Hillsboro Banner

By MICHELLE MCLEAN

Hillsboro residents will soon have a chance to count the dollars and cents behind a proposal for a new water treatment plant.

A public informational meeting on the matter has been tenatively set for Thursday, May 29 at 7 p.m.

City commissioners heard from their head engineer Monday night about what customers can expect to pay for water if Hillsboro builds a new treatment plant. 

While any new construction is at least two to three years away, the process must begin now to secure financing, commissioners agreed. In the meantime, the old plant — about 45 years old — can continue to operate, noted public works supt. Jim Anderson.

Charlie Vein, president of Advanced Engineering, helped write a water study for the city in 1999 that recommended a new water treatment plant was needed. For the past 10 years, the debate of what to build and when to build has continued off and on — at times heated, at other times forgotten.

Vein was back in Hillsboro Monday for a third installment in a month about costs for a proposed new water plant.

Three options have been the focus of recent comparisons — a new iron and manganese removal plant for the city (the same process used today), a new membrane water treatment plant for the city or a new membrane water treatment plant as part of a regional water system in conjunction with Traill Rural Water District.

The 1000-gallon per minute regional plant would use raw water from TRWD’s wellfield and treat water for Hillsboro city customers and about two-thirds of TRWD’s customers, all in the eastern part of the county. A similar plant in Mayville would draw raw water from the same TRWD source and treat water for Mayville and rural customers in that part of the county.

As outlined at previous meetings, the cost of a regional plant is largely offset by the potential of 70 percent federal funding. No federal funding is available for similar municipal projects, commissioners have learned.

Vein outlined the proposals and costs:

Option 1 — Iron-manganese removal plant for the city’s use. Cost = $2.7 million, financed entirely by a loan. A typical monthly bill (7500 gallons per month): $41.07

Option 2 — Membrane plant for city’s use. Cost = $6.8 million, financed entirely through a loan. Typical monthly bill: $85.14.

Option 3 —  Membrane plant for a regional system. Cost = $8 million, financed by a $5.6 million grant and $2.4 million loan. Typical monthly bill: $44.09.

City hall reports that a typical monthly bill today is $16.

Vein said he estimated Hillsboro has 720 users in his calcuations. Anderson suggested the current count is closer to 760. If the higher number holds true, the per-customer cost could be reduced.

Vein also highlighted the advantages of the membrane treatment process. Hillsboro’s water is high in sodium, sulfates and total dissolved solids. A new iron-manganese plant would not change the quality of the water delivered to the tap, Vein noted. On the other hand, a membrane treatment plant would reduce sodium levels from 114 mg per liter to as little as 2 to 5. Total dissolves solids in Hillsboro’s existing water test at 938 mg per liter, more than the 500 recommended. A membrane plant could reduce that to as little as 100-120.

Working in its favor, the membrane plant would use a better quality raw water to start, Vein added.

Vein reported that a membrane plant will deliver better tasting water. It could “potentially eliminate home softening” by reducing hardness levels from 31 grains per gallon to 3 to 5. A regional plant would also be more capable of meeting future water regulations, which grow more stringent with each passing year, Vein commented.

Since a regional plant would draw water from TRWD’s wellfield, the city’s wells could be freed up to provide water for industry, Vein noted. It would also be suited to tie in with a Red River Valley Water Supply Project also in the works, Vein said.