19 - Laserfiche WebLink

A summary of these project alternatives is provided in the table below. ,: `2t., 4 k s. ✓y 0p005+ do v e ,+ Livermore Groundwater 1 Water Augmentation 5 500 $112 $2,530 Reclamation via Chain of Plant Lakes Livermore 2 Water Groundwater 5,500 $103 $2,420 Reclamation Injection Plant DSRSD Raw Water Wastewater Augmentation 3 Treatment via Chain of 10,000 $222 $2,350 Facility Lakes and DVWTP DSRSD 4 Wastewater Groundwater 10,000 $194 $2,160 Treatment Injection Facility 5 Zone 7 Mocho Groundwater 10,000 $210 $2,250 Demin Facility Injection Raw Water Pleasanton Augmentation 6 Operations via Chain of 10,000 $208 $2,240 Service Center Lakes and DVWTP Notes: 1. Unit cost includes capital cost financed by debt plus annual operation and maintenance costs. As summarized in the table above, a potable reuse project could yield water in the range of 5,500 to 10,000 acre-feet per year. To give a sense of scale, Zone 7's 2016 Water Supply Evaluation projects a Tri-Valley treated water buildout demand of approximately 58,000 acre-feet per year with the City of Pleasanton accounting for approximately 18,000 acre-feet per year of that demand. The capital cost for the various project alternatives range from $103 million to $222 million. When the capital costs are financed by debt and combined with annual operational and maintenance costs, a potable reuse project can provide water in the range of$2,200 to $2,500 per acre-foot. The six alternatives described above were all found to be technically feasible. However, the alternatives vary on their degree of benefit for considerations such as delivered water quality, groundwater basin quality, regulatory pathways, and ease of implementation. These considerations have been evaluated in the study but their complexity will require more detailed analysis to further understand and resolve. Page 4 of 6