In a recent column, I discussed how pumping through an inspection port was a bad practice that has been proven ineffective at removing the solids from a septic tank despite backflushing and other attempts at mixing the contents before removal. The column was a result of a homeowner question I received about how his family’s system operates.

I received a response from a septic service contractor who felt the column was calling out pumpers who sometimes continue this practice as “bad people.” The Pumper reader says that some customers will insist the inspection port be used for pumping, saying, “You either use the pipe or we will find someone else” to pump the tank. He went on to mention that some septic tanks he encounters are homebuilt or are failed steel tanks where someone added a concrete cap with a pipe for access. And he says searching for a larger access point is fruitless and there is often customer pushback to that suggestion.

The intent of the column was not to call out pumpers as bad people, but to highlight that it is our responsibility in the industry to educate homeowners and other pumpers who call themselves professionals but are not following best practices. We all have learned things over the years that have shown some of our preconceived ideas about operation of systems turned out to be wrong. Once this has been shown, it is important that we no longer promote those practices and work toward educating others about why the practice should be changed.

ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITY

It is clear that solids removal is one of the major maintenance requirements for septic system longevity and that solids are not removed without opening a tank manhole. It is our ethical responsibility to stop the practice and to inform others. The fact that this practice continues contributes to the septic service industry having a bad name with regulatory agencies, designers and engineers. It is one of the chief reasons the industry struggled to be recognized as a part of the broader wastewater solution rather than a problem. Fortunately we have come a long way in the past two decades and decentralized wastewater treatment is now viewed not only as a part of the solution, but in many areas as the most cost-effective solution.

My comments above are based on the tank and system being of sound design, construction and installation. When that is the case, tank access can be improved using products such as manhole risers. Some situations raised by the letter writer involved tanks that are clearly not structurally sound and watertight. Some of these situations are not only bad for system operation and treatment, but also from a personal safety standpoint for both residents and service providers.

The steel tank scenario was mentioned. When the lid deteriorated, the writer explains, a layer of concrete was installed over the top of the tank with a 4-inch pipe installed as the point of access to pump the tank. A documented problem with steel tanks, which resulted in them being used less frequently over time, is that they are subject to deterioration and collapse.

Early in my career, we worked on numerous systems where steel tanks were dug up and found to be partially or fully collapsed and were not watertight or structurally sound. We included numerous slides showing collapsed steel tanks in our education programs. This led to my state putting in place strict requirements for tank strength and durability that precluded use of steel tanks for septic tanks.

JUST SAY NO

To me, continuing to use the tank described means the system is not properly treating the wastewater generated on site and is a safety risk. This could have detrimental impacts on the environment by degradation of either surface or groundwater, present a human health risk with untreated sewage being discharged, and most importantly create a safety risk due to the potential for tank collapse. If the lid has deteriorated to the point where a cap needed to be poured over the top, the rest of the tank must be deteriorating. Every year we read about homeowners and others (often children) falling into holes due to collapsed cesspools or septic tanks, resulting in serious injury or death.

By continuing to use this tank instead of replacing it with a tank that meets current structural standards, service providers give the homeowner and others a false sense of security about the tank. When you present yourself as a professional with your state license and/or certification and you knowingly contribute to an unsafe situation, realize this opens you to liability for accidents that could happen and could have been prevented.  

Nobody wants to go to court in a situation where there is litigation due to somebody’s death. Telling the homeowner about the problem is part of the solution and may protect you somewhat from the legal exposure. But why put yourself in that position? When the homeowner says, “Well if you don’t pump it, I will find someone else,” give some thought as to how much you are at risk by doing this pumping without solving or correcting the situation.

To me, the answer to them is “I in good conscience cannot continue to do this if you do not fix the problem, and you can find someone else.” You do not have to be the person who continues a bad and dangerous practice. You are in the business to help people, not to put them or yourself in harm’s way.