Zero founded violations under current thresholds
Public Works Director Khattab Shammout and Assistant Police Chief Dave Burkhart told the Board of County Supervisors that none of 19 resident complaints tested since the amended noise ordinance took effect in May have exceeded the current limits. Readings generally fell in the nighttime 50s and daytime low 60s, below the 73 dB daytime and roughly 60-to-68 dB nighttime thresholds.
Of the 19 complaints filed through the county’s 311 system, 18 did not meet the definition of steady tonal noise, though staff measured them anyway. The department aims to respond within two business days and has averaged about 8.5 days from complaint to measurement feedback.
How the amended ordinance works
The ordinance, adopted in October 2025 and effective in May, added steady tonal noise measured on a dBC-weighted scale that captures more low-frequency sound. It also includes an unenforceable octave-band provision meant to help identify the source of the sound.
Public works handles the steady-tonal portion while police continue to handle other noise complaints. A third-party consultant and the county’s first acoustic engineer, Koltai Hunter, who was hired in July, support the work.
Staff recommendation and technical limits
Shammout said the current data set is too limited to recommend specific changes and that the department wants more measurements, including ambient readings and octave-band analysis. He noted the difficulty of cumulative sound when multiple data centers sit near one another, because each facility is evaluated against the threshold individually.
Staff are also reviewing noise studies and profiles submitted with new high-energy-use facility applications. Three code-enforcement staff recently completed noise-enforcement certification at Rutgers.
Residents urge return to earlier recommendations
Speakers during public comment, including residents from the Great Oaks community in the Coles District, described persistent low-frequency hums that disrupt sleep and daily life. Several criticized the current thresholds as too high and urged the board to restore recommendations developed by the Data Center Ordinance Advisory Group and its consultants.
They said hundreds of thousands of dollars and volunteer hours went into that earlier work, which was set aside before the board adopted the current ordinance. Coles District Supervisor Yesli Vega called the staff recommendation to wait for more data “insulting and infuriating.”
Board sets Nov. 17 discussion
Chair Deshundra Jefferson said Tuesday’s discussion serves as notice of intent and that the board will take up a presentation and discussion on Nov. 17. Newer board members and staff, including Hunter, will review the prior DCOAG and consultant work at that meeting.
After Nov. 17, staff would need clear direction on exact wording changes, advertise a public hearing, and return for a vote. County Attorney Michelle Robel noted that the board cannot amend the ordinance without a properly advertised public hearing and that any proposed edits must be specific enough for the advertisement.
Next steps and legal process
Brentsville District Supervisor Tom Gordy said he intends to bring a directive soon evaluating options for updates. Occoquan District Supervisor Kenny Boddye and others asked that Hunter and the original consultants have a chance to weigh in so the board does not simply copy-paste earlier language.
Jefferson emphasized the need to follow the legal process while acting for residents who say they cannot sleep. No vote to change the ordinance occurred Tuesday.
Subscribe to our FREE email newsletter to get local news you can trust.
