feature class describes water mains. The wMain feature
class attributes include characteristics like pipe diameter and material.
09-1086.503 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Eval.Phase 3
January 2012 Page 4 of 15 Portland Water Bureau
G:\PDX_Projects\09\1086\503•Enhanced geodatabaseThase 3 Memo\RWPC Geodatahase Phase 3 Memo.doc
To further improve standardization, domains can be established for each attribute. A domain
is a pre-defined set of values that the user entering data must choose from. This constrained
set of values is not appropriate for every attribute, for instance,you would not want the name
of a reservoir constrained to a list of pre-determined values but it may be useful to have a pre-
defined list of pipe materials. The user entering data would choose Ductile Iron from the
domain of pipe materials rather than entering the acronyms DI or DIP. Although DI and DIP
are generally understood industry-wide abbreviations for ductile iron pipe, the database will
interpret these as distinct and thus different values, thereby making it more difficult to
identify or group water mains by pipe material. Domains also help eliminate anomalies in
the data caused by typing errors. The AssetOwner domain is used to define standard water
provider names in all feature classes of the geodatabase. The domain values are shown in
Table 2 below.
Table 2.
AssetOwner Domain (Water Provider Standard Names)
Beaverton Milwaukie South Fork WB
Boring WD NCCWC Sunrise Water Authority
Clackamas River Water NCCWC/SFWB/CRW Tigard
Cornelius Oak Lode WD Troutdale
Fairview Oregon City Tualatin
Forest Grove Palatine Hill WD Tualatin Valley WD
Gladstone Portland Water Bureau Valley View WD
Washington County Supply
Gresham Raleigh WD Line
Joint Water Commission Rivergrove WD West Linn
Hillsboro Rockwood Water PUD West Sloe WD
Lake Oswe o Sandy Wilsonville
Lusted WD Sherwood Wood Villa e
Each feature class and its associated attributes are described in the following tables. Where a
domain has been established for an attribute, the key values and a brief explanation are
provided.
Some additional attributes that are available in the Water Utilities Data Model are not shown
in the tables below because there was no existing data for these attributes. The Consortium
may ultimately decide to populate-these attributes with data collected from its members or
eliminate the attributes from the data model template. It is recommended that the Consortium
reach consensus on the necessary attributes and refine the data model to include only this
information.
09-1086.503 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Eval.Phase 3
January 2012 Page 5 of 15 Portland Water Bureau
GAPDX_Projects\09\1086\503-Enhanced geodatabase\Phase 3 Memo\RWPC Geodatabase Phase 3 Metno.doc
wMain Feature Class
The wMain feature class describes both distribution and transmission piping for individual
water provider systems and region-wide facilities such as the Washington County Supply
Line. Table 3 presents the wMain feature class and Tables 3A and 313 present the wMaterial
and wMainDistributionDiameter domains,respectively.
Table 3
Water Main Attributes
An ID number for the pipe provided with the
FACILITYID String ori final GIS data from each waters stem
INSTALLYEAR Integer Year of installation ifprovided)
MATERIAL String The pipe material ifprovided) wMaterial
DESCRIPTION String Pipe location description ifprovided)
COMMENTS String Any comments pertaining to the pipe
DIAMETER Double The nominal pipe diameter(inches) wMainDistributionDiameter
SEGMENTLENGTH Double The approximate length of pipe feet
Hazen-Williams roughness coefficient from
ROUGHNESS Double hydraulic model ifprovided)
ISTRANMAIN Small The type of water main. wMainType
Integer
1 -Distribution,2-Transmission
3-PWB Conduit
4:Washington County plx.Line _
5-JWC Transmission
OWNEDBY String The waters stem provider that owns the facility AssetOwner
The source file of the data or plan where the
DATASOURCE String information may be found
Identifies the pipe as significant to potential
region-wide water transmission,domain values
ISREGTRANMAIN String are yes or no wYesNo
09-1086.503 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Eval.Phase 3
January 2012 Page 6 of 15 Portland Water Bureau
GAPDX_Projectsl09U086\503-Enhanced podatabaseftase 3 Me=\RWPC Geodatabase Phan 3 NUnlo.doc
Table 3A
Pipe Material Domain
Asbestos Cement High Density Polyethylene
HDPE
Cast Iron Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC)
Concrete Cylinder Steel
Copper Wrought Iron
Ductile Iron Unknown
Galvanized Steel
Table 313
Pipe Diameter Domain
4" 42"
61' 4811
811 54'1
10" 60"
12" 66"
14" 7211
16" 78"
18" 84"
20" 90"
24" 96"
30"
Unknown(stored in
36" the database as 99)
wReservoir Feature Class
The wReservoir feature class describes finished water storage reservoirs and tanks throughout
the region. Where necessary and available, electronic data from providers was supplemented
with information from the provider's Water System Master Plan. Table 4 presents the
wReservoir feature class.
09-1086.503 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Eval.Phase 3
January 2012 Page 7 of 15 Portland Water Bureau
G1PDX_Projects\09\1086\503-Enhanced geodatabase\Phase 3 Memo\RWPC Geodatabase Phase 3 Memo.doc
Table 4
Reservoir Attributes
An ID number for the reservoir provided
with the original GIS data from each
FACILITYID String waters stem
INSTALLYEAR Integer Year of installation ifprovided)
Year of seismic improvements(if
UPGRADEYEAR Integerprovided)
Reservoir location description(if
LOCDESC String provided)
STRUCTTYPE String Reservoir construction style wRsvrStructureType
Buried
Partially Buried._.............._........................_..._. _.-._...
.... ...... .......
Above Ground
Elevated
Standpipe
The water system provider that owns the
OWNEDBY String facility AssetOwner
Does the reservoir have seismic
SEISMIC String improvements?-yes,no or unknown wSeismic
OVERFLOWELEV Double Reservoir overflow elevation feet
MATERIAL String Reservoir construction material wRsvrMaterial
Concrete
Steel
COMMENTS String Any comments pertaining to the reservoir
FACILITYNAME String Common facility name or description
The source file of the data or plan where
DATASOURCE String the information ma be found
wPump Feature Class
The wPump feature class describes finished water pump stations. Provided pump station data
varied from stations with a single pump to those with multiple pumps providing water to
more than one (1) pressure zone. Pump stations were divided into three (3) "Function"
categories:
1. Pump to Distribution with Gravity Storage: supply water to pressure zones with
finished water storage reservoirs serving the zone by gravity
2. Constant Pressure: supply pressure zones without the benefit of gravity storage
3. Pump to Terminal Storage: directly supply a water system's terminal finished water
storage reservoir through transmission mains. A terminal reservoir is defined as the
primary supply reservoir receiving a water system's source water prior to distribution
to customers. Not all systems are configured with a terminal reservoir.
09-1086.503 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Eval.Phase 3
January 2012 Page 8 of 15 Portland Water Bureau
GAPDX_Prnjects\09\108a503-Enhanced geodatabase\Phase 3 Memo\RWPC Geodatabase Phase 3 Memo.doc
This classification system provides information beneficial to identifying relevant facilities
when performing analysis with the geodatabase. Overall station capacity is listed by pressure
zone served. When available, individual pump capacities and discharge pressures were also
included. Table 5 presents the wPump feature class.
Table 5
Pump Station Attributes
NOR
An ID number for the pump station provided with
FACILITYID String the original GIS data from each waters stem
INSTALLYEAR Integer Year of installation ifprovided)
FUNCTION String Pump station function: wPumpFunction
Pump to Distribution_with Gravity Storage
Constant Pressure
__.._......_...._.._........__.._...._...._._........._....._.._._.....__....._......._.._._..._..__._....._.....�.
Pump to Terminal Storage
Small
BUPPWRKW Integer Kilowatts of backup ower if any,if known
LOCDESC String Pump station location description ifprovided)
Pump station description including number of
DESCRIPTION String pumps ifprovided)
COMMENTS String Any comments pertaining to the pump station
Station capacity(gallons per minute)serving
STA CAP 1 Integer pressure zone at discharge head STA HGL 1
Station capacity(gallons per minute)serving
STA CAP 2 Integer pressure zone at discharge head STA HGL 2
Discharge hydraulic grade(feet)at station
STA HGL 1 Integer capacity STA CAP 1
Discharge hydraulic grade(feet)at station
STA HGL 2 Integer capacity STA CAP 2
CAP TYPE String NOMINAL or FIRM capacity asprovided) wPumpCapType
Station capacity(million gallons per day)serving
STA CAP IMGD Double pressure zone at discharge head STA HGL 1
Station capacity(million gallons per day)serving
STA CAP 2MGD Double pressure zone at discharge head STA HGL 2
Individual pump capacity(gallons per minute),#
P CAP # Integer represents the individual pump number up to 6
Individual pump discharge grade(feet),#
P HGL # Integer represents the individual pump number up to 6
ELEVATION Double Pump station elevation feet,ifprovided)
NAME String Common facility name or description
OWNEDBY String The waters stem provider that owns the facility AssetOwner
The source file of the data or plan where the
DATASOURCE String information may be found
09-1086:503 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Eval.Phase 3
January 2012 Page 9 of 15 Portland Water Bureau
G:\PDX_Projects\09\1086\503-Enhanced geodatabase\Phase 3 Memo\RWPC Geodatabase Phase 3 Memo.doc
wlntertie Feature Class
Water system interconnections are included in the geodatabase where identified in electronic
mapping, hydraulic models or through meetings with water providers about their system data.
Interties are identified as either emergency or source interties. The emergency intertie type
represents typically unmetered emergency connections between two (2) adjacent water
systems. Source interties represent wholesale supply or other metered supply connections
between a water supply system or agency and a system receiving a wholesale or metered
water supply. Table 6 presents the wlntertie feature class.
Table 6
Intertie Attributes
An ID number for the intertie provided with
FACILITYID String the original GIS data from each waters stem
LOCDESC String Intertie location description ifprovided)
PIPESIZE Double Nominal size.of pipe or valve inches wMainDistributionDiameter
Small If metered intertie,nominal size of meter
METERSIZE Integer inches wMeterSize
Common name for water system 1 (SYS_1)
ZONE l String pressure zone
Common name for water system 2(SYS-2j
ZONE 2 String pressure zone
Hydraulic grade of water system 1 pressure
HGL 1 Double zone
Hydraulic grade of water system 2 pressure
HGL 2 Double zone
SYS 1 String Waters stem 1 wlntertieSystems
SYS 2 String Waters stem 2 wIntertieSystems
Intertie capacity from water system 1 to
CAP 1 2 Integer waters stem 2 m,if known
Intertie capacity from water system 2 to
CAP 2 1 Integer waters stem 1 (gpm,if known
DESCRIPTION String Intertie description ifprovided)
COMMENTI String Any comments pertaining to the intertie
COMMENT2 String Any comments pertaining to the intertie
Type of intertie:emergency,source or wIntertieType
INTTYPE String unknown
INSTALLYEAR Integer Year of installation ifprovided)
The source file of the data or plan where the
DATASOURCE String information may be found
NAME Strin Common facility name or description
09-1086.503 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Eval.Phase 3
January 2012 Page 10 of 15 Portland Water Bureau
GAPDX_Projects\09\1086\503-Enhanced geodatabase\Phase 3 Memo\RWPC Geodatabase Phase 3 Memo.doc
The water system domain wlntertieSystems used in the SYS_#attribute of the wlntertie
feature class is different than the AssetOwner list of water systems. There are several small
water districts included in the wlntertieSystems domain that have connections to other
regional water providers but are not members of the Consortium and their facilities are not
included in other feature classes of the geodatabase. Table 6A presents the wlntertieSystems
domain and Table 6B presents the wMeterSize domain.
Table 6A
Intertied Water Systems Domain
Beaverton Lusted WD Southwood Park WD
Burlington WD Milwaukie Sunrise Water Authority
Clackamas River Water NCCWC Sk lands Water Co
Fairview North Plains Ti and
Forest Grove Oregon City Troutdale
Glenmorie Palatine Hill WD Tualatin
Green Valley&GNR Water Pleasant Home WD Tualatin Valley WD
Gresham Portland Water Bureau Two Rivers Water Assoc.
Hideaway Hills Water Co Raleigh WD Valley View WD
Hillsboro Rivergrove WD West Linn
Joint Water Commission Rockwood Water PUD West S-lope WD
Lake Grove WD Sherwood Wilsonville
Lake Oswego South Fork WB Wood Village
Lorna Water Co
Table 613
Intertie Meter Size Domain
Unknown(stored in
NOR
the database as-1 1211
2't 1611
311 18°
411 2011
6't 2411
811 3011
None (stored in the
10" database as 0)
09-1086.503 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Eval.Phase 3
January 2012 Page 11 of 15 Portland Water Bureau
G:\PDX_Projects\09\1086\503-Enhanced geodatabase\Phase 3 Memo\RWPC Geodatabase Phase 3 Memo.doc
wSourceFacility Feature Class
Attributes for water system source facilities include source type and capacity, and water
quality information that is pertinent to a blending analysis of water from multiple sources,
such as the disinfection method and presence of fluoride. Table 7 presents the
wSourceFacility feature class.
Table 7
Source Facility Attributes
An ID number for the source facility provided
with the original GIS data from each water
FACILITYID String system
INSTALLYEAR Integer Year of installation ifprovided)
LOCDESC String Source location description ifprovided)
COMMENTS String Any comments pertaining to the source facility
NAME String Common facility name or description
FACILITYTYPE String The type of source facility: wFacilityType
WTP=water treatment plant treating ground
or surface water
....................................._...._............._.._..._._._..._..... ..._..........__.......__.........._._...._..-............_._....._..._
Well=groundwater well
........__..•........._............._............,....._............._......._........_...................._....___.....................
_....-...
ASR=aquifer storage and recovery well
TREATMENTTYPE String Water treatment process: wTreatmentType
Conventional Filtration
.._......._ .._..._...._.............._._.................._....._........_...__.....__........___......................_....__............_....._._......
Green Sand Filter
............. .__...__-..._............_................._.........__..__._._.._.......__..__.._........_................_................
Membrane
......_..._..............._......_............._......................._........._..._._......................................_._..............._..................
None
-__._....._............................. ..._....................._......_...._............._.._...._._..._.._................_._.... .._..
Unknown
_.....__._........_.._."".._........._...._..__..........__.._._.................._................
............
.....
Aeration tower
DISINFECTMETHOD String Residual disinfection method: wDisinfectMethod
Chloramine
Chlorine
None
_,.__....._..._._....._..._....__.__._._...._...__....__..____.._._...._._........._.........................
_..._...
Unknown
CAPACITYMGD Double Nominal capacity million gallons per da
ISFLUORIDATED String Is the source fluoridated? wYesNo
Hydraulic grade line of the source discharge to
HGL Double the distributions stem feet,if known
ISMAJORSOURCE String Is the source's capacity eater than 1 m d? wYesNo
OWNEDBY String The waters stem provider that owns the facility AssetOwner
The source file of the data or plan where the
DATASOURCE String information may be found
09-1086.503 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Eval.Phase 3
January 2012 Page 12 of 15 Portland Water Bureau
GAPDX_Projects\09\1086\503-Enhanced geodatabase\Phase 3 Memo\RWPC Geodatabase Phase 3 Memo.doc
wWaterServiceArea Feature Class
The water service area feature class is composed of polygons showing the boundary of each
water system's service area based on provider data, Metro's Regional Land Information
System(RLIS) dataset and meetings with water providers to resolve overlapping data. As
stated previously, areas where adjacent water providers indicated conflicting service area
boundaries were left to be resolved by the Consortium in future work.
The most recently reported population and water demand data are included in the
wWaterServiceArea feature class attributes. Population and water demand information was
summarized in Phase 1 primarily from current.water system master plans or other
documented water demand forecast updates. Consortium members Clackamas River Water
and Tualatin Valley Water District have divided their water system boundaries and water
demand data into hydraulically separate sub-areas as discussed in their respective planning
documents and this has been reflected in the geodatabase. Table 8 presents the
wWaterServiceArea feature class.
Table 8
Water Service Area Attributes
WATERSYS PStringThe water provider name AssetOwner
EXPOP Double The current service area population
EXPOPYR Double 'The year of the current service area population value
FUTPOP Double The future planned service area population
FUTPOPYR Double The year of the future planned service area population
POPDATASRC String The data source of the service area population value
EXADD Double Existing annual average day demand
EXMDD Double Existing peak day demand
EXYR Double Year of the existing demand data
EXSRC String Source of the existing demand data
FUTADD Double Future annual average day demand
FUTMDD Double Future peak day demand
FUTYR Double Year of the future demand data
FUTSRC String Source of the future demand data
Name of the non-wholesale water treatment facility
WTP String serving the waters stem
Does the water system operate aquifer storage and
ASR String recove facilities? wYesNo
09-1086.503 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Eval.Phase 3
January 2012 Page 13 of 15 Portland Water Bureau
G\PDX_Projects\09\1086\503-Enhanced geodatabase\Phese 3 Memo\RWPC GeodatabasePhew 3 Memo.doc
COMMENTS String Any comments pertaining to the waters stem
Name of any wholesale water provider serving the
WHOLESALE String system
WELLS Strin Does the waters stem operate wells? wYesNo
wPressureZones Feature Class
The pressure zone feature class is composed of polygons showing the boundary of each
pressure zone as provided by the individual water systems. For the purposes of the Regional
Interconnections geodatabase, pressure zone boundaries were adjusted to reflect the water
system that is physically serving an area rather than the water system within whose political
boundary the area lies. Table 9 presents the wPressureZone feature class.
Table 9
Pressure Zone Attributes
ZONENAME String The common pressure zone name
OWNEDBY String The waters stem provider that owns the pressure zone AssetOwner
HGL Double The h draulic grade line of the RressHELKone feet
Staff Training
Staff training provided an overview of basic GIS concepts and use of ArcGIS software, an
introduction to the information available in the Regional Interconnections geodatabase and
examples of thematic mapping and queries based on this information. The trainings were .
designed to be identical with some flexibility depending on the GIS skill of each group of
participants.
Staff training was conducted in two (2) three-hour sessions:
1. Thursday, October 27, 2011 from 9 am to 12 pm at the City of Gresham
2. Friday, October 28, 2011 from 1 pm to 4 pm at the Portland Water Bureau
Training sessions were attended by the following water system providers:
• City of Beaverton • City of Sandy
• Clackamas River Water • Sunrise Water Authority
e City of Gresham • City of Tigard
9 City of Hillsboro • City of Tualatin
09-1086.503 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Eval.Phase 3
January 2012 Page 14 of 15 Portland Water Bureau
GAPDX_Projeds\09\1086\503-Enhanced geodatabase\Phase 3 MeimaWK Geodatabase Phase 3 Mew.doc
• City of Lake Oswego • Tualatin Valley Water District
• Portland Water Bureau
Feedback from these training events indicate that GIS professionals from participating water
agencies see potential in continuing to compile region-wide water system data although
additional review and standardization of the data will likely be needed. Many of the GIS
professionals in attendance had no, or limited, prior knowledge of this database project from
their organizations.
Conclusions and Recommendations for Future Work
Phase 3 of the Regional Interconnections project brought the geodatabase developed in
Phases 1 and 2 into a standard Esri Water Utilities Data Model, further refined the existing
data and improved data processing by establishing attribute domains. Data quality was also
improved by meeting with water providers to elicit feedback on specific water system
questions. Phase 3 identified additional attributes to enhance the utility of the geodatabase as
an analysis tool. Staff training conducted as part of Phase 3 allowed Consortium water
provider GIS professionals to explore information available in the latest version of the
geodatabase.
Through the Phase 3 work, including meetings with individual water providers and round-
table discussions during the training sessions, a number of recommendations and next steps
have been developed for the Consortium's consideration. A brief description of each is
presented below:
Finalize data sharing agreement to facilitate regional and sub-regional use of the
geodatabase. While creation of the Regional.Interconnections geodatabase has been
primarily a technical effort, it is recommended that the next steps taken by the Consortium in
the development of this tool be matters of policy and procedure. It is recommended that the
Consortium come to consensus on the means of distribution, updating and maintenance for
the geodatabase in order to maintain its integrity and usefulness as an analysis tool. The first
step in this task is to obtain authorization from each of the member agencies to allow access
to the geodatabase for analysis.
Establish a working group to manage geodatabase use, update and distribution. Once
member agency authorization has been obtained, a working group consisting of managers
and GIS professionals from member water systems should be established to review the
content and form of the geodatabase relative to individual water system GIS data and
establish protocols and standards to streamline future updates. This should be considered a
high priority item for the Consortium in order to preserve the investment made to date in the
geodatabase.
BMG:has
09-1086.503 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Eval.Phase 3
January 2012 Page 15 of 15 Portland Water Bureau
G:\PDX_Projects\09\1086\503-Enhanced geodatabase\Phase 3 Memo\RWPC Geodatabase Phase 3 Memo.doc
Submitted at the IWB Meeting
By: eum/1115-iux' C.i'' BU f-1 ce c
Date: /Z. Agenda Item No.: In
Mulxa &tissmates,l,C.
ePl �a11111C1S 1.)1 S 11:Salmon,Suite 9W a RAW,Oregon 97292919 PHONE503.225.9010 FAX 403 22$.9022
MEMORANDUM
DATE: January 16, 2012
PROJECT: Interconnections Map and Evaluation—Phase 3
Develop Preliminary Hydraulic Model
TO: Regional Water Providers Consortium—Technical Committee
FROM: Joe Foote, P.E.
Brian Ginter, P.E.
REVIEWED: David Stangel, P.E.
RE: Hydraulic Model Development Assessment and Recommendations
Introduction
The Regional Water Providers Consortium(Consortium) is a group of 22 water providers in
the Portland, Oregon metropolitan area. These water providers serve approximately 90
percent of the urban metropolitan area from five major water sources;the Bull Run
Watershed, the Trask& Tualatin River system, the Clackamas River,the Willamette River,
and groundwater. The Consortium's Strategic Plan identifies the need to encourage
partnerships between providers to facilitate and support reliable back-up water supplies for
all water providers should one or more sources or a transmission facility become unavailable
due to an emergency or natural disaster. In order to develop a tool to aid the Consortium's
evaluation of emergency water supplies through existing water system interconnections; the
Portland Water Bureau(PWB)authorized Murray, Smith&Associates, Inc. (MSA) to
conduct the Regional Water Interconnections Map and Evaluation(Interconnections project)
project in 2009. This memorandum documents Task 4 of Phase 3 of the Interconnections
Project.
This document was prepared under a grant from the Office of Grants and Training,United
States Department of Homeland Security. Points of view or opinions expressed in this
document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of
09-1086.504 Page 1 of 10 Interconnections Map and Evaluation
January 2012 City of Portland Water Bureau
policies of the Office of Grants and Training or the United States Department of Homeland
Security.
Project Purpose and Outcome
On September 22, 2011, the Consortium authorized Phase 3 of the Interconnections project.
Task 4 of this phase of the project involved an evaluation of the effort required to develop a
preliminary regional hydraulic model based on the data contained in the geodatabase. This
technical memorandum (TM) documents those efforts and the resulting recommendations
and next steps should the Consortium elect to pursue actual development of a regional
hydraulic model. A separate memorandum was prepared which describes the Task 1-3 work
elements, findings and recommendations.
The hydraulic model development assessment element's focus was to determine if a
skeletonized hydraulic model of the interconnected regional water systems could be
developed. Though this phase did include the partial development of a preliminary regional
hydraulic model as a "pilot", the main focus was to perform a Gap Analysis of the ArcGIS
geodatabase information and provide recommendations for the development of a regional
hydraulic model. The effort is intended to identify critical facilities that are required for a
functioning regional water distribution system hydraulic model.
A regional hydraulic model is one of the potential next steps in meeting the following
objectives that the Consortium has set for the Interconnections Map and Evaluation project.
• Provide the foundation for a strong, flexible and redundant regional water supply
system
• Identify,within the region and on a sub-regional basis, options available for
conveying water during an emergency
• Provide a framework to inform local decision-making regarding priorities for
infrastructure improvements
• Support funding opportunities for future interconnection projects
• Identify future regional and sub-regional water system interconnections to strengthen
the overall water system reliability and resiliency
Hydraulic Model Development Assessment
The previous efforts of the ArcGIS geodatabase development(Phases 1 and 2 of the
Interconnection project) included all of the existing water system facilities and piping in the
Consortium's members service areas. A next potential step could include the development of
a regional hydraulic model. There is still considerable work that must be completed prior to
the development of functional hydraulic model. One of the major questions remaining is that
of whether some level of"skeletonization" should be implemented. The resulting number of
elements in a regional model that includes every pipe in all 22 of the consortium member's
09-1086.504 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Evaluation
January 2012 Page 2 of 10 City of Portland Water Bureau
G:\PDX_Projects\09\1086-Opm\RWPC Interconnections Phase 3 Task 4 Final Memo-01-16-12.docx
systems, would be extremely complex and potentially difficult to analyze. It would also
include many areas that are not important from a regional water supply perspective. A
regional hydraulic model could be developed that incorporates "only"the hydraulically
significant elements and would exclude the others. The skeletonization effort would be
performed on a system by system basis. Each system would be evaluated to determine what
areas and or,facilities should be included or excluded. This effort would also provide an
additional level of validation to ensure that the operation of each system was clearly
understood prior to inclusion in a regional model. In general, any service area or pressure
zone that could receive or convey "regional" supply would be included in the overall model.
Regardless of the level of skeletonization,the overall goal would be to develop a hydraulic
model that would be mathematically stable allowing convergence under steady state and
extended period simulation(EPS) simulations in a reasonable amount of time.
The development of a hydraulic model requires accurate information for the following:
• Spatial information(element location and elevation)
• Connectivity and diameter of system piping
• Demand distribution
• Facility information(tank dimensions, pump curves and automated valve settings)
• The collection of field and/or SCADA to enable the model to be calibrated
Hydraulic Model Development Assessment Summary
The development of a regional hydraulic model will require extensive effort to incorporate
the critical details from each of the Consortium's interconnected water systems. To assist in
determining these details, the development of a"pilot"hydraulic model was undertaken to
evaluate the overall process. This allowed for review of the ArcGIS geodatabase information
in detail to find data gaps and identify a recommended approach for the future development
of a regional hydraulic model. The extent of the preliminary model development to date
included the Regional Transmission Mains layer developed for illustrative purposes in Phase
2 of the Interconnections Project and associated critical facilities. The following discussion
gives a summary of the model development assessment, which leads to the recommendations
that are based on the findings from this preliminary work.
Regional Hydraulic Profile
An important initial step in understanding the regional system hydraulics was to develop a
hydraulic profile and mass balance. This provided an overall understanding of the flow of
water within, and between each of the water systems. The hydraulic profile developed for
this phase of the project is attached to this memorandum as Figure 1. An initial mass balance
was developed to determine the overall flow consumed and transferred between each of the
water systems on an overall average basis. Limited information was available regarding the
09-1086.504 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Evaluation
January 2012 Page 3 of 10 City of Portland Water Bureau
G.\PD3(_Pmjects\09\1086-Open\RWPC Interconnections Phase 3 Task 4 Final Memo-01-16-12.docx
v� PDB AILINGTGM f
NEI—R0.1.2 L S TYMD_WEST HILLS
WEST SLOPE M. RFSERV01R5 WTP
Rl d '-2a3
"..riiP RIP,
of-ea5' oAM 2
CIE-&2(r OE.Batl
UE-ow
ttTa IWSW.
TP,w5Y1551d
M CITY 6 SAMY P M BMD
NEIEfl NQ I k 2
M -
OE=13tl
YLLT TIIX
700- —TI—PIPPING M CQriECTIONS
IL.TI6
PWB (135'-515'-82P)
I PNB WE5IWODD
3&4
M
10f.. �Yq
•619
�v
M -5O0
600- I A PIFAtWT NauE
d WD
T1.MO PWB M Ctt�PEPLE
CTl
iEy POWOL BUTTE
CCWYN
FEN NILL 162 I (nE511A4
.. WASNINDTd C TY APPLY LINE OE-5w QUINT Rum
CITY
500-
OE•52tl i uTON VIM -500
I TIGMD
1.MG OE-90'
a 5
� � oE•d9tl
SELLA
BEuAo 0 PID
I VISTA M
OE 47S TVMD RESEAVOIAB� BOLT011 I
gMEld
_ I eMm LAM N WA1 -I ICT I 4401 PRO OE.Mw
u T OMD 0E=135'. WILSMIVILUi �•
1 a 2 gESRvolgs ELLI GSEN RES
'- OE.62P B-I k D-2
1WLLATIN M 1...-n,_._.. __. - dW 2 -4G0
B l!M 9EAWOOD S1R1YT �j M pEvdIT OTTY 1,2
a S
.�.. 400 XILL20g0 OE•dttl OE=dttl M p61 a2 I EYED FNCY
•393. INTERTIE
W.SYSTEM) N � OM L—MD FAIRVIEW
NMn SBP IYWD LICIf LMflf I VALLEY VIEW PFS i a 3
i pFSERV.IM � M DE•3B3' i......._ OEa3B3' RES I 81W`D-
sQ CITY KFpEST DIVISid ._-..._..
M P OREGd cllY/ON q.IWIQIT'B' ' Nti.919' x . OEa 2)5
y CITY w
LIQ. OE-3W .._
WAUIGA
R-Ia M M �rB WIP
M
M Ice_ .I SOU111 FpP
YIlWAMO[
N M CtlYIECTIONs TU�Tln PNaf
NIL}' T16Ag0
RATER WIP OEVAIEO CRW uATNFR M WFBa TROAD -300
300- I 80111 TA PS -... 11.®..- XOO<W000 PIA
_,..... J
I... .RgNO NATfII
OEv28w �j 0E=29i OE= MRN SnEFT OEv 281' iKILTMENT
U PM8-WEST SIDE SPRY LINE p �P m
$ W�T'N
- ' PWB-SE 92TLY LINE N04WC wfP FACILITY
I E3n 9D' FAIRV IEW wELL4
j
u
�: MRRwoo. oxAZ� Figure 1
200- I BEAVOLTaN P ;d.3 L 6 — InT�TIE
ASR L2.4 WAd IN.Td CAR.IINA PS
EL.81' ?V1,
RIC WTP
EPL IB�1' WEP P wIL VSLLE �q
ntt d wILLMErtE a1YEa wTP WR Y
M GROVE EL•130' P VA
NCtr 3N' 1.V0:OSWEGO WTP YILYPNflE Wnlc A't,
3 FLTd PS Eln 12r CRW Wry `+TJ
INTERCONNECTIONS MAP&ELEVATION PROJECT
LEGEND ABBREVIATIONS
ASR AQUIFER STORAGE a RECOVERY PWB PORTLAND WATER BUREAU REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM
WATER SUPPLY LINE O PUMP STATION BWD BORING WATER DISTRICT PS PUMP STATION HYDRAULIC SCHEMATIC
n
RESERVOIR/TANK ® NORMALLY CLOSED CONNECTION CSSWF COLUMBIA SOUTH SHORE WELL FIELD RES RESERVOIR
DAFRCENCY INTERTIE PIPING
CRW CLACKAMAS RIVER WATER DISTRICT SWA SUNRISE WATER AUTHORITY
❑M MASTER METER EL ELEVATION WSWD WEST SLOPE WATER DISTRICT
al WATER TREATMENT PLANT WELL -- - -
MG MILLION GALLONS WTP WATER TREATMENT PLANT January 2012
CONTROL VALVE
OE OVERFLOW ELEVATION
flow rates through interties between each of the water systems, reducing the ability to
determine (on an overall average basis) how much water is conveyed through the different
water systems. As highlighted in the recommendation section, a detailed mass balance and
operational strategy should be developed in subsequent phases of the project to assist with
complete regional hydraulic model development.
Model Skeletonization
In order to keep the hydraulic model manageable, skeletonization was used to remove
facilities that do not have a regionally hydraulic significance. The skeletonization of the
entire regional water system included the Regional Transmission Mains and additional pipes
within each of the water systems that are required from a regional network perspective.
Critical facilities where identified, which includes water supply sources, reservoirs and a
limited number of booster pump stations. These facilities are tabulated in Table 1.
Connectivity between pipes and facilities was reviewed and corrected based on available
information.
Table 1
Critical Regional Facilities
Sources = Reservoirs con 'd Reservoirs cont"d
Bella Vista(Rockwood Water Sexton Mountain No. 1,2
Bull Run Supply PUD) (Beaverton)
Clackamas River Water WTP Bolton Reservoir West Linn Springville No. 1,2 TVWD
Burlingame Tank No.2,3,4 Sunset Reservoir No 1,2
JWC WTP PWB Sherwood
Elligsen Reservoir B-1,2
Lake Oswego WTP Wilsonville Tabor Reservoir No. 1, 5
Fern Hill No. 1, 2 JWC Valley View Res No. 1,2
Portland Wellfield Treatment Florence Lane(TVWD) Walu a OLWD
Facility Thompson TVWD Westwood Tank
Rockwood Groundwater Grabhorn TVWD
Treatment Facility Grant Butte(Gresham) Pump Stations
South Fork WTP Hyde Park TVWD Carolina PS
Willamette River WTP In lewood(TVWD) Fulton PS
Ma er(CR Washington Park Station 2 PS
Mo tainview Reservoir
10 MG(Tigard) Joegon Ci Washington Park Station 3 PS
Ai lington 0. 1 , 2,3
(PWB) Otty No.1,2, 3 (CRW)
Powell Butte Reservoir
Amy Tualatin North/South PWB
During the review of the Regional Transmission Mains network(a subset of piping from
provider's GIS piping data that includes large diameter transmission facilities and piping
09-1086.504 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Evaluation
January 2012 Page 5 of 10 City of Portland Water Bureau
G:\PDX_Projects\09\1086-Open\RWPC Interconnections Phase 3 Task 4 Final Menlo-01-16-12.docx
connecting sources and storage elements), it was identified that key connections were
missing in many areas, particularly within individual water systems, that could be utilized for
the regional conveyance of water. Additionally, it was found through working with this data
that the pipe GIS layer requires further refinement to determine the accurate connectivity of
the pipes (particularly between systems). There are numerous locations where pipes either
terminate near each other and are not connected, or one pipe crosses another where they
should be connected. To update this information and correct the connectivity, requires a
coordinated effort between the hydraulic model and the GIS. Where the model is not
skeletonized, it is preferable that a one-to-one relationship between the model and GIS be
maintained. Ultimately this will require each utility to update their GIS to correct areas
where pipe and facility discrepancies were found. In some areas,relatively small mains(8-
12 inches)running in parallel serve as a"transmission" system conveying water between
various systems. This illustrates that the regional system is comprised of more than just the
large diameter Regional Transmission Mains. After reviewing this process, the
recommended approach would be to systematically work with each water utility and develop
a partially skeletonized hydraulic model that includes the hydraulically significant elements,
subsequently combining them into one overall regional model.
System Demands
Initial demand evaluations reviewed the Average Day Demand(ADD) and Maximum Day
Demand(MDD)for the 22 water service areas that comprise the Consortium and an
additional six non-consortium members: Rivergrove Water District, Valley View Water
District, Boring Water District, Palatine Hill Water District, Cities of Troutdale and Wood
Village, included in the geodatabase. The reduction of the hydraulic model to the Regional
Transmission Mains resulted in point demands representing each of the water systems. A
more accurate distribution of demands within each respective utility will be required to more
accurately model regional system conditions. This would be particularly important to
conduct extended period hydraulic simulation, which evaluates how water moves in the
system over time.
Facility Information
A review of the facilities indicated that hydraulically significant parameters in the
geodatabase are missing at many locations. For a complete hydraulic model to be developed,
the information in Table 2 will need to be gathered and incorporated into the geodatabase, for
all facilities to be included.
09-1086.504 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Evaluation
January 2012 Page 6 of 10 City of Portland Water Bureau
G:\PDX_Projects\09\1086-Open\RWPCinteroonnectiorts Phase 3 Task 4 Final Memo-01-16-12.docx
Table 2
Required Model Facility Information
Type Elevation(ft) Valve Type
Base Elevation(ft) Diameter(in) Elevation(ft)
Minimum Level (ft) Shutoff Head (ft) Diameter(in)
Maximum Level (ft) Design Head (ft) Pressure,Elevation
Initial Level (ft) Design Flow(gpm) or Flow Setting
Diameter(ft) Low Head(ft)
High Flow( m)
Summary and Next Steps
Phase 3 of the Regional Water Interconnections Map and Evaluation project resulted in an
improvement in the overall understanding of the regional system and identified where
additional investment is required. The objective of this effort was to outline the steps for the
development of a regional hydraulic model,to be considered for completion in future phases.
This process evaluated skeletonization options, including which facilities are required, and if
there were other data gaps.
The following is a summary of recommendations needed to complete the development of a
regional hydraulic model:
• Initially create an overall"steady state" regional model. This effort would be
completed by developing skeletonized(excluding areas not hydraulically significant
to the movement of regional water) hydraulic models for each of the individual water
systems using the available GIS data. These models would then be merged to create
an overall regional model.
• Include a distribution of demand that is representative of actual conditions across the
system, for demand scenarios relevant to regional water supply and emergency supply
evaluation(ADD, MDD, Peak Season and Winter Average Demand).
• Ensure that facility information including reservoirs,pumps and automated valves is
complete and accurate. The existing geodatabase has been updated as part of this
Phase 3 work to validate facility information with each water provider. Automated
valves are not currently included in the geodatabase. In order to manage the volume
and complexity of automated valves, only those valves related to supply transmission
should be included in the model and.identified after the initial system by system
skeletonization is complete.
• Calibrate the steady state model. Calibration is critical to the overall model
development to ensure that the users ultimately have confidence in the results it
09-1086.504 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Evaluation
January 2012 Page 7 of 10 City of Portland Water Bureau
G:\PDX_Projects\09\1086-Open\RWPC Interconnections Phase 3 Task 4 Final Memo-01-16-12.docx
produces. As part of this step, developing a mass balance for the flow of water within
the regional system would be required under various conditions to use as a reality
check to the hydraulic model. This calibration effort will focus on primary
intersystem water transmission facilities and major emergency supply/transmission
facilities. Individual system calibration would likely be comprised of both flow and
pressure testing along with SCADA for facilities.
• Develop a extended period simulation model (EPS). Once the steady state model has
been developed and calibrated an EPS model could be developed. This would require
the collection of additional information on diurnal demand patterns and facility
operations.
• An EPS calibration effort would be required that would compare modeled flows and
tank levels to those collected with the regional and system specific SCADA.
• A regular updating process should also be identified to ensure the hydraulic model
and the GIS are regularly synchronized. In some systems this may result in a one-to-
one relationship between the model and GIS.
The next steps for the regional hydraulic model development are defined below. This along
with the information provided in Table 3 provides an overall strategy for developing a
hydraulic model that offers an appropriate level of confidence for regional and sub-regional
emergency supply analysis. Table 3 gives a summary of the each of the individual water
systems and assumptions related to developing a steady-state regional integrated hydraulic
model. The table also includes the estimate for the effort required to complete this task.
Based on our understanding of the 22 Consortium member systems and the status of existing
hydraulic models, a level of effort in the range of 2,500 to 3,000 hours is estimated to
develop a fully functioning steady state regional hydraulic model.
Outline of Potential Next Steps
1. Identify sub-regions based on major supply sources
• PWB and East County
• Clackamas River Water Users
• JWC Members
• Other Washington County Suppliers
2. Skeletonize each sub-region area's individual systems verifying:
• Connection of pipe network
• Inclusion of critical facilities
• Demand distribution
• Calibration at individual system and sub-regional level
3. Incorporate sub-regional models into a single regional model
4. Collect field and SCADA and calibrate under steady state conditions
5. Use model for specific steady state "what if' scenario evaluations
09-1086.504 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Evaluation
January 2012 Page 8 of 10 City of Portland Water Bureau
G:\PDX_Projects\09\1086-Open\RWPC Interconnections Phase 3 Task 4 Final Memo-01-16-12.docx
6. Collect additional diurnal demand information and facility operations set points
7. Calibrate model under specific EPS conditions
8. Use model for specific EPS "what if' scenario evaluations
Develop model and GIS maintenance and update protocols
The development of a calibrated regional hydraulic model would allow for evaluation
opportunities for additional interconnections, and further opportunities for back-up supply
options between each water system.
This effort provides some proposed steps for developing a regional pipe network hydraulic
model that would be used to identify pathways for routing water in emergency situations and
to develop corresponding operational strategies.
Lastly, this hydraulic model would require a protocol to be developed for managing the
access of information to ensure that sensitive water system information is protected while
being available to water providers for planning and evaluation purposes.
09-1086.504 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Evaluation
January 2012 Page 9 of 10 City of Portland Water Bureau
G:\PDX Projects\09\1086-Open\RWPC Interconnections Phase 3 Task 4 Final Memo-01-16-12.docx
Table 3
Individual Water Systems Hydraulic Model Development Summary and Assumptions
„ .. ,
102,
City of Beaverton 2,140 Supply from JWC and ASR to base zones 410,470 and 550. Interties primarily in these service Existing Calibrated Steady State Model. Opportunity to skeletonize and remove high level pressure zones. 150
zones. Connection to JWC transmission mains. Update control valves at JWC connections and Tigard intertie.
Boring Water District 250 Small system with groundwater supply and no existing interties Inclusion could be delayed until development of interties with neighboring water providers is achieved. 120
Model to include limited facilities:sources Groundwater wells),stor a and limited piping.
Clackamas River Water 2 950 Complex system served from multiple sources with numerous interties with neighboring water Existing steady state hydraulic model,calibration unknown. Some opportunity to skeletonize upper zones 200
providers. Upper level pressure zones have limited regional connectivity in South s stem.
City of Fairview 870 No information provided. Development of a new hydraulic model required to link major storage,groundwater supply wells and 100
interties.
City of Forest Grove 610 Base level system with storage supplied from City's WTP and JWC WIT. Interties with Hillsboro Feng Calibrated Steady State model. 100
U er S stem and City of Cornelius.
Ci of Gresham 5,340 PWB wholesale supply and joint groundwater facilities with RWPUD. Many upper level pressure Existing Calibrated Steady State and EPS model. Successfully integrated into a sub-regional model with 100
City zones have limited/no regional connectivity. Rockwood Water PUD system. Some opportunity to skeletonize and remove upper pressure zones.
City of Gladstone _ No information provided. Supply connections to NCCWC WTP and transmission mains. Interties Key facilities to be identified and included in the regional model,if no individual hydraulic model exists. 60
with neighboring water providers.
City of Hillsboro 10,370 JWC supplied system with ground level storage and pumped supply. Interties with TV WD and Hydraulic model will likely require full inclusion to capture interconnect of distribution system between 150
Beaverton. supply oints and interties.
City of Lake Oswego 7,460Key facilities include WTP,transmission and Waluga service level. Major interties with West Linn Existing calibrated hydraulic model,Opportunity to skeletonize and remove upper level pressure zones. 100
and Tigard.
Hydraulic mode(development recently completed with Water System Master Plan. May be limited 100
City of Milwaukie 6,300 Groundwater supplied system with major interties to CRW and PWB. o rtunity for skeletonization given distribution of sources and interties.
Oak Lodge Water District 1,060 NCCWC supplied system with major transmission and interties to Gladstone and CRW. Existing steady stare hydraulic model. Limited opportunity for skeletonization. 100
City of Portland 95,830' Largest water system with complex transmission and distribution network. Many upper pressure Existing steady state hydraulic model. Only include"base system",upper pressure zones(with no 280
zones have no/limited interties regional transmission or large capacity interties)to be skeletonized and removed to the extent possible.
Raleigh Water District 330 PWB supplied system from WCSL. Limited regionally important facilities and transmission capacity Existing calibrated steady state hydraulic model. Could be represented as a demand node on the 60
to other systems.
Rockwood Water PUD 2,060 PWB wholesale supply and joint groundwater facilities with Gresham. Interties with Gresham, Existing Calibrated Steady State model. Successfully integrated into a sub-regional model with City of 100
Portland and Fairview. Gresham system. Some opportunity to skeletonize and remove one small upper pressure zone.
Development of a hydraulic model to reflect integration of future PWB wholesale supply recommended 80
City of Sandy 340 Local WTP supplied system currently isolated from other providers. for inclusion in regional model.
West Linn(South Fork Water Board) 1,560 SFWB supplied system with major transmission and interties to Oregon City and Lake Oswego. Existing calibrated steady state hydraulic model. Opportunity to skeletonize upper pressure zones. 100
Oregon City(South Fork Water Board) 6,280 SFWB supplied system with major transmission and interties to CRW and West Linn. Existing calibrated hydraulic model. Opportunity to skeletonize and remove upper pressure zones. 100
Sunrise Water Authority 2,530 NCCWC/groundwater supplied with major transmission and interties to OLWD,CRW and SFWB. Existing calibrated hydraulic model. Opportunity to skeletonize and remove upper pressure zones. 150
City of Sherwood 1,050 Three pressure zones with storage in 2 zones. Groundwater well supply to main zone,intertie to Existing calibrated steady state hydraulic model. Opportunity to skeletonize/remove upper pressure zones. 80
Tualatin,transmission from PWB and transmission from Willamette River Water Treatment Plant.
Supply from PWB,Lake Oswego and ASR with major interties with TV WD(Metzger),Beaverton Existing calibrated steady state hydraulic model. Opportunity to skeletonize and remove upper pressure 120
City of Tigard 8.800 and Lake Oswego. Isolated upper pressure zone areas on Bull Mountain. zones(550's and 713).
City of Tualatin 1,160 PWB wholesale at end of WCSL. Interties with all neighboring water providers. Existing calibrated steady stare hydraulic model. Include whole system. 80
City of Wilsonville 1,550 Willamette River WTP supplied through high pressure transmission main into 3 service zones. B Existing calibrated steady state hydraulic model. Could skeletonize to WTP transmission piping ata 100
level service zone critical,others could be skeletonized. minimum...would not include limited capacity emergency intertie with Tualatin.
West Slope Water District 600 PWB wholesale customer supplied from Arlington Heights. Pazallel and intertied transmission with Existing calibrated steady-state hydraulic model. Opportunity to skeletonize/remove isolated sub-zones. 100
TV WD from Arlin on Heights.
Tualatin Valley Water District(Wolf 6,550
Creek Large,complex system with multiple sources:JWC,PWB,ASR Interties with all adjacent water Existing calibrated hydraulic model. Level effort estimated to be similar to PWB with extensive effort to 240.
Tualatin Valley Water District 1 020 providers including WSWD,Beaverton,Hillsboro,PWB,Tigard. determine the extent of skeletonization that is feasible.
(M-ger)
1. Estimated Effort based on MSA's understanding of existing systems,status of existing hydraulic models and overall water system knowledge. Estimated effort does not include individual water system staff time to support hydraulic model development,skeletonizing,
update,calibration and integration into the regional model
2. Number of Pipes based on known hydraulic model data,or number of pipe segments included in GIS data provided for the geodatabase.
3. PWB—Number of Pipes based on GIS data. PWB's existing hydraulic model contains less than 15,000 pipes.
09-1086.504 Murray,Smith&Associates,Inc. Interconnections Map and Evaluation
January 2012 Page 10 of 10 City of Portland Water Bureau