Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-08 Comments (2)McKee & Butler, P.L.C. 112 South Cameron Street P. C. Dra::,er 2097 Winchester, Virginia 22604-1297 (540)662-3486 Facsimile (540) 722-3787 E -Mail: bmblawl ftcomcast.net Peter K. McKee (1934-1967) Benjamin M. Butler Stephen G. Butler Edwin B. Yost October 17, 2008 VIA FACSIMILE & E-MAIL Eric Lawrence, Director Frederick County Planning Department 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 and Mark R. Cheran, Zoning Administrator Frederick County Planning Department 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: CUP Application #11-08 — Diane and Andrew Hirshfeld Properties identified as Tax Map Nos. 80-1-9 and 80-1-10 My File No. 2007-0082 Dear Eric & Mark: I have been authorized by Andrew Hirshfeld and his wife, Diane Hirshfeld, to request a postponement to a later date on the application for the Conditional Use Permit now pending before the Frederick County Board of Supervisors and currently set for a public hearing on October 22, 2008. I would request a postponement on the public hearing. The purpose of the continuance is to allow the Hirshfelds the opportunity to try to work with the citizens of Star Tannery as to what would be acceptable to those citizens for the property owned by the Hirshfelds. In addition, both I and Mr. and Mrs. Hirshfeld will be working with Gary Lofton, the Supervisor in Back Creek District, to try to reach an acceptable agreement by all parties. Eric Lawrence and Mark Cheran Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Very truly yours, BMB:jds cc: Mr. & Mrs. Andrew Hirshfeld (via e-mail) October 17, 2008 Page 2 Mark Cheran From: Ben Butler [bmblaw1@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 3:54 PM To: Eric Lawrence Cc: Mark Cheran; DHirshfeid@aol.com Subject: CUP Application #11-08 - Hirshfeld Eric: I have been in contact with my client, Andrew Hirshfeld, with regard to the sports camp which he would propose at Star Tannery and which is set for hearing on October 22nd at 7:15 p.m. (Conditional Use Permit Application No. 11-08). The Hirshfelds have authorized me to offer the following conditions which would be acceptable to them in order to have the sports camp approved. 1. The Hirshfelds would be willing to limit the commercial use of the property to 25 campers and counselors at any given time; and, 2. Use the sports camp on a commercial basis for 100 days of use in any calendar year. 3. The Hirshfelds would further agree that between October 1st and January 31st, the use of the property as a sports camp would not occur during the firearm hunting season in effect in Frederick County for the months of October 1st through January 31st. The above reduction in use as a sports camp is approximately 27% of the calendar year and is made in an attempt to try to be accepted by the neighbors and citizens living in the Star Tannery region. The Hirshfelds, of course, continue with the previous quiet times and there would no illuminated fields or sporting activities after sunset or before sunrise. Any irrigation which took place on the premises would be from natural runoff of water and would not be effected by drilling of wells to irrigate the fields. I would appreciate it if you would include these conditions in the packet which is sent to the Board of Supervisors and with the hope that the Hirshfields sincerely want to have a peaceful coexistence with their neighbors and the citizens of Star Tannery. Very truly yours, Ben Benjamin M. Butler, Esquire McKee & Butler, PLC 112 South Cameron Street P. O. Drawer 2097 Winchester, VA 22604 Phone: (540) 662-3486 Fax: (540) 722-3787 bmblaw1(a�comcast.net Mark Cheran From: James Walpole Orwalpole@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 2:44 PM To: rncheran@co.frederick.va.us Subject: Conditional use permit 11 -08 --Paddy Run h ear Star Tannery Road Mr. Cheran and members of the Planning Commission -- Thank you for letting me submit comments on this important matter in our community. Please deny the permit. As you know the community is pretty rural and wooded. The roads are OK but often in need of repair. They are pretty small, and very winding --and a bit dangerous. we all probably know people in the area who have been towed out of a ditch on the side, or hit a deer. The dedicated volunteer fire and rescue team do a fine job, but they are certainly stretched in ternis of personal and financial resources. They have the same trouble on the roads. --Fire- Rescue Protection --the facility will overload an already stretched and dedicated fire and rescue service in the community. The nature of such a camp is that --now and for years to come-- there will certainly be activities that will need support from Rescue resources --it just stands to reason. Approving the Camp facility will disadvantage the community relating to fundamental rescue if not fire protection and result in additional/costly resources being needed. The burden is being unfairly borne by the community. Approval of the Camp permit will result in current and future damage. Vehicles necessary for construction and operation of this Camp facility will damage community roads in the are. The roads are small and winding and equipment trucks for operation and upkeep of the camp will put too heavy a burden on the already worn roads. The roads were not made for high volume and heavy vehicles --the winters are hard enough on them. Allowing the Camp operation --now and in the future-- will result in additional costs to the community to keep the roads in repair to service the camp --Star Tannery Road, Paddy Run Lane, as well as state roads nearby ( such as rt. 55). Besides construction, there will be a constant flow of suppliers, camper families,food and beverage trucks, utility service and repair, more mail trucks, etc. It is a long term business that will harm the local community roads, now and later. Your approval of the Camp permit will cause great safety risks throughout the community by substantially increasing vehicle traffic on already dangerous small and winding roads. These roars are dangerous enough --especially early morning and dusk --and the additional vehicles necessitated to construct, maintain, repair and operate the camp bring an unacceptable risk to this community. There are dangers enough with rain and snow and wildlife on these roads. Current residents in the area who "straighten out the curves" , drive too fast, might be new drivers, possibly senior drivers, and those talking on cell phones are current risks. Same with necessary school buses, mail trucks and delivery, and farm vehicles. There is no choice for these. However the Board does have a choice not to substantially increase safety risks on these small roads in the community --it has a responsibility to look out for the greater good in making its decisions. It should not allow the camp --with all is construction, repair and many years of future activity --to go forward. Can you put me on an email list regarding the status of this matter? Thank you James Walpole arwaIpole comcast.net Mairk Cheran Ana From: Alicia Reaney [alicia.reaney@rliinsassoc.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 5:02 PM To: mcheran@co.frederick.va.us Subject: Agenda 10/1/2008 CUP11-08 Hirshfield I would like to express my opposition to the approval of this zoning. I am part owned of property nearby and feel this is not in the best interest for the residents in the area. The roads are very narrow and it will bring a large amount of traffic in a concentrated amount of time. It could be potential for more auto accidents with crowded narrow roads. It would be a big burden for services from our volunteer fire dept and rescue personnel. This would take away services for other residents. This is a residential/farming area and I feel opening it up to a commercial operation would open the door for other commercial exposure spoiling the low traffic rates and pleasant environment now in the area. Thank you for considering my opinion. Alicia Reaney Don't forget RLI writes all types ofpersonal, business, life & health insurance. PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN AND SEWAGE DISP©SAL, NARRATIVE Prepared For: Drew Hirshfeld 2507 Charlestown sane Reston, VA 20191 Prepared By: Racey Engineering, PLLC Racey Project No.: 3778 May 27, 2008 Racey Engineering, PLLC 3778 Preliminary Design Calculations PRELIMINARY SEWAGE DISPOSAL EVALUATION — FLOW CA LCULATIONS Project: Matthews Ridge Camp Date: 07/01/08 Camp Flows: 35 No Laundry 60 gpd/persor* 2100 gpd 5 w/ Laundry 75 gpd/person** 375 gpd 1 otal 2475 gpd Flow Rates from Table 3 "Contributing Sewage Flow Estimates" from the VDI -I -Sewage Collection and Treatment Regulations. Person is defined in the above calculation as either a camper, or staff member. *35 People without Laundry: Per 12 VAC 5-610-670 Sewage Flows are based on 60 gpd/person. This is 75 gpd minus i 5 gpd for laundering. **5 People with Laundry: Per 12 VAC 5-610-670 Sewage Flews are based on 75 gpd/person. This value is based on full-time residence for the owner's family. (gpd) — gallons per day (gpm) — gallons per minute Camp Daily Flow 2475 gpd 1.71 gpm Minimum Design Flow 2475 gpd 1.71 gpm System Design Flow 2500 gpd 1.74 fpm Pre -Treatment: There will be a kitchen in the proposed dining hall. The kitchen unit should be plumbed separately from the main sewer system. A properly sized grease trap will be provided to remove fats, grease, etc. from the kitchen waste streams. The grease trap has not been designed in this stage of preliminary engineering, but once more detailed information is received for the kitchen, an adequately sized grease trap will be included in the design. Typically the grease trap is sized to be one to two times the volume of the daily kitchen flow. Solids and buildup will be pumped regularly by a local grease collector. The solids loading should be monitored at start-up to determine the regular pumping frequency. Primary and Secondary Treatment — Preliminary Design: Typical influent concentrations are expected to be domestic strength. Typical influent concentrations are 220 mg/1 BODS and 220 mg/i TSS. (Date provided by Metcalf and Eddy Third Ed. 199 11) Page 1 of 5 Racey Engineering, PLLC 3778 Preliminary Design Calculations The main treatment system being recommended at this time is a septic tank with a single MicroFAST 3.0 treatment system by Bio-Microbics, Inc. as the secondary treatment. The treatment system will treat 3000 gpd, which is greater than the 2500 gpd system design flow. The proposed MicroFAST system will have solids separation/pretreatment prior to the secondary treatment. This treatment will be provided by a 5,000 gallon septic tank which will provide the required 48 hour storage capacity. The septic tank will be fitted with a single 3,000 gallon effluent filter to help facilitate the solids separation during the pretreatment step. This would be a Bio-Microbics SaniTee or equal. Septic tanks typically provide 50% reduction in BODS and 75% reduction in TSS. With the system processing 2,500 gpd, the septic tank will leave a remaining 110 mg/l BODS and 55 mg/I TSS to be treated by the secondary treatment system (MicroFAST System). The MicroFAST system has a removal efficiency of 90% for TSSBOD5 when used with a solid separating pre-treatment system. The effluent leaving the MicroFAST system will have expected BODS levels of 1 lmg/l and expected TSS levels of 5.5 mg/l. The treatment levels will be acceptable to meet the 30 mg/1 BOD / 30 mg/I TSS removal requirements. Treatment for Nitrogen is an additional concern for mass drain fields. The treatment system should see an average of 60 mg/l total Nitrogen (Metcalf and Eddy). A septic tank typically has a treatment efficiency of 25%, leaving 45 mg/l remaining to be treated in the secondary system. The MicroFAST system has an expected 70% treatment efficiency of Nitrogen, which would leave an effluent level exiting the secondary treatment system of 13.5 mg/1. A target level of 5 mg/1 of Nitrate leaving the property must be achieved. The 13.5 mg/1 of Nitrate in the effluent distributed over the dilution area shown on the site map will be less than the 5 mg/1 target level (See Nitrate Calculations for Details). Solids removal from the primary and secondary treatment unit will be regularly removed by a septage hauler and disposed of at the local Waste Water Treatment Plant with capacity for the septage handling. Solids Treatment will not be provided on the site. See the attached calculations for solids generation and removal schedule. At a minimum, an expected pumping cycle for the septic tank and the FAST tank will be once a year. There will be enough storage in the pumping/piping system to ensure operation over a period of time that would be needed should a pump replacement be required. Page 2 of 5 Racey Engineering, PLLC Treatment Efficiency Summary BOD5 - Influent 220 m /I Efficiency Effluent Septic Tank Treatment 50% 110 m /l FAST Treatment 90% 11 m /I TSS - Influent 220 m /I Efficiency Effluent Septic Tank Treatment 75% 55 m /I FAST Treatment 90% 5.5 m /I Nitrate - Influent 60 m /I Efficiency Effluent Septic Tank Treatment 25% 45 m /I FAST Treatment 70% 13.5 m /I Disposal: 3778 Preliminary Design Calculations Disposal of the treated effluent will be by a drip irrigation disposal system. Soil Scientists have completed a site soil evaluation for determination of the infiltration values for the various fields within the system. The square foot requirement for the size of the fields is shown separately within this package. Distribution to the drain field will be completed through dosing procedure. An equalization/pump chamber will be provided to include a single pump for dosing of the drain field. The field is being set up into 6 zones which will be controlled by a Zoeller Series 6000 K -Valve. Dosing Rates The MicroFAST Unit will be dosed by a Zoeller Model #E-284 solids pump at 14 gpm and be controlled by a Rhombus Model 112 control panel. The second pump tank is to pressurize the drainfield with a Zoeller Model #50320009 effluent pump at a maximum of 13.6 gpm and be controlled by a FCP Flexco Time Dose Control Panel. Reliability and Alarms: Due to the type of facility generating the waste stream, it is not intended to provide trailered power generator capacity or on site power generator capacity for this facility. if the power fails, it is expected that the facility water will stop and flow to the treatment system will cease. Appropriate storage will be provided within the septic tank to provide necessary storage. The pump systems, treatment systems, and the disposal systems will Page 3 of 5 Racey Engineering, PLLC 3778 Preliminary Design Calculations all be provided with high water level alarms and sized to handle unexpected high flows to account for any surges that may occur due to the high usage or peaks after power outages. All pumping systems and mechanical systems will be provided with the appropriate controls in weather tight enclosures and each will be provided with the necessary audible and visual alarms alerting of high water situations in the appropriate locations. The locations for the alarms will be determined during the design phase of the project. At this time it is expected that the alarms would be provided at the treatment/pump site and an alarm internal to one of the buildings. Operation and Maintenance: It will be recommended that the owner enter into a contract with the service company to operate, inspect and maintain this system after it has been completed and operating. The design of the system will comply with the VDH standards and details. Overall Campground Narrative: The attached Preliminary Site Plan and the narrative presented here is to represent the probable plan for the proposed Matthew's Ridge Camp. The campground is intended to operate with three cabins, each approximately 700 sf. There will also be proposed to be a Recreation and Dining Hall, an office, a pool, basketball court, and a recreation field. The existing pond is shown on the preliminary site plan as having a potential future expansion. There is a proposed gravel parking area near the entrance to the camp ground on Paddy's Run Road. Page 4 of 5 Racey Engineering, PLLC Nitrate Loading Calculations: 3778 Preliminary Design Calculations Nitrate calculation is based on GMP #72 dated June 29, 1995 and document "Calculating the Nitrate Concentration in Ground Water below Mass Drainfields" by the Bureau of Sewage and Water, VA Department of Health dated November 1, 1988. Step 1: Rainwater Infiltration RI = Annual Rainfall in inches* R = Absorbed rainfall in inches (50% of RI) D = Acres available for infiltration of rain ** DR = Dilution Rainfall RI 38 inches R 19 inches D 20 acres DR 28,120 gallons *Rainfall data provided by SCS -Soil Survey for Frederick County dated 1987 'Dilution area footprint can be seen on Preliminary Site Plan by Racey Engineering, PLLC Step 2: Mass Balance Calculation Q = Flow of wastewater per day Q 2,475 d OD = Wastewater plus dilution rainfall OD 30,595 d n = Nitrate" concentration in wastewater effluent n 13.5 m 11 *Conservative assumption of all nitrogen in effluent is in the nitrate form Mass Balance Equation: N = Nitrate in conc. In aquifer N = (QIQD) x n I NJ 1.09 1 rngll Target Nitrate Concentration = 5 mgll Water Mounding Below Mass Drain Field Calculatio: Water Mounding Computations will be performed for the final septic system design is complete. Page 5 of 5 1`TQe: 7,ne TCS n T�€ 'fig is t ( 'ni ir.! dlwc�„n, -5, �� n 2.r i i:.LunC L i:� J i COV) :�,STJ TTIIDH PER)COLHATi 110N R,�,.T s� pct_ o c 21 M90 - NUMBER si9F --ct- OPLE PER MEEK so NUMBER 3KA' GALLONS PER PERSON F. R Iv)AV c 0 si b°C173 to chap " OO PRI FIff" SIM, 217 SQ. M / 100 GAS,. f 237 sq. ft /100 gallons (4800 gal/day" x 3 for LPD conversion = 3t42 She Ft Depth to rock, Pans or impervious strata Depth to gray,water mottles % Slope Required increase of the absorption area (pereent) Reserve required? Recommended installation depth 21 79 Lfra VE RP -1 5 %® 17%, Les g 50°/® 6®8" TOTAL "FOOTPRINT" SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIRED (subject to change) Primary, 17% increase and 50% reserve for a total of 54,841 5g,. Ft. need �..,li�,,LT11 TOTAL "FOOTPRINT" SQUARE. FOOTAGE IN DES IG'N (sui ?' to change) G' Approximately 60,000 Sq. Ft. staked in field (300' L x 200' `� BARRY HAEY Mo..132 Eric Lawrence From: Jay Tibbs btibbs@co.frederick.va.us] Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2009 3:20 PM To: 'Bill Ewing'; 'Chuck DeHaven'; 'Dick Shickle'; Gary Dove: 'Gary Lofton'; 'Gene Fisher'; 'Philip Lemieux' Cc: 'Eric Lawrence'; mcheran@co.frederick.va.us ,JUUJeCA. FW: Conditional use permit 11-08 John asked that I forward the following e-mail to you for your information. Jay E. Tibbs Deputy County Administrator County of Frederick, VA 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 540-665-6382 Fax: 540-667-0370 E-mail: -itibbs(@co.frederick.va.us -----Original Message ----- From: jrwalpole@comcast.net [mailto:jrwalpole@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2009 12:07 PM To: iriley@co.frederick.va.us Subject: Conditional use permit 11-08 **This message was sent via the website email form.** Sender: james walpole Email: jrwalpole(comcast.net IP address: 68.83.209.155 Date: 5/20/2009 12:07:13 PM CC: Message: Please forward this to all Supervisors --thank you Thank you for letting me submit comments on this important matter in our community. Please deny the conditional use permit 11-08. As you know the community is pretty rural and wooded. The roads are OK but often in need of repair. They are pretty small, and very winding --and a bit dangerous. we all probably know people in the area who have been towed out of a ditch on the side, or hit a deer. The dedicated volunteer fire and rescue team do a fine job, but they are certainly stretched in terms of personal and financial resources. They have the same trouble on the roads. --Fire- Rescue Protection --the facility will overload an already stretched and dedicated fire and rescue service in the community. The nature of such a camp is that --now and for years to come-- there will certainly be activities that will need support from Rescue resources --it just stands to reason. Approving the Camp facility will disadvantage the community relating to fundamental rescue if not fire protection and result in additional/costly resources being needed. The burden is being unfairly borne by the community. 1 Approval of the Camp permit will result in current and future damage. Vehicles ne-essG,y for construction and operation of this Camp facility will damage community roads in the are . The roads are small and winding and equipment trucks for operation and upkeep of the camp will put too heavy a burden on the already worn roads. The roads were not made for high volume and heavy vehicles --the winters are hard enough on them. Allowing the Camp operation --now and in the future-- will result in additional costs to the community to keep the roads in repair to service the camp --Star Tannery Road, Paddy Run Lane, as well as state roads nearby ( such as rt. 55). Besides construction, there will be a constant flow of suppliers, camper families,food and beverage trucks, utility service and repair, more mail trucks, etc. It is a long term business that will harm the local community roads, now and later. The owner would be absentee and thus not supervise the operations! Not a sensible situation. If a problem arises and people are hurt, who will be responsible? This entire operation is simply not compatible with the rural -residential -farming community profile of the entire area. Please do not allow the area to be disrupted and endangered Your approval of the Camp permit will cause great safety risks throughout the community by substantially increasing vehicle traffic on already dangerous small and winding roads. These roars are dangerous enough --especially early morning and dusk --and the additional vehicles necessitated to construct, maintain, repair and operate the camp bring an unacceptable risk to this community. There are dangers enough with rain and snow and wildlife on these roads. Current residents in the area who &quot;straighten out the curves&quot; , drive too fast, might be new drivers, possibly senior drivers, and those talking on cell phones are current risks. Same with necessary school buses, mail trucks and delivery, and farm vehicles. There is no choice for these. However the Board does have a choice not to substantially increase safety risks on these small roads in the community --it has a responsibility to look out for the greater good in making its decisions. It should not allow the camp --with all is construction, repair and many years of future activity --to go forward. Can you put me on an email list regarding the status of this matter? Also --would you forward to all other Supervisors since I am not sure how to do that. Thank you. James Walpole 2 COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA. PHONE: (540)463-7136 Department of Health ROCKBRIDGE SQUARE SHOPPING CENTER FAX: (540)463-3892 OFFICE OF DRINKING WATER LEXINGTON, WALKER STREET LEXINGTON, VIRGINIA 24450-2431 Lexington Environmental Engineering Field Office April 7, 2008 SUBJECT: Frederick County Water - General (Hirshfeld Property) Mr. Drew Hirshfeld 2507 Charlestown Lane Reston, VA 20191 Dear Mr. Hirshfeld: Enclosed are copies of the completed inorganic, metals, nitrite, nitrate, cyanide, and volatile organic contaminant (VOC) analyses performed on water samples collected from the proposed well for your proposed summer camp on February 21, 2008. These analyses are for your information and indicate that the water complies with current chemical standards for the constituents tested with the exception of the iron (0.93 mg/1), manganese (0.079 mg/1), and turbidity (11 NTU) concentrations. The maximum allowable limits for these parameters are 0.3 mg/l for iron, 0.05 mg/l for manganese, and 1.0 NTU for turbidity. The analyses also indicated the presence of toluene (0.002 mg/1) which is well below its maximum allowable limit of 1.0 mg/l. Also, enclosed is a copy of the completed evaluation of the 20 -sample bacteriological series conducted on 20 and 21 February 2008. This evaluation did not indicate the presence of either total or fecal coliform bacteria in any of the samples analyzed. Based on the attached results, iron and manganese removal treatment facilities need to be provided to ensure compliance with current drinking water standards. Plans and specifications, as prepared by a Virginia licensed engineer, must be submitted to this office for the development and connection of the well to the facility's water system. Should you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me. V ry truly yo s, � 'I 1 � Harold T. Eberly District Engineer HTE/ bt/ 040708_5 cc Frederick County Health Department VDH - Richmond Central V/DHODF H€ALMHNT AroteclaW You and Your fnviromnent W W W.VDH.VIRGINIA.GOV `JIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH �eirfr��_vtRGINIA OFFICE OF DRINKING WATER t?'EPARTMEN7 Of rtEALrat Lexington Field Office Protecting yri gnd YourEnvirOrimortf 131 Walker Street Lexington \/A 24450 Phone: (540) 463-7136 Fax: (540) 463-3892 Inorganics MR. DREW HIRSHFELD Location DISTRICT 07 2507 CHARLESTOWN LANE Lab 00090 - DCLS RESTON, VA 20191 Sample Number 1569083 Sample Type RT PWSID 2069335 IHRSHFELD PROPERTY Collection Date/Time 02/21/2008 9:00 am Facility _W_L0_01 WELL NO. I— _ _ Date Received at Lab 02/21/2008 Sampling Point RW001 WELL 1 DISCH TAP (RW) Taken By _ H. CORBIN Last Water Use Parameter Concentration Limit and Standard Test Result (Exceedances in Bold) 0100 TURBIDITY 11 NTU 1003 NITROGEN -AMMONIA (AS N) < 0.04 MG/L MRL 1017 CHLORIDE 250 MG/L SMCL < 5 MG/L MRL 1025 FLUORIDE 4 MG/L PMCL < 0.2 MG/L MRL 1027 HYDROGEN SULFIDE *0 MG/L 1044 ORTHOPHOSPHATE *0 MG/L 1049 SILICA 8.7 MG/L 1055 SULFATE 250 MG/L SMCL 37.8 MG/L 1058 RESIDUE, FILTERABLE VOLATILE 10 MG/L 1059 RESIDUE, FILTERABLE FIXED 264 MG/L 1064 CONDUCTIVITY 449 UMHOS/CM 1905 COLOR 15 COLOR UNITS SMCL *0 CU 1910 CORROSIVITY SMCL 12.31 AGGR 1914 HARDNESS, CALCIUM 224 MG/L 1915 HARDNESS, TOTAL (AS CAC03) 248 MG/L 1925 PH 7.64 PH 1927 ALKALINITY, TOTAL 208 MG/L 1928 ALKALINITY, BICARBONATE 208 MG/L 1929 ALKALINITY, CARBONATE *0 MG/L 1930 SOLIDS, TOTAL DISSOLVED (TDS) 500 MG/L SMCL 274 MG/L 1997 LANGELIER INDEX 0.2534 LANG *Lab reported as less than minimum detection level. Date results received in ODW 03/14/2008 Page 1 of 2 Date Printed 03/17/200811:06:56 AM PWSID 2069335 Sample Number 1569083 The results on this form indicate that all contaminants tested are below the maximum contaminant levels as set forth by the US EPA. The next INORGANICS sample from this sampling point is due MONTHLY. If you have any questions, please contact us at the number listed above. Reviewed by Date results received in ODW 03/14/2008 Page 2 of 2 Date Printed 03/17/2008 11:06:56 AM VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH -;: VIRGINIA OFFICE OF DRINKING WATER VEPARTMIENT ff for- HEALTH Lexington Field Office Pr»feeti0g YGu snd Your Envfrurir ent 131 Walker Street Lexington, VA 24450 Phone: (540) 463-7136 Fax: (540) 463-3892 Metals MR. DREW HIRSHFELD Location DISTRICT 07 2507 CHARLESTOWN LANE Lab 00090 - DCLS RESTON, VA 20191 Sample Number 1569084 Sample Type RT Collection Date/Time 02/21/2008 9:00 am PWSID 2069335 HIRSHFELD PROPERTY Facility WL001 WE_LL_N_O._I Date Received at Lab 02/21/2008 Sampling Point RW001 WELL I DISCH TAP (RW) Taken By I1. CORBIN Last Water Use Parameter Concentration Limit and Standard Test Result (Exceedances in Bold) 1002 ALUMINUM 0.05 — 0.20 MG/L SMCL < 0.05 MG/L MRL 1005 ARSENIC 0.010 MG/L PMCL < 0.002 MG/L MRL 1010 BARIUM 2 MG/L PMCL < 0.2 MG/L MRL 1015 CADMIUM 0.005 MG/L PMCL < 0.002 MG/L MRL 1020 CHROMIUM 0.1 MG/L PMCL < 0.01 MG/L MRL 1022 COPPER 1.3 MG/L Action Level < 0.2 MG/L MRL 1028 IRON 0.3 MG/L SMCL 0.93 MG/L 1030 LEAD 0.015 MG/L Action Level < 0.002 MG/L MRL 1032 MANGANESE 0.05 MG/L SMCL 0.079 MG/L 1035 MERCURY 0.002 MG/L PMCL < 0.0002 MG/L MRL 1036 NICKEL 0.1 MG/L PMCL < 0.01 MG/L MRL 1045 SELENIUM 0.05 MG/L PMCL < 0.01 MG/L MRL 1052 SODIUM < 5 MG/L MRL 1074 ANTIMONY 0.006 MG/L PMCL < 0.002 MG/L MRL 1075 BERYLLIUM 0.004 MG/L PMCL < 0.002 MG/L MRL 1085 THALLIUM 0.002 MG/L PMCL < 0.002 MG/L MRL 1095 ZINC 5 MG/L SMCL < 0.2 MG/L MRL Date results received in ODW 03/18/2008 Page 1 of 1 Date Printed 03/20/20088:17:30 AM VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH EDHOFVIRGINIA OFFICE OF DRINKING WATER DEPARTMENT HEALTH Lexington Field Office Prnfineffng You and Your Envirannrmuf 131 Walker Street MR. DREW HIRSHFELD 2507 CHARLESTOWN LANE RESTON, VA 20191 Lexington, VA 24450 Phone: (540) 463-7136 Fax: (540) 463-3892 Nitrate + Nitrite (Combined) I Location DISTRICT 07 Lab 00090 - DCLS Sample Number 1569086 Sample Type RT PWSID 2069335 HIRSHFELD PROPERTY Collection Date/Time 02/21/2008 9:00 am Facility WL001 WELL NO. 1 Date Received at Lab 02/21/2008 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — --- — -- -- — — — — — — — — Sampling Point RWO01 WELL 1 DISCH TAP (RW) Taken By H. CORBIN Last Water Use Parameter Concentration Limit and Standard Test Result (Exceedances in Bold) 1038 NITRATE+NITRITE (AS N) 10 MG/L PMCL < 0.05 MG/L MRL The results on this form indicate that all contaminants tested are below the maximum contaminant levels as set forth by the US EPA. The next NITRATE + NITRITE (COMBINED) sample from this sampling point is due MONTHLY. If you have any questions, please contact us at the number listed above. Reviewed by Date results received in ODW 04/02/2008 Page 1 of 1 Date Printed 04/04/2008 8:25:57 AM VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WM INIA OFFICE OF DRINKING WATER H1, f ;TAf�1`fs41~1fT' OFf, Lexington Field Office , V` D �P. aft-cvnj 3145U at q )�dLPeniliironin"rit 131 Walker Street MR. DREW HIRSHFELD 2507 CHARLESTOWN LANE RESTON, VA 20191 Lexington, VA 24450 Phone: (540) 463-7136 Fax: (540) 463-3892 Nitrite -N (iced) Location DISTRICT 07 Lab 00090 - DCLS Sample Number 1569085 Sample Type RT PWSID 2069335 HIRSHFELD PROPERTY Collection Date/Time 02/21/2008 9:00 am Facility WL001 WELL NO. 1 Date Received at Lab 02/21/2008 - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Sampling Point RW001 WELL 1 DISCH TAP (RW) Taken By H. CORBIN Last Water Use Parameter Concentration Limit and Standard Test Result (Exceedances in Bold) 1041 NITRITE (AS N) 1 MG/L PMCL < 0.05 MG/L MRL G The results on this form indicate that all contaminants tested are below the maximum contaminant levels as set forth by the US EPA. The next NITRITE -N (ICED) sample from this sampling point is due MONTHLY. If you have any questions, please contact us at the number listed above. Reviewed by 1X_ Date results received in ODW 03/10/2008 Page 1 of 1 Date Printed 03/14/2008 8:29:44 AM VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH YtRGIhlEA OFFICE OF DRINKING WATER ' DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Lexington Field Office Prrtfe€tiny Yuu awtYour Envtrornnmw l 131 Walker Street MR. DREW HIRSHFELD 2507 CHARLESTOWN LANE RESTON, VA 20191 Lexington, VA 24450 Phone: (540) 463-7136 Fax: (540) 463-3892 Cyanide i Location DISTRICT 07 Lab 00090 - DCLS Sample Number 1569082 Sample Type RT PWSID 2069335 HIRSHFELD PROPERTY Collection Date/Time 02/21/2008 9:00 am Facility_ WL001 WELL NO. 1 Date Received at Lab 02/21/2008 Sampling Point RW001 WELL 1 DISCH TAP (RW) Taken By H. CORBIN Last Water Use Parameter Concentration Limit and Standard Test Result (Exceedances in Bold) 1024 CYANIDE 0.2 MG/L PMCL < 0.01 MG/L MRL The results on this form indicate that all contaminants tested are below the maximum contaminant levels as set forth by the US EPA. The next CYANIDE sample from this sampling point is due MONTHLY. If you have any questions, please contact us at the number listed above. Reviewed by If Date results received in ODW 03/13/2008 Page 1 of 1 Date Printed 03/17/2008 11:07:08 AM VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH V/-D-HOF VIRGINIA OFFICE OF DRINKING WATER DEPARTMENT HEALTH Lexington Field Office Ptis[deig Yov arid Your Envitarwr "r`t 131 Walker Street Lexington, UA 24450 Phone: (540) 463-7136 Fax: (540) 463-3892 VOCC MR. DREW HIRSHFELD Location DISTRICT 07 2507 CHARLESTOWN LANE Lab 00090 - DCLS RESTON, VA 20191 Sample Number 1569107 Sample Type RT PWSID 2069335 HIRSHFELD PROPERTY Collection Date/Time 02/21/2008 9:00 am Facility _ W_LO_O1 WELL NO. 1 Date Received at Lab 02/21/2008 Sampling Point RW001 WELL 1 DISCH TAP (RW) Taken By H. CORBIN Last Water Use Parameter Concentration Limit and Standard Test Result (Exceedances in Bold) 1925 PH 1.6 PH 2030 P-ISOPROPYLTOLUENE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2210 CHLOROMETHANE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2212 DICHLORODIFLUOROMETHANE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2214 BROMOMETHANE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2216 CHLOROETHANE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2218 TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHANE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2224 TRANS-I13-DICHLOROPROPENE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2228 CIS-1,3-DICHLOROPROPENE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2232 1,2-DIBROMOETHYLENE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2246 HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2248 NAPHTHALENE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2251 METHYL TERT-BUTYL ETHER (MTBE) < 5 UG/L MRL 2378 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE 0.07 MG/L PMCL < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2380 CIS-1,2-DICHLOROETHYLENE 0.07 MG/L PMCL < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2408 DIBROMOMET1 ANE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2410 1, 1 -DICHLOROPROPENE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2412 1,3-DICHLOROPROPANE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2414 1,2,3-TRICHLOROPROPANE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2416 2,2-DICHLOROPROPANE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2418 1,2,4-TRIMET14YLBENZENE < 0.5 UG/L MRL Date results received in ODW 03/04/2008 Page 1 of 3 Date Printed 03/06/2008 1:20:33 PM PWSID 2069335 Sample Number 1569107 2420 1,2,3-TRICHLOROBENZENE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2422 N-BUTYLBENZENE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2424 1,3,5-TRIMETHYLBENZENE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2426 TERT-BUTYLBENZENE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2428 SEC-BUTYL13ENZENE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2430 BROMOCHLOROMETHANE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2931 DIBROMOCHLOROPROPANE (DBCP) < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2941 CHLOROFORM < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2942 BROMOFORM < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2943 BROMODICHLOROMETHANE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2944 CHLORODIBROMOMETHANE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2955 XYLENES 10 MG/L PMCL < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2964 DICHLOROMETHANE 0.005 MG/L PMCL < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2965 O-CHLOROTOLUENE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2966 P-CHLOROTOLUENE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2967 M -DICHLOROBENZENE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2968 O -DICHLOROBENZENE 0.6 MG/L PMCL < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2969 P -DICHLOROBENZENE 0.075 MG/L PMCL < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2976 VINYL CHLORIDE 0.002 MG/L PMCL < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2977 1, 1 -DICHLOROETHYLENE 0.007 MG/L PMCL < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2978 1,1-DICHLOROETHANE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2979 TRANS-I,2-DICHLOROETHYLENE 0.1 MG/L PMCL < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2980 1,2-DICHLOROETHANE 0.005 MG/L PMCL < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2981 1,1,1 -TRICHLOROETHANE 0.2 MG/L PMCL < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2982 CARBON TETRACHLORIDE 0.005 MG/L PMCL < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2983 1,2-DICHLOROPROPANE 0.005 MG/L PMCL < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2984 TRICHLOROETHYLENE 0.005 MG/L PMCL < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2985 1,1,2 -TRICHLOROETHANE 0.005 MG/L PMCL < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2986 1,1,1,2 -TETRACHLOROETHANE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2987 TETRACHLOROETHYLENE 0.005 MG/L PMCL < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2988 1,1,2,2 -TETRACHLOROETHANE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2989 MONOCHLOROBENZENE 0.1 MG/L PMCL < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2990 BENZENE 0.005 MG/L PMCL < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2991 TOLUENE 1 MG/L PMCL 0.002 MG/L Date results received in ODW 03/04/2008 Page 2 of 3 Date Printed 03/06/2008 1:20:33 PM PWSID 2069335 Sample Number 1.569107 2992 E T HYLBENZENE 0.7 MG/L PMOL < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2993 BROMOBENZENE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2994 ISOPROPYLBENZENE < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2996 STYRENE 0.1 MG/L PMCL < 0.5 UG/L MRL 2998 N-PROPYLBENZENE < 0.5 UG/L MRL The results on this form indicate that all contaminants tested are below the maximum contaminant levels as set forth by the US EPA. The next VOCC sample from this sampling point is due FIRST QUARTER OF 2009. If you have any questions, please contact us at the number listed above. Reviewed by Date results received in ODW 03/04/2008 Page 3 of 3 Date Printed 03/06/2008 1:20:33 PM ptBactiDist 04/07/2008 Reject Reason Page 1 of 1 Report Total FO - Bacti Results for 01/01/2008 through 03/31/2008 Run date:04/07/2008 Method: MPN SamplelD Type PWS Name/ Lab ID - Location - Sampler Req. Samp, Collect Date Collect Time TO 2069335 HIRSHFELD PROPERTY EC CL2 1 M 1569097 Q 00090 RWO01 WELL 1 DISCH WL00 H. CORBIN 02/21/08 4:30 0 1569089 Q 00090 RWO01 WELL 1 DISCH TAP H. CORBIN 02/21/08 0:30 0 0 0 1569090 Q 00090 RW001 WELL 1 DISCH TAP H. CORBIN 02/21/08 1:00 0 0 0 1569091 Q 00090 RWO01 WELL 1 DISCH TAP H. CORBIN 02/21/08~ 1:30 0 0 0 1569092 Q 00090 RWO01 WELL 1 DISCH TAP H. CORBIN 02/21/08- 2:00 0 0 0 0 1569093 Q 00090 RW001 WELL 1 DISCH TAP H. CORBIN 02/21/08" 2:30 0 0 0 1569094 Q 00090 RW001 WELL 1 DISCH TAP H. CORBIN 02/21/08' 3:00 0 0 0 1569096 Q 00090 RWO01 WELL 1 DISCH TAP H. CORBIN 02/21/08 4:00 0 0 1569106 Q 00090 RWO01 WELL 1 DISCH TAP H. CORBIN 02/21/08 9:00 0 0 0 0 1569098 Q 00090 RWO01 WELL 1 DISCH TAP H. CORBIN 02/21/08 5:00 0 0 0 1569099 Q 00090 RW001 WELL 1 DISCH TAP H. CORBIN 02/21/08" 5:30 0 0 0 1569100 Q 00090 RW001 WELL 1 DISCH TAPM H. CORBIN 02/21/08- 6:00 0 0 0 1569101 Q 00090 RWO01 WELL 1 DISCH TAP H. CORBIN 02/21/08 6:30 0 0 0 1569102 Q 00090 RWO01 WELL 1 DISCH TAP H.; CORBIN 02/21/08- 7:00 0 0 0 1569103 Q 00090 RWO01 WELL 1 DISCH TAP H. CORBIN 02/21/08 7:30 0 0 0 1569104 Q 00090 RW001 WELL 1 DISCH TAP H. CORBIN 02/21/08" 8:00 0 0 0 1569105 Q 00090 RW001 WELL 1 DISCH TAP H. CORBIN 02/21/08 8:30 0 0 0 1569095 Q 00090 RWO01 WELL 1 DISCH TAP H. CORBIN 02/21/08' 3:30 0 0 0 1569087 Q 00090 RWO01 WELL 1 DISCH TAP H. CORBIN 02/20/08 23:30 0 0 0 1569088 Q 00090 RWO01 WELL 1 DISCH TAP H. CORBIN 02/20/08 11:59 0 0 0 0 ptBactiDist 04/07/2008 Reject Reason Page 1 of 1 �y ATER QUALITY "POR -1 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA Department Of General Services DIVISION OF CONSOLIDATED LABORATORY SERVICES March 31, 2008 LIMS Ill: -15(9086 s�,.�;n..�� nlr; LieXinaI.VII iRcallona■ Office 13 �.�,.. 2 Aegion: 131 Walker Street, Process Lab: Lexington, VA24450-2431 RICHMOND - PWSID SOURCE 1 HIRSHFELD PROPERTY -VALLEY DRILLING CORP it 7200269 9172 JOHN S MOSBY HWY i; UPPERVILLE,VA 20184 jl FIELD DATA ITEMS: Date Receive 02/21/2008 Sampling Date 02/21/2008 Collected By H. CORBIN Order Number 90020186 Source ID WLOOI VDH Sample Type RT Fluoride Category CH PB CU Chemist Compliance Y Original Lims Number F Method Sample Location WELL l DISCH TAP (CONTAMINANT PARAMETER PMCL SMCL RESULT ANALYSIS ANALYST ID (Ppm) (Ppm) DATE r1038 Nitrate+Nitrite as N 10 < 0.05 mg/I 02/22/2008 RMUSTAK APPROVED BY: BDAVISI DATE APPROVED: 03/31/2008 67 WQR INORGANIC