Laserfiche WebLink
DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES <br /> <br />provisions for a disinfection system that can meet the Level IV reuse requirements will <br />provide Level IV effluent. Current planning efforts are to provide 10 mgd of reuse through <br />the design period, through phased implementation. For perspective purposes, during the <br />maximum crop uptake (liquid) months of July and August, an estimated 620 acres of land is <br />required for 2.5 mgd of reuse, based on applying the reuse to grass. If reuse were applied <br />June through September, more acreage would be required because crop water uptake <br />during the months of June and September is almost half of the peak uptake during the <br />months of July and August. <br /> <br />6.4.1 Reuse Alternatives <br />Five effluent reuse alternatives have been developed for the application of Level II and <br />Level IV quality effluent. These alternatives are based on developing 10 mgd of reuse within <br />the design period. <br /> <br />Alternative 1 - Local Reuse Demonstration Site (Level IV) <br />Alternative 1 represents an initial reuse demonstration project. This alternative would <br />provide 0.5 to 1.0 mgd of Level IV effluent reuse to public areas located within a two-mile <br />radius of the WPCF. The demonstration project would most likely supply water to park <br />vegetation and areas with high public visibility. Assuming the reuse water were applied on <br />grass, approximately 125-250 acres would be required during an application period of July <br />and August. This is based on providing a daily reuse application rate of 0.5 to 1 mgd. <br /> <br />Advantages: <br />· Provides the ability to gage public reaction and receive public response from the use of <br /> reclaimed water on public areas without fully developing a Level IV reuse program <br /> <br />· Less restrictions associated with application of Level IV reuse as compared to Level II <br /> effluent <br /> <br />· Level IV effluent can be applied on a greater variety of sites (e.g., golf courses) than <br /> Level II effluent <br /> <br />Disadvantages: <br />· Level IV reuse is more costly to achieve than Level II <br />· Need to develop conveyance and distribution system <br />· Study required to evaluate all potential urban reuse sites <br />· Requires significant amount of land in proximity to WWTP <br />· Requires public awareness and education program <br /> <br />This alternative would require the installation of a UV disinfection system capable of <br />treating the desired quantity of Level IV effluent; a conveyance pipeline; and a distribution <br />system (i.e., laterals, sprinklers, etc.). The cost assumptions for this alternative are based on <br />identifying land within 2 miles of the WPCF, a 1-mgd UV disinfection system, and leasing a <br />transportable, pilot filtration unit. <br /> <br />Estimated Cost: $2,100,000 <br /> <br />Alternative 2 - Level II Reuse at the Seasonal Industrial Waste Facility (SIWF) <br />Alternative 2 is to apply Level II reuse on the agricultural land available at the SIWF site, <br />which is approximately 190 acres. A reclaimed water main (RWM) is currently connected <br /> <br />MWMC_6.0_REV1 I.DOC 6-27 <br /> <br /> <br />