One and two. Those are our true obligations. [reading notes] existing obligations to existing customers, 184 million gallons per day is our water supply assurance to wholesale customers. It is contained in the water supply agreement but it is also very clear the obligation exists regardless of whether it is in the contract with our customers. The rest of the 265 supply to retail customers in San Francisco. We need to bridge some gaps there. Some of the project may not deliver the full water supply that we anticipated. We need to make sure second, permanent and regulatory requirements to maintain healthy habitat. It could be a very large number of 293 million gallons per day to maintain our level of Service Goals while meeting the bay delta plan requirements. That may decrease based on the outcome of state negotiations or litigation. San mateo creek we are contributing about 3. 5 mgd. Alameda creek we have been streamflow which we are currently meeting and we will be bringing to the Alameda Creek recapture project where we are working to recapture some of that supply without disrupting the instream flow. The next water supply planning goals are addressing additional customer demands through 2040. The first is the request of san jose and santa clara to become permanent customers. We were trying to resolve by the end of 2018 we have now deferred to the water supply amendments up to 2028. That is a historic allocation level of 4. 5 mgd each for san jose and santa clara. Meeting increased demands protected by individual wholesale customers. San francisco, under the most recent urban Water Management plan we are looking at an increase of 1 million gallons per day, that will be refined in the upcoming urban Water Management plan. We are to anticipating hearing from the Planning Department are additional growth projections for San Francisco in terms of population and jobs. San jose is looking for an additional 4. 5 mgd above the interruptible guarantee he guarantee. Brisbane has a development which they are looking for 2 million gallons per day. East palo alto had a prior request of 1. 5 million gallons per day and that was resolved by transferring supply guarantees from palo alto. That only goes through about 2035 through that point in time. Those are with projections they look like they need additional supply at that time. What is mgd . Million gallons per day. Again, that covers the goals we are aiming for. And some are very and some are still to be resolved. We cant let time go by without Getting Started on the process. That is what we are looking at potential water supply projects. Can you go back a slide . Share. So, san jose and santa clara are not permanent customers. What i am seeing here is it would not only be historic allocation level, but it could potentially be at this increased level that they are requesting . Yeah, it actually differentiates those, the commitment level for us to reevaluate and make the hard decision on making them permanent at the 4. 5 mgd level. Since that time, since that was discussed back in 2,008 and 2,009, water supply agreement they have developed additional desires. 2008 and 2009, water supply agreement they have developed additional desires. The question of permanency at 4. 5 mgd level, we actually have to come up with an answer on that. We dont have an obligation to increase demands that are without their info form. We want to make sure the commission is aware that they are there i will be asked to confront that decision. We dont have an obligation on number three either, but we have to respond to them . Yeah, the obligation is to give them a definitive answer on that. Great. Thank you. When we look at number four, the goal for making increased demands projected, or even number three, when we look at that are we taking into consideration trying low flow toilets and all of the other things we are trying to do are we looking at that within . Is there a menu of things that they would have to do in order for us to give them this allocation . Everybody, you know, in our service area is doing a quite a good job on conservation. I think nicole can speak directly to that. For example, in San Francisco, we are down to about 42 gallons per person per day. Residential usage. That is based on heavy penetration of the marketplace for low flow factors fixtures throughout. Our wholesale customers as well come are doing a very good job. In the last ten years the bulk of them have been in the 85 gallon per day category. They are now down to about 65. They have made significant reductions. Similar types of programs and their areas which also includes much more suburban landscapes. Their big landscape modification programs that are underway throughout our service area. We are not in the position to tell them what to do, but we are in a position to work with them, and help support them in those efforts. Even if they wanted to become permanent customers we couldnt say, you know, working on getting you down to what San Francisco does, or at least close to it . Is there a goal for them . There is not a goal for them. I think that gets into an area where there may be some, you know, as discussion we have to have about what we can or cannot do. In terms of how they use the supply and their area. The fact that that san jose and santa clara are not permanent means they are not part of the 184 billion gallons per day supply assurance. We are obligated to provide. This is over and above. Exactly how we do that, we do have a little bit more flexibility. Thank you. I have a question on the sustainability goal. Maybe it is just semantics. As it is framed to meet our in stream requirements. It makes it seem like our sustainability goals are lobar rather than being Good Environmental stewards. I just want to quote go on record saying that. Meeting in stream requirements goal seems lobar to me. I talked to the commission in 2017 and we have been working with the City Attorney on how to move forward with those. Im hoping, this fall, potentially through the budget process of bringing you an updated set of Service Goals and objectives covering all things and beefing up the environmental part is part of that. This was done in 2,008. You are right, it is a minimum bar. I hope that is one of our goals. It is a lobar. We do have more to offer their that we can talk about when we bring the item back. Thank you. Lets look at the potential projects. I have broken them into regional and local projects. These are projects that are in the Tuolumne River area. Recycled water and purified water projects. When i say purified water, i mean, we are taking water to a whole new level and supply. Other projects, which helped make the other ones work better and i will talk about them in a little bit. But first, i want to include Regional Water supply projects be considered but did not include, they have been suggested to us before that we should somehow connect to the california aqueduct and become part of the state water project. I think we have no interest in doing that as part of a delta supply. Also, much as it might seem as a good idea to some people, i think that was a very difficult idea. I am not going to say never, because i have learned over time some things, you know, that you never expect to happen, do. I dont think that will happen anytime soon. Also, there is talk of a spillway raised there and we have not included this here. If they can convince us that is a good idea that we may want to frame the project in as well. There are some that we are not including, at this time, because we dont think they are right. The potential Tuolumne River projects. It is part of our proposed voluntary agreement. We have said that we will do Feasibility Study of that. This is actually a landmark thing that the irrigation district had never wanted to talk about that before. They have finally put that on the table. This would entail basically putting excess water where there are big flows in the Tuolumne River into the groundwater basin. So it is a healthy basin that the districts can then shift to in dry years. Leaving us with some of that flow on the Tuolumne River. There would also be an area dedicated to the Tuolumne River. It would be a package deal. One of the districts have never wanted to talk to us about. They are finally doing that. Interbasin collaborations between these rivers, particularly the stanislaus. The plumbing is close to each other. There might be ways we can operate the two rivers in conjunction to actually benefit, you know, the overall environment and users on both rivers on my thinking in terms of a Bigger Picture of water tools to manage. Lastly, dry year transfers. We continue to know that we are going to need to find some way to work a deal with the irrigation district for dry year water someday. Why do you think they havent wanted to talk about the groundwater baking. They see that as their resource, and they see us, i will repeat an anecdote that i heard when they talked about working with San Francisco before. One farmer reportedly got up and said, i dont want to transfer any water to those hippies in San Francisco. He was followed by another farmer that said ive got bad news for you, all of my relatives in texas think everybody in california is a hippie. It is just your perspective. They are very jealous of that. We work well together because of our water rights. But, you know, they are an Agricultural Community and they like to take care of agricultural folks first before they think about shipping water to other cities. That is kind of their deal. We did have a couple of Board Members on the tour of the system on the conversations were very good. Potential regional recycle projects. These are with daly city, alameda water project, Crystal Spring purified water in the Bigger Picture. On daly city, whips, too fast there. The picture on the left is plumbing with purple lines taking recycled water from expanded Wastewater Treatment plant and delivering water to the green areas which are irrigated areas in daly city and then the gold colored areas are the cemeteries and they primarily rely on groundwater at this point. The goal of this project would be to get them on recycled waters so than the groundwater basin can be used much more fully for the benefit of our system as part of the Regional Water system. We actually have money in the budget for this. This is a project that is actually moving forward. The next thing we need to do is work in agreement with daly city, our self and California WaterService Company who delivers water on a roles responsibilities going forward. The next is a map of the freemark yuba city area. It is the portable service boundary, the red boundary there in the upper lefthand corner. It is the el dorado Wastewater Treatment plant. That is where the sanitary district treats wastewater. To a higher level and then transport it to the quarry lakes which are right in the middle and into the groundwater. Then that water can be extracted into the facility which is blackish groundwater Treatment Plant. So, they run that from time to time. This would be a steady supply that will travel through the groundwater basin, to be treated there and our transmission lines go right through there. That water can be used directly by our Water District or it could be put into our Regional Water system and utilized that way. That is still to be determined. 23 Commission Meetings ago you approve the next phase of study. The next one is Crystal Springs purified water. This is work we are doing with Silicon Valley clean water. It is a nice fancy name. Potentially the city of san mateo as well. It shows sites where advanced Water Purification facility might be built. And then a potential Pipeline Route that would take water and could send it up to Crystal Springs reservoir. Where it would be blended with supply there. And then that water, as already established would be treated at the tracy water Treatment Plant. Both this and the previous project are purified water projects where we are basically treating wastewater into making water ultimately. Just like nature does. And then i dont have a map here for it. The other is looking at evaluating opportunities for all of the Wastewater Treatment plants in the service area. We know from other situations, it is a delicate relationship that you develop with the Wastewater Agency on that. On whos water it is and how it works. We are not presuming to tell them what to do there. We are just making sure we have identified opportunities. The next potential regional project is the reservoir expansion. Conveyance alternatives and the reservoir expansion. They have been proposing to expand that reservoir. They voted preliminary proposition one funding. They also have federal funding. They are looking at a large number of potential partners without project. This can work a lot of different ways to move water into it. It basically is just a storage volume. What kind of water you move in, when, where, and how . And then how you move water out to particular customers . We are trying to figure out if there are benefits without project. When we expand reservoirs that means we are Holding Water . Yes. That means that water is not going back into the aquifers, back into the ground, back into the sky and involved in what water does. Right. Are we doing anything to make up for that . The waters not going back into the ocean. How is that working . In this case you take water out of the system to move it into it. It does not have a big watersh watershed. It doesnt deflect local water drainage there. Is taking water of the system. Particularly in big years, they are built to take water as fresh as possible to improve the water in the contra costa Water District. It is the only time it would take water into it. This would look at different ways to put water in there. Again, from different mechanisms, all of these intakes work together. The one opportunity that we see looking at here is taking some a nation water from the delta potentially storing that. Are we looking at the ramifications of not putting water back into the underground system . Are we looking at that . Yes. This water doesnt work with the groundwater basin there. It all flows out and that is when you get into the whole bay delta discussion, how much water do you need to flow out to her how much do you divert for different uses. One of the uses here would be the Water District which would be using the water for wetland habitat. That they had developed in the central valley. There are different ways to use it, that is what the state money would pay for would be for that beneficial use that the public overall benefits from. Are we looking at the more reservoirs we build, are we looking at building more habitats in order to deal with that . I mean, the only way water works is when it does the cycle. It goes up and he comes back down. If it doesnt go up in the rate that it used to go up, what is going to happen ultimately . Every time you do a project like any of these you have to go through extensive Environmental Review process to identify the impacts that either will, or may occur and make sure that you mitigate for those in away that goes over and above just taking care of the problem. Making sure you actually make things better. That is the way we do business. Okay. I appreciate that. Thank you. If you look at the calaveras project, might be useful to take a look at some of the mitigation measures that were associated with that. Those are exactly the issues. We do acquisition of watershed land. We do a lot of watershed land protection. That would be perhaps a good case study to take a look at. What you are saying, when we do a project there is a mitigation that goes along with that . Always. That is good. Our case, these dams were built so long ago there were no environmental laws. We have been welcomed into the 21st century by others that we are doing our fair share now. What about going back into the ocean . I think colorado doesnt go back into the ocean anymore at all. The colorado river. They basically dried up that system. Theyre slowly and making improvements. The system is totally oversubscribed. We are not doing that and we are careful that no, we are not doing that. Dont laugh. Ive seen the colorado enough times that is a sad situation. Thank you. Back to the slides again. The bay area do, we have been studying this for some time with other partners, trying to figure out if there is a good place from an Energy Perspective so its less energy intensive. That is what we are doing, looking out the western end of the delta for that. That water could potentially be stored in the carroll reservoir, and would be moving from the system and a way that is protective of fish and wildlife. The big question on that one is how to move water to them in a place where we can actually make use of it which is like conveyance alternatives project in particular there is a redline there, the South Bay Aqueduct which takes water from t