I have a sand filter recycle discharge septic system that has been in operation for about 15 years. Right now I have a contractor inspect the system every quarter at an annual cost of about $800,00. I would like the regualtions changed so that I can contract with a septic system operator, Tripple R, to inspect and collect samples to send to a labortory for testing twice each year rather than four times each year. 

Smaller government is good; less regulation is good.  Increasing the number of private sector jobs is good.  Reducing the size of government while increasing regulation is a recipe for failure.

The Governor wants to reduce state agency budgets by 6%.  The only effective way to accomplish this is to cut employee positions.  The plan is to cut 20 health department sewage positions by July 1st.  Regardless of what any impact statement may claim, this regulation will necessitate a significant increase in health department staff.  Otherwise, an understaffed agency will have no choice but to ignore enforcement.  VDH has been ignoring enforcement for the past 18 months under the Emergency Regulations.  With the current state budget problems this is no time to implement this regulation.

If there's no turning back on this performance based regulation perhaps VDH can streamline it's permitting process so that it can focus on O&M and enforcement issues.  Since anything goes now, i.e. there are no minimum soil requirements so you'll be able to install a sewage system practically anywhere, why focus on the reviews of the private sector evaluations and designs.  Obviously the desire is to shift the focus to post-flush performance.

Streamline permit approvals: Develop an express permit process that includes standardized forms, preferably with an electronic option that is compatible with and can be imported into the health department's poor excuse for a database.  Include specific certification check-off items for the OSE/PE.  Recognize and accept their certifications and signatures.  Have a pass/fail test based on the certification, not based on the content of 30 to 50 pages of plans, specifications, fluff, etc.

This express permit submittal could be optional for applicants.  If you follow the standardized process with standardized forms, you get a permit quickly with little or no review.  VDH has no review liability, the OSE/PE is 100% responsible for his/her work, the applicant gets a permit quickly, and VDH can shift resources to implementation of this regulation.  All QA shifts to post-flush performance.

We need to stop getting bogged down on reviews.  If the OSE/PE says the design meets the regulations (for BOTH sewage and water supply) then it meets the regulations.  Issue the permit then focus on performance.

It may take up to 10 years or more to find out what impact this performance based regulation will have on public health and the environment.  It sort of reminds me of the comment the former Speaker of the House made: "Pass it so we can find out what's in it".

I was dissappointed to see that home owners were not considered in the final regulations.  Virginia home owners have always been allowed to maintain their residences themselves.  This is the first component in the typical rural residence that the home owner will not be allowed to maintain. 

Home owners should be able to maintain their systems and report the result to VDH in the same manner as operators.  They could even be required to pass the same DPOR test as licensed operators to ensure they were qualified to maintain their systems.

Thank you for your consideration,

Last year I spent $400 for an operator to inspect my system.  It took him about 20 minutes to do whatever he did.  This year I hired a different operator.  That was $350 for 30 minutes.  I contacted a pumper who said he would pump out my tank for $200 and he would throw in the operator inspection for another $100.  He'll be doing the job for me next year.

What a racket.  I'm getting nothing for my money.  What's the penalty for not having an operator?  Maybe the penalty is less than the cost of the operator.   

12VAC5-613-120. Operator responsibilities.

A. Whenever an operator performs a visit that is required by this chapter or observes a reportable incident, he shall document the results of that visit [the results of that visit shall be documented] in accordance with 12VAC5-613-190 [ or as otherwise specified in the operation permit ].

B. Whenever an operator performs [operators perform] a visit that is required by this chapter, he [they] shall do so in such a manner as to accomplish the various responsibilities and assessments required by this chapter through visual or other observations and through laboratory and field tests that are required by this chapter or that he deems [they deem] appropriate.

C. Each operator [Operators] shall keep an electronic or hard copy log for each AOSS for which he is [they are] responsible. The [Each] operator shall provide a copy of the log to the owner. In addition, the operator shall make the log available to the department upon request. At a minimum, the operator shall record the following items in the log:

The procedure for determining ground water needs to codified before this definition can be applied. Water table level is the single most predominant factor affecting the use of and individuals land.  Vac 610-470 Para D, E attempts to do this but.  610-D method is very arbitrary as to which water table is being determined. The water table indicated could be from 100 years ago before any land drainage in the surrounding area. The current W/T may be much deeper. Codify how 610-470 Para E method will be used in the determination.

Recommend amending 12VAC5-613-40  as follows:

G. [ In accordance with standard engineering practice, each Each] application
under § 32.1-163.6 of the Code of Virginia shall include a site [and soil]
characterization report [prepared by an individual licensed as an Alternative Onsite Soil Evaluator or other licensed soil professional] using the Field Book for Describing and Sampling Soils, Version 2.0, National Soil Survey Center, Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture,September 2002. The report may contain such information that the designer [evaluator] deems appropriate; however, it must describe the following minimum attributes of the site of the proposed soil treatment area:

Thank you for your consideration.

Definition section 613-10 "Ground Water" needs to establish a length of time period in the case of observed wetting fronts passing through the soil. Under the current definition a wetting front after a large amount of rain could be deemed as a water table. Water tables that persist for more than about 21 days or otherwise anaerobic water tables are the issue with soils acting as a treatment media.

When soliciting sample data for consideration of listing secondary treatment units for General Approval under TL-2 or TL-2 standards please define the location of sampling, and the statistical requirements for acceptance of this application. Current sample handling allows some manufacturers to sample lysimeters (which filter solids) beneath the trench bottom, while others grab sample from a d-box  or effluent port. Allow a level playing field and let the OSE/PE and consumer consider the data.

Define a protocol which all manufacturers may meet; e.g: Sample volume and handling must be by auto sample interval of 5ml/hour over course of 24 hour test period of 10 systems installed within the Commonwealth of Virginia.  Provide for sample  preservation and testing under BOD & TSS standard methods. Statistical reporting must include: sample size, distribution, mean values.

It should be more important to define what these effluent qualities are, and since it is unlikely that there shall be third party review let us at least define the means to compare.

Is there an Administrative function at VDH or DPOR which will require documentation of licensure?

Currently there appears to be no requirement for any party  (owner, EHS, OSE, PE) to verfify the licensure of an installer. Owners have a difficult time negotiating the DPOR website, if they are even aware of the listing system, since cross references are by locality, name or field. There are SDS contractors in the system, who are not certified for Onsite Installation. VDH does not require a license number on the As-built Report, nor the Completion Statement. DPOR seems to have taken the stand that it does not regulate unlicensed contractors, since they only have jurisdiction over those who are licensed. Contractors have paid fees and complied with training and other requirements, but are competing with unlicensed or unqualified individuals and firms.