More water questions

Dear editor:

Regarding the article “City looks south for plant location” printed in the Friday, Aug. 18, edition of The Sentinel-Record, I was glad to learn that the

23 mgd allocation is an annual average, meaning that much more than 23 mgd could be treated on a given day. Apart from that, though, the article raised more questions in my mind than it answered. I am delineating some of these questions below:

1. Is the treatment plant proposed to be 15 mgd or 30 mgd or something in between?

2. What is the elevation difference between the intake and the proposed treatment plant?

3. Where do the 24-inch and the 36inch distribution lines from the plant connect to the existing system? Will existing distribution lines be adequate to transport the additional water from the connection points? (The current water system was designed for water coming from the north.)

4. A storage tank on Amity Road was taken out of service due to the water becoming stagnant. Is it logical to now propose to locate an entire treatment plant in the same general location? Surely trihalomethanes could successfully be removed from the treated water without having an entire system designed around preventing their formation?

5. When this treatment plant is placed online, will the restrictions on providing water permits to county retail customers be lifted?

6. My last two questions are taken from the Feb. 18, 2015, “Garland County Position on Water System Policies.” Would different engineers offer different options, especially in respect to the location of treatment plants for a Lake Ouachita project? Have all options been equally analyzed or has decision making been influenced by the needs and desires of Central Arkansas Water and the city of Hot Springs? Ellen Varhalla Garland County