Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM060679 CQMMUNICABLE PUBLIC WEALTH HOME VITAL ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH - DISEASE CONTROL NURSING NURSING STATISTICS HEALTH EDUCATION tt • 71 , ...e. „, .. ;:i 7 5. .. 6..-,-.Z''46,b,.. r.—, -0.."'""....T.T. .". <,..."--"'„..-- --%%•-4,v' IP `. . t -, JEFFERSON COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT } 1 902 SHERIDAN PORT TOWNSEND,WASH.MSS .(20B)38S-0722 BOARD OF HEALTH MEETING HEALTH DEPARTMENT CONFERENCE ROOM BOARD MEMBERS: STAFF MEMBERS: B. G. Brown, Member • Randall M. Durant, A.S. ' ,A. M. O`Meara, Chairman Phyllis Bee, P.H.N. Carroll M. Mercer, Member Joseph Fischnaller, M.D. Gael Stuart, Administrator MINUTES June 6, 1979 9:30 a.m. Meeting called to order by Chairman A. M. O'P ears with all members present. . MINUTES: The minutes of May 2, 1979 were approved by motion of Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Mercer. Unanimous. 4. CORRESPONDENCE: 1. Letter from John H. Laubach on Senate Bill 2411 which provides for defense ` of county employees named in liability suits. If the County Commissioners are convinced that the employee acted within the scope of is official duties they can provide for defense (attachment #1). i OLD BUSINESS: 1 1. The proposed budget extension for $11,800 was presented. After discussion Commissioner Mercer moved and Commissioner Brown seconded that the budget extension be set into the form of a resolution and public hearing date be set at the regular meeting of the County Commissioners to-be held-June 11, 1979 (attachment #2) . 2. Letter to Mr. Strickland from Randy Durant requesting permission to dve test the septic tank and drainfield (attachment #3) . Randy reported no response to the letter. NEW BUSINESS: 1. The professional employees of the Health Department wish to explore the adoption of a professional salary scale similar to the State Merit System. The Commissioners stated that there was nothing in the County contract with the union that would prevent this. The union negotiates only for the Road Department and the Sheriff Department. A professional salary scale will be developed for discussion. 2. The mileage reimbursement rate has been raised to .17t per mile. REPORTS: 1. Public Health Nurse; Phyllis Bee a) Report of Nursing Services (attachment #4) Activities of the nursing staff are increasing in every area. Concern was expressed by Dr. Fisch- 1 nailer and Mrs. Bee about the new immunization legislation and the r burden placed upon the school to provide for record keeping. There has been an increase in cases of tuberculosis. The scoliosis testing is now completed in the schools. b) There was a program audit on W.I.C. May 21-21, 1979. Mrs. Bee reported that the audit came out well, - „_ 2. Environmental Health; Randy Durant a) Activities Report (attachment #5) • ter... amomweewea Board of Health Meeting June 6, 1979. Page 2' • b) Randy reported that he is working with the city, mapping where the septic fanks and drainfipids are located around the lagoon area within the City. c) Results from the. Donald's sewage system. First tests results returned on the suspended solids --- 570, almost twices as much as a normal system. Tests will be taken over the next six months. d) Letter was sent to Thousand Trails informing them that they should not continue to remove material from their drainfield area. Durant will have to retest the drainfield area. e) Seaview Estates (discussed at the May 2, 1979 meeting) . Mr. Durant reported another failing system in addition to the original one discussed at last month's meeting. These two residents are going to talk with their neighbors and to the city about getting the sewer extended to • the plat. Durant suggests that,until they find out for sure whether its E ible to extend the sewer, the:County not approve anymore systems or on-site evaluations. The Board agreed with Mr. Durants sug gestion f) Letter to Mr. & Mrs. Richard P. Thornton regarding a proposed travel trailer park, Olympic Canal Tract area, Brinnon (attachment # 6) . Durant brought in the Jefferson County Ordinance No. 2-77 paragraph 1.2 stating that every place where persons congregate to which a public sewage system is not available, shall be provided with a water-flush toilet system connected to an On-Site Disposal System or shall have an alternate device for the disposal of domestic wastes. Randy reported that he has heard nothing from the Thornton's since the March 5, 1979 letter. Dr. Fischnaller suggests having the Prosecuting Attorney write Mr. Thornton pointing out that he has not used the proper procedures and the sign for his park suggests he is acting illegally. Mr. Durant intends to have Mr. Howard interpret section I & II of Ordinance No. 2-77 and if it applies have him right and advise Mr. Thornton. g) Copy of letter from E. Meril Martin, Cape George Fishing, Inc. to Randy Durant regarding the West Beach Lot #37, lease holder is Ronald Priest. The Board of Trustees approved the request from Mr. Priest to use a sanatation/sewage holding tank to accomodate a travel trailer with the following stipulations. (attachment #7) "The structure to be of a material and capacity as deemed necessary by your department to accomodate a travel trailer (common term) and to be situated on the lot as to not obstruct off street vehicles or the subject travel trailer." Mr. Durant indicated to the Board that he feels that a holding tank should not be approved based on the WAC. Commissioner O'Meara said that it should be judged on an individual basis. This particular request where the trailer is at Beckets Point amongst houses that would not allow the holding tank to over flow and drain in the community would be safe to OK. Durant feels it would be opening the door to too many future problems. Moved by Ca missioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Mercer to approverequest with the stipulation that it is a part time 7,CP and uatched clos"1y. h) Mr. Durant gave the Board copies of the Agenda from the Technical Review Committee Meeting May 29, 1979 and the Technical Review Committee Fill SystemQuestionaire Summarized Responses. They discussed the results of the questionaire. (attachment #8) i) In the next couple of months the Health Department is going to help residents who want to put in class 4 water systems, 10 or less taps. Prior to this time they have been referred to the State but on the class 4 systems the local health departments are handling this with the requirement that it be designed by an engineer. The State will be a back-up for any questions on the review. d j 3) Public Health Officer; Dr. Fischnaller a) The Health Deaiewingnew immunization law the schools. TheSchool Board isrev required toe keep immunization re ordsh on every student. b) Dr. Fischnaller and Mr. Durant have recently inspected the Roma Inn Tavern and Tjemsland's Grocery Store, both needing clean-up work. The Board will hold the next regular meeting of the Health Department at the County Commissioners' Chamber, Courthouse, July 10, 1979, 2:00 p.m.(attch. #9) Meeting adjourned attachment #i ` STATE OF DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL AND HEALTH SERVICES •� rL WASHINGTON I "f.j. - a,m+ai+.was},,,ytoR vP3a r :4 - Div tee Ray �( C Gaaernpri\ia May 25, 1979 � �l -H ''1,E�%pj. TO: Environmental Health Directors } ' f;. FROM: John H. Laubach, Administrative Consultant ' Environmental Health Surveillance Section SUBJECT: LEGISLATION The enclosed bill, Substitute Senate Bill 2411, which provides for the defense t of county employees named in liability suits, has been signed into law. It The benefits of the new law are rather weak, however, it is a move in the right direction. - - The clincher is that the county administrative authority must be convinced that the acts or omissions were within the scope of the defendant's official duties. This suggests that the burden of proof is on the defendant, and further, that t carefully documented records will play an essential role in realizing any benefits from the new law. it In this regard, the technical criteria used in deriving the action, and adherence to generally accepted or legally prescribed practices and avoidance of unsubstan- tiating variances, will strengthen one's case. ' JBL:mb 4 Enclosure t t *MIL, 41111111111111Mlifililillik. PV ti 7 attachment #2 A `/ _+"L4*H3-1 ii:'E SLtil.TE BILL wD 2411 - .k �^' sSYa o Aashineton By£saittee on Local Gore, t- a- guar Session - fe iginally sponsored by .. Se aio.-a xilsoa. 3el3ar and.- -_ - 4rI first taaeiFebru 22 e to - ar'y� 1,97f, and passed to sectiaB.rending, 2 ,A Si ACC i. A" 7'"7'• - K*'e #t x' -<t 6`c., s: ;. _ - - via Belst; to Ioeal goaernmeat end„addinga ae�.section to - _ 2 s • chapterlid-1a t ,`s x s'�-r _ � .. - g BE 2T EINACTEA BY THBLLEGISLAfLIgg OF THE STATE of IsASBI.GTOY,. 4 liEV SECCIM Section 1, There`is added is claptc 34 14 �. -�'"- -- - - _ S- sd3i'a new soaaen to read as follows,,- C ' .. p t thenever fn.-action or proceeding for dsages is,brought : '`r...'- 7 against any officer dr esployee of"a •county_-:nf this`' state,? •„- --.z - B nil arising from acts ur o €scions ohale perfor jng or an good faith s..-r ;B�yarporting is perlsrn his or'h`er ill ctal duties rs-sorb otfacec +sic. $ tx� t .. -s� r . - • • .r i -,�ariir empla�ee may req¢est xhe county.ta an iborize.the defense -.af. '+xll�"the action or.proceeding at the_expense of the countt;, .. '" ` - If-. the ronaty Ieg€slaw ve a athoiltxy finds'that the iota _ ri 13 ar ant ssiohs of the officer or eaployre vere- -or`;n good':fillal.- 11 purported to Le vt ciao the scope of hi or her offaei I dutaes ,--I the--regn ear `nap be - anted �` i _ '-� ' _ '11, granted:; If the.requesi its grrnted the "ii accessary expenses of defeni og the act oa or:proceeding._she 1L 17 be "paid by count Any_nanny "- f- . he_ y judgment"against the officer _ a a s- II or esplo}ee. ay b a-e paid a approral of'the- county IegisIative.; - 1f aathorlty ,1"z. a yy • Y - 4 r 4 ems i.,...- r .j- 3 t- Kr..ra .,L r -`4 t s . �' _"- f .'4,. - i i z„S- Z"S._ 9k-TU-- s`�.,.�--r 23. :` _:} -Y. ` 47 -e , d.. 7 -4 r 1_ "a r-"- i? �S-a 2412 -4.,.a^' :4 + `-F -? r r£^s, y_s-----'""a'r yY.t's: AMIIMMIIIIIMMINIMMIW attachment #2 COMMUNICABLE PUBLIC HEALTH HOME - VITAL ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ' . DISEASE CONTROL NURSING NURSING STATISTICS HEALTH EDUCATION t xcg, ' '''ittl' 1-- - 1 JEFFERSON COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT y r "v 302 SHERIDAN PORT TOWNSEND,WASH.9E36i Nay 31 1979 t-: To: Jefferson County Commissioners From: Gael R. Stuart t ' Re: Budget Extension Request CHANGES IN REVENUE (Proposed) 1979 Budget Proposed '. 330.00 Intergovernmental Revenue 330.00 Federal Grants Indirect It; i 333.62 Public Health 314-D $ 2,800.00 $ 6,000.00 , 334.62.02 WIC Program 4,200.00 4,800.00 334.62.04 Home Health Program 36,000.00 44,000.00 $43,000.00 $54,800.00 Revenue Increase ($ ,800.00) CHANGES IN EXPENDITURE (Proposed) 562.00.10 PERSONAL SERVICES I -(.11 Salaries and Wages 1 , .014 Clerk Typist — $ 5,790.Oo t Expenditure increase I ($ 5,790.00) .11 Total Salaries and Wages g $148,429.00 $154,219.00 .13 Personal Benefits 3 .001 OASI (I' $ 360.00) 9,099.00 9.459.00 .002 Retirement (+ $410.00) 10,089.00 10,499.00 .003 Industrial Ins. ( + $40.00) 620.00 660.00 .004 Health Insurance (+ $830.00) 14,748.00 15,578.00 .005 Unemployment Ins. (+ $83.00) 1,855.00 1,938.00 - .13 Total Personal Benefits $ 36,411.00 $ 38,134.00 Expenditure increase IT ($ 1,723.00) 562.60.30 OTHER SERVICES AND CHARGES .31 Professional Services .002 Contracts for Services (+ $1,100.00) $ 8.500.00 $ 9.600.00 .31 Total Professional Services 17,000.00 18,I00.00 Expenditure Increase III ($ 1,100.00) .33 Travel (+ $1,500.00)- $ 10,500.00 12,000.00 Expenditure Increase IV ($ 1,500.00) .a • attachment 12-A f/I Budget Extension Request May 31, 1979 Page 2 562.00.60 CAPITAL OUTLAY 1979 Budget Proposed .64 Machinery and Equipment (+ $1,687.00) $ 3,500.00 $ 5,187.00 Expenditure Increase V ($ 1,687.00) EXPENDITURE INCREASES I $ 5,790.00 II $ 1,723.00 * - III $ 1,100.00 IV $ 1,500.00 V $ 1,687.00 Total Expenditure Increases$ 11,800.00 124 Total Revenues $ 233,586.00 $245,386.00 124 Total Expenditures 231,586.00 245.386.00 Total Budget Increase $11,800.00 j attachment t2-B A WHEREAS, The Jefferson County Board of Health has requested an emergency budget extension to cover costs incurred to expand the Home Health Care and WIC Program in Jefferson County; and x ; WHEREAS, funds in the additional amount of $11,800.00 mill be paid in 1 fees by WIC, 314 D, Medicare, Medicaid and private individuals for services provided by the Jefferson County Health Department; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that Home Health Care and WIC are essential , to the health and safety of many of the citizens of Jefferson County; and l 1 WHEREAS, it appears to the Board of County Commissioners, Jefferson County, that a need and emergency exists as could not have been foreseen or ' contemplated at the time of making the budget for 1979,-and the sum of $11,800.00 is necessary to meet such need and emergency and is for the best interests of Jefferson County that the appropriation be made: 40, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that an emergency is hereby declared, that an appropriation of $11,800.00 be made for the Jefferson County Health Depart- ment to be used for salaries, travel, and equipment. BE IT knaili R RESOLVED that a public hearing be held on said emergency appropriation and that said hearing be held in the County Commissioner's Chamber of Jefferson County on the day of 1979, at the hour of 10:30 a.m. and that notice of said hearing be published in the official newspaper of Jefferson County and that at said hearing any interested taxpayer may appear t. •and be heard for or against the appropriation for such alleged emergency. APPROVED this day of 1979. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS JEkkERSON COUNTY SEAL: A. M. O'Meara, Chairman ATTEST: Betty J. Anderson, County Auditor B. C. Brown, Member and Ex-Officio Clerk of the Board Carroll M. Mercer, Member attachment #3 O MWUNICABLE PUBLIC HEALTH HOME VITAL DISEASE CONTROL NURSING NURSING ENVIRONMENTAL At HEJILTO A. .. . STATISTICS EDUCATION : , 2..,, --=.- ., - _. _I .4.7., ,,_P - ---14-,r4,.. - ,-,,,,,--t.., .., - ,-,, , ,. .. ..,---,„,. w. ...,,.. ii V ' ' !' i7 ON COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT i, F. # &12.SHERIDAN PORT TOWNSEND,WASH_9B366 1206)395{l122 mair 21, 1979 l'' ' REIBEGWRifil MAY 11 James F. Strickland Route 2, Box 711 B `•,• Quilceae, Washington 98376JEFFERSO CUltY + :3, P4 Dear Mr. Strickland: 1 My last evaluation of your drainfield made on April 15, 1479 indicated a probable failure of your drainfield. I would like your permission to dye 1 test your septic tank and drainfield an a date convenient for you in the very near future. Our concern and resonsibility under WAC 248-96 and Ordinance 2-77 is to try and assure sewage is disposed of in.a manner which will not create a potential health hazard to you or the public. Your cooperation will be appreciated. CStnc ely, \' I Randall M. Durant, R.S. Director of.Environmental Health t 1 R24/sa CC:"Board of Health Dr. Fischnaller,Health Officer William E. Howard, Pros. Attorney t.. Y f. T . • a �. d REPO T OF NURSING Sz.RRVICE attachment #4 • MAY,Y1979 Nay Apra May 1979 1979 19787 $dME VISITS 3�'J 278 �� 374 OFFICE VISITS NEWBORN 11111111EMEM11111111 • - UNDER 1-YEAR IIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1111111111111111p11111,1131 ' 21 - 60 SO 60+ 11111....IIIIIMIN 354 302 202 wCCNE in _44. 34 s_ 142 24ail Eli! .: AT�ULT FEALm$ plitioPii 0 slum ACUTE COMMUNICABLE DISEASE Intro. CONTROL rR40 Imm. 163 140 120 SCHOOL HEAL Milks' Ca ,o soli. - TH 696 5 2 17Ell DENTAL 01.0 0 iniii° _ all HOME HEALTH (AIDE) Mill um YdP4E HEALTH (P.A_.N. 190 155 00Y CARE 34 27 0 AMMIIIIIImmim f 3 b fe V. tMUNICABIE PI1HLlC HEALTH HOME VITAL ENVIRONMENTAL����SEASECONTROL. NURSING. NURSING STATISTICS' HEALTH EDUCATION attachment €5 ' l JEFFERSON COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT .^� , 802 SHERIDAN PORT TOWNSEND.WASH.98368 (208I 385'0722 444, E To: Jefferson County Board of Health From: Randall M. Durant, R.S. it Director of Environmental Health t Date: June 4, 1979 Subject: Activities - Environmental Health Section - May 1979 s Fidld Work: Slight increase in sewage disposal permits and increase in plats over same period last year. Sharp decrease in site evaluations. Food program continues at approximately the same pace as last month. Thirty seven full inspections and seventeen followup inspections were made. Final inspections of septic tank and drain- field expanded to 16 along with additional followup of existing systems and surveys begun on Kilisut Harbor and in Port Townsend in the area of systems on hill above lagoon. Other field work: Food Complaints Water Other Finals Followup Total r' 54 184 39 16 . I 57 11 Contacts: Office calls, telephone calls, plan review and design Sanitarian: 562 Secretaries: 294 telephone contacts 115 office contacts 409-total for secretaries 971 total for secretaries and sanitarians ' Total contacts for year to date: 3,494 (does not include field contacts or food handler tests) Food Handler permits: May - 43 210 year to date . o s cillilene 115-A - t ENVI1€ON2'IENTAL HEALTH TOTALS - 1st 5 months 1978 1979 Septic tank and drainfield $5,344.50 (201) $5,103.00 .(179) Site Evaluations 3,480.00 (284) $2,876.00 (245) Platting 392.00 (1 long, 646.00 (4 long, 10 short) 14 short) Food.Establishments 75.00 (8 restaurants) 953.50 (33 restaurants) 110.00 (10 grocery, meat markets I Food Handler Permits 348.00 (174) 420.00 (210) 468.75 662.50 (23) Installer, Pumpers $10,108.25 $10,771.00 • • t T i a!' .. attachment 15-B en s^,nI v .1 C.CO CJ WI""1.,r1 .-1'A s0 al.p w1 co Q ?,��'�t rOi °ate .... c c `- -0 'CD O° O O 0 'C}O 0. 0 0 0 O O O 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 O -- cm.,,s V7 co O:-e,r1 �,.t COw W cis o.0 .n c r-1i to'sy �. - o N"c r1 "C. .[' - _ �..y 0 f1 O - 0 0 0 O r"k h a+' OOOQOOQ O O OO C. ".{: r[ 04" Cc 00CI O O O O O -al O O O -11 -.•s r! ,�O v1 `,n`y;O r--ko w ..--i Ti a+ u u s.r ss O. g s< ©.Q.t c- rW O VI O r•t•0 M Cl.c-1 O E H 4 M Ft t" 1 R .4 N .-(..N .-4__" ,"1� O ', - I �t C 0 O Q 5 • O 1i1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0• 0 0 0 0^ t Or vt v ci{ .r"O C)*n OO Cr y1 '1 at - tr EZ O Q O C .c-e ^e u„ Q N i .-t N .a-4 i G1"^v °- n - .0 O ,-1 ,n , 0 - y C1 fig cc O 01 _ ai. .1 .,.,,. .-. C. - C 3 -. .. it 4. •- 4 0.- - 0- C.a ` -n 0 .-, .s 0 Os O OOO O 0 .-1 0 00 0 r,s 4 m ii. - • �y �„L t L ,C Q m 3 N O N O - - ,-- at m a1 as Cs .f e t wl -.al _ N - .... O - a 0. v 0 Cr 0 00 O D O Q ... .._ _...; is �r s -X is is +* ^ a -.. it_ _ .. .... _Ct--O 0O0.. 27.0..00._O_.O Q� .-. vt es r`.1 .n � .s'1 N c. - m _ p '- - o - t�,n a-, sn O O•'- `�• u el J V1 , t•1 en E` Cl r. r- it: N N N "{ ly ,-f v� ..w v -' y r- at u7"Sr,- c.....0 et- .-1 M.-4 ,--i vs vO 0 000 00 0 0.00 .1 E 0' OO O O Q O O 00 0, it 0�0.0 t p ,,r1 0 _ ,�c v 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0© O O pii p ©I'''. 0 c0•sO ,-"^. c.� c N a . 1 00000 000 - •ri O ,nso cs o .--1.�-c r r. ,-� .t ,-1 -C. c� c.+ 0' 1• .- co o a c, ,r. ,r. �. o. rt L es Q f1 G1 r! " .--t N N N Cl 2. Ql a1 .{ .i C• '4 f fa% .1 �.0 .1)c- 0 u�r-t c� I 00000 0 ../-A et cr1i.n Cs,c c ry rvr"s c -el < El 0" 00 p.p 00 0OO �1p. -I (((((( r1 0 yl O O O c ON.O O O OOOQOO 00 OOOO .As O I cp < c O O O O ,r1 v1.O 00 O O O1O t v ., ry 1 an..-t rc.-t - • .r t^t[( F sa r- '0 r-tr.:.n [-c W N C1 _ 0 0' 0 r- ,n rt .a" Q .1 r- O. C-0`N '0 a. n, c ,r1 s0 .1 0 c 0 to r-C j C ' 0/ 1. ;t -A m • > L a ta' as 2' L•a u E maa E 000000000 0000 - ,o OL. us C'- E E d O,nOOo0ov10 .noo '^ O. a�i t v-.- CJ >,0 '-' 0a' Q' O- r .D O . - r-O r- ry ,"' C- 0 c- C..-. m ' c D L. L c.- C Q.+-'..> 0 I `r O ['- N r1 V'' .1 r'1 r• n IO CJ q Giq �.7 7 a' tl Q Q1G' OO Q` O e'r.- c r1 .: r, cn�.-�.pof 37 ti=C c'�^7<.r1 O C C_).. rvc c .n {{{ -v m ..t W V j L F L Xi2t Lpt .-1 u - O -. 7 L l' L 0 1., 31 V.7 V C . V .L V T L o 1 U j t.. I- - A f attachment. #6 w fi "w March sr, 1979 Mr. and Mrs. Richard P. Thornton P.O. Box 37 Britinon, Washington 98320 3 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Thornton: r 5 Re: Proposed travel trailer park, Olympic Canal Tract area, Brinnon Your preliminary proposal received March 1 and discussed that week via ohone has been reviewed with a second evaluation of the site Wade on efarch 1, 1979 by by tarry Anderson, County Sanitarian. Soils were evaluated and found to be acceptable for on site sewage disposal. The amount of drainfield required for initial and replacement area has also been determined. However, as the roads, campsite locations, and dump station Location were not clearly marked on site the location of the drainfield could not be determined. Another `actor was the posiibility of a well site near the drainfield area. Please provide the Information requested by items 6, 7, and 3, Sec. III Plan Review Guidelines for Recreational Vehicle Parks, and stake out the site. We would then review your proposals. The standard procedure for this office, and I believe most counties, is to be lureacre an approved public water system is developed prior to issuance of sewage gal: permits and building permits. Thus far, an approved water system has nPt been developed to my knowledge. As per my letter of November 13, 197$ I recommend that you contact John Kirner, District Engineer, Water Supplies and Waste Section, Health Services Division, Fail Stop ID-11, Olyrpia, Washington 98504 (Telephone: 753-2452). His office is responsible for approving public water supplies. Please note that design of the dosing system for the drain- field trill require an engineer. Any approval of permits prior to development of an approved public water supply for your park would be the decision of the Board of Health. I am enclosing the following: 1. Design of a dump station facility. Please provide traffic flow proposal noting in andout to the facility. 2. Flow rate work sheet you reqsted March 1 (based on 4;AC 24$-96, Manual of Septic Tank Practice and Guidelinesue for larger Systems). Rlease note the Division of Health is recormendinge the use of 140 gallons per day per site sewegeff3ow rather than 50. P i • _ '; ; r �u attachment f6-A Mr. and Mrs. Richard P. Thornton Re: Proposed travel trailer park Date: March 5, 1979 Page If you feel aggrieved by this decision you may appeal to the Health Officer, J. E. Fischnaller, M.D. (385-0722). . If you have any questions or comments please contact this office. Sincerely, , . Randall N. Durant, R.S. Director of Environmental Health RMD/sa Encl. 2 CC: Board of County Commissioners J. E. Fischnaller, M.D. 4 r, x: attachment #6-B • FLOW RATES - Travel Trailer Park, Richard P. Thornton 50 gallons/space/day 50 x 50 = 2,500 gal./day 75 x 50==3,750 gal./day 100 x 50 = 5,000 gal./day V = 1,125 + .75 x Q (Q = daily flow rate) V It 1,125 + .75 x 2,500 = 3,000 gallons - ,v-.V = 1,125 + .75 x 3.750 = 3,937.5 gallons Y a 1,125 + .75 x 5,000 = 4,875 gallons 2,5O0/2.0 = 1,250 sq. ft/2 = 625 ft. 3,750/2.0 = 1,575 sq. ft/2 = 937.5 ft. 5,000/2.0 = 2,500 sq. ft/2 = 1,250 ft. 50 to 100 spaces require dosing of the system (alternating recommended between halves of the drainfield. Need approximately 120' x 240' for 100' spaces Need approximately the same for 75' spaces Need approximately 100' x 200' for 50' spies Water system - see applicable WAC 248-54.... AUMMINIMIMMIM d�` Y _ k attachment #6-G , -. JEFFERSON COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2 I AN ORDINANCE relating to the sanitation and health requirements of public food service establishments as defined in the "Rules and Regulations of the State Board of Health, Food Service Sanitation," and the "United States Public Health Service Food Sanitation Ordinance and Code"; the governing of solid waste handling and implementing the com- prehensive solid waste management plan covering storage, collection, transportation, treatment, utilization, processing and final disposal; providing for the regulation of on-site sewage disposal systems, the licensing of commercial installers, providing for 1 on-site management systems, providing for establishing standards for equipment and operation of septic tank pumpers: establishing permit fees, the issuance and revocation of permits, the payment of permit fees; and prescribing penalties for violations thereof. RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR ON-SITE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS e f RULES AND REGULATIONS PROVIDING FOR THE REGULATION OF ON-SITE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS, ESTABLISHING PERMITS, PERMIT FEES AND THE LICENSING OF COMMERCIAL INSTALLERS; PRO- I • VIDING FOR OR-SITE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS; PROVIDING FOR ESTABLISHING STANDARDS FOR EQUIP- { I MEET AND OPERATION OF SEPTIC TANK PUMPERS AND REQUIRING PERMITS TO OPERATE, ESTABLISH- ING PERMIT FEES, AND PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS. WHEREAS, under provisions of RCW 70.05.060, RCW 70.46.060 and RCW 43.20 this Board is charged with the duty of protecting the public health and safety of all inhabitants of Jefferson County, and WHEREAS, the following Rules and Regulations are necessary for the protection of public health and safety, and WHEREAS, WAC 248-96-015, and WAC 248-96-016, State Board of Health Rules and Regulations governing On-Site Sewage Disposal Systems require local boards of health to adopt minimum standards as set forth by the State Board of Health, now therefore, BE IT RESOLVED by the Jefferson County Board of Health that the following be adopted as ordinance SECTION I Scope f 1.1 The provisions of these regulations shall apply to all territory within the boundaries of Jefferson County. : 1.2 Every residence, place of business or other building or place where persons congregate, reside or are employed, to which a public sewerage system is not available, shall be provided with a water-flesh toilet system connected to an On-Site Disposal System or shall have an alternate device for the disposal of domestic wastes. Non-residential buildings may be exempt from this requirement at the discretion of the Health Officer, provided suitable toilet facilities are provided`within 200 feet of the work area. SECTION II Adoption by reference 2.1 VAC 248-96-018 through VAC 248-96-175, State Board of Health Rules and Regulations governing On-Site Sewage Disposal Systems adopted June 1974 are hereby adopted by reference as Rules and Regulations of the Jefferson County Health Department. 2.2 The D.S. Public Health Service Publication No. 526, The Manual of Septic ... y f h9 4?. .F, �g man w r attachment #7 - i - a } Cape George Dishing Inc. T ecketts Point Hk Discovery Bay 1,' . Mav 26, 1979 , � i „ Jefferson County Health Dept. Pert Townsend, Wa. RE:. finest Beach Lot e37 II ' Lease Holder, Ronald Priest Dear Mr. Durant, During our normal Board of Trustees meeting, March IQ, 1979, a request for a sanaticn/sewerage holding tank for West Beach Lot #37 was submitted for our evaluation and approval. The request was voted upon and-approved -pending the following stipulations: $ z The structure to be of a material and capacity e as deemed necessary by your department to accomodate a travel trailer (common term) and to be situated on the lot as to not obstruct off- street vehicles or the subject travel trailer. During a prior meeting, the beard arproved the parking _: ) on the lessors lot 1 37 for the purpose cf a temporary week-ender (common term) accomodations during the summer months. ' Yours truly, n t z-lc:N,0,,,,_. 6.,.,..,(,..----- • 1 E. 2eril Martin Chairman; Planning, Building & ?anation Committee t 1 ihiumementemint .r..ero.mems _nmems y -, - , . a. , n .. {"f' attachment #7—A ... • , t 'NAC 249-16-110 DESIGN. (1) The detailed design and con- . 4 struction of aII''systems shall conform to the Manual of Septic Tank Practice,' U.S. Public Health Service Publication No. S26, 1947, or any succeeding edition, except where modified by, or La conflict with these regulations. x p' (2) The. system shall be designed to receive all sanitary sewage and domestic waste from the building served unless i otherwise approved by the health officer. Footing or roof _ drains..shall not enter the sewage disposal system. v 1 ' (3) The size of the effluent absorption area shall be `>"'. • : determined by the results of percolation tests performed in • accordance with WAC 24H-96-09S together with an evaluation of l data, drainage conditions, and such other related data as may be required by the health officer.#�. (4) .All septic tanks shall be designed in accordance t _ ,. with subsection (1) of this section. r +=. (a) AU rams must have a minimum of two compartments. (b) 'Materials' - septic tanks Ind dosing tanks shall be constructed of corrosion resistant material,,and shall be water- 1 tight.. - They may be constructed of poured in-place concrete, pre ' cast reinforced concrete, concrete blocks with mortar joints, or other materials approved by the health officer and the secretary. ° (c) Suitable baffles and/or tees shall be provided to pre- .vent floating solids from leaving the tank. (d) *cress and cleanouts shall be provided for easy in- epection and removal of the tank contents. (5) Effluent shall be disposed of by means of subsurface , disposal fields except when special approval for other disposal systems is granted by the health officer and the secretary. (a) The installation and use of cesspools for disposal of sewage is not permitted. (h) Seepage pits shall not be used for the disposal of septic tank effluent except under special conditions approved t by the health officer. The depth of approved seepage pits shall not exceed 10 feet from finished grade unless approved by the ,' departlnent Sewage ecge bogy. - ._. - , �s�d (cT ent of eoholding tanks shall not be'used as a permanent method of sewage disposal for residential dwelling units. ` - The health officer may allow holding tanks on an interima 14 .....use basis to handle emergency situations or to correct existing problem systems. �` the health officer may allow holding tanks for controlled part-time-use situations such as recreational vehicle parks and ;,. trailer dump stations: PROVIDED, That an approved on-site. system management program as provided by NRC 248-9 Q_0?0 is in • effect.,. 1 �6) The subsurface disposal system generally shall not be installed in fill. Pill can be used as cover over a subsurface , it disposal area up to a maximum depth of eighteen (18) inches A , ;3 provided that no portion of the absorption trenches are installed i { -in this material. The health officer may allow installation of a subsurface disposal system in fill that has been in place a-period of time and has stabilized to the point where site conditions and soil 0 tests show the site to be satisfactory to allow full compliance ,: • tl with provisions of these regulations. -(7) Construction on slopes in excess of 1St but not ' (' greater than 30% may be allowed: PROVIDED, That subsoil pro- f files indicate no restrictive layers of soil and appropriate x f . engineering design is provided. i (241-96--P 91` 4 I i e • narMMrrr.► AiiinENNININPIL • \t � • e i AGENDA attachment $8 TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING " NAY 29, 1979 `, OBJECTIVES: 1) To determine the "state-of-the-art" regarding fill systems within the State of Washington by having local health depart- ments report of their experiences. 2) To delineate those items or criteria which should be con- sidered during the site selection, design, installation and operation of fill systems and give as much detail as possible. 3) To arrive at a Committee decision whether sufficient in- formation exists to establish guidelines. If so, interim or final guidelines? 9:30 Call to order General introductory remarks , 9:40 Introduction of meeting's objectives and activities 10:00 Local health department reports, discussion 11:20 Lunch 12:30 Continuation of local health department reports, if needed Comparison with mound systems r,. 1:00 Delineation of items/criteria to consider 3:00 Decision by Committee. 3:30 (At latest) Meeting Adjourns • woemovassams . ( .aIIIIIIIIPIIIIIIIMIN4 . - - - -': '''''''' * ,,, '''': ' . , May, 1979 4 _ TECHNICALREVIEW C0k4 SUMMARIZED 1 ; FLL SYSTE4 QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES local health department permitted fill systems (::sit:msin:ht:I;ed? 1. 1) Ras your 1::rinfields are actually installed in fill material) B) Are they presently permitted? C) If no to B, and theywere formerly permitted, why aren't they presently . . . allowed? - , - Bellingham-Whatcom Yes Yes - ton-Franklin Yes Yes (No date) constructed - Bremerton-Hitsa! Yes Yes - Chelan-Douglas No No (Mounds okay, if sites (comply with guidelines) - Cillu Yes No Have had rate. failure ' fill systems were Five have . into • :Itts:f. fill or backing No No , * - Grant - Grays Harbor Yes Yes (Sand only) Lack of design criteria..Yes - Jefferson an old plat. Do not approve ( No Have installed only one in full, fills under any con- dition at this time. ; t ; - Hittites Yes No dConcern esign. over what is proper i, • , - Lewis . Yes No - Lincoln No Yes testing basis only. - N.E. Tr -Counties Yes Yes On neral approval of fill systems (i111gcrliernitesl.mounds) has been ,.. - San Juan Yes Yes (Authorized o :db codeby county "when ; bi : . i17: : lt useci : t l period. 1 - Seattle-King very Yes No They 1.!Idag.not hold effluent t No No A few- Snohomish and failed. many yy were lir!otcl'ul::::1111:(1. with specific Mh A B C 44 Yes Yes S.W. Washington_/ Use is presently being gpc�kaae Yes restricted to five acre par cels and replacements, r, as.there is too much demand for.them until the criteria is finalized —hopefully, y{thise two months. No (Not enough concrete know- - Walla Walla ledge regarding compaction, etc. 'prior to installation). Yes yes (Permitted recently) ,. ; — yaYima 1 Yes the last 7 gears only 3 1 Tes iSsotln approved systems. Was allowed lots that had been previously approved lots of a subdivision pzior to tht time that the Health Officer ever approved subdivisions. 4 • r 1" I • u. t i } r a* y AMMINIMMIIIMMA • ^y� TECE€NICAL REVIEW COINITTEE FILL SYSTEM„QUESTIONNAZRE 8-C SUMMARIZED RESPONSES 2. Site Selection Criteria - gellingham-Whatcom - Dry location, not subject to flooding - One or five acre lot sizes depending on amount of fill required due to original soil depths- - 18-30 inches permeable soil - 1 acre, lot 150 feet wide --418 inches permeable soil - 5 acre, '. first 300 feet wide ---Maximum slope of 5% - Renton-Franklin -'2 feet of permeable soil - 5 acre lot size - Bremerton-Kitsap - Every site or proposal is judged on its oWn merits. No criteria are set up for any one site characteristic by itself. 74 - Chelan-Douglas- - As per mound guidelines - C:lallam Maximum slope of 101. No other criteria - Kittitas - Maximum slope of 15% - - Lincoln - Water table must not be too close to surface of ground -Lewis -Maximum slope of 30 - 40% -Minimum of 18-24 inches of usable soil above lim(ting feature - N.E. Tri-County - Maximum slope of 12% - Minimum of 2 feet of permeable soil (for ,mounds only) - gan Juan - No specific guidelines in effect - Seattle-King -No special criteria were established --S.W. Washington - Maximum slope of 8% - 36 inches of soil to water table (used to be 24 inches) - 36 inches to any impervious strata, presently - Spokane - Maximum slope of 10% -Only real restriction was water ponded on the ground surface • - Yakima - Not too high a water table - Not an excessive slope - MOUNDS - Minimum of 24 inches of permeable soil (0-30 min/inch) above water table - Minimum of 5 feet above impervious material - Maximum slope of 12% -Asotin - Essentially level site- On existing lots approved prior to regs., large enough lot for initial and reserve fields * WPC TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE FILL SYSTE"i QUESIONNAIRE 8-1) t`, SUMMARIZED RESrONSES t- { • 3. Site Preparation -Bellingham-(hatcom - Leveling • -Benton-Franklin - Plowing -.Rotovating Bremerton-gitsap - A mixing of 6-8 inches depth by plowing or discing -Chslan-Douglas As per mound guidelines - Ceilam - Scraping off of organic mat layer was done on three systems. 2 of the 3are failing. - Kittitas None Leafs - Rotovating - Lincoln - Leveling area -N.E. Tn-i-County - Ground surface roughing to avoid interface problems - San Juan Scarify surface - Seattle-King - Recommended scarifying the interface by discing or? - S.W. Washington - Discing well and rotovating to break up sod - Spokane - Leveling, if necessary Scarifying organic layer prior to placement of fill - -- Yakima - None, so far MOUNDS - Cut vegetation to surface and remove Plow perpendicular to slope, throwing soil upslope • Do not plow if soil rolls into a wire - Rotovation or discing of top layer can be done instead of plowing if soils are types 1, 2 or 3 as per regulations 3' y Asotin - I)Leveling of site 2)Removal of sod, if not done during leveling 3)Rototlling remaining soil x TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE FILL SYSTEM QUESTIONNAIRE SW0 ARIZED RESPONSES / X 4., Pill: Material Criteria • - Bellingham-Whatcom - Must pass a sieve test Sieve si Percent ssin �----K 3/4" 85-100 '` 50-100 I; #7.0 6-45 (:,, #100 0-22 1200, , - Bremerton-Ritsap Sand or sandy loam soil - Same or a looser texture than native soil on-site , . i 4 -.Chelan-Douglas - As per mound guidelines - Sandy loam was the general type. It was - Cl.allam overburden soil pulled off the top 1-2 feet of a gravel pit. -1Citt3.tas -Generally any soil except clay or gravel • f - Lewis - - Do not have sufficient criteria - On designed systems, texture, estimated " percolation and source approval by designer required. - Soil must have good drainage characteristics - Lincoln and good sewage treatment potential. - N.E. Tri-County -Sand as per mound guidelines for mound systems. , 4 - San Juan - None specified as yet h.. - Seattle-Ring - Percolation rates around 3-7 min/inch, usually sandy loam or "pit run" - S.W. Washington - Try to use soil of same consistency and particle size to eliminate capillarity - In no case was fill material to be higher in clay content than native soil on-site, but often was coarser. . - Fill material should have a low moisture content when worked. - Spokane - Range between fine sand and sandy loam - most in sandy loam . -Moisture content restricted to between "dry" and "saturated" when worked. t - Sandy loam or medium sand Yakima 14 - MOB -Medium sand according to U.S.D.S. Soil i Conservation Service definition ,f i z 4 1 rANNOIMMOMOMIL • • Benton-Franklin - Native soil from area of construction site - Limited to biologically active soils -Asotin - Sandy loam required -"Soil must:be fairly consistent - Soil must be inspected prior to its placement on the site, in its original state r r- • • 4 • i 3a ` , _ .4'�,� C :r is TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE FILL SYSTE( QUESTIONNAIRE 8_G SUMMARIZED RESPONSES A / S, Fill Installation Procedures - Bellingham-Whatcom : - Mechanical compaction after placement . - Test far degree of compaction using 1 ,. Proctor Test Density, Method A. Average d ne ty should be around 90Z_ - Bremerton-Kitsap - Tamed at the interface, then filled all at one time i - C1allam - Fill material installed all at once - - Kittitas - Fill material installed all at once - Lewis - Fill laid before construction - Taper or landscape after backfilling to present surface ponding - Lincoln - No set procedure t - N.E. Tri-County, - For mounds, as per mound guidelines ?' - San Juan - Fill placed in lifts - Rubber tired vehicles inappropriate on fill it - Seattle-King - No criteria established _ s.w. Washington - After rotovation of native soil, fill laid in 3-inch layers followed by rotovation. x: :; Then another 3-inch layer followed again by . rotovation,. etc. - This is done to eliminate particle size stratification, and to assure uniform capil- larity £1, Spokane -,Presently require lifts of 6-8 inches in depth After each lift, the fill is compacted, A _ with the top being raked or otherwise roughened '‘, prior to placement of the next lift. .4 - Yakima - Fill laid in lifts - Soaked after each lift t - MOUNDS -Medium sand deposited around outer edges of plowed area without any driving on plowed area a - Maintaining at least 6 inches of sand under the tracks of the vehicle (crawler tractor rather than wheeled tractor) spread sand to e • appropriate depth and shape -Benton-Franklin - All at once followed by active irrigation ,ii and suitable plant cultivation -Asotin - Placed in 8 inch lifts v - Each lift compacted, usually with tired tractor -Each lift watered , - Intent is to obtain 90Z of proctor density or a relative density of soil based on AASHO T-99 6 TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE FILL,SYSTEM QOESIONNAIRE SI QfARIZED RESPONSES 8-$ / 6. Design Criteriav - Bellingham-Whatcom 4 feet of unsaturated, permeable soil re- quired. Depth of fill dependent on depth of usable original soil. - Absorption fields in fill are required to be of permanent alternating type equal in sire to 160Z of normal required absorp- * tion field. - material at the required depth is to extend at least 10 feet beyond ends or sides of absorption lines. In addition, p when more than 18 inches of fill is re- quired, a sloping buffer zone shall extend a minims of 5 feet on a level site and 10 feet downhill. Absorption trenches shall be level, shall not be less than 60 lineal feet (2 feet wide) per bedroom with the laterals on 10 foot centers. Interconnecting ends on a minimum of 50 foot centers may be counted as part of the required lineal footage. -When more than 18 inches of fill, the mini- mum setback from the toe of the fill to property lines, depressions, cuts or banks, etc. is 20 feet. I; - Bremerton-Kitsap -Minimum 10 foot separation between edge of fill and nearest drainfield line. - (Probably more criteria but memo stating them was lost). - Chelan-Douglas - As per mound guidelines. - f:Tallam - No maximum depth of fill - Minimum depth of fill was 3 feet -Were no criteria of slopes of fill area - Drainfield design was conventional trench in the top 18-24 inches of fill -Minimum length in four cases was 300 feet (2 are failing) - Length in other systems was 150-200 feet (3 are failing) - Kittitas None - Lewis - 12 inch separation between the trench bottom and seasonal high water table(or mottling) - 12 18 inches of fill over drainfield pipe - 8-15 feet from drainfield pipe to toe of fill • _ _� y. { �a pp Lewis (cont.) Reserve area must be equal or better soil conditions than original site - No testing or filling required. - Standard setbacks - Lincoln -No maximum depth of fill material -Standard-setbacks - N.H. Tri-County - As per mound guidelines - Standard setbacks. - San Juan - None specified at this time - Seattle-King - Sufficient fill plus original soil to total 4 feet - Same distribution system design as for standard system - No filled reserve area required - Standard setbacks - S.W. Washington - 4 feet of usable permeable soil required -Depth of fill= gs inches original effective depth depth (previously 24", now 36" x 50% (to allow for compaction and settling)- 3:1 (horizontal: vertical side slope ratio - Overall size to be 100 feet x 125 feet (in- cludes reserve area) - Lines to be placed on 20 foot centers (reserve area then between the lines ti --Standard setbacks ` - Spokane No maximum depth. The depth is set by the amount of fill required to maintain a 3 foot separation from the bottom of the drainfield trench to the limiting factor. - Side shapes 3:1 (horizontal: vertical) - Distance from drainline to side slope is to be 10 feet plus the height of the fill - Reserve area is also initially filled - Standard setbacks - Yakima -Maximum-depth of fill is 4 feet - 150 square feet/bedroom minimum size of drainfield ! '_ - Standard setbacks - MOUNDS- - 2 feet of medium sand below trenches, 1 foot trench, 1-2 feet of soil above trenches - 3:1 or 4:1 (horizontal: vertical side slopes) - Size of distribution systems and basal area of mound determined by appropriate acceptance rate of sand and original soil. . . o • 8-3 — ROUNDS (cont.) All trenches level• y - Pressure distribution system F - gee guidelines for other criteria Isaton-Franklin - Standard setbacks Standard construction for drainfield- . Top of slope must be at least 20 feet from drainfield lines "= Reserve area must be established prior to construction Msx mam,depth related to minimum separation required by ordinance permitted on 5 acre parcels or larger �sotin - No maximum depth of fill material; however, tried to maintain a 3 foot separation between bedrock and trench bottom --No specific side slope requirements., although a 11/2:1 slope was used. In some cases a concrete retaining wall was also used at the edge of the fill. - A licensed engineer was required to design system, perform percolation and compaction tests. - On these 3 systems reserve area was not required to be filled. However, this will be a requirement if such systems are per- witted in the future. - Standard setbacks - A percolation rate in the compacted sandy loam fill of 5 - 10 minutes per inch Is the design standard. tw • • , _ : _, a ss to. iX _ _...:.—�--�^•.:..-fi.._. $ 'k. 3..d"n "� r.. ` FYI, TECHNICAL REVIEW COIMITTEE FILL SYSTEM QUESTIONNAIRE ` S:{DD}ARIZED RESPONSES for stabilization? ., 14( 7. A) Before use, is (was) a period of time necessary B) - If so, what periods time? 04 h C) Is (was) planting vegetation required? t ,£# cal compaction allowed to compensate for stabilization? D) Is (was) mechanc p � P ; A No (6•mos. .sta- No Yes -Bellingham-tdhatcom hilizaton can replace mechanical compaction) Kitsap Yes 12 mos. Yes « No - B=emeston- or through mos. of -. • suspected high water table No (As per mound Yes No Chelan-Douglas guidelines) l year or No No i Yes , Clallan through winter. ;: Yes 2 years Yes No Jefferson l�cr #. No , - Kittitas Yes (inade- No quate in Lewis our ex- 1 perience) Yes 1 yearNo } - Lincoln Yes No i - No (As per mound - - t N.E. Tri-County guidelines) Yes 1-2 years Yes No ' Juan z - Seatle- - San tle- Yes King 1 year, Kerns'- Yes (Varied) more re-- mended :� neatly c 5 years. Yes Less than Yes Na S.W. Washington Yes fill - -1 year More than 18" but less than x `j 36" fill 2 years } • � v E+ ! I h> _ • Spokane lb Retom- Yes - Yakimma. Yes Soaked over-.Yes Yes • -night MOUNDS Sand does not require stabilization. Spreading of sand, installation of dis- tributionsystem, growth of vegetation, and operation of system, settles and stabilizes mound. Planting of vegeta- tion recommended- - Benton-Franklin Yes Usually 2 Yes No years ee 4sotin- No No Yes • • • • u • it • I te" TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE FILL SYSTEM QUESTIONNAIRE e SUMMARIZED RESPONSES 8, AI Have fill systems been monitored? Bk Methods of Monitoring and Results. - Bellingham-Whatcom Yes - Systems are surveyed after 3 gears of operat on. -Performance appears quite good. - Bremerton-Ritsap No - Satisfactory - Clailam Yes - Cross-sections of drainfields were dug up by LED and SCS personnel. Of 3 installed in high water table area, 2 have failed - twice within 8 months. - Of 5 installed in hardpan or clay soil conditions, 3 have failed. - Ia one failure fill material was a silty sandy loam. -In another failure, a sand and gravel was used as fill material, that had compacted as hard as hardpan after 2 years of weathering. - In another failure, medium sand had been used, but the reason for failure was the depth of the distribution pipe. tl - Jefferson Yes - Current system 131 years old - Rittitas No - Assumed to be satisfactory !j - Lewis Yes - Annual surveys of all designed systems with a write-up for the Board of Health and the designers. - 1977 - 23Z malfunction rate f overall - 1002 malfunction rate when there was originally c less than 18 inches of usable soil - 1978-79 - Results not yet tabulated, but survey completed. - Lincoln No 1 - N.E. Tri-County Yes - Periodic checks for seepage and ponding made. —jai • f ` 8_N c • — N.g. Tri-County (Cont.) - Insufficient time of operation - one system less than two mos. olsi . - one system not completed yet - San Juan No - None presently going in. - Seattle-King Yes - Monitoring accomplished by casual return calls and responding to complaints by neighbors. g, -Not aware of any existing successful systems. r` - Last system installed (about 1972) failed in 2 months. - S.W. Washington Yes - Routine site inspections to check for surfacing, back-up, etc. - Thus far, though limited numbers are in use, no problems have been encountered.- 3° Spokane Yes - Visual observations made for - seepage- - Same systems have inspection pipes, so water levels can be Observed. . —Performance data collected from June through September, 1978 indicated that of 74 systems Installed since 1976, only 3 had any known problems. 96%were apparently functioning satis- factorily._ Sampling of effluent quality now being attempted to increase data base. - Yakima No - No data yet. au" - Benton-Franklin Yes - Asotin No • - Systems not set up for monitoring. However, follow- - up survey done. _-1973_system--_satisfactory - 1974 system- effluent surfacing in 1978. Water usage cut back. Sandy loam was not used in this case; instead a silt soil with a perc rate of 30 min/inch - 1975 system - generally satis- factory. Initial signs of seepage on slope in 1976, but shrubbery planted then with no problems evident since then. TBGEPF1GtfI. REVIEW CO*flK1TTBE FILL SYSTEM QUESTIONNAIRE Si IARIZED RESPONSES 9. How great a need is seen for such an alternative in your area of jurisdiction? - Bellingham-Whatcom - Great need - Bremerton-Kitsap - There is a need for fill systems - Chelan-Douglas - Very little. There are few areas with high ground water or excessively permeable soil where cheaper alternatives cannot be found. - Clallam A great need, particularly in areas with little topsoil on hardpan. Artty alternative should be experimented with more before approval. - Grant There is a frequent need for such a system, ,ni,ttly in areas of high water tables adjacent to lakes. r - Heavydemand in beach areas -.GYay Harbor-Pacific - Jefferson - Great need provided they function properly - Kittitas -Very great need for high water table areas } ' and some cemented, hard soil conditions. - Lewis - Due to soil conditions, they are needed Requirements that prevent subdivision or shortplatting of such land are needed. - Lincoln -Not much need, if any • R $_ 'Sri-County - Little need in Ferry and Stevens counties - Heavy need in Pend Oreille county - San Juan Badly needed due to shallow soil depth - Seattle-King - A great need if they work, no need if they don't - Snohomish - If permitted, there would be many requests - S.W. Washington - Very great. A great amount of district has soils with less than 48 inches effective depth to seasonal water tables. - Spokane - Very great need - Walla Walla - There is some need in areas of high water tables and severe slopes. _ Yakima - 15-202 of total_applicants - Benton-Franklin - Great - Asotin - Justifiable need in some areas where there are shallow soil conditions. -r smommemomms asammixd ' „ -P , 10. Other comments or oeful information f- Clallam - Many of failures can be attributed in part to lack cd'care in installation and lack of design criteria. - In the systems located in high water table areas (swampy ground), there was tremendous wicking action. Par example in one situation, the water table on surrenniding unfilled lots was about 2-3 inches above the natural soil surface. The water table on the lots filled with 5 feet of imported soil was at 30 inches. Thus, due to capillary action, water was , being drawn 30 inches up into the fill material. - Type of soil and size of fill should be standardized *munch as possible. - grant - All information is being sought to be used for guide- limes in dealing with requests and possibilities of allowing installations in fill area. - Lewis -Sh,tL platting or subdividing multiplies the problem before the solution is found. - Statewide uniform procedures and regulations for de- signers are needed. An exam should be required for new designers and for existing ones. - Datil now alternatives are proven,strict enforcement of no permits at all on very poor sites is needed. - Seattle-Ring - The only fill system that appeared to work was in a situation where the natural soils presented no problem, but which had high water tables. There was no evalua- tion conducted to determine the effect on ground water (pollution) as the installation occurred only where Public water supply was available, and not adjacent ,to lakes. - Snohomish -Property owners sometimes fill their lots in hopes of obtaining a permit in the future. They are told that they are taking their chances. 'In some cases after a period of stabilization (usually 1 year or more), a permit can be issued. However, in many cases, if a high water table exists, the problem exists even after • the fill is in place. - 8.17. Washington - The system was designed so that the initial distribution laterals were placed on 20 foot centers. This allowed a reserve area suitable for line placement between initial system lines. This was done to fully use the entire field for two reasons: 1) to minimize localized saturation, and 2) keep the owners aware that a drain- field was on this area and thus prevent them from utilizing part of the fill area for building construction, roadways, etc., which happened when the initial system was placed on just 1/2 of the fill area. - The fills that were greater than 18 inches in depth, after a "waiting" or "restructuring" period showed mottling levels much higher than anticipated. Evidently capillary action in the fill material is much greater than we assumed. Thus, we have saturation above where # r w y` attachment #9 a . *`* * PUBLIC NOTICE * * * Notice is hereby given that the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Jefferson County Health Board will be held Tuesday, July 10, 1979 at 2:00 p.m. in the Jefferson County * 1 Commissioners` Chambers, Courthouse, Port Townsend, Washington. ' 3 /s/ A. M, O'Meara, Chairman /s/ B. G. Brown, Member is/ Carroll M. Mercer, Member ATTEST: /s/ Betty J. Anderson, County Auditor and Ex-officio Clerk of the Board 3 h } i Please publish June 27 & July 4, 1979 i Thank you a � , p ems. .. , ....COMMUNICABLE PUBLIC HEALTH HOME VITAL ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH` DISEASECONTROL NURSING NURSING• STATISTICS HEALTH EDUCATION Fr .." yam ~a= 'Li JEFFERSO1. COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT JV ,, 802 SHERIDAN PORT TOWNSEND,WASH.98368 (206)385-0722 �` BOARD OF HEALTH MEETING AGENDA June 6, 1979 9:30 a.m. Approval of minutes of previous meeting Correspondence: A. Letter from John H. Laubach on Senate Bill 2411 (attached). 1 Old Business: f A. Proposed budget extension as a result of changes in program (attached). B. Other old business. • Nets Business a A. Discussion of County employees contract with the Union and its effect on possible development of a Health Department salary schedule. B. Discussion of mileage reimbursement rate. I C. Other new business. Reports: A. Public Health Nurse B. Environmental Health C. Public Health Officer D. Administrator ' The next meeting will be July ? , 1979. Regular meeting would be Inde- pendence Day.