Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Utility topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fort Recovery moves ahead with EPA design loan application as village weighs $3–4 million RO plant
Summary
Village staff told council they are completing EPA paperwork for a 0% design loan and provided preliminary estimates that an RO (reverse‑osmosis) water plant could cost $3–4 million to build with roughly $56,000/year operating costs versus current $266,000/year; council authorized continuing design work while seeking clearer payback numbers.
Village staff told the Fort Recovery Council on July 1 that the village is pursuing a 0% design loan from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and will complete required paperwork before an expected decision around Aug. 1.
Randy Diller, speaking for village staff, summarized work on lagoon operations and water‑system planning and presented preliminary financial figures. He said a prior study showed annual operating expenses of about $266,000; a proposed reverse‑osmosis (RO) treatment option is estimated to operate at roughly $56,000 per year and carry a construction price in the range of $3 million to $4 million depending on design choices and reuse of existing plant components. Diller said engineering for a full construction package was estimated at about $410,000 and that final payback depends on concrete savings and grant financing.
"We are finishing up EPA paperwork for the 0% percent design loan. Won't hear back on that until around August 1st," Diller said. He told council staff should complete design work and provide more specific repayment and savings projections before committing to construction.
Council discussion centered on payback and timing. Cliff Wendel asked about payback periods; Diller said earlier estimates were long (20–25 years) but cautioned that estimates vary with what parts of the existing plant are reused and with post‑COVID cost changes. The council directed staff to continue with design work and return with detailed cost and repayment scenarios before moving into construction funding.
Other water‑system matters addressed at the meeting included a paused well study — staff will re‑evaluate best drill locations — and lagoon monitoring and a planned dredging bid packet tied to a sonar case study. Diller said algae observed in lagoons has not pushed the facility’s numbers below required regulatory levels and staff will hand‑sample sludge locations to assess dredging needs.
Diller also reported state funding for the village water tower and progress on pool repair planning. He warned that earlier pool renovation estimates have risen: what was roughly $500,000 several years ago could approach $800,000–$1 million now for the improvements described, and some larger pool projects in the region have exceeded $1 million.
What happens next: Staff will complete the EPA design‑loan application and produce a more detailed financial analysis and design scope. The council scheduled a budget hearing for July 15 and will review funding options, including an ODNR conservation grant that could contribute up to $500,000 toward pool work. Any construction authorization will require subsequent council action and confirmed funding sources.
