Prince William Digital Gateway CPA Approved

This morning just before 9 am and after a marathon all night meeting lasting 14 hours the Prince William County Board of County Supervisors voted to approve the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the Prince William Digital Gateway. The vote was straight across party lines with the Democrats voting for industrial development in the rural area and Republicans voting against. (Supervisor Candland reclused himself and did not attend.)

This development in the northern portion of the Rural Crescent threatens the health of the Occoquan watershed and the very sustainability and affordability of the drinking water supply for Northern Virginia including 350,000 residents of Prince William County. When an undeveloped or generally open rural area is developed stormwater runoff increases in quantity and velocity washing away stream banks, flooding roads and buildings carrying fertilizers, oil and grease, and road salt to the Occoquan Reservoir.

The total amount of planned data center space exceeds existing data center square footage in Loudoun County (the data center capital of the nation and the world). It took Loudoun County 14 years to build out the existing data centers and Loudoun County still has approved data centers that have not yet been built. The majority of the 2,400 acres in the existing Data Center Overlay district are owned by data center development companies or directly by data center operators. This land has not yet been built.

The one growing sector of electricity demand in Virginia is data centers, and, wow, is that growing. In 2018 power demand for data centers was just over 1 gigawatt of power, by 2022 that had reached 2.6 gigawatt of power this past fall and is projected to double that in the next few years with projects already under way. 

It is clear that there is no limit to the desirability of data centers to county supervisors and landowners. The counties have been blinded by the windfall profits to the landowners and the prospect of increased tax revenue. They will more than double the number of data centers in all of Northern Virginia with this approval and this massive change in use will bring great wealth to the landowners- land that was worth $25,000-$50,000 is now magically be worth almost $1,000,000 an acre to be used for data centers, but these windfall profits come at the cost of degradation of our land and water resources and increased power and water costs for all Virginians. 

I offer my congratulations to Maryanne Gahaban on orchestrating the sale of the 194 parcels and 2,139 acres of rural and rural residential land for $2.1 billion dollars. Well played. Take your money and go.

 

The Piedmont and Blue Ridge Groundwater

About half of the nation’s population relies on groundwater for drinking water. As the nation’s population grows, the need for high-quality drinking-water supplies becomes ever more urgent. The USGS has identified 68 principal aquifers in the United States, these are regionally extensive aquifers that are used as sources of drinking water.

Groundwater pumped from these primary aquifers provides nearly 50% of the nation’s drinking water. Twenty of these principal aquifers account for about three quarters of the nation’s groundwater pumped for public supply. These aquifers also provide 85 % of the groundwater pumped for domestic (private) supply. Three of these principal aquifers are in Virginia and were evaluated by the USGS National Water-Quality Assessment Project, which began in2012 and continued through 2021. Below are excerpts from the evaluation of the Piedmont and Blue Ridge aquifers and information taken from the USGS Groundwater Atlas of the United States.

The Piedmont and Blue Ridge crystalline-rock aquifers underlie an area with a population of more than 25 million people in 11 states (map). The Piedmont and Blue Ridge crystalline-rock aquifers, together with the other rock types in the Piedmont and Blue Ridge regions, rank second in the Nation as a source of groundwater for private domestic supply, providing about 360 million gallons per day (Arnold and others, 2017a).

These aquifers are also an important source of public supply, and about 92 million gallons per day are pumped for that use. Land use overlying the Piedmont and Blue Ridge crystalline-rock aquifers is mostly undeveloped (71 %) and agricultural (19 %). The cities of Atlanta, Georgia, and Charlotte, North Carolina, overlie the aquifers, as well as suburbs of Richmond, Virginia; Washington, D.C.; Baltimore, Maryland; and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

The Piedmont and Blue Ridge Provinces are underlain by three principal types of bedrock aquifers. In order of decreasing area, these are crystalline-rock and undifferentiated sedimentary-rock aquifers, aquifers in early Mesozoic basins, and carbonate-rock aquifers. Unconsolidated aquifers that are part of the surficial aquifer system overlie the bedrock aquifers locally in Pennsylvania and northern New Jersey.

Crystalline-Rock and Undifferentiated Sedimentary-Rock Aquifers are the most widespread aquifers in the Piedmont and Blue Ridge Provinces. These aquifers extend over about 49,000 square miles, or about 86 % of the area, of these provinces. Most of the rocks that make up crystalline-rock and undifferentiated sedimentary-rock aquifers are crystalline metamorphic and igneous rocks of many types. The main types of crystalline rocks are coarse-grained gneisses and schists of various mineral composition; however, fine-grained rocks, such as phyllite and metamorphosed volcanic rocks, are common in places.

Unconsolidated material called regolith overlies the crystalline-rock and undifferentiated sedimentary-rock aquifers almost everywhere. Because the regolith material varies greatly in thickness, composition, and grain size, its hydraulic properties also vary greatly. However, the regolith is more permeable than the underlying bedrock. Water in the bedrock is stored in and moves through fractures, which form the only effective porosity in the bedrock.

Early Mesozoic rift basins are spread out in the Piedmont Province and occupy about 9 % of the combined area of the Blue Ridge and the Piedmont Provinces. Aquifers in early Mesozoic basins are primarily in three major basins-the Newark Basin in New Jersey and Pennsylvania is the largest basin and the one from which the most ground water is withdrawn; second largest is the Gettysburg Basin of Pennsylvania and Maryland; and third is the Culpeper Basin of Virginia.

The Culpeper Basin of northern Virginia and Maryland is an elongate, fault-bounded trough that trends north-northeast from the southern border of Madison County, Va., about 90 miles to Frederick County, Md. All the formations in the basin are part of the Culpeper Group. The lower part of the group consists of sandstone, siltstone, and conglomerate of Late Triassic age; the upper part consists of Lower Jurassic sedimentary rocks and interbedded basaltic lava flows.

The water in the Culpeper Basin is the least impacted by iron, manganese and sulfate in the region and of only moderate hardness. My home overlies a section of the Culpeper basin that runs through all but one small corner of northwestern Prince William County. I chose this area for the water. It requires no treatment.

Carbonate-Rock supports the largest aquifers in the Piedmont and Blue Ridge. Limestone, dolomite, and marble of Paleozoic and Precambrian age form carbonate-rock aquifers that extend over about 3 % of the Piedmont and the Blue Ridge Provinces. Although these carbonate rocks are of small extent, they are significant local sources of water. Carbonate-rock aquifers are in five areas of the Piedmont and the Blue Ridge Provinces. In addition to these areas, small, isolated elongate stringers of limestone and marble form minor aquifers locally, particularly in Virginia, and generally trend parallel to the Blue Ridge front.

Recharge is highly variable in the Blue Ridge and the Piedmont Provinces because it is determined by local precipitation and runoff, which are highly variable and are influenced by topographic relief, ground cover, compaction and the capacity of the land surface to accept infiltrating water. 

Most of the Piedmont and the Blue Ridge Provinces are covered by regolith. Compared to the Blue Ridge, the gentler topographic relief of the Piedmont and less precipitation make the Piedmont less subject to rapid denudation than the Blue Ridge and thus favor the accumulation of a thicker regolith. The combination of large areas of thin regolith and dense bedrock with minimal permeability in the Blue Ridge Province do not favor large amounts of ground-water recharge. These areas have a limited ability to provide water.

Almost all recharge is from precipitation that enters the aquifers through the porous regolith. Much of the recharge water moves laterally through the regolith and discharges to a nearby stream or depression during or shortly after a storm or precipitation event. Some of the water, however, moves downward through the regolith until it reaches the bedrock where it enters fractures in crystalline rocks and sandstones or solution openings in carbonate rocks.

The USGS Aquifer Studies were designed to evaluate groundwater used for public supply prior to any treatment. Groundwater quality was assessed by comparing contaminant concentrations to regulatory limits established for drinking water quality.  Trace elements and major and minor ions are naturally present in the minerals of rocks, soils and sediments, and in the water that comes into contact with those materials.

The USGS sampled 60 wells at depths that a used for public supply wells: 150-700 feet beneath grade. Samples were analyzed for 90 VOCs, of which 38 have human-health benchmarks. VOCs were detected at moderate concentrations in 5 percent of the study area but were not detected at high concentrations. Compounds detected at moderate concentrations were the disinfection byproduct chloroform and the solvent trichloroethylene (TCE).

Manganese was found to be present at high concentrations relative to the SMCL in about 15 % of the study wells. Iron was present at high concentrations relative to the SMCL in about 12 % of the wells.

Samples were analyzed for 227 pesticide compounds (pesticides and their breakdown products), of which 119 have human-health benchmarks. Pesticides were not detected at high or moderate concentrations in the study

In some areas, the pH of the groundwater was not in the SMCL range of 6.5 to 8.5. The pH did not meet the standard in 35 % of the study area, typically because it was less than 6.5, which is acidic and potentially corrosive.

The total dissolved solids (TDS) concentration is a usually considered a measure of the salinity of the groundwater, though all water naturally contains TDS as a result of the weathering and dissolution of minerals in rocks and sediments. Concentrations of TDS can be high because of natural factors or as a result of human activities such as applications of road salt, fertilizers, or other chemicals to the land surface in urban or agricultural areas. Concentrations of TDS were high in about 3 % of the study area. Chloride, fluoride, and sulfate—constituents that also contribute to TDS concentrations—were detected at moderate, but elevated concentrations.

Radioactivity is the release of energy or energetic particles during spontaneous decay of unstable atoms. Most of the radioactivity in groundwater comes from the decay of isotopes of uranium and thorium that are naturally present in minerals in aquifer materials. Samples were analyzed for eight radioactive constituents, of which four have human-health limits for drinking water. The USGS found radioactive constituents were present at high levels in about 30 % of the study area and at moderate levels in about 17 %. Radon (using the proposed alternative maximum contaminant level of 4,000 picocuries per liter) and gross-alpha activity were the only constituents that were present at high concentrations. Radium (combined concentration of Ra-226 and Ra-228 isotopes) was detected at moderate concentrations in 2% of the study area.

Nutrients are naturally present at low concentrations in groundwater; high and moderate concentrations (relative to human-health benchmarks) generally result from human activities. Samples were analyzed for five nutrients, of which two have human health benchmarks. Common sources of nutrients, aside from soils, include fertilizer applied to crops and landscaping, seepage from septic systems, and human and animal waste. No nutrients were detected at high concentrations in the study area. Nitrate was detected at moderate concentrations in about 3% of the study area.

 

Backyard Cows and other Changes

On February 2nd, the Prince William County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved a zoning text amendment to allow those with two acres or more to own cattle within the domestic fowl overlay district. Residents in these areas will now be permitted to have one cattle per acre after the first acre. Prior to this decision, only those living on parcels of 10 acres or more could own cattle. The ownership of horses in these areas on parcels of 2 acres or more was already allowed.

This will apply to more than 4,000 semi-rural residential parcels in the Brentsville, Gainesville, Coles, Neabsco, and Occoquan, Districts will now be allowed to have cattle on their property if they so choose. The county’s planning office says the new rule “provides increased flexibility in allowing the keeping of cattle on agricultural zoned land in areas of the county that have already been recognized for their rural characteristics.” According to county staff, an existing or future HOA could prohibit cattle in their neighborhoods, just as they can prohibit other livestock.

 

Following the passing of the Cattle Zoning Text Amendment which will allow in certain parts of the county on two or more acres to own cattle, Supervisor Kenny Boddye issued a directive instructing county staff to look into the ‘environmental impacts’ of the Board’s decision. The recorded directive was:

DIR 21-09 Boddye :Environmental Impacts of ZTA #DPA2021-00005, Cattle

“Staff was directed to research the potential environmental impacts of the recent Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) adopted by the Board on February 2, 2021, in relation to cattle. Where feasible, this analysis should include, but not be limited to, impacts on air, soil and water quality, potential surface and overland water runoff, impacts on native flora and fauna, impacts on septic systems, sewer systems, wells, and aquafers.”

As any regular reader probably knows I am most concerned about water quality impacts and how this will effect compliance with the Chesapeake Bay TMDL. Overstocking causes most of the water quality damage on small-scale livestock farms and hobby horse farms. It occurs when too many animals are kept on too few acres. Overstocking can strip areas of pasture, increasing polluted runoff. Good environmental stewardship of these properties can go a long way in making hobby agriculture sustainable.

Another Zoning Text Amendment adopted in February to establish the Agritourism and Arts Overlay District (AAOD). Eligible Properties are all properties in the Rural Area zoned A-1 with 2 or more Acres and all properties in the Development Area zoned A-1 with 20 Acres or more. The light green and darker green areas on the map below.

 

New Agritourism uses which will be allowed or no longer require a special use permit are:

• Retail area for selling goods and related products
• Weddings and events
• Instructional teaching related to on site agricultural uses
• Trail, Playgrounds, or equipment, such as slides, swings, climbing and bouncing apparatus
• Wagon, sleigh, and hayrides
• Arts related uses

All Arts related uses which include:

• Art studio, gallery, and/or classes
• Culinary classes
• Pottery/ceramics studio
• Jewelry-making
• Flower shop
• Bakery
• Photographic studio

According to county staff, an existing or future HOA could prohibit these activities within their communities. 

Occoquan Watershed

Recently, the Prince William County Board of Supervisors approved the development of the Preserve at Long Branch, rezoning a portion of the Rural Crescent. No analysis was done as to the potential impact of this development to the hydrology of the Occoquan Watershed.  There is no understanding what the impact this might have to the sustainability of the drinking water supply of adjacent property well owners and the quality of the Occoquan Reservoir itself. 

Occoquan Watershed

The Occoquan Reservoir is an important part of our drinking water supply. The Occoquan supplies about 40% of the clean drinking water for around 2 million people and, in an emergency, can supply all for a short period of time. The reservoir’s current storage capacity is estimated by ICPRB to be 8.3 billion gallons. Prince William land accounts for 40% of the Occoquan watershed which contains 1,300 stream miles, Lake Jackson and Lake Manassas as well as the Occoquan Reservoir.  Water from the Occoquan Reservoir is distributed to customers in Fairfax and Prince William Counties. This water is essential. 

Development impacts water quality. Minimizing impervious surface cover and maintaining the tree canopy is critical to the protection of the County’s streams which flow to the Occoquan and other reservoirs. There is a direct correlation between stream health and impervious surface cover and tree canopy. According to the Northern Virginia Regional Commission, watersheds with impervious surface cover of 10 to 15% show clear signs of degradation, while watersheds with impervious surface cover greater than 25% typically do not support a diverse stream ecology and are dying.

During development the primary impact is erosion and sediment that are carried by stormwater into the streams. The primary post-development impact is increased stormwater volume and velocity that is caused by the removal of tree canopy cover and the replacement of pervious surfaces of plants and grass with the impervious surfaces such as roads, parking lots, rooftops, driveways, patios, etc.

Development increases impervious surface area, and this has created in the past and will in the future create a host of concerns for managing the Occoquan Watershed. For instance, the physical condition of the Watershed's tributaries has been measured to fall with development. Increased stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces flows into streams and creeks at a higher volume and velocity. The result is increased erosion of stream banks that leaves a degraded ecosystem.

The Occoquan Watershed is more than just a source of water for the Reservoir. In addition to its role as an essential portion of the drinking water system for approximately 1.2 million Northern Virginians, the Reservoir and the Watershed also serves to improve water quality:

• The Reservoir is an essential element in meeting the Chesapeake Bay TMDL by trapping sediments and nutrients. According to the Occoquan Watershed Monitoring Lab (OWML) the Reservoir captured 34% of total nitrogen, 56% of total phosphorus, and 83% of total sediment.
• The downzoned portion of the Watershed within Fairfax and the Rural Crescent serve as a natural water treatment system and high quality ecological habitat.
• The Reservoir is a regional recreational asset.

Prince William has ignored its responsibility to best manage the Occoquan watershed in conjunction with Fairfax County’s management of Occoquan Reservoir (and their side of the Watershed) maintaining the primary benefit of the Reservoir as an essential and reliable source of safe, clean drinking water for Prince William County and the importance of the Reservoir as an integrated ecological and hydrological system with multiple uses.

Climate Goals for Prince William County

The Prince William Board of County Supervisors voted last Tuesday night to adopt the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments’ (COG) Region Forward Vision includes a sustainability goal that calls for a decrease in greenhouse gas emissions of 50 % below 2005 levels by 2030.

But, the Prince Board of County Supervisors went further in their resolution and directed staff to incorporate into the Comprehensive Plan goals of 100% of Prince William County’s electricity to be from renewable sources by 2035, for Prince William County Government operations to achieve 100% renewable electricity by 2030, and for Prince William County Government to be 100% carbon neutral by 2050.

The Board of Supervisors also directed staff to begin to work on recommendations for the creation of a public advisory body charged with advising on potential enhancements to the Community Energy Master Plan (CEMP) to achieve the goals of the Comprehensive Plan changes.

Okay, let’s look at these goals:

• 100% of PW County’s electricity to be from renewable sources by 2035
• 100% PW County Government operations to achieve 100% renewable electricity by 2030
• and for the PW County government operations to be 100% carbon neutral by 2050

First of all, not all renewable sources of electricity are carbon neutral and carbon neutral is not necessarily renewable. In July Governor Ralph Northam officially launched Clean Energy Virginia,  to direct investment to renewable energy and energy efficiency and help meet the Commonwealth’s goals under the Virginia Clean Economy Act for clean energy production, which include powering "100 % of Virginia’s electricity from carbon-free sources" by 2045.

According to U.S. Energy Information Agency (EIA) Natural gas fueled more than half of Virginia's electricity net generation in 2018. The state's two nuclear power plants supplied about 30% of Virginia's generation. Coal provided most of the rest, but biomass, hydropower, petroleum, solar photovoltaic (PV), and other energy sources also generate some electricity.

As the Washington Post pointed out the Virginia Clean Economy Act defines “ total electric energy to mean the electric energy sold by Dominion Energy and Appalachian Power in the previous calendar year, excluding nuclear power generated by plants in service in 2020, and excluding carbon-free (but not renewable) electrical power sources established after July 1, 2030.” This definition allows Dominion Energy and Appalachian Power the flexibility to ensure that they can provide reliable power 24/7 to a future that includes the needs of data centers, and envisioned to have increased demand from the electrification of cars and other portions of the transportation sector as well as electrification of space heating. The nuclear power that provides over 30% of Virginia’s needs will stay in the mix and provide the base power.  

It is unclear what definitions the County is using since this was adopted as a resolution without definitions. Howeve[EW1] r, it is clear, this creates a conundrum for Prince William County. They cannot rely on the grid to ever supply the 100% of PW County’s electricity to be from renewable sources by 2035 or in the future. Nuclear is not renewable, but will remain a significant portion of the electrical supply under the Virginia Clean Economy Act 

Furthermore there are problems with the other portions of the resolutions goals:  Prince William County Government operations to achieve 100% renewable electricity by 2030 and for the County government operations to be 100% carbon neutral by 2050. Prince William County has a source of renewable energy that is not carbon free:

In the late 1990’s NEO Prince William (Fortistar) installed a landfill gas collection system and a 1.9 Mega Watt generator tied into the electrical grid. This system became operational in November 1998. The landfill electrical generation plant was expanded in November 2013. The facility, still operated by Fortistar, now generates a total of 6.7 MW of electricity. This is enough power for approximately 5,000 homes. NOVEC buys the renewable (but not carbon free) energy produced at the landfill and resells it to their customers.

In addition, the county built a pipeline from the landfill to the county animal shelter on Bristow Road with connections to several buildings along the way to provide landfill gas to heat the Fleet Maintenance Building and provide fuel to the Animal Shelter incinerator. A connection to the School bus garage was added in 2014. This allows the County Public Works Department to replace the propane formerly used with landfill gas which is a “Renewable Fuel Resource,” and reducing the energy footprint of our county. While this is all renewable and captures and uses the landfill gas with is a very powerful greenhouse gas, it is not carbon neutral.

NOVEC which supplies electricity to a significant portion of Prince William County has only limited generation, it is predominantly a distributor of electricity purchased from other sources including the landfill and a small solar farm in Fauquier. What limited generation they own is renewable, but not carbon free. NOVEC’s   first-ever power plant is the Halifax County Biomass Plant. The plant has the capacity to generate nearly 50 megawatts , but biomass is not carbon free.

So, staff and the future Prince William County public advisory board have work to do to sort out what needs to be done to meet these goals in the Community Energy Master Plan (CEMP). It looks as if there will be significant need and opportunity for a renewable, carbon free credit market for the county to meet these goals. This could benefit residents in the county interested in building solar arrays on their roofs or property. This could make the difference in the return on investment in a solar project and make it worthwhile to deal with the constant stream of repairs to keep a distributed solar system operational or other costs associated with solar power generation.

Other thoughts, for years there has been conversation to use the landfill for a wind power generation. That is a possibility. Also, Lake Jackson Dam once generated electricity maybe it could again or the expanding water storage in Northern Virginia could be used as part of a water storage/power generation management scheme. This no doubt will all be explored as the County moves forward.  

Prince William County Wells in 2020

Last week all who participated in the 2020 Prince William County Well Water Clinic received their results by email. Above you can see the summary of what was found in the 86 wells tested. What we tested for were mostly the naturally occurring contaminants and common sources of contamination: a poorly sealed well or a nearby leaking septic system, or indications of plumbing system corrosion. These are the most common contaminants that effect drinking water wells.

In order to determine if treatment is necessary, water test results should be compared to a standard. The standard used was the U.S.EPA Safe Drinking Water Act (SDW) limits. Though private wells do not fall under the regulatory authority of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or the Safe Drinking Water Act, the SDW act has primary and secondary drinking water standards that we use for comparison. Primary standards are ones that can impact health and from the tested substances include: coliform bacteria, E. coli bacteria, nitrate, lead, and arsenic. Secondary standards impact taste or the perceived quality of the water.

Just because your water appears clear doesn’t necessarily mean it is safe to drink. The 2020 Prince William County water clinic found that almost 48% of the wells tested present for coliform bacteria. This is more than double what was found last year. Coliform bacteria are not a health threat itself, it is used to indicate other bacteria that may be present and identify that a well is not properly sealed from surface bacteria. The federal standard for coliform bacteria is zero, but the federal standard allows that up to 5% of samples can test positive for coliform during a month.

Nine wells tested positive for E coli. Fecal coliform and E. coli are bacteria whose presence indicates that the water is contaminated with human or animal wastes. Disease-causing microbes (pathogens) in these wastes can cause diarrhea, cramps, nausea, headaches, or other symptoms. These pathogens may pose a special health risk for infants, young children, and those with compromised immune systems. However, people can drink water contaminated with fecal bacteria and not notice.

If your well is contaminated with coliform but not fecal coliform or E. coli, then you have a nuisance bacteria problem and the source may be infiltration from the surface from rain or snow melt. Typical causes are improperly sealed well cap, well repairs performed without disinfecting or adequately disinfecting the well, failed grouting or surface drainage to the well. Very low levels of coliform (1-5 MPN) may present during extremely wet periods. A recent study at Penn State showed that there were significantly more positive bacteria tests during wet periods with lots of rain.  It seems when the water table is very high, or up to the surface, there is more opportunity for bacteria to move up and down in the water as it saturates the earth..

If your well had coliform bacteria present you should shock chlorinate the well (according to the procedure from VA Tech), repack the soil around the well pipe to flow away from the well and replace the well cap. Then after at least two weeks and the next big rainstorm retest the well for coliform. If coliform bacteria is still present then a long-term treatment should be implemented: using UV light, ozonation, or chlorine for continuous disinfection. These systems can cost up to $2,000 installed.

If you have fecal coliform in the well or E. coli, your well is being impacted by human or animal waste and you are drinking dilute sewage. If there is not a nearby animal waste composting facility, then you are probably drinking water from a failed septic system- yours or your nearest neighbors or in some older areas a leaking sewer line. To solve this problem you need to fix or replace the septic system that is causing the contamination, replace the well or install a disinfection and filtration system. Disinfection does not kill Giardia or Cryptosporidium, two microscopic parasites that can be found in groundwater that has been impacted by surface water or sewage. Both parasites produce cysts that cause illness and sometimes death.

The failing septic systems can often be identified by using tracer dyes. While continuous disinfection will work to protect you from fecal bacteria and E. coli, be aware that if your well is being impacted by a septic system, then the well water might also have present traces of all the chemicals and substances that get poured down the drain. Long term treatment for disinfection, and micro-filtration should be implemented: using UV light, ozonation, or chlorine for continuous disinfection, carbon filtration, and anything that is used for drinking should be further treated with a reverse osmosis systems or micro membrane system that works by using pressure to force water through a semi-permeable membrane. Large quantities of wastewater are produced by reverse osmosis systems and need to bypass the septic system or they will overwhelm that system creating more groundwater problems. Reverse osmosis systems produce water very slowly, a pressurized storage tank and special faucet needs to be installed so that water is available to meet the demand for drinking and cooking.

Nitrate can contaminate well water from fertilizer use; leaking from septic tanks, sewage and erosion of natural deposits. None of the wells in our group of 86 samples had nitrate levels above the MCL.

This year they found 1.2% of homes have first draw lead levels above the SDWA maximum contaminant level of 0.015 Mg/L. After the flushing the tap for at least one minute no homes had lead levels above the 0.15 mg/L level; however, many scientists do not believe that any level of lead is safe to drink over an extended period of time. Often homes that have elevated lead in the first draw, have lower pH values.

Houses built before 1988 when the ban on lead went into effect and have low pH water typically have higher lead concentrations. Lead leaches into water primarily as a result of corrosion of plumbing and well components, but can also result from flaking of scale from brass fittings and well components unrelated to corrosion and corrosion control techniques such as adjusting pH or alkalinity that are commonly used to neutralize aggressive water will not work in those cases. For most instances, though, a neutralizing filter and lead removing activated carbon filters can be used to remove lead. Recently, some home water treatment companies are offering in home treatment systems that neutralize the water and add orthophosphate other phosphate solution to coat the piping to prevent further corrosion. It should work, but I have never seen such a home system and am not aware of any testing.

Iron and manganese are naturally occurring elements commonly found in groundwater in this part of the country. 1.2% of the wells tested exceed the iron standard and 3.5% exceeded the manganese standard. At naturally occurring levels iron and manganese do not present a health hazard. However, their presence in well water can cause unpleasant taste, staining and accumulation of mineral solids that can clog water treatment equipment and plumbing and discolored water. The standard Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) for iron is 0.3 milligrams per liter (mg/L or ppm) and 0.05 mg/L for manganese. This level of iron and manganese can be detected by taste, smell or appearance. In addition, some types of bacteria react with soluble forms of iron and manganese and form persistent bacterial contamination in a well, water system and any treatment systems. These organisms change the iron and manganese from a soluble form into a less soluble form, thus causing precipitation and accumulation of black or reddish brown gelatinous material (slime). Masses of mucous, iron, and/or manganese can clog plumbing and water treatment equipment.

All systems of removing iron and manganese essentially involve oxidation of the soluble form or killing and removal of the iron bacteria. When the total combined iron and manganese concentration is less than 15 mg/l, an oxidizing filter is the recommended solution. An oxidizing filter supplies oxygen to convert ferrous iron into a solid form which can be filtered out of the water. Higher concentrations of iron and manganese can be treated with an aeration and filtration system. This system is not effective on water with iron/ manganese bacteria, but is very effective on soluble iron and manganese so you need to do further testing to determine what type of iron/manganese you have before you install a treatment system. Water softeners can remove low levels of iron and are widely sold for this purpose because they are very profitable, but are now being banned in some locations due to rising sodium and chloride levels.

Chemical oxidation can be used to remove high levels of dissolved or oxidized iron and manganese as well as treat the presence of iron/manganese (or even sulfur) bacteria. The system consists of a small pump that puts an oxidizing agent into the water before the pressure tank. The water will need about 20 minutes for oxidation to take place so treating before a holding tank or pressure tank is a must. After the solid particles have formed the water is filtered. The best oxidizing agents are chlorine or hydrogen peroxide. If chlorine is used, an activated carbon filter is often used to finish the water and remove the chlorine taste. The holding tank or pressure tank will have to be cleaned regularly to remove any settled particles.

The pH of water is a measure of the acidity or alkalinity. The pH is a logarithmic scale from 0 – 14 with 1 being very acidic and 14 very alkaline. Drinking water should be between 6.5 and 7.5. For reference and to put this into perspective, coffee has a pH of around 5 and salt water has a pH of around 9. Corrosive water, sometimes also called aggressive water is typically water with a low pH. (Alkaline water can also be corrosive.) Low pH water can corrode metal plumbing fixtures causing lead and copper to leach into the water and causing pitting and leaks in the plumbing system. The presence of lead or copper in water is most commonly leaching from the plumbing system or well rather than the groundwater. Acidic water is easily treated using an acid neutralizing filter. Typically these neutralizing filters use a granular marble, calcium carbonate or lime. If the water is very acidic a mixing tank using soda ash, sodium carbonate or sodium hydroxide can be used. The acid neutralizing filters will increase the hardness of the water because of the addition of calcium carbonate. 4.7% of the wells tested were found to have acidic water this year.

Water that contains high levels of dissolved minerals is commonly referred to as hard. Groundwater very slowly wears away at the rocks and minerals picking up small amounts of calcium and magnesium ions. Water containing approximately 125 mg/L can begin to have a noticeable impact and is considered hard. Concentrations above 180 mg/L are considered very hard. Hard water can be just a minor annoyance with spotting and the buildup of lime scale, but once water reaches the very hard level 180 mg/L or 10.5 grains per gallon, it can become problematic. Overall 20.9% of homes tested had hard water.

Two methods are commercially available (and certified) to treat hard water. A water softener and a water that work through a process called template assisted crystallization (TAC), have been certified by DVGW-W512 and are available in whole house units. In template assisted crystallization, water flows through a tank of TAC media. When the hard water comes into contact with the media, the magnesium and calcium ions are caught by the nucleation sites. As more calcium and magnesium ions build up within the sites, small micro-crystals form and flow through your plumbing. They do not attach themselves to your water pipes as scale.

The ubiquitous water softening system is an ion exchange system consisting of a mineral tank and a brine tank. The mineral tank holds small beads of resin that have a negative electrical charge. The calcium and magnesium ions (along with small amounts of other minerals) are positively charged and are attracted to the negatively charged beads. This attraction makes the minerals stick to the beads as the hard water passes through the mineral tank. Sodium from salt is used to charge the resin beads. The brine tank is flushed out when the resin beads are recharged carrying the salty solution to the environment. The salinity of surface waters and groundwater is an emerging environmental concern. Research has shown that salinization has affected over a third of the drainage area of the contiguous United States even in areas without road salt. At the present time the EPA guidance level for sodium in drinking water is 20 mg/L. Given the number of homes with elevated sodium and our local geology, it is probably a reflection of the number of homes with water softeners-48.8% of the wells tested had elevated sodium.

1.2% of wells were found that had arsenic exceeding the EPA MCL for drinking water of 10 ppm. While arsenic is a naturally occurring element found in soil and groundwater it is not typically found at significantly elevated levels in this geology. Arsenic is best removed by water treatment methods such as reverse osmosis, ultra-filtration, distillation, or as a last choice ion exchange (water softeners). Typically these methods are used to treat water at only one faucet. Though anionic exchange systems (water softeners) are whole house systems, they may not be the best choice.

Groundwater of Prince William County

from USGS

About 25 years ago the U.S. Geological Survey studied the groundwater systems within Prince William County, Virginia. The following is based on that report.

Private wells draw their water from groundwater. Geology, climate, weather, land use and many other factors determine the quality of the groundwater. Within Prince William County Virginia there are four distinct geologic provinces: (1) the Blue Ridge, (2) the Culpeper Basin, (3) the Piedmont, and (4) the Coastal Plain. The U.S. Geological Survey divides the four geologic provinces of the county into seven hydrogeologic groups based on the presence and movement of the ground water calling them groups: A, B, B1, C, D, E and F.

The quantity and quality of ground water in Prince William County varies across the county depending on the geologic and hydrogeologic group you are in. The rocks in the Blue Ridge, Piedmont, and Coastal Plain contain minerals that are resistant to weathering, and the ground water tends to be acidic having low concentrations of dissolved constituents. Generally, ground water is soft (slightly acidic) to moderately hard in the Blue Ridge, Piedmont, and Coastal Plain and soft to very hard in the Culpeper Basin. Hydrogeologic group A is within the Blue Ridge formation; hydrogeologic groups B, B1, and C are in the Culpeper Basin; hydrogeologic groups D and E are in the Piedmont; and hydrogeologic group F includes unconsolidated material of the Coastal Plain and overburden in the other provinces.

Hydrogeologic group A underlies the northwestern part of Prince William County on Bull Run Mountain, which is part of the Blue Ridge geologic province, and consists of Early Cambrian metasedimentary rocks. Because of the thin to absent cover of overburden, ground-water storage predominantly is in the fractures in the bedrock. Areas underlain by Quaternary mountain-wash deposits along the base of Bull Run Mountain may have ground water stored in these deposits.

Hydrogeologic group B underlies the western part of Prince William County and consists of sedimentary rocks of the Culpeper Basin. The predominant rock types are conglomerates, sandstones, siltstones, shales, and argillaceous limestones. Rocks within hydrogeologic group B tend to have moderate to excellent water-bearing potential because it is a fractured rock system with very little overburden. The highest reported yields in the county are from wells located in this hydrogeologic group B and this is where I bought a house. The downside is that the hydrogeologic group is susceptible to contamination- the fractures that carry water can easily spread a contaminant and without adequate overburden spills could flow to depth through a fracture.

Hydrogeologic group B1 is a subset of group B with similar rock types, structure, and water-bearing potential; except that B1 is beneath group B at 500 feet below grade and evaporitic minerals tends to increase at depths. The predominant mineral is gypsum (CaSO4) though it does not appear to impact taste.

Hydrogeologic group C, which is interspersed throughout the area of groups B and Bl, in the western part of the County, consists of igneous rocks (basalt and diabase) of the Culpeper Basin. The rocks of group C are Early Jurassic in age. The predominant rock types are basalt, sandstone, siltstone, diabase, hornfels, and granofels. Rocks within hydrogeologic group C tend to have generally poor water-bearing potential because of the wide spacing between fractures, mineralization of fractures, and random fracture orientations. In other words, unless you hit a good fracture, you are likely to have a dry well and these wells tend to become mineralized and loose flow over time. The best wells are in the basalt.

Hydrogeologic group D is located within the Piedmont formation and consists of three igneous plutons in the eastern part of Prince William County: the Goldvein, Lake Jackson, and Occoquan Plutons. Rocks within hydrogeologic group D tend to have moderate water-bearing potential and ground-water storage tends to be predominantly in the overburden. Wells in this area are most susceptible to drought and tend to be slightly acidic.

Hydrogeologic group E is also in the Piedmont formation in the eastern part of the county, and consists of metasedimentary, metavolcanic, and other metamorphic rocks. Rocks within hydrogeologic group E tend to have poor to moderate water-bearing potential, and thin- to thick cover of overburden. Similar to the rocks of hydrogeologic group D, ground-water storage tends to be predominantly in the overburden. Some of the poorest yielding wells are located in this hydrogeologic group.

Hydrogeologic group F is an approximately 5 mi in width, at the very eastern edge of Prince William County. This area is east of the Fall Zone in the Coastal Plain. The geology consists predominately of sand, silt, clay, lignite, gravel, soil, and weathered bedrock. Because of the sand and gravel this area tends to have very good to excellent water-bearing potential and wells in the Potomac Formation of the Coastal Plain tend to have high yields. There is a possible interconnection between the aquifers and the Potomac River.

Generally speaking, the groundwater in the county is recharged in elevated areas between stream valleys and channels and discharges to streams and estuaries. The paths and duration of groundwater flow are different between consolidated rocks and unconsolidated material. Groundwater in the consolidated rocks flows through the system of fractures following a circuitous path before discharging to a stream or estuary. In unconsolidated material, ground water generally follows a direct path from the recharge area to the discharge area. Well yields tend to be highest in the rocks of hydrogeologic groups B and B1, which can be attributed to the closely spaced fractures, joints, and bedding-plane of this fractured rock system. This area is most likely to produce a reliable and water rich well. Well yield in hydrogeologic group C range widely with the best yield coming from the basalt..

We Need Sustainable Groundwater Use in Virginia

USGS  2010

According to the U.S. Geological Survey estimates for 2010 Virginia uses 299 million gallons of groundwater each and every day which is about 20% of all fresh water consumed daily in Virginia (this excludes use for thermal electric power generation). Of this groundwater use the three largest categories of use are public supply groundwater wells (71 million gallons a day), private/rural water wells (124 million gallons a day) and self-supplied industrial wells (74 million gallons a day) Domestic water use includes indoor and outdoor use at homes and apartments in Virginia for drinking, food preparation, washing clothes and dishes, bathing and flushing toilets. Common outdoor uses are watering lawns and gardens or maintaining pools or landscape features at your home. Domestic water is either self-supplied or provided by public water companies. Industrial use would be manufacturing sites including paper mills, printing companies, breweries and wineries. Public supply water wells supply community domestic and commercial needs like churches, schools and offices.

According to the USGS data, the 124 million gallons a day of self-supplied domestic water from private wells provides 1,650,000 Virginians or 21% of the population of the Commonwealth with their water. These rural or semi-rural wells are drilled in rural or semi-rural locations throughout Virginia. Nationally only about 14% of domestic water is from private wells. The typical Virginian uses 75 gallons of water a day for all domestic uses and is the same for public supplies households as well as households supplied by private well. In most states, households on private well use less water than those on public water supplies.

Despite being a very rural state, less than 3% of fresh water withdrawn from rivers, streams, and groundwater is used for agriculture. It rains in Virginia and only 1.4% of fresh water is used for irrigation which includes water for crop irrigation, frost protection, application of chemicals, weed control, field preparation, crop cooling, harvesting, dust suppression, as well as watering of golf courses, parks, nurseries, turf farms, cemeteries, and landscape-watering for businesses and public buildings.

At one firth of the total water supply groundwater is an important component of the water supply. Sustainable groundwater use in Virginia is not tracked or managed by DEQ or any other agency for that matter. Groundwater is not unlimited. Our groundwater is at risk. Despite the water rich climate of our region, the Atlantic Coastal Plain aquifer is under stress and is being used beyond it recharge rate. This has been confirmed by measurements of groundwater levels, modeling of the aquifer system by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and measurements of changes in gravity by the GRACE satellite project at NASA over the past 12 years of data collecting.

The rate of groundwater withdrawal from the Virginia Coastal Plain is currently unsustainable. The withdrawal rate of groundwater increased continuously during the 20th century. By the 2003 the withdrawal rates from Coastal Plain aquifers in Virginia totaled approximately 117 million gallons per day (DEQ). As a result, groundwater levels have declined by as much as 200 feet near the large withdrawal centers of West Point and Franklin, Virginia the home of paper mills that are large industrial users of groundwater. The water level has continued to fall despite the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VA DEQ) attempting to regulate groundwater withdrawals in the Virginia Coastal Plain through the VA DEQ Groundwater Withdrawal Permit Program over the past 12 years. To make that groundwater sustainable, we need to reduce use or increase recharge otherwise Virginia will find that areas within the historic boundary of the aquifer begin to go dry. In order to prevent this first Virginia needs to know how much groundwater there is and what is sustainable use is. Groundwater resources are property and should be protected for all property owners.

Less is known about the sustainability of the smaller groundwater basins in the region, but their problems are still at a more manageable stage. Our own Culpeper Basin that feeds the private wells in the Rural Crescent of Prince William and areas of Loudoun and Fauquier counties as well as areas beyond our region. We now have tools (groundwater models and data from the GRACE project) that can help develop a picture of the volume of the water within the groundwater basin and at what rate it is being used and at what rate it is being recharged. We need to know if the current and planned use of our groundwater is sustainable even in drought years. An understanding of the impact on our essential water resources from ground cover by roads and buildings impacting recharge to proposed water withdrawals can be used to determine if a proposed additional use of groundwater is sustainable before it is granted.

How any proposed land use, or business or building impact water and groundwater sustainability should be one of the first questions asked. The right of existing property owners to their water is primary and valuable and should not be compromised or impaired to generate profits for others by the taking of their rights to their water. Because there are natural fluctuations in groundwater levels it is easy to mask or ignore signs of the beginnings of destruction of the water resources that we depend on. The USGS has been smoothing the water level data from at least one well in our region to eliminate what appeared to be an anomaly, but instead may be the first indications of a problem. Fluctuations in climate or rainfall and imperfect measurements and vantage points mask trends from clear view.

How the resource is owned or not owned can potentially create a resource abusive atmosphere where taking what I can without regard for sustainability is rewarded for a period of time. No groundwater resource is infinite and we need to preserve and protect our groundwater which belongs to all the landowners by recognizing its value, that it is property and by using it sustainably. The permitting process for zoning changes and building permits for large users of groundwater needs to examine and consider the impact on and sustainable use of groundwater resources in that area. The rights to groundwater need to be quantified, so they can be protected.

Our Sewers and Waste Water in the DC Region

The most essential infrastructure in our Washington DC Metropolitan region and anywhere are the portions that are almost invisible, but essential to the American way of life- water, sewage and power. The water infrastructure for the Washington Metropolitan region which provides our homes, schools, businesses and public buildings with healthy, reliable water and sanitation and plays a key role in protecting public health and maintaining and restoring the quality of our rivers and streams. There are three main types of water infrastructure: drinking water, wastewater and stormwater.

District of Columbia's sewage system is actually one of the oldest in the United States, and dates to around 1810, when the first sewers and culverts were constructed to drain stormwater and groundwater carrying sewage and muck from the streets of Washington D.C. Epidemics of smallpox, typhoid and malaria during and after the Civil War lead to an expansion of the system, though the system simply moved the waste from streets and open canals into rivers and estuaries. Washington DC did not start treating the sewage waste until 1937 when the Blue Plains sewage treatment plant was built. Blue Plains is still operating today when the treats to public health include MRSA (Methicillin-resistant S. aureus).

MRSA causes difficult-to-treat and potentially fatal antibiotic resistant bacterial infections that in the late 1990s began to appear outside the hospital setting in the greater community. The incidence of these so called “community-acquired” MRSA infections has been increasing in the United States. Scientist from the University of Maryland found that MRSA was present in 83% of the raw sewage samples taken at four waste water treatment plants in Maryland. The percentage of MRSA positive samples decreased as treatment within the waste water treatment plant progressed, and the MRSA bacteria did not survive in the plants that used chlorination, a tertiary step in wastewater treatment.

Today most of the Washington DC region’s waste water treatment plants use tertiary treatment and the waste water is treated to meet the stringent standards to protect the Potomac estuary and Chesapeake Bay where most of the regional waste water treatment plants discharge. Waste water treatment plants with tertiary treatment are called “advanced” waste water treatment plants, but that is not as modern as it sounds.

At waste water treatment plants primary treatment screens wastewater, and performs some rudimentary treatment to remove crude solids of human waste, all the trash flushed down toilets and skim off grease, oil and fat. Then wastewater sits in settling tanks, which are designed to hold the wastewater for several hours. During that time, most of the heavy solids fall to the bottom of the tank, where they become a thick slurry known as primary sludge. Primary Treatment consists of sedimentation and removal of large debris using screens and the large settling tanks. Until 1960’s primary treatment was the only form of sewage treatment in most sewage plants.

Secondary treatments usually includes biological and/or chemical treatment. One of the most common biological treatments is the activated sludge process; in which primary wastewater is mixed with bacteria that break down organic matter and cleans the water. Oxygen is pumped into the mixture. A clarifying tank allows sludge to settle to the bottom and then the treated wastewater moves on for tertiary treatment.

Coagulation, filtration and disinfection take place in tertiary treatment. A coagulant is added, the commonly used high-lime process can reduce phosphorus to below 0.10 mg/L. This process also serves as a barrier to viruses, captures organics leaving secondary treatment, and precipitates heavy metals and other suspended particles. Coagulation is followed by filtration which removes organic matter, microorganisms, minerals and excess nutrients. The final barrier to pathogens is a chlorination and dechlorination processes.

Since 1978, the upper Occoquan Sewage Authority (an advanced waste water treatment plant) has been discharging tertiary treated water into a stream above Occoquan Reservoir, one of the two potable water supply sources for Fairfax County, Virginia. Recycled water has been part of the Occoquan supply for 34 years and chances are if you are in Fairfax, parts of Prince William and Loudoun counties you have been regularly drinking recycled water. Fairfax Water fully treats and tests all water they send out as potable. The Occoquan Watershed Laboratory (OWL), operated by the Virginia Polytechnic Institute Department of Civil Engineering conducts comprehensive studies of the Occoquan water quality, and effects of the waste water treatment effluents on the watershed and water supply.

The Washington DC metropolitan area has 24 regional waste water treatment plants that treat 90% of the regions waste water. About 10% of the region is served by on-site septic systems. Combined, the waste water treatment plants treated an average of 544 million gallons of water a day in 2013. Blue Plains remains the largest plant in the region. The Washington DC region also has over 16,000 miles of pipes and pumping stations that move sewage from our homes to the waste water treatment plants. Due to the age of the Washington DC and Alexandria systems, parts of those systems are what is called combined systems where sewer and stormwater are carried through the same pipes. These systems tend to be overwhelmed by the volume of water during rain storms.

The Blue Plains Advanced Waste Water Treatment Plant is under a consent order from the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, to meet new effluent limits for total nitrogen released and better control of the system during storms and has just completed boring a four-and-a-half-mile-long tunnel that will be used to store the excess storm and sewage water flow during rains and reduce releases of raw sewage into the Anacostia River. This tunnel is part of a $7.8 billion 20 year improvement program called the Clean Rivers Project.

In 2013 the Washington DC region spent about $1.3 billion on capital investments primarily at the waste water treatment plants and spend $950 in operating cost for their waste water systems. The majority of this money was spent at the central waste water treatment plants. Though the region’s waste water treatment plants have made sizable investment to meet the U.S. EPA discharge permit limits, less has been spent of the sewer piping system. The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments that over $1 billion will need to be spent each year to replace and properly maintain the aging sewer pipes, pumps and valves in the waste water gathering system. As our aging sewers fail, public health and the water quality of our rivers, streams and estuaries are threatened.

Only Rain Should Go Down the Storm Drains

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regulates the discharges into the “waters of the United States,” the rivers, streams, estuary and bays, but in the real, everyday world they don’t really work on the local level. In the case of Virginia (and most other states) they actually do this by delegating to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality the authority to implement the federal Clean Water Act under the Virginia State Water Control Law. While it is the EPA and DEQ who make regulations and inspect for compliance with those regulations, it is the local government, our towns and counties that implements the programs to stop or reduce pollution and encourage compliance with regulations. Prince William County staff translates permits limits and state regulations into action.

The Prince William County department of Public Works implements a series of programs aimed to reduce the release of pollutants into the local stormwater sewer systems to protect our local waterways from pollution to the greatest extent possible. The Prince William County storm water sewer system consists of man-made components (pipes, ditches, and ponds) and natural components (streams, wetlands, and floodplains) that control the flow of storm water to prevent flooding and minimize pollutants entering our waterways. Prince William like much of Virginia, is also engaged in implementing programs to reduce the nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment pollution from the County to not only protect, but to improve the water quality of nearby streams, rivers, wetlands, the Occoquan Bay and ultimately the Chesapeake Bay.

The Chesapeake Bay and its tidal waters have been impaired by the release of excess nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment. These pollutants are released from waste water treatment plants, agricultural operations, urban and suburban runoff, wastewater facilities, septic systems, air pollution and other sources that enter the tributaries and are carried to the Chesapeake Bay. The EPA has mandated a contamination limit called the TMDL (total maximum daily load for nutrient contamination and sediment) to restore the local waters. The TMDL sets a total Chesapeake Bay watershed limit which is a 25% reduction in nitrogen, 24% reduction in phosphorus and 20 % reduction in sediment from the 2011 levels.

The Prince William County Department of Public Works addresses reducing releases from the stormwater sewer system by a series of programs all paid for by the stormwater fee on your property taxes. I spoke with Robert Jocz who is an Environmental Engineer with the County Department of Public Works, Department of Environmental Services in the Watershed Management Branch. Bobby is in charge of the Dry Weather Monitoring Program for the Prince William County stormwater system. He joined the County Staff in 2013 after receiving a master’s degree in Biological Engineering Systems from Virginia Tech. What Bobby and his inspector do is look for illegal discharges (which the U.S. EPA and the County insist on call illicit discharges) into the stormwater sewer system. We talked about the challenges and the new and improved County program and changes that have been made in response to the new stormwater regulation and tighter permit requirements.

Recently, Prince William County set up a demonstration of our stormwater compliance programs for the EPA to use for training state and regional enforcement inspectors. Bobby set up a demonstration of the Dry Weather Monitoring Program at the landfill. There was also a demonstration by Fleet Management Services of their facilities management programs and Fairfax County set up a demonstration of stormwater programs and VDOT. (See EPA Blog for more details.)

​While stormwater itself can be a problem, according to EPA it is a leading cause of pollution in our rivers and streams. When rain falls the stormwater picks up pollution as it flows across roads, parking lots, and open land, picking up oil and grease, litter, dirt and whatever else is on the ground and carrying the water through stormwater sewer systems which have traditionally been only conveyances. They do not treat the water. So any pollution that enters the system get carried right into our rivers, streams, wetlands and bays and this includes any pollution that was intentionally discharged into the stormwater sewer system. All stormwater programs are intended to reduce the flow of pollutants into the stormwater sewer system. Illicit discharges are intentional discharges into the stormwater sewer system; pouring anything down a storm drain is illegal.

Initially, the EPA regulated only the largest industries and city stormwater sewer systems. As the years have passed, EPA has extended regulation down to smaller and smaller entities. In the last few years as regulations have expanded to include stormwater sewer systems outside the urbanized areas, EPA has worked with many municipalities and counties in the region to improve their compliance with stormwater sewer system regulations and permits. Programs have been tightened and expanded to meet the mandated reductions in stormwater volume and pollutants.

As a result, Prince William County and many other local governments have improved their stormwater management programs to further reduce the contamination of stormwater runoff and prohibit illicit discharges into the system by small businesses and individuals. When small businesses wash their company cars and allow the wash water which contains dirt, grease, gasoline to flow into the storm drain in the parking lot, they are essentially pouring that dirty water directly into the Potomac River and Chesapeake Bay. Likewise, small painting contractors washing their brushes or incorrectly disposing of paint containing water down the storm drain, carpet cleaning companies’ disposal of waste water and cleaning solution into the stormwater sewer system, and others who routinely pour small amounts of waste water into the stormwater system are polluting. All these small pollutants add up. The stormwater system only carries water to our waterways, it does not treat it.

Bobby runs the Dry Weather Monitoring Program. A "dry weather condition" is the period at least 48-hours after the most recent rainfall. If it is not raining, there should be limited flow if any in the stormwater sewer system. Dry weather sampling and monitoring is an effort to isolate potential illegal discharges. Occasionally, people knowingly or unknowingly discharge hazardous waste or other non-storm related waste into the stormwater sewer system. When illicit releases are discovered the first step is education. Bobby and his inspector inform the business or individual that what they are doing is illegal, and though the usual reaction is “it’s only a small amount,” small amounts of pollution quickly add up.

from PW County

If the illicit discharge was by and individual, the first step Bobby and his inspector take is to educate and then get them to agree to comply with the regulations. With small businesses or repeat offenders a “Notice of Violation” is issued that gives them 30 days to come into compliance with regulations of face fines up to $1,000 per day. So far there has been no need to issue fines. Bobby and his inspector revisit the sites to verify continued compliance, but in truth they can only spot check. So far, the largest number of violations have been from washing cars.

To clean up the Chesapeake Bay and meet the requirement of the EPA mandated TMDL we all need to change our behavior to reduce small source of pollution to the stormwater sewer system and our waterways. Individuals are still allowed to wash their automobiles in their driveways, but businesses are not. The car wash that was used as a fundraiser for schools has been banned in many communities and is a source of illicit discharge. You can help clean up our rivers, streams, wetlands and the Occoquan and Chesapeake Bays by not dumping any waste, liquid or trash into the stormwater sewer system or onto the ground that drains to the stormwater sewer system. You can also help Bobby and his inspector protect our waterways by reporting any illicit discharges you observe to the Dry Weather Mentoring Program at Prince William County Department of Public Works (703) 792-7070. Remember, only rain should go down the storm drain.

What's in the Water Wells of Prince William County

The Virginia Cooperative Extension (VCE) Offices in Virginia occasionally holds drinking water clinics for well, spring and cistern owners as part of the Virginia Household Water Quality Program. The VCE subsidizes the analysis cost for these clinics. Currently, samples are analyzed for: iron, manganese, nitrate, lead, arsenic, fluoride, sulfate, pH, total dissolved solids, hardness, sodium, copper, total coliform bacteria and E. Coli bacteria at a cost of $49 to the well owner. This is far from an exhaustive list of potential contaminants, but with one or two exceptions these are the most common contaminants that effect drinking water wells. These are mostly the naturally occurring contaminants and common sources of contamination: a poorly sealed well or a nearby leaking septic system, or indications of plumbing system corrosion. The above chart shows what we found in the private wells tested in Prince William County in 2014.

There are other contaminants that have be found in groundwater in many parts of the country, but this clinic only tested for the most common water quality problems in Prince William County and Virginia. There are also nuisance contaminants which are fairly common, but lack an approved EPA methodology for testing, iron bacteria is an example. Wells should be tested annually for bacteria and every 1-3 years for other common contaminants and at least once have a full analysis . If you install a treatment system to address a problem, testing should be more frequent. Groundwater is dynamic and can change over time, and it is important to make sure that any treatment is still appropriate and effective. Water treatment systems are not an install and forget piece of equipment, they are more systems to maintain, adjust and control to keep the water within ideal parameters. Improperly treated water can be as problematic as not treating water.

In order to determine if treatment is necessary, water test results should be compared to a standard. The standard we use is the U.S.EPA Safe Drinking Water Act , SDW, though that regulation does not apply to private well owners. The SDW act has primary and secondary drinking water standards. Primary standards are ones that can impact health and from the our tested substances include: coliform bacteria, E. coli bacteria, nitrate, lead, and arsenic.

The 2014 Prince William County water clinic, like most of the clinics in the Virginia Rural Household Water Quality Program, found that a third of the wells tested found coliform bacteria present in the water samples. Coliform bacteria are not a health threat itself, it is used to indicate other bacteria that may be present and identify that a well is not properly sealed from surface bacteria. The federal standard for coliform bacteria is zero, but the federal standard allows that up to 5% of samples can test positive for coliform during a month. Fecal coliform and E. coli are bacteria whose presence indicates that the water is contaminated with human or animal wastes. Disease-causing microbes (pathogens) in these wastes can cause diarrhea, cramps, nausea, headaches, or other symptoms. These pathogens may pose a special health risk for infants, young children, and those with compromised immune systems. However, people can drink water contaminated with fecal bacteria and not notice. If your water is contaminated with coliform but not fecal coliform or E. coli, then you have a nuisance bacteria problem and the source may be infiltration from the surface from rain or snow melt. Typical causes are improperly sealed well cap, failed grouting or surface drainage to the well. Shock chlorinate the well, repack the soil around the well pipe to flow away from the well and replace the well cap. Then after the next big rainstorm retest the well for coliform. If it is still present then a long-term treatment should be implemented: using UV light, ozonation, or chlorine for continuous disinfection.

If you have fecal coliform in the well or E. coli, your well is being impacted by human or animal waste and you are drinking dilute sewage. If there is not a nearby animal waste composting facility, then you are probably drinking water from a failed septic system- yours or your nearest neighbors. To solve this problem you need to either fix or replace the septic system that is causing the contamination, replace the well or install a disinfection and filtration system. Disinfection does not kill Giardia or Cryptosporidium, two microscopic parasites that can be found in groundwater that has been impacted by surface water or sewage. Both parasites produce cysts that cause illness and sometimes death.

Membrane filtration is the usual treatment for these parasites- a one micron membrane is required after disinfection and can be accomplished at home with a reverse osmosis system. The failing septic systems can often be identified by using tracer dyes. While continuous disinfection will work to protect you from fecal bacteria and E. coli, be aware that if your well is being impacted by a septic system, then the well water might also have present traces of all the chemicals and substances that get poured down the drain. Long term treatment for disinfection, and micro-filtration should be implemented: using UV light, ozonation, or chlorine for continuous disinfection, carbon filtration, and anything that is used for drinking should be further treated with a reverse osmosis systems or micro membrane system that work by using pressure to force water through a semi-permeable membrane. Large quantities of wastewater are produced by reverse osmosis systems and need to bypass the septic system or they will overwhelm that system creating more groundwater problems. Reverse osmosis systems produce water very slowly, a pressurized storage tank and special faucet needs to be installed so that water is available to meet the demand for drinking and cooking.

Nitrate can contaminate well water from fertilizer use; leaking from septic tanks, sewage and erosion of natural deposits. Only one well in our group had nitrate levels above the MCL. The MCL for nitrate is 10 mg/L the one well that tested above that level tested at 10.5 mg/L. Infants below the age of six months who drink water containing nitrate in excess of the MCL could become seriously ill from blue-baby syndrome and, if untreated, may die. Symptoms include shortness of breath and a blue ting to the skin common in blue-baby syndrome. The NO3 dissolves and moves easily through soil which varies seasonally and over time as plants use up the nitrate over the summer. Testing in the spring will usually produce the highest levels. Nitrate may indicate contamination from septic tanks, but do not boil the water- boiling water reduces the water and actually INCREASES the concentration of nitrates. Reverse osmosis, or ion exchange is necessary to control the nitrate.

Iron and manganese are naturally occurring elements commonly found in groundwater in this part of the country. Several of the wells tested exceeded the secondary standard, 5.1% of the wells tested exceed the iron standard and 7.7% exceeded the manganese standard. At naturally occurring levels iron and manganese do not present a health hazard. However, their presence in well water can cause unpleasant taste, staining and accumulation of mineral solids that can clog water treatment equipment and plumbing. The standard Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) for iron is 0.3 milligrams per liter (mg/L or ppm) and 0.05 mg/L for manganese. This level of iron and manganese are easily detected by taste, smell or appearance. In addition, some types of bacteria react with soluble forms of iron and manganese and form persistent bacterial contamination in a well, water system and any treatment systems. These organisms change the iron and manganese from a soluble form into a less soluble form, thus causing precipitation and accumulation of black or reddish brown gelatinous material (slime). Masses of mucous, iron, and/or manganese can clog plumbing and water treatment equipment.

All systems of removing iron and manganese essentially involve oxidation of the soluble form or killing and removal of the iron bacteria. When the total combined iron and manganese concentration is less than 15 mg/l, an oxidizing filter is the recommended solution. An oxidizing filter supplies oxygen to convert ferrous iron into a solid form which can be filtered out of the water. Higher concentrations of iron and manganese can be treated with an aeration and filtration system. This system is not effective on water with iron/ manganese bacteria, but is very effective on soluble iron and manganese. Chemical oxidation can be used to remove high levels of dissolved or oxidized iron and manganese as well as treat the presence of iron/manganese (or even sulfur) bacteria. The system consists of a small pump that puts an oxidizing agent into the water before the pressure tank. The water will need about 20 minutes for oxidation to take place so treating before a holding tank or pressure tank is a must. After the solid particles have formed the water is filtered. The best oxidizing agents are chlorine or hydrogen peroxide. If chlorine is used, an activated carbon filter is often used to finish the water and remove the chlorine taste. The holding tank or pressure tank will have to be cleaned regularly to remove any settled particles.

The pH of water is a measure of the acidity or alkalinity. The pH is a logarithmic scale from 0 – 14 with 1 being very acidic and 14 very alkaline. Drinking water should be between 6.5 and 7.5. For reference and to put this into perspective, coffee has a pH of around 5 and salt water has a pH of around 9. Corrosive water, sometimes also called aggressive water is typically water with a low pH. (Alkaline water can also be corrosive.) Low pH water can corrode metal plumbing fixtures causing lead and copper to leach into the water and causing pitting and leaks in the plumbing system. The presence of lead or copper in water is most commonly leaching from the plumbing system rather than the groundwater. Acidic water is easily treated using an acid neutralizing filter. Typically these neutralizing filters use a granular marble, calcium carbonate or lime. If the water is very acidic a mixing tank using soda ash, sodium carbonate or sodium hydroxide can be used. The acid neutralizing filters will increase the hardness of the water because of the addition of calcium carbonate. The sodium based systems will increase the salt content in the water. Though 20.5% of the wells tested were found to have acidic water, only one well tested had a pH above 8.5 and that well also had high levels of sodium. The well owner emailed me with that information because I had stated in the clinic that high pH and elevated sodium levels were possible indications of salt water intrusion.

Water that contains high levels of dissolved minerals is commonly referred to as hard. Groundwater very slowly wears away at the rocks and minerals picking up small amounts of calcium and magnesium ions. Water containing approximately 125 mg/L can begin to have a noticeable impact and is considered hard. Concentration above 180 mg/L are considered very hard. As the mineral level climbs, bath soap combines with the minerals and forms a pasty scum that accumulates on bathtubs and sinks. You either must use more soap and detergent in washing or use specially formulated hard water soap solutions. Hard water can be just a minor annoyance with spotting and the buildup of lime scale, but once water reaches the very hard level 180 mg/L or 10.5 grains per gallon, it can become problematic, 18% of the wells had hard water exceeding that level. Hard water spots appear on everything that is washed in and around the home from dishes and silverware to the floor tiles and cars. When heated calcium carbonate and magnesium carbonate are removed from the water and form a scale (lime scale) in cookware, hot water pipes, and water heaters.

Water softening systems are used to address the problem are basically an ion exchange system. The water softening system consists of a mineral tank and a brine tank. The water supply pipe is connected to the mineral tank so that water coming into the house must pass through the tank before it can be used. The mineral tank holds small beads of resin that have a negative electrical charge. The calcium and magnesium ions are positively charged and are attracted to the negatively charged beads. This attraction makes the minerals stick to the beads as the hard water passes through the mineral tank. Sodium is often used to charge the resin beads. As the water is softened, the sodium ions are replaced and small quantities of sodium are released into the softened water, thus the salty taste of softened water. When the water softening system is recharged the excess sodium solution carrying the calcium and magnesium is flushed to the septic system which may shorten the life of the drain field.

At the present time the EPA guidance level for sodium in drinking water is 20 mg/L. This level was developed for those restricted to a total sodium intake of 500 mg/day and does not necessarily represent a necessary level for the rest of the population. Based on taste of the water levels of sodium should be below 30 to 60 mg/L based on individual taste. Water softening systems add sodium. Reverse osmosis systems and distillation systems remove sodium and are safe for household use, but addressing hard water by using vinegar to descale pots and dishwashers, regularly draining hot water heaters, and using detergents formulated for hard water might be a better solution for you.

The Rural Crescent

The long awaited “Prince William County Rural Preservation Study Report” was posted on the Department of Planning web site. I treasure the quiet and rural character of my home and I am a strong supporter for maintaining the Rural Crescent for ecological and water quality reasons as well as for quality of life for the entire community, so I was anxious to read the report. I attended a couple of the community outreach meeting and was left discouraged by the challenges that we face.

When the County Supervisors created the Rural Crescent in 1998 they slowed the loss of rural land in Prince William County. Limiting development density to one house per 10 acres combined with the limit on sewer extensions, creating one of the most protective zonings in Virginia, was a first step to preserve agricultural land. However, according to the consultants and based on the experience of the past 16 years, unless the zoning is very protective (one home per 30 to 50 acres, zoning alone will not preserve agriculture in the county and we are doomed to see the Rural Crescent cut up into 10 acre lots.

The Prince William County Rural Preservation Study found a broad support among stakeholders (community groups and residents) that it is important to maintain a Rural Area within the County. Another point of general consensus was that current preservation policies (primarily 10-acre zoning) is a one-size fits all approach that is not working very well across the large Rural Crescent area, which varies greatly in character from one end to the other. More tools are needed in the County’s Rural Crescent preservation toolbox to preserve a rural area. Furthermore, the consultants argue that mindful use of a series of tools can advance both Rural Crescent preservation areas and development goals.

According to the consultants, the County has a narrow window of opportunity to develop additional programs to maintain the character of the Rural Crescent. The 20,000 to 30,000-acre pool of farmland is fairly small and has been shrinking. Subdivision of the remaining farmland continues. The Study makes a series of recommendations that the consultants believe if fully adopted would result in a net increase of approximately 1,150 houses in the Rural Crescent and an increase of approximately 10,700 acres of permanently preserved land.

This 10,700 acres is far less than the County’s master plan stated goal of 39% protected open space, but almost 39,000 additional acres would be needed to meet that goal, and the pool of land still available to achieve this is less than 30,000 acres. Without policy changes, the Rural Crescent will likely continue to develop dominated by large lot residential development, with little contiguous open space and significant loss of agricultural lands, losing the open space for the county and the rural character of the area. So, the consultants recommend that the Supervisors adopt within the Comprehensive Plan a vision that describes what the County wants the Rural Area to be and use that vision as the basis for setting policy. They suggest:

“The Rural Area is a landscape dominated by agriculture, woodland, open space and other undeveloped land. The Rural Area allows for low-density residential development that is planned and designed to not dominate the landscape. The Rural Area accommodates a variety of activities and lifestyles associated with rural areas including farming of all types, low density residential living, rural businesses, cultural heritage, recreation, and preservation and enjoyment of the natural environment.”

The more I thought about it, the more I liked that vision for the Rural Crescent (which the consultants always call the “Rural Area.”) The consultants go on to recommend that each development proposal should be reviewed on a case by case basis to consider whether it would further the vision and policies for the Rural Area and limiting maximum gross density of one unit per two to three acres and a minimum 50 % open space requirement.

Tools that the County needs to develop for maintaining the Rural Crescent are adopting a Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) program. A Purchase of Development Rights is a voluntary program in which a landowner agrees to sell his or her development rights to a government (local, state, or federal) in return for a cash payment. A reasonable, though aggressive, goal according to the consultants would be to preserve 8,000 acres through a PDR program. This level of preservation would maintain the largely rural character of the agricultural parts of the Rural Crescent. The consultants recommend that the County appropriate $5 million to begin funding the program using local and non-local revenue sources that are further outlined in the report (see section 4). Five million dollars could preserve at least 1,000 acres using a cap of $5,000 per acre and with additional acreage possible through leveraging state and federal matching funds and partnering with preservation-oriented organizations. There are several existing programs for matching.

The consultants also recommend that the County explore the creation of a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program. A transfer of development rights (TDR) program creates a market in development credits through the county government. The County would give development credits to landowners in a designated preservation area. A system of TDRs allows ownership of the development rights on a privately owned parcel of land to be separated from ownership of the parcel itself. These rights can then be transferred from that property to another property in a different location that has been designated as a receiving area and that the county will allow higher density development if TDRs are purchased. Having transferred the development rights, the original landowner and all future owners of that property are restricted from developing the land by a conservation easement or deed restriction. The buyer of the development rights uses them to develop another piece of property with more density than allowed by its comprehensive plan zoning.

Protected areas, the sending areas, should be the highest value agricultural, scenic, and culturally significant parts of the Rural Area. Receiving areas would be: appropriate locations in the Comprehensive Plan’s Development Area; what the consultants calls Nokesville Village, Sector Plan Core Area; and areas within the Transitional Ribbon (see diagram below) where higher density development would be more protective of environmental resources and rural character than development of the sending areas.

the proposed Rural Character Areas