Proceedings of the 1995 Georgia Water Resources Conference, April 11 and 12, 1995, Athens, Georgia.As part of a water distribution study for Westinghouse Savannah River Company (WSRC), Metcalf &
Eddy, Inc. (M&E) evaluated the potential for total or partial
consolidation of the site's water supply systems. Under current
operation, the site meets water demand through 28 systems
serving populations from 1000 to 6000 consumers. With an
overall 24-hour average water demand of 1080 gallons per minute (gpm) and peak water demands varying in each system from 10 to 750 gpm, the site area for consolidation covers approximately 300 square miles. Multiple consolidation alternatives were evaluated for consolidation of the drinking water supply. Potential shifts in population centers and area demands was an important element considered in the study.
The evaluation of the alternatives considered available groundwater and surface water quality and quantity to meet the projected demand while considering capital costs, operational reliability and flexibility, and low life-cycle cost. Hydraulic analysis of the water distribution transmission lines for each alternative were modelled using an M&E digital computer
modeling program. Ranking and weighting of both economic and
non-economic factors allowed for a recommendation of a final
alternative for consolidation. It was shown that in many cases,
non-economic factors could be as important, if not more important, than economic factors.Sponsored and Organized by: U.S. Geological Survey, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, The University of Georgia, Georgia State University, Georgia Institute of TechnologyThis book was published by the Carl Vinson Institute of Government, The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602 with partial funding provided by the U.S. Department of Interior, Geological Survey, through the Georgia Water Research Institute as authorized by the Water Resources Research Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-397).
The views and statements advanced in this publication are solely those of the authors and do not represent official views or policies of the University of Georgia or the U.S. Geological Survey or the conference sponsors
