Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supervisors debate biosolids land application and groundwater testing; staff to analyze new state law effective 2027
Summary
Supervisors raised concerns about biosolids spreading, PFAS contamination risk to private wells, and called for public input; staff noted the General Assembly amended state law to increase oversight and restore some local authority effective Jan. 1, 2027, and offered to prepare ordinance options and further analysis.
Board members discussed community concerns about biosolids land application and possible groundwater contamination.
Supervisor Underwood told the board he had sought county staff support and showed maps of sites receiving biosolids, urging the county to ask the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality to test adjoining private wells for PFAS because most rural residents rely on shallow wells. Underwood characterized the health risk strongly in the meeting, saying those chemicals are ‘‘proven to cause cancer’’ and urging a formal county response.
Supervisor Long and others urged a balanced approach: Long recommended public meetings with farmers, soil-and-water experts and affected residents so the board can hear both benefits and risks, noting that some farmers rely on biosolids for fertilizer benefits. A board member suggested inviting the soil and water conservation district to provide technical context.
County staff (speaker 6) said the General Assembly passed amendments this session that increase regulatory oversight of PFAS and land application, and that the amendments restore some authority to localities with an effective date of Jan. 1, 2027. Staff offered to provide a detailed analysis and to prepare ordinance options the county could adopt once the law takes effect.
What this means: The board signaled openness to further engagement and directed staff to provide legal and technical analysis. A formal testing request to DEQ or a county ordinance was not adopted at the meeting; supervisors asked staff to schedule opportunities for public input and to return with recommended next steps under the amended state law.
