10/11/1995 - Packet . 1_
Fik Cc;
INTERGOVERNMENTAL WATER BOARD MEETING MINUTES
AUGUST 16, 1995
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Bill Scheiderich, Paul Hunt, Beverly Froude, Peggy
Manning and John Buidhas
STAFF PRESENT: Ed Wegner, Randy Volk, Mike Miller and Kathy Kaatz
VISITORS PRESENT: Jack Polans and Steve Feldman
1. Call to Order
Meeting was called to order at 5:34 p.m.
2. Roll Call
Roll call was taken and all Board Members were present.
3. Visitor's Comments
Jack Polans of the City of King City spoke regarding the minutes from the June
14 meeting of the IWB and the Oregonian article. Mr. Polans stated that he
had attended the City Council meeting of the City of Lake Oswego last evening
and questioned them regarding this article. Mr. Polans stated that he had
spoke with Mr. Leland from the State Health Division and questioned the
report. Mr. Polans did receive copies of the report from Mr. Leland (pages 882-
886). Mr. Polans stated that Mr. Leland will provide him with the full report,
press releases as well as names of people he can contact in Washington D.C.
This is the information that was provided to the City of Tigard and the City of
Lake Oswego by Mr. Polans.
4. Approval of Minutes
A motion was made by Paul Hunt for approval of the minutes of the June 14,
1995 meeting as written, which was seconded by Peggy Manning and voted
upon unanimously.
5. Easement - Mike Miller
Mike Miller discussed a request from the State of Oregon regarding an
easement across the property frontage of the Tigard Water District. They are
requesting an estimated 300 square foot to accommodate a bike and pedestrian
walkway access along Hall Blvd. The crossing needs to be perpendicular at the
railroad tracks which will require an easement on this property. According to
the IGA, this property has been divided among the various members (Durham,
King City, Tigard and the unincorporated area), Mr. Miller stated that they
would need a consensus from this Board allowing the State this easement. The
State of Oregon is willing to pay $550.00 (fair market value, which was
determined by an independent assessor). The Tigard Water District Board has
already approved this easement and with this Board's approval will be
forwarded to the Tigard City Council. Commissioner Scheiderich questioned
the possibility of negotiation in the amount of money or the possibility of the
contractor making further improvements? Mr. Miller stated that our
improvements on the property are complete.
Chair Scheiderich stated that this work should be completed at the State's
initiative and expense. Mr. Miller stated that since the property has not been
transferred, this motion would need to be made on behalf of the IWB.
A motion was made by Paul Hunt to recommend to the City of Tigard that they
act on behalf of the Intergovernmental Water Board to grant an easement to the
State of Oregon as requested. This motion was seconded by Bill Scheiderich
and passed unanimously.
Commissioner Hunt questioned whether this Board should in the near future
discuss the properties such as this building and whether the City of Tigard
should purchase this property or some of the facilities that are being used by
the City for non water uses? Chair Scheiderich stated that most of the uses
of this building are being used as public space. Mr. Hunt continued to discuss
what the other entities feel is fair and equitable.
Mr. Scheiderich stated that possibly the staff should give direction to determine
whether any portion of this building or other properties are surplus to the actual
means of the Water District or the entities served by the Water District.
Commissioner Froude stated that included in the audit was the agreement that
the parties would pledge their share of the use to the Water building? If this
has changed then Ms. Froude felt this should be discussed. Mr. Scheiderich
stated that he was unsure whether this Board had the authority to direct the
Water District staff but could recommend that Tigard City Council on their
behalf direct staff to come back to the Board with an informal report on what
property they deem to be surplus. Commissioner Manning stated that if the
building and it's purposes are for Water business, there is the IGA to go by and
any other uses would need to be agreed upon by the members of the IGA and
come before the IWB for approval.
IWB MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 16, 1995 PAGE 2
Ms. Froude stated that last year it was necessary for the Tigard Water District
Board to meet on occasion in another area to accommodate the Interfaith
Shelter. Mr. Hunt stated that there is a plan to continue the use as a shelter
again this year. At this time, Mr. Volk stated that the City of Tigard is also
using this building and parking lot for the Saturday Market which is an
exclusive City of Tigard use. Mr. Volk stated that the Board may feel that the
City of Tigard is taking advantage of this facility's use. Commissioner Froude
also discussed the use of the building on a daily basis being used by the
Finance Department, not Water employees. Mr. Volk also stated that the
Canterbury facility is used primarily by the Maintenance Services Department
and these areas are not available to the City of King City or the City of Durham.
Commissioner Manning requested that the staff prepare a schedule of use to
include the percentage of use and how much is being used for water purposes
versus City of Tigard usage. Mr. Hunt also stated that a part of this report
should include what the Water District use of other City facilities are.
A motion was made by Chair Scheiderich to ask the Water District to direct it's
staff to survey the uses of property, (real estate) that is generally assigned to
the Water District purposes. This motion was seconded by Peggy Manning and
voted upon unanimously. It was stated that this survey would be complete by
the September meeting.
6. Water Rules, Rates and Regulations
Mr. Volk questioned whether the Board had any questions on the Rules, Rates
and Regulations? Mr. Volk stated that he had spoke with Beverly Froude today
and they had discussed one change being made to item 12.10.070 - Credit for
Leak. Mr. Volk stated that this had been discussed at a previous meeting and
additional language needed to be added to state that any request over the
$165.00 is to be brought before the Board for consideration. Mr. Volk stated
that Ms. Froude would also like language added that if there is a grievance or
if the customer is still dissatisfied, they would refer to item 12.10.260 -
Grievances.
With the Board having no further comments, Ed Wegner questioned whether
the Board had reached a consensus to send this document on to the Tigard City
Council for adoption minus"the rates until the rate study is complete? It was
discussed that once the rate study was approved this would be put together
as one document. Mr. Scheiderich questioned the status of the rate study?
Mr. Wegner stated that Mike Miller had met with Wayne Lowry and the
consultant a couple of weeks ago and are moving ahead. Mr. Wegner stated
that they should have a preliminary report by mid September.
IWB MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 16, 1995 PAGE 3
7. Director's Report
Mr. Wegner stated that included in the packet distributed to the Board was the
month of July report, by date which outlined a tracking of water purchases
(Lake Oswego, Bull Run, Tualatin Valley), includes the wells, water purchased
or produced, water storage and water demand. We will continue to produce
these reports through the summer. This reflects the purchases from TVWD
which is currently up to 1.7 mgd. through the Baylor intertie. Also included in
this packet were some articles from the West Linn Tidings and the Lake
Oswego paper with the issue of the Lake Oswego water treatment facility
being within the city limits of West Linn. There have been some concern on
approval on the Lake Oswego plant expansion in West Linn. Mr. Wegner, Mr.
Volk and Mr. Monahan will be visiting West Linn tomorrow.
Also in packet are the Regional Water Supply Plan minutes for the past two
months. Mr. Wegner also discussed the large packet of information that was
provided to the Board on the Regional study. Mr. Wegner stated that by the
end of the month there will be a draft copy of the Regional Plan. He stated
that on June 22, Beverly Froude and himself attended a public forum which
included some position papers which were also supplied. Also included in this
large packet was a report by McArthur and Associates of a synopsis of the
public hearings that were held within the region.
Commissioner Manning suggested that next month the Board members can go
through this information provided and come back with any questions.
8. Discussion - Letter
Mr. Wegner stated that he had received a letter from Mr. Robert Moore who
experienced a water break which was taken care of in a timely manner by
emergency repairs. Mr. Moore had a large bill from the break as well as a large
repair bill and would like to recoup some of the water costs. Mr. Moore was
credited with the allowable $165.00 credit on his account but he choose to go
through the process of bringing this issue before the IWB.
Chair Scheiderich questioned whether the average use was confirmed, which
it was. Mr. Scheiderich also questioned how this leak occurred? Staff was not
aware of how this leak occurred.
Commissioner Hunt questioned what the outcome of the last request was a
few months ago? After some discussion and looking into the previous minutes
(March 1995) it was stated that they had given her full credit. Mr. Hunt stated
the need for consistency in these issues.
IWB MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 16, 1995 PAGE 4
Chair Scheiderich recommended that we split the difference of the excess
($702.00 minus the average usage and half the difference). The customer
would pay for his average usage and then half of the excess usage. Although
the Rules, Rates and Regulations outlines the process with $165.00 being the
maximum allowable, Mr. Scheiderich stated that these exceptions should come
before the Board for approval. Mr. Volk stated that if an employee is called out
after hours and the leak in on the side of the customer, the employee will fix
that leak while they are there.
Commissioner Hunt made a motion to grant relief as requested which is to split
the difference that is over the average usage. This was seconded by
Commissioner Froude and voted upon unanimously.
The Board discussed adjusting the language in the Rules, Rates and Regulations
to grant half with a no fault circumstances, over the average usage with the
approval of the IWB. The relief granted to Mr. Moore will be $702.17 less his
average usage and a split of the difference.
Chair Scheiderich questioned whether the Board would be ruling on the request
from KOIN TV that was furnished by Mr. Volk? Mr. Volk stated that he had
received a request from KOIN TV to install a camera at the Baylor Street
location. Chair Scheiderich stated that he felt this request would be ok with
the condition that it does not interfere with any telemetry and that all initiative
and expense be on the part of KOIN TV. Discussion was held on the possibility
of a bond. Mr. Volk stated that this would be connected to the ladder which
is four feet out from the actual reservoir and extends only slightly below the
crown of the roof. The Board discussed the chance of damaging any portion
of the reservoir, endangerment to someone on the ladder, or security or
accessibility to the site.
Mr. Wegner stated that KOIN TV would be responsible for meeting design
criteria and would have the appropriate insurance to ensure workmanship and
for the equipment.
Chair Scheiderich stated that this should be short term agreement.
A motion was made by John Budhihas and seconded by Bill Scheiderich to
allow KOIN TV to mount a sky camera above the Baylor Street reservoir. This
passed unanimously.
IWB MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 16, 1995 PAGE 5
9. Commissioner's Comments
With no further comments the next meeting was set for September 13, 1995.
Mr. Wegner stated that the Tigard Water District Board had agreed to meet bi-
monthly beginning in September and their new Chairperson is Norman Penner.
Commissioner Hunt suggested that if the Chairperson and the staff agree there
is no need for a meeting, with proper notification to the Board members would
be appropriate.
Mr. Wegner also stated that the Tigard Water District Board proposed that we
take a tour of the various water facilities on a Saturday morning. A specific
date has not been set at this time but possibly mid September.
10. Adjournment
A motion was made to adjourn by Commissioner Manning and seconded by
Commissioner Hunt at 6:35 p.m. and passed unanimously.
kethy\iwb\8-16mtg.min
IWB MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 16, 1995 PAGE 6
Memorandum
City of Tigard, Oregon
TO: Intergovernmental Water Board
FROM: Wayne Lowry, Finance Director
Ed Wegner, Maintenance Services Director
DATE: October 3, 1995
SUBJECT: Water Study Contract
In May 1995, the I ntergovem mental Water Board (IWB) heard presentations from three
Consultants to perform a study of Water rates. The IWB recommended the selection of
CH2M Hill at a cost of $20,750. The Council then approved that recommendation in
June 1995.
In August, it was learned that both employees with CH2M Hill assigned to our study
were leaving the firm and that very little progress had been made on the project.
In reviewing the options, we spoke with Economic and Engineering Services (EES)
which was the runner up firm in the selection process. They were willing to step in and
complete the study and reduced the cost of their proposal to $24,590. We have
attached a copy of the EES refined scope of work and cost proposal for your review.
This issue was discussed with the Council on September 12, 1995. Council gave
direction to review the replacement staff suggested by CH2M Hill. We have therefore
asked CH2M Hill to have their representatives present at the October 11, 1995
meeting of the IWB to make a presentation. CH2M Hill proposes to replace the original
staff of David Hasson and Debra Davis with Eric Rothstein and Robert Tomlinson.
This will give the IWB an opportunity to assess their confidence in the replacement
CH2M Hill team and their ability to complete a quality study of Tigard water rates. We
have attached copies of their resumes for your review.
If the IWB is satisfied with CH2M Hill's newly assigned staff, we will move ahead with
the project with CH2M Hill. If the IWB recommends cancellation of the CH2M Hill
contract and award of the contract to EES, the issue will be scheduled on the next
available City Council agenda for final action.
If you have any questions about this issue before the meeting next week, please call
Wayne at 639-4171 ext. 345 or Ed at 639-4171 ext. 396.
Robert I Tomlinson
Economist
Distinguishing Qualifications
• Financial management experience in rate and impact fee development for
municipalities and utility districts
• Experienced in successful interaction with citizen advisory committees and
elected officials
• Expert witness testimony in electric, gas, telecommunication, water, and
wastewater rate proceedings
Related Experience
Mr. Tomlinson serves as project manager and project economist for a wide range of economic
projects, including utility rate and financial planning studies, system development charge studies,
economic and financial feasibility analyses, and demand studies. Mr. Tomlinson has participated in
numerous utility rate studies and has presented expert testimony in electric, gas,
telecommunication,water, and wastewater rate proceedings.
Representative Projects
Mr. Tomlinson-is managing a wastewater rate and system development charge (SDC) study for
the City of Wilsonville, Oregon. The current project updates wastewater cost of service analyses
from a previous study that included both water and wastewater rates and SDC studies. Mr.
Tomlinson has worked extensively with a citizens' advisory committee to develop alternative rate
structures that are equitable for all customer classes.
Mr. Tomlinson is currently the project manager for a laboratory. analysis fee study for the
Clackamas County Department of Utilities. This cost of service analysis includes determination of
the labor, materials, equipment, and facility costs associated with the lab tests it conducts for the
various sewer districts associated with the Clackamas County Department of Utilities.
Mr. Tomlinson recently managed a wastewater rate and system development charge study for the
City of Woodbum,;Oregon. The project included analysis of various sewer rate structures and
participation with a citizens' advisory committee on the development of the cost of service rate
methodology and alternative rate designs.
Preparation of a financial feasibility analysis for the City of Portland's Bureau of Environmental
Services, for a $250-million revenue bond issue. The bond, which is to be used for wastewater
system improvements, was the largest construction-related bond ever issued in Oregon (as of
1994). He evaluated the bureau's financial operation and budget forecasts to determine whether
debt service coverage would be adequate in the future.
Robert I Tomlinson
Mr. Tomlinson was assigned to the City of Los Angeles' Wastewater Program Management
Division offices on a full-time basis for more than 4 years. This $5 billion wastewater facility
upgrade and expansion program was a joint venture between CH2M HILL and the City of Los
Angeles. Mr. Tomlinson's responsibilities included developing financial policies for the wastewater
utility, analyzing capital improvement program financing; developing customer tariff schedules;
and coordinating all contract agency meetings and workshops.
For CH2M HILL INTERNATIONAL, LTD., Mr. Tomlinson was a financial specialist on an
institutional support contract with the Cairo, Egypt, Wastewater Authority. The utility's goal was
to become quasi-independent and decrease subsidies from the central government. Mr. Tomlinson
managed the financial viability tasks,conducted a revenue and cost analysis with a goal of full cost
recovery within 3 to 5 years; developed a 5-year financial plan; and assisted development of a
computerized accounting system.
As an employee of the Denver Water Department (DWD),Mr. Tomlinson was responsible
for the development of retail and wholesale customer rate designs. The DWD wholesaled
water to 44 outside city water districts which includes most of the Denver metropolitan area.
For the utility's capital improvement program, Mr. Tomlinson was responsible for population
and demand forecasts, long-range financial analyses, cash-flow analyses, bond and debt
projections, and projections of rate impacts.
Participation in water and wastewater rate proceeding for the City of Rio Rancho, New Mexico,
an intervener, before the New Mexico Public Utilities Commission. Mr. Tomlinson presented
expert testimony in the areas of rate of return, rate design, and the utility's corporate structure and
equity financing.
Participation in water and wastewater rate studies for the Albuquerque Utilities Corporation in
Albuquerque, New Mexico. Mr. Tomlinson prepared a return-on-equity analysis using a
discounted cash flow methodology to determine a reasonable rate of return for the water and
wastewater utilities. The corporation used these findings in its request for increased rates to the
New Mexico Public Service Commission.
Education
M.S.,Economics, Colorado State University
B.S.,Mathematics/Computer Science, Colorado State University
Membership in Professional Organizations
American Water Works Association
National Association of Business Economists
Pacific Northwest Pollution Control Association
Water Environment Federation
08/30/95 14:51 CH2K HILL IMD04/OD5
Robert J. TQJ<littJ nson.
Economist
Educakorc
M.S.,Economics, Coloiado State LTniv+etsity '
B.S.,Math/C'omput w Science, Colorado Sithe 1Uuiv&•sity
,l�cperdeace
Mr. 'romlinson is a sensor e=omist with mare than 13 years of expedence, in financial
m .Wrr eM regulatory and natural resource econormics;utility rate design,budgeting, and
accounting;economic irmpact ama�lysis;and economic,financial,and bond fe 1'bft analyses.
He has presented expert testimony in electric gas, and telocammunication carte proceedings-
Mr. Tomlinson is currently coodueft a water and sewer rate study for the City of
VrLhonvMr,Oregon,and a cash suf icieUcy atdy fm the Clainucmt WdW District of O1te9*n
City, C7r+agti m He has evaluated the district's proposed budgets,ca*tat irnpmvetnent plans,
and source of finds to emsare revenue adequacy for the dbftic t- He has also patiicipated in
a wastewater race classification M*sb for the City of Portland In addition,W.ToMIJI son
is mmaging a water system development charge study and a waste system d8v1810pmeaat
charge study for rile City of Gmshatn, Oregon. Whas anatyzed the city's capital
impx+aysement pba and fined assets to determine both the cast of capacity in the existing
system and the incre nUd cow of expandon capita]pa*ct r-
Recently for aum Hila.INTmNATioNAL„Mr.Tomlinson served as a financial specialist
on an institutional sti►ppatt const-act for the Cairo,P..gypt,'Wasft-. a ter Authodty. The ntiUty's
goal is to become a quasi indeWadent utility and degrease the current subsidies it rete m
-f om the central.government. Mr.Tampon managed ft financial viabitity tasks forthe
uh11ty. His r+esponsimities inched conducting a revenge and.cost analysis with a gel of
full est recovery vAthin-3 to 5 years;developing emd impiememtmg it 5-year fi nmcht plan;
and assisting in the development of a comput tined utility Ming 50�eft
He garticipatad in a watur and wastewater rate proceeding for an inoxveaer before the New
Akxico Public-Utilities Commission- *presented expert testimony in the areas of rate of
return, rage design,..and tate utility's corporate stmam and equiLy fin •.
W. Tomlinson was assigned to the Coity of los Angeles WaMwater Progr m Managemw
Division offices on a full-time basis fart mom than 4 yam. This C12M HILL Project is an
ongoing joint venture with the City of Los Angeles for the maaagemmot of a $5 billion
wastewater facility upgrade and expansion program. Mr. Tomlinson was responsible for
fmanciai policy &we'loptnent for the city's wasunvater charge system. His Wks included
t analysis of the capital improvement program fi n8 and new custameir-tanff schedules.
r �enxtsc�a-wps'
f
. ..,..�� •11`•" X1005/005
Robert I Tomftson
W. Tomlinson was also the city's coordinator for all eonwAa agency meetings and
worlmhops.
Mr. Tomlinson was assigaed to a CWM HILL project team that malyzed various water
supply and wastewater alternatives for Mem Matrauh, EZYPL Mersa Matrouh, the
governorate in the northwest corner of P,gypt, is faced with the challenge of limited water
resources. Mr. Tomlinson reviewed the local waberr and wasicwater utility Menow, costs,
and,rate mss. He also provided a financial analysis of the various waaer UPPIY
alternatives avadW*for the region and developed a cost-of-serom rate,model for fame rate
updafin& j
As an employee of the Denver Water Deft, he was responsible for the fLanciai
analysis of a. major water supply pra}ect and customer rate analysis. His respond
included the loug-ranges finalcial analysis; cash flow analysis; bond and ddt prnjecdow;
demand pmjec&=;and castomer rate impacts of the chart' y's capital,iWwvement program.
W.Tou ttson also has provided ti almogy before the Wyoming Public Service Cominissioa,
both as an expert wiums for an fndusuy ve ner and as a coionm inion staff nwadW He
specialmd in cost-of-cagrtal and sem-of-mtutu analysts is a la=i,gas,and teleca�pnmunical
tioat rate.proceedings+as wen as east-of-se ndoe,mw design,and monomic impact anaiyses.
Membership in Prufe cheat Orgaar a&ns
American Water Wofs Association
California.Water Pollution CbnUvI Assoeiatition
Natimal Association of Business EcOGOMAM
Waw Bavhv=wew Federation
i
PDXtiC14.VMI
I
Eric P. Rothstein, CPA
Senior Economist
Distinguishing Qualifications
P Expert in water and wastewater utility economics
NO, Hands-on financial management experience from the municipal perspective in rate
development,evaluation of alternative capital financing options,and integrated resource
planning
Nationally recognized rate,public involvement,and conservation program expertise, including
participation on American Water Works Association's Rates and Charges and Water
Conservation Program Planning and Evaluation Sub-Committees
Related Experience
Mr.Rothstein, a senior economist, specializes in water and wastewater utility finance, rate design,
integrated resource planning, and the application of decision analysis techniques to financial issues.
Mr. Rothstein has participated in numerous rate studies, including most recently work for East Bay
Municipal Utility District in Oakland, California, the City of Idaho Fails, Idaho, and the City of
Colorado Springs, Colorado. Mr. Rothstein is currently project manager on rate studies for the cities
Of McMinnville, Oregon and Sedona, Arizona.. He is also providing decision support services for
several projects that include financial evaluations of alternative project financing options including
privatization.
Previously, Mr. Rothstein served as utilities finance manager for the City of Austin, Texas. In this
capacity, he directed a technical staff of eight in utility ratemaking and finance, financial reporting,
internal control evaluation, and revenue forecasting. His financial analysis responsibilities included
evaluation of regionalization alternatives, proposed utility investments, capital financing options, and
alternative rate designs. Financial reporting responsibilities included development of monthly fund
summaries, budget development and tracking, and review of GAAP-basis financial statements. His
internal control evaluation responsibilities included both financial and performance audits.
Representative Projects
As project manager, Mr. Rothstein directed the City of Austin's water and wastewater utility
cost-of-service rate setting and implementation. Project work included extensive public
information efforts, hourly water demand monitoring, billing system modifications, and
technical analysis of revenue requirement allocations.
Other contracts with the city for which Mr. Rothstein provided project management are as
follows:
— City of Austin Water and Wastewater Utility rate consultant, 1993
— City of Austin Water and Wastewater Utility capital improvement plan process
improvement study, 1993
— City of Austin Water and Wastewater Utility hourly demand monitoring sampling plan
and data analysis, 1989-1993
City of Austin Water and Wastewater Utility line maintenance productivity study,
1991-1992
During a 3-year tenure as division manager of the City of Austin Resource Management
Department, Mr. Rothstein directed a staff of 22 employees in financial and personnel
management, computer system services, and planning and evaluating energy and water
conservation programs for commercial, multifamily, single-family residential, and low-income
sectors.
Initiated the City of Austin's electric Integrated Resource Planning effort through project
management of its 1987 "Technical Audit of Demand-Side Management Programs" and work
supported through a U.S.Department of Energy Integrated Resource Planning grant to develop
load shape impact curves of energy conservation programs.
Publications
"Applications of Decision Analysis Techniques to Water Conservation Program Planning",
Proceedings of the American Water Works Association CONSERV'96 Conference, January
1996, forthcoming.
"Benefit/Cost Evaluation of Water Conservation Programs", Proceedings of the American
Water Works Association CONSERV'96 Conference, January 1996, forthcoming
"Public Involvement Strategies That Work" with Elaine Jones, Operations Forum, vol. 11,
no. 6, (June 1994) pp. 10-13. Also published in Proceedings of the Water Environment
Federation 66th Annual Conference-and Exposition, vol. 8 (October 1993), pp. 137-144.
"Public Involvement Strategies for Water Rate Change Acceptance" with Elaine Jones,
Journal AWWA. vol. 85, no. 11 (November 1993) pp. 47-53. Also published in Proceedings
of the American Water Works Association Annual Conference and Exposition, June 1993, pp.
41-57. An abbreviated version published as "Raising Rates: Involving the Public". Public
Works.February 1994.
"Summer Water Demand Patterns in a Southwest City", Proceedings of the American Water
Works Association CONSERV'93 Conference December 1993, pp. 1491-1516.
"Balancing Interests of Wholesale and Retail Customers in Utility Ratemaking" with David S.
Hasson, Ph.D., Proceedings of the American Water Works Association Annual Conference
and Exposition. June 1993, pp. 541-556.
"Water Demand Monitoring in Austin, Texas", Journal AWWA vol. 84 (October 1992), pp.
52-58.
"Time Differentiated System Load Impacts of Demand-Side Management: A Case Study",
with Ken Monts, Ira Birnbaum, and Beverly Bonevac, Electric Power Research Journal, vol.
16, (1989), pp. 165-172.
r .
"Institutional Barriers to Data Collection and Demand-Side Management Program Evaluation:
Practical Lessons in Political Economy", Proceedings of the 1988 American Council for an
Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) Summer Study on Energy Efficiency In Buildings.
August 1988, vol. 9, pp. 139-151.
"The Demand-Side Management Audit - An Integral Step to Least-Cost Utility Planning"
with Robert K. Camera, Proceedings of DSM Strategies in Transition - Third National
Conference on Utility DSM Programs, (June 1987), pp. 34-1 through 34- I.
Testimony
Prefiled testimony in the matter of One Austin Capital, Inc., et. al. of City of Austin Ordinance
No. 920903
Prefiled and oral testimony 'in the City of Austin Electric Utility Department's rate filings,
January 29, 1988 and August 1, 1987.
Prefiled and oral testimony in the City of Austin in the Public Service Commission of the
District of Columbia's Case No. 834, Phase II: Application of Potomac Electric Power
Company for Changes to Electric Rate Schedules, February 9, 1987.
Certifications/Professional Licenses
Certified Public Accountant
Oregon, License No. 7998, June 1995
Texas, License No. 60341, September 1992
Education
MA,Economics,University of California-Davis
A.B.,Economics,Ripon College
Membership in Professional Organizations
American Water Works Association(member of Rates and Charges Sub-committee)
Water Environment Federation(member of Financing and Charges Manual Sub-Committee)
08/30/95 14:50 CH2M HILL X1002/005
Eric p. Rothstein, C.P.A.
wed MahWr
Educadan
M.A., EGAOmiCS, University of Califomia Davis
A.B., Economics, Ripon College
Experiewe
f
Mr. Rot aeK a senior economist. specializes in Qvater and water utility f ancibg rind {
rate design: Mr.Rothstein has participated in nuimerous•raw etudiles,including mast recently i
work for the City of Anaheim, Califom M the Lcenvitlle and 3effc n County MSD,
Kentucky,and the East Bay Mu*dPOl Utility District is flakhmd,Caliifomia. Mr.Rothstein
is cuntatly the Pewmanagerfor s,,aad solid waste rale studies for the City of Idaho
Fa11s,Idaho,and=Want project mRnagor on a wastewater billing determinants study for the
1
•
City Of Colorado Springs, Colorado.
previously,W.Rothstein was utMes finance manager for do Qty of Austin,Texas. In this �
capacity, }e, &ODW a technical staff of eight in utility vasmak:ing and finanim,
financial
reporting, internal control evaluation; and revenue fare UM& • IRS finsocxal arAalysis l
respo�ibilina included evaluation of system devvlopmeot charges, proposed utility
inerts, capital financing options, and almmative rafts desmons. Financxal x+eP ng
'bi$ties included development of monthly find summaries;budget development and
tracking; and review of GAAP-basis financial stammenm. Plies ba=d control evaluation
respo.nsibili&s included both financial and performance audits.
As project manager,Mr. Rothstein.dined the Chy of Austin's water and wastewamer utilitY
cost-of-s� rate man and imglementatiOn- prrqect work indudod extensive public
infaoao�ation efforts, houxly waw demand mouitorwg, billing system modifi�oas, and
technical anWysis of revenue requirement allocations.
other contras with the city for which Mr. Rothstein pr vided pl*a ulanagcm=t are as
follows. '
City of Austin Water and Wastewater Utility rate consoltnnt, 1993
City of Austin Water and Wastewater Utility capital iatpravement pun process
improvement study, 1993
• City of Austin Nater and Wastewater Utility hourly demand monitoring
sampling plan and data analysis, 1989-1993
Pp7C15sF3.�
08/30/05 14:50 V CH2X HILL IJ 003/005
Erik P. R6thstein
• City of Austin Nater MW Wastewater Utility line maintenance.productivity
study, 1991-1992
During a 3-Year tenure as division maxager of the City of Austin Resotxtr..e Management
. Diepart=14 Mr Rothstein directed a staff of 22 employws in financial and personnel
managemeV�computer system services;and the planning and evaluation of energy and water
conservation programs targeted to caommumal,multifam7y,sin1gk-f&MWY residential,and low-
income sectors.
Mairebershilt ra I'rofessi+aetari Urgaua�teons .
Ammicam Nater Warks Association(mennber of Rates and Charges 5ubomxxmeium)
Water Envixonrnent Federation (member of Financing sad(urges lmual Committee)
Pabfec+ dow and Preseretaffons
With Elaine Jones. Public Involvement Strategies That WmiL Dpsratioiuur Forum 11(6):101-
13. June 1994. Also published in Proceedings of the Water, EnvirOnmeret Federarian 66th
'Am uml Co4krenci a EUpositean 8:137-144, October 1993.
With Elaine Jones. Public lhnvoivement Strategies for Waw%RM ChmW Aoc:eptsnce.
.journal AWWA 85(11)-47-53. November 1993. Also puhlisbed in Proceedings of the
American Water Works Association Anmal Co4erence ted Fjposition,pp.41-5y. June 1993.
.An a0breviated version publisbed as: Raising Rags: Involving the Public,,Public Works.
Febtaary 1994.
Summer Water Demand Patterns in a Southwest City. Proceedings of the Americom Water
Works Assocon's Ct?NSERV'93 Conference,Pp. 1491-1516. •Decesn6er 1993:
With David S. Hasson, PhD. Balancing k tex+ests of Wholesale and Retail CWtomets in
Utility Rawmddn& Proceedings of the Amnerfcrm Water Work)- Association Aur ud
Conference and Eq�osition,pp. 541-556. Jame 1993.
PDX156r3.WF5
09/11/95 11:25 FAX 206 451 8096 EES--Bellevue IM002/032
project Merrtornndurn
To: Wayne Lowry,City of Tigard
From: Tom Gould,EES
Date: September 11, 1995
subject: Revised Water late Study Proposal
Wayne-
Please find attached our revised proposal to provide a water rate study for the City. You
will note that the proposal is very similar to our previous proposal,but we have made
some changes which have reduced the proposed casts_ Specifically,these changes include
the following:
El Eliminated my attendance at the initial project meeting;- Randy, as project
manager will attend the meeting- This saved labor and airfare.
® Eliminated the educational session from the initial project meeting. This
saved material preparation time for the meeting.
❑ Simplified the determination of growth rates within the revenue
requirement model This saved labor and had no signiFicant impact upon
revenue requirements_
❑ Simplified the modeling process in re gard to the calculation of interest
income. Rather than attempting to calculate interest income on ending
cash balances, we will use City budgeted estimates and check to see-if they
S= reasonable based upon current cash balances. The initial approach is
more precise and technically correct, but interest income seldom has a
major impact upon revenue requirements
❑ We have stated that the City will be required to provide data in the format
specified by EES. In our initial proposal, we had provided time for EES
staff to work with the City's data and re-format as required (e.g. - a
thick computer printout that rids to be 5ummvzzed into some usable
fashion for the study_)
O We have stated a specific limit on the development of rate design options.
We had no stated limit in our initial proposal.
❑ We eliminated written progress reports to the City's project manager-
instead,We stated that we would provide verbal reports.
U'
We have provided two options for the presentation of the results- We
talked about this approach,and we have pried the study both ways-
09/11/95 11:25 FAX 206 451 8096 EES--Bellevue 1003/032
in:.-A w�,o;-DMIA Study Pm,nnssl �91111�5 k''.►ge;d
I hope this revised proposal meets the City's needs. We look forward to the opportunity
to work with you on this project. If X can pmvida any'other information. please let me
know.
09/11/95 11:28 FAX 206 451 8096 EES--Bellevue 4005/032
9 m
9% Economic and Engineering Services, Inc. .�.oy
September 9, 1995
Mr. Wayne Lowry
Finance Director
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Burd.
Tigard,OR 97223
Se�hjerts R.evige r o I For Coma rehens#v mater ate St v
Dear Mr. Lowry:
Economic and Engineering Services, Inc. (EES) is pleased to submit this
revised proposal to the City of Tigard (City) to provide consulting services for the
development of a comprehensive water rate study. Our proposal details the scope of
services to be performed'for the City, a project time schedule and the project zees
assaulted with the work. In addition, the qualifications of EES and its personnel
to perform this study are listed.
Given the opportunity to work on thus project, I arn confident that you will be
pleased with the quality of work provided to the City, along with quality of
persoiir�et assigned ou he p.��.�..�+
•,,� �1,n --pe%At11 .;4-,t *et reg,in0V to your needs Pind hope that the City
I 2ipprVQa'tis lle lj;F u. arm., . Jr - a
will provide us with the opportunity to assist the City. Should you have any
questions regarding this proposal, Randy Goff or myself will pleased to help you.
Sincerely yours;
ECONOMIC AND ENGINEERING
SERVICES, INC_
'Phomas E. Gould
Vice President
TEGJdzr
Enclosure
12o11 Bel-Red Road,Suioe 2111 Post Office Box 1989
ieLmie,mfiingmn 98005-2471 BeRevuOVashington 90409.1884
Teiephone206A31-901S Fax 206451.80% I Bcilevue• 0R mpia • Fortiand +vanrouver,B.C. •Washington,Uk
09/11/95 11:47 FAX 206 451 8096 EES--Bellevue Ijj018/020
City of Tigard
Exhibit 5-2
PRO.� �TE� EIE 1r
Option 2-Consolidated Meeting With Jurisdictions
Randy Tom Angie Cheri
k Task Offigriutianriutian. rda fLwu &ndm Bmdkuk Cleric Malt
Hourly Bulling Rate 8105.00 $105.00 565.00 $W.OQ $40A0
1 Tx►i621_Projeet Meeting
Hours 6 0 0 0 1 7
Labor Costs $630 $0 $0 $0 $40 $670
2 'Revenue Requirement Analy56s
Hours 4 16 40 0 2 62
Labor Casts $420 $1.680 $2.600 $0 $80 $4,780
3 cost or Serviee Study
Hours 4 24 40 0 2 70
Labor Costs $420 $2.520 $2,600 $0 $80 $5,620
4 Develop Rate Options
Hours 4 12 .24 0 2 42
Labor Costs $420 $1,260 $1.560 $Q $80 $3,320
5 System Development Charges
Hours 32 0 0 S 2 42
Labor Costs $0 $o $'484 $80 53,920
6A Written Report
Hours 8 12 4 4 8 36
Labor Costs x$40 $1,260 $260 $240 5320 $2,920
6B Presentations
Hours 12 0 0 0 6 18
Labor Costs $1.260 '$0 $0 $0 $240 $1,500
7 Computerized Models
Hours 0 0 12 0 2 14
Labor Casts $0 $0 $780 $0 $80 $860
Subtotal 70 120 12 25 241
Hours
Labor Costs $7-350 $6,720 $7,800 $720 $1,0000 $23,590
Plus=Expenses 1.
GRAND TOTAL �
Economic and Engineering Services,Eric. 24 City of Tigard Proposal
City of Tigard
Water Utility Rate Study
CH2M HILL
October 11, 1995
CH2M HILL Experience
♦ Over 200 rate studies
♦ 100 rate models
♦ 50 System Development Charge studies
♦ Expert witness testimony
♦ AWWA financial planning model
♦ AWWA committee membership
Proj ect . Team.
City of Tigard
Intergovernmental
Water Board
,'tt::#i:f:'sx.'�.:d`Z•:i?;�T S:F. 53Fff::SS*k"v}.'Sfut.�ri#...
ffProffjectct Manager xP . Rothstein �;%` .,
:•":•i+:•:•wFi..•:,"•,:;•;.;;.:::o:sr:•::x�c�.���.r%fx�'4Si .i :$3.uf.}#'o-'�x'3t"}�c:Ko:�.. '"'q. ^�;x�•ir�;6 :.�'��%•''x�`•>::•":•�:•`:�>:`•:::�i:`•3:� ::"
Project Engineer Project Economists
Bob Fuller Bob Tomlinson
Toby L aFranc e
x .r..w.. :s3��bt''"c:2:mw:�:::r�::2cf'-:i�•?.'•::6itiw::�� :••�`::".••:<:::::::':::r,,>%:�:'.•''
Project Manager Experience _
♦ City of Austin, Texas rate manager
♦ AWWA Rates & Charges Committee
♦ Recent Rate Project Work:
♦ McMinnville, Oregon
♦ Sedona, Arizona
♦ Idaho Falls, Idaho
♦ East Bay Municipal Utility District, CA
♦ Anaheim, CA
Project Economist _Experience
♦ 8 Years with CH2M HILL
♦ Previously with Denver Water Board
♦ Recent project '..work:
+ Wilsonville, Or, egon
* Woodburn, Oregon
♦ Clackamas County Utilities Department, OR
♦ Gresham, Oregon
* Idaho Falls, Idaho
Study Objectives
♦ Adequate revenue to meet„ system costs
♦ Equitable Rates
♦ Conservation-oriented rate structure
♦ Fairness between current and future users
o Consistency with Orgeon SDC laws
♦ Affordable rates and charges
♦ Public Acceptance
Project Status
♦ Project management transition
♦ Project work
♦ Reviewed basic system data
♦ Begun rate model development
♦ Outstanding Issues
♦ Project scheduling
♦ Identify new or additional concerns
♦ Public involvement process
1
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Ed Wegner
FROM: Mike Miller
DATE: October 11, 1995
SUBJECT: Facility Use
This is a status update of the facility use survey that was requested by the IWB. Attached is a
spreadsheet showing the Water Building, Operations and City Facilities, and the Canterbury
building square footage's. Also under each heading is a listing of the current department
occupancy or usage.
Because of the overlapping responsibilities, it has been difficult to determine exactly the percentage
of chargeable usage to a department. Additional time is necessary to evaluate all aspects of facility
use. For example Human Resources and Risk Management is a City wide function which is head
quartered in a city of Tigard owned building. Although the majority of issues are City wide, there are
also specific Water Division matters that they handle. Chargeable time spent on water related
issues, personnel or otherwise, is adjusted once a year during the budget process.
Another area is Fleet operations. Fleet is now housed in the shop bays at the Water Building and
spends approximately 70% of its time maintaining the Police fleet. The remaining 30% is divided
up amongst the rest of the City's departments. If we are just talking about routine and preventative
vehicle maintenance, the Water Divisions share would be less than 5%. However, with the size of
the Water Division fleet a major failure of a piece of equipment will skew the percentages.
Although we need additional time to complete the analysis, here are some of the preliminary
findings:
Canterbury Facility
The Tigard Tualatin School District has lease agreement, originally with
Tigard Water District, to utilize 1200 square feet of building area and
additional outside area for their mini bus operations.
City of Tigard utilizes a small portion of the upstairs offices at Canterbury for
record storage. The rest of the shop area is utilized for storage of
Maintenance Services equipment. Most of the equipment belongs to the
Parks division, however some of the equipment is used to maintain water
reservoir sites.
Community Use
Farmers Market utilizes the Water Building Auditorium and parking lot along
SW Burnham Street on Saturdays from June 1 through October 31. The
Farmers Market pays no rent, but has paid for additional electrical service.
Severe Weather Shelter utilized the Water Building Auditorium for 71 nights
during the 199495 fiscal year. They do not pay rent, although they do
provide their own cleaning services.
Other community usage's: City of Tigard Office Services is currently
checking the registration list for out of house usage of the Water Building.
This information should be made available sometime next week. In house
usage is not tracked the same way as out of house usage's, plus the
number of attendees are not tracked. No fees are collected for use of the
Water Building, however, after November 1, 1995, certain uses will be
charged a rental fee.
One last item. Although the carpet in the Water Building Auditorium is in excellent physical
condition, its appearance, due to food stains, is unacceptable. New carpet for the Water Building
Auditorium will be purchased by the City Building Maintenance Fund.
Sheet1
% SF Charged Adjusted SF
Occupied SF to Water Charged to Water
Water Building
Water Operations 7,485.95
Fleet 3,036.58
Finance (A/P PR) 560.00
Finance (Customer Service) 1,152.18
Finance (Finance Director) 203.71
Finance (Accounting Mgr) 265.25
Copier/Mail/Printer room 252.88
Inside Conference room 217.00
Office Lunch Room 401.64
Vacant Office 195.00
Public Use 2,562.76
Halls, Mech. Rm., Gen. Rm 1619.05
Operations/City Facilities
Maintenance Services Dir 195
Directors Sec. 175.5
Utility Manager 148
Operations Manager 126
City Administrator 204.35
Canterbury
Leased Section (TTSD) 1200
City of Tigard-record storage
and Maintenance Services
equipment 2496
Page 1
r T'
I
AUGUST 1995
WATER MONTHLY REPORT
Revenues/Expenditures:
Month of August Year to Date Prior Yr. to Date % of Budget
Revenues:
Water Sales $534,457.04 $937,162.60 $851,339.81
Meter Sales 40,707.41 84,797.41 70,640.00
Developer Fees 0.00 9,970.88 11,199.72
Other Income 28,619.31 46,856.12 13,128.17
Total Revenue $603,783.76 $1,078,787.01 $943,301.70 27%
Expenditures:
Personal Services $68,693.22 $119,548.43 $123,466.00
Material Services 270,828.21 282;429.74 263,463.85
Capital Outlay 37,265.87 62,518.92 54,256.44
Cap. Proj. Res. Fund 00.00 00.00 00.00
*Total Expends. $376,787.30 $464,497.09 $441,186.29 12%
SDC Fund: $49,716.25 $109,030.26 $81,728.00 29%
SDC Fund Balance: $1,763,699.85
* City accounting system is on a cash basis
Meter Installations: 5/8" x 3/4" 1" 1 1/2" 2" 3" Total
Durham 0 0 0 0 0 0
King City 0 0 0 0 0 0
Unincorporated Area 24 1 0 0 0 25
City of Tigard 17 10 0 0 1 28
Total for August 53
Water Consumption and Loss:
Total 100 cubic feet of water purchased or produced 317,761 ccf
Plus amount of water from storage during August and
consumption not billed in July 140,500 ccf
Total 100 cubic feet of water billed <354,279 ccf>
Net amount of water in storage < 10,100 ccfl
Amount of water consumed but not yet billed < 75,000 ccfl
Total Water loss 18,882 ccf 6%
Work Accomplished:
Durham
• Water Division personnel responded to a few routine requests to check for
water leaks or low water pressure at the customer's service.
• Water Division personnel replaced a defective 5/8" x 3/4" water meter and
3/4-inch pressure regulator in the Kings Gate neighborhood.
King City
• Water Division personnel responded to a few requests to check for low or
no water consumption.
• Water Division personnel replaced a defective 3/4-inch pressure regulator
and raised one meter box within King City.
Unincorporated Area
• Water Division personnel replaced two 3/4-inch regulators that were
malfunctioning; replaced three 5/8"x 3/4" water meters; responded to 19
requests to check for low or no water consumption and three requests to
check low or high pressure.
• Water Division personnel repaired one 1-inch water service on SW Beef
Bend Road and one 3/4-inch water service on SW Chardonnay Avenue
that were damaged by a contractor.
City of Tigard
• Water Division personnel replaced 22 3/4-inch pressure regulators and
six 5/8" x 3/4" water meters that were malfunctioning. In addition Water
staff also responded to 50 calls to check on water leaks at the meter,
replace damaged meter boxes or checked reports of low water pressure.
• Water Division personnel replaced and relocated a 2-inch water service
located on SW Grant Avenue for St. Anthony's Church. This
relocation/replacement was necessary due to the City's Grant Street Bike
Path and Sidewalk Improvement project.
• Water Division personnel installed a 2-inch water service located on SW
North Dakota Street for a new Boston Chicken. Water personnel also
installed a 1-inch water service for the Kenny Rogers Roaster located on
SW Pacific Highway; removed a 3/4-inch water service on SW McDonald
Street; and installed a 1-inch water service and meter for the new Chevron
Station located at the corner of SW Pacific Hwy. and McDonald Street.
• Water Division personnel relocated a fire hydrant on SW Landmark Lane
that was damaged by a moving van.
• Water Division personnel relocated two 2-inch water services, three 3/4-
inch water services, one air release and adjusted water valve boxes that
were impacted by the City's Bonita Road Improvement Project. Also the
Water Division had personnel standby as the pilings were driven for
the new bridge over Fanno Creek. This was a precautionary act in case a
transmission main was damaged.
• Water Division personnel removed a water service along SW Burnham
Street that was for the tavern located on the corner of SW Main and
Burnham Street. The tavern was demolished to make improvements to this
intersection.
• Water Division personnel raised and repaired valve boxes due to street
overlay projects on SW Main Street, SW Wilton Drive, SW Bonita Road,
SW Scoffins Street, and SW Hunziker Street.
Status Report:
On August 18, we increased our water purchases from TVWD to 2.1 million gallons a
day. We were able to sustain this flow with no negative effects to the TVWD system.
The average yield, during the remainder of the month, was 2.06 MGD.
The combined average water production for Wells 1 and 2 for August was 1.16 MGD.
This is an increase of approximately 16% from last year.
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
T0: Interested Parties
FROM: Ed Wegner, Director of Maintenance Services
DATE: September 14, 1995
SUBJECT: Regional Water Supply Plan Joint Meeting
The City of Tigard will be hosting a joint meeting on October 11, 1995, at 8777 SW
Burham, Tigard, at 7:00 p.m. to discuss the Preliminary Regional Water Supply Plan.
Council members from Tigard, King City, and Durham, as well as Board members from
the Intergovernmental Water Board and Tigard Water District Board are invited.
A light dinner will be served from 6:00 p.m. to 6:45 p.m.
We have attached a copy of the Preliminary Regional Water Supply Plan for your
reference.
Hope to see you there.
44*4.1
I 11
EXECUTIVE SUMMARYI.
PRELIMINARY REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY PLAN
_ _ __
I
. .. I.
11
1I
..._ _.... ....... .. . ..__ ........_ _ . __ ..... .. _ _ _ _ _ __.._ .... .
for he
Portland MetI-Iropolitan Area
August 1995
THIS PLAN WAS FINANCED AND MANAGED BY THE FOLLOWING
PARTICIPANTS:
City of Beaverton
Canby Utility Board
Clackamas River Water
Damascus Water District
City of Fairview
City of Gladstone
City of Gresham
City of Hillsboro Utilities Commission
City of Forest Grove
City of Lake Oswego
Metro
City of Milwaukee
Mt. Scott Water District
Oak Lodge Water District
City of Portland
Raleigh Water District
Rockwood Water
City of Sandy
City of Sherwood
South Fork Water Board:
City of Oregon City/City of West Linn
Tigard Water District
City of Troutdale
City of Tualatin
Tualatin Valley Water District
West Slope Water District
City of Wilsonville
City of Wood Village
CONSULTANT TEAM:
Barakat & Chamberlin, Inc.
Montgomery Watson
Barney & Worth
Murray, Smith & Associates
Squier Associates
Parametrix, Inc.
McArthur & Associates
Pete Swartz
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
HISTORY OF THE REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY PLANNING EFFORT
The Portland, Oregon, metropolitan region is located on the lower Columbia River,
where the Willamette River joins the Columbia. Its urban area is made up of 3
counties and 24 cities with a combined 1990 population of 1,138,000. This population
is growing.
The region is served by a number of different surface water and groundwater sources.
The water supply system operated by the City of Portland currently supplies about
750,000 people; the rest are served by a variety of sources, most notably the
Clackamas River, the Trask River/Tualatin River system, and groundwater.
In 1989, a number of the region's water providers convened to discuss future water
supply issues. It was agreed that the region was going to face future supply shortfalls
given current supplies, use patterns, and growth projections. A group called the
Regional Providers Advisory Group (RPAG) was formed. It met on a monthly basis
and had about 35 members.
The RPAG process has evolved into a regional water supply planning effort of
unprecedented scope. Phase 1 of this effort, which was completed in 1992, found
that:
■ Water demands would increase significantly throughout the region;
■ Existing supplies would not meet all of these demands;
■ Conservation could play an important role in meeting regional water
needs; and
■ New sources of water and efficient transmission systems offered the
potential to meet these increasing needs.
The Phase 1 "Water Source Options Study" evaluated 29 different water supply
options that could potentially be developed to serve the Portland/Vancouver
metropolitan area's water needs and ranked these sources against a predetermined set
of criteria. The evaluation concluded that six supply source options were worthy of
additional analysis and should be carried forward to a second phase Regional Water
Supply Plan (RWSP). The six source options are:
ES-I
■ A third dam in the Bull Run Watershed;
■ Additional diversion and treatment capacity on the Clackamas River;
■ Diversion and treatment capacity on the Willamette River;
■ Diversion and treatment capacity on the Columbia River;
■ Raising the height of Barney Dam on the Trask River, thereby
increasing the storage capacity of Barney Reservoir; and
■ Aquifer Storage and Recovery, involving the use of one or more of the
region's surface water sources.
Since the completion of Phase 1, the Joint Water Commission and the Tualatin Valley
Water District have continued to pursue the Barney Reservoir option' and have
initiated construction on that project. The RWSP therefore focuses on the remaining
five supply options.
The RWSP also considers water conservation as a key resource option.
This document reports on the results of the RWSP. Phase 2 was funded and managed
by a group of 27 water providers in the metropolitan region.Z In 1994, the
Metropolitan Service District (Metro) became the 28th participant. The project used
the techniques of Integrated Resource Planning and was conducted by a team of
consultants led by the firm of Barakat & Chamberlin, Inc. Following is a list of the
project participants:
City of Beaverton* City of Portland
Canby Utilities Board Raleigh Water District
Clackamas Water District** Rockwood Water PUD
City of Gladstone City of Sandy
Clairmont Water District** City of Sherwood
Damascus Water District South Fork Water Board
City of Fairview City of Tigard
City of Gresham City of Troutdale
City of Hillsboro Utilities Commission* City of Tualatin
'An Environmental Impact Statement was being developed for this project before Phase 2 began.
-The City of Vancouver and Clark County, Washington chose not to participate in Phase 2. The Phase 2
participants are all Oregon jurisdictions.
ES-2
City of Forest Grove* Tualatin Valley Water District*
City of Lake Oswego West Slope Water District
City of Milwaukie City of Wilsonville
Mt. Scott Water District City of Wood Village
Oak Lodge Water District Metropolitan Service District (Metro)
*Denotes members of the Joint Water Commission.
**The Clackamas and Clairmont Water Districts have recently merged to form
Clackamas River Water.
SCOPE OF THE PHASE 2 REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY PLAN
The scope of the Regional Water Supply Plan (RWSP) is comprehensive. It includes
the following major elements:
(1) An active and ongoing public information and involvement program.
(2) Development of policy objectives that reflect the important regional
values that this plan must attempt to meet.
(3) Development of a logical and defensible demand forecast for the
region.
(4) Evaluation of five potential supply sources.
(5) Identification and evaluation of possible transmission system
improvements and expansions.
(6) Identification and evaluation of a broad range of voluntary and
mandatory demand management and conservation options available
to the region.
(7) Development and evaluation of integrated resource strategies based on
the information developed in the foregoing elements. A sophisticated
modeling tool was developed to assist this process.
(8) Identification of short-term and long-term actions that the region must
undertake to ensure that the needs of the regional water providers and
ES-3
their customers are met throughout the planning period, which runs
through the year 2050.
This report contains the preliminary results of the RWSP. The plan is "preliminary"
at this point because of the critical need for public feedback over the next several
months on the report contents. Based on that input, the plan will be finalized in early
1996.
Chapters of the preliminary plan document provide descriptions of all RWSP
elements. For most of these, more detailed documentation has been prepared over the
course of the project in the form of interim reports or technical memoranda. These
are listed in Appendix A of the plan. Arrangements to review these documents may
be made through participating water providers.
THE REGION'S NEED FOR NEW RESOURCES
A key conclusion of the RWSP is that, with current resources and facilities
supplemented by the resource additions to which the region's providers have already
committed, the earliest point at which the region will need major new supply additions Iwo
will be around the year 2017. This point is illustrated in Figure ES-1, which shows a
simple comparison between available supplies and peak-day demands under extreme
weather conditions, assuming no utility-sponsored conservation programs. An active
conservation effort by providers can put off this need until at least the early-to-mid
2020s.
This does not imply that there is no work to be done until that time. There is, in fact,
much to be done in the near-term to ensure that the region meets the needs of its
water customers. Some of these near-term actions include the timely completion of
resource additions to which the regional providers have committed, development of
necessary transmission and interconnection facilities to meet the needs of all
providers, conservation program planning and implementation, and design of a
suitable institutional and financial structure to govern the delivery of water service in
the region.
ES-4
Figure ES-1
Comparison of Regional Peals-Day Demand
To Existing and Committed Supply
Portland Metropolitan Region
1992--2050: All Customer Classes
Millions of
Gallons per Day
800 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
750 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
700 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
650 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
600 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
550 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
500
450 . . . . . . . . . . _ - _ _-- -.. -�. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
*A -- -.-."--._
. . . . . .- -- ----------------- ------ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
400
350 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
300 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . .
250 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
200 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
150 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
100 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
50 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. .
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Forecast Scenarios ----""-` High Growth 1 13 11 Baseline ----- Low Growth '—`—• Supply
01 AT TCT95
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IN THE REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY PLANNING
PROCESS
Public information and involvement (PI&I) has been a cornerstone of the RWSP.
Water provider participants demonstrated their commitment to PI&I by making it a
key element of the project's scope, Substantial fiscal and staff resources have been
dedicated to ensuring that the values of the citizenry are understood and heard.
From its inception, the RWSP was designed to obtain input from various audiences
through a mix of activities. Some activities targeted the general regional population,
while others involved those with specific interests. Through this process, providers
also attempted to promote consensus-building concerning the process and findings of
the Plan.
Vehicles used to obtain that input and inform the public about the project have
included:
■ A broad range of written materials made available to the public;
■ A variety of workshops, roundtable discussions, and public forums;
■ Over 80 interviews of key stakeholders in the region;
■ A detailed public opinion research study;
■ A survey to assess the value that customers place on water supply
reliability;
■ More than 100 presentations to interested agencies, organizations, and
citizens;
■ Various newsletters, informational materials, and bill inserts;
■ An Environmental Task Force of environmental organization
representatives and government officials to review the environmental
analysis;
■ Exhibits at county fairs in Multnomah, Clackamas, and Washington
counties;
■ Two focus groups with residential water customers;
ES-6
■ A slide show on the RWSP; and
■ A 15 minute RWSP video.
Thus, there has been, throughout the planning process, a great deal of information
exchanged between project participants and interested citizens, organizations, and
decision makers. Over 300 persons receive regular notification of committee meetings
and documentation of ensuing discussions. Approximately 3,300 citizens receive
updates and invitations to submit feedback through newsletters and other information
pieces related to the project. Many customers have received bill inserts on the RWSP
process. In turn, project participants have received input from over 3,200 people
through surveys and public workshops or briefings.
Participating providers made it a priority to listen to the public. Several key public
values and priorities have emerged from the PI&I effort. The issues that people most
care about include:
■ Cost
■ Equity
%W ■ Water quality
■ Environmental protection
■ System reliability
■ Efficient water use
■ Implications of growth
Not surprisingly, these key issues reflect the diverse interests of the region's
citizenry. The goal of the public involvement process has been to capture the range of
interests and concerns held throughout the region.
REGIONAL POLICY OBJECTIVES
The PI&I efforts provided key input to the development of a set of regional policy
objectives developed specifically for the RWSP. The policy objectives, along with
associated evaluation criteria, provide a framework to design and evaluate the relative
strengths and weaknesses of alternative resource configurations.
The region's water providers have not attempted to prioritize the policy objectives.
This is consistent with not providing a single "best" resource plan. Rather, the plan
presents several options that emphasize different sets of objectives. The plan makes
ES-7
tradeoffs among these options clear. The region must now make choices among these
alternatives.
Some of the policy objectives complement each other, while others compete or
conflict. The complexity of the water supply planning and decision-making process is
appropriately reflected in the broad range of policy objectives identified.
The policy objectives include:
Efficient Use of Water
■ Maximize the efficient use of water resources, taking into account the
potential for conservation, availability of supplies, practicality, and
relative cost-effectiveness of the options.
■ Make the best use of available supplies before developing new ones.
Water Supply Reliability
■ Minimize the frequency of water shortages of any magnitude and
duration.
■ Ensure that the duration and magnitude of shortages can be managed
(e.g., through the operation of raw water storage facilities or through
access to alternative sources of water).
Water Quality
■ Meet or exceed all current federal and state water quality standards for
finished water.
■ Utilize sources with the highest raw water quality.
■ Maximize the ability to protect water quality in the future, including
using watershed-protection based approaches.
■ Maximize the ability to deal with aesthetic factors, such as taste, color,
hardness, and odor.
ES-8
Impacts of Catastrophic Events
■ Minimize the magnitude, frequency, and duration of service
interruptions due to natural or human-caused catastrophes, such as
earthquakes, landslides, volcanic eruptions, floods, spills, fires,
sabotage, etc.
Economic Costs
■ Minimize the economic impact of capital and operating costs of new
water resources on customers.
■ Assure the ability to relate rate impacts associated with new water
resources to benefits gained within the region on an equitable basis over
time.
Environmental Impacts
■ Minimize the impact of water resource development on the natural and
human environments.
Growth
■ Be consistent with Metro's regional growth strategy and local land-use
plans.
Flexibility to Deal with Future Uncertainty
■ Maximize the ability to anticipate and respond to unforeseen future
events or changes in forecasted trends.
Ease of Implementation
■ Maximize the ability to address local, state, and federal legislative and
regulatory requirements in a timely manner.
ES-9
Operational Flexibility
■ Maximize operational flexibility to best meet the needs of the region,
including the ability to move water around the region and to rely on
backup sources as necessary.
Comparisons and tradeoffs among alternatives are facilitated through a set of
measurable evaluation criteria. Each policy objective is associated with one or more
evaluation criteria. Each alternative resource strategy is evaluated against these
criteria.
FUTURE WATER DEMANDS IN THE REGION
A well-developed and defensible water demand forecast is critical to the RWSP. The
demand forecast underlies the entire planning effort. The RWSP demand forecast was
a complex undertaking that projected annual, seasonal, monthly, and peak-day
demands for the region as a whole and for each of the three counties. These
projections are based on demographic and employment forecasts developed as part of
Metro's Region 2040 project. RWSP staff and consultants have coordinated closely
with Metro staff throughout the process to ensure consistency.
Tables ES-1 through ES-3 summarize the forecasting results for annual average,
summer average, and peak-day demands respectively. The 1992 base demands are
shown, as are the high, medium, and low demand forecasts for the year 2050, the last
year of the planning period. Average annual growth rates over the planning period are
also shown.
These demands reflect naturally-occurring conservation, which results from legal,
regulatory, and market forces which tend to increase water efficiency over time
regardless of any utility conservation programs.
lowi
ES-10
;'err
Table ES-1
ANNUAL AVERAGE WATER DEMAND FORECAST (MGD) AND
AVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH RATES
1992 2050: High 2050: Medium 2050: Low
Region 172 310 (2.1%) 264 (1.5%) 211 (0.7%)
Multnomah County 97 144 (l.4%) 126 (0.9%) 106 (0.3%)
Clackamas County 33 67 (2.6%) 56 (l.9%) 43 (0.9%)
Washington County 42 99 (3.1%) 82 (2.4%) 62 (l.4%)
Table ES-2
PEAK SEASON WATER DEMAND FORECAST (MGD) AND
AVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH RATES
1992 2050: High 1 2050: Medium 2050: Low
Region 220 417 (2.3%) 350 (l.7%) 275 (0.8%)
Multnomah County 123 190 (1.6%) 165 (1.1%) 136 (0.4%)
Clackamas County 41 90 (2.8%) 74 (2.1%) 56 (1.1%)
Washington County 56 137 (3.27T) 111 (2.5%) 84 (1.5%)
Table ES-3
PEAK DAY WATER DEMAND FORECAST (MGD) AND
AVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH RATES
1992 2050: High 2050: Medium 2050: Low
Region 365 780 (2.7%) 667 (2.2%) 535 (1.4%)
Multnomah County 183 305 (1.8%) 269 (l.4%) 227 (0.8%)
Clackamas County 87 221 (3.4%) 185 (2.7%) 144 (l.8%)
Washington County 96 255 (3.6%) 213 (2.9%) 164 (l.9%)
ES-11
CURRENT AND COMMITTED RESOURCES
Existing water systems in the region have an estimated usable storage capacity of 11.4
billion gallons and a delivery capacity of 413.8 million gallons per day (mgd).
Current regional peak-day demand, even under weather conditions that approach the
hottest and driest that the region has experienced over a 65-year historical period of
record, is about 370 mgd. Despite this apparent excess capacity, some individual
providers within the region do face more immediate shortfalls due to transmission and
distribution system constraints.
Existing water sources and facilities for the region include:
■ The Bull Run watershed, with two dams that impound 10.2 billion
gallons of usable storage. About 750,000 residents of the region rely on
the Bull Run as their primary supply.
■ The Clackamas River, on which regional providers have developed 66
mgd of intake and treatment capacity. The Clackamas is currently the
primary source of water to 175,000 residents.
■ The Trask/Tualatin water system, which includes the 1.3 billion 1"004
gallon Barney Reservoir on the Trask River, a conduit from the
reservoir to the Tualatin River, and 43.5 mgd of intake and treatment
capacity on the Tualatin. In addition, in most years, the region has
access to 4.2 billion gallons from Hagg Lake, which is owned by the
Bureau of Reclamation and located on Scoggins Creek. This system
supplies water to over 120,000 residents in the western part of the
region.
■ The Columbia Southshore Wellfield, which was developed in the
1980s as an emergency backup and peaking supply source. Since 1986,
the ability to use the wellfield has been limited to prevent migration of
contamination plumes. As a result, the current usable delivery capacity
of the wellfield is assumed to be 35 mgd. The City of Portland is
working closely with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
and with the responsible parties to implement a remediation program
that restores the wells to their full capacity of up to 90 mgd.
■ Local sources, which are used by a number of smaller communities in
the region for base use or peaking purposes. These are largely
ES-12
,%w
groundwater sources scattered throughout the region and provide nearly
60 mgd of capacity.
■ Transmission lines, which range from 4-inch diameter pipes in small
districts to the 66-inch diameter Bull Run Conduit No. 4.
In addition to maintaining existing water supply sources and transmission facilities,
the region's water providers are committed to completing several facility additions,
expansions and improvements over the next two to ten years. The projects will
provide another 80 mgd of delivery capacity and 5.2 billion gallons of storage. These
additions are not being evaluated as part of the Regional Water Supply Plan. Rather,
the RWSP assumes these projects will be completed, and includes them in the plan's
baseline resource assumptions or "base case".
Resources to which regional providers have committed, but which are not yet
operational, include:
■ The Barney Reservoir expansion, which will increase the water
storage capacity of Barney Reservoir from 1.3 billion gallons to 6.5
'*ww'
billion gallons. This project is expected to be completed by 1998. In
addition, improvements to the Joint Water Commission's intake and
treatment facilities on the Tualatin River and addition of a new
transmission line are expected to increase delivery capacity by 20 mgd
to 63.5 mgd by 1997.
■ Additional Clackamas River capacity beyond the 66 mgd that already
exists. Several Clackamas providers have committed to developing a
total of 22.5 mgd of additional capacity. This would bring the total
"base case" capacity on the Clackamas to 88.5 mgd.
■ Columbia South Shore Wellfield enhancements, which the RWSP
assumes will increase the current 35 mgd of capacity to 72 mgd by
2005.
Table ES-4 summarizes the existing and committed resources being assumed in the
RWSP "base case."
As discussed earlier, these committed resources enable the region to defer the need
for further resources or facilities until at least the year 2017. Without these committed
additions, needs can occur as early as 2004.
ES-13
Table ES-4
REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY PLAN
EXISTING AND COMMITTED SUPPLY SOURCES
Existing Additional Committed Existing and Committed
Usable Storage Usable Storage Usable Storage
Delivery Capacity Capacity Delivery Capacity Capacity Delivery Capacity Capacity
Source (mgd) (mg) (mgd) (mg) (mgd) (mg)
Bull Run Res 1,2 210 10,200 210 10,200
Clackamas
CRW 30 30
SFWB 20 10 30
Lake Oswego 16 4 20
Oak Lodge 8.5 8.5
Subtotal 66 22.5 88.5
Trask/Tualatin 43.5 1,153 20 5,214 63.5 6,367
Southshore Wellfield 35 37 72
Local Sources
South 28.4 28.4
West 12.8 12.8
East 18.1 18.1
Subtotal 59.3 59.3
Total 413.8 11,353 79.5 5,214 493.3 16,567
N%W. ANALYSIS OF SOURCE OPTIONS
For each source option, possible facility locations were screened to identify
representative sites, which the RWSP defines as:
Potential facility locations that merit detailed analysis because they offer the
highest likelihood of successful permitting and potential development based on
preliminary analyses of technical, land use, water quality, environmental, cost,
and other relevant factors.
Identified representative sites are as follows:
■ Bull Run Dam 3: Bull Run River canyon just downstream of Log
Creek and about one-half mile downstream of the confluence of Blazed
Alder Creek and the Bull Run River.
■ Clackamas River: A consolidated facility adjacent to the current
Clackamas River Water site.3
■ Willamette River: Just upstream (west) of the existing railroad bridge
' in Wilsonville on the north side of the river on property currently
owned by Oregon Pacific which is currently used for sand and gravel
operations.
■ Columbia River: Just below the Sandy's mouth, on a site currently
used for gravel mining and storage.
■ Aquifer Storage & Recovery: Two sites, one in the Powell Valley
area southeast of Gresham and the other in the Cooper-Bull Mountain
area about four miles to the southwest of the City of Beaverton in
Washington County.
Extensive analyses of each option were then performed. Areas analyzed include:
■ Water Availability and Water Rights
■ Raw Water Quality and Treatment Requirements
■ Environmental Impacts
■ Vulnerability to Catastrophic Events
'Several configurations were considered that use this consolidated facility instead of or in conjunction with
the various existing or planned Clackamas River facilities.
ES-15
■ Costs vote
■ Ease of Implementation
One of the key conclusions is that all of the surface sources can readily be treated to
meet or surpass all safe drinking water standards.
These analyses formed the basis of ratings of each option against key evaluation
criteria and provided crucial information to the development and assessment of
alternative resource strategies. Table ES-5 summarizes the ratings of the source
options.
ANALYSIS OF TRANSMISSION OPTIONS
In addition to the source options, transmission is critical to efficiently meeting the
region's needs. The region's transmission systems include several components,
including:
■ Pipelines that move treated water from the treatment plant to the
regional storage reservoirs; low
■ The regional reservoirs themselves;
■ Major lines linking sources to demands in other parts of the region;
■ Major lines designed to serve demands within a portion of the region;
and
■ Local "spokes" to serve the needs of individual providers.
Representative regional reservoir sites for the surface source options are as follows:
■ Bull Run and Columbia sources: Existing Powell Butte reservoir site.
■ Clackamas source: Forsythe Road site near the unincorporated
community of Outlook in Clackamas County.
■ Willamette source: Cooper Mountain site in unincorporated Washington
County west of Beaverton.
ES-16
Nine major representative transmission corridors were identified, as follows:
■ Lusted Hill/Powell Butte
■ Columbia River/Powell Butte
■ Powell Butte/Clackamas River
■ Powell Butte/Beaverton
■ Clackamas/Tualatin
■ Clackamas/Forsythe Road
■ Willamette/Tualatin
■ Tualatin/Beaverton
■ Cooper Mountain/Beaverton
Corridor alignments were chosen for each of these based on preliminary land use,
environmental, and geotechnical analyses. Based on specified design criteria, cost
functions were then generated for each corridor. These cost functions also included
base cost estimates for the local "spokes" between the corridor and the appropriate
local providers.
The final components of the transmission system are the "spokes" that deliver water
to the local providers from one of the major transmission lines. For each provider,
these spokes were sized to meet the projected 2050 demand deficit based on
forecasted high peak-day demands. As discussed below, a key plan implementation
issue for the region is the specific local interconnections that are needed to ensure
that provider needs are met in the near-term as well as the long-term. The region
should attempt to configure these local transmission additions to be consistent with the
adopted long-term regional resource strategy.
ES-17
Table ES-5
RATINGS OF SOURCE OPTIONS
Raw Vulnerability to Ease of
Natural Human Water Water Watershed Catastrophic Implemen-
Source Option Environment Environment Quality Aesthetics Protection Events tation
Bull Run Dam 3 4.9 3.6 1.2 1.0 1.0 3.5 4.5
Columbia 2.6 2.5 2.1 2.5 5.0 3.3 3.5
Willamette 1.0 2.5 2.2 2.0 4.0 2.5 4.0
Clackamas (>50 mgd) 2.4 1.0 1.8 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.0
Clackamas (:!5; mgd) 1.0 1.0 1.8 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.0
ASR 1.5 2.2 3.0 3.0 N/A* 2.0 3.0
Note: Ratings range from 1 to 5; lower scores are preferred.
* This issue was not directly addressed in the RWSP. It is assumed that rigorous wellhead protection programs will be required for any ASR site.
It is critical that the development of regional, subregional, and local transmission
options meets local needs over the entire planning period in a manner consistent with
the region's anticipated ultimate resource configuration. At times, there will be some
friction between short-term local needs and long-term regional needs. The manner in
which this friction is resolved must recognize that a regional plan that cannot flexibly
meet the ongoing needs of the participant providers will not retain the critical support
of those providers. These needs should, however, be met in the context of the
strategic direction the region has chosen.
ANALYSIS OF CONSERVATION PROGRAMS
A basic premise of the RWSP is that water conservation is a resource that can play a
key role in meeting future water needs and that this resource must be carefully
considered and subjected to the same level of analysis as are supply sources. A
comprehensive framework was used to examine water conservation to assure that all
viable conservation technologies and management practices are considered.
The framework began by specifying a large universe of potential conservation
measures. These measures were then subjected to a qualitative screen to narrow the
focus to those that had potential value to the region. For those measures that passed
the qualitative screen, technology profiles were developed that described each
measure's key technical and economic characteristics. The profiles formed the basis
of an economic screen of the remaining measures.
The next step was to combine measures passing both screens into effective
conservation program concepts. A conservation program is a set of conservation
measures bundled for delivery to a defined target market of customers. The results of
this step are presented in Table ES-6, in which the program concepts are divided into
three levels in increasing order of "aggressiveness." Detailed descriptions were
developed for each of 24 program concepts. In addition, estimates were made of the
further savings that could be achieved through conservation pricing programs beyond
those already in place in the region.
The RWSP also included a preliminary analysis of opportunities for increasing water
reuse and recycling, and for the direct use of stormwater. Options evaluated include:
■ Stormwater capture
■ Cisterns
■ Gray water systems
ES-19
■ Recycling of industrial cooling water v■r�
■ Reuse of treated wastewater effluent
DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVE RESOURCE STRATEGIES
The final product of the RWSP is a set of resource strategies that best meet the
region's needs as expressed through the policy objectives. There are many possible
strategies that reflect the tradeoffs the region must make among the policy objectives.
In light of the importance of future uncertainties, it is useful to distinguish between a
resource sequence and a resource strategy.
■ A resource sequence is a linear progression of resource and
transmission additions over the planning period. Note that a resource
sequence does not provide flexibility for the region. It is a single
development path that does not respond to changing future conditions.
■ A resource strategy is a multi-branched "tree" of sequences that defines
actions that should be taken under various sets of uncertainty outcomes.
It is a "road map" of recommended actions under a wide range of "
future conditions, and provides a series of points at which the region
can respond to new information about then-current conditions.
14000,
ES-20
Table ES-6
REGIONAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM CONCEPTS
Commercial, Industrial, Commercial, Industrial,
Residential Indoor Residential Outdoor Institutional Indoor Institutional Outdoor
Level 1 Public education and Public education and Commercial plumbing and CI&I outdoor education and
awareness awareness appliances education awareness
Customer landscaping HVAC workshops C&I watering practices
workshops workshops
Trade ally landscaping Trade ally landscaping
workshops—res. portion workshops—C&I portion
Level 2 Indoor audit (combined with Outdoor audits Commercial indoor audit CI&I outdoor audits
outdoor)
Incentives for new efficient HVAC financial incentives Large landscape audits
Appliance incentives and landscaping and irrigations
equipment tagging systems Industrial process technical Incentives for new efficient
assistance and incentives landscaping and irrigation
systems
Level 3 Ultra low-flush toilet rebate Landscaping ordinance Ultra low-flush toilet direct Landscaping ordinance
installation and incentives
Incentives for early
retirement of single-pass
cooling
Water Supply Reliability
One of the fundamental goals of the RWSP is to address the issue of water supply
reliability. This goal is embodied in the policy objective of "minimiz(ing) the
frequency of water shortages of any magnitude and duration." In many ways, supply
reliability is basic to the RWSP, as concern about future unreliability is the key
reason the region's providers joined to develop the plan.
The region must ultimately choose a desired level of future reliability, just as it must
make choices about other policy objectives. Tradeoffs occur between increased
reliability levels and other important objectives, such as minimizing costs and
environmental impacts. Policymakers must understand the consequences of different
reliability levels to make informed decisions. To accomplish this, resource sequences
and strategies were defined for each of three reliability levels.
The definition of these reliability levels was guided by the key finding that, given
existing and committed resources, the Portland region will have sufficient total water
supply volumes to avoid all volume-related shortages for the entire planning period
(i.e. through 2050), even under high demand and low flow conditions. However, in
the absence of further resource and facility additions, the region will face shortages in
delivery capacity on high-demand days.
Since the region must concern itself with shortages in delivery capacity that are driven
by peak demands, the alternative reliability levels should be defined accordingly.
Thus, the key distinctions in reliability relate to the level and frequency of shortages
during peaking events.
■ A system that achieves Level 1 reliability would be perfectly reliable.
No shortages would be experienced even under the worst historical
weather conditions.
■ A system that achieves Level 2 reliability would allow for no more
than a 10% peak day shortage for any of the three counties under the
worst historical weather conditions.
■ A system that achieves Level 3 reliability would allow for no more
than a 20% peak day shortage for any of the three counties under the
worst historical weather conditions.
ES-22
Resource Sequences That Achieve Level 1 Reliability
There are many ways for the region to add resources and facilities to ensure that
future shortages do not occur. The RWSP proposes five approaches to meeting the
region's needs and achieving this highest possible level of reliability. Each of these
five sequences was designed to emphasize different policy objectives or combinations
of objectives. Table ES-7 provides a guide to the key policy objectives addressed by
each sequence. The sequences themselves are illustrated in Figure ES-2. Each of these
sequences assumes high demands.
These resource sequences were evaluated against the evaluation criteria. Table ES-8
shows the results of the key assessments.
Table ES-7
KEY POLICY OBJECTIVES
ADDRESSED BY LEVEL 1 RESOURCE SEQUENCES
Natural Water Use Raw Water Catastrophic
Sequence Environment Efficiency Quality Costs Events
1.1 ✓ ✓
1.2 ✓ ✓
1.3 ✓ ✓ ✓
1.4 ✓ ,/
1.5 ✓ ✓ ✓ ,/
ES-23
Table ES-8
PERFORMANCE OF LEVEL 1 RESOURCE SEQUENCES
AGAINST KEY EVALUATION CRITERIA
Cost Water Quality Catastrophic Events
Expected Seasonal
Efficiency: % Unserved Demand in
Present Present Conservation
Worst Year Without:
Value Value Savings for 2nd No. of Ease of
Societal ($ Utility Planning Natural Raw Water Watershed Largest New Implemen-
Sequence millions) ($millions) Period Environment* Quality*,t Protection* Bull Run Source Sources tation*
1.1
Natural 996.6 962.9 10.57% 1 2.2 2.1 23% 1.5% 1 2.5
Environment/
Efficiency
1.2
Raw Water 722.2 802.6 5.04% 4.9 1.2 1.3 60% 0.7% 0 4.5
Quality/Efficiency
1.3
Cost/Water 611 647.6 5.04% 3.2 2 2.1 16% 9.0% 1 3.1
Quality/Efficiency
1.4
Catastrophic 635.1 673.9 5.04% 2.9 2.2 2.1 2% 0.7% 3 3.8
Events/Efficiency
1.5
Costs/Natural 647.9 673.9 5.04% 2.1 2.2 1.8 2% 0.9% 2 3.3
Environment/
Catastrophic
Events/Efficiency
* Comparative scale ranging from 1-5 with 1 as the most favorable rating and 5 as the least favorable rating.
Volume weighting of raw water quality ratings of new sources.
Resource Strategies That Achieve Level 1 Reliability
For each of the five sequences, associated resource strategies that reflect demand
uncertainty were developed. These strategies indicate how future resource and facility
development activities would vary as future demands deviate from earlier forecasts. In
all cases, the objective would still be to achieve Level 1 reliability. To illustrate, a
resource strategy diagram is shown in Figure ES-3.
Table ES-9 shows the expected values of the key evaluation ratings for each of the
strategies.' The flexibility rating is based on the number of possible resource paths in
the strategy.
`4%W
'These expected ratings are based on assumed probabilities for each possible demand outcome (high,
medium, or low) for the successive demand reassessments that occur throughout the planning period.
ES-25
Table ES-9
EXPECTED VALUES OF KEY EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR LEVEL 1 STRATEGIES
Costs Water Quality
Present Value Present
Societal Value Utility Natural Raw Water Watershed
Strategy ($million) ($million) Environment* Quality* Protection* Flexibility*
1.1 864.3 797.8 1.0 2.0 1.8 3
Natural Environment/Efficiency
1.2 580.6 619.9 4.1 1.2 1.2 5
Raw Water Quality/Efficiency
1.3 494.0 501.4 2.2 1.7 1.7 3
Costs/Water Quality/Efficiency
1.4 534.4 546.9 2.2 2.1 1.7 1
Catastrophic Events/Efficiency
1.5 539.9 539.9 1.8 2.1 1.5 2
Costs/Natural Environment/
Efficiency/Catastrophic Events
*Comparative scale ranging from 1-5 with 1 as the most favorable rating and 5 as the least favorable rating.
Implications
As mentioned earlier, these results indicate that—even if the region were to pursue the
highest possible level of reliability and future demands turn out to be high—major
resource additions would not be required until well into the 2020s. This conclusion
assumes that the region pursues a menu of conservation programs that focus on
outdoor uses and is critically dependent on the region's developing committed sources
in a timely manner. If the region undertakes those near-term activities, there is
considerable time before additional sources must be developed.
ES-27
Figure ES-2
Level 1 Resource Sequences—High Demand
1995 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Level l Reliability
I
Sequence 1.1 Maximum
Natural Environment/ A conservation Willamette— 60 mgd ■ Willamette 50 mgd ■
Efficiency Willamette— 50 mgd ■
i
Sequence 1.2
Outdoor ; East-South Bull Run Dam 3 ■
Raw Water Quality/ i
conservation • (75 mgd) i
Efficiency East-West(75 mgd) •
Sequence 1.3 Outdoor Clackamas—50 mgd ■ Clackamas—33 mgd ■ Columbia—55 mgd ■
Costs/Water Quality/ A conservation Columbia -50 mgd ■
Efficiency East-West(75 mgd) •
i
Sequence 1.4 I
Catastrophic Events/ Outdoor ASR E&W ■ Columbia —50 mgd ■E Columbia —25 mgd ■
Efficiency A conservation ■ East-South(50 mgd) Willamette—50 mgd ■ Willamette—25 m'gd ■
West-South(20 mgd) 0
Sequence 1.5
Costs/Natural
Environment/Efficiency/ Outdoor `ASR E&W ■ Willamette—50 mgd ■ Willamette—50 mgd ■
Catastrophic Events A conservation ♦ South-East(50 mgd) Clackamas—50 mgd ■ South-West(25 mgd)
A Conservation • Single Direction Transmission
■ Supply Option ♦ Bidirectional Transmission
95 920293.por l.ba.7/95.ap
�ilrrr'
Figure ES-3
Level 1 Reliability — Strategy 1.5
Number of possible Willamette
sequences=35 Willamette H 50 mgd
150 mgd ----------M' --------------------
Clackamas _ _H_
50 mgd - M
H Willamette
----------------
H i 100 mgd
-- --- - --- -- ----------- I"
ASRM,L=----------------------------------
Clack—50 m d
Willam�te—10 mgd
---------------
Wil—50 mgd H ` Clackamas—70 mg
H
M40 mgd
Clackamas—
- - -- - ---- - -- ------------- ----------
M M Clack—40
HL L ---•-- ----------- -----
M = Clackamas L
------------- 40 mgd
ASR Wil—50 mgd L =`
r---------------
H E Clack—50 mgd Clack—50 m9d,,
H Wil—100 mgd
-- ---------
Wil— 100 mgd
Outdoor M ASR Clackamas—�0 m d H Clack—10 mgd
----------------------- ------------- - ---5--- -------`
Conser- M M M L
vatlon
$ L Clack—40 mgd
M
L
ASR
L ` M Clack—40mgd
--------------- -
Clack—40 mgd
L =--------------------------------- ASR
ASR L `-------
L M
-------------------------------f
L I-------------------- • Indicates on-line date
1995 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
95-920293 T,i,.X[-1 8.7M Jh
This does not mean the region can afford to defer a decision on which resource
strategy will be pursued. As discussed below, the region faces many challenges in the
short-term that will require action to ensure the needs of individual providers will be
met. Policymakers' adoption of a long-term resource strategy will provide important
direction to water providers, guiding near-term actions such as regional conservation
program implementation and additions to the region's transmission system.
Resource Strategies that Achieve Level 2 or 3 Reliability
It is important to understand the implications of the region choosing less-than-perfect
reliability, particularly in terms of costs. To illustrate, Level 2 and 3 strategies were
developed that correspond to Level 1 strategies 1.2 and 1.5. Table ES-10 contains the
mean values of key evaluation indices for these four new resource strategies. Their
expected costs are significantly less than for their Level 1 counterparts. This key
tradeoff between costs and reliability is one of many such tradeoffs that the region
must make.
-40
ES-30
Table ES-10
EXPECTED VALUES OF KEY EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR LEVEL 2 AND 3 STRATEGIES*
Costs Water Quality**
Present Value Present Value
Societal Utility Natural Raw Water Watershed
Strategy ($million) ($million) Environment** Quality** Protection** Flexibility**
2.2 517.2 537.2 3.7 1.1 1.3 5
Raw Water Quality/Efficiency
2.5 494.1 487.8 1.8 2.0 1.5 3
Costs/Natural Environment/
Efficiency/Catastrophic Events
3.2 481.9 490.9 3.7 1.1 1.3 5
Raw Water Quality/Efficiency
3.5 476.2 462.9 1.7 2.2 1.4 5
Costs/Natural Environment/
Efficiency/Catastrophic Events
*Probability-weighted averages across all possible resource development paths.
** Scale ranging from 1-5 with 1 as the most favorable rating and 5 as the least favorable rating.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A regional dialogue regarding the appropriate future level of water supply reliability
should be undertaken. Yet, that decision does not have to be made before going
forward with required near-term actions since the major impact of lesser reliability
levels is to put off necessary resource additions even further. At the appropriate time,
the region's decision makers must determine the desirable level of reliability for the
region.
While long-term system reliability does not influence near-term actions, many of the
near-term actions the region must pursue will be affected by resource choices pursued
over the long-term. Thus, it is critical for the region to consider the five strategies
presented for Reliability Level ,1 and to select one of these or develop an alternative.
Based on the evaluation of Strategies 1.1 through 1.5, the regional providers suggest a
ranking based upon how well each strategy meets the entire range of policy
objectives. Table ES-11 shows the ranking of the five strategies recommended by the
regional providers.
ES-32
Table ES-11
RANKING OF LEVEL 1 RESOURCE STRATEGIES
Emphasized Policy Objectives
Water
Provider Strategy Natural Water Use Raw Water Catastrophic
Ranking Number Resource Additions Environment Efficiency Quality Costs Events
Outdoor Conservation, ASR, ✓
1 1.5 Clackamas, Willamette ✓ ✓ ✓
2 1.3 Outdoor Conservation, ✓ ✓ ✓
Clackamas, Columbia
3 1.4 Outdoor Conservation, ASR, ✓
Willamette, Columbia
Outdoor Conservation,
4 1.2 gull Run Dam 3 ✓ ✓
5 1.1 Maximum Conservation, ✓ ✓
Willamette
Thus, based on the RWSP analysis conducted to date, water provider participants
recommend Strategy 1.5 for consideration during preliminary RWSP review because
it seems to best meet the broadest array of policy objectives identified through the
planning process. This strategy focuses on the following major future resource
additions:
■ Outdoor water conservation;
■ Aquifer Storage and Recovery;
■ The Clackamas River; and
■ The Willamette River
The advantages of Strategy 1.5 include:
■ Relatively low costs;
■ Relatively low environmental impacts;
■ An emphasis on the efficient use of water;
■ Relatively low vulnerability to catastrophic events; and
■ Flexibility to deal with future uncertainty.
The overall raw water quality rating for Strategy 1.5 is comparable to Strategies 1.1
and 1.4. It is not as good as Strategies 1.2 or 1.3. The RWSP's raw water quality
analysis has revealed that the quality of all the surface supply options is high when
compared to most other municipal sources nationwide. The conservative treatment
approaches recommended for the river sources will provide multiple-barrier protection
against current and future contaminants and will yield good-tasting water. Moreover,
the Willamette and ASR will both be used primarily as peaking sources. For the vast
majority of any year, the region will be served by the Bull Run, the Trask/Tualatin
system, and existing local supplies (primarily groundwater). In addition, the likely
injection source for ASR will be the Bull Run.
The region's water providers are committed to an open and fair discussion about the
merits of the alternative water futures available to the region. The public's response
concerning the resource strategies presented and how these meet the region's needs is
important. The providers fully recognize that no one "right answer" exists that
perfectly meets all of the public's values. This is why several strategies are presented
for consideration. Strategies 1.1 through 1.4 are also fully capable of meeting the
region's water supply needs. They address some of the same policy objectives and, in
many cases, do a better job at meeting particular objectives than Strategy 1.5.
Nevertheless, none of the other alternatives seems to meet so many important
objectives.
ES-34
WHERE DOES THE REGION GO FROM HERE?
Regardless of the strategy adopted by the regional providers, a range of issues must
be addressed in the near term. Providers have already expressed their commitment to
establishing an ongoing regional organization to meet the region's water supply needs
following RWSP completion. The exact form and functions of this organization will
be discussed over the next few months prior to adopting the final RWSP. However, a
key overall role will be to ensure that the needs of all water customers throughout the
region are met within the context set by the adopted Regional Water Supply Plan. It
will also consider possible long-term changes to the current institutional and financial
arrangements under which water service is delivered in the region.
Not only must the ongoing relationships among the providers be defined, but so also
must the critical role of Metro. Metro has the authority and responsibility to adopt
and enforce the region's urban growth management strategy, including the adoption
and revision of the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). Thus, there is a direct
relationship between Metro's role and the job of the regional providers to serve the
water needs of the growing metropolitan region.
In addition, the Metro Charter requires Metro to adopt an Urban Water Supply and
Storage Element in its Regional Framework Plan. As a RWSP participant, Metro
itself will provide input on the preliminary and final RWSP documents. It will adopt
the final RWSP by resolution. The relationship between the region's water providers
and Metro requires further discussion as the region moves toward final adoption of a
RWSP.
Specific near-term actions that must be undertaken by the region include:
■ Adoption of a long-term regional resource strategy.
■ Continued maintenance, upgrades, and remediation of the Columbia
Southshore Wellfield.
■ Expeditious completion of the Barney Reservoir and Joint Water
Commission treatment plant and transmission expansions.
■ Timely development of the additional committed capacity on the
Clackamas River.
■ Development of transmission and interconnection facilities to serve the
short-term and medium-term needs of individual providers. It is critical
ES-35
that these facilities be developed within the context of the adopted
long-term regional strategy.
■ Planning and implementation of an appropriate mix of conservation
programs.
■ Expanded coordination with the region's wastewater management
agencies regarding the potential use of stormwater and treated effluent
as non-potable water resources.
■ Actions necessary to maintain the viability of all source options
considered in the RWSP.
This last point deserves particular attention. Over the last two decades, events have
shown that competing demands, coupled with increased regulatory requirements, will
make securing water sources more difficult for the future. Contingencies must be
considered if particular choices later become unavailable. The water providers should
continue to protect their ability to utilize the water sources considered in the RWSP.
This will require a variety of activities for each source option.
In short, completion of the RWSP project signals the region's water providers to
continue and redouble the collaborative and visionary efforts that they have begun.
Among the benefits of the RWSP effort has been an increase in trust and
understanding among the providers that has allowed a truly regional plan to be
developed. It is critical that the providers capitalize on this trust and understanding to
immediately begin to undertake the near-term actions that will lead to effective plan
implementation and will meet the needs of the region's water customers.
ES-36
• Water Division personnel relocated a fire hydrant on SW Landmark Lane
that was damaged by a moving van.
• Water Division personnel relocated two 2-inch water services, three 3/4-
inch water services, one air release and adjusted water valve boxes that
were impacted by the City's Bonita Road Improvement Project. Also the
Water Division had personnel standby as the pilings were driven for
the new bridge over Fanno Creek. This was a precautionary act in case a
transmission main was damaged.
• Water Division personnel removed a water service along SW Burnham
Street that was for the tavern located on the corner of SW Main and
Burnham Street. The tavern was demolished to make improvements to this
intersection.
• Water Division personnel raised and repaired valve boxes due to street
overlay projects on SW Main Street, SW Wilton Drive, SW Bonita Road,
SW Scoffins Street, and SW Hunziker Street.
Status Report:
On August 18, we increased our water purchases from TVWD to 2.1 million gallons a
day. We were able to sustain this flow with no negative effects to the TVWD system.
The average yield, during the remainder of the month, was 2.06 MGD.
The combined average water production for Wells 1 and 2 for August was 1.16 MGD.
This is an increase of approximately 16%from last year.
jk'ARE p�
C ��
GREG&
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
October 10, 1995
Jack Polans
16000 SW Queen Victoria Place
King City, Oregon 97224
Dear Jack:
Thank you for the June 2, 1995 Oregonian article on the quality of drinking water. The article
insert, "In Oregon" stated that Lake Oswego is affected by excessive levels of lead. This statement
is misleading.
The City regularly monitors its raw water and finished water, and water at the tap of Lake
Oswego homes. The quality of the City's finished water meets all federal drinking water
standards. However, the water at the tap of several homes exceeded the federal action level for
lead. During two rounds of sampling of 60 homes, only one home exceeded the action level for lead
both times. It is believed that the source of lead is from the service line between the meter and the
home.
The City conducted a desktop evaluation of corrosion control measures to reduce the lead levels at
the tap. This study was completed in October 1994 and submitted to the Oregon Division of
Health for its review and approval. The recommended method of reduce lead levels is to raise the
pH of the finished water. An increase in pH reduces the solubility of lead and less lead is leached
into the water from residential services and plumbing fixtures. The Oregon Division of Health has
concurred with the recommendations of the City.
Thank you for your interest in the City's water system.
VV e truly yours,
Do gXanager. Schmitz
City
DJS:jm
c: Alice L. Schlenker, Mayor
Lake Oswego City Council Members
2Rn ^A" A%,n,w • Po ,;t Office B0v 369 Lake Osweko. Ore4(,n 147034 (503)(,3;-0'-1 FAX (�O3)hy7-6 94