Laserfiche WebLink
,... _: <br /> a <br /> To: Leon A. Wurl -Pogo 2- <br /> June 26, 1964 <br /> PLANT #2 SUBSTANTIAL SUBSTANTIAL FINAL <br /> DESCRIPTION COMPLETION COAtPLETIOW COMPLETION <br /> Original Target <br /> at Pre-Bid May 15 June 15 <br /> Approved Schedule _ June 17 June 29 <br /> Schedule w/18 <br /> weather days _ July 5 July 17 <br /> June 4 Contractor <br /> Proposed <br /> Schedule August 1 August 15 October 1 <br /> Revised Contractor <br /> Schedule (Anticipated) August 1 August 15 t September 10 <br /> Status of Backwash/Recycle System <br /> For your information as well as council's, the original scope of our 1984 <br /> improvements included the construction of the backwash/recycle system. <br /> However, due to site constraints, this system cannot be staged until <br /> after the pre-treatment project is completed. We have agreed upon a <br /> final system design which will reduce overall pond requirements, and <br /> will allow for partial or total backwash and sludge water recycling to <br /> the plant headworks, aiding in chemical cost reduction. The system <br /> also provides collection of all surface and sub-surface waters, for re- <br /> cycling back into Louisville Reservoir. <br /> The components of the system are: <br /> (1) Trac-Vac Automatic Sludge Removal <br /> (2) Groundwater/Backwash Detention i Recycle tank: pumping <br /> (3) Holding pond and pumping <br /> (4) Sludge drying beds <br /> The site layout and status of the existing leach field will necessitate <br /> the construction of a new sewer service to Washington Avenue. <br /> The engineering and construction schedule is as follows: <br /> Complete all design engineering June 1 - Aug. 1 <br /> Advertise for bids August 7 <br /> Bid Opening August 23 <br /> Council Award of Bid Sept. 4 <br /> Start Construction Sept. 24 <br /> Substantial Completion Dec. 7 <br /> Final Site Completion Spring, 1965 <br /> Water Demands vs Production Capability <br /> From our most recent discussions, I have summarised below the data re- <br /> lating to plant production capability and our ability to meet 1984 as <br /> well as 1985 demands. In summary, Louisvilles two filter plants cannot <br /> produce treated water at the levels designed. Design capacity of our <br /> North Treatment Facility is 5.5 )4GD assuming adequately sized pretreat- <br /> ment and optimum filter runs over several 'sax-days' We however con- <br /> clude from our own analysis, that due to additional hydraulic constrictions <br /> which seriously limit Plant #1, the maximum gross production capability <br />