The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About3184; CANNON ROAD WEST; FORCE MAIN ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION OF GRAPHICS FINAL REPORT; 1989-04-14I I I U I I I I I Li I I I I I '91 I I I I; LUKE-DUDEK 605 Third Street I CIVIL ENGINEERS, INC. . - Encinitas, CA 92024 . (619)942-5147 Fax No. (619) 632-0164 I . . 195-02 April 14, 1989 Mr Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer City of Carlsbad I 2075 Las Palinas Drive . . Carlsbad, CA 92009 I Re South Agua Hedionda (Cannon Road) Pump Station Dear Lloyd I Luke-Dudek submitted on March 22 our preliminary review and analysis of the force main alternatives for the South Agua Hedionda (Cannon Road) Pump Station. This report includes some I capital cost corrections and revised graphics. We have completed a present worth/future expenditure comparison. This letter .report presents this comparison and suggests that at least I seven graphics -be prepared for presentations at the Planning Commission, City Council, and Coastal Zone Commission. Two force main alignment alternatives were considered with the I pump station being located at "Site 1" in both cases The first alternative assumes. a force main alignment along the southern shore of the lagoon. The second alternative assumes a force main I alignment along Cannon Road. The alternative profiles graphic prepared by NBS-Lowery- for .the presentations was used as the basis for the two alternatives' lengths I An initial design report containing sewage flow phasing, a preliminary pump selection. and a site layout was prepared by Kevin Schmidt of Wilson Engineering In this report it is stated I that the ultimate peak flow of 7080 gallons per minute (gpm) will be pumped by. four duty pumps and one stand-by pump. Each pump will have a capacity of 1770 gpm Two 18-inch force mains will I ultimately be required Initial construction will consist of a two pump pump station and one 18-inch force main The station will be designed to accommodate a phased upgrade to five pumps I and two parallel force mains The third, fourth and fifth pumps will be added in. years 4, 8, and. 12 respectively. The parallel force main will be added when the fourth pump is added, year 8 I Peaking factors used to determine average daily flow were taken from the City of Carlsbad Master Plan.,of Sewerage (Dec. 1987), Figure 5-1 I I I Mr. Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer Page Two Calculated energy and energy demand charges were based on the San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) Energy Forecast, April 1988 and the 1988. AL-TOU rate schedule. The rates used are a weighted average of secondary service voltage summer and winter rates. The energy charges are based on semi-peak rates (summer: 6AN - hAN and 6PM - 10PM, winter: 6AM - 5PM and 8PM -10PM). The following equations were used to compute power consumption Total pumping rate: Years 1-3 .(Constant speed):. Pumping rate = pump capacity Years 4-15 (Variable speed) Pumping rate = peak flow / no of duty pumps Brake Horsepower = (pumping rate x TDH) /',(3960,x epump) in gpm HP input to motor = BHP / emotor Running time per pump = average daily flow / pumping rate Motor demand kW = BHP X 1 0.7457 / emotor Energy usage = Motor demand x Pump run time x No duty pumps The following equations were used to calculate. power costs: Daily energy charge = energy charge rate x energy usage Monthly non-coincident demand charge = non-coincident demand charge rate x motor demand Monthly peak period demand charge = peak period demand.charge rate x motor.demand . - Maintenance costs were assumed to be 15 percent of the total operation (power and maintenance) costs. The following, equation was used, to calculate present worth: Present worth— F x (1 + i) - Where F = Future value i = interest rate - n = number of interest periods Mr. Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer V Page Three The following assumptions were Vinade: Pump efficiency = 67% Motor efficiency =-90% Yearly inflation rate = 5% V Yearly interest rate ='10% Calculation results are attached and are summarized in the following table: V INCREMENTAL DIFFERENCE DESCRIPTION LAGOON., CANNON RD FOR CANNON ROAD Force main discharge et (ft) V87 170 V 83 more V V Force main Length (ft) 4625 2300 . 2325 less V Wet well water surface et. (ft) 0 0 V Q sane 30" gravity Line Length (ft) 0 3000 3000 more Maximum TDH (ft), C = 120 V 107. V 180 V. 73 more Total Operation & Maintenance: V V Present worth . $1,096,500 $1,947,400 $850,900 more Cumulative future money spent $2,878,100 . $5,116,100 . $2,238,000 more V Total Capital cost: r V Present worth V $4,162,100 $5,144,400 $982,300 more Cumulative future money spent $5,725,700 V $6,839,500 . $1,113,800 more Grand total: V V Present worth VV • $5,258,600 $7,091,800 $1,833,200 more Cumulative future money spent $8,603,800 $11,955,600 $3,351,800 more For presentations to the Planning Commission, City Council, and Coastal Zone Commission, Luke-Dudek suggests .that the graphics attached hereto be updated and prepared for slide presentation. The following list summarizes., these graphics: Sequence V ' - V - Prepared No. V V Title V V V V By 1 Project LocationV (USGS) V VRecon or NBS-L 2 Proposed Force Main Alternative V Routes Recon or NBS-L 3 Proposed Force Main Alternative Profiles NBS-Lowery 4 Capital Cost Differences L-.D 5 Annual O&M Cost Differences V V 6 Cumulative Annual Cost Differences V ' L-D 7 Pros and Cons for Force Main Alternatives L-D Mr. Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer , . Page Four Additionally, a preliminary plan of the pump station layout at Site 1 by Wilson Engineering might be helpful. Three layouts done by Wilson Engineering were briefly reviewed by Luke-Dudek These included: 1) a non-specific site plan, 2) ground level pump station plans (Phases -1 and 2), 3) pump room plans (Phase 1, 2, and 3).. These appear very preliminary and the City should review and approve the specifics of the proposed construction phasing with careful consideration. Please call if you have any questions regarding our analysis. We will proceed to prepare our.final bar graphs in preparation for photo work. Please direct your own staff, or any of your available consultants, to prepare the remaining graphics, ie: RECON, Wilson, and Alingren and Koptionak. We would also be happy to provide further graphics assistance. ., Very truly yours, S - - - Luke-Dudek Civil Engineers, Inc Steve Deering, Project Manager; -S - - -, - 0 2000 feet - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - t" •AL Country C: \j =j 30 z~a LAGOON EDGE ALIGNMENT it 0 160* I S:'J•' c 'i I) / ihJc• Subsa 1\ \. t' ALIGNMENT -\Wate \\ '\ 60 91 \ / FIGURE 2. PROJECT LOCATION ON U.S.G.S. 7.5 MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS, SAN LUIS REY AND ENCINITAS QUADRANGLES R-1739 3/88 LAGOON EDGE ALIGNMENT.V. z;• ;X2. \ ' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ID 800 feet BRIDGE OS pot PUMP STATION • - ?; J, S / *'( tYiñ4K N I \~~CANNON ROAD ALIGNMENT IA PROPOSED SEWER LINE FIGURE 3. PROPOSED ROUTES OF CANNON ROAD AND THE SEWER LINE R-1739 1- 1 4 4'. PROS AND-CONS -FOR PROPOSED - CANNON ROAD PUMP STATION 4 FORCE MAIN ALTERNATIVES LAGOON EDGE ALIGNMENT . PROS CONS $1,100,000 CAPITAL COST -s PROXIMITY TO LAGOON "SAVINGS*.- .4. .. • MAINTAIN SEPARATE ALL- $2,200;0000&M SAVINGS OVER- ' WEATHER ACCESS ROAD. 15 YEARS • IFFICULT FORCE MAIN — MORE DIFFICULT., LOWER OPERATING PRESSURE CONSTRUCTION (46 PSI VS 77 PSI) -. LOWER HORSEPOWER-T7 5 HP 'VS.-,'.. 130 HP) - -,.. ¼'' '.: - ..• - •' - . • - - 4 . -.•.• ,.'-.--.- t• . -. - •_.%__ .-••t --,.-•.. - . ,-.. .4 ', .•,..- . .'.• 4 --------------.'. .- .4. 4 - - -- -. .-.• _.I 4' -c--.. '.' •, . . •.pI _;. -- ' - .• - . ,4.•_'.4 c,--. CANNON ROAD ALIGNMENT.. - PROS CONS .- ex 1 DISTANCE FROM -LAGOON.'s $1,100,000 ADDITIONAL CAPITAL COST GOOD MAINTENANCE ACCESS - s $2,200,000 ADDITIONAL O&M - -TA COST OVER 15 YEARS 4 - -.LOWER OPERATING PRESSURE (77 PSI VS 46 PSI) I -LOWER.-HORSEPOWER :: x (13 OHP VS 75 HP) -3 1 LUK.._DUDL I I I I. 1. rl I I MR I II H - r - 0 0 0 •ó - : - 006 1 t— - -- —--- -s — —iil+ -— 0019 It -±---:-/ - 1 i----f-- -, 1 — .-"---- - ---- - 0099 0099 00)1 Cott ZVI cost ----- ---it- ------ooz' —i-'— I ------4— 000 0099 $1 .! • -- 009* Dot g -- - - —4 - - - - - -0009 =1 - - Is . . C . .. .,--—--O .i-' 00*1 -• ç - .1 . .. ,.• . . ----•-.---.-. --..-.'.0 -- ... ;•---;- ... 0001 0Ot 009* -I / 1 009 . 009* . .1 ............... ...........( •; ...............00)9 ••• - - - C 001* o••• •J- - Dot I = . — _I - - L 000* 000* 009$ 009$ ----------------------: .009$ . . . . .. ................. ......\.•. 00p . - .... * . . .. . . .• ..................00*! 00*! 000$ . . .\ . ------------------. ........................................ fl$ .,.}............- . --I - 5. .... / 009 -00! .----.........._-•.-.- . 5-...-- ---- 009 IN .oct - •.I ,_ 00) \ L : :° ° _, .: •-, . :........................................... . . ....................- .5. . .. . . S.. I ..:,y..'::-.. - . .:, -,.-...-..-,.,..,-.-_,-.-..-,..S •"•S...... •'Ys' I I Li I I I I Li nn I I I I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CITY OF CARLSBAD SOUTH AGUA HEDIONDA (CANNON ROAD) PUMP STATION FORCE MAIN ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS LAGOON EDGE CANNON RD INCREMENTAL DIFFERENCE DESCRIPTION ALTERNATIVE ALTERNATIVE FOR CANNON ROAD 'Force main discharge el (ft) 87 170 83 more Force main length (ft) 4625 2300 2325 less Wet well water surface el (ft) 0 01 0 same .,~301. gravity line length (ft) 0 3000 3000 more Maximum TDH (ft), C --120' 107 180 73 more Total Operation & Maintenance Present worth $1,096,500 $1,947,400 $850,900 more Cumulative future money spent $211878,100 $5,116,100 $2,238,000 more Total Capital cost Present worth $4,162;100 $5,144,400 $982,300 more Cumulative future money spent $5,725,700 $6,839,500 $1,113,800 more Grand total Present worth- $5,258,600 $7,091,800 $1,833,200 more Cumulative future money spent $8,603,800 $11,955,600 $3,351,800 more LUKE-DUDEK Capital Costs Construction LUKE DUDEK 0.9 A U. 08___ - 07 - C. - .0 ... - S tM. 9.6___________ -: S. L -. L 05_ F UN S 0.4_ -U. . -r e 03_ - - - - - - - - D . 0 -.. . 02_ a r S 0.1 . - 1 •2 3 4 .5 6 .7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 - - Year -,Lagoon - Cannon Rd. INCREMENTAL DIFFERENCE DESCRIPTION - - . - LAGOON - CANNON RD FOR CANNON ROAD Total Operation & Maintenance: - -- - - Present worth .. - $1,096,500 $1,947,400 $850,900 more CunuLative future money spent $2,878,100 - $5,116,100 . $2,238,000 more LUKE DUDEK Cumulative Annual Costs 12 Capital and 0 & M Costs U u .-, nuiuuuiuuum :JIIIIIIIIIINII II i1.flhIIIiN1i 1111111 I I I I .11 1 ! iI! I! II I ll IF II I I i III IF ii I I IF IL II IF IF II IF III, F 1 2 3 4 5. 6 7 8 9 10 11 1213 14 15 Year Lagoon Cannon Rd • INCREMENTAL DIFFERENCE DESCRIPTION LAGOON CANNON RD FOR CANNON ROAD TotaL ArwuaL cost: Present worth $5,258,600 $7,091,800 $1,833,200 more CunuLative future .money spent $8,603,800 $11,955,600 $3,351,800 more LUKE-DUDEK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - GuM AGUA HE0IO44DA PUMP STATION LAGGCN EDGE ALIGNMENT 04/12/89 FILE: LAG00U.V41 - ANIABLES GIVEN: YEAR I YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 YEAR 7 YEAR 8 YEAR 9 YEAR 10 YEAR 11 YEAR 12 YEAR 13 YEAR 14 YEAR 15 ask muse. (gps) ............................471.87 943.73 1415:60 1887.47 )9.33 2831.20 3303.07 3774.93 4246.80 4718.67 519O.3 5662.40 6134.27 6606.13 7018.00 at wall suer surface elevation (It) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 orca in high point (It) 87 87 87 87 81 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 crc. Main length (It) 462S 4625 4625 4625 4625 4625 4625 4625 4625 4625 4625 4625 4625 4625 4625 in. ollosebi. velocity in force min (fps) 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 *sired velocity in force sum (fps) ........3 to S 3-to S 3 to 5 3 to 5 3 to 5 3 to 5 3 to S 3 to 5. 3 to 5 3 to 5 3 to 5 3 to 5 3 to 5 3 to 5 3 to 5 us. .tioe.sble velocity in force sum (fps) 8 8 8 8 6 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8- 8 8 n Willis. . coefficient (C) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 -bar oftyp..sp ¶ I 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 I. 4 4 4 sty p...ep capacity (9pe) ¶170 1770 1770 ¶770 1770 1770 1770 1770 ¶770 1770 1710 1770 1770 1710 1770 CALCULATIONS:. Peak Inflow (Cf.) I 05 2.10 3 ¶S 4.21 5.26 6.31 7.36 8.41 9.46 10.51 11 .56 12.62 13.67 14 12 15.77 P..¼ mIte.. (mcd) 0.66 1.36 2.04 2.72 3.4 4.08 4 76 5.44 6.12 6.79 7.47 8.15 5.83 9.51 10 19 Peak inflow (gp") 471.87 943.13 1415.60 1887.47 2359.33 2831.20 . 3303.07 3774.93 4246.80 4718.61 5190.53 5662.40 6134.27 6606.13 7618.00 St tic heed (fi) 87 87 81 87 87 87 87 87 87 57 87 87 87 87 87 (9..IvuIent force main diameter (in) 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 2546 2546 25.46, 2546 2546 2546 25.46,2546 Equivalent force main disoeter (ft) 1.5 1 5 1.5 1.57 1.5 I S 1.5 2A2 2.12 2.12 2.12 2 ¶2 2.1Z 2.12 2.12 Ping floe. (9p.) 1770 1770 1770 3540 3540 3540 3540 5310 53)0 5310 5310 7080 7080 7080 7080 Png floe. (cii) - 3.94 - 3.91. 3.94 1.89 7.89 189 7.89 11.83 - 11.83 l.83 11.55 15.77 15.77 - 15.77 15.77 P.acdng floe. (mgd) - - - 2.55 2.55 - 2.55 5.1 5.1, - 5.1 - 5.1 7.65 - 7.65 7.65 : 7.65 10.2 10.2 10.2 - 10.2 Velocity In forcesuin (fps) 2.23 2.23 2.23 4.46 4.46 4.46 4.46 3.35 3.35 3.35' 3.35 4.47 4.47 ' Design heed toss ds to friction (it) 545 545 545 1966 1966 1968 1966 770 770 170 770 1312 13)2 1312 1312 Based on eden Wilt los $ equal ion Total dyiweic heed (It) - - 92 92 92 - 101 - 107 107 - 107 95 95 95 95 100 100 100 100 Total dnsetc heed (psi) 40 40 40 46 46 46 46 41 41 41 I.) 43 43 43 43 - - -- - - - - - - LUKE-DUDEK -. - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. - - - - PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS FOR LAGOON EDGE ALICNMCIT - - - Based on SOGAE Energy Forecast. Schedule AL-SW. April 1988 DESCRIPTION YEAR I YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 YEAR 7 YEAR 8 YEAR 9 YEAR 10 YEAR 11 YEAR 12 YEAR 13 YEAR 14 YEAR I Peak flow (gp.) 471.87 963.73 1415.60 1887.47 2339.33 2831.20 3303.07 3774.93 4246.80 4718.67 5190.53 5662.60 6134.27 6606.13 7018.0 Total dynamic head (ft) 92 92 92 lOt 107 107 lOT 95 95 95 95 100 100 100 10 Peakti.g Factor ...............................2.4 2.3 2.25 2.25 - 2.2 2.2 2.15 2.15 2.15 2* 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2. Duty pu'p capacity (gpa) 1770 1770 1710 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1110 - 1770 177 Maber of duty pn.a I I I 2 2 2 2 3 3 . . 3 3 4 4 4 P-9 efficiency ................................0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.6 Motor efficiency ..............................0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 - 0. Yearly Inflation rate ........... .............. .00S- 0.05 . 0.05 0.05 0.05 005 .0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.0 Yearly interest rate .........................0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 - 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.1 Aere6e deity flow (gpd) 283120 - 590859 905984 1207979 1544291 1853149 2212287 2528327 2844368 3235657 3559223 3882789 4206354 4529920 . 485341 Average deity flow (n9d) . 0.28 0.59 0.91 1.21 1.54 1.85 2.21 2.53 . 2.84 3.24 3.56 3.88 4.21 4.53 - 4.8 Average daily flow (gp*) 196.61 410.32 629.16 838.87 1072.42 1286.91 1536.31 1755.78 1915.26. - 2246.98 2471.68. 2696.38 2921.08 3145.78 310.4 Paping rate (OP.) - 1770 1770 1770 944 1180 . 1416 1652 1258 1416 1573 1730 1416 1534 1652 Il? Brake Morsepo...er - IMP 61.37 61.37 . 61.37 38.06 47.57 57.09 66.60L45.05 50.69 56.32 . 61.95 53.35 57.80 62.25 66.6 Herae pou.r irçwt to mtor 68.19 68.19 68.19 42.29 52.26 63.43 74.00 50.06 56.32 62.58 68.83 59.28 64.22 69.16 74.1 Rsa-a-ling time per p.ap (hr/day) 2.67 5.56 8.53 10.67 10.91 10.91 11.16 11.16 11.16 11.43 11.43 11.63 11.43 11.43 11.4 Motor demand (LW) 50.85 50.85 50.85 63.07 78.84 94.60 110.37 111.99 125.99 139.99 ¶53.99 176.83 191.56 206.30 . 221.0 101.1 daily energy usage (LW-hr/day) 135.57 282.93 433.82 1345.47 1120.06. 2064.07 2464.08 3750.41 4219.21 4799.63 5279.59 8083.59 8757.22 9430.85 10104.4 Monthly Service Charge......................... 20.00 21.00 22.05 . 23.15 24.31 - 2553 26.80 28.14 29.55 31.03 3258 34.21 35.92 37.71 . 39.6 (based on inflation after year I) . . . . . Yearly, calculated . 240.00 . 252.00 264.60 277.83 291.72 306.31 321.62 337.70 354.59 372.32 390.93 410.48 431.01 452.56 475.1 Energy Charge Per KW hour ...................0.05355 0.0562 0.0590 0.0620 0.0651 0.0683 0.0718 0.0754 0.0791 0.0831 - 0.0872 0.0916 0.0962 0.1010 0.106 (based on inflation after year I) - - Daily energy charge - 7.26 - 15.91 - 25.61 83.41 111.96 - 141.07 176.83 262.59 . 333.81 - 398.72 460.52 740.31 842.17 952.29 1071.3 Yearly energy charge - 2650 - 5806 9345 30443 . 40865 51490 64542 103147 121842 - 45534 168092 270233 307390 347587 39103 Non-Coincident Demand Charge Per KW .......................................3.05 - 3.20 - 3.36 3.53 3.71 3.89 4.09 4.29 4.51 4.73 4.97 5.22 5.48 5.15 6.0 (based on Inflation after year I) Monthly deotard charge 155.10 162.86 171.00 222.68 292.27 368.26 451.12 480.63 567.74 662.37 765.03 922.63 1049.27 1186.48 1334. LUKE-DUDEK - - - - -' - - --- - - - - - early demand charge 1861 1954 2052 2672 3507 - '.619 5413 5768 6813 7948 9180 11069 12591 14238 16017 ask Period 0eissrd Charge er KW ........................................7.97 - 8.37 8.79 9;23 9.69 10.17 10.68 11.21 11.78 12.36 12.98 13.63 . 14.31 15.03 15.78 (based On inflation after year 1) .. . . . '• . ., S - onthly demand charge . 405.29 . 425.56 446.84 581.89 763.73 962.30 1178.82 1255.94 1483.58 ¶30.84 1999.12 2410.42 2741.85 3100.40 3467.95 Yearly demand charge - 1.664 $107 $362 - 6983 9165 11548 14146 15071, - 17803 20770 23989 28925 - 32902 37205 41835 Total yi.rty energy charges . ' $9615 113119 S17027- -$.60376 153629 $67763 $84423 $124323 1146813 $174•625 $201,652 11310638 $353315 $399483 8449.384 Average total coat per KW hour , 80.19 $0.13 ' so.1I - $0.08 $0.09 $0.09 $0.09 $0.09 $0.10 $0.10 $0.10 $0.11 $0.11 $0.12 $0.12 Ner of Interest periods ' - . . 0 1 2 3 . - 4 5 . ' - '8 -7 ', " 8 9 . 10 , , .11 . 12 . 13 ' . 14 Present worth of energy charges ' 9615 ¶1927 14072 30335 36766 42076 47655 63798 68489 , 74058 77146 108877 112577 115716 116337 TOTAL Energy Present Worth . , ' 5932.041 Maintenance, Costa ' ' 1697 .2315 ' 3005 7125 . 9499 11956 ' 14898 ' 21939 25908 30816 35586 '54818 . 62350 . 70497 ' 79303 Present worth of m.inten.nc. costs '. 1697 . -2105 ' 2483 -5353 T6488 ' 7425 8410 11258 12086 13069 ¶3720 ' 19214 19867 20420 20883 TOTAL Arrs..s( 084 Costs (.tsrgy • "Int.) ' 11311 15435 ' 20032 47501 - 63328 , 79721 " 99321 146263 172721 205641 237238 365456 415664 469980 528687 TOTAL 0414 Costs future $ %2,878.099 Present Worth of 0414 Can to 11311 14032 16555 35685 - 43254 49501 56064 75056 80576 67127 91465 *28090 132643 - 136136 *39220 TOTAL 0*14 Present Worth - $1.096.519 - - - - - - - - - - -. - - - - - - -. LAGOON 'EDGE ALIGSI4ENT • - DESCRIPTION YEAR .I YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR S YEAR 6 YEAR 7 YEAR 5 YEAR 9 YEAR 10 - YEAR IT YEAR 12 YEAR 13 YEAR 16 EAR I Capital Costs Prp Station 2.000.000 250 000 1,900,000 350.000 01 of 30 gr.vity tine I $200/IF 4 ,625, of 9 force ..tn I 1110/IF 508.750 4.625, of ¶8 force ...In I $155/IF 716 875 blat yearly capital costs 2.508,750 0 0 250 000 0 0 0 2.616.875 0 0 0 350,000 0 0 TOTAL Capital Costs Future $ $5,725.625 Present worth of capital costs 2 508.750 0 0 187,8 1 29 0 0 0 1 342 87% 0 0 0 122,673 0 0 TOTAL Capital Present Worth M,162,122 TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS FUTURE 6 62 520 06% $15 435 $20.032 $297 501 S63.326 1179.121 S99.321 52 763 138 $172 72% $205 66% $231,238 11715,456 $415 666 S469.990 $528,66 (ENERGY 0 MAINTENANCE CAPITAL) CLRVIAIIVE COSTS FUTURE $ $2 520 061 $2.535.496 $2 555 528 S2,853,029 $2,916.357 $2,996,07111 13.0".400 $5.858.537 $6 031 258 $6 236 699 $6,473.937 $7.189,393 $7.605,057 $8.075.017 $8 c.03 72 GRAND TOTAL FUTURE $ 14.603.724 LUKE-DUDEK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - liEN AGIJA NEDIONDA PIJIP STATIcAl - CANNON ROAD ALIGNMENT . FILE: CAN)1ON.IIKl ARIABLES GIVEN: YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 YEAR 7 YEAR 8 YEAR 9 YEAR IP YEAR It YEAR 12 YEAR 13 YEAR 14 YEAR IS CCII Flew (9po) 471.87 943.73 M5.60 1887.4? 2359.33 2631.20 3303.07 3T74.93 4246.80 4718 67 5190.53 5662.40 6134.27 6606.13 7078.00 it welt water surface elevation (ft) ,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 crce iae in high point (ft) ...................*70 ITO 170 170 170 170 *70 - 170 *70 170 170 170 170 *70 170 crc. Main length (ft) .......................2300 2300 2300 2300 2300 2300 2300 2300 2300 2300 2300 2300 2300 2300. 2300 in altowat. velocity in force m.ln(fpo) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 ..lr.d velocity in fort. pain (ipo) .........3 toS 3 to 5 3 to 5 3 to S 3 to S 3 to 5 3 to 5 3 o 5 3 to S 3 to 5 3 to 5 3 to 5 3 to 5 3 to S 3 to S allo..aIa velocity In force main (fps).. 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 a a 8 8 8 sien-Witil s coefficient CC) *20 120 w 120 120 120 120 *20 120 *20 *20 120 120 120 120 120 .agsr of duty pope .........................I I 1 2 2 2 2 3' . 3 3 - 3 '. 4 . uty pop capacity (VIA) *770 1770 1770 *770 1770 1770 1770 *770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 *770 *710 AL Ct)!. AT IOIIS sal flow (Cf.) I 05 2 10 3.15 4.21 5.2 1 6 6.31 736 6 41 9 46 10 51 11.56 12.62 13 .67 *4 72 IS 77 le.k flow (.gd) 0.6a 1 36 2 04 2 72 3 4 4 08 4 76 5 44 6.12 6.79 TAT. BAS 8.83 9.51- *0 *9 I tic head (ft) 170 *70 *70 *70 ITO 170 *70 *70 170 170 *70 170 *70 *70 170 arcs In diao.otsr (in) 18 *8 18 18 18 18 18 25.46 25.46 25.46 25;46 15.46 25 46 25.46 2S.46 arce main diameter (H) 1.5 1.$ 1.5 1.5 1.$ 1.$ * S 2.12 2.12 '2.12 L12 2.12 2.12 2.12 2.12 toping flow (gpo) *770 *770 *770 3540 3540 3540 351.0 53*0 53*0 5310 5310 7080 7080 7080 7080 aping flow (cfs) .. 3.96 3.96 . . 3.94 7.69 1.89 7.89 7.89 11.83 11.83 11.83 1183 15.77, 15.77 15.77 *5.77 .opinQ flow (o.gd) 255 235 255 51 51 5.1 5* 765 765 765 765 102 *02 *02 102 Velocity in forcemain (fps) 2.23 2A3 2.23 4.46 1.46 4.46 4.46 3.35 3.35 3.35 3.35 4 6T 4.47 4.47 esigri head loss 6... to friction (It) 2.71 2.71 2.71 9.78 9.78 9.78 9.78 3.83 3.83 3.83 3.83 6.52 6.52 6.52 6.S2 laced on Hazen-Willi m's equation . ol.l dr.amic head (ft) *73 173 173 180 180 180 180 *74 *74 *74 *74 177 *77 171 *77 mtst dynamic head (psi) 75 75 75 78 78 78 78 75 75 75 75 7' 77 77 77 LUKE DUDEK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - RESENT %1DRTM ANALYSIS FOR CANIIC*I ROAD ALIGNMENT 04/12/89 FILE: CAIIWOI1.iJK1 ased on SOO&E Energy Forecast. Schedule AL-IOU, April 1988 DESCRIPIIOW YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR S lEAR 6 YEAR 7 YEAR 8 YEAR 9 YEAR 10 YEAR It YEAR 12 YEAR 13 YEAR 16 YEAR 15 Peak flow (gpm) 471.87 943.73 1415.60 18.87.47 2359.33 2831.20 3303.0? 3774.93 4246.80 4718.67 5190.53 5662.40 6134.21 6606.13 7078.00 Total dyiwasic head (it) 173 173 173 180 180 180 180 174 174 174 174 171 177 177 177 P..king Factor ..............................2.4 2.3 2.25 2.25 2.2 2.2 2.15 2.15 2.15 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 b...ty pu.ç capacity (gp.) 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1170 1770 1770 1770 1770 1710 1770 Ni.L.eretdutyp..mv.e I 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 Pi.p efficiency ..............................0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.61 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 Motor afficlency ............................0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 Yearly Inflation rate ........................0.05 0.05 0.05 0.0% 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 Yearly Interest rat, ........................0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 Av.r.ge dolly flow (gpd) i113120 590859 905984 1207979 1546291 1853149 2212281 2528327 2846368 3235657 3559223 3882789 4206354 4529920 4853486 Aer.ge dolly flow (mgd) 0.28 0.59 0.91 1.21 1.54 1.85 2.21 2.53 2.84 3.24 3.56 3.88 4.21 4.55 4.85 Aeer.g* deity flow (9p.a) 196.61 410.32 629.16 838.87 1072.42 1286.91 1536.31 1755.78 1973.26 2246.98 2471.68 2696.38 2921.08 3145.78 3370.48 P....ping rat. (9p..) 1770 1770 1770 944 1180 1416 1652 1258 1416 1573 1730 11.16 1534 1652 ¶770 Ir.k. Horsepower IMP 115.41 115.41 115.41 64.03 80.03 96.04 112.04 82.82 92.64 103.15 113.47 94.44 102.31 110.18 118.05 Hors* power irçut to each motor 128.24 128.24 128.24 71.14 88.92 106.71 124.49 91.69 103.1% 114.61 126.07 - -14.93 113.67 122.42 131.16 R..reilrg time per p..a (hr/day) 2.67 5.56 8.S3 W.67 10.91 10.91 11 .16 '11.16 II ¶6 11 .43 11.43 11.43 Il 43 11.43 11.43 Total motor deo..nd (8W) 95.62 95.62 95.62 106.10 132.62 159.15 185.67 205.12 230.76 256.40 282.04 312.99 339.07 365.15 391.23 total daily energy usage (kW-hr/day) 254.93 532.02 815 77 2263.40 2893.56 3472.27 4145.19 6869.17 7(27 82 8790.90 9669.99 14307.95 15500 28 16692.61 1/884 94 Monthly Service Charge 2000 2100 2205 2315 2431 2553 2680 2814 2955 3103 3258 3421 3592 3771 3960 (based on lofl.tion after year 1) Ye rly calculated 24000 25200 26460 27783 29112 30631 32162 33710 351.59 372.32, 39093 41048 43101 45256 47318 Energy Charge Per KV hour 0.0535S 0.0562 0.0590 0.0620 0.0651 6.0683 0.0718 0.0754 0 0791 0.0631 '0.0872 0.0916 0.0962 0.1010 O 1060 (baSed on Inflation after year 1) - Daily .r.ergy charge - 13.65 29.91 48.16 140.31 188.34 237.31 297.47 517.59 611.41 730.29 843.49 1310.45 1490.63 1685.56 1896.26 Yearly energy charge 4983 10919 17379 51213 68745 84419 108576 188922 223164 264557 307873 478313 544081 615230 692154 Mon-Coincident DNe.and Chargé Per KW hour .................................3.05 3.20 3.36 3.53 3.71 3.89 4.09 4.29 4.51 6.73 4.97 5.22 5.48 5.75 6.06 (bosed on Inflation after year I) Mco.thly d.omod charge 291.66 306.24 321.55 374.60 491.67 619.50 738.89 880.31 1039.86 1213.18 1401.22 1632.70 1857.20 2100.07 2362.57 LUKE-DUDEK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - early demand charge 3500 3.675 3859 4495 5900 7434 9101 10564 12676 14558 16815 19592 22286 25205 28351 eek Period Demand Charge or CU hour 7.97 8.37 8.79 9.23 9.69 10 57 10.68 11 21 11.78 12.36 12.98. 13.43 5!. 35 55 03 15.78 based on inflation after year I) onthly dmsa.4 charge 76213 80026 64025 978.68.128478 161882 198306 23003$ 271729 317017 366154 426644 481308 548775 657368 early da..nd ci. rgo 9146 9603 10083 1171.7 15417 19626 23797 27604 32607 38042 13939 55197 58237 65853 74064 Total reor t y energy charges $17 868 826 41.8 $31.785 "7.A3 $90,354 $113;78S $141.801 S227.427 S268.604 $310.529 S369.017 S549.513 $625,035 S706,736 $7,915.044 smt.er of Interest periods 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 1 8 9 10 15 12 13 14 sent uor%jh of energy charges 57668 22226 T26269 50889 161713 70652 80043 116706 525306 135511 142272 192601 199555 204716 209360 TOTAL Inorgy Present Worth $1,655.287 int.nscc. Costa 3153 4314 5609 11953 15945 20080 25024 40134 47405 56387 65121 96973 110300 124718 140302 sent Worth of maintenance costs 3153 3922 4636 8980 10891 52468 16125 20595 22113 23914 25107 33988 35145 36126 36946 TOTAL Ares.t OM Costa (energy • —int.) - 21021 28763 37395 79686 106299 533865 166824.' 267561 316005 375917 634138 6.46483 . 735336 831454 9$5346 TOTAL 0&M Costs future $ 85 516 094 Present worth of O6!l costs 21021 26548 3.0905 59669 72604 83119 94168 137301 147459 159425 167379 226589 234301 240843 246306 TOTAL 0LM Present Worth $1.947,396 LUKEDUDEK — — — Mon — MM — — MM a. — — — — — M. CANNON ROAD ALIGNMENT DESCRIPTION YEAR I TEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR S YEAR 6 YEAR 7 YEAR 8 YEAR 9 YEAR 10 YEAR IT YEAR, 12 TEAR 13 YEAR 14 TEAK IS I Capital Coot. Pr9 Station 2,500.000 310.000- 2.380 000 440 000 3,000' 30 9r.diy If n. a 5200/IF 600 000 2,300' of l$P (orc. ..in R $110/IF 253,000 2,300' of ¶8" force mIn S $135/IF •, S 356,500 - 101.1 yearly capital costs 3,353,000 0 0 310,000 0 0 0 2,736,500 1, 0 0 0 440,000 0 0 0 TOTAL Capital Costs - Iutw-. $ $6,839,500 -- Present worth of capital cost. 3,3S3,000 0 0 232,908 0 0 0 1,404,257 0 0 0 , 154,211 0 0 TOTAL Capital Present Worth $5,144,382 - TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS - FUTURE $ 1331`4,021 $28,763 131,395 $389,686 $106,299 11133,865 $166,824 $3,004,061 $316,005 11375,917 $434,138 $1,086,486 $735,336 $831,454 11935,341 (IsIRSY • PIAINTENANCE • CAPITAL) c*,.NJIATIVE COSTS - FUTURE I 113,374,021 13,402,704 13,440,179 113,829,865 $3,936,164 54,0/0,028 14,236,852 $7,240,914 117,556,919 317,932,81S 18,366,973 $9,453,459 $10,188,794 $11,020,248 $11,955,591 GRAND TOTAL ' FUTURE S $11,955,594 - GRAND TOTAL PRESENT lAKTN $1,091,719 • LUKE-DUDEK U DEXTER S. WILSON. P.E. KEVIN E SCHMIDT P.E. I ANDREW M OVEN P.E. March 30 1989 505-007 I Luke-Dudek Civil Engineers, Inc I 605 Third Street Encinitas, CA 92024 I Attention Steve Deering, Project Manager Subject South Agua ,Hedionda Interceptor System - This letter establishes phasing of 'flow in the subject I system so that you can conduct an energy analysis for the force main alternatives from'.the South Agua Hedionda Pump Station Force main size, length, staging and static lift I are also given I It is assumed that build-out would occur period and that flows would increase over a 15 year linearly to the ultimate flow condition It is also assumed that the ultimate station will consist .of five pumps with 100% I standby I Phasing of SAHIS Flows Year Flow, gpm Remarks 1 471 87 1 2 943 73 3 1,415 47 1 1,887 47 Add Third Pump 5 2,359 33 I 6 2,831 20 1 7 3,303 07 8 . ,. .. 3,774.•93 . Add Second Force I - Main and Fourth Pump 9 4,246 80 1 10 4,718 67 438-4422 2185 FARADAY AVENUE, SUITE 140 CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA 92008 . (619) Phasing of SAHIS Flows'(Eontinued). Year Flow, gpm Remarks 11 5;190.5310 12 5,662 40 Add Fifth Pump 13 6,134 27 I .., 14 6,606 13- 15 7,078 00 Each of the'' 'two, parallel' force mains' is, 18-inch diameter and 4,500 feet long for the lagoon routing alternative. The force' main discharge point is at approximately 90 feet elevation for the lagoon routing alternative. The Cannon Road alignment yields a discharge point of 'approximately 170 ,.feet with a length . of each force main of 1,900 feet. The water level in the pump station" wet well will be approximately at sea level - Please contact us' if -you have any questions or require additional information Wilson Engineering Kevin E Schmidt KES trm cc Dale Gruel, NBS/Lowry Craig Kahlen, Rick Engineering • I • Co rc+;oCs ?p Sr. I • Fiu, A •: I SN6t: coi/3/1 • /90 = 5)?9.4 •• I /• 3 0 I. I y • cfry U€(/ ( 3T?L)nlfs .1 • 1 -• Co' 2000 I 4 OOK f/Ie f I 8 I(/Q1 2 dry vie 'p) f/ / I 'z of • I .• I 4SSL'fi1 IOA COSS Li(/ &? 25%LqheL O((A ±O • rçe3er - I - X C )V41Ol C ,verQic. • I • I I •••..•. . • I LUKE DIJDEK • Sheet ( of 3 Sheets 1 • Date B, _____ ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS RAW SEWAGEPUMP STATIONS V 10.0 cr 0 . 1.0 - :: . • .5C IC • : -• .05 __ __ __ ENR=370 LA .0! l. IU .bU LU 5.0 10.0 50.0 100.0 15-771 - DESIGN CAPACITY, Mgd -• E NK :. ..-- •. I • cS I Fer 6c, s4 s 352, F ,6/c( D 'l Cas-(s I Pow cr 14 • I H:O/5(j s ) - LUKE -DUDEK Sheet of Sheets Date _203 BUf I - Guidelines , I This brochure contains SDG&E's current forecast of natural gas and electric rates. It is intended to help you project your future energy costs so you can plan on making ' the most efficient use of your resources. As with all forecasts, these values are subject to a great deal of uncertainty. Conse- quently, they are intended to be used as generalguide only. SDG&E cannot and does not guarantee this forecast Assumptions. The forecasted figures were derived by SDG&E economists and planners. They I include estimates of all components of rates including fuel, labor and material costs. This forecast is based on the best information available to us in January 1988 I Electric I During 19S7, a maj6r restructuring of cost allocation between customer classes and rate design took place. This forecast reflects this restructuring, and anticipates I minimal future changes in cost allocation between classes. Gas I The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is undertaking a major revi- sion to gas rate design and cost allocation. This forecast reflects recent CPUC direc- tives for 1988. Future years may vary significantly from the forecast based on future CPUC action and refinements I For More Information I To find out more about Energy Price Forecasts, contact your SDG&E Account Executive or call the Energy Information Center at: (619) 239-SDGE (7343). I I I I I .. Energy,-Pric.e Forecast Recorded .. Estimated Average I . . .. . Average Rate . Rate Forecast 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 ELECTRICITY I (Cents . per kwhr) . . Residential 11.9 11.2 12.1. 11.3 11.3 10.7 10.7 10.9 11.0 . . (DR. DM, DS. & DT) I Small .. Commercial 12.1 12.1 13.1 12.9 12.1 11.4 11.4 11.6 11.7 (A)/ . . . Commercial 11.6 12.0 13.0 12.2 11.2 '9.00 9.0 9.2 9.3 I (AD) V/ . ,. Industrial . . .. 12.0 11.9 12.8 10.6 9.8 8.0t 8.0 8.2 8.3 AL-TOU & A6-TOW). I Agriculture . 11.3 11.3 12.3 11.2 10.2 . 9.6 9.6 9.8 9.9 (PA & PA-TOW) Street Lighting . 16.9 . 16.6 .16.7. 15.1 . 14.4 12.6 12.6 12.8 12.9 I (LS 1. 2. 3, & OL-l) . . .. .. . . NATURAL . .. . I (Cents per therm) . . Residential 60.2 65.2 56.1 48.6 52.5 ,57 .8 59.9 63.2 67.9 . (GR, GM, GS&GT) I Small . Commercial . 72.2 78.7 65.7 53.5 55.9 57.8 59.9 63.2 67.9 (GN-1 & GN-2) . . . Large Cothrnerciai 65.2 62.0 52.9 48.1 41.0 . 39.3t 45.0 48.9 53.6 I ..JGN-3&GN-4 - Industrial .• . 55.1 54.8 51.0 41.8 35.7 39.3 45.0 48.9 53.6 (GN-36) .. . . . Schedule GCG 55.6 52.3 47.4 36.7 28.2 28.9 39.8 45.9 50.6 The predominate rate for each of the customer classes is shown.on the forecast. Where applicable, demand and customer I . charges have been included as part of the average rate. . . The average rate shown for schedule AD is reflective of a customer with a load factor of 45%; the average rate that I you pay can vary from a low of 7.9 to a high of 25.7 depending on.your load factor. tThe average rate shown for schedule AL-TOW reflects a customer with a load factor of 45%; the average rate that I you pay will vary from a low of 6.9 to a high of 10.6 depending on your load factor. Load Factor is derived by dividing your total kilowatt-hours in the billing period by the product of your maximum demand and the total number of hours in the billing period. For example. assume 39.000 Kwhrs of usage on a I 30-day billing period (720 hours) and a maximum, demand of 120 Kw: - 39.000 I 120 X 720 hours = 0.45 or 45% Load Factor . Effective May 1, 1988. Schedules GN-3. GN-4 and GN-36 will be replaced with Noncore Schedules GPNC/OPCE and GTNC. Schedule CCC will be replaced with Noncore Schedules GPNC/GPCE and GTCG. SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC C-ipANY Revised Cal.P.u.C.Sh..t Me. 6051E San Diego, California Cancelling Revised cal.p.u.C.sh..t No. 596E (Snest 1 of 5) SCHEDuU 14,-IOU GENERAL stv:cE - LARCE - TIME METERED APLlCAP!LITY Applicable to all customer; who request service on this schedule and whose maximum monthly demand is expected to be above 20 lw, to existing Schedule A customers whose monthly demand has exceeded 20 1w for 12 consecutive months, and to .isting Schedule AD customers whose maximum monthly demand exceeds 500 1w for three consecutive months. Any customer whose moidmurs monthly demand has fallen below 20 lw for three consecutive months may. at their option, elect to continue service under this schedule or be served under any other, aFFlicable schedule. TERRITORY Within the entire territory served by the utility. -. Per Meke Month S ervice Charce ..................... $20.00 Service Voltac. -'-Secondary. Prmry Tn5rr''!0on Season Summer Winter - Surer Wi nter Summer 'rer Demand Charce: Per 1w of Non-Coincident Demand 53 05 53 05 SZ 2 S2.42 51 02 S 02 Per 1w of Maximum * Peak-Period Demand $14.62 $3.36 $14.42 E3.36 5907 Energy Charge: Peak Per',.,- Base Energy per kWh S.0S910 5.049&7 5.05335 S.066& 5.05055 $.04243 ECAC and AER per kWh . 03021. 02021. 03C26 .03.021. .02026 . Total per kWh 5.05934 5.05011 5.05.359 5.07492 5.05109 5.07267 Semi-Peek Period Base Energy per kWh 5.02753 5.02029 5.02475 5.01667 5.02313 5.01527 ECAC and AER - per k Wh 03024 .0302 02024 02024 03026 02C71- Total per kwh 5.05777 5.05053 5.05502 S.0691 '5.05237 5.055i (Continued) Advice L tr. No. 729E Issued DY Date Fl.dDeccer 29, 1967 Decision No. S712-06g DONALDE. FEt.SINCER E'fective iaflu2ry 1 1 18S Vice President - Mark.ti'n5 Resolution No I I I 1 I I I 1 I I SAN DISCO CAS & ELECTRIC C'i!&$Y Revised Cal -..P U C Sheet No. 6052E Se, Diego. California Cancelling Revised Cal.P.U.C.SPest me. 5573 - sp..t 2 SCHEDULE AL-IOU (Continued) PA'ES (Continued) Service Voltage Seeondary ,,P,4tsry r.em4ssion Season Summer Winter .Summe Winter S•jmrer Winter Energy Charge C-Peak Period " Base Energy per kwh 5.01345 5.01226 ' 5.01065 5.00&44 S.00963 ECAC and AER - Per kwh .0302. 03024' 03024 0302.r. . 03C2' Total per kwh S.'C436 $.04150 '5 040&9 $.03U$ 5.03567 VOL1ACE L EVELS Service voltac. levels are defined as folls Secondary - service taken below 2.00 Lv. Primary service taken at or above. 1.00 Lv but below 25.00'4v from regularly available facilities. ,Transmission - service taken at 25.00 Lv and above from recularly available facilities L MIERS Averace Rate Limiter: - The averace rate for service under this, schedut'wiil be limited to S0.16 per kwh for' all chares e'cluding.the service charge and stand- charges (if any). If the total billed energy and demand ctarces, on a per kwh basi s, eceed $0.16 per kwh' then $0.16 per kWh is substituted for that portion of the Dill On-Peak-Rate Limiter: The on-peak rate limiter only applies to customers taking service in conjunction with Schedules S or S-I. If, on a per kwh basis, the total charge for peak period demand and energy exceeds 50.67 per kwi summer, or. $0.26 per kwh winter, the bill for that service will be reduced such thot.the applicable $0.67 or $0.26 per kwh limit is not e*ceeded. '-This limiter 'only applies to energy and demand tasten as 'backup service. When a customer takes service In conjunction with Schedules S or S-I, a calculation is made in order to determine what demand and usace is subject to the $0.67 or so. 26 per kwh on-peak limiter and i.hat is subject to the $0.16 per kwh averace rate limiter. If a standby customer has a forced eutace, that is demonstrated to the reasonable sati54action of the utility within 60 days of occurrence, the on-peak demand and energy -rssociated with the contracted standby kw are subect to the on-pak ra'. limiter. All oeraand and usage not subject to 'he on-peak-rate limiter is subject to the average rate lim,'.r . (Continued) Advice Ltr. He. 729—! Issued by , , Date' Fi ~ed Decezber 29. 1957 Decision No 87-12-069 DONALD E FELS'NER E44ec'ive JG:ivar I loss Vice President -Marketing ' Resolution He. ii I F I i I I I I S .00721 C 3 0 2 5.03752 SAN DIEGO 0*5 & ELECTRIC COPIPA.NY Revised Cal.P.UC.SPet 6053E Son Dl•, California Revised 964-E Cancelling Revised Cal.P.U.c.sh.,t No. 5573 5574 (Sheet I of 5) S AL-TOW (Continued) RATES (Continued) ' Energy Cost Adjustment and Annual Energy nate (AU) : An Ener.' Cost Adjustment,' as specified in Section 9. of the Preliminary Statement, and an AU. 14111 be included in each blfl for service. The Enercy Cost Adjustment and AU amount shall be the product of the total 411oi.ott-hours for which t. bill I. rendered, multiplied by the £rer;y Cost Ad justment and AU rates 5h014n above. Franchise Fee Differential: A franchise lee di44arenti&l of 1.9 14111 be' applied to the mon t hly billings calculated under this schedule for all customers within the corporate limits of the City of San Diego. Such franchise lee differentia shall beso Indicated and added as a separate item t o b i l l s r e n d e r e d t o s u c h customers. Time Periocs: All time periods lsted are applicable to local time. The definition of time 14111 be based upon the date service is ' rendered. Surrser I . Seot 20 Winter All On.-eak 11 A.R. P.M. Weekdays 5 p.m. - 1 p.m. ee6a"5 $em1 -Peak 6 a.m. - 11 a.m. Weekdays. , a.m. - 5 p.m. eek:a"s - 10 p.m. Weekdays , 1 p.m. - 10 p.m. Weea-s Off-Peak 10 P.M. —6 a.m. Weekdays 10 p.m. — a.m. ..eekc.syS Plus eekends &. Mclidays ' Plus Weekends & :c:i:a-s Where the billing month contains, time from both April and Msy r 'September and October, the an-peak period demand charg e s will be based an the demands recistered in each month, 14e1chted by he , number of days bil'ed in each month Ene'gv i.zill be billed on the basis of the time period and season in which .'the usage occurred. The holidays peci'ied in this schedule are: New Year's Da.', Whincton'5 Birthday, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Veterans Days Thanksgiving Day and Chris t mas Day. When any holiday listed above falls on Sunday, the ,following Monday will be r.cccniz.d .as an o44.-peak period. He chance in of"-pe'k period will be made for holidays falling, on Saturday. a I I (ontinued) Advice Ltr. He. 729 , Issued by Decision No. 8712-O9 pC?iALD E. FELS1HCU - , Vce Preiocnt .Marketina -' sate Filed________________ December 29, 1967 Ef4ective 3aru 1. 1988 Resolution No. i I I I I 1 I I I I I I I U SAN 1EO GAS & ELECTR IC CY1PY Revtsed c.l.P.U.C.sh..t Me. 6051.-E San Di ego. Cali4ornia Revised C.nc.11lnç Revised Ca1.P.U,.Sheet ,v. 5575-E , (Sheet 4 04 5) s:N(uLr AL-IOU (Continued) SP:1&L ':ONs . Vo'ce t,:uaters, Volta a regulators, if required by the customer, shall be furnsned, instal.d, owned, and maintained by the customer. - eand. T he ma.'mum demand shall be the average kil owatt input during the fifteen-minute Interval in which the consumption of electric .nerg" is greater than in any other llft*en-mf nut. interval in the bill i ng peeled as indi cated or recorded by Instruments installed, o.ned and maintained by the utility, but not less than the diversified resistance welder load :.ptcd In accordance with the utility's Rule 2F-2b. In the case case of hoi sts, elevetor, 4jrnaces, or other loads ,..i'e'e the eriercy demand is intermittent- or subject to violent uctuat'ons. the ut-i-Hey may base the maximum demand upon a jut-minute interval nsead 04 a fifteen-minute interval. In case the maximum demand has-not been measured. It may be deter'red by test at the option of the utility. Won-Ccinc1dent 'emend hsrce. The non-coincident cemand will be based on the kflatts of ma'imt demand measured at any time durinc the month. For billinc purposes ne non-coincident demand charce ill be based on the hicher of tine crer.t month's non-coincident demand or 50 of the hichest •non-coincicent =emand occurring -during the previous eleven months, In the application of the E provision, only demands created in months during which the :ustcmer received service under this schedule and occurring after December 31, 197 W4 11 he used. In the case -of customers- paying for standby service under Scnedu'es S or S-1_ if a forced or , scheduled outace of the customer's cenerati tc system - durir.c the billing period is demonstrated to the reasonac.e sat'sact'fl of the utility within days of occurrence, the level of that outace (net to -exceed the amount of the contracted standby level), on a kw basis. is subtracted from the 'recorded demand in the applicable month in the non-coincident demand cherce billing calculation. Peek et" od Demand Cheree, - - - The demand charoe will be based on kilatts of maximum demand measured each billing period during the on-peak period. Demands created by the scheduled maintenance -o4 a customer's self ceneratien system (not to exceed the amount of the contracted standby level) will be- subtracted from the messured peak-period demand used in calculating the demand charce, provided that the maintenance schedule has been previously approved by the utility. L 7 I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I (ont1 nued) Advice Ltr. ho. 455usd by Decision No. 87-12-069 DONALD E. FELSINER Vice President -M-arketing Date Filed December 29, 196 Effective Resolution So. I I I I 1 I I I I I I I. I 1 I I I I SAW DE0 GAS & ELECT R IC COMPANY Revised ol.P.U.C.SP•et We. 6055E Sort Diego, California Revised 5575-t Cancelling Revised cal.P.U.C.Shest No. 5965-E - - - S (Sheet 5 of 5) SMEJLE AL-0U (Continued) C S C T T S (Cont inued) 5 ' me-c4-tJi Mt'er 14urckIort : Digital Pulse 'Recorder Malfunction. In the event that the digia pulse recorder (DPk) malfunctions during the tilling period, the enersa'OI will be based on the mechanical meter reading. Where the moii:t1cn e'itsd for less than 25 of the billing period, the energy soles will be prorated to time periods based en the energy division during the pericc when the DPR was working properly. Where the malfunction time eCted5 2% of the billing period, the energy 141*5 .ill be prorated t o t i m e periods based on the energy division cvring the three previous calendar rscntPts. If the DPK functions properly or more t h an 25 of the ling period, the demand charge will be based on the maimum demand as measured during. the period of correct PR functntn:. In the event that the R malfunctions for more than 75 of the billing period, the dernar- :.3re will be based on the overact of the three previous demand cares. Fallure.of Meter Timing.' In the event 'the t a timing -device. ct- than a an the time-o4-use mete 'otis cousi n= the :n-Peak and04z-Peak energy consumptions and billing demands to be incorrectly r e c s ' e o d . energy sales and billing demand will be prorated to time periocs based cn the energy division and biilin- demand durn: the three. previous oilr.; periods . £ ecn"ec'.on Cha-ce In the event that a customer terminates service 6nder this schedve Rnd re-initiates service at that same location wi:tin 12 month s . t h e r e - i l l b e a reconnection ortarce equal- to the' charges which would have been billed ra the customer not terminated service but not received an y e n e r g . ' 7 M ce''ar\eous This schedule is not applicable to standby, ay.il a r y s e r v i c e o r s e r v i c e operated in parallel with a customer's cenerating p l a n t u n l e s s s e r ' i : e i s taken In combination with other ,schedules specif i c a l l y w a i v i n g t h e s e provi sions. Adv ice-U . )O_ Cv.e Ltr. ho. '- - ss'sued b - Decision We. S12i9 DONALD E. FELS'lt(CZR S Vice Pre5ioeflt-.. Marketinc O* Fied Decernber 29, 1967 Efect1ve january 1, 1988 e,ciutIon No.