easygrants id: 22564 national fish and wildlife foundation

of 71

Easygrants ID: 22564 National Fish and Wildlife Foundation NFWF/Legacy Grant Project ID: 0603.09.022564

Chesapeake Bay Small Watershed Grants 2009 - Submit Final Programmatic Report (Activities)

Grantee Organization: Center for Watershed Protection, Inc.

Project Title: Rainwater Harvesting Systems in the James River Watershed (VA)

Project Period 05/01/2010 - 12/31/2011

Award Amount $90,000.00

Matching Contributions $

Project Location Description (from Proposal)

Project Summary (from Proposal) Test and promote the benefits of rainwater harvesting in Virginia by

demonstrating agricultural and urban applications at two sites in the

James River watershed. Project will conduct educational and outreach

activities about the conservation practice, monitor both systems,

measure water use savings, and quantify the reduction in runoff

affecting local streams.

Summary of Accomplishments The partners of this project accomplished the following:

• Secured two rainwater harvesting demonstration sites in central

Virginia, one agricultural and one urban.

• Conducted multi-season monitoring of water conservation and runoff

reduction benefits for both systems.

• Collected nation’s first multi-season dataset for water quality of a

poultry barn rainwater harvesting system.

• Offered educational venues to farmers, engineers, developers, code

officials, students, and others to learn about rainwater harvesting

practices.

• Inspired poultry farmers in the Farmville area to seek cost-share funds

for installing their own rainwater harvesting systems.

Lessons Learned Here are a few of the important lessons we learned about the factors that

influence the success of a rainwater harvesting system:

• Ensure a year-round use of the rainwater, if possible, to maximize

runoff reduction benefit.

• Site layout greatly affects cost – find ways to minimize piping length

and excavation

• Generally a lot easier to use rainwater for non-potable uses (and maybe

for feeding animals too).

• For non-farm applications, make sure to be aware of codes and

regulations that will apply.

• Gutter and filter sizing will affect how well you can catch high

intensity rainfall events

Conservation Activities Construct rainwater harvesting system on farm

Progress Measures Other Activity Metric (Gallons of roof runoff storage capacity)

Value at Grant Completion 20,000 gallons

Conservation Activities Monitor roof runoff capture and storage

Progress Measures Other Activity Metric (# of systems monitored)

Value at Grant Completion 2

Conservation Activities Monitor quality of stored rainwater in poultry barn cistern

Progress Measures Other Activity Metric (# of systems monitored)


Conservation Activities Select rainwater harvesting system in urban setting

Progress Measures Other Activity Metric (Gallons of roof runoff storage capacity)

Value at Grant Completion 3,000 gallons

Conservation Activities Conduct rainwater harvesting workshops and tours

Progress Measures Other Activity Metric (# of workshops)


of 71

Conservation Activities Give other presentations at conferences and meetings

Progress Measures Other Activity Metric (# of presentations)


Conservation Activities Develop list of rainwater harvesting service providers in Central VA

Progress Measures Other Activity Metric (# of service providers)


Conservation Activities Survey of rainwater harvesting users in central Virginia

Progress Measures Other Activity Metric (# of users surveyed)


Conservation Activities Increase public awareness about rainwater harvesting through articles,

presentations, videos, and websites

Progress Measures Other Activity Metric (# of viewers/readers/participants)

Value at Grant Completion >5000

of 71

Happenings from the Field | April 2011

file:///C|/...Harvesting%20VA/Admin/NFWF/Final%20Report/Attachments/Happenings%20from%20the%20Field%20%20April%202011.htm[1/2/2012 3:00:24 PM]

Contractors assemble the cistern to be used inDewitt Goin’s new rainwater capture and reusesystem for his poultry houses (courtesy photo).

Featured Links: Happeningsfrom the Field

April 2011 Virginia Natural Resources Conservation Service - U.S. Department of Agriculture

Rainwater Capture is a “Snap” for Prince Edward Poultry

Producer

Conservation planning can be like a puzzle with manyparts that must fit together over time to improve land andwater quality. For Dewitt Goin of Prince Edward County,those pieces are actually interlocking to create a newrainwater capture system for his poultry operation.

Goin is a committed conservationist who has worked withNRCS for the past five years on an intricate conservationplan for his 45-head beef cow/calf operation on 120acres of pasture. Farmville District Conservationist DennisJones says Goin has been extremely vigilant inaddressing the nearly 20 items in his plan. ThroughEQIP, he has fenced streams and established buffers,planted hardwood trees, put in an animal trail to cross astream, and set up cross fencing with a watering systemfor rotational grazing.

As a Tyson breeder, Goin also raises laying hens androosters and collects eggs for the company’s hatchery inJetersville. He installed a litter storage shed andcomposter for the operation but hadn’t addressedassociated water conservation issues until former localextension agent Brent Clayton approached him aboutrainwater capture and reuse.

“I was interested in using rainwater to supplement myexisting groundwater because I have run short of water

in the past, and I believe water quantity is going to be critical to farmers in the future.” says Goin.

Jones says it is not uncommon for producers to have three or four wells for watering chickens andrunning cooling cells in the summer. Fans located at one end of the poultry barn pull air throughevaporative cooling cells located at the opposite end of the barn. Water running through the cell coilscools the air and maintains humidity. Goin currently has an 800-gallon reservoir for the chickenhouses and cattle and also waters his livestock off the well system.

Clayton worked with the Center for Watershed Protection, the Piedmont Soil & Water ConservationDistrict and Rainwater Management Solutions (Charlottesville consulting firm) to obtain an Altria grantfor a rainwater capture system, which includes residential, commercial and agriculturalapplications. Goin is using EQIP funding to supplement the cost of installation. Gutters are now inplace on his two breeder houses, and rainwater runoff is being piped to a new 20,000-gallon cisternconstructed of interlocking blocks similar to milk crates.

Unlike a metal or concrete tank, the blocks were easily transported and assembled onsite. Contractors stacked the blocks in a 16 by 25 foot rectangular opening underground, wrapped theunit in a rubber liner, and backfilled it with soil. A large port on one end contains a submersible pumpthat pumps water up to cooling cells in the poultry barn. A pumping and filtration system to get waterback into the existing water system will soon be complete, along with a heavy use area treatment andcritical area seeding for disturbed area.

of 71

Happenings from the Field | April 2011

file:///C|/...Harvesting%20VA/Admin/NFWF/Final%20Report/Attachments/Happenings%20from%20the%20Field%20%20April%202011.htm[1/2/2012 3:00:24 PM]

This paved courtyard is a focal feature of thenew Chatham Service Center (courtesy photo).

Longwood College, which uses this rainwater capture technology to store runoff from their athleticfields, is a partner in the project. Dr. David Buckalew from the Biological and Environmental SciencesDepartment will help collect water samples and data both before and after an ultraviolet treatment filterto determine whether the runoff is safe for drinking.

The Center for Watershed Protection will monitor this system for several years to develop lessonslearned for future designs. The group is particularly interested in the quality of water running offgalvanized roofs on poultry houses. Though lead galvanization is no longer used and most poultrybarns do not have lead galvanized roofs, testing for lead may put aside that concern.

Though these systems are commonly used under parking lots, Jones doesn’t know of any otheragricultural use in Virginia and says design criteria for agricultural rainwater capture are not plentiful.

“This system could one day help solve poultry growers’ primary resource concern of inadequategroundwater reserves,” says Jones. “During the droughts in 2002 and 2003, we heard regular reportsof poultry operators who had to dig new wells. The conversion of all existing poultry barns to tunnelventilation with cooling cells also drastically increases water use in the summer.”

In addition to supplementing existing water supplies, rainwater capture and reuse offers an attractiveenergy savings component for producers needing to cool poultry houses in the warm summermonths. The Piedmont SWCD plans to hold a field day this fall at Goin’s farm to show area poultrygrowers what might be possible in the future.

New Complex Puts Chatham Service Center on CenterStage

In the real estate world, location is everything. The samecould be said for the new Chatham Service Center. Inmany ways, their new offices in the Old DominionAgricultural Complex have put Chatham on the map withincreased visibility and ease of access for customers.

“Our old Service Center was in downtown Chatham,” saysChatham DC Steve Cassada. “The new location is muchmore visible, and it’s a lot easier to tell folks how to gethere. The 53,000-square foot livestock arena is a focalpoint as you come up US 29.”

In addition to NRCS, the 100,000-square-foot complex houses the Farm Service Agency, VirginiaCooperative Extension, the Pittsylvania Soil & Water Conservation District, and the county FarmBureau. Cassada says the Chatham team moved into the new complex on March 1 and were up andrunning two days later.

Visitors to the NRCS space enter an open, well-lit space with cubicles for NRCS and districtstaff. Cassada says their new offices are “wonderful,” with lots of windows that let in natural light andcreate a much more pleasant atmosphere than their previous building.

The numerous amenities of the agricultural complex include a 500-seat banquet and lecture hallsuitable for agency meetings and outside functions, a paved courtyard with a fountain, and an industrialkitchen that can be used to cater large events. Cassada says partitions will be added to divide thelecture hall into spaces where three concurrent meetings can be held. A covered farmer’s market withconcrete floor and booth spaces is also being built on the grounds.

Though he was in Albuquerque, New Mexico, for training when Governor Bob McDonnell dedicated thecomplex in early March, Cassada will have an opportunity to give the grand tour when Area III holds itsMay JED session there.

“It’s a great opportunity for the folks in our area to see the new building,” says Cassada.

Return to Newsletter

of 71

Runoff Rundown Fall 2011

file:///C|/...uments/Rainwater%20Harvesting%20VA/Admin/NFWF/Final%20Report/Attachments/Fall%202011%20Runoff%20Rundown.html[1/2/2012 2:51:23 PM]

Fall 2011 Issue #44In This Issue

Runoff Ramblings: I Flush,Therefore I Waste

Rainwater Harvesting on theFarm

Yes, Virginia, There is Such aThing as Stormwater

MaintenanceUsing Watershed Planning to

Meet Local and Bay-WideTMDL Goals in Baltimore

County, MDAnnouncements

Trainings and ConferencesCool Links

Published by:

Connect with us:

Greetings! The Fall 2011 issue of Runoff Rundown is here! We hope you have been able to spend some time outside to enjoy the beautifulFall weather and colors. To get you in the Halloween spirit, we've unearthed somephotos of Halloweens past at the Center. First is a photo of some current andformer Center staff. We also have a photo from our annual Halloween tradition ofmacroinvertebrate pumpkin carving (usually inflicted on our newest unsuspectinghire). Don't you want to join this motley crew? (see our Announcements below)

of 71



dream" is that other, cheaper supplies would be available and could be harnessedto satisfy the non-potable fraction of overall usage. Candidate technologiesinclude harvested rainwater and reclaimed or recycled water (e.g., treatedwastewater), not to mention continuing to enhance the efficiency of water-usingappliances and equipment. Many parts of the country have already started downthis path due to constraints on existing water supplies in the face of populationgrowth. This brings us back to the connection between watershed and utility managers. Ifour potable and non-potable supplies continue to be blended together (and mostof the supply is for non-potable purposes), then we will continue to expendenormous energy and resources protecting, collecting, and treating source waterthat isn't going to be used for drinking. In terms of alternatives, we cannot "rainbarrel" our way out of this particular dilemma, but it certainly is an issue thatshould stimulate the creative juices of the next generation of watershed anddrinking water managers. How can we use potable water supplies more efficientlyby retooling our infrastructure at the scales of the municipality, neighborhood,and individual home or business? How can watershed and stormwater managersand their counterparts in the utility sector contribute in constructive ways to guideus towards that future? Let us know your thoughts and ideas on this topic. Email us at [email protected].

Rainwater Harvesting on the Farmby Laurel Woodworth The Center for Watershed Protection has been branching out into new territoryrecently: rainwater harvesting and poultry farming. In fact, we thought, why notcombine the two? With funds from Altria and National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, we were ableto contribute approximately half the cost of installing a rainwater harvestingsystem to capture runoff from the roofs of two poultry barns in Virginia - totalingover one acre of roof. Federal Environmental Quality Incentive Programagricultural cost-share funds paid for the other half. The 600-foot long barnsbelong to Dewitt Goin of Prince Edward County, Virginia, a farmer with a longtradition of using conservation best management practices. The rainwatercaptured in his new 20,000-gallon underground tank is circulated throughevaporative pads that help cool the barns when the Piedmont heat sets in. For Mr.Goin, being able to use the cistern during wet times of year provides additionalsecurity that his well water will be available during drought conditions. For theCenter and others concerned with water quality, it means that the farm producesless runoff and less pressure on local groundwater supplies.

Figure 1: Installation of modular RainTank system at Mr. Goin's farm. (Photo courtesy of Rainwater Management Solutions)

of 71



Although the captured rainwater is currently used on a seasonal basis, there ispotential for it to also be used as drinking water for the chickens. To help answerquestions about the suitability of the water for poultry and livestock consumption,as well as other water quality questions, the project team has been monitoringconcentrations of nutrients, metals, and bacteria, as well temperature and pH inthe stored rainwater since the system was "activated" in May. We hypothesize thata number of factors, including the galvanized steel roof, aluminum gutters, poultrydust, and bird droppings can influence the quality of the water. We have alsoinstalled equipment at the site to collect continuous data on rainfall depth, waterlevel in the cistern, and volume of rainwater used. This information will quantifythe volume of groundwater saved and runoff reduced, and may help us tounderstand fluctuations in water quality conditions in the tank. Since manypoultry farms use similar building materials and have similar environmentalconditions, our aim is to learn how best to use captured rainwater in poultryproduction, and other farming functions (e.g., water for cattle and horses,irrigation, wash water).

Figure 2: Laurel Woodworth (Center) and Dewitt Goin looking at raingauge data at cistern site.

Some great partners havemade this project a reality: Rainwater ManagementSolutions (designers of the system), Dr. David Buckalew of Longwood University(bacteria monitor extraordinaire), the Farmville office of Natural ResourcesConservation Service (NRCS) and the Piedmont Soil and Water ConservationDistrict (SWCD) (experts in reaching out to farmers), and Brent Clayton (originalinstigator), formerly with the Prince Edward County Agricultural Extension office.Despite being an ancient source of water, rainwater harvesting on farms in thispart of the country is considered an emerging conservation practice with fewapplications in place so far. Therefore, this has been an experiment and learningopportunity for all those involved - with exciting prospects for moreimplementation already emerging. In September, our NRCS and SWCD partnershosted a workshop and tour of Mr. Goin's rainwater collection system, and manyof the poultry producers in attendance expressed serious interest in installing suchsystems on their farms. Momentum is building. In the months to come, we will continue monitoring and analyzing water qualityand quantity parameters and getting the word out about rainwater harvesting on

farms and in developed areas. On November 17th, we will host a workshop andtour in Charlottesville, Virginia on large-scale rainwater harvesting for urbanapplications (e.g. commercial, industrial, and institutional settings). Email me [email protected] for more information or to register. You may wonder how the Center for Watershed Protection got involved withrainwater harvesting for chickens. Well, the origins may be less glamorous, butequally interesting. The Center was part of an effort to develop Virginia's firstdesign specifications for rainwater harvesting as a stormwater management

of 71



practice. When we heard about the opportunity to apply rainwater harvesting atMr. Goin's barns, we were eager to broaden our stormwater management effortsto the farmyard setting. After all, where there is a roof, there is runoff just waitingfor someone to come along and use it.

Yes, Virginia, There is Such a Thing as StormwaterMaintenance by Dave Hirschman Long-term maintenance of stormwater BMPs has long been considered theAchilles' heel of stormwater management. Much emphasis is placed on the earlystages of design and installation, but, thereafter, many BMPs are put out topasture with no shepherd to tend to the flock. That situation is beginning tochange, one institution at a time. Non-traditional MS4s, such as universities, arein a unique position to lead by example in the field of stormwater maintenance. Over the summer, the Center worked with facilities management staff at theUniversity of Virginia to conduct stormwater maintenance training for thoseengaged in all manner of maintenance activities (of which stormwater is a subset).Prior to the training, the Center customized BMP-specific checklists to representexisting and possible future practices at the University. Based on the institutionalset-up of maintenance at the University, the checklists were divided into monthlyand annual maintenance activities as well as unique tasks for utilities andlandscaping crews. In all, we developed twenty-three individual checklists. The maintenance took place on four half-days in July, dividing training topics bythe type of BMP (e.g., basins vs. small-scale vegetated practices vs. in-groundvaults). Training largely took place in the field, using the new checklist templatesand visiting a variety of sites. A classroom session was held at the end of the fieldtraining to reinforce lessons we all learned together in the field. This was a heartening and positive experience because the staff recognizes theimportance of BMP maintenance, and, in general, is doing an admirable jobkeeping the practices in good operating condition. The University has alsobranched out in recent times to include a wide variety of both traditional andinnovative practices (including one of the coolest urban bioretention applicationswe've seen so far). The biggest maintenance challenges are identifying the ultimatetarget vegetative community in large practices and identifying the right triggersfor maintenance of underground structures.

Center Staffer Laurel Woodworth leads crews through the checklist for anextended detention basin

of 71

Rainwater Harvesting Forum Held at CitySpace - NBC29 WVIR Charlottesville, VA News, Sports and Weather

file:///C|/CWP/My%20Documents/Rainwater%20Harvesting%20VA/Admin/NFWF/Final%20Report/Attachments/rainwater-harvesting-forum-held-at-cityspace.htm[1/2/2012 2:50:28 PM]

Email Share | Print

Rainwater Harvesting Forum Held at CitySpace

Recommend Be the first of your friends to recommend this.

Posted: Nov 17, 2011 4:49 PM ESTUpdated: Dec 01, 2011 5:23 PM EST

Building professionals and others are learning how theycan better utilize their own rainwater. The Center forWatershed Protection and a number of otherorganizations sponsored a Rainwater Harvesting forumThursday at CitySpace in downtown Charlottesville.

The goal is to help understand the benefits and hurdlesof harvesting rainwater, and what regulatory changesneed to be made to increase its use.

Rainwater Management Solutions water specialist Sarah Lawson said, "There hasn't been achange yet to really account for these alternate water supplies, even though we're seeing a lotmore use of it. Because it's a great way to save water, it's a great way to reduce runoff fromthe site, and sort of has a lot of benefits from that standpoint."

In the past several years, the industry has moved from a focus on increasing water supply todecreasing the amount of runoff in urban areas.

MEMBER CENTER: Create Account | Log In SITE SEARCH WEB SEARCH BY

Reported by Ed SykesEd joined the NBC29 news team in May, 2011. A Charlotte, NC, native, hegraduated from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill with degreesin journalism and political science. Email / Follow on Twitter / Full Story

AdvertisementExclusive short videoreveals the secret ofhow to learn anylanguage in just 10days!

Homeowners in Virginiamay be eligible for 3%refinance rate with anycredit type.

Refinance now at 2.5%.$160,000 Virginiamortgage $632/mo. NoHidden fees. No ssnreq. (2.9% apr)

Top cruise lines aregiving away theirunsold cabins up to75% off...

Cambridge scientistsreveal a fast and easy

Virginia TeachingProgram Now Enrolling.

Local News HeadlinesHurt Starts New Year LookingTowards NovemberCrozet PARC Reaches FundraisingGoalUVA Falls 43-24 In Chick-fil-A BowlKeeping 'SMART' Fitness Goals toKeep Your New Years ResolutionsWinning Tickets Drawn in VirginiaLottery RaffleFans Get Excited and Bars Stock Upfor a Busy NightFirst Night Virginia Rings in the NewYearCharlottesville Anti-Abortion GroupSupports New Clinic RegulationsCandidates Struggle to Get Names onVirginia BallotClick Here for More NBC29 Local News

Advertise with Us!Would you likeyour message toreach over 250,000

people each week? NBC29 can show youhow!

Submit a StoryIdea

Do you have thescoop on a newsstory for NBC29

News? Use this link totell us!

Contact UsNeed to get in touchwith us? Use this linkto find out how.

News LinksIf we mentioned aweb site on-air,you'll find the link

here.

Jobs @ NBC29Want to work for a

DTV ConsumerEducation

Go

of 71

Rainwater Harvesting Forum Held at CitySpace - NBC29 WVIR Charlottesville, VA News, Sports and Weather

file:///C|/CWP/My%20Documents/Rainwater%20Harvesting%20VA/Admin/NFWF/Final%20Report/Attachments/rainwater-harvesting-forum-held-at-cityspace.htm[1/2/2012 2:50:28 PM]

All content © Copyright 2000 - 2012 WorldNow and WVIR. All Rights Reserved. For more informationon this site, please read our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.

wrinkle trick that helpswomen everywherelook younger..

Fin. Aid for those whoqualify. Receive freeinfo today.

small marketstation that thinks

big, plus live in America'snumber one city? Checkout our job openings!

Quarterly ActivityReports

Click for the DTVConsumerEducation

Quarterly ActivityReports.

NBC29 EEO Report

of 71

Analysis of Rainwater Harvesting System at the Hydraulic Wash Laundromat Kevin Albanese, Jonathan Showalter, Erik Smedley, Lauren Wilson

CE 4210 Fall 2011

Introduction: Rainwater harvesting is an emerging stormwater management practice. To better understand the effectiveness of this practice, our team studied the newly installed rainwater harvesting system at the Hydraulic Wash Laundromat at 2405 Hydraulic Road in Charlottesville, VA. On the macro level we analyzed the system’s capture efficiency in different storm conditions and used this capture efficiency to analyze effectiveness of the harvesting system in reducing total site runoff. On the micro scale we modeled the gutter and pipe system in an effort to identify inefficiencies in the conveyance and filtration system. Our findings led us to ascertain possible improvements to improvement rain capture efficiency and suggest future avenues for research. Methods: The performance of the system was characterized using ten storms from April-October 2011 of various durations and intensities. The percent capture of the system was obtained by using storm data from the weather station on the laundromat roof and nearby weather stations. This data was archived on www.weatherunderground.com. The ideal volume captured was calculated based on storm intensity and roof area. These values were compared with the actual change in volume in the tank measured by a sonar sensor. To understand how the system functioned to reduce site runoff the total site runoff was calculated based on the surface characteristics. The total runoff was then compared to the percent capture to find total runoff reduction. The efficiency of the gutters and overflow tendencies were analyzed using a mass balance approach using principles from open channel flow. The pipe system was modeled using Bernoulli's energy equation for flow in conduits. Results: 1. Percent Capture as a Function of Storm Characteristics

To analyze how the rain water harvesting system performs as a function of storm characteristics a combination of two data sources was used. Rainfall data and tank volume data were collected as described in the methods section. We also used the roof area and the intensity of each storm at ten minute intervals to find the expected volume of runoff from the roof. When this calculated volume of water hitting the roof is compared to the total water the system captured in same interval of time it shows the amount of available water that the system was able to capture. Results from ten storms were analyzed. The following graphs represent the average percent of water captured from each storm with various storm characteristics, intensity, duration and depth of rain. It should be noted that the original data contained averages from the 5.23.11 storm in the charts. These charts are included in the Appendix. However, this data point appeared to be an outlier.

1

of 71

Closer examination of the data indicates that the system captured more water than the storm should have produced based of the rain gauge data and the tank sensor data. This indicates some error in one or possibly both sensors during this storm causing us to not use this data point in our analysis. When that data point was omitted the R squared values of our fitted line increased which indicates a better fit of the data to a linear approximation.

Figure 1.1: Intensity vs. % Capture without storm data from 5.23.11 outlier storm

Figure 1.1 compares average intensity of each storm with the percent of the available stormwater the system captured for the entire storm event. When a line of best fit is added to the data it has a negative slope of -0.425 which indicates a statistically significant correlation between storm intensity and percent of volume collected. These results indicate the system captures a larger percentage of the available rain water when the intensity of the storm is lower and a loses efficiency when the intensity of the storm is higher. The intensity characteristic of the storm is made up of two factors, time and amount of water that falls during the storm. These two factors are further analysed below to see if either one accounts for a larger singular effect on the percent capture of the system.

Figure 1.2: Duration vs. % Capture without storm data from 5.23.11 outlier storm

2

of 71

Figure 1.2 analyses whether there is a significant relationship between the length of the storm and the percentage of available stormwater that is captured by the system. When a line of best fit is added to the data it has a slope very near zero suggesting there is not a significant correlation between length of the storm and the percent of available water that was captured. This analysis isolates time characteristic of the storm’s intensity. This indicates that the length of the storm has no significant impact on the performance of the rain water harvesting system. This is consistent with expectations that length of storm as an isolated variable does not have significant impact. Examining the duration by itself ignores the total amount of water dropped by the storm which is crucial to take into account. This is because two storms with the same duration one could be very slow and steady limiting gutter overflow while the other could be a heavy downpour overloading the system and causing large overflows and inefficiencies.

Figure1.3: Depth of rain vs. % Captured without storm data from 5.23.11 outlier storm

Figure 1.3 compares the depth of water dropped by the total storm and the percent of available water that the system captured. This analysis isolates the depth of water characteristic of storm’s intensity. When a line of best fit is added to this chart it has a negative slope of -0.06 which indicates a slight but insignificant relationship between total water depth dropped by the of the and the percent of available water captured. The slight correlation is possibly due to error but could also be explained through the fact that storm that are more intense will likely drop more water. Still, this is hard to truly analyze when only considering the amount of water a storm drops not knowing the rate at which it falls. Therefore it is again determined that the best analysis comes from looking at storm intensity vs. percent capture.

While stormwater harvesting systems vary greatly in size, shape, location, and type some commonly expected values for percent capture were found in various literature The Texas Water Development Board (2005) recommended a range of system efficiency between 75 and 90 percent (p.30). Khoury-Nolde (n.d.) says, “The efficiency of rainwater harvesting depends on the materials used, design and construction, maintenance and the total amount of rainfall. A commonly used efficiency figure, runoff coefficient, which is the percentage of precipitation that appears as runoff, is 0.8” (p.5).From the gathered information we decided to use 80% as an expected value for system capture efficiency. It is clear that this

3

of 71

system falls short of that efficiency of capture target indicating that the system has problems that are reducing the amount of water captured below what should be expected. Reasons for system inefficiencies and water looses are included in the following pages. Main reasons for potential loss are gutter flow and filter performance which are both addressed below. 2. Effectiveness as a BMP: Volume Reduction as a Function of Storm Characteristics

It is very important to know how much the system reduces the total site run off to as it demonstrates how effective the current rain water harvesting system is as a BMP. The following graphs analyze this by comparing the volume reduction of the total site run off to the the intensity and duration characteristics of the storms.

Figure 2.1: Intensity vs. % Volume reduction without storm data from 5.23.11 outlier storm

Figure 2.1 shows how the intensity of the storm effects the total reduction in the storm water run off from the entire site. In this comparison the line of best fit has a slope of -0.113. This indicates that for greater storm intensity the system functions less effectively as a BMP capturing a smaller percentage of the total site runoff. The red data points indicate what reduction would be achieved had the system reached an ideal efficiency capture rate of 80%. This demonstrates that there is a lot of room for improvement in the rain water harvesting system that could improve its performance as a BMP to regularly reduce the total runoff by 20 percent or more.

Figure 2.2: Duration vs. % Volume reduction without storm data from 5.23.11 outlier storm

4

of 71

Figure 2.2 provides a comparison of percent volume reduction and it’s relation to storm duration. The line of best fit for this data has a slop very near to zero. This indicates as in the above section that isolating the effect of storm duration on the system capturing performance does not indicate a significant relationship. 3. Gutter overflow

“Rainfall from high-intensity, short duration rainfall events may be lost to...splash out from the gutters” (Texas Water Development Board 2005, p. 31). To look at this problem, the flow from the roof and through the gutters was modeled using mass balance (see appendix for detailed equations) making the following assumptions:

● roughness coefficient of 0.013 for the gutters, based ● A minimum slope of 0.5% for the gutters ● A very small depth is initially assumed ● Rainfall intensity is the same for the full ten minutes per increment ● If cumulative volume over gutter capacity resets to gutter capacity

The model first goes through the gutter geometry which has a trapezoidal shape, one side slopes out and one is completely vertical. A very small depth is assumed so that an initial flow out can be used to model various storms. The initial flow is calculated using Manning’s Equation.

As can be seen in Figure 3.1 on the next page, the roof diverts water into either the back or the front roof. 59% of the water goes to the front gutter and 41% of the water collects in the back gutter.

Figure 3.1 Plan and section views of the roof with flow arrows

For each storm, using storm data from weather stations at the laundromat and at Observatory Hill, rainfall intensity is taken every ten minutes. The intensity is used to find the change in mass, which is converted into volumetric rise or fall in the gutter for each ten minutes. From this acquired and cumulative volumes are found. At the end of each ten minutes a new flow rate for the gutter is found to reflect the rise or fall of water level in the gutter. The model does not allow for zero volume in the gutter, since it is impossible to have a negative volume.

5

of 71

Further, the gutter can only hold a certain amount of water, so if the volume is higher than gutter capacity, the model assumes overflow and resets the cumulative volume to the gutter capacity.

Figure 3.2 Storm on May 23, 2011 shows a typical rain event Figure 3.2 depicts a typical storm with short duration and an average intensity of 0.09 inches per hour. The front gutter fills up more than the back gutter, but both do not overwhelm the gutters. Therefore, in a typical storm, the system does not suffer from overflows from the gutter.

Figure 3.3 A storm on July 3, 2011 shows a high intensity storm Figure 3.3 depicts a short duration high storm with an average intensity of 0.49 inches per hour. This high intensity overwhelms the gutters and they overflow. Therefore, in high intensity storms, the system does lose potential water.

6

of 71

Figure 3.4 A storm on September 5-6, 2011 shows a long duration, higher than average intensity storm Figure 3.4 depicts a long duration storm with a higher than average intensity storm (0.29 inches per hour), although not as intense as the previous storm. This shows that the gutters do overflow during longer storms. However, the gutter may not overflow in lower intensity long duration storms. More data would be needed to determine this using the model. 4. Pipe and Vortex filter flow The flow through the pipe system and at the vortex filter was modeled by using Bernoulli’s energy equation (see appendix for detailed equations) making the following assumptions:

● The pressure change between points is small and thus negligible ● The pipes are flowing half full ● All bends are 45 degrees ● All pipes are schedule 40 PVC pipe

The volumetric flow rate into the pipe is dependent upon the flow rate in the gutter which was modeled for each of the ten storms in the gutter overflow analysis. The volumetric flow rates from each intensity interval of each storm was inputted in the pipe flow equations to find the flow rate at the filter for each interval. Interestingly, despite the widely varying duration and intensity characteristics the flow rate at the filter hovered in the 542-543 gallons per minute range. The average flow rate of each storm in relation to the average intensity is shown below.

7

of 71

Figure 4.1: Average flow rate at the filter in relation to average intensity.

As Figure 4.1 indicates, the average flow rate slightly decreases with intensity but this decrease is not large enough to have substantial implications for the filter efficiency. The fact that the flow rate at the filter is largely independent of the intensity and gutter flow rate means the the majority of the energy obtained by the flow happens in the pipe system. In looking at the calculations the majority contributor to the energy of the flow is the elevation change experienced in the pipes. Since the pipes are smooth the minor and major losses in the flow are small. The flow rate at the filter was compared with the specifications put forth by the manufacturer. The chart below was provided by the manufacturer.

Figure 4.2: Vortex filter efficiency vs. rainwater flow rate. The laundromat filter is “High Capacity” Source: Rainwater Management Solutions Extrapolating from Figure 4.2 to a flow rate of 542 GPM the efficiency was calculated to be about 35%. The filter efficiency in relation to actual capture efficiency is shown in the table below.

8

of 71

Figure 4.3: The estimated filter efficiency and actual capture efficiency of each storm Aside from the outlying storm the filter efficiency is similar to the actual capture efficiency. Also since gutter overflow was only determined to be an issue in isolated instances this means that the factor limiting the capture of the system is the efficiency of the filter.

The poor efficiency of the filter is surprising in comparison to the manufacturer’s specifications and to the Virginia BMP handbook which indicates that modern filters are 90% efficient (Cabell Brand Center, 2009, p. 29). One must be weary of this conclusion though because our search revealed no substantiation of this claim nor any detailed studies of similar systems on filter efficiency. So it is unclear whether this performance is normal or abnormal. Problems and Limitations: A variety of issues were encountered when it came to interpreting meaningful results. We were limited in our time frame of storm events at this site due to the lag in construction between the completion of the rainwater harvesting system and the weather station. The harvesting system was in place in January of this year while the monitoring station was not up and running until May. To help increase our storm sample size, nearby weather station data were used, with the assumption that the storm characteristics would be similar at the Laundromat. Specifically, the weather station at Observation Hill at UVA was used to help lengthen our window of data collection.

Another issue brought into question was the accuracy of the water tank level meter at our site. It was observed on multiple storm events that the level in the tank showed no changes in volume. This proved to not be an isolated instance, leading our group to believe there was a problem with the gauge rather than another factor such as a blocked up gutter, etc. Similarly, certain rain storms produced unexpected results in volume change. It was found that some larger storms would fill the tank less than smaller storms, going against all intuitive reasoning. Perhaps foretelling in this inaccurate level data, the gauge in the tank actually broke in October thus reducing our storm event time frame even further.

One last limiting factor in our analysis was the level of precision in the water consumption meter. The methods in place for recording the data also left much to be desired. At semi-regulated times, the total consumption was read off the meter and then written on a nearby

9

of 71

sheet of paper. Recordings provided difficulty in interpretation and were often forgotten to be taken. Recommendations for future work The system was installed within the last year so our analysis only covers a small time frame. It would be advantageous to study the performance of the system in a larger amount of storms over a longer period of time. Also it would be useful to compare the system at the laundromat to other rainwater harvesting systems, preferably other systems in the area or areas with similar rainfall characteristics. A comparison study would be particularly helpful in contextualizing if the performance of the laundromat system is good or bad relative to other systems of its type. It is difficult to make such a conclusion presently because little data on Rainwater Harvesting collection efficiency currently exists. More accurate tank level and water usage data would also improve the accuracy of the analysis. This in conjunction with a longer term study would help to indicate whether or not a pipe and gutter re-design or replacing the vortex filter would be cost efficient. Based on our study it appears as if the Vortex filter is the factor limiting the collection efficiency but it is our recommendation that future studies be undertaken before system re-design is considered.

10

of 71

References: Texas Water Development Board. (2005). The Texas Manual on Rainwater Harvesting. Retrieved from http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/publications/reports/rainwaterharvestingmanual_3rdedition.pdf Cabell Brand Center. (2009). Virginia Rainwater Harvesting Manual. Retrieved from http://www.jrsmith.com/products/rainwater_harvesting/virginia_rainwater_harvesting_manual.pdf Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation. (2011). Rainwater Harvesting. Retrieved from http://vwrrc.vt.edu/SWC/NonPBMPSpecsMarch11/VASWMBMPSpec6RAINWATERHARVESTING.html Norma Khoury-Nolde (n.d.). Rainwater Harvesting. Retrieved from http://www.ercsa.eu/uploads/media/Rainwater_Harvesting_-_an_overview_.pdf Crowe, C. T., D. F. Elger, and John A. Roberson. Engineering Fluid Mechanics. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2005. Print. Mays, Larry W. Water Resources Engineering. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley, 2011. Print. Storm Event data retrieved from http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KVACHARL30 Rainwater Harvesting System tank level data retrieved from http://www.levelandflow.com/sensor.php?id=227

11

of 71

Appendix

Figure A.1: Intensity vs. % Capture including storm data from 5.23.11 outlier storm

Figure A.2: Duration vs. % Capture including storm data from 5.23.11 outlier storm

12

of 71

Figure A.3: Depth of rain vs. % Captured including storm data from 5.23.11 outlier storm

Figure A.4: Intensity vs. % Volume reduction including storm data from 5.23.11 outlier storm

13

of 71

Figure A.5: Duration vs. % Volume reduction including storm data from 5.23.11 outlier storm

Figure A.6: Rainwater Harvesting System Performance for Various Storms

14

of 71

Equations used for Roof and Gutter Flow: Initial Gutter Flow: Q=(1.49/n)*AR2/3*S0

.5 where R = Wetted Perimeter/Cross-Sectional Area n=0.013, roughness coefficient S0=.005 Mass Balance: Mass In= Water Density*Rainfall Intensity*Percentage of Roof Area to Gutter Mass Out=Water Density*Q Determined from Previous 10 minute interval Change in Mass=Mass In - Mass Out Change in Volume: Rate of Flow Rise/Fall=Change in Mass/Water Density Acquired Volume = Rate of Flow Rise/Fall*Gutter Length*Intensity Interval Cumulative Volume= If <0, =0 If > Gutter Capacity, = Gutter Capacity=Gutter Length*Gutter Cross-Sectional Area Otherwise, = Previous Cumulative Volume + Acquired Volume If Cumulative Volume=Gutter Capacity, the gutters overflow New Q at End of Each Interval Qout = (Cumulative Volume + Initial Volume)/Time Interval

15

of 71

Figure A-7: Pipe System and Bernoulli Equation diagram

16

of 71

Figure A-8: Equations used for Pipe Flow calculations

17

of 71

Figure A-9: Roof Back Pipe System Properties

18

of 71

Figure A-10: Roof Front Pipe Properties

19

of 71

Figure A-11: Pipe to Filter Properties

20

of 71

A Survey of Rainwater Harvesters in Virginia

Ian D. Green, University of Virginia

Laurel Woodworth, Center for Watershed Protection December 13, 2011

CE4210 Stormwater Management Dr. Teresa Culver

of 71

Executive Summary

This study was commissioned by the Center for Watershed Protection’s (CWP) Charlottesville, VA office was worked in partnership as a term project for CE4210 Stormwater Management at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA. Contained within, this report are the results of a small survey, which aims to uncover rainwater harvesting user experiences, relating individual “lessons learned” to determine successes and shortcomings of this relatively emergent technology. The overall objective of this survey is to document user experiences throughout the Charlottesville, VA and Northern Virginia region in order to aid, promote, and optimize future residential user experience.

Though the sample size is relatively small, results suggested two main findings. 1. Users were not fully aware of the future end use of the harvested rainwater and 2. Due to the “organic” position that rainwater harvesting maintains, people were not fully aware of local water and/or health departmental permitting processes that are involved with routing reclaimed water plumbing through buildings.

It is the recommendation of the author that future considerations for data collection expand within the region to more residential users, as their lessons learned are likely more variable and therefore more valuable to the scope of this report.

2

of 71

3

Introduction

By 2025, 48 nations, and nearly 3 billion people, will face freshwater scarcity.1 Water has undoubtedly been taken for granted in the United States, yet less than 1% of it is potable. Rainwater harvesting has become an emergent and attractive technology for many property and business owners looking for sustainable alternatives to reducing stormwater runoff, municipal water consumption, carbon footprint, or those looking to increase water source reliability.

Although Virginia is considered a state with abundant rainfall, with a yearly average of about 45 inches, the increasing populations place increasing demands on water supplies. Due to the regional, or subregional, nature of rainfall patterns, the process of designing rainwater harvesting systems on residential or commercial properties must often go through specific and sometimes hidden processes, which to many may seem contradictory to the “organic” essence that rainwater harvesting maintains. Through the survey process, this study attempts to uncover experiences, or lessons learned, in order to better optimize the process for future potential rainwater harvesters.

The Survey

This study, commissioned by the Center for Watershed Protection’s (CWP) Charlottesville, VA office (Contact: Laurel Woodworth), was worked in partnership as a term project for CE4210 Stormwater Management at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA.

The survey was conducted throughout a six-week period between October 24,

2011 and December 6, 2011, consisting of 15 questions, broken into 3 sections. The first section, entitled “System Characteristics,” aims to collect information on system metrics (ie. capacity, drainage area, treatment, and intended use). The second section, “Lessons Learned,” strikes at the objective of this study by attempting to glean important conclusions from user experiences during the construction and maintenance processes. The final section was left open-ended for the subject to submit any schematics, photos, list of materials, or plans for the system. See Appendix 1 for survey template.

Data was conducted through a convenience sample (a sample where the units that are selected for inclusion in the sample are the easiest to access) of 24 rainwater harvesters throughout the Charlottesville, VA and Northern Virginia area. System proprietors and business representatives were first contacted via telephone to discuss the purpose and organizations involved with the study. Once contact had been established, email attachments of the survey were distributed, which tended to be the preferred mode of communication, as verbal surveys often omitted details due to time and the transcribing process.

It is important to note that from the 24 identified subjects, all those that were contacted via telephone were cooperative and returned a completed survey, except for the

1 Hinrichsen D, Robey B, Upadhyay UD. Solutions for a water-short world. Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Population Information Program. 1997

of 71

Blue Moon Fund, which was in the midst of a funding campaign and did not have the staffing or time resources to respond. Results Of the 24 systems selected for the survey, 13 sets of data were collected, comprised of 8 commercial and 5 residential systems (some incomplete). This >50% response rate however, is artificially inflated due to large consulting firms returning data for more than a single system, which they were contracted to construct. Responses to System Characteristics questions appeared fairly consistent due to the fact that multiple systems were installed by either Rainwater Management Solutions (RMS) or VMDO Architects. While capacities often fluctuated and were a function of drainage area and projected use, systems were fairly consistent with treatment and filtration methods. Lessons Learned

Question #10 – Differences v. Municipal Water Answers indicated in that rainwater maintains a noticeable pH difference that actually increases plant growth rates. “The recommended range of irrigation water pH and substrate solution pH for production depends on the crop being grown. In general, pH should range from 5.2 to 6.8 for irrigation water and 5.4 to 6.3 for substrate solution (Figure 1).2” Rainwater in the Charlottesville area reports around a pH of 4.8, while municipal water suppliers often raise pH to 9 to prevent corrosion of pipes. (Only ~15% reported “No Difference”)

Figure 12 Figure 2

2 Doug Bailey and Ted Bilderback. North Carolina State University. Department of Horticultural Science. Alkalinity Control for Irrigation Water Used in Nurseries and Greenhouses. August 1998.

4

of 71

5

Question #11 – Benefits Using Rainwater

Answers ranged from receiving no benefit, to those indicating plants flourishing, ample economic savings, and additional educational value to students & community. Another value increase observed in the study applies to those with well water as a primary source, as rainwater has a lower TSS and thus softer water. (92% reported as beneficial, left blank by one subject)

Question #12 - Functioning as Anticipated? Water level meters are often not reliable and the joints in PVC pipes often need

repairs when leaks begin to form. (100% report functioning as expected) Question #13 – Preferred Performance/ Recommendations for Others Determine final use during design process and contact locality if captured

rainwater is to be used in the household. For those looking to operate a system year-round, pipes must be relocated below the frost line, or the system must be purged to prevent the freezing and damage of critical components. (15% reported locality issues, 15% reported cold weather-related issues)

Projected use seemed to be an underlying crux of a couplecr systems. Captured

rainwater if it is intended to be plumbed into households for non-potable purposes, must be approved by appropriate water and/or health department authorities to ensure building codes are not in violation.

Question #14 – Recommend Your System to Others in a Similar Situation? Overwhelmingly, Yes. Question #15 – Receiving an Appropriate Return on Investment (ROI)? Often, these projects were funded by donations, but in one case, the subject

commented on the added water security having more than paid for itself. This particular family had 4/5 wells run dry and at 100/gallons/day for a family of 4, this system bettered their quality of life. Additionally, water trucks can fill up these tanks during especially dry periods if a municipal water source is not available. (23% reported definite ROI, while 15%, due to retrofits, were looking at much larger time frames.) Recommendations and Further Considerations

of 71

Survey participation rates were much higher after first contacting via telephone so

it is important that a goal during the surveying process should be to first establish a personal connection with the subject. Surveying can oftentimes appear as spam with little encouragement to participate, so it is almost critical to the success of the study to establish personal contact to generate interest.

Further studies should expand to encompass as many residential users as possible,

as therein lies the most variability and value. Commercial properties are often “cookie-cutter” and the purpose of this study should be to provide for those users that perhaps are looking to self-install a system on their property. Acknowledgements

6

of 71

7

This study owes its success to the contributions of the following individuals and organizations: Ms. Laurel Woodworth, Center for Watershed Protection; UVA Jefferson Scholars Foundation; Aqua Nova Engineering, PLC; Charlottesville Waldorf School; Mr. Greg Fournet (Residential); Bell Creek Farm (Farmville, VA); Mr. Wes Zell (Residential); Dr. Axel Goetz (Residential); Mr. Wyck Knox, VMDO Architects; James Madison University, Wayland Hall; Mr. Todd Niemeier, Quality Community Council; Wetland Studies and Solutions; Mr. Seth Oldham (Residential); Manassas Park Elementary School Ms. Beth Chung (Residential); Rainwater Management Solutions (RMS). References

1. Hinrichsen D, Robey B, Upadhyay UD. Solutions for a water-short world. Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Population Information Program. 1997

2. Doug Bailey and Ted Bilderback. North Carolina State University. Department of Horticultural Science. Alkalinity Control for Irrigation Water Used in Nurseries and Greenhouses. August 1998.

Appendix 1

of 71

8

System Characteristics

1. When was your rainwater harvesting system installed? 2. Did you design and install the system, or did you hire out? 3. Do you have a design schematic available? 4. How large is the tank (gallons) and the roof area (square feet, footprint)? 5. What are the components of your system (from roof materials to piping, to filter,

to tank)? 6. Do you treat your water? Using what method? 7. Could you share with us the names of suppliers/manufacturers of the materials for

your system? 8. What do you use your water for? Is this a year-round use or seasonal? 9. What kind of maintenance do you conduct on your system?

Lessons Learned

10. Have you observed any differences from using rainwater as opposed to municipal or well water?

11. What benefits have you realized by using rainwater? 12. How do you “monitor” your system? Is it functioning how you anticipated? 13. What would you like for it to do better/ recommend others to do differently with

your system? 14. Would you recommend your type of system to others who are in a similar

situation and considering rainwater harvesting? 15. Do you feel that you are receiving a return on your investment?

Materials to Gather for each System

Photos Schematic of system Plans/designs (if available) Names of suppliers/manufacturers of materials

of 71

RAINWATER HARVESTING ON YOUR FARM

LEARN ABOUT THE

COMPONENTS & COSTS OF A

RAINWATER HARVESTING

SYSTEM

TOUR A RAINWATER

HARVESTING SYSTEM ON A

POULTRY FARM

FIND OUT HOW HARVESTING

RAINWATER CAN HELP YOUR

FARM OPERATION

Thursday, Sept. 29 @ 10am-2pm (includes lunch)

Prince Edward Natural Resources-Agriculture Building 100 Dominion Drive, Farmville

Workshop, Lunch & Tour are FREE , PREREGISTRATION REQUIRED

SPACE IS LIMITED, REGISTER BY SEPTEMBER 27TH

Questions & Registration:

Please Call Piedmont SWCD (434) 392-3782 ext 108

Sponsored by: NRCS, Center for Watershed Protection,

Rainwater Management Solutions, Altria, National Fish & Wildlife, Prince

Charitable Trust & Piedmont SWCD

of 71

Rainwater Harvesting in Agriculture RESOURCES

General Virginia Rainwater Harvesting Manual, Version 2.0. http://www.cabellbrandcenter.org American Rainwater Catchment Systems Association website http://www.arcsa.org/index.asp H2O.com: An Online Rainwater Harvesting Community: www.harvesth2o.com NC State University Rainwater Harvesting website: http://www.bae.ncsu.edu/topic/waterharvesting/ Rainwater Harvesting: System Planning - by Texas AgriLife Extension http://iaspub.epa.gov/pls/grts/GRTSADM.download_my_file?p_file=80800&p_page=PROJECT Texas Manual on Rainwater Harvesting http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/publications/reports/RainwaterHarvestingManual_3rdedition.pdf Agriculture Texas AgriLife Extension Service, Rainwater Harvesting website: rainwaterharvesting.tamu.edu Rainwater Harvesting: Livestock - by Texas AgriLife Extension https://agrilifebookstore.org/tmppdfs/viewpdf_2454_48850.pdf?CFID=15868817&CFTOKEN=fddf2c21a06ce856-ACA31692-907E-B623-983E3A636EA6F651&jsessionid=90307e9d0d4d4174e8dcd083e4b6b271e5f1 Rainwater Harvesting: An On-Farm Guide – by UK’s Environment Agency http://publications.environment-agency.gov.uk/PDF/GEMI1109BRGU-E-E.pdf Alabama Rainwater Harvesting on Poultry Barns (Auburn Univ. Extension Service project) http://southeastfarmpress.com/livestock/rainwater-enhances-poultry-profitability?page=1 http://agfax.com/Content/alabama-poultry-rainwater-collection-09272010.aspx http://media.alabama.gov/pr/pr.aspx?id=5508&t=1 http://www.alabamapoultry.org/magazine/2010%20Magazines/Sep-Oct%202010/Sept-Oct%2009%20Alabama%20Poultry%20Magazine.pdf http://missionextension.wordpress.com/2010/10/01/why-i-remain-so-optimistic-about-cooperative-extension-work/ Guidelines on Drinking Water Quality for Poultry/Livestock Drinking Water Quality for Poultry – by NC State Cooperative Extension (data from Penn State) http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/depts/poulsci/tech_manuals/drinking_water_quality.html Poultry Drinking Water Primer – by University of Georgia http://www.caes.uga.edu/applications/publications/files/pdf/B%201301_2.PDF When is Water Good Enough for Livestock? – by Montana State University http://www.montana.edu/cpa/news/wwwpb-archives/ag/baudr146.html Water Quality for Livestock and Poultry – by New Mexico State University http://aces.nmsu.edu/pubs/_m/m-112.pdf

of 71

Water Quality for Livestock Drinking – by University of Missouri http://extension.missouri.edu/p/EQ381 Videos Rainwater Harvesting Video – by James River Association http://www.youtube.com/user/JamesRiverAssoc?blend=22&ob=5#p/u/0/Tdvpqp2UwPU Texas Producers Rebuild After Drought – by Voices of Agriculture http://www.dairyherd.com/dairy-resources/video-voices-of-agriculture---texas-producers-rebuild-after-drought-113403194.html

of 71

CitySpace ‐ 100 5th St. NE, Charlottesville, VA

AGENDA 8:30 REGISTRATION

9:00 WELCOME

9:15 CASE STUDIES: RAINWATER HARVESTING BY VMDO

Wyck Knox, VMDO Architects

9:45 RAINWATER HARVESTING FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT

David Hirschman, Center for Watershed Protection

Alex Forasté, Environmental Protection Agency (ORISE) and ASCE Blue Ridge Branch

10:15 BIGGER THAN RAIN BARRELS: DESIGNING COMMERCIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL SYSTEMS

Sarah Lawson and Benjamin Sojka, Rainwater Management Solutions

11:00 THE TRIALS & TRIUMPHS OF GETTING AHEAD OF THE GREEN CURVE

Sarah Lawson, Rainwater Management Solutions

Charlie Smith, owner of Hydraulic Wash & Cleaners Laundromat

11:20 BREAK

11:30 RAINWATER HARVESTING CODES & REGULATIONS PANEL DISCUSSION:

Bethany Bezak, Wetland Studies and Solutions

Kristel Riddervold, City of Charlottesville Public Works

Dwayne Roadcap, Virginia Department of Health

Emory Rodgers, Virginia Department of Housing & Community Development

Jay Schlothauer, Albemarle County Department of Community Development

Moderator: Alyson Sappington, Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District

12:30 – 1:30 LUNCH (complimentary)

1:30 – 3:00 TOUR OF LOCAL RAINWATER HARVESTING SITES (transportation provided)

Urban Farm at Garrett Square – above‐ground tanks, used for irrigation

Charlottesville Area Transit Operations & Maintenance Facility – under‐ground cisterns, used for bus washing & toilet flushing

Event Sponsors: Center for Watershed Protection, Thomas Jefferson Soil & Water Conservation District, City of Charlottesville, ASCE Blue Ridge Branch, Prince Charitable Trusts, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation

of 71

QUESTIONS TO INITIATE PANEL DISCUSSION – Nov. 17th, 2011 Rainwater Harvesting Forum (Charlottesville) Dan Frisbee or Kristel Riddervold (City of Charlottesville) 1. The City of Charlottesville has shown a strong interest in Rainwater Harvesting. Could you tell us when

the City began to develop that interest and why the City sees Rainwater Harvesting as a useful practice? What uses of harvested rainwater do you see as the most important ones to achieve the City’s objectives?

2. (Follow‐up) In your experience to date, what have been the biggest challenges to getting more rainwater harvesting systems installed in the City?

Bethany Bezak (Wetland Studies & Solutions) – 1. Wetland Studies and Solutions has a cistern that collects roof runoff that is used indoors for toilets. Could

you describe the process that you went through to get local approvals from the Building Official and the VDH. What parts of the process went smoothly, and what parts were challenging.

2. (Follow‐up) Do you have any thoughts for improvements to the process (including communications and potential Code changes, technical guidance, etc.)

Jay Schlothauer (Albemarle County Chief of Inspections) – 1. You were involved in the installation of a rainwater harvesting system on a commercial building from a

different perspective than Bethany. You were on the Building Official side for the commercial laundry facility. Could you describe any challenges you faced as a Building Official with providing a permit for that system?

2. In 2003, the TJSWCD had funding available to help homeowners install rainwater harvesting systems. I recall that you could not sign off on the plumbing system because the VDH could not sign off on the water system. However, VDH did not have current specifications to enable them to sign off on the water system. Although, in this situation, the roof water was of a higher quality than the homeowners’ well water (which had an extremely high mineral content), we were caught in this “catch‐22”. Could you discuss the issues involved and how it was finally reconciled to allow the homeowners to have the potable system that they currently utilize?

Emory Rodgers (DHCD) – 1. Recent changes to the Uniform State Building Code (USBC), lumped rainwater harvesting within the

section that addresses graywater. Since there is a big difference in the quality of rainwater collected from rooftops as compared with graywater (untreated wastewater), do you have any recommendations for Code amendments to distinguish rainwater from graywater and make the Code more compatible with the indoor use of rainwater?

2. (Follow‐up) We understand that there will be a public comment period in the near future to re-work the USBC, including the section on rainwater/graywater. Could you discuss the timeline for this and how individuals can take advantage of opportunities for input. How best can individuals keep up with new information and stay connected to the process?

Dwayne Roadcap (VDH) – 1. In March 2010, the VDH published “Virginia Rainwater Harvesting & Use Guidelines”. These Guidelines

specifically omit potable indoor uses. How do showers, toilets, and washing machine uses fit within the definitions of potable versus non‐potable?

2. (Follow‐up) Do you envision future updates to these guidelines to provide guidance to single family homeowners who wish to create a potable system? If not, how would you suggest such homeowners navigate the permitting process?

3. Section 1.3 of the VDH Guidelines describes “Related Virginia Regulations & Guidelines”. One of those related regulations is the “Water Reclamation and Reuse Regulation”. Since rainwater collected from rooftops is not “reclaimed” or “reused”, how is the “Reclamation and Reuse Regulation” related to rainwater harvesting?

of 71

Rainwater Harvesting Service Providers in Central Virginia

Company Design Parts/Supplies Installation O & M 2rw 100 10th St. NE, Suite 202 Charlottesville, VA 22902 (434) 296‐2116 http://2rw.com

ACF Environmental Richmond, VA (804) 370‐1126 www.acfenvironmental.com

Aqua Nova Engineering, PLC 3452 Bleak House Road Earlysville, VA 22936 (434) 202‐7052 http://aquanovaengineering.com

Contech Construction Products Multiple offices (804) 794‐6357 http://contech‐cpi.com

Landsaver, Inc. 2831 Cardwell Rd. Richmond, VA 23234 (800) 588‐9223 http://landsaver.net

Madison Steel & Water Construction, Inc. Orange, VA 22960 (540) 672‐9581 http://madisonsteelwater.com

Rainwater Management Solutions 111 3rd St. SE Charlottesville, VA 22902 (434) 293‐4485 www.rainwatermanagement.com

Southeast Rural Community Assistance Project, Inc. 347 Campbell Ave Roanoke, VA 24016 (866) 928‐3731 http://sercap.org

Updated 12/31/11

of 71

Updated 12/31/11

Company Design Parts/Supplies Installation O & M Water Street Studio 111 3rd St. SE Charlottesville, VA 22902 (434) 295‐8177 www.waterstreetstudio.net

If you know of other service providers in the Central VA region, please contact Laurel Woodworth at (434) 293‐5793 or [email protected].

of 71

Chesapeake Bay Stewardship Fund Final Programmatic Report Narrative

Instructions: Save this document on your computer and complete the narrative in the format provided. The final narrative should not exceed ten (10) pages; do not delete the text provided below. Once complete, upload this document into the on-line final programmatic report task as instructed.

1. Project Description. Briefly describe your project, including a description of the problem your project is trying to address, the project’s objectives and strategies, as well as the project location, and a characterization of the watershed and the relevant characteristics of the community’s natural resources, population, and economy. Overall Goal The overall goal of this project was to demonstrate the practice of and raise awareness about rainwater harvesting so that it gains greater acceptance and use across a variety of land uses in Virginia. Description of Need For decades, homeowners, businesses, and farmers in arid regions of the United States have used rainwater harvesting systems to collect runoff from rooftops to supplement otherwise scarce sources of water. More recently, rainwater harvesting is emerging as a conservation measure in East Coast communities where drought and municipal water shortages have become evermore common. Rainwater harvesting is a clean, low-energy source of water that can reduce demands on wells and water treatment plants. However, the use of rainwater harvesting for stormwater management tool has lagged behind other applications. In Virginia, we are also starting to explore how capturing and re-using rainwater can provide benefits beyond just water conservation. For example, the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation has released design specifications for the use of cisterns as an approved stormwater management practice to reduce volumes and velocity of polluted urban runoff into local streams. This same benefit can be realized in agricultural settings: by capturing rainwater from barns, storage sheds, and other farm structures, less runoff travels across pastures and fields, therefore reducing the quantity of nutrients, bacteria, pesticides, and herbicides that would otherwise flow to nearby streams. Because urban areas and agricultural lands contribute the vast majority of the stormwater pollution entering the James River and its tributaries, this project aimed to build interest in rainwater harvesting within these two particular sectors. Objectives and Strategies Despite being an ancient practice, rainwater harvesting is a fairly “new” practice in modern-day Virginia. Therefore we saw a need to demonstrate to developers and farmers the particular benefits of rainwater harvesting and provide them with practical design information to apply this practice. We also saw a need to demonstrate to the science community and government agencies the level at which rainwater harvesting can help reduce runoff from both urban and agricultural land uses, so they can feel confident in approving such systems as a best management practice. To achieve the demonstration objective of this project, our strategy was to establish two rainwater harvesting demonstration sites, one in a city, and one on a farm in central Virginia. To achieve the second objective of better understanding the potential runoff and pollutant reduction benefits of rainwater harvesting, our strategy was to conduct water monitoring of these two rainwater harvesting systems. Finally, to achieve the third objective of developing better understanding and greater interest in the use of rainwater harvesting practices in Virginia, our strategy was to conduct workshops, presentations, articles, and other outreach methods to reach a diverse audience. Project Partners Although the Center for Watershed Protection served as coordinator of this project, many others made this a collaborative initiative. The following were the primary partners involved:

Sarah Lawson and Benjamin Sojka, Rainwater Management Solutions Deanna Fehrer, Piedmont Soil and Water Conservation District

of 71

Dennis Jones and Sean Kimmel, Farmville office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service Dr. David Buckalew, Longwood University Longwood University students Dewitt Goin, Bell Creek Farm Charlie Smith, Hydraulic Wash

2. Summary of Accomplishments In four to five sentences, provide a brief summary of the project’s key accomplishments and outcomes that were observed or measured. The partners of this project accomplished the following:

Secured two rainwater harvesting demonstration sites in central Virginia, one agricultural and one urban. Conducted multi-season monitoring of water conservation and runoff reduction benefits for both systems. Collected nation’s first multi-season dataset for water quality of a poultry barn rainwater harvesting system. Offered educational venues to farmers, engineers, developers, code officials, students, and others to learn about

rainwater harvesting practices. Inspired poultry farmers in the Farmville area to seek cost-share funds for installing their own rainwater

harvesting systems. 3. Project Activities & Outcomes

Activities Describe and quantify (using the approved metrics referenced in your grant agreement) the primary activities

conducted during this grant. Constructed Cistern for Poultry Barns

With funds from this grant, we were able to contribute approximately half the cost of designing and installing a rainwater harvesting system to capture runoff from the roofs of two poultry barns in Prince Edward County, Virginia – totaling over one acre of roof. The 600-foot long barns at Bell Creek Farm belong to Dewitt Goin, a farmer with a long tradition of using conservation best management practices. The new 20,000-gallon underground tank was installed in early spring 2011, coordinated by Rainwater Management Solutions. The rainwater captured in the cistern is circulated through evaporative cooling pads that help cool down the barns during hot summer days. The harvested rainwater almost entirely replaces well water that was previously used for this purpose. The rainwater is also occasionally used as drinking water for cattle, and may eventually be used as drinking water for the chickens (if Tyson Foods, the owner/processor of these chickens, deems it safe). The rainwater harvesting system at Bell Creek Farm served as the primary demonstration and monitoring site for this project. Mr. Goin was also successful in acquiring federal Environmental Quality Incentive Program agricultural cost-share funds through the Natural Resources Conservation Service to pay for the other half of the construction costs of the rainwater harvesting system. Urban Rainwater Harvesting Site A newly-built rainwater system, located in Charlottesville, served as the urban demonstration and monitoring site for this project. The site, called Hydraulic Wash and Cleaners, is a laundry facility for which the harvested rainwater is used to offset municipal water in the clothes-washing process. The 3,000-gallon above-ground tank captures runoff from the 3000-square-foot laundromat roof. Grant funds were used to purchase equipment to monitor quantity of water use and runoff reduction performance of this rainwater harvesting system. Monitoring Study Poultry Barns Site: Microbiology professor, Dr. David Buckalew of Longwood University, and CWP staff gathered water samples at the Bell Creek Farm rainwater harvesting site approximately every two weeks from May to November (more frequently for bacteria). We sampled water from the tank for the following constituents: total coliform and e. coli bacteria, nitrogen, phosphorus, lead, aluminum, zinc, iron, pH, and temperature. We also collected several samples of direct roof runoff and the farm’s well water for most of these same parameters. Automated monitoring equipment that CWP installed at the site (rain gauge, water level sensor, and water meter) collected continuous data for rainfall depth, water level in the tank, and water use. The purpose of this monitoring

of 71

was to assess the suitability of the water to be used for drinking (for the chickens and cattle), and to quantify the runoff reduction benefit of the rainwater capture system. Preliminary findings of the monitoring study at Bell Creek Farm were shared with farmers in attendance at a workshop and tour on September 29, 2011, and at a meeting of the Virginia State Technical Committee on Agriculture on November 22, 2011. Both events are described in more detail below.

Laundromat Site: Equipment installed at Hydraulic Wash and Cleaners to gather continuous records of water level in the tank, rainfall, and indoor rainwater use allows us to quantify the conservation and runoff reduction performance of the rainwater system. With this data, Charlie Smith, the owner of the laundromat, was able to notice some problems with the configuration of the system – specifically that less roof runoff was entering the tank during heavy rain events than would ideally. This fall, a group of University of Virginia engineering students analyzed the monitoring data and the configuration of the rainwater system at Hydraulic Wash, in part to identify potential re-design solutions to fix this situation. The students’ study summary has been uploaded to EasyGrants as an attachment to this report. Workshops On September 29th, 2011 partners of this project conducted a workshop and farm tour for area farmers to learn about the rainwater system installed at Bell Creek Farm. Approximately 29 people were in attendance. The event was well received, and many of the poultry producers in attendance expressed serious interest in installing such systems for their farm operations. We also conducted an urban rainwater harvesting forum and site tour held in Charlottesville, VA on November 17th. One of the focus topics of this forum was the use of rainwater harvesting as a stormwater management practice, with special attention paid to Virginia’s new stormwater management design specifications. In attendance were 50 architects, civil engineers, building contractors, and others in the design and building field. In addition to presentations from a diverse slate of presenters, we held a panel discussion on the important topic of building codes and health department regulations that come into play when trying to design and build rainwater harvesting systems. The all-day event was very well received, with several attendees requesting that we conduct more such training events in the future. Participants of both workshops completed evaluations to provide their feedback on the events. Several materials from these workshops, including agendas and flyers, have been uploaded to EasyGrants. List of Rainwater Harvesting Service Providers To aid in our goal of encouraging greater use of rainwater harvesting in central Virginia, we developed a list of rainwater harvesting service providers in the region. This includes consultants, designers, installers, and parts suppliers. The list was shared at and updated by attendees at the November 17th forum in Charlottesville. Ultimately, the completed list will be shared with the James River Green Building Council and other organizations of architects and engineers in the region. The updated list has been uploaded to EasyGrants. Survey of Rainwater Harvesting Users CWP staff and Ian Green, a University of Virginia graduate student, developed a short survey of users of rainwater harvesting in central and northern Virginia to gather “lessons learned” from systems that have already been in use for some time. In November and December 2011, the survey was completed for 12 existing rainwater harvesting systems. The findings were recently compiled into a report and presentation which will be distributed to the Cabell Brand Center, Rainwater Management Solutions, and other organizations involved in rainwater harvesting projects. The report has been uploaded to EasyGrants. Other Outreach Throughout 2011, CWP staff made other presentations about the process and results of this rainwater harvesting project. We presented the project at the annual Environment Virginia conference at Virginia Military Institute in April, with approximately 40 individuals in attendance. In July, we were able to share some of the preliminary monitoring findings to approximately 15 attendees of the annual York River Roundtable meeting in Louisa County, VA. And most recently, CWP and Rainwater Management Solutions, were invited to present in Richmond at the November meeting of the Virginia State Technical Committee on Agriculture. The latter was an especially exciting opportunity for us to develop more interest in agricultural applications of rainwater harvesting in Virginia, and encourage more state and federal financial cost-share support for this practice to be used on farms.

of 71

We expect that other outreach opportunities will arise as a result of this project’s activities. We have already received a request from the Virginia Plumbing and Mechanical Inspectors Association to conduct a rainwater harvesting class for their members in 2012. Briefly explain discrepancies between the activities conducted during the grant and the activities agreed upon

in your grant agreement. One discrepancy between our original grant proposal and activities that we actually conducted is that we have not yet produced a final monitoring report for the two systems we monitored. This is primarily related to difficulties we had in gathering sufficient and sound water quality and water quantity monitoring data. These difficulties are described in Section 4, below. We do, however, have preliminary findings that we can qualify with caveats (e.g., mud contamination of tank at Bell Creek Farm, problems with automated equipment at Laundromat). The analysis of data gathered at Hydraulic Wash Laundromat was conducted and summarized by University of Virginia environmental engineering students (report attached). Our hope is to acquire more funds in 2012 to conduct further monitoring on these and/or other rainwater harvesting sites, now that we have a better understanding of the environmental variables and equipment needs. Our plan is to report on the collective monitoring results by the end of the year.

Outcomes

Describe and quantify progress towards achieving the project outcomes described in your grant agreement. (Quantify using the approved metrics referenced in your grant agreement or by using more relevant metrics not included in the application.)

The table below outlines the outcomes we anticipated in our original grant proposal to Altria as well as other relevant outcomes that have resulted from this project.

Anticipated Outcome Metric Goal Actual From Altria Proposal: Increase breadth and depth of environmental impact – Sustainable agriculture

Number of innovative sustainable farming technologies or methods in Altria’s tobacco farming communities

1 1 rainwater harvesting farm demonstration site at Bell Creek Farm near Farmville, VA

Hours of education provided in Altria’s tobacco farming communities

4 hrs. (per attendee)

Rainwater Harvesting workshop and Bell Creek Farm tour in Farmville 9/29/11. Five-hour event with 29 attendees = 145 hours

Increase breadth and depth of environmental impact – Water

Number of water sites being monitored for water conservation and pollutant reduction

2 2 sites monitored – Bell Creek Farm and Hydraulic Wash Laundromat

Increase public awareness on how behaviors impact environmental issue

Number of people reached by communication to public

200 *Over 5000 estimated

Number of people educated about project results

12,000 – circulation of CWP’s newsletter

Actual circulation of Runoff Rundown is 13,152

Increase and sustain public engagement on environmental issues

Number of in-bound media inquiries to grantee

2 1.) TV and internet coverage of 11/17/11 workshop in Charlottesville by NBC Channel 29; 2.) request from James River Association to produce video about Bell Creek Farm rainwater project

Number of unique website hits on grantee website

200 hits 900 hits on CWP website (for Charlottesville workshop); also hits on NRCS website and JRA YouTube channel, although numbers unknown

Number of volunteer hours related to sustainable agriculture and water

75 Well over 75 hours provided by Dennis Jones, Deanna Fehrer, Dewitt Goin, Charlie Smith, David Buckalew and his students, and the many speakers of the Charlottesville workshop on 11/17/11.

of 71

Increase grantee capacity to change awareness, attitudes, and behaviors of individuals

Dollars raised as a result of Altria’s Environmental Program funding

$10,000 Cash match raised = $9000 from VA Chesapeake Bay Restoration Fund; $2500 from Dominion; $10,000 from Prince Charitable Trust; and >$50,000 from Environmental Quality Incentives Program (federal)

Survey forms to be completed by workshop participants

200 forms Approximately 40 filled out

Help position grantees as leaders in their respective fields

Number of press mentions related to priority areas

2 - 3 (1) NBC 29 TV and internet; (2) NRCS newsletter article; (3) James River Association video

Number of invitations for grantee to speak at events

5 (1) 2011 Environment Virginia conference; (2)York River Roundtable annual meeting; (3) VA State Technical Committee on Agriculture; (4) request from Virginia Plumbing and Mechanical Inspectors Association

Other Unexpected Outcomes: Reveal codes and regulations that serve as roadblocks to rainwater harvesting

-- -- Hosted panel discussion with state regulators and local code officials at 11/17/11 workshop.

Establish links with other institutions for further rainwater harvesting research

-- -- (1) University of Virginia, Civil and Environmental Engineering class (Dr. Teresa Culver); (2) We will share our monitoring results with University of Auburn Professor of Poultry Science, Gene Simpson, who worked on an Alabama poultry barn installation of rainwater harvesting.

*Between all the outreach activities described above and other webcasts, articles, videos, and presentations described in the Dissemination section below, we estimate that we have informed over 5000 people through this project.

Briefly explain discrepancies between what actually happened compared to what was anticipated to happen.

Two small discrepancies exist between our grant proposal matrix and actual events. We fell short of our goal to gather 200 evaluations from our workshops. This is due in part to smaller attendance numbers, and in part to not insisting enough that attendees turn in their evaluations at the end of the workshops. We did however, receive great verbal feedback from attendees at both workshops and requests for more such workshops on the topic of rainwater harvesting.

Provide any further information (such as unexpected outcomes) important for understanding project activities

and outcome results. Several unexpected outcomes are listed at the end of the matrix above. Another such unexpected outcome is that the partners of this project received recognition by the Soil and Water Conservation Society of Virginia for our work on this rainwater harvesting initiative. The award was presented at the Society’s annual meeting in Charlottesville on October 20th (an image of the award has been uploaded to EasyGrants). We are very proud of the collaborative spirit of this project, and we appreciate that the Society has taken notice of the interest we have developed in the use of rainwater harvesting in cities and on farms in Virginia.

4. Challenges and Lessons Learned Describe any specific challenges that have arisen during the course of the project and how they have been addressed. Also describe the key lessons learned from this project, such as the least and most effective conservation practices or notable aspects of the project’s methods, monitoring, or results. How could other conservation organizations adapt their projects to build upon some of these key lessons about what worked best and what did not? Challenges This was a project of “firsts” for all partners involved: first rainwater harvesting project for CWP, Piedmont SWCD, Farmville NRCS, and Longwood University; first poultry barn application for our designer, Rainwater Management Solutions; and first rainwater harvesting monitoring project for any of us. And with new endeavors and experiments comes plenty of trial and error.

of 71

The timeline of the grant project was extended due to a number of factors – delays in receiving grant funds, delays in the design and bidding process, and delays in acquiring federal Environmental Quality Incentive Program funds needed to pay for construction of the system at Bell Creek Farm. Winter weather and various problems with excavation/installation also protracted the rainwater harvesting construction process at Bell Creek Farm. Time delays were certainly our biggest challenge during this project. Another challenge to note is related to construction costs of the system installed at Bell Creek Farm. In retrospect, the costs of construction were very much underestimated when we originally proposed this project. This was the first system installed in Virginia (that we know of) to harvest roof runoff from such large, long poultry barns. During the design and bidding process, it became clear to Rainwater Management Solutions that the quantity and size of piping and plumbing materials, and cost of the excavation contractor, would be much more extensive than they had anticipated. However, the project was fortunate to receive EQIP funds to cover the difference in cost. Several lessons came out of this challenge, described in the section below. Environmental monitoring never seems to be without challenges, and this project was no exception. At Bell Creek Farm, we encountered several problems with the time-based data recorder that monitored water use. This caused a loss of several months’ worth of data, but fortunately, was backed up by a regular water meter that measured cumulative water use from the cistern. Our most unfortunate challenge was mud that had washed into the cistern during a heavy downpour. This occurred just after installation when the vent pipes entering the cistern had not been capped by the contractors. An attempt was made to remove the sediment as best as possible, but a thin layer of remains on the floor of the cistern matrix. Because some of this mud may get sucked up by the pump when the stored rainwater is drawn out of the tank, some of our water quality monitoring results for the Bell Creek Farm cistern may not be fully reflective of a clean, untainted rainwater harvesting system. However, it is anticipated that through time, this issue will be ameliorated and the system will function as designed for water quality purposes. Key Lessons Useful lessons came out of the challenges described above, which could be incorporated into future rainwater harvesting projects. For example, if our rainwater harvesting designer had done more detailed research into the material and excavation needs of the site, we could have better planned for the construction costs prior to our submitting the grant proposal. Another option would have been to try to request cost estimates from several rainwater harvesting firms, although we likely would have had to look out of state for others. The rainwater harvesting system at Bell Creek Farm is a very high quality system in terms of its components (e.g., vortex filters, automatic turn on/turn off pumps, UV light). These features reduce Mr. Goin’s operation and maintenance burden and create a very user-friendly system. It also is a very low-profile system in that nearly everything is below-ground and does not reduce the useable space around the poultry barns. However, the costs of these features certainly add up and this site may have served as a better demonstration for other farmers if the design were simplified and price reduced. In response to this concern, Rainwater Management Solutions presented several potential lower-cost alternative design options to the farmers in attendance at our workshop in Farmville and for the presentation to the Virginia State Technical Committee on Agriculture. Here are a few of the important lessons we learned about the factors that influence the success of a rainwater harvesting system:

Ensure a year-round use of the rainwater, if possible, to maximize runoff reduction benefit. Site layout greatly affects cost – find ways to minimize piping length and excavation Generally a lot easier to use rainwater for non-potable uses (and maybe for feeding animals too). For non-farm applications, make sure to be aware of codes and regulations that will apply Gutter and filter sizing will affect how well you can catch high intensity rainfall events

Finally, another lesson learned is that there is a high level and growing level of interest in rainwater harvesting across many sectors. This project has especially raised awareness in Virginia’s farming community and in Virginia’s stormwater management sector on the varied benefits and potential of rainwater harvesting.

of 71

5. Dissemination Briefly identify any dissemination of lessons learned or other project results to external audiences, such as the public or other conservation organizations. Activities and results of this project were disseminated via several venues throughout 2011, some geared toward the general public and others for a specific audience. The following list reflects dissemination not yet mentioned in the report above, with viewership/circulation numbers listed (if available):

CWP hosted two webcasts during the grant period on the topic of rainwater harvesting as a stormwater

management practice, with the participation of our project partner, Rainwater Management Solutions. o December 1, 2010 – 165 viewers estimated o September 14, 2011 – 290 viewers estimated

Article in April 2011 Virginia NRCS Newsletter– “Rainwater is a Snap for Prince Edward Poultry Producer” (uploaded to EasyGrants).

The James River Association produced a 7.5-minute documentary entitled, Rainwater Harvesting Pilot Project, featuring the poultry barn rainwater system at Bell Creek Farm. It can be viewed at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tdvpqp2UwPU&list=UUEs_yDa7cR-2U99nEvoLAZQ&index=5&feature=plcp

o 346 online views recorded during grant period. Brent Clayton, formerly with the Virginia Cooperative Extension, presented about the Bell Creek Farm

poultry barn rainwater project at the 2011 Annual Conference of the American Rainwater Catchment Systems Association in Portland, OR.

The poultry barn project was featured in CWP’s Fall 2011 Runoff Rundown newsletter, in an article entitled, “Rainwater Harvesting on the Farm” (uploaded to EasyGrants).

o Newsletter circulation – 13,152; Newsletter “open rate” – approximately 2,918 readers. The urban Rainwater Harvesting Forum and Tour in Charlottesville, VA was advertised on CWP’s website

(screenshot uploaded to EasyGrants). o Received 900 hits.

The Charlottesville workshop was also featured in a television report and online article by Charlottesville’s NBC Channel 29 on November 17th (article uploaded to EasyGrants).

o NBC Channel 29 – “250,000 viewers per week” Presentations and materials from the Charlottesville workshop were requested by and shared with several

EPA staff members at Washington, D.C. headquarters in: Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds; Office of Wastewater Management; and Office of Science and Technology.

6. Project Documents Include in your final programmatic report, via the Uploads section of this task, the following:

2-10 representative photos from the project. Photos need to have a minimum resolution of 300 dpi; report publications, GIS data, brochures, videos, outreach tools, press releases, media coverage; any project deliverables per the terms of your grant agreement.

POSTING OF FINAL REPORT: This report and attached project documents may be shared by the Foundation and any Funding Source for the Project via their respective websites. In the event that the Recipient intends to claim that its final report or project documents contains material that does not have to be posted on such websites because it is protected from disclosure by statutory or regulatory provisions, the Recipient shall clearly mark all such potentially protected materials as “PROTECTED” and provide an explanation and complete citation to the statutory or regulatory source for such protection.