Part 2: The dilemma of wastewater treatment management

by Don Audette, 7 July 2005

Interest in onsite/decentralized wastewater systems has increased lately for a number of reasons:

• First, these systems are proliferating. With suburban and rural sprawl, conventional septic systems, plus septic systems with secondary treatment, and decentralized "package" wastewater treatment systems are coming into greater use. EPA estimates they now are being used in about one-third of all new housing and commercial development. These systems currently serve 25 percent of the U.S. population. Northern Virginia has ten of thousands of these units.

• Second, there is a public health issue. Septic systems are viewed as the second greatest threat to the quality of groundwater, the source of the water you drink and bathe in. Half of all septic
  systems are over 30 years old. Failed and failing systems expose people to typhoid fever, hepatitis A, dysentery, acute gastrointestinal illness, cholera, etc.
• Third, people abuse these systems. They flush anything and everything down a toilet, or overburden their system, destroying it over time. Replacing a failed or failing septic system can cost the same as the price range of a car, from inexpensive to a luxury model.
• And fourth, onsite/decentralized wastewater systems are generally hard to regulate. They are on private property. Making sure such systems meet performance requirements and do not fail, thus creating environmental and public health problems, is critical.

Looking back at waste

Since the late 1970s, ways and means of solving the growing dilemma of what to do with wastewater in suburban and rural areas has proceeded in fits and starts. An interesting article in the Winter 2005 issue of the "Small Flows Quarterly," summarized the steps taken since the late 1970s; the funding provided, or not provided, by Congress; and the many players involved.

One major concern noted in the article is worth quoting, "The regulatory approach will need to change dramatically, with less emphasis on prescriptive oversight [this refers to perc tests, drain field size, safe distances from ground or surface water] and more on watershed impact with oversight of local management entities."

Management options

To aid communities in this concern, EPA has provided guidelines for the management of onsite/decentralized wastewater systems. There are five "model programs" from which a county or a town can pick and chose, depending on specific situations. The summaries below describe the complexity of the array of onsite and decentralized systems in use or available to the public and how they might be managed. Each "model program" has considerably more detail in its implementation.

• Management Model 1: "Homeowner Awareness: "This model specifies appropriate program elements and activities where treatment systems are owned and operated by individual property owners in areas of low environmental sensitivity. This program is adequate where treatment technologies are limited to conventional systems that require little owner attention. To help ensure that timely maintenance is performed, the regulatory authority mails maintenance reminders to owners at appropriate intervals.
• Management Model 2: "Maintenance Contracts: "Specifies program elements and activities where more complex designs are employed to enhance the capacity of conventional systems to accept and treat wastewater. Because of treatment complexity, contracts with qualified technicians are needed to ensure proper and timely maintenance.
• Management Model 3: "Operating Permits: " Specifies program elements and activities where sustained performance of treatment systems is critical to protect public health and water quality. Limited-term operating permits are issued to the owner and are renewable for another term if the owner demonstrates that the system is in compliance with the terms and conditions of the permit. Performance-based designs may be incorporated into programs with management controls at this level.
• Management Model 4: "Responsible Management Entity (RME) Operation and Maintenance:" Specifies program elements and activities where frequent and highly reliable operation and maintenance of decentralized systems is required to ensure water resource protection in sensitive environments. Under this model, the operating permit is issued to an RME instead of the property owner to provide the needed assurance that the appropriate maintenance is performed.
• Management Model 5: "RME Ownership:" Specifies that program elements and activities for treatment are owned, operated, and maintained by the RME, which removes the property owner from responsibility for the system. This program is analogous to central sewerage and provides the greatest assurance of system performance in the most sensitive of environments.

It appears that Management Model 1: "Homeowner Awareness" applies to most of Rappahannock County, as conventional septic systems are widely used here. Management Model 2 and Model 3 are suited to those septic systems with more complex treatment capabilities, or where more critical public health and water quality issues are involved.

The Town of Washington, with a possible decentralized "package" wastewater treatment system in the future, might be a candidate for Management Model 4: "Responsible Management Entity (RME) Operation and Maintenance."

©Times Community Newspapers 2005. Used with permission.

Read Part 3: "Why Me?"

Related article: Wastewater treatment goes high tech

Return to Current Issues