Resolution No. 4793 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

6 DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUAT)ON OFALTERNATNES Disadvantages: e Only provides for 1.5 mgd of reuse The reuse irrigation system would consist of two new effluent reuse pumps (one for redundancy) located at the BF pump station, a 14-inch buried pipel/ne, and irrigation tubes on 20- to 30-foot gr/ds with microsprays on a minimum spacing of 20- to 30deer. Tb~e irrigation tubes would be connected to a sub-main manifolded off the 14-inch reuse main. Estimated Cost: $3,600,000 Alternative 4 - Level ~V Reuse Phase AIternat/ve 4 would provide approximately 1.5 mgd of additional Level Iv' effluent, for a total of 2.0 to 2.5 mgd of Level IV reuse. The implementation of this alternative would be based on the publ/c acceptance of Alternative 1, as well as general operational results. Similar to Alternative 1, the Level IV effluent would be applied to areas in proximity to the WPCF. The application area would have to be expanded. AsstLming the reuse were applied on grass, approximately 370 additional acres of lm~td would be required during an application period of July and August. This is based on providLng an additional daily reuse application rate of 1.5 mgd (2.0-2.5 mgd total). Advantages: Less restrichons associated with application of Level IV reuse compared to Level II effluent Level IV effluent can be applied on a greater variety of sites (e.g., golf courses) than Level II effluent · Provides a buffer for future effluent thermal load regulations ~ Potential to fixrther strengthen public perception of reuse Disadvantages: Level IV reuse is more costly to achieve th_an Level II Must expand the conveyance and distribution system constructed irt Alternative 1 o More public land required - Requires public awareness and education program This alternative would require the expansion of the UV disinfection system installed as part of Alternative 1, and expansion of the conveyance pipeline and distribution system. A permanent structure housing the reuse equipment at the WPCF would also be needed. The cost assumptions for this alternative are based on identifying land within 3 miles of the WPCi~, and an additional 1.5 rngd of UV dis/nfection capacity. Estimated Cost: $4,100,000 Alternative 5 - Full Scale Level iV Reuse Alternative 5 represents full development of reuse during the desigm per~od. This alternative assumes that all, or part of Alternatives 1 through 4 have been implemented. The intent of this alternative is to implement full-scale reuse of Level IV effluent. T1Ms would be accomplished through the additional application of effluent on green spaces, golf courses, and agricultural lands. 2.5- (poplars) to 5.0- (grass) mgd of reuse would be developed under