COMMUNITY SEPTIC SYSTEM OWNERS GUIDE

Transcription

1 COMMUNITY SEPTIC SYSTEM OWNERS GUIDE Sara Heger 1, Kitt Ferrell-Poe 2, Dendra Best 3, Dan Olson 4, David Gustafon 1, Aaron Wills 5, Sheila Craig 6, Jules Inda 7, Pat Carney 7, and Nancy Deal 8 Abstract This USDA grant funded project, led by the University of Minnesota (UMN), is developing a wastewater decision-making tool for consumers to help to transform rural wastewater management by developing a customizable Community System Owner s Guide (CSOG). At the time of preparing this paper, the project is at the end of year one of a three year project. The primary deliverable of this project is a web-interface that allows an individual to produce an expert-driven and locally-customized manual (electronic or hard-copy) CSOG for any cluster soil-based wastewater treatment system in America. This tool will provide users with fundamental information about the operation and management of various wastewater management systems. A consultant, engineer, septic professional, facilitator, or even an educated community member will be able to use this tool to develop a management plan for either a new or existing community onsite wastewater treatment systems OWTS. The developer of any given CSOG will be able to assemble a professionally designed guide by selecting situation-specific boilerplate language and graphics and inserting customized content to integrate system-specific permit and ordinance requirements. Key partnerships in Arizona, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, and North Carolina, along with the US EPA, will be utilized to assure this grant will deliver a nationally relevant and locally customizable interface tool to facilitate the development of Community System Owner s Guides. Introduction Today, nearly 25% of the US population is served with an onsite wastewater treatment system (OWTS) as their primary means of wastewater treatment (U.S. EPA, 2002). This equates to approximately 70 million Americans (U.S. Census Bureau, 1999) generating roughly 5 billion 1 University of Minnesota, Water Resources Center, Onsite Sewage Treatment Program, 173 McNeal Hall, 1985 Buford Ave, St. Paul, MN, sheger@umn.edu, gusta002@umn.edu 2 The University of Arizona, Agricultural & Biosystems Engineering Department, Shantz Bldg., #38, Room 504A, 1177 E. 4th Street, Tucson, AZ kittfp@ag.arizona.edu 3 Wastewater Education, PO Box 792, Traverse City, MI info@wastewatereducation.org 4 Iowa Department of Natural Resources, Onsite Wastewater Program Wallace Building 502 E. 9th St. Des Moines, IA daniel.olson@dnr.iowa.gov 5 Cannon River Watershed Partnership, 8997 Eaves Ave., Northfield, MN aaronlwills@gmail.com 6 SE Minnesota Wastewater Initiative, 902 Houston St. NW, #3, Preston, MN The Carney Group, 837 Glenwood Avenue, Minneapolis, MN info@carney.com 8 North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, Onsite Water Protection, Division of Public Health Six Forks Road, 1642 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC nancy.deal@dhhs.nc.gov

2 gallons per day with the distribution of users shown in Figure 1. In addition to these private residences, there are an unquantified number of wastewater systems serving commercial properties strip malls, resorts, restaurants, gas stations and other similar establishments. Moreover, new construction is disproportionately served by onsite or decentralized wastewater treatment systems, with approximately 33% of all new construction served by these systems (WEF, 2005). Figure 1. Percentage of state residences using onsite wastewater treatment systems. The vast majority of onsite systems include raw wastewater treatment in a septic tank or similar unit followed by soil infiltration to achieve final treatment and serve as the ultimate receiving environment for the wastewater stream. Cluster OWTS are systems serving multiple connections, often with high densities. There are currently hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of these systems nationwide, but specific numbers are not available because small cluster systems (serving fewer than 20 people) are difficult to account for. US EPA estimates that there are more than 350,000 existing large-capacity septic systems (serving more than 20 people) nationwide (U.S. EPA, 2002). When solving unsewered wastewater challenges, cluster OWTS are a popular option for a variety of reasons, including, lack of space for individual system replacement, reduction of load allocation for meeting total maximum daily load standards, reduced costs compared to wastewater treatment plants, smart growth initiatives, and the popularity of development and redevelopment occurring outside the reach of municipal sewer 2

3 extensions (see Figure 2). Risks to public health and the environment increase when wastewater is clustered and discharged to the soil at one location. Effective management mitigates this risk by creating a continuous condition of compliance backed by treatment performance data. The delivery of management services, however, is complicated when there are multiple treatment systems with multiple owners. Adding to the management challenge is the increasing percentage of OWTS that include additional treatment steps that provide advanced treatment in areas of increased risk associated with high density, sensitive environments, or high strength waste. Individual septic Individual septic Cluster septic Figure 2. Before and after a decentralized approach to addressing wastewater challenges. Well-designed and installed OWTSs reliably achieve important performance goals of: (1) hydraulically processing all of the effluent applied; (2) treating the effluent to the extent needed to protect public health and water quality; (3) providing a long service life with low operation and maintenance; (4) enabling resource recovery and reuse; and (5) maintaining an affordable cost. Yet in order to function properly in the long-term, all systems require routine and on-going maintenance that is often beyond the skills of the average homeowner. Since 1997, U.S. EPA has been actively promoting the use of decentralized sewage treatment methods to provide wastewater treatment for rural areas and small communities. Along with this policy shift came the recognition that if these technologies are to serve the long-term needs of rural residents and small communities there is an increased need for better construction coupled with efficient and on-going operation and maintenance. In March 2003, the U.S. EPA published a document, Voluntary National Guidelines for Management of Onsite and Clustered (Decentralized) Wastewater Treatment Systems The document specifies management as implementation of comprehensive, life-cycle series of elements and activities necessary for ensuring performance of onsite wastewater systems. To the end-users, homeowners or business owners, of onsite systems, the information presented 3

4 about management in the EPA s guidance document does not seem directly relevant to their situation because this guidance is directed towards the administrators of OWT permitting and inspection programs. As far as end-users are concerned, OWTSs must offer the same services for wastewater management at a reasonable and affordable price compared with municipal treatment, regardless of the management scheme in place to ensure compliance. These federal policy changes have and will impact all aspects of OWT programs across the nation. Individual designers, contractors and maintainers need to increase their technical knowledge of how to design, install, maintain and operate alternative technologies. State and local regulators have to develop similar awareness and knowledge of system alternatives and how to factor these systems into their regulatory and management programs. System owners must be prepared to evaluate proposed alternatives on a life-cycle basis and develop the administrative capacity to ensure long-term system care. The University of Minnesota s Onsite Sewage Treatment Program (UMN OSTP) and its national partners are uniquely positioned to address this increased need for education and resource development. This grant will enhance our ability to bridge the gap between septic system professionals, regulators, and owners through the availability of sound management guidance from the perspective of a system owner. As we raise the bar for OWTS management expectations, we need to remember to educate system owners about the relationships between clearly defined and ongoing maintenance activities, increased system performance, and long-term cost-savings. The users of wastewater treatment technology depend on effective system management in order for the treatment processes to treat wastewater to acceptable limits. Decentralized wastewater treatment system users are more closely linked to the systems success or failure because system owners and managers are also the system users. Therefore this project s primary objective will be the development of a tool to create a clear and customizable Community System Owner s Guide (CSOG) for every owner and user of a septic system in America. The project team is developing the nationally based content and a web-interface that allows a developer to produce an expert-driven and locally-customized manual (electronic or hard-copy) for any soil-based wastewater treatment system in America. This tool will provide system owners and users with fundamental information about the operation and management of their wastewater management systems. Using this tool, an engineer, septic professional, community facilitator, or educated community member will be able to develop a management plan for either a new or existing community system. Stakeholder Integration Two stakeholder groups have been established to guide and develop this project, enhancing existing partnerships and networks. These groups have a wide range of professional backgrounds to make for a well-rounded technical group along with community septic system owners to assure the final products are user-friendly. 4

5 A. Project Development Team (PDT) The PDT will create the contents of the various modules. PDT members will develop, review, revise and refine materials through cooperative roles based upon experience gained from the other national development programs. This team will consist of community and state level experts that have agreed to collaborate in the development, beta-testing, and roll-out phases of this project. Sara Heger, Dave Gustafson, U of M OSTP Kitt Ferrell-Poe, University of Arizona State Regulatory Specialists; Dan Olson (Iowa State DNR Regulator), Nancy Deal (North Carolina Department of Health) Dendra Best, WasteWater Education, Executive Director Sheila Craig and Aaron Wills, Southeast Minnesota Wastewater Initiative This team is diverse to assure project transferability among various organizations, professionals, and homeowners in the onsite/decentralized wastewater field. The team will use the current Consortium of Institutes for Decentralized Wastewater Treatment (CIDWT) Glossary as a basis for consistent communication for OWTS terminology. B. Project Stakeholder Council (PSC) The PSC is a larger group with the primary responsibilities of reviewing materials developed by the project development team. This group consists of EPA Region 5 staff, state and local regulators, assistance organization staff, septic system professionals, new system users, and decentralized wastewater experts. The PSC will assure the project tools extend beyond the boundaries of PDT member states and be applicable across the United States. The PDT determined membership of this council. Methods This project includes the development, selection, and review of boilerplate modules, building the web-interface, and training CSOG developers to prepare infinite CSOG iterations. The developer of any given CSOG will be able to assemble a professionally designed guide by selecting situation-specific boilerplate language and graphics and inserting customized content to integrate system-specific permit and ordinance requirements. Any individual working with small community wastewater issues will be able to develop this guide via a web-interface. The final customized product will take the form of a html web document that is smartphone/tablet compatible or a pdf document ready for professional printing. Each Community System Owner s Guide will be customized to the local site, system, and regulatory requirements and identify the following key aspects: 5

6 1. The specific treatment train components and how they work, in addition to the service activities and frequencies. 2. The management issues, challenges, and operations plan each system has identified and implemented to ensure long-term, effective wastewater treatment. 3. The operational responsibilities each system user must accept to protect the infrastructure from premature failure. The UMN and project consultants are drafting a template of the modules for the PDT to review. After their comments are addressed it will be forwarded on to the PSC to assess content areas, local applicability and the user-friendliness of the web interface. The template will give the hard and electronic copies a consistent feel. Each CSOG will be a combination of boilerplate content that has been critically reviewed and accepted by the PDT and locally customized content that enables local rules and regulations to drive recommendations and required service activities and frequencies. Tables, figures, and pictures will play a major role in the transfer of information from CSOG developer to CSOG audience. There will be boilerplate and customizable content, images and data. The CSOG developer will ultimately answer a survey about the system that will, in turn, populate the CSOG boilerplate sections. A developer will also be able to enter and upload customized text, graphics, and or photographs that they desire to appear in the manual. This will allow the input of local information such as number of connections, treatment train components, local permitting issues, rate structures, and any regional, state, or local differences in regulations that affect the management of community systems. This information will only need to be entered once to minimize CSOG development time, which is anticipated to take less than one hour. The Carney Group ( is leading the technical logistics related to interface development. The first phase of development included an evaluation of user needs through a discovery phase with the PDT to produce a Functional Specifications document. This serves as the blueprint for development and includes the wire frame and database design plan. The next step was the development of the wire frame or site map. The site map specifies what information is boiler plate (blue text), required for the user to enter (black text) and what is optional (green text), and locations for an image to be uploaded. The site map general structure is: 1. Log In - allows a user to save and update materials, have multiple projects and create templates 2. Organization of the system general info about system including regulatory body and where to get more information, setbacks, expenses, etc 1. In-home plumbing type, access and O&M 2. Collection type, access and O&M 3. Tanks type, access and O&M 6

7 4. Advanced treatment systems type, access and O&M 5. Final treatment and dispersal type, access and O&M 6. General use and operation 7. Specific O&M and options for extending life 8. Problems/Troubleshooting An example of the site map for septic tanks is shown in Figure 3. Figure 3. Site map for a septic tank. 7

8 At this time the database to hold all the content is being developed along with the user interface. An example of a draft user interface is shown in Figure 4. Figure 4. Draft user interface. Currently the PDT is writing boiler plate content to populate the database. This project will deliver educated, well-designed, and easily understood advice and instruction for cluster septic system owners throughout the United States. This site will become a two-way hub, where the producer/manager of the site learns from the developers as they navigate the decision tree and submit valuable information about the communities and systems proactively seeking management guidance. This data will be invaluable to a real understanding of the kind of systems being built across the nation and profile user needs. The choices made in the decision tree can provide rich statistical information. Developers will be given the option to opt out of research data collection, and no private data will be kept in the content database. Project staff will deliver five examples of customized CSOGs, including both new and existing cluster systems. The five examples will provide opportunities for the selected communities, beta-test the modules, and improve document-building effectiveness. Experts will develop, review, and improve proposed materials for both the boilerplate and customizable fields/sections of each beta-manual. Once the tool is adequate for a nationwide roll-out, each CSOG created can be updated by the developer. Community leaders, regulators, or assistance organization representatives will be able to update the manual with changes in management details such as rate structure, number of connections, additional treatment train components, etc. The project team envisions the ability for interested parties to learn a great deal about the status of systems and their management across the country through a back-end analysis of the customized data entered for the development of each CSOG. The repository of information 8

9 pertaining to system selection, service activities and frequencies, and local requirements will provide researchers with a source of data to assess how well we are meeting our goals to ensure effective wastewater management for all decentralized systems in the United States. Back-end analysis is not planned for in this grant. It is worth mentioning because the wealth of data that will result from the utilization of this tool can be made available to interested researchers and policy makers. Project Timeline Currently the PDT is drafting the modules. After they have been internally reviewed they will be sent to the PSC for review. It is anticipated that the beta resting will begin in November of 2013 and in the spring of 2014 the five communities serving as beta communities will have a CSOG developed, delivered and evaluated. Community system owner-users with representation including users of existing and new community systems in Arizona, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, and North Carolina have been identified by the team to test the tool. Then in 2014 the materials will be updated and enhanced based upon feedback. Finally the tool will be disseminated via a webcast and presentations at numerous regional and national conferences. References U.S. Census Bureau National Data Chart for Total Occupied Housing Units. ahs/97dtchrt/tab2-6.html. U.S. Census Bureau Census Data. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Voluntary National Guidelines for Management of Onsite and Clustered (Decentralized) Wastewater Treatment Systems; EPA 832- B ; Washington, D.C. U.S. EPA Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems Manual. Report No. 625/R-00/008. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH. U.S. EPA, Response to Congress on Use of Decentralized Wastewater Treatment Systems. EPA-832-R b, April, Washington, D.C. Water Environment Federation. March Highlights Newsletter. 9