Laserfiche WebLink
,nrJK DO PAGE 101 <br />INDIAN RIVER COUNTY <br />South County WWTP Expansion <br />Alternate No. 4 - Relocate Future Aeration Basin to Percolation Pond <br />■ Maximizes the use of existing plant tankage. <br />Additional Cost <br />■ Impacts future plant hydraulics - pumping required. <br />$100,000 <br />■ Operation and maintenance costs increased. <br />50,000 <br />• Excavation/filling of existing pond required. <br />300,000 <br />• County cut/fill balance requirement not met. <br />■ Lose effluent storage in ponds - storage tank required (FDEP requires three day storage) <br />100,000 <br />■ Piping modifications required. <br />30,000 <br />■ Saves Oak Hammock <br />■ Increased liability for removal of access road for service/sludge hauling. <br />■ Delays construction of this phase. <br />1,000 <br />■ Additional engineering/permitting required. <br />60.000 <br />TOTAL ADDITIONAL COST <br />$641,000 <br />Comment: This alternate was not pursued due to additional storage requirements to replace existing <br />percolation pond. rnrrnaand enol wn uld b +HaidbV�� ti�it� n�gtomer. <br />INDIAN RIVER COUNTY <br />South County WWI? Expansion <br />Alternate No. 5 <br />Relocate Expansion of New Facilities to Percolation Pond Area <br />Additional Cost <br />■ Lose effluent storage in ponds - storage tank required g eq (FDEP requires three day storage) $300,000 <br />■ Use of existing facilities marginal (limited) (differential cost) <br />2,000,000 <br />• Split train treatment system not desirable <br />• County cut/fill balance requirements net <br />■ No wetland impact <br />■ Saves Oak Hammock <br />• Additional engineering/permitting required <br />250.0 <br />TOTAL ADDITIONAL COST $2,550,000 <br />Comment: This alternate was not pursued due to additional storage requirements to replace existing <br />percolation ponds. Increased costs would be paid by utility customer. <br />DECEMBER 17, 1996 90 (d) <br />