PUB approves budget, discusses PFAS filtration project
- Mike Davis, standing, with Burgess & Niple, discusses the upcoming installation of a filtration system to remove PFAS from water during Tuesday’s Parkersburg Utility Board meeting. (Photo by Evan Bevins)
- Parkersburg Utility Board member Tom Farrah speaks during a discussion about purchasing a pickup truck for the maintenance department during a utility board meeting Tuesday. (Photo by Evan Bevins)

Mike Davis, standing, with Burgess & Niple, discusses the upcoming installation of a filtration system to remove PFAS from water during Tuesday’s Parkersburg Utility Board meeting. (Photo by Evan Bevins)
PARKERSBURG — Members of the Parkersburg Utility Board approved the 2025-26 budget and heard a presentation on the planned construction of a filtration system to remove forever chemicals from drinking water on Tuesday.
The budget, which projects $17.48 million in revenue, was approved on a 5-0 vote. It includes a 4.2% cost-of-living adjustment for employees, the same base amount Parkersburg City Council approved for municipal workers; a 16% increase in health insurance costs; and a 6.5% increase in operating and maintenance expenditures, according to Mayor Tom Joyce, the board’s chairman.
The budget includes the first step of a proposed sewer rate increase that would go into effect Sept. 1 if approved by Parkersburg City Council. As proposed by the board, it would increase rates by a total of 18.47% over four years.
“This rate increase is necessary to responsibly fund increases in routine expenses, planned capital projects and debt service,” according to a budget memo provided to board members.
Comptroller Erin Hall said after the meeting that the operating and maintenance increase was due to most such costs rising, including payroll, benefits, chemicals, materials and utilities.

Parkersburg Utility Board member Tom Farrah speaks during a discussion about purchasing a pickup truck for the maintenance department during a utility board meeting Tuesday. (Photo by Evan Bevins)
The budget also includes the addition of a lead and copper technician in the water department, with an accompanying payroll and benefit cost of $66,840.
A public presentation was made on the filtration system project by Mike Davis with engineering firm Burgess & Niple.
Including a 12-tank filtration system, a new pumping station to move treated water to the filtration tanks and the nearly completed relocation of the Parkersburg Police Department shooting range, the project is expected to cost $21,480,000, Davis said.
“We’re looking at advertising (for bids) hopefully in August, with completion by 2027,” he said.
Joyce noted the project will not impact customer rates. The utility has been approved for a principal forgiveness loan through the West Virginia Clean Water Revolving Fund and also is negotiating with Chemours to contribute to the project.
C8, also known as perfluorooctanoic acid or PFOA, was used for years in the Teflon production process at the Washington Works plant south of Parkersburg when it was owned by DuPont. Chemours was spun off from DuPont and took ownership of the plant after C8 had stopped being used, but it persists in local water supplies.
PUB Manager Eric Bennett said any money the utility receives from Chemours would go toward repaying the loan, without any penalty.
Joyce asked if the money from the state, originally provided through a 2022 federal bipartisan infrastructure bill, was still available, given recent changes in Washington, D.C., by the Trump administration.
“It’s still there,” Bennett said.
In other business, the board approved the purchase of two trucks from Matheny Motors, the only bidder for each, on 4-0 votes, with member Paul Hoblitzell abstaining.
A half-ton pickup would replace a 2006 vehicle used by meter reading personnel. It would cost $42,068.
“We had $33,000 budgeted,” Bennett said. “Unfortunately, with the prices today, you can’t budget anything good unless you shoot high.”
The second truck, a replacement for a 1996 vehicle used by maintenance personnel, was originally in the upcoming budget, “but the engine decided not to last that long,” he said.
There was $60,000 allocated for it, but Matheny’s bids came in under that. A 1-ton truck would cost $49,392, while a §-ton option would be $47,996. But Bennett said the 1-ton vehicle is in stock now, while the other is expected to arrive by the end of June.
The board voted to go with the larger truck, since the utility board could get it sooner.
“We’re looking at $1,400 difference. One’s readily available,” board member Mike Evans said.