Item A-MWMC Facilities Plan - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MWMC FAClLfl'IES PLAN TABLE 5.1.6-1 Reliability Class I Requirements MWMC Facility Plan, Eugene-Springfield Plant Component Requirement Filtration 75% of design flow capacity with largest unit out of service. Design flow is defined as the flow used as the design basis of the component. Effluent Pumps Peak flow with largest unit out of service. Peak flow is defined as the maximum wastewater flow expected during the design pedod of the treatment works. Electrical Power Two separate and independent sources of electrical power shall be provided, either from two separate utility substations or from a single substation and a works-based generator. Designated backup source shall have sufficient capacity to operate all vital components, critical lighting, and ventilation during peak flow conditions The reliability criteria for sludge processes presented in Table 5.1.6-2 are also based on the guidance offered in EPA's Works Design Criteria. TABLE 5.1.6-2 Sludge Handling System Reliability MWMC Facility Plan, Eugene-Springfield System Component Requirement Sludge Holding The volume of the holding tank shall be based on the expected time necessary to Tanks perform maintenance and repair of the component in question. Anaerobic Sludge At least two digestion tanks shall be provided. At least two of the digestion tanks Digestion provided shall be designed to permit processing of all types of sludges normally digested. Sludge Pumping Pumps sized to pump peak sludge quantity and maintain velocities above 2 fps. Provide a minimum of 2 pumps. 5.2 Basis for Cost Estimate Unit process and system alternative cost comparisons are to be based on total project or relative project costs. Project costs are calculated to include legal costs, administrative costs, contingency costs, and engineering costs in addition to the construction and annual operation and maintenance costs. End-of-life salvage value will not be considered in the cost evaluations. Relative cost estimates are typically used to compare alternatives in which many of the facilities in each alternative are identical. Only those costs that are unique to each alternative are estimated and used for comparison purposes. This approach is useful when considering systemwide alternatives in which many of the facilities are the same and the relative costs of each alternative can be narrowed down to selected facilities. Costs for the selected 5-22 MWMC_5.0_REVS_VKS.DOC