Complaints Offer an Important Reminder; Required Septic Inspections Are a Good Thing

Interested in Onsite Systems?

Get Onsite Systems articles, news and videos right in your inbox! Sign up now.

Onsite Systems + Get Alerts

Last fall, the National Association of Wastewater Transporters Ethics Committee received two separate, unrelated complaints against an onsite inspector. The NAWT Board of Directors approved the Ethics Committee’s recommendation to give the individual six months to retake and pass our inspector training course. If he doesn’t comply, the board will consider pulling his NAWT inspector credential.

When the committee studied inspection reports submitted to the state’s department of environmental quality, they showed that the inspector didn’t look closely enough at the systems. Although he raised issues with certain components, he checked the “functional” box in the system summary instead of the box for “functional with concerns.” The summary rates systems as functional, functional with concerns or not functional.

The inspector had scored in the high 90s on his inspection exam, so it didn’t appear knowledge was the problem. What was it then? The first possibility is under our noses every day. We’re always busy and pressed for time. If we can do a $100 job in five minutes, that’s good. If it takes 90 minutes, that’s not so good. It’s human nature to rush through a task and justify the effort as good enough, but that’s not fair to the customer.

Another possibility is that the inspector may also have been the homeowners’ service provider. Many of us are in that situation and we don’t like being bearers of bad news. The majority of inspections are done by companies for their customers, and inspectors cross their fingers and pray that everything is working properly. Finding nonfunctional components or those with concerns reflect badly on the service provider.

Long ago, I had customers say, “You’ve serviced my system for 10 years, and now you’re telling me it’s no good?” Hearing that often enough taught me the importance of telling them about impending problems sooner. Today, we use a checklist on regular service calls to determine if systems are functioning correctly, and tick off issues of concern, such as a high level in the septic tank or drainfield.

While waving these red flags in front of homeowners, we warn them that if they were to sell their home, the system wouldn’t pass inspection. This presents the opportunity to discuss solutions with them. Whether they take action is their decision, but we have met our professional responsibilities. That being said, I’ll be the first to admit that labeling systems as noncompliant puts pressure on inspectors, and some can be coerced by customers who have also become their friends.

Mandates and Funding

Each year, more municipalities across the country require periodic septic tank inspections. It hasn’t reached tidal wave proportions yet, but the trend is growing.

Not enough pumpers see this as a work opportunity. Instead, I hear them grumbling that no one is paying them to fill out the paperwork. Businessmen realize that since the reports must be done, they must pass on the expense to their customers. Some companies break out the cost as a separate item on invoices and reference the mandate, or include a copy of the report with the regulating body’s contact information. Many times homeowners are already aware of the mandate and are calling to have the report completed.

If legislators are going to require us to do reports and require people to upgrade failing systems, then they have an obligation to help pay for or finance those repairs. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has said repeatedly that there are no restrictions on the use of state revolving funds when it comes to wastewater. Historically, states have spent it on sewers and treatment plants, but the federal agency says that the money is also for private onsite systems. Many service providers and regulators throughout the country are unaware of this.

For example, Pennvest, a successful program managed by the Pennsylvania Infrastructure Investment Authority, selects state financial institutions to manage the loans and deal with homeowners. Applicants must submit three repair bids and prove their financial status to qualify. Interest rates are 1.75 percent for amounts up to $25,000 for a term of 20 years. Unfortunately, many service providers don’t know of the program’s existence.

Remediating systems is expensive, but we’re blessed with all sorts of technological improvements we didn’t have 20 years ago. I’ve been hands-on in the industry for 40 years now and I look back and wonder how I could have done some of the things I did. Didn’t I know better? No, none of us did. We lacked the information or technology. We did what we thought would work from experience.

Not only do we have more options, but they have become more affordable. Does anyone remember the no-discharge greenhouse system for a family of four that appeared in the late 1970s or early 1980s? It sold for $85,000. That’s a far cry from the drip irrigation or mound system selling for $20,000 to $30,000 in Pennsylvania, or other less expensive options. People who develop onsite technologies realize they have to be affordable.

The major problem — and the EPA said this in its 1997 response to Congress — is state and county regulators and their regulations. Unless they have a pilot program for experimental systems or accept NSF certification, they can be less than willing to approve new technology that enables us to install onsite systems almost anywhere, and do it economically.

The only recourse to regulators tying our hands is to support your state onsite association and be involved in the legislative process. The EPA doesn’t have regulatory authority on septic systems. The states do. State associations must be involved to the point that when the Department of Environmental Protection or Department of Health wants to change the language, the first call officials make is to that state onsite association for guidance. If your state doesn’t have an association, call NAWT at 800/236-6298 and we’ll help you establish one. n



Discussion

Comments on this site are submitted by users and are not endorsed by nor do they reflect the views or opinions of COLE Publishing, Inc. Comments are moderated before being posted.