Editor’s note: This blog post summarizes and highlights key findings and recommendations from the Center’s new report, Private Wells in Virginia: Data Gaps and Public Health Concerns around Nitrate Contamination of Groundwater.
Widely available clean drinking water is something that we usually take for granted. One of the main reasons is that the vast majority of the U.S. population has access to public water systems, which are in charge of providing safe drinking water to their users. However, in many parts of the country, particularly rural communities, people rely on private wells for sourcing their drinking water, which broadly lack regulatory safeguards for public health and well-being. This is particularly striking in Virginia, where 22 percent of the population relies on water supplied by a private well, with the share of private well use reaching upwards of 80 percent of the population in the Commonwealth’s most rural counties.
Although federal and state laws require testing for and treatment of contaminated water in municipal water systems, broadly, no such legal protection exists for private wells. In Virginia, the burden of testing and treating private well water is placed on the property owner. This represents a major concern in the Commonwealth, where people sourcing their drinking water from private wells face exposure to potentially harmful levels of contaminants in their water supply.
One of the most common of these contaminants is nitrate: a colorless, odorless, and tasteless compound that is toxic when ingested in significant amounts. Although there are many pathways for nitrate to enter a water supply, the most common means of contamination comes from agricultural processes, typically those related to intensive application of fertilizers that leach into aquifers and travel into private well water sources.
As we explore in a new report, there is little comprehensive information on the distribution and severity of nitrate contamination in private well systems in Virginia. This is attributable to a lack of uniform testing and data collection protocols within state agencies, as well as the dissemination of information that would alert residents to the likelihood of a threat and motivate them to test their water supply. The report also highlights the impact of contamination across communities facing worse socioeconomic conditions and less access to healthcare, representing serious equity considerations in how residents are able to respond to water contamination.
Findings and Analysis
In researching this report, we conducted a study of almost 19,000 private wells across the Commonwealth. We partnered with the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, in particular in its role with the Virginia Cooperative Extension, which carries out a testing support program, and the Southeast Rural Community Assistance Project, Inc., which supplied data spanning 14 years of private well sampling.
We structured our analysis around three main building blocks: the spatial distribution of contaminated wells, the spatial distribution of certain contributing factors (like animal feeding operations and preponderance of agricultural activities), and multiple socioeconomic and healthcare variables to understand the equity implications of nitrate contamination of private water wells.
The data shows that 1,128 wells (approximately 6 percent of the total sample) have nitrate levels above 5 mg/L, which studies have found to be potentially dangerous to human health. These numbers, which are already concerning, are an undercount of private well systems in the state with potentially or likely dangerous levels of nitrate contamination, highlighting that greater data collection, reporting, and access to data is necessary in Virginia to address public health risks tied to nitrate in private well water.
We also found important equity implications associated with nitrate contamination. There are hundreds of examples of high-nitrate wells located in tracts with high poverty and unemployment and where access to health care is difficult. These individuals are at a notorious disadvantage when it comes to bearing the costs of testing, remediating a contaminated well, or taking action once the consequences of ingesting contaminated water manifest.
Increasing both knowledge of sources of contamination and improving mitigation practices through funded best management practices will serve to reduce the risk of and severity of contamination. For example, we obtained data for animal feeding operations via a request to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality regarding currently operating facilities and found a strong overlap between their location, predicted levels of underground nitrate, and a concentration of elevated rates of nitrate in private wells.
Recommendations
The report includes several important recommendations at the state and federal levels. Critically, we recommend that Virginia should address the lack of information and the financial burden on private well owners, both for testing and remediation in case of contamination.
For example, expanding the Virginia Cooperative Extension Program’s well testing program, as well as providing a compensation program to offset costs for well water testing directly through the Virginia Department of Health (VDH), would reduce barriers to residents to conduct testing. The state should also require testing for nitrate (and other priority contaminants) at the time of well drilling and that all testing data be collected and stored by VDH’s Office of Drinking Water while also facilitating the submission of future testing results. This should be paired with a comprehensive public-facing database.
This regulatory landscape not only affects property owners, but renters as well, who have comparatively less agency to conduct testing or remediation. The state should require nitrate testing to be conducted by owners of properties that source their water from a private well and who lease their property to tenants. Testing should be conducted prior to the start of leasing the property and every three years subsequent.
Given the inequitable implications of nitrate contamination in private wells, the state should pay special attention to this issue and increase funding streams, particularly grant funding to private well owners, to facilitate remediation and ensure safe drinking water when contamination is present, with special focus on low- and moderate-income households.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency should re-evaluate nitrate’s safety levels based on current scientific evidence that expands on nitrate’s potential harmful effects, as well as increasing funding opportunities for private water systems to assist populations, who are often socioeconomically disadvantaged, to remediate their source of drinking water.
By expanding data collection, analysis, and dissemination and taking common sense actions to protect and empower residents, Virginia can meaningfully improve health outcomes for those who rely on private wells for their drinking water.
Showing 2,840 results
Bryan Dunning, Federico Holm | January 22, 2025
Widely available clean drinking water is something that we usually take for granted. One of the main reasons is that the vast majority of the U.S. population has access to public water systems, which are in charge of providing safe drinking water to their users. However, in many parts of the country, particularly rural communities, people rely on private wells for sourcing their drinking water, which broadly lack regulatory safeguards for public health and well-being. This is particularly striking in Virginia, where 22 percent of the population relies on water supplied by a private well, with the share of private well use reaching upwards of 80 percent of the population in the Commonwealth’s most rural counties. As we explore in a new report, there is little comprehensive information on the distribution and severity of nitrate contamination in private well systems in Virginia.
James Goodwin | January 14, 2025
On January 15, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (HSGAC) will take up the nomination of Russell Vought to be president-elect Donald Trump’s Director of the Office of Management Budget (OMB). Vought’s nomination lacks the potential fireworks of Pete Hegseth (Secretary of the Department of Defense), Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. (Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services), or Tulsi Gabbard (Director of National Intelligence), but his confirmation hearing will arguably be the most important of all Trump’s nominees.
Daniel Farber | January 2, 2025
President-elect Donald Trump’s picks for office provide a strong hint of what the next year will look like. In Trump’s first term, government actions were often overturned by the courts. Agencies made basic mistakes: skipping mandatory procedural steps, ignoring important evidence, or failing to address opposing arguments. Many people thought he had learned his lesson and would pick competent, experienced administrators this time. They were mostly wrong.
Minor Sinclair | December 11, 2024
The Center for Progressive Reform was founded during the George W. Bush era when Republicans won the White House and controlled both houses of Congress. As a candidate, Bush threatened to put in the crosshairs the nation’s social safety net, public protections, and the government’s role to protect civil rights, consumer rights, the environment, and the common good. The circumstances were similar to those we currently find ourselves in. Then, as now, our job was to secure the system of rules and regulations critical to protecting people from harm and the environment from degradation. Still, we now face challenges that are entirely new.
Daniel Farber | December 9, 2024
They say that history never repeats itself, but it often rhymes. As in many sequels, there will be many things we’ve seen before. Much of that consisted of an all-out attack on environmental law. If you hated the original, you won’t enjoy watching the same thing the second time around. But there are a few additions to the cast and some new backdrops on the set. Today, I’m going to talk about some areas of continuity.
Daniel Farber | December 2, 2024
When the U.S. Supreme Court overruled Chevron, one effect was to raise a crucial question about how courts should apply the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). For decades, courts have deferred to regulations issued by the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). The basis for that deference was a bit fuzzy, but now it is much fuzzier.
Daniel Farber | November 15, 2024
This is the final installment in our series of posts about the causation issue under NEPA. In our previous post, we laid out NEPA’s purposes and why analogies to tort law can misfire because that area of law has very different purposes. Today, building on our recent working paper, we explain the functional approach to causation that we believe courts should apply.
Daniel Farber | November 14, 2024
Overall, the Supreme Court has articulated a functional approach that is based on the purposes of NEPA, based on the structure and text of the statute. Today’s post will lay the foundation by discussing NEPA’s purposes and how they differ from those of another area of law often used as an analogy, tort law.
Daniel Farber | November 13, 2024
NEPA requires that agencies consider the environmental effects of their projects, but the petitioners in the Seven Counties case raise hairsplitting arguments to exclude obvious effects due to technicalities. We consider their arguments one by one.