Government monitoring by the U.S. Geological Survey sampled groundwater in CT’s FIPS 170 area from aquifer 112DFSF, focusing on hardness components calcium and magnesium. In three samples taken between 2011 and 2017 from wells 19 to 24 feet deep, hardness was consistently detected, with a median concentration of 105.0 mg/L and a range from 74.7 to 154.0 mg/L. None of these results exceeded any federal threshold.
Myth: Treatment capacity should only be based on average water usage in an industrial facility
The government data provides median and range values, not average facility demand. Judging treatment capacity requires matching the water softener’s grain capacity—not simply median hardness—to the volume and hardness levels of the actual process water used daily. For example, the Nelsen 600,000 Grain Skid-Mounted Commercial Water Softener offers treatment sized for substantial industrial water use but must be evaluated against specific daily demand and hardness levels confirmed by testing your supply.
Myth: Hardness limits reported by government are health standards applicable directly to process water
The hardness measurements here relate to an aesthetic secondary standard. These govern concerns like scale impact and taste, not health risks. Hardness, caused by calcium and magnesium ions, does not violate federal health-based water quality limits in this aquifer. Industrial operators must still consider hardness for process chemistry and equipment longevity, but not as a health compliance issue.
Myth: The median and range of hardness sampling reveal precisely what process water hardness will be
The median of 105.0 mg/L provides a central tendency from limited samples while the range (74.7–154.0 mg/L) shows variability. However, these values come from only three samples at two wells and cannot predict exact hardness in your facility’s water. Site-specific hardness testing remains essential to understand day-to-day or batch variations influencing process water quality.
Myth: Hardness data from this CT aquifer equates to the same conditions in neighboring counties
Regional differences in geology and hydrology mean aquifer hardness varies. Comparing this FIPS 170 data from aquifer 112DFSF to neighboring counties does not provide an exact match. Each area’s USGS sampling results are unique, so care must be taken not to assume your water will mirror adjacent regions without direct testing.
Myth: Industrial water hardness concerns end at source water—plumbing materials and age do not influence outcomes
While hardness originates in source water, the condition of plumbing infrastructure also affects water quality delivered to industrial processes. Scale buildup over time can reduce flow or alter treatment needs independently of source hardness levels. Operators should consider system age and materials alongside hardness measurement when specifying treatment.
Next Step: Confirm Your Facility’s Hardness with a Dedicated Water Test
The government sampling record offers valuable context but cannot replace a dedicated hardness test of your actual process water. This test will identify the specific calcium and magnesium concentrations you must address to meet your process specification. Once you know your water’s hardness profile, a commercial water softener like the Nelsen 600,000 Grain Skid-Mounted model ships ready to configure for effective hardness removal tailored to your operational demands.
Where this information comes from
Source: USGS groundwater sampling. Sampled 2017-09-06. These figures describe groundwater sampled in this area. They are not a test of any individual private well - only a test of that well can establish its own water.
On record: U.S. Geological Survey sampling of Hardness, Ca, Mg in the 112DFSF aquifer (FIPS 170): 3 results from 2 wells, median 105.0 mg/L, range 74.7-154.0 mg/L; none above any federal threshold