The recent Maryland Geological Survey (MGS) presentation to the Tri-County Council received major media attention for its seeming revelation that residents could one day turn on their faucets and get nothing.  However, this presentation wasn’t the first to warn local authorities about our water supply.  Charles county aquifers are indeed reaching new lows.  Our fresh water supply is indeed limited.  But, county government has known about it for years.

The county was warned in 2005 by Charles County Groundwater Resource Update as well as by the May 2004 Report from the Governor’s Advisory Committee on the Management and Protection of the State's Water Resources.  In fact, they have known about the county’s water issues since the late 1980’s when, instead of drilling another public well, the County secured the rights to an additional 1.4 million gallons of water per day for Western Charles County from the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission.

“This is a very serious issue, one that I personally feel does not get the attention it should,” said Cheryl Thomas, a member of the County’s Water Resource Advisory Committee.  “…negative stories like this are usually dismissed as overblown and many say that the supply issue is not as bad as it appears.  However, the MGS and the [US Geological Survey] reports are quite the contrary.”

Conserve Water, but Expand Development

County government has a confusing history of action associated with protecting our water supply.  On one hand, the board of commissioners created a Water Resource Advisory Committee (WRAC) in early spring of 2006.  This group of local volunteers, county employees and water experts were assigned to study the data then make recommendations to the Board.  The Committee completed its task and presented its report with a prioritized list of recommendations to the Board nearly a year ago in late November 2006.  Charles County has also spent nearly $45 million since 1993 improving our infrastructure and water resource management .

“We’re trying to do everything we can to save the aquifers,” Commissioners’ President F. Wayne Cooper (D) told the La Plata Town Council this week, while the Council discussed the possibility of installing treated wastewater utility lines for use in future town developments. 

On the other hand, the Commissioners firmly state that our water supply isn’t in such danger that development needs to be curbed.  In the last year, the Board of Commissioners have approved several water intensive development projects:  Mirant Mid-Atlantic’s wet-scrubbers, La Plata’s Heritage Green development with its thirsty golf course (also approved by La Plata’s Town Council), and Waldorf’s Towne Centre South residential/commercial project, to name a few.

“There was a tone created after the [recent MGS briefing] that this is an imminent crisis, and it’s not,” said Commissioner Gary Hodge (D) at the September 25th Board of Commissioners meeting.

According to Chuck Beall, acting director of Planning & Growth Management, the county is in the process of hiring a Water Resource Manager; the WRAC advised the creation of this position.  The manager will oversee the county’s efforts to acquire and conserve potable water.  The WRAC suggested that the county have the manager in place by last spring.

Conservation Before Growth

Water conservation was high on the list of the Committee’s recommendations.  At this point, however, it’s county residents who’ve made the most significant changes to their rate of daily water use.  An October 16th county press release praises residents for dropping the county’s water consumption level by 10 percentage points. 

“At the beginning of October water usage in Charles County was at about 82 percent capacity, but as of October 13, usage has dropped to 73 percent,” stated the county media relations department.

To further encourage water conservation among consumers, Beall says a plan for a graduated scale of water rates will be part of next spring’s budget talks.  Such a scale would charge high quantity consumers with higher rates per gallon. 

Individual members of the WRAC have repeatedly taken county government to task for a lack of conservation effort in its development of county growth.  These citizens want to see water conservation efforts reflected in the county’s approval process for potentially thirsty local developments.

“In my opinion, the water supply is THE most important issue facing the county.  It is crucial that it be considered first and foremost before plans are implemented for more development, otherwise we could end up a county chock full of developments with little or no water,” Thomas told The Bay Net in a letter.

“I seriously doubt that there is anything more important in your life than water.  Not air.  All creatures rely on water.  It’s extremely important that we plan for the future so that everyone has an adequate supply,” said Larry Wooster, WRAC member.  “You just can’t grow a community without water.”

The Committee suggested that the county get extra water from the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC).  Beall told The Bay Net that his staff is meeting with WSSC staff to gather information and options for the forthcoming negotiation process.  The WSSC, however, has not traditionally seemed eager to give up their water to Charles County.

At the Sept 25th Board Meeting, County Attorney, Roger Fink described to the commissioners, the lawsuit it took to get WSSC to honor its original water deal with Charles County in the late 1980’s.  That deal was for 1.4 million gallons per day and WSSC tried to slip in a $10 million connection fee that wasn’t part of the original agreement.  This time, the county needs more than 3 times as much water.  Fink told the commissioners that securing an additional 5 million gallons per day “will take some serious negotiation.”

Right Hand Doesn’t Know What Left Hand Did or Said

The one conservation measure toward which the county does seem to be progressing is the WRAC’s suggestions that the county re-use our treated wastewater, or effluent, for industrial purposes, saving millions of gallons of potable water daily for residential use.  Mirant Mid-Atlantic is in final negotiations to build a pipeline bringing effluent to the Morgantown power plant to use in its forthcoming wet-scrubbers.  The plant will need 1.8 million gallons of water or effluent per day.

That pipeline won’t be ready for another two years, however, and Mirant’s is the most solid deal the County yet has for the use of our effluent water.  Other commercial and residential uses for effluent are still in the idea stage.

The 2007 Fiscal Year Report to the Citizens of Charles County, which residents received in their mailboxes this month, contains erroneous facts about “reclaimed water use”. 

It claims, “the Department of Planning and Growth Management negotiated with power plants in St. Charles, Morgantown, and Indian Head for the use of reclaimed water in their facilities.”  Beall, however, told The Bay Net that negotiations were with the Morgantown plant only, although the corporations planning to build the other two plants are considering the merits of using effluent in their operations. 

The report also claims that, “Reclaimed water can be used to replenish aquifers and supply lakes, streams and rivers with water for fish, wildlife, and recreation.” 

However, according to Beall and former Economic Development Director John Reardon during their effluent presentation to the commissioners on September 11, the point of reclaiming water is to reduce the amount of treated water which would otherwise be dumped into the Potomac River, the Chesapeake Bay and other local watersheds.  They told the Commissioners that effluent is not potable water; it’s neither safe to drink nor to use to irrigate crops.  It should not be used to “replenish” any of our water sources.