Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2008- February
Cathy • Jefferson County Board of 3-fealth .agenda 3Vlinutes • Jebruary 21, 2008 • • JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH Thursday, February 21, 2008 2:30 PM--4:30 PM Pope Marina Building 100 Madison Street Port Townsend, WA 2:30—4:30 PM DRAFTAGENDA I. Approval of Agenda II. Approval of Minutes of January 17, 2008 Board of Health Meeting III. Public Comments IV. Old Business and Informational Items 1. Influenza Season Update 2. Methamphetamine White Paper • V. New Business 1. Board of Health Discussion: Proposed Revisions to Jefferson County Septic Code 8.15 and Associated Fee Schedule 2. 2008 Legislative Update: Bioremediation,Thimerosol Ban, and Other Public Health Issues 3. Green Business Designations 4. Public Health Heroes 5. City of Victoria Sewage Discharge, Request for Board of Health Letters VI. Activity Update VII. Agenda Planning VIII. Next Scheduled Meeting: February 21, 2008 2:30 PM--4:30 PM Main Conference Room Jefferson County Public Health • gs • 4/4p JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH MINUTES Thursday, January 17, 2008 Board Members: Staff Members: Phil Johnson— County Commissioner District#1 Thomas Locke,MD, Health Officer David Sullivan—County Commissioner District#2 Jean Baldwin,Public Health Services Director John Austin, Vice Chairman—County Commissioner District#3 Julia Danskin,Nursing Programs Director Jill Buhler—Hospital Commissioner District#2 Geoff Masci—Port Townsend City Council Sheila Westerman— Citizen at Large(City) Roberta Frissell, Chair—Citifen at Large(County) Meeting was called to order at 2:35 pm on January 17, 2008 by Chair Frissell in the conference room of Jefferson County Public Health. Members present: Chair Frissell, Member Austin, Member Johnson, Member Sullivan, Member Westerman and Member Russell. • Members absent: All members present Staff present: Dr. Thomas Locke, Jean Baldwin, Julia Danskin,Neil Harrington and Cathy Avery. A quorum was present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Board Member Westerman moved to approve the agenda as written. Member Sullivan seconded the motion,which carried by a unanimous vote. ELECTION OF BOARD CHAIR& VICE CHAIR Chair Frissell called for nominations to elect the new Board of Health Chair. Board Member Sullivan nominated John Austin. Board Member Westerman seconded the motion. The vote passed unanimously. Chair Frissell called for nominations to elect a new Board Vice Chair. Board Member Frissell nominated Sheila Westerman. Board Member Austin seconded the motion. The vote passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Board Member Westerman motioned to approve the minutes of December 20, 2007 • as written. Board Member Frissell seconded the motion. There were three in favor and 2 abstentions. Member Westerman asked for clarification on approving the minutes with 3 votes. Jefferson County Board of Health,January 17,2008 Page 1 of 5 • PUBLIC COMMENTS A large number of people assembled to attend the scheduled public hearing on revisions to the Jefferson County Septic Code. During the Public Comments sections, several citizens complained that the Jefferson County Public Health Conference room was not large enough to comfortably accommodate the number of people wishing to attend the meeting. Member Westerman moved to change the venue of the Public Hearing on the On- site Sewage and setting fee schedule to a larger venue at a later date that is published in the in the paper of record,which is the Port Townsend Leader. Member Russell seconded the motion,which passed by unanimous vote. Member Sullivan said there would be people who could not make it to an evening meeting and those that cannot make it to a meeting scheduled in the afternoon but he wanted everyone to know that they could write to the Board and give written testimony if they couldn't make it to future scheduled meetings. It was noted that Public Hearing comments are limited to 3 minutes in length and written comment will be accepted through the close of the public hearing. Additional public comments concerned the Public Utility District announcement they would be ending their septic system inspection program, individuals questioning the need of expanded onsite sewage system inspections, and a perception that there had been inadequate public participation in revising the Jefferson County Septic Code. Member Westerman encouraged the public, before they came to the next meeting, to get a copy of the 8.15 Jefferson County Septic Code and read it, along with the fee schedule. These can be found on the website or at the libraries. OLD BUSINESS Letter to Board re: Port Townsend Paper Company Mill Emissions Dr. Locke discussed the letter from Ms. Cindy Buxton regarding Port Townsend Paper Company mill emissions. He explained that we are still waiting for the final Health Assessment report by the Washington State Department of Health. We received a draft copy and provided a large number of comments. Dr. Locke recommended waiting until the report is released by the state, which is projected to be released at the end of the month. The report does a good job of framing the many health issues associated with air pollution. The Jefferson County Board of Health has no regulatory authority over industrial air pollution but it has responsibilities to assess threats to community health. Two key issues are the specific chemical contaminates in the mill emissions and determining whether emission levels fall within legally permitted levels. . Jefferson County Board of Health,January 17,2008 Page 2 of 5 } • Jean Baldwin stated that during the public comments,today, a member of the public presented her with a letter and petition from the mill signed by 101 employees to be entered into the record. Jean read the letter to the Board. The letter disputed allegations that mill emissions were causing adverse health effects. 2008 Budget Follow-up Veronica Shaw, Chief Operations Director, briefed the Board on the budget. During the budget process this year, JCPH was asked to reduce the General County Fund contribution by $100,000. During the same budget cycle union employees successfully bargained for a significant pay raise, adding additional costs to the Health Departments budget. The JCPH budget that was approved for 2008 is in the "red"by $292,000. The current salaries and benefits increase to JCPH was 7.32% for a total of$160,000. That is not impacted by any FTE changes. In the 1st Quarter budget appropriation JCPH will be talking to the Board of County Commissioners requesting a transfer from the County General Fund. Veronica pointed out that from 2006 to 2008 JCPH is looking at an 18% reduction in county contribution. Jean reminded the Board that very few service programs are funded out of the County General Fund. Jean said that she does not foresee having to reduce FTEs at this time. Update on Royer Group Study on Health District Feasibility Jean updated the Board on The Royer Group (TRG) study. TRG interviewed the Hospital Commission, City Council, to the Board of Health and some staff of JCPH. They have • finished the budget tabulation work. We anticipate preliminary summaries in February. NEW BUSINESS Public Hearing: Jefferson County Septic Code 8.15: Proposed changes regarding Operation and Maintenance Plan Implementation The Public Hearing was postponed due to the large number of attendees and the limited space available. The Public Hearing will be rescheduled in the future, preferably in the evening. The Board suggested: a Press Release providing relevant facts and what the Board will be deliberating about, a summary sheet of the history and the specifics of the regulation and the issues that are before the Board and identifying the limited changes being proposed. Member Westerman suggested having a history of the meetings held in October including dates and the number of attendees and, before the hearing starts, give a brief history of state regulations pertaining to this issue. Neil Harrington, Water Quality Division Manager, discussed a letter that was sent out by PUD that may have added to some people's confusion. It was sent to notify their customers that PUD was going to stop their Municipal Oversight Service (MOS) contract. Neil and other staff spent a great deal of time putting together a letter of explanation but instead PUD sent out a"draft" letter to their customers, which was very confusing. To date the managers of PUD have not sent out a letter of correction, which resulted in the front desk of Environmental Health fielding approximately 150 phone • calls. Jefferson County Board of Health,January 17,2008 Page 3 of 5 Member Westerman said she would like to try to offer Homeowner Operation and Monitoring classes that are more affordable. Neil related that the PUD has offered some money to subsidize the classes. Public Hearing: Proposed Fee Schedule Changes The Public Hearing was postponed due to the number of attendees and the limited space available. New State Funding Authorized by E2SSB 5930 (Governor's Blue Ribbon Commission on Health Care Reform) Dr. Locke reported on the legislative appropriation of$10 million per year for public health improvement. There are nine different priorities areas in the legislation and it calls for the creation of a statewide system where all public health services are measured and tracked on a regular basis. Two committees have been working on developing performance measures and setting priorities. $103,000 per year in state funding is Jefferson County's share. Statewide priorities have been established to use these new funds for increasing the levels of vaccination and improving notifiable condition reporting and response. Jean Baldwin stated that the first requirement is for immunizations and to increase the immunization rate in Jefferson County. We have a significant number of parents who decline immunizations for their children. We may do many outreach behaviors and never change immunization rates. JCPH will continue to meet with the schools and do many outreach activities until we reach the point where we are clear that we have done the best t we can to raise those rates. School Based Clinic Proposal and Application Process Jean informed the Board that she is being encouraged by Port Townsend and Chimacum Schools to apply for a school base clinics grant. Mike Blair is very concerned about health issues and mental health issues in his school. In this planning process, Jean has met with the Vic Dirksen and Paula Dowdle from the hospital and Superintendents from the schools. There is general interest in trying to increase services in the schools. School Based Health Clinics, nationally, show good impacts for mental health and access to health care. Adolescents have very limited access to health care. It's not that they can't get in to see physicians in this area; it's that they just don't go. It's a different culture. The impacts are phenomenal on the health of kids, they stay in school, pregnancy rates are lower, and immunization rates improve. Along with many challenges are great outcomes. Solid Waste Tonnage Annual Report Margie Boyd, Environmental Health Specialist, presented to the Board the 2007 Solid Waste Tonnage Annual Report. JCPH has a contract with the state to remove junk/abandoned vehicles and other solid waste. 700 junk vehicles have been recycled and removed from Jefferson County. One site had 300 vehicles removed. The vendors used to haul junk vehicles are working with Clallam County to set up a crushing site on the West End. Margie also remarked on the tons of garbage that was removed. Margie said that . Jefferson County Board of Health,January 17,2008 Page 4 of 5 4. • Department of Ecology has given JCPH money for a Tire Amnesty for local homeowners, which will coincide with Earth Day in 2008. Jefferson County Public Health Staffing Updates Jean Baldwin reported that the Environmental Health Director position is still open and is being advertised again. Susan Porto in the interim is functioning as the Environmental Health Lead and managing the programs with Jean and Neil. ACTIVITY UPDATE None AGENDA PLANNING Schedule Public Hearing for proposed changes regarding Operation & Monitoring to Septic Code 8.15 Meeting was adjourned at 4:35 p.m. Next Board of Health meeting is February 21, 2008 II JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH John Austin, Chair Sheila Westerman, Vice Chair Roberta Frissell, Member Chuck Russell, Member Phil Johnson, Member David Sullivan, Member • Jefferson County Board of Health,January 17,2008 Page 5 of 5 • JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH MINUTES Thursday, January 17, 2008 Board Members: Staff Members: Phil Johnson—County Commissioner District#1 Thomas Locke,MD,Health Officer David Sullivan—County Commissioner District#2 Jean Baldwin,Public Health Services Director John Austin, Vice Chairman—County Commissioner District#3 Julia Danskin,Nursing Programs Director Jill Buhler—Hospital Commissioner District#2 Geoff Masci—Port Townsend City Council Sheila Westerman—Citizen at Large (City) Roberta Frissell, Chair—Citizen at Large (County) Meeting was called to order at 2:35 pm on January 17, 2008 by Chair Frissell in the conference room of Jefferson County Public Health. Members present: Chair Frissell, Member Austin, Member Johnson, Member Sullivan, Member Westerman and Member Russell. • Members absent: All members present Staff present: Dr. Thomas Locke, Jean Baldwin, Julia Danskin,Neil Harrington and Cathy Avery. A quorum was present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Board Member Westerman moved to approve the agenda as written. Member Sullivan seconded the motion,which carried by a unanimous vote. ELECTION OF BOARD CHAIR& VICE CHAIR Chair Frissell called for nominations to elect the new Board of Health Chair. Board Member Sullivan nominated John Austin. Board Member Westerman seconded the motion. The vote passed unanimously. Chair Frissell called for nominations to elect a new Board Vice Chair. Board Member Frissell nominated Sheila Westerman. Board Member Austin seconded the motion. The vote passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Board Member Westerman motioned to approve the minutes of December 20, 2007 as written. Board Member Frissell seconded the motion. There were three in favor • and 2 abstentions. Member Westerman asked for clarification on approving the minutes with 3 votes. Jefferson County Board of Health,January 17,2008 Page 1 of 5 • PUBLIC COMMENTS A large number of people assembled to attend the scheduled public hearing on revisions to the Jefferson County Septic Code. During the Public Comments sections, several citizens complained that the Jefferson County Public Health Conference room was not large enough to comfortably accommodate the number of people wishing to attend the meeting. Member Westerman moved to change the venue of the Public Hearing on the On- site Sewage and setting fee schedule to a larger venue at a later date that is published in the in the paper of record,which is the Port Townsend Leader. Member Russell seconded the motion,which passed by unanimous vote. Member Sullivan said there would be people who could not make it to an evening meeting and those that cannot make it to a meeting scheduled in the afternoon but he wanted everyone to know that they could write to the Board and give written testimony if they couldn't make it to future scheduled meetings. It was noted that Public Hearing comments are limited to 3 minutes in length and written comment will be accepted through the close of the public hearing. Additional public comments concerned the Public Utility District announcement they • would be ending their septic system inspection program, individuals questioning the need of expanded onsite sewage system inspections, and a perception that there had been inadequate public participation in revising the Jefferson County Septic Code. Member Westerman encouraged the public, before they came to the next meeting, to get a copy of the 8.15 Jefferson County Septic Code and read it, along with the fee schedule. These can be found on the website or at the libraries. OLD BUSINESS Letter to Board re: Port Townsend Paper Company Mill Emissions Dr. Locke discussed the letter from Ms. Cindy Buxton regarding Port Townsend Paper Company mill emissions. He explained that we are still waiting for the final Health Assessment report by the Washington State Department of Health. We received a draft copy and provided a large number of comments. Dr. Locke recommended waiting until the report is released by the state, which is projected to be released at the end of the month. The report does a good job of framing the many health issues associated with air pollution. The Jefferson County Board of Health has no regulatory authority over industrial air pollution but it has responsibilities to assess threats to community health. Two key issues are the specific chemical contaminates in the mill emissions and determining whether emission levels fall within legally permitted levels. • Jefferson County Board of Health,January 17,2008 Page 2 of 5 Jean Baldwin stated that during the public comments, today, a member of the public • presented her with a letter and petition from the mill signed by 101 employees to be entered into the record. Jean read the letter to the Board. The letter disputed allegations that mill emissions were causing adverse health effects. 2008 Budget Follow-up Veronica Shaw, Chief Operations Director, briefed the Board on the budget. During the budget process this year, JCPH was asked to reduce the General County Fund contribution by $100,000. During the same budget cycle union employees successfully bargained for a significant pay raise, adding additional costs to the Health Departments budget. The JCPH budget that was approved for 2008 is in the "red" by $292,000. The current salaries and benefits increase to JCPH was 7.32% for a total of$160,000. That is not impacted by any FTE changes. In the 1st Quarter budget appropriation JCPH will be talking to the Board of County Commissioners requesting a transfer from the County General Fund. Veronica pointed out that from 2006 to 2008 JCPH is looking at an 18% reduction in county contribution. Jean reminded the Board that very few service programs are funded out of the County General Fund. Jean said that she does not foresee having to reduce FTEs at this time. Update on Royer Group Study on Health District Feasibility Jean updated the Board on The Royer Group (TRG) study. TRG interviewed the Hospital Commission, City Council, to the Board of Health and some staff of JCPH. They have finished the budget tabulation work. We anticipate preliminary summaries in February. • NEW BUSINESS Public Hearing: Jefferson County Septic Code 8.15: Proposed changes regarding Operation and Maintenance Plan Implementation The Public Hearing was postponed due to the large number of attendees and the limited space available. The Public Hearing will be rescheduled in the future, preferably in the evening. The Board suggested: a Press Release providing relevant facts and what the Board will be deliberating about, a summary sheet of the history and the specifics of the regulation and the issues that are before the Board and identifying the limited changes being proposed. Member Westerman suggested having a history of the meetings held in October including dates and the number of attendees and, before the hearing starts, give a brief history of state regulations pertaining to this issue. Neil Harrington, Water Quality Division Manager, discussed a letter that was sent out by PUD that may have added to some people's confusion. It was sent to notify their customers that PUD was going to stop their Municipal Oversight Service (MOS) contract. Neil and other staff spent a great deal of time putting together a letter of explanation but instead PUD sent out a"draft" letter to their customers, which was very confusing. To date the managers of PUD have not sent out a letter of correction,which resulted in the front desk of Environmental Health fielding approximately 150 phone • calls. Jefferson County Board of Health,January 17,2008 Page 3 of 5 • Member Westerman said she would like to try to offer Homeowner Operation and Monitoring classes that are more affordable.Neil related that the PUD has offered some , money to subsidize the classes. Public Hearing: Proposed Fee Schedule Changes The Public Hearing was postponed due to the number of attendees and the limited space available. New State Funding Authorized by E2SSB 5930 (Governor's Blue Ribbon Commission on Health Care Reform) Dr. Locke reported on the legislative appropriation of$10 million per year for public health improvement. There are nine different priorities areas in the legislation and it calls for the creation of a statewide system where all public health services are measured and tracked on a regular basis. Two committees have been working on developing performance measures and setting priorities. $103,000 per year in state funding is Jefferson County's share. Statewide priorities have been established to use these new funds for increasing the levels of vaccination and improving notifiable condition reporting and response. Jean Baldwin stated that the first requirement is for immunizations and to increase the immunization rate in Jefferson County. We have a significant number of parents who decline immunizations for their children. We may do many outreach behaviors and never change immunization rates. JCPH will continue to meet with the schools and do many outreach activities until we reach the point where we are clear that we have done the best • we can to raise those rates. School Based Clinic Proposal and Application Process Jean informed the Board that she is being encouraged by Port Townsend and Chimacum Schools to apply for a school base clinics grant. Mike Blair is very concerned about health issues and mental health issues in his school. In this planning process, Jean has met with the Vic Dirksen and Paula Dowdle from the hospital and Superintendents from the schools. There is general interest in trying to increase services in the schools. School Based Health Clinics, nationally, show good impacts for mental health and access to health care. Adolescents have very limited access to health care. It's not that they can't get in to see physicians in this area; it's that they just don't go. It's a different culture. The impacts are phenomenal on the health of kids, they stay in school, pregnancy rates are lower, and immunization rates improve. Along with many challenges are great outcomes. Solid Waste Tonnage Annual Report Margie Boyd, Environmental Health Specialist,presented to the Board the 2007 Solid Waste Tonnage Annual Report. JCPH has a contract with the state to remove junklabandoned vehicles and other solid waste. 700 junk vehicles have been recycled and removed from Jefferson County. One site had 300 vehicles removed. The vendors used to haul junk vehicles are working with Clallam County to set up a crushing site on the West End. Margie also remarked on the tons of garbage that was removed. Margie said that • Jefferson County Board of Health,January 17,2008 Page 4 of 5 Department of Ecology has given JCPH money for a Tire Amnesty for local homeowners, which will coincide with Earth Day in 2008. Jefferson County Public Health Staffing Updates Jean Baldwin reported that the Environmental Health Director position is still open and is being advertised again. Susan Porto in the interim is functioning as the Environmental Health Lead and managing the programs with Jean and Neil. ACTIVITY UPDATE None AGENDA PLANNING Schedule Public Hearing for proposed changes regarding Operation&Monitoring to Septic Code 8.15 Meeting was adjourned at 4:35 p.m. Next Board of Health meeting is February 21, 2008 • JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH John Austin, Chair Sheila esterman, Vice Chair Roberta Frissell, Member Chuck Russell, Member 7 /7 ' Phil Johnson, Member Davis iv.' , ember • Jefferson County Board of Health,January 17,2008 Page 5 of 5 • Board of Health Netiv Business .agenda Item # T., 1 Board of Health Discussion: . Proposed Revisions to Jefferson County Septic Code 8.15 & Associated Fee Schedule yebruary 21, 2008 • Homeowner On-Site Sewage System Inspection Options Option 1: Allows property owners to inspect all OSS serving property they own,including rental properties. Option 2: Allows property owners to inspect any OSS of which they are a resident owner ("a person who owns and occupies, or intends to occupy, a property.") Option 3: Similar to #2, but limited to only one OSS serving the primary residence. Option 4: Similar to #1,with a limit of three OSS. Allows inspection of rental properties. NB:A person can be a "resident owner"of multiple OSS—house,ADU, vacation/secondary home, businesses—as long as they aren't renting them out. Matrix showing which septic systems a Homeowner Operator can inspect under the various code options For a septic system serving: 1 2 3 4 primary residence of owner X X X X secondary/vacation residence of owner X X X rental property X X property owned by a friend or family member a food-service establishment both owner's house and a rental ADU on one septic system X X X X rental ADU on separate system from the house X X ADU on separate system from the house,but the ADU is used by the X X X owners and not rented out. • commercial property owned and occupied by same person X X X multiple commercial buildings, one of which is occupied by property X X X owner commercial property where the property-owner owns land, building, and X X septic, but sells ownership of the business itself Maximum number of OSS one person may inspect no funct'1 1 3 limit limit Notes and Clarifications: • In all cases,we have very limited ability to audit Homeowner Operators. We can ensure that they submit inspection reports, but we cannot tell if the information in the report is accurate without a time-consuming field audit (repeating the inspection using JCPH staff). If an inspection report is in error or deliberately falsified,we are not likely to know. • In the rare case that we discover unmistakable evidence of falsified reports, it will be straightforward to revoke a Homeowner Operator certificate. In most cases,and in all cases of error/incompetence,it will be a much longer and more difficult process to build a case for revocation. Declining to renew a certificate will require the same standard of proof. • A new professional O&M Specialist (or someone new to our county and our way of doing things)gets a lot of feedback from JCPH on their inspection reports —about one-quarter of their reports prompt a call from JCPH. This feedback provides an informal training that • significantly improves the quality of O&M inspections. A Homeowner Operator submits far fewer reports and will take decades to go through a similar"training" period. • Septic systems are the only part of the house with required regular O&M—because they are vital to protecting the public health,welfare, and safety.Protecting a monetary investment is secondary. Regular inspections help ensure that problems or maintenance needs are detected promptly. If issues are undetected or ignored, this could lead to system failure and contaminate surface or groundwater. o The Homeowner Operator option may encourage people to start O&M inspections sooner than waiting for a legal requirement to kick in. o A Homeowner Operator may not detect all the issues that a professional inspector would notice, or may downplay their severity (possibly unconsciously) to avoid repair costs. • The installation portion of the code allows resident owners to install their own septic system only if it serves their primary residence. They are limited to installing one system per calendar year. Option 3 most closely parallels that for O&M inspections. • When resident owners install their own septic system instead of using a licensed installer, the designer and JCPH are both inspecting the progress throughout to help ensure success. In contrast, there will not be a similar safety net for homeowner O&M inspections. • Options 2 and 3 limit people to inspecting septic systems where they will live with the results of their work. • Options 1 and 4 allow landlords to inspect septic systems on rental properties. This raises the following issues: o The renters using the septic system do not have a vested interest in protecting it the way a resident owner would. o The renters have not received the Homeowner Operator training and may not know how to use a septic system properly. • o Landlords often maintain their rental properties to different standards than they do their own homes. In cases of"affordable housing" rentals, prices are often held down by performing only the minimum possible maintenance. o Without a professional inspection, there is no independent third-party verification of a system's operating status. If a septic system fails and the landlord and tenants end up in a legal dispute,JCPH is likely to get dragged into it. We will have no proof one way or the other that the landlord's inspection reports are an accurate and honest assessment of the system. o If a landlord inspector fails to notice and correct problems, and this leads to premature septic failure, this could pose a health risk to the tenants (e.g. surfacing sewage,backup into the house). • Option 1 would allow a landlord to inspect an unlimited number of systems. We have already heard from one interested landlord who might be performing over a dozen inspections a year. Option 4 would prevent landlords from developing this sort of a"sideline business" by capping an individual at three septic systems. DRAFT 1110 Fee Schedule Proposed amendment to add to the existing Jefferson County Public Health Fees, Ordinance No. 11-1215-05 certain new fees in conjunction with revisions to Jefferson County Septic Code 8.15, said revisions intended to update and implement the Operation and Monitoring requirements and add the new homeowner operator program. These revisions reflect changes in WAC 246.272A. The additional new fees proposed to be added to the existing Jefferson County Public Health Fees (Ordinance No. 11-1215-05) are: ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 2008 FEES Additional Fees and Other Information Evaluation of Existing System/Monitoring Inspection Filing Fee—Electronic 39.00 Filing Fee—Paper 46.00 Pumper Report Filing Fee—Electronic 2.00 _ Filing Fee—Paper 9.00 • O&M Homeowner Certification Homeowner Operator 98.00 Renewal 50.00 , '' ' ' C o vA ‘,,A,E-u 7-- on) •'\ Ll c_ A-L7-11- vv\ 'T/tdc. • r'l4 0 8 a & Es-m:5 3g3t,2,�1A0 <.-)A; 0131 c„ J 4 0 L.21-1-E R E; -r 60. Po Irc� SE PTA L. 1NsPBcn00 coVi.y( w1Dz� :L LA)uVLt) E,Vcov2AC:E A Gov�'SPLi;I 1 l.) S fEC T 1 o kJ ST(2r4-y E G y' ) 1--}o jeUER2. AJ.\ 1n,& \ /3-1::. e A---‹ i C. 4 : &b -To \An.4-K e- _., - S O vets T -r4T vkA`C S 1' S T-1& 1 5 V N c T, 0/v /'kJ u3 ALL ANS S,¢Fe. Ly . SiNL1✓ IAA s-• T. LAA "(A j A-5 Py2 ti`^ , TV1E to 6 I iki e KE Ii)., -'f S Loc,kT i old vNC_ ,O9--) A (2'E LJ LL -- 0C., wlE i-3.-c t . oLk.) \i 2 ) M '' OE 1 Gt-t f oa 14.4-s G,e� '6 S VR v-A L... v P LE 11-1- .•�T N- 15 5V s IE v✓\ 15 Ar ' C3 tQA_ (5LE(Z HE- 13v RI E.1 2O LeF.t-n-S -o . ?L E E M A-K G- 5-yzE tT N+J4-T T 5it/o60 DO C. ) r'VE t -7- --t) " 5 "es t)411,s1 ' sgE A 1,5 0 f NS P 1,c--1- -TA--4--1JL i D `� , , 3'r,.. , +- ...,-,-.7-,-..,...„-31,,-,,,,,,,,,-.:11-1*- ..;mss - ..� 1-__.„-„L. 'ra- ,--- i.V1y : p` \,,. - v: .µ � sr �----7=',',--'4i,-;-,,,,,,-,.;.:- . l ® � " - �l � ° P '...7--li:'fi:i- ''''-'•.;-,., - . ''.1r.'''.1-:::-4•••- - 1' '1%'''' '-''.-- ,•,:'";--4'/',;1`-=-,rc.-- --- '- - / i" r I� qe1c / ' ,,,:it,,,z_...,,..---,N-4,,Y/- '-, ": 1 i'.2.*:.. k,r, ,.,:_s.,..:',::::7,:,,,,,,a.1.:::,.'_-"_ - -a';',--;;;,,, ;;;4 :k'''_j_z::-.41' '%E.-e- -fil_ -:;°:',,,--1-04. ..-faiti.. .; r® ®bio r/ - 4.-i-:, -,.-..--'.1,,:i:':,:;!...1.--;:,,,, =--.----_-3:7-:'4;-:-'----!'; (T- P#:1'fr-c"H•.-''',--Fg',,,,,-;;-:.,,'-:-4,-':''-'''''''-','-_::'az-4,7.-:1-/-,.•t.2_2.1,7:ili,A.L.,,,,;'',----_j-;-'- _ cgel.f/r. e-S51.04.7: :-.‘#II ,,,,,:f:::1 l , -- . ° .440.16EuJj !{XN`VJ j `/®/ / / �e:!`o giQeCf� • • •• • r 04r BY`TrendwestH tie / ��• , / rip /44\--iz_ ,11) ,n e 'A 771 or. •w • avt /1- e ( • 1 /if Aro laes L z? -r -r 4strdC o 1 dpi Si, 4'/ , : \jc //-1z 2 ik, 1 -800-457-0103 1 -888-648-7363 Reservations Owner Services • • i't i 9P(>ua, hohnto 504 i 5 e-c(, D S 6\ NPQ1 i ii Pd V" vh cj t " 5 riOt" S ‘-'l a d4 -e(_ & cr\,5 -0.- 1 --t- Q. r\ . e iy( 5E!,c \--\-- ,o °NOLA -P{4)a4 -F P1/4., 0 5(.1.0(A)1 • op 1p 1 � P, kca utr4 kii4 1, CY-a 711 ° ,, GYIN" ei 0 r , Jefferson County Board of Health • 615 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 February 14, 2008 You are considering the adoption of a program that is going to have substantial financial impacts on homeowners throughout Jefferson County. At your initial public hearing on this issue, I was one of many who requested the hearing be rescheduled to an evening time when it would be possible for working people to attend. I never imagined that you would reschedule this hearing to the evening of Valentine's Day! My wife and I had already made reservations for a quiet dinner together this evening to celebrate our love and for a few hours of relaxation together away from the stresses of our busy lives. Instead, we are attending a governmental public hearing in an effort to ensure that the voices of at least a few rural homeowners are represented. I understand that this program is being developed in response to WAC 246-272A-0270, a section of WAC 246-272A, On-site Sewage Systems. While this section may be well- intentioned, it sets an unfunded mandate that translates into tremendous expenses for each homeowner who operates an OSS. Although there are no doubt some failing systems here and there, they do not represent a significant environmental problem that warrants the implementation of an inspection program (OSSIP) as stringent as that demanded by the WAC. • Government should assume a responsibility to demonstrate that there is an actual problem before it attempts to solve it, and that has not been adequately accomplished in this case. Jefferson County has presented some information, but does not appear to have a good "feel" for the scope and scale of the "problem" that is being represented as requiring the proposed solution. We are required by statute in many other areas to present best available science (BAS) in support of regulatory programs, and that requirement does not appear to have been met in this instance. In the absence of a showing of harm, the homeowner should not be placed into the position of having to prove to the county that the system remains functional on such a frequent basis at the cost of these inspections. (If your septic system is failing, you are not going to have any doubt that there's a problem, and you are going to fix it.) I note that Clallam County has successfully defrayed the cost of training homeowners to inspect their own OSSs by winning a Department of Ecology grant in the amount of $242,000. Jefferson County's current option for training homeowners for this type of education is to effectively charge them more for the training and certification than it would cost to hire a professional, if one is available within a reasonable timeframe to perform the inspection. Stepping away from the immediate issue for a moment, Federal Reserve Chairman Bernake recently declared that there is a 50-50 chance of a recession beginning in the first quarter of 2008. Many economists and financial consultants believe that recession began in 2007, and is poised to become much deeper in 2008. The bulk of adjustable rate mortgages will adjust in • 2008, at a time when inflation is higher than it has been in seventeen years. In order to recoup losses from problem mortgages, many banks are raising the interest rates on their credit cards to as high as 30% on unpaid balances. Just as we are tipping into troubled financial waters, Jefferson County is proposing to implement a program that will cause even more financial hardship for many homeowners in the county. Is • this a wise course of action at this time? I, for one, strongly believe that it is not. If this action must go forward, then inspections should be tied to OSS pump-out and/or repair activities, so that the inspection can be performed as a far less expensive checklist item by the pumping technician or the installer. Education and certification for those wishing to perform their own inspections should be made less expensive and filing fees should be waived. In general, any OSS already approved for installation by the county should be considered acceptable for the life expectancy of the type of system, with a supplemental inspection program to begin no sooner than the first year beyond the system's life expectancy. In any instance where an inspector determines a system has a problem, the homeowner should be allowed to seek a second opinion from another inspector prior to being required to actually make the recommended repair. It's time to stop chasing the phantom menace of significant numbers of failing septic systems. Studies have already demonstrated that there simply are not enough failing systems to justify such an expensive and onerous inspection program as the one being proposed. Studies conducted in the more heavily populated portions of the eastern United States demonstrate that wildlife are the majority contributors of fecal coliform, even in such built-up areas as the metropolitan region around Washington, DC (Hagedorn, et. al.). Locally, regulations are already in place for dealing with the few problem systems that are identified through existing monitoring programs. Instead, state and local jurisdictions should be working more intensively on the more frequently reported and quantifiable environmental challenges to the Puget Sound resulting from municipal sewer operations. Every day these large systems contribute millions of gallons of effluent into the Puget Sound and surrounding waterways, laden with an ecologically damaging cocktail of biopharmaceutical residuals. (Research at the Department of Energy's Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (Battelle) in Sequim found that even short-term exposure to the type of estrogen used in oral contraceptives reduces fish fertility (Schultz, et. al.), and other research has demonstrated that the chemical can even change the sex of individual fish.) There are frequent discharges of raw sewage during storm events and whenever there's a significant mechanical failure. These generally take place without significant legal consequences for the operating municipality. Would an OSS owner ever be allowed to operate this way? (King County's new Brightwater outfall will be bringing the pharmaceutical residual cocktail and incidental raw sewage discharges to waters frequented by the endangered J, K, and L Pod resident orcas, once the facility is completed and brought online.) Recognition that WAC 246-272A-0270 is of significant concern in other counties has resulted in the introduction of HB 3345, Regarding inspection intervals for properly functioning on-site sewage disposal systems. Put forward by Representative Linville, the bill serves to inform the state Department of Health that there is significant Legislative concern over the provisions the department included in their WAC, and offers an opportunity for changing the WAC, even if the legislation does not succeed during this session. I strongly recommend that Jefferson County's elected officials petition for immediate rescission or significant modification of WAC 246-272A-0270, and request a stronger legislative focus on the ecological challenges posed by municipal sewer systems. The county should point to the burdensome costs of the inspection program resulting from the WAC provisions, the current inability of the OSS professional community to provide an adequate level of service, as well as to the lack of a demonstration of harm prior to the adoption of the WAC requirement. Officials • • should further point out that the already-identified pollutant contributions of various municipal sewer operations should be of much greater concern as a public health and environmental issue than the hypothetical problems resulting from the failure of a few isolated rural septic systems. Other rural counties may be interested in joining such an effort. There are many excellent reasons to delay adoption of this ordinance update to allow time to work with the OSS-owning community and the state Department of Health to develop both a more appropriate requirement at the state level and a more acceptable inspection program at the local level. I've provided just a few, and I'm certain that others will provide still more. This is not something that has to be completed immediately, and the current level of legislative interest indicates that the state Department of Health should be willing to work on a more reasonable approach. In disaster response medicine, injured people are sorted according to the severity of their injuries, in order to provide the most essential care to those who need it the most. The process is called triage, and it should be employed to allocate our resources for cleaning up the Puget Sound, too. We will get more bang for the buck if we target those resources to municipal sewer system operation and confine our concern for OSS operations to only those systems that are demonstrably failing. Thank you very much for your time and your kind consideration of my comments. Norman acLeod 241 Sand Road Port Townsend, WA 98368 379-8912 1111 Seatic System Maintenance-Chapter 5-The Septic System Owner's Manual r ,: q'" 7 1 '":':":' ^„ 4 k_ "reg; n, v Reprinted with author's permission. For more II . , ,. , , , ..... , .. information about The Septic Owner's Manual . , ,. and to order your own copy, please visit: __ .= _. __ + . i http://www.shelterpub.com/ shelter/ssom book.html rize _ Chapter 5 The Septic System Maintenance Septic System from The Septic System Owner's Manual Owner's Manual , 1 ,,.. • In the last chapter we talked about what goes down the drain. Here we're going to cover long- '' - 1 term periodic maintenance,which consists mainly of septic tank inspection and pumping when 'Wil necessary. We'll also discuss drainfield inspection. tt, r,e +fit; People often say, "Oh, I've never had to pump my tank,"as if that were proof that their septic . system works fine. But be aware, failure to pump tanks is(next to improper siting and design) Y perhaps the greatest single cause of septic system failure. Here's what can happen: 'What It's About ♦n•i+(1ti r., ,-11t tg3t�1±, *,+P. , r ' i• ��' & 1,R/1.+ 9 ,rs.In T� M.•Er4 + 9V '.4T3 -7.3 #, °... '' I''1'.‘ t 1� �,' /../ rf 6),k+ j 1 st 1r •t, i,,.t4.' ,s. '',.,:i., ,;,'1/4,,, r � t t{ •_What's New in \ e ?¢ r; .,,, - t.SVa°‘ 'le wz /g �V.-,-fly 1 This Edition j r Y , , +t--41:,,....1;4 + �• -44. \'` ;lithe') rl ,:Vi.t 11/i��P�,ett Ir/,'1,, { 4N 4�' .. t-. .—fid F'')),1{ ,t 1 u"'---..� .+� .�_ , .fit r.tr� . i_.f`.il..,.•r l f+ ! t/o,1. 'mil. / i,Sample Content ■ ilia" �► 4 i M +UMW Win ! 4 �U i`. 0 ,,,, Table ofIiillwer ,•.. 7,3--... '.+.:• Contents u�eT ' ��«. L. ILi :-.5-..'�' 4 FROM – I!'- ��' ,' r ` -: t Chapter 5 Hoose Fill r r..!`LL1IEP11D ~ - t a�3: :'7`..u�; 1 '4 ,,Septic System `: , �� Maintenance r f' .I ' ` 'Chapter 6 4 ' ' ^ ` j i1 ' t'7'C3Red Alert! ' .-",• a, v5i ystem Failure �' Ex Si ! d -.�y`l 4 " { --,4V -;::••;.;-•;•' llustrations by s1,udGE 8110(5 i.e , Peter INTO 0Kc{urF1E1,o .-r. Aschwanden Healthy tank Clogged tank ;New Chapters A.Scum at top:cooking fats, oils, grease,soap scum, other floatables ° Chapter 9 B.Liquids in middle $: c'` Advanced C.Sludge at bottom:solids heavier than water and what is left over after solids have been partially eaten Systems by bacteria. Once sludge gets up to outlet pipe, it enters and clogs drainfield. .° 3x Chapter 10 "f ' Z. Excessive ` Engineering Drainfield Failure ft: r�y Chapter 11 After several years of use, a build-up of bottom sludge and floating scum will reduce the effective A Tale of Two capacity of the tank, as shown in the"clogged tank"illustration on page 48. This means waste AgiAg -; - Sewers passes through the tank too fast, and solids eventually plug the pipes in the drainfield.The microorganisms in the drainfield no longer have an aerobic(with air)environment in which to perform their cleansing action; they are now struggling to survive in an anaerobic(without air) vi:• Editorial environment. Either untreated effluent begins surfacingon theground or sewage backs upinto Reviews g 9 _` - house drains.At this point, the system has failed, and a new drainfield is required—expensive! http://www.shelterpub.com/_shelter/ssom-maintenance.html(1 of 8)[1/29/2008 4:21:23 PM] Septic System Maintenance-Chapter 5-The Septic System Owner's Manual Magazines andif, 7. , '. " Newspapers .4pii1j1p 7,-itsi '''.---.Z.,-A. x ' Ll'0 Home Power Magazine Inspection and Pumping `" Inspect the Tank . t. More Septic ? Information I. How can you avoid drainfield failure? Inspect the tank at regular intervals and pump when The Truth necessary. In many parts of the country, it is recommended that tanks be pumped every three to } about Septic five years, but recent studies indicate that a functioning tank,without abuse, may only need Systems pumping every 10 to 12 years. Since there are many variables,we recommend an inspection Mother Earth News Article by every three to five years and basing pump-outs on inspections.As the years pass, you should be Or g. Lloyd Kahn able to see the pattern of sludge and scum accumulation. f Septic System � _ Bulletin Board Keep a Record ", r Ongoing Info Use a file folder(or get your wastewater district to get the Homeowner's Septic System Guide z, Feedback from t. shown on page 180)to keep a record of inspections and dates when the tank has been pumped.) Readers What Is Pumping? Recommended Books Septic tanks are pumped by a licensed pumper with a vacuum tank truck. The pumper will use a :: Links 4-to-6-inch-diameter hose and vacuum everything out of the tank(both solids and liquids). Waste pumped from a septic tank is called septage. It is approximately 5%solids and 95%water. Organize Your (Raw sewage is 1%solids and 99%water.)The septage waste must be taken to a licensed • Paperwork disposal site because of the potential health problems with contamination. In many rural areas, 1 t; Septic System private companies have developed septage disposal sites—generally evaporation ponds. In Maintenance other communities, there may be a centrally located sewage plant that can handle the septage Folders waste. Where Is It? Locating the Tank . t You can save some money by locating the tank yourself and digging up the manhole covers. If the tank has no risers over �, inspection holes, and no diagram is available showing the etil)location, you will have to probe for the tank, as follows: Use a 4-: long metal rod (1/2-inch rebar, bent over 90°to make a y 4E' handle at the top)and begin probing where the main drain . ; •+ 0. i e leaves the house. Push the rod firm) down into the soil `k�'' �r, t,until you"feel"the drain pipe. Use a firm and steady push. ¶�...t. .r :, ,J.4 } ,, i' Don't punch or pound the rod as you can damage the pipe, ','.4 :1` , it ;_ • ,ix 41.. r, P; particularly the pipe/septic tank connection. If the soil is too k, tit'' ,v1, ! ,t,' :, j; hard and dry for probing, try soaking the area with a garden • .,N �+. �1y�.,,:?n"1•::..' hose. I Another method:There may be lush growth over the drainfield.Then the tank will be in an /*!.. . obvious place between the house drain and the drainfield. Or, you can run a snake down the 55 t- clean-out to the tank and locate it with a metal detector. t , , s,7 4 '::"I'*z' °D.. ,• ,." 3 '' tea . 2. - _ss"Ite.- _- , .,n z» http://www.shelterpub.com/_shelter/ssom-maintenance.html(2 of 8)[1/29/2008 4:21:23 PM) Septic System Maintenance-Chapter 5-The Septic System Owner's Manual l`c" ,:f.— ex :n:y. :; M ri .„ s?, *;`' „_•Wi . , +It w«3.r '" $,`" mx`C i ,WW--z r45% "",Wr,;#". ' When you find the drain pipe at one spot, move a little further from the house and probe again. :1511 • • Continue along the path of the drain pipe until • 0 . you locate the tank. The tank will probably be 1 to 3 feet underground and at least 5 feet from the COV building. Once you locate it, dig up both manhole "n" .. . covers. Or, if you're lucky, the tank will have 4'lt4;' fr.i . risers with sealed caps instead of the very heavy manhole covers of earlier models. If you plan to inspect your own system and don't have these � � � T risers(see p. 6),we recommend that you have i.-,1 them installed. In addition to providing easy -'� access for inspection, they keep out dirt and rainwater. In the meantime, use a rope through N. "`p the metal handles on the concrete manhole covers to swing them up and off the tank. The "r'' . tank is now ready for inspection and/or pumping. EPDXY—' ." _ Note:Once you locate your tank, make a y .� -5 diagram of where it is for future reference, - '�� _ indicating number of feet from a particular point -- of the house. -7.- / - 1,ijklaliN_\ = . GROOVE z '12—%) C TANK :2, _ r. _ 1 -- . - _` Know Where Thy Tank Lieth! B& M Contractors, of Bolinas, Calif., tells the story of some people who added a kids' bedroom to their house without checking the location of the septic tank.All went well until one day, the system failed and it was then discovered that the room had been built over the the tank. To get to it, the pumpers had to pull back the rug, cut a hole in the floor, run their suction hose into the room through a window,and pump out the tank. Yuck! Tank Inspection Checking It Out You can save money by doing your own inspections. This way you will only call the pumper when needed. Inspection is done from above, by looking in through the manholes. Look around inside with a flashlight and perhaps even a hand mirror attached to a long pole. When checking tanks be sure to wear gloves and to wash your hands thoroughly with an anti-bacterial soap afterwards. r- However, if you've had no experience, it's hard to know what to look for. If you intend to make your own inspections,we suggest you have the pumper come out the first time and that you 4'° watch how s/he performs the inspection.Ask questions. Then, the next time you should be able to do it yourself. http://www.shelterpub.com/_shefeyssom-maintenanoe.html(3 of 8)[1/29/2008 4:21:23 PM] Septic System Maintenance-Chapter 5-The Septic System Owners Manual m �ism�a(,. -,.-_ -�=a a- . r �rs�„g�t°"m �..c . r. .2,,,,:,,,, fir' `��.%��i” `-` :.- �`c � . - sa e m: THE-T NI ` s .® ® -e -`'' eft -tea*� What to Look For Once the tank is open, here's what to look for(assuming the tank has two compartments): Inlet Chamber Odor:Odors should not be too obnoxious f y, when you open the inlet side. (Odors will t be a lot stronger when you stir the * .. r " � V contents.) , Insects:There should not be too manyrii- % ., • flies or flying insects present. 's, ��, 4 >. ( `` Scum:Should be firm,with a crust, but 4 "i - , ' ,,z .•� not solid. It should be like pudding, a e '•' t medium brown color, and 3 to 4 inches '*1.-:'''':f":;''; �'ati 4 r � z1-4";...."-e21.,..,;` ' deep. By poking a stick through the scum, L you can estimate the average thickness. , ..,-,.t<!---,:.k ..:::--:ti„;„,tx,,p, Or, you can fashion an"L-rod,"as shown at the top right.You can figure on there ,ait -i- Wit} fix being equal amounts of scum above and �� �`" ` below the water line. )Tip: Sometimes you can use a hose with high pressure to + +,�14 Roo THROUGH&CuM, squirta hole in the scum big enough to faora,ti sro° arm raNn.Y Rse • estimate its thickness. - aT u''rt'-"��Tvt,cz~es BovMa Cr SCUM,MEASURE'THICKNESS Sludge:You can use a long stick, but U L Ax rxr s OR NAILS OR u: A best is a concrete hoe(the type with two !A.,Roo wltrt A 90arm. holes is best)and an extension handle • - wired or taped on.As you lower the hoe, r® '`' .l.it's a little tricky is to tell when you first hit . , -'s. . . the sludge. Thus, proceed slowly. If you #!f' w.....e: = - -'' feel resistance halfwayto the bottom, it .*' .� , r ,,.;'1"-"6',.,...:. •• • needs pumping. :' Inlet tee:Concrete tees deteriorate. 4'A' "- 4 Outlet Chamber Homemade scum measuring device Scum:In a two-compartment tank, there should be little, if any, scum on the effluent side—the effluent should appear w; relatively clear. If there is much scum here(more than 2 inches),the tank needs pumping. If either scum or sludge is floating out the outlet,the tank needs pumping. In a one-compartment tank, a rule of thumb is that the tank should be pumped when the sludge is 20 inches and the scum is 10 inches. w 1 Outlet tee: If the inside of this tee is clogged, the tank is flooding, and this t - W .._ " .. - . http://www.shelterpub.com/_shelter/ssom-maintenance.html(4 of 8)(1/29/2008 4:21:23 PM] Septic System Maintenance-Chapter 5-The Septic System Owner's Manual could indicate trouble with the drainfield. If the top is dry, it's a good sign, since a wet ,ig top would indicate the tank is flooding. If the tank is flooding, there is no air at the •��! i-t' le"a 14`0 top of the tank, and this anaerobic } ,�� ;•. �y,'4.11 a ,j,'�t��/ •of' condition can result in tank deterioration. e*, , 1', '{ 1, 1. Outlet tee deterioration:A concrete or "3, 1Ji' ceramic outlet tee in a tank can •f ii,`-„ deteriorate above the water line due to sulfuric acid. This is easy to replace with a , • 1 z� plastic tee and should be inspected • w r periodically. � 'l, .,• Baffle wall deterioration:The baffle wall between the two chambers can i scum deteriorate as well. Consider putting an s r y effluent screen in place rather than trying h 111 , i,lj k , ., to repair the baffle wall, or replace the f1, f' , tank.A local septic tank inspector �i0 I �, I �j�� • mentioned an owner who went into his 141, i'5�11,'} , = 4' C tank to repair a baffle wall and was sick "4.,'1,4141 for over a year as a result. In Oregon, for ' ` ' c•• -_` example, most new tanks are now one , , chamber S 7 } S Insects ..._.....r..��.�,. Homemade sludge-measuring device Mosquitoes and flies can be a problem if they You can use hoe to measure depth to sludge, enter and breed in a septic tank. Strangely, this then a rod to measure depth of sludge. is not often mentioned in literature on the subject. Mosquitoes and flies can enter through the plumbing vent of the house, go down through the 4-inch drain pipe and through the inlet tee to the tank. They can then breed in the tank and travel via the same route, reversed, to the outside world. You can cover the top of the vent with a capper of stainless steel screen.Another place for mosquito entry can be tanks with wood or fiberglass risers; here the manhole covers can be sealed with roof patch or a plastic sheet over the lids, then covered with a few shovelfuls of sand. If the Tank Needs Pumping Try to be there when the pumping is done. Lean over the shoulder of the pumper and make sure the tank is pumped completely. We heard about one company that pumped only the liquids and no solids. As the tank is pumped, it should be cleaned out as thoroughly as possible with a hose. There will be plenty of bacteria left to reactivate the system even when the tank is thoroughly cleaned. It is difficult to suck out the bottom 2 to 3 inches of sludge, particularly if it contains a lot of sand. The pumper should hose down the sludge on the bottom when it is exposed so that it will partially liquefy and can then be sucked out.A high-pressure squirter, not a thumb applied to the hose, should be used. Drainfield Inspection If the drainfield was properly designed and installed (and the tank functions properly), it should be mostly maintenance-free. However, here are some tips. vE x - tea*: ems. - � _->�_ cn. .*; .-. . '�#-.�.�P :���- ..�.. �. � ,. �•: _ t� � -°� .,, .... : 74 pA.:. http://www.shelterpub.com/_shelter/ssom-maintenance.html(5 of 8)[1/29/2008 4:21:23 PM] Septic System Maintenance-Chapter 5-The Septic System Owner's Manual > Drainfield Test -14 Lush plant growth over the drainfields(or tank) may be a sign of sewage surfacing. Here's one way to check the drainfield's absorption capacity: run 40 to 80 gallons of water into the tank and, with the outlet riser open,watch how long it takes to drain into the drainfield.A slight back-up from the normal tank water level (the bottom of outlet pipe) is OK. The water level may rise H to 1 inch, but if the field is unclogged(and not flooded), a fully-flooded tank should drop to normal in five to ten minutes. The "French Drain" If the original installation didn't allow for good drainage of surface waters(rain or run-off) around the drainfield, drainage ditches(with proper setbacks from the drainfield)may be needed. Also, a high water table in winter and/or dense soil can cause effluent to surface, causing bad odors and a possible health hazard. st trAce D1v RSION DITO1 Lr'IER TO DOwNsLOPE ' ;DRAINFIELD Vl _ �'r IRE:NO-CS , .- ,� _ ,444"r-.,44..__0+4-1.. !,*'.7: , - '. _ .ff_. i/ J •`� - BACKFLL M �� .t k '' /GRAVEL • eta"0' •f RPORp�TED ...1.i.::-.: S :-.,,,,,%!-. ;.k � --�.. .�;401-4::::i .; �i hi;I COLLECTOR w PE . ' _ _` j DOWN SI CPE E LINER lirlimp- 0, 1enteleii . 1000 ....110, trts, � ,i ,` !t', i L.ETTO TANK f, :z. ti.! DRAMIPIELD t •- frit LEVEL TRENCH /BOTTOMS ,g ' ,c, BACKFILL Ai .•••r•-•--.•.-- --;-•:-•:-...2:.-: _.- GEOTEXTtLE FABRIC 11.E 1 PERFORATED Titth/N • t DISTkUTK)N PIPE l f t rRavEL SYST 1 Roots Trees or shrubs with aggressive,water-seeking roots growing near the drainfield can cause real problems in conventional drainfields. The roots will seek out water, and can run inside the drainfield pipes and choke off the flow of effluent. Willow roots are notorious drainfield invaders. Dual Drainfields If you have a dual drainfield with a diverter valve, rotate the valve to the alternate field every six : months or year. (See p. 20.)This allows the trenches to dry out and rejuvenate. ff Soil Compaction Be sure no one parks cars over the drainfield. It will compact the soil and reduce the aerobic capacity of the drainfield.Also, be sure cars don't drive over the inlet and outlet pipes to the ii septic tank. This can snap the pipes and even cause the tank itself to crack. 4 http://www.shelterpub.com/_shelter/ssom-maintenance.html(6 of 8)[1/29/2008 4:21:23 PM] Septic System Maintenance-Chapter 5-The Septic System Owner's Manual ,%•ie,WerarA:%;.:,4'., ;as.._,- . „t 11 `-' .i.""4"4/1"1,., ' ..`''.."f,'^w °- gf4A-°. .. ,„V- aEv t . .. ";+i -i m+:erg94 : a,.waw°k3ii ,-,- Pump Maintenance For mounds, sand filters, STEP systems, and lift systems for gravity drainage fields: . Run the pump through its cycle periodically to make sure there are no leaking pipes. . Pumps should have alarms. . Pumps should have check valves. Note:in areas of severely cold weather, check valves can be detrimental to proper pump operation. Keep Those Hands Clean! Just as you can pick up a cold or the flu by getting germs on your hands and then touching your hands to your nose, you can pick up some much nastier organisms if you have manual contact with an open tank or drainfield. If you're going to do your own inspection or repairs,wear gloves and wash your hands scrupulously afterwards. Never Been Pumped The fallacy:You often hear a homeowner say, "Oh, I've never had to pump my tank." The irony:Typically, the homeowner has never had any septic system problems and thinks this means nothing need be done. The remedy:Just as you need to check the oil level in your car so it doesn't get too low, you need to periodically check the solids level in your tank so it doesn't get too high. e 8 is s ' Summary E) . Sludge and scum accumulate in every septic tank. How much and how fast depend upon a number of conditions. . You can save money by locating the tank yourself and inspecting scum and sludge levels to determine when pumping is necessary. (However, there is a learning curve.) . Inspect your tank every three to five years until you determine the inspection frequency required for the future. . Scum and sludge must be pumped on a regular basis or system failure can result. . Drainfield operation can be maximized by checking the tank's outlet tee, by testing the drainfield's absorptive capacity(see pp. 52-53), by ensuring good drainage,and by avoiding soil compaction. • 41 11 ' 'ry e.copyright©2007-Shelter Publications, Inc f ' na http://www.shelterpub.com/_shelter/ssom-maintenance.html(7 of 8)[1/29/2008 4:21:23 PM] I J PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON • COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) Signature Street Address Landowner Have YM Septic f A 2 64)4-Czi,e, , t t � C' . aVa 6 0 5 ��ee44 -� Yom, Z7 &71?Cr ÷rt,,,,,„,...(Ke..fi. -r -r l es- i _ 2-6. I W4 Lit,r;t4 e.j., Ace ri--)e S' iZi --c. -- a?6/ 77,,i; / - / Y X1e.,..„,J Ci) ,,.....L ,,,,... _, �GYCJ yJ3-�,� / °X�Q-►_ /4�A— yi N"/eik ra- • aivI,,r7 4ele- -- )3 4.1 er 611-141Q 414 c e;4`, 7 A4-4Ati 7\ ,A A1404114- . ^ z I ,/ 3 5-0 Al 76-cb � -It fl (4 112, pium r -r- 1.-- X. 1 ptp{{ii ; I 1 1 i 0 /1 ' C/,,C44,111 (d-es2-)--e- ....,aziet, 3 TS iwytrvxm..., 41/71-- X 7\ S< UG // mac/ S /J / /1)//4/C-3//0/5,1-; l �' Imo. �c/� �� /)9"01,Du 1-11,1&3145 ,I4d,„ I 4 1 7, il V / I Prepared and distributed by the Olym sic Stewardship Foundation, P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock, WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a • responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens and their government. PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. • 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) vT/ re ,, Street Address ON Have l vN Septic P - i , . S- „ r . 1t?({ c e n#< Q� ON 10(1 a220e`1 Or $4001 /Via fIr/( 0 L: �5 �, f /DOW cue- X Y /�� 11 t -t'�7C.—e ' ' l, j )--- �SLG% �' , „.,,,,,, y Gam y - , v-1..j I //1:,,N ././ 17 i ' I q 7 i C 441-kig_ eci 49. e . lec,‘„ svc% /f -C.--Ce vi,e, 710-741 y ri . 7, czi, � fW ��'+ 7 tAt m.:4, ,,,,mw�/. L - tel' ,,,,,,il 4.21,00,2,A,Ncytoo y I tn3 iv c lei--At -.:s.- (11A_______ jiii4, 00 deepix_. Y Y c-10b,....,,... c2,,,t repared and distributed by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation, P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock, WA 1339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens and their governmen ` if,.. x i 9,444/i // Grit �V"w tifri AY/ Yota)11-eildiv PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON • COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) Si.- ature Street Address Landowner Have Y/ A v .o, t ;( #C,fW YIN eptic AcifC Thieock43 C)*'°.s.s el ----Ait- '' 6473(4/612itzp91 )61 y /1/4)./ .:- 14/ ' difr k- . 0/.., i__, 1,rdti olg) (04-,tii,L) y Y1 t ickt-e_ 1-----, Ar _aw33ga tiro ( c_a/ .A 't /' ?7. • 'd (2,4(4,,,,,_ 11, co,,,,,„ bi(-) l /t/v ---a+c,„. Nill'‘viee ...., , i .e, 100-11,4-f, 4./-11\1: i )44j L Ts'4_ 7 r� , l0 �S '�� 's WO � Q(��4it S1 L �� fr.�� .� Y - / , \ 6)gi-igiuk It' v -1 Y, ,,, .,,,,,, 4/ mo 4 -64.017 ' ' •-•U14-11A IC Sil o. ctoes , t __ a �_� ): f f yrs_' 1 I' or , _ ._ ,/, -07/20,„4„4, i r‘ ' - P4,0‘,/ 1 cleve pi olive ,.,- , %i 00' - 3o /ler /1/ ., keigeAg.,z -DOINt „i 1 PC Kemrk% Aati I .Prepared a • distributed by the I , pic •i• Found. '•n,P.O. Box 111 Po Hadlock, WA 98339. 7 F is . _ ass roots i tion o` : ferson sunt_citizens who�ievetl Y idea that stewardsh> f the la is a responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens 0 and their government. a t PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. • 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count)Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair,effective and practical. Name (print) Signature r Street Address Landowner Have Y/N Septic 44/0 ??ay 02•9Y el3 . ii - tai es xiks GedlicAWA1v5 .295 9G 3 h1-&/y/0 if , 5 YCf Zi Po) 42-A4 Kyht-itugtyyp...., k Qu-il, oft qi3?C Ie) / e.5411 — f.<'rr r Eliot � 2a i � Q./cQfr,o, l✓ y " tom ,_gi e `-' /6-5 764-9 ;) Ye aotR7 6--60 Rickf Jz�Q,u- �t r f2a*elc t5�ci< R+7 tis Ye5 j 11 v't 6,F0 VAI't -/),;;,.. /Z4t461.441t--) 5-90 ./(74/ -1) i Prepared and distributed by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation,P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock,WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens and their government. • r Y PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON • COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) Signature Street Address Landowner Have Y/N Septic YM 4/1'c h ri-e=f 54144z W � � .N 9s'.7 9,4,_ /47 IDI Y Y �p �i e5S (/29 / f'faSJ,� !� fi 3 y2' / .�I r�r0 0.,,(44Prkg9c =.---wei d*! eL? Ie in& /c LI) '1 '`..-, , 674%--- O. I-150 fe_,Pkvic,,c,,cz, ,i_ ! 42.4,4....._ Y Y s 10a9 /a A c • c v /r I 0 r i Ct A e' ee I ../51.A )L.,0 4:eil / ' 3 .0 4 xi ( i -77/1 f A, e too Ce►nc*qvc gt,k `� (-;,,i, ‘,1 ?vt' u (1r6-7L r t t 35 6)0 C?ev29e* V CI 1/ J4et) - Ti !'1 1 c U .'�.. ._tt. 3 76 ( py) G PC / t 0 ."yr )0.--/-10-,-1`-.1L, �� f t r. Ar, ftnDn G%,(1 re3 Prepared and distributed by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation, P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock, WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens • and their government. , PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. • 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson 4unty, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair,effective and practical. Name (print) Signature Street Address andowner Have Septic Y/N i'r.,,r „1/42,228 4 iocitzczt,-4., 70/ cri,-,622-71) Y )/ ) A.49, k •t ,,,.... d?,.LJ:.04,-7 1 ccandoi-P1 7 • 0 i I- i 9 LA : di b_• 1 .' ._ ! .��, e . t tom. e R tr- kc4: ' ,� \(v\o�c Coy,." 3j Vc4 (0oW Cen-l-e IL la ,--rAmmi 64)&15 Ja7„,_04...,____ Y ,i>7 47/Zi4,�4 1k `4" 4 /` i S53 Qui ( vl C / r l NR,VI iik.J >% }- .� i 0ii,u140.4' DSV Is P€ 1 YYl �Co Cc� 9'� Te i360 RD y y Prepared and distributed by the Olympic Stewards ip Foundation, P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock,WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens and their government. III r . PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON • COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) enaturejlStreet Address Landowner Have t Y/N Septic 11 Cr�." ' -i2_ La"L2 p -fitv& tki 11;t C✓1/4- c t Q/ Y>/N Gil__ r,:)b.111 G e t 'ca : , � , , -l;I 1��,. c-4. .,p /Sets, , l4Kt % >i&S 6114-41a, 61111-A1A , i . ' f _4 ./ :, 1 1 1°. r-C itie,c 44,--s • t C r kj/�,t 9 . c` �' `�>� I V( S ti .c. �.(,4^*17.2, '. w,e/ "rte `4i J•?a.,z//4_1 .1 I U 'rCt tl .i \ffi : -3-.) c( Yes e5 / Pk( Ti'\i2c c6 .46% Za �3,C Getgl. Get/ poi( ��... C�l1 U c -77) I" e -3_,_,Egu,eleir- No.. " i ' ..�_ n ( k1 a 'C i c ZJC, fQ ,-, t3? Yes F � 7 u , Ye5 Prepared and distributed by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation, P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock, WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens • and their government. PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. • 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders,including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) Signature Street Address Landowner Have } Y/N Septic Ar- Re,-1 /1) ce r AV \et JSc=%f /a't7Jr`c7 -" > r/ ° C� 5� Q�riceL \/ 7s //C ' / ( 1/.� - Q / or, • Prepared and distributed by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation,P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock, WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens and their government. 40 f , PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON • COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson CountWoard of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, rncluding a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) Signature Street Address Landowner Have Y/N Septic Y/N cs5Ginde0 &MN 0/ „ ,,„, 6 MO o Las top P, Mci,, Prepared and distributed by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation,P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock, WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens • and their government. • • MOMMER EARTH NEWS. Otigkial Guide lb Wag Wisely February/March 2008 Reprinted with permission from Mother Earth News This article appears in the February/March 2008 edition,and is available online at: http://www.motherearthnews.com/Modern-Homesteading/2008-02-01/Truth-About-Septic-Systems.aspx The Truth About Septic Systems By Lloyd Kahn It came to my attention on a quiet summer day in 1989—heavy trucks were rolling down the dirt road. Trees were being cut down; stumps, bulldozed. Twenty truckloads of sand and gravel were brought in. My neighbor was adding a small addition to his house, and because of local building codes, he had to install a "mound" septic system. The landscape-disrupting mound, along with pumps and complex plumbing, cost more than $40,000! In contrast, my conventional gravity-powered system, built for less than $3,000 in 1971 on land with the same soil profile, has worked reliably for 36 years. Homeowners across the United States are being confronted by regulators and • engineers decreeing that their septic systems are failing and must be replaced by complex and expensive alternatives. It's a trend that's been gaining momentum over the past decade for both single-family homes and community sewer systems. Many of these expensive systems are unnecessary and being forced on homeowners under false pretenses in order to generate maximum income—often federal "Clean Water" grant funding. For several years I have been working with science researcher John Hulls, attempting to educate homeowners about septic systems so they can deal intelligently with officials when confronted with expensive upgrades; this article summarizes our advice. The push for expensive wastewater disposal is not a movement; there is no central headquarters. Rather, it's a recurring theme. Why is there virtually no media attention about this phenomenon? Well, septic systems are underground —out of sight, out of mind—and they tend to work so well (and silently) that people are scarcely aware of their function. Then there's the "eeeeyu" factor: Feces is not a subject for polite conversation or one that inspires rational discussion. Yes, there are some failing septic systems that need fixing, and there are soils unsuitable and lots too small for conventional systems. Certainly, septic systems that leak into wells should be condemned. There also are areas where soil characteristics and population densities are leading to problems with nitrates in groundwater. But I think many, if not most, of the "upgrades" now being required are not necessary for either environmental or health reasons. • There's Money in Sewage • There's always been money to be made in sewage and garbage—stuff people don't want to mess with —and the sums presently generated in the U.S. on-site wastewater disposal industry are enormous. For example, if a bill that's in the California legislature (AB 885) as of this printing mandates statewide septic requirements as restrictive as those in affluent California counties, the cost could be as much as $30 billion in mandatory home septic upgrades in California alone (not counting new systems)—if only one-third of the systems were targeted for replacement. I've been amazed by the scale, by the lack of accountability, by the hoodwinking of the public and by so many homeowners placidly accepting their fates. If you own a home with a septic system and haven't been pushed to upgrade to an expensive new system yet, I bet you will be in the next five years. The amount of money to be made is just too great for this new industry to slow down on its own accord. The Players You will encounter four categories of people who promote expensive septic systems: engineers, regulators, developers and misguided environmentalists. Engineers. Don't assume that an academic degree necessarily ensures competence, design skill or honesty. I've seen civil engineers repeatedly distort science and dupe the public in order to justify exorbitant fees. Remember that it's in their interest for systems • to be failing. John H. (Timothy) Winneberger, Ph.D., is a botanist and a renowned pioneer in advocating on-site sewage disposal as opposed to sewers for small towns; he is the author of Septic Systems, a Consultant's Toolkit. Winneberger says claims of health hazards from failing septic systems are vastly exaggerated, that accusations of pollution are more political than scientific, and that the field is rife with misinformation. He says there's no scientific evidence that people get ill from failing septic systems. "Nitrogen just does not want to travel through soils," he says. "Neither do bacteria or viruses. It's really immaterial because the accusation is all that's needed. There is no scientific follow-up to put these guys (engineers) in their places." Regulators. Many health agencies are funded by permits and fees, so the more expensive the systems, the bigger their department's income. I think many regulators just honestly don't understand the science of on-site wastewater systems; they're taking the word of "experts." Also, in many states, county health regulators are forced into unrealistic requirements by state agencies—in California, by the State Water Resources Control Board. Developers. Some landowners want to use grant money to build expensive septic systems to increase their land's value before selling it. Environmentalists. I consider myself an environmentalist, but I've seen misguided ones condemning septic systems without the most basic understanding of them. • • Small Towns This all started for me in 1989 when a multimillion dollar wastewater plan was suddenly sprung on my hometown of Bolinas, Calif. E. coli (Escherichia coli) had reportedly been discovered in a creek and, even though no tests were done to determine if the bacteria were coming from human, wildlife or livestock waste, the septic systems of all 300 houses in town were declared failing. Engineers were hired to design a plan. (These same engineers had previously been hired to write the county's alternative wastewater standards.) Federal Clean Water grant money was available, so apparently a need had been manufactured to obtain the money. The plan called for "community leachfields," i.e., dumping sewage effluent on various town lots. My neighbor was going to have sewage from 20 houses pumped to a lot next to his house. Townspeople rose up. A year of town meetings, passionate debate and newspaper articles ensued. We shot the plan down, but barely. The engineers ended up collecting $500,000 for designs that were never built. That amount would have fixed all the failing systems (maybe there were 10) with enough left over to provide needed drainage for the entire town. Since then I've seen the same modus operandi in small towns country-wide. For example, there is another California town currently wrestling with a multimillion dollar 1111 rip-off of homeowners and taxpayers. In Los Osos, an ongoing $150 million wastewater nightmare has homeowners facing $300 to $400 monthly sewer payments for a plan that is $50 million more expensive than the cheaper, more ecological plan many townspeople want. For details see: http://rockofthecoast.com/indexphp?oqption=com content&task=view&id=39&Itemid=1 http://www.pzldf.orq/ and a video clip— http://www.insiderexclusive.com/los osos.htm Monte Rio, Calif., was presented with a ludicrous plan designed to maximize profit for engineers and benefit developers. The project was recently abandoned by Sonoma County due to ballooning costs, and at least some of the local homeowners are investigating how much in government funds were spent on engineering and planning costs. (This is a win-win situation for the engineers in that they get paid handsomely for design even when their plans are unworkable.) Small towns all over the country are grappling with similar situations. Single Homes • It's also happening with individual homes. For example, if your system fails (or you build an addition that prompts stricter septic requirements), you must hire an engineer to design a $50,000 (where I live) mound system instead of a simple gravity-powered system that would work just fine in most locations. I wondered if this was just a California phenomenon, so I ran a short notice in Mother Earth News early last year asking people to contact me if they had encountered new and expensive wastewater requirements. I received more than 75 replies from all over the country. Geauga County, Ohio: "The new mound will be larger than our house. How to pay for it? Bye-bye savings." Whatcom County, Wash.: "The assessor came onto my property and told me when the sewer goes down my road, he will increase my property's tax valuation to $1.2 million dollars! I bought these 19.51 acres, with two trashed houses and a barn, for $195,000 and could barely afford the taxes on it then, almost $2,000. Now my taxes are almost $5,000, and our income has not increased at all." Northport, Mich.: "The firm that assessed the village's need for the sewer is the same one that designed it and is now planning to build it." Spooner, Wis.: "We were planning to buy a piece of land for $6,000 where a tornado • had leveled the house—until we were told we'd need a $30,000 mound system." Hillsdale County, Mich.: "Exasperated homeowners are fed up with eyesores for yards, not to mention costs of these systems that force mortgage refinancing for those whose homes are nearly paid off." Thurston County, Wash.: "I am going through this nightmare now. FYI, the system has not failed, there is no sewage on the surface of the ground, no sewage backup, no sewage leaks, no soggy ground, no smells, no soil investigation (indicating) human pathogens." From a general contractor in Shasta County, Calif.: "I have seen people with the most perfect soil (for a conventional gravity system) get turned down for various reasons and have to hire a septic designer, and that's where it gets expensive." Water Pollution and Scientific Testing Water pollution is commonly measured by either pathogens or nitrates (and more recently pharmaceuticals). • • Pathogens: Huge sums are being spent because E. coli is being discovered in local waterways. But regulators are not testing to see if the E. coli is from humans, livestock or wildlife. Recently the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has promoted Bacterial Source Tracking (BST), a new methodology that examines DNA to determine the actual sources of fecal bacteria. If E. coli contamination from septic systems is alleged as the reason for excessive septic regulations in your area, ask your health officials if BST has been utilized. If not, the mere presence of E. coli does not indicate failing septic systems. "My hypothesis is that if we get good source tracking, septic systems are going to look awfully good," says E. Jerry Tyler, Ph.D., Professor in the Soil Science Department, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and co-author of The Wisconsin Mound Manual. I've seen regulators and engineers stonewall accurate BST testing because they want to blame septic systems. And by the way, BST is no longer"too expensive." Nitrates: Nitrates in groundwater can be a real problem. But nitrate contamination of groundwater should not be an excuse for blanket application of Draconian standards in the absence of scientific testing. Nitrate impact from septic systems is actually minimal compared to runoff from agricultural fertilizers, cattle feedlots, atmospheric pollution and large discharges of municipal waste. • Depth to Groundwater and Percolation Tests Individual homeowners are generally being forced into "advanced" systems as opposed to conventional gravity systems due either to a requirement that there be 24 inches of unsaturated soil above groundwater level in the wettest months, or because water does not percolate through the soil fast enough. These rules are intended to assure wastewater never seeps to the surface, and they presume that such seepage is dangerous. When I asked Winneberger about the risks involved with effluent surfacing, he said, "If someone in the house has an illness and the pathogen survives the septic tank (not likely) and surfaces on the ground, and a baby crawls along and drinks it, the baby could get that illness. But what are the chances of that occurring?" He went on to say, "I don't know of any bona fide case of anyone getting an illness from septic tank effluent surfacing." Also, cost has to be a factor in these decisions. There is no such thing as zero risk. In a 2000 study sponsored by the EPA, it was concluded that "acceptable risk levels, rather than zero risk, need to be targeted with due awareness of attendant costs and benefits." Most of the septic designers I talked with said perk tests, as currently conducted, are relatively worthless. Pouring water in holes to see if it disappears does not accurately gauge water absorption capabilities. • t , What Can You Do? Jennifer Hause is an engineering scientist with the National Environmental Services Center at West Virginia University. Her organization answers questions regarding on- site sewage disposal [(800) 624-8301]. "The main problems I see," she says, "are lack of education and lack of maintenance." It's going to be a difficult battle for homeowners in coming years, but education is the foundation for participating in the dialogue. Maintaining your system is the key to its functionality and longevity. (I've posted the chapter from our book on septic system maintenance: http://www.shelterpub.com/ shelter/ssom-maintenance.html .) I hope this forewarning will help you forearm yourself with knowledge. Get to know your septic system. Do some research on on-site wastewater disposal so you can maintain your system—and so you'll be prepared to deal with this situation. There's a lot at stake here. Three Main Types of Septic Systems There are three broad categories of septic systems: conventional gravity systems, mound systems and "advanced" treatment systems. Conventional gravity systems: Waterborne waste flows to the tank by gravity, and effluent (the liquid part of wastewater) exits the tank to the drainfield (or Ieachfield) by gravity. No pumps, electricity or mounds. (A drainfield is a series of perforated underground pipes through which effluent is dispersed so that it can gradually seep into the subsoil.) This all goes on underground. And if things work properly, the soil purifies the effluent and returns clean water to the water table. It's a "green" system. "Soil has this marvelous capacity for treating all these constituents," says George Tchobanoglous, Ph.D., and co-author of the "bible" of the wastewater industry, Small and Decentralized Wastewater Systems. Mound systems: Large man-made, aboveground mounds of sand and gravel are installed when authorities think conventional drainfields won't be adequate. This system is run by electrical pumps. See the illustration below. Mounds are expensive, use a lot of resources, don't work when the power is off, and are more prone to failure. "Advanced" treatment systems: This includes a wide range of systems or additions to conventional systems, such as sand filters, aerobic units or trickling biofilters. An example is Orenco's AdvanTex system. http://www.orenco.com/ots/ots adv index.asp • • There is a continuum of less expensive options between a gravity system and the most advanced systems. If something goes wrong with a gravity system, it doesn't mean you have to automatically go to a mound or other high-tech replacement. There are steps that can be taken to fix a gravity system without paying big bucks to replace it. So why are mound or advanced systems required? Small towns are generally being forced to "upgrade" due to alleged pollution of local waterways or groundwater. Individuals are facing installation of expensive, other-than-conventional systems due to a requirement that there be, for example, 24 inches of unsaturated soil to depth of groundwater during the "wet season," or soil that does not percolate (drain) "fast enough." An Example of Faulty Reasoning In 1996 a shellfish farming operation on Virginia's eastern shore was shut down due to E. coli in the waters; the assumed culprit: "must be from septic systems"—yet there were none in the area. But there were a lot of raccoons. When 180 raccoons were trapped and removed, the contamination ceased and the tidal creeks were reopened to shelifishing. • Lloyd Kahn doesn't take any crap when it comes to septic systems. He served for a year on a county septic advisory committee and has followed all matters septic over the past 15 years, starting when his town was confronted with a corrupt$7 million wastewater plan in the late '80s. In 2000, he wrote The Septic System Owner's Manual. The new edition (2007) remains the single best book about septic systems for homeowners. Copyright 2008,All Rights Reserved I Ogden Publications,Inc.,1503 SW 42nd St.,Topeka,Kansas 66609-1265 Reprinted with Permission Dick Bergeron 41110 240 Elk Drive Brinnon WA 98320 February 14, 2008 Jefferson County Board of Health 615 Sheridan Street Port Townsend WA 98368 Dear Board Members, Safe sewage management is a human responsibility. Yet much like those who think that water comes from a faucet, or that electricity comes from a wall outlet, waste products do not magically disappear once the toilet is flushed. An overwhelming majority of septic systems work well, as they should. The relatively few that do fail from time to time have a minimal effect on the environment. It would take hundreds of thousands of OSS failures to match the harm caused by even one municipal system failure, or to match the residual pharmaceuticals discharged daily into the ocean by municipal systems. Given this low risk of OSS, I have to wonder why the Board of Health is intending to pass the burden of this unfunded mandate to the residents of Jefferson County. • The state Department of Health has been put on notice that some legislators in Olympia are unhappy with these excessive rules (HR3345). As the campaign increases by organizations representing rural landowners,we will likely see changes to septic monitoring rules as early as next year. I have to wonder why Jefferson County officials have not joined with other counties to express indignation with Olympia rulemakers. As to the costs to city sewer users versus septic users,those of us on septic systems have already paid a substantial amount to have our systems installed. We are responsible for maintaining those systems, and for eventually replacing them at today's average cost of $20 to 25,000. Until state rules are changed, or at least until the basic infrastructure exists to allow adequate monitoring, I strongly urge this board to table the adoption of a new OSS ordinance while at the same time establishing a stakeholder panel to thoroughly investigate factual information for county officials and landowners alike, and to review what can and cannot reasonably be done with regard to the proper functioning of septic systems. Sincerely, • J,.. Public Comment re: proposed On-Site Septic System Ordinance,entered into the public record on February 14,2008: • I am the Chair of the Church Council for Community United Methodist Church in Port Hadlock,and brought the public hearing tomorrow to the attention of our Council this evening. We were in agreement that we are all interested in clean water and all that you are trying to accomplish with this ordinance,and understand that to some extent,action by the State is the occasion for change in the current local ordinance. However,we have concerns about how the proposed ordinance may affect us if what I have heard about it is true. For example, we have three separate septic systems on our property. All of these are old systems. My understanding is that we could be out thousands of dollars, literally,both in the inspection costs and in the prep work and possible"rehabbing"of our systems under this ordinance. Further,having one homeowner-member who takes the class inspect all of our systems may not be allowed. We are a relatively small congregation on a very limited budget,and could hardly afford such a cost,especially on a regular basis! We are also in the area of Port Hadlock scheduled to be on the UGA sewer line when that is completed, and wonder if you are giving consideration to allowing such systems to remain as is until that system is in place and the current systems no longer needed. Further,once certified, we do not believe there is any reason to limit the number of systems a person could inspect,as long as they were of the type the person was trained for. We also wonder if you are making any allowance for non-profits,people on fixed incomes, handicapped and elderly,people on welfare or other minimal incomes such as SSI or Social Security— this certainly applies to a large number of our congregation,and many of them do actually own homes. Those who are renting will certainly see the costs passed on to them in the form of higher rents. (My own landlord owns at least six rental properties in addition to his own home—will he not be able to do all of his own inspections for a single class and certification fee [see above]?) As an individual citizen who sat on the citizens' committee to develop a new Critical Areas Ordinance,I personally have an additional comment about this ordinance. Unless I missed the point entirely,the reason we established buffers for critical areas was to allow for the natural filtration of contaminants from sources such as septic systems,among others,and thereby protect the critical area, wetland,etc.,from possible pollution. Isn't it massive overkill to chase down and contain every possible little coli before it can even enter the buffer? One fmal comment, a thank you: as a citizen who works full time,I appreciate that you added an evening session for the hearing—older folks who don't drive at night would appreciate a daytime opportunity,I'm sure. But I am not in a position to cancel on-going client appointments,and am sure there are many other working people in the county who will be equally affected by this ordinance and who also appreciate the opportunity to be heard. Respectfully submitted by Diane Johnson, Ph.D. / / •ii / A" 70 Market Street Port Hadlock, WA 98339 and 1521 Dabob Road Quilcene,WA 98376 • • • k .c7 fersOvi c 144 -e -1-4' +1, 6+ S C) I 00,rsa ) oCs CA r s e kit _ yr) r 6- e 2 A/A ti S • p ,,4'1' ' /47/1 Z5CC7 ifrIy"-e I /7,-2---/ . , , ,,,,, -es-4 /3a-,/,--/---2 e .c.-- 0 0 40 / /ter-, 6 e`///7 T V1 , G'--t� i ' flee_ -A . Li 2- .CW.e3-cY ''.7/4e-- /e-'6.1eA (df ' g ICL-'1/ 74 '(?(->17(J 1,L10K - 4-►-/i —h1 } 4 v ! � l 'a ems ' -e_ rn /KS 1- i r� a 1,1; 1;x.- , t1 /'fes -yt e - 1 1 i ' i,1 ,,..:(1 _Z. 1-,\, t, ,..ec >pi \-1-14.„0, ...., 7_ s---z_41-7,-w,o1.--zes--,<„,,,,-_4 .,&),_) . ,, _ re,/.--" ' /l'e:i '--- I"; -.--- • z e -4-e: ----- d 9 *4 1 4)- -17- --, :----lz) -/-4--A-e 7/--,t--ej- e- J--y. d,i5 -....(.1,-„- -, -7 ,L 06an . ' _ — F tp(i-v---r-7? .(�7' _ - 2z - / � 7s kr t i-- ; , . eo ic., .;,-4-,-," _ W , . ,e4,41 < / 1 i , - A '�/ / / a (. , , 6.7 it a I ?' / f I 60d1/ /tee - OW 0421-/ i al j/e`Q,1 kjf/-17 Vtital el/Se-- ki-krt-C ,...r ot..-tel • Y--&-c-- 'eve- 7)5„.._, fi putti•ng Conservationcin the round for Fut rr C e to s • FACT SHEET for Jefferson County Board of Health's Public Hearing Jefferson County Septic Code 8.15 Proposed changes regarding Operation and Maintenance 0 Plan Implementation and Proposed Fee Schedule Changes This document is a clarification of the position taken by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation on the issue of On-Site Sewage(OSS),or septic system,maintenance and monitoring proposals by Jefferson County Public Health. We believe that we have our facts right;however,there has been • a considerable amount of conflicting, sometimes misleading, information disseminated by various county officials over the past months. FACT: State law does require the monitoring of on-site sewage (septic) systems. Simple gravity systems without pumps must be monitored every three years, while any system that is more complex must be monitored once a year. FACT: Jefferson County's proposed ordinance goes far beyond state requirements for operation, maintenance and monitoring without justification. The requirement for professional inspections do not come from the state. Draft section 8.15.150 FACT: County officials are limited in how and when they may enter privately owned property. FACT: Septic systems safely dispose of sewage for anywhere from 25%to 33%of homes and businesses in the United States. Residual excreted, legal drugs, a major problem with urban sewage, where effluent is discharged into water,are safely sequestered in soil with septic systems. Most of the water used by homes and businesses on septic systems goes back into the water table as clean as if it has fallen as rain from a pristine atmosphere. FACT: In addition to all other powers and duties, health districts shall have the power to charge fees in connection with the issuance or renewal of a license or permit required by law: PROVIDED, That the fees charged shall not exceed the actual cost involved in issuing or renewing the license or permit. RCW 70.46.120 License or permit fees. • What is the Olympic Stewardship Foundation's position on septic system inspections? OSF is not against monitoring. Quite the opposite. OSF simply believes that owners of on-site septic systems need to be informed and encouraged to monitor, and to maintain their systems in good working order. The county Health department is proposing draconian regulations and fees that OSF does not believe will accomplish the goal of ensuring that septic systems throughout the county will function as designed. Effective stewardship through regular septic monitoring will benefit the homeowner with reduced maintenance costs. This is well within the realm of do-it-yourself. Jefferson County says: All county offices comply with the Open Public Meetings Act...we provide written notice to the public through the press and media about meetings and hearings. The Leader, Q&A about septic system rule changes,February 6,2008 FACT: They have done that and it complies with legal provisions. They even sent post cards announcing the Valentine's Day public hearing to a few members of the public; however, very few people ever read the small-print legal ads at the back of the classified ad section. Most citizens, including the many who own property in the county, yet who primarily reside elsewhere, or who are snowbirds, will never know about new rules, regulations or laws until they are notified that they are in violation. OSF has proposed that Jefferson County notify ALL property owners in writing about public hearings that affect their property ownership. The cost to do this is not very great- the County Treasurer has the mailing list of all property owners. 411) ' Jefferson County proposes: Homeowners or property owners would only be allowed to inspect their own septic system. Certified homeowners could not help neighbors or relatives. Even rental 1111 property owners would have to have a certificate for each property they own. Draft Jefferson County Septic Code 8.15 FACT: During the septic system meetings, held last year by former Environmental Health Director Mike McNickle, and which are much-touted by current officials, Mr. McNickle had a reasonable vision for a homeowner monitoring program that included realistic training costs, the ability to monitor several systems-certainly for friends and neighbors -and perhaps as a side job to benefit the community. Mr. McNickle recognized the important element to be awareness by residents with septic systems rather than another onerous regulatory burden. Jefferson County Proposes: "Exception. A resident owner may construct, alter, repair, or modify a permitted on-site sewage system on his/her own property for his/her own use without obtaining an Installer's Certificate, PROVIDED: ...The resident owner does not arrange for, nor contract, nor hire, with or without reimbursement, any person or concern to perform that work, unless that person is a Jefferson County Certified Sewage System Installer as set forth in this section...."Draft Jefferson County Septic Code 8.15 Our problem with that: Rural values hold that neighbors work together to solve problems. The county proposal that we cannot help a friend or neighbor is ludicrous. It also does not allow a resident owner to hire a local equipment operator to do the hard digging that may be necessary to install or repair a septic system. Jefferson County Says: ...we will be required to default to the state law which has no similar provisions for homeowner O&M...JCPH information sheet distributed at the originally scheduled hearing on • January 17, 2008 Our problem with that: We have no idea what state law the county is looking at. WAC 246- 272A-270, Operation, monitoring, and maintenance-Owner responsibilities, simply requires owners to assure a complete evaluation of their system. Nothing says it has to be a professional inspection. In fact, a review of documents related to the state Board of Health rule-making procedure clearly indicates that the intent of the state board was to allow homeowners to do their own monitoring without burdensome training by the Washington On-Site Sewage Association. WAC 246-272A-0340 (2) Local health officer may establish programs and requirements for approving maintenance service providers. 70.118.120 RCW does mention qualifications and certificates for inspectors, although the intent of that section, written in 1999, was directed at those who perform such duties for profit. Jefferson County Says: [The] proposed homeowner O&M, would have been paid for by the clean water district fee. The Leader, Q&A about septic system rule changes,February 6,2008 FACT: County Commissioner David Sullivan tried to force a clean water district, including an $18 per parcel fee, on Jefferson Count property owners in the latter half of 2007. The Board of Commissioners decided against the fee, yet they did adopt a paper clean water district. Most of that proposed clean water district would have been used to fund the county's share of a state Department of Ecology grant to look for problems with septic system along 60 miles of Hood Canal shoreline. That the parcel fee would have paid for homeowner O&M is not true. That Commissioner Sullivan put his hand over his microphone after the public hearing on the • clean water district at Fort Worden and told the other commissioners that if we didn't want to • FAIR LEA TREE FARM January 16,2008 11111 Jefferson County Board of Health 615 Sheridan Street Port Townsend,WA 98368 Re: Draft Jefferson County Code 18.15;Jefferson County Septic Code The following statement is made in opposition to various provisions in the proposed Jefferson County Septic Code;it is being made at this time to establish legal standing for myself in any actions resulting from adoption of the proposed ordinance. I object to the proposed Jefferson County Septic Code OCC 18.15) for the following specific reasons: 1. Provisions of the ordnance that allow homeowners to inspect their own systems are overly restrictive and clearly intended to discourage,if not punish,homeowners for exercising their traditional right to maintain their property by themselves by; a) Requiring the homeowner to attend a class costing approximately $200 and pass a test given by the presenters of the class before they can inspect their systems. b) By arranging that those classes be conducted by the Washington On-Site Sewage Association, an organization whose members have a direct financial interest in preventing homeowners from conducting such inspections and which has demonstrated hostility toward such inspections. c) By requiring that homeowners who successfully pass such a course be certified and registered with the county,and pay a fee of$98 for doing so. d) By limiting the certification of homeowners to do their own inspections to three years. e) By requiring homeowners who have been previously certified to go through training and testing again • in order to be recertified.And,in addition to an unknown cost for the training to require that they pay a fee of$50 to the county for such recertification. f) By requiring that in addition to the cost of training and testing, and certification by the county, homeowners pay an additional fee for filing the necessary inspection report. g) By requiring that homeowners who have gravity systems,which require inspections every three years, go through the certification process each time they inspect their system. h) By establishing a certification schedule that does not insure that the homeowners inspection is based on current knowledge since the homeowner can inspect his system at the end of his certification period and before he is recertified, thus demonstrating that the purpose of the certification requirement is other than to make sure that the landowner has the necessary knowledge to conduct the inspection. i) By purposely establishing a system that landowners must go through in order to conduct inspections of their own systems that is vastly more expensive than having such inspections done by professional septic system inspectors,with the apparent intent of discouraging,if not preventing,such inspections. 2. The inspection schedule and requirement are excessively rigorous and are not based on demonstrated benefit with regards the following: a) The requirement for an annual inspection of all systems lying within a Marine Recovery Area by a Professional certified by the county to conduct O&M inspections is done without regard to the fact that the pollution problem in the Recovery area may not be related to septic systems, or human sewage,at all. b) The authority for DOH to designate any area of it's choosing as similar to a Marine Recovery Area and requiring the same protection is an excessive assumption of power, particularly given the stated concerns that DOH has about all of the watersheds associated with shellfish growing areas in Jefferson County as was indicated by their justification for the need for a county wide Clean Water • District. a � —2— January 17,2008 3. The ordinance leaves unclear the status of PUD inspections of OSS systems under contracts that were • required by the county,whether those inspections took place in the Past or will take place in the future. The following questions need to be answered: a) Is the PUD inspection considered a Professional inspection under the code, or is the PUD exempt from Professional Certification requirements under the governmental exemption that it grants itself? b) Will landowners who have had PUD inspection contracts and inspections, be required to have a "Professional" inspection done before they can participate in the Homeowner Owner Operator certification program? c) Will landowners who have had PUD inspection contracts and inspections,and desire to continue with those contracts; be required to have an initial "Professional" inspection done outside of the PUD contract? 4. The ordinance, as written, ignores the fact that there are not sufficient certified professional inspectors available in the country to meet the requirements of the ordinance. The ordinance provides no phased timeline for owners to comply with these requirements in recognition of this.This rush to implement the full program without sufficient development of the septic industry in Jefferson County to meet the needs of the program will result in the following: a) It will automatically place large numbers of county residents in violation of a county ordinance, and make them subject to the enforcement provisions of ordinance even when they make a good faith effort to comply. b) It will result in the limited number of certified septic system designers in the county having to determine whether they will spend time designing new systems or inspecting old ones, with the predictable result that neither will be done in a timely fashion at great inconvenience and potential cost to the homeowner. c) It will result in a slowdown in the real estate market in the county because septic system inspections and assessments required by lending institutions can not be scheduled within reasonable time frames. • d) It will result in large numbers of homeowners being required to request waivers of the regulations, provide repeated documentation that inspectors could not be scheduled,and pay filing fees of at least $164 simply because the DOH has decided to enact an ordinance with woefully inadequate industry support. e) The ordinance will at the outset and probably for a number of years,be unenforceable;be seen as an excessive and unnecessary exercise of government power;and be interpreted as an unreasonable and unachievable requirement by many homeowners. It will therefore be either ignored or actively opposed by a number of county citizens. 5. Though provisions for a waiver of the requirements of the ordinance have been included which would allow a homeowner, once a waiver has been granted to continue to operate his OSS even though he is unable to schedule a septic inspection within the time period required in the ordinance, the waiver provisions are not intended to deal with the lack of inspection capability in the county. The ordinance is therefore flawed in the following ways. a) It required the homeowner to pay a fee (presently $164) to obtain a waiver which is caused by a known defect in the ordinance over which the homeowner has not control, i.e., insufficient septic system inspection capability within the county,. b) Only two of four conditions for receiving a waiver will be met based on the lack of inspection capability,i.e.,i.Special circumstances exist that are not of the applicant' making;and ii.An unnecessary hardship will occur without the waiver. c) Since it is unclear how the Health Officer or the homeowner can meet the other two requirements for a waiver,i.e.,iii. The Health Officer has determined that the waiver is consistent with the standards in,and the intent of, the public health protection purpose and objectives of these rules;iv. Corresponding mitigation measure(s)to assure that public health and water quality protection,at least equal to that established by these rules,is provided It appears that a homeowner wishing to comply with the requirements of the ordinance would be required to • request a formal Hearing at a cost of$274. • —3— January 17,2008 1110 6. Provisions of the ordinance concerning homeowner requirements with regards operation, maintenance and monitoring of their OSS are excessively regulatory and based on uncertain grounds in the following ways: a) In the event that a reserve area has not been designated by the DOH the ordinance requires a landowner to protect all potentially useable septic sites to the same standard as though they were designated reserve areas. No consideration is given to the size of the property and indeed all land contiguous(touching)owned by the landowner would need to protected in this way. This requirement would virtually eliminate, and certainly restrict all development activity on the land, and leads to the ridiculous situation where a landowner having hundreds of acres of land on which he has one residence is treated as though he had a small lot. b) The ordinance suggests that the landowner (should) not allow livestock access to either septic or reserve areas. Such a suggestion completely ignores the well accepted practice of using some livestock, e.g.,goats as a low impact method of brush control,which is preferable to either chemical or the use of equipment to do this necessary job. 7. Provisions of the ordinance concerning when the Department of Health will approve permits made to DCD uses the fact that the applicant needs a permit as a means to require full compliance with this ordinance, even when the work being done is unrelated to the workings of the OSS, it is therefore a coercive and improper use of administrative power. 8. The provisions of the ordinance concerning the necessity for full compliance by a homeowner with an existing OSS prior to the enactment of the ordinance whenever ownership of the property is transferred, would appear to require that individuals who have lived on the property but not held full title to it, including surviving spouses and parties receiving the property as a result of a dissolved marriage would be required to bring the system into full compliance with the ordinance even though there has been no change in the circumstances of the property,(other than perhaps a reduction in OSS flow). This is an unnecessary • intrusion of the county into situations of inheritance and divorce. Respectfully submitted, William A. Wheeler • 222 BIG LEAF LANE • QUILCENE, WA • 98376 PHONE: (360)774-1861• E-MAIL: FAIRLEAFARMS@HOTMAIL.COM 9 i 6tl ere fhtlyitt 6cf . . wilth 4Ve • and 9ffeehn f6clay , etifte I -,fiz.- i5; / Juiii'mt 9 111 /11 q 9 E 1/4 valletipirte 4 Pay 9 .. ,, . _ c,, 1pfli 16ve 4\v--- , . • , 7 ; of c y, . , ., • ( 1 k \ \ r \ L \ i4 ) 0 . 1 , '.: '.'.'....' :'.. .' .. .—. - ..... f. •-•:: :,-,....-„...:. , • -,----,'...J.." ,, .. ...... . .... ........,,,;, ....: i .-.... ( .• •. ••: • - ..... . ...' - ----— ,. '. .."... '...:...1..,,, ',... ' -.............., • . tIP • 4111/111111 . ' -.-- . IC Vir A_____ ... ... • I-% , , '! - _ • . -., . . . ..---. . ,..... . .• .. ..o• ...,„.. , ...- ., . 41F-, • --,'. . . ‘... , .... , ..... • c,..,..., , , ..... ,, ...) . . ., , .._ . .,_,_.. . 4_ ........._ .., ... .,. , _.•4.,„ ---- \,,,,c_ ._, „.. .....„......).. .. / ,. .,. , .„.. ... • • Jefferson County Public Health 1110 615 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 Subject: Onsite Sewage Monitoring Program Attn: Director Dear Sirs: It is my understanding that JCPH is proposing, for home owner monitoring, a class put on by the organization of septic system companies for a fee of about $200, with a yearly requirement for recertification(at unknown costs). This fee appears excessive. Consider a class of 25 home owners, that is $5000 for a one day class that takes the presenter little in preparation or presentation materials (I would love to make that kind of income). Is the level of this fee intended to deter home owners from doing their own inspections? Septic system monitoring is not rocket science,particularly for gravity systems. My belief is that setting up a class of this type will be an embarrassment to the county when people come back,reporting how easy the class was,how little they got for their money. May I suggest that JCPH set up a written test that home owners can take to show being qualified to monitor their own system and provide printed or on-line materials for owner education? Even in many colleges,there are provisions for passing a class by testing. • Thank you. Sincerely Esko G. Cate 85 St James Place PT, WA • February 11, 2008 • Neil Harrington Environmental Health Director Jefferson County Health Department 615 Sheridan Port Townsend, WA 98368 Re: Proposed changes to Jefferson County Septic Code Dear Mr. Harrington, Please send me a hard copy of the peer reviewed scientifically proven information which shows the necessity of fencing animals away from septic systems. I am well aware of the suspect quality of a fair amount of Department of Ecology Best Available Science. Suppositions and computer projections do not constitute proof in my opinion. Be aware that wildlife do not respect fences. Is Jefferson County next going to mandate that everyone in rural areas put a 12 foot tall cyclone fence around their septic system? That is what would be required .As far as cattle being"bad"and elk being"good",be aware that grass fed cattle and elk eat the same things. Realizing of course that Jefferson County has no jurisdiction over Olympic National Park,be aware that 40-50 elk regularly feed on the luxuriously green grass atop the mound septic system at the Hoh Ranger • Station here in the Hoh Valley. t(emember this system is the largest waste water producer in the Hoh Valley. Respectfully Submitted, d xLL Marjorie K. Dickson 9772 Oil City Road Forks, WA 98331 360-374-2553 OCCENED '`.. :. Jttg e Gouty rt it it el'-lealti • To the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners • Jefferson County Septic Plans By Robert Huelsdonk, Washington State Professional Engineer Considerations of the Cost of Septic Systems to homeowners. I am not happy with the plans for septic system inspection as I have read them so far. I think they are too expensive, untrusting of the residents to take care of there own property and assuming the residents have little or no ability to learn things that have been done capably for over a century. How serious is the Septic System Problem. There is no question that pollution is harmful to the environment in large doses. Testing should meet the required minimum requirements with a reasonable margin but not go overboard. The cost of monitoring septic systems should not be a large burden to the landholder. Some History • I have lived here on the Hoh river for over forty years; my family has lived on the Hoh for over one hundred years. That is a lot of experience in husbandry, farming and raising stock and a family. Many homes and outbuildings have been built by landholders. Septic systems have been built, water systems have been built, fences have been installed, and gardens have been kept. All by the individuals living on the land. Amazing; no planners, no planning commission, no detailed plans, no inspectors, no land police. And most of those facilities are still standing, still in use, and doing the job that was planned for them very well. When we built our house on the Hoh, the only requirement for inspection was for the electrical system. That was forty years ago and with some periodic maintenance it all still works. When we polled the people during the GMA effort it was surprising to see how well educated the residents were. A number of four year degrees, two year degrees, as well as years of apprenticeship within families. We typically know what we are doing or often we can get advice from a neighbor who does. • I don't mean to say that there is not a scofflaw here and there who might try to take advantage of the freedom we have experienced but if 1 so, they have been reported by residents. This on the basis of simply generational learning and knowing how to live. Overflowing septic • drain fields are fairly easily diagnosed and resulting pollution can easily be reported to the Health Department. Comparisons with Clallam County. It appears that Clallam County has developed a considerably lower cost method in solving this problem. Is Jefferson County unable to offer as simple an answer or is it bound to make living here as expensive as possible. I attended a meeting of the planning commission last year wherein a consultant pointed out that Port Townsend is having problems with economic growth because there are no homes that middle income residents can afford. So our teachers, nurses, restaurant workers, and other 'blue collar" employees cannot afford to live in the city or close to their jobs. Has Jefferson County had meetings with other Counties or the Washington State Association of Counties to discuss this problem? It is said that pioneers get arrows in their backs. It doesn't make sense for a small under funded County to do a first approach without meeting a common solution. 410 I visited the planning Department in another County once and picked up a small flyer that said we are here to help you attain your reasonable goals. Would that it were so in our County. Septic systems. My septic system was first placed in 1961. It has been inspected, tested, and pumped on a reasonable schedule. I have read directions at the University of Washington library on many approaches to septic systems. I must expect that local libraries must have such information. I will admit that I am a Washington State Registered Engineer and so I have some advanced education but to think that you must pay $200 to learn to recognize sludge and scum on a measuring stick seems exorbitant. To add insult to injury, there will be a restriction on inspecting another persons system. A much better approach would be to license local professionals to perform tests for a fee. I also believe that 3 years is too short a period unless there are special circumstances. We have found that five years is more appropriate. 2 Every rational person likes and seeks to be in control — it is human nature. The inspectors and planners can be and sometimes are helpful but they there is an automatic response to the "unwashed lower caste" by an inspector who "knows it all" and the assumption of low IQ on the part of the Jefferson County public is a result. Lets assume that most people are out to have freedom of use of their property and that they do not wish to harm themselves or their neighbors property. Lets also assume that the laws and ordinances are clearly written and that there is backup information on the internet. People who live on the land, care for the land. HRRA • 3 • 171603 Hwy 101 • P.O. Box 536 Forks, WA 98331 February 13, 2008 Jefferson County Department of Public Health 615 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA ATTN: Ms. Jean Baldwin; Thank you, for this opportunity to present my comments to be placed on permanent record of the Public Hearing for the Draft of Jefferson County Septic Code on February 14, 2008. I am a resident of the Hoh River Valley, owning a tract of 98 acres, consisting of 40 acres of the original Homestead of John Huelsdonk. Over my lifetime of more than 70 years, I have lived or worked on nearly every homestead in the valley. I am familiar with the modern utilities of the households, as well as their pioneer facilities. Until after WW II, no septic systems in the modern sense of a tank and drainfield, were utilized. • Those without piped water relied on either a surface source, with its attendant risks, or a dug well, as close as possible to the residence. The outhouse pit was usually in the opposite direction from the house, or "downstream" from the general course of the nearest surface water. A home with piped water and a flush toilet usually utilized a "cesspool", a pit about 8 feet deep, covered with cedar planks and a foot of soil. These served a small family, provided that impermeable soil or clay layers were sufficiently deeper and that a well drained sand or gravel lay above it. Today, nearly every residence in the west end of the county has sanitary facilities. Little environmental impact is noted, based on the widely separated homes. In regard to specifics in the draft JC Code 8.15 revised 2007: None of the 4 options as now written give responsible landowners sufficient flexibility to provide economic or flexible sewage disposal systems. There are far too many fees imposed for permits, design reviews, inspections, continuing education, etc. Page 8: JCC 8.15.060 Section (4) - Why does a replacement structure require triggering the Code for inspection? If the sewage loading is identical to that of the replaced structure, why is the existing sewage facility not adequate? • Page 19-JCC 8.15 Sewage System Installer: Suggest that an owner of rental homes on or adjacent to the owner's residential property may be included under the Exception clause of • Section 8 for installation, etc. of new or replacement sewage systems. Suggest adding a Chapter as follows: JCC 8.15.120 A: SEWAGE SYSTEM OWNER-INSTALLER (1) Owner-Installer Certificate Required. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to engage in construction, alteration, repair or modification of on-site sewage systems without first having been issued a Septic System Owner-Installer's Certificate by the Health Officer except as allowed in Section 8.15.120 (8) of this Code. (2) Requirements for Sewage System I Owner-Installer shall include the following: a. Application shall be made on forms provided by the Health Officer. b. Certificate and/or application fees as set forth in the Fee Schedule shall be payable to JCPH. Written proof showing a minimum of one a-r experience under the direct c. Completion of classroom training specific to on-site sewage system installation as approved by JCPH. • . - . e - - - . e - —e• - - - - • . (3) Take and pass a written examination to verify the applicant's knowledge of the operation and monitoring requirements, both herein and in WAC 246-272A or as amended, for the on • - site sewage systems approved by the Washington State Department of Health, excepting those proprietary devices requiring a special authorization from the system proprietor. A passing score is a minimum of 70% correct. (4) Renewal of Certificate. Application is required annually for certificate renewal. All certificate renewal applications, along with the required bond, renewal fee, and verification of continuing education shall be submitted to the Health Officer no later than March 1. The Certificate shall not be issued or renewed if the applicant is found by the Health Officer to be out of compliance or in violation of the provisions of this chapter. After March 1 of any particular year, the certificate issued to that installer for the prior year shall become void and of no effect. If an installer's certification lapses or becomes void, then to become recertified, the applicant must comply with all requirements of this section, including passing the written examination. (5) An Installer's Certificate is not transferable. (6) An Owner-Installer's Certificate grants authority to install any on-site sewage system approved for use in the State of Washington, EXCEPT in the case of a proprietary product where a special authorization, in writing, is required by the manufacturer or patent holder. (8) Exception. A resident owner may construct, alter, repair, or modify a permitted on-site • sewage system on his/her own property for his/her own use without after obtaining an Owner-Installer's Certificate, PROVIDED: a. That he/she complies with other terms of this chapter, WAC 246-272A-0250, AND AN c. The on-site sewage system is intended to serve the properties on or adjoining the primary residence of the owner, AND d. The resident owner does not arrange for, nor contract, nor hire, with or without reimbursement, any person or concern to perform that work, unless that person is a Jefferson County Certified Sewage System Installer as set forth in this section, AND. e. The sewage system is located on the same lot as the residence or situated on adjoining property controlled by the owner and legally listed as an encumbrance, AND (- (Delete entirely) (11) (Delete entirely) (12) (Include in entirety) (13) (Include in entirety) Page 26: JCC 815.15.145 Homeowner Operator: A clear distinction should be made that it is • the Homeowner Operator, who is being trained, examined and certified to conduct the OSS inspection, not the OSS itself that is being certified under the Certificate. Qualification to inspect one system is clearly qualification to inspect others so owned. Further, the Homeowner Operator should not be limited to only one OSS self-installation per year, he should be allowed to construct all needed for his property use. Qualification to install one owned system is sufficient qualification to install others so owned. In the event that a homeowner chooses to construct 4 separate and widely-spaced buildings, such as the main dwelling, an accessory dwelling unit, a sweat building containing a sauna, shower and toilet, and a private aircraft hanger with plumbing facilities, each with a separate septic system, these are not commercial OSS's, but are clearly appurtenant to the purpose of the main dwelling. It is not correct to consider each septic system as falling under the purview of multiple Homeowner Operator certificates. Rather, the individual systems should be recognized in the permitting applications. A Certificate for each type of OSS owned by a Homeowner Operator should be sufficient, regardless of number OSS's serving single rental dwelling units, and include authorization to • inspect and repair any or all so owned. Therefore, a composite of the four options presented in the draft is hereby submitted for your consideration: . 8.15.145 HOMEOWNER OPERATOR (1) A Homeowner Operator certificate allows the certificate holder to inspect one all OSS serving property that he/she owns regardless of the quantity of properties owned by the landowner holding a Homeowner Operator Certificate. An individual owning multiple different specific system types OSS may may-hokl-multiplies is required to hold additional Homeowner Operator certificates for each type of system. (2) A sewage system Homeowner Operator certificate is issued to a particular individual and shall not be transferable. (3) Requirements for a Homeowner Operator certificate shall include all of the following: a. Application shall be made on forms provided by JCPH and specify the type OSS to be inspected. b. Certificate and/or application fees as set forth in the Fee Schedule shall be payable to JCPH. Each certificate for each specific system type s#aJl may be charged a separate fee. c. Written proof of completion of operation and monitoring classes provided by a JCPH-approved agency within the past three years. This class must cover the applicant's specific system type. Fees may be charged for this class. d. Take and pass a written examination from a JCPH-approved agency within the • past three years to verify the applicant's knowledge of the operation and monitoring for their specific system type. Fees may be charged for this examination. e. An individual's completion of the class and passing of the examination(s) may, if applicable based on system type(s), be applied to more than one Homeowner Operator certificate,. (4) The Homeowner Operator certificate does not authorize the holder of that Certificate to maintain or repair an OSS of which the Homeowner Operator is not an resident owner, nor to maintain a proprietary product that requires maintenance by a manufacturer-authorized person. (5) The Homeowner Operator shall report failure of an on-site sewage system to JCPH within 24 hours of first identifying the failure. (6) Inspection Reports shall be submitted by the Homeowner Operator to JCPH or other authorized agency within thirty (30) days following the inspection, and shall be accompanied by the required fees. By submitting these reports, Homeowner Operators shall warrant that they have performed at least the minimum 0 & M inspections required in these regulations for the respective system by visiting the site, visually inspecting all tanks, pump basins and other components of the system as detailed on the record drawing for inspection access (as applicable to era and system type), and completing and submitting all required documents to JCPH. • (7) Maintenance items shall be reported on the inspection report to JCPH. (8) If the system contains a proprietary product requiring maintenance by manufacturer-authorized personnel, the Homeowner Operator shall include written documentation of such maintenance as part of the required inspection reports. (9) A bond is not required for Homeowner Operator certificates. (10) Continuing Education: A system-type specific refresher and test authorized by JCPH is required within one year prior to each renewal of the Homeowner Operator certificate. Fees may be charged. (11) Renewal of Certificate. Certificate renewal is required every three years. Application, fees, and proof of continuing education shall be submitted to JCPH prior to each inspection. The certificate shall not be issued or renewed if the applicant is found by the Health Officer to be out of compliance or in violation of the provisions of this chapter. (12) Suspension/Revocation. A Homeowner Operator certificate may be revoked or suspended as set forth in 8.15.180 if he/she has been found to be in noncompliance with the terms of this chapter or has performed with negligence, incompetence, or misrepresentation. JC Code • Further questions involve whether existing residential sewage systems in either east or west Jefferson County contribute significantly to surface water quality problems. If not, is the extent of onerous and expensive retrofitting, and inspection justified, as proposed at this time? Sincerely, /s/ John C. Richmond, P.E., C.E. 7750 Oregon cc: Board of County Commissioners From: Trish Grant •Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 8:40 AM To: Cathy Avery Subject: FW: Letter for 2/14/08 JCBPH Meeting... Cathy, I gave a copy to Angie. Original Message From: Roger Pick [mailto:pick@olympus.net] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 2:11 AM To: Trish Grant Subject: Letter for 2/14/08 JCBPH Meeting... A Letter to All Members of the Jefferson County Board of Public Heath To be Entered as Comments at Their CHS Auditorium Meeting on 14 February, '08 I hope you are soon able to finalize your program to allow property owners to comply with state law by monitoring and inspecting their own on site sewage systems (OSS systems) and that this option will be available, after passing appropriate tests and acquiring necessary equipment, for all systems, including proprietary systems near shorelines. •Out of curiosityI have recentlyread all the codes of the US EPA, WADOH, and JCPH that govern the activities of installers of on site sewage systems in this county-- the codes they are required to be tested on to to become certified to practice their trade as a certified installer. For sure the codes are detailed, voluminous, and technical, but they address, and address as well as I think we can reasonably hope for today, the practical, affordable, and most necessary demands that reasonable people might agree are essential to protect the public health and to maintain an environment that promotes the public health. I think it's great that these state mandated standards govern the designers and installers of OSS systems in our country; that they mandate that our county survey every OSS system in the county and verify that each system meets the minimal code requirements required to prevent it from being declared a failed system, be it newly installed or a hundred years old. It is fortunate we have empowered government to assume the function of code generation at a national and state level after receiving guidance from public hearings with local health department officials. Jefferson county is, as are all counties in the state, required to adopt this uniform code. This is a relatively new code update that provides methods to accept even the most recent technology and still maintain code compliance. I believe other, private solutions would be considerably more expensive and chaotic in achieving the same degree of compliance needed to ensure OSS systems are functional and of proper design. From my reading of the OSS system codes, and from talking with people who oppose what the county is doing to implement mandated code requirements, I can see nothing the county has done 1 that comes close to exceeding or even being overzealous in promoting code compiance. Reading the code, it is quite apparent that far more stringent, costly, and obnoxious methods could be used for even the most minor code violations. A county wide inventory of systems is not a discretionary option for the county, and yes, it is sure to find failing and seriously non-compliant • systems. Is this not what the vast majority of us want-- to have our own sewage systems function to protect our health? I hope it is clear to my county administrators that I'm not an isolatee d lone to understandter, I think you have the support of the vast majority of people who have taconstraints under which you work. I have no idea how to placate those who feel the fees charged for monitoring and inspection are too high, or those who feel inspections and codes violate their property rights. Owning a home is expensive, even if it was home built decades ago and in good repair. It should be clear that the county administration, and those of us living in the county who have been more fortunate, regret any hardship that anyone must experience as a result of OSS system code compliance. Possibly if we all worked together the money that would be spent expanding the current conflict could be better used helping some of the people who are most negatively affected by codes that really do seem to benefit us all. By the way, I'm hardly happy we had to spend as much as we did to comply with the code-- I know OSS systems are expensive! But I know the designer, the installerand d the county for the iid thet best theye could to give me a system that will do what it is designed to do and • time. Thank you... Roger Pick Carol Hardy POB 781 Port Townsend, WA 98368 ID 2 Page 1 of 1 • _ _ _ From: Leslie Locke Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 9:37 AM To: Phil Johnson; Cathy Avery; Neil Harrington Subject: FW: septic resolution? Hearing Comments From: CaptTimo@aol.com[SMTP:CAPTTIMO@AOL.COM] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 7:35:45 PM To: John Austin; David Sullivan; tom_linda@earthlink.net Subject: septic resolution? Auto forwarded by a Rule we were all horrified to hear the draconian ideas promugated by the Health Dept for Septic inspections Have you noticed that Clallam Cty handles more humanely with reasonalble cost Hopefully we will adopt features of that program Secondly • When an owner pumps his tank, for just under$400, that is both a defacto inspection and a mitagation of any problem. To have any additional requirements or fees during that period is unreasonable many thanks tim snider ************** The year's hottest artists on the red carpet at the Grammy Awards. Go to AOL Music. (http://music.aol.com/grammys?NCID=aolcmp00300000002565) 2/14/2008 HIMACUM GRANGE fiamosik Serving Rural Jefferson County Rhody Drive O ov© • P.O.Box Chimacum,WA 99999 JV4 10 GR 4P360-732-0015 ® January 17, 2008 Jefferson County Board of Health 615 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 Re: Onsite Sewage System Inspection Program (OSSIP) draft ordinance Dear Members of the Board, Chimacum Grange supports your efforts to insure clean water and protect our valuable environment. While it is the responsibility of the Health Board to reasonably protect the county's citizens, we feel more • time is needed to properly examine the financial consequences of the proposed revision and its effects on the county's rural population. We propose you establish an advisory committee of concerned citizens to further study the problem and make recommendations to the Board. This is a complex issue and demands nothing less. We ask that the Board consider the ordinance very carefully before making a final decision. Sincerely, Judi Stewart President • Helping to make Jefferson County affordable, sustainable and self-sufficient • Jefferson County Environmental Health 615 Sheridan Street Port townsend, Wa. 98368 Jefferson County Environmental Health Public Meeting, At the public meeting, February 14, 2008, please address your plans to reduce the exorbitant class fee ($200.00) and other miscellaneous fees pertaining to the homeowner who chooses to monitor his on-site system through your certification process. Thank you, R • �, Joanne Pickering /: i -- - 17 , (_, oey 8865 Flagler Rd. Nordland, Wa. 98358 77, • i: cy t :J Y� efoa 4ssnr ri County anvirnnmentel Healtt Response to the revision of WAC 246-242A dated 07/01/07. • Revising Jefferson county code 8.15. 1-There has not been a response from the State of Washington health department when asked to: provide some kind of evidence that these septic systems are in need of inspection. 2- The state has indicated that state funding to the county would be interrupted if we did not respond to WAC 246-242A as the state has requested. 1- The first thing needed to be done is to find viable proof that these inspection's have to be. The proof that these septic's are failing and in need of inspections lies on the state since it is the state that has made this change mandatory. 2- Let it be known that the current plan for charging home owners and using contractors is not acceptable by Jefferson county residence's. 3-Form a comity of all interested parties including a cross section of home owners. 4-Have the home owners certification done by county inspectors. Using out side contractors is a conflict of interest, since county inspectors have to approve these septic's that are already inspected by these very same inspectors. Unless the county inspectors have just been signing these off and not inspecting. . 5-Jefferson county to apply for grants where needed to help with funding. There is no need for the people of the county to have to pay one red cent when grant money for this project is available at the state level .Ask Clallam county. 6-Currently,using outside, conflict of interest contractors,we pay twice as much to get certified to be an inspector than to have our system inspected. There is no need for cost to be put on the home owner. 7-Quality assurance can be done by spot checks done by county personnel. Unless they feel that just might add to much to there current work load. It has been determined that the county septic inspectors are the ones who came up with the current,use contractors and charge the customer,plan. If the inspectors believe it is cheaper to use contractors than for them to teach and spot check, than perhaps we need to turn there jobs over to contractors. It is cheaper for the county to hire another employee than to implement there current septic tank plan. One of two things need to happen. 1-The county put forth effort to implement a system that does not cost the home owner as Clallam county has. 2-Remove all health department personnel and replace with those who will hold the good of the • people in the county first and foremost. There seems to be a complete lack of caring for the people of the county and what these people have to say. No body at the health department is willing to listen. • An example of that was the meetings held in the county,marked as informational rfie€ti igs by health department staff,the numbers responding to those meetings were completely and totally ignored. The meeting of the 17t at the health department and again the 18th by phone I was told they had never had such a turn out on this issue. In reviewing the adds in the Leader for the health department board meetings I find that January's mention's septic's specifically,non other did. So all the over loaded meetings on septic were ignored together with all suggestions and public comments on the septic's made at that time. When the septic tank issue came up at the Clean Water District meetings,the meeting at the court house was over loaded and we had to move to fort Warden. But the response from the health department was,(We have never seen this much interest) What does it take a brick up beside the head. A health department official went as far as to insinuate a local pastor was lying,when he pointed out the interest on the septic's displayed in the before mentioned meetings. The Health Department needs a wake up call. Either start working for the people of Jefferson county,who pays their pay checks,listen to the people of Jefferson county, or get out and let some one else fill your position. Perhaps we should listen to what the inspectors are saying and fire them all and hire a contractor. John Mc Duff Quilcene • .4wsonQ` JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH 4ssH 615 Sheridan Street • Port Townsend •Washington • 98368 • www.jeffersoncountypublichealth.org February 12, 2008 John McDuff 2123 E. Quilcene Rd. Quilcene WA 98376 Dear Mr. McDuff, We received your comments from September 2007 and January 2008 and would like thank you for your interest regarding the changes to the septic regulations. The next few lines are a brief overview of the changes--The changes to the Operation and Monitoring Program are driven by the July 2007 changes to the State Code, WAC246-272A. These changes increased the monitoring frequency for on-site septic systems. The July '07 changes made the State Code more restrictive than the current County Code, JCC 8.15. Per State Code, the County is required to have a system in place for the tracking of the Operations and Monitoring (O&M) of all onsite sewage systems. Over the past 15 years the PUD filled this role. The PUD no longer wants to perform the Operations and Monitoring of Onsite Sewage Systems resulting in the proposal by Jefferson County Public Health (JCPH) for homeowner training and certification as an option to satisfy the State requirements. The option for homeowner O&M is very innovative, this County would be one of the first • in the State to implement such an option. Homeowner operator O&M was requested by citizens as a proactive way to implement the state law while meeting the needs of Jefferson County residents. JCPH has and will continue to minimize the cost of implementing this program and intends on utilizing any services that will help in managing the increased workload. As you noted work load is an issue and it is our goal to streamline this process for professionals and JCPH for the benefit of the public as a whole. Finding ways to reduce receipting, routing, data entry, & review time. Your correspondence will be forwarded to the Board of Health for consideration. Sincerely, eil Harrington Water Quality Program Manager Jefferson County Public Health 615 Sheridan St., Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 385-9444 • COMMUNITY HEALTH PUBLIC HEALTH ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES ALWAYS WORKING�O� SAFER WATER QUALITY MAIN: 360-385-9400 MAIN: 36(1385-9444 FAX: 360-385-9401 HEALTHIER COMMUNITY FAX: 36(}379-4487 Page 1 of 1 JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH 615 Sheridan Street • Port Townsend •Washington • 98368 4'sHl riG�^ www.jeffersoncountypublichealth.org • February 12, 2008 Marjorie K. Dickson 9772 Oil City Road Forks, WA 98331 Dear Ms. Dickson, Thank you for the Valentine and your interest and support regarding the changes to the septic regulations. The next few lines are a brief overview of the changes--The changes to the Operation and Monitoring Program are driven by the July 2007 changes to the State Code, WAC246-272A. These changes increased the monitoring frequency for on- site septic systems. The July 2007 changes made the State Code more restrictive than the current County Code, JCC 8.15. Per State Code, the County is required to have a system in place for the tracking of the Operations and Monitoring (O&M) of all onsite sewage systems. Over the past 15 years the PUD filled this role for alternative systems. The PUD no longer wants to perform the Operations and Monitoring of Onsite Sewage Systems resulting in the proposal by Jefferson County Public Health (JCPH)for homeowner training and certification as an option to satisfy the State requirements. A homeowner may also choose to hire a private entity to perform O&M. Regarding your questions: 1) The experience of someone with a current Level One Wastewater Operator • Certification from the State of Washington may be a suitable equivalent for the training required for a Homeowner Operator or a Professional Operation and Monitoring Specialist. This determination is made on a case by case basis and is at the discretion of Health Officer, Dr. Tom Locke. If this experience is applied it is still necessary for the individual to meet all other County requirements, for Homeowner or Professional certification, which includes the demonstration of competency through examination. As you noted if an individual were to meet all the County requirements of a Professional Operation and Monitoring Specialist, including bonding, they would then be able to inspect other homeowners' septic systems. From our viewpoint it would be advantageous to have an O&M specialist on the West End. 2) The number of systems that a homeowner is allowed to perform O&M on is still being considered by the Board of Health. At the very minimum a homeowner will be able to check the system for their primary residence. As proposed, each septic system requires the submittal of a system specific inspection report, a filing fee is charged with the submittal of each report. A certificate would also be required for each system. Regarding the inspection of multiple systems this would require consideration of system type, the Homeowner Operator will need to demonstrate competency in inspecting any proposed systems. 3) Yes, if a home is only occupied part of the year the same inspection requirements apply (per state code). • COMMUNITY HEALTH PUBLIC HEALTH ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES WATER QUALITY MAIN: 360385-9400 ALWAYS WORKING FOR A SAFER AND MAIN: 360-385-9444 FAX:360385-9401 HEALTHIER COMMUNITY FAX: 360379-4487 Page 1 of 2 CC : f-►ec tj2 1*6 • • February 5,2008 • Neil Harrington Environmental Health Director R E C E IVE I) Jefferson County Health Department 615 Sheridan Port Townsend,WA 98368 FEB 0 7 2008 Re: Septic Tank Inspection rules change JEFFERSON COUNTY Dear Mr Harrington, COMMISSIONERS No one disagrees with the need for properly working septic systems. You will consider that the largest waste water generator in the Hoh Valley,on the West End of Jefferson County,is Olympic National Park. Olympic National Park does not fall under the jurisdiction of Jefferson County. Question: 1. Would someone with a current Level One Wastewater Operator Certification from the State of Washington be qualified to inspect their own septic tank? Continuing education is part of maintaining the certification. Would that person be able to inspect other homeowners' septic tanks if that person were bonded? 2. If a person has more than one septic tank on their property,would there be a separate • set of fees for each one? 3. If a home is occupied only part of the year would the inspection requirement still be the same? 4. Can only a professional install risers on a septic tank? 5. If a professional inspects the septic tank,do all the same filing fees apply as if the homeowner had done their own? 6. What sort of mechanism is in place to help ALL the people who are unable to afford the new and increased fees? A written response to these questions would be appreciated. Respectfully submitted Mari orid K. Dickson 9772 Oil City Road Forks, WA 98331 360-374-2553 • February 5,2008 Neil Harrington Environmental Health Director P FC;FR/En Jefferson County Health Department 615 Sheridan Port Townsend, WA 98368 Re: Septic Tank Inspection rules change Jeffers:r _Au nit, "-f V3ronmere_a. Dear Mr Harrington, No one disagrees with the need for properly working septic systems. You will consider that the largest waste water generator in the Hoh Valley, on the West End of Jefferson County, is Olympic National Park. Olympic National Park does not fall under the jurisdiction of Jefferson County . Question: 1. Would someone with a current Level One Wastewater Operator Certification from the State of Washington be qualified to inspect their own septic tank? Continuing education is part of maintaining the certification. Would that person be able to inspect other homeowners' septic tanks if that person were bonded? 2. If a person has more than one septic tank on their property, would there be a separate set of fees for each one? 3. If a home is occupied only part of the year would the inspection requirement still be the same? 4. Can only a professional install risers on a septic tank? 5. If a professional inspects the septic tank, do all the same filing fees apply as if the homeowner had done their own? 6. What sort of mechanism is in place to help ALL the people who are unable to afford the new and increased fees? A written response to these questions would be appreciated. Respectfully submitted, ) 74-krct_ t Marjoickson 9772 Oil City Road Forks, WA 98331 360-374-2553 02/01/2008 16:38 FAX 3603859382 BOCC ;tjuul • Past-ir Fax Note 7677 p. To r Deter / Rag ' David Sullivan /- _ . co./Dept. . Co. • From: Allison Arthur[aarthut@ptleader_cornj Phone# Pf, g Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 11:20 AM Fax# To: David Sullivan 3 S 7Q0/ Rax# Subject: Re: I'm here • Hi David, Thanks for your comments. Here are the questions I'm posing to environmental health to answer. Let me know if you have heard of other questions that should be added to clarify this issue. I'm hoping to run something next week so that people have time to look at these before your hearing. I understand the health department is inundated with calls. • Allison Q. What's the most common question the health department is hearing from people concerned about the on-site septic code issue? Tell what it is and then answer it. A. Q_ How many failing systems does Jefferson County think exists now and how do you know that? A. Q. Could Jefferson County bow out of following the state laws requiring septic system inspections? If not, why not? A. •Q. If there are only four options for homeowners, what's the point of public comment? Could there be other options and are you open to that possibility? A. Q. I own an old-fashioned gravity-fed septic system that was put in a long • time ago. I don't even know where it is anymore. How much will it cost for me to find out where it is and how much am I going to have to pay to have it . maintained? A. Q. What if I don't have a permit now for a system that was put in a long time ago. Will I be fined on top of having to get the system inspected? A. Q. Will there be an amnesty program for those who don't have a functioning on-site sewer system? A. • Q. Will there be any programs offered to low-income property owners whose septic systems may be failing and who don't have money buy into a septic system? A. Q. I own waterfront property and have an alternative system that has a pump. How much will it cost for me to have my system inspected and why does it have to be done annually? A. • S. Will the fees be increased every year and if so will there be a public hearing before that happens? A. Q. Is it true that neighboring Clallam County property owners aren't paying 1 u4'ul,cvvo lo:on rani aovaaaaJoc nuw ""a: anything in response to the new state law? if that's true, why does I Jefferson County want to set fees that could cost homeowners a lot during a .. time when the economy is in trouble? ; . . 1111 Q. Why does it cost $200 to take a class to inspect my own system? A. Q. What would happen if the county doesn't enact this operation and maintenance code? Would the state take any action against the county and if so what?. A. Q. Why can't the county spend 41 cents to mail a flier and let everyone who owns a septic system know about these meetings and what's happening? A. Q. How does the septic system issue related to the clean water district that was approved, as a paper district last year by Jefferson County Commissioners? If so, how? A. Q. What happens when I sell my property and haven't had my septic system approved? A. Q. How long will it take for you to implement these new rules if they are adopted? Won't the county commissioners have to have a hearing on this 4$ well? i A. r On 1/25/08 4:51 PM, "David Sullivan" <madronapoint@cablespeed.com> wrote: > Allison, > The County has developed a self monitoring, option to save property owners > money complying with state septic regulations protecting public health, A > question is can we find a way to also do this for renters? Another is > creating options for people with low incomes. Olycap has a weatheriza!tion > program. Perhaps we could do something similar, and train "Septic Stekwards" ' > to help. > David > > Original Message • > From: Allison Arthur [mailto:aarthur@ptleader.Com] > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 9.37 AM > To: David Sullivan > Subject: I'm here > > > Hi David, > I got your message. . - Most of it, I think. I was on the phone with Lynn > Kessler when you called. Anyway, I got most of what you said. . . But the > machine did not take the last few comments. I'll be here until about 12:45 > and would love to talk to you more. I'd like to do a legislature update, a > list of bills people should know about in terms of how they impact Jefferson > County. i i > Also, I'm working with the health department to do a Q&A over the septic > issue so that facts get out. Jean Baldwin and Neil are *planning to heilp me, ! • > but if you are hearing a certain question asked over and over, I'd be happy' > to include that question . . . So that we can get that information together > before the public hearing. . . I > Thanks much. 2 i I UZ/01/ZOUb 1(3:39 FAX 3603859382 ' BOCC , , . 14003 . . > Allison > 385-5100 ext. 106 > > Bad. news: I thought 1 was leaving the county beat, but I'm afraid yoU' ll 0 > have to put up with me for another three to six months. Sorry about that. > . , > > > , . • 1 ! ' . I • . . , • . • i 1 . ; I • • • , i I . 1 I , • ! i , i • , I ! ; 1. , • . I , I 1 . ! i - , 1 , , ! , ! I .• 1• • • • . 1. . • 1 i I I I I i I , , 1 • , ! I I ; • . , . I I• . 1 ! . , I . . 1 I I . . ! , 1 ; . • . ! , ' ! . • . ' . I ; I i , • . i . . i t I • : , I ! 3 1 I I i ; 1 • • Jean Baldwin February 4, 2008 Director Public Health Dept. 615 Sheridan St. Port Townsend, Wa. 98368 Dear Director Baldwin, Thank you for your reply to my correspondence concerning the excessive$200.00 class fee for homeowners who wish to become proficient in monitoring and inspecting their on- site septic systems. I have since learned that there will be additional fees for various miscellaneous services on an on-going basis. I urge you to revisit this issue and pursue every means possible to reduce these fees. Why must a private company be hired to teach a class when there are many locally qualified people and certainly employees in your department that could readily teach this class ? Your correspondence left the impression that because the class fee was negotiated by your predecessor with a private company that it could not be renegotiated. Your goal of holding individuals responsible for maintaining an efficiently working system, improving the health and safety of county residents and providing a cleaner more productive environment will be thwarted if you pursue a program of exorbitant fees. • I urge you to make effort to have a more open and cooperative approach to insure the success of this much needed program. Respectfully, OP //‘(Y / Joanne Pickering 1/ 8865 Flagler Rd. Nordland, Wa. 98358 • 4°4-6 '144- 6-(/(-6- 717erivfy ��5a'ize(hj • ,til 4 `c �vrv� ori r;-- 6 - /'�. She abic c fs (-1.€ vV ,ed Osdvie-ded.-79mg(;Idee' • • Page 1 of 3 Susan Porto From: Neil Harrington Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 8:15 AM To: Susan Porto; Jean Baldwin; Daniel Nidzgorski Subject: FW: Chimacum Grange meeting, Tuesday, January 15, 2008 Hi Gang, Please see the email below. I was unable to go last night, but what I am thinking is that a fact sheet to hand out to folks as the sign in might be appropriate. Just looking at Norm's email i.e. new county reg will require this,well guess what, maybe that is current state law. SO-some of the questions I could see being answered are: What these changes are to the code, what happens if the code is not revised, that this is what was spoken about in the eight public meetings, insert your own here. Let work on this when we meet this afternoon Susan and Daniel (and Jean we are meeting at 1:30 to go over my talk for tomorrow) Thanks, Neil Harrington Water Quality Program Manager Jefferson County Environmental Health 615 Sheridan St. Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 385-9411 From: wayne king [mailto:kinghyd@olypen.com] • Sent: Tuesday,January 15, 2008 5:00 PM To: Neil Harrington Subject: Fw: Chimacum Grange meeting, Tuesday,January 15, 2008 Neil .Are you going to this meeting. If you are let me know I can attend also. I am sure this is more WRONG info. Wayne King Jefferson County PUD Commissioner District#3 Home 797-7491 www.jeffr ud.orq ----Original Message --From: Norman MacLeod To: various Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 8:51 PM Subject: Chimacum Grange meeting, Tuesday, January 15, 2008 In addition to our scheduled program, we will also have(a sho i cussion concerning this coming Thursday afternoon's public hearing on the Onsi e- age System Inspection Program (OSSIP) draft ordinance. This is of great importance to everyone who uses a septic system, because Jefferson County is planning to require you to have your septic system inspected periodically (once every three years for a conventional system, and annually for 410 alternative systems) at an expected cost to you of at least $175 per inspection, plus the cost of any needed modifications to the system. 1/16/2008 Page 2 of 3 Chimacum Grange 1 #681 9572 Rhody Dr. at W.Valley Rd., dao-° Chimacum WA 98325 Serving Rural Jefferson County, Brinnon&Quilcene Greetings, If you've seen the local papers recently, you've probably read that the doors to Chimacum Grange are now open and the Grange is undergoing a renewal. Current plans are to offer a variety of services and programs specifically aimed at improving the quality of life of not only Grange members but the community as a whole. Building improvement discussions are already underway. Grange meetings will be held on the third Tuesday of the month. The next meeting will be on January 15th at 6:30 pm. We hope you'll be there to enjoy the first in a series of special community programs. Three local farmers of distinction are being featured ... Andy Driscoll of Plum Wild Farm Julie Boggs of Westbrook Farm John Gunning of Gunning Family Farm . The first program is entitled, "Agricultural Niche Marketing in Jefferson County." Andy and Karen Driscoll raise and sell flowers, eggs, wool, jellies, jams and other farm related items; Julie and Chuck Boggs raise champion breeding Black Angus and John Gunning is a long-time certified organic grower. They'll each share their experiences and explain how they discovered the need for their products and addressed and developed their particular niche. The new 2008 Washington State Grange Legislative Handbook is just out and available on line. In order to become more familiar with the Grange, its beliefs, what it recommends, supports and opposes, simply follow this link and examine the positions of the state Grange... http://wvvw.wa-grange.org/Leg_Handbook_2008.pdf If you have any questions or would like to offer suggestions, please call or drop us a note. The new Chimacum Grange phone number is (360) 732-0015. Grange vice president is Dick Bergeron in Brinnon and he can be reached at (360) 796-0132. Come to the Grange meeting on the 15th and bring a friend or neighbor with you. Refreshments will be served. I look forward to seeing you, Jzo. SXa 1/16/2008 Page 1 of 1 angela pieratt • From: Neil Harrington Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 4:06 PM To: Allison Arthur Cc: Susan Porto; Donna Marvin; Jean Baldwin; angela pieratt; Trish Grant; Daniel Nidzgorski Subject: Jeffco Septic Code Revision Attachments: Leader O&M Q&A February 1, 08.doc Hi Alison, Here are the answers to your questions. In a couple of places we doubled up answers and we have not received any information from Clallam County yet. The new public hearing date and time is February 14th, 5PM, Chimacum High School Auditorium. Please feel free to call me with questions and clarifications. Thanks, Neil Harrington Water Quality Program Manager Jefferson County Environmental Health 615 Sheridan St. Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 385-9411 • . 2/1/2008 A � Q. What's the most common question the health department is hearing from people concerned about the on- • site septic code issue?Tell what it is and then answer it. Why do we have these new O&M requirements? Actually, O&M requirements have been around for a long time. In 1983,when"alternative" septic systems were first allowed under state code, they came with a monitoring requirement which Jefferson County implemented in 1987. In 1995,the state code required"periodic monitoring" of all septic systems (including gravity systems) by the year 2000. In 2000, Jefferson County revised its old 1977 septic code and created our O&M program. We have continued to refine this program over the years as we have learned what works well in Jefferson County. The state septic code was revised in 2005,and the O&M section of the new code went into effect on July 1, 2007. This was the first time the state code set a schedule for O&M inspections: every three years for gravity systems,and annually for all other systems. The Washington State Board of Health developed this schedule over a three-year process,which included a lot of feedback from advisory groups and public meetings. It is now our turn to update Jefferson County's existing O&M program to not only reflect the new schedule in state law,but also meet the changing needs of our communities. A the request of the public we are exploring new options such as the Homeowner Operator program,and seeking out innovative solutions to streamline the process both internally and • for the public. The"new" O&M requirements are just the latest adjustment to a program that has been evolving for more than twenty years. I'm interested in getting certified to inspect my own system. How does that work, and how much does it cost? The Board of Health is considering different options for the Homeowner Operator program, so the details aren't finalized yet. The options being considered differ as to which systems and how many systems a homeowner will be eligible to inspect. The basic requirements will consist of an educational component, county review and certification. We hope to develop options for the educational classes, for the Homeowner O&M, as soon as the septic revisions that allow Homeowner O&M are approved by the Jefferson County Board of Health. Q. How many failing septic systems do we have in the county? Let's take a moment to clarify what the term"failure"means to a septic system. A failure is a very strong word that we don't throw around lightly—it refers to a situation that threatens public health from inadequately treated sewage. The ultimate goal of the O&M program is to find and fix minor problems before they cause failures. In a perfect world, O&M would find all of the problems early and greatly extend the life of people's septic systems. The most dramatic examples of a failure are sewage on the surface of the ground, or sewage . backing up into a home. We get a few calls a year about this sort of problem. Most failures, however,are a lot less visible--like a leaking tank. You'll never see evidence of the problem • until you look inside the tank and see that a lot of the liquid has drained out,but this is raw sewage going directly into groundwater. We unfortunately don't have precise data on failures. We have issued at least 195 repair permits in the last three years, and we know this is an underestimate of our actual repair rate. Many of our"New System"permits were also replacing failed or problematic septic systems. These repairs are of a significant nature,often requiring the replacement of the entire septic system. We encourage homeowners to take the initiative to repair problematic systems without waiting for a clear failure such as surfacing sewage. Perhaps the most striking statistic,though,is the fact that forty percent of O&M inspections since 2001 have found some sort of a problem with the system. Many of these just require simple fixes—resetting a timer, replacing a baffle, sealing a leaking tank—but if ignored, they could overload the drainfield or allow solids to plug it up. And then we'd have a big expensive premature failure that could have been avoided. Q. Could Jefferson County bow out of following the state laws requiring septic.ry rtem inspections? Jefferson County cannot simply bow out. As a local health jurisdiction,we have a legal mandate to ensure that Jefferson County complies with the state sewage code. We have to protect the health,welfare, and safety of all people in our county. There have been cases in other counties where septic inspectors didn't live up to that • responsibility. The consequences were pretty severe: lawsuits, sanctions, and the state Department of Health taking over the septic program to make sure that it was run safely. To enact a county code that is less restrictive than state law,we would need to prove to the state Department of Health that our proposed code would do at least as good a job of protecting public health. Based on our experience with Jefferson County septic systems,we would not be able to prove that less-frequent O&M inspections would be adequate. Today's septic systems are often more complex than they were in the past,with more parts that need to be checked regularly. Forty percent of all O&M inspections in Jefferson County are fording a problem, so we cannot make an honest argument for less-frequent inspections. We are also now recognizing the potential for septic systems to contribute to environmental pollution—the twelve Puget Sound counties, and especially those along Hood Canal,are all focusing a lot of energy on creating good O&M programs. Regular O&M inspections are a critical part of good stewardship and keeping your septic system functioning properly. Q. I own an old fashioned gravity fed septic system that was put in a long time ago. I don't even know where it is anymore. How much will it cost for me to find out where it is, and how much am I going to have to pay to have it inspected? S For O&M inspections on an older gravity system, the only part of the septic system you need to find and uncover is the tank. (if your system has a pump chamber, or if it's a newer . system with monitoring ports,you need to find those as well) Please contact JCPH to see if we have information on file (an old permit,sanitary survey, or O&M inspection) to help you locate your tank. If not,many people locate their tank themselves. Start in your basement or crawl space to find where the sewer lines exit your house, and then look in that direction for some signs of a buried tank. Carefully probe or dig around a bit until you find it,and you're all set. If you prefer to have someone else do the work,most O&M Specialists can also locate your tank for you. Locating your tank will add around$30-$60 to the cost of the O&M inspection, and you only need to do it once. A gravity system needs to be inspected every three years. The PUD doesn't inspect gravity systems,and if you use JCPH we charge$274. Private O&M Specialists offer better prices than we can,however, and we encourage you to shop around, currently there are seven specialists in Jefferson County. If you are willing to enter a five-year contract,you may get a price of about$125 per inspection. Q My septic system was put in a long time ago,and I don't have a permit. Will I be fined on top of having to get the system inspected? No,enforcement action is generally limited to landowners that refuse to take action to correct a failing system that is impacting public health. Permits were not required before 1970, so septic systems put in before then do not need a permit to be legal. If the system1110 was installed after 1970 without a permit,we still don't fine people. We send the owner a letter stating that JCPH cannot approve any further permits on the property until the septic system receives a permit. Often people will get their system permitted of their own accord when selling the property, or to meet the requirements for a building permit. To permit an old system,a licensed designer takes a look at the system and the soils,same as for a new permit. They submit the permit application to JCPH,including any proposed modifications to bring the system up to current code. Once we approve this retroactive permit,and the owner makes any needed modifications, the system is permitted and good to go. Q. Will there be an amnesty program for those who don't have a functioning on-site sewer system? For all intents and purposes,we have a permanent amnesty program. If your septic system has a problem,we work with you to help you fix it. We have no reason to write tickets unless you repeatedly refuse to fix a major problem,like sewage running down the side of the hill onto your neighbor's property or into a stream. And even if we do write a ticket, the judge may dismiss the ticket if you fix the problem. (It would be great if parking tickets worked the same way—just move your car and you don't have to pay the ticket.) So if at any point you find a problem with your septic system,it's safe to call us for help. We won't write a ticket;we'll help you find a solution. 410 r � Q. Will there be any programs offered to low-income property owners whose septic systems may be failing? • Yes, ShoreBank Enterprise Cascadia is a non-profit organization offering low-interest loans to replace, upgrade or repair failing or substandard septic systems. The program is open to everyone in Jefferson County regardless of income. Interest rates and monthly payments are on a sliding scale and prior credit problems can typically be overcome. For more information,visit www.sbseptic.com or call 360-427-2875. Q I own waterfront property and have an alternative system that has a pump. How much will it cost for me to have my system inspected and why does it have to be done annually? O&M Specialists are private contractors who set their own prices—and they're getting serious about competing for your business. The price for a private O&M inspection can vary from about$125-250 depending on the type of your system. The inspection frequency for an alternative system is determined by state code (WAC246-272A). Q. What are the fees for O&M inspections? The price for a private O&M inspection can vary from about$125-250 depending on the type of your system. O&M Specialists are private contractors who set their own prices—and they're getting serious about competing for your business. We have one O&M Specialist who has formally offered five-year contracts at a reduced rate, and this has prompted other O&M Specialists to lower their prices to compete. JCPH can give you a list of the O&M Specialists who are certified to work in our county, so shop around to find the best price and • service for your needs. If you use a private O&M Specialist, the only money the county receives is the$39 filing fee. You do have the option to have JCPH inspect your system,but at$274 we're not a very competitive option. We also cannot provide many of the services that the O&M Specialists include in their inspection price. If you have an existing PUD contract, the PUD will inspect your system for$200. Note:we are still wating for some an answer from Clallam County Q. Why does it cost,$200 to take a class to inspect my own system? A. $200 is the cost that the Washington Onsite Sewage Association (WOSSA) has agreed on to teach homeowners a full day class and administer a test at the end for Operation and Monitoring of their systems.WOSSA is conducts training for many of the Onsite Sewage System professionals in Washington State. Other possibilities may exist for homeowner education;the county is currently looking into several options. Until the septic code revision is passed Homeowner O&M is not an option. Deciding who will teach the class, and what the cost is,is not something that will be determined by this code revision. Q. What would happen if the county doesn't enact this operation and maintenance code?Would the state • take any action against the county and if so what? [We answered this one above asking if we could bow out.] Q. Why can't the county send out a notice by mail about every public meeting and public hearing? A.All county offices comply with the Open Public Meetings Act (RCW 42.30.080)which in essence states that we provide written notice to the public through the press and media about meetings and hearings. Q. How does the septic system issue related to the clean water district that was approved as a paper district lastyear by Jefferson County Commissioners?If so, how? A.The Operation and Monitoring program,including the proposed Homeowner O&M, would have been paid for by the Clean Water District Fee. Ongoing O&M is an important way to insure that your system is operating properly thereby safeguarding water quality. Q. What happens when I sell my properly and haven't had my septic system approved? The only time we approve a septic system is when it's first installed and we final the permit. Once that happens, the septic system is approved permanently and you never need county approval again for the life of the septic system. Septic systems do have to be inspected before selling the property,but it's perfectly legal to sell a septic system in any condition, even a failure. The inspection requirement is so the buyers know what they're getting. Often the sellers will fix problems,or get an unapproved system permitted,to attract a buyer, or a buyer will make a sale contingent on fixing the septic. We've found that a lot of septic problems get fixed this way without the government needing to get involved. Q. How long will it take foryou to implement these new rules if they are adopted?Won the-eouen The proposed O&M requirements contain a gradual implementation process with a deadline of 2015. We estimate there are 13,500 septic systems in Jefferson County,and it would unreasonable to try and get them all inspected right away. We're spreading it out over several years. We expect most septic systems to start O&M the way they do now,either as new systems are permitted, at the sale of the property, or when applying for a building permit. • t0tedural requirements apply specifically to regular meetings? The date and time of regular meetings must be established by ordinance, resolution,order, or rule,as may be required for the particular governing body.34 a If the regular meeting date falls on a holiday,the meeting must be held on the next business day 35 What procedural requirements apply specifically to special meetings? � The procedural requirements that apply to special meetings deal primarily with the notice that must be provided. These requirements,contained in RCW 42.30.080, are as follows: ., • A special meeting may be called by the presiding officer or by a majority of the members of the governing body.36 • Written notice must be delivered personally or by mail at least 24 hours before the time of the special meeting to: • each member of the governing body, and to • each local newspaper of general circulation and each local radio or television station that has on file with the governing body a written request to be notified of that special meeting or of all special meetings.37 34The Act does not directly address designating(in the ordinance,resolution,order,or rule designating the date and time of regular meetings) the place at which regular meetings will be held. RCW 42.30.070. However, the statutes governing the particular classes of cities,except those governing first class cities,require designation of the site of regular council meetings. RCW 35A.12.110; 35.23.181; 35.27.270. The county statutes do not address designating the site of regular meetings. As a practical matter,counties and first class cities should also designate the site of regular meetings along with the designation of the date and time of those meetings. 35RCW 42.30.070. 36There is a conflict between the provision in RCW 42.30.080 authorizing a majority of the members of a governing body to call a special meeting and the provision for code cities in RCW 35A.12.110 authorizing three members of the city council to call a special meeting. This conflict occurs only with respect to a code city with a seven-member council,because �4,=< three members is less than a majority. Since RCW 42.30.140 provides that the provisions of the Act will control in case of a conflict between it and another statute,four members of a seven-member code city council,not three,are needed to call = a special meeting. 37Note that the Act does not require any notice directly to the public. Also,there may be no media with a request on file to be notified of special meetings. This does not mean,however,that the governing body need not notify the public in some way about an upcoming meeting. Statutes relating to each class of city require that cities: establish a procedure for notifying the public of upcoming hearings and the preliminary agenda for the forthcoming council meeting. Such procedure may include,but not be limited to, written notification to the city's official newspaper,publication of a notice in the official newspaper,posting of upcoming council meeting agendas,or such other processes as the city determines will satisfy the intent of this requirement. • RCW 35A.12.160; 35.22.288; 35.23.221; 35.27.300. There is no similar statute that applies to counties. Nevertheless, counties should have procedures for notifying the public of meetings. 10 Open Public Meetings Act PUD to Discontinue MOS Inspection Program Page 1 of 1 PUD Cutting Septic Program, Will Now Administered by Jefferson County Health Department (REVISED 1/29/2008) As of January 1, 2008, Jefferson PUD#1 will no longer issue new contracts to inspect onsite sewage systems. Regulations, new laws, rising costs and the desire for greater homeowner flexibility all contributed to the PUD's decision to discontinue the program. We urge all homeowners with onsite septic systems to carefully follow the changes to this important program. Please see the links below for up to date program information. Those who are currently under a PUD septic inspection contract can: 1) have their septic systems inspected by the PUD at the cost of$200 per inspection; 2) inspect their systems by becoming certified or; 3) hire a certified inspector. 4) go with a third party contractor being used by the County. • The administration of septic inspection program will be handled solely by the Jefferson County Health Department. If you have specific questions regarding the County's septic inspection program please call 385- 9444 and ask for Trish or Angela, Links to more information: Jefferson County Environmental Health Jefferson County Onsite Sewage Program Return to PUD Home • http://pud.co.j efferson.wa.us/mos.htm 1/29/2008 . Response to questions from John Austin 1/22/08 1. Last years stats on repairs/failures is a little misleading considering the number from Beckett Point, so we did a calculation of what we could for the last 3 years. It appears that we have approximately 185 in the last three years. However, let me also clarifying what the term "failure" means to a septic system. A failure is a very strong word that we don't throw around lightly—it refers to a clear and immediate threat to public health. The O&M inspections are really not about finding failures, though, but about finding and fixing minor problems before they cause failures. In a perfect world, O&M would find all of the problems early and we'd never have another septic failure again. The most dramatic examples of a failure are sewage on the surface of the ground, or sewage backing up into a home. We get a few calls a year about this sort of problem. Most failures, however, are a lot less visible -- like a leaking tank. You'll never see evidence of the problem until you look inside the tank and see that a lot of the liquid has drained out,but this is raw sewage going directly into groundwater. We unfortunately don't have precise data on failures. We have issued at least 185 repair permits in the last three years, and we know this is an underestimate. Many of our"New System" permits were also repairs replacing failed or problematic septic systems. (Our database does not allow us to provide meaningful data going back ten years) • Perhaps the most striking statistic, though, is the fact that forty percent of O&M inspections since 2001 have found some sort of a problem with the system. Many of these just require simple fixes—resetting a timer, replacing a baffle, pumping the tank—but if ignored, they could overload the drainfield or allow solids to plug it up. And then we'd have a big expensive premature failure that 2. You raise a good point that it's confusing to sometimes say "Health Officer or designee" and sometimes just "Health Officer." The term "Health Officer or designee" is actually redundant, because our definition of Health Officer includes "or duly authorized representative..." Our recommendation is to remove the in-text references to designees. At this stage in the public-hearing process, however,we would request that the BOH direct us to make this clarifying change. 3. Community OSS must be managed by a public entity: "Managed" refers to who owns the system and pays for repairs. It can certainly be the private O&M Specialists who do the inspections. The state has found that homeowner associations and similar groups do not have a stable financial base to guarantee that there will always be money for repairs. Some community OSS in other counties have been in an unsafe state of failure for years before being repaired. Public entities like the PUD are much less likely to get caught with empty pockets when a drainfield needs to be replaced. 4. Failure reporting on weekends: Public-health emergencies are dealt with after hours and on weekends through the Regional Duty Officer network. A homeowner, O&M specialist, • or anyone else who observes a failure (e.g. surfacing sewage)when JCPH is closed should dial 9-1-1 and JeffCom will relay the information to the RDO. 1110 5. Enforcement and right-of-entry:This section is actually a reminder of our limitations;it does not give us any additional right of entry. If we don't have permission, state and federal laws severely restrict our right to enter property. It would take pages to spell out all the details,and we have a good field-safety protocol that does so. What it boils down to is that we can walk up the driveway to knock on the door,same as a UPS delivery. We cannot poke around the property without permission, and we can never,ever, enter a house without permission (unless we have a search warrant). This item was reviewed with David Alverez. His comment was as copied from the e-mail" The section should stand as currently written. It does mean what you think it means that the PH person would have to a lawful reason to go on the property-i.e., a search warrant. People will twist it however they want. David Alvarez • S Page 1of2 , Susan Porto _ From: Daniel Nidzgorski ...._ _� • Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:59 PM To: Susan Porto Subject: FW: Septic enforcement question Regarding the section John Austin asked abut enforcement and property access—Alvarez says it should be left as written. Daniel Nidzgorski Environmental Health Specialist Jefferson County Environmental Health 360-385-9407 360-379-4487 (fax) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail mess.ge,including any attachments,is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged informat on. Any unauthorized review,use,disclosure,or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,please contact toe sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. All e-mail sent to this address has been received by t e J fferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to the Public Records Act,a state law found at RCW 42.56. Unde tl e Public Records law the County must release this e-mail and its contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy(or for insp ti n) of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from disclosure under state law, including RCW 42.56. • From: David Alvarez Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:41 PM To: Daniel Nidzgorski Subject: RE: Septic enforcement question The section should stand as currently writt•n. It does mean what you think it means that the PH person would have to a lawful reason to go on the property-i.e., a search warrant. People will twist it however they want. David Alvarez From: Daniel Nidzgorski Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 12:22 P To: David Alvarez Subject: Septic enforcement question David, John Austin has raised a question about a s- ti.n of our septic-code enforcement section There was some flak from members of the public erroneous) ci aiming that our new septic code would give us the authority to come in and inspect any time during our . king hours. They didn't cite this section, but we think that their allegation was on John's mind when h r.'sed a question about 180(3)c. 8.15.180(3)c If permission to enter said building, structure,prope or portion thereof is not obtained from the owner, occupier or other • persons having apparent control of said building, st ct re,property or portion thereof the inspector may enter said building, structure,property or portion therof only if the entry in i the building, structure, or property is consistent with applicable state and federal law. 1/31/2008 Our read is that this section is limiting our a ility to enter—a reminder that we cannot enter without 2 of 2 Page permission unless it's legal to do so—but m st people don't realize how rare it is that it's legal to do so. • We're happy to explain and defend it as wri deny but we wanted to check with you first for legal advice. Does this section need any amending, or is i good as it stands? It would take many pages to explain "consistent with applicable...laws" so our t ulght is that it's appropriate code language to leave it as is and not try any further explanation within the co e. Daniel Nidzgorski Environmental Health Specialist Jefferson County Environmental Health 360-385-9407 360-379-4487 (fax) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail mess ge,including any attachments,is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged informa oni Any unauthorized review,use,disclosure,or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,please contact e d,ender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. All e-mail sent to this address has been received by t e Jefferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to the Public Records Act,a state law found at RCW 42.56. Und the Public Records law the County must release this e-mail and its contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy(or for insp tion)of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from disclosure under state law, including RCW 42.56. • • • • • 1/31/2008 Page l of 1 / rAI ' 0 Susan Porto `�� /, / , --- • From: Daniel Nidzgorski ' / Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 1:0e PM , 1 To: Susan Porto Subject: Austin's questions 1) You raise a good point that it's confusing to sometimes say"Health Officer or designee" and sometimes just "Health Officer." Tlke term "Health Officer or designee"is actually redundant, because our definition of Health Off`ice'r includes "or duly authorized representative..." Our recommendation is to remove the in-text references to designees. At this stage in the public-hearing process, however, we would request'that the BOH direct us to make this clarifying change. 2) Community OSS must be managed by a public entity: "Managed" refers to who owns the system and pays for repairs. It can certainly be the private O&M Specialists who do the inspections. The state has found that homeowner associations and similar groups do not have a stable financial base to guarantee that there will always be money for repairs. Some community OSS in other counties have been in an unsafe state of failure for years before being repaired. Public entities like the PUD are much less likely to get caught with empty pockets when a drainfield needs to be replaced. 3) Failure reporting on weekends: Public-health emergencies are dealt with after hours and on weekends through the Regional Duty Officer network. A homeowner, O&M specialist, or anyone else who observes a failure (e.g. surf.citig sewage) when JCPH is closed should dial 9-1-1 and JeffCom will relay the information to the RDO. 4) Enforcement and right-of-entry: This section is actually a reminder of our limitations;it does not • give us any additional right of entry. 1 If we don't have permission, state and federal laws severely restrict our right to enter property. lit zould take pages to spell out all the details, and we have a good field-safety protocol that does o.; What it boils down to is that we can walk up the driveway to knock on the door, same as a UP$ delivery. We cannot poke around the property without permission,and we can never, ever,enter a house without permission (unless we have a search warrant). Daniel Nidzgorski Environmental Health Specialist Jefferson County Environmental Health 360-385-9407 360-379-4487 (fax) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail messge;including any attachments,is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review,use,disclosure,or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. All e-mail sent to this address has been received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to the Public Records Act,a state law found at RCW 42.56. Undr the Public Records law the County must release this e-mail and its contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy(or for inspection) of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from disclosure under state law, including RCW 42.56. S 1/31/2008 From: Susan Porto Sent: Thursday,January 31, 2008 4:46 PM To: 'Mountain Coalition' Cc: Neil Harrington; Jean Baldwin Subject: FW: Reminder about requested septic system info Importance: High Mr. Bergeron: You asked me, on 12/17/08, the following questions: 1. In last 10 years how many failures do we know about? 2. Of these failures, how many were caught as a result of an evaluation of the septic system through the EES program? 3. How many are still in a failed status? You then requested that I talk with Dr. Locke because you had asked these questions during the brief meeting of the Board on 12/17/08, and felt like maybe he had taken notes and would have additional questions to be answered. Dr. Locke is out of town, and currently unavailable. As soon as I can, I will ask him if he has other clarifications. First, let me preface the answers by clarifying what the term "failure" means to a septic system. A failure is a very strong word that we don't throw around lightly— it refers to a clear and immediate threat to public health. The O&M inspections are really not about finding failures, though, but about finding and fixing minor problems before they cause • failures. In a perfect world, O&M would find all of the problems early and we'd never have another septic failure again. The most dramatic examples of a failure are sewage on the surface of the ground, or sewage backing up into a home. We get a few calls a year about this sort of problem. Most failures, however, are a lot less visible -- like a leaking tank. You'll never see evidence of the problem until you look inside the tank and see that a lot of the liquid has drained out, but this is raw sewage going directly into groundwater. Data on "failures" is mixed with data on "problems". We have issued at least 185 repair permits in the last three years, and this is an underestimate. Many of our"New System" permits were also repairs replacing failed or problematic septic systems. (Our database does not allow us to provide data for the last ten years) Perhaps the most striking statistic, though, is the fact that forty percent of O&M inspections since 2001 have found some sort of a problem with the system. Many of these just require simple fixes — resetting a timer, replacing a baffle, pumping the tank— but if ignored, they could overload the drainfield or allow solids to plug it up. And then we'd have a big expensive premature failure that could have been avoided. We are not able to isolate how many of the failures versus problems were found through an O&M inspection. We have been working to improve our ability to track failures and repairs. We ask ourselves the same questions you raised, and realize that we need a more comprehensive tracking method. We really cannot answer your third question, how many systems are currently in a state of failure. Individual homeowners are responsible for their systems and we may not be notified of failures. Our"violation" status includes a variety of other issues besides failures —living on a property without a legal septic; installations without permits; unresolved parcel-boundary disputes related to the septic system location, etc. There are the sixty-four current septic violations, many of those are actual failures. Thank you for your questions. We are making the information in this response publicly available through our JCPH blog (http://jcph.livejournal.com) which contains many additional questions and answers about our program in general. Please feel free to give me a call anytime. We are all committed to be as responsive as possible! Susan Porto, R.S. Jefferson County Public Health (360) 385-9444 fax(360) 379-4487 Always working for a safer and healthier Jefferson County CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message,including any attachments,is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,disclosure,or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. All e-mail sent to this address has been received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to the Public Records Act,a state law found at RCW 42.56. Under the Public Records law the County must release this e-mail and its contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy(or for inspection) • of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from disclosure under state law, including RCW 42.56. From: Susan Porto Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 5:43 PM To: 'Mountain Coalition' Cc: Neil Harrington Subject: RE: Reminder about requested septic system info Mr. Bergeron, Thank you for your patience! And I finally think I am getting better, whew, this was the sickest I have been in a long time! My can't feel too sorry for myself, as it seems I know I am not the only one that has been fighting this bug! Your request has been on my"list" of items to complete this week. I have already started coming up with the answers, and will be meeting with staff tomorrow afternoon to double check the figures. I will e-mail you either tomorrow or Thursday at the latest. Again, thank you for your patience. Susan Porto, R.S. Jefferson County Public Health (360) 385-9444 fax(360) 379-4487 Always working for a safer and healthier Jefferson County CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, • use,disclosure,or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,please contact the sender • by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. All e-mail sent to this address has been received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to the Public Records Act,a state law found at RCW 42.56. Under the Public Records law the County must release this e-mail and its contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy(or for inspection) of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from disclosure under state law, including RCW 42.56. From: Mountain Coalition [mailto:mountaincoalition@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 4:00 PM To: Susan Porto Cc: Neil Harrington Subject: Reminder about requested septic system info Hi Susan, Neil said you had been under the weather last week. Hope you're better and will have time to gather that information I had asked for about malfunctioning septic systems. Thanks, Dick Bergeron President, Mountain Coalition P. 0. Box 601 Brinnon, WA 98320 • (360)796-0132 P. 0. Box 65 Mountain Center, CA 92561 email: mountaincoalition@yahoo.com Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. • Page 1 of 2 angela pieratt • From: Jean Baldwin Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 3:32 PM To: angela pieratt; Susan Porto Cc: Neil Harrington Subject: FW: mos Fro the file Angie Jean Baldwin MSN Director Jefferson County Public Health 615 Sheridan Port Townsend, WA 98368 360-385-9408 )effersoncountypublichealth_orgl Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message,including any attachments,is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review,use,disclosure,or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. All e-mail sent to this address as been received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to the Public Records Act,a state law found at RCW 42.56. Under the Public Records law the County must release this e-mail and its contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy(or for inspection)of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from disclosure under state law,including RCW 42.56. From: Jean Baldwin Sent: Monday,January 28, 2008 3:32 PM To: 'kinghyd@olypen.com' Cc: Jim Parker Subject: FW: mos Wayne, Good luck thanks for asking. My thoughts are in blue. Jean Jean Baldwin MSN Jefferson County Public Health 615 Sheridan Port Townsend From: wayne king [mailto:kinghyd@olypen.com] Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 12:04 PM To: Jean Baldwin; Jim Parker Cc: Neil Harrington Subject: mos Good Morning.lf you made it to work!! A little slippery out here in Gardiner. In preparing for my Grange talk this evening. After talking with Jim Parker this morning I need to clarify the following. 1 $37.00 Filing fee—$37 is the 2007 filing fee, presently paid by professionals with the submittal of all Evaluation of Existing System (EES's). This fee has changed in 2008 to $39 and is paid with the submittal of all EES's. The proposed changes to the fee schedule differentiate between electronic and paper filing of EES's. The electronic filing will only be available to professionals, homeowner inspections will require a paper submittal. • Electronic Filing Fee of$39--(Available to professionals through electronic submittal via eOnsite.) Paper Filing Fee of$46--(Option available for homeonwers) 2 $7.00 Staff time—This is not a separate fee, this additional staff time is included in the Paper filing 1/30/2008 Page 2 of 2 fee 3 $97.00 Permit—This is not a permit. This is the fee proposed for Homeowner Operator as O&M • Homeowner Certification. This will be valid for 3 years. My questions are: #1 Is this a one time fee??? Or will this be charged each time of inspection?? $37 is the 2007 filing fee(yearly or every three years), presently paid by professionals with the submittal of all Evaluation of Existing System (EES's). This fee has changed in 2008 to$39 and is paid with the submittal of all EES's. So using the filing fee this looks like: The proposed changes to the fee schedule differentiate between electronic and paper filing of EES's. The electronic filing will only be available to professionals; homeowner inspections will require a paper submittal. Electronic Filing Fee of$39--(Available to professionals through electronic submittal via eOnsite.) Paper Filing Fee of$46--(JCPH enters the inspection info for the electronic system for homeowners) #2 It this also a one time fee??? $7 Or will this also be each time of inspection. Evaluation of Existing System/Monitoring Inspection: At each inspection Filing Fee–Paper$46 (Option available for homeonwers) Is the $39 plus the $7 #3 Is this the Certification Fee??? Or what is this Fee for?? Will it be a one time charge. This is the fee proposed for the Homeowner Operator as O&M Homeowner Certification. This will be valid for 3 years. By contrast, the licensed O&M specialist, pumpers, & installer pay initial certification fee of$369, which includes testing though our office, then a yearly renewal $260. • The other question is about the$200.00 Training fee. Will this person be able to do more than one system other than his own. Mike had said that once Certified you could do more than one system. Lots of chatter on this. This is something that the Board of Health will decide. They are reviewing choices of how many systems each home owner can inspect. If you could lend us a hand, please emphasis that O&M is meant as a preventative measure for keeping systems from failing and not for the sole purpose of identifying failures. Also the rolling schedule will require all county implementation by 2015. All new building permits and sale of property are already on a monitoring schedule, that is how we will continue. Also don't forget that most folks will qualify for Shorebank for identified repairs. Thanks Wayne King Jefferson County PUD Commissioner District#3 Home 797-7491 www.jeffpud:orq • 1/30/2008 Page 1 of 1 angela pieratt • From: Neil Harrington Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 12:46 PM To: angela pieratt Subject: FW: JCC 8.15 page 1 of 2 Attachments: My Document Name.jpg And there is one more too. Neil Harrington Water Quality Program Manager Jefferson County Environmental Health 615 Sheridan St. Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 385-9411 From: John W Mc Duff [mailto:jwmd43@embargmail.com] Sent: Wednesday,January 23, 2008 12:18 PM To: Neil Harrington Subject: RE: JCC 8.15 page 1 of 2 Please inform me of the next meeting time and place when available. • • 1/23/2008 Page 1 of 1 , angela pieratt From: Neil Harrington • Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 12:53 PM To: angela pieratt Subject: FW: JCC 8.15 page 2 of 2 Attachments: My Document Name.jpg FYI Neil Harrington Water Quality Program Manager Jefferson County Environmental Health 615 Sheridan St. Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 385-9411 From: John W Mc Duff[mailto:jwmd43@embarqmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 12:23 PM To: Neil Harrington Subject: JCC 8.15 page 2 of 2 S 410 1/23/2008 .4:4F:sponse to the revision of WAC 246-242A dated 07/01/07. ....e visiii.g JerprArtl county axle 8.15. . , l-Thi hos no,Ineit 9 TX*Parile frtfrill thZ State of Wasbingtpo health depart:ft-lent when asked to Awl-. ()vide some kind of evidence that these septic systems ate in rixti of inspection. git- The etc h indiea)zcj that state funding to the county would be interrupted if we did not respond to WAC 246-242A as the state has requested. I- 'the first thing needed to he done is to find viable ptInof that these i nspection'3 have to be. The pr(:)of that these se)tic's are failing.and ill rigid a itispeztions lies ori the ;tate since h is the state that has made this change mandatory. 2- LI it bc known that the catrcat plan for charging home viers mil using conirive.tors not acceptable by Jefferson courtty residence's. 5- Form a comity of all interested parties includiiv a ctoss section of home OVillerS. 4- !lave the hoineOWIterS 4,.'e r1ification klone by county inspect**. Using out side contractors is a.conflict of interzst. since 'warty icors have to approve these optics that ate zilready inspected by these very same ins:lectors Unless the county inspectors have just been signing these off and not inspecting. di- Jetterson county to apply fin grants where needed to help'with twitting. g.is no need fi,i'.the people of fite county to have ti row one red cent when grant money for this prDica is available a the state !eve] -ANk CLEatum county. 6- Currently, uAtig outside, conflict of interest contractors, we pay twice as much to get certified to bc an inspector than to have our system inspected. '1'htere is no need for cost to he put on the home owner.. 7-Quality assurance can be done by spot cloths done by county pelsonnel. Uriess tta.,..y feel [hal just might add IQ Intla to ihtze current work had.. It has been detennined that the ommtlir septic inspectors are the on who c411111:e up will the cluTent, use contractors and charge the customer, plan. tithe iTrirmoton belie it is' dievet to use coirractors than for them to teach and spot chek, Ali perhaps we nerd in turn there jobs Over Lit i;UrittlitiUni- it i Clunipa for the oounty to bite anothtt employee than t implement there eurreat septic tank plan. Ow of two,ridneed to happen. The county put forth effort to imp1ernent a system That doe g not cost the home owner as ! lalhan county has„ , 2-Rcanovo all health departgital personnel and replay& with'those who yfill hold the pot'of the peopie Late county first arldtfoietaot. litete semis tty hc a c unpick,faek.. of eating for the people of the county and what these people 4 „rm.) .4.„ki. IV 1 Tr/ = 4 ,..., -- r C#2 Er-4 '5 7.LS r"4'"1-4:". r 1,_ - , = rn ,_ 0 i ad m rti ,......, , , , , .6 • g- ' a sill g 0 gr" ir.r ai. pi 4mo ' cj13—mv.zw ... OrDaidiroEtrain �.' C g- p R z... g r, 7.,. ri , .... a. = , 5 1-6. 4ffiLlIT ...7 : , ; 1..,. Flra",,i, „,„1.1-4- :- 1"4*.j. : gauPi"-- rfIR: :rip Zs: ile;=., !....e affeP-d.`b-.jmS o 'Thieei,1.i-:t*l-., 4. 0 rear , 0 a " . - � ' " - -._ MP imp - rm 1. i-. IV E ita 61 n P. �y res ifti rii CD S. la. 'Il• - Q ...,„ §6 6 4 .4 53 *1a G. 6 6 5 r ei 9 . in � ' a - R �, ,�+ ,_ �` LI E PC13 0 16'''''1 31' ,..71;76 1.: 5) e ..2-- ID n. � s. ': ' 19 v, ig w.-. 4 ,,, 0 r. , tio 0 ri — ie -, ri ''''' fr4 . m g" fb . 4 gi ..., , , w ED ,y-+. - F+ ..:r . 43 Pg ti +' = IEPP4" 0°.' i:g 14,4 M" La , u. 1. CD ici Q. ,i. . i ...-1 ck C ;� R 5 1- i...... ,...If. m ai LI&II 1. rn va i 5. LI .--- u-4-v r:=P3r 1:' 'i:a i'''- . ,r,.. .4. q 1 =0 R. ,,,Ta 0 re eb n • Jefferson County Health Dept. January 17, 2008 615 Sheridan St. Port townsend, Wa. 98368 Director Jean Baldwin, I strongly support the recent state proposal to mandate regular septic system inspections. Failing septic systems is a major contributor to the degradation of our environment. Property owners should be held accountable to achieve a higher standard of efficiency of their on-site systems. Offering homeowners the option to take a class to learn how to test their own system is commendable but the price for a one-day class seems excessive. Does the $200.00 fee include the purchase of special equipment, transportation to a on-site system or some other additional expense? I vail to understand how a few hours of class time would • require such a high fee. I am aware that the PUD is offering financial assistance to low-income individuals but what about those who do not qualify for assistance and are struggling financially? The high fee for this class could be prohibitive for many homeowners and result in noncompliance. I would appreciate any information you have on the need for a $200.00 class fee and if it is possible to reduce it. Respectfully, (4 -7 /Joanne Pickering Pig 8865 Flagler Rd. Nordland, Wa. 98358 • s, -- JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH . M - tis,,,a,° 615 Sheridan Street • Port Townsend •Washington • 98368 www.jeffersoncountypublichealth.org III January 24, 2008 Joanne Pickering 8865 Flagler Rd. Nordland, WA 98358 Dear Ms. Pickering, Thank you for your interest and support regarding the changes to the septic regulations. The next few lines are a brief overview of the changes--The changes to the Operation and Monitoring Program are driven by the July 2007 changes to the State Code, WAC246-272A. These changes increased the monitoring frequency for on-site septic systems. The July '07 changes made the State Code more restrictive than the current County Code, JCC 8.15. Per State Code, the County is required to have a system in place for the tracking of the Operations and Monitoring (O&M) of all onsite sewage systems. Over the past 15 years the PUD filled this role. The PUD no longer wants to perform the Operations and Monitoring of Onsite Sewage Systems resulting in the proposal by Jefferson County Public Health (JCPH)for homeowner training and certification as an option to satisfy the State requirements. As you noted the option for homeowner O&M is very innovative, this County would be one of the first in the State to implement such an option. Homeowner operator O&M was requested by citizens as a proactive way to implement the state law while meeting • the needs of Jefferson County residents. Regarding your questions, the fees for the homeowner training are set by a private organization, Washington Onsite Sewage Association (WOSSA). You are correct; the one day training will cost $200 this price was negotiated by past director, Mike McNickle. The PUD will be offering scholarships for low-income citizens in Jefferson County. WOSSA is a private organization that provides training to industry professionals and these classes typically cost significantly more. These courses will be approximately 6 hours in length with instruction provided by industry professionals. System specific resource documents will be provided for the homeowner, safety information and an examination are included. This fee does not include transportation or the purchase of special equipment; the equipment necessary to perform an inspection will be the responsibility of the homeowner. The cost for the course does not cover the County fee for certification, an additional fee of$98 has been proposed for the review of case information (as there are limits in place as to which properties are eligible for homeowner operation and monitoring). The courses will be held locally in a classroom setting with field examples. We are working with WOSSA to develop the criteria. Each class will be system specific; e.g. Gravity, mound/sandfilter, pressure distribution etc. We are working with proprietary product manufacturers to allow for homeowner inspection of these devices. COMMUNITY HEALTH PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH • DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES ALWAYS WORKING FOR SAFER HEALTHND WATER QUALITY MAIN: 66084HEALTHIER COMMUNITY MFAX:3643AIN: 734487 5-9444 FAX: 364385-95-940101 Page 1 of 2 Homeowners will submit their reports on paper forms, with required fees, and these . reports will be reviewed by JCPH upon receipt. The accuracy of these reports will be on the word of the homeowner; however, this department will have a quality improvement audit system to review reports, professional and homeowner. This will involve a site visit by a county Environmental Health Specialist to verify site and system conditions. Should reports submitted be inaccurate or falsified the individual's certification will be revoked. It should also be noted that Third party professional inspections will still be required at various triggering events, the initial inspection of the system, and as is presently the case, at the time of sale and for some building permits. There are also specific site characteristics that preclude the homeowner from performing the O&M on their system, see DRAFT JCC 8.15.150(10). JCPH has tried to minimize the cost of implementing this program and intends on utilizing the services of eOnsite to help in managing the increased workload. This is a web based platform that will allow for the electronic submittal of evaluations and fees. Streamlining this process for professionals and JCPH will be very beneficial. This will allow for reduced receipting, routing, data entry, & review time for staff--plus the information will automatically update the associated septic operation and monitoring case with inspection information and alert County reviewer to deficiencies. Please do not hesitate to call me directly if you would like to discuss this matter further, 379-4489. Sincerely, • Angela Pieratt Environmental Health Specialist Jefferson County Health Department p 360.379.4489 f 360.379.4487 IDCOMMUNITY HEALTH PUBLIC HEALTH ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES ALWAYS WORKING FOR A SAFER AND NATURAL RESOURCES MAIN:360-385-9400 MAIN: 360-385-9444 FAX:360-385-9401 HEALTHIER COMMUNITY FAX: 360-385-9401 Page 2 of 2 hearing on septic ordinance Page 1 of 2 • angela pieratt • From: Susan Porto Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 5:44 PM To: Neil Harrington Cc: Linda Atkins; angela pieratt; Daniel Nidzgorski Subject: FW: hearing on septic ordinance Susan Porto, R.S. Jefferson County Public Health (360) 385-9444 fax (360) 379-4487 Always working for a safer and healthier Jefferson County CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message,including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review,use,disclosure,or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. All e-mail sent to this address has been received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to the Public Records Act,a state law found at RCW 42.56. Under the Public Records law the County must release this e-mail and its contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy(or for inspection)of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from disclosure under state law, including RCW 42.56. From: jim parker [mailto:jparker@jeffpud.org] • Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 1:32 PM To: Susan Porto Cc:jim parker Subject: RE: hearing on septic ordinance Thanks. Again I am on your side, if there are sides, so please do not take this the wrong way. Is the wac 246-272a? If so it would appear wac 46-272a-0270 describes the owner responsibilities, I do not see anywhere where the county is responsible for ensuring how or by whom. There are spots requiring the health department to develop a plan, but it seems to make the owner responsible: It state: OSS owner is responsible for operating, monitoring, and maintaining the OSS and shall Obtain permission before repairing, altering or expanding Renew contracts fro periodic maintenance where required Obtain permit if required Assure a complete evaluation annually and every three years depending on type Employ approved pumper Provide maintenance Protect the OSS area Keep flows at approved levels Operate and maintain as directed Request assistance from local health officer upon occurrence At time of property transfer—seller disclosure and records • Also there is a technical advisory committee is required by wac 246-272a-0400. is that the local health department. Is the PUD on that committee? 1/31/2008 hearing on septic ordinance Page 2 of 2 • Same with the policy committee? Oh wayne had bill drop the"good memo"from our web site today, so if you need the"good" memo for your records let me know. • Thanks Jim Original Message From: Susan Porto [mailto:sporto@co.jefferson.wa.us] Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 1:04 PM To:jim parker Cc: Jean Baldwin; Neil Harrington Subject: RE: hearing on septic ordinance Feb 14th, 5:00 at Chimacum School. Susan Porto, R.S. Jefferson County Public Health (360) 385-9444 fax(360) 379-4487 Always working for a safer and healthier Jefferson County CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments,is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review,use,disclosure,or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. All e-mail sent to this address has been received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to • the Public Records Act,a state law found at RCW 42.56. Under the Public Records law the County must release this e-mail and its contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy(or for inspection)of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from disclosure under state law,including RCW 42.56. From: jim parker [mailto:jparker@jeffpud.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 8:45 AM To: Susan Porto Subject: hearing on septic ordinance Susan when and where is the hearing on the septic rules? Thanks Jim • 1/31/2008 Page 1 of 3 angela pieratt From: Hiatt-Pratt[priatt@olympus.net] Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 8:45 PM To: angela pieratt Subject: Re: new septic regulations Dear Angela, Thank you very much for your detailed answers to my questions. It has certainly helped my understanding of the proposed homeowner inspection process. I'll forward this to colleagues to help get the word out. You say: A professional inspection is required for the initial inspection of all systems. This goes a long way toward reassuring me that failing, damaged or otherwise inadequate systems will be identified. (I have to confess my suspicion that the 30 year old system on my own property wouldn't pass that initial inspection on the basis of the current code. We know we're heading toward replacement within the next few years. I wonder how many hundreds of others are in a similar situation!) Amy Original Message From: angela pieratt<apieratt@co.jefferson.wa.us> • To: priatt@olympus.net<priatt@olympus.net> Cc: Jean Baldwin<jbaldwin@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Susan Porto<sporto@co.jefferson.wa.us> Date: Tuesday,January 22,2008 4:12 PM Subject: RE: new septic regulations Dear Amy, Thank you for your interest and support regarding the changes to the septic regulations. The next few lines are a brief overview of the changes--The changes to the Operation and Monitoring Program are driven by the July 2007 changes to the State Code, WAC246-272A. These changes increased the monitoring frequency for on- site septic systems. The July '07 changes made the State Code more restrictive than the current County Code, JCC 8.15. Per State Code, the County is required to have a system in place for the tracking of the Operations and Monitoring (O&M)of all onsite sewage systems. Over the past 15 years the PUD filled this role. The PUD no longer wants to perform the Operations and Monitoring of Onsite Sewage Systems resulting in the proposal by JCPH for homeowner training and certification as an option to satisfy the State requirements. As you noted the option for homeowner O&M is very innovative, this County would be the first in the State to implement such an option. Homeowner operator O&M was requested by citizens as a proactive way to implement the state law while meeting the needs of Jefferson County residents. As a part of the revisions to the code this department has had similar concerns of abuse and has taken this into account in recommending to the Board of Health that the changes in the code limit the number of systems that can be monitored by a homeowner to that of a resident owner. Regarding your other questions: • Why does the course cost so much? The fees are set by a private organization. You are • correct; the one day training will cost$200 this price was negotiated by our recently departed director, Mike McNickle. The PUD will be offering scholarships for low-income citizens and Clallam County has applied for a grant which may be available to homeowners in Jefferson County. WOSSA(Washington On-site Sewage Association) is a private organization that provides training to 1/23/2008 Page 2 of 3 industry professionals and their classes typically cost significantly more. These courses will be , approximately 6 hours in length with instruction provided by industry professionals. System specific resource documents will be provided for the homeowner, safety information and an examination are included. The cost for the course does not cover the County fee for certification, an additional fee of • $98 has been proposed for the review of case information (as there are limits in place as to which properties are eligible for homeowner operation and monitoring). • Is the course given in a classroom, or is it one-on-one at the homeowner's property? The courses will be held locally in a classroom setting with field examples. We are working with WOSSA to develop the criteria. Each class will be system specific; e.g. Gravity, mound/sandfilter, pressure distribution etc. We are working with proprietary product manufacturers to allow for homeowner inspection of these devices. • If it is site-specific, does it also qualify as an inspection of that system for the one year or three year inspection period? I am not clear on your question. It sounds as though you are asking; if the education is a one-on-one situation would this training satisfy an inspection...if this is what you are asking then this does not apply as there will not be one-on-one trainings. However, it would be advisable for a homeowner interested in performing their own O&M to shadow a professional during their initial inspection. A professional inspection is required for the initial inspection of all systems. • How will the Department monitor the inspection reports of homeowners? Homeowners will submit their reports on paper forms, with required fees, and these reports will be reviewed by JCPH upon receipt. • How will you know that the inspections are being done correctly and the results reported honestly? Great question. Much of this will be on the word of the homeowner; however, this department will have a quality improvement audit system to review reports, professional and homeowner. This will involve a site visit by a county Environmental Health Specialist to verify site and system conditions. Should reports submitted be inaccurate or falsified the individual's • certification will be revoked. It should also be noted that Third party professional inspections will still be required at various triggering events, as is presently the case, at the time of sale and for some building permits. There are also specific site characteristics that preclude the homeowner from performing the O&M on their system, see DRAFT JCC 8.15.150(10). JCPH intends on utilizing the services of eOnsite to help in managing the increased workload. This is a web based platform that will allow for the electronic submittal of evaluations and fees. Streamlining this process for professionals and JCPH will be very beneficial. This will allow for reduced receipting, routing, data entry, & review time for staff—plus the information will automatically update the associated septic operation and monitoring case with inspection information and alert County reviewer to deficiencies. Please do not hesitate to call me directly if you would like to discuss this matter further, 379-4489. Best regards, Ar eia / Pe,,,att R Environmental Health Specialist Jefferson County Health Department 615 Sheridan Street Port Townsend WA 98368 p 360.379.4489 f 360.379.4487 JCPH : Working for a safer and healthier Jefferson County! CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:This e-mail message,including any attachments,is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review,use,disclosure,or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the • intended recipient,please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. All e-mail sent to this address has been received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to the Public Records Act, 1/23/2008 Page 3 of 3 t , . a state law found at RCW 42.56. Under the Public Records law the County must release this e-mail and its contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy(or for inspection)of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from disclosure under state law,including RCW 42.56. • From: Hiatt-Pratt [mallto:priatt@olympus.net] Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 8:24 AM To: director@jeffersoncountypublichealth.org Subject: new septic regulations Ms. Baldwin, I wasn't at your meeting last Thursday re. the new septic system regulations but I have read the recent PDN articles by Jeff Chew. I support what you are doing and sincerely hope that your process will not be derailed by the opposition the way others have, such as the Critical Areas update and the Clean Water District. I think the option of allowing homeowners to monitor their own systems is particularly innovative, although I fear that it may end up being badly abused by some. Jeff Chew's articles note that the one day training to be offered will cost $200, and that Jim Parker or Angela Peratt can be contacted for more information. I haven't called either of them but I have looked at the web-site. Some questions still in my mind are: • Why does the course cost so much? • Is the course given in a classroom, or is it one-on-one at the homeowner's property? • . If it is site-specific, does it also qualify as an inspection of that system for the one year or three year inspection period? • How will the Department monitor the inspection reports of homeowners? How will you know that the inspections are being done correctly and the results reported honestly? Thanks very much, Amy Hiatt 234 Sand Road Port Townsend, WA 98368 360-385-1172 priatt@olympus.net • 1/23/2008 • PERCEPTION Having attended the February 14, 2008 Jefferson County Board of Health meeting,the February 19th Grange meeting and the Republican meeting of the same date I would say the commissioners,the board and the county are held in very low esteem by many in Jefferson County. The revised septic code is but one of the issues these folks are upset about. The perception is that the majority of the people are incapable of being good stewards of the land and must be regulated to the hilt. You of the board may not agree, but their perception is their reality. I do not know why the initial septic code meetings were not attended well. They now wish to have the opportunity to form a stakeholders committee,plead their case,present and review best science on this subject before the final code is written. When I first started following the public statements about the opposition to the code as drafted, I was very much on the side of the board. After attending meetings, county and opposition, and researching the WAC, county code and other material, I too think you could do things better. Public health and the board need to be better listeners. Communication needs to be improved. The public seems to be confused between inspections, code approval, and implementation. All the focus seems to be with inspections and fees. INSPECTION • I will concern myself only with septic inspections and fees. I believe septic inspection should be addressed at two levels; simple gravity systems and advanced systems. The advanced systems may, in fact, require certified training. Many of the homeowners wishing to inspect their own systems have gravity systems that require very little training. Needed training could be given by a certified inspector at the time of initial inspection. I am talking about a gravity septic system,not an advanced system. No certification should be required for a gravity system. Send the homeowner the inspection sheet to be filled out and let them either do the inspection or have it accomplished by a professional. The sheet is then returned to the county and filed. If you must charge a fee,make it minimal. Don't treat these homeowners with simple systems in the same manner as you do professional inspectors, or advanced systems. I have talked to a county certified septic designer/installer and a certified inspector. Neither believes the homeowner is receiving value for the money spent. Does it make sense that the county will authorize a homeowner to install their own septic system with out being a certified installer but will not allow them to inspect their gravity system unless they are certified? Which has the bigger learning curve. Chris Grant 360 385 7548 S Page 1 of 1 Trish Grant • From: Dick Nockleby [dick@nockleby.com] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 10:04 AM To: environmentalhealth@jeffersoncountypublichealth.org Subject: question about required monitoring I live in Kala Point and have my system pumped every 2 or 3 years. Question: Can the pumping firm do the necessary inspection and certification? I used Good Man Sanitation Services in 2006, and I see they are on your list of certified on-site septic pumpers. Their charge was about $360. I hope these new requirements don't result in a big fee increase by the pumpers. Richard Nockleby 624 Pinecrest Drive 379-8885 • • 2/21/2008 Trish Grant Orom: Laurie McGinnis [mcginnis@cablespeed.com] nt: Thursday, February 21, 2008 10:22 AM o: environmentalhealth@jeffersoncountypublichealth.org Subject: Septic systems I have two conventional septic systems on my 8ac One for my main home and one for my adu. One is 12yrs old and one 6yrs old each are cleaned every two to three years and I do the inspecting the correct way. So your saying I have to pay you now to do what? and why?What about my taxes?There has never been any problems that I can't take of by myself or a septic contractor.Again why would I need to pay you for something I've been doing all along?And where does this money go and for what? Show me. What is my tax money for anyway? This seems wrong, Jim McGinnis, a good county tax payer! • • 1 Trish Grant From: Roger Pick [pick@olympus.net] ent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 4:55 PM o: Trish Grant Subject: Letter for 2/21/08 JCBPH meeting packet... --A Letter to All Members of the Jefferson County Board of Public Heath --To be Entered as Comments at Their Pope Marine Meeting, 21 February, ' 08 --Subject: Agenda Item V. 1. Proposed Revisions to the County Septic Code We have a proprietary OSS system (Glendon) sited within 200 ' of surface water (marine shoreline) in Jefferson County. In your Revised Draft of Section 8.15.150 (5) I see you provide for homeowners to fulfill the requirements for monitoring and inspection. I read in the draft code (8.15.150.6 (b) Table 1, that only a Professional O&M Specialist is listed as authorized to perform inspections and submit reports for systems such as ours. I would urge you to not exclude us (as a class of OSS system owners) from being certified as Owner Operators in the program. Please specify any necessary education or testing in the requirements for certification and grant us certification upon passing tests. In support of our inclusion I would say that the proprietary nature of the system does not present an impediment. Reviewing my last PUD inspection, I see only a visual inspection was done and there was no recording of information from system devices (counters, flow meters, hours of operation, etc. ) built into my system as proprietary control and monitoring equipment. Other supporting information is too lengthy to include in this short letter but I am available to discuss the issues at your convenience) . The proximity of our system to a shoreline (we meet required setbacks) also does not present a problem if appropriate education in shorelines issues is required of applicants. IIIwe cannot be included as a class of OSS system owners, the code should allow for exceptions on a case by case basis in more specific form than is provided by recourse to the provisions of 8 .15.165 (2) (iii) , Granting of Waivers. Personally, I'm fully prepared to equal or exceed the requirements demanded of Certified Professional Operation and Monitoring Specialists since I have long experience in industrial process control instrumentation, research support in theoretical and applied physics and engineering, and handling of hazardous materials. In conclusion, on reading my PUD monitoring contract, I note that, contrary to Leader reporting, the fee for each monitoring visit is $50, and that the terms of the contract remain in force until the system is no longer in use. I've not been informed of, nor have I agreed, to any changes in this contract. As I said in my letter submitted for last weeks public hearing-- I hope you are soon able to finalize your program to allow property owners to comply with state law by monitoring and inspecting their own OSS systems and that this option will be available for all systems, including proprietary systems near shorelines. Thank you. . . Roger Pick, POB 781, Port Townsend, WA 98368 III 1 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - Feb. 19, 2008 08-042 Public invited to share input on "footprint" project at Port Townsend Paper mill OLYMPIA - Port Townsend area residents are invited to two public meetings, Feb. 28 and Mar. 4 , where they can learn about and share their input on the Industrial Footprint Project at Port Townsend Paper Corporation' s (PTPC) pulp and paper mill . The Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) and PTPC are partnering on the unique project to measure the company' s environmental, economic and social "footprint . " The Port Townsend mill has volunteered, along with four other mills in the state, to provide baseline data to Ecology on a range of indicators . Working with consultant Earth Economics, stakeholders • and the participating mills, Ecology will use the data to create a scoring system to establish a footprint measurement for each facility. The footprint will serve as a baseline to help companies set targets for improving over time . The meetings are scheduled for Thurs . , Feb. 28 and Tues . , March 4 at the Erickson Building Dance Hall on the Jefferson County Fairgrounds on 4907 Landes . Both meetings begin at 6 p.m. During the first meeting, participants will learn about the Industrial Footprint Project at the Port Townsend mill . The second meeting is for those interested in making suggestions about performance indicators and project strategies . Project stakeholders especially encouraged to attend: mill employees and neighbors, local community members, labor union representatives, public interest and environmental organizations, local government representatives, business and civic leaders, school and youth representatives and members of the general public . ♦ 1 . A survey will be available on the Internet after the second meeting. Follow-up public meetings are planned for the spring. A final stakeholder involvement report for the project is slated for publication in May 2008 . # # # Media Contacts : Kim Schmanke, Ecology media relations, 360-407-6239 Carol Kraege, Ecology Industrial Section, 360-407-6906 Chuck Madison, Port Townsend Paper, 360-379- 2155 For more information: http: //www. ecy.wa. gov/programs/swfa/industrial/IndFootprint .html Ecology' s Web site : http: //www. ecy.wa. gov ### 111 Office of Communication and Education Ecology' s Home Page: http: //www.ecy.wa.gov To unsubscribe to Econews, point your browser to http: //listserv.wa.gov/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=econews&A=1 , or send a "SIGNOFF ECONEWS" command to LISTSERVQLISTSERV.WA.GOV • I 2/19/2008 To: Jefferson County Board of Health Members From: Briana Weller Subj: Septic Fee Inspection Plan - Jefferson County The septic fee inspection plan currently on the agenda is ridiculous! This proposed plan is just another avenue that will further strip away the dwindling rights of the property owner. It is also another venue for imposing more ridiculous fees and taxes on the already overburdened property owner. This proposed amendment for the 3 year home-owner on-site septic evaluation is just STUPID! I see it as • another "brainchild" of the flaming liberals that are running our county and state. I ask myself, what on earth are we ALREADY paying the county septic permits and fees for? Isn't there already a set standard imposed by the county and its inspectors in order to ensure septic systems are deemed environmentally safe? I understand the concern over septic leakage in older systems...but come on...the majority of this county's septic systems can't fall into that category!! And on the outside chance of a septic problem with an updated system, the average property owner is intelligent enough to diagnose some of the obvious signs of septic trouble. • I just scratch my head and ask what has happened to good old common sense. This issue is simple. The county needs to find another answer to this septic evaluation issue. Burdening us with more fees and regulations is not the answer in regards to this issue!! Sincerely, Briana Weller 1072 Dabob Road Quilcene, WA. 98376 • IP • Board of 3-feaCth Old Business .agenda Items # IV., 2 .914ethamphetamine • "White Payer February 21, 2008 • Methamphetamine "Meth" in Jefferson County Meth Lab Clean Up, eo urce Jefferson County and Washington State, 1997-2007 Source: Washington State Department of Ecology MI Jefferson County Washington State In both Jefferson County , 20 — — 2,000 and Washington State, 1890 g 18 — meth production lab ,, 1693 clean-up has decreased Z 16 Q 1454 1480 1,500 due to legislation making 103 > 14 - 12 1339 ° �, it more difficult to get the Du 0 12 - , ingredients to produce c 10 - - 1,000 meth and because of an o t2 8 — 789 806 2 c influx of high grade meth `oo o" produced in other places. 6 - 5 5 5 5 - 500 4 — 349 390 Z 203 2 2 237 Z 1111 0 0 III l ■ 1 l l 1 i 1 , 1 1 1 0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Reported Lifetime Use '✓ About 1% of lower income Jefferson County adults report having used meth in the past year while 0 9% report lifetime use. Around 7 - 8% of Jefferson County youth report having used meth in their lifetime. Adult Reported Methamphetamine Use, Youth Self-Report of Ever Having Used Jefferson County and Washington State,2003 Methamphetamine,Even Once in their Lifetime, Source:DSHS:Washington State Needs Assessment Household Survey Jefferson County and Washington State, (WANAHS) I2002,2004,2006 14.0%- total 14% Source:Healthy Youth Survey ®above 200%FPL" 12.0%- 2002 i 2004 ■2006 ■at or below 200%FPL* 12%- O 10.0/- 9.0 10%- 8.0%- 8%8% ° 8% 6.0%_ 5.5% 7% 7% 7% 7% a4.40 s% 16°/ 4.0% -, 6%- 5°/ 5 2.0%- 4% 4% 0.3% 0.9% 1.0% 4%- 0.1% 0.3%0.2% data not available 3 0.0% 21 Jefferson County Washington State Jefferson County Washington State 2% past year lifetime 0% Methamphetamine Use Jefferson WA State Jefferson WA State Jefferson WA State *FPL=Federal Poverty Level.In 2003,a family of 4 at or below 200%FPL earned$36,800, County County County a single person earned$17,960. 8th graders 10th graders 12th graders III i, PUBLIC FORHEALTH , . 'r %` HEALTHIERJEFFERSON February 13, 2008 Methamphetamine "Meth" in Jefferson County Publicly Funded Treatment Admissions • The meth treatment admission rates for low-income Jefferson County adults and youth were significantly higher than the Washington State rates for adults and youth in 2004-2006. Number of Publicly Funded Meth Treatment Admissions, Jefferson County Publicly Funded Treatment Admission Rates, Adults Youth Jefferson County Rank(highest to lowest) 1998-2000 101 9 among WA Counties 2001-2003 88 8 Adult #8 2004-2006 216 16 Youth #4 Source:DASA, Abuse Trends in Washington State Adult Publicly Funded MethamphetamineTreatment Youth Publicly Funded MethamphetamineTreatment Admissions*,Jefferson County and Washington State, Admissions",Jefferson County and Washington State, 1998-00 through 2004-06 1998-00 through 2004-06 Source:DASA:Abuse Trends in Washington State Source:DASA:Abuse Trends in Washington State 350.0 co —M—Jefferson County Adult Rate 319.1 150.0 —M—Jefferson County Youth Rate L Washington State Adult Rate P. 300.0- Washington State Youth Rate as o 105.9 2502. .0- $ 0 100.0 11,3 200.0- o 0 163.6 c • 00 S o 0 136. 172.6 57.9 0 150.0- it. 52.6 a 130.1 i 50.0- 55.6 a 100.0 co c0 c 93A •y 41.4 0 N 50.0 g 25.6 £ Q -o a 0.0 1998-00^ 2001-03 2004-06^ 1998-00 2001-03 2004-06^ *Admission rate per 100,000 population.Excludes detox,transitional housing,group care enhancement,private `Admission rate per 100,000 population age 0-17 Excludes detox,transitional housing,group care enhancement payand Department of Corrections.Includes total admissions-counts may be duplicated for an individual based private pay and Department of Corrections.Includes total admissions-counts maybe duplicated for an Individual on multiple admissions or multiple modalities of carebased on multiple admissions or multiple modalities of care. ^Jefferson County rate significantly higher than Washington State. I ^Jefferson County rate significantly higher than Washington State. • ''''rt PUBLIC HEALTH ALWAYS WORKING FOR A SAFER AND ` , HEALMIER JEFFERSON February 13, 2008 • Board of Health .New Business .Agenda Item # 17., 2 2008 Legislative Update: • Bioremediation, Tiiimerosol Ban and Other Public 3-lealth Concerns February 21, 2008 • • DRAFT (Version 7) Analysis of SB 6300, 21 January 2008 Public Health— Seattle &King County, CD Epidemiology and Immunization Section Overall conclusion: This bill provides no additional health benefits to Washington State residents yet has significant costs and negative impacts. Main points: This bill will confuse and frighten the public without justification regarding the safety of beneficial vaccines • Even though there's no evidence that thimerosal in vaccines is dangerous, the effort that began in 1999 to remove mercury-based preservatives from vaccines was a good decision: Unnecessary exposures to mercury should be eliminated. • This bill inappropriately applies a standard developed for daily exposure to a toxic form of mercury, methylmercury, to small amounts of ethylmercury used as a vaccine preservative. Methylmercury is a toxic form of mercury that builds up in fish, shellfish and animals that eat fish. Fish and shellfish are the main sources of methylmercury exposure to humans, including pregnant women and young children. • Mercury levels in vaccines have decreased dramatically since 1999, and since 2001, all routinely recommended vaccines manufactured for administration to infants in the U.S. have been either thimerosal-free or have contained only extremely small amounts of thimerosal. • • The bill is based on the unsubstantiated belief by some people that thimerosal in vaccines is dangerous and can lead to autism in children, although neither of these beliefs are true. A large body of scientific evidence has found no relationship between autism and mercury containing vaccines. • The bill is not supported by scientific or medical evidence and is contrary to the recommendations of the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, and the official statements of all authoritative medical and public health professional organizations. • The Institute of Medicine, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and other medical and public health experts have concluded based on scientific data that thimerosal-containing vaccines are safe. An exhaustive 2004 report by the Institute of Medicine concluded that thimerosal in vaccines does not cause autism, a conclusion also reached by countries around the world. And additional evidence that there is no relationship between vaccines and autism continues to accumulate. Yet this legislation would send a different message to the public—that the legislature is concerned enough about the health risks of thimerosal to interfere with medical practice and limit availability of certain safe vaccines. • Basedon guidelines established by the FDA, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), no child will receive excessive mercury from childhood vaccines regardless of whether their flu shot contains thimerosal as a preservative. • 1 This bill ignores the large and important health benefits of immunizations for children and adults. • • The hypothetical risks of low levels of ethylmercury exposure are greatly outweighed by the benefits of providing recommended immunizations to children and adults who need them. Furthermore, no medical treatment is completely risk-free, and we routinely accept a low risk to gain greater health benefits. For example, we accept chlorination of water to prevent microbial contamination and assure the safety of drinking water, even though low levels of toxic and carcinogenic chlorine byproducts result. Many studies have found no association between mercury in vaccines and health problems. • This bill could lead to a decrease in vaccination rates at a time when improvements in vaccination coverage are needed. Overall immunization rates could fall and the rates of many vaccine preventable diseases could rise including measles,whooping cough, and meningitis to name just a few, in addition to influenza. • The bill appears to be specifically prejudiced against vaccines in that it requires health care providers to provide adverse event reporting forms that are not required for any other medical treatments, even though adverse events can occur with all medications and treatments. Moreover, it could cause some parents and patients to question the safety of all vaccines regardless of whether they contain thimerosal. The bill would make it difficult for children, pregnant women and other adults in Washington State to get the vaccines they need and would cause shortages, particularly for influenza vaccine. • • Every year in the United States, more than 200,000 people are hospitalized from flu complications and about 36,000 people die from flu, including approximately 4000 excess hospitalizations and 720 deaths in Washington State. Some people, such as older people, young children, and people with certain health conditions, are at high risk for serious flu complications. Last year 3 elementary school-aged children died of influenza infection in King County. We should be taking steps to increase immunization of children and adults against influenza and other diseases, not make it more difficult. • The bill (and the existing RCW 70.95M.115) makes it impossible for pregnant women and children in Washington State to get the Japanese encephalitis vaccine, which prevents a serious and frequently deadly infection, and could prevent pregnant women exposed to the hepatitis B virus from getting vaccinated thereby putting her and her unborn child at risk for acute and chronic hepatitis B. • This bill would reduce access to influenza vaccine in the general population, including among children, because thimerosal-free versions of the injected vaccine are not as readily available as formulations of the vaccine which contain thimerosal. • Reducing the overall vaccine supply is especially unwise at a time of concern for a global flu pandemic, and both pre-pandemic vaccine and vaccine for use during a pandemic would be manufactured in multi-dose vials and contain thimerosal as a preservative. • The vast majority of influenza vaccine manufactured contains thimerosal and shortages of vaccine that meet the requirements in this bill would be expected. • 2 Doctors may opt out of providing immunizations altogether. • • The bill intrudes in doctor-patient relationships, and can confuse patients and discourage them from receiving beneficial immunizations. • The bill adds a new administrative burden and a counterproductive disruption of clinical practice to an already overburdened immunization delivery system. • Most vaccine is provided by private healthcare providers outside of the public health system, with millions of doses administered each year in the United States. In King County, local public health jurisdictions administer only 5% of vaccines, and private health care providers administer the remaining 95%. Doctors may not want to find themselves in court debating whether low-thimerosal or thimerosal-free vaccine was "readily available." Or they may fear that patients will reject needed vaccines out of confusion or fear, or they may be unwilling to take on this additional work in the absence of any medical or scientific reason to do so. As a result, many may simply stop offering the vaccine each year, reducing access to a life-saving intervention. The bill is costly yet returns no health benefits • The bill would significantly add to the cost of influenza vaccines for Washington State residents. The increase in cost is approximatelyl6-24% higher for single doses of preservative free vaccines compared with preservative-containing multi-dose vials, and for some preparations of preservative-free vaccine, the cost could be 70%higher. • This means that for every 100,000 persons enrolled in a state's Medicaid program who • are vaccinated for influenza, the state will pay an additional $160,000 to $240,000. • In addition, the bill's notification requirements and resulting longer medical visits, additional unnecessary counseling and inappropriate provision of reporting forms will incur additional costs. • 3 Timeline: Thimerosal in Vaccines(1999-2008) • The following is a brief timeline of key events and published articles on thimerosal and vaccines from 1999 to 2008. 1999 A congressionally-mandated Food and Drug Administration(FDA)review of mercury in drugs and food was completed,which included a recommendation for the reassessment of thimerosal use in vaccines. (July 7)A joint statement about thimerosal was issued by the American Academy of Pediatrics(AAP) and the Public Health Service(PHS).A separate but comparable statement about thimerosal was released by the American Academy of Family Physicians(AAFP). (October 20)Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices(ACIP)reviewed information about thimerosal in vaccines and received updates from CDC's National Immunization Program and several vaccine manufacturers on the current and anticipated availability of vaccines that do not contain thimerosal as a preservative. (November 5)MMWR was published that stated"given the widely acknowledged value of reducing exposure to mercury,vaccine manufacturers,FDA, and other PHS agencies are collaborating to reduce the thimerosal content of vaccines or to replace them with formulations that do not contain thimerosal as a preservative as soon as possible without causing unnecessary disruptions in the vaccination system. FDA will expedite review of supplements to manufacturers'product license applications that present formulations for eliminating or reducing the mercury content of vaccines." CDC launched a study by Verstaeten et al.to assess safety of thimerosal-containing vaccines. • 2001 All vaccines routinely recommended for children 6 years of age and under in the U.S.were produced without thimerosal as a preservative,with the exception of inactivated influenza vaccine. (May 5)A comprehensive risk assessment of thimerosal use in childhood vaccines was conducted by Ball et al. and published in Pediatrics.This assessment found no evidence of harm from the use of thimerosal as a vaccine preservative,other than local hypersensitivity reactions.The review also stated that some infants may be exposed to cumulative levels of mercury during the first 6 months of life that exceed EPA recommendations,and that exposure of infants to mercury in vaccines can be reduced or eliminated by using products formulated without thimerosal as a preservative. (October 1)Institute of Medicine's(IOM)Immunization Safety Review Committee issued a report,based on a review of available data,concluding that the evidence was inadequate to either accept or reject a causal relationship between thimerosal exposure from childhood vaccines and the neurodevelopmental disorders of autism,attention deficit hyperactivity disorder,and speech or language delay. 2002 (September 3)A CDC and Danish Medical Research Council cohort study,A Population-Based Study of Measles,Mumps, and Rubella Vaccination and Autism,was published in the New England Journal of Medicine.This study followed more than 500,000 children in Denmark over 7 years and found no association between the MMR vaccination and autism. • 2003 • (January)Last lots of thimerosal-preservative containing pediatric vaccines expire. (August) Stehr-Green, et al. ecological cohort study,Autism and Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines:Lack of Consistent Evidence for an Association,American Journal of Preventive Medicine-This study assessed autism incidence and the use of thimerosal-containing vaccines. Data did not support an association between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism in Denmark and Sweden where exposure to thimerosal was eliminated in 1992 and where autism rates continued to increase. (November)Verstraeten et al.,Safety of Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines:A Two-Phased Study of Computerized Health Maintenance Organization Databases,Pediatrics-In this study, the Vaccine Safety Datalink(VSD)was used to screen for possible associations between exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccines and a variety of renal,neurologic and developmental problems. No consistent significant associations were found between thimerosal-containing vaccines and neurodevelopmental outcomes. 2004 (May 17)IOM issued a follow-up to their 2001 report. This report,based on further epidemiological studies,concluded that these studies consistently provided evidence of no association between thimerosal- containing vaccines and autism. The report further stated that while the committee strongly supported targeted research that focused on better understanding the disease of autism, from a public health perspectivethe committee did not consider a significant investment of studies of the theoretical vaccine- autism connection to be useful at the time of the report's publication. In addition,the committee encouraged that research on autism focus more broadly on the disorders causes of and treatments for autism. Further,the committee did not recommend a policy review of the schedule and recommendations for routine childhood vaccine administration based on hypotheses regarding thimerosal and autism. • (May 28)ACIP recommended the inactivated influenza vaccine for routine use in children 6 to 23 months of age.This recommendation did not include a preference for thimerosal-free influenza vaccine for this group and stated that the benefits of influenza vaccination outweigh the theoretical risk, if any, for thimerosal exposure through vaccination. 2006 (September 26)In a statement prepared for the Coalition for Mercury-free Drugs (CoMeD),FDA concludes that the evidence reviewed by IOM in 2004 does not support an association between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism. 2007 (July 7)CDC releases official statement on Autism and Thimerosal. Excerpt: some people believe increased exposure to thimerosal(from the addition of important new vaccines recommended for children)explains the higher prevalence in recent years.However, evidence from several studies examining trends in vaccine use and changes in autism frequency does not support such an association. Furthermore,a scientific review by the Institute of Medicine(IOM)concluded that "the evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism." CDC supports the IOM conclusion.Full text of the statement is available at http://www.cdc.gov/od/science/iso/concerns/thimerosal.htm. (September 27)Thompson et al.,Early Thimerosal Exposure and Neuropsychological Outcomes at 7 to 10 Years,New England Journal of Medicine -This study more rigorously examined the hypotheses that • increasing exposure to thimerosal is associated with neurodevelopmental disorders. Findings did not 2 support a causal association between early exposure to mercury from thimerosal-containing vaccines and immune globulins and deficits in neuropsychological functioning at the age of 7 to 10 years. • 2008 (January 8) Schechter et al., Continuing Increases in Autism Reported to California's Developmental Services System:Mercury in Retrograde,Archives of General Psychiatry-The study examined the prevalence of Autism Spectrum Disorders in children 3 years of age and older reported to the California Developmental Services System using client reports for the years 1989 through March, 2007. Data found that the prevalence of children with autism born from 1989 through 2003 increased each year(and for each age up to 10 years).This was true whether the data were examined by year of birth or age group. Specifically,the prevalence at ages 3 to 5 years increased for each birth year since 1999, during the period when exposure to thimerosal preservative in vaccines began to be reduced. CDC is currently conducting a thimerosal-autism case control study to determine if there is an association between the diagnosis of an autistic disorder and the level of mercury exposure from vaccines and immunoglobulins, and to determine if there an association between the diagnosis of autistic spectrum disorder and level of mercury exposure from vaccines and immunoglobulins. A study is being completed in Italy to compare the prevalence of neurodevelopmental disorders among DTaP vaccine trial participants exposed to different quantities of thimerosal during infancy in randomized, controlled trials of aceellular pertussis vaccines.The study evaluated the children using a standardized battery of neuropsychological tests.The Immunization Safety Review Committee of the Institute of Medicine(IOM) specifically recommended such a study in 2001. A thimerosal and autism case-control study in three U.S.MCOs was conducted and is scheduled for publication in 2008. Children with autism were evaluated by certified specialists using state of the art, • standardized diagnostic assessments. Vaccination histories and information on other potential confounding factors were ascertained for both cases and matched controls by review of medical records and standardized interviews of the children's parents. • 3 • HB3312 if SB 6620 - Regarding biological remediation technologies for on- site sewage disposal systems. Summary of Key Bill Provisions: These bills: • Exempt bioremediation products from DOH listing requirements (Registered Products List) until SBOH adopts rules for them. • Allow bioremediation products to be used for non failures without oversight or review by local health. SB 6620 allows local health to charge for registration and tracking, but HB 3312 does not. Both bills allow local health to require on-site professionals to submit monitoring data annually. • Require the SBOH to adopt rules by 7/1/2010, and to report back to the legislature by 7/1/2009 on progress. Provides no resources for SBOH or DOH for this purpose, however. • Allow local health to permit these systems for repairs. Creates process for repairs only where the owner can be reimbursed by the installer if the if the device fails to make significant improvements in the condition of the failed drainfield within • three months and the health offer requires the OSS to be repaired. • Require manufacturers of bioremediation products to submit documentation to local health that confirms their device meets IAPMO Standard 180-2003 and that the biological component meets the additive requirements in RCW 70.118.060. For more information you can review the bills at the State Legislature web site (click on SB 6620 and HB 3312) Recommendation: Support SBoH and DOH Develop Rule making process • Complete rules as soon as possible • Provide resources so this can happen Require rule process to be completed before bioremediation devices are used in the state for repairs or as additions to existing systems (non-failures). • Local health can allow use of system via waiver and described in RS&G's WHY are we concerned? • Adequate testing and evaluation is needed before these products are used. • Regulators, the public and industry professionals need to know about the technology to properly match it to sites and situations. • The technology, testing and research for the bioremediation products have not been evaluated by DOH, the Technical Review Committee of DOH or any other body recognized by the state. We really don't know much about these products other than the claims of the proponents and some anecdotal evidence provided by customers. • What if it really does "work"? The product claims to reduce drainfield clogging caused with the biomat becomes excessive. What happens when you rejuvenate an old, undersized drainfield in poor soils near the shoreline? (Or an old gravity system system in excessively drained soils?). We don't know. The bills seem contrary recent mandates from the Washington State Board of Health and the Legislature. Both bodies recently adopted rules to make sure: • OSS are properly installed and maintained • Local health agencies accurately inventory all OSS within their jurisdiction. • This bill will allow systems to be modified without review or documentation by local health. Increased public health and economic risks • The systems cost $5000 or more - a mistake will be costly • If it doesn't work, proper repairs will be delayed, and OSS owners may be hesitant to make additional investments to repair their system. • • Allows OSS to be modified without oversight. Increased burden on local health • Research to understand technology. Even if we don't permit these systems, the public will expect us understand these systems and to be responsive when they have problems. • We will incur costs for setting up registration and data management systems. • No fee provisions will have substantial financial impact on local health. Local health can already permit these systems as described in RSEtG for biological remediation devices. A process already exists for local health to permit reasonable proposals on appropriate sites. Other issues: • If this legislation goes forward any language exempting these systems from review and approval by local health should expire when the new rules approved by SBOH. The new rules should address whether review is needed for use of these on non- failing systems • No Fee Permit language should be struck. • • ` ,Y ' Washington State Association on WI of Local Public Health Officials An Affiliate of Washington State Association of Counties January 29,2008 The Honorable Phil Rockefeller,Chair Water,Energy&Environment Committee Members J.A. Cllerberg Building P.O.Box 40466 Olympia, Washington 98504-0466 Subject: SB 6620-Regarding biological remediation technologies for on-site sewage disposal systems Dear Senator Rockefeller and Committee Members: On behalf of the Washington State Association of Local Public Health Officials(WSALPHO), I would respectfully like to express concerns with SB 6620. While WSALPHO's 35 local health jurisdictions appreciate the desire to bring new and effective sewage system technologies to market,we have concerns about the exemptions granted by the bill and the public health risk that they pose. • Biological remediation technology may offer promise for the repair of clogged and failing on-site sewage systems(OSS). However,this technology remains unproven. Knowledge is needed regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the technology developed through and fair and objective review process so all concerned can properly match the technology to sites where its use is proposed. Without a reliable and successful track-record for this technology, incorrect choices could be made at the expense of the sewage owner and public health. The exemptions provided by this bill seem contrary to recent mandates from the Washington State Board of Health and the Legislature. Both bodies recently adopted rules to make sure OSS are properly installed and maintained,and that local health agencies accurately inventory all OSS within their jurisdiction. This bill will allow systems to be modified without review or documentation by the local health jurisdiction. We believe the best approach is for the Washington State Board of Health and State Department of Health to develop rules for the use of biological remediation on-site sewage systems,and for this to take place as quickly as possible. We understand that neither agency currently has the resources to do this work,so we ask that you work with the finance committees of the Legislature to provide sufficient resources so bioremediation technology rules can be completed by July 1,2010. Thank you for considering our perspective. We would very much like to work with you other stakeholders to refine your proposed legislation. Sincerely, /7/L,e,„' Richard B. Mockler • WSALPHO Chair 206 Tenth Avenue SE, Olympia, WA 98501 Telephone: (360) 753-1886 (360) 753-2842 Conference call follow-up Page 1 of 2 • From: ehdir-bounces@mailman1.u.washington.edu on behalf of Grunenfelder, Gregg (DOH) [Gregg.Grunenfelder@DOH.WA.GOV] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 12:25 PM To: ehdir@u.washington.edu Cc: Guichard, Maryanne (DOH) Subject: [Ehdir] Conference call follow-up Attachments: 3312-S.pdf; 6620-S.pdf; ATT107518.txt In follow-up to our conference call this morning I am attaching the two legislative bills that deal with biological remediation technologies for on-site sewage disposal systems. SHB 3312 was passed from the House Environmental Health committee on Feb 5 and is now in the House Appropriations Committee. SSB 6620 passed the Senate Water, Energy, and Telecommunications committee this morning (Feb 7) and has been referred to the Senate Ways & Means committee. The deadline for these bills to move from the applicable finance committee is next Wednesday (Feb 13). State rule making, which everyone says they support for adequate review and evaluation of these technologies, has been estimated to cost$155,000. DOH has been clear throughout the legislative process that given competing priorities, this additional funding is critical if we are to move ahead with rule making on this issue later in 2008. As requested during the call I have listed the members of the two finance committees below. • Thanks for the good discussion this morning. I will look forward to our continued discussions at the statewide meeting in March. «3312-S.pdf» «6620-S.pdf» Appropriations Committee Members Helen Sommers - Chair (D) Hans Dunshee - Vice Chair (D) Gam Alexander- Ranking Minority Member(R) Barbara Bailey - Asst Ranking Minority Member(R) Larry Haler- Asst Ranking Minority Member(R) Glenn Anderson (R) Bruce Chandler(R) Eileen Cody(D) Steve Conway (D) Jeannie Darneille (D) Mark Ericks (D) Bill Fromhold (D) Bill Grant (D) Tami Green(D) Kathy Haigh (D) Bill.Hinkle (R) Sam Hunt(D) Ross Hunter(D) 2/12/2008 Conference call follow-up Page 2 of 2 Ruth Kagi (D) Phyllis Kenney (D) Lynn Kessler (D) • Joel Kretz(R) K_._elliLinv._ille (D) Joyce McDonald(R) Jim McIntire (D) Dawn Morrell (D) Eric Pettigrew (D) Skip Priest(R) Charles Ross (R) Joe Schmick(R) Shay Schual-Berke (D) Larry Seaquist (D) Pat Sullivan (D) Maureen Walsh(R) Ways & Means Committee Members Margarita Prentice - Chair (D) Karen Fraser- Vice Chair, Capital Budget Chair (D) Craig Pridemore - Vice Chair, Operating Budget(D) Joseph Zarelli -Ranking Minority Member (R) Dale Brandland(R) Mike Carrell (R) Darlene Fairley_(D) • Brian Hatfield (D) Mike Hewitt (R) Steve Hobbs (D) Jim Honeyford (R) Karen Keiser(D) Jeanne Kohl-Welles (D) Eric.Oemig (D) Linda Evans Parlette (R) Marilyn Rasmussen(D) Debbie Regala (D) Pam Roach (R) Phil Rockefeller (D) Mark Schoesle..r(R) Rodney Tom (D) Public Health -Always working for a safer and healthier Washington Gregg Grunenfelder, Assistant Secretary Division of Environmental Health Washington State Department of Health P.O. Box 47820 Olympia, WA 98504-7820 • phone (360)236-3050 fax (360) 236-2250 2/12/2008 JEFFERSON COUNTY • BOARD OF HEALTH February 15, 2007 The Honorable Lynn Kessler PO Box 40600 Olympia, WA 98504-0600 Dear Representative Kessler: At the monthly meeting of the Jefferson County Board of Health, the Board discussed two bills seeking to exempt certain on-site sewage devices from registration with the Washington State Department of Health. HB 2012 seeks this exemption for devices sold to reduce nitrogen waste products in on-site sewage effluent. HB 1821 deals with"biological remediation technologies" for use in failing on-site sewage systems. On-site sewage systems play a critical role in assuring the safe disposal of infectious waste and protecting surface and marine waters from contamination. To assure that these systems are correctly designed, installed, and maintained the State Board of Health adopted a comprehensive • revision of on-site sewage system codes (WAC 246-272A)to be enforced by the State Department of Health(DOH) and local health jurisdictions. This code took years to develop and represents the state of the art in evidence-based environmental health practice. HB 2012 and HB 1821 seek to bypass this system of public health protection by allowing unproven, unregulated on-site sewage technologies to be sold and installed based solely on the representations of the device manufacturers. HB 2012 and HB 1821 exempt these devices from DOH evaluation and approval, treating them as simple plumbing fixtures subject only the "interim guide criteria standards"of a national trade organization. The Jefferson County Board of Health voted today to oppose both HB 2012 and HB 1821. Current on-site sewage rules create a fair and impartial system for the evaluation of on-site sewage technologies. Local health jurisdictions depend on DOH to evaluate devices based on these standards. Exempting devices from this evaluation process would seriously compromise the ability of local health jurisdictions to carry out our environmental health protection responsibilities. Please join us in our opposition to these unwise and potentially harmful bills. Sin ly, , 4a,,__U Jelin Austin Vde-Chair, Jefferson County Board of Health • 615 Sheridan St.,Port Townsend, WA (360) 385-9400 • Board of Health Netiv Business .agenda Item #17., 3 Green Business Designations • February 21, 2008 kil-r- -00 JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH Always Working for a Safer and Healthier Jefferson January 31, 2008 Jefferson County Board of Health PO Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Dear Board of Health Members: The Green Business program is proud to announce a new business. Ravenstone Tiles, 1633 Cherry Street, Port Townsend, has become the first ceramics Green Business. This business is going the extra mile to conserve water, energy and other valuable resources. They are leaders in the Community and both businesses have developed unique ways to protect the environment while doing business. • After signing the award, please return them to: Anita Hicklin Jefferson County Public Health Solid Waste Management Program 615 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 Thank you for your continued support of the Green Business Program! Sincerely, a\la;:) Anita Hicklin Environmental Health Specialist Jefferson County Public Health • COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPMENTAL NATURAL HEALTH HEALTH DISABILITIES RESOURCES (360) 385-9400 (360) 385-9444 (360) 385-9400 (360) 385-9444 615 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, Washington 98368 fax (360)385-9401 web: www.jeffersoncountypublichealth.org • Board of Health NetivBusiness Agenda Item #17., 4 Public 3-fealth 3-feroes • February 21, 2008 • News Release Public Health Heroes 1111 March 5, 2008 Contact: Jean Baldwin Jefferson County Public Health (360) 385-9400 National Public Health Week is April 7-13; the theme in 2008 is `Climate Change and the Nation's Health'. Join us in nominating local Public Health Heroes; tell us their story. Jefferson County Public Health(JCPH) began honoring Public Health Heroes as a way to locally celebrate National Public Health Week. The annual public health awards honor people who live or work in Jefferson County and promote Public Health in their daily lives. Nominations are open to the public through Tuesday, March 25th. Please send in a nomination for an individual, agency or group you feel is making a difference in the health of Jefferson County. Public Health is: Helping communities to be healthy places to live,work and play. Provides reliable information you can use to make healthy choices, protects our communities from hazards in the environment. Public health works to prevent health problems before they occur. The focus is on improving an entire community. Public health helps people achieve a healthier lifestyle. What is a public health hero? A public health hero is a person or organization that • promotes public health in their daily lives. Public Health Hero awards could represent the following categories but is open to others: • Community Health Promotion—The Community Health Promotion award honors individuals or groups whose efforts increase the quality of life in the county. • Public Health Leadership—The Public Health Leadership award honors those in our community who have provided leadership in creating policy solutions that assure, promote, and protect the community health. • Business—Business's merit awards for environmentally sound practices but many make healthy choices in what they sell, how they support employees, and how they promote community health. • Community-Based Organization—Community Based Organization awards recognize those who provide infrastructure and services that promote public health in a variety of ways. • Special Recognition Award—Special Recognition Award for the Public Health Hero who helps us to identify a problem and help the community work towards its resolution, e.g. planting trees, building trails, promoting physical exercise or health diets, or fitting children's car seats. 11111 I know someone in my community who is a public health hero. How do I nominate • them? The Jefferson County Public Health is taking nomination until March 25, 2008. Nomination forms are available online www.jeffersoncountypublichealth.org or by calling(360) 385-9400. Can I nominate more than one person or group? You can nominate as many deserving people or groups as you like. How do I return the nomination form? Pick it up at the Courthouse,Jefferson County Public Health or down load one at wwwjeffersoncountypublichealth.org & return the form: • You can mail it: Jefferson County Public Health, c/o Public Health Heros, 615 Sheridan St., Port Townsend, WA 98368 • You can download the online form at www.jeffersoncountypublichealth.org • You can email it to publichealthhero@jeffersoncountypublichealth.org • Or you can fax it to: (360) 385-9401 • tiw' � Public Health Heroes Award '41 2008 ,y Nomination Form " � " } Deadline: March 25, 2008 Drop Box locations: Courthouse, 1820 Jefferson St., Port Townsend Public Health, 615 Sheridan St., Port Townsend Email: publichealthhero@jeffersoncountypublichealth.org Please fill in all fields below so that we cn contact the appropriate person/s. Your Name: Address: City,state,zip: Phone: Email: Person or group y ' you are nominating • How can we contact this nominee? Please fill in all fields ** -- - - -- ------- __ ---- - - _ - ---._--_..--.--- Address: ** City, state, zip: ** I Phone: ** Email: Category for which you are nominating this person or group (one category per nomination please): Communit Health Promotion Public Health Leadership Business Community-Based Organization Special Recognition Award i Other (specify) Board of Health NetivBusiness .agenda Item #17., 5 + City of /Victoria Sewage Request for Board of Health Letters February 21, 2008 • Tyler Ahlgren 747 Princess Ave. #37 Victoria, BC. Canada V8T 1K5 Governor Christine Gregiore POBox 40002 Olympia, WA 98504-0002 January 28, 2008 Re: Comment Opportunity on Victoria Sewage Discharge Requirements Dear Governor Gregiore, As I'm sure you are aware, the City of Victoria has been discharging 120 million litres of untreated sewage into the shared waters of the Strait of Juan de Fuca daily, for many years. The State of Washington has in the past issued statements concerning this practice. In recent months, the Capital Regional District (CRD) has been pursuing project designs for the construction of treatment facilities. However, parties with long standing opposition to the construction of sewage treatment • facilities for Victoria have been lobbying the Province, and are succeeding in gaining a degree of momentum with their arguments that treatment is not needed. Their position is that " fast moving currents provide natural treatment", and the construction of treatment facilities is a waste of taxpayer's monies. Tide circulation studies reveal most discharge materials remain in the eastern areas of the Strait of Juan de Fuca. The State of Washington, the Department of Ecology, and the cities and residents in Western Washington have spent an immense amount of money and resources addressing pollution source reduction for Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Every city abutting the public waters has spent taxpayer monies to build wastewater treatment facilities, and many are working on reducing the negative impacts associated with storm water run-off. Even pet, animal and agricultural wastes are subject to appropriate management in Washington State. Even Neah Bay, population 794, has secondary treatment facilities! Yet, Victoria stands alone in its' continuation of untreated discharges. The Federal government of Canada has new, stricter discharge standards due to come into effect that would make Victoria's practices illegal, and subject to enforcement • actions. However, lobbying efforts by treatment opponents are attempting to water down and delay enforcement of such stricter standards. 2 Currently, Environment Canada has been holding "consultation sessions" on its' • "Proposed Regulatory Framework for Wastewater" and the CCME (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment) draft Canada-wide "Strategy for the Management of Municipal Wastewater Effluent." I'm hoping that you may have a few moments to write to BC Premier Gordon Campbell, Environment Minister Barry Penner, the CRD Director Denise Blackwell, and Victoria Mayor Alan Lowe to urge them to support stricter discharge standards, and to pursue the construction of treatment facilities ASAP. (Addresses enclosed) You have initiated very admirable projects designed to enhance and restore salmon habitats, remove polluting materials such as old creosote pilings, and support public education efforts to further help clean up Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca. As mentioned, waterfront communities in these areas have worked within their limited budgets, sacrificing other needs to finance and maintain water pollution control facilities. Commercial fishing, recreational activities and the natural beauty that contributes to property values are all negatively impacted by the pollution, and by chemicals such as the endocrine disruptors present in untreated sewage that hinder fish reproduction and growth. After so many years of polluting practices, Victoria is closer than it ever has been • towards the construction of sewage treatment facilities. I believe a letter from your office representing the States' interests would be very beneficial in helping to counter the opposition to treatment, and to maintain needed support from the Provincial and local entities to continue with required design and funding. Thanking you in advance for your time and attention to this matter. Sincerely, Tyler Ahlgren Encls. Board of Health �►�ledia Report • February 21, 2008 • • Jefferson County Public Health January/February 2008 NEWS ARTICLES 1. "Nasal spray vaccines for flu available," Peninsula Daily News, January 14th, 2008. 2. "Thursday is last day for nasal spray,"Port Townsend Leader,January 16th, 2008. 3. "Jefferson to take septic proposal to health board,"Peninsula Daily News,January 17th, 2008. 4. "Heated words mar meeting on septics,"Peninsula Daily News, January 18th, 2008. 5. "More room for meeting on septics,"Peninsula Daily News, January 21St, 2008. 6. "Jefferson septic plan," Peninsula Daily News, January 23`d, 2008. 7. "Victoria's sewage," Peninsula Daily News,January 23r1, 2008. 8. "Own a septic system? Inspection choices surface,"Port Townsend Leader, January 23rd, 2008. 9. "Septic system issue causes overflow crowd,"Port Townsend Leader,January 23`d, 2008. 10. "Septic meeting disconcerting,"Port Townsend Leader, January 23r1, 2008. 11. "Dr. Locke `astonishes',"Peninsula Daily News, January 24th, 2008. 12. "Jefferson septic rules spur queries,"Peninsula Daily News, January 25th, 2008. 13. "60 students call in sick in Crescent,"Peninsula Daily News, January 25th, 2008. 14. "Attendance vital at health board,"Port Townsend Leader, January 30th, 2008. 15. "Bank tailors loans for septic owners,"Peninsula Daily News, January 30th, 2008. 16. "Victoria, raw sewage and our Peninsula,"Peninsula Daily News, February 1St, 2008. • 17. "County sends a Valentine: septic hearing,"Peninsula Daily News, February 1St, 2008. 18. "Public utility district," Peninsula Daily News, February 4th, 2008. 19. "Call a county hall meeting," Port Townsend Leader, February 6th, 2008. 20. "Q&A about septic system rule changes,"Port Townsend Leader, February 6th, 2008. 21. "Funding for disabled youth programs encouraged," Port Townsend Leader, February 13, 2008. 22. "On-site septic hearing is Thursday in Chimacum,"Port Townsend Leader, February 13th, 2008. 23. "Complaints pour on septics,"Peninsula Daily News, February 15th, 2008. • Briefly Nasal spray vaccines for flu available PORT TOWNSEND— Three nasal spray flu vaccine clinics for children 2 through 18,will be heldat Jefferson County Public Health, 615 Sheridan St., from 1 p.m. to 4 % p.m. on Monday,Tuesday and Thursday. FluMist nasal spray cannot W be given to children who have • chronic medical problems, including asthma, diabetes, seizures or heart or lung con- ditions. It is,also not recommended for pregnant women. Traditional flu shots for children are also available at Jefferson County Public Health from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. every Tuesday and Thursday. For more information, phone 360-385-9400. • Port Townsend&Jefferson County Leader , . • :..:::- j. ' .,..,,,,4 ea:,i?.:::.. t Thursday is last day spray nasal s ra y The nasal spray flu vaccine, should get a flu shot but should FluMist, is available locally for not receive the nasal spray. only one more day because cur- rent vaccine stocks are expiring. Flu shots Jefferson County Public Health Getting a flu shot can still still has plenty of the vaccine be effective, as an increasing and hosts a final immunization number of influenza cases are .clinic for Flu Mist tomorrow, now being seen in Washington, • Thursday, Jan. 17 from 1 to noted Kurata. 4 p.m. at the health depart- Traditional injectable flu vac- . ment, 615 Sheridan St. in Port cines for children will continue Townsend. to be available throughout the FluMist is intended for use influenza season. All children with children ages 2 through ages 6 months through 18 years 18. Immunizing children against can get state-supplied flu vac- 'influenza is one of the best ways cines, and the shot is especially to protect vulnerable people they recommended for those who are "may come in contact with, such at high risk for complications as babies,grandparents and fam- from influenza. ily members with chronic con- Children younger than 9 who ditions, emphasizes the Health have not had at least two flu Department. immunizations in the past should " Children who have had the receive two flu vaccines, one nasal spray vaccine overwhelm- month apart,for protection. . ingly prefer it to the traditional Flu shots are available at shot, said Jane Kurata of the Jefferson Medical & Pediatrics department."Just a small mist of Group, Olympic Primary Care, vaccine in each nostril can help and Port Townsend Family protect your child from influ- Physicians. Call these medical enza." providers for an appointment. However, FluMist cannot Children's flu injections be given to children who have are also available at Jefferson chronic medical problems, such County Public Health every as asthma, diabetes, seizures, Tuesday and Thursday from 1 • heart or lung conditions or other to 4 p.m.Call 385-9400 to learn conditions. Pregnant women more. /,9 `� ,�eaQ /ice/p Jefferson to take septic proposal to health b -_ • BY JEFF CHEW least once every three years Homeowners interested in PENINSULA DAILY NEWS regardless of the type of sys- monitoring their own systems ; PORT TOWNSEND tern. must take a one-day course to The new regulation learn how to properly test With intensified state regula- requires monitoring once their systems. tions for monitoring on-site every three years for gravity The course costs$200. septic systems that took effect , septic systems. The benefit, said Jefferson last July 1, Jefferson County For other•types, particu- County Public Health Director Environmental Health will larly systems with pumps, the Jean Baldwin, is that home- take its proposed program regulations require annual owners can have more auton- day to the county Board of itori Health. monng. . omy from government. H A public hearing is sched- "They don't have to have uled during the meeting, Self-monitoring program visits from the PUD or govern- which begins at 2:30 p.m. in Because of the increased ment and can just monitor it the conference room at the monitoring requirements, Jef- themselves," Baldwin said. county Public Health Office in ferson County Environmental King said the PUD is the QFC Shopping Center, Health has created a program putting up $10,000 to assist Upper Sims Way and Sheridan that will allow residents to low-income residents with Street in Port Townsend. check their own septic systems paying the$200 fee to take the The Board of Health is corn- to ensure they're working monitoring class. prised of Jefferson County properly and avoid paying It will hold a public hearing commissioners and other com- someone to test it on a more sometime in January. munity leaders. frequent basis. If approved, the program As proposed under the new The options now available will be the only one of its kind regulations, property owners to homeowners are: in the state, offering home will be allowed to monitor • They can continue with owners the option of monitor- their own systems. their PUD contract until expi- ing their own on-site septic • The program shifts the ration or until they wish to terminate the contract; systems. monitoring responsibility If it proves successful,Bald- from the Jefferson County NI They can perform the win has said she hopes it will Public Utility District, which operation and monitoring act as a model for other coun- now contracts with aboutthemselves; ties in the state. 4,000 property owners to mon- 1 They can hire an opera- itor their systems, to the resi tion and monitoring consul dents, themselves. Port Townsend-Jefferson County Editor • tant from a list of certified spe- Jeff Chew can be reached at 3633-385-2335 PUD Wants Out cialists at time of inspection or jeftchew@peninsuladailynews.com. that would cost from $125 to The PUD wants out of the $250,depending on the system septic system monitoring busi- type. LOST MOUNTAI N — ness, which it charges $50 i•They can "buy in" to pri ~ IIILA��hIDR each visit,because the number vate, third-party operation of contracts has outgrown its and monitoring contract for January capabilities, said PUD Corn- inspection. ./ /� missioner Wayne King. .Soap Sate' "When we first got into it W_2 Forms j' [in the early 1990s1, it was ACCuClsize bars 20°��off a only 15 or 20, not a big deal," King said last year. � Great for NaCentine's Day! "But it's grown to where we r Q can't do it anymore." The PUD, which has nine ..'-,',.74 s' employees, will still monitor septic systems for those who don't want to break their con- �'' " r r . 0, Vii:'Thursday :1ond2y tract, but $200 each visit will ALLa alt , ,, .4, 10 a.m. 4 p.m. be charged instead of$50. ' ' �owI. g 1541 Taylor Cutoff Rd. III The old state code required ULy„,,,:, tirar:.,,:(•, , 1Sequim 681 2782 monitoring septic systems at 122 F.Erect,Port Angeles.4574111•Fox 4574729 A4// > ami ti 'fl G >, U .D b ,b .o o U co .G °. $4 U cd G y O G C '� C °''' .�.0 i a.' ,-..'a' m+� c° 1 2 o � E � �� o o ro p ri d ° +� ° o o q"' .r a • :A ‘IIF m.d 0.1 T� E C.0 G 3 m'� m 3 m a".� U C ° vi 1 ✓ s. of.� m .U.' m _ o G Y Ti 'O m<'.,, $.., U m aUi m .c.-2 ._�? U G Z U m O U U 6: U p. m Op y.Q fy G C�"...� G.E U.� G ° E l m m i. G .0 s.,-...-' C� A a 4 d G °a o m 3.. d 0 3 U m`"y 3" a' 0.W xi � °°o ps ou4 a> aoia°,.5 Q•`• ''''.°. oa�Y m v1 •® o� G m`'y m �' G• �'..t--: E'� a y o` to'.2i °y o a.N j !� 4 _ 7 U ° y ° °� > E p> ° � a � m � 3�� cL � a �G gaE � ono: a� x t . o U l m pmj CC� uo a) a, nUE C °'_''v▪'_, o . ` ?_''`! 3t-. 0.i° mai CGt^o I� w �d a ba cy�-0,.. ,O > a) U C ct s• O C a C`a" E a>i m •n a.o y C C o.� 3? ° p,� Cli) on '� a � ,9,,,,2 N c�;; m ^ ° . `. ,c�.,� n,Ccc� a a'p. E�t.' °D 0 3� ti�w x .�, O G U 3 W U'�—0. O. .G ~'ZJ G U �' ca-0 Exp . E x-2 tm. a°.' m ,;',4 U0 �\ m� cox o b E O F °off �cCa ro aE, m aF o •2 o o c GF U o v m ao o.a m a _ r, v._._ U.. m E 3.� Ery m E o o �y �n , a%2,-R,,, =in z C O C 't , Y sV8,N yirt, E r � . , _ r � . �R • N R,,a E tea 1 . y *-'' ' ,o-*A,11w`, s . =Za— ® W .. It, '171 Ita ik ' } > o C o G.+ oaw s s4' oRm9N7, cWIL2 II: 1 °t- }' II MN .),1• '1 "-40' ,4Fikl,14•4"•'? ',. ••• • .."-- — ;it 0 w 1-3•3 c4 s. k. rj � S ;r..�1 N CD .—`,',;.,,- • —- \i.t welldifttil cOCT;, . � 0 d2 a, m.Gm C W Y 2'5 a' c°I) ' ka �.a C +� ( 41 `anc. a s nEwa ptEE s' � _ 17, .. „ . , ,,, . L- et el 7,.,ri):,' g 2 0 . ,. •. .. haw f w. EuE EP,Et,Y3qdm9F °-a: jjji ) \' r •C CW t ~ liC' 4:477 .+ Llo'l >' E a m OG ° b zr 4:s sve. 4 w We Y CO : ,,,1:1 440110110111011M ,k..",, m° mmp Eap m 2 C.' 5, 0CiGm 8,a5 Ui�" sn `p � Uae•14'` ? h 01404 � 4ku ..,4'''''',144;44: 1"14q:' '' r T4:-'IV ry , m m . . .4r.::;0.‘' ?,r,,c.a:74,41 ,, . :04,.:7 l',.'',,;.14'4, ''' € 7 "m�a2.e t U® { y'nCre a ,n, r �' Gs .. H!1 .:.. H c inEel•c° j. a x . c G^ o 'Ca• , 4 v G .2 ,Gy3CE o ^oti vi- C � b 0lo ° i3'-, d0o aco E n - cw .'v �' s e '° moE UKa, U� s. O U ,U 27 Q.'aU -(0) ') '6 Lo.0 UE >'" m L e .°tao . �so_ "' (3) wianill (15 O ..-i. a.caav mvU� °a •d o3c,....2,7„ „ ya) ' Eu ° Gy. T pd > a °u> ° ° E o1cm ofcmOpE4 1piUm� Gm °hro my^ rov °'QUO G ' •, Ecyu �ad03mg3WW co a,..- ZiI ., 3E �vootUr" aUQC .wAU °.Eoa oo °h. .° o.E U ! a0o...`.aL0UFOo` m'uyv, �pro,vy `'”o Octooq C mAG• w F U m >'U U b. 0 4 4 • oEfCS a ~ . ovGEx °l°1Jo1 O - v° • GOFC " O Li' vi -I F.0 aE w° a'2 > ° ? EoGos ,—' Q �� � T �3 . 000 Qf u tt Q' d c> O fx. r OQ 61 U E •N k�r' '�` /+ { A CNC w = �' fi 4 �y yt g g = ac 0. H �" ��� � ,.'t�� ��Y., z ,f Y •'"-w., �' S Y 2°- c m.11 � � �N 4 >'*'i Yz t«W W ami L a ' 4 f �v 'mac �, oowW � �- - � -fit s'ii � �` a�'� a �m � l w key$ ' M C m O O.'.'` m Kilgt ( .41 :".°-: 1. - ,L leL M 2 _ 6 - iltY *Y w"�" ,� "°"r����,« bin --0-77, �� V�' N O C. ...,Q L ,;‘,/ ti"‘ '41'.'¢ ' filN — d'" \: : -4,,.. r''' _fr ' t e�- a�0 e = N :a -,3-:, itIthAtt J m m W o w n o c 3 c >t ° c E a, o- d 7 0' �2,,...ca6 11 O b-• - - ) -er---'' rx HD cu '9t;, r' ,,3 ;) O • J CI '� ^`�� WCN d d � -' J --,--4y`:.'r O�W N r+ OC m F¢ dCN Ja> 3 .° C��'fl O O ., _,=`!"3,.., 7 ,� il m° o �F O a mq iso HH a ° A�� d� B ° °� Xc Iifl•: ~ ro qq 3 q m �x'�c°�O d... . _ ma, o �m °J' 3 > ° my .' d 2 pwoMb .� F„ � �, q ,a ua _ � Jy `" �.nv ^>.0 �m� db c) �° gym (Ni ,.. i.4-.719'E }J o —00o - wog, m r o U ° ,, .4Z 0!��• ,. >>V m... d O: -0u J � �� d 1. OJ �j % Q �• o mgc,-.0 o"fix °d ° xx IiIflI1'i! d yLI .. i• ,ova '°Eo '" > v4. I � �JF ° wa � � � m �o c" c E:91.2" c c . ;F, k 2 q ° vac ° �3 03 tnn , i� W 1�w O oo >,�F,]... � q.-.J LL �J J F..9,-.51 ° LL 'i. O.�C .I J Cr C k000 _4.) 3 °�yy• •c �w u o �+ V'" C -.° 0'°' V3 ac �om$� a w 3 y c 0. c y [3n �� •�� ,c x �'og' cc�,,' ° �000� o C � a� �3 aw 1 ar;' ., o„:04 ° W 6 V) G .C:-"+'•'ow �.ti mF ro..�,,°, 0.0.co. .. .O N m'«, 'U o ;^, 7 >, wc. O z � . . ,..-, F,t " 2 ayv .,„,.,,,,,,,,- ,..,s >,, ,,... .,7,.2,.,,,, ,, m cosir.„4.4 .4 ,,) ,-, $ �� c . ,a c. 1120 ••11 O ..02o3 °' m +4°' d O c ° S `" a ~ o a Jam'= 3 N c a '� o a3 Coo p °' 'N' C l/�I `J U "'•" 00 ,a, .0 c m 00 N 00 c W O y J O y �Y/ ..)y., F2 .a.a c ° c, m s O m q a •y w J'a p'° a>,i-5 El.mflPhLwiwuzamilJu �J 4cQG 2yea q cmw.4 �� cy y dP+ cg1mI !1d (7) � �oo� o � �ro � o y 'ani;^ mini • t �t w.`4"��.4 a�w ° r°a.a�' pJC I\1 ore room Harrington said that the Because of • county has about 9,000 resi- the increased dential septic systems, with monitoring requirements, Jefferson County Environ - for r meeting about 3,000 proposed to bemonitored first because they mental Health created a pro . are pressurized or are non gram that will allow residents standard models, to check their own septic sys The state code calls for get- tems to ensure they're work- o se t'cS ting all systems on regular ing properly and avoid paying monitoring by 2015, someone to test them. The proposed program The options are: BY JEFF CHEW shifts the monitoring respon- I They can continue with PENINSULA DAILY NEWS sibility from -the Jefferson their PUD contract until expi- County Public Utility Dis- ration or until they wish to PORT TOWNSEND — After a tense, stormy trict, which now contracts terminate the contract. session last week on controversial on-site septic with about 4,000 property ■ They can perform the system regulations,Jefferson County Public Health owners to monitor their sys- operation and monitoring officials are regrouping. tems, to the residents them- themselves. There are plans for a larger venue sometime in selves monitoring their own ■ They can hire an opera- February to conduct a new county Board of Health systems. tion and monitoring consul- hearing. The PUD wants out of the tant from a list of certified A public hearing was begun in a Health Depart- septic system monitoring specialists at time of inspec- ment conference room on Thursday, but was post- business because the number tion that would cost 125 to poned until a larger venue could be found after the of contracts has outgrown its $250. room was packed with concerned members of the capabilities. I They can"buy-in"to pri public. The PUD, which has nine vate third party operation The regulations are opposed by some concerned employees, would continue to and monitoring contract. about the additional fees attached to them for mon monitor septic systems for For more information, itoring septic systems under state regulations that those who don't want to phone Angela Peratt at the became effective July 1. break their contract, but the Health Department at 360- price of each visit will rise 385 9444, or Jim Parker at For some,the cost of monitoring privately owned septic systems could go from $50 per visit to $200. from the current$50 to $200. the PUD, 360-385-5800 Ext. County Public Health Director Jean Baldwin The old state code required 307. said a hearing time is being considered for early monitoring septic systems at February. least once every three years regardless of system type. Port Townsend-Jefferson County Edi- • TURN TO MEETLNG/A8 The new regulation for Jeff Chew can be reached at 33o-38& 2335 requires monitoring once jeftchew@peonsuladadynews.com or every three years for gravity CONTINUED FROM Al Written comments septic systems. In addition to taking ver She said two larger hearing For other types, particu- bal comments at the next larly systems with pumps, the locations are being considered meeting, the health board regulations require annual — Fort Worden State Park also will accept written com- monitoring. Commons and the Chimacum ments until the February High School auditorium. hearing takes place. "We will really try to hear Comments can be sent to people's comments," Baldwin Jefferson County Public said. Health, 615 Sheridan St., Members of the Board of Port Townsend,WA 98368. Health took a lashing from For information, phone the standing-room-only crowd 360-385-9400, e-mail info@ that packed into the Health jeffersoncountypublichealth.org Department conference room . or check the department's ; on Thursday. Web site at www.jefferson Baldwin.said she now real- countypublichealth.org. izes that she should not have Baldwin and county Envi- scheduled the hearing for the ronmental Health Specialist conference room, which was Neal Harrington said much of cleared of chairs to allow a the criticism voiced Thursday legal room capacity of 92. was the result of false infor- Although only 78 showed mation circulated at the meet- up for the hearing,many were ing. upset about having to stand He said that accurate without chairs. information can be found on "That was a mistake on my the county Web site. art, to get people in so they "A septic system is a prop- ould be heard," Baldwin erty owners asset, so its best said. function is for it to operate as long as it can," Baldwin said. , :- , "We at the health depart- ment are not making money //a/4 on this." affected by this onerous ordi- Interestingly, "the people" and received grants to conduct nance can attend. knew that this was unneces- the training. ("Heated words mar meet- sary regulation and a money ' Jefferson higher-ups ii• ing on septics,"Jan. 18 PDN) grab,and his statements decided that homeowners As usual,when there is a prove it. should bear the brunt of the disagreement between county Contrast Clallam County's cost and made it so that officials and the public,off- Environmental Health Ordi- homeowners,doing their own cials try to intimidate the pub- nance policy with Jefferson , inspections, will pay twice as lic by calling out the gen- i County's approach. much as having a"county- dames. Clallam actually developed approved" inspector do it. Arrogant statements by. regulations using a committee In addition, Clallam Jeffco septic plan public servant Neil Harring- of the people and will hold County will have quality ton(environmental health free classes to certify home- assurance by using county Interesting photo in the specialist)are blaming"the owners;•unlike Jefferson staff to monitor homeowners Peninsula Daily News show- people." County,which intends to use who have taken their training ing a Jefferson County public Harrington had a punishing Washington On-Site Septic class.Jefferson County has no official berating a private citi- tone—that it is the people's Association,which seems to be such assurance program. zen who is asking that the fault because they rejected his a conflict of interest. Time for a change in 2008. septic meeting be postponed proposed clean water district Unlike Jefferson, Clallam Bernie Arthur, to another day so every citizen tax. County has also applied for Port Townsend • • /DOA/ • Victoria's sewage • The health officer for Clal- lam and Jefferson counties, Dr. Tom Locke,was quoted on the tons of sewage dumped daily into the ocean by Victo- ria as saying: "The impact[on the North Olympic Peninsula]is proba- bly zero or very close to zero" Response to a letter to Peninsula Voices, `tectoria sewage,"in the Jan. 18, Peninsula Daily News.) Would it be reasonable to then say that the tons of sewage and effluent dumped into Puget Sound through occasional failures or floods at urban sewage treatment facili- ties,such as happened in Olympia during the December floods, also have a negligible impact? If so,one would have to wonder why the state Depart- ment of Health is requiring 'counties ti-.)spend a combined millions of taxpayer dollars to imiiose'eiceeelvere tions and financial;btu:4 s on own'.. • ers Of septic systems when seepage from the few that may fail from time to time are absolutely minimal: Perhaps this is a question our elected officials`should be asking. e, Dick Bergeron, Brinnon • x,)/1,7 • Own a septic system? • p Y Inspection choices surface If you own a septic sys- tic system, and other choices. for eight years, according to tern, state laws governing how Homeowners can: PUD Manager Jim Parker. they are maintained and oper- •Perform their own operation Parker said that $10,000 has ated changed July 1, 2007. The and maintenance on their septic been set aside to help offer train- law impacts all septic systems system. People doing this must ing. Classes will be scheduled throughout the state, not just take a class in order to be certi- after the Jefferson County Board those in Jefferson County fled.Classes will be offered later of Health acts on the monitoring The new law requires that this spring and cost$200. requirements that go hand in gravity septic systems - which •Hire an operation-and-main- hand with the new law. most people have—be inspected tenance specialist from a list of For more information on the every three years.More compli- certified specialists. proposed code changes as well cated alternative systems, such • Buy in to a private third- as the change in the law that as those with pumps, must be partyoperation-and-maintenance took effect July 1, 2007, visit inspected annually. contract for inspections. the health department's web- Jefferson County Public •Arrange an inspection with site at www.jeffersoncounty- Health is the agency respon- Jefferson County Public Utility publichealth.org or call Angela sible for implementing the four District 1 if the homeowner Pieratt, 385-9444. options that people now have in has had a contract with the order to meet this new state law. district. Call the utility at 385- The proposed revisions call 5800, ext. 303, to arrange for • for all systems in the county an inspection. The cost per to receive inspections by 2015, inspection rose to $200 as of according to the health depart- Jan. 1, up from $50 charged ment. Cost of the inspections previously. Until this year, the varies by contractor,type of sep- PUD had not increased its rates • i/ 2�d //02 OP • � '� i _> ioifr ill U vEn9b.ti' 'Fu � u.E > �a \i cs, IUI .o gw°� -. 0 -<-4 = -06, &43. ,,,-,,. i CD> u g aEi c o u o 3 c v u 0 °, v �, m•21E,m1 Ew 3 ! a v° L'i`Usaw5.5 n Eli _' ° H a° Hoo 3 �u•o > o E ._ gu` O `ice v. ti i c v 1 1. i E 3 ' _El ,,,E "': 3 0.E a S ° �E—j +.� S� .., �' ^ 3Sd3 ?•, .0 s, S c-.64, to ,.°) 1, 731oo � � u ° I,, N N ti, ii SN3 t, 182.5 - auwaaua9 � E 4 .x'7 $$ ti W �. > E '2, -§� � 3 ? O ,k E :O L 1112 gJI! t ig . 01ogi�JA.Q• o i' :, Od � - i=,f„ W '1 ?, � � O � % 2 w� v . - 4 ,N, o i ° coo y N u 'G � O ° odlt H 0 a:v E 4, o •S 3 E g aE. O5 ! ,,; lil rg41.h) °fk. E pv"•tI �ny,:�codo w u ai �,' . , ao, .5Oy� o (�$7 tC"�. S2 'k1 y o ��°SSh.. y, ° d a ! i418 ti'8 I1iflil11I B Atg r8. ;1=11111g11191 !P , . .Q$ B 1. t,�. ' g IiI4Hfl4.: c Eb .8 s?,i ' P `•' 6. i % 4 j o U O .° 1 4 p �i a� y .a u oo vii 33G3voo � a� � �yY 5° o � � a - 0.L' Qti '_. CV2 —.E .Eby U •` SI 's 0E ° N 00 = 1-54, 008 EE 3 .g p C °O y A . c Q u 0 A � . �, tft � oov, 73 \IN3 ti1Nll abp� •53 g33z or ° `-, ..'- . a oo u xa > c 3 030 �' > ° a a o o v �' tk ,i o w E p u G 5 a 2 o Exa C o i `" a y y G N iYy 3 3 o s"v u >s € 0 '^ xa v o v - �.., a +� a `` aw JE GL 'Gi O p E• J v �', 8` °xa O .d 3 `' 4,u v c C G q _ I.) < -g.„, .:0 z : •5. 3 o f..-4s84 .1-i680 a 8 4 xa 0 6i S o p o xau 3 o r 31' G ,-- �'\, l7 .w, 111. dES $ - c E L $ z . 5 ,-- :- ... c. " ETEtiri VI E , i Ill .e t + i. - �.= 1, -.? 4,3u - ,1 ,-. ' c >' /l+ FY V € �' — NO �''''�e " +fib, a 9n ' E ' C r C N Y LL Y6 :if I i' - ilkilE twa ; i CA ra 5 ,'81'4V .° 6u � 1 V ,$. .„ •gym . 3 r� 6i� 8a 2 � °vl3 �i FOOD Eos � v 3r oo � - '7 v 8 4 E �S p ,§i f! . p i p ^� °� .� o c c .ter c . 4.• ° opj i ' t -iwftJJ-4i1 Ea 41 .•v � � �i a ig , : ..,(5t1,--3 � E w � .c • h o c .. a s � yQ p •g n , R J IlVdIfillildllitql4111411 §1411fr tc $g3ui3 a. 4 o -i - 1 g 'b .5 �N oE�i/ a = �i "' `uta i " . " 0 Q rn c�v 1. I .. .- •y ., 4h6,10 : 11 :- . E'� c� '� 9 `� El3 a o f la .. uy E z .Ecuc4Hy 83 '3 .5 ,2 •5c 2(281' 3 • Septic meeting disconcerting Editor,Leader: Thursday I took the time to go to a meeting at the Jefferson County Health Department about, among other things, a proposed on-site septic system ordi- nance. It was a disconcerting experi- ence, sans chairs and in the presence of police guards to protect the board members from the "enemy" (us), held in a sort of hallway,with a sound sys- tem that was effective for about half the approximately 100 people there. It was held in the early afternoon of a workday. The real disturbing piece of informa- tion, though, was the statement by a member of the Board of Health that it is not possible for them to notify everyone in the county by letter all at the same time. Can this be true? What if there is an epidemic or SARS or E.coli in • the water or a biological warfare attack or whatever? Can they not send all of the county citizens a letter? How is it that the auditor's office or the county assessor's office:can get to all of us simultaneously? Also, do.I understand correctly that I would need to hire a professional inspector to do the first inspection of my septic system for around $200? Then, if I take a $200 course and pass a test, I can pay a $98 fee to be certified to inspect my own system and$39 to file my report—a total of$337 for my first homeowner inspection? Will the fee stay $39 or will it increase as the years go by? • After three years, do I have to be recertified? Of course, if I•live too close to the shore, I may not do my own inspec- tions.And I may not do the inspection for my neighbors with.the same type of system,even though I am certified? B.J.CORNETT Port Hadlock • • Dr. Locke `astonishes' concentration of septic tanks I was astonished to read and drain fields. the opinion of Dr. Tom There are otters, seals, sea Locke, health officer for Clal lions and an occasional gray lam and Jefferson counties, whale in the bay. regarding the dumping of There are cows, pigs, chickens,dogs, cats, eagles, millions of gallons of raw sewage into the Strait by the crows, seagulls and other ani- city of Victoria. mals that live around the bay. (Response to Jan. 1849 Rational thought directs letter to Peninsula Voices, us to human sources rather letter Sewage than animal. Why? Locke seems to have for- Some very old septic sys- tems on Discovery Bay still gotten something. , All clams, mussels, oysters, dump raw sewage into the 1?ay snails,limpets, moon snails Ignorance and a lack- and so forth filter whatever adaisical approach to public comes their way,including health can be fatal, Dr. Locke. Hepatitis A, vibrioform bacte- Try protecting the public ria and other pathogens that health on both sides of the •have been sources of severe Strait instead of being an illness and death every year... apologist for the city of in our region. Victoria. Raw sewage contributes to David Jenkins, the algae blooms that pro- Port Townsend duce demoic acid and para- lytic shellfish toxins, both of Jenkins is a retired micro- which are killers on both bioligist. sides of the Strait. Toxic chemicals enter our food chain from sewage through the fish caught in the Strait. They are also deadly to the fish. I live on Discovery Bay. No one knows the cause of the contamination there, but it just happens to be in an area of a comparatively high II The main authority for A number of citizens on-site septic systems regula- expressed interest in a pro- Jeffersonn is the state Board of grain to train homeowners to' Health, a 10 member citizen perform their own monitoring. IN � board appointed by the gover- The state code assigns this septic r nor. cially trained td licensed, spa In July 2005, the state really trained techniciari� board passed a comprehensive Locke said. revision of the state's sewage In response to public inter- codes. est, Jefferson County devel- s u rqueries It was the result of a three- oped standards so that home- year process that involved owners could be certified to do hundreds of meetings and their own monitoring, he said. • extensive input from people all Jefferson County Public over the state. Utility District,which has nine Next hearing he hearing date will Provisions of this new law employees, will still monitor be rescheduled in affecting homeowners took septic systems for those who ischeduled effect in July of 2007. don't want to break their con- searly February and the I The state public health tract, but instead of $50 per location would be either code now in effect—WAC 246- visit, $200 will be charged. for February272A — requires that all on- site sewage systems be Jefferson County Editor Jeff Chew can BY JEFF CHEW Fort Worden State Park inspected on a regular basis. be reached at 360-385-2335 or PENINSULA DAILY Nsws Commons in Port This process is known as jeff..chew@peninsuladailynews.com. operation and monitoring. PORT TOWNSEND—Jef- Townsend. The frequency of monitor- ferson County Public Health ing varies according to the type officials have heard a number of system and its location. of comments .from residents- Locke comments Complex systems require concerned about the county'sTom Locke,. Jefferson and annual monitoring. Simpler proposed on-site septic system Clallam County health officer, systems in low risk areas operations and monitoring said in a written statement require a less frequent moni- id JeanBaldwin, toring of every three years. program, sareleased Thursday that home- Public Health director. ■ The county Board of "We're getting a lot of owners of on-site sewage sys- "We're was required to revise tems "have a legal obligation calls," said Baldwin, who is to prevent their systems from its own septic code in July • dying to set a new time and contaminating their neigh 2007 to make it consistent large enough location for a ith the state code. public hearing on the proposal. bor s property and the envi- Local boards of health are ronment we all share." A Jan. 17 Board of Health Locke said most will choose required to enforce state public hearing on the proposal was to have this service performed health codes. postponed to an undetermined by licensed professionals, just They can adopt regulations date after concerned home- as they have their cars serviced ,that.are more stringent than owners jammed the Public state-standards;,-but they cart= by qualified mechanics. Health conference room, Others, he said, will take not weaken or void statewide which proved to be too small. the do-it-yourself route. regulations. Baldwin said the hearing "Although very few counties II Repeal of the state Board date would be rescheduled inof Health's regulations does allow this in Washington state, early February and the loca- Jefferson County has gone to not lie within the authority of tion would be either. Chi- considerable effort to design the local board of health. macum High School or Fort and implement a homeowner What is before the board are Worden State Park Commons O&M [operation and monitor- draft regulations to allow. in Port Townsend. homeowners to monitor their Several.attending the Jan. ingl program, Locke said. own systems as longas 17 hearing voiced opposition to The new system •will only Y they work if the do-it-yourselfers acquire the minimum knowl new fees and county officialsare qualified to inspect and edge and skills to do so, Locke having the ability come ontomaintain their systems." said. their property. Inspections can only be per- County Public Health is Other facts,Locke said,are: formed with the permission of now taking written comments X Sewage systems are regu- the property owner. on the proposed the Jeffersonfated by public health laws in IIIn fall 2007, 10 public County Septic Code revisions. Washington state. The state meetings were conducted to Comments may be mailed to Department of Health regu- discuss ways to implement the 615 Sheridan St., Port lates large systems, while local new requirements. Townsend, WA 98368, and will health departments deal with be accepted until the end of the smaller,residential systems. . as-yet unscheduled public Human sewage contains a hearing in February. complex mix of microbes — The proposed ordinance and bacteria, viruses and parasites • /D/3/V other information about septic —that can cause public health � `� systems can be found at threats if allowed to contami- A U w w W.j e f f e r s o n c o u n,t y. nate shellfish, water, and the publichealth.org. environment. o O G ca to . .• E. a n v v o cZ O cuID- !� '-6c �8 \\ a) id " m o (� O ro! HflJ o15 U CIDo o co .,,,..0 - -c r .. . ,,, . 0 8_ ,, a) 0 c (1.) a)•o a) ca o a) u) .G'••••• tiL . . . ti V O C4 ill3 � �' ...> ...o 0 ).. •cd 0. co 3 • t3 • G a) dto 3 N 5.0 --' a;) -d a > xXbx c.4 .� cv 90;)( >1U •co -' 0 O� as a; 5 ov w >1:b ° s-,ty m al c• oO � ) a, bip � c •4 Zo ate) 0b 0. a) r--.( • a)• c_ _ o a) �4 _' - ., o 0°,o (1) E., 0. Q c� cid 3 v � Q) s ro o.m..m_�t� roa a a C °'V 0 ty 3 0 C 0 �, N a6 ���---iii W of co d O a' > O .� v .a . ..) O �.. Q) N .em. m C a.4 0 O a O d 4 73 Orn cnsC O ^ mn u7 0 G yC O sO• a)a o u °04 u) w a°i.� w 3 aa) ] .• .-E3 .I,� Q),oma v -� c M o c) CO 3 0 gi o O ny U v .1., le Z a) U y v c2 N .0 ''i. 'O O ...-ti a) +> 3 0 E x0 0 -d t ca. 1 t,'-C 4, y v cE ¢ ca a1 y a) • o cci CO ,-, u) 7 CO O d 3 3 • F. �' O G E o z. 4' v vi 0 mL1. ..) a) Z u)- a). c o o ,--c1) c o co 0 •c 6 co (10) ' cam...-- g'O a) coo= Attendance vital • at health board Editor,Leader: The public needs to know that at its :,next meeting the county health board will be talking about passing the man- datory septic inspection package. This package includes each septic owner paying a minimum of$150 per inspection and could be as high as$250. These figures are subject to increase yearly. Gravity-feed systems are every three years and pump systems every year. This is in response to a state mandate, sent to the county in 2005 and revised in July 2007. However, Clallam County residents pay nothing, zero, to implement the same inspection system in response to the same state mandate, WAC246- 242A,Jefferson County JCC 8.15. In the past what the health board was handling at the meetings has not been clear. We must be aware that the next meeting will be on the septic tank issue. • Those opposed to the current pro- posal should attend the next meeting. The health department states it does not have the funds to inform everybody of the coming meeting. We will have to rely on The Leader as to time and place of this meeting. JOHN McDUFF Quilcene • Bank tailors . • • Io a n s fo r Group writing new rules Y y and health insurance agree- Brastad spoke of the ments with management and Se county's new regulations that professional members of the owners an On-site Septic System Washington State Council of Work Group continues to County and City Employees. write. They also ratified six-year ShoreBank's septic pro- agreements with corrections Low-interest gram manager, Terry Hull, sergeants. Septic group outlined the program to corn- offered with missioners at their weekly Crews spread sand meeting work session Monday, picking In other action, commis- Clallam in mind rescheduled up pandmg the endorsement foor o sinners: eP ■ Opened their sole bid for BY Jrm CASEY Clallam as well as to Grays the 2008 supply — 6,355 tons PENINSULA DAILY NEWS THE ON-SITE Sep- Harbor County. — of hot mix asphalt, tic System Work Group Hull said the septic loans $463,000 from Lakeside PORT ANGELES—A pho- meeting that had been started for homeowners along Industries of Port Angeles. tographer eliciting a smile scheduled for Monday Willapa Bay in Pacific County ■Learned that county road doesn't ask you to say "septic has been tentatively in 2001, then spread to coun- crews spread 230 cubic yards system." resetfor Feb; I1. ties along Hood Canal —Jef of sand on county roads in the ShoreBank Enterprise Cas- Monday's meting was ferson, Kitsap and Mason — wake of Sunday's snowstorm. cadia may change that for canceled due to snowy in 2004. ■ Heard from Chapman, homeowners for whom the weather. ShoreBank will ask the who had visited legislators a words now produce a scowl. Details of the meeting Legislature for $3 million for week earlier, that plans to Essentially a nonprofit will appear next week, the expansion, although fund- widen U.S. Highway 101 financial institution, Shore- according to the group's ing isn't certain, between Shore and Kitchen- /1) Bank hopes to extend to Clal- coordinator,Susan Guhk "We may not get all the way Dick roads are on track for lam County residents its low- of Sound Resolutions there this session," Hull said. 2011. interest loans to people with consultants in Seattle. ShoreBank Enterprise Cas- ■ Signed a letter to U.S. septic system sorrows. The meeting will P Y cadia, which maintains an Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Belfair, "I really appreciate that address a proposed office in Port Angeles, has: requesting additional federal there is a business like Shore- training program to ■ Invested $20 million in funds to replace the Elwha qualify homeowners to 200 business, social and civic River Road Bridge. Bank to help owners with sep- inspect their n sys tic improvements," County ventures. ■ Observed a moment of Commissioner Mike Chap- terns. ■ Advised more than 100 silence for veteran state legis- man, R-Port Angeles, said More information clients about business strat- lator Paul Conner, who died Tuesday about the OSS group egy, nonprofit organization, Sunday. • Andy Brastad, director of f its plan can be new product development and Conner represented the found at www.cl<xllam. the county's Environmental real estate development. North Olympic Peninsula in Health Division, said, "This is calling CI mkcounr b� ■ Produced more than the state House of Representa- a reallyneeded piece of the Enviz•anmental Health 1,500 jobs, and leveraged an tives and Senate from 1957 to project for on-site manage- Services at 360-417- additional $20 million in 1992. ment"so home and small busi- ;2543 investment. ness owners won't avoid "That's what ShoreBank is Peninsula Daily "That's Jim Casey can be reached inspecting, their systems for News good at," Chapman said. at 360-417-3538 or at Jim.casey@ fear of finding problems — At their regular meeting peninsuladailynews.com. and repairs that could cost thousands of dollars. • , . 3 chi:;-) f > m 5, - _� ° -- c t • •ct° • 4 .2RRI a�a y wvti5 �' mtwK°flGao 3 44 .8 eQ a2� 0�rD q li iiigp � ai m O O•V c °~ 0 0 53 VJ O•a ,,e-4 V c 4. (i) o 85J -N ,piw gi b! 21..x.5 m .s 0 .. o cocd,, 0 m a cc , d�' g a4..., - S, M 014." E_ •j. : .0i o 02502.5. b'iw c • .°w 5 m .b a-c u.5 c• y t,. o f 5 5 00g a mco a' .•ao'�, > ., O °ijJiiIUInV! ° . ,21I5oz . g q•2 7:ic.3 &' x. s.1om 3a1 % .0-5 b ��"""11 a opo i�igo' .a 0 $la/ 144 IlliblillI 1.5> i °'l •-a y- U W1t ? flh /�^ .b° 0 a,,,o ^.1 y5 0• l w c ad Q `4 `" 5 5 m m _q o+g �1 v y > 7 FCs5" � y° pmmou 1 0 „) �.., 0 �� S S C g k 0 0 •2 " 03 .4,�3C7 co 0 8W +d -s4 5 .41 �� It J -a3 > y .° •5 • r1 5� •8 8 0 E' o 2S- f 3 C) 55.5...6' 42 cqa�� gcga Is sco °G . ° ,S 5 tlo& 8.1, oar „...5.E., igi),' ,,,,A. ,,r)-u„.tib..5. a 0 iluitIhiJiII' h1h m4o .5 EwM1 • N. ' O , - ,tup _ �v) ^; +' a1 ai o U) :: 0 c"(,-, -4-'-0� � p ai a)Q v' ) so. • 3 0� �.c— F al•—gp -�' ai o ov > d a 1 by c a) g^G.� a) bpm 04iIIas.Q -c a) A1.0 • • I osp,y �.0 cti � `� ai � apim � � U] C G) LIM °4 CD ,$., tea CD bb � 4 �' m02 � 3 .� `� � a N as aoR� a a o o �4 . a a) C (13 3 0 �� �407.apy �� �.° �m � o ��G � � � y m cC a a a p p� a) ami 0 u)o , (11) II 411) 0.-0 a) 0 os ..,(1) $_, 0 ul -b 0 p, s .4, a 6) o o ca a. y . um r ..Q 01 IIC C:1' a'-'...@ 5)". 75 ÷"ti': +31i 2 cu E., z ,_, , bv-c, 4 a -,_'111111, C r7i 4.,..) o a) tot a; 4 Lo,4 rn Q TJ > a) 044, 18 o ° `� 3 Q, a GQ o C1111) (� �'."� . "D f co o g m F 4 a i p C11 •.--, ...NI a$ Mia °p r--� wg;: j ;: o by #1119 > CM Niir a) 44 , ._i ,..c ,_,:, Ca &' .°-) ,-'-Es;8 0 by • 0 CU 0) W ci) 0 -0 ND T'd o ."''' (1)4,''-' 1).. CO (2) Eh U -a CCS �" i� °" o m"cl--E. 3 cu a 3 0 Wa. Us°). > . m ci.cilax� 3 ,• v -0 ? X04,+°-'as cOd0 �.0 c°n >, a° � wa) >,-.-,�a,o v0 Lo Z i.� 3 ° cO.U ca m^b m.,. Ws 0 d)z g 0 a, bp • .. 0 v ��cci >, �i/ 0x a0 WU a� .0"'.cog W -1 E mb C b. -> r , vi a .0 d 3 •3 O O... 0+..� S. N v >0 0 0—.°o o c' x `4"'8 a° r' 0 p.c..) c���� ° 3 0 0 A �7a ° ro0 � oa) 2 0 , OD t -'4 3 g z 5"° 3 a)4 cf)-2 ..-.:.—8 t 8 .a' s° • te.{ C C aC3 'D HI p y t0 „+:fla =Oy6p- y, C p 0 bA. .0 ° C;, d 4 $ 64n a,m o n o�. 0X1,4 -°.x p0,0aipOc�n ., , 0 4 ° O .., mO.0 p 0 vq�.p L a.�TA trA 0)a .u, .OF Si° O m 92- ••—,{ ••" ,{ d ro= oro o o M° m o O oA +' >vw C 0 0 'Li:,.,,,+..ob A o' 8 ws--wad p'v-d o•,.- � o vT �4,73 a c •ri -m ° C,0 of 0 ;,.-, 6.-,.p 0 .a ° m Q E.�. ...) mo.. c% .n >o owotoG > mo $- 4 bn i.0 as Uaco ` C �' m + o ' ° • o c>4 u.0 s0. v°,.E ••-,•U ca.x ca 3 m o o 0 ((1) o a, morns • 5 ° ° 0 2 -o° 0 0 °ro am oc� ° m.0 2-8 o 0 a,o.o .) 0 6.> a Cli r-°°m.'�,y bo- „,a t.o ro cuimp� aro 0, ��w 2'aU 0 m o 3 •c.o, v°• o .5 �44•�� I ° �o C aro .•m °x °4>'�'o o `" �•, Q a„y ><,.> g • E 100 °' a › ° mo0 oCCW 6aOaopIflpH-Fop'oq:u4Iaait1IauhIH ! p0 . a, ^O -j rom"�- .V °al c6. 6)cf) m000 ' o !a,o aq m .N CWNa, 00hv, r .-. a) G 8 w a a O..-.,, +� Cvi o.p. 4 .U. 3 Q) O,• aim m.-, A >"ro a, m.4 'c7� a, m m C s.. ro .� n p a, a, o y.� .� a� .0 a� ay a1 ... C C P ;-..4 a 0 P. o o ° x., G..... '5 W 2 a,.� >,0_ y c a c'°" cot `� a3i N p' '� N ,,, °to .. m ti 0.�-, u, CO s,.a m c,% o .,•C x, g vi C �0 ,-C..k p o a, E-G vi �, O .., e,':� IfJ' 0s yps .� s .� a,w., •O C.0 3 oc m cd °� oO0 003 m ro3 ma 30. .. a) a, mn. o.), s. ° a m 0-- a, as 0 a o r ci i 0 toc 3 oy 0 0 C N o a, m ro o .� a ° o FA cn-0' as° > ro o ° as �.� E ro'-a v 0 O ill E0A 0a,�« 0 G� cydV s0 w ai•y s. � o ,O. 8 my bp,.... �� t tdO v P. c� a)•5 -0 0 0 o °'d a, N C d o 0..0) cd'..--• a 0 O tt . �'�1 0 c,ww. Boa •04., ca,-0 a' 0 °•5A � Fc, 5 ° asEl-� �1 .�m O•b�p G O a° i:, m 3 N °y tl-C• y >, bp m 0" C •O .0 0.A m o m d, b0 al;, 0 m.0 ori, 3 �.0 y0 ° ca-d m O 0>'ai ca y.[ m r'4•..° $°. 0 °+, �.� 0y m 0 a,•c�.'.,; aa)i,� _ as) co 0 w.C� s. 0 aa)2 E 0°d•�°^,P°. a vi u,P." m 0 0. _ 0.7". °y 0 0: a, ui 0 r A.C., 0 d W t0.o_ , a. ...,o ,a3.°• 5)) `L') 'Ft ° 3 030° 0 '5w °an 0 330, r+� 0 assn w • cr!-5'O O.ti a,1-7.-, C = E „ ..., o ro b 0 1' a, d b v C °�^pwCa sv o o ° °0°tg 3 w s' ! o ao m a., C6 t I 0 '+'' a.0 Q U N C ', ", ,!>', t y'�• C.4 bL O O by"' O ti'a CC S. .-, {., ani �` v C� 3 0'' 0-, tiq o..0Q: 3 �o °, $ s, o� NEM q • x o0 23.• w\ c+' 0 0 ae C' m 0 o 0 p 5 '0 +� 1 0 m m o° > ,-0ro•QO.� C° Cgar, gPccic' t N y0m oa,P. m 3 3 U 0. ° N - 0 ,gyp U a� c3 3 6 a-(1) .-:§ � O 2 �� -0 u) P���...0o x01:4 CD a > ZWia - t'.: 4.; p C: 30 ro3c00 3C 3cs. o � �� s0.�ro. ca Uc° m ° ?— o bp ° bu o v d o asv m 6 c43 u' a caw bA OD c e aC, ..., k' 0 °p p o „i, ,..,„:„, •� NW AZ ° C a o.-, a, a 0 , S o a,... w^,..- W a) a, + y. 0 5t 0 o.° o 4-d I x ca s, ,c„0, . > V.) W G o a, a.0 a,c ° 3 0 0a .>m c`c_m o 00 ) F0 o, �,m0 cDomro a, ° > o ovo E cc w y E �� ' � '' E.o • C NO C.F 00 0 a '-�. .'--1 WW o �° " Q''-' • u� c � 5 0 b, > aro o a;db o LT m 0-V. ■, .0-a ■ as ■ a, N G F_ °, o ,., a mw ;o c25a S8 • a' a•ro 3 �c.•o3H OCKS o ° s CO i '•i -0 4 0-0 m'0 a) a, s, 0..m-,-O m a, >,a1 0 3 cm, a, a, -O'O C o <4 ma,� ro0 y�yv ° ��>, -' +0' .�y'0o ° ZW.y a.� N 2 00.0a) 3ro 30 •°-r-0Opm wc°,os. C F'-; A a7 ■ ■ o x 3x-0c°i who s, 3PG0 -' owowa> 3 o acE ti cill 14 od O U C Fm, m 0 O a,, o m y°l E"._a i, y a, C a d b0 F, ca 03E.03'ti �� c>ao o00o° a�'-o�2 ,., . C o o '-':a 0 I_ .0 r- °� o 33� g3 -0o,:0' -0 as 1., a 8 `° a a°i a Willa z o ' 0 $ d - ° 3 j aurP p. ,,0 @ s. .as 0 • -, p '-z ate, a, s. sem,, ai,.0,4'u p o 0' cn 2,1-ti a, (D'-'.0 C as,, cd+, 0• C 0•-" O U �, U C OC .-, o. -a y 0 a>'›•- A C.�..,,_, p,. % 0+0 0.0 Qat b C 1 0.'�, m C. 0 tea, N� aFi >'i. C � ca .8 °. amu, 0° S,yDa c1 0.> I 8•c-a, E m0 > qoa°.'• xa WiIIDr ii �c�� a, • Public utility district The Jefferson County Public Utility District com- missioners will discuss the county's proposed on-site septic system monitoring program when they meet Wednesday. The PUD commissioners will meet at 5 p.m. in their conference room at the PUD offices, 230 Chimacum Road, Port Hadlock. The commissioners are scheduled to consider award- ing a contract for the Spading well and the Beckett Point final assessment hearing date. • / • • � Call a county hall meeting Editor,Leader: A City of Port Townsend-sponsored in the middle of a workday,later resched- public meeting on the current public uled for Valentine's Day. Meaningful public input is marginalized when service financial crisis will be structured Commissioners Austin and Sullivan tip around two basic questions: "What is their hand on the CAO before all the the problem?"and"What are we trying facts are in, reinforcing suspicions that to solve?" decisions are predetermined. Imagine, analyzing a problem in Worse, all this is done without advance before taking action, and answering the two basic questions' involving the public no less. What a above.People ask,"Show us the harm" concept. and "What is necessary to meet the This is in stark contrast to the county, legal standard?" Are these new laws which has adopted a "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality when devel- that will ultimately be funded out of our oping public policy. own pockets made in direct response The time is ripe for a similar town to conditions as they really exist or in hall meeting in Jefferson County.In this response to speculation and unfounded month alone, two important issues with assumption?In return,we get platitudes or even blamed for being misinformed, the potential to substantially affect every but no direct answer. county resident, the critical areas ordi We are all facing tough financial nance (CAO) and on-site septic (OSS) times. The last thing we need is the ordinance,will conduct public hearings. extra burden of unneeded costs without Jefferson County has developed a any corresponding demonstration they habit of writing new regulations in iso are even necessary. lation from the public, and then acting Our neighboring counties have found surprised when the people object. The a way to involve the public before CAO was originally written in private new rules are written. Island County with the Washington Environmental Council,and the OSS hearing was held sent notice out not once but twice to every resident informing them of the • intent to amend their CAO and how people can get involved. Clallam and Kitsap counties currently have citizen advisory.groups working on a revised septic ordinance. Jefferson has a wealth of citizens committed to researching the facts and arriving at the best pos- sible result where the private and public interests are equally served.All people want is the sense that government is on their side. JIM HAGEN Cape George %/, Port Townsend&Jefferson County Leader Q&A about . , ., . . . • Learn more sept � For more information on proposed code changes to on-site ic system septic system inspections as well as details on the change in the lawthat took effect July T,2007,visit the Jefferson County Public Health website at www.jeffersoncountypublichealth.org. The health department also has set up a blog on;the sub ject at http://jcphilvejoumal.com.Some of the questions The Port rule changes Townsend&Jefferson County Leader posed to health officials last month are on the bldg. People also can call Angela Pieratt at the health department at Public hearing is Valentine's 385-9444. Day at CHS auditorium O&M program. We have contin- ued to refine this program over Q. How many By Allison Arthur the years as we have learned what failing septic sys- Leader Staff Writer works well in Jefferson County. tems do we have .Sullivan said he just heard The state septic code was in the county? Setting a public hearing to dis- from someone wondering how revised in 2005, and the O&M PH: Let's take cuss proposed new on-site septic the proposed new rules would section of the new code went a moment to clarify what rules on Valentine's Day prompt- work with a sewer system in into effect on July 1,2007.This the term "failure"means ed several people on Monday Hadlock.Sullivan said that was a was the first time the state code to a septic system. to question whether Jefferson good question. set a schedule for O&M inspec- Failure is a very County commissioners really ,"That's why you have hear- tions:every three years for gray- strong word want to hear from people on the Ins. We've made a lot of changes ity systems,and annually for all that we don't subject. based on what we hear,"Sullivan other systems. The Washington throw around Commissioners said that they said of past issues, adding that State Board of Health developed lightly—it refers to a situation did and that there could be more if people plan on a Valentine's this schedule over a three-year that threatens public health from public meetings and other ways dinner out that night, "I say go process, which included a lot of inadequately treated sewage. for people to comment than just for it." feedback from advisory groups The ultimate goal of the O&M the hearing set for 5 p.m.Thursday, There were so many questions and public meetings. program is to find and fix minor Feb. 14 at the Chimacurn High being asked at the meeting last It is now our turn to update problems before they cause fail- . School auditorium. month that The Port Townsend& Jefferson County's existing O&M ores. In a perfect world, O&M "A cynical person would say Jefferson County Leader asked program, not only to reflect the would find all of the problems it's an attempt to suppress public Jefferson County Public Health new schedule in state law but also early and greatly extend the life comment," Norm MacLeod, a Director Jean Baldwin and Water to meet the changing needs of our of people's septic systems. regular commentator at county Quality Manager Neil Harrington communities. The most dramatic examples commission meetings,told com- to answer some basic questions At the request of the public, of a failure are sewage on the missioners Feb.4. about the proposal in a question- we are exploring new options, surface of the ground or sewage The first public hearing was arid-answer(Q&A)format. such as the homeowner operator backing up into a home. We get canceled last month after dozens ; Some of The Leader's ques- program,and seeking innovative a few calls a year about this sort of people crowded the county tins were posted last week on solutions to streamline the process of problem. Most failures, how- board of health monthly meeting the county's blog,http://jcph.live- both internally and for the public. ever, are a lot less visible—like room, exceeding fire codes on jdumal.com. The "new" O&M requirements a leaking tank. You'll never see the capacity of the room to safely 1 Questions below were posed are just the latest adjustment to a evidence of the problem until accommodate them.A number of b" The Leader;the answers,edit- program that has been evolving you look inside the tank and see them were concerned about the ed for style and grammar, are for more than 20 years. cost of the inspections, classes from health officials. that a lot of the liquid has drained and permit fees. out,but this is raw sewage going Q. I'm interested in getting directly into groundwater. Jim Fritz, another regular .; Q. What's the most common certified to inspect my own sys- Unfortunately, we don't have county commentator, suggested question the health department is tem. How does that work and precise data on failures.We have Monday that the health depart- h4aring from people concerned how much does it cost? issued at lea8t 195 repair permits ment was in financial trouble,as a'out the on-site septic code PH: The Board of Health is in the last three years, and we is'the county as a whole. Fritz issue? Relate the question and considering different options for know this is an underestimate of et4pressed concern that property then answer it. the homeownetoperator program, our actual repair rate. Many of owners could be"shaken down" . Public Health:Why do we have so the details aren't finalized yet. our"new system" permits were for permit fees unnecessarily if these new operation-and-mainte- The options being considered di f- also replacing failed or problem- the sewer-inspection rules are nance(O&M)requirements? fer as to which systems and adopted by the board of health Actually, O&M requirements how manys sue are osf a sc g systems. nature,Thte often Y -A hoot, / req it a significant of the after the public hearing. hive been around for a long time. eowner will be eligible-1'o' All three county corntnission- Iii 1983,when"alternative"sep- inspect.The basic require- equiring the system. replacementc the ers sit on that board. tie systems were first allowed ments will consist of an entireesepticeosers to We encour- ers ini- County Commissioner David uiider state code,they came with educational component, age homeowners rs ro takem the ys- Sullivan said he has received a psonitoring requirement,which county review and certifi- ti out waiting problematic le r comments from constituents who Jefferson County implemented in cation. \ tems without for a clear say they don't want to drive at 1987. o failure such as surfacing sewage. • We u ational class night so want a daytime meet- > In 1995,the state code required for the educational classes, ing. Other commissioners have "Periodic monitoring"of all sep- for the homeowner O&M, as received comments from people tie systems,including gravity sys- soon as the septic revisions who say they don't want daytime toms,by the year 2000.In 2000, that allow homeowner meetings because that's when Jefferson County revised its old O&M are approved by '"-,-- most people are working. 1977 septic code and created the the Jefferson County /9/ Board of Health. / Q. How does the septic sys- Perhaps the most striking good stewardship and keeping septic system receives a permit. Q. What are the fees for O&M tem issue relate to the clean statistic, though, is the fact that your septic system functioning Often people will get their inspections? water district that was approved 40 percent of O&M inspections properly. system permitted of their own PH: The price for aprivate since 2001 have found some accord when sellingthe propertyas a paper Countydiulost year by O&M inspection can vary from Jefferson commission- sort of a problem with the sys- Q. I own an old-fashioned or to meet the requirements for a about$125 to$250,depending on ers? tem.Many of these-require only gravity-fed septic system that was building permit.To permit an old the type of your system.We have PH:The operation and mo simple fixes—resetting a timer, put in a long time ago. I don't system,a licensed designer takes one O&M specialist who has for- toring program, including I replacing a baffle,sealing a leak- even know where it is anymore. a look at the system and the soils, malty offered five-year contracts proposed homeowner O&M, ing tank — but if ignored, they How much will it cost for me same as for a new permit.They at a reduced rate, and this has would have been paid for by the could overload the drain field or to find out where it is, and how submit the permit application to prompted other O&M specialists clean water district fee.Ongoing allow solids to plug it up.And much am I going to have to pay JCPH, including any proposed to lower their prices to compete. O&M is an important way to then we'd have a big,expensive, to have it inspected? modifications to bring the-sys- JCPH can give you a list of the ensure that any home sewer sys- premature failure that could have PH:For O&M inspections on tern up to current code.Once we O&M specialists who are certified tem is operating properly,thereby been avoided. an older gravity system,the only approve this retroactive permit to work in our county, so shop safeguarding water quality. part of the septic system you need and the owner makes any needed around to find the best price and Q. Codld Jefferson County to find and uncover is the tankmodifications,the system is per- service for your needs. Q. What happens when/sell bow out of following the state If your system has a pump mitted and good to go. If you use a private O&M spe- my property and haven't had my laws requiring septic system chamber, or if it's a newer sys- cialist,the only money the county septic system approved? inspections? tern with monitoring ports, you Q. Will there be an amnesty receives is the$39 filing fee.You PH:The only time we approve PH: Jefferson County cannot need to fmd those as well.Please program for those who don 1 have do have the option to have JCPH a septic system is when it's first simply bow out.As a local health contact public health to see if we a functioning on-site sewer sys- inspect your system,but at$274 installed and we finalize the per- jurisdiction,we have have information on file(an old tem? we're not a competitive option. mit.Once that happens,the septic a legal mandate permit,sanitary survey or O&M PH: We have a permanent We also cannot provide many system is approved permanent.,tt hsgrp?'that, it tpect)gnn'b help ytstr locate amnesty program.If your septic of the services that the O&M ly and you never need county : 3efferson Our tank.'''''''' ''`'" system has a problem,we work C o u n t y If not, many people locate with you to help you fix it, specialists include in their i tion price. If you have an exist- ing septic system.approval again for the life of the complies their tank themselves. Start in We have no reason to write ing PUD contract,the PUD will Septic systems do have to be with the your basement or crawl space tickets unless you repeatedly inspect your system for$200. inspected before selling the prop- s t a t e to find where the sewer lines refuse to fix a major problem, erty, but it's perfectly legal to sewage exit your house, and then look such as sewage running down the Q. Why does it cost 8200 to sell a septic system in any condi- c o d e. in that direction for some side of the hill onto your neigh- take a class to inspect my own tion,even a failure. The inspec- We have signs of a buried tank. bor's property or into a stream. system? tion requirement is so the buyers to protect Carefully probe or dig And even if we do write a ticket, PH: The Washington Onsite know what they're getting.Often I h e around a bit until you the judge might dismiss the ticket Sewage Association has agreed the sellers will fix problems or get find it,and you're all if you fix the problem. on that$200 fee to teach a full- anunapprovedsystem permitted health, welfare and safety of all set. So if at any point you find a ct people in our county. day class to homeowners and to attract a buyer,or a buyer will There have been cases in other If you prefer to have someone Problem with your septic system, administer a test at its conclusion make a sale contingent on fixing counties where septic inspectors else do the work,most O&M spe- it's safe to call us for help. We for operation and monitoring of the septic. We've found that a P cialists can also locateyour tank won't.wtite:a,ticket;.we'l1:11bg` didn't live up to that responsibil- tY, their systems. lot of septic problems get fix for you.Locating your tank will you'find a solu tion. WOSSA conducts training for this waywithout ity.The consequences were pretty the govt severe: lawsuits, sanctions and add around$30 to$60 to the cost many of the on-site sewage sys- needing to get involved. the state Department of Health of the O&M inspection,and you Q. Will there be any program tern professionals in Washington. taking over the septic program to only need to do it once, offered to low-Income property Other possibilities might exist Q. How long will it take for A gravity system needs to be owners whose septic systems for homeowner education; the make sure that it was run safely. you to implement these new rules To enact a county code that is inspected every three years.The might be failing? county is currently looking into f they are adopted? Won't the PUD doesn't inspect gravitysys- PH:Yes,ShoreBankEnterprise several options. less restrictive than state law,we tams, and ifyou use JCPH we Cascada is a nonprofit organize- Until the septic code revision county commissioners have to would need to prove to the state P have a hearing on this as well. charge$274.Private O&M spe- tion offering low-interest loans to ispassed, homeowner O&M is Department of Health that our PH: The proposed O&M proposed code would do at least cialists offer better prices than we replace,upgrade or repair failing not an option.Deciding who will requirements contain a gradual can,however,and we encourage or substandard septic systems. teach the class,and what the cost as good a job of protecting public $ implementation process with you to shop around. Currently Theprogramisopento is, is not something that will be deadline of 2015. We estimate health. Based on our experience there are seven specialists in everyone in Jefferson determined bythis code revision. with Jefferson County septic sys- P Countyregardless of there are 13,500 septic systems Jefferson County.If you are will- in Jefferson County, tems, we would not be able to income. and it would prove that less-frequent O&M ng to enter a five-year contract, Q. Why can I'the county spend be unreasonable to try to get Interest rates and inspections would be adequate. you might get a price of about monthlypayments are 41 cents to mail a flier and let them all inspected right away Today's Septic systems are often $125 per inspection. everyone who owns a septic sys- We're spreading it out over set- on a sliding scale, and tem know about these meetings eral more complex than they were in years.We expect most septic Q. My septic system wasput prior credit problems can and what's happening? the past,with more parts that need typicallybe overcome. county systems to start O&M the way to be checked regularly. Forty in a long time ago, and I dont PH:All county offices comply they do now,either as new sys- percent of all O&M inspections have a permit. Will I be fined on For more information, with the Open Public 'meetings tems are permitted,at the sale of in Jefferson County are finding a top of having to get the system visit www.sbseptic.com Act (RCW 42.30.080), which, the property, or when applying inspected? essence,ted? or call 360 427-2875. in states that weproblem, so we'cannot make anpro- for a building permit. honest argument for less-frequent s generallyto landown-PH: No. Enforcement action vide.written.nntic ';tq,the.pub- ilimited Q. I own waterfront property lie through the.pr�ess and.media inspections. and have an alternative stem We are also now recognizing ers who refuse to take action toabout meetings and hearings. • the potential for septic systems to correct a failing system that is that has a pump.How much will contribute to environmental pol- impacting public health. Permits it cost for me to have my system lotion.The 12 Puget Sound coun- were not required before 1970,so inspected and why does it have to ties—and especially those along septic systems put in before then be done annually? do not need a permit to be legal. PH:O&M specialists are pri- Hood Canal—are all focusing avete contractors who set their lot of energy on creating good If the system was installed O&M programs. Regular O&M after 1970 without a permit, we own Prices—and they're getting inspections are a critical part of still don't fine people. We send serious about competing for your III the owner a letter stating that business.The price for a private JCPH cannot approve any further O&M inspection can vary from permits on the property until the about $125 to $250, depending on the type of your system.The inspection frequency for an alter- native system is determined by state code(WAC246-272A). r - • Funding for disabled youth programs encouraged By Allison Arthur others.His daughter attends the private Leader Staff Writer nonprofit program Gatheringplace, which can be reached at 385-3541. Programs that help disabled youths People with different abilities gather make the transition from high school to learn how to cook, create and sell to work and independence are impor- artwork, and to bake, package and tant but lack funding, the Governor's sell dog biscuits to help support the Committee on Disability Issues and programs. Employment was told Feb. 7 when it Anna McEnery, developmental met in Port Townsend. disabilities coordinator for Jefferson "It's an important statewide issue," County Public Health, introduced her- said Bob Wheeler, who attended the self and noted that there are programs meeting with his son Blaine. Wheeler available that residents might not be said his son is a good worker and is aware of in Jefferson County. She looking forward to being employed. invited people to call her at 385-9410 Blaine is one year away from leav- to learn more about the programs ing high school and moving into the offered through the county as well as work-a-day world. Wheeler is con- become involved on an advisory board • cemed about whether there will be that oversees the programs. services for Blaine as he moves from And Emily Mandelbaum thanked school to the real world of employ- those at the Port Townsend Community ment. Center who bought a system for people A Port Townsend teacher who did who have hearing difficulties.Because not identify herself said funding for a of the system, Mandelbaum was able program that identifies children with to hear people at the event. 'disabilities before they go to school People with disabilities also;were also is important She noted that it encouraged to get involved in ether- is hard on parents when they learn a gency preparedness programs to ensure child may be facing a lifetime of chal- their needs are taken care of during a lenges. disaster. To learn more about disaster Andanother man said his 23-year- preparedness for those with disabili- old daughter probably will not be able ties, email community preparedness to work in a regular job and there are planner Dennis Crawford at dcraw- few places for her to socialize with ford@co.jefferson.wa.us. • -//.3/) • On-site, septic hearing is Thursday in Chimacum A public hearing on proposed with the rules on septic system code changes to on-site septic inspections. system inspections in Jefferson Harrington said Clallam .County is set for 5 p.m.Thursday, County is doing an experi- Feb. 14 at the Chimacum High ment to see whether a home- School auditorium before the owner-inspection option, which county Board of Health. • , Jefferson County is proposing, The board may deliberate on would work. "They are running the new rules that night or at its an experiment first and are not next regular meeting, which is at the code revision stage," he at 2:30 p.m. ThUrsday, Feb. 21 said. at Pope Marine Park Building As for neighboring Kitsap in downtown Port Townsend, County, Harrington said that according to Jefferson County the county is ahead of Jefferson Water Quality Manager Neil in terms of requiring inspec- Harrington., tions through an operator-and- A hearing in January had to maintenance provider. be postponed because the health board's regular 'meeting room was too small to accommodate • a crowd that showed up to com- ment and ask questions. After that hearing,health offi- cials crafted a blog to ,answer the numerous questions being posed.That website is littp://jcph. livejoumal.com. The Leader also asked questions of health offi- '.,cials,incJ those answers are avail able online at www.ptleadeicom. One issue _that continues to surface is the difference between . how Clallam County is deal- , Mg-»with a neW state,law that went into effect last summer and how Jefferson County is dealing 1 ,,Z1/4,7A42 , . Complaints pour on septics f County gets come.up with a better solution. L y 1 Many had questions or asked for earful about fees more informati()behest::: n, saying they did not understand what the proposal meant to their personal situations. BY JEFF C�w Although some called for an PENINSULA DAILY NEWS extension of the public comment CHIMACUM — Many of the period,John Austin,Board of Health more than 70 people who spoke chairman, said the comment period Th;Lir,rsday night ended Thursday night with the close he Jefferson County Board of of the forum at Chimacum High Health heard protests of fees and School Auditorium. state-mandated regulations that The board will meet at 2:30 p.m. would come with the county's pro Thursday at the Pope Marine Build posed on-site septic system monitor ing, at, City Dock, Water and Madi- ing and operations program at a son streets in Port Townsend, to hearing_that drew more..than 200 resume deliberations on the pro people Thursday. poral. The 70 who spoke during the two ,,We may or may not take final hour meeting asked county officials action at at meeting," Austin told to slow the process and consider the auliencthe. forming a stakeholders group to TuxN TO SEPTICS/A6 • *111174•-•-','...-4,4,,,•.,,, g I r y x. ter ' r. • • t �..., ��,"+ '�c � ;,,",,,.,,i,-..0.a . '� �� .v,'T ♦ � �1. �• - .�„ -. _ r . \ =,„4 _4:\ .4 t t , • - , , , .,-, iik x agc + 6� 6 i rt 1 JEFF CHEW/P0 — ENWSli LAllniLY NEWS Diane Johnson of Tarboo Valley, standing at lower right, is one of about 70 people who spoke Thursday night before the Jefferson County Board of Health at Chimacum High School auditorium. More than 300 people attended, many protesting fees and state-mandated regulations proposed for monitoring septic systems. d4/ . • • • , Septic: Cost of prOgram questioned CONTINUED FROM Al the fees proposed as unreason- the board. • ■ A $97 certification fee 4111 able, especially a $200 charge "We're not stupid." homeowner/operator and mon- Many questioned the costs to homeowners for instruction A Board of Health hearing itoring certification, which associated with the septic mon- on how to inspect their own on the proposal was postponed would be valid for three years. itoring program. septic systems. Jan. 17 after homeowners The licensed operations and Tom Locke, Jefferson Locke explained that Jeffer- jammed the Public Health con- monitoring specialist pays$369 County health officer —.who son County was a pilot pro- ference room, which proved to for initial certification, which was chairman of the stategram to test a program to train be too small and lacked chairs. includes testing through the Board of Health when it passed and allow, homeowners to Several attending the Jan. Public Health office, with a new state septic monitoring inspect their own systems. 17 hearing also opposed the yearly renewal of$260. regulations in July— said the No other county is doing new fees and county officials ■A$200 training fee,which rules were "based on known or this,he said. having the ability come onto may or may not allow home- projected costs of a particular . their property. owners to inspect a limited program. "Control and money" Tom Thiersch, a Port number of other owners' sys- "When you have a new pro- • Townsend-area resident, said tems. gram, the fees are best "What this is really about is Thursday night that the 185 Baldwin said the program's guesses," he said. . , control and money—control of repair permits issued by county emphasis is operations and "We're only going to know our property, control of us," Public Health Director Jean monitoring to prevent systems when we move down that Lorna Ward of Quilcene said. Baldwin's office in the last from failing, not for the sole road" '"' . "D.e.77o11.,ka,eallytth k.. we three yew for failing septic purposed of identifying fail- '.,'„T' ail- ,' hat.did,not'.sit well:Witt"'',don'i.rk ttow=when"our' septic'"`'sysl:eint`�`ep�esents less than 1 »s. many at the hearing who saw system`gdes''bad?" Ward asked percent of all systems county- She said ShoreBank is also wide. being considered for financing Canadians pump raw identified system repairs. sewage into Puget Sound Jefferson County and Clal- waters, Thiersch told the lam counties are already work- board. ing with nonprofit financial "The state got it wrong," he institution, ShoreBank Enter said, "and you should tell them prise Cascadia, to help septic that." system owners secure 1 Jefferson County ,Public interest loans to people Utility.District is getting out of septic system troubles. the septic system monitoring About 19 Jefferson County business to focus on water ser residents have so far contacted vice. PUD now serves about ShoreBank for loans that can 4,000 customers. have zero interest, depending on income. Proposed fees The program for septic sys- tem loans to homeowners Fees proposed for the pro- started with Willapa Bay home- gram and under consideration owners in Pacific County in are: 2001,then was offered to coun- ■A$39 electronic filing fee ties along Hood Canal, includ- charged professionals who sub- ing Jefferson. mit evaluations of existing sys- ShoreBank is now asking tems. the state Legislature for$3 mil- li A $46 paper filing fee lion to expand the program. charged to homeowners, with county employees filing for Jefferson County Editor Jeff Chew can ' homeowners..It is charged for be reached at 360-385-2335 or each inspection.• • .. jeff.chew®peninsuladailynews.com • r Board of Health • Public Sign-in sheet February 21, 2008 Do you want Subject of Name to offer public comment comment? 4 es_a.,.‘ i.., - ,4r/v n e g._ )-).)fe k gz--n6,70..) /7,0,,,f/- s;;;7„ 3 0 / e A- c..d.d— 7 ,e/11.- c ,------- a,.... c 7 fif ► I ; r\ �'tki, ikAc- K ti,, L C e Si--rj1.e..-- ,4 • --/til , //((-- i'(FG� 'Sp/(' ‘;`?,--iL dk7.-1 a X6-4,4_, -2 a 16d }419-1. /005 itY)a)1 JO (s-L ' ii-1 fL 4 &PCL /nal 12 i'6-'-' //(. 1,, --------7- ...- ------------- .t--1:Wer, 4)tejr ..., ye s-- --97(---%et,6, Ye 1 flo c..,., shey{÷ ye5 5 J2-11 A' al/t tAi-J GL,_, ( f -2- 7 S---.,;,' Aftc- ��4j5-- fie. 4-5 0 L t v-L J 6✓'a -t I �. Name Do you want Subject of . to offer public comment comment? ?Ce2 c1S [6J, -� w C—if t,v 42, i p er t\ls 9 9 Name Do you want Subject of to offer public comment comment? • • Name Do you want Subject of . to offer public comment comment? • • • Board of Health Special Meeting • Public Hearing February 14 , 2008 1 • JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH SPECIAL MEETING Thursday, February 14, 2008 5:00 — 7:00 PM Chimacum Auditorium Board Members Staff Members Phil Johnson, County Commissioner District#1 Thomas Locke,MD,Health Officer David Sullivan, County Commissioner,District#2 Jean Baldwin,Public Health Director John Austin, Chair, County Commissioner,District#3 Julia Danskin,Nursing Services Director Chuck Russell,Hospital Commissioner District#2 Neil Harrington, Water Quality Director Michelle Sandoval,Port Townsend City Council Sheila Westerman, Vice Chair, Citizen at large(City) Roberta Frissell, Citizen at large(County) Chair John Austin called the Public Hearing—Special Meeting to order at 5:04 PM in the Pope Marine Building, Port Townsend. Members Present: John Austin, Roberta Frissell, Phil Johnson, Michelle Sandoval, David Sullivan, Sheila Westerman, Chuck Russell • Staff Present: Jean Baldwin, Dr. Thomas Locke, Veronica Shaw,Neil Harrington, A quorum was present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There was a motion to approve the Agenda. The motion was seconded, which carried by unanimous vote. Chair Austin introduced the Board and reviewed the recent changes to the Washington Code. Chair Austin commented briefly on the Public Comment forum. Member Westerman presented a historical report. Dr. Locke explained the role of Washington Department of Health, State Board of Health and the thirty-five different local Boards of Health and Health Districts. Enforcement for large systems is regulated by the State Department of Health. Small residences are regulated by local Boards of Health and Health Districts. Local Boards of Health are required to enforce State Code. Dr. Locke spoke about serving on the State Board of Health and commented on the research and adoption of the State Code while he served on the Board. He spoke to Jefferson County Septic Code, On-site Management Plan and state mandates and • explained that Jefferson County does not have the ability to change State Code. Jefferson County Board of Health February 21,2008 Page 1 of 3 • Also discussed was the authority to adopt fees to cover cost,new program fees and the current proposed fees and the need for homeowners to have the knowledge and skill to monitor their own septic system. Public Comments Service own system to keep cost down, how will systems be located, how will unknown systems be located and recorded, cost, schedule to get all done, overly restrictive, schedule and regulations are rigorous, fee is excessive, improper use of administrative power,petition from citizens, establish stakeholder group, appreciate efforts to keep this sound, would homeowner be allowed to repair system,big thanks for evening meeting, old Church septic can't afford a lot- non-profit, social security, seniors, low income, multiple properties multiple classes or one, conventional vs. non-conventional and why different, all fees on owners who have systems paying for unknown systems, needs to be fixed at State level, county should to State to change, another unfunded State mandate, need to have plan and approach, more time, remarkable level of inspection now, doesn't like fee schedule, those who follow rules are being penalized, wants clear explanation of work, majority of systems work well-few fail, why hasn't Jefferson County joined other counties during economic downfall, no science to support the frequency of inspections, systems are best inspected when pumped, residual pharmaceutical,target problems known, health department frustrating, 1-3 months to get septic approval, right of entry-you can force your way into someone's home, asking for violent confrontation, deal with problem that doesn't exist, the State got it wrong-BOH needs to tell them, grant waivers and then deal with failed systems, regulations written in isolation, decision makers forget their citizens, invite • citizens proactively, misunderstanding of where pollution is coming from, BOCC lack in providing money to departments-cut funding to Health Department,palm pilots available, break county into ten sections, look at work process, streamline, postpone implementation, who constitutes rules of inspection, slow down and set up another system, outside contractors-conflict of interest, current inspectors can train, sewer sludge being sprayed, look at existing taxes being collected, Clallam Co. open process, PUD was virtually doing noting to slow down,thank Dr. Locke for explaining what Health Department does, $200 fee for training is ridiculous, find out where the source is coming from, have State show cause,keep public comment open until next week, WSU provided class free, classes every 3 yrs. exurbanite, what's the inspection going to consist of, what allows county to extend/go beyond what State requires, once certified-wants to inspect others,presentation cleared up a lot, up to citizens to talk to legislature, concern with retired community and young, homeowner is the first one who knows if their system is working, multiple tanks-trailer park, multiple fees owner checks it themselves, big cities are polluting the bay, PUD—no trespassing, PUD no way to collect fees if customer doesn't pay, Clallam Co. has advisory group, PUD wants to give $10k for training, give owner form and have owner say whether it's working or not, where did the numbers come from, hoping for training here, create checklist-accept photos, homeowners care about their home investment, will systems go un- inspected until decisions are made. Public testimony closed at 7:20 pm. Board of Health deliberation scheduled for Thursday, February 21, 2008 at 2:00 pm at the Pope • Marine Building in Port Townsend. Jefferson County Board of Health February 21,2008 Page 2 of 3 • Chair Austin adjoined the meeting. Next Board of Health meeting is February 21, 2008 JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH • • Jefferson County Board of Health February 21,2008 Page 3 of 3 S SPECIAL MEETING OF THE JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH Thursday, February 14, 2008 Chimacum Auditorium 91 W Valley Rd Chimacum, WA 5:00—7:00 PM Board Members: Phil Johnson—County Commissioner District#1 David Sullivan—County Commissioner District#2 John Austin, Chair—County Commissioner District#3 Chuck Russel—Hospital Commissioner District#2 Michelle Sandavol—Port Townsend City Council Sheila Westerman—Citizen at Large (City) Roberta Frissell, Chair—Citizen at Large (County) DRAFT AGENDA iI. Call to Order II. Review and Approval of Agenda III. Continuation of January 17, 2008 Public Hearing re: Proposed Revisions to Jefferson County Septic Code 8.15 and Associated Fee Schedule 1. Board Chair and Members Introductory Comments 2. Health Officer Report: Thomas Locke, MD, MPH 3. Opening of Public Hearing to Receive Testimony Regarding Proposed Revisions to Jefferson County Septic Code 8.15 (Please Limit Testimony to 3 Minutes per Person) 4. Close of Public Hearing IV. Adjournment VIII. Next Scheduled Meeting: February 21, 2008 2:30 PM--4:30 PM 100 Madison Street Pope Marina Building Port Townsend, WA • • Homeowner On-Site Sewage Sysptio Option 1: Allows property owners totem inspInsect allection OSSOpserynsing property they own,including rental properties. Option 2: Allows property owners to inspect any OSS of which they are a resident owner ("a person who owns and occupies, or intends to occupy, a property.") Option 3: Similar to #2, but limited to only one OSS serving the primary residence. Option 4: Similar to #1,with a limit of three OSS. Allows inspection of rental properties. NB:A person can be a "resident owner"of multiple OSS—house,ADU, vacation/secondary home, businesses—as long as they aren't renting them out. Matrix showing which septic systems a Homeowner Operator can inspect under the various code options For a septic system serving: 1 2 3 4 primary residence of owner X X X X secondary/vacation residence of owner X X X rental property X X property owned by a friend or family member a food-service establishment both owner's house and a rental ADU on one septic system X X X X rental ADU on separate system from the house X X ADU on separate system from the house, but the ADU is used by the X X X owners and not rented out. • commercial property owned and occupied by same person X X X multiple commercial buildings, one of which is occupied by property X X X owner commercial property where the property-owner owns land, building, and X X septic, but sells ownership of the business itself Maximum number of OSS one person may inspect no funct'l 1 3 limit limit Notes and Clarifications: • In all cases,we have very limited ability to audit Homeowner Operators. We can ensure that they submit inspection reports, but we cannot tell if the information in the report is accurate without a time-consuming field audit (repeating the inspection using JCPH staff). If an inspection report is in error or deliberately falsified,we are not likely to know. • In the rare case that we discover unmistakable evidence of falsified reports, it will be straightforward to revoke a Homeowner Operator certificate. In most cases, and in all cases of error/incompetence,it will be a much longer and more difficult process to build a case for revocation. Declining to renew a certificate will require the same standard of proof. • A new professional O&M Specialist (or someone new to our county and our way of doing things) gets a lot of feedback from JCPH on their inspection reports —about one-quarter of their reports prompt a call from JCPH. This feedback provides an informal training that • significantly improves the quality of O&M inspections. A Homeowner Operator submits far fewer reports and will take decades to go through a similar "training" period. • • Septic systems are the only part of the house with required regular O&M—because they are vital to protecting the public health,welfare, and safety. Protecting a monetary investment is secondary. Regular inspections help ensure that problems or maintenance needs are detected promptly. If issues are undetected or ignored, this could lead to system failure and contaminate surface or groundwater. o The Homeowner Operator option may encourage people to start O&M inspections sooner than waiting for a legal requirement to kick in. o A Homeowner Operator may not detect all the issues that a professional inspector would notice, or may downplay their severity (possibly unconsciously) to avoid repair costs. • The installation portion of the code allows resident owners to install their own septic system only if it serves their primary residence. They are limited to installing one system per calendar year. Option 3 most closely parallels that for O&M inspections. • When resident owners install their own septic system instead of using a licensed installer, the designer and JCPH are both inspecting the progress throughout to help ensure success. In contrast, there will not be a similar safety net for homeowner O&M inspections. • Options 2 and 3 limit people to inspecting septic systems where they will live with the results of their work. • Options 1 and 4 allow landlords to inspect septic systems on rental properties. This raises the following issues: o The renters using the septic system do not have a vested interest in protecting it the way a resident owner would. o The renters have not received the Homeowner Operator training and may not know • how to use a septic system properly. o Landlords often maintain their rental properties to different standards than they do their own homes. In cases of"affordable housing" rentals, prices are often held down by performing only the minimum possible maintenance. o Without a professional inspection, there is no independent third-party verification of a system's operating status. If a septic system fails and the landlord and tenants end up in a legal dispute,JCPH is likely to get dragged into it. We will have no proof one way or the other that the landlord's inspection reports are an accurate and honest assessment of the system. o If a landlord inspector fails to notice and correct problems, and this leads to premature septic failure, this could pose a health risk to the tenants (e.g. surfacing sewage, backup into the house). • Option 1 would allow a landlord to inspect an unlimited number of systems. We have already heard from one interested landlord who might be performing over a dozen inspections a year. Option 4 would prevent landlords from developing this sort of a "sideline business" by capping an individual at three septic systems. • • DRAFT Fee Schedule Proposed amendment to add to the existing Jefferson County Public Health Fees, Ordinance No. 11-1215-05 certain new fees in conjunction with revisions to Jefferson County Septic Code 8.15, said revisions intended to update and implement the Operation and Monitoring requirements and add the new homeowner operator program. These revisions reflect changes in WAC 246.272A. The additional new fees proposed to be added to the existing Jefferson County Public Health Fees (Ordinance No. 11-1215-05) are: ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 2008 FEES Additional Fees and Other Information Evaluation of Existing System/Monitoring Inspection Filing Fee—Electronic 39.00 Filing Fee—Paper 46.00 Pumper Report Filing Fee—Electronic 2.00 Filing Fee—Paper 9.00 • O&M Homeowner Certification Homeowner Operator 98.00 Renewal 50.00 IP w jt JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH y4.. .. 615 Sheridan Street • Port Townsend •Washington • 98368 51 , S • www.jeffersoncountypublichealth.org What is the Board of Health hearing today? Today the Jefferson County Board of Health (BOH) will listen to comments about a set of revisions to the county septic code (JCC 8.15). On July 1, 2007, the revised Washington State septic law (WAC 246-242A) went into effect. We are updating our county code to reflect the changes to this state rule. These revisions will update the operations and monitoring (O&M) requirements and add choices for the homeowner on how to meet these new state requirements. Part of this revision process has been a series of eight public meetings throughout the county during the month of October. Several hundred people attended these meetings. We introduced our ideas for the new O&M program, and gathered feedback from county residents. That positive feedback has been an important part of shaping the code that the BOH is taking comments on today. JCPH views privately owned well functioning septic systems as an asset to their owners and to their property value as well as public health. Regular O&M is an important mechanism in preserving a well functioning septic system and is analogous to regular maintenance on your vehicle: it can save the owner in costly repairs due to failure. How often will I have to inspect my system? . State law already requires that gravity systems be inspected every three years,with all other systems inspected once a year. For some septic systems, this is more frequent than previous state and county laws allowed. We are not allowed to have county code less stringent than state law, so today's revisions will reflect the schedule in state law. We are also continuing our current policy of requiring an O&M inspection before the sale of the property. The proposed revisions call for all systems in the county to receive O&M inspections by 2015, so this will be phased in gradually. If today's revisions are not passed, however,we will be required to default to the state law which has no similar provisions for homeowner O&M or delayed implementation. Who can inspect my system? What will it cost? You can have your septic system inspected by any of the six certified private O&M Specialists or a licensed Septic System designer. Prices vary between contractors, $125-250 depending on system type. Some offer contracts or other reduced-cost options to compete for your business. An important part of today's revisions includes the new Homeowner Operator (O&M) program which will allow homeowners to inspect their own septic systems. The BOH will consider between four options for this program. Homeowner operator O&M was requested by citizens as a proactive way that we could implement the state law while meeting the needs of Jefferson County residents. . COMMUNITY HEALTH PUBLIC HEALTH ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES ALWAYS WORKING FOR NATURAL RESOURCES MAIN: 360-385-9400 MAIN:360-385-9444 FAX 360-385-9401 HEALTHIER COMMUNITY FAX 360-385-9401 JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH PUBLIC HEARING 2008 Operation and Monitoring Plan Introduction of the Board of Health members and who they represent: Board of County Commissioners, Phil Johnson District 1, David Sullivan District 2, John Austin District 3, Shelia Westerman, member, representing citizens, Dr.Roberta Frissell, member, representing citizens. There are two new members this year, Chuck Russell representing the Hospital Commission and Michelle Sandoval • representing the City of Port Townsend. Introduction: The public hearing is now open regarding the proposed 2008 amendment TO THE EXISTING Jefferson County Septic Code Chapter 8.15, On-Site Sewage Code Ordinance No. 06-0719-07 and the fees to support this activity. The revisions proposed are being made to reflect recent revisions to the State On Site Code, WAC 246-272-A . This is a public comment forum from which a decision must result. Both oral and written testimony is welcome with written testimony due by the close of the meeting tonight. Comment boxes and forms are in the front and at the exit. The Board will be recording what is said, therefore when you speak, begin by stating your name and address. Each person will be allowed to speak for up to 3 minutes. When the green light is on it means you may proceed to speak; the yellow light 410 will go on when the speaker has 30 seconds remaining; the red 1 light illuminated means stop speaking. All written and oral testimony must be submitted by the end of the hearing today. Unruly behavior cannot be an element of the hearing. This is a legal process in which facts and opinions are presented to decision makers. Common courtesy is expected from all participants. Board of Health members will give a historic report of the involvement in the On Site ordinance and the history of fee setting within Jefferson County Public Health. Staff will give their report first. Please refer to your agenda. These are legislative proceedings. STAFF Report: Dr. Tom Locke • The floor is now open for public comment regarding Ordinance No. 06-0719-07 Jefferson County 8.15 On-Site Sewage Code. The public hearing on this On Site Code amendment is now closed. Final Written testimony must be submitted tonight. Board of Health deliberations regarding the Amendment to THE EXISTING Jefferson County Code Chapter 8.15 On-Site Sewage Code Ordinance No. 06-0719-07. Scheduled for Thursday, February 21, 2008 at 2:30 at the Pope Marine Building, 100 Madison St Port Townsend. NOTICE OF ADJOURNMENT i 2 • PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) Signature Street Address Landowner Have Y/N Septic iri il le 4 EikeilRAP i i °740,4fulevudie- 6 d 5 el'Ag(1447-2,_ y " )//' IoM L�1ZLr +0,„_:E,..{..,- uI /kiiti � 7j '/ Y A ar-,e s = G/ i/mhe.-/ /7,/ Y y k • ci Cb32 5' �/ x • if 4� °Q. C> ,.., �.z_,�--, '/ //:-/4t 1.2-,61414' r 6v 1,4r7�r7 64-44.206c4C� � 4°#14I 1 A 8friota-ro . 0 ,, i 3 Al 7c cch Miler' s/(11 (it HI ill0A4 414- 10, 1-- --ic. x. -Th [ u t•I �'v c . I t Z u'dti d 641144, 13'1 c1/laL, ('.2/4 '�'~ A 1 i I ' V.,,,d-Zilli (tY62'"-L ,,,J...ew..t,' ..? -25- 64,,,,„,47)-L. 414- X 7<' J L U G/�',E-K-iCZ 641iirt iv/ch /c/5/ 2X� / /)9,21_ i kiA&51 !9 47 4% ' y i II �J Prepared and distributed by the Olym•ic Stewardship Foundation, P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock, WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a • responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens and their government. 0 PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) 1/, re Street Address A Landowner Have ON Septic I / ilk len Is -.Jr y / ON 1� r 49' 3, 0 1a? 1 por rk 0 l+ &$ Met.2 0 it,e-,,w,., /DOW Cir X Y • r 6-7/9,,,.", ,,,,-7.___,_ )--'/..., , ,Xey I-1 aa `/ / cYf /u , 2 t 1�,,,/Av Lv v iguicl C a at .... 1 (q 7 I C -t recd V l 49cx, r 'eq.;i 1€7 47. 6 -a 'S'''S.--r-Ce e 741 7 vi.7,. Z0 - iso,„ si,,,u P.1-9A.4, geir z- E-a.,:,,,X, 7 Alp 4-S"-.. &raw v -D, ,✓ 1)-27/a o� oJA Y '* it;I:`- •J'it't ovitte4e. ,--4.. ,r.m.st,i.:4, 9-,/,,fe , C-I 12(ce.SXS t-*RA CZAVa-t. Y iit---- - ? repared and distributed by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation,P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock, WA 1339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a • responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens and their governmen 410 Yna//c ®t. v • PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) Si, ature Street Address Landowner Have ��A„-„,, �r's � l l /ltCJf/�a` Ac, Y/N eptic Y ON e5)(3'43cue'ateq- � e: , _tve, )c? Mb& Fillet/ 1 7 1 v °Igo WNL Qrx) 0.4,1.,, itiL_ a--, A _ ri /' Y' • ki-eFmoviyie.� 1 /Ctv � � �� -VI/4A) aNi -k . , .3 w Pi II a f7 rat z1c ? 2 -�46 rx lir , yea o05�W,ll;fs lq frmo A li-t44" -- ,, „/, ',; ,.4,61-AA v311 rg;11,42/ '1 ao„, ,,a,),,,,„ i ,, Y- _ ✓ '� n/ ,,c rj $ pinkie % . , 30 �, - >'/ TIZcsk ,..A ,, ► , 5Z L i`f - Prepared a . distribute by the • . pic ' - r,.c:.i. Founds .n, P.O. 11 Po Hadi ck, WA 98339. g�Boxt1Q ue F is .s . ass roots 1 ion o'g i ferson s unty citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship f the la is a 0 responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens and their government. • PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson CountBoard of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) Signature r Street Address Landowner Have YIN Septic r ,.i'✓1Ail� 0295/90 3w /ol /eS S 4444—'",'''4147 1 , .-` -J Si fric.X evrt. V. -,��i/ ` .23 cv /`�` 95 9G / y/64 a �S Yef Kii-, ) II ) X11- Lt11OS -, 4:-L<0 k.igtn ami u-LIe,, Ott ai37(- yes Y es Vrr S i E-04/0 .) /4-Siome aiita,-,e, 04 , r -c r 1 p e __.1 t/ e_ . 0 aa.A crop k,c c1 24r, -a-Q 4/11 f�A�� Btt R� �e 5 yes Joh vi 6 !/ ,,.1. s . f, y;, z . 33-90 t= X76 r' (1_,0,3 t 51 ,,, l ,,,,i f -7,2- ZZe G7f " Prepared and distributed by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation,P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock, WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a • responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens and their government. 0 PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) Signature Street Address Landowner Have YIN Septic YIN /iic-h r/ s 1hcz - d.,��,t a9s".7yA fray /at >' y Brikass ,/ rraSam ifoize-v ti Y / ,f\ ....timp&iii Aloe - • UOLKAPPeedte -P ' r. A - ---- ee 01 e iint- ite - 1 r 450 e." c,... (-1) "I Y. (�� II �-- 4p5 / 1/ / �,� C, .l L d..- -,POrIct Weal � A,c, / fog .I� oe- Ff,3,‘, gia; I -Tifkile- .4ftetktuyst/it too CevneAc.wcfga . 1 / `k V %,Gkoevt* t1_4 45371, S4-e0� TA-4 Ie ..-iQ ��� +>�t�y f y 7 ) / 7 ...2 e i o -..),y )6,---1,10-,_I,.K) \ f 7 Y 1ArfnnDn, WA 9e3d'a Prepared and distributed by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation, P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock,WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a 0 responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens and their government. • PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson Ofvunty, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) Signature Street Address andowner Have Septic Y/N ,/ ill .� r #67-7761 .1G@r� 76-1/ c 4) Y sioir s Hand/7 %' ' aoi 1 c ' k kr r Jo 1/A; f 1��,vice y' i .S/'y �c ru N is fr r , 0 '-Wf- ria c& trL5 � 4.2,0 qt . 1) A,Vyte `/ � �L° v <N--(4— �►v 1�� l<��x QJ � `f` 314)4 L \itc4 i / Ainm y (ie✓�S jek--k nc - IoW Cep-k,� Y "RAI 45444 "-%''''°"' i 4t€A/ Td5;t ES 3, (4tii i V Y ,y 6,,,,, „ 1,y,,,,,4___ Al.,„ , -g bo 11000)-0 4-v-(- bOjivo�► 4e d--- /9°0e're13�r Rp y y Prepared and distributed by the Olympic Stewards ip Foundation, P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock, WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a • responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens and their government. . PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) Si nature Street Address Landowner Have _�ly(^ Y/N Septic 4 idLL 14 t- LI-0 tv 14ci!z. P'i f Lc.C✓` '1 Qi .N d 6*' 2 4/#/0'L4,eg Da e S 0 T.uL Eiwt- Cuz 3 HE-1 &ice . yEs is©r s, 47Acen/ritt_t4 IIIaiwdeAkvih,t, / /,,, 64,, ,i/ A rr t./.... o , x2��_ 'Ni 5 ekr, . i s t 9 . , r ,ar,,,..... ..1/'X e v®/ 7,41,17— ±4/ i7 e/ Ua, .u STr(, ri - 3-2A 1°. yes VeS LA-4/4`,2i4.‘ OA /ek, 1J d&%_1 '4)/L 4 `72Z. 13 r6 Gb Kr. Get/ (� Q4iC /V6-16dAI Yes "gt-eigA;L•caki- dir - -17Z IL 6cl. 0. 1 .. ... ii.,... r AMva //wyi©/ t' Joy L% i ' Ot,:kewe,coif f3?ee Yes yes t?7 cY Prepared and distributed by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation, P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock,WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a . responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens and their government. • . PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) Signature Street Address Landowner Have Y/N Septic , y 7j C ��� �„v0 7y Y/N �, , el' Ca,dea4e) / h s74) Il60 tt5f Q���aPrt� �crt &A( y 28&f8 z oeiyla( Me a./ *0'l 4u 00,7 Prepared and distributed by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation, P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock,WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a • responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens and their government. S PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Counoard of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, rncluding a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) Signature Street Address Landowner Have Y/N Septic Y/N *trik0 6611(01- I A5 tiy % po e-- lOsts Mewl. Re_N-Ce OcAr16114/fre,G1/,‘I 8 R/AJA2©to VO,v�-D/j/�'/ jAJ V Prepared and distributed by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation, P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock, WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a 41 responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens and their government. • S • JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH Sign-In Sheet TITLE: Hearing re: Operation & Monitoring proposed changes to 8.15 Septic Code DATE: Thursday, February 14, 2008 at 5:00 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? YES NO MAYBE oaT 1 ._gO7CII (4ImiG011 ❑ ❑ ❑ .4,41;( /7 ( LI LI a/v\ woo. I CtArtlit2r2- 0 r' /v/f/-:4 /4////./e_ / 455S -- ,/Cry//%‘‹/ LI • „ Adair 7Aoge/77.,' ri El El 3W: e- A,4/Lee rirs 70(1(4-1Z-4. E) El fi" eq /cf _ Etoo ad,/ litLL,,,tA,i(' El. El CI m C7 0 Kejl Pi 34. In Y1 ❑ ❑ 11 El ❑ ❑ ❑ . El ❑ ❑ • _ Finn • 0 • JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH Sign-In Sheet TITLE: Hearing re: Operation & Monitoring proposed changes to 8.15 Septic Code DATE: Thursday, February 14, 2008 at 5:00 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? YES NO MAYBE / eca- aarti .S.-.- 1;?6' / 7714/7 444/1 t 11 0 OS] X Tr r- -. 1 z 7/ C A 4-'0 4' t)" 4 / 7 . la LI 13 0 11 /7 ,,I ' °‘'.1/‘ W7 ) l'I'C'jiji.‘ 0 U0 5 _I t tili i'L el Au -/ K0 5,5 6. '-g 6,y4,41;647 0 13 0 ibt.411)‘16:10/1d.Z0V-'L't-.'' 1#411' \ 6/2/41A/(li7X . _ 0 111 0 AI 4 .-. ie?( e'N'N‘-k (.1t:' 0 i 1 (y . ev- N fr\14,4,- , 0 0 0 H 4 /-7-A... .‹..K 0 0 LA /26- Lc?etaviit (1 til /,-1/4 3- d ) 0 c . -- 0 0 0 ti it(aS 1 P, /11 '4/212e,LiiSfrivc. 4-„...z. ..A"-rz.-- a,Laolce 111 El Li r4. Zr-.-\ 0 i. a 64( P.4,1..r- :14413,14.4.z....1 &Id__ i Y.',.5'.34, 0 ,E 0 1.-o .itoz 4 4 02-Sag hk 1°- _ CY?,/..”A C.' I/4-1 9 f1,3Z-c 0 0 gi &kern/R. Ofilt\i‘bory jtv /sr atijakil, ?(Mt 11 El 11 e 0 7--- it,.70 f/ v cdat/C..R 4_/\/' 77/ El 0 0 iviL6‘, _S-GH,14 , 7 ,- .....--1 f _..........---, P i 11 11 El 0 0 1 -5-2,-itt C-r-e)(37.1-- (Lis(r c4-(71C),A..( 10 11 El • n 17 17 • 0 • JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH Sign-In Sheet TITLE: Hearing re: Operation & Monitoring proposed changes to 8.15 Septic Code DATE: Thursday, February 14, 2008 at 5:00 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? YES NO MAYBE X / Div k 1 t.. .-r---"- a,- I I'om6 6th:we Tact g4--- cwifts-tt-i, 0 Ei 0 )1.6-t--0) ._,- /H, II SINS.6•P'"2 S//'1 C,T/V/►/ (5 .1. 1.2 ,„/_ ❑ ❑ RI I\ ::-3 (-7274e --) .--- -< ,2 4Z . .-' ''' ///e/ z71-,eZe-er.oe7, 0 0 N ,re,-- , ,....77,,, e 4,;�- A e-A-4 6 S/e n e (/i'ss e r , 3 Lee (.�/ �` n h ❑ ❑ 4is. II El ` 2.,r'v ti 4 c ✓m 0 ',..'.,!vo,t,:i 4 fgo),"1,.L., i it 1-I.(c.cc( vo -7- 0 CI Et xr?), ,_ 5 i,t) u)Li-i Z-1-icl" 1.1'4-lerzTi-'1'1-1 .'%c. (?I) 'O.(-,: .._c_c&te,.. oi 6 ,,,7/),A g/M Aj 6 /agA2e.i. (y &WI-) 13P.Ittv uo--\) 0 0 RI S o,,C ►1ca thci E Atirrow t, WO1Th),14/1l1) ❑ 11,N )( v ;vpi /46::\le,A /6-0 A-1 lc b r Pr Et 111 0 "AriN./ lead/"iii iI Liu. LE:67 eh , fro ❑ ® ❑ Zcfl1: 2 f N if r N„v /te fr% 0 cO. El G'W i,Av, L • 1,4,Lo,,, 7 e'l`1 me s A4 16 r7” 1 K.ede u, ❑ ❑ ❑ /hicoi€4,“. -4,44,4-e-L' t,o()c) -5 e 1-ibt„i4 4.1z- Opp G:-uA-tz, %))-z-1--- &eh) To m Rte( e i)4 3,J- (d o< ❑ ON • • • JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH Sign-In Sheet TITLE: Hearing re: Operation & Monitoring proposed changes to 8.15 Septic Code DATE: Thursday, February 14, 2008 at 5:00 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? YES NO MAYBE ❑ ❑ L -T : rr � 67A — . )7,..71:734,1-7IO/ 5 ��Nv'1 //J� iigf El ,1 Se--_;,; 7T i i C A /4/3/t-/Cilova:s.filiv 67Z, ,I,4, 0 A) .0\111 111 141,et#a,, 44 ii a ,cc, p4 1-- //I /IG.Z•4 iv �A .-; �.,;< tem ii PO T L...4 c.; ❑ ❑ ❑ • ,f ,/V f//2 r/i/ til ,g--- J L O c k 00 et'/A4,1/G1/V ❑ ❑ ❑ I-- cc/di\ r-v(ss, (I 1 O S R.Gt.%�4. 0 w rr rt -ro o s-c,‘c4 ❑ ❑ ❑ —10ti .i cm!AI 3oa S Poles POET LyIIL00 ❑ ❑ ❑ l�l/ d h,A11,1 U r101�ti ❑ --3-7'Ac - / U c N /kc'1' c'c„E/14 y' 1fr— 7 I c.o,..-><..J ❑ ❑ GK/3c--776c7z ew zeL' , bn .'Z/,,/,/,,.) SI. ❑ ❑ -n-- ck -7.4 f o, Box /9V 7 t I41.1 #4 /L /c L p ❑ ,j4 L1"/ ,,4/, 2,I Tu,) D. d• zgdx 3479 c/4ebi4-,44 ❑ Cl ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • nnn • • 0 JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH Sign-In Sheet TITLE: Hearing re: Operation & Monitoring proposed changes to 8.15 Septic Code DATE: Thursday, February 14, 2008 at 5:00 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? YES NO MAYBE t' S,-/q e/1/---�:%V1 vV ❑ E. ❑ fruou[t(7 4vepe,t_if__, iiig -tte.e4,_t_, `571-- )Dc-L, / 111 0 4 . i1� , 2dgg zc,(r ( / 4)(A/Lcc--7\f-E- 7 0 ❑ ❑ 1 ci i m Ca c.; ss.,„.A PA clock ❑ ❑ 1 F /7.-- 1 2/ OZ.,44.-sz frA:7 0 JO ,./\tv 0 0 0 Lc-ri 2g7 c-LJ ((J11- n co-z(( ❑ 4❑ A1: -' '/ didiff'�1 e j „ v f �� Ai,- , % " ❑ ❑ ❑ k ,6,-Rik., ?, c.ic L4--,-c., ,, c gt.6 *:- 11-1-6 4 t_4--4_, M /t1•4 r ,c.,../x 7—'• 1-•••' 0 D 0 X f-.1?44E- 11/11,g- 7t14 12-,/- .P-T" ,A)Pv Et ❑ ❑ I '1},-�' �.iL-A- 1)-.6 v��-y4.: r Q `r v�. f 1/r-PL 4 CV ❑ ❑ [- , g ok p • re6;///y/i,./ti, 40 8f' /9v- ri- ikilc,�lr ❑ ❑ ❑ It ❑ ❑ Ill ❑ ❑ ❑ • nnn • • • JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH Sign-In Sheet TITLE: Hearing re: Operation & Monitoring proposed changes to 8.15 Septic Code DATE: Thursday, February 14, 2008 at 5:00 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? YES NO MAYBE 7) 44-17sL 42-. - I 6 i fa,4--4 El El El k "/ / ' ' Z `::;7; /2-- ? 2`-" C‘'(- l62 - ka ‘,24 El El 1:7 IA Lj,- C`Jl74 CS,f(/6-/7 / ??5-7 )4 .4 ✓),i f .s-r. & t," /J g ❑ ❑ Al, f(-e,. 9 t L t )- V f,_ . ❑ SE -t- ? V i r L4 ( 0 1:7 0 �z3z- . ._� o i----/Li--/e&/ fr%if•V /(/ 7 CI ❑ r ix41 - Je1.1K ,.1s asMa 1 eki TP// , ❑ ❑ F/V 17=3 .3-DDS C,3c)F�"` . Q W _�c w' ,gip T: ❑ r JJ/I Gr? Cyt > JL y 23 / s Ic ❑ ❑ ,> ,I ( (/.. AC14c1((i 3 2---5(,( ,i c.,-( r 131/ 1iic o El ❑ --7.V, C:(-.)v) ,(2-t)_J -3ss- ,,,L6 6kc-_ -z ( (A'koLC'c-----k CI 0 El Je , � 1G1 i << �� ��'*/(/ A/a27.(;*jf?,. v", ❑ ❑ ❑ / 2k'y' 1/0 L2Cri�471. t 3e/. /1/4')OZ_P,,/,/ ,7),, a C. ' ❑ ❑ ix /4----/ //7E, 11- 111e/foil -?..I/.�G, Se ` &' 'ci, Poc'� /;91iil-C '/'7,1 ❑ ❑ ❑ 14.6 614- ❑ ❑ ❑ • 0 411 JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH Sign-In Sheet TITLE: Hearing re: Operation & Monitoring proposed changes to 8.15 Septic Code DATE: Thursday, February 14, 2008 at 5:00 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? YES NO MAYBE i (3Ce...,,,,,,.._- 34x--4,----- 07'.. 44-6-ar El CI 111 x -9,- oi ii,z ,1,;7 (z- 6)4,7/ 0 0 0 L. (A.ex_e_.. 7,60td -❑ ❑ ❑ Arti,-) 24t1 ' , / 1 C El ❑ ❑ C SAA �' iii• -J / r ❑ E, L---ar / c., /7(''V El ❑ ❑ i),./ .--.2•A'V)id-ri-tAil&-- --1/4., /---it -74 /oma El El Ei /A/ 1—e---- ❑ ❑ ❑ I . % �= ❑ ❑ ❑ n /2.4, -,-;4„,...i,-Y Nee 1/,‘,/,‘ 111 11 111 :li , ,r, < <. ", ❑ El :-.*t- e-3 \,)°-- V.3rItZ\ 3 . J-;a1D,;50c.). D ) , -- 4_ ci ii I-v-5 i 7J)$"1/1 `J ❑ ❑ ❑ 0p, /.:,,,,-;: is 00 C}/Yr^p,' Uie_ pf_ 4 :1G� . ❑ ❑ if ' ii6/‘_,(„044/, 'Ili i 3- cictf\: 6,204 T /1" ❑ ❑ C r 0 • JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH Sign-In Sheet TITLE: Hearing re: Operation & Monitoring proposed changes to 8.15 Septic Code DATE: Thursday, February 14, 2008 at 5:00 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? YES NO MAYBE i �,mi .C� IA.( )6/0 r ( I 1 1::oi n "0 r. 1, A ❑ [A ❑ ik..((e. LU` -c..o ( id (,ttl 2Ui1 /kC -et- .-r- i , & , r T , (---,/a9 0 lA-f- -,Ser_e_. 0 Cit://%4Af c 6,-, A ,b R, (,;, S,,,; )4 ; o..-C:-Z-4 -°-)11\ ❑ ❑ ❑ ii -Le ,,,,.... ,, ,, „ , off/ h J "41z.- ❑ ❑ ❑ ' eiia a �U 22 . /e (Pl&i: ❑ ❑ ,,-L /1../L., w//1102/27 l )I�.�J j 1eii t d a tial I k i v <,,010 c.•.214-t if e.G ,,,, ❑ ❑ ❑ ��i \L Liw � . - ❑ ❑ ❑ J ,.. :4 3 M 4._it v ..0Q6--.e. , . J2 % ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ S n n n • • • • JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH Sign-In Sheet TITLE: Hearing re: Operation & Monitoring proposed changes to 8.15 Septic Code DATE:Thursday, February 14, 2008 at 5:00 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? YES NO MAYBE g `'--7,'(t 717 :2P'. S ?7-1- [ ❑ ❑ 5 .,, 1-/e is4 ,(l 3 , tu ,4 Hi, ,.J rt. ❑ El la t. .inA 0,, 4-1--P...:„), -f)-r a 0 0 ._1, ,, S ci uIA ,j 'Bec( t Lo P"r ❑ D ❑ Ai, avoij.,v/iii:6/ 'Plo), 3A e}tivvi-6A/1,------ pylli 0 111, r ri6 ,Icidd 15 A odo P T0 IT 111 El 4. El 0 El ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Ill ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • nnn • • 0 :0 • JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH Sign-In Sheet TITLE: Hearing re: Operation & Monitoring proposed changes to 8.15 Septic Code DATE: Thursday, February 14, 2008 at 5:00 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY b Testimony? f YES NO MAYBE N t i- ✓ C1)et e N(fee+ii `1 n ®S Alec� v e VD �r-NJ iN 1 e- #1 ell 110 C Lr c As,- r. It)C' Ea-tri ee L 'p i'1- Ik4 (c t ❑ ❑�( El���:�� a v,. J L 4 r^r 5 6 r t/ #,z Ji1ccJ " _ /6 o, w 1"-?477,5�'/(. ❑ �] ❑ / Z w 3'p o> S'Tt?.emZ r 0.*...4_44...-,...t co,ZA(.._. V Ot2tc kL6AbLoj,-- El 12 El tee gttle...." 4140r- - ® ❑ J i../w . kwr $4i �� V v f4 1)' 4 i:///-7-r i 2 91 d v // /, 1v ,fin �. /e/9sJ ❑ I'7 ❑ )1\ -11/ ei e /,,.,,, .,.2 2 .fir f Z ec�f L>tv QA,1 L c,6 NE C ❑ ❑ ,i'--6-QA. Q. 0 t\ /j sv-k./ ' d ec-Qi4_,--7-7 /`7 4. ,/Wit,/ / e/t,T, . y -�,e;-�'--� ❑ ❑ CI 1,44rik-ei �C oil. �N ei6 ►� c (.L, ittetztor ❑ ❑ ❑ i--) (/ i ` k., , ( tk- ❑ ❑ ❑ j,e- ai-,,oir- 0-1� /%� 2G/ Lived a y Pr Aqicliok, .4-� AV 1pv CGh-) J 1 ((loft'? C -. - % C : . > ❑ VI ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • n nn r • • JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH Sign-In Sheet TITLE: Hearing re: Operation & Monitoring proposed changes to 8.15 Septic Code DATE:Thursday, February 14, 2008 at 5:00 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? YES NO MAYBE 0,55. V\ aU t 5 -a. E `t1a v'Vo ., NoveUatd�0& II CI '12,,i,-4--- Fa rz.; -' i' ) `k q c' live` -1^`S r)a_006/4,1 t', t-c 11_ ❑ ❑ E erAic e„t (1226- 1\l5 o� � GI E. CI1ei. Zvrf �I �,1 C/ I,,AA, ❑ 4 ❑ yo (,)mN 12-1‘r, 6,044;-4-Ns 7;.)-( Goo 1 v ?tkKc� CiNr-cik\vu---- ❑ ❑ ❑ 4 lift( . ivaghk,f ;:iz Woie4fjpiat44I'- ❑ V EI o - L,4k,- Dl . I' k \ 1 k ❑ ❑ Er. R0Aimb o J AftOOA lc v?,70ar1/ E Perm.. vAt ❑ ❑ C AtI (cAfriz i �,( ❑ ❑ E (4,\C.s X kio,„,,v„, e l aCL )' 24[ 52nd poac( 0;1f,c c,71or2 ,,,,,L Ei`❑ ❑ l'Ci g( ' LL Iso/S.c*ci-skiitta Ar ❑ ❑ ❑ (t/ - ' ,Aze-f,--- 44(35,2,vere,<d)5't kiefee.aack DA 11 X 1-='5-Ve) 6,(-19-71 :›/s-' '-) -,7---- ft.,it' s /2_ ./P2riary5oN D ®` ❑ ❑ ,NL/nDA Ix/1f��cc ►ws .. 51, #4.-b/c)c . El 0 • nnn • • JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH Sign-In. Sheet TITLE: Hearing re: Operation & Monitoring proposed changes to 8.15 Septic Code DATE: Thursday, February 14, 2008 at 5:00 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? YES NO MAYBE �/ i5 21 �D P U l �^�pa►lc O k 14 SON lta Mgr( -1+ 1JC ❑ ❑ ❑ %O: tio, A 6e462 ❑ ❑ ❑ >" 6/ /dz /4iJ kL ) C-- 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ C ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • nn • • JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH Sign-In Sheet TITLE: Hearing re: Operation & Monitoring proposed changes to 8.15 Septic Code DATE: Thursday, February 14, 2008 at 5:00 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? YES NO MAYBE /9t' 4-4*CelVe / L� T 7 1-1 I .4— 111 .ccr6 7(--Trz .5r ❑ ❑ EI pc()) •2.,‘ Q 0 0 [p / f3c.r6• `S !3 ( 044. C ❑ ❑ 6<-7 a/J(1 re (?((4,() E- 0 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 11 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ nnn • • JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH Sign-In Sheet TITLE: Hearing re: Operation & Monitoring proposed changes to 8.15 Septic Code DATE: Thursday, February 14, 2008 at 5:00 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? YES NO MAYBE l �� ❑ ❑ .rte ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ El El ❑ C ❑ • ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ C ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • n n n • • JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH Sign-In Sheet TITLE: Hearing re: Operation & Monitoring proposed changes to 8.15 Septic Code DATE: Thursday, February 14, 2008 at 5:00 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? YES NO MAYBE _5 ya „ 3 5, �— -Z ,C'�,: ❑ ❑ E IV EYE/" V" � "1 �'. .M,` % //TZ'��if�/Cf" 1...'!/(/ ,/`� �Ll e"�Z ❑ : ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 1111 ❑ • ❑ ❑ ❑ El El ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ID El 11 11 1111 ❑ 1111 ❑ El 11 • n n n x C 0 vA 6k) !?v ZL i G ALTA- v\Ai,IJ c. • TatS 0 8 • G/ctz-ti EsTEs au WA 40LE-1-} (.3..?Po P11C 1 /`) PE-CI-10 O N C , 1 y`( ,-J u0 O V L E lV co v 2A G A Go vA.1P L E TT 1 tiJ S E CT i o STRA-`11. C,`t' l-}aLJ E11ER LAA e A s i rJ G 4 F e-e-- `TO \MA--K t ��,reC3 T AT %AA-`C S "[I S T 15 F.:0 N CT f ON /A c.JALLt N S4F SINC.0IAA 1 SE'S u� (Ai A-56-g E G( KUV., LocAT14544) • ? -v N ‘O10 AiL' -T LL �C-.� wtE N cc' . vs-a. M )' OE :(_,,H 13o12 4.45 c,er.� 1 $ V Y-A L_ a P L.'E T1-} �-i t4 5 S'Y s sE S A ` C3 1R,4 (SLE F E 430 R1 >✓b 2D F-A-n-5 -o . PL EA-5 E M G. 5 0)2•-e- 0' N4T AL-5D /NS ``P - • r � �' �/jI] Com_) ,,,:::"-'2,4.--:''��, may' ... � • ,� D� ✓If./ �F-'mom - £ : f ,217; At l i ` *'4^ / Ste® ® _�. yr' Y `/ �f r ® / "fit - t ' D i s / ,�//�� _=; " A � i ; 14. 47 it.ey ./ f • 9 1-'',F",4P- - - 'A if' '' `�tefkri/A it, / • c3 P14G Vtfr- •/W '{.C��J'�', j � � O®/� ®>�.^`•�: .e,'aG .`e'�: yieeCt • e 1 t . ,,,... • 1 ' .117ter.44rJ& BYTrendwestQ "n//, t-t),.., -, /',3 q e..0-)2 7 r 4, ie_to / A-41/4--.i /a 4, /li ` ,1e ,� - rZ 1 __L /;_-11,0 _ / f C' c� z.‘4.-4_ tz..., 1- Z j v-e a L 4"- Q 16' -- lam? 21 1.4 S' 1-a >7Lx _2—&a.",,,,`-/ /CP /Lt .9A /``Z -Li x,/ / ' fit- 1s ,5: c;-:-..w /Li {e4 ('' • "3 off Ard Ali- Lei L_� 7-2; .r,.,ecK--, r Aoivq. y e) z, r l C -.: c r • Nic .6, S /) k.5---/`-,t 2Sim iZ r 1-800-457-0103 1-888-648-7363 Reservations Owner Services • f r • 7-41 IC 0 /-kLt 6 0 ht ,e 50041 nu s < .L / oyes a � J rimr / N P4 se evNejio 1,1 (' e...5C,,icit k,t ,,,_ c\,,,C.--et_ & szxeD � 5e Ur( N26 tGQ � b 5q ,H �dW opr � t( • ` Dv gr� h krQ � ih ill 1 Cr y is 4nQ GYI4- 4,-/ 3s—( e_,CAczyrq4-LneC . _ • 1 T Jefferson County Board of Health • 615 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 February 14, 2008 You are considering the adoption of a program that is going to have substantial financial impacts on homeowners throughout Jefferson County. At your initial public hearing on this issue, I was one of many who requested the hearing be rescheduled to an evening time when it would be possible for working people to attend. I never imagined that you would reschedule this hearing to the evening of Valentine's Day! My wife and I had already made reservations for a quiet dinner together this evening to celebrate our love and for a few hours of relaxation together away from the stresses of our busy lives. Instead, we are attending a governmental public hearing in an effort to ensure that the voices of at least a few rural homeowners are represented. I understand that this program is being developed in response to WAC 246-272A-0270, a section of WAC 246-272A, On-site Sewage Systems. While this section may be well- intentioned, it sets an unfunded mandate that translates into tremendous expenses for each homeowner who operates an OSS. Although there are no doubt some failing systems here and there, they do not represent a significant environmental problem that warrants the implementation of an inspection program (OSSIP) as stringent as that demanded by the WAC. • Government should assume a responsibility to demonstrate that there is an actual problem before it attempts to solve it, and that has not been adequately accomplished in this case. Jefferson County has presented some information, but does not appear to have a good "feel" for the scope and scale of the "problem" that is being represented as requiring the proposed solution. We are required by statute in many other areas to present best available science (BAS) in support of regulatory programs, and that requirement does not appear to have been met in this instance. In the absence of a showing of harm, the homeowner should not be placed into the position of having to prove to the county that the system remains functional on such a frequent basis at the cost of these inspections. (If your septic system is failing, you are not going to have any doubt that there's a problem, and you are going to fix it.) I note that Clallam County has successfully defrayed the cost of training homeowners to inspect their own OSSs by winning a Department of Ecology grant in the amount of $242,000. Jefferson County's current option for training homeowners for this type of education is to effectively charge them more for the training and certification than it would cost to hire a professional, if one is available within a reasonable timeframe to perform the inspection. Stepping away from the immediate issue for a moment, Federal Reserve Chairman Bernake recently declared that there is a 50-50 chance of a recession beginning in the first quarter of 2008. Many economists and financial consultants believe that recession began in 2007, and is poised to become much deeper in 2008. The bulk of adjustable rate mortgages will adjust in 2008, at a time when inflation is higher than it has been in seventeen years. In order to recoup losses from problem mortgages, many banks are raising the interest rates on their credit cards to as high as 30% on unpaid balances. Just as we are tipping into troubled financial waters, Jefferson County is proposing to implement a program that will cause even more financial hardship for many homeowners in the county. Is this a wise course of action at this time? I, for one, strongly believe that it is not. • If this action must go forward, then inspections should be tied to OSS pump-out and/or repair activities, so that the inspection can be performed as a far less expensive checklist item by the pumping technician or the installer. Education and certification for those wishing to perform their own inspections should be made less expensive and filing fees should be waived. In general, any OSS already approved for installation by the county should be considered acceptable for the life expectancy of the type of system, with a supplemental inspection program to begin no sooner than the first year beyond the system's life expectancy. In any instance where an inspector determines a system has a problem, the homeowner should be allowed to seek a second opinion from another inspector prior to being required to actually make the recommended repair. It's time to stop chasing the phantom menace of significant numbers of failing septic systems. Studies have already demonstrated that there simply are not enough failing systems to justify such an expensive and onerous inspection program as the one being proposed. Studies conducted in the more heavily populated portions of the eastern United States demonstrate that wildlife are the majority contributors of fecal coliform, even in such built-up areas as the metropolitan region around Washington, DC (Hagedorn, et. al.). Locally, regulations are already in place for dealing with the few problem systems that are identified through existing monitoring programs. Instead, state and local jurisdictions should be working more intensively on the more frequently reported and quantifiable environmental challenges to the Puget Sound resulting from municipal sewer operations. Every day these large systems contribute millions of gallons of effluent into the Puget Sound and surrounding waterways, laden with an ecologically damaging cocktail of11111 biopharmaceutical residuals. (Research at the Department of Energy's Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (Battelle) in Sequim found that even short-term exposure to the type of estrogen used in oral contraceptives reduces fish fertility (Schultz, et. al.), and other research has demonstrated that the chemical can even change the sex of individual fish.) There are frequent discharges of raw sewage during storm events and whenever there's a significant mechanical failure. These generally take place without significant legal consequences for the operating municipality. Would an OSS owner ever be allowed to operate this way? (King County's new Brightwater outfall will be bringing the pharmaceutical residual cocktail and incidental raw sewage discharges to waters frequented by the endangered J, K, and L Pod resident orcas, once the facility is completed and brought online.) Recognition that WAC 246-272A-0270 is of significant concern in other counties has resulted in the introduction of HB 3345, Regarding inspection intervals for properly functioning on-site sewage disposal systems. Put forward by Representative Linville, the bill serves to inform the state Department of Health that there is significant Legislative concern over the provisions the department included in their WAC, and offers an opportunity for changing the WAC, even if the legislation does not succeed during this session. I strongly recommend that Jefferson County's elected officials petition for immediate rescission or significant modification of WAC 246-272A-0270, and request a stronger legislative focus on the ecological challenges posed by municipal sewer systems. The county should point to the burdensome costs of the inspection program resulting from the WAC provisions, the current inability of the OSS professional community to provide an adequate level of service, as well as to the lack of a demonstration of harm prior to the adoption of the WAC requirement. Officials should further point out that the already-identified pollutant contributions of various municipal 11111 sewer operations should be of much greater concern as a public health and environmental issue than the hypothetical problems resulting from the failure of a few isolated rural septic systems. Other rural counties may be interested in joining such an effort. There are many excellent reasons to delay adoption of this ordinance update to allow time to work with the OSS-owning community and the state Department of Health to develop both a more appropriate requirement at the state level and a more acceptable inspection program at the local level. I've provided just a few, and I'm certain that others will provide still more. This is not something that has to be completed immediately, and the current level of legislative interest indicates that the state Department of Health should be willing to work on a more reasonable approach. In disaster response medicine, injured people are sorted according to the severity of their injuries, in order to provide the most essential care to those who need it the most. The process is called triage, and it should be employed to allocate our resources for cleaning up the Puget Sound, too. We will get more bang for the buck if we target those resources to municipal sewer system operation and confine our concern for OSS operations to only those systems that are demonstrably failing. Thank you very much for your time and your kind consideration of my comments. Norman acLeod • 241 Sand Road Port Townsend, WA 98368 379-8912 • Seatic System Maintenance-Chapter 5-The Septic System Owner's Manual 01 . 1 Reprinted with author's permission. For more ` information about The Septic Owner's Manual and to order your own copy,please visit: - c "` ; • - ° http:// www.shelterpub.com/ shelter/ssom book.html w' " - `— j c9/2 iL fze Chapter 5 The Septic System Maintenance Septic System from The Septic System Owner's Manual Owner's Manual -, „� „ t. In the last chapter we talked about what goes down the drain. Here we're going to cover long- 'y i 11. , term periodic maintenance,which consists mainly of septic tank inspection and pumping when r.t• bolo t necessary. We'll also discuss drainfield inspection. Pitf ; , ; - ,21I People often say, "Oh, I've never had to pump my tank,"as if that were proof that their septic AY ' a-eq c 'r: system works fine. But be aware,failure to pump tanks is(next to improper siting and design) j perhaps the greatest single cause of septic system failure. Here's what can happen: Y What It's About 1`;.,ISS i f • ��!��; J `k }�`�1, ,`, 4 ,.. , I�� c�tt EF�ft~d ` rr7r ,1 `t;j What's New in , �\ 'ftr.�,-,%%it TJ,`, :(ji '~' ,q 4!tI....-(.Q i` , ,' # ,�i ,1 6!r t • \ Sri ! ,.r1 r;1/ This Edition } ,jr r 1 y t -" shl.- c-,r. �1 'r , rs. '.. ) (,�1,11f s i/1)/4:\ Ir{.l(/ 4i.f*•''1 ' 5,...) �r !.'i } l e� � 1 'i`.'t 17 / t . 'r-,n ,. •.- 4 c 7. . ,. ..�� . it :'..1„,-;,„.;.10:f.- '�;,�� Sample Content � � l.i 4 i!� i'K� ' i{ i. 1.111111 WEI ,-....- ,.i--,'Sample ip ,,,,,,, Table ofimp, }} },..6.1 r �� '' ' Contents Y�t.ET y{3 L'.4•FI Li. �....� ..'�. '-s:.s' 4 _ k.i,, : •■ Lx. f -"` 1 J;' rj'-_" •T. a-N- r tiry_rZ- 4,.Tt E• ,..,. Chapter 5 HOI.sE II1� t z - - --.„ -` ti• ,... =<Septic System I i'' _k,■I II t l I. n'Maintenance 3 ..-A J A ,A l Chapter 6 -x• �, ` V: 4 - i. 7r 1[3 , �•.. Red Alert! i .rro2VIRtt ,. ►v-.,S,4n;t:-..-;',1,::,-•-;.•',:-:,_--,-`'} 0A f�•�c•" e,= System Failure idwl i k r ,,� , t :} .4,,. .. } .1 h `e:{s! �4 `,`-;1 t,•".-i-',;;.„--' =. Er ` � Illustrations by - Peter SLUM aAres"' uH,Q ORattanEt,D . Aschwanden Healthy tank Clogged tank zlz. A;New Chapters A.Scum at top:cooking fats, oils,grease, soap scum,other floatables Chapter 9 B.Liquids in middle , . Advanced C.Sludge at bottom:solids heavier than water and what is left over after solids have been partially eaten Systems by bacteria. Once sludge gets up to outlet pipe, it enters and clogs drainfield. = Chapter 10 Excessive Drainfield Failure `Engineering .: Chapter 11 After several years of use, a build-up of bottom sludge and floating scum will reduce the effective A Tale of Two capacity of the tank, as shown in the"clogged tank" illustration on page 48.This means waste ' Sewers passes through the tank too fast,and solids eventually plug the pipes in the drainfield.The microorganisms in the drainfield no longer have an aerobic(with air)environment in which to 4. perform their cleansing action;they are now struggling to survive in an anaerobic(without air) Editorial environment. Either untreated effluent begins surfacing on the ground or sewage backs up into Reviews house drains.At this point, the system has failed,and a new drainfield is required—expensive! - a ..._-,,_. - - g m g s a h°' : a Y• rn%a _ .e .r http://www.shelterpub.com/_shelter/ssom-maintenance.html(1 of 8)[1/29/2008 4:21:23 PM] Septic System Maintenance-Chapter 5-The Septic System Owner's Manual ..-„€ �+.'� .., ..b."�' ,:. '' <�"';. `w4vorY�-kra�M:.-..:..4wewk‹o�'s ,.„„"3`a'3'�.�"�-'fir-mwt°vw% w , ° ':'T , te, Magazines and Newspapers � ” e 1 e ,r g a t Fine ` i.� TWOrgitC1_ 1, Homebuilding fr . 4. !::` Magazine .,. t� ,:aiV ' Home Power 11, Magazine Inspection and Pumping x• ; More Septic Inspect the Tank Information How can you avoid drainfield failure? Inspect the tank at regular intervals and pump when The Truth necessary. In many parts of the country, it is recommended that tanks be pumped every three to about Septic , � five years, but recent studies indicate that a functioning tank, without abuse, may only need ' .` Systems pumping every 10 to 12 years. Since there are many variables,we recommend an inspection -Mother Earth News^ Article by every three to five years and basing pump-outs on inspections.As the years pass, you should be f` Lloyd Kahn able to see the pattern of sludge and scum accumulation. k r Septic System ie Keep a Record iBulletin Board Ongoing Info Use a file folder(or get your wastewater district to get the Homeowner's Septic System Guide Feedback from shown on page 180)to keep a record of inspections and dates when the tank has been pumped.) Readers {,a .What Is Pumping? Recommended F` Books Septic tanks are pumped by a licensed pumper with a vacuum tank truck.The pumper will use a i4-to-6-inch-diameter hose and vacuum everything out of the tank(both solids and liquids). ., Links 9 A ) Waste pumped from a septic tank is called septage. It is approximately 5%solids and 95%water. : I Organize Youro 0 (Raw sewage is 1%solids and 99/o water.)The septage waste must be taken to a licensed Paperwork disposal site because of the potential health problems with contamination. In many rural areas, - Septic System private companies have developed septage disposal sites—generally evaporation ponds. In 4i, k Maintenance other communities, there may be a centrally located sewage plant that can handle the septage 4 Folders waste. Where Is It? Locating the Tank { You can save some money by locating the tank yourself and - digging up the manhole covers. If the tank has no risers overg. i .. inspection holes, and no diagram is available showing the ; s location, you will have to probe for the tank, as follows: Use a long metal rod (1/2-inch rebar, bent over 90°to make a handle at the top)and begin probing where the main drain r r; ' ,t,,� ie) ,` pipe leaves the house. Push the rod firmly down into the soil , '” . k ;4 ,.rh „ 4,: untilyou "feel"the drain pipe. Use a firm and steady ,' ' , P P push. �l TI ;, , , Don't punch or pound the rod as you can damage the pipe, .,'%‘-4 t i f, •,,i\ TA r'.° particularly the pipe/septic tank connection. If the soil is too r '',ti' ,'4 . ,y`f7`� 'tif hard and dry for probing, try soaking the area with a garden •' *'I' • �Ut?' ;7ur4'. hose. " l".1. Yr; ! . ov Another method:There may be lush growth over the drainfield. Then the tank will be in an obvious place between the house drain and the drainfield. Or,you can run a snake down the clean-out to the tank and locate it with a metal detector.. `ilk � �, .. -�r �5 'Y'Y 4 {` -fir http://www.shelterpub.com/_shefer/ssom-maintenance.html(2 of 8)[1/29/2008 4:21:23 PM) Septic System Maintenance-Chapter 5-The Septic System Owner's Manual . : ' .. `-:.,*,s ,i.,• '`:.�'', x4 a` _s^ "�., - ;;P# ev'° .3,4 i"s,.. :'&; .✓.ro., '<' k=w;l asWet't '' `F ^1mf« When you find the drain pipe at one spot, move a little further from the house and probe again. Continue along the path of the drain pipe until • you locate the tank. The tank will probably be 1 to 3 feet underground and at least 5 feet from the COVER building. Once you locate it, dig up both manhole U "'" covers. Or, if you're lucky, the tank will have �'�4 I Cr . risers with sealed caps instead of the very heavy manhole covers of earlier models. If you plan to inspect your own system and don't have these RISERS It`ti risers(seep. 6),we recommend that you have I41 them installed. In addition to providing easy access for inspection, they keep out dirt and rainwater. In the meantime, use a rope through ~ .. the metal handles on the concrete manhole covers to swing them up and off the tank. The — - .— ; tank is now ready for inspection and/or pumping. EPDXY— "` Note:Once you locate your tank, make a diagram of where it is for future reference, indicating number of feet from a particular point • of the house. fr jfl��lil •— — • '•'` Know Where Thy Tank Lieth! B&M Contractors, of Bolinas, Calif., tells the story of some people who added a kids' bedroom to their house without checking the location of the septic tank.All went well until one day, the system failed and it was then discovered that the room had been built over the the tank. To get to it, the pumpers had to pull back the rug, cut a hole in the floor, run their suction hose into the room through a window,and pump out the tank. Yuck! Tank Inspection Checking It Out You can save money by doing your own inspections. This way you will only call the pumper when needed. Inspection is done from above, by looking in through the manholes. Look around inside with a flashlight and perhaps even a hand mirror attached to a long pole. When checking tanks be sure to wear gloves and to wash your hands thoroughly with an anti-bacterial soap afterwards. However, if you've had no experience, it's hard to know what to look for. If you intend to make your own inspections, we suggest you have the pumper come out the first time and that you watch how s/he performs the inspection.Ask questions. Then, the next time you should be able to do it yourself. . . 4 a a ,vwJ1 ',,i r� °'yt.,^ 5,:'" `' - .z °`S_ `',?' http://www.shelterpub.com/_shelter/ssom-maintenance.html(3 of 8)(1/29/2008 4:21:23 PM] Septic System Maintenance-Chapter 5-The Septic System Owner's Manual e''"'isaa *SUPA`'k .-=::,'4. Vii;':r ,...r?'. ,,:. L41 ':. 2'r'Ite i- `:4+. w T n , '� ,_. ,t tits �,' E 0 What to Look For Once the tank is open, here's what to look for(assuming the tank has two compartments): Inlet Chamber Odor:Odors should not be too obnoxious ,,• , ,•9r`7 � , when you open the inlet side. (Odors will F be a lot stronger when you stir the o g contents.) � � guy �. . , a Insects:There should not be too many t' • . 6 ', flies or flying insects present. 6 ; I a g a ; .. , Scum:Should be firm, with a crust, but :. aI ri not solid. It should be like pudding, a44 medium brown color, and 3 to 4 inches r ;, ;+ � � ' "` `; tri`Ideep. By poking a stick through the scum, ' e'-all^-i: e,t i - you can estimate the average thickness. ¢ c „ Or, you can fashion an"L-rod,"as shown t `` at the top right.You can figure on there _ __,,,-,----4-,-Ke v£ - being equal amounts of scum above and below the water line. )Tip: Sometimes _ -- you can use a hose with high pressure to ----- squirt a hole in the scum big enough to Ro-r 90" aw c lt•rt.Y Rake • estimate its thickness. �T UNTIL �-d TM/CMS BOTTOM Cr scan.MEASURE THICKNESS You can use a long stick, but Itl: a'r r rvOts OR NAILS OR usE A best is a concrete hoe(the type with two y"raoa unTr+A Qo SENO holes is best)and an extension handle ,', _ wired or taped on.As you lower the hoe, - ,r+ /`-," it's a little tricky is to tell when you first hit 1y'•i F c.$ •w. the sludge. Thus, proceed slowly. If you " feel resistance halfway to the bottom, it ''r . '',,,`•If� _ ,•:... :. needs pumping. • • :i}. Inlet tee:Concrete tees deteriorate. •' SLUDGE Outlet Chamber Homemade scum measuring device Scum:In a two-compartment tank, there should be little, if any, scum on the effluent side—the effluent should appear relatively clear. If there is much scum here(more than 2 inches), the tank needs pumping. If either scum or sludge is floating out the outlet,the tank needs pumping. In a one-compartment tank, a rule of thumb is that the tank should be pumped when the sludge is 20 inches and the scum is 10 inches. 1111 If Outlet tee: If the inside of this tee is clogged,the tank is flooding, and this _ 1,-;•7...-4,7m•-t-, 1.� ti t . _ .41:444,404,10:1,_ .„ e -, 's _. - http://www,shelterpub.com/_shelter/ssmn-maintenance.html(4 of 8)11/29/2008 4:21:23 PM] Septic System Maintenance-Chapter 5-The Septic System Owner's Manual could indicate trouble with the drainfield. If the top is dry, it's a good sign, since a wet C•� top would indicate the tank is flooding. If ", ' ,..V.11 ." ,i,tank is flooding,there is no air at the i '..%,—,. �Ai '1 it P. 'Int, ill� top of the tank, and this anaerobic �� ,{ .o ��},`1 i •,, , ! - #, condition can result in tank deterioration. 4"l,a. _ ,ill'' r1, 4` �. Outlet tee deterioration:A concrete or ,4,,,,,.. : ' a , ,,,,,. '' ceramic outlet tee in a tank can •'•••••,•,•.1, S h'iif -er deteriorate above the water line due to ( J°'ill -0 sulfuric acid. This is easy to replace with aJ.11l 1 plastic tee and should be inspected iia;, s^-- 2 , periodically. Baffle wall deterioration:The baffle wall •1� t11i'ililvi !+'' between the two chambers cani s} _--..b-'""'"" `� I —scum deteriorate as well. Consider putting any ., r r„,- - effluent screen in place rather than trying 1 li, ,, i to repair the baffle wall, or replace the ,1 I E i '` ,, T-�‘ tank. A local septic tank inspector ! ` , ,, a , ',3.., mentioned an owner who went into his ,,�,1�o, I'�ly,a I. - v' C • tank to repair a baffle wall and was sick „.i;•�I/,' .• ' 0 for over a year as a result. In Oregon, for ; � ` - °+�-_' example, most new tanks are now one Ye - "w'- ,X`.a-' chamber %- '•1 a 711. �, . 0...n.- A R? - Insects *k.r...,.�.... Homemade sludge-measuring device Mosquitoes and flies can be a problem if they You can use hoe to measure depth to sludge, 6 enter and breed in a septic tank. Strangely, this then a rod to measure depth of sludge. is not often mentioned in literature on the subject. Mosquitoes and flies can enter through the plumbing vent of the house, go down through the 4-inch drain pipe and through the inlet tee to the tank. They can then breed in the tank and travel via the same route, reversed,to the outside world. You can cover the top of the vent with a capper of stainless steel screen.Another place for mosquito entry can be tanks with wood or fiberglass risers; here the manhole covers can be sealed with roof patch or a plastic sheet over the lids, then covered with a few shovelfuls of sand. If the Tank Needs Pumping Try to be there when the pumping is done. Lean over the shoulder of the pumper and make sure the tank is pumped completely. We heard about one company that pumped only the liquids and no solids.As the tank is pumped, it should be cleaned out as thoroughly as possible with a hose. There will be plenty of bacteria left to reactivate the system even when the tank is thoroughly cleaned. It is difficult to suck out the bottom 2 to 3 inches of sludge, particularly if it contains a lot of sand. The pumper should hose down the sludge on the bottom when it is exposed so that it will partially liquefy and can then be sucked out.A high-pressure squirter, not a thumb applied to the � hose, should be used. 41n ', Drainfield Inspection If the drainfield was properly designed and installed (and the tank functions properly), it should .. be mostly maintenance-free. However, here are some tips. http://www.shelterpub.com/_shefer/ssom-maintenance.html(5 of 8)[1/29/2008 4:21:23 PM] Septic System Maintenance-Chapter 5-The Septic System Owner's Manual Drainfield Test Lush plant growth over the drainfields(or tank) may be a sign of sewage surfacing. Here's one way to check the drainfield's absorption capacity: run 40 to 80 gallons of water into the tank and, with the outlet riser open,watch how long it takes to drain into the drainfield.A slight back-up - from the normal tank water level (the bottom of outlet pipe)is OK.The water level may rise H to • 1 inch, but if the field is unclogged(and not flooded), a fully-flooded tank should drop to normal in five to ten minutes. The "French Drain" If the original installation didn't allow for good drainage of surface waters(rain or run-off)around the drainfield, drainage ditches(with proper setbacks from the drainfield)may be needed.Also, a high water table in winter and/or dense soil can cause effluent to surface, causing bad odors and a possible health hazard. &APACE DIVERSION DITCM LINER TO DOwNSLCPE ORA INFIELD _- ' r 'X ! ..1_- ) 9/ 1 - • ' BAOcFtt.L »r b^` : i i•,,..;;t01,,,.j. .-1'� . ♦ �` y .G GRAVEL 1 *.. " � '. _ :• Se=t •:•• 1 h: cou.ECT�OR ' --� , i "I tce` PIPE LINER : III ' Arlie/V*2r 000000top, . tit%.,;,• 01111 la wild eteleillitielreablir.r •ftPL.ET TO TA"`,L,. � DRG1KFtELD • fj LEYEt.TftENCFt jolt ... .-_ .- ;:::....'''.1:,,;-..,..,.,.. ,. ...TV'-'. . '/BOTT06.45 j ` - at, BAC X1Ftl L • • GEOtEXTtt-E FABRIC l 'tp(Gflr' r.- ',PERFORATED lil a f DI$rRUILITK N PIPE l p ,-GRAVEL lITIlt S Roots K WinTrees or shrubs with aggressive,water-seeking roots growing near the drainfield can cause real problems in conventional drainfields. The roots will seek out:water, and can run inside the 7.4 drainfield pipes and choke off the flow of effluent. Willow roots are notorious drainfield invaders. V. 4 f Dual Drainfields If you have a dual drainfield with a diverter valve, rotate the valve to the alternate field every six months or year. (Seep. 20.)This allows the trenches to dry out and rejuvenate. Soil Compaction Be sure no one parks cars over the drainfield. It will compact the soil and reduce the aerobic capacity of the drainfield.Also, be sure cars don't drive over the inlet and outlet pipes to the septic tank. This can snap the pipes and even cause the tank itself to crack. • :„ 411111 http://www.shelterpub.com/_shelter/ssom-maintenance.html(6 of 8)[1/29/2008 4:21:23 PM] Septic System Maintenance-Chapter 5-The Septic System owner's Manual Pump Maintenance For mounds, sand filters, STEP systems, and lift systems for gravity drainage fields: . Run the pump through its cycle periodically to make sure there are no leaking pipes. . Pumps should have alarms. . Pumps should have check valves. Note:in areas of severely cold weather, check valves can be detrimental to proper pump operation. Keep Those Hands Clean! Just as you can pick up a cold or the flu by getting germs on your hands and then touching your hands to your nose, you can pick up some much nastier organisms if you have manual contact with an open tank or drainfield. If you're going to do your own inspection or repairs,wear gloves and wash your hands scrupulously afterwards. Never Been Pumped The fallacy:You often hear a homeowner say, "Oh, I've never had to pump my tank." The irony:Typically, the homeowner has never had any septic system problems and thinks this means nothing need be done. The remedy:Just as you need to check the oil level in your car so it doesn't get too low, you need to periodically check the solids level in your tank so it doesn't get too high. Y 14; Summary i-,7' ..-*) . Sludge and scum accumulate in every septic tank. How much and how fast depend �' upon a number of conditions. moi_ . You can save money by locating the tank yourself and inspecting scum and sludge SI hlevels to determine when pumping is necessary. (However, there is a learning curve.) . Inspect your tank every three to five years until you determine the inspection frequency required for the future. . Scum and sludge must be pumped on a regular basis or system failure can result. ' . Drainfield operation can be maximized by checking the tank's outlet tee, by testing :° the drainfield's absorptive capacity(see pp. 52-53), by ensuring good drainage,and by avoiding soil compaction. copyright©2007-Shelter Publications, Inc ' es � A http://www.shelterpub.cony_shelter/ssom-maintenance• .html(7 of 8)[1/29/2008 4:21:23 PM] PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON • COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) Signature Street Address Landowner Have Y/N Septic fri P 2 4)4-C m 2/1 o r c °24(044.61a (o © s c0/ilr/ 47� YM la IAA 9e lc c--T- -----t-L4.4:3A...1 z_.c. i ,,,,440,4,,,z, IQ Y . esAi ,nn « � s — i 7�rr?/'tlrk-;' -/ Y y J e r...✓,J Cit ,w.. c----/a..,9-. A a l c� �'u✓;2 � x �9,... y/ 1/ /�� J.2.- • a.• t,or7 ,� 1 11 d ^ F.-t er 64-44? i� - e#17 IV r A .A Ifri (.{ 112, Ou(4).4 4 '' p 1.--- 1-- X. i 6 + V i l' 4� / {! C�Cl'Y� yu' .itf"v'& !?d1/ tZ ( w%�( /I i i;t Ws ' (/., 4,414 a 3 Fs U/I- X <. / -fit. J / �, seuc/ z 6s , ' 7,c o2 d 24., / / /)9,6,/14 I e>I rf54:d„, / / j ii "„ , ..-/, , ,, ,. 4,4 ifr 1/, 224 ..b,ari.�.a� kr t( 4.1.. 1 Prepared and distributed by the Olym•is Stewardship Foundation, P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock, WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens • and their government. PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. . 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) , �`.' re Street Address �Landowner Have Septic P�. 1 , . - ,. / , l�r�� n#< �-aw l_5 Grrnr Len 122,., ir1v-- a 04 101 y y ,0 fAe i// 0 AV5 M 0 j /,3/ cou4or x y r rr7i,-7 --e--02,-4--,,," ( SiLGAf � ice/ ip , • fi? / / t- „ / c,;' /14V`t, 2C1 ...,fW CV V 4g0 ICI 4 fild le L 49a, . ie ie 4) 4., '15-7,c--('''' 1 Atf) y ,,,, ---1 el,: ., 7 e viA.e cx,tri V %N1 Sig,4 P(-Plifdit> qt 2- '6--avjd 7 ILI -. :4,2,,�, - * y i •vit Ce1444 ed. '�` i�eeY )1 0 -4, ,tramIlfr";i;... 4eice- .A:11" C2,I .L-Z.c: Frepared and distributed by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation, P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock,WA 339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens and their governmen /.4'%.?,.." 410 Q/k ®t x • 9444/iN f i rn kiir PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON 1111 COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) Si ature Street Address Landowner Have esu, rs YM tj t�c 1;,, "yea- Ar-(-„, euick4S 0 e vS6 el,--C2C‘Pe-t-trca2kc:WO X , 'IP/ k _ 0 V At ilii& 4, ,,__, ItA,..„,,d GI& (*Jr fr-A) • 4da`411°'\ 41'‘L" j.47---/(kt-P.44-'1-7-, 7:::::14119":41::(1' 7 Y Vert— ,,,,„et,, Y 1/ -410 ,..) .6, . \iiii, , 7v vt< tee / 4Wir ;„-- A., — I is ' pq":7\--4 -- 16;940. 6_,P - WO aty , ...,-- �, fjiut , . Y Y. i fymr---),Lii itwecE - ill - 0-- tA if' Iv' ' p,ki.4" - i "itid-1 03//g/fAii' al3a ‘7ACriLi 'r ' pi (--- G, , f m, . '- ' t d' ' 11 -0,,x/o,"it A(3 Ac4,1144/ S ti Al Mite _ , 7404,0_ 30 hierb.e-71 -- /1/ ?fiztskeici6A __ . ... a , --Datv,i l PC K pli et,Prepared a • distributed by the or . pie Po.r.,,ip Found. '•n, P.O. Box 11 Po Hadlock, WA 48339. 7 F is . Nass roots 1 ion o V ferson aunty citizens who believe in the idea that stewardsh. of the la` is a responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens 0 and their government. PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON • COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson CountrBoard of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name(print) Signature r Street Address Landowner Have YIN Septic MAtvililey. 0,cle___) — , a9V `3 46-o_ loi es ye s G A,cgh1ANsbe, / 7Z1- e — j-y, et- u t�J Geigy ' �J S� Hcv Ad, .. ..- �/:�' .295 9G 3' i /" /0!t -S Yef J I i BIz-` Lt.,os P, \/e� v�°S 4 1ug_i,r �N.4c / �(,-i.ICe.... oft q 3-1( 7 I III VT 1 Eevito/N) /4-51,046&_, lg c•itl e f0 Al p/ , 'i5 `,---/ 'r'1„0-1 ")71,' ).1--"---- 6 yed yew o A-it/Li 4-00 ktc.41 24 -x- ." 1 ti RAwk- e1( 1W cps ye, 1 LUILL-I I f 1, JV /;rO01 ` � `! Y6S Jo tl vl 6 ,I 1 I i l , , ,1.,�'i1 �° � Z iJ S% f/ €44-€:C, hiiii/1 ,,1 rq 71/(A -v Prepared and distributed by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation,P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock,WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens and their government. 0 PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON • COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) Signature Street Address Landowner Have Y/N Septic YM ,h1/cI li-rr 5ch4 1/1-4.-/j t. _ a 9..s".7 94 A1d/ IDI Y y gia\I 2 e5SJ9 a&lve ilk y /„: , , Uouf4P9CgotC '7,1"1"7-1 ; -II”. rt. eciSit, 4Mt" bt.. _ (3) 'I Ill 'e 4 V• t (' 0 C ii i,,,_se / 1450 �, // 0 y ..a..4,-e.._ Y Y iiawazz__ /2: 9 -Pa yb c � '-. i f / / 6--- Or tct. i/Vetce 7 ..ck!/:.-1,64fii01. ,)'Z j / �/ /(/ _ t OA? .904,6 A ZD1 ' vY/cam[ ACe , "A \d, 6-).Ali -77d--1 le- Aajtt,t4y(i tc)0 cevr‘c.A-g gd, , 1 I (."A's 1 4 ‘e evc* u JCA Cl. 3 7L ��_._ G�levYlerJ �! t ua i � ,� r 4 �'"�� /I�` '�' `. ,, .c1 C "fix )) -' ..,r`--.Iv Prepared and distributed by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation, P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock,WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens 0 and their government. PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. • 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson Okunty, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dat d 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair,effective and practical. Name (print) Signature Street Address andowner Have Septic Y/N '-'-,_,7-- h/c2-21c 0 iPc94://a71.4- 7S/ C cl/-inizAr 4) Y )/ / / J 6 Ai I'Vr'ebt/CeY/7_______----7 ..5eW iy46,,,, 7 fr' (----, ) • biro C jtr,5a4,66:,;,13gl . QA e \ 0 Ci) ,v 1� (naxQ0j k,-4 314si-4 1_ , \fal I ,ilmi r y (we41$ J ne is l cis, C eek n y /tibig ==--,, ii-t 7& E 53` qu` I t�J Y ,y6101& 3 1111)V-I-- , , m lc hoc 00 Pe f e ; RD y y Prepared and distributed by the Olympic Stewards ip Foundation, P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock,WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens and their government. • PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON • COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name(print) Si nature .-, Street Address Landowner Have A�^ Y/N Septic ( -4:--- 4i Li-12 tv -r4cuiez. Klux", (.7 of (IN ldni P`'tl26XV%---- " Y ii 7 /set s, ' 'Es yo6. &.Afcw ? (-01-4/Ott um,h6,1,,,, utiik,Lti:., 4,- A r r 67e_c 'Yes fix:. -z i Sic ;i- r--• .,. 4 L S NIujtS-M i `.. 3-" c(04 1�"et°'' Ye ` e r , ?e,6 : . 60' G;� f -24)11. '7ZZ. 73rD GEk9r. Get/ Ai sqr �� QAiI /V6-., Cclll Ye S" „,,,..0„,,.„..i.„ 1wac,,..,/,.,- . ., .,. 40 , „,,,,,, y, es f�� /�� �t S$p/s',2 A)/ fair �C /����^y �1?/ �,,4[ /M �fx�LCrsferj /�f 5 YGi.' V Prepared and distributed by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation,P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock,WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens • and their government. PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. • 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Count Board of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, including a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) Signature Street Address Landowner Have YIN Septic YIN 1,yytk ,k—Cs t) v77- 18 4' /10/Y/az y /10,401-a.fr%,9, 47 a te_c 9.;* • Prepared and distributed by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation, P.O.Box 1122 Port Hadlock,WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens and their government. • PETITION FROM THE CITIZENS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY TO THE JEFFERSON • COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH. 1. We, the undersigned citizens and property owners of Jefferson County, Washington object to the proposed Onsite Septic System Ordinance (Draft JCC 18.15 dated 12/27/07) and Revised Fee Schedule associated with that ordinance. 2. We request that the Jefferson Counoard of Health, Reject the Draft Ordinance JCC 18.15 and create a committee of stakeholders, ncluding a reasonable number of citizens who will be affected by the ordinance, to review the draft and make such changes as they see fit to make before again presenting it to the Board of Health. 3. We make this petition in the belief that protecting our environment can only be done by engaging us in a meaningful process to develop an ordinance that is fair, effective and practical. Name (print) Signature Street Address Landowner Have Y/N Septic Y/N *Idea felt I IP "rwl. A5 lig *ffoosto eco, Q > :l 10)43 - Mewl, i � C e /2---- 12:PP Oc—,1A61-16 ,e-6,1,14d k--LJIL-D1.000,1110a • 1 Prepared and distributed by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation, P.O. Box 1122 Port Hadlock, WA 98339. OSF is as grass roots organization of Jefferson County citizens who believe in the idea that stewardship of the land is a responsibility we all bear and that the only way to accomplish that is through a genuine partnership between the citizens • and their government. • MOTHER EARTH NEWS. The WOW Ilkside Th Living Wilmot/ February/March 2008 Reprinted with pert Osion from Mother Earth News This article appears in the February*arrct 2000 a, ion,and is available online at: http://www.motherearthnews.com/Modern-Hom actin 8-02-01/Truth-About-Septic-Systems.aspx The Truth About Septic Systems By Lloyd Kahn It came to my attention on a quiet summer day in 1989—heavy trucks were rolling down the dirt road. Trees were being cut down; stumps, bulldozed. Twenty truckloads of sand and gravel were brought in. My neighbor was adding a small addition to his house, and because of local building codes, he had to install a "mound" septic system. The landscape-disrupting mound, along with pumps and complex plumbing, cost more than $40,000! In contrast, my conventional gravity-powered system, built for less than $3,000 in 1971 on land with the same soil profile, has worked reliably for 36 years. Homeowners across the United States are being confronted by regulators and • engineers decreeing that their septic systems are failing and must be replaced by complex and expensive alternatives. It's a trend that's been gaining momentum over the past decade for both single-family homes and community sewer systems. Many of these expensive systems are unnecessary and being forced on homeowners under false pretenses in order to generate maximum income—often federal "Clean Water" grant funding. For several years I have been working with science researcher John Hulls, attempting to educate homeowners about septic systems so they can deal intelligently with officials when confronted with expensive upgrades; this article summarizes our advice. The push for expensive wastewater disposal is not a movement; there is no central headquarters. Rather, it's a recurring theme. Why is there virtually no media attention about this phenomenon? Well, septic systems are underground —out of sight, out of mind—and they tend to work so well (and silently) that people are scarcely aware of their function. Then there's the "eeeeyu" factor: Feces is not a subject for polite conversation or one that inspires rational discussion. Yes, there are some failing septic systems that need fixing, and there are soils unsuitable and lots too small for conventional systems. Certainly, septic systems that leak into wells should be condemned. There also are areas where soil characteristics and population densities are leading to problems with nitrates in groundwater. But I think many, if not most, of the "upgrades" now being required are not necessary for • either environmental or health reasons. There's Money in Sewage • There's always been money to be made in sewage and garbage—stuff people don't want to mess with—and the sums presently generated in the U.S. on-site wastewater disposal industry are enormous. For example, if a bill that's in the California legislature (AB 885) as of this printing mandates statewide septic requirements as restrictive as those in affluent California counties, the cost could be as much as $30 billion in mandatory home septic upgrades in California alone (not counting new systems)— if only one-third of the systems were targeted for replacement. I've been amazed by the scale, by the lack of accountability, by the hoodwinking of the public and by so many homeowners placidly accepting their fates. If you own a home with a septic system and haven't been pushed to upgrade to an expensive new system yet, I bet you will be in the next five years. The amount of money to be made is just too great for this new industry to slow down on its own accord. The Players You will encounter four categories of people who promote expensive septic systems: engineers, regulators, developers and misguided environmentalists. Engineers. Don't assume that an academic degree necessarily ensures competence, design skill or honesty. I've seen civil engineers repeatedly distort science and dupe the public in order to justify exorbitant fees. Remember that it's in their interest for systems • to be failing. John H. (Timothy) Winneberger, Ph.D., is a botanist and a renowned pioneer in advocating on-site sewage disposal as opposed to sewers for small towns; he is the author of Septic Systems, a Consultant's Toolkit. Winneberger says claims of health hazards from failing septic systems are vastly exaggerated, that accusations of pollution are more political than scientific, and that the field is rife with misinformation. He says there's no scientific evidence that people get ill from failing septic systems. "Nitrogen just does not want to travel through soils," he says. "Neither do bacteria or viruses. It's really immaterial because the accusation is all that's needed. There is no scientific follow-up to put these guys (engineers) in their places." Regulators. Many health agencies are funded by permits and fees, so the more expensive the systems, the bigger their department's income. I think many regulators just honestly don't understand the science of on-site wastewater systems; they're taking the word of "experts." Also, in many states, county health regulators are forced into unrealistic requirements by state agencies—in California, by the State Water Resources Control Board. Developers. Some landowners want to use grant money to build expensive septic systems to increase their land's value before selling it. Environmentalists. I consider myself an environmentalist, but I've seen misguided ones condemning septic systems without the most basic understanding of them. • Small Towns This all started for me in 1989 when a multimillion dollar wastewater plan was suddenly sprung on my hometown of Bolinas, Calif. E. coli (Escherichia col►) had reportedly been discovered in a creek and, even though no tests were done to determine if the bacteria were coming from human, wildlife or livestock waste, the septic systems of all 300 houses in town were declared failing. Engineers were hired to design a plan. (These same engineers had previously been hired to write the county's alternative wastewater standards.) Federal Clean Water grant money was available, so apparently a need had been manufactured to obtain the money. The plan called for "community leachfields," i.e., dumping sewage effluent on various town lots. My neighbor was going to have sewage from 20 houses pumped to a lot next to his house. Townspeople rose up. A year of town meetings, passionate debate and newspaper articles ensued. We shot the plan down, but barely. The engineers ended up collecting $500,000 for designs that were never built. That amount would have fixed all the failing systems (maybe there were 10) with enough left over to provide needed drainage for the entire town. Since then I've seen the same modus operandi in small towns country-wide. For example, there is another California town currently wrestling with a multimillion dollar • rip-off of homeowners and taxpayers. In Los Osos, an ongoing $150 million wastewater nightmare has homeowners facing $300 to $400 monthly sewer payments for a plan that is $50 million more expensive than the cheaper, more ecological plan many townspeople want. For details see: http://rockofthecoast.com/index.php?option=com content&task=view&id=39&Itemid=1 http://www.pzIdf.ord/ and a video clip — http://www.insiderexclusive.com/los osos.htm Monte Rio, Calif., was presented with a ludicrous plan designed to maximize profit for engineers and benefit developers. The project was recently abandoned by Sonoma County due to ballooning costs, and at least some of the local homeowners are investigating how much in government funds were spent on engineering and planning costs. (This is a win-win situation for the engineers in that they get paid handsomely for design even when their plans are unworkable.) Small towns all over the country are grappling with similar situations. • Single Homes • It's also happening with individual homes. For example, if your system fails (or you build an addition that prompts stricter septic requirements), you must hire an engineer to design a $50,000 (where I live) mound system instead of a simple gravity-powered system that would work just fine in most locations. I wondered if this was just a California phenomenon, so I ran a short notice in Mother Earth News early last year asking people to contact me if they had encountered new and expensive wastewater requirements. I received more than 75 replies from all over the country. Geauga County, Ohio: "The new mound will be larger than our house. How to pay for it? Bye-bye savings." Whatcom County, Wash.: "The assessor came onto my property and told me when the sewer goes down my road, he will increase my property's tax valuation to $1.2 million dollars! I bought these 19.51 acres, with two trashed houses and a barn, for $195,000 and could barely afford the taxes on it then, almost $2,000. Now my taxes are almost $5,000, and our income has not increased at all." Northport, Mich.: "The firm that assessed the village's need for the sewer is the same one that designed it and is now planning to build it." Spooner, Wis.: "We were planning to buy a piece of land for $6,000 where a tornado • had leveled the house—until we were told we'd need a $30,000 mound system." Hillsdale County, Mich.: "Exasperated homeowners are fed up with eyesores for yards, not to mention costs of these systems that force mortgage refinancing for those whose homes are nearly paid off." Thurston County, Wash.: "I am going through this nightmare now. FYI, the system has not failed, there is no sewage on the surface of the ground, no sewage backup, no sewage leaks, no soggy ground, no smells, no soil investigation (indicating) human pathogens." From a general contractor in Shasta County, Calif.: "I have seen people with the most perfect soil (for a conventional gravity system) get turned down for various reasons and have to hire a septic designer, and that's where it gets expensive." Water Pollution and Scientific Testing Water pollution is commonly measured by either pathogens or nitrates (and more recently pharmaceuticals). • • Pathogens: Huge sums are being spent because E. coli is being discovered in local waterways. But regulators are not testing to see if the E. coli is from humans, livestock or wildlife. Recently the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has promoted Bacterial Source Tracking (BST), a new methodology that examines DNA to determine the actual sources of fecal bacteria. If E. coli contamination from septic systems is alleged as the reason for excessive septic regulations in your area, ask your health officials if BST has been utilized. If not, the mere presence of E. coli does not indicate failing septic systems. "My hypothesis is that if we get good source tracking, septic systems are going to look awfully good," says E. Jerry Tyler, Ph.D., Professor in the Soil Science Department, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and co-author of The Wisconsin Mound Manual. I've seen regulators and engineers stonewall accurate BST testing because they want to blame septic systems. And by the way, BST is no longer "too expensive." Nitrates: Nitrates in groundwater can be a real problem. But nitrate contamination of groundwater should not be an excuse for blanket application of Draconian standards in the absence of scientific testing. Nitrate impact from septic systems is actually minimal compared to runoff from agricultural fertilizers, cattle feedlots, atmospheric pollution and large discharges of municipal waste. • Depth to Groundwater and Percolation Tests Individual homeowners are generally being forced into "advanced" systems as opposed to conventional gravity systems due either to a requirement that there be 24 inches of unsaturated soil above groundwater level in the wettest months, or because water does not percolate through the soil fast enough. These rules are intended to assure wastewater never seeps to the surface, and they presume that such seepage is dangerous. When I asked Winneberger about the risks involved with effluent surfacing, he said, "If someone in the house has an illness and the pathogen survives the septic tank (not likely) and surfaces on the ground, and a baby crawls along and drinks it, the baby could get that illness. But what are the chances of that occurring?" He went on to say, "I don't know of any bona fide case of anyone getting an illness from septic tank effluent surfacing." Also, cost has to be a factor in these decisions. There is no such thing as zero risk. In a 2000 study sponsored by the EPA, it was concluded that "acceptable risk levels, rather than zero risk, need to be targeted with due awareness of attendant costs and benefits." Most of the septic designers I talked with said perk tests, as currently conducted, are relatively worthless. Pouring water in holes to see if it disappears does not accurately gauge water absorption capabilities. • What Can You Do? • Jennifer Hause is an engineering scientist with the National Environmental Services Center at West Virginia University. Her organization answers questions regarding on- site sewage disposal [(800) 624-8301]. "The main problems I see," she says, "are lack of education and lack of maintenance." It's going to be a difficult battle for homeowners in coming years, but education is the foundation for participating in the dialogue. Maintaining your system is the key to its functionality and longevity. (I've posted the chapter from our book on septic system maintenance: http://www.shelterpub.com/ shelter/ssom-maintenance.html .) I hope this forewarning will help you forearm yourself with knowledge. Get to know your septic system. Do some research on on-site wastewater disposal so you can maintain your system—and so you'll be prepared to deal with this situation. There's a lot at stake here. Three Main Types of Septic Systems There are three broad categories of septic systems: conventional gravity systems, mound systems and "advanced" treatment systems. • Conventional gravity systems: Waterborne waste flows to the tank by gravity, and effluent (the liquid part of wastewater) exits the tank to the drainfield (or leachfield) by gravity. No pumps, electricity or mounds. (A drainfield is a series of perforated underground pipes through which effluent is dispersed so that it can gradually seep into the subsoil.) This all goes on underground. And if things work properly, the soil purifies the effluent and returns clean water to the water table. It's a "green" system. "Soil has this marvelous capacity for treating all these constituents," says George Tchobanoglous, Ph.D., and co-author of the "bible" of the wastewater industry, Small and Decentralized Wastewater Systems. Mound systems: Large man-made, aboveground mounds of sand and gravel are installed when authorities think conventional drainfields won't be adequate. This system is run by electrical pumps. See the illustration below. Mounds are expensive, use a lot of resources, don't work when the power is off, and are more prone to failure. "Advanced" treatment systems: This includes a wide range of systems or additions to conventional systems, such as sand filters, aerobic units or trickling biofilters. An example is Orenco's AdvanTex system. http://www.orenco.comlotslots adv index.asp • • There is a continuum of less expensive options between a gravity system and the most advanced systems. If something goes wrong with a gravity system, it doesn't mean you have to automatically go to a mound or other high-tech replacement. There are steps that can be taken to fix a gravity system without paying big bucks to replace it. So why are mound or advanced systems required? Small towns are generally being forced to "upgrade" due to alleged pollution of local waterways or groundwater. Individuals are facing installation of expensive, other-than-conventional systems due to a requirement that there be, for example, 24 inches of unsaturated soil to depth of groundwater during the "wet season," or soil that does not percolate (drain) "fast enough." An Example of Faulty Reasoning In 1996 a shellfish farming operation on Virginia's eastern shore was shut down due to E. coli in the waters; the assumed culprit: "must be from septic systems"—yet there were none in the area. But there were a lot of raccoons. When 180 raccoons were trapped and removed, the contamination ceased and the tidal creeks were reopened to shellfishing. • Lloyd Kahn doesn't take any crap when it comes to septic systems. He served for a year on a county septic advisory committee and has followed all matters septic over the past 15 years, starting when his town was confronted with a corrupt$7 million wastewater plan in the late '80s. In 2000, he wrote The Septic System Owner's Manual. The new edition (2007) remains the single best book about septic systems for homeowners. Copyright 2008,All Rights Reserved I Ogden Publications,Inc.,1503 SW 42nd St.,Topeka,Kansas 66609-1265 Reprinted with Permission • Dick Bergeron 240 Elk Drive Brinnon WA 98320 February 14, 2008 Jefferson County Board of Health 615 Sheridan Street Port Townsend WA 98368 Dear Board Members, Safe sewage management is a human responsibility. Yet much like those who think that water comes from a faucet, or that electricity comes from a wall outlet, waste products do not magically disappear once the toilet is flushed. An overwhelming majority of septic systems work well, as they should. The relatively few that do fail from time to time have a minimal effect on the environment. It would take hundreds of thousands of OSS failures to match the harm caused by even one municipal system failure, or to match the residual pharmaceuticals discharged daily into the ocean by municipal systems. Given this low risk of OSS, I have to wonder why the Board of Health is intending to pass the burden of this unfunded mandate to the residents of Jefferson County. 411 The state Department of Health has been put on notice that some legislators in Olympia are unhappy with these excessive rules (HR3345). As the campaign increases by organizations representing rural landowners, we will likely see changes to septic monitoring rules as early as next year. I have to wonder why Jefferson County officials have not joined with other counties to express indignation with Olympia rulemakers. As to the costs to city sewer users versus septic users, those of us on septic systems have already paid a substantial amount to have our systems installed. We are responsible for maintaining those systems, and for eventually replacing them at today's average cost of $20 to 25,000. Until state rules are changed, or at least until the basic infrastructure exists to allow adequate monitoring, I strongly urge this board to table the adoption of a new OSS ordinance while at the same time establishing a stakeholder panel to thoroughly investigate factual information for county officials and landowners alike, and to review what can and cannot reasonably be done with regard to the proper functioning of septic systems. Sincerely, Public Comment re: proposed On-Site Septic System Ordinance,entered into the public record on February 14, 2008: • I am the Chair of the Church Council for Community United Methodist Church in Port Hadlock,and brought the public hearing tomorrow to the attention of our Council this evening. We were in agreement that we are all interested in clean water and all that you are trying to accomplish with this ordinance,and understand that to some extent, action by the State is the occasion for change in the current local ordinance. However, we have concerns about how the proposed ordinance may affect us if what I have heard about it is true. For example,we have three separate septic systems on our property. All of these are old systems. My understanding is that we could be out thousands of dollars, literally,both in the inspection costs and in the prep work and possible"rehabbing"of our systems under this ordinance. Further, having one homeowner-member who takes the class inspect all of our systems may not be allowed. We are a relatively small congregation on a very limited budget,and could hardly afford such a cost,especially on a regular basis! We are also in the area of Port Hadlock scheduled to be on the UGA sewer line when that is completed, and wonder if you are giving consideration to allowing such systems to remain as is until that system is in place and the current systems no longer needed. Further,once certified,we do not believe there is any reason to limit the number of systems a person could inspect,as long as they were of the type the person was trained for. We also wonder if you are making any allowance for non-profits,people on fixed incomes, handicapped and elderly,people on welfare or other minimal incomes such as SSI or Social Security— this certainly applies to a large number of our congregation,and many of them do actually own homes. Those who are renting will certainly see the costs passed on to them in the form of higher rents. (My own landlord owns at least six rental properties in addition to his own home—will he not be able to do all of • his own inspections for a single class and certification fee [see above]?) As an individual citizen who sat on the citizens' committee to develop a new Critical Areas Ordinance,I personally have an additional comment about this ordinance. Unless I missed the point entirely,the reason we established buffers for critical areas was to allow for the natural filtration of contaminants from sources such as septic systems,among others,and thereby protect the critical area, wetland,etc.,from possible pollution. Isn't it massive overkill to chase down and contain every possible little coli before it can even enter the buffer? One final comment,a thank you: as a citizen who works full time,I appreciate that you added an evening session for the hearing—older folks who don't drive at night would appreciate a daytime opportunity,I'm sure. But I am not in a position to cancel on-going client appointments,and am sure there are many other working people in the county who will be equally affected by this ordinance and who also appreciate the opportunity to be heard. Respectfully submitted by Diane Johnson, Ph.D. / 70 Market Street Port Hadlock, WA 98339 and 1521 Dabob Road Quilcene,WA 98376 • • k e e r 5 Ovi C 1/14 -14,1/4_."1 3 -L fi.e 6 (1.4-)-e tA r 0 / Li 6--:i rs- 6-re_ +4 2 61--vy 1,7 • • .J , / z /4 Z4 /141-e-/ /)--2- , ,,, L -eS-4 da"7,--1---7e Y-- 0 • . VJ `� 4/ / //,---)--) ,6e,-.4/7 2 / 'e- 6 6 74 A --v-Li 4 ,,.,,': ' ../:-A, .64-iin 6 ,,_, ,„,,, Y---- 1.5, / ` G� 7,-) e `. .e. `Se 4 1--7 ty-z) ° .. - 't ' '' ( , l f Svc A e`--"td _ 7 - i ' ,, = (j /1- '-a s- 1,--7,,1,.E J -- t / (� /car,/ , t-1 1 e`e 7 \ , AN ,,, s-1 (i 0"-/ *-1 tif ,! 1 114/\ -771- ne" e e- --71-;.17-a6-4/63-b-6 fry-e Akti, v' e-- cear 4 06Un e h `. tis 1-e.eX. '-/---Ze__, e ; )' \",tsi -J a.J1 - s\ i /Sri 1 , ;� , / „iti ai)e)//11(1-71-,--/Cs): /eetypt, 72.46,,,, --(bel,„6 d-f/' ? I_a KeW e/ s'etfel 0 l el- ,e/VeY ;e:(3_, FUj � the Grafihd for Future 13=2r f • ... FACT SHEET for Jefferson County Board of Health's Public Hearing Jefferson County Septic Code 8.15 Proposed changes regarding Operation and Maintenance Plan Implementation and Proposed Fee Schedule Changes • This document is a clarification of the position taken by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation on the issue of On-Site Sewage(OSS), or septic system,maintenance and monitoring proposals by Jefferson County Public Health. We believe that we have our facts right;however,there has been • a considerable amount of conflicting, sometimes misleading, information disseminated by various county officials over the past months. FACT: State law does require the monitoring of on-site sewage (septic) systems. Simple gravity systems without pumps must be monitored every three years, while any system that is more complex must be monitored once a year. FACT: Jefferson County's proposed ordinance goes far beyond state requirements for operation, maintenance and monitoring without justification. The requirement for professional inspections do not come from the state. Draft section 8.15.150 FACT: County officials are limited in how and when they may enter privately owned property. FACT: Septic systems safely dispose of sewage for anywhere from 25%to 33%of homes and businesses in the United States. Residual excreted, legal drugs, a major problem with urban sewage, where effluent is discharged into water, are safely sequestered in soil with septic systems. Most of the water used by homes and businesses on septic systems goes back into the water table as clean as if it has fallen as rain from a pristine atmosphere. FACT: In addition to all other powers and duties, health districts shall have the power to charge fees in connection with the issuance or renewal of a license or permit required by law: PROVIDED, That the fees charged shall not exceed the actual cost involved in issuing or renewing the license or permit. RCW 70.46.120 License or permit fees. • What is the Olympic Stewardship Foundation's position on septic system inspections? OSF is not against monitoring. Quite the opposite. OSF simply believes that owners of on-site septic systems need to be informed and encouraged to monitor, and to maintain their systems in good working order. The county Health department is proposing draconian regulations and fees that OSF does not believe will accomplish the goal of ensuring that septic systems throughout the county will function as designed. Effective stewardship through regular septic monitoring will benefit the homeowner with reduced maintenance costs. This is well within the realm of do-it-yourself. Jefferson County says: All county offices comply with the Open Public Meetings Act...we provide written notice to the public through the press and media about meetings and hearings. The Leader, Q&A about septic system rule changes,February 6,2008 FACT: They have done that and it complies with legal provisions. They even sent post cards announcing the Valentine's Day public hearing to a few members of the public; however, very few people ever read the small-print legal ads at the back of the classified ad section. Most citizens, including the many who own property in the county, yet who primarily reside elsewhere, or who are snowbirds, will never know about new rules, regulations or laws until they are notified that they are in violation. OSF has proposed that Jefferson County notify ALL property owners in writing about public hearings that affect their property ownership. The cost to do this is not very great-the County Treasurer has the mailing list of all property owners. Jefferson County proposes: Homeowners or property owners would only be allowed to inspect their own septic system. Certified homeowners could not help neighbors or relatives. Even rental • property owners would have to have a certificate for each property they own. Draft Jefferson County Septic Code 8.15 FACT: During the septic system meetings, held last year by former Environmental Health Director Mike McNickle, and which are much-touted by current officials, Mr. McNickle had a reasonable vision for a homeowner monitoring program that included realistic training costs, the ability to monitor several systems-certainly for friends and neighbors - and perhaps as a side job to benefit the community. Mr. McNickle recognized the important element to be awareness by residents with septic systems rather than another onerous regulatory burden. Jefferson County Proposes: "Exception. A resident owner may construct, alter, repair, or modify a permitted on-site sewage system on his/her own property for his/her own use without obtaining an Installer's Certificate, PROVIDED: ...The resident owner does not arrange for, nor contract, nor hire, with or without reimbursement, any person or concern to perform that work, unless that person is a Jefferson County Certified Sewage System Installer as set forth in this section...."Draft Jefferson County Septic Code 8.15 Our problem with that: Rural values hold that neighbors work together to solve problems. The county proposal that we cannot help a friend or neighbor is ludicrous. It also does not allow a resident owner to hire a local equipment operator to do the hard digging that may be necessary to install or repair a septic system. Jefferson County Says: ...we will be required to default to the state law which has no similar provisions for homeowner O&M...JCPH information sheet distributed at the originally scheduled hearing on January 17, 2008 • Our problem with that: We have no idea what state law the county is looking at. WAC 246- 272A-270, Operation, monitoring, and maintenance-Owner responsibilities, simply requires owners to assure a complete evaluation of their system. Nothing says it has to be a professional inspection. In fact, a review of documents related to the state Board of Health rule-making procedure clearly indicates that the intent of the state board was to allow homeowners to do their own monitoring without burdensome training by the Washington On-Site Sewage Association. WAC 246-272A-0340 (2) Local health officer may establish programs and requirements for approving maintenance service providers. 70.118.120 RCW does mention qualifications and certificates for inspectors, although the intent of that section, written in 1999, was directed at those who perform such duties for profit. Jefferson County Says: [The] proposed homeowner O&M, would have been paid for by the clean water district fee. The Leader, Q&A about septic system rule changes,February 6,2008 FACT: County Commissioner David Sullivan tried to force a clean water district, including an $18 per parcel fee, on Jefferson Count property owners in the latter half of 2007. The Board of Commissioners decided against the fee, yet they did adopt a paper clean water district. Most of that proposed clean water district would have been used to fund the county's share of a state Department of Ecology grant to look for problems with septic system along 60 miles of Hood Canal shoreline. That the parcel fee would have paid for homeowner O&M is not true. That Commissioner Sullivan put his hand over his microphone after the public hearing on the • clean water district at Fort Worden and told the other commissioners that if we didn't want to FAIR LEA TREE FARM January 16,2008 • Jefferson County Board of Health 615 Sheridan Street Port Townsend,WA 98368 Re: Draft Jefferson County Code 18.15;Jefferson County Septic Code The following statement is made in opposition to various provisions in the proposed Jefferson County Septic Code;it is being made at this time to establish legal standing for myself in any actions resulting from adoption of the proposed ordinance. I object to the proposed Jefferson County Septic Code OCC 18.15)for the following specific reasons: 1. Provisions of the ordnance that allow homeowners to inspect their own systems are overly restrictive and clearly intended to discourage,if not punish,homeowners for exercising their traditional right to maintain their property by themselves by; a) Requiring the homeowner to attend a class costing approximately $200 and pass a test given by the presenters of the class before they can inspect their systems. b) By arranging that those classes be conducted by the Washington On-Site Sewage Association, an organization whose members have a direct financial interest in preventing homeowners from conducting such inspections and which has demonstrated hostility toward such inspections. c) By requiring that homeowners who successfully pass such a course be certified and registered with the county,and pay a fee of$98 for doing so. d) By limiting the certification of homeowners to do their own inspections to three years. e) By requiring homeowners who have been previously certified to go through training and testing again in order to be recertified.And,in addition to an unknown cost for the training to require that they pay a fee of$50 to the county for such recertification. f) By requiring that in addition to the cost of training and testing, and certification by the county, homeowners pay an additional fee for filing the necessary inspection report. g) By requiring that homeowners who have gravity systems,which require inspections every three years, go through the certification process each time they inspect their system. h) By establishing a certification schedule that does not insure that the homeowners inspection is based on current knowledge since the homeowner can inspect his system at the end of his certification period and before he is recertified, thus demonstrating that the purpose of the certification requirement is other than to make sure that the landowner has the necessary knowledge to conduct the inspection. i) By purposely establishing a system that landowners must go through in order to conduct inspections of their own systems that is vastly more expensive than having such inspections done by professional septic system inspectors,with the apparent intent of discouraging,if not preventing,such inspections. 2. The inspection schedule and requirement are excessively rigorous and are not based on demonstrated benefit with regards the following: a) The requirement for an annual inspection of all systems lying within a Marine Recovery Area by a Professional certified by the county to conduct O&M inspections is done without regard to the fact that the pollution problem in the Recovery area may not be related to septic systems, or human sewage,at all. b) The authority for DOH to designate any area of it's choosing as similar to a Marine Recovery Area and requiring the same protection is an excessive assumption of power, particularly given the stated concerns that DOH has about all of the watersheds associated with shellfish growing areas in Jefferson County as was indicated by their justification for the need for a county wide Clean Water • District. —2— January 17,2008 3. The ordinance leaves unclear the status of PUD inspections of OSS systems under contracts that were • required by the county,whether those inspections took place in the Past or will take place in the future. The following questions need to be answered: a) Is the PUD inspection considered a Professional inspection under the code, or is the PUD exempt from Professional Certification requirements under the governmental exemption that it grants itself? b) Will landowners who have had PUD inspection contracts and inspections, be required to have a "Professional" inspection done before they can participate in the Homeowner Owner Operator certification program? c) Will landowners who have had PUD inspection contracts and inspections,and desire to continue with those contracts; be required to have an initial "Professional" inspection done outside of the PUD contract? 4. The ordinance, as written, ignores the fact that there are not sufficient certified professional inspectors available in the country to meet the requirements of the ordinance. The ordinance provides no phased timeline for owners to comply with these requirements in recognition of this.This rush to implement the full program without sufficient development of the septic industry in Jefferson County to meet the needs of the program will result in the following: a) It will automatically place large numbers of county residents in violation of a county ordinance,and make them subject to the enforcement provisions of ordinance even when they make a good faith effort to comply. b) It will result in the limited number of certified septic system designers in the county having to determine whether they will spend time designing new systems or inspecting old ones, with the predictable result that neither will be done in a timely fashion at great inconvenience and potential cost to the homeowner. c) It will result in a slowdown in the real estate market in the county because septic system inspections • and assessments required by lending institutions can not be scheduled within reasonable time frames. d) It will result in large numbers of homeowners being required to request waivers of the regulations, provide repeated documentation that inspectors could not be scheduled,and pay filing fees of at least $164 simply because the DOH has decided to enact an ordinance with woefully inadequate industry support. e) The ordinance will at the outset and probably for a number of years,be unenforceable;be seen as an excessive and unnecessary exercise of government power;and be interpreted as an unreasonable and unachievable requirement by many homeowners. It will therefore be either ignored or actively opposed by a number of county citizens. 5. Though provisions for a waiver of the requirements of the ordinance have been included which would allow a homeowner, once a waiver has been granted to continue to operate his OSS even though he is unable to schedule a septic inspection within the time period required in the ordinance, the waiver provisions are not intended to deal with the lack of inspection capability in the county. The ordinance is therefore flawed in the following ways. a) It required the homeowner to pay a fee (presently $164) to obtain a waiver which is caused by a known defect in the ordinance over which the homeowner has not control, i.e., insufficient septic system inspection capability within the county,. b) Only two of four conditions for receiving a waiver will be met based on the lack of inspection capability,i.e.,i. Special circumstances exist that are not of the applicantir making;and ii.An unnecessary hardship will occur without the waiver. c) Since it is unclear how the Health Officer or the homeowner can meet the other two requirements for a waiver,i.e.,iii. The Health Officer has determined that the waiver is consistent with the standards in,and the intent of, the public health protection purpose and objectives of these rides;iv. Corresponding mitigation measure(s)to assure that public health and water quality protection,at least equal to that established by these rules,is provided It appears that a homeowner wishing to comply with the requirements of the ordinance would be required to request a formal Hearing at a cost of$274. —3— January 17,2008 6. Provisions of the ordinance concerning homeowner requirements with regards operation, maintenance and monitoring of their OSS are excessively regulatory and based on uncertain grounds in the following ways: a) In the event that a reserve area has not been designated by the DOH the ordinance requires a landowner to protect all potentially useable septic sites to the same standard as though they were designated reserve areas. No consideration is given to the size of the property and indeed all land contiguous (touching) owned by the landowner would need to protected in this way. This requirement would virtually eliminate, and certainly restrict all development activity on the land, and leads to the ridiculous situation where a landowner having hundreds of acres of land on which he has one residence is treated as though he had a small lot. b) The ordinance suggests that the landowner (should) not allow livestock access to either septic or reserve areas. Such a suggestion completely ignores the well accepted practice of using some livestock, e.g., goats as a low impact method of brush control,which is preferable to either chemical or the use of equipment to do this necessary job. 7. Provisions of the ordinance concerning when the Department of Health will approve permits made to DCD uses the fact that the applicant needs a permit as a means to require full compliance with this ordinance, even when the work being done is unrelated to the workings of the OSS, it is therefore a coercive and improper use of administrative power. 8. The provisions of the ordinance concerning the necessity for full compliance by a homeowner with an existing OSS prior to the enactment of the ordinance whenever ownership of the property is transferred, would appear to require that individuals who have lived on the property but not held full title to it, including surviving spouses and parties receiving the property as a result of a dissolved marriage would be required to bring the system into full compliance with the ordinance even though there has been no change in the circumstances of the property,(other than perhaps a reduction in OSS flow). This is an unnecessary intrusion of the county into situations of inheritance and divorce. Respectfully submitted, William A. Wheeler • 222 BIG LEAF LANE • QUILCENE, WA • 98376 PHONE: (360)774-1861• E-MAIL: FAIRLEAFARMS@HOTMAIL.COM • Y6a9(re (4t,tylit 4 '11Alth 4 Ve • . RitC1 affeefUrt f&CIRy• • • m c' t,tvileo -,g4_ illift / do/II'. , p ftR y Valensffrte 4 Ry . . . , 0 Iii" 1 fir I 4 ki ,-/i • F • r - . . , / f --e- , • ,.. _ ---.„ ,_-_...•_.., • _4 .,....,,'•,..-4,-;,-.-.4, .7.-',..4 ,,•'-' .:‘,.., , - .. . ... . ,.,. ,_. • . . ............„, ..... ...... .:_-4 .-,-, •. ,.... _,,, .. ,,:.4 -,:.:::. 4..•• /.. -..• OP .. . . . . .... .. - - 44. .. , .-.,.',.-.:.....::..-..:.••••''...:.:'. ...,L .47 • •• -' ' '.:.'•-:•''' ''' :"•::-:.•' •;'''' -' laik. • 411A • ...... ....s...--- da ......"-- , .. .-:. ...- , . ...... . . .,'• •t•'-' -'- ' ...NO. :7- ' t ..- ..: ; '', ' • ''. .• '' . . 7,..t .'jt' k ....,...../ ...... min .. . ... I , ',/ Nzeg ..,. - . .._.. ..,...._ ..., ... .. •7 , ... , . . %• , ''?.. ..,, ' -,,,,, t . . \\11 . •,• • : • -..'\ .....t. 0,00•Adia00000101/0.1151, ,,• . .• ,.,. .. t ..... ... -Nt'-'.7.7'...... .."7\1•'--..---"-'..-......• r•I'......-...--' ' ..,,-' ' • .' ',:f. '•. ,-. ..r. .. 0 • Jefferson County Public Health • 615 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 Subject: Onsite Sewage Monitoring Program Attn: Director Dear Sirs: It is my understanding that JCPH is proposing, for home owner monitoring, a class put on by the organization of septic system companies for a fee of about$200, with a yearly requirement for recertification(at unknown costs). This fee appears excessive. Consider a class of 25 home owners, that is $5000 for a one day class that takes the presenter little in preparation or presentation materials (I would love to make that kind of income). Is the level of this fee intended to deter home owners from doing their own inspections? Septic system monitoring is not rocket science,particularly for gravity systems. My belief is that setting up a class of this type will be an embarrassment to the county when people come back,reporting how easy the class was,how little they got for their money. May I suggest that JCPH set up a written test that home owners can take to show being qualified to monitor their own system and provide printed or on-line materials for owner education? Even in many colleges,there are provisions for passing a class by testing. • Thank you. Sincerely Esko G. Cate 85 St James Place PT, WA • February 11, 2008 Neil Harrington • Environmental Health Director Jefferson County Health Department 615 Sheridan Port Townsend,WA 98368 Re: Proposed changes to Jefferson County Septic Code Dear Mr. Harrington, Please send me a hard copy of the peer reviewed scientifically proven information which shows the necessity of fencing animals away from septic systems. I am well aware of the suspect quality of a fair amount of Department of Ecology Best Available Science. Suppositions and computer projections do not constitute proof in my opinion. Be aware that wildlife do not respect fences. Is Jefferson County next going to mandate that everyone in rural areas put a 12 foot tall cyclone fence around their septic system? That is what would be required .As far as cattle being"bad"and elk being"good",be aware that grass fed cattle and elk eat the same things. Realizing of course that Jefferson County has no jurisdiction over Olympic National Park,be aware that 40-50 elk regularly feed on the luxuriously green grass atop the mound septic system at the Hoh Ranger • Station here in the Ha Valley. 1-emember this system is the largest waste water producer in the Hoh Valley. Respectfully Submitted, Marjorie K. Dickson 9772 Oil City Road Forks, WA 98331 360-374-2553 • . .. ..N . . Jetteiscri County, 4, }fdr l Heattr, To the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners • Jefferson County Septic Plans By Robert Huelsdonk, Washington State Professional Engineer Considerations of the Cost of Septic Systems to homeowners. I am not happy with the plans for septic system inspection as I have read them so far. I think they are too expensive, untrusting of the residents to take care of there own property and assuming the residents have little or no ability to learn things that have been done capably for over a century. How serious is the Septic System Problem. There is no question that pollution is harmful to the environment in large doses. Testing should meet the required minimum requirements with a reasonable margin but not go overboard. The cost of monitoring septic systems should not be a large burden to the landholder. Some History • I have lived here on the Hoh river for over forty years; my family has lived on the Hoh for over one hundred years. That is a lot of experience in husbandry, farming and raising stock and a family. Many homes and outbuildings have been built by landholders. Septic systems have been built, water systems have been built, fences have been installed, and gardens have been kept. All by the individuals living on the land. Amazing; no planners, no planning commission, no detailed plans, no inspectors, no land police. And most of those facilities are still standing, still in use, and doing the job that was planned for them very well. When we built our house on the Hoh, the only requirement for inspection was for the electrical system. That was forty years ago and with some periodic maintenance it all still works. When we polled the people during the GMA effort it was surprising to see how well educated the residents were. A number of four year degrees, two year degrees, as well as years of apprenticeship within families. We typically know what we are doing or often we can get advice from a neighbor who does. I don't mean to say that there is not a scofflaw here and there who might try to take advantage of the freedom we have experienced but if 1 so, they have been reported by residents. This on the basis of simply generational learning and knowing how to live. Overflowing septic drain fields are fairly easily diagnosed and resulting pollution can easily be reported to the Health Department. Comparisons with Clallam County. It appears that Clallam County has developed a considerably lower cost method in solving this problem. Is Jefferson County unable to offer as simple an answer or is it bound to make living here as expensive as possible. I attended a meeting of the planning commission last year wherein a consultant pointed out that Port Townsend is having problems with economic growth because there are no homes that middle income residents can afford. So our teachers, nurses, restaurant workers, and other 'blue collar" employees cannot afford to live in the city or close to their jobs. Has Jefferson County had meetings with other Counties or the Washington State Association of Counties to discuss this problem? It is said that pioneers get arrows in their backs. It doesn't make sense for a small under funded County to do a first approach without meeting a • common solution. I visited the planning Department in another County once and picked up a small flyer that said we are here to help you attain your reasonable goals. Would that it were so in our County. Septic systems. My septic system was first placed in 1961. It has been inspected, tested, and pumped on a reasonable schedule. I have read directions at the University of Washington library on many approaches to septic systems. I must expect that local libraries must have such information. I will admit that I am a Washington State Registered Engineer and so I have some advanced education but to think that you must pay $200 to learn to recognize sludge and scum on a measuring stick seems exorbitant. To add insult to injury, there will be a restriction on inspecting another persons system. A much better approach would be to license local professionals to perform tests for a fee. I also believe that 3 years is too short a period unless there are special circumstances. We have found that five years is more appropriate. . 2 . Every rational person likes and seeks to be in control — it is human IIIInature. The inspectors and planners can be and sometimes are helpful but they there is an automatic response to the "unwashed lower caste" by an inspector who "knows it all" and the assumption of low IQ on the part of the Jefferson County public is a result. Lets assume that most people are out to have freedom of use of their property and that they do not wish to harm themselves or their neighbors property. Lets also assume that the laws and ordinances are clearly written and that there is backup information on the internet. People who live on the land, care for the land. HRRA • • 3 171603 Hwy 101 • P.O. Box 536 Forks, WA 98331 February 13, 2008 Jefferson County Department of Public Health 615 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA ATTN: Ms. Jean Baldwin; Thank you, for this opportunity to present my comments to be placed on permanent record of the Public Hearing for the Draft of Jefferson County Septic Code on February 14, 2008. I am a resident of the Hoh River Valley, owning a tract of 98 acres, consisting of 40 acres of the original Homestead of John Huelsdonk. Over my lifetime of more than 70 years, I have lived or worked on nearly every homestead in the valley. I am familiar with the modern utilities of the households, as well as their pioneer facilities. Until after WW II, no septic systems in the modern sense of a tank and drainfield, were utilized. • Those without piped water relied on either a surface source, with its attendant risks, or a dug well, as close as possible to the residence. The outhouse pit was usually in the opposite direction from the house, or "downstream" from the general course of the nearest surface water. A home with piped water and a flush toilet usually utilized a "cesspool", a pit about 8 feet deep, covered with cedar planks and a foot of soil. These served a small family, provided that impermeable soil or clay layers were sufficiently deeper and that a well drained sand or gravel lay above it. Today, nearly every residence in the west end of the county has sanitary facilities. Little environmental impact is noted, based on the widely separated homes. In regard to specifics in the draft JC Code 8.15 revised 2007: None of the 4 options as now written give responsible landowners sufficient flexibility to provide economic or flexible sewage disposal systems. There are far too many fees imposed for permits, design reviews, inspections, continuing education, etc. Page 8: JCC 8.15.060 Section (4) - Why does a replacement structure require triggering the Code for inspection? If the sewage loading is identical to that of the replaced structure, why is the existing sewage facility not adequate? • Page 19-JCC 8.15 Sewage System Installer: Suggest that an owner of rental homes on or adjacent to the owner's residential property may be included under the Exception clause of • Section 8 for installation, etc. of new or replacement sewage systems. Suggest adding a Chapter as follows: JCC 8.15.120 A: SEWAGE SYSTEM OWNER-INSTALLER (1) Owner-Installer Certificate Required. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to engage in construction, alteration, repair or modification of on-site sewage systems without first having been issued a Septic System Owner-Installer's Certificate by the Health Officer except as allowed in Section 8.15.120 (8) of this Code. (2) Requirements for Sewage System I Owner-Installer shall include the following: a. Application shall be made on forms provided by the Health Officer. b. Certificate and/or application fees as set forth in the Fee Schedule shall be payable to JCPH. . • •- • - . -- •• •-e • - - . e- •_ . c. Completion of classroom training specific to on-site sewage system installation as approved by JCPH. • - . e • - - - - - - • -• • - - - - •- • . (3) Take and pass a written examination to verify the applicant's knowledge of the operation and monitoring requirements, both herein and in WAC 246-272A or as amended, for the on- site sewage systems approved by the Washington State Department of Health, excepting those proprietary devices requiring a special authorization from the system proprietor. A passing score is a minimum of 70% correct. (4) Renewal of Certificate. Application is required annually for certificate renewal. All certificate renewal applications, along with the required bond, renewal fee, and verification of continuing education shall be submitted to the Health Officer no later than March 1. The Certificate shall not be issued or renewed if the applicant is found by the Health Officer to be out of compliance or in violation of the provisions of this chapter. After March 1 of any particular year, the certificate issued to that installer for the prior year shall become void and of no effect. If an installer's certification lapses or becomes void, then to become recertified, the applicant must comply with all requirements of this section, including passing the written examination. (5) An Installer's Certificate is not transferable. (6) An Owner-Installer's Certificate grants authority to install any on-site sewage system approved for use in the State of Washington, EXCEPT in the case of a proprietary product where a special authorization, in writing, is required by the manufacturer or patent holder. a ► (8) Exception. A resident owner may construct, alter, repair, or modify a permitted on-site S sewage system on his/her own property for his/her own use without after obtaining an Owner-Installer's Certificate, PROVIDED: a. That he/she complies with other terms of this chapter, WAC 246-272A-0250, AND b. That he/she installs no-more than one (1-) system in any one (1) calendar year, AND c. The on-site sewage system is intended to serve the properties on or adjoining the primary residence of the owner, AND d. The resident owner does not arrange for, nor contract, nor hire, with or without reimbursement, any person or concern to perform that work, unless that person is a Jefferson County Certified Sewage System Installer as set forth in this section, AND. e. The sewage system is located on the same lot as the residence or situated on adjoining property controlled by the owner and legally listed as an encumbrance, AND (40)- (Delete entirely) (11) (Delete entirely) (12) (Include in entirety) (13) (Include in entirety) Page 26: JCC 815.15.145 Homeowner Operator: A clear distinction should be made that it is • the Homeowner Operator, who is being trained, examined and certified to conduct the OSS inspection, not the OSS itself that is being certified under the Certificate. Qualification to inspect one system is clearly qualification to inspect others so owned. Further, the Homeowner Operator should not be limited to only one OSS self-installation per year, he should be allowed to construct all needed for his property use. Qualification to install one owned system is sufficient qualification to install others so owned. In the event that a homeowner chooses to construct 4 separate and widely-spaced buildings, such as the main dwelling, an accessory dwelling unit, a sweat building containing a sauna, shower and toilet, and a private aircraft hanger with plumbing facilities, each with a separate septic system, these are not commercial OSS's, but are clearly appurtenant to the purpose of the main dwelling. It is not correct to consider each septic system as falling under the purview of multiple Homeowner Operator certificates. Rather, the individual systems should be recognized in the permitting applications. A Certificate for each type of OSS owned by a Homeowner Operator should be sufficient, regardless of number OSS's serving single rental dwelling units, and include authorization to inspect and repair any or all so owned. • Therefore, a composite of the four options presented in the draft is hereby submitted for your consideration: , 8.15.145 HOMEOWNER OPERATOR (1) A Homeowner Operator certificate allows the certificate holder to inspect one all OSS serving property that he/she owns regardless of the quantity of properties owned by the landowner holding a Homeowner Operator Certificate. An individual owning ale different specific system types OSS may hold-r u-ltiplies is required to hold additional Homeowner Operator certificates for each type of system. (2) A sewage system Homeowner Operator certificate is issued to a particular individual and shall not be transferable. (3) Requirements for a Homeowner Operator certificate shall include all of the following: a. Application shall be made on forms provided by JCPH and specify the type OSS to be inspected. b. Certificate and/or application fees as set forth in the Fee Schedule shall be payable to JCPH. Each certificate for each specific system type shall may be charged a separate fee. c. Written proof of completion of operation and monitoring classes provided by a JCPH-approved agency within the past three years. This class must cover the applicant's specific system type. Fees may be charged for this class. d. Take and pass a written examination from a JCPH-approved agency within the • past three years to verify the applicant's knowledge of the operation and monitoring for their specific system type. Fees may be charged for this examination. e. An individual's completion of the class and passing of the examination(s) may, if applicable based on system type(s), be applied to more than one Homeowner Operator certificate,. (4) The Homeowner Operator certificate does not authorize the holder of that Certificate to maintain or repair an OSS of which the Homeowner Operator is not an resident owner, nor to maintain a proprietary product that requires maintenance by a manufacturer-authorized person. (5) The Homeowner Operator shall report failure of an on-site sewage system to JCPH within 24 hours of first identifying the failure. (6) Inspection Reports shall be submitted by the Homeowner Operator to JCPH or other authorized agency within thirty (30) days following the inspection, and shall be accompanied by the required fees. By submitting these reports, Homeowner Operators shall warrant that they have performed at least the minimum 0 & M inspections required in these regulations for the respective system by visiting the site, visually inspecting all tanks, pump basins and other components of the system as detailed on the record drawing for inspection access (as applicable to era and system type), and completing and submitting all required documents to JCPH. • • (7) Maintenance items shall be reported on the inspection report to JCPH. (8) If the system 0 contains a proprietary product requiring maintenance by manufacturer-authorized personnel, the Homeowner Operator shall include written documentation of such maintenance as part of the required inspection reports. (9) A bond is not required for Homeowner Operator certificates. (10) Continuing Education: A system-type specific refresher and test authorized by JCPH is required within one year prior to each renewal of the Homeowner Operator certificate. Fees may be charged. (11) Renewal of Certificate. Certificate renewal is required every three years. Application, fees, and proof of continuing education shall be submitted to JCPH prior to each inspection. The certificate shall not be issued or renewed if the applicant is found by the Health Officer to be out of compliance or in violation of the provisions of this chapter. (12) Suspension/Revocation. A Homeowner Operator certificate may be revoked or suspended as set forth in 8.15.180 if he/she has been found to be in noncompliance with the terms of this chapter or has performed with negligence, incompetence, or misrepresentation. JC Code ISFurther questions involve whether existing residential sewage systems in either east or west Jefferson County contribute significantly to surface water quality problems. If not, is the extent of onerous and expensive retrofitting, and inspection justified, as proposed at this time? Sincerely, /s/ John C. Richmond, P.E., C.E. 7750 Oregon cc: Board of County Commissioners • From: Trish Grant • Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 8:40 AM To: Cathy Avery Subject: FW: Letter for 2/14/08 JCBPH Meeting... Cathy, I gave a copy to Angie. Original Message From: Roger Pick [mailto:pick@olympus.net] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 2:11 AM To: Trish Grant Subject: Letter for 2/14/08 JCBPH Meeting... A Letter to All Members of the Jefferson County Board of Public Heath To be Entered as Comments at Their CHS Auditorium Meeting on 14 February, '08 I hope you are soon able to finalize your program to allow property owners to comply with state law by monitoring and inspecting their own on site sewage systems (OSS systems) and that this option will be available, after passing appropriate tests and acquiring necessary equipment, for all systems, including proprietary systems near shorelines. • Out of curiosity I have recentlyread all the codes of the US EPA, WADOH, and JCPH that govern the activities of installers of on site sewage systems in this county-- the codes they are required to be tested on to to become certified to practice their trade as a certified installer. For sure the codes are detailed, voluminous, and technical, but they address, and address as well as I think we can reasonably hope for today, the practical, affordable, and most necessary demands that reasonable people might agree are essential to protect the public health and to maintain an environment that promotes the public health. I think it's great that these state mandated standards govern the designers and installers of OSS systems in our country; that they mandate that our county survey every OSS system in the county and verify that each system meets the minimal code requirements required to prevent it from being declared a failed system, be it newly installed or a hundred years old. It is fortunate we have empowered government to assume the function of code generation at a national and state level after receiving guidance from public hearings with local health department officials. Jefferson county is, as are all counties in the state, required to adopt this uniform code. This is a relatively new code update that provides methods to accept even the most recent technology and still maintain code compliance. I believe other, private solutions would be considerably more expensive and chaotic in achieving the same degree of alk compliance needed to ensure OSS systems are functional and of proper design. From my reading of the OSS system codes, and from talking with people who oppose what the county is doing to implement mandated code requirements, I can see nothing the county has done 1 4 0. that comes close to exceeding or even being overzealous in promoting code compiance. Reading the code, it is quite apparent that far more stringent, costly, and obnoxious methods could be used for even the most minor code violations. A county wide inventory of systems ste s is not ant a discretionary option for the county, and yes, it is sure to find failing and Y • systems. Is this not what the vast majority of us want-- to have our own sewage systems function to protect our health? I hope it is clear to my county administrators that I'm not an isolated, lone sueand thr, I ink you have the support of the vast majority of people who have taken the time to uppe s constraints under which you work. I have no idea how to placate those who feel the fees charged for monitoring Owning inspectg a home is are too high, or those who feel inspections and codes violate their propertyrights. expensive, even if it was home built decades ago and in good repair.adeefclear tthat tget any county administration, and those of us living in the county who ve been more hardship that anyone must experience as a result of OSS system code compliance. Possibly if we all worked together the money that would be spenet expanding the cd rrenby nt os fist could be better used helping some of the people who are most negatively that really do seem to benefit us all. By the way, I'm hardly happy we had to spend as much as we did to comply with the code-- I know OSS systems are expensive! But I know the designer, the installer, and do it for the e county iid the est they could to give me a system that will do what it is designed to do and • time. Thank you... Roger Pick Carol Hardy POB 781 Port Townsend, WA 98368 • 2 Page 1 of 1 • From: Leslie Locke Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 9:37 AM To: Phil Johnson; Cathy Avery; Neil Harrington Subject: FW: septic resolution? Hearing Comments From: CaptTimo@aol.com[SMTP:CAPTTIMO@AOL.COM] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 7:35:45 PM To: John Austin; David Sullivan; tom_linda@earthlink.net Subject: septic resolution? Auto forwarded by a Rule we were all horrified to hear the draconian ideas promugated by the Health Dept for Septic inspections Have you noticed that Clallam Cty handles more humanely with reasonalble cost Hopefully we will adopt features of that program Secondly • When an owner pumps his tank, for just under$400, that is both a defacto inspection and a mitagation of any problem. To have any additional requirements or fees during that period is unreasonable many thanks tim snider The year's hottest artists on the red carpet at the Grammy Awards. Go to AOL Music. (http://music.aol.com/grammys?NCID=aolcmp00300000002565) • 2/14/2008 am CHIMACUM GRANGE I Serving Rural Jefferson County Rhody Drive ©°f© . P.O.Box (�n Chimacum,WA 99999 ,��+( 360-732-0015 v 10.4140411r40` January 17, 2008 Jefferson County Board of Health 615 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 Re: Onsite Sewage System Inspection Program (OSSIP) draft ordinance Dear Members of the Board, Chimacum Grange supports your efforts to insure clean water and protect our valuable environment. While it is the responsibility of the Health Board to reasonably protect the county's citizens, we feel more • time is needed to properly examine the financial consequences of the proposed revision and its effects on the county's rural population. We propose you establish an advisory committee of concerned citizens to further study the problem and make recommendations to the Board. This is a complex issue and demands nothing less. We ask that the Board consider the ordinance very carefully before making a final decision. Sincerely, ItAttt Judi Stewart President • Helping to make Jefferson County affordable, sustainable and self-sufficient • Jefferson County Environmental Health 615 Sheridan Street Port townsend, Wa. 98368 Jefferson County Environmental Health Public Meeting, At the public meeting, February 14, 2008, please address your plans to reduce the exorbitant class fee ($200.00) and other miscellaneous fees pertaining to the homeowner who chooses to monitor his on-site system through your certification process. Thank you, ..,,,, , ' , ' ah(17- -1f4 - 5 • V Joanne Pickering 8865 Flagler Rd. Nordland, Wa. 98358 0 i- '.;' -PO • ,rscr County nvirnnrnen j Heatti • Response to the revision of WAC 246-242A dated 07/01/07. Revising Jefferson county code 8.15. 1-There has not been a response from the State of Washington health department when asked tp. provide some kind of evidence that these septic systems are in need of inspection. 2- The state has indicated that state funding to the county would be interrupted if we did not respond to WAC 246-242A as the state has requested. 1- The first thing needed to be done is to find viable proof that these inspection's have to be. The proof that these septic's are failing and in need of inspections lies on the state since it is the state that has made this change mandatory. 2-Let it be known that the current plan for charging home owners and using contractors is not acceptable by Jefferson county residence's. 3-Form a comity of all interested parties including a cross section of home owners. 4- Have the home owners certification done by county inspectors. Using out side contractors is a conflict of interest, since county inspectors have to approve these septic's that are already inspected by these very same inspectors. Unless the county inspectors have just been signing these off and not inspecting. • 5- Jefferson county to apply for grants where needed to help with funding. There is no need for the people of the county to have to pay one red cent when grant money for this project is available at the state level .Ask Clallam county. 6-Currently,using outside, conflict of interest contractors,we pay twice as much to get certified to be an inspector than to have our system inspected. There is no need for cost to be put on the home owner. 7-Quality assurance can be done by spot checks done by county personnel. Unless they feel that just might add to much to there current work load. It has been determined that the county septic inspectors are the ones who came up with the current, use contractors and charge the customer,plan. If the inspectors believe it is cheaper to use contractors than for them to teach and spot check, than perhaps we need to turn there jobs over to contractors. It is cheaper for the county to hire another employee than to implement there current septic tank plan. One of two things need to happen. 1-The county put forth effort to implement a system that does not cost the home owner as Clallam county has. 2-Remove all health department personnel and replace with those who will hold the good of the people in the county first and foremost. There seems to be a complete lack of caring for the people of the county and what these people have to say. No body at the health department is willing to listen. • An example of that was the meetings held in the county, marked as informationerfieetirigs by health department staff,the numbers responding to those meetings were completely and totally ignored. The meeting of the 17th at the health department and again the 18th by phone I was told they had never had such a turn out on this issue. In reviewing the adds in the Leader for the health department board meetings I find that January's mention's septic's specifically,non other did. So all the over loaded meetings on septic were ignored together with all suggestions and public comments on the septic's made at that time. When the septic tank issue came up at the Clean Water District meetings,the meeting at the court house was over loaded and we had to move to fort Warden. But the response from the health department was,(We have never seen this much interest) What does it take a brick up beside the head. A health department official went as far as to insinuate a local pastor was lying,when he pointed out the interest on the septic's displayed in the before mentioned meetings. The Health Department needs a wake up call. Either start working for the people of Jefferson county,who pays their pay checks,listen to the people of Jefferson county, or get out and let some one else fill your position. Perhaps we should listen to what the inspectors are saying and fire them all and hire a contractor. John Mc Duff • Quilcene • JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH 5'1 (s 615 Sheridan Street • Port Townsend •Washington • 98368 • www.jeffersoncountypublichealth.org February 12, 2008 John McDuff 2123 E. Quilcene Rd. Quilcene WA 98376 Dear Mr. McDuff, We received your comments from September 2007 and January 2008 and would like thank you for your interest regarding the changes to the septic regulations. The next few lines are a brief overview of the changes--The changes to the Operation and Monitoring Program are driven by the July 2007 changes to the State Code, WAC246-272A. These changes increased the monitoring frequency for on-site septic systems. The July '07 changes made the State Code more restrictive than the current County Code, JCC 8.15. Per State Code, the County is required to have a system in place for the tracking of the Operations and Monitoring (O&M) of all onsite sewage systems. Over the past 15 years the PUD filled this role. The PUD no longer wants to perform the Operations and Monitoring of Onsite Sewage Systems resulting in the proposal by Jefferson County Public Health (JCPH)for homeowner training and certification as an option to satisfy the State requirements. The option for homeowner O&M is very innovative, this County would be one of the first • in the State to implement such an option. Homeowner operator O&M was requested by citizens as a proactive way to implement the state law while meeting the needs of Jefferson County residents. JCPH has and will continue to minimize the cost of implementing this program and intends on utilizing any services that will help in managing the increased workload. As you noted work load is an issue and it is our goal to streamline this process for professionals and JCPH for the benefit of the public as a whole. Finding ways to reduce receipting, routing, data entry, & review time. Your correspondence will be forwarded to the Board of Health for consideration. Sincerely, eil Harrington Water Quality Program Manager Jefferson County Public Health 615 Sheridan St., Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 385-9444 • COMMUNITY HEALTH PUBLIC HEALTH ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES r WATER QUALITY MAIN: 360385-9400 ALWAYS WORKING FORA SAFER AND MAIN: 360385-9444 FAX: 360385-9401 HEALTHIER COMMUNITY FAX: 364379-4487 Page 1 of 1 4JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH 615 Sheridan Street • Port Townsend •Washington • 98368 • www.jeffersoncountypublichealth.org February 12, 2008 Marjorie K. Dickson 9772 Oil City Road Forks, WA 98331 Dear Ms. Dickson, Thank you for the Valentine and your interest and support regarding the changes to the septic regulations. The next few lines are a brief overview of the changes--The changes to the Operation and Monitoring Program are driven by the July 2007 changes to the State Code, WAC246-272A. These changes increased the monitoring frequency for on- site septic systems. The July 2007 changes made the State Code more restrictive than the current County Code, JCC 8.15. Per State Code, the County is required to have a system in place for the tracking of the Operations and Monitoring (O&M) of all onsite sewage systems. Over the past 15 years the PUD filled this role for alternative systems. The PUD no longer wants to perform the Operations and Monitoring of Onsite Sewage Systems resulting in the proposal by Jefferson County Public Health (JCPH) for homeowner training and certification as an option to satisfy the State requirements. A homeowner may also choose to hire a private entity to perform O&M. Regarding your questions: 1) The experience of someone with a current Level One Wastewater Operator • Certification from the State of Washington may be a suitable equivalent for the training required for a Homeowner Operator or a Professional Operation and Monitoring Specialist. This determination is made on a case by case basis and is at the discretion of Health Officer, Dr. Tom Locke. If this experience is applied it is still necessary for the individual to meet all other County requirements, for Homeowner or Professional certification, which includes the demonstration of competency through examination. As you noted if an individual were to meet all the County requirements of a Professional Operation and Monitoring Specialist, including bonding, they would then be able to inspect other homeowners' septic systems. From our viewpoint it would be advantageous to have an O&M specialist on the West End. 2) The number of systems that a homeowner is allowed to perform O&M on is still being considered by the Board of Health. At the very minimum a homeowner will be able to check the system for their primary residence. As proposed, each septic system requires the submittal of a system specific inspection report, a filing fee is charged with the submittal of each report. A certificate would also be required for each system. Regarding the inspection of multiple systems this would require consideration of system type, the Homeowner Operator will need to demonstrate competency in inspecting any proposed systems. 3) Yes, if a home is only occupied part of the year the same inspection requirements apply (per state code). • COMMUNITY HEALTH PUBLIC HEALTH ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES ALWAYS UVGRKiNG FOR�,SAFER AND WATER QUALITY MAIN: 361}385-9400 MAIN: 360385-9444 FAX:360385-9401 HEALTHIER COMMUNITY FAX: 36079-4487 Page 1 of 2 CC: flea N-k - ,,2 hk6 February 5,2008 4 Neil Harrington Environmental Health Director RECEIVE D Jefferson County Health Department 615 Sheridan Port Townsend,WA 98368 FEB 0 7 2008 Re: Septic Tank Inspection rules change JEFFERSON COUNTY Dear Mr Harrington, COMMISSIONERS No one disagrees with the need for properly working septic systems. You will consider that the largest waste water generator in the Hoh Valley,on the West End of Jefferson County,is Olympic National Park. Olympic National Park does not fall under the jurisdiction of Jefferson County. Question: 1. Would someone with a current Level One Wastewater Operator Certification from the State of Washington be qualified to inspect their own septic tank? Continuing education is part of maintaining the certification. Would that person be able to inspect other homeowners' septic tanks if that person were bonded? 2. If a person has more than one septic tank on their property,would there be a separate set of fees for each one? 3. If a home is occupied only part of the year would the inspection requirement still be the same? 4. Can only a professional install risers on a septic tank? 5. If a professional inspects the septic tank,do all the same filing fees apply as if the homeowner had done their own? 6. What sort of mechanism is in place to help ALL the people who are unable to afford the new and increased fees? A written response to these questions would be appreciated. Respectfully submitted 11/? Mari orid K. 9772 Oil City Road Forks,WA 98331 360-374-2553 February 5,2008 • Neil Harrington Environmental Health Director Jefferson County Health Department ` 615 Sheridan Port Townsend, WA 98368 Re: Septic Tank Inspection rules change :pv r Ji (flet Ej Dear Mr Harrington, No one disagrees with the need for properly working septic systems. You will consider that the largest waste water generator in the Hoh Valley, on the West End of Jefferson County, is Olympic National Park. Olympic National Park does not fall under the jurisdiction of Jefferson County . Question: 1. Would someone with a current Level One Wastewater Operator Certification from the State of Washington be qualified to inspect their own septic tank? Continuing education is part of maintaining the certification. Would that person be able to inspect other homeowners' septic tanks if that person were bonded? • 2. If a person has more than one septic tank on their property, would there be a separate set of fees for each one? 3. If a home is occupied only part of the year would the inspection requirement still be the same? 4. Can only a professional install risers on a septic tank? 5. If a professional inspects the septic tank, do all the same filing fees apply as if the homeowner had done their own? 6. What sort of mechanism is in place to help ALL the people who are unable to afford the new and increased fees? A written response to these questions would be appreciated. Respectfully submitted, MarjorieK. Dickson 9772 Oil City Road Forks, WA 98331 • 360-374-2553 02/01/2008 16:38 FAX 3603859382 BOCC ;wj uu1 Note Post-ir Fax 767! / Dace / Ragas To David Sullivan MEZZO . s,• From: Allison Arthur[aarthuraptleader.corni Phone# P,n# •Sent; Monday, January 28, 2008 11:20 AM Fax# To: David Sullivan 3 s?zip/ Pax#, Subject: Re: I'm here • i Hi David, Thanks for your comments. Here are the questions I'm posing to environmental health to answer. Let me know if you have heard of other questions that should be added to clarify this issue. I'm hoping to run something next week so that people have time to look at these before your hearing. I understand the health department is inundated with calls. Allison Q. What's the most common question the health department is hearing from people concerned about the on-site septic code issue? Tell what it is and then answer it. A. Q_ How many failing systems does Jefferson County think exists now and how do you know that? A. Q. Could Jefferson County bow out of following the state laws requiring septic system inspections? If not, why not? A. 41,Q. If there are only four options for homeowners, what's the point of public cbmment? Could there be other options and are you open to that possibility? A. Q. I own an old-fashioned gravity-fed septic system that was put in a long • time ago. I don't even know where it is anymore_ How much will it cost for me to find out where it is and how much am I going to have to pay to have it maintained? A. Q. What if I don't have a permit now for a system that was put in a long time ago. Will I be fined on top of having to get the system inspected? A. Q. Will there be an amnesty program for those who don't have a functioning on-site sewer system? A. Q. Will there be any programs offered to low-income property owners whose septic systems may be failing and who don't have money buy into a septic system? A. Q. I own waterfront property and have an alternative system that has a pump. How much will it cost for me to have my system inspected and why does it have to be done annually? A. • Will the fees be increased every year and if so will there be a public hearing before that happens? A. Q. Is it true that neighboring Clallam County property owners aren't paying 1 ,tE VL/V1/LUNO 10.00 rttA JOVJOOOJOL DVlil. i 1 Vua 1 t anything in response to the new state law? If that's true, why does Jefferson County want to set fees that could cost homeowners a lot during a time when the economy ,is in trouble? ' A. , , • Q. Why does it cost $200 to take a class to inspect my own system? A. . i Q. What would happen if the county doesn't enact this operation and maintenance code? Would the state take any action against the county and if so what?. A. Q. Why can't the county spend 41 cents to mail a flier and let everyone who owns a septic system know about these meetings and what's happening? A. Q. How does the septic system issue related to the clean water district that was approved, as a paper district last year by Jefferson County Commissioners? If so, how? A. Q. What happens when I sell my property and haven't had my septic system approved? A. Q. How long will it take for you to implement these new rules if they are adopted? Won't the county commissioners have to have a hearing on this as well? A. • i On 1/25/08 4:51 PM, "David Sullivan" <madronapoint@cablespeed.com> wrote: > Allison, > The County has developed a self monitoring. option to save property owners > money complying with state septic regulations protecting public health, A > question is can we find a way to also do this for renters? Another is; > creating options for people with low incomes. Olycap has a weatherization > program. Perhaps we could do something similar, and train "Septic Stewards" > to help. > David > > Original Message > From: Allison Arthur [mailto:aarthur@ptleader.com] > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 9:37 AM • > To: David Sullivan > Subject: I'm here > > > Hi David, > I got your message. .. Most of it, I think. I was on the phone with Lynn > Kessler when you called. Anyway, I got most of what you said. . . But the > machine did not take the last few comments. I'll be here until about 12:45 > and would love to talk to you more. I'd like to do a legislature update, a > list of bills people should know about in terms of how they impact Jcffersorn > County. > Also, I'm working with the health department to do a Q&A over the septic > issue so that facts get out. Jean Baldwin and Neil are .planning to hejlp me, 1 , • > but if you are hearing a certain question asked over and over, I'd be happy' > to include that question . . . So that we can get that information together > before the public hearing. . . > Thanks much. 2 02/01/ZU08 1t5:39 FAX 3UU3659382 BOCC > Allison > 385-5100 ext. 106 > Bad. news: I thought •I was leaving the county beat, but I'm afraid yoU'll have to put up with me for another three to six months. Sorry about that. • • • 1 • • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • • • • • Jean Baldwin February 4, 2008 Director Public Health Dept. 615 Sheridan St. Port Townsend, Wa. 98368 Dear Director Baldwin, Thank you for your reply to my correspondence concerning the excessive$200.00 class fee for homeowners who wish to become proficient in monitoring and inspecting their on- site septic systems. I have since learned that there will be additional fees for various miscellaneous services on an on-going basis. I urge you to revisit this issue and pursue every means possible to reduce these fees. Why must a private company be hired to teach a class when there are many locally qualified people and certainly employees in your department that could readily teach this class ? Your correspondence left the impression that because the class fee was negotiated by your predecessor with a private company that it could not be renegotiated. Your goal of holding individuals responsible for maintaining an efficiently working system, improving the health and safety of county residents and providing a cleaner more productive environment will be thwarted if you pursue a program of exorbitant fees. • I urge you to make effort to have a more open and cooperative approach to insure the success of this much needed program. Respectfully, s id7'ir4 (/ / Joanne Pickering ki 8865 Flagler Rd. Nordland, Wa. 98358 • She OGJ,/Kc f� Page 1 of 3 Susan Porto From: Neil Harrington Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 8:15 AM To: Susan Porto; Jean Baldwin; Daniel Nidzgorski Subject: FW: Chimacum Grange meeting, Tuesday, January 15, 2008 Hi Gang, Please see the email below. I was unable to go last night, but what I am thinking is that a fact sheet to hand out to folks as the sign in might be appropriate. Just looking at Norm's email i.e. new county reg will require this, well guess what, maybe that is current state law. SO-some of the questions I could see being answered are: What these changes are to the code, what happens if the code is not revised, that this is what was spoken about in the eight public meetings, insert your own here. Let work on this when we meet this afternoon Susan and Daniel (and Jean we are meeting at 1:30 to go over my talk for tomorrow) Thanks, Neil Harrington Water Quality Program Manager Jefferson County Environmental Health 615 Sheridan St. Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 385-9411 From: wayne king [mailto:kinghyd@olypen.com] • Sent: Tuesday,January 15, 2008 5:00 PM To: Neil Harrington Subject: Fw: Chimacum Grange meeting,Tuesday, January 15, 2008 Neil .Are you going to this meeting. If you are let me know I can attend also. I am sure this is more WRONG info. Wayne King Jefferson County PUD Commissioner District#3 Home 797-7491 www.jeffpud.org Original Message---- From: Norman MacLeod. To: various Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 8:51 PM Subject: Chimacum Grange meeting, Tuesday, January 15, 2008 In addition to our scheduled program, we will also have(a sho i cussion concerning this coming Thursday afternoon's public hearing on the Onsi a age System Inspection Program (OSSIP) draft ordinance. This is of great importance to everyone who uses a septic system, because Jefferson County is planning to require you to have your septic system inspected periodically (once every three years for a conventional system, and annually for • alternative systems) at an expected cost to you of at least $175 per inspection, plus the cost of any needed modifications to the system. 1/16/2008 Page 2 of 3 Chimacum Grange • #681 P x 9572 Rhody Dr. at W.Valley Rd., 'r ° 5r Chimacum WA 98325 Serving Rural Jefferson County, Brinnon&Quilcene Greetings, If you've seen the local papers recently, you've probably read that the doors to Chimacum Grange are now open and the Grange is undergoing a renewal. Current plans are to offer a variety of services and programs specifically aimed at improving the quality of life of not only Grange members but the community as a whole. Building improvement discussions are already underway. Grange meetings will be held on the third Tuesday of the month. The next meeting will be on January 15th at 6:30 pm. We hope you'll be there to enjoy the first in a series of special community programs. Three local farmers of distinction are being featured ... Andy Driscoll of Plum Wild Farm Julie Boggs of Westbrook Farm John Gunning of Gunning Family Farm • The first program is entitled, "Agricultural Niche Marketing in Jefferson County." Andy and Karen Driscoll raise and sell flowers, eggs, wool, jellies, jams and other farm related items; Julie and Chuck Boggs raise champion breeding Black Angus and John Gunning is a long-time certified organic grower. They'll each share their experiences and explain how they discovered the need for their products and addressed and developed their particular niche. The new 2008 Washington State Grange Legislative Handbook is just out and available on line. In order to become more familiar with the Grange, its beliefs, what it recommends, supports and opposes, simply follow this link and examine the positions of the state Grange... htt•://www.wa-•ran.e.or•/Le• Handbook 2008.•df If you have any questions or would like to offer suggestions, please call or drop us a note. The new Chimacum Grange phone number is (360) 732-0015. Grange vice president is Dick Bergeron in Brinnon and he can be reached at (360) 796-0132. Come to the Grange meeting on the 15th and bring a friend or neighbor with you. Refreshments will be served. I look forward to seeing you, 1/16/2008 Page 1 of 1 angela pieratt From: Neil Harrington _ _....____.� Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 4:06 PM To: Allison Arthur Cc: Susan Porto; Donna Marvin; Jean Baldwin; angela pieratt; Trish Grant; Daniel Nidzgorski Subject: Jeffco Septic Code Revision Attachments: Leader O&M Q&A February 1, 08.doc Hi Alison, Here are the answers to your questions. In a couple of places we doubled up answers and we have not received any information from Clallam County yet. The new public hearing date and time is February 14th, 5PM, Chimacum High School Auditorium. Please feel free to call me with questions and clarifications. Thanks, Neil Harrington Water Quality Program Manager Jefferson County Environmental Health 615 Sheridan St. Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 385-9411 • • 2/1/2008 Q. What's the most common question the health department is hearing frompeople concerned about the on- • site septic code issue?Tell what it is and then answer it. [Vhy do we have these new O&M requirements? Actually, O&M requirements have been around for a long time. In 1983,when"alternative" septic systems were first allowed under state code, they came with a monitoring requirement which Jefferson County implemented in 1987. In 1995,the state code required"periodic monitoring" of all septic systems (including gravity systems)by the year 2000. In 2000, Jefferson County revised its old 1977 septic code and created our O&M program. We have continued to refine this program over the years as we have learned what works well in Jefferson County. The state septic code was revised in 2005,and the O&M section of the new code went into effect on July 1, 2007. This was the first time the state code set a schedule for O&M inspections: every three years for gravity systems,and annually for all other systems. The Washington State Board of Health developed this schedule over a three-year process,which included a lot of feedback from advisory groups and public meetings. It is now our turn to update Jefferson County's existing O&M program to not only reflect the new schedule in state law,but also meet the changing needs of our communities. A the request of the public we are exploring new options such as the Homeowner Operator program,and seeking out innovative solutions to streamline the process both internally and 41111for the public. The"new" O&M requirements are just the latest adjustment to a program that has been evolving for more than twenty years. I'm interested in getting certified to inspect my own system. How does that work, and how much does it cost? The Board of Health is considering different options for the Homeowner Operator program, so the details aren't finalized yet. The options being considered differ as to which systems and how many systems a homeowner will be eligible to inspect. The basic requirements will consist of an educational component, county review and certification. We hope to develop options for the educational classes, for the Homeowner O&M,as soon as the septic revisions that allow Homeowner O&M are approved by the Jefferson County Board of Health. Q. How many failing septic systems do we have in the county? Let's take a moment to clarify what the term"failure"means to a septic system. A failure is a very strong word that we don't throw around lightly—it refers to a situation that threatens public health from inadequately treated sewage. The ultimate goal of the O&M program is to find and fix minor problems before they cause failures. In a perfect world, O&M would find all of the problems early and greatly extend the life of people's septic systems. The most dramatic examples of a failure are sewage on the surface of the ground,or sewage • backing up into a home. We get a few calls a year about this sort of problem. Most failures, however,are a lot less visible--like a leaking tank. You'll never see evidence of the problem • until you look inside the tank and see that a lot of the liquid has drained out,but this is raw sewage going directly into groundwater. We unfortunately don't have precise data on failures. We have issued at least 195 repair permits in the last three years, and we know this is an underestimate of our actual repair rate. Many of our"New System"permits were also replacing failed or problematic septic systems. These repairs are of a significant nature,often requiring the replacement of the entire septic system. We encourage homeowners to take the initiative to repair problematic systems without waiting for a clear failure such as surfacing sewage. Perhaps the most striking statistic,though,is the fact that forty percent of O&M inspections since 2001 have found some sort of a problem with the system. Many of these just require simple fixes—resetting a timer,replacing a baffle, sealing a leaking tank—but if ignored,they could overload the drainfield or allow solids to plug it up. And then we'd have a big expensive premature failure that could have been avoided. Q. Could Jefferson County bow out of following the state laws requiring septic system inspections? Jefferson County cannot simply bow out. As a local health jurisdiction,we have a legal mandate to ensure that Jefferson County complies with the state sewage code. We have to protect the health,welfare, and safety of all people in our county. • • There have been cases in other counties where septic inspectors didn't live up to that responsibility. The consequences were pretty severe: lawsuits, sanctions, and the state Department of Health taking over the septic program to make sure that it was run safely. To enact a county code that is less restrictive than state law,we would need to prove to the state Department of Health that our proposed code would do at least as good a job of protecting public health. Based on our experience with Jefferson County septic systems,we would not be able to prove that less-frequent O&M inspections would be adequate. Today's septic systems are often more complex than they were in the past,with more parts that need to be checked regularly. Forty percent of all O&M inspections in Jefferson County are finding a problem, so we cannot make an honest argument for less-frequent inspections. We are also now recognizing the potential for septic systems to contribute to environmental pollution—the twelve Puget Sound counties,and especially those along Hood Canal,are all focusing a lot of energy on creating good O&M programs. Regular O&M inspections are a critical part of good stewardship and keeping your septic system functioning properly. Q. I own an old-fashioned gravity fed septic system that was put in a long time ago. I don't even know where it is anymore. How much will it cost for me to find out where it is, and how much am I going to have to pay to have it inspected? For O&M inspections on an older gravity system,the only part of the septic system you need to find and uncover is the tank. (if your system has a pump chamber,or if it's a newer , system with monitoring ports,you need to find those as well) Please contact JCPH to see if we have information on file (an old permit,sanitary survey, or O&M inspection) to help you locate your tank. If not,many people locate their tank themselves. Start in your basement or crawl space to find where the sewer lines exit your house, and then look in that direction for some signs of a buried tank. Carefully probe or dig around a bit until you find it, and you're all set. If you prefer to have someone else do the work,most O&M Specialists can also locate your tank for you. Locating your tank will add around$30-$60 to the cost of the O&M inspection,and you only need to do it once. A gravity system needs to be inspected every three years. The PUD doesn't inspect gravity systems,and if you use JCPH we charge$274. Private O&M Specialists offer better prices than we can,however,and we encourage you to shop around, currently there are seven specialists in Jefferson County. If you are willing to enter a five-year contract,you may get a price of about$125 per inspection. Q.My septic system was put in a long time ago, and I don't have a permit. Will I be fined on top of having to get the system inspected? No, enforcement action is generally limited to landowners that refuse to take action to correct a failing system that is impacting public health. Permits were not required before • 1970,so septic systems put in before then do not need a permit to be legal. If the system was installed after 1970 without a permit,we still don't fine people. We send the owner a letter stating that JCPH cannot approve any further permits on the property until the septic system receives a permit. Often people will get their system permitted of their own accord when selling the property, or to meet the requirements for a building permit. To permit an old system,a licensed designer takes a look at the system and the soils,same as for a new permit. They submit the permit application to JCPH,including any proposed modifications to bring the system up to current code. Once we approve this retroactive permit,and the owner makes any needed modifications, the system is permitted and good to go. Q. Will there be an amnesty program for those who don't have a functioning on-site sewer system? For all intents and purposes,we have a permanent amnesty program. If your septic system has a problem,we work with you to help you fix it. We have no reason to write tickets unless you repeatedly refuse to fix a major problem, like sewage running down the side of the hill onto your neighbor's property or into a stream. And even if we do write a ticket, the judge may dismiss the ticket if you fix the problem. (It would be great if parking tickets worked the same way—just move your car and you don't have to pay the ticket.) So if at any point you find a problem with your septic system,it's safe to call us for help. We won't write a ticket;we'll help you find a solution. • Q. Will there be any programs offered to low-income property owners whose septic systems may be failing? • Yes,ShoreBank Enterprise Cascadia is a non-profit organization offering low-interest loans to replace,upgrade or repair failing or substandard septic systems. The program is open to everyone in Jefferson County regardless of income. Interest rates and monthly payments are on a sliding scale and prior credit problems can typically be overcome. For more information,visit www.sbseptic.com or call 360-427-2875. Q. I own waterfront propery and have an alternative system that has a pump. How much will it cost for me to have my system inspected and why does it have to be done annually? O&M Specialists are private contractors who set their own prices—and they're getting serious about competing for your business. The price for a private O&M inspection can vary from about$125-250 depending on the type of your system. The inspection frequency for an alternative system is determined by state code (WAC246-272A). Q. What are the fees for O&M inspections? The price for a private O&M inspection can vary from about$125-250 depending on the type of your system. O&M Specialists are private contractors who set their own prices—and they're getting serious about competing for your business. We have one O&M Specialist who has formally offered five-year contracts at a reduced rate,and this has prompted other O&M Specialists to lower their prices to compete. JCPH can give you a list of the O&M Specialists who are certified to work in our county, so shop around to find the best price and • service for your needs. If you use a private O&M Specialist,the only money the county receives is the $39 filing fee. You do have the option to have JCPH inspect your system,but at$274 we're not a very competitive option. We also cannot provide many of the services that the O&M Specialists include in their inspection price. If you have an existing PUD contract, the PUD will inspect your system for$200. Note: we are still wating for some an answer from Clallam County Q. Why does it cost$200 to take a class to inspect my own rystem? A. $200 is the cost that the Washington Onsite Sewage Association (WOSSA) has agreed on to teach homeowners a full day class and administer a test at the end for Operation and Monitoring of their systems. WOSSA is conducts training for many of the Onsite Sewage System professionals in Washington State. Other possibilities may exist for homeowner education;the county is currently looking into several options. Until the septic code revision is passed Homeowner O&M is not an option. Deciding who will teach the class, and what the cost is,is not something that will be determined by this code revision. Q. What would happen if the county doesn't enact this operation and maintenance code?Would the state • take any action against the county and if so what? [We answered this one above asking if we could bow out.] Q. Why can't the county send out a notice by mail about every public meeting and public hearing? A.All county offices comply with the Open Public Meetings Act (RCW 42.30.080)which in essence states that we provide written notice to the public through the press and media about meetings and hearings. Q. How does the septic system issue related to the clean water district that was approved as apaper district lastyear by Jefferson County Commissioners?If so, how? A.The Operation and Monitoring program,including the proposed Homeowner O&M, would have been paid for by the Clean Water District Fee. Ongoing O&M is an important way to insure that your system is operating properly thereby safeguarding water quality. Q. What happens when I sell my proper y and haven't had my septic system approved? The only time we approve a septic system is when it's first installed and we final the permit. Once that happens, the septic system is approved permanently and you never need county approval again for the life of the septic system. Septic systems do have to be inspected before selling the property,but it's perfectly legal to sell a septic system in any condition, even a failure. The inspection requirement is so the buyers know what they're getting. Often the sellers will fix problems,or get an unapproved system permitted, to attract a buyer, or a buyer will make a sale contingent on fixing the • septic. We've found that a lot of septic problems get fixed this way without the government needing to get involved. Q. How long will it take foryou to implement these new rules if they are adopted?W -the-eauny The proposed O&M requirements contain a gradual implementation process with a deadline of 2015. We estimate there are 13,500 septic systems in Jefferson County,and it would unreasonable to try and get them all inspected right away. We're spreading it out over several years. We expect most septic systems to start O&M the way they do now,either as new systems are permitted, at the sale of the property, or when applying for a building permit. • l cedural requirements apply specifically to regular meetings? The date and time of regular meetings must be established by ordinance,resolution, order, or rule,as may be required for the particular governing body.34 I If the regular meeting date falls on a holiday,the meeting must be held on the next business � day 35 What procedural requirements apply specifically to special meetings? The procedural requirements that apply to special meetings deal primarily with the notice that must be provided. These requirements,contained in RCW 42.30.080, are as follows: • A special meeting may be called by the presiding officer or by a majority of the members of the governing body.36 • Written notice must be delivered personally or by mail at least 24 hours before the time of the special meeting to: • each member of the governing body, and to • each local newspaper of general circulation and each local radio or television station that has on file with the governing body a written request to be notified of that special meeting or of all special meetings.37 34The Act does not directly address designating(in the ordinance,resolution,order,or rule designating the date and time of regular meetings) the place at which regular meetings will be held. RCW 42.30.070. However, the statutes governing the particular classes of cities,except those governing first class cities, require design ation of the site of regular council meetings. RCW 35A.12.110; 35.23.181; 35.27.270. The county statutes do not address designating the site of regular meetings. As a practical matter,counties and first class cities should also designate the site of regular meetings along with the designation of the date and time of those meetings. 35RCW 42.30.070. 36There is a conflict between the provision in RCW 42.30.080 authorizing a majority of the members of a governing body to call a special meeting and the provision for code cities in RCW 35A.12.110 authorizing three members of the city council to call a special meeting. This conflict occurs only with respect to a code city with a seven-member council,because three members is less than a majority. Since RCW 42.30.140 provides that the provisions of the Act will control in case of a conflict between it and another statute,four members of a seven-member code city council, not three,are needed to call a special meeting. 37Note that the Act does not require any notice directly to the public. Also,there may be no media with a request on file to be notified of special meetings. This does not mean,however,that the governing body need not notify the public in some way about an upcoming meeting. Statutes relating to each class of city require that cities: establish a procedure for notifying the public of upcoming hearings and the preliminary agenda for the forthcoming council meeting. Such procedure may include,but not be limited to, written notification to the city's official newspaper,publication ofa notice in the official newspaper,posting of upcoming council meeting agendas,or such other processes as the city determines will satisfy the intent of this requirement. • RCW 35A.12.160; 35.22.288; 35.23.221; 35.27.300. There is no similar statute that applies to counties. Nevertheless, counties should have procedures for notifying the public of meetings. 10 Open Public Meetings Act PUll to Discontinue MOS Inspection Program Page 1 of 1 • PUD Cutting Septic Program, Will Now Administered by Jefferson County Health Department (REVISED 1/29/2008) As of January 1, 2008, Jefferson PUD#1 will no longer issue new contracts to inspect onsite sewage systems. Regulations, new laws, rising costs and the desire for greater homeowner flexibility all contributed to the PUD's decision to discontinue the program. We urge all homeowners with onsite septic systems to carefully follow the changes to this important program. Please see the links below for up to date program information. Those who are currently under a PUD septic inspection contract can: 1) have their septic systems inspected by the PUD at the cost of$200 per inspection; 2) inspect their systems by becoming certified or; 3) hire a certified inspector. 4) go with a third party contractor being used by the County. • The administration of septic inspection program will be handled solely by the Jefferson County Health Department. If you have specific questions regarding the County's septic inspection program please call 385- 9444 and ask for Trish or Angela. Links to more information: Jefferson County Environmental Health Jefferson County Onsite Sewage Program Return to PUD Home http://pud.co.jefferson.wa.us/mos.htm 1/29/2008 11111 Response to questions from John Austin 1/22/08 1. Last years stats on repairs/failures is a little misleading considering the number from Beckett Point, so we did a calculation of what we could for the last 3 years. It appears that we have approximately 185 in the last three years. However, let me also clarifying what the term "failure" means to a septic system. A failure is a very strong word that we don't throw around lightly—it refers to a clear and immediate threat to public health. The O&M inspections are really not about finding failures, though, but about finding and fixing minor problems before they cause failures. In a perfect world, O&M would find all of the problems early and we'd never have another septic failure again. The most dramatic examples of a failure are sewage on the surface of the ground, or sewage backing up into a home. We get a few calls a year about this sort of problem. Most failures, however, are a lot less visible -- like a leaking tank. You'll never see evidence of the problem until you look inside the tank and see that a lot of the liquid has drained out,but this is raw sewage going directly into groundwater. We unfortunately don't have precise data on failures. We have issued at least 185 repair permits in the last three years, and we know this is an underestimate. Many of our"New System"permits were also repairs replacing failed or problematic septic systems. (Our database does not allow us to provide meaningful data going back ten years) • Perhaps the most striking statistic, though, is the fact that forty percent of O&M inspections since 2001 have found some sort of a problem with the system. Many of these just require simple fixes—resetting a timer, replacing a baffle, pumping the tank—but if ignored, they could overload the drainfield or allow solids to plug it up. And then we'd have a big expensive premature failure that 2. You raise a good point that it's confusing to sometimes say"Health Officer or designee" and sometimes just"Health Officer." The term "Health Officer or designee" is actually redundant, because our definition of Health Officer includes "or duly authorized representative..." Our recommendation is to remove the in-text references to designees. At this stage in the public-hearing process, however,we would request that the BOH direct us to make this clarifying change. 3. Community OSS must be managed by a public entity: "Managed" refers to who owns the system and pays for repairs. It can certainly be the private O&M Specialists who do the inspections. The state has found that homeowner associations and similar groups do not have a stable financial base to guarantee that there will always be money for repairs. Some community OSS in other counties have been in an unsafe state of failure for years before being repaired. Public entities like the PUD are much less likely to get caught with empty pockets when a drainfield needs to be replaced. 4. Failure reporting on weekends: Public-health emergencies are dealt with after hours and on weekends through the Regional Duty Officer network. A homeowner, O&M specialist, • or anyone else who observes a failure (e.g. surfacing sewage)when JCPH is closed should dial 9-1-1 and JeffCom will relay the information to the RDO. t 5. Enforcement and right-of-entry: This section is actually a reminder of our limitations;it does not give us any additional right of entry. If we don't have permission,state and federal laws severely restrict our right to enter property. It would take pages to spell out all the details,and we have a good field-safety protocol that does so. What it boils down to is that we can walk up the driveway to knock on the door, same as a UPS delivery. We cannot poke around the property without permission, and we can never,ever, enter a house without permission (unless we have a search warrant). This item was reviewed with David Alverez. His comment was as copied from the e-mail" The section should stand as currently written. It does mean what you think it means that the PH person would have to a lawful reason to go on the property-i.e., a search warrant. People will twist it however they want. David Alvarez • • Page 1 of 2 Susan Porto • From: Daniel Nidzgorski_..._...._...__,,.___ _ . — Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:59 PM To: Susan Porto Subject: FW: Septic enforcement question Regarding the section John Austin asked ab ut—enforcement and property access —Alvarez says it should be left as written. Daniel Nidzgorski Environmental Health Specialist Jefferson County Environmental Health 360-385-9407 360-379-4487 (fax) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message,including any attachments,is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged informat'on. Any unauthorized review,use,disclosure,or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,please contact t e sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. All e-mail sent to this address has been received by t e J fferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to the Public Records Act,a state law found at RCW 42.56. Unde tl e Public Records law the County must release this e-mail and its contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy(or for insp ti n)of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from disclosure under state law, including RCW 42.56. • From: David Alvarez Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:41 PM To: Daniel Nidzgorski Subject: RE: Septic enforcement question The section should stand as currently writt n. It does mean what you think it means that the PH person would have to a lawful reason to go on the property-i.e., a search warrant. People will twist it however they want. David Alvarez From: Daniel Nidzgorski Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 12:22 PM To: David Alvarez Subject: Septic enforcement question David, John Austin has raised a question about a s tion of our septic-code enforcement section There was some flak from members of the public erroneous) ci aiming that our new septic code would give us the authority to come in and inspect any time during our • king hours. They didn't cite this section, but we think that their allegation was on John's mind when h r..sed a question about 180(3)c. 8.15.180(3)c If permirsion to enter said building, structure,prope i r portion thereof is not obtained from the owner, occupier or other • persons having apparent control of said building, st ct re,property or portion thereof the inspector may enter said building, structure,property or portion therof only if the entry in i the building, structure, or pryper0 is consistent with applicable state and federal law. 1/31/2008 Page 2 of 2 Our read is that this section is limiting our alif ility to enter—a reminder that we cannot enter without permission unless it's legal to do so—but most people don't realize how rare it is that it's legal to do so. . We're happy to explain and defend it as written but we wanted to check with you first for legal advice. Does this section need any amending, or is i good as it stands? It would take many pages to explain "consistent with applicable...laws" so our t tight is that it's appropriate code language to leave it as is and not try any further explanation within the co e. Daniel Nidzgorski Environmental Health Specialist Jefferson County Environmental Health 360-385-9407 360-379-4487 (fax) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail mess•ge,including any attachments,is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged informa ion! Any unauthorized review,use,disclosure,or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,please contact e 4nder by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. All e-mail sent to this address has been received by t e Jefferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to the Public Records Act,a state law found at RCW 42.56. Und the Public Records law the County must release this e-mail and its contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy(or for insp. tion)of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from disclosure under state law, including RCW 42.56. • • 1/31/2008 Page 1 of 1 /, 0 Susan Porto r-44,0-' if ,, ____ 4, /� _ , • From: Daniel Nidzgorski ' / Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 1:0e P'M To: Susan Porto Subject: Austin's questions 1) You raise a good point that it's confusing to sometimes say"Health Officer or designee" and sometimes just "Health Officer." The term "Health Officer or designee"is actually redundant, because our definition of Health Officer includes "or duly authorized representative..." Our recommendation is to remove the in-tett references to designees. At this stage in the public-hearing process, however,we would request that the BOH direct us to make this clarifying change. 2) Community OSS must be managed by a public entity: "Managed" refers to who owns the system and pays for repairs. It can certainlybe,the private O&M Specialists who do the inspections. The state has found that homeowner associations and similar groups do not have a stable financial base to guarantee that there will always be money for repairs. Some community OSS in other counties have been in an unsafe state of failurje for years before being repaired. Public entities like the PUD are much less likely to get caught with empty pockets when a drainfield needs to be replaced. 3) Failure reporting on weekends: Pubic-health emergencies are dealt with after hours and on weekends through the Regional Duty Officer network. A homeowner, O&M specialist, or anyone else who observes a failure (e.g. surfskcing sewage) when JCPH is closed should dial 9-1-1 and JeffCom will relay the information to the RDO. 4) Enforcement and right-of-entry: This section is actually a reminder of our limitations; it does not • give us any additional right of entry. If we don't have permission, state and federal laws severely restrict our right to enter property. t Would take pages to spell out all the details, and we have a good field-safety protocol that doeso., What it boils down to is that we can walk up the driveway to knock on the door, same as a UPS delivery. We cannot poke around the property without permission,and we can never, ever,enter a house without permission (unless we have a search warrant). i 1 Daniel Nidzgorski Environmental Health Specialist 1 Jefferson County Environmental Health 360-385-9407 360-379-4487 (fax) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message,including any attachments,is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review,use,disclosure,or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. All e-mail sent to this address has been received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to the Public Records Act,a state law found at RCW 42.56. Undr the Public Records law the County must release this e-mail and its contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy(or for inspection) of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from disclosure under state law, including RCW 42.56. • 1/31/2008 From: Susan Porto • Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 4:46 PM To: 'Mountain Coalition' Cc: Neil Harrington; Jean Baldwin Subject: FW: Reminder about requested septic system info Importance: High Mr. Bergeron: You asked me, on 12/17/08, the following questions: 1. In last 10 years how many failures do we know about? 2. Of these failures, how many were caught as a result of an evaluation of the septic system through the EES program? 3. How many are still in a failed status? You then requested that I talk with Dr. Locke because you had asked these questions during the brief meeting of the Board on 12/17/08, and felt like maybe he had taken notes and would have additional questions to be answered. Dr. Locke is out of town, and currently unavailable. As soon as I can, I will ask him if he has other clarifications. First, let me preface the answers by clarifying what the term "failure" means to a septic system. A failure is a very strong word that we don't throw around lightly—it refers to a clear and immediate threat to public health. The O&M inspections are really not about • finding failures, though, but about finding and fixing minor problems before they cause failures. In a perfect world, O&M would find all of the problems early and we'd never have another septic failure again. The most dramatic examples of a failure are sewage on the surface of the ground, or sewage backing up into a home. We get a few calls a year about this sort of problem. Most failures, however, are a lot less visible -- like a leaking tank. You'll never see evidence of the problem until you look inside the tank and see that a lot of the liquid has drained out, but this is raw sewage going directly into groundwater. Data on "failures" is mixed with data on "problems". We have issued at least 185 repair permits in the last three years, and this is an underestimate. Many of our"New System" permits were also repairs replacing failed or problematic septic systems. (Our database does not allow us to provide data for the last ten years) Perhaps the most striking statistic, though, is the fact that forty percent of O&M inspections since 2001 have found some sort of a problem with the system. Many of these just require simple fixes — resetting a timer, replacing a baffle, pumping the tank— but if ignored, they could overload the drainfield or allow solids to plug it up. And then we'd have a big expensive premature failure that could have been avoided. We are not able to isolate how many of the failures versus problems were found through an O&M inspection. We have been working to improve our ability to track failures and repairs. We ask ourselves the same questions you raised, and realize that we need a • more comprehensive tracking method. We really cannot answer your third question, how many systems are currently in a state of failure. Individual homeowners are responsible for their systems and we may not be notified of failures. Our"violation" status includes a variety of other issues besides failures —living on a property without a legal septic; installations without permits; unresolved parcel-boundary disputes related to the septic system location, etc. There are the sixty-four current septic violations, many of those are actual failures. Thank you for your questions. We are making the information in this response publicly available through our JCPH blog (http://jcph.livejournal.com) which contains many additional questions and answers about our program in general. Please feel free to give me a call anytime. We are all committed to be as responsive as possible! Susan Porto, R.S. Jefferson County Public Health (360) 385-9444 fax (360) 379-4487 Always working for a safer and healthier Jefferson County CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments,is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,disclosure,or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. All e-mail sent to this address has been received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to the Public Records Act,a state law found at RCW 42.56. Under the Public Records law the • County must release this e-mail and its contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy(or for inspection) of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from disclosure under state law, including RCW 42.56. From: Susan Porto Sent:Tuesday, January 29, 2008 5:43 PM To: 'Mountain Coalition' Cc: Neil Harrington Subject: RE: Reminder about requested septic system info Mr. Bergeron, Thank you for your patience! And I finally think I am getting better, whew, this was the sickest I have been in a long time! My can't feel too sorry for myself, as it seems I know I am not the only one that has been fighting this bug! Your request has been on my"list" of items to complete this week. I have already started coming up with the answers, and will be meeting with staff tomorrow afternoon to double check the figures. I will e-mail you either tomorrow or Thursday at the latest. Again, thank you for your patience. Susan Porto, R.S. Jefferson County Public Health (360) 385-9444 fax (360) 379-4487 Always working for a safer and healthier Jefferson County CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, 1111 use,disclosure,or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,please contact the sender • by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. All e-mail sent to this address has been received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to the Public Records Act,a state law found at RCW 42.56. Under the Public Records law the County must release this e-mail and its contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy(or for inspection) of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from disclosure under state law,including RCW 42.56. From: Mountain Coalition [mailto:mountaincoalition@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 4:00 PM To: Susan Porto Cc: Neil Harrington Subject: Reminder about requested septic system info Hi Susan, Neil said you had been under the weather last week. Hope you're better and will have time to gather that information I had asked for about malfunctioning septic systems. Thanks, Dick Bergeron President, Mountain Coalition P. 0. Box 601 Brinnon, WA 98320 • (360)796-0132 P. 0. Box 65 Mountain Center, CA 92561 email: mountaincoalition@yahoo.com Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. • Page 1 of 2 angela pieratt • From: Jean Baldwin Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 3:32 PM To: angela pieratt; Susan Porto Cc: Neil Harrington Subject: FW: mos Fro the file Angie Jean Baldwin MSN Director Jefferson County Public Health 615 Sheridan Port Townsend, WA 98368 360-385-9408 j_effersoncountypublichealth,orgL Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message,including any attachments,is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review,use,disclosure,or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. All e-mail sent to this address as been received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to the Public Records Act,a state law found at RCW 42.56. Under the Public Records law the County must release this e-mail and its contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy(or for inspection)of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from disclosure under state law,including RCW 42.56. From: Jean Baldwin Sent: Monday,January 28, 2008 3:32 PM To: 'kinghyd@olypen.com' Cc: Jim Parker Subject: FW: mos Wayne, Good luck thanks for asking. My thoughts are in blue. Jean Jean Baldwin MSN Jefferson County Public Health 615 Sheridan Port Townsend From: wayne king [mailto:kinghyd@olypen.com] Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 12:04 PM To: Jean Baldwin; Jim Parker Cc: Neil Harrington Subject: mos Good Morning.lf you made it to work!! A little slippery out here in Gardiner. In preparing for my Grange talk this evening. After talking with Jim Parker this morning I need to clarify the following. 1 $37.00 Filing fee—$37 is the 2007 filing fee, presently paid by professionals with the submittal of all Evaluation of Existing System (EES's). This fee has changed in 2008 to $39 and is paid with the submittal of all EES's. The proposed changes to the fee schedule differentiate between electronic and paper filing of EES's. The electronic filing will only be available to professionals, homeowner inspections will require a paper submittal. 41) Electronic Filing Fee of$39--(Available to professionals through electronic submittal via eOnsite.) Paper Filing Fee of$46--(Option available for homeonwers) 2 $7.00 Staff time—This is not a separate fee, this additional staff time is included in the Paper filing 1/30/2008 Page 2 of 2 fee 3 $97.00 Permit—This is not a permit. This is the fee proposed for Homeowner Operator as O&M • Homeowner Certification. This will be valid for 3 years. My questions are: #1 Is this a one time fee??? Or will this be charged each time of inspection?? $37 is the 2007 filing fee (yearly or every three years), presently paid by professionals with the submittal of all Evaluation of Existing System (EES's). This fee has changed in 2008 to$39 and is paid with the submittal of all EES's. So using the filing fee this looks like: The proposed changes to the fee schedule differentiate between electronic and paper filing of EES's. The electronic filing will only be available to professionals; homeowner inspections will require a paper submittal. Electronic Filing Fee of$39–(Available to professionals through electronic submittal via eOnsite.) Paper Filing Fee of$46--(JCPH enters the inspection info for the electronic system for homeowners) #2 It this also a one time fee??? $7 Or will this also be each time of inspection. Evaluation of Existing System/Monitoring Inspection: At each inspection Filing Fee–Paper$46 (Option available for homeonwers) Is the$39 plus the $7 #3 Is this the Certification Fee??? Or what is this Fee for?? Will it be a one time charge. This is the fee proposed for the Homeowner Operator as O&M Homeowner Certification. This will be valid for 3 years. By contrast, the licensed O&M specialist, pumpers, & installer pay initial certification fee of$369, which includes testing though our office, then a yearly renewal $260. • The other question is about the $200.00 Training fee. Will this person be able to do more than one system other than his own. Mike had said that once Certified you could do more than one system. Lots of chatter on this. This is something that the Board of Health will decide. They are reviewing choices of how many systems each home owner can inspect. If you could lend us a hand, please emphasis that O&M is meant as a preventative measure for keeping systems from failing and not for the sole purpose of identifying failures. Also the rolling schedule will require all county implementation by 2015. All new building permits and sale of property are already on a monitoring schedule, that is how we will continue. Also don't forget that most folks will qualify for Shorebank for identified repairs. Thanks Wayne King Jefferson County PUD Commissioner District#3 Home 797-7491 www.jeffpud.orrg 1/30/2008 Page 1 of 1 angela pieratt • From: Neil Harrington Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 12:46 PM To: angela pieratt Subject: FW: JCC 8.15 page 1 of 2 Attachments: My Document Name.jpg And there is one more too. Neil Harrington Water Quality Program Manager Jefferson County Environmental Health 615 Sheridan St. Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 385-9411 From: John W Mc Duff[mailto:jwmd43@embargmail.com] Sent: Wednesday,January 23, 2008 12:18 PM To: Neil Harrington Subject: RE: JCC 8.15 page 1 of 2 Please inform me of the next meeting time and place when available. . • 1/23/2008 Page 1 of 1 angela pieratt From: Neil Harrington • Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 12:53 PM To: angela pieratt Subject: FW: JCC 8.15 page 2 of 2 Attachments: My Document Name.jpg FYI Neil Harrington Water Quality Program Manager Jefferson County Environmental Health 615 Sheridan St. Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 385-9411 From: John W Mc Duff[mailto:jwmd43@embargmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 12:23 PM To: Neil Harrington Subject: JCC 8.15 page 2 of 2 . 1/23/2008 Response to the evision of WAC 246-242A dated 07101/07. Vin ,Jeterson eutinty code S.15. l-There h MA hOeti i Mirtat1r.J01turn the Slate ofw::,,mbingiortheauti depastrnent when asked to drirovidc some kind of ovidenoc that these septie•SySterili MC in n=d of inspection. The$tate has, inclica;cd that state funding to The toorrty uvula be interrupted if we did not respond to WAC 246-242A as the state has requestod. 1 he first th ing needed to he done is to find viable prnof that these i nspection"3 have to be. 'rhe [woof that these septic,'s are Ibiling aria in need of inspe:lions lies on the 'date since it is the state that has made this change 1-muds:wry_ 2- Lail be known that the.current plan for charging home owners,and using contract= i ni..4 awl:able by Jefferson canary residence's. 3- Fenn a comity of ail interested parties includiiv a cross section.of home OVirlen. 4- floe the home ownerS curl ifitAtioa done by cooly irtspeetot . Using out 1:10 zontmetors is a cantliet of inte.r it. since county iaspectors haveLx agprovc these septics that are gready inspected by these very sane ins:wtors. Unless the county inspectors have just been signing the off and net inspecting, gir Jefferson county to apply far grants where needed to help with funding. her is tto need fur the pccipto of the county to have to pay one red cent when grant mon for this project,i available a the slate level .ANk Ciallaxn county. 6- Currently, using outside, enflkI of interest contakatin, we pay twice Muoh to get certified to be anhispector than to have our system inspected. There is no need for cost to be put on the home owner. 7-Quality assurance can be dont by spot cheas done by counq peg Unless they foul that just rnighl add k much Lu thei mrcra work load.. It has been determined that the county septic;inspeetors are the once Ntho came up with the current; use contractors and charge the customer, plan. If the intoi believe it is cheaper to use conzxactots than,for them to teach and spot check, anzit perhaps we need Lurrt there jabs OVti. iti Wiltia4;1131S- Iti licapez fur the wanly ti hire another employee than to implement tiere current septic tank One of 1w thins need to happen. Tfie county put firth effort ro implement a symtern that does not cost the home owner as Clallant vomit):hes.. 2-Ranove till health dopattimmit pommel and replacc ‘N.ith those who will hold th gid ate peopfie lathe county rust and foremost Mewscut—ts lu to:, a compkite lack attiring ft it tho pitoplo of tlxcounty and vbat these people ,. .. ,. - , ....-.,-• a.,., ,_j ,4). ;10, , - w p,, s' tet,s',•r' ,u.." =,..,-. ,,,,,,,1 in.,-- ri..; ,-,,- ...44, 4.,t. *1010_,, r7}*'• --1, niso0 rc,ai .. up' -...--.1,,,A7— ...., ' •1.,.. -. 0.: 1.-1. . :,--1 -,.-:, .0 tj 7 , - . 410 , 0 -',•,.ff . Z-6 ' ', C, - tti , 0 , , „ 7-4 ft 17 71) tasfil •, cal, /.... 0 • ' t•--i ,L', AT' g et? ..,,..d. Q n ,d: : ot, c,... IN p !L..... t...4, , c tb r, , w . .._, 0 , .: . 4.‘ t M n 'rt..,- r* , "I -rt , ,--- -- i.••,- A. =, - -p- .0. ,... w • ite to . imni sr rei . 12 e•-i .A' e w ga M„ 'r..P ,-,..,061h e,,, -..... -p..,- -....' &NIMBI A 1 k. rj P. d .K. '-o ,: `,•?, ....., f74 F>'"r' • ,mgo,'Z M. 12' (1) 4 Vi- - '0 0 54 0 - , .6 + ft- et . 0. . ..-• re) .,. - .. , . tg-- _,. -4, 0, • ' 8 ,.... — - 9.,:t . ,...... ,,,,„ ... 1-+- , 0 IV fri, PP nt Vett tt, 6,0 w.113 l'i CO. pr. . , it 0 Ki ,p-- ,,...., . ". 47 4'..!,c, ,-r.... ill 0 2 rip''-- g '--.41-..' P In to g rE7-7, e•-s, a * - - ,,,*„ :-0.J - , - N. ..f• • (it 0 -i-7- 4„ ram 7111Pr F r ''''' E ri "I ;V-, 47,.; CO liti-I, .1‘''' ' , ,,r. ,•1•, — , Q . ,-(1,- V .6 m. ro3 0 -, er G. - r , • I- Mcw ,r.ww..., lt4te po F.42 eL p . se, tt.,,' 00 am mi, 1 LI . P --Z itC4'kti 0 , ,, ... 1F- ---, ' FT) T, b . ...... , g " r.-.4 . 74.,,ei ,, .t1117 = P , PI ;--L,, M" P" rro r 004..,96. i R. pMEW leo 0„, ,,.. , 9e _ .... , ID iL-4., ei .., . — .4 .s.g r r r . 0 3 r ' '7.5:.,..' Par r?:8 qr ,,INIRro En IIIIV ..rti g •, „)... ire it 'ri5 e4 g -ta„ a 0 17,10 .4tt, Da irg R . ....1 -..." r :4 1 ir rld g P = . ho 5! Li3 A C3 Cre• F; re 75- 0 —p g M t, 5 Pum,„ ram . 2e* 6 En" ^.% .,,,, ' Ler , . t ir.it. _Z' , eb , C teil i....„001 tni , gm 1 , =#,.,' m. 4r, ...... • 0*' e., ' L 4-4, • Jefferson County Health Dept. January 17, 2008 615 Sheridan St. Port townsend, Wa. 98368 Director Jean Baldwin, I strongly support the recent state proposal to mandate regular septic system inspections. Failing septic systems is a major contributor to the degradation of our environment. Property owners should be held accountable to achieve a higher standard of efficiency of their on-site systems. Offering homeowners the option to take a class to learn how to test their own system is commendable but the price for a one-day class seems excessive. Does the $200.00 fee include the purchase of special equipment, transportation to a on-site system or some other additional expense? I vail to understand how a few hours of class time would • require such a high fee. I am aware that the PUD is offering financial assistance to low-income individuals but what about those who do not qualify for assistance and are struggling financially? The high fee for this class could be prohibitive for many homeowners and result in noncompliance. I would appreciate any information you have on the need for a $200.00 class fee and if it is possible to reduce it. Respectfully, /Joanne Pickering 8865 Flagler Rd. Nordland, Wa. 98358 • -- JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH 14'N 1-4',° at„o° 615 Sheridan Street • Port Townsend •Washington • 98368 www.jeffersoncountypublichealth.org • January 24, 2008 Joanne Pickering 8865 Flagler Rd. Nordland, WA 98358 Dear Ms. Pickering, Thank you for your interest and support regarding the changes to the septic regulations. The next few lines are a brief overview of the changes--The changes to the Operation and Monitoring Program are driven by the July 2007 changes to the State Code, WAC246-272A. These changes increased the monitoring frequency for on-site septic systems. The July '07 changes made the State Code more restrictive than the current • County Code, JCC 8.15. Per State Code, the County is required to have a system in place for the tracking of the Operations and Monitoring (O&M) of all onsite sewage systems. Over the past 15 years the PUD filled this role. The PUD no longer wants to perform the Operations and Monitoring of Onsite Sewage Systems resulting in the proposal by Jefferson County Public Health (JCPH) for homeowner training and certification as an option to satisfy the State requirements. As you noted the option for homeowner O&M is very innovative, this County would be one of the first in the State to implement such an option. Homeowner operator O&M was requested by citizens as a proactive way to implement the state law while meeting the needs of Jefferson County residents. . Regarding your questions, the fees for the homeowner training are set by a private organization, Washington Onsite Sewage Association (WOSSA). You are correct; the one day training will cost $200 this price was negotiated by past director, Mike McNickle. The PUD will be offering scholarships for low-income citizens in Jefferson County. WOSSA is a private organization that provides training to industry professionals and these classes typically cost significantly more. These courses will be approximately 6 hours in length with instruction provided by industry professionals. System specific resource documents will be provided for the homeowner, safety information and an examination are included. This fee does not include transportation or the purchase of special equipment; the equipment necessary to perform an inspection will be the responsibility of the homeowner. The cost for the course does not cover the County fee for certification, an additional fee of$98 has been proposed for the review of case information (as there are limits in place as to which properties are eligible for homeowner operation and monitoring). The courses will be held locally in a classroom setting with field examples. We are working with WOSSA to develop the criteria. Each class will be system specific; e.g. Gravity, mound/sandfilter, pressure distribution etc. We are working with proprietary product manufacturers to allow for homeowner inspection of these devices. COMMUNITY HEALTH PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH HEALTH • DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES AL4,,,�`,.WOR FOR J,�iFF( ND WATER QUALITY MAIN: 360385-9400 MAIN: 360-385-9444 FAX: 360-385-9401 HEALTHIER COMMUNITY FAX: 360379-4487 Page 1 of 2 Homeowners will submit their reports on paper forms, with required fees, and these • reports will be reviewed by JCPH upon receipt. The accuracy of these reports will be on the word of the homeowner; however, this department will have a quality improvement audit system to review reports, professional and homeowner. This will involve a site visit by a county Environmental Health Specialist to verify site and system conditions. Should reports submitted be inaccurate or falsified the individual's certification will be revoked. It should also be noted that Third party professional inspections will still be required at various triggering events, the initial inspection of the system, and as is presently the case, at the time of sale and for some building permits. There are also specific site characteristics that preclude the homeowner from performing the O&M on their system, see DRAFT JCC 8.15.150(10). JCPH has tried to minimize the cost of implementing this program and intends on utilizing the services of eOnsite to help in managing the increased workload. This is a web based platform that will allow for the electronic submittal of evaluations and fees. Streamlining this process for professionals and JCPH will be very beneficial. This will allow for reduced receipting, routing, data entry, & review time for staff--plus the information will automatically update the associated septic operation and monitoring case with inspection information and alert County reviewer to deficiencies. Please do not hesitate to call me directly if you would like to discuss this matter further, 379-4489. Sincerely, • Angela Pieratt Environmental Health Specialist Jefferson County Health Department p 360.379.4489 f 360.379.4487 . COMMUNITY HEALTH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES PUBLIC HEALTH ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH NATURAL RESOURCES MAIN:360-385-9400 ALWAYS WORKING FOR A SAFER AND MAIN: 360-385-9444 FAX: 360-385-9401 HEALTHIER COMMUNITY FAX: 360-385-9401 Page 2 of 2 hearing on septic ordinance Page 1 of 2 angela pieratt • From: Susan Porto Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 5:44 PM To: Neil Harrington Cc: Linda Atkins; angela pieratt; Daniel Nidzgorski Subject: FW: hearing on septic ordinance Susan Porto, R.S. Jefferson County Public Health (360) 385-9444 fax (360) 379-4487 Always working for a safer and healthier Jefferson County CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message,including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review,use,disclosure,or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. All e-mail sent to this address has been received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to the Public Records Act,a state law found at RCW 42.56. Under the Public Records law the County must release this e-mail and its contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy(or for inspection)of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from disclosure under state law, including RCW 42.56. From:jim parker [mailto:jparker@jeffpud.org] • Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 1:32 PM To: Susan Porto Cc:jim parker Subject: RE: hearing on septic ordinance Thanks. Again I am on your side, if there are sides, so please do not take this the wrong way. Is the wac 246-272a? If so it would appear wac 46-272a-0270 describes the owner responsibilities, I do not see anywhere where the county is responsible for ensuring how or by whom. There are spots requiring the health department to develop a plan, but it seems to make the owner responsible: It state: OSS owner is responsible for operating, monitoring, and maintaining the OSS and shall Obtain permission before repairing, altering or expanding Renew contracts fro periodic maintenance where required Obtain permit if required Assure a complete evaluation annually and every three years depending on type Employ approved pumper Provide maintenance Protect the OSS area Keep flows at approved levels Operate and maintain as directed Request assistance from local health officer upon occurrence At time of property transfer—seller disclosure and records • Also there is a technical advisory committee is required by wac 246-272a-0400. is that the local health department. Is the PUD on that committee? 1/31/2008 hearing on septic ordinance Page 2 of 2 Same with the policy committee? Oh wayne had bill drop the "good memo"from our web site today, so if you need the"good" memo for your records let me know. • Thanks Jim Original Message From: Susan Porto [mailto:sporto@co.jefferson.wa.us] Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 1:04 PM To:jim parker Cc: Jean Baldwin; Neil Harrington Subject: RE: hearing on septic ordinance Feb 14th, 5:00 at Chimacum School. Susan Porto, R.S. Jefferson County Public Health (360) 385-9444 fax(360) 379-4487 Always working for a safer and healthier Jefferson County CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message,including any attachments,is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review,use,disclosure,or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. All e-mail sent to this address has been received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to the Public Records Act,a state law found at RCW 42.56. Under the Public Records law the County must release • this e-mail and its contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy(or for inspection)of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from disclosure under state law,including RCW 42.56. From:jim parker [mailto:jparker@jeffpud.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 8:45 AM To: Susan Porto Subject: hearing on septic ordinance Susan when and where is the hearing on the septic rules? Thanks Jim • 1/31/2008 Page 1 of 3 angela pieratt • From: Hiatt-Pratt[priatt@olympus.net] Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 8:45 PM To: angela pieratt Subject: Re: new septic regulations Dear Angela, Thank you very much for your detailed answers to my questions. It has certainly helped my understanding of the proposed homeowner inspection process. I'll forward this to colleagues to help get the word out. You say: A professional inspection is required for the initial inspection of all systems. This goes a long way toward reassuring me that failing, damaged or otherwise inadequate systems will be identified. (I have to confess my suspicion that the 30 year old system on my own property wouldn't pass that initial inspection on the basis of the current code. We know we're heading toward replacement within the next few years. I wonder how many hundreds of others are in a similar situation!) Amy Original Message From: angela pieratt<apieratt@co.jefferson.wa.us> To: priatt@olympus.net<priatt@olympus.net> Cc: Jean Baldwin<jbaldwin@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Susan Porto<sporto@co.jefferson.wa.us> Date: Tuesday,January 22,2008 4:12 PM Subject: RE: new septic regulations Dear Amy, Thank you for your interest and support regarding the changes to the septic regulations. The next few lines are a brief overview of the changes--The changes to the Operation and Monitoring Program are driven by the July 2007 changes to the State Code, WAC246-272A. These changes increased the monitoring frequency for on- site septic systems. The July '07 changes made the State Code more restrictive than the current County Code, JCC 8.15. Per State Code, the County is required to have a system in place for the tracking of the Operations and Monitoring (O&M)of all onsite sewage systems. Over the past 15 years the PUD filled this role. The PUD no longer wants to perform the Operations and Monitoring of Onsite Sewage Systems resulting in the proposal by JCPH for homeowner training and certification as an option to satisfy the State requirements. As you noted the option for homeowner O&M is very innovative, this County would be the first in the State to implement such an option. Homeowner operator O&M was requested by citizens as a proactive way to implement the state law while meeting the needs of Jefferson County residents. As a part of the revisions to the code this department has had similar concerns of abuse and has taken this into account in recommending to the Board of Health that the changes in the code limit the number of systems that can be monitored by a homeowner to that of a resident owner. Regarding your other questions: • Why does the course cost so much? The fees are set by a private organization. You are • correct; the one day training will cost$200 this price was negotiated by our recently departed director, Mike McNickle. The PUD will be offering scholarships for low-income citizens and Clallam County has applied for a grant which may be available to homeowners in Jefferson County. WOSSA(Washington On-site Sewage Association) is a private organization that provides training to 1/23/2008 Page 2 of 3 , industry professionals and their classes typically cost significantly more. These courses will be approximately 6 hours in length with instruction provided by industry professionals. System specific resource documents will be provided for the homeowner, safety information and an examination are included. The cost for the course does not cover the County fee for certification, an additional fee of $98 has been proposed for the review of case information (as there are limits in place as to which • properties are eligible for homeowner operation and monitoring). • Is the course given in a classroom, or is it one-on-one at the homeowner's property? The courses will be held locally in a classroom setting with field examples. We are working with WOSSA to develop the criteria. Each class will be system specific; e.g. Gravity, mound/sandfilter, pressure distribution etc. We are working with proprietary product manufacturers to allow for homeowner inspection of these devices. • If it is site-specific, does it also qualify as an inspection of that system for the one year or three year inspection period? I am not clear on your question. It sounds as though you are asking; if the education is a one-on-one situation would this training satisfy an inspection...if this is what you are asking then this does not apply as there will not be one-on-one trainings. However, it would be advisable for a homeowner interested in performing their own O&M to shadow a professional during their initial inspection. A professional inspection is required for the initial inspection of all systems. • How will the Department monitor the inspection reports of homeowners? Homeowners will submit their reports on paper forms, with required fees, and these reports will be reviewed by JCPH upon receipt. • How will you know that the inspections are being done correctly and the results reported honestly? Great question. Much of this will be on the word of the homeowner; however, this department will have a quality improvement audit system to review reports, professional and homeowner. This will involve a site visit by a county Environmental Health Specialist to verify site and system conditions. Should reports submitted be inaccurate or falsified the individual's • certification will be revoked. It should also be noted that Third party professional inspections will still be required at various triggering events, as is presently the case, at the time of sale and for some building permits. There are also specific site characteristics that preclude the homeowner from performing the O&M on their system, see DRAFT JCC 8.15.150(10). JCPH intends on utilizing the services of eOnsite to help in managing the increased workload. This is a web based platform that will allow for the electronic submittal of evaluations and fees. Streamlining this process for professionals and JCPH will be very beneficial. This will allow for reduced receipting, routing, data entry, & review time for staff—plus the information will automatically update the associated septic operation and monitoring case with inspection information and alert County reviewer to deficiencies. Please do not hesitate to call me directly if you would like to discuss this matter further, 379-4489. Best regards, 4/a / Ref.aer X Environmental Health Specialist Jefferson County Health Department 615 Sheridan Street Port Townsend WA 98368 p 360.379.4489 f 360.379.4487 JCPH : Working for a safer and healthier Jefferson County! CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:This e-mail message,including any attachments,is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review,use,disclosure,or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the • intended recipient,please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. All e-mail sent to this address has been received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to the Public Records Act, 1/23/2008 Page3o a state law found at RCW 42.56. Under the Public Records law the County must release this e-mail and its contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy(or for inspection)of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from disclosure under state law,including RCW 42.56. • _ From: Hiatt-Pratt [mailto:priatt@olympus.net] Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 8:24 AM To: director@jeffersoncountypublichealth.org Subject: new septic regulations Ms. Baldwin, I wasn't at your meeting last Thursday re. the new septic system regulations but I have read the recent PDN articles by Jeff Chew. I support what you are doing and sincerely hope that your process will not be derailed by the opposition the way others have, such as the Critical Areas update and the Clean Water District. I think the option of allowing homeowners to monitor their own systems is particularly innovative, although I fear that it may end up being badly abused by some. Jeff Chew's articles note that the one day training to be offered will cost $200, and that Jim Parker or Angela Peratt can be contacted for more information. I haven't called either of them but I have looked at the web-site. Some questions still in my mind are: • Why does the course cost so much? • Is the course given in a classroom, or is it one-on-one at the homeowner's property? • • If it is site-specific, does it also qualify as an inspection of that system for the one year or three year inspection period? • How will the Department monitor the inspection reports of homeowners? How will you know that the inspections are being done correctly and the results reported honestly? Thanks very much, Amy Hiatt 234 Sand Road Port Townsend, WA 98368 360-385-1172 priatt(a,olympus.net • 1/23/2008