United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region 5
Water Division
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
March 1983
Water Division
Rural Lakes Project
Handbook
-------
Contents
Foreword
Introduction
Do you Really Need Sewers?
The Existing Situation
Chapter 1 So You Think You Have a Problem
Failures
Constraints
Where to Begin?
Chapter 2 Don't Make Things Worse
It Could Happen to You
So What?
How Does This Happen?
Chapter 3 Finding the Smoking Gun
Phase I Needs Documentation Methods
Phase II Needs Documentation Methods
How Much Is Enough?
Detailed Site Analysis
Chapter 4 Choosing Your Weapons
Conventional On-Site Systems
Soil Absorption Systems
Salvaging a Sinking System
Off-Site Systems
Chapter 5 The Road Not Taken—An Introduction to Community
Wastewater Management
Why Do Anything?
What Does a Community Management Agency Do?
Who is the Management Agency?
Services Provided
Risk and Liability
The Problem of Privacy
The Community Management Agency Wants You
Chapter 6 Is It Worth It?
Cost-Effectiveness of Alternatives
Present Worth Comparisons
Local Economics
Environmental Impacts
Development
What's It Worth to Whom?
Chapter 7 Facilities Planning
Defining the Planning Area
Demography
Joint Land Use and Wastewater Planning
Needs Documentation and Alternatives Development
Environmental Impact Analysis
Financial Analysis
Public Participation
Alternative Selection
1
2
11
18
23
28
34
37
Chapter 8 Help—Extending Your Resources
Federal Funding
State Funding
Assistance—Who to Contact
Glossarv U S. Environmental Protection Agency
Information—What to Read ' *
-------
•
Foreword
In 1977, Region V of the U.S.
Environmental Protection
Agency decided to prepare
Environmental Impact
Statements on wastewater
facilities planning documents
submitted by seven rural lake
communities in Indiana, Ohio,
Michigan, Wisconsin and
Minnesota. Although each
community was unique in
many respects, they all had
proposed sewers and
centralized treatment facilities
to serve low density
development around lakes. All
or large portions of the
development was served by
on-site sewage disposal
systems at the time.
In the preparation of those
statements we used new
research tools and evaluated
many alternatives and
innovative techniques for
wastewater management We
gained important insights into
the problems that on-site
systems cause, and we
learned much about the
economics of wastewater
management for low and
moderate density development.
The most basic lesson we
learned was that continued
use of existing on-site systems
is cost-effective when
compared to any centralized
alternative as long as adverse
water quality and public health
impacts of subsurface waste
disposal can be controlled.
This handbook relates the
major findings of our studies
in a format intended to be
useful to the interested
citizen The homeowner who
wants to prevent or correct
problems with his on-site
system will find Chapters 1
and 4 useful. Homeowners
and civic leaders should
benefit also from the
community-wide perspective
presented in Chapters 2, 3 and
5 through 8
If you wish to explore this
subject in more detail, another
Region V document, the Final
Generic Environmental Impact
Statement for Wastewater
Management in Rural Lake
Areas, is recommended. Also,
U.S. EPA, the states and
others have prepared a
number of excellent reports
related to small community
wastewater management.
Selected references are listed
at the end of this handbook.
-------
Introduction
Do You Really Need
Sewers?
Chances are, you've never
really considered this question
in much detail before You've
probably never spent much
time debating the relative
merits of sewers and on-site
septic-tank systems. But now,
for any one of a number of
reasons, you need to consider
that question.
Perhaps you are moving to a
rural, unsewered area after a
lifetime in an urban area
where wastewater treatment
means the Metropolitan Sewer
District and you never give
wastewater another thought
as long as it disappears down
the appropriate drains. But
septic tanks aren't like that,
are they? Don't they smell and
back up? You can't use
washing machines, can you?
And only one shower a week,
right?
Perhaps you are
constructing a second
residence in a rural area, a
summer place on the quiet
shores of a placid little lake,
and you want to know what
your building contractor is
talking about when he
discusses mound systems and
drainage fields and depth to
bedrock. You don't want to
stand there nodding as if you
read up on septic systems as a
hobby, but where do you go for
information? And how much
are all these mounds and
trenches going to cost? What's
wrong with blasting through
that bedrock and putting in a
sewer like everyone else?
Perhaps you are already well
acquainted with on-site
systems—have one in your
backyard, in fact. But a year
ago your neighbor's system
failed and you want to avoid
the same fate. What causes a
system to fail? What can you
do to preserve the life of your
system? If it fails, do you have
to put in a whole new system?
Perhaps you are a local
official involved in solving the
wastewater treatment
problems in your community.
You are faced with a number
of seemingly equally feasible
alternatives and you want to
choose the alternative that will
adequately serve the
community's residents without
undue disruption of their lives
or a staggering price tag.
Moreover, you have to
consider how your community
can finance costs for new
systems Can the government
help? Who ought to pay for
services? Are the problems
really serious enough to make
centralized collection and
treatment necessary?
Whether you are a
prospective resident, a current
homeowner, or a local official,
if you are concerned about
improving wastewater
management in your
unsewered community, this
handbook is designed for you.
You will find answers here to
many common questions about
waste treatment technologies
for small communities. You
will also be introduced to some
recent ideas about how your
community can ensure
adequate wastewater
management at affordable
costs.
Partly because the subject of
this handbook is wastewater
management in unsewered
communities, we have
emphasized existing
wastewater facilities, what
makes them fail, and what can
be done to detect, prevent and
correct failures. But, as you
will see, the high costs of new
sewer construction are
another reason for
emphasizing on-site and other
low-cost alternatives. These
alternatives to new sewer
construction seldom have been
considered objectively when
grants were available to help
pay the high initial cost of
sewers. Failure to define
actual wastewater problems
and to seek the least-cost
remedies has resulted in
millions of dollars spent for
elaborate facilities that were
not really needed.
As the taxpayer and the
person who will pay the user
charges, your interest in
effective, low-cost wastewater
management should be at
least as keen as the federal
government's. This handbook is
intended to add understanding
to your interest.
-------
The Existing Situation
Today, the most common on-
site system in unsewered
areas is the septic tank/soil
absorption system, often called
a septic system or septic tank
system. This system is
described in Chapter 4. Septic
tank systems chiefly serve
detached, single-family
houses. Densely developed
single-family houses and
multi-family housing may be
served by off-site systems
such as conventional gravity
sewers and treatment plants
or cluster systems. These
systems are also discussed in
Chapter 4. Older buildings may
be served by cesspools, and
dwellings on properties
unsuitable for standard on-site
systems are typically served by
holding tanks.
Septic tank systems have
only been used in large
numbers since the end of
World War II, when
widespread electrification
programs made rural areas
more attractive. When septic
tank systems first made their
appearance as a modern
alternative to pit privies, few
local jurisdictions set
standards for determining
appropriate sites and designs,
for supervising installations, or
for operating and managing
the systems.
Many early septic tank
systems were constructed
poorly or were installed in
places where they would not
work. As they failed, our
knowledge of what makes
them work increased. Design
codes were adopted to reduce
future failures. These codes
have become increasingly
conservative through the years
and the systems have become
larger, or in many instances,
not allowed at all. Many older
systems that do not meet
existing code standards are
functioning satisfactorily
nevertheless. Established,
unsewered communities are
likely to have an elaborate mix
of on-site systems, old and
new, properly used and
abused, working and not
working.
As rural populations have
grown, it has become
increasingly necessary for
communities to deal with
problems arising from
construction and failure of on-
site systems. The involvement
in wastewater management of
most communities can be seen
as a path that begins with
advice, leads to regulation, and
comes to a fork leading one
way to sewers and the other
way to expanded public
involvement with on-site
systems. We call this second
path "small waste flows
management" If you and your
neighbors asked "Do we need
sewers?", you are at this fork.
Where housing density is
low or failures are infrequent,
communities can deal with
wastewater problems by
offering advice on construction
and repair of on-site systems.
Naturally, the success of this
approach depends greatly on
the builders' and homeowners'
sense of civic and personal
responsibility. Most of all, the
homeowner has to be his own
expert on the use and care of
his system. This form of
management was common
until the mid-sixties and is still
all that is provided in some
states and communities.
Regulation of on-site
systems by local officials is a
further step along the
management path. Most local
governments now regulate the
construction of new on-site
systems and enforce the repair
of failing systems. But local
government rarely takes
responsibility for supervising
maintenance of on-site
systems or monitoring their
performance once they are
Absorption Field (Bed)
Gravel or Crushed Rock
CLUSTER SYSTEM USING SMALL DIAMETER COLLECTION
SEWERS AND COMMON SOIL ABSORPTION SYSTEM
SOIL
ABSORPTION
SYSTEM
HOLDING TANK
,PIPE FOR ACCESS
TO INLET
:••:•• •Yv'/lW-rra . . ., ...
••&#;;£ aj.-..;:': •••^~
WATER FLOWING INTO SEWAGE
SYSTEM SHOULD BE METEREO
-------
SMALL WASTE FLOWSHWANAGtMEN
installed. Again, the
community must rely on
homeowners to maintain their
systems for the public good.
Where failure rates remain
low, or where the public
health and water quality
impacts resulting from system
failures are negligible, this
regulatory approach is a
satisfactory and inexpensive
way to deal with wastewater
problems.
But as on-site systems age,
properties change hands and
communities grow, the
regulatory approach becomes
increasingly unable to make
maximum use of on-site
systems that do work, to deal
effectively with failing
systems, and to handle the
demand for new housing.
As a result, many
communities find themselves
standing at the fork in the path
and considering two
alternatives: the installation of
sewers or the adoption of
small waste flows
management.
For both local officials and
homeowners, sewers have
often seemed to be the most
attractive solution to
wastewater problems. Sewers
can overcome almost all
natural constraints that rule
out on-site systems, such as
dense clay soils or a high
water table. Sewers can easily
accommodate growing
populations. Where housing
densities are high or where
failure rates of existing on-site
systems are uncontrollable,
sewers may be the answer to
wastewater problems.
But your community may not
easily be able to classify either
its housing density or its
failure rate for on-site systems
as high. And it is an
indisputable fact that sewers
are costly. The community
must weigh this cost against
the probable benefits, and, in
so doing, it may find itself back
at the fork in the path seeking
another alternative.
For many communities,
small waste flows
management can deal
effectively with public health
and water quality problems at
a fraction of the cost of
sewering. Small waste flows
management is community
management of all phases in
the life cycle of on-site
systems and small-scale off-
site systems. These phases
include design, construction,
use and maintenance, failure,
and abandonment or repair.
This approach can be used in
communities—or even parts of
communities—to take
advantage of existing systems
that are functioning properly,
to supervise repair and
maintenance of on-site
systems, and accommodate
new housing up to an
environmentally defined limit.
Depending on how many
existing on-site systems can
remain in use, it can be a very
cost-effective approach.
It is important to note at this
point that neither sewers nor
on-site systems alone can
solve a community's
wastewater problems. These
problems generally result from
the ways these systems are
selected, designed, built, and
operated. In short, problems
result from poor management
of either the sewering or the
small waste flows approach.
Spending a lot of money on
sewers will not automatically
solve the problems caused by
inadequate management of
existing on-site systems.
Unless an effective
management plan is
"installed" along with the
sewers, there is no guarantee
that centralized treatment will
solve a community's
wastewater problems. This is
especially true for on-site and
small-scale systems.
What this boils down to is
that the most important step
your community can take in
solving its wastewater
problems is to plan for careful
management of all aspects of
wastewater treatment in the
community, from the initial
consideration of problems to
the final design of the
solutions. And the best way to
ensure good management is
by becoming a part of the
management process yourself.
If your community is facing up
to the off-site impacts of on-
site systems, you will be
involved, possibly as a
participant in the planning and
decisions, but certainly as a
bill payer. Either way, this
handbook should help you
understand what you are
getting into. Or what "they"
will get you into if you sit it
out.
-------
Chapter 1.
So You Think You Have a Problem
Problems with on-site systems
come in various forms and
degrees of seriousness.
Perhaps, as the title of this
chapter indicates, you are
reading this because you
believe your on-site system is
malfunctioning. Or perhaps
you don't like the restrictions
in water use that an on-site
system places on you. But
before you bring in the
backhoe to dispose of your
system, you ought to find out
whether it is really failing or
just needs some help to work
right. If it is failing, why? And
what can be done about it?
Some failures result from
soil or groundwater conditions
that cannot be changed.
Replacing the system may
result in little or no
improvement. Many failures,
however, can be prevented or
corrected by a variety of
measures aimed at
controllable factors such as
excessive water use, plumbing
obstructions, and inadequate
maintenance.
You may want to know if a
particular type of failure
constitutes a health hazard or
damages the quality of surface
waters or groundwater near
your on-site system. Or is it
simply a nuisance that can be
tolerated?
This chapter reviews the
most common types of failures
and their resulting hazards. It
also discusses some of the
limitations or constraints that
on-site systems impose on
property owners.
Failures
Plumbing Backups
Plumbing backups are the
most common evidence of on-
site system failures. You have
this problem when the fixtures
at the lowest level of your
house will not drain fast
enough.
Backups are caused by soil
clogging, by impermeable soil,
by stopped up pipes, or by pipe
collapse. Soil clogging occurs
where your wastewater flows
into the soil around your
drainfield, cesspool, dry well or
other design of soil absorption
system. Organic solids and
grease that pass through a
septic tank get filtered out in
the first few inches of soil.
Microscopic organisms that
feed on these organic wastes
often secrete slime that clogs
the soil's pores even more.
When the soil is impermeable
or becomes clogged, the
wastewater from the septic
tank cannot pass through the
soil, and it either rises to the
ground's surface (see surface
malfunctions) or backs up into
the building's plumbing.
CLOGGED TRENCH
CLOG
Likewise, if the plumbing
becomes obstructed or
collapses, wastes cannot flow
through the system and
consequently back up.
Backups seldom result in
water quality problems, but
they disrupt the use of
essential sanitary fixtures.
Recurrent or long-lasting
backups can prevent good
personal hygiene and, thus,
directly harm the health of the
residents. The health of
persons these residents come
into contact with might also be
affected.
Surface Malfunctions
Your system may have a
surface malfunction if parts of
the ground over your drainage
field are regularly damp, or if
foul-smelling water pools on
top of the ground.
Surface malfunctions are
caused by some of the same
factors that cause plumbing
backups: Clogged or
impermeable soils prevent
wastewater from percolating
downward, so some or all of it
is forced to the surface.
Stopped up or collapsed pipes
outside the house may cause
surface malfunctions. A
common cause for collapsed
pipes is driving cars and heavy
equipment over the pipe. They
are usually only a few feet
underground and are easily
crushed. Some soil absorption
systems have a "distribution
box," a chamber which splits
the septic tank effluent into
several smaller streams which
flow through pipes to
individual trenches, beds or
pits. If this distribution box
settles or is disturbed, all of
the effluent may flow to one
part of the system, overloading
it until it malfunctions. To
check out this possibility, you
would need to locate and dig
down to your distribution box.
Surface malfunctions can
vary in degree from occasional
damp patches on the surface
to constant pooling or runoff of
wastewater to a stream, lake
or someone else's property.
Occasional dampness may
result from soil saturation due
to recent rains or from
temporarily high water use.
Dampness might, however, be
a forerunner of more serious
pooling or runoff due to soil
clogging or impermeability.
Until it is shown that
occasional dampness is not
sewage related or that it can
be readily prevented, any
surface malfunction is
considered a failure. Moreover,
this failure is the one most
likely to annoy not only you
but also your neighbors.
Surface malfunctions are
potential public health hazards
and threats to surface water
quality because of the
possibility of direct contact by
residents with untreated
wastes and by the possibility
that the wastes will be washed
into drinking or recreational
water sources. Animals or
insects that have had direct
contact with the wastes can
carry disease organisms to you
and your neighbors.
. ,
/- '4 f-jiKKi.: .,.-_•. , ..•-*.• K-•
-------
WELL
SEPTIC TANK
SAS
EFFLUENT
PLUME
QROUNDWATER
Groundwater Contamination
All septic tank systems
contribute water to
groundwater. If the soil
adequately treats the
wastewater, this is beneficial
because it replenishes
groundwater stores
However, the problems arise
when wastewater discharged
by septic tank systems is not
sufficiently treated by the soil
This happens when the soil is
made up of coarse sand or
gravel layers, or when
fractured rock beneath shallow
soils allows effluents to flow
directly to the water table. In
some cases, the system may
be located too close to the
groundwater level, allowing
too little soil depth to treat the
wastewater adequately
The significance of
groundwater contamination
depends on the final use of the
groundwater, the types of
contaminants discharged to
the groundwater, and their
concentrations at points of
use Points of use include any
existing water supply well,
springs, lake shore, stream
bank, potential well sites that
comply with required
separation distances from on-
site systems or any other place
where use of the water
resource may be impaired
The contaminants of
greatest concern are nitrate
and disease-causing microor-
ganisms Nitrate is a simple
chemical compound Ground-
water containing nitrate above
a certain level, when used to
make baby formula, can cause
a condition in infants called
"methemoglobinemia," also
known as "blue babies "
While septic tank systems
can raise nitrate concentra-
tions above the critical level,
this requires many systems
and somewhat varied
groundwater flow conditions
Nevertheless, you and your
community may want to
evaluate this threat if you keep
your on-site systems
More frequent and
potentially more hazardous is
contamination of wells by
disease organisms It is too
expensive to test for all
possible species of disease
organisms so we use a group
of bacteria, called fecal
coliform bacteria, that are
abundant in the intestines of
warm-blooded animals,
especially man Fecal coliform
bacteria found in wells do not
necessarily come from septic
tank systems But if they do,
you have a real problem. Your
water may have to be
continuously chlorinated, your
well abandoned or your septic
tank system moved or
abandoned. Experts who know
the rock formations and soil
types in your community can
perform additional tests to see
if the source of contamination
is sewage
Nutrients In Lakes
If your septic tank system is
near a lake or a stream that
flows to a lake, you might be
growing plants that you never
even knew were yours Plants
growing in water need
nutrients just like plants on
land Two important plant
nutrients, phosphorus and
nitrogen, are abundant in
sewage
As long as wastewater
passes through enough soil,
nutrient concentrations
probably will not be high
enough for you to see any
plants However, the algae
attached to rock, or the fern-
like or grass-like plants
growing from the sediments
near your shoreline could be
using nutrients from your on-
site wastewater systems
If there are many on-site
systems near your lake, the
nutrients from them may be
growing another type of plant,
floating, microscopic algae in
the open water. If the
nutrients, especially phos-
phorus, accumulate much in
the water and sediment of
your lake, excessive plant
growth will discolor the water,
interfere with recreation and
use up valuable oxygen in the
water In most lakes, septic
tanks systems and other on-
site systems contribute a small
percentage of phosphorus, the
key nutrient in this process,
called eutrophication. But if
your lake is small, does not
have a continuous outflow.
has sandy or gravelly soils or
is highly developed, your
community should thoroughly
evaluate the nutrient releases
from on-site systems.
Direct Discharges
Direct discharges are exactly
what they sound like. A pipe
carries wastewater from the
house plumbing or from a
septic tank to a ditch, an
unused part of the lot, or a
bordering stream or lake
where the wastewater is
dumped Pipes or trenches
illegally installed over or near
soil absorption systems to
route surface malfunction
overflow away from the
system might also be called
direct discharges
Direct discharges are
considered failures of the most
serious kind, because the
wastes are untreated. They are
public health hazards and
threats to water quality
because of the presence of
untreated wastes near
habitations and in water
resources.
Odors
You may believe that odors are
a certain sign that your system
is failing. But correctly
functioning systems
occasionally produce odors as
a normal part of the waste
treatment process. While they
may aid in detecting other
failures and can be a
nuisance, odors are not
considered hazardous to either
health or water quality.
-------
Constraints
The great majority of people
who have on-site systems,
especially those designed by
current standards, use their
sinks, toilets, showers and
clothes washers as freely as
people who have sewers. But
successful performance of on-
site systems is highly
dependent on the environ-
ment. Sometimes that
environment, your yard,
constrains how much
wastewater you can safely
generate. Sometimes the
environment in your
community will limit the
number of new people who
can safely dispose of their
wastewater on-site.
As you will see in Chapter 4,
there are methods for
maximizing the ability of our
soil and water resources to
accept and treat wastewater
There are methods for
modifying the amount and
strength of wastewater that
we generate. But there will be
some residents and some
property owners who will not
be able to avoid the
constraints presented by their
environment, their property.
Water Use Restrictions
Water use restrictions can be
just as bothersome to you as
some of the failures discussed
above even though such
restrictions are not considered
failures.
Water use restrictions
generally come into play when
your on-site system is not
capable, for a variety of
reasons, of handling the
quantities of wastewater your
household generates These
reasons can include slowly
permeable soils, a high water
table, or a system that is not
large enough
Problems associated with
water use restrictions are
generally curbs on your
lifestyle You may not be able
to install a garbage grinder, a
dishwasher, or a water-
softening unit in your
residence. In most instances,
these restrictions are self-
imposed. That is, you have to
be very careful or you cause a
back-up or surface malfunc-
tion Or you may have no
problems until the health
department rejects your
application to add bedrooms
onto your house Either way,
this can be an embarrassment
and an inconvenience
Constraints on
Residential, Commercial
and Industrial Development
This constraint is most likely to
be a problem for your
community rather than for you
as an individual homeowner
Even specially designed on-
site systems may not handle
the volume of wastewater that
a proposed commercial or
industrial establishment would
generate. Consequently, if your
community is situated in an
area where sewering is
impractical for economic or
geographic reasons, your
community may lose growth
opportunities
Similarly, if your community
is situated in an area that will
support only a limited number
of new residential on-site
systems, residential develop-
ment must be limited to avoid
overloading the capacity of the
soil to treat wastes. Your
community could therefore
lose chances to attract new
residents.
Constraints on development
are not necessarily a drawback
in rural areas where
communities have stable
economies and stable
populations, or where the
unspoiled beauty of the
landscape is worth more than
a bigger supermarket. But
such constraints may be a
serious disadvantage if
development pressures cannot
be met in nearby areas that
already have sewers.
-------
Where to Begin?
Some of the problems
discussed above are readily
identifiable A pool of sewage
standing in your backyard, for
example, is a clear indication
that some remedial action
must be taken But suppose
you merely suspect that your
system is failing. How do you
go about gathering information
about your system and other
systems in your community?
First of all, clarity begins at
home Here are some ways
you can check your own
system:
• If you're not sure whether
that puddle or seep in your
backyard is sewage, ask your
local health department for
some dye Flush some down
your toilet and watch the
wet area for a few days
• You may be able to
distinguish between backups
caused by plugged or broken
pipes and those caused by
your soil absorption system
by noting when the backups
occur. If they occur after ram
or during spring, when many
soils are naturally wet, or
when you have a lot of
company, the soil absorption
system may be at fault. If
the problem gradually gets
worse, starts suddenly, or
isn't related to weather, the
cause may be your house
plumbing or the piping
connecting your house,
septic tank, and soil
absorption system A good
way to find out for sure is to
have a contractor pump your
septic tank and, while it is
open, have the pipes
entering and leaving it
cleaned out If your soil
absorption system has a
distribution box, have the
contractor dig it up to see if
it is working properly
- -'
*
• Determine how much water
you're using Even if you
have your own well, a water
meter can be installed for
about the same cost as a
few septic tank pumpings If
you use 45 gallons per
person per day, you are
about average If you use
more than 60 gallons per
person per day, look for
leaks and then consider new
low-flow toilets, shower
heads, and cleaning
appliances.
• Look for sources of excess
water. Roof drains, base-
ment sumps, driveway
runoff, springs, or even
surface runoff from your
yard may be filling up your
septic tank and soil
absorption system faster
than you are.
These are things you can
check yourself. Other problems
may require help from your
community's sanitarian, a soil
scientist, septic tank installer,
water quality scientist, or
others with special expertise.
What if you do have a
problem that requires special
expertise? If you do, your
neighbors may need the same
help. You may find out what
the general situation in your
community is by discussing it
with your local health
department officials. Your local
health department or public
works department may be able
to help you by providing
information on past well
contamination or septic tank
repairs in your community.
You can also try to find out if
any agency has conducted an
areawide study of the on-site
systems in your community
Use the contacts listed at the
end of this handbook as a
starting point. If such
information is available, it can
tell you whether failures in
your area are widespread
enough for you and your
community to consider a full-
scale study. If no one else has
made a community study and
you believe your system is only
one of several problem
systems, you might consider
forming a citizens' committee
to conduct a preliminary
survey.
These first steps, which
require relatively little time
and effort on your part, are
useful for establishing the
outlines of the wastewater
treatment problem in your
community. If your findings are
inconclusive or seem to
indicate failure in one or more
systems, you will need further
information on ways to find
and correct them, both of
which are covered later in this
handbook.
But first .
-------
Chapter 2.
Don't Make Things Worse
It Could Happen to You
Your first inclination upon
suspecting you have a problem
with several on-site systems in
your community may be to
scrap them entirely and
contract for a sewer system.
After all, sewers seem so
simple: wastewater goes down
the drain and you need never
give it another thought.
Treatment and disposal are
someone else's concern, as
are routine maintenance and
operation. But before you place
the call to the design
consultant, consider these
scenarios*.
Community A
Community A is a midwestern
community located on the
shores of a large lake. On-site
septic systems were replaced
by a conventional collection
system leading to a treatment
plant. The relevant facts and
figures are:
• Plant size—3,000,000
gallons per day
• Users served—1,600
dwellings or commercial and
industrial users
Sewered population—4,700
people
• Total cost—$14,500,000
(Local share of this cost was
funded by loans, bonds, and
assessments)
• Average costs to property
owners after initial $1,800
assessment:
Average hookup—$1,000
User charges—$175 to
$200 per year
Tax levy—$300 per year
per property
Total—$500 per year per
family
• Median income—$9,700 per
family
Annual sewerage costs are
thus 5% of median income
• Capital cost per home—
$9,100
• Value of average home—
$20,000
Community B
Community B is a northeastern
community that, like
Community A, is adjacent to a
large lake. Septic tanks and
direct outfalls (that is, direct
discharges of untreated
wastewater) were replaced by
a conventional collection and
treatment system. The relevant
facts and figures for this new
system are:
• Plant size—250,000 gallons
per day
• Users served—650 dwellings
Sewered population—1,350
people
(The plant was designed to
serve a population of 2,500
even though the population
has been declining in recent
years)
• Total cost of project—
$4,200,000
This cost was paid as
follows:
Plant—75% EPA funding,
25% state grants
Collection system—50%
Farmer's Home
Administration and
Economic Development
Administration grants;
balance paid by 40-year
5% Farmer's Home
Administration loan
• Average costs to property
owners
Connection costs—$500 to
$1,200 per connection
Annual use charge and loan
repayment—$220 per family
• Median income—$6,600 per
family
Annual sewerage costs are
thus 3.3% of the median
income
• Value of average home—
under $20,000
• Capital cost per home—
$6,500
"These examples are actual case
studies reported by Keith H Dearth,
"Current Costs of Conventional
Approaches" in Less Costly
Wastewater Treatment Systems for
Small Communities Proceedings of a
national conference given by U S EPA.
Reston. Virginia. April 12-24, 1977
-------
So What?
Take a minute to consider
what these figures mean in
human terms.
Many small towns and rural
communities have a
proportionately large
population of older people who
my be living alone on small
social security payments.
Additionally, these
communities include farm
families whose net wealth is
quite often invested in land
and equipment.
You do not have to be an
economist to understand that
coming up with an SI ,800
chunk of money for connection
to a sewer could result in
considerable hardship for
homeowners living on fixed
incomes Imagine, too, the
difficulty a pensioner may have
in finding an extra $200 per
year for user charges
How Does This
Happen?
Jt may have been that no
effective alternatives to sewer
construction were possible in
Communities A and B, in
which case the high costs
were necessary. Government
loan and grant programs are
justified when they make the
right alternative possible, even
when it is expensive But it is
a fact that some reasonable
alternatives, including the
continued use of existing on-
site systems, are not always
properly considered
Many factors contribute to
the sort of poor judgments
made by consultants for
Communities A and B. Even if
plain incompetence is ruled
out, it is still an unfortunate
fact that some consultants and
local or municipal officials are
unfamiliar with the entire
range of technologies
available And, while new
technologies designed to
overcome various siting or
soils problems continue to
come on the market,
contractors are naturally
reluctant to accept the risks
that accompany installing
relatively unproven systems.
Thus, a consultant may take
the safe way out and
recommend sewers, even
though they may cost many
times the amount of a
correctly chosen on-site
system.
In the recent past, federal
and state governments and
other agencies have made the
sewering alternative even
more attractive by offering
substantial subsidies for sewer
installations In the case study
of Community B, for example,
combined grants paid 100
percent of the costs of the
treatment plant and 50 percent
of the costs of the collection
system. It is another
unfortunate fact that the lure
of "easy money" attracts
consultants and local officials
who see that they can get
what they believe is the best
alternative for a nominal in-
vestment by the community.
Another reason why small-
scale and on-site alternatives
may not be considered
seriously is the matter of
privacy Governments
generally do not want to send
their employees onto private
property Privacy is not a
problem with sewers—the
resident takes care of the
house plumbing and house
sewer on his property and the
community takes care of the
sewer in the street Privacy
can become a concern with
community management of
on-site systems, however. (See
Chapter 5).
Thus, it is easy to see that
consultants and local officials
have several reasons for
overlooking the simple
expedient of repairing or
replacing failing on-site
systems Even though
replacement and upgrading
can cost communities far less
than expenditures on
centralized systems, sewers
continue to be recommended
as the best—and sometimes as
the only—alternative for
communities with wastewater
treatment problems.
This chapter is not intended
to prejudice you against the
sewer alternative but to
prepare you to deal with the
experts who may want to sell
you on centralized treatment
without fully exploring other
options Even if your expert
assures you that the
government will pick up the
tab, you and your neighbors
may still have to pay
substantial connection and
user charges The prospect of
these charges should certainly
provide you with the incentive
to explore alternative solutions
to your community's waste
treatment problems
10
-------
Chapter 3.
Finding the Smoking Gun
A sound decision to improve
wastewater systems cannot
be made unless the failures
and their causes are known. If
your preliminary efforts
revealed that on-site systems
are failing, its time for the
officials who represent your
community to take over. They
should find out how many
failures there are. But just as
important, they will need
evidence that explains why
there are failures—they will
need to find the smoking gun.
Is it old systems that are under
designed? Is it small
drainfields in tight soils? Is it
septic tanks that are never
pumped? Or is it four
teenagers who wash their hair
twice a day?
The process of finding and
explaining the failures is
known as needs
documentation.
Several methods can be
used in needs documentation,
ranging from simple
questionnaires to sophisticated
on-site testing. Choosing the
right methods is a matter of
common sense and knowing
what the methods can and
cannot do Its also a matter of
costs. The three-phased
process that is discussed here
begins with the most
inexpensive methods and the
ones that cover the entire
community (Phase 1). Then it
continues to more intensive,
but limited, investigations on-
site (Phase 2) If this needs
documentation work shows
that the failures can be
corrected on-site, it is followed
by the last phase, detailed site
analysis, used to select the
right remedy for each system
The needs documentation
(Phases 1 and 2) and detailed
site analysis work can get
costly There is no need to go
the whole route if there are
few failures If early work
shows there are too many
uncorrectable failures, then
stop and start looking at
sewers.
The recommended methods
for needs documentation
include:
Phase I
gathering and analysis of
available data,
mailed questionnaires,
aerial photographic
interpretation,
septic leachate detection
(lake communities)
nearshore plant surveys
(lake communities)
eutrophication modeling
(lake communities)
Phase II
partial sanitary surveys, and
representative samplings.
Phase I Needs
Documentation
Methods
Gathering and Analysis of
Available Data
Using information that is
already available can be a
quick and inexpensive way to
define the need for improved
wastewater management
facilities on a community-wide
basis. Several sources of
information are:
7 Local Well and Septic Tank
Permit Records
Some public health agencies
keep records on the
bacteriologic characteristics of
private water supplies; such
information may include the
locations of wells possibly
contaminated by on-site
systems. For new wells, many
states require logs that will
show the geologic setting of
your community. Where repair
permits for septic tank systems
are well maintained, they
record the types, frequency,
and locations of failures
However, they seldom indicate
the course of failures.
2. Sanitarians, Soil Scientists,
Septic Tank Installers and
Haulers, Well Drillers, and
Zoning Officers
Interviews with these people
can give you information on
the location of on-site
problems such as surface
malfunctions, plumbing
backups, and illicit discharges;
as above, this information can
pinpoint areas that may need
further investigation. These
interviews will be particularly
useful for gathering
information on system
problems resulting from poor
site conditions or inadequate
maintenance practices.
11
-------
High Schoo
3 Windshield Surveys
An automobile tour of your
community with a local
sanitarian, soil scientist, or
other knowledgeable person
can provide first-hand
observation and interpretation
of site conditions and on-lot
system practices.
4 Soil Maps
Analysis of soil types in your
community will not provide
direct documentation of need,
but it may give evidence useful
in guiding your search for
problem systems and in
analyzing the causes of
failures
Soil maps are published by
the US Department of
Agriculture Soil Conservation
Service in cooperation with
state agricultural experiment
stations Soil maps may be
general or detailed Detailed
soil maps will describe the
types of environmental
limitations (like clay layers,
high groundwater and
flooding) that on-site systems
have to operate under. If there
is a choice between general
and detailed maps, get the
detailed ones—they usually
have a generalized map
included
Soil maps can be used for
preliminary determinations of
the suitability of on-site
systems on a community-wide
basis, as well as to estimate
how many lots in a community
can be expected to be served
satisfactorily by on-site
systems Soil maps can also
indicate potential problem
areas that may be investigated
at a later stage
5 Available Water Quality
Studies and Eutrophication
Modeling
Your streams and lakes may
have been studied already by
universities, state agencies or
federal agencies Such studies
may increase your understand-
ing and appreciation of these
resources
Few studies concentrate on
the effects of on-site systems
on specific bodies of water. An
exception is the National
Eutrophication Survey, which
estimated nutrient inputs to
812 lakes in the United States,
241 of which were in Region V
states. These nutrient budgets
include estimates of
phosphorus and nitrogen from
on-site systems
Your state's water resource
agency or regional planning
organizations are excellent
places to look for available
water quality studies
6. Base Map Preparation and
Overlays
After exploring these types
of available information, your
community should consider
preparation of a base map The
base map can be inexpensively
made by using available maps
or aerial photography.
Commonly available sources
are the U.S. Geological
Survey's topograpic maps, the
aerial photographs reproduced
in US. Soil Conservation
Service soil maps, and local
tax maps See the end of this
handbook for other
possibilities. The base map
should show, at a minimum,
streets, streams, lakes, town
and county boundaries, any
existing sewer service areas
and central treatment plants,
and either property boundaries
or buildings.
As information is gathered
on the natural environment,
land use and needs
documentation, it can be
transferred to clear plastic
overlays.
This base map and the
overlays will give you
preliminary ideas about what
sorts of systems your
community may need and
what areas in your community
require additional needs
documentation. The base map
can later be used to show data
collected in the course of new
field work.
12
-------
Mailed Questionnaires
Mailed questionnaires can
accomplish a number of
objectives. They can be used to
inform residents of the
objectives of the wastewater
management planning effort.
They can be used to obtain a
variety of information on each
homeowner's wastewater
system. And they can be used
to determine how willing the
residents are to allow follow-
up surveys and site
investigations.
When you consider using
mailed questionnaires, you
must understand that the
responses you get are going to
be only as good as 1)
residents' knowledge of their
property, 2) their
understanding of the questions
being asked, and 3) their
willingness to give you
information. You must
consider, too, the psychological
factors that are involved Some
homeowners may not want to
admit their systems are failing
because they believe the
situation will reflect badly on
them. Moreover, if they realize
that honest responses to the
questionnaire could lead to
replacement or renovation of
their systems that will cost
them a significant sum, they
may feel it is in their best
interests not to offer
information about their
sewage disposal systems A
straightforward cover letter
explaining what the
questionnaire's purpose is and
what will be done with the
information may encourage
full and honest responses.
Aerial Photographic
Interpretion
Aerial photographic surveys
can provide information on
surface malfunctions of on-site
systems m an entire
community. Such surveys are
quick and relatively
inexpensive, with the added
bonus that no one needs to
intrude on private property
where there are no surface
malfunctions These surveys
are generally timed for late
winter or spring when the
ground is not snow-covered
and tree cover is limited This
does present a minor problem
in communities where a large
part of the population is
seasonal. In this case,
photographs may be taken in
the summer months when
summer people are in
residence but the photographs
must be analyzed more
carefully because visible signs
of malfunctions are hidden by
trees.
The photographs are
analyzed by an experienced
photo interpreter who looks for
evidence of surface
malfunctions, such as:
• conspicuously lush
vegetation,
• dead vegetation (especially
grass),
• standing wastewater or
seepage, or
• dark soil indicating excessive
accumulation of organic
matter
Suspected malfunctions can
then be checked by on-site
inspection and reclassified as
confirmed malfunctions
(standing wastewater from an
on-site system is visible on the
surface), as marginal
malfunctions (accumulations of
excess organic matter or the
presence of dead vegetation
indicates that wastewater has
surfaced in the past), or as
surface features that mimic
malfunctions but are not
caused by wastewater
The color photographs taken
to find surface malfunctions
can be used in other helpful
ways. House counts, land use,
and vegetation types (field,
wetland, woods, and so on)
can be rapidly inventoried and
explained to others.
Septic Leachate Detection
Septic leachate detectors are
electronic instruments used to
locate groundwater discharges
or surface runoff carrying
domestic wastewater into
lakes These detectors must be
used very carefully because
they respond to some natural
compounds as well as to
sewage materials Also, under
some conditions, detectors
may miss leachate since it is
often recognizable only very
close to the place where it
enters a lake. Because of the
possibilities for error and the
many factors influencing the
result of septic leachate
detection, the validity of the
surveys rests heavily on the
experience, knowledge, and
judgment of the surveyor.
While septic leachate
detectors can locate signals
resulting from wastewater,
they cannot tell whether the
leachate was properly treated
before it entered the lake. To
determine this, samples need
to be collected and then
analyzed in a laboratory.
13
-------
Nearshore Plant Surveys
As you learned in Chapter 1,
nutrients in septic tank
effluents that are carried to
lakes by groundwater can
stimulate the growth of
aquatic plants along the
lakeshores Aerial photography
taken during the growing
season can provide a starting
point for surveyors Close-up
inspection of the plants noting
their type, density, and
nearness to homes will provide
more detailed information
Costs for such surveys can be
minimized if they are done
along with septic leachate
detection or partial sanitary
surveys
Nearshore plant surveys can
provide evidence that nutrient-
rich wastewater from on-site
systems may be seeping into
the lake But remember that
wastewater from on-site
systems is only one, and not
always the most important,
contributor to excessive
shoreline plant growth.
Eutrophication Modeling
If your community includes
developed lakeshore areas you
may consider modeling to
predict the impacts of on-site
systems on potential lake
eutrophication. Eutrophication
modeling can be a useful way
of predicting what may happen
over time if failing systems are
not corrected or if the density
of on-site systems located near
lakeshore increases.
The model starts with a
nutrient budget, an estimate of
the amount of nitrogen or
phosphorus coming from
different sources Commonly,
the major sources will include:
• sewage treatment plant
discharges
• major tributaries
• storm runoff from land
adjacent to the lake
• on-site systems, and
• precipitation
The total nutrient load is
then evaluated for its potential
to cause too much plant
growth in the lake. For
freshwater lakes, phosphorus
is the nutrient of concern
since there is often more
nitrogen available than the
plants can use
To predict what happens if
the on-site systems are
abandoned or if more systems
are built, the assumptions for
that part of the budget are
changed and the plant growth
potential is reevaluated
On studies of 35 lakes in
Region V, we found that the
fraction of the total
phosphorus budget estimated
for on-site systems was
usually small and that
sewering the homes around
the lakes would make little
difference. There will be
exceptions and detailed
sampling may be justified to
spot them
Wrapping Up Phase I
Once you have completed the
Phase I methods appropriate
for your community, stop and
take a look at the data. How
frequent and how difficult to
solve are the problems you
have found? Can your local
officials and your neighbors
solve them without state or
federal financial help? Is it
obvious that some or all parts
of your community cannot get
by with on-site systems?
The answers to these
questions will guide you in
setting up Phase II, or
determining whether Phase II
is even necessary.
The end of Phase I activities
can be a decision point—a
time for your neighbors, local
officials, consultants, and
funding agencies to huddle
before the next play. At this
time, you should consider the
following rules of thumb:
Whenever it is
environmentally sound to do
so, the continued use of on-
site systems will cost your
community less over both
the short run and the long
run than constructing
sewers, with few exceptions.
Without sewers, however,
industrial, commercial and
housing development may
be slowed down or stopped
because the capacity of the
soil and groundwater to
accept waste is limited.
Now might be the time to
take a hard look at the actual
potential your community has
for growing, and how much
the community is willing to
spend to help it happen.
14
-------
Phase II Needs
Documentation
Methods
Phase I information should
provide a good profile of the
types of failures in your
community and how frequent
they are. If you are lucky, the
major causes of failure may
also have been revealed. In
this case you can make a good
guess as to what types of
remedies are needed, compare
the costs (all the costsl See
Chapter 6), and make a
decision.
If it is still unclear why
failures happen, the next step
is to go on-site and find some
answers.
Sanitary Surveys
A sanitary survey, as the term
is used here, is an inventory of
the location, age, condition,
design, and use of on-site
systems based on available
data and on-site sanitary
inspections. Each sanitary
inspection should include an
interview with the resident
followed by a walk-over
inspection of the property to
collect and record opinions and
data on the on-site wastewater
and water supply systems.
If it is decided before the
sanitary survey that the
community will rely on
upgrading on-site systems, the
survey may be set up to cover
all the residences in the
community. However, if there
is still a possibility that sewers
may be needed, then a
complete sanitary survey could
be a waste of money. A partial
survey that is large enough to
estimate the overall
percentage of systems needing
upgrading and the types of
technology required will be
sufficient.
Whether complete or partial,
sanitary surveys provide an
excellent opportunity for the
surveyors to explain the
initiatives being taken by the
community and to find out
what the residents want.
Representative
Sampling
Representative sampling of soil
and groundwater conditions
can reveal the causes of
failures and can quantify their
impacts on water quality.
Conditions that could be
measured include:
• seasonally or permanently
high water table,
• groundwater flow,
• well water contamination,
• shallow groundwater
contamination, and
• soil permeability
Representative sampling can
be expensive, but its worth
comes from being able to
make decisions based on
known relationships, not rules
of thumb, between failures
and their causes. The
difference in the quality and
ultimate cost of decisions will
more than offset the expenses
of sampling
How Much Is
Enough?
As a cost-conscious member
of your community, you will
want to consider carefully how
much information you really
need in order to make a
decision about wastewater
treatment in your community
Obviously, the amount of
information you need will
depend largely upon factors
specific to your community.
We have presented a fair
selection here so that you will
have some idea what types of
information are required in the
needs documentation process,
and so that you will
understand what information a
soils engineer or sanitarian is
seeking when he or she
suggests them. But your
community certainly need not
use all these methods. If at the
end of Phase I, it is
documented that a high
percentage of failures exist in
your community and that they
cannot be fixed, for example,
your next step is planning and
design of off-site systems, not
eutrophication modeling
If, however, needs
documentation studies show
that upgrading and
replacement of on-site systems
is the way to go, then planning
and design work should
proceed with detailed site
analysis.
i^^^^
15
-------
Detailed Site Analysis
Whereas needs documentation
studies are intended to support
community-wide decisions to
sewer or not, remaining data
collection will support
selection of specific on-site
technologies for each
developed property.
At a minimum, on-site
sanitary inspections need to be
completed for those buildings
not already inspected. The
work performed in the
remainder of the detailed site
analysis depends on the type
of problems indicated by these
on-site sanitary inspections.
This figure illustrates both the
range of analyses that might
be needed and the principle
that the analyses depend on
the type of problem. A possible
sequence of analyses and
decisions for a common
failure, plumbing backups, is
highlighted in the figure.
Notes
1. If, through previous
experience, the cause of
the problem can be
identified at this point, the
detailed site analysis can
be bypassed.
2. State standards for
minimum setback dis-
tances should be used
unless a hydrogeologic (or
other) reason exists to use
a larger distance.
3. In using contaminated
wells as a criterion for
delineating sewer service
areas, only data from
protected wells should be
used.
4. Odors can come from a
properly functioning septic
tank/soil absorption
system. Relocation of vent
may solve the problem.
AVAILABLE
DATA REVIEW
AND COMMUNITY
SURVEYS
ON-SITE
SANITARY
INSPECTION
IDENTIFICATION OF PROBLEM
• Homeowner
interview
• Site inspection
• Well inspection
f Complete survey.~\
I No additional I
\_ work required J
(1)
LEGEND
J /Information to/
/ choose from /
SXaV (^ of sequence)
'Suspected effluent
plumes reaching lake j
or excessive algal
growth along shore
"Well within minimum
setback distance
from on-site treat-
ment system
Note: This diagram shows how an individual site with on existing
on-site system could be analyzed. Nothing is implied regard-
ing Construction Grants eligibility of specific items or their
appropriate timing in the 3-step Construction Grants process.
(2,3)
i
Recurrent back ups
or poor flushing and
drainage
i
No record or mem-
ory of on-site sys-
tem design
1 Surfacing or pond-
ing of liquids
• Odor problems
(4)
Improvised and slip-
shod methods of
disposal
5. Shoreline scan should be
repeated to ensure that
plumes are located
properly.
6. Well samples should be
taken at least twice to
ensure reliability of
conclusions.
7. If house drains are likely
to be clogged, snaking
drains may solve problem.
Note: Monitoring of water
meter is required after
installation.
8. Septic tank and sewer
inspection to include:
excavation; pumping;
inspection for size,
structural integrity, outlet
and baffle condition;
rodding house and effluent
sewers; measuring
distance and direction to
SAS using snake and
metal detector.
9. If septic tank and/or
sewers (to and from septic
tank) need replacement
and additional work on
drainfield is required,
follow "no" route and
investigate other factors
before replacing septic
tank and/or sewers. This
process will avoid
replacement of septic
16
-------
DETAILED SITE ANALYSIS
TECHNOLOGY SELECTION
(INDIVIDUAL PROPERTIES)
Protect well; change ~"\
location of well or \
on-site system; invest- 1
igate community well; I
off-site wastewater /
treatment
10.
Analyze surface and
groundwater samples
from plumes
Problem
contaminants
found
Plumes
confirmed
Rescan
shoreline
/Record data. No addi-
tional work required
Are
contaminants
from on-site
system
Analyze for
fluorescence
Obstructions in
drainfield
Contaminants
confirmed
Does
soil ab-
sorption sys-
tem operate
properly
Try to identify source\
and recommend pro- 1
tectiye measures. Re-/
cord information J
Poor distribution
Soil hydraulics
Perform soils and
groundwater hydrol
ogy studies
Are
septic tank
and sewers inac
ceptable con-
dition
Seasonally high
water table
Inspect septic tank (or
sedimentation portion
of on-site system) and
sewers
Hydraulic over- /
load /
Are
soils and
groundwater
suitable for exist-
ing on-site
system
• Septic tank
•Sewers from house
to septic tank or from
septic tank to drain-
field
/Pressure distribution
Has
septic tank
been pumped
in last 2
Oversized drainfield
Perform soils and
groundwater studies
for replacement
facilities
I Water conservation
Curtain drains
H202 treatment
7 Rod drainfield lines
Alternate drainfield
Off-site treatment
Plume recapture
/Graywater segregation /—
Reuse/recycle
^y Replace septic tank or sewers/—
tank/sewers when entire
system is not functional.
Other tests may be
substituted if they
distinguish between
wastewater and non-
wastewater sources of
well contamination.
This procedure is limited
to digging and inspecting
test pits in the drainfield,
excavation and repair of
distribution boxes and
broken header lines,
snaking distribution lines
to remove obstructions,
and soil borings through
drainfield laterals, pits, or
trenches.
Record information,
schedule future mon- '
itoring, design facil-
ities and install >
17
-------
Chapter 4.
Choosing Your Weapons
At this point, your community
has a pretty good estimate of
how many systems are failing
(and why, and how seriously),
and how many are functioning
satisfactorily. You may have
evidence that certain
neighborhoods in your
community are going to
continue experiencing failures
because of soil types or
groundwater depths.
But what action should you
take? Should you replace the
failing systems with new
ones? Should you replace all
the on-site systems with a
new sewer system?
First, you must understand
what the options are.
Conventional On-Site
Systems
The predominant type of on-
site system is the septic
tank/soil absorption system.
The septic tank receives the
wastewater first. The septic
tank has four functions: it
separates solids from liquids, it
partially stabilizes organic
matter, it stores solids until
they can be pumped away, and
it allows clarified liquid, the
effluent, to discharge to the
soil absorption system for
further treatment and disposal.
Solid materials in the
wastewater settle to the
bottom of the tank. As they
accumulate, the solids
decompose into sludge. A
scum of lightweight material
such as fats and greases rises
to the top. The partially
clarified liquid layer between
the septage and the scum is
allowed to flow through an
outlet structure carefully
positioned below the scum
layer. This liquid is the effluent
that flows to the soil
absorption system.
One of the major advantages
of the septic tank is that is has
no moving parts and therefore
needs very little routine
maintenance. A properly
designed and maintained tank
made of concrete, fiberglass,
or plastic should last for 50
years. Tanks can also be made
of steel; because of corrosion
problems, steel tanks may last
only 10 years.
The major cause of septic
tank problems is the failure to
pump out the sludge solids
when necessary. As the sludge
layer increases in depth, the
liquid volume decreases,
which does not allow as much
time for settling. Then
treatment efficiency falls off,
and more solids escape in the
effluent. The only way to
prevent this problem is to
pump the tank regularly. Plan
to pump the tank once every 2
to 5 years.
Most septic tanks are buried
so that inspecting or pumping
them requires some digging.
That disruption can be avoided
if the manhole covers in the
top are fitted with access
pipes. These 4- or 6-inch
diameter pipes can be cut off
just above ground level and
capped to keep odors in and
water and dirt out.
Soil Absorption
System
The function of the soil
absorption system is to
distribute the septic tank
effluent to the soil. The
effluent then percolates
through the soil and is filtered.
Many waste materials are
removed through reactions
with the soil particles.
A clogging mat forms at the
point where the wastewater
meets the soil surface. The
formation of this mat depends
primarily on how much and
what kind of wastes go
through the system. This mat
slows the seeping of water
into the soil, preventing the
soil underneath from becoming
saturated. This is beneficial
because the wastewater has to
travel through t//?saturated soil
in order to reach the
groundwater. This removes
disease-causing organisms
and other pollutants. Naturally,
the clogging mat also slows
the rate at which the effluent
enters the soil. Well-designed
soil absorption systems take
into account the formation of
the clogging mat and its effect
on the rate of wastewater
dispersal.
18
-------
Absorption Field (Bed)
Grave! or Crushed Rock
There are several different
designs of soil absorption
systems, but the most
commonly used are trenches,
beds, and mounds. All share
the following construction
similarities: They are covered
excavations filled with porous
material such as gravel and
they include a means for
introducing and distributing
the wastewater throughout the
system. The distribution
system discharges the
wastewater into the air spaces
in the porous material. These
spaces provide storage for the
wastewater until it can seep
away into the surrounding soil.
The type of system selected
depends on the site. Of
particular importance are the
permeability of the soil, the
depth of the soil over the
water table or bedrock, slope
of the site, and the size of the
area suitable for system
placement.
Where soil conditions are
right—that is, the soil is
neither too permeable nor
impermeable—and the soil is
deep enough over the water
table, trench and bed systems
are most commonly used.
Trenches are shallow, level
excavations usually 1 to 5 feet
deep and 1 to 3 feet wide. The
bottom of the trench is filled
with 6 inches or more of
crushed rock or gravel over
which runs a single line of
perforated pipe to distribute
the effluent. More rock is
placed over the pipe, and then
a semi-permeable barrier is
placed over the rock to prevent
backfilled soil from filtering
down into the rock layer.
Beds differ from trenches in
their width—they are wider
than 3 feet. Thus, the
bottoms of the beds provide
the primary distribution of
wastewater to the soil.
If the soil is relatively
impermeable or naturally
becomes saturated by
groundwater within two feet of
the ground's surface, or if soil
over the bedrock is shallow, a
mound system may be used.
Mounds are, as you would
imagine from their name,
raised beds constructed above
the natural soil surface. The
distribution system discharges
into a porous layer just as for
trenches and beds, and then
percolates down through the
soil. This system thus uses the
generally more permeable
topsoil layer rather than the
subsoil, which may be wetter,
slowly permeable, or of
insufficient depth.
Variations on the
Theme
Other design variations are
available that are useful for
upgrading existing on-site
systems or for new systems. A
few of these variations and the
reasons they would be used
are:
• Oversized soil absorption
systems can be installed
when soils are slowly
permeable or when
increased wastewater
contact with highly
permeable soil is needed
to get adequate treatment.
In either case improved
distribution of effluent by
intermittent pumping may be
necessary to take advantage
of the additional trench or
bed.
• Another way to improve
performance in slowly
permeable soils is to split an
oversized system in two,
provide each half with its
own distribution pipes and
switch from one half to the
other annually.
• Grease traps installed before
the septic tank and cleaned
routinely can reduce scum
formation and the amount of
scum that carries over to the
soil absorption system.
• Improved baffles in the septic
tank, a two-compartment
septic tank, or two septic
tanks one after the other will
reduce the amount of organic
solids going to the soil
absorption system. If you are
going to use a garbage
grinder, two tanks or a two-
compartment tank is a must.
• Stormwater from roofs,
driveways, sump pumps and
side slopes can tax the ability
of a soil absorption system.
Divert this extra water with
shallow trenches or pipes.
• Runoff also flows as a
temporary water table below
the ground surface and over a
tight layer in some soils. This
extra water can be diverted
through curtain drains,
trenches with perforated
pipes at the bottom and
partially filled with gravel.
Curtain drains should be far
enough above the soil
absorption system so they do
not become direct discharges
(See Chapter 1).
These design features can
be built into a new or replace-
ment on-site system. Some
can be added later if neces-
sary. But what if your existing
on-site system is acting up and
there is no room left on your
property for an oversized soil
absorption system? Or a new
drainfield that can alternate
with your present one?
Perforated Pipe ge a ion Absorptlon
Cross
Section
Inlet Pipe From Septic or Aerobic
Plowed Surface, Original Grade
Tank & Siphon or Pump
Rockyor Tight Soil or High Ground Water
19
-------
Salvaging A Sinking
System
There are still some effective
remedies available to you that
can control the causes of your
system's problems. But first a
word of caution. Chemical
additives that make claims to
clean out your septic tank can
make matters worse in the
long run. The organic material
from your tank just flows to
your soil absorption system
and can make it fail.
In increasing order of cost
and difficulties, the effective
remedies are:
• Check the house's plumbing
fixtures regularly and repair
any leaks.
• If you take baths, switch to
showers if you have them.
This almost invariably will
save water.
• If you use a public water
supply, ask the water utility
what the water pressure is
in your area. If it is above 40
pounds per square inch,
install a pressure reducing
valve in the water service
pipe. This will reduce water
consumption and
wastewater flows in many
such houses. Check the
water meter periodically if
you have one to see how
much you are using.
• Install the inexpensive flow-
reduction devices that are
available. Most homes that
do not already have fixtures
designed to save water can
get a 1 0 percent or greater
reduction with low-flow
shower heads, faucet
aerators and toilet tank
dams or dual-flush toilet
tank adapters. These devices
will pay for themselves in a
short time by reducing your
water supply and water
heating bills. You will have
to quit taking baths for the
low-flow shower head to
save water.
• Disconnect your garbage
grinder. It contributes about
a third of the organic solids
going to your septic tank.
Unless you have that second
tank mentioned above, or
are really diligent in
pumping your septic tank,
this extra solids load can
stress your soil absorption
system.
• Replace old water-using
fixtures and appliances.
Many old toilets and faucets
were over-designed.
Replacing your old 7 gallon-
flush toilet with a 3 gallon
model is the best switch you
can make. Also consider a
suds-saving or front-loading
washing machine (if your
system will handle one at
all) and faucets with built-in
hot and cold mixing valves.
• Abandon luxury appliances.
If your only choices are
polluting your neighborhood
or washing your clothes at
the laundromat, your
conscience should take you
to the laundromat. But the
choice is seldom that harsh.
• Replace your conventional
shower with an air-assisted
shower. Compressed air is
used to spray a reduced flow
of water on the bather. To
use this, you will have to
buy especially designed
equipment, replumb your
shower, and enclose your
tub or shower stall with a
sliding door. But it will cut
your water use for bathing
about 90 percent and will
reduce the average
household's entire water
usage 10 to 25%. This is
about the same savings you
could get by abandoning
your clothes washer.
AIR
EXTERNAL
FLOW RESTRICTOR
INTERNAL
FLOW RESTRICTOR
WATER
SHOWER
VALVE
AIR
ASSISTED
SHOWER
SMALLER TANK
SHALLOW TRAP TOILET
BALLCOCK TOILET TANK DAMS
TOILET TANK DAMS
LEVER
FLUSH FLOAT
VALVE BALL
WATER SAVED WITH^
DAMS
TOILET TANK DAMS
MOTOR
AIR
COMPRESSION
TANK
IT
~\\_
FLUSH BUTTON
WATER SUPPLY
AIR ASSISTED TOILET
20
-------
If nitrate or bacteria
contamination of
groundwater is a potential
hazard on your site or
additional flow reduction is
needed to protect your soil
absorption system, handling
toilet wastes,or black water,
separately from other
wastewater may solve your
problem. There are several
ways to do this such as
composting toilets, chemical
toilets, incinerating toilets
and air-assisted toilets.
Separate treatment of black
water will reduce flows to
your soil absorption system
by about a third and nitrogen
by a whopping 80 percent.
Each method has wastes left
over that have to be
disposed of separately, but
their volumes are
comparatively small You will
want advice from an expert
to help select the best
method for your home. Also
check with your health
department and public works
department to see what is
permitted.
> Still not enough? It is
possible to reduce the flows
by recycling and reusing
some of the less
contaminated waste streams
such as bathing water and
laundry water It will require
some replumbing and
continued maintenance, but
these wastes can be filtered,
stored and/or disinfected to
be reused for toilet flushing
or irrigation of lawn and
garden.
CHEMICAL TOILET
CHEMICAL
RESERVOIR
HYDRAULIC FLUID
(ETHYLENE GLYCOL
AND WATER
SOLUTION
METERED
CHEMICAL BOWL
FACULTATIVE LAGOON
FILTERED
FILTER FLUSHING
FLUID
NEAR 1/3 POINTI
WITHOUT PRIOR PRIMARY SEDIMENTATION)
The (almost) last resort is a
holding tank and routine
pumping and hauling by a
tank truck. No one likes
them, they are very
expensive when all
wastewater from a house is
collected in them, and the
high cost of pumping them
encourages illegal emptying
into ditches, streams and
even lakes To keep pumping
costs to a minimum, any of
the methods above will help
But holding tanks will do the
job of protecting public
health and water quality if
you cannot or will not use
the next two options
If your property is not
suitable for soil absorption
systems, you may be able to
treat your wastewater to a
high degree and discharge it
to a stream Septic tanks or
home-sized aerobic
treatment units or both are
used to pretreat the
wastewater. A variety of
additional treatment units
such as various sand filter
designs, disinfection devices
or small ponds may be
needed to provide final
treatment. You will have to
apply to the agency in your
state that issues permits for
surface discharges.
High technology treatment
systems have been
developed which take all the
wastewater from your house
and treat it so that it is
suitable for all uses,
including drinking. These
systems include continuous
automatic monitoring and
mandatory service contracts.
They are not universally
available because not all
states approve them yet and
the manufacturers require a
minimum number of sales
before delivering new units.
But these systems show
what can be done when it
has to be done
If you are the only
homeowner within a quarter of
a mile or so that has to go to
this much trouble for adequate
wastewater disposal, then you
may have to go it alone.
But what if your neighbors
are having similar problems?
As the number of problems
and the density of
development increase, the
economic and public health
justifications for off-site
systems increase.
21
-------
Off-Site Systems
Off-site systems collect wastes
from individual dwellings for
processing at a centralized
location. Off-site systems
might be limited in extent to
serve just those groups of
buildings with severe problems
or they may extend throughout
a community. Each type is
discussed in the following
sections.
Cluster Systems
Cluster systems are so called
because they provide
treatment services for a small
number of dwellings.
Wastewater is collected in
sewers and carried to a nearby
site for treatment and disposal.
Low-maintenance technologies
are used for treatment and
disposal, including large soil
absorption systems or lagoons.
In either case, existing septic
tanks can be left in place to
pretreat the wastewater. Large
soil absorption systems are
often divided up into two or
three drainfields to allow
periodic resting of each and to
provide emergency backup.
Use of cluster systems
depends on sites suitable for
subsurface discharge or
nearby streams that can
accept lagoon effluents.
Centralized Collection and
Treatment
The most common methods of
wastewater collection are
conventional gravity, small-
diameter gravity, pressure, and
vacuum sewers. Topography,
depth to bedrock, depth to
groundwater, and housing
density are the major factors
that determine relative costs of
these types of sewers in a
particular community.
Conventional gravity sewers
are usually made of clay but
can also be made of plastic,
cast iron, concrete, or asbestos
cement. They are designed to
carry raw wastewater and,
therefore, are normally 8
inches in diameter or more to
avoid solids buildup and
clogging. A variation of
conventional gravity sewers is
small-diameter sewers. These
4- or 6-inch diameter sewers
can be made of the same
materials as conventional
sewers. Used with septic tanks
at each house to remove
coarse solids, small-diameter
sewers can be laid at slighter
grade and require fewer lift
stations than larger sewers
carrying raw sewage. Other
advantages of small-diameter
sewers include fewer
manholes, use of lower-cost
cleanouts in place of some
manholes, lower cost of the
smaller sized pipe, and less
chance of clogging.
The best system for your
area need not consist entirely
of one kind of treatment. A
scattering of clusters or
mounds for the worst problem
areas may accompany simple
upgrades or even no action.
This house-by-house mixing
and matching can drastically
cut costs.
Two types of pressure
sewers are available: grinder
pump pressure sewers and
septic tank effluent pump
(STEP) sewers. The grinder
pump does not use a septic
tank at each house as does the
STEP system. Both systems
transport wastewater under
pressure from small pumping
stations serving one or two
houses each to a treatment
facility or to an area where
gravity sewers are used.
Infiltration of groundwater
through cracks into
conventional sewers is not a
problem with these 1 - to 4-
inch diameter pressure
sewers. Other advantages of
pressurized sewer systems
include easier installation (a
downhill grade is not
necessary), and lower costs
than conventional sewers,
especially in areas of steep
slopes or shallow bedrock.
However, the lower cost of the
sewers is partially offset by
pumping units and electricity
costs. Density of development,
therefore, is a factor in
economic comparisons
between gravity and pressure
sewers.
Vacuum sewers have the
same advantages over
conventional sewers that
pressure sewers have. The
main difference between
vacuum sewers and pressure
sewers is that wastewater is
transported by a central
vacuum pump instead of many
pumps located at individual
residences. Neither pressure
sewers nor vacuum sewers
depend on gravity, so the
excavations to install them do
not have to be as deep and
wide as excavations for gravity
sewers. Therefore, detrimental
impacts of disturbing
streambeds and low-lying
wetlands during construction
can be more readily avoided.
Once the wastewater has
been collected, it can be
treated and discharged in
three ways: by land
application, by wetland
discharge, and by surface
water discharge.
Land application of large
flows consists of some form of
pretreatment followed by
discharge of the wastewater to
the surface of the soil. Rates
of application and whether the
treated effluent is recovered
vary depending on site
conditions.
If suitable wetlands—
marshes, peatlands, or
swamplands—exist near the
community, treated wastes
may be discharged into these
areas for more complete
treatment and natural
recycling of nutrients.
Sometimes artificial wetlands
are constructed for this
purpose.
Although wastewater may
be discharged to surface
waters, this option is often not
considered for lake areas
when such discharges are
likely to add to the nutrient
level of the lake. In some
instances, however, surface
water discharges are
necessary, such as when
continued use of on-site
systems and land application
have been shown to be
unfeasible. A wide range of
treatment methods are
possible before discharge to
streams or rivers.
22
-------
Chapter 5.
The Road Not Taken—An Introduction to
Community Wastewater Management
Why Do Anything?
This is really the $64,000
question. Why should your
community become involved in
wastewater management? You
can probably think of plenty of
good reasons to let sleeping
dogs lie: What does
community management
involve? I don't know anything
about wastewater manage-
ment, and neither do my
neighbors, so who's going to
do the managing? Why should
my neighbors follow the advice
of a community agency? And
why bother with management
anyway? Why don't we just let
the current situation go on?
After all, it isn't so bad, is it?
You will find the answers to
some of these questions in
this chapter. You'll learn what
a management agency does
and who actually serves in the
agency. But we should answer
the essential question of why
before you get into the details.
If your on-site system
affected water quality only on
your property and the health of
your family alone, the
community would not need to
become involved. The problem
of correcting these impacts
would be your problem, and no
one else in the community
would need to be concerned in
the repair or replacement
process. If you wanted to
reduce the health risks to your
family or threats to your water
quality, you would simply fix
your system.
However, on-site systems
can have off-site impacts. Your
failing system could be
affecting the water quality of
the lake used by the entire
community. Your neighbor's
system could be contaminating
the groundwater from which
you draw your drinking water.
As housing densities and
failure rates increase and
when sensitive water
resources become involved,
the problem of off-site impacts
becomes too serious to be
solved by individuals alone.
Some sort of supervisory
agency is needed to ensure
that the solutions to the
problems are carried out.
But community management
is not just a convenience.
Local governments are
obligated to protect the health
and welfare of its citizens and
the quality of their water
resources. Where on-site
systems are creating off-site
problems, the community is
obligated to solve these
problems.
There are several other
reasons why your community
should undertake the
management of its own
wastewater facilities. Consider
the fact that no one from
outside your community is as
familiar with local problems
and interests as you and your
neighbors are. Community
management is thus more
likely to be responsive to the
specific concerns of the
neighborhood Additionally,
community management can
avoid enforcement actions by
higher levels of government.
23
-------
What Does a
Community Manage-
ment Agency Do?
As your community considers
the management of its
wastewater treatment
systems, at some point you
and your neighbors will ask,
"How much management is
enough?" Generally,
management responsibilities
should increase in direct
relation to the density and the
number of problems
encountered with the
wastewater systems in the
community. Also, sensitive
water resources such as lakes
and groundwaters that are the
only source of drinking water
must be considered in the
planning of wastewater
treatment. The costs of
managing and the authority
given to the management
agency are flexible, and can be
matched to the severity of
what happens if management
is not sufficient.
Several management models
are discussed below to give
you an idea how community
management can work and
how responsibilities for
maintenance and repair are
handled in increasingly
problematic situations Keep in
mind that your management
program need not adhere to
any one model. It should be
designed to meet your
community's unique
requirements and be revised
as necessary based on periodic
performance reviews.
Regulatory Model
This is the management
approach presently in use in
most states and small
communities. It is suitable for
areas where community
obligation for the regulation of
private systems is low because
of low density of systems, few
problems with existing
systems, and/or lack of
sensitive water resources.
Such areas include rural land
areas where scattered
development, farms, and large
tract sudivisions predominate.
This type of program is usually
limited to management agency
approval of permits for septic
tank system construction,
inspection of system
installations, and
investigations of complaints
concerning failures of on-site
systems. It is distinguished
from the following model by its
lack of any routine inspections
of the system or monitoring of
their impacts on water quality.
Under this approach, the
homeowner is completely
liable for system operation and
maintenance, including
necessary system repairs. The
management agency does not
conduct routine inspections or
monitor system performance,
does not finance repairs, does
not consider the use of off-site
treatment, and does not permit
the use of experimental on-site
designs
Voluntary Participation Model
Some communities may have
limited areas of high density,
high failure rates, or sensitive
resources, any of which may
increase community
obligations for private systems.
Increased services are made
available to residents in these
problem areas who elect to
pay user fees for services
provided. In addition to the
management program outlined
under the Regulatory model,
the management agency
provides the services of
routine inspection and water
quality monitoring.
Homeowners are notified of
necessary repairs for their
systems, and the community
management agency offers
technical and possibly financial
assistance to make the repairs.
If a significant enough problem
area is identified, homeowners
could receive state or federal
funding for repair of their
systems. The community
management agency could
apply for and distribute the
funds to those homeowners
whose systems qualify for
assistance.
Under this model, the
homeowner retains both
responsibility for system
operation and maintenance
and liability for system repair.
The management agency's role
is to educate, provide technical
assistance and advise or
remind residents to maintain
their systems.
Universal Community
Management Model
As system density, failure rate,
and sensitivity of water
resources increase, community
obligations for managing
private systems increase so
that all on-site systems within
prescribed areas would be
included in a management
program. Depending on the
risk and consequences of
failures, the management
agency could assume
responsibility for system
operation and maintenance
and liability for system repairs.
This would insure swift
correction of serious problems
and, at the same time,
minimize the consequences of
homeowner negligence.
This level of management
may be seen as an insurance
policy. You would not buy it if
you do not need it. But if you
do, everyone covered would
have to pay their share. This
means that a fair and efficient
user charge system will be
needed (See Chapter 6).
24
-------
Multizone Management
Model
This approach is useful when
sections of a given community
have different wastewater and
management needs. For
example, sewers may serve
one area and on-site systems
serve other areas. Owing to
varying risks of failures, both
voluntary and universal
management zones may also
be present.
Under this approach, the
management agency must
develop specific programs for
each section of the
community. By so doing, the
agency can ensure that the
program meets each given
area's needs.
A possible objection to this
approach is the diversity of
skills that management agency
personnel may need. However,
there may be enough overlap
in skills so the agency staff
can be kept to a reasonable
number.
Under a multizone
management approach,
homeowners would be
responsible for paying annual
fees to support the
management services they
receive. Responsibility for
operation and maintenance
and liability for system failure
may vary within each zone.
Comprehensive Water Quality
Management Model
Where the sensitivity of water
resources is of the greatest
concern, prevention and
control of water pollution need
not be limited to monitoring of
wastewater facilities. The
management program in
communities with these
concerns may be based on
universal management of the
wastewater facilities and
expanded to include
identification and control of
other sources of water
pollution Responsibilities
under this expanded approach
could include:
• non-point source monitoring
and control,
• education of residents and
visitors about individual
pollution control policies,
costs, and benefits,
• inventory of the biological
resources of the lake and its
tributaries,
• research into the chemical,
physical, and biological
characteristics of the lake,
and
• coordination with other
local, state, and federal
agencies on pollution control
activities and funding
Communities with such a
high interest in the control of
water pollution are also likely
to assume direct responsibility
for system operation and
maintenance and liability for
correcting system failures.
Who Is the Manage-
ment Agency?
The management agency can
be made up of members from
a wide variety of public and
private sources Public sources
of management agency
personnel may include state,
regional, or local agencies and
nonprofit organizations; private
sources may include
homeowner associations and
private contractors
The community management
agency need not be a new
organization, nor need it be
solely devoted to the purpose
of wastewater management
People with the appropriate
skills and experience may
already be available in
agencies that have the
necessary authority to provide
public management services A
combination of agreements
among agencies, additional
training of existing personnel,
and hiring new people will
provide the basis of
management agencies in many
communities.
25
-------
Services Provided
The range of services that a
management agency can
perform varies greatly.
Common sense dictates that
the services chosen be only
those needed to fulfill
community obligations without
unnecessary regulation,
authorities, labor, or
investments. Although a few
services are essential to all
management programs, many
are optional, and it is left to
the community to decide
which to include in the
management program. Table 1
lists administrative, technical,
and planning services that a
community might select.
The services that the
management agency will
provide are determined to a
degree by the factors of risk
and liability. Risk refers to the
likelihood of system failure.
Liability involves acceptance of
responsibility for remedying
failure. These factors
ultimately affect who will pay
for system repairs. When the
management agency is set up,
an assessment of the risk of
future system failure should be
made, and assignment of
liability for repairs should be
agreed upon by the agency
and the community.
Where risks of failure are
high, the management agency
may assume full liability for
repair or replacement In this
case, the agency often
requires that owners
contribute to a reserve fund to
provide financing for repairs
and replacement
Where risks are low, each
homeowner may retain liability
for his or her own system,
making repairs as necessary.
Part and parcel of selecting
services is deciding how the
services should be performed
and who should perform them
Risk And Liability
Answering the how question
defines specific methods that
will be used to provide
services Consider the service
of water quality monitoring, for
example. How is water quality
monitoring to be performed?
Answering this question
involves decisions on whether
to include nonpoint source and
surface water monitoring, the
design of the groundwater and
other monitoring plans, the
development of the user
charge system that will pay for
the monitoring, and decisions
on financing the local share of
costs for this service.
TABLE 1.
Administrative
• Staffing
• Financial
• Permits
• Bonding
• Certification programs
• Service contract supervision
• Accept for public manage-
ment privately installed
facilities
• Interagency coordination
• Training programs
• Public education
• Enforcement
• Property/access acquisition
Technical
• System design
• Plan review
• Soils investigations
• System installation
• Routine inspection and
maintenance
• Septage collection and
disposal
• Pilot studies
• Flow reduction program
• Water quality monitoring
Planning
• Land use planning
• Sewer and water planning
Who performs these
services? Generally, three
groups of people can provide
the services that are selected:
• the public management
agency, which may get
assistance from regional and
state organizations,
• property owners or
occupants, and
• private organizations such as
contractors, consultants,
development companies,
private utilities, and private
community associations.
Some communities may
control services by providing
them directly, but others may
provide only those services
that the designated regulatory
body can provide (such as
issuing permits and
enforcement), and supervising
the services assigned to
owners or private
organizations. When the
community assigns service
responsibilities, it should make
sure that the designated
person or persons have the
necessary skills, financial
capabilities, and regulatory
authority to provide the
service. The community should
also consider the costs
required for different groups to
supply these services, as well
as the risks associated with
poor performance.
26
-------
The Problem of
Privacy
Although required by both
federal legislation and
common sense, local
management of on-site
systems raises concerns about
individual privacy and the
sanctity of private property.
When you relinquish authority
over your system to a
governing body, even if it is
composed of your neighbors,
you may feel that you have
lost control over part of your
property and that you will be
subjected to intrusions at the
whim of the management
agency. For this reason,
members of community
management agencies are
urged to exert their authority
tactfully and sparingly, with
the goal of balancing public
health and water quality needs
against any infringement on
privacy.
Possible violations of your
privacy from community
management of on-site
systems depends, as one
would expect, on the
performance of your on-site
system. If your system is
causing no problems and
meets current design
standards, short-term intrusion
would include a 1 - or 2-hour
interview and site inspection
during a sanitary survey and
possibly a return visit for well
water sampling. Continuing
intrusions would include
periodic (every 1 to 3 years)
site inspections by a surveyor,
routine septic tank pumping
every 2 to 5 years, and, for
lakeshore dwellings, possible
groundwater and surface
water monitoring along their
beaches. All these intrusions
can be minimized by careful
advanced notice and mutual
agreement on public entry
If your on-site system
requires repair, replacement,
or upgrading, intrusions
caused by detailed site
analysis and construction will
be roughly comparable to
laying out and installing house
sewers. Either could require
modification of interior
plumbing that may be
disruptive as well as annoying
For some on-site systems
needing repair, replacement,
or upgrading, continuing
intrusions will also be greater
than for properly designed and
operating systems or with
gravity sewers Continuing
intrusions will be related to
the complexity of the facilities
necessary to deal with site
limitations; the more complex
the facilities, the more
maintenance will be required
The Community
Management Agency
Wants You
One of our goals in preparing
this handbook is to get more
homeowners involved in the
wastewater management
process in their own
communities It makes sense
that you will weigh costs and
other decisions that affect your
family more carefully than
might a state or federal
official. Besides, you will be
involved in the process
whether you want to be or not
if your management agency
requires you to replace, repair,
or upgrade your system. Why
not have a hand in
determining whether such
expenditures are necessary or
not?
You can contribute to the
process by joining your
neighbors in setting up a
homeowners' advisory
committee that can keep the
management agency aware of
your concerns and your
opinions on the program of
wastewater management in
your community You might
even convince the people
setting up the management
agency to formalize the role of
your homeowners' advisory
committee The committee
could act as an arbiter
between the agency staff and
homeowners. It could also
work like a zoning appeals
board to ensure that rules and
regulations don't impede
acceptable solutions.
27
-------
Chapter 6.
Is It Worth It?
By this time, you are ready to
consider the thorny issue of
costs.
When you think about the
costs of wastewater treatment
alternatives, your immediate
question will likely be, How
much am I going to have to
pay for decent wastewater
management in my com-
munity? But we want to
encourage you to consider the
costs of wastewater treatment
in broader terms. It is certainly
important to understand the
concept of cost-effectiveness
and important to know who
might pay for the systems and
how the money can be raised.
But it is equally important for
you to understand the other
costs related to wastewater
treatment: the costs to the
environment if you choose
some alternatives and the
costs to your community in
development potential if you
choose other alternatives. You
may not be able to measure
these costs in a tangible way,
as you can measure the
dollars-and-cents costs of
paying for a new septic tank.
But as an informed and
interested resident of the
community, you need to look
at all the costs of the systems
you are considering.
Cost-Effectiveness of
Alternatives
What is cost-effectiveness?
The term implies making the
most effective use of your
money.
In theory, cost-effectiveness
is a measure of all monetary,
environmental and social costs
of achieving a specified goal. In
practice, many environmental
and social costs cannot be
reduced to dollars and cents, so
calculations of cost-
effectiveness depend heavily
on estimating monetary costs.
Then environmental and social
impacts are considered in
selecting among the least
costly alternatives that meet
specified goals.
All of the alternatives that
have been discussed in this
handbook have monetary costs
that fall into one of three main
categories: present capital,
future capital, and annual. In
addition, at the end of the
period over which costs are
compared, the facilities will
have some worth for their
continued use—this is called
salvage value. Present capital
includes expenses required to
get the project built in the first
place and may include, besides
construction, engineering and
legal fees, interest on a
construction loan and costs of
establishing a management
agency, among others. Future
capital includes construction
and related costs of new
facilities needed to upgrade
existing facilities or to provide
capacity for more users. Both
present and future capital
costs will go for facilities that
may have some salvage value
at the end of the planning
period. Annual costs include
labor, energy, transportation,
replacement parts, chemicals,
supplies and other goods and
services necessary to make a
wastewater management
alternative work the way it is
intended.
Because money has time
value (put it in a bank at 6
percent and after a period of
time, you have more money),
we cannot just add up all of
the dollars expended over the
planning period. So let's see
how the present capital, future
capital and annual costs of on-
site and centralized
alternatives differ, then look at
some overall comparisons.
• Present capital
a. Centralized facilities
require a large capital
outlay at the beginning
of a wastewater facilities
project. Typically, a large
portion of all the money
spent over a 20-year
period for new
centralized systems will
be for the initial design
and construction.
b. Upgrading and repairing
on-site systems will
involve a much smaller
part of the long-term
costs. Since not all on-
site systems will require
funds for construction,
the average capital cost
will usually be a fraction
of the cost of centralized
facilities per house.
• Future capital costs
a. The major capital
investments for
centralized facilities are
made at the beginning of
the project. After start-
up, capital improvements
will usually consist of
extending sewer lines.
Reserve capacity for
increases in flow are
built into the pipes and
tanks. The expense for
population growth are
already committed
whether growth occurs
or not.
b. Future capital expenses
for on-site systems will
be for replacing systems
that fail and for building
systems to serve new
homes and businesses.
Reserve capacity for
development is not built
into the system, so
increases in future
capital expenses will be
directly related to
growth.
Annual costs
a. After the centralized
system begins operation,
costs for operation and
maintenance of sewers,
pumping stations and
treatment facilities rise
slightly as flows increase
and the facilities become
older.
b. Maintenance and
management costs can
vary widely from one on-
site system to another.
The amount of electrical
or mechanical
components required will
partly determine
operation and
maintenance costs. Also,
the effort required for
monitoring, inspection,
and administration will
cost money. Cost
analyses for several rural
lake communities
indicate that community-
wide operation and
maintenance costs will
be comparable with or
less than centralized
facilities. Costs for
individual houses, such
as those on holding
tanks, could be
substantially higher than
the average.
28
-------
10.000-1
UJ
tt
O
Q
^
I
I-
CC
O
6,000-
4.000-
2.000-
FIQURE A
50% GROWTH
^CENTRALIZED
SEWER
60% UPGRADE1
ON-SITE
10% UPGRADE
ON-SITE
38 76 113 160
HOUSES/MILE OF COLLECTOR SEWER
UJ
a>
3
O
X
•«*
to
a:
O
a
X
t-
oc
O
*
t-
z
uj
CO
Ul
-------
Local Economics
Once you accept the fact that
no wastewater treatment is
free, despite various federal
and state subsidies, you need
to know what costs you may
have to pay and how they
might be charged. You also
need to know what costs your
community may be liable for
and how it can finance its
share of total costs. These
aspects of the costs of
wastewater systems to you
and your community are
detailed in the following
sections.
Homeowners' Costs
You are likely to encounter
some or all of these costs:
• Private capital costs. These
are the costs that you, the
user, will have to pay for
items related to a
wastewater treatment
project, such as house
sewers, necessary plumbing
modifications, on-site
systems for new housing,
and flow-reduction devices.
Your community is not
involved in the payment of
these costs.
• Public capital costs. These
costs include interest on
debt incurred during the
project, local share of initial
capital costs, and reserve
fund (see below) costs. Your
community generally pays
these costs by charging
users of the systems for
service. (User charge
systems are discussed later
in this section.) These costs
may also be charged at the
beginning of the project in
the form of hookup fees or
frontage fees. For centralized
facilities and cluster
systems, the community can
recover capital costs by
charging both present and
future users for services, but
public capital costs for on-
site systems are recovered
from present users only.
HYPOTHETICAL CASH FLOW COMPARISON BETWEEN USE OF
ON-SITE SYSTEMS VS. CONSTRUCTION OF NEW SEWERS
SEWERS
20
ON-SITE
PRIVATE
CAPITAL
People moving into a
community and building new
on-site systems will have to
pay the full cost themselves.
Operation and maintenance
costs. These costs are
determined by several
factors. If your community
has received federal grant
money to construct new
systems, operation and
maintenance costs must be
allocated on the basis of
each user's proportionate
use of the system. For
centralized systems,
proportionate use can be
measured by wastewater
strength or flow since
operation and maintenance
costs are closely related to
these wastewater
characteristics. However,
proportionate use for on-site
and small-scale systems is
more closely tied to services
provided by a management
agency.
Reserve fund. The reserve
fund is a kind of insurance
policy to cover future costs
of major equipment
replacement, sewer
extensions or repair of failed
on-site systems. For
communities leaning heavily
to on-site systems, the
reserve fund can be used to
replace systems that may
fail in the future. This fund
reflects the liability a
community is willing to
assume for each type of
system used. If, for example,
your community wants to
assume no liability for future
failures of wastewater
systems, a reserve fund is
not necessary. Payments
into the reserve fund will
generally be low when the
failure rate for systems is
low; conversely, higher
payments are required for
communities with relatively
high failure rates.
Homeowners with high-risk
systems might be charged
higher reserve fund
assessments that those with
low-risk systems.
How many of these costs
and how much you will have
to pay depend on your
community's specific situation
and the status of wastewater
treatment systems in your
area. When you do pay them,
all but the private capital costs
may be levied in the form of
user charges,.
30
-------
User Charges
We have talked about user
charges without really
explaining what they are and
how they're set up. This is the
point to go into some detail
about them.
Simply put, user charges are
fees that you pay to a
wastewater management
agency for services provided.
These charges can include
your share of the costs for
administration, operation and
maintenance, monitoring by
management agency experts,
and the recovery of local public
costs, mentioned in the
previous section.
Setting up a user charge
system requires careful
planning to make sure that the
charge system is both fair and
efficient. Obviously, the fairest
way to charge users would be
on an individual basis—you
pay for precisely the amount of
service you receive. But
keeping track of each person's
charges would create
bookkeeping chores that small
communities may not be
equipped to handle.
If most users receive roughly
the same benefits from the
wastewater management
program, then an average
charge may be the fairest and
most efficient way to allocate
costs. Average costs are also
the easiest to calculate.
A third alternative is to
establish specific groups or
classes of users on the basis
of factors such as flow, type of
technology, or location. These
groups can then be charged
amounts proportionate to the
equipment and services they
need. This alternative works
well when a community has a
mix of wastewater systems,
because costs for equipment
and services can vary
significantly according to the
type of system Charging
according to what type of
system you have can prevent
the bad feelings that may arise
when users with low-cost
systems have to subsidize
users with high-cost systems.
Charging by user class does,
however, require the
community to spend more time
and effort on bookkeeping than
it would to average costs
among all users.
Your Community's Role in
Financing
Part of the local economic
situation is your community's
fiscal capability to undertake a
wastewater treatment
program. Even if the
community is counting on
receiving federal funds to help
finance the program, it still
must demonstrate that it has
the necessary financial
resources to ensure adequate
construction, operation, and
maintenance of the proposed
facilities.
The fiscal capability of a
community is determined by
its ability to pay for and
maintain wastewater facilities.
First, the community must
acquire funds to meet the local
share of the capital costs of
the wastewater facilities. This
is generally accomplished
through the use of either
general obligation or revenue
bonds. Second, the community
must be able to bear the total
annual debt service costs
(principal and interest
payments on the bonds) and
operation and maintenance
costs. Finance officers who
judge a community's fiscal
capability usually look at factors
such as property values,
median family income,
community growth character-
istics, and the revenues,
expenditures, assets, and total
outstanding indebtedness of
the local government.
To some extent, your
community's role in financing
wastewater facilities depends
on what type of community it
is and how long it has been in
existence. Newly established
special purpose districts that
do not have property taxing
authority will have difficulty
raising funds to meet costs.
Such districts also will not be
able to issue general obligation
bonds and will have to pay a
higher rate of interest on debt.
And new districts, whether or
not they have taxing authority,
will have no record to prove
how reliably they discharge
their debts. They are therefore
likely to face higher interest
rates.
Your community can get
help in planning its financial
role by retaining the services
of a bond attorney. A bond
attorney can assist your
community in assessing its
financial resources and can
recommend the types of
financing available to the
community
31
-------
Environmental
Impacts
If you and your neighbors
value the natural beauty of
your community, the high
productivity of your farmlands,
or the diversity of wildlife in
your forests and streams, the
costs to the environment of
both on-site and centralized
systems will be a major
concern for your community.
Understanding how
wastewater treatment systems
affect the environment can
guide you in your choice of the
least costly facility
Water Quality Impacts
As you read earlier, soil
absorption systems discharge
to the groundwater This will
cause no problems as long as
the systems are working
properly to prevent
contaminants from reaching
water supplies. If the soil
underlying soil absorption
systems doesn't provide
thorough filtration, then
contamination of groundwater
by bacteria may result Even if
the systems are in good repair,
nitrate buildup in the
groundwater can occur,
resulting in a possible health
hazard to pregnant women
and infants
Moreover, groundwater may
be contaminated by viruses
and toxic substances, but more
information is needed on this
possible health and water
quality impact because the
extent and effect of such
contamination are at present
not defined.
Surface Water Impacts
Lakes and rivers may be
affected by effluents from both
on-site and centralized
treatment systems.
On-site systems can
contribute both bacterial and
nutrient loads to surface
waters Bacterial
contamination is most likely to
result from direct discharges
and runoff from surface
malfunctions, both of which
problems can be resolved by
careful management programs
Bacterial contamination may
also occur if on-site systems
are situated in sandy or
gravelly soils very near
lakeshores or streams. Excess
nutrients can stimulate local
plant growth and increase the
overall potential for excessive
plant growth in surface
waters. But nutrient loads
from on-site systems are
generally small compared with
total nutrient loads Small
waste flows management can
often reduce nutrient loadings
from on-site systems
If wastes from centralized
treatment plants are
discharged to surface waters,
they can also boost nutrient
levels, with the same impacts
as described above Because
centralized discharges are
much larger and not
necessarily better treated, their
impacts on aquatic plant
growth and on bacterial quality
can be signigicantly greater
than dispersed individual
systems
Environmentally Sensitive
Areas
Environmentally sensitive
areas are cultural or natural
resources that are particularly
sensitive to damage caused by
wastewater facility
construction or development.
Examples are floodplains,
wetlands, prime agricultural
lands, aquifer recharge areas,
steep slopes, habitat for rare
and endangered species, and
historical and archaeological
sites Damage to them may
consist of the disruption of
delicate ecological balances,
the loss of valuable farmland,
or disturbance of significant
historical areas.
Floodplains, wetlands, and
steep slopes are generally
protected by on-site sanitary
code prohibitions However,
cluster systems and sewers
can overcome natural
constraints to development in
such areas, opening a way for
permanent environmental
damage Innovative on-site
systems can also overcome
site limitations and may permit
development in sensitive
areas, although the degree of
impact would probably be less
than for centralized systems
Unless protective legislation
is enacted, many irreplaceable
cultural resources and natural
areas can be damaged or
destroyed because of
development made possible by
centralized wastewater
treatment and some of the
innovative on-site and small-
scale systems The loss of
natural resources, farmlands,
wildlife refuges, and other
sensitive areas can be a stiff
price to pay in return for
wastewater treatment
32
-------
Development
What are the costs of
development?
You can really rephrase this
question in two ways, in terms
of wastewater treatment
facilities: How much will we
have to pay for the kind of
systems that will enable our
community to develop as we
want? What will development
cost us in social and
environmental impacts? And to
these questions we can add
another: Is development worth
the combined costs of systems
and impacts?
To answer the questions
requires you and your
community to agree on
development objectives. Only if
you know what your
development goals are can you
decide the relative costs of
systems.
Community managed on-site
system plans may affect the
amount, rate, and density of
development in communities
within a reasonable
commuting distance of
employment centers. Building
sites suitable for on-site
systems may be getting scarce
in and near your community. If
so, committing to continued
use of on-site systems may
place serious constraints on
new development, preventing
your community from taking
advantage of its proximity to
the employment center.
Cluster systems that
discharge off-site provide one
means of creating more
building sites. Cluster systems
may therefore permit
higher density residential
development. These systems
may also permit infilling within
existing development areas,
resulting in loss of open space
buffers between existing
development. Growth may
extend into areas having
natural features unsuitable for
residential development.
The argument about the
costs of development is
obviously double-edged. If you
want development in your
community, then you may
believe that more costly
centralized systems are worth
every penny. If development in
your community is not an
important issue or if you see
that the additional revenues
from development are
substantially offset by the
additional demands, then you
may decide that these
expensive systems are not
worthwhile. Ultimately, the
question of whether the costs
associated with development
are worth paying must be
answered by each community.
What's It Worth to
Whom?
We have been skirting this
issue throughout this chapter,
but the time has come to
consider that one person's
meat is another's poison.
While you are milling over the
relative costs of systems and
of financial, environmental,
and developmental impacts,
you must remember that other
members of your community
may have very different
opinions about what is best for
the community. Suppose you
are all for replacement of
poorly performing systems. Do
you think the necessary
investment will seem
worthwhile to the summer
people down the road who
have always managed
perfectly well with a holding
tank?
Let's turn that example
around and look at it a
different way. Perhaps you are
worried that their holding tank
is polluting your drinking
water. In that case, do you
think it's worth it to you to see
that the system is managed
properly?
What is effective wastewater
management worth to you?
And how can you be certain
that the best interests of all
the community's residents are
being met?
If your answer to the first
question is that properly
functioning wastewater
systems are worth quite a lot
to you and others in your
community, then you are ready
for the last step of facilities
planning, laying out the actual
plans for new systems. And in
the course of this planning,
you can answer the second
question by accepting or
rejecting alternatives that
serve only certain members of
the community at the expense
of other members.
To find out how facilities
planning works, read on.
33
-------
Chapter 7.
Facilities Planning
We have been talking about
many of the steps involved in
facilities planning in Chapters
3 through 6. Needs
documentation, systems
selection, management agency
development, environmental
impact assessment and cost
analyses are all part of the
facilities planning process. In
this chapter, we will put them
together in sequence along
with other aspects of facilities
planning so that you will have
an idea how the process
works. When your community
undertakes the facilities
planning process, you will
understand what the planners
are doing.
Defining The Planning
Area
The first step in facilities
planning is to consider what
areas will be included in the
plan. It is often better to work
with a larger area than a
smaller one, because
information on a county, for
example, may be more readily
available than information on
half a township. Also, if
facilities must be purchased, it
is more economical to buy a
large number than a few.
When deciding on planning
area boundaries, these factors
are also considered:
« local growth and
development objectives,
• wastewater treatment
needs,
« housing density and known
public health problems,
• sensitivity of local water
resources to on-site system
failure,
• availability of data (both
socioeconomic and
environmental), and
• cooperation of local
municipalities.
For some communities it will
already be clear that an
improved management
program for private systems is
needed. The area presently
covered by the likely
management agency might be
an additional criteria for
planning area boundaries.
Demography
An important part of facilities
planning is considering the
demography of your
community, that is, the
characteristics of the people
who are going to be served
now and in the future.
Demographic studies
determine these
characteristics. Once the
planners have a statistical
profile of a specific population,
they can make assumptions
about future growth of that
population.
Demographic studies
undertaken for facilities
planning in rural lake
communities will concentrate
on gathering information on
seasonal versus permanent
populations, population
projections, and economic
characteristics of residents.
But it should be noted at the
outset that published
information may be limited for
rural areas, so demographic
studies may require surveys
and interviews that would not
be necessary in urban
communities.
Population Projections
Population projections are
essential to planning
wastewater facilities expected
to accommodate possible growth
in a community. Where the
information base is strong,
demographic studies can rely
on projection models based on
various factors associated with
population growth. However,
as mentioned earlier,
population information in rural
areas is not as accurate as in
urban areas. Thus, projections
of growth for small populations
in rural areas are determined
as much by educated guesses as
by projection models. The
community should be
concerned about the
reasonableness of the
projection rather than striving
for absolute accuracy. A
reasonable projection of
growth is important because
the projection will influence
cost-effectiveness comparisons
between sewering and
nonsewering options. For
example, if a reasonable
projection estimates that the
population of your community
will skyrocket over the next
few years, sewering will be
relatively more cost-effective
compared to on-site upgrading
than if the population is
projected to be stable. But if
you build the expensive system
and no one shows up to help
pay for it, you may be stuck
with high costs and agitated
neighbors.
65
34
55
Z
o
D
0.
Q. 35
25
1975 1980
1985
1990 1995
2000
-------
Seasonal Versus Permanent
Population
Obtaining correct figures for
seasonal and permanent
population is a recurring
problem in rural areas
surrounding natural
receational resources, such as
a lake, mountains, or a river
You can understand that an
accurate estimation of
population levels within a
proposed wastewater
management service area is
important in choosing the
design of the systems and
evaluating possible impacts
Most published population
information, however, does not
include data on seasonal
residents.
There is no straightforward
or easy method of determining
the percentage of the
population that is seasonal
House-to-house surveys
provide the most reliable
figures, but are also expensive
and time-consuming. However,
if house-to-house surveys are
needed for other purposes
anyway (such as sanitary
surveys), then the additional
cost of obtaining population
and occupancy information
would be negligible
Local utilities may be willing
to indicate which dwelling
units are receiving various
utility services on a year-round
basis. The use of this
information eliminates the
need for house-to-house
surveys except for some
possible follow-up or cross-
checking surveys
If there are resorts or tourist
facilities in the community,
these should be contacted for
occupancy rates.
Another useful method is to
use property tax rolls, which
indicate the home address of
the owner of each residence.
This then tells you how many
homes are occupied by their
owners Dwellings that are not
owner occupied may be
presumed to be rented to
seasonal or permanent
residents or occupied
seasonally by the owner. In
combination with other
methods, this can provide a
fairly accurate figure on the
seasonal and permanent
population of a given
community.
Economic Characteristics of
Residents
Economic information about
residents is needed to help
facilities planners set
expenditure limits for proposed
systems. Economic information
is available from several
sources, including economic
censuses, state government
agencies, regional planning
agencies, and municipal and
county planning departments
Other sources of information
are property tax rolls, local real
estate agents, homeowner
associations, chambers of
commerce, utilities, and other
community groups
The types of information that
will be valuable for facilities
planning are per capita
income, employment levels,
commercial and industrial
statistics, and property values.
Joint Land Use and
Wastewater Planning
You have read about some
aspects of land use in previous
chapters that discussed
development problems. To
anticipate and possibly
minimize the impacts that
might result from development
in unsuitable or
environmentally sensitive
areas, your community should
consider land use planning
before or at the same time as
wastewater facilities planning
Land use planning at this
stage should consider the
suitability of the area for
development, define
community development goals,
and specify standards that
wastewater systems must
meet to reduce possible
impacts of both wastewater
facilities construction and
associated residential
development.
Needs Documentation
and Alternatives
Development
Chapters 3 and 4 of this
handbook have already
covered both of these steps in
some detail The key points to
review are these:
• Establish, with proof, that
your community does indeed
have a need for some form
of action, whether that
means replacement or
upgrading of existing on-site
systems or construction of
new centralized systems
The methodology of
documenting need is
summarized in Chapter 3
• Consider the alternatives.
Available technologies are
summarized in Chapter 4.
Alternatives development
includes analysis of the cost-
effectiveness of each
alternative. The several
types of costs that are
considered in this analysis
are discussed in Chapter 6
35
-------
Environmental Impact
Analysis
Needs documentation studies
will reveal valuable
information on your local
environment and how it
responds to the stresses of on-
site wastewater disposal. The
understanding that comes with
those studies will also improve
the facilities planner's
judgement in developing and
comparing small-scale and
centralized alternatives.
Before the environmental
impact analysis is complete,
the planner needs to know
what other cultural and
environmental resources are
present. Often, the citizens in
a community will have
information on these
resources, information that
does not appear in the
published references the
planner uses. Help yourself by
pointing out the wildlife areas,
historic sites, Indian sites,
scenic areas, fishing grounds,
farmlands and recreational
areas that are important to
you. Try to do this before the
alternatives are developed and
the reports are presented to
the public.
Read the assessment of
environmental impacts
included in the facilities plan.
If cultural or environmental
features important to you are
not considered to your
satisfaction, discuss your
concern with your local
officials in charge of the
planning. You may find that
there is no threat to the things
you hold dear or you may find
that there is a threat that was
not realized but that there are
ways to minimize possible
damage. But do not just sit it
out expecting someone else to
save the things you want
saved.
Financial Analysis
The accuracy of cost estimates
made during planning is
subject to many changing
factors such as interest rates,
price competition between
construction contractors, final
design specifications and, if
not yet completed, detailed site
analysis for on-site upgrading
alternatives.
Nevertheless, the ultimate
success of any alternative
relies on your community's
ability to continue paying the
necessary costs of making it
work as planned. So the
financial analyses discussed in
Chapter 6, homeowners
cost estimates, initial user
charge system development,
and community fiscal
capabilities, should be
completed before final
decisions are made on which
alternative is best.
Public Participation
You may count yourself
fortunate, in a way, because
you have the opportunity to
make your voice heard in the
plans for the future of your
community. In order to be sure
that your concerns, and those
of your neighbors, are
understood and considered by
local officials and decision
makers, you and your
neighbors might want to form
a citizens' advisory committee
when your community first
begins to deal with its
wastewater management
problems. Such a committee
can represent homeowners'
opinions and concerns,
providing valuable information
and guidance during the
preliminary problem-solving
stages.
Later in the actual facilities
planning process, you will
have further opportunities to
contribute your ideas. You can
participate at the following
points in the process:
• During sanitary surveys.
Each on-site sanitary
inspection includes an
interview. At this point you
can learn about the project
and discuss your concerns
about it with knowledgeable
project personnel.
• During alternatives
selection. Your major
opportunity to share your
opinions on facilities will
likely be at public hearings
conducted to review facilities
plans. This is the point to
ask pertinent questions
about costs and impacts, and
to reassure yourself that the
planners are proposing the
least expensive facilities that
will provide adequate
treatment.
• After the planning is over, if
you want to be involved
more directly in the design
and work of the community
management agency, you
and your community
members could set up a
sanitary review board. This
board can ensure that the
agency's technical and
economic decisions meet
with the approval of other
citizens. The sanitary review
board can reflect citizens'
interests, even to the point
of arbitrating between
citizens and the
management agency over
disputed decisions.
• Finally, if you are very
committed to the goal of
sensible wastewater
management in your
community, you may want to
become a member of the
community management
agency.
Alternative Selection
This is what the entire
planning process is about,
selecting the best overall
means of wastewater
management. If the planning
was thorough and objective,
this final step can be
conclusive and widely
supported by the people it
affects.
36
-------
Chapter 8.
Help—Extending Your Resources
As a concerned citizen, you
have read through this
handbook picking up ideas
that, we hope, will help you to
realize your personal interests
and your community's
interests in good wastewater
management. If you feel better
equipped to get involved, we
have done our job.
Additional resources that
you can use to achieve good
wastewater management are
discussed in this last chapter.
They include funding from
state and federal resources
and information from
professionals in your state and
from the literature.
Federal Funding
The Construction Grants
Program
The Construction Grants
Program of the U.S.
Environmental Protection
Agency provides funds to pay a
portion of the capital costs of
eligible municipal wastewater
treatment systems. At present,
the Construction Grants
Program will provide 75 or 85
percent funding toward
construction of wastewater
treatment facilities that comply
with the Environmental
Protection Agency's rules and
regulations.
These regulations reflect the
concern of many federal and
state regulatory people that
small communities were being
made to pay high costs for
systems they did not really
need. Thus, the Construction
Grants Program stresses cost-
effective choices and urges the
consideration of alternative
systems in the facilities
planning process by funding
85 percent of their
construction.
The special problems of
small communities were
considered in the design of the
Construction Grants Program,
resulting in guidelines
intended to respond to their
needs. Some of these
guidelines are:
• set-aside funds for small
communities,
• increased funding for
innovative and alternative
technologies,
• increased funding for
individual systems,
• loans for Step 1 and Step 2,
• state management
assistance, and
• public participation.
Because these policies may
affect your community's ability
to qualify for funds, each is
briefly discussed below.
Set-Aside of Funds for Small
Communities
Each state is given a specific
sum of money for funding the
federal share of wastewater
facilities. Under the
Construction Grants Program,
4 percent of the total funds
given to rural states must be
set aside to fund alternative
technologies. Alternative
technologies are defined in
this case as systems designed
to conserve, reclaim or reuse
water, recover energy, recycle
resources, or reduce costs.
On-site systems and small-
scale off-site systems are
alternative technologies. Since
these funds will be given to
other states if they are not
spent, rural states have an
incentive to fund such projects
and to encourage planning
that could result in such
projects.
Funding for Innovative and
Alternative Technologies
Innovative technologies are
defined the same way as
alternative technologies, with
the exception that alternative
technologies are proven and
innovative technologies are not
fully proven. The U.S.
Congress is interested in
promoting use of these
systems. To do this, the
Construction Grants Program
provides up to 85 percent of
the capital costs of alternative
or innovative systems, rather
than the standard 75 percent
for conventional sewers and
treatment plants.
Funding for Individual
Systems
The Program will provide funds
for upgrading or replacing
privately-owned treatment
systems that serve one or
more existing households,
where new systems will
correct existing water pollution
or public health problems.
Some strings are attached to
these funds: Groundwater
monitoring is required; a
management agency must
ensure that the systems are
properly operated and
maintained; the system must
be cost-effective; and the
funds can be used only for
households or commercial
establishments that were in
existence on December 31,
1977.
Loans for Step 1 and Step 2
The 1981 Amendments to the
Clean Water Act delay
Program funding of Step 1
planning and Step 2 design
work until the construction
grant is made at the beginning
of Step 3. An exception is
made for small communities
that need financial assistance
in order to prepare Steps 1
and 2. The states can loan
such communities program
funds for this purpose.
State Management
Assistance
Under the Program, states are
allowed to spend 4 percent or
$400,000, whichever is
greater, of their allotment on
state management assistance
to help administer the
Program. This amount may be
increased to account for state
management of Construction
Grants for small communities.
Public Participation
The Construction Grants
Program specifically requires
public participation in the
planning of wastewater
facilities that it funds: A public
hearing must be held on all
projects before an alternative
is selected, and the planning
board must provide free access
to all important documents
associated with the plan.
These requirements will
ensure that no significant
decisions are made without
the knowledge of the
interested public and that the
public will understand official
programs and the proposed
actions.
Other Sources of Federal
Funding
Besides the Construction
Grants Program, other sources
of federal funding may provide
help for your community. You
can investigate funding from:
• the Farmer's Home
Administration (FmHA) of
the Department of
Agriculture, and
• the Community Block Grants
Program of the Department
of Housing and Urban
Development.
Some of these funds can be
used for the local share of
projects eligible for
Environmental Protection
Agency funding. Others, such
as funds from the FmHA
Housing Progam, may help
make the local costs more
affordable for low-income
residents in the community.
37
-------
Glossary
State Funding
Most states have grant
programs for wastewater
facilities that supplement
federal programs. These
programs can be used to fund
worthwhile projects that may
not for some reason qualify for
Construction Grants funds.
In addition to providing
funds, state and regional
agencies can provide
management assistance to
communities that may
encounter problems in dealing
with the Construction Grants
Program. Such management
assistance may range from
providing technical assistance
to assuming full management
responsibility for a
community's Construction
Grant.
State agencies responsible
for administering the
Construction Grants program
should be contacted for
information on current funding
and management assistance
policies.
Assistance—
Who to Contact
If you are interested in your
own on-site system or one on
a property you're thinking of
buying, and you want to know
more about the soils, the
design of the system or past
problems, contact the local or
district health department.
Look in your telephone book
under county or state listings.
The sanitarian who best knows
the area may be able to find
old permits or repair records;
he'll know about the local
soils; and he may even have
worked with that system.
Calling the local contractors
who install on-site systems or
who pump septic tanks may
also turn up some specific
information about the system
you're concerned with. Look in
your local Yellow Pages under
"Septic Tanks."
If you are thinking of buying
a lot and building a new house
and on-site system, by all
means contact the health
department and apply for a
permit before you buy. If a
standard septic tank-soil
absorption system won't work,
ask whether water conserva-
tion or alternative system
designs might overcome site
limitations and how to get
approval for them.
Local officials may be more
interested in community
management, funds for
facilities construction, and
their obligation to protect the
public health and water
quality. In coordination with
your health department and
public works directors, your
state health department and
water pollution control
agencies should be contacted
for information. Do keep in
mind that many of the
technologies and wastewater
management methods
summarized in this Handbook
are new—your state personnel
may not have all the answers
for you. But then your
community might be just the
place where they want to start
trying the new solutions.
Whatever your individual or
local concerns, you may wish
to learn about the research
and training programs that are
sponsored by organizations
such as the U.S.
Environmental Protection
Agency, the National
Sanitation Foundation, the
National Environmental Health
Association and the American
Society of Agricultural
Engineers. The Alternative and
Innovative Technology
coordinators in each U.S. EPA
Region can tell you what is
going on. In U.S. EPA, Region
V, contact:
Mr. Al Krause
U.S. EPA, Region V
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, IL 60604
312/353-2126
Air-Assisted Toilets—A low-
flow, water flushed toilet
which discharges to a small
chamber. The wastes are then
evacuated from the chamber to
a house sewer, holding tank or
septic tank by a surge of
compressed air.
Alternative technologies-
Types of wastewater facilities
that are fully proven and that
reclaim and reuse water,
productively recycle waste-
water constituents, eliminate
the discharge of pollutants, or
recover energy.
Annual costs—Continuous or
recurring expenses needed to
make wastewater facilities
work as intended. These are
included in economic analyses
as annual costs.
Black water—Wastewater
from water-flushed toilets.
Cesspools—Leaching pits
dug in the soil, usually lined
with stone, blocks or wood,
into which raw sewage
discharges.
Chemical toilets—Toilets
which use chemicals to trans-
port, store, deodorize or treat
human wastes. They are
usually provided with a storage
tank or chamber which
requires periodic emptying.
Clogging mat—The biological
growth on and in the soil that
limits the flow of water from a
soil absorption system.
Cluster systems—Wastewater
facilities serving two or more
buildings using small-scale
collection, treatment and
disposal technologies.
Composting toilets—Toilets
that do not use water but that
rely on aerobic biological
activity and the heat from that
activity to stabilize and
dehydrate human waste and
sometimes kitchen refuse. The
humus generated in a well-
operated composting toilet may
be recycled on soil.
Cost-effectiveness—A
measure of the economic,
environmental, social and
institutional costs of an
alternative. The alternative is
most cost-effective that meets
water quality objectives at the
lowest present-worth cost
without overriding adverse
impacts.
38
-------
Curtain drains—A trench with
drain tile at the bottom and
partially or wholly filled with
gravel, designed to intercept
groundwater and to transport
it away from some structure or
facility such as a soil absorp-
tion system.
Demography—The statistical
study of human populations.
Detailed site analysis—The
sequence of investigations and
decisions made to determine
the causes of problems with
existing on-site systems and to
develop information for
selecting appropriate repairs,
replacements or upgrading.
Economy of scale—The
economic phenomena that the
unit costs of goods and
services often decrease as
their production or delivery
increase.
Effluent—Wastewater flowing
out of a collection, treatment
or disposal facility.
Environmentally sensitive
areas—Biological, agricultural,
geological or cultural
resources that are subject to
degradation or destruction by
man's activities.
Eutrophication—The enrich-
ment of bodies of water by
dissolved nutrients, resulting in
over-production of plant life,
seasonal stress from lowered
oxygen concentrations and,
ultimately, the filling in of the
water body by sediments and
organic material.
Future capital—Significant
construction expenses
expected after the initial year
of operation.
General obligation bonds—
Municipal bonds backed by the
property tax base of a
community.
Holding tank—A large
concrete, metal, fiberglass or
plastic tank used to store
wastewater until it can be
hauled away.
Impermeable soil—Horizons or
layers of soil through which
water flows away slowly or not
at all.
Incinerating toilets—Toilets
that do not use water but that
convert human wastes to ash
and vapor using heat from a
gas flame or high temperature
eletric heater.
Innovative technologies-
Types of wastewater facilities
that have been tested on a
small scale but are not fully
proven. They offer potential to
reclaim and reuse water,
productively recycle waste-
water constituents, eliminate
the discharge of pollutants, or
recover energy.
Land use planning—The
establishment of goals, policies
and procedures for the
accommodation of increased
urban use of land.
Liability—As used here, the
obligation to pay for and
implement remedies for the
failure of wastewater facilities.
Methemoglobinemia—Nitrate
poisoning of infants caused by
excessive nitrate concentra-
tions in formula or water.
Needs documentation—The
collection and analysis of on-
site system performance
information in sufficient detail
to decide whether sewering is
necessary or not.
Non-point sources—Dispersed
sources of pollutants that are
not controllable by collection
and treatment.
Nutrient budget—An
accounting of the annual load
of nitrogen or phosphorus to a
lake as generated by major
point and non-point sources.
Nutrient load—The mass of
phosphorus or nitrogen
discharged from a source or
the total mass discharged to a
lake or stream within a
specified time period, usually
a year. Usually expressed as
pounds per year (Ib/yr) or kilo-
grams per year (kg/yr).
Operation and maintenance—
Activities required to make
wastewater facilities function
as intended.
Plumbing backups—
Inadequate drainage of waste-
water from a building's
plumbing due to clogging
within the plumbing, clogging
or collapse of house sewer or
effluent sewer, or failure of
the soil absorption system.
Points of use—In reference to
groundwater resources, places
where groundwater has
existing or potential use as
drinking water or where
groundwater flowing into a
spring stream or lake could
affect those resources.
Present capital—Expenses for
designing and building waste-
water facilities at the
beginning of a planning period.
Present worth—An estimate
of the funds that could be
invested at the beginning of a
project to pay all costs,
including construction and
operation and maintenance,
for a specified number of
years. Future costs and the
salvage value of the facilities
at the end of the period are
discounted to the present with
a specified discount rate.
Private capital costs-
Expenses for construction or
purchase of wastewater
facilities that are paid directly
by users and not funded by
federal, state or local
agencies. Examples are house
sewers on private property,
plumbing, and water conserva-
tion devices.
Public capital costs-
Expenses for construction of
wastewater facilities that are
funded by federal, state or
local agencies. Public capital
costs funded by local agencies
are usually recovered from
users through hook-up
charges, front-foot charges,
increases in property taxes or
amortized debt repayment as
part of user charges.
Reserve fund—An account
established by a wastewater
management agency to pay for
replacement, repair, expansion
or major modifications of
wastewater facilities in the
future. Contributions to the
account usually are collected
as part of user charges.
Revenue bond—Municipal
bonds backed by the authority
of the management agency to
collect user charges.
Risk—As used here, the
statistical probability that an
on-site system or a type of
wastewater technology will
fail.
Salvage value—The estimated
worth of wastewater facilities
at the end of a specified
planning period. For example,
a facility that costs $10,000
to construct and is expected to
last 50 years would have a
salvage value of $6,000 after
20 years.
Sanitary survey—An inventory
of the location, age, condition,
design and use of on-site
systems in all or parts of a
community based on available
data and on-site inspections.
Septic leachate detectors-
Instruments designed to detect
traces of wastewater in lakes
and streams.
Septic tank/soil absorption
system—This is the most
common and generally the
least expensive on-site waste-
water system in the United
States. The septic tank is large
enough to hold several days
wastewater flow and is
internally baffled to retain
sludge and scum. It discharges
to a soil absorption system of
various designs which
distributes the wastewater to
the soil beneath the ground
surface.
Small Waste Flows Manage-
ment—Supervision of all
phases in the lite cycle of on-
site and small-scale waste-
water systems. Includes
provision of specified services
by a management agency,
delegation and oversight of
services provided by other
organizations and by home-
owners, and services
necessary to maintain the
management agency itself.
Surface malfunction—A seep
or flow of wastewater to the
ground's surface from an on-
site system.
User charges—Periodic fees
paid by users of a wastewater
system to the management
agency. Parts of the user
charges may pay for debt
retirement, payments to a
reserve fund, operation and
maintenance of facilities, and
other services provided by the
management agency.
User charge system—A
schedule of payment and the
means for collecting user
charges.
39
-------
Information—
What to Read
In the last decade research,
policy development, and public
awareness in the field of rural
wastewater management have
increased significantly. Over a
thousand books, research
reports, seminar proceedings,
and journal articles have been
published, reflecting this
increase.
Listed below are 17 recent
publications that together
define the current state of the
art in rural wastewater
management.
Title, Author and Date
Final Generic Environmental Impact
Statement for Wastewater Management
in Rural Lake Areas. (U.S EPA, Region
V and WAPORA, Inc., 1982)
Introduction to Wastewater Management
in UnseweredCommunities; Small Waste
Flows Technologies: Small Waste Flows
Management; Needs Documentation in
Unsewered Communities. Land Use
Planning and Small Waste Flows
(filmstrips; Gerald Peters and Melissa
Wieland, 1982)
Management of Small Waste Flows
(Small-Scale Waste Management Project,
University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1 978)
Individual On-Site Wastewater System
(8 vols )
(Nina I McClelland, ed., 1972-1981)
Ordering Information
No charge while supply lasts
Available from.
Mr Jack Kratzmeyer
U.S EPA, Region V
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, IL 60604
312/353-2157
No charge for two-week loan
Available from
Mr Jack Kratzmeyer
U S EPA, Region V
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, IL 60604
312/353-2157
Price. $49 50
Available from
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
Order No EPA-600/2-78-173
Price per volume S30
Available from
Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Inc
The Butterworth Group
10 Tower Office Park
Woburn, MA 01801
Comments
A companion document to this Handbook,
the Final EIS is based on case studies of
7 rural lake communities within Region
V and on 69 detailed research reports
supporting the EIS Topics include
documentation of need, on-site and small
scale technologies, community
management, facilities planning, policy
analysis, and environmental impacts
150 pages plus appendixes.
These 5 slide shows highlight topics in
rural wastewater management of
possible interest to the lay public A
written script for narrating each show is
included. One 80-slide tray for each slide
show
This report is a compilation of laboratory
and field investigations conducted at the
University of Wisconsin between 1 971
and 1978 Topics include characteristics
of household wastewater, flow reduction
and waste segregation treatment
processes, on-site systems, soils,
community management, and alternative
selection Useful to scientists, engineers,
and sanitarians. 86-page summary
plus 664 pages of references and
appendixes
Proceedings of the annual National
Sanitation Foundation conferences.
Individual papers cover 9 wide variety of
topics
Proceedings, National Symposium
on Individual and Small Community
Sewage Treatment
Vol 1 • Home Sewage Disposal (1 974)
Vol 2 Home Sewage Treatment (1977)
Vol 3 On-Site Sewage Treatment
Planning Wastewater Management
Facilities for Small Communities
(P L Deese and J F Hudson, 1980)
Management ol On-Site and Small
Community Wastewater Systems
(Roy F. Weston, Inc , 1981)
Prices Vol 1, $15. Vol. 2, $15,
Vol 3, $19 50
Available from.
American Society of Agricultural
Engineers
P 0 Box 410
St Joseph, Ml 64502
Price $15
Available from
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield. VA 22161
Order No EPA-600/8-80-030
Price Free
Available from.
ORD Publications
U S EPA/CERL
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Proceedings of the 1974, 1977, and
1981 Symposia on Individual and Small
Community Sewage Treatment
sponsored by the American Society of
Agricultural Engineers. Individual papers
cover a wide variety of topics.
Procedures for planning wastewater
facilities for small communities of 1,000
or less Applicable for planning
conventional sewer systems as well
as small-scale and on-site systems.
147 pages
A guide for developing institutional
arrangements for the management of
small wastewater systems.
40
-------
Title, Author, and Date
Home Sewage Treatment Workshop
Workbook (R E. Machmeier and
M. J. Hansel, 1980)
Ordering Information
Septic Tank Practices
(Peter Warshall, 1979)
Residential Waste Conservation
(Murray Milne, 1976)
Flow Reduction: Methods, Analyses,
Procedures, Examples
[FRD-15](U.S EPA Office of Water
Program Operations, 1981)
Small Wastewater Systems: Alternative
Systems for Small Communities and
Rural Areas
(U S. EPA Office of Water Program
Operations, 1980)
1979 Bibliography of Small Wastewater
Flows (EPA Small Wastewater Flows
Clearinghouse, 1979)
Community-Managed Septic Systems—
a Viable Alternative to Sewage Treatment
Plants (Comptroller General of the
United States, 1978)
Innovative and Alternative Technology
Assessment Manual
(U.S. EPA, Municipal Environmental
Research Laboratory, 1980)
Design Manual- On-Site Wastewater
Treatment and Disposal Systems
(U.S. EPA, Office of Water Program
Operations and Municipal Environmental
Research Laboratory, 1980)
1979 State of the Art Manual of On-Site
Wastewater Management (National
Environmental Health Association, 1 979)
Price: $15
Available from
University of Minnesota
Bulletin Room
3 Coffey Hall
1420 Eckles Ave.
St. Paul, MN 55108
Price $3.95
Available from
Doubleday & Co.
(Anchor Books)
Garden City, NY 11530
Price $7.50
Available from.
California Water Resources Center
University of California
Davis, CA 95616
Available from
Mrs. Bernita Starks (WH-547)
U.S. EPA
Office of Water Program Operations
401 M St., SW
Washington, DC 20460
Available from:
Mrs. Bernita Starks (WH-547)
U.S. EPA
Office of Water Program Operations
401 M St., SW
Washington, DC 20460
Price $7
Available from
Bookstore
West Virginia University
Morgantown, WV 26506
Price. Free (1 copy)
U.S. General Accounting Office
Publications Department
Washington DC 20548
Order No.: CED-78-168
Price $30
Available from:
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA22161
Order No.: EPA-430/9-78-009
Price $30
Available from
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
Order No.. EPA-625/1 -80-01 2
Price $5
Available from:
National Environmental Health
Association
1200 Lincoln St., Suite 704
Denver, CO 80203
Comments
This workbook can't give you the
experience that your sanitarian has But
it will tell you most of what he knows
about on-site systems. Even though it is
specific to Minnesota, this workbook
illustrating and explaining commercially
design guidance, and personnel training
efforts that states can and do provide for
localities Three ring binder.
"A guide to the conservation and re-use
of household wastewater." Entertaining
and informative with some philosophical
musing on human relationships with
wastes For the resident. 117 pages
Everything you would want to know about
controlling your flow. Especially good for
illustrations and explaining commercially
available water conservation equipment.
While this report is intended for people
planning centralized treatment plants,
the information on flow reduction
techniques, public education, and cost
analysis will also be of interest if you are
making your on-site systems work better
while working less. 92 pages.
Illustrations and brief descriptions of 21
alternative technologies for the
collection, treatment, and disposal of
small wastewater flows One-sheet
foldout.
Abstracts on531 publications concerning
on-site and small scale wastewater Also
title, author, state, and subject indexes.
Update planned for late 1982
The General Accounting Office's stamp
of approval on the concept of community
Fact sheets on unit processes for
collection, treatment, and disposal of
wastewater, including some on-site and
small-scale processes. Also, criteria for
increased Construction Grants funding
of innovative and alternative
technologies
Technical information for scientists,
engineers, and sanitarians. Also a few
pages on management 391 pages.
A good overview of technologies and
management considerations for
community management of on-site
systems. 108 pages.
This document was prepared
for
Region V U.S. EPA
by
WAPORA, Inc.
EPA Contract No. 68-01-5989
US GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFH.E 19K <--F,Vj'ji
------- |