Monday, February 11, 2008

Heidelberger: Tighten inspection & enforcement on existing septic systems

I don't know how far we can take this conversation without it turning into a telemeeting in violation of open meetings rules, but here's a suggestion: what if we directed at least some effort to dealing with what we have now, i.e., the decentralized, individual septic tanks? Whatever we may pursue for future centralized solutions, perhaps we should take steps now to inspect and certify the existing wastewater treatment systems.

1. Our current installation inspection system appears to be insufficient. I just received the permit and check from Johnsons for the system they installed at Chris Whitethorn's new house on Sunrise Drive back in August. Perhaps we need to beef up enforcement on new systems.

2. Let's also prepare some materials (like what's on the website, maybe with more links, maybe with some info our septic tank installers could direct us toward) to be given to each owner installing a new system and all existing residents. (They're paying their taxes and permit fees; they ought to get something for their money.)

3. Let's enforce some maintenance on the existing systems, just as we would maintain a central system. Let's enact a requirement that landowners submit written proof every three years that they have had their septic tanks pumped (if not fully inspected, if any sort of worthwhile inspection is possible). Also require that the pumpers file with us certification that they did the job, how much they pumped out, where the outtake pipe is located, etc. Upon passage of this requirement, landowners could bring us any written receipt from the past year to meet their obligation; otherwise, they would have until two years after enactment to get the job done and show us the receipt. Any landowner who doesn't present a receipt in required time gets a visit from a pumper truck sent by the district to do the job, followed by a hefty bill from the district.

We can continue to pursue a far-off dream of an expensive, complicated (and, I maintain, unnecessary) system that would be built by money from outside donors (federal govt, IWQC, whoever). But perhaps we should focus some more effort on the here and now. I will offer the above suggestions at our March meeting for formal consideration. Your comments are welcome!

No comments: