My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
11 ATTACHMENTS 1-3
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2021
>
020221
>
11 ATTACHMENTS 1-3
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/27/2021 1:49:04 PM
Creation date
1/27/2021 1:48:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
2/2/2021
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
Document Relationships
11
(Attachment)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2021\020221
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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
TRI-VALLEY WATER AGENCIES I ESI Joint Tri-Valley Potable Reuse Technical Feasibility Study <br /> issue in the treatment train upstream.This treatment train,called FAT+,when combined with <br /> the downstream WTPs,greatly exceeds expected regulatory goals. <br /> Alternative Development Method <br /> Due to the numerous possibilities of potable reuse projects,with various source water,treatment <br /> locations,and end uses,a step-wise decision process was used to evaluate the potential Tri- <br /> Valley potable reuse projects,as is shown in Figure ES.4.At key stages in the selection process, <br /> workshops with representatives from all project participants were convened to facilitate key <br /> decisions.The effort was designed to develop a"book-end"of options to be considered with the <br /> end goals of improving water supply reliability,protecting water quality,and being fiscally <br /> responsible. <br /> World of Alternatives <br /> End <br /> Treatment Use <br /> Sources <br /> NCI <br /> l� Alternatives Tr, 'a' <br /> luaid scr, Further <br /> u_ Alternatives <br /> ' Analysis <br /> ■ii'� .0 <br /> •1 ' 00 <br /> Figure ES.4 Alternative Development Process <br /> Evaluation Criteria <br /> The following evaluation criteria were used in the screening of project alternatives: <br /> • Yield(measured by acre-feet per year-AFY). <br /> • Cost(Capital and Operations&Maintenance(O&M)). <br /> • Improved Supply Reliability <br /> • Improved Delivered Water Quality <br /> • Improved Groundwater Basin Quality <br /> • Clear Regulatory Pathway <br /> • Minimizes Neighborhood Impacts <br /> • Ability to Phase the Project <br /> • Operational Flexibility <br /> • Ease of Construction <br /> Alternatives Development <br /> Alternatives were developed by combining source of water,treatment locations,and different <br /> end uses as discussed below. <br /> Source Water and Potential Yield <br /> There are two sources of water for the purified water projects, LWRP and DSRSD WWTP.These <br /> two WWTPs have existing non-potable recycled water programs.These programs limit the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.