Appendix. Pairwise Comparison Results

Transcription

1 ppendix Pairwise Comparison Results This section summarizes method for prioritization of the pump station and force main repair or upgrade projects. Major pump station mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) and structural repairs or upgrades will require temporary pumping around the pump station with portable pumps and power. The adjacent force main could still be used for effluent conveyance. Major force main repairs or upgrades require temporary force main for effluent conveyance because the sanitary system lacks pump around bypasses. The existing pump station could be used for pumping. However, major pump station and force main repairs and upgrades could create significant inconveniences and/or financial hardships for the impacted neighborhoods. Therefore, pump stations and adjacent force mains repair and upgrade projects will be grouped together to minimize inconveniences and/or financial hardships. To prioritize repair or upgrade projects, their conditions were ranked using a Pairwise Comparison method. matrix comparison is another common method but could be easier biased. In Pairwise Comparison, each pump station and force main combination is compared head to head with each other pump station and force main combinations. The total number of head to head matchups can be calculated as follows: X = N * (N 1) / 2 where X = total number of head to head matchups N = number of items for comparison There are twenty (20) pump stations and twenty one (21) force mains making a total of twenty one combinations with one force main only combination and a total of 210 head to head combinations. The one force main only combination was in relatively good condition, removed from comparison, and reducing the total head to head matches to 190. Page 1 of 14

2 Figure 1. Graphical representations of head to head matches. Left: One round of nineteen (19) headto head matches for twenty (20) pump stations. Right: Complete 190 head to head matches for twenty (20) pump stations. Each head to head match is compared against ten (10) metrics making a total of 1,900 head to head combinations. The metrics are ranked using Pairwise Comparison method to find their relative important and weighting factor. Each combination gets one point for a one to one win, one point for a tie, and zero points for draw. The combination with the most total points is the winner. The ten metrics used to evaluate the pump station and force main combinations are summarized in Table 1. Pairwise Comparisons of the evaluating metrics are summarized in Table 2. Results of metrics importance are summarized in Table 3. Table 1. Metrics for head to head pump station and fore main evaluations. n Metric Description 1 PWWF/Firm Ratio of peak wet weather flow to firm pump station pumping capacity 2 Time to overflow Time to overflow wet well 3 Site civil condition Conditions of civil items including but not limited to pavement, sidewalk, curbs, etc. 4 Dry well condition Condition of dry well structure and to house mechanical and electrical equipment 5 Wet well condition Condition of wet well structure and to contain influent 6 Mechanical condition Conditions of mechanical equipment including but not limited to pumps, valves, piping, HVC, odor control, etc. 7 Electrical condition Conditions of electrical equipment including but not limited to power, backup power, I&C, SCD, etc. 8 Force main condition Conditions of the pipeline and ability to convey effluent 9 Dependencies Pump station daisy chain / connected linearly and increasing dependency and criticality 10 RWQC CDO Regional Water Quality Control oard (RWQC) Cease and Desist Order (CDO) violations Other evaluating metrics considered but ruled out included but not limited to the following: 1. Complaints (odor, noise, FOG, etc.); 2. Power reliability; and 3. Future capacity increases Table 2. Pairwise comparison of the evaluating metrics. n Metric Importance 1 PWWF/FIRM Time to overflow oth 2 PWWF/FIRM Site civil condition 3 PWWF/FIRM Dry well condition Page 2 of 14

3 Table 2. Pairwise comparison of the evaluating metrics. n Metric Importance 4 PWWF/FIRM Wet well condition 5 PWWF/FIRM Mechanical condition 6 PWWF/FIRM Electrical condition 7 PWWF/FIRM Force main condition 8 PWWF/FIRM Dependencies 9 PWWF/FIRM RWQC CDO 10 Time to overflow Site civil condition 11 Time to overflow Dry well condition 12 Time to overflow Wet well condition 13 Time to overflow Mechanical condition 14 Time to overflow Electrical condition 15 Time to overflow Force main condition 16 Time to overflow Dependencies 17 Time to overflow RWQC CDO 18 Site civil condition Dry well condition 19 Site civil condition Wet well condition 20 Site civil condition Mechanical condition 21 Site civil condition Electrical condition 22 Site civil condition Force main condition 23 Site civil condition Dependencies 24 Site civil condition RWQC CDO 25 Dry well condition Wet well condition 26 Dry well condition Mechanical condition 27 Dry well condition Electrical condition 28 Dry well condition Force main condition 29 Dry well condition Dependencies 30 Dry well condition RWQC CDO 31 Wet well condition Mechanical condition 32 Wet well condition Electrical condition 33 Wet well condition Force main condition 34 Wet well condition Dependencies 35 Wet well condition RWQC CDO 36 Mechanical condition Electrical condition oth 37 Mechanical condition Force main condition 38 Mechanical condition Dependencies 39 Mechanical condition RWQC CDO 40 Electrical condition Force main condition 41 Electrical condition Dependencies Page 3 of 14

4 Table 2. Pairwise comparison of the evaluating metrics. n Metric Importance 42 Electrical condition RWQC CDO 43 Force main condition Dependencies 44 Force main condition RWQC CDO 45 Dependencies RWQC CDO Table 3. Results of metrics importance and weighting. n Metrics Score Weight 1 (%) Comment 1 PWWF/FIRM This metric was tied for least importance. It s a relative magnitude measurement of the RWQC CDO 2 Time to overflow This metric was tied for least importance. It s a relative magnitude measurement of the RWQC CDO 3 Site civil condition This metric was third least important because it s provide access to the effluent conveyance equipment but independent to effluent conveyance 4 Dry well condition This metric was fourth most important because it houses the mechanical and electrical equipment for conveying effluent 5 Wet well condition This metric was the second most important to impound influent and inability for collection when failed 6 Mechanical condition This metric was tied for fifth most importance to convey effluent 7 Electrical condition This metric was tied for fifth most importance to convey effluent 8 Force main condition This metric was third most important for conveying effluent. Portable pumps and power could be brought in for failed pump stations; however, utilizing temporary force mains will be more difficult due to street closures and other challenges 9 Dependencies Pump station daisy chained / connected linearly and increasing dependency and criticality 10 RWQC CDO This metric was found to be most important because it trigger the condition assessment and needs for repairs and upgrades Total Note(s): 1. The metric weights are calculated by dividing the score by the total. Page 4 of 14

5 The RWQC CDO metric Pairwise Comparison will be described in detail as an example. The 38 th venue, 41 st venue, Kehoe Kelly, Laurie Meadows, Los Prados No. 1, Los Prados No. 2, Los Prados No. 3, Mongini, and Santa Clara pump stations are under RWQC CDO. When a RWQC CDO pump station is compared with a non RWQC CDO pump station, the former pump station receives one point. When a RWQC CDO pump station is compared with another RWQC CDO pump station, both pump stations receive one point. When a non RWQC CDO pump station is compared with another non RWQC CDO pump station, both pump stations receive no point. Table 4 summarized the comparisons. Table 4. RWQC CDO metric Pairwise Comparison. n Pump Station RWQC CDO 1 2nd Quebec 38th venue 2 2nd Quebec 41st venue 3 2nd Quebec rroyo None 4 2nd Quebec Chatham East None 5 2nd Quebec Kehoe Kelly 6 2nd Quebec Kehoe Scott None 7 2nd Quebec Laurie Meadows 8 2nd Quebec Los Prados No nd Quebec Los Prados No nd Quebec Los Prados No nd Quebec Mariners Island No. 1 None 12 2nd Quebec Mariners Island No. 2 None 13 2nd Quebec Mariners Island No. 3 None 14 2nd Quebec Mariners Island No. 4 None 15 2nd Quebec Mongini 16 2nd Quebec Parkwood None 17 2nd Quebec Santa Clara 18 2nd Quebec Toyon None 19 2nd Quebec Woodbridge None 20 38th venue 41st venue oth 21 38th venue rroyo 22 38th venue Chatham East 23 38th venue Kehoe Kelly oth 24 38th venue Kehoe Scott 25 38th venue Laurie Meadows oth 26 38th venue Los Prados No. 1 oth 27 38th venue Los Prados No. 2 oth 28 38th venue Los Prados No. 3 oth 29 38th venue Mariners Island No th venue Mariners Island No. 2 Page 5 of 14

6 Table 4. RWQC CDO metric Pairwise Comparison. n Pump Station RWQC CDO 31 38th venue Mariners Island No th venue Mariners Island No th venue Mongini oth 34 38th venue Parkwood 35 38th venue Santa Clara oth 36 38th venue Toyon 37 38th venue Woodbridge 38 41st venue rroyo 39 41st venue Chatham East 40 41st venue Kehoe Kelly oth 41 41st venue Kehoe Scott 42 41st venue Laurie Meadows oth 43 41st venue Los Prados No. 1 oth 44 41st venue Los Prados No. 2 oth 45 41st venue Los Prados No. 3 oth 46 41st venue Mariners Island No st venue Mariners Island No st venue Mariners Island No st venue Mariners Island No st venue Mongini oth 51 41st venue Parkwood 52 41st venue Santa Clara oth 53 41st venue Toyon 54 41st venue Woodbridge 55 rroyo Chatham East None 56 rroyo Kehoe Kelly 57 rroyo Kehoe Scott None 58 rroyo Laurie Meadows 59 rroyo Los Prados No rroyo Los Prados No rroyo Los Prados No rroyo Mariners Island No. 1 None 63 rroyo Mariners Island No. 2 None 64 rroyo Mariners Island No. 3 None 65 rroyo Mariners Island No. 4 None 66 rroyo Mongini 67 rroyo Parkwood None 68 rroyo Santa Clara Page 6 of 14

7 Table 4. RWQC CDO metric Pairwise Comparison. n Pump Station RWQC CDO 69 rroyo Toyon None 70 rroyo Woodbridge None 71 Chatham East Kehoe Kelly 72 Chatham East Kehoe Scott None 73 Chatham East Laurie Meadows 74 Chatham East Los Prados No Chatham East Los Prados No Chatham East Los Prados No Chatham East Mariners Island No. 1 None 78 Chatham East Mariners Island No. 2 None 79 Chatham East Mariners Island No. 3 None 80 Chatham East Mariners Island No. 4 None 81 Chatham East Mongini 82 Chatham East Parkwood None 83 Chatham East Santa Clara 84 Chatham East Toyon None 85 Chatham East Woodbridge None 86 Kehoe Kelly Kehoe Scott 87 Kehoe Kelly Laurie Meadows oth 88 Kehoe Kelly Los Prados No. 1 oth 89 Kehoe Kelly Los Prados No. 2 oth 90 Kehoe Kelly Los Prados No. 3 oth 91 Kehoe Kelly Mariners Island No Kehoe Kelly Mariners Island No Kehoe Kelly Mariners Island No Kehoe Kelly Mariners Island No Kehoe Kelly Mongini oth 96 Kehoe Kelly Parkwood 97 Kehoe Kelly Santa Clara oth 98 Kehoe Kelly Toyon 99 Kehoe Kelly Woodbridge 100 Kehoe Scott Laurie Meadows 101 Kehoe Scott Los Prados No Kehoe Scott Los Prados No Kehoe Scott Los Prados No Kehoe Scott Mariners Island No. 1 None 105 Kehoe Scott Mariners Island No. 2 None 106 Kehoe Scott Mariners Island No. 3 None Page 7 of 14

8 Table 4. RWQC CDO metric Pairwise Comparison. n Pump Station RWQC CDO 107 Kehoe Scott Mariners Island No. 4 None 108 Kehoe Scott Mongini 109 Kehoe Scott Parkwood None 110 Kehoe Scott Santa Clara 111 Kehoe Scott Toyon None 112 Kehoe Scott Woodbridge None 113 Laurie Meadows Los Prados No. 1 oth 114 Laurie Meadows Los Prados No. 2 oth 115 Laurie Meadows Los Prados No. 3 oth 116 Laurie Meadows Mariners Island No Laurie Meadows Mariners Island No Laurie Meadows Mariners Island No Laurie Meadows Mariners Island No Laurie Meadows Mongini oth 121 Laurie Meadows Parkwood 122 Laurie Meadows Santa Clara oth 123 Laurie Meadows Toyon 124 Laurie Meadows Woodbridge 125 Los Prados No. 1 Los Prados No. 2 oth 126 Los Prados No. 1 Los Prados No. 3 oth 127 Los Prados No. 1 Mariners Island No Los Prados No. 1 Mariners Island No Los Prados No. 1 Mariners Island No Los Prados No. 1 Mariners Island No Los Prados No. 1 Mongini oth 132 Los Prados No. 1 Parkwood 133 Los Prados No. 1 Santa Clara oth 134 Los Prados No. 1 Toyon 135 Los Prados No. 1 Woodbridge 136 Los Prados No. 2 Los Prados No. 3 oth 137 Los Prados No. 2 Mariners Island No Los Prados No. 2 Mariners Island No Los Prados No. 2 Mariners Island No Los Prados No. 2 Mariners Island No Los Prados No. 2 Mongini oth 142 Los Prados No. 2 Parkwood 143 Los Prados No. 2 Santa Clara oth 144 Los Prados No. 2 Toyon Page 8 of 14

9 Table 4. RWQC CDO metric Pairwise Comparison. n Pump Station RWQC CDO 145 Los Prados No. 2 Woodbridge 146 Los Prados No. 3 Mariners Island No Los Prados No. 3 Mariners Island No Los Prados No. 3 Mariners Island No Los Prados No. 3 Mariners Island No Los Prados No. 3 Mongini oth 151 Los Prados No. 3 Parkwood 152 Los Prados No. 3 Santa Clara oth 153 Los Prados No. 3 Toyon 154 Los Prados No. 3 Woodbridge 155 Mariners Island No. 1 Mariners Island No. 2 None 156 Mariners Island No. 1 Mariners Island No. 3 None 157 Mariners Island No. 1 Mariners Island No. 4 None 158 Mariners Island No. 1 Mongini 159 Mariners Island No. 1 Parkwood None 160 Mariners Island No. 1 Santa Clara 161 Mariners Island No. 1 Toyon None 162 Mariners Island No. 1 Woodbridge None 163 Mariners Island No. 2 Mariners Island No. 3 None 164 Mariners Island No. 2 Mariners Island No. 4 None 165 Mariners Island No. 2 Mongini 166 Mariners Island No. 2 Parkwood None 167 Mariners Island No. 2 Santa Clara 168 Mariners Island No. 2 Toyon None 169 Mariners Island No. 2 Woodbridge None 170 Mariners Island No. 3 Mariners Island No. 4 None 171 Mariners Island No. 3 Mongini 172 Mariners Island No. 3 Parkwood None 173 Mariners Island No. 3 Santa Clara 174 Mariners Island No. 3 Toyon None 175 Mariners Island No. 3 Woodbridge None 176 Mariners Island No. 4 Mongini 177 Mariners Island No. 4 Parkwood None 178 Mariners Island No. 4 Santa Clara 179 Mariners Island No. 4 Toyon None 180 Mariners Island No. 4 Woodbridge None 181 Mongini Parkwood 182 Mongini Santa Clara oth Page 9 of 14

10 Table 4. RWQC CDO metric Pairwise Comparison. n Pump Station RWQC CDO 183 Mongini Toyon 184 Mongini Woodbridge 185 Parkwood Santa Clara 186 Parkwood Toyon None 187 Parkwood Woodbridge None 188 Santa Clara Toyon 189 Santa Clara Woodbridge 190 Toyon Woodbridge None Table 5. RWQC CDO metric Pairwise Comparison results. 1 2nd Quebec 0 11 Los Prados # th venue Mariners Island # st venue Mariners Island #2 0 4 rroyo 0 14 Mariners Island #3 0 5 Chatham East 0 15 Mariners Island #4 0 6 Kehoe Kelly Mongini 19 7 Kehoe Scott 0 17 Parkwood 0 8 Laurie Meadows Santa Clara 19 9 Los Prados # Toyon 0 10 Los Prados # Woodbridge 0 Multiplying the RWQC CDO results from Table 5 by the RWQC CDO weighting of results in Table 6. Table 6. RWQC CDO metric Pairwise Comparison results with weighting. 1 2nd Quebec 0 11 Los Prados # th venue Mariners Island # st venue Mariners Island #2 0 4 rroyo 0 14 Mariners Island #3 0 5 Chatham East 0 15 Mariners Island #4 0 6 Kehoe Kelly Mongini Kehoe Scott 0 17 Parkwood 0 8 Laurie Meadows Santa Clara Los Prados # Toyon 0 10 Los Prados # Woodbridge 0 Page 10 of 14

11 Table 7. Dependencies metric Pairwise Comparison results. 1 2nd Quebec 0 11 Los Prados # th venue Mariners Island # st venue Mariners Island # rroyo 0 14 Mariners Island #3 6 5 Chatham East 0 15 Mariners Island # Kehoe Kelly Mongini 0 7 Kehoe Scott 0 17 Parkwood 0 8 Laurie Meadows Santa Clara 0 9 Los Prados # Toyon 0 10 Los Prados # Woodbridge 0 Table 8. Force main condition metric Pairwise Comparison results. 1 2nd Quebec Los Prados # th venue 0 12 Mariners Island # st venue 0 13 Mariners Island #2 0 4 rroyo 0 14 Mariners Island #3 0 5 Chatham East 0 15 Mariners Island #4 0 6 Kehoe Kelly Mongini 0 7 Kehoe Scott Parkwood 0 8 Laurie Meadows 0 18 Santa Clara 0 9 Los Prados # Toyon 0 10 Los Prados # Woodbridge 0 Table 9. Electrical condition metric Pairwise Comparison results. 1 2nd Quebec 2 11 Los Prados # th venue 2 12 Mariners Island # st venue 2 13 Mariners Island #2 0 4 rroyo 2 14 Mariners Island #3 2 5 Chatham East 2 15 Mariners Island #4 2 6 Kehoe Kelly 2 16 Mongini 1 7 Kehoe Scott 2 17 Parkwood 18 8 Laurie Meadows 2 18 Santa Clara 19 9 Los Prados # Toyon 2 10 Los Prados # Woodbridge 2 Page 11 of 14

12 Table 10. Mechanical condition metric Pairwise Comparison results. 1 2nd Quebec 5 11 Los Prados # th venue Mariners Island # st venue Mariners Island #2 0 4 rroyo Mariners Island # Chatham East 6 15 Mariners Island #4 9 6 Kehoe Kelly Mongini 1 7 Kehoe Scott Parkwood 3 8 Laurie Meadows 8 18 Santa Clara 2 9 Los Prados # Toyon 4 10 Los Prados # Woodbridge 7 Table 11. Wet well condition metric Pairwise Comparison results. 1 2nd Quebec Los Prados # th venue 9 12 Mariners Island # st venue 0 13 Mariners Island #2 0 4 rroyo Mariners Island #3 0 5 Chatham East Mariners Island #4 0 6 Kehoe Kelly 8 16 Mongini 1 7 Kehoe Scott 9 17 Parkwood 0 8 Laurie Meadows Santa Clara 0 9 Los Prados # Toyon 0 10 Los Prados # Woodbridge 1 Table 12. Dry well condition metric Pairwise Comparison results. 1 2nd Quebec Los Prados # th venue 0 12 Mariners Island # st venue 0 13 Mariners Island # rroyo 0 14 Mariners Island #3 0 5 Chatham East 0 15 Mariners Island #4 0 6 Kehoe Kelly 0 16 Mongini 0 7 Kehoe Scott 0 17 Parkwood 0 8 Laurie Meadows Santa Clara 19 9 Los Prados # Toyon 0 10 Los Prados # Woodbridge 0 Page 12 of 14

13 Table 13. Site civil condition metric Pairwise Comparison results. 1 2nd Quebec Los Prados # th venue 0 12 Mariners Island # st venue 0 13 Mariners Island #2 5 4 rroyo Mariners Island # Chatham East 0 15 Mariners Island # Kehoe Kelly Mongini 0 7 Kehoe Scott Parkwood 0 8 Laurie Meadows 0 18 Santa Clara 0 9 Los Prados # Toyon 0 10 Los Prados # Woodbridge 0 Table 14. Time to overflow metric Pairwise Comparison results. 1 2nd Quebec 3 11 Los Prados # th venue Mariners Island # st venue 9 13 Mariners Island # rroyo Mariners Island #3 5 5 Chatham East 1 15 Mariners Island # Kehoe Kelly 6 16 Mongini 12 7 Kehoe Scott 5 17 Parkwood 7 8 Laurie Meadows 9 18 Santa Clara 8 9 Los Prados # Toyon Los Prados # Woodbridge 0 Table 15. PWWF/FIRM metric Pairwise Comparison results. 1 2nd Quebec 0 11 Los Prados # th venue Mariners Island # st venue Mariners Island #2 5 4 rroyo 3 14 Mariners Island # Chatham East 1 15 Mariners Island #4 2 6 Kehoe Kelly Mongini 12 7 Kehoe Scott 7 17 Parkwood 6 8 Laurie Meadows Santa Clara 18 9 Los Prados # Toyon 8 10 Los Prados # Woodbridge 9 Page 13 of 14

14 This page intentionally left blank Page 14 of 14