Laserfiche WebLink
hold a kick-off meeting with both parties to determine the options to be considered . CDM will <br /> coordinate with SJRWMD and South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) to have <br /> representatives attend the kick-off meeting and provide input into the feasibility of various <br /> options. These options may include but are not limited to a pipeline from the Upper St. Johns <br /> Basin reservoir in the western portion of the County, surface water treatment, desalination of <br /> ocean water, and/ or expanding the County' s wellfield to include a larger footprint in an effort <br /> to minimize local impacts. The options identified in this task will be the basis for the remaining <br /> tasks in this Work Order. <br /> TASK 2.0 CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS <br /> CDM will perform a conceptual analysis for each alternative identified in Task 1 .0 . The analysis <br /> will include identifying the pros and cons of each identified alternative, ease of permitting, <br /> distance of proposed alternative from existing treatment infrastructure, transmission/ <br /> conveyance corridors for pipeline routing, efficiency of treatment process, and the ability to <br /> convert existing treatment infrastructure to accommodate new source water. CDM will conduct <br /> up to two meetings with SJRWMD and FDEP staff to obtain conceptual considerations and <br /> permitting needs on each of the alternatives. CDM will also conduct one meeting with County <br /> staff and SWCD board members to discuss the draft analysis and receive comments . <br /> TASK 3. 0 COST IMPACTS <br /> CDM will establish a planning-level comparison of the costs to implement each alternative <br /> identified in Task 1 .0. These cost estimates will include treatment costs, process modifications <br /> needed to treat each source if RO is not plausible, piping to/ from the water plant from each <br /> alternative source, and estimated operations and maintenance costs. Costs associated with <br /> expansion of the existing plants into the UFA will be presented for comparison purposes. This <br /> analysis will serve as a basis of comparison for determining which option (s) could be <br /> considered further as an alternative to constructing additional UFA production wells. <br /> TASK 4. 0 SCHEDULE OF IMPLEMENTATION <br /> Once options are identified and cost estimates are established CDM will estimate the time frame <br /> necessary to implement each option. Development of implementation schedules will consider <br /> the construction time associated with pipelines and other infrastructure needed to tap into the <br /> source, including WTP construction/ modifications, in-line booster pump stations (if needed) <br /> and/ or storage tanks. Permitting issues will also be factored in to the implementation schedule. <br /> Certain options, such as desalination, may have a significantly longer construction time, while <br /> tapping the St. Johns upper basin project may require more lead time in the permitting process . <br /> TASK 5.0 RANKING OF OPTIONS <br /> CDM will summarize the findings/ results of Tasks 1 .0 through 4 .0 and compile a ranking of the <br /> alternatives based on various parameters (cost, implementation schedule, etc.), as well as how <br /> each schedule relates to the projected demands of the water system. The County has developed <br /> projected demands through 2025 based on population projections. The final three wells that <br /> would be pursued after the TCUP is issued would be required by the year 2011 to stay ahead of <br /> demand. Any alternative considered would have to have an implementation schedule to meet <br /> that demand as well . <br /> A-2 mh2582 Att A.doc <br />