Laserfiche WebLink
6 DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES <br /> <br /> 120 ...... <br /> <br /> 1 O0 - _9~2__ <br /> <br /> ~ 80 ---- i urn Month __ <br /> ~ Wet Weather Flow <br /> <br /> 0 Filtered Secondary <br /> -- Effluent Required to <br /> ~ 40 Meet 85 % Removal-- -- <br /> for MMWW <br /> 20 - !-0 <br /> <br /> 20t0 2015 2020 2025 <br /> ~ Filtered F~ow <br /> <br /> FIGURE 6.2.6-2 <br /> F~ltration Required at Worst Case Maximum Month Wet Weather Flow <br /> MWMC Facilities Plan, Eugene-Springfield <br /> <br />The following filtration technologies were identified as either appropriate or preferred for <br />the WPCF. <br /> <br /> Deep bed granular media filtration <br /> Fabric disk or Fuzzy Filters <br />- Membrane filtration <br /> <br />A detailed cost evaluation m~d non-monetary analysis was not performed for these <br />alternatives. Conventional deep bed granular media filtration is currently recommended to <br />meet the large scale filtration needs identified above. This is due to the following reasons: <br /> <br /> The techrtology is well established in the industry <br /> <br />,, Siting of deep bed granular media filters will occupy the largest site space relative to <br /> other alternatives and thus the planning will be conservative <br /> <br /> The filters can be constructed using a modular approach to meet the projected facility <br /> needs in a "just in time" approach <br /> <br />· The technology is well suited for large volumes of filtered flow <br /> <br /> The cost of constructing deep bed granular media filters will be adequate for plmming <br /> purposes. If MWMW would like to evaluated other technologies when the facilities are <br /> actually needed there would be adequate ftmds available. <br /> <br />MWMC_6 O_REV/1 DOC 6-21 <br /> <br /> <br />