News and notes about the onsite industry and a reminder to share your system install stories:

Iowa county forced to pay for bad inspections

Installers and designers can face scrutiny for their work, but local government inspectors can make mistakes, too. Such is the case in Tama County in central Iowa, where errors on required time-of-sale real estate inspections have cost the county thousands of dollars so far.

The county recently agreed to pay out almost $14,000 to two property owners to address missed inspection issues — and the county board of health budgeted $30,000 to cover such payments in the future. The recent payouts will take care of half the expected cost to fix problems that were not discovered by a former environmental health officer/sanitarian.

According to a report by the North Tama Telegraph:

• One house passed inspection, though it was later found to have a septic tank smaller than the required minimum and that septic system was located too close to the home’s well, 15 feet away. The estimated cost to remedy the issues was $10,400.
• In another system, the house passed inspection with a 400-gallon tank, while the minimum tank size is 500 gallons. The tank was also made of bricks and had caved in. The problem was discovered when the house went up for sale again two years later. The estimated cost of a new tank was $15,400.

The takeaway: Nobody is perfect. Approvals for new systems can be a rigorous process for designers and installers, and sometimes mistakes are found and adjustments have to be made. But health departments and other regulators also must be vigilant in the role they play as inspectors.

An inspection snapshot in Canadian lakes country

A small sample of mandated onsite system inspections in a Canadian recreational lakes area supports what many experts think about the state of decentralized wastewater treatment across North America: That is, a good number of aging systems are no longer up to the task and need upgrades to protect sensitive waterways and drinking water supplies.

The Halliburton Echo in Dysart, Ontario, took a look at the results of about 160 system inspections completed at the beginning of a 2023 septic maintenance program covering dwellings around several lakes. Homeowners were given a 50% discount on the fee if they responded during this period, and the inspections were treated as a training opportunity for new inspectors.

The local maintenance program supervisor reported what were described as “typical results.”

• 41 permits were called “high risk” because permit rules were not followed, such as having too many bedrooms for the size of the system.
• 58 properties were medium risk, for instance requiring pumpouts, replacement lids and baffles.
• 56 were considered low risk and having no compliance issues.

Where systems were nonconforming because of having too many bedrooms, property owners were allowed to pay $150 for a review and possible decommission of a bedroom — by converting a sleeping room into an office or den. 

Mayor Murray Fearrey said it was a “wake-up call” for residents to see that eight of 15 properties on one lake had some septic issue to deal with. “It’s good for people on the lakes to see that,” he told the Echo.

I suspect these inspection results would be mirrored in thousands of communities across the U.S. and Canada, where many systems are operating well beyond their expected life span and building codes have been ignored when remodeling and adding to houses, creating greater sewage flow.

As regulations stiffen to protect precious water supplies, a steady flow of new work will come to the installer community. I only hope the industry can attract enough young talent to answer this anticipated demand for new systems, repairs and upgrades.

Amish win latest round in septic system debate

It’s taken eight years — and an unlikely hearing before the U.S. Supreme Court — but a Minnesota Court of Appeals finally reversed a lower court decision requiring an Amish sect to install septic tanks to treat graywater effluent. I first addressed this contentious septic regulation issue in 2021, and I’ll admit my opinion was on the failing end of this debate.

Since 2015, four members of the Fillmore County Swartzentruber Amish community fought an order by county and state officials requiring them to install a graywater treatment system on their farms. They argued that mandating a subsurface treatment system under the county rules violated their religious freedoms. Instead, the Amish proposed what they said was an acceptable alternative, a mulch basin system, to handle the flow of graywater from their homes.

Depending on the Amish sect, some groups refuse to use electrical power or other modern conveniences in the name of religious traditions. In the past, governments have faced off with Amish over the use of outhouses and pit toilets when septic systems are required by local codes.

Attorneys for the Amish argued questions under the Religious Land Use and Institutional Persons Act. They are: Does the government have a compelling interest in regulating the disposal of graywater, which includes laundry, bath and dishwasher water? And, is a septic system the least restrictive method when they argue that 20 states allow Amish-preferred mulch basin systems?

At the time I argued the people of Minnesota should be able to expect uniform standards to protect public health and it was hard to see how individual homeowners or a group should be able to skirt best practices on graywater treatment. But the Supreme Court found that the lower Minnesota courts were wrong in siding with the regulatory officials and sent the case back to the state appeals court for reconsideration.

Despite the county maintaining that graywater contains some human fecal material, harmful bacteria, viruses and chemicals that pose environmental concerns, the appeals court recently found that the Amish group doesn’t need to install septic systems to handle graywater. Officials from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency can apparently appeal the court’s decision and carry on with the debate.

What is your opinion? Do you have experience with the mulch basin treatment preferred by the Amish group? If so, how effective has it been? Stay tuned; this discussion is likely to continue.

Still time to suggest a system profile story

We’re always on the lookout for interesting projects for our System Profile feature. If you have a challenging install coming up and would like us to feature it in Onsite Installer, please reach out at editor@onsiteinstaller.com. What are criteria for projects we select for layouts in the magazine? Difficult topography, small lots, poor soils, nearby lakes and streams, new-to-you technology used, high flows and systems donated for charity are examples. We will cover both residential or commercial decentralized systems.

We enjoy publishing your tough-job stories and photos featuring your hardworking crews at work. This case study feature is a great way to share your knowledge and give credit to your frontline workers for a job well done. I hope to hear from you soon with suggestions.