My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item A-MWMC Facilities Plan
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2004
>
CCAgenda-05/19/04WS
>
Item A-MWMC Facilities Plan
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 1:11:10 PM
Creation date
5/12/2004 3:16:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
5/19/2004
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
349
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
B, DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES <br /> <br />the land lease agreement would remain in place. Advantages and disadvantages of this <br />alternative are listed below. <br /> <br />Advantages: <br />· Reclaimed water main already constructed to the SIWF <br />· Lowest cost alternative for beneficially using the SIWF <br />· Provides MWMC with a readily available effluent reuse location <br />· Maintain small revenue source through lease agreement <br /> <br />Disadvantages: <br />· Costs associated with modifications and equipment required to apply liquid biosolids to <br /> the site <br /> <br />The fact that the reclaimed water main from the WPCF is connected to the SIWF makes this <br />an attractive alternative. Effluent could be applied at the SIWF with minor inspection and <br />retrofitting of the sprinklers on the center pivots. This cost is estimated at approximately <br />$2,000 per pivot. <br /> <br />Liquid biosolids from the BMF could also be applied to the SIWF with relatively minor <br />piping/equipment additions. Applying liquid biosolids from the BMF to the S1WF would <br />require the following improvements/modifications: <br /> <br />· A new pipeline from the BF pump station to the SIWF that would convey liquid <br /> biosolids. It is assumed that the existing liquid biosolids pumps would have enough <br /> capacity to pump to the SIWF. <br /> <br />· A hose reel system with distribution pipeline. The onsite distribution system would <br /> consist of three hose reels to spread the liquid biosolids on poplars or grass. <br /> <br />· A booster pump station to distribute biosolids to the hose reels. <br /> <br />Alternatives Cost Comparison <br /> <br />Table 6.5.5-1 provides a cost estimate comparison between alternatives. The net cost <br />presented in the table is the difference between revenue and cost. <br /> <br />TABLE 6.5.5-1 <br />Alternatives Cost Benefit Comparison <br />MWMC Facilities Plan, Eugene-Springfield <br /> <br /> Alternative Revenue Cost Net Cost Comments <br />Alternative I $6,450 $11,500 ($5,050) only 1 year of annual costs <br />No action - continue to <br />lease the SIWF <br />Alternative 2 $2,030,000 $300,000 $1,700,000 excludes site replacement cost; <br />Sell the SIWF assumes $7K/ac; 6% closing costs <br /> and decommissioning <br /> <br />MWMC_6.0_REV11.DOC 6-49 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.