Richland County public works staff report major boiler failure; replacement estimate $100,000–$180,000

A Richland County public works staff member told the Public Works Committee that one of two large boilers serving county facilities has failed and will need replacement, and that a preliminary vendor estimate for replacing both boilers ranges from $100,000 to $180,000.

The staff member said, “We finally lost 1 of our big boilers. It's now leaking, and it's all tore apart,” and described the fire chamber filling with water and corrosion inside the boiler jacket. The staff member said the boilers are about 43 years old and that the department has been trying for years to secure CIP (capital improvement project) money for replacement.

County staff said they asked two local vendors (Precision and Ash Creek, who are working together) to provide a rough cost estimate. The quoted range—“a 100 and not to exceed a 180,000”—covers parts and labor for both boilers and the gas and water piping work required to match the new equipment. The replacement package would also include a magnetic filtration system, the staff member said, “for any kind of metals that would possibly come through.”

The staff member provided technical details in the meeting: each existing boiler is rated at roughly 1,300,000 BTUs, and the department believes it needs about 3,000,000 BTUs total to maintain current capacity. The staff member said one vendor declined to bid because they only handle residential work; staff said they will seek additional estimates to “match apples to apples” on BTU and flow capacity.

Committee members asked about short-term operations and funding. The staff member said the air-conditioning is currently running and that there is “a little bit of time,” but cautioned that vendor lead times are already three to four weeks and that tariffs could increase prices if replacement is delayed. On funding, a committee member asked whether the general fund would pay for the replacement; staff replied that the general fund and other available county funds might be used and that the county has been seeking CIP funding for the last four years.

The committee discussed procurement steps and the county’s procurement policy; the staff member said they had already reviewed the policy and would obtain three bids or estimates where feasible. Committee members urged speed to secure competitive bids and to avoid single-source contracting.

The staff member emphasized the boilers’ age and maintenance history, noting the county performs annual inspections and uses chemical treatment and filtration systems. “They inspect them every year,” the staff member said, adding that state pressure tests were passed in a recent inspection and that certificates are on file.

While the meeting included discussion about timing, costs, and procurement, the committee did not record a formal vote on boiler replacement during the session. Staff said they will pursue additional estimates and return to the committee at a future meeting with procurement-ready cost comparisons and recommended funding sources.

The committee instructed staff to follow procurement policy and to present replacement options and funding recommendations at the next meeting.