Maintaining Your Septic System to Keep Your Water Well Clean

Many homeowners rely on both a private well for water supply and a septic system for wastewater treatment. To ensure a clean and healthy water supply both systems need to function properly. The most likely source of contamination to a drinking water well is a nearby septic system failure, and typically, the nearest septic system is your own. If your home has a septic system of any type you are responsible for maintaining it. There are many different types of septic system designs. The most common type used for single family homes is a traditional septic system that consists of a single chamber septic tank and drain/leach field. The tank receives the toilet and drain waste water from the house and allows the solids to settle down to the bottom of the tank where the anaerobic bacteria that live in the tank digest the organic materials while the effluent (water around all that stuff) flows out to the leach field to be purified by passing through soil until it reaches the groundwater. Scum consisting of oil and grease floats on top of the water layer and can be pulled into the leach field limiting its effectiveness. The septic tank effluent water is either pumped or allowed to flow to a leach field where it percolates into the soil, which provides final treatment by removing harmful bacteria, viruses, and nutrients.

Suitable soil is necessary for successful wastewater treatment. The “percolation rate” is the rate at which water moves through soil. The acceptable rates are between one minute and one hour per inch of soil. Take either more or less time for the water to pass through your soil and the natural soil is unsuitable for treatment of the waste water. If the water moves too slowly through the soil the leach field will flood with contaminated, foul smelling water or the water will back up into the house. If the water moves too quickly thought the soil the water will not be adequately treated and contaminate nearby ground or surface water. Other types of septic systems are grouped together and called alternative on-site sewage systems, AOSS. One example of an AOSS is an aerobic system consists of a multi chamber tank or several tanks. After separation of solids in the first tank waste is forced through a filter into a second chamber or tank where air is pumped in to enhance aerobic bacteria which decomposes the organic material. The waste then flows into a third chamber or settling chamber which collects the bacteria and passes the liquid on to the leach field or drip field. Aerobic systems can remove more than 90% of the organic material and suspended solids within the tanks themselves, but require much more maintenance. Other type of AOSS include traditional septic tanks followed by treatment with tanks filled with peat, or sand mounds, or other soil absorption system that provide the secondary treatment.

In Virginia all AOSS are required to have a licensed operator maintain the system and be inspected at least annually. For more information on AOSS regulations and requirements see the Guidance Document from the Virginia Department of Health. Indoor water use in the typical single-family home is between 50-70 gallons per person per day. Septic systems are sized by bedrooms, which is an estimate of the number of people living in a home. However, even if the number of people living within your home is appropriate for the size of the septic system, you can still overload the system. Use too much water in a short period of time and the system will be overwhelmed. Each time the system is overwhelmed untreated sewage will leave the tank and begin to clog the leach field. If the amount of wastewater entering the system is chronically more than the system can handle, the wastewater containing raw sewage eventually backs up into the house or yard and creates a health hazard. By the time you can smell or see a problem, however, the damage to the leach field might already be done. Replacement of a leach field can run to the tens of thousands of dollars. So caring for your septic system not only cares for the earth but also cares for your wallet.

By limiting your water use and spreading out peak demands on the system you can reduce the amount of wastewater your system must treat. When you have your system inspected and pumped as needed, you reduce the chance of system failure. The US EPA’s Homeowner’s Guide to Septic Systems is a terrific basic guide to caring for and maintaining your septic system. Follow the Dos and Don’ts and your septic system may last for decades. Remember though, what goes into your septic system goes into the earth. Rethink the products you use to clean your house. Paint, solvents, gasoline, insecticides and poisons should never go down your drain. Every chemical you pour down your drain is buried in your yard. In a multitude of ways your yard is part of the earth’s yard. The functional lifetime of a traditional septic system is limited. The system is designed so that with proper maintenance it will last 20 to 30 years, under the best conditions. Many other factors can cause early failure of a septic system. Pipes blocked by roots, soils saturated by storm water, compacting of the drain field by parking vehicles or heavy objects on the top of the field, improper location, poor original design or poor installation can all lead to major problems. Septic systems and AOSS fail because they are abused, improperly maintained or just old. Remember that the entire functioning of a septic system is based on natural ecological cycles. It needs to be treated kindly and kept in balance. When a system is poorly maintained and not pumped out on a regular basis, sludge (solid material) builds up inside the septic tank, and then flows into the leach field, clogging it beyond repair. Excessive load from toilets, garbage disposal, putting grease, coffee grinds, kitty litter down the drain will shorten the life of and potentially overload the system.

Even with proper use and maintenance the system will wear out. Eventually, the soil around the leach field becomes clogged with organic material, forcing sewage upward into the yard or back into the house. Before that happens, however, there are warnings signs that you need to pay attention to.
Signs that a Septic System is Failing
1. Sewage backup in your drains or toilets. This is often seen as an unpleasant smelling black liquid.
2. Slow flushing of all or most of your toilets. Many of the drains in your house will drain much slower than usual, despite the use of plungers or drain cleaning products (which by the way should not be used with a septic system). Unfortunately, this is often gradual and goes unnoticed.
3. Liquid seeping along the surface of the ground in the back yard near the leach field. It may or may not have a noticeable odor associated with it. Lush green grass growing over the absorption field, even during dry weather or visual stripes in the grass texture and quality is often an indication that an excessive amount of liquid from your system is moving up through the soil, instead of downward, as it should. While some upward movement of liquid from the leach field is expected, too much could indicate major problems.
4. The presence of nitrates or bacteria in the drinking water well. This indicates that liquid from the system may be flowing into the well through the ground or over the surface. Annual water testing will indicate if you have this problem.

With alternative septic system assessing functionality is relatively simple for a qualified inspector (as required in Virginia). AOSS require maintenance to keep functioning properly and so AOSS regulations in Virginia require that these systems are installed with conservative horizontal set backs, are operated and maintained by a licensed operator, are sampled by a licensed operator every five years (with some older AOSS exempt from the sampling requirement), and an operating manual and records maintained on site. Remember that AOSS also need to have their primary tank pumped regularly and these expensive systems need to be treated with care.

Potomac Watershed Roundtable Meeting: The Virginia Watershed Implementation Plan, and septic regulation in Virginia

The most recent meeting of the Potomac Watershed Roundtable was in Warrenton, VA at Lord Fairfax Community College on January 7th 2011. The session addressed the Chesapeake Bay strict pollution diet, the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) mandated by the EPA and the Virginia Chesapeake Bay Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) to achieve the mandated reduction in nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment pollution.

The revised WIP also reduces the rate of growth in on-site sewage disposal systems, or septic. The stated intension is to raise the costs to operate a septic system through regulation which would make clustered systems or community systems more competitive and raise the overall cost of building and maintaining homes. The cost of constructing housing would increase in the area in response to these requirements. Though according to the Department of Environmental Quality, DEQ, it is not intended to limit regional growth, the requirements cannot help but impact housing costs and availability.

In addition the revised WIP proposes to require the offset new system loads through an expansion of the Nutrient Credit Exchange Program. The Commonwealth intends to implement amendments to Virginia Department of Health regulations for alternative systems which are currently a bit in limbo because of the temporary emergency regulations that the department of health has done little to enforce in much of the Commonwealth and are set to expire on April 7th 2011, but can be extended for 6 months.

The proposed amendments to the current Emergency Regulations that require all single family alternative onsite sewage systems, AOSS, continue to have professional operators certified by DPOR to operate and maintain the AOSS in accordance with the operating permit, and visited by the operator as specified in the operation permit (typically once or twice a year for preapproved commercial systems) and finally an annual maintenance report submitted to the regulators by the operator. In addition, sampling at startup to confirm proper functioning of the system and every five years for those systems put into operation after the date of the enabling legislation and not grandfathered, like mine.

In addition to those requirements the new legislation requires a minimum 50% reduction in delivered nitrogen for all new small alternative onsite systems in the Chesapeake Bay watershed resulting in an effective delivered load to the edge of the project boundary of 4.5 lbs TN/person/year. Single family home AOSSs are about to get very expensive in the Cheseapeake Bay Watershed if the regulations are enforced.

As Bob Marshall pointed out a few days ago, the civil penalty regulation establishing a uniform schedule penalties for violations of onsite sewage and alternative discharging sewage treatment system regulations. was withdrawn. There will be little or no enforcement. Those who ignore the law will not suffer any consequences. There seems to be very little follow through on the part of the VDH to even inform the public of the regulations.

The Potomac Watershed Roundtable of nine counties, six towns and cities, the six soil and water conservation districts and various stakeholders including interested citizens was at a loss of how to incorporate these requirements into their programs. If these regulations are necessary and appropriate, then they should not be voluntary. The public should be informed and simple and reasonable penalties established. The public comment period on these changes closes on February 4th 2011. There will be a public hearing on January 25th 2011 at 10 AM at the James Madison Building at 109 Governor Street in Richmond, VA.

Commonwealth of Virginia HB 332 Alternative Onsite Sewage Systems-Improving the Emergency AOSS Regulations

On October 28, 2009 the Virginia Department of Health published their long awaited and needed Emergency Alternative Onsite Septic System, AOSS, regulations after public comment. The purpose of these regulations is to ensure that these more effective treatment systems are designed and installed appropriately and maintained in a manner to allow them to function properly to be protective of the environment and public health.

For single family homes the new Emergency AOSS regulations require that these tested and approved systems are installed with conservative horizontal set backs, are operated and maintained by a licensed operator, grab samples taken by a licensed operator every five years (and analyzed by an EPA certified laboratory), and an operating manual and records need to be maintained on site.

HB 332 maintains the essential point of the regulations that these effective AOSS are maintained in a manner that makes them function properly for the protection of the environment and public health. However, this bill prevents the Department of Health from requiring routine sampling and analysis of single family AOSS with flows of less than 1,000 gallons a day. The sampling required under the Emergency Regulations was without technical merit or standard protocol. The sampling was statistically invalid, and potentially counter productive to the safety of the system. Developing an effective sampling protocol is impossible because the end of treatment for many AOSS systems is below ground surface and above groundwater. A monitoring well would remain dry and incapable of being sampled. Even if there were a way to sample the effluent at the end of treatment, testing of a septic system operation at a single point in time every five years can be impacted by volume, load, temperature and humidity and is not representative of overall performance. Results from a single test taken every five years can be expected normally to vary from acceptable overall average results and so are statistically misleading and not representative of sound sampling methods.

HB 332 also creates a provision in the law allowing for a homeowner to become trained to operate their own system. This would minimize the burden on many homeowners who are currently fully capable of operating and maintaining their systems or who can be trained to do so and is more in keeping with Virginia’s history and traditions of individual responsibility and self-reliance. Self regulation is a proven and effective model that can work here. Also, HB 332 would allow all Professional Engineers, registered environmental health specialists/sanitarians, authorized onsite soil evaluator or wastewater works operators licensed in the Commonwealth of Virginia to operate and maintain their own single family AOSS without further training.

Finally, HB 332 requires all field technicians working for a licensed operator to be trained to an adequate level to properly maintain the AOSS. This is to prevent licensed operators from hiring untrained and unqualified workers to respond to mandated demand and creates a minimum level of knowledge necessary for anyone working on an AOSS to ensure that these systems are maintained according to manufacturers’ guidelines.

Commonwealth of Virginia HB 332 Alternative Onsite Sewage Systems; Routine Testing-Looking for Support

A new bill HB 332 Alternative onsite sewage systems; routine testing is being carried by Delegate Bob Marshall and is looking for support please contact your Virginia State General Assembly Delegate and Senator and urge them to support and or co-patron it. The bill is currently in House Health, Welfare and Institutions Committee. Let’s work together to get this change done to improve the Alternative Onsite Sewer System regulations. The summary of the bill is below, but the full text can be accessed at the Virginia General Assembly site.
Alternative onsite sewage systems; routine testing; who may test. Prohibits the Department of Health from requiring that owners of alternative onsite sewer systems with flows of less than or equal to 1,000 gallons per day and serving a single-family dwelling provide analyzed samples of effluent on a routine and recurring basis. The Board for Waterworks and Wastewater Works Operators and Onsite Sewage System Professionals must develop licensure for (i) employees or agents of licensed operators and (ii) owner-operators of an individual single-family dwelling that have demonstrated the competence and knowledge to operate, monitor, and maintain their own alternative onsite sewage system. Any professional engineer with a current license in the Commonwealth may elect to be deemed an owner-operator without the demonstration of further competence.
On October 28, 2009 the Virginia Department of Health published their Emergency Alternative Onsite Septic System, AOSS, regulations after public comment. The purpose of the regulations is to ensure that these more effective treatment systems are designed and installed appropriately and maintained in a manner to allow them to function properly to be protective of the environment and public health. The US EPA states in the “Volunteer National Guidelines for Management of Onsite and Clustered Treatment Systems” that improper design, construction, installation, operation and/or maintenance are the source of onsite waste treatment failures. The EPA estimates that 29-30% of Virginia households have septic systems and that 8% of theses systems are AOSS.
For single family homes the new Emergency AOSS regulations require that these systems are installed with conservative horizontal set backs, are operated and maintained by a licensed operator, grab samples taken by a licensed operator every five years (and analyzed by an EPA certified laboratory), and an operating manual and records need to be maintained on site. The HB 332 maintains the essential point of the regulations that these effective AOSS are maintained in a manner that makes them function properly for the protection of the environment and public health. However, the bill prevents the Department of Health from requiring routine sampling and analysis of single family AOSS with flows of less than 1,000 gallons a day. The sampling required under the Emergency Regulations was without technical merit or standard protocol. Developing an effective sampling protocol is impossible because the end of treatment for many AOSS systems is below ground surface and above groundwater. A monitoring well would remain dry and incapable of being sampled. Even if there were a way to sample the effluent at the end of treatment, testing of a septic system operation at a single point in time can be impacted by volume, load, temperature and humidity and is not representative of overall performance. Results from a single test can be expected normally to vary from acceptable overall average results and so are statistically misleading and not representative of sound sampling methods.

The bill also creates a provision in the law allowing for a homeowner to become trained to operate their own system. This would minimize the burden on many homeowners who are currently fully capable of operating and maintaining their systems or who can be trained to do so and is more in keeping with Virginia’s history and traditions of individual responsibility and self-reliance. Self regulation is a proven and effective model that can work here. Also, HB 332 would allow all Professional Engineers licensed in the Commonwealth of Virginia to operate and maintain their own single family AOSS without further training. Finally, the bill requires all field technicians working for as licensed operator to be trained to an adequate level to properly maintain the AOSS. This is to prevent licensed operators from hiring untrained and unqualified workers to respond to mandated demand and creates a level of knowledge necessary for anyone working on an AOSS.

Misplaced Priorities at the Virginia Department of Health

The final version of the Emergency Regulations for Alternative Onsite Sewage Systems (AOSS) is posted at the Department of Health web site and can be downloaded for your perusal.

Still contained in the final version is the requirement that single family alternative onsite sewage systems be sampled every five years. This gives the appearance of the emergency regulations that serve to ensure enrichment of the septic service companies and department of health data gathering project. The regulations require two year contacts and basically tie the homeowner to an extremely limited pool of service providers. My own service provider just informed me that his contact rates have gone up almost 25% to meet the requirements of the new regulations and does not include sampling. The requirement for testing is a waste of the homeowner’s money and the inflexibility of the regulations will not serve to better protect public health and the environment. To work regulations must be effective, clear and not overly burdensome.

The proposed requirement for sampling and analysis by single family homeowners at a single point in time is misleading and it has no scientific value beyond data gathering. Results from a single test would normally vary in a range around the design parameters and so are statistically misleading and not representative of sound sampling methods. The Department of Health is using this requirement to data gather on the homeowner’s nickel. There are no standards for the sample results.

Perhaps I am wrong and the Department of Health intends to use the design parameters of the system as sampling standards. Let’s walk through this. If the system “failed” to meet the design parameters the next steps would be to make adjustments to the use or operation of the system. Then, to verify that these changes had the desired result, the system would be retested, again at the home owners expense to verify effluent within the design parameters. How many rounds of testing would be required to determine that the “average” parameter was met? Or would the Department of Health simply ignore the results and allow the systems to continue to operate until the next five year sample date? In real life there will be variability in performance. At what cut off does the VDH take enforcement action, or require further investigation? Without these answers a sampling program can be no more than data gathering.

All of the approved AOSS systems were demonstrated to perform satisfactorily to meet the requirements of the Commonwealth. Operation and maintenance of these AOSS systems by professional operators (or trained homeowners) ensures that a single family home (low volume) unit is functioning properly. These are not very complicated systems, they contain tanks, pumps and filters and natural process of bacteria breaking down the waste. As an experienced chemical engineer I know that a single sample once every five years would be misleading. Testing of a septic system operation at a single point in time can be impacted by volume, load, temperature and humidity and is not representative of overall performance. These systems do not have controlled sample ports and the field workers servicing single family homes have no sampling training and under the regulations are not required to have any form of license. Temperature and pressure will not be recorded, temperature will not be controlled during hold and delivery, and sampling will be unprofessional. There are no standards for appropriate sampling of a septic system. Nonetheless, I will be charged hundreds of dollars. In addition, the results of the single sampling event can be easily manipulated by adding a large quantity of clean water from the garden hose to the location being sampled. In my case, simply adding water to the third tank will ensure that the data obtained is entirely worthless. Such a single sample test would never have been adequate by itself to get an AOSS approved for use.

What is even more annoying than paying for the data gathering efforts of the Department of Health is their failure to put their first priority on the primary duty of protecting public health and the environment. If they wanted to do something useful they could test private drinking water wells annually. This data would ensure the public health and could identify failing or failed AOSS and traditional septic systems that had impacted groundwater. However, the massive costs of this would be visible and the pain of the cost felt by the public. At least, the groundwater of the Commonwealth could be carefully tracked. The Virginia Department of Health does not require homeowners to test their drinking water wells annually or even every five years. There is no logic behind the requirement that I should be spending hundreds of dollars to have some septic operation company sample and then send for analysis a sample from my third septic tank, but does not require me to ever pull a sample from the faucet of my house. Evidently, the Department of Health regulatory process was very influenced by the input from the industry.

Ideas for Modifying the Emergency Regulations for Alternative Onsite Sewage Systems

After much thought I have come up with some ideas on how to amend the Emergency Regulations for Alternative Onsite Sewage Systems in Virginia to better achieve the goals of the regulation and serve the people of Virginia. Alternative Onsite Sewage Systems are likely to be used more extensively in the future and may replace many of the conventional septic systems that fail. Though, conventional septic systems were designed to operate indefinitely if properly maintained, the truth is they have no alarms or ways to monitor them and the EPA states that most are not well maintained. The EPA estimates that the life of a conventional septic system is t 20 years or less. AOSS systems that are properly maintained will better serve the 30% of all homes that use on-site sewage systems and protect Virginia and Virginians.

To protect public health and the environment are essential and the goal of these regulations. In order to achieve this goal, regulation must be effective, clear and not overly burdensome. Self regulation is a proven effective model that can work to ensure that single family and low volume AOSS units are operated and maintained to protect public health and the environment. We allow people to operate their own automobiles on highways with school buses, ambulances, fire trucks, taxicabs, professional drivers and other citizens. We allow licensed pilots to fly planes. These citizens operate and maintain their machinery with annual inspections. The same self regulatory system can work for AOSSs.

First of all I believe that any PE, engineer licensed in the state of Virginia can operate and maintain their own AOSS.

Anyone who maintains an AOSS must personally hold either a PE, be certified under Chapter 23 of title 54.1 as being qualified to operate, monitor, and maintain AOSSs, or hold a (new) Class 2 License even if working under the direct supervision of an individual who is licensed or certified under Chapter 23 (§ 54.1-2300 et seq.) of Title 54.1 as being qualified to operate, monitor, and maintain an alternative onsite sewage system. I believe that the field employees should have at least a basic knowledge of AOSS systems, their operations, working parts and maintenance requirements before they are sent out to my house to work on my system.

“Maintenance” means performing adjustments to equipment and controls and in-kind replacement of normal wear and tear parts such as light bulbs, fuses, filters, pumps, motors, or other like components. Maintenance includes pumping the tanks on a periodic basis. Maintenance shall not include replacement of tanks, drain field piping, distribution boxes, or work requiring a construction permit and installer.

The DPOR must develop a test to qualify anyone seeking capability to maintain an AOSS system. All field employees of any entity that is licensed or certified under Chapter 23 (§ 54.1-2300 et seq.) of Title 54.1 as being qualified to operate, monitor, and maintain an alternative onsite sewage system, must have at least a Class 2 License. The new Class 2 License can not have a professional work experience requirement, but must demonstrate knowledge of AOSSs.

An owner of an AOSS of less than 1,000 gallons a day may operate and maintain their own system if they have obtained a Class 2 License demonstrating knowledge of the systems.

All AOSSs less than 1,000 gallons a day must be inspected annually. Inspections can only be performed by the department of Health or an individual who is personally licensed or certified under Chapter 23 (§ 54.1-2300 et seq.) of Title 54.1 as being qualified to operate, monitor, and maintain an alternative onsite sewage system.

All AOSS under 1,000 gallons a day must be operated by either an individual who is licensed or certified under Chapter 23 (§ 54.1-2300 et seq.) of Title 54.1 as being qualified to operate, monitor, and maintain an alternative onsite sewage system or the owner of the system and is either a PE in Virginia or holds a Class 2 License.

All AOSS less than 1,000 gallons a day must be maintained according to the requirements of the operating manual and maintain a log.

No AOSS less than 1,000 gallon a day will be required to sample the system. All of the approved AOSS systems were demonstrated to perform satisfactorily to meet the requirements of the Commonwealth. Operation and maintenance of these AOSS systems by professional operators, PEs, or trained homeowners ensures that a low volume unit is functioning properly. A sampling and testing requirement is burdensome, without public health or environmental benefits.

Virginia’s Emergency Alternative Onsite Septic System Regulations Comments 2

On September 28, 2009 the Virginia Department of Health published their proposed Alternative Onsite Septic System, AOSS, regulations for public comment. There was a 30 day comment period that closed on October 28th 2009. On Friday, November 6, 2009 the Department of Health posted the comments. The comments and emergency regulations were posted on the VDH website for your review (they have since been taken down). There are 187 pages of comments from designers, regulators, manufacturers, environmental groups, consultants, and homeowners. Some of the comments are so technical in nature that I fear the resolution would require a multi year experimental program. Many comments are interesting.

Amelia McCulley of Albemarle County states that enforcement of noncompliance will be critical. The Emergency Regulations read:
“The Board, commissioner, and Department may use any lawful means to enforce this chapter, including voiding a construction or operation permit, imposition of civil penalties, or criminal prosecution.”

To ensure the successful implementation of the Emergency Regulations, the regulations need to be clear in the operating requirements for homeowners and the failure to comply with the operating requirements requires clearly spelled out appropriate fines and penalties the department of health is willing and able to invoke. Criminal prosecution of a homeowner for lack of an Operation and Maintenance contract is unlikely to be pursued. Therefore, As Amelia points out the necessary staffing, tools and procedures will need to be in place to assure that enforcement can occur as needed.

Ted McCormack of the Virginia Association of Counties strongly endorses the provisions of 12VAC5-613-110 that require all AOSS owners to maintain an ongoing relationship with an state-licensed AOSS operator, and further, to have the AOSS visited on a regular basis… In addition, current and prospective staffing reductions at local health departments mean that regular operator visits of AOSS by licensed professionals may be the only way the commonwealth will ever know that the systems are functioning properly. “ He concludes that the protections, the performance and laboratory sampling and monitoring provisions must not be weakened under any circumstances, and in some instances, should be increased. His argument is that the costs of maintaining, monitoring and regulating the AOSSs should be born by the property owner.

Scott York of Loudoun County supports annual maintenance and inspection requirements. “Unlike traditional septic tanks, AOSS are complex machines with components that must be properly maintained in order to continue functioning according to system design. Annual operator inspection reports filed with the health department will not only ensure that each AOSS is properly functioning, but it will also lead to improved maintenance as problems are identified during the required site visit and pointed out to the homeowner. Annual inspections and better routine maintenance will decrease the incidents of catastrophic system failures, which can cost many thousands of dollars to fix.” Because the costs of repairing a complete system failure are so high, Loudoun County goes on to suggest the Health Department to develop a requirement for the owner, designer, installer, manufacturer or operator to post a performance bond or other form of financial surety in order to cover the costs of major system failures in the event that routine maintenance and inspections are not enough to prevent such failure.

For the single family homeowner the requirements of the Emergency Regulations are about, ensuring and that these systems perform to protect public health and the waters of the Commonwealth of Virginia. For single family homes the typical homeowner cannot afford a gold plated regulatory system with every potential system and regulatory failure, monitored for, tested for, and insured against on the homeowner’s nickel. As was pointed out by the PEC, even waste water treatment plants, may not provide adequate protection of the waters of the state from man. We as a state could not afford the infrastructure necessary to be monitor and verify performance and operation, and the homeowner can not afford it all. The Department of Health needs to determine the reasonable compromises that will protect public health and the environment in a less than perfect world. Controlling the density of septic systems and the required inspections and maintenance will go a long way in ensuring the protection of public health and the waters of the state. It is a start.

Virginia’s Emergency Alternative Onsite Septic System Regulations Comments 1

On September 28, 2009 the Virginia Department of Health published their proposed Alternative Onsite Septic System, AOSS, regulations for public comment. There was a 30 day comment period that closed on October 28th 2009. On Friday, November 6, 2009 the Department of Health posted the comments. I was a little surprised to see both my comments and what I thought was a personal e-mail to Alan Knapp posted as comments. Nonetheless, I learned a lot reading through the comments and was really pleased with all the sheer number of people who participated in the regulatory process. The comments and emergency regulations are posted on the VDH website for your review. There are 187 pages of comments from designers, regulators, manufacturers, environmental groups, consultants, and homeowners. Some of the comments are so technical in nature that I fear the resolution would require a multi year experimental program. Many comments are interesting.

Thomas Crow of the Fairfax Co. Health Department points out that “In the initial stages finding an operator for home owners will be difficult and expensive. There are very few operators for a home owner to choose from in today’s market. We suggest providing an effective date for this paragraph to allow time for the infrastructure to be built to meet the demand.” He goes on to suggest that Emergency Regulations require that “…operating permits must be renewed every five years by the Health Department. We believe that requirement is necessary because local Health Departments lack the staff necessary to adequately provide oversight to the program as described in the regulations. Requiring a renewable permit will make it ensure that the Health Department is able to evaluate each AOSS at least every five years.” So, every year the Health Department will have to issue or renew operating permits complete with sampling for 20% of all AOSS in the state and every new system built. I do not think that will alleviate the staffing issue. Furthermore, if the operating permit lapses is the occupancy permit voided or must the homeowner begin pump and haul until such time that the department of health renews the permit. I think the idea of outside licensed operators and computer systems was intended to automate compliance someday, not create a system where the VDH needs to manually review and issue a new permit for an ever growing number of systems each year.

Scott Fincham also of the VDH points out that according to his reading of the regulations “Low Pressure Distribution System’s will be considered Alternative (AOSS) and thus require maintenance and monitoring.”

W. Todd Benson of the Piedmont Environmental Council points to the USGS research on the Potomac River that identified intersexed fish. Researchers identified the presence of endocrine disruptors. “Evidence is mounting that trace levels of prescription drugs in rivers and streams may be harming fish, tadpoles, frogs, mussels and oysters. Obviously, the same constituents in the solid and liquid waste stream of conventional waste water treatment works should be expected in AOSS effluent. One might assume that the risk posed by and individual AOSS is the same or better than individual, traditional septic system and, therefore, the permitting of individual AOSSs should be allowed. But the assumption of no greater harm dissipates as the systems grow in size.” Emerging chemicals of concern will be an issue to septic systems, AOSS, clustered systems and sewage treatment plants in the future. It is unknown which of these systems will prove most protective of human health and the environment. Soil filtration may prove to be more effective that point source release. There is still much research to be done in this emerging area of investigation. Todd is correct when he states “These regulations are prepared without any analysis of or attention to the problem of endocrine disruptors or other chemicals of concern.” The PEC recommends that all AOSSs other than individual AOSSs should be banned.

Several different investigations within the Fish and Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey studied the relationship between wastewater treatment plants, other chemicals, and the impacted fish. The study Todd refers to found the problem of endocrine disruption in fish to be widespread in the limited study area of a portion of the Chesapeake Water Shed, but increased in proximity to and downstream of the wastewater treatment plants. Chemical sampling that took place along with the fish sampling found higher concentrations of wastewater chemicals near the wastewater plants. Pesticides currently used in agriculture were detected at all locations. Hormones were not detected in the samples, but analysis using yeast screening assays found estrogenic endocrine-disrupting chemicals at all locations their specific source is not yet known. Though they cannot identify a single chemical or group of chemicals responsible, the US FW and US GS have embarked on further studies.

Anish Jantrania, Ph.D., P.E, a former VDH employee, is a supporter of the clustered systems and today makes his living designing and operating those systems. I should give him the opportunity to counter the PECs recommendation against clustered systems, but as always Anish’s comments are way beyond my knowledge base, but he does state “It is important that Lab Sampling be required for ALL types of AOSS, large and small, at frequency that does not create undue financial burden on either type of AOSS… It’s all about Performance WITH Verification.” I like the philosophy which would allow the regulations to evolve with the knowledge base. However, I am still thinking about that, after all, for at least the single family homeowner the requirements of the Emergency Regulations are intended to ensure that these systems perform to protect public health and the waters of the Commonwealth of Virginia. For single family homes the typical homeowner cannot afford a gold plated regulatory system with every potential system and regulatory failure, monitored for, tested for, permitted and re-permitted on the homeowner’s nickel. As Todd elegantly points out, highly regulated point source generators, waste water treatment plants, may not provide adequate protection of the waters of the state from man. We as a state could not afford the infrastructure necessary to monitor and verify performance and operation, and the homeowner can only afford essential protections to protect public health and the environment, not those that make a regulator's life easier. The Department of Health needs to determine the reasonable compromises that will protect public health and the environment in a less than perfect world.

How will the Single Family Homeowner Comply with the new Virginia Emergency Alternative Septic Regulations

The Emergency Alternative Onsite Sewage System (AOSS) Regulations were published September 28, 2009 by the Virginia Department of Health and the comment period is open until October 28, 2009.

The single family homeowner who has an AOSS will not have and easy time complying with the requirements of the regulations. The Virginia code and the Emergency regulations require the owner of an AOSS, have that system operated by a licensed operator, as defined in § 32.1-163, and visited by the operator as specified in the operation permit. Very few homeowners have seen the operating permit for their septic system and most are unaware of its requirements. In addition, it is possible to have an AOSS and not know it.

Effective July 1, 2009, oversight of soil scientists and septic construction and repair companies was transferred from the Department of Health to the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation (DPOR). Virginia law now requires that soil evaluators, installers, and operators of onsite sewage systems to be licensed by the Board for Waterworks and Wastewater Works Operators and Onsite Sewage System Professionals at the DPOR. Any individual who was previously certified by the Department of Health for construction and/or repair of septic systems can get an interim license.

Prior to July 1, 2009, Virginia law did not require a license to practice as an onsite sewage system installer or operator. To make the transition smoother, any individual that was practicing as installers or operators could obtain an interim license from DPOR. As I understand it, anyone operating in any aspect of septic can obtain a license to perform any of the tasks, qualified or not. It appears as if the license is merely evidence of currently involvement in the septic business, not ability to operate an AOSS. Because the program is new, DPOR does not have any complaint history or even a list of licensed contractors available in your area.

Previously, county Department of Health qualified individuals to perform these tasks and to a limited extent could remove their permit if their work was unsatisfactory. Single family homeowners have any easily accessible tools at their disposal to determine who should be the operator of their AOSS, merely having a license is not evidence of competence. Supposedly, Virginia is requiring licensed operators to operate and maintain all AOSSs to protect public health and the environment, because homeowners cannot operate these systems themselves.
This is very much an example of let the homeowner beware. Verifying a license is not a substitute for checking references with both other homeowners and the Department of Health and local engineers. Many county offices of the Department of Health used to maintain a list of qualified contractors to install AOSSs. Some of these lists are still on line or can be obtained from the county office. That is the basic list to start with or start with the contractor who installed your system. That information is available from the Department of Health. Next call each contractor and ask if they operate and maintain your type of system. If you do not know what type of system you have, go outside and write down the name from the power boxes and lids you can piece the information together from the component names.

Find two or three contractors who state that they are familiar with and licensed to operate and maintain your system. Get copies of their maintenance contracts and read them. Are the required visits included? How many emergency calls are included under the contract? What about minor adjustments and repairs, pumping the tanks every few years, etc. Understand what is included. Ask for references and call them and find out if customers are happy with the contractor. Ask about the training and experience of the person who will actually make the site visit. Next, call the local Department of Health office to determine how many and what type of complaints are listed against the contractor in the files still available. Additional information you might ask about is the contractor familiar with regulations, are they proactive and easy for the Department of Health to work with. Talk to them, they are your best source of information. Finally, it is important to verify that the contractor is familiar with your specific system, knows how to determine that the system is actually operating properly and knows how to repair the system if there are problems. Call the manufacturer of the system and ask about certification and training that an operator should have. Then make sure that your operator is properly trained.

As you are faced with the work to find a qualified operator, the possibility of a Department of Health managed option looks attractive. The local county Departments could engage a qualified and licensed individual or firm to operate and maintain various types of AOSSs. Any single family homeowner could choose to have the contract managed by the Department of Health and pay the monthly fee of $25-$40 to the Department of Health to operate their system. For those home owners who felt unsure at how to select a “good” contractor, the Department could manage the process. The benefits of this approach would be that the Department of Health could serve as quality control for the process. The Department by being the customer could ensure that public health and the environment were protected, but would not be on site to observe systems alarms and ensure they were responded to in a timely fashion or even responded to at all. The downside is that the Department of Health has only dealt with contractors in a limited environment during the approval process for installation and really has no experience with contractors as operators. Nor does the Department have any demonstrated expertise in contract negation and management. Finally, the contractor would first serve the department of health not the customer, and this approach would hinder the development of a healthy marketplace and could be influenced by criteria not in the homeowners best interests. So I am afraid that the best course is to get to work in finding a qualified operator for your system.

A final note. I have negotiated a 25% discount on the annual contract for a group within my HOA. You might band together with your neighbors if there are a number of AOSSs in your neighborhood. Also, you could divide up the work of checking references, reviewing contracts, and verifying training and license.

Alternative Septic Regulation and the Virginia Single Family Homeowner

Here are some additional thoughts on the proposed Alternative Onsite Sewage System (AOSS) Regulations as they pertain to single family homeowners. These regulations were published September 28, 2009 by the Virginia Department of Health and the comment period is open until October 28, 2009.

The proposed regulations implement the 2007 legislation and require professional operators certified by DPOR to operate and maintain all alternative onsite septic systems, AOSS, including those of single family homes. The Virginia code requires the owner of an AOSS, to have that system operated by a licensed operator, as defined in § 32.1-163, and visited by the operator as specified in the operation permit. Effective July 1, 2009, Virginia law requires that soil evaluators, installers, and operators of onsite sewage systems must be licensed by the Board for Waterworks and Wastewater Works Operators and Onsite Sewage System Professionals at the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation (DPOR). For the interim regulations nothing can be done to change that. However, the proposed regulations go on and require the same operation, maintenance, sampling, record keeping behavior in single family home owners as required of clustered systems of up to 39.999 gallons per day. This serves to add to the profitability of the licensed operators and the expenses for the homeowner without benefiting public health or the environment.

The proposed testing requirement is not authorized or required by statute and is useless. Laboratory testing of a septic system at a single point in time can be misleading. Operating performance is impacted by volume, load, temperature and humidity, and a single sample is not representative of overall performance. These approved AOSS have already been tested to demonstrate an acceptable operating average performance over a period of time and range of conditions. The authorizing statute requires regulation of the operation and maintenance of AOSS but does not authorize or require testing or reporting unrelated to this purpose. An AOSS that is operated and maintained by a professional operator meets the requirements in the law and protects the environment. Regular inspections and maintenance should serve to identify systems that are not functioning properly.

The requirement for operation and maintenance by a licensed operator favors operator over homeowners, and does not require certification by the manufacturer of all approved systems for implementing operation and maintenance programs. Effectively, licensed operators unqualified to maintain a particular system can contract with homeowners to operate and maintain the system. This bias is compounded by the record keeping, and evidence of maintenance contract requirements making it extremely difficult to change operators. The DPOR and VDH do not give homeowners any tools to evaluate operators, yet tie the homeowner to the operator by the requirement to “Maintain a relationship with an operator.” Before a contract expires the homeowner is required to have another one in place.

Finally, a home owner is required to keep a copy of the Operation and Maintenance Manual (O&M Manual) on the property where the AOSS is located, make the manual available to the Department upon request and make a reasonable effort to transfer the O&M Manual to any future owners. The requirements for the manual are listed in the proposed regulations, and appear to be another profit center for the licensed operators to provide these manuals to homeowners. Since the homeowner is not allowed to operate or maintain their systems themselves a manual is a useless pile of paper conveying little information to untrained reader. A simple diagram of the system, physical location of the components and a list of components, their manufacturer and their function would suffice for single family systems. This short information brochure would more likely to be read and understood by the homeowner and could serve as an educational tool and be useful in shopping for a licensed operator.

The success of the regulations in protecting the environment and public health will depend on the compliance of the AOSS owners. For the individual homeowner the regulations should be clear, fair and easily understood by a layman reading them. Compliance with the regulations will suffer if they are, or are perceived, to be excessively costly or burdensome and without benefit to public health and the environmental. Though I believe there should be a method for a homeowner to become licensed to operate their own systems, these approved AOSS need to be annually inspected and properly maintained by professional or trained operators. A monthly cost for a maintenance contract of around $40 will be perceived as an additional cost like a property tax, but is manageable. The other portions of these regulations make the cost to the homeowner too high without providing additional protection to public health and the environment.

Commonwealth of Virginia Proposed Septic System Regulations

On September 28, 2009 the Virginia Department of Health published their proposed Alternative Onsite Septic System, AOSS, regulations for public comment. The window for public comments closes on October 28, 2009. The comment period is closed.


The proposed regulations implement the legislative mandate of 2007 and require professionals operators certified by DPOR to operate and maintain all alternative onsite septic systems, AOSS. The Virginia code requires the owner of an AOSS, to have that system operated by a licensed operator, as defined in § 32.1-163, and visited by the operator as specified in the operation permit. Effective July 1, 2009, Virginia law requires that soil evaluators, installers, and operators of onsite sewage systems must be licensed by the Board for Waterworks and Wastewater Works Operators and Onsite Sewage System Professionals at the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation (DPOR). Prior to July 1, 2009, Virginia law did not require a license to practice as an onsite sewage system operator. DPOR’s regulations for licensing operators does not have any sort of exemption or modified certification for homeowners, but should. It is irrational that home owners can operate direct discharge septic units, but the legislation requires that all single family AOSS units be operated and maintained by a licensed operator.

In their proposed regulations the Virginia Department of Health did not have the option of allowing homeowners to operate and maintain their own systems without modifying the DPOR licensing requirements. The legislation passed in 2007 required that licensed operators perform these tasks. The Department of Health, fully aware of the problem, did not attempt to develop an alternative certification for homeowners, instead they choose to propose that single family home AOSS (under 1,000 gallons per day) be required to be operated by a licensed operator, maintained by a licensed operator and sampled. These are the same requirements that are used for AOSS units processing up to 39,999 gallons per day. These requirements combined are far in excess of what is required to ensure that these systems function as designed. It is to be noted that most single family homes operate at far fewer than 1,000 gallons a day.

The requirement for operation and maintenance by a licensed operator favors operator over homeowners, and does not require certification by the manufacturer of all approved systems for implementing operation and maintenance programs. This bias is compounded by the record keeping, and evidence of maintenance contract requirements making it extremely difficult to change operators. I am not give any tools to evaluate operators, yet sa a homeowner I am tied to the operator by the requirement to “Maintain a relationship with an operator.” Before a contract expires the homeowner is required to have another one in place. Finally, a home owner is required to keep a copy of the Operation and Maintenance Manual (O&M Manual) on the property where the AOSS is located, make the manual available to the Department upon request and make a reasonable effort to transfer the O&M Manual to any future owners. The requirements for the manual are listed in the proposed regulations, and appear to be another profit center for the licensed operators to provide these manuals to homeowners. A simple diagram of the system and a list of components and their function would suffice for single family systems. The question is why the VDH is proposing such punishing regulations for single family AOSS that go beyond the need to properly maintain these systems, but serves as a profitability act for the licensed operators.

Alternative onsite septic systems are designed to be state of the art, meeting EPA's treatment standard one. This exceeds the standards for sewage treatment plants and replenishes existing groundwater systems. These alternative onsite systems can be more sustainable to the surrounding ecosystem than sewers and centralized waste treatment and are certainly less expensive for the homeowners in sparsely populated areas. However, the systems need to work properly and these newer alternative systems with multiple tanks, compressors and various parts require consistent maintenance to continue working properly. Rather than attempt to educate the homeowner and offer cost effective solutions to ensuring that AOSS are maintained properly, the VDH has proposed three layers of oversight within the regulations that are likely to result in avoidance of compliance and potentially abandonment of the technology. The VDH is treating low volume single family home AOSS the same way as clustered systems. Is this the best answer for Virginia?

Virginia’s Proposed Alternative Onsite Septic System Regulations 12VAC5-613

Today, September 28, 2009 the Virginia Department of Health published their proposed Alternative Onsite Septic System, AOSS, regulations for public comment. There is only a 30 day window for public comments. The opportunity to comment has closed.

The purpose of the regulations is to ensure that these more effective treatment systems are maintained in a manner to allow them to function properly to be protective of the environment and public health. It is widely accepted, but not documented that improperly managed septic systems contribute to major water quality problems. The US EPA states in the “Volunteer National Guidelines for Management of Onsite and Clustered Treatment Systems” that improper design, construction, installation, operation and/or maintenance are the source of these onsite waste treatment failures. EPA hopes to better determine the extent of the relationship as documentation becomes available. In 2003 EPA reported that 168,000 viral and 34,000 bacterial illnesses occur nationally each year from drinking water contaminated by waterborne pathogens from fecal contamination. Proper maintenance of septic systems (both traditional and alternative) is essential for protection of public health and local water resources. The EPA estimates that 29-30% of Virginia households have septic systems and that 8% of theses systems are AOSS.

The research into the contamination from septic systems was performed at the RS Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory in Ada, Oklahoma. The classic study by Marylynn V. Yates points out that septic systems contribute 800 billion gallons of waste water per year to the subsurface. The study found that the most important factor influencing groundwater contamination by septic systems is the density of systems in an area and the distance to the contamination point. It is as simple as that. The fewer systems per square mile the less chance of contamination. Distance from a septic system, the so called horizontal set backs are the final protection from harm especially for those of us who obtain our drinking water from private water supplies. The proposed regulations maintain and expand the conservative set backs for traditions systems.

The AOSS were approved by the state based on demonstrations of their functioning and effectiveness. In the proposed regulations the Commonwealth is going to require outside operators to inspect and maintain these systems in perpetuity at a cost to the home owner of $400-$600 per year (the basic contract where I live is $480, but the provider will grant a 25% discount if I get a group of at least 10 families together.). This level of oversight and maintenance should ensure that these AOSS function as intended and ensure that anomalies and alarm situations are responded to in a timely manner.

Ideally, homeowners should care for their septic systems appropriately to avoid the system back up in the future, contamination of the groundwater (which may be the source of the local drinking water), and future septic system repair bills of tens of thousands of dollars to remediate and replace a system. Many homeowners are unaware of how septic systems work and what is necessary to maintain them. In addition, many people do not seem to be able take appropriate responsibility for their systems. One method to deal with this problem is to eliminate all but the most basic systems in the most geologically favorable locations (reduce percolation rate tolerances and design the systems as conservatively as possible). The other method is to regulate, control and track. Establish system performance and monitoring and maintenance requirements, establish a tracking system for compliance monitoring. Virginia has taken the tact to require outside operators and an ongoing operations and maintenance contract. There is no opportunity for an interested homeowner to obtain the skills and knowledge to operate and maintain their own systems. I do not know if this is the right answer, but it is the one the VDH picked.

All AOSS systems were demonstrated to perform satisfactorily to be approved for use in the Commonwealth. Monitoring and operating these AOSS systems with professional operators is designed to ensure a single family home (low volume) unit is functioning. In addition, the VDH proposes that single family AOSS be required to have the outside operator sample and send out for analysis system effluent every five years. As an old chemical engineer I know how misleading a single sample once every five years can be. Septic systems are impacted by volume, load, temperature and humidity. The AOSSs are really the most basic and tiny of waste treatment plants. These systems were tested over a period of time and conditions to demonstrate an acceptable operating average performance.

A single sample every five years will provide little if any useful information that is not provided by an initial demonstration of functioning and on going maintenance and inspection. If a system is tested and does not meet the design averages, does it fail? What range around the design parameters is officially acceptable to the VDH? If a system fails, protocol would require a retesting (at the consumer’s expense). If the system “failed” to meet the design parameters adjustments to the use or operation of the system would be then be made and the system retested again at the home owners expense. How many rounds of testing would be required to determine that the “average” parameter was met? Or would the Department of Health simply ignore the results and allow the systems to continue to operate until the next five year sample date? In real life design parameters will sometimes be exceeded and sometimes not met. THE VDH has not quantitative standards for these operating ranges, but wants quantitative sampling performed every five years. At what levels does the VDH take enforcement action, or require further investigation? Without these answers how can a sampling program be instituted that is anything more than data gathering? If the VDH has no intention of using the data for enforcement it is inappropriate to require this level of expenditure from home owners. What is the limit of the amount of money the VDH will require to be spent by a home owner? I do not believe the environment or public health of the Commonwealth will benefit from this sampling. This requirement creates a permanent substantial and open ended additional cost to the homeowner above the annual cost of having an operator maintain the system.

I investigated the costs of testing an AOSS with an ATU by having the third tank sampled. To test for Total Coliform, ecoli, and Nitrate-Nitrite cost $321.42 (which included a 10% discount for having a maintenance contract). Sampling BOD, TSS, Oil and Grease and Nitrate-Nitrite, as Nitrogen samples from the third tank cost $353.58 (also including a 10% discount). For $675 all these parameters could by tested by the outside operator. This level of cost, even at a five year interval is excessive on top of the operations and maintenance contract. This cost could financially stress a home owner. The possibility to have to retest, take corrective action or develop an average effluent profile to demonstrate compliance with a design parameter is an open ended financial liability that might have no benefit to the environment or public health, but could have dire consequences on the financial viability of the home owner. Routine inspections and maintenance should serve to identify systems that are not functioning properly. If there appears to be an on going problem then sampling and testing could be performed if the operator in consultation with the VDH felt it could help resolve an operating problem.

The success of the regulations in protecting the environment and public health will depend on the compliance of the AOSS owners. For the individual home owner the regulations will have to be clear, easily understood by a layman reading them and fair. I believe home owners will be able to accept that AOSS systems need to be annually inspected and maintained by operators at a monthly cost that is around $40. It will be perceived as an additional property tax, but is constant and will become routine like any other homeowner expense.

The Cost to the Homeowner of Septic Regulations in Virginia

On Thursday, August 20th, 2009 the fourth and final meeting of the Virginia Department of Health “Alternative On-site Sewage Systems Emergency Regulations Ad Hoc Committee” took place. I have participated in the process representing the homeowner’s point of view. Legislation approved in 2009 (HB 2551, Acts of Assembly, 2009, Ch 220) requires the Board of Health to promulgate emergency regulations to establish performance requirements and horizontal setbacks necessary to protect public health and the environment for alternative on-site sewage systems. The regulations must go into effect no later than April 6, 2010 and must also contain Operation and Maintenance requirements for alternative on-site sewage systems.

Today, alternative on-site septic treatment systems are designed to be state of the art, meeting EPA's treatment standard one. This exceeds the standards for sewage treatment plants and replenishes existing groundwater systems. These alternative on-site systems can be more sustainable to the surrounding ecosystem than sewers and centralized waste treatment and are certainly less expensive for the homeowners in sparsely populated areas. However, the systems need to work properly and these newer alternative systems with multiple tanks, compressors and various parts require consistent maintenance to continue working properly. The US EPA has found that adequately managed decentralized waste water treatment systems are a cost effective long term option for meeting public health and water quality goals in less densely populated areas. So, let’s manage them correctly, exactly the goal of the Virginia legislation. What will this cost the homeowner? Of course the final cost will be determined by the exact scope of the regulations, but to give you some idea of what this means to your pocket book I have spent some time pricing out the services.

Loudon County currently requires annual inspections and maintenance contracts for alternative systems, so that at least in Northern Virginia, there is a market for the various services. In addition, § 32.1-164 of the Code of Virginia requires Virginia Board of Health to begin an O&M program for alternative septic systems that is based on the manufacturer’s operation and maintenance instructions, local requirements, or state rules and policies whichever is most stringent. These requirements went into effect on July 9th 2009 and remain in effect until final regulations for O&M of alternative systems are in place. Thus, throughout the state there are septic installation and service companies that have been certified by various manufacturers and currently offer the inspection and operation and maintenance service. Though prices seem to be higher for Northern Virginia and Virginia Beach than other areas I checked, prices from a qualified firm tend to range from $400-$680 annually with a 25% discount available if a group of neighbors get together to negotiate a contract or the HOA negotiates contracts for 10 or more homes. Travel time is a big factor in overall expenses to the service company. That expense translates into an annual operating expense of about $40-$50 a month for sewage. If you have an alternative septic system, make sure that the firm you deal with is certified by either the county or the manufacturer to service your type of system. I did have one firm that quoted a price of $1,750 annually!! When I questioned the price, they told me that I had a “buried tank” that would have to be dug up each year. This was nonsense; I have three tanks with surface ports that can be plainly seen and the man was standing in my yard when he handed me the quote. There are no four tank systems.

There is another area of potential expense that was discussed at the final meeting of the Virginia Department of Health “Alternative On-site Sewage Systems Emergency Regulations Ad Hoc Committee,” should there be end of pipe monitoring for single family home systems. This end of pipe monitoring includes several related items: laboratory sampling of end of pipe effluent, laboratory sampling of groundwater, and field sampling/testing. Let me address groundwater first, it is impractical under any circumstance. Sampling of groundwater for compliance monitoring is impractical because without installing at a minimum three monitoring wells and potentially many more it would be impossible to determine if a groundwater aquifer were contaminated and the costs of not only the well installation and sampling but water analysis would be astronomical. In addition, leaving monitoring wells on-site in perpetuity for ongoing sampling would open potential pathways of contamination to the groundwater.

For end of pipe sampling there was some support for the requirement for single family homes from the VDH and some of the engineering community. As Anish Jantrania of Northwest Cascade put it “I would argue that the regulatory requirements for O&M should be set such that they do not become the driver in decision-making process for selecting which approach to take for designing land-based effluent dispersal system. This mainly applies to the requirements/frequencies of effluent quality sampling and lab analysis. If effluent quality sampling is going to be required at some frequency for large systems then it must be required at a reduced frequency for single home system!” The VDH was attracted to the idea of sampling end of pipe as a method to develop a database of the functioning of the systems. As someone who actually went through the expense of sampling the third tank in my alternative septic system just to find out if the system functions properly I am well aware that the cost could be between $350 and $400. The actual analysis costs $240 but to have a company come out and draw the sample according to protocol, ice and deliver the sample to the laboratory for analysis can cost up to $150 more. I thought long and hard about that expense, but in the end I wanted to make sure that at least on a typical summer day my system was operating within design parameters. It was. Since there are no regulatory consequences for single family alternative systems sample results adding an expense to the homeowner to level the playing field or collect data was something I argued against at the meeting. There are potentially economies of scale in clustered systems and that would help level the playing field.

The group did not vote in favor of routine end of pipe sampling for single family homes for approved technologies. However the group was in favor of field sampling. Where field sampling and laboratory analysis was thought to be potentially beneficial was for approving new technologies into a state or for "unproven" or unique designs. Having to routinely sample individually engineered designs would put these systems at a disadvantage. Joel Pinnix made a very powerful argument for the effectiveness of the individually engineered systems and their potential superiority for the out of the box or off the shelf systems. Then went on to say “There is no place in a regulatory process for data gathering. If VDH wants to gather data for informational purposes, then they should do so by getting a grant and performing a scientific study. There is certainly a role for VDH to conduct or fund studies of alternative systems, but the Emergency Regulation is not an appropriate mechanism to gather data for informational purposes.” Colin Bishop of BMN-US pointed out to me in a communication yesterday there is a role for field sampling and possibly laboratory sampling in extreme circumstances. Operation and Maintenance service providers will routinely perform field checks such as Dissolved Oxygen, Turbidity, pH, etc. with field testing equipment. Field tests can be performed for just a few dollars and are extremely helpful in identifying a problem if a system seems "upset" and there is a need further troubleshooting.

Commonwealth of Virginia Emergency Regulations for Alternative Septic Systems Part 4

On Thursday, August 20th, 2009 the fourth and final meeting of the Virginia Department of Health “Alternative On site Sewage Systems Emergency Regulations Ad Hoc Committee” took place. I have participated in the process representing the homeowner’s point of view. Legislation approved in 2009 (HB 2551, Acts of Assembly, 2009, Ch 220) requires the Board of Health to promulgate emergency regulations to establish performance requirements and horizontal setbacks necessary to protect public health and the environment for alternative on site sewage systems. The regulations must go into effect no later than April 6, 2010 and must also contain Operation and Maintenance requirements for alternative on site sewage systems. It is the goal of the Virginia Department of Health to promulgate the regulations in the third quarter and have them go into effect before the end of the year.

For the final meeting, members of the Ad Hoc Committee and the Department of Health made a full court press to pull together and wrap up the process. I for one found the meeting and the materials provided both thought provoking and satisfying. The Committee was able to come to a consensus thanks in a large part to the able facilitation by Bruce Dotson of CSR of the University of Virginia. All the loosely controlled discussions of various people’s point of views allowed the Committee members to develop an appreciation of other perspectives to enrich our understanding of the difficulty of the problem. This broadening of our viewpoints allowed us to be accepting of the majority opinion for the scope of the performance requirements and horizontal setbacks necessary achieve our goal. Hopefully, the suggestions of the Committee will be incorporated into the emergency regulations.

To a large extent the final vote of the Committee was impacted by the materials provided by other Committee members. Colin Bishop of Bord Na Mona Environmental Products provided some research articles that clarified, for me, the issues on horizontal setbacks despite the reasonable arguments for a narrower limit for engineer designed systems. Most influential in my thinking was some of the older, but still valid research from the RS Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory in Ada, Oklahoma. When I worked for the US EPA this was the laboratory providing the groundwater research that was used in the development of groundwater models and regulations. The study by Marylynn V. Yates points out that septic tanks contribute 800 billion gallons of waste water per year to the subsurface. The study found that the most important factor influencing groundwater contamination by septic tanks is the density of systems in an area and the distance to the contamination point. It is as simple as that. The fewer systems per square mile the less chance of contamination. Distance from a septic system, the so called horizontal set backs are the final protection from harm especially for those of us who obtain our drinking water from private water supplies.

In a memo, Merle Fallon and a co-author who are very familiar with Department of Environmental Quality regulations pointed out that the Virginia Department of Health regulations for clustered system should be compatible with the current DEQ regulations for operators of alternative on site sewage systems. The rules for the operators should be substantially the same. In addition they point out that a single set of horizontal set backs will provide consistency. Though secondary treatment levels provided by alternative on site systems might allow the reduction in setback in some circumstances, using the standard setbacks allows for simplicity and provides a secondary degree of protection. When the Committee voted (thought it was in reference to engineered designs horizontal setbacks) it was in overwhelming support that the horizontal setbacks from drinking water, property lines and surface water were to be maintained for single family alternative septic systems. The balance of providing a reasonable secondary level of protection, especially in environmentally sensitive areas, defined as proximity to surface and drinking water supplies while allowing development and use of property was achieved. At least for me the logic of the argument presented by Marcia and Merle and information provided by Colin was most convincing. Virginia’s water supply is one of its great assets and should be carefully protected to ensure that the Commonwealth can continue to grow and prosper in years ahead.