Greater Cincinnati Water Works details budget, lead‑line pace and PFAS cost estimates

Interim Executive Director Andrea Yang presented the Greater Cincinnati Water Works' fiscal and operational status to the Cincinnati Budget and Finance Committee, saying the utility has strong cash reserves but faces significant upcoming capital and staffing pressures.

Yang told the committee the utility’s drinking‑water operations serve more than 1.1 million residents in southwest Ohio and northern Kentucky and are funded separately from the city’s stormwater utility. ‘‘We have very strong cash reserves,’’ said Andrea Yang, interim executive director of Greater Cincinnati Water Works, noting the utility exceeded its goal of roughly 450 days of cash on hand in the first two quarters. She said those reserves will be important as the utility faces large capital costs ahead.

Yang highlighted four performance goals: maintaining cash on hand, replacing 1% of water mains annually (about 31 miles per year), accelerating lead service‑line replacements to meet a U.S. EPA 10‑year compliance timeline, and improving call‑center customer satisfaction. The utility reported trailing the 1% main‑replacement measure in early quarters, in part because the metric has a roughly six‑month reporting lag, Yang said, and because the utility must also prioritize other large discrete assets.

On lead service lines, Yang said the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regulation effective in October 2027 requires replacement of all lead service lines over 10 years—about 3,000 replacements per year. Yang said Greater Cincinnati Water Works completed roughly 900 replacements in fiscal 2023, set an internal goal of 1,200 and is on track this year for about 1,600; the utility expects to continue ramping toward the federal pace.

Yang described the PFAS (per‑ and polyfluoroalkyl substances) regulatory response as another major capital need. She said the larger Richard Miller treatment plant on the Ohio River already uses granular activated carbon to meet likely new PFAS levels, but a smaller groundwater plant in the northwest portion of the service area has detectable PFAS at or near regulatory levels. Preliminary capital estimates for upgrades at that smaller plant are ‘‘about $100 million to $120 million,’’ Yang said; she added the utility expects more refined numbers by year end and plans to include PFAS costs in an upcoming cost‑of‑service study and rate presentation.

Yang and Sam Stevens, the utility’s chief financial officer, discussed workforce and customer‑service challenges. Yang said vacancies were about 15% (approximately 102 openings), improved from 17% the prior year; the workforce is about 90% unionized. Customer‑satisfaction post‑call surveys were reported at about 80% in the first quarter, short of a 90% target; Yang said response rates on surveys are low and the utility may add other measures.

Yang described ongoing asset work including a $40 million clearwell replacement and cited backup power and PFAS treatment as near‑term capital priorities. She said the utility has pursued grants—about $5.8 million since 2021—and plans to finance large projects with bonds and state programs such as the Ohio Water Development Authority when appropriate.

Council members asked whether Butler County retail customers pay lower bills than city customers; Yang and Stevens noted bills include multiple charges (water, sewer, stormwater and MSD fees) and that contractual multipliers can make retail rates vary by jurisdiction. Several council members praised the utility’s outreach on lead replacement, saying owner participation rates had climbed from the 50% range into the high 80s and 90s on recent projects.

Yang also described community engagement efforts, including a ‘‘Water University for Kids’’ hosted with the University of Cincinnati attended by about 300 fourth‑grade students, and said the utility achieved full compliance with Ohio EPA and U.S. EPA requirements this year.

Committee members asked about timing for rate adjustments; Yang said the last five‑year rate increases adopted in 2021 conclude in January 2026, and the utility will return later in the year with a cost‑of‑service study incorporating PFAS cost estimates.

Ending: The committee filed the presentation; no formal council action or vote on rates or capital funding was taken during the session.