Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 02-01-2000 - 10bORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT . Meeting Date: February 1, 2000 Action Agenda Item No. /Q4 SUBJECT: W Treatment Management Program Expansion DEPARTMENT: I Health PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No ATTACHMENT(S): Executive Outli a of Proposal Educational Plan Discussion Paper INFORMATION CONTACT: Rosemary Summers, ext 2411 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough 732-8181 Chapel Hill 968-4501 Durham 688-7331 Mebane 336-227-2031 PURPOSE: To provide a report to the Board on the educational plan and initial financing of the Wastewater Treatment Management Program (WIMP) expansion. BACKGROUND History of Current Program The current Wastewater Treatment Management Program (WIMP) was approved by the Board of Commissioners in 19?i95. The program inspects non-municipal discharging wastewater systems and municipal sludge sites. These are commonly called "alternative systems" and include low pressure pipe systems, pump conventional systems, large systems, discharging sand filters, and non-municipal package plants, in addition to sludge application sites. The impetus to explore the expansion of the current WTMP was three result of a joint meeting of the Board of Commissioners and the OWASA Board in the spring of 1998, and a subsequent meeting of the Board of Health. All three boards recognized that existing failure rates of conventional septic systems are not likely to improve without action and that centralized wastewater disposal will not be a repair option in many areas of the county. History of Expansion Proposal The Board of Health farmed a special committee at its August 1998 meeting to consider whether citizens in the county would benefit from an expansion of the current wastewater treatment management program (WTMP) than would include conventional on-site wastewater systems (septic systems). The WTMP Expansion Committee, composed of representatives from the County Commissioners, OWASA, Hillsborough Town Engineer, the Board of Health, health department staff, Commission for the Environment, planning department staff, and county manager's office met several times in the fall of 1998 and into 1999. The Board of Health approved the conceptual plan in November 1998, subject to Commissioner approval of resources needed to further refine the plan. The proposal was presented to a joint Board of Health, Board of Commissioners work session in March 1999. The Commissioners expressed interest b t desired to see a further refinement and expansion of the Educational Plan component of the proposal. Staff prepared a draft educational plan that was reviewed and refined by the Expansion Committee and submitted to the Board of Health for approval. The Board of Health approved the Educational Plan end the Executive Outline at its July meeting and directed staff to forward the plan to the Board of Commissioners for approval and funding. The Proposed Expansion of the Program The problem this program addresses takes into account two major factors; first that of the approximately 20,000 conventional septic systems in Orange County, about 8 to 10 percent experience some degree of failure and second that extension of sewer lines as a remedy in most situations in the county is impractical and/or undesireable. The county is therefore faced with a situation where some 2,000 homes may be discharging waste that can affect groundwater and other surface waters that are sources of public and private water supplies. The expansion of this program is designed to: • improve source water quality, • prevent disease transmission, • optimize septic system lives, • maintain and preserve septic system repair areas, • avoid or delay septic system repairs • minimize obstructions to transfers of property due to failing septic systems, especially those with limited or no viable repair options, and • reduce the expansion of collection systems through optimizing septic system lives. The proposal utilizes three basic approaches: education, homeowner incentives, and an inspection program. Phase One of the program would engender development of a public awareness campaign regarding importance of septic systems, development of educational modules and a training plan, establishment of a database of septic systems, and further development of the homeowner incentive and inspection program. In addition, grant funds will be sought during the first year to offset the costs of the program's initial development and to establish a revolving fund for homeowner incentives and potential repairs. Grant funding would specifically be sought to establish the database for future evaluation of both the project itself as well as to begin monitoring water quality by geographical sector. Phase One is projected to take approximately two years. Phase Two would continue the education program developed and initiated in Phase One and begin the homeowner incentive and inspection program as further developed in phase one. The grants sought in Phase One are intended to minimize the financial impact on homeowners that may need repairs identified during the inspections conducted during the second phase of the program. Phase Two is projected to begin in year three, but will depend on progress in Phase One. Request to Board of Commissioners The Board of Health is requesting that the Board of Commissioners approve Phase One of the WTMP Expansion proposal, which includes the implementation of the Educational Plan, establishment of the database, seeking grant funding, and the further development and refinement of the remainder of the proposal. Year One of Phase One of the proposal approved by the Board of Health calls for one permanent, full- time Health Educator to be hired to: • refine the educational plan in the attachment, • begin the,public awareness campaign, and • begin materials development for further training. In addition, Year One also calls for homeowner incentives to be defined and for grant funding to be sought for re-inspection start-up funding and/or for the establishment of a revolving fund for repairs of. failing systems. Year Two of Phase One calls for • hiring a GIS database specialist at .5 FTE to begin database development as a long-term planning and evaluation tool, • further development of training materials, • holding educational sessions for targeted groups and individuals, • random inspection sampling to assess the need for full program of re-inspections, and • finalize funding mechanisms for program continuation. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Assuming hiring a health educator beginning March 1, 2000, costs would include: • four months of salary and benefits (approximately $14,801), ? one time start-up costs (approximately $3,300) --includes office furniture, computer • operating costs (approximately $7,500) -- $5,000 for focus groups, materials purchase, or materials development. The total cost in the 1999-2000 fiscal year would be $25,600. In the 2000-2001 budget, the costs would be: ? a full-year salary and benefits for health educator (approximately $44,429) • $15,000 for operating expenses for a subtotal of $59,429 for the education plan ? salary and benefits for a half-time GIS specialist (approximately $12,179) ? one-time start-up costs (approximately $13,000 -- includes a GIS workstation, printer, office furniture) ? operating expenses ($3,000) for a subtotal of $28,179 for the addition of GIS. The total cost for the 2000-2001 fiscal year would be $87,608. Funds are available inl the Miscellaneous Expenditure function, Manager's Miscellaneous account, to fund the current year costs. If the Board approves the program, projected funds for the following year will be included in the 000-01 Manager's Recommended Budget this spring. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board receive the report. 4 MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE OUTLINE WTMP EXPANSION PROPOSAL July 14,1999 Board of Health Adopted July 22, 1999 Como nts 1. Education (Draft plan attached) 2. Homeowner Incentives and Methods' of ' ' g Financial Impact on Homeowners • Possible low interest loans or grants through a revolving fund for septic system repairs • Exemption or delays from some re-inspections based on proper cbeclding and maintenance of individual systems • Free advanced training for community or homeowners' associations volunteers to be "ambassadors" in wastewater management and " first responder" duties • Possible free water sampling or other services provided at the time of the re-inspections. 3. Re-inspections • The option given the most favorable response for re- inspections is to begin in the water quality critical areas and expand outwards to the corresponding watersheds and eventually to the whole county Objectives 1. Improve source water quality through protection of both ground waters and surface waters 2. Prevent disease transmission 3. Optimize septic system lives 4. Maintain and preserve septic system repair areas 5.. Avoid or delay septic system repairs 6. Minimize obstructions to transfers of property due to failing septic systems, especially those with limited or no viable repair options 7. Reduce expansion of collection systems through optimizing septic system lives. S Phase One 1°t year - Projected startup date: January 2000 1. Educational plan development, implementation of community awareness, and module development - See attached plan 2. ' Define homeowner incentives - 3. Begin search and submit applications for startup monies from federal and state agencies for re-inspections and possible revolving fund monies for repairs of failing systems Staffing required: One fall-time health educator 2nd year . I. Education plan continues -- sessions for individuals and targeteu groups 2. Random inspection sampling to assess need for full program of re-inspections - sampling to be drawn from existing system inspections completed in the normal course of applications received in the Environmental Health office 3. Complete final framework for re-inspections and frequency of 4. Nualize funding. mechanisms for program continuation S. Continue funding search for repair of failing systems (if Staffing required: Half-tune GIS/database position Phase Two 3`d, 4" and years 1. On oing education to individuals 2. Complete Hrst round of educational efforts to targeted groups 3. Begin re-inspections 4. Ha a revolving fund monies, if available, in place for grants or low?interest loans to repair failing systems discovered d - - wring Staffing required: 1 full-dime Registered Sanitarian 6 Beyond five years 1. Re-educate/update education of targeted groups 2. Continue individual and community educational efforts with upgrades as necessary _ 3. Continue re-inspections - complete cycle for all systems should occur in approximately 20 years Staffing required: 2-5 full-time additional Registered Sanitarians for re-inspections. Depends on scope determined in year two. Funding QRtIons L. Federal or State grants - for start-up of specific portions of the program and for reducing costs to homeowners of potential repairs 2. General fund 3. Fee per inspection 4. Annual operations permit fee charged to the owners of inspected systems structured to recover actual cost of inspection in 5(?) years 5. Annual fee charged to all septic system owners structured to recover direct costs of service delivery on an annual basis 6. Hybrid or combination 7. Staff recommendation - combination of 1, 2, and 5 above roues Represented io the Workgroun 1. OC Health Department staff 2. OC Board of Health 3. OC Planning Department staff .4. OC Manager's Office staff 5. OC Board of County Commissioners 6. OC Commission for the Environment 7. OWASA & Town of Hillsborough (invited) 9. Triangle J Council of Governments . 10.OC Water Resources Commission (presentation made only) 11. NCSU Cooperative Extension (sent copies of materials only) 7 Educational Plan Orange County Health Department 'astewater Treatment Management Plan Expansion July 149 19" Board of Health Adopted July 22,1999 Submitted b)r Cornelia Ramsey, Health Education Phase I Phase II Phase III Phase N Phase V Staff Requirements Timeline July 14, 1999 Outline of Educational Plan Preparation and Public Awareness Planning and Development Evaluation and Tracking System and Staff Preparation Educational Implementation Evaluation 8 Page 3 S 7 8 11 11 12 July 14,1999 Introduction The WTMP educ a Public Ai ¦ Planning WTMP Educational Plan plan consists of 5 phases: :d Development of Training Modules and Educational Materials and Tracking ition of Educational Activities and Measurement 9 These phases focus on the important stages of educating the community about wastewater treatment The ieducatiional plan outlines the purpose and strategies of each phase. Staff needs are discussed on page 11 and the timeline is shown in the Gantt chart (page 12). Phase I: Public Phase I consists of a variety of strategies intended to build community support for the WTMP. The strategies include use of media outlets, distribution of informational brochures, working with community organizations and an information day with the environmental health.staff. The public awareness i?mpaign will serve to "kick-ofP' the educational phase of the WT11e program and lay the foundation for the implementation of educational activities. Phase I • Introduce the important topic (W'I'MP) to the community; clarify purpose; benefits (see WT MP Plen); • "Frame the issue" - clarify the link between individual septic tank care and individual benefits (1©nger system life, lack of sewer availability, reduced obstacles to home sales, etc) safes water (i.e. detail the benefits of WTMP including soil preservation, water prot?cdon, protection of land values, environmental stewardship etc.); • Solicit pullic input for the initiative; • Mobilize 1wc;al organizations (e.g. neighbourhood associations) and-interpersonal networks of key opinion leaders to support the initiative. Strategies: 1. Focus grou 2. Submit a ti issues, clar Health Din 3. Develop br stores, lion available. 4. Develop in 5. Develop in 6. Identify tar 7. Identify civ farm associ staff to glvc or some similar method of getting public input. part news article to local newspapers to present the data regarding the the. initiative and recommended procedures (interview with Environmental n) and outline the solutions and tips for homeowners. lures to be placed in identified public outlets (e.g. pharmacies, hardware s etc.). Brochure will include summary of data, alternatives and resources rational flyers for churches, businesses, and health clubs. 6rmatiion on county/environmental health web page. et communities (through GIS) and conduct a mass mailing (of brochure). c organizations (e.g. Kiwanis, Lions, and Rotary), and other groups (e.g., lion groups, neigborhood associations), and send mailings and/or send health presentations. July 14,1999 10 9. Develop a short 5-question "teaser" to send through schools or mail in utility bill. This will ask key questions about septic maintenance and include resources for more information. 10. Participate in local cable access television program. 11. Environmental health hosts. an information day for the community. 12. Target all Orange County governing boards and all appropriate regulatory/advisory boards for presentations about WTMP and current wastewater technologies. 13. Conduct Community Forums. 14. Educate critics and other residents concerned with WIMP through community forums, .focus groups and targeted presentations which include purpose, benefits etc.) Measures: Circulation of brochures, flyers, short questionnaire. Number of orwi=ons or boards contacted. Number of "hits" on web page. Number of individuals in mass mailing(s). Number of participants in Information Day. Brochures will briefly provide: • Summary of WTNIP (pw:pose, overview - see WTMP Plan for detail) • Outline benefits (i.e. soil and water protection, environmental stewardship, protecting land, values, informing homeowners to be `proactive in septic maintenance) • Highlight tips for maintenance (i.e. frequency of pumping etc.) • List of "Do's and Don'ts" . • List on contacts and educational programs and materials available. The short questionnaire (to be sent through the schools or other county wide mailing) will ask key teaser questions for homeowners. EXAMPLES of questions that may be used: 1. Do you know the X % of Orange County homes have wells and septic tanks rather than depending on public systems? YOU MAY BE ONE OF THOSE HOMEOWNWERS. 2. What is the most important factor homeowners should know, about wells and septic teaks? 3. How do you protect the water quality for your family? 4. Did you know that, depending on where you live in Orange County, public sewer may never be available to your house, even if your septic system and those around you fail? July 14,1999 Phase II: Plmning and Development 11 Phase II consists I of first identfying other similar W'I'MP programs in the U.S. and reviewing the educational plan$ and materials used. Depending on appropriateness of other materials, either adopt existing resources or develop educational modules for the target audiences in orange County. Several modules are necessary because there are several different interested parties in the WIMP and each plays a separate but important role in the success of the VnW. Phase H The purpose of phase two is to establish mechanisms to reach all interested target audiences and clearly define dw role in WIMP. The development of educational modules will: • Provide consistency across all educational sessions; • Increase Imowledge about WIMP and develop skills in maintenance; and • Establish a working network to support W'I'MP- and system referrals among training session pacticipants- The training modules will contain core educational pieces but will be adapted to fit the audience (e.g. homeowners installers etc.) needs. Training modules are needed for the following audiences: • Business ('real estate, banks etc.); • Homeowners (volume 1 and volume 2); • Septic Tank Installers; • Pumpers; • Community Wastewater system pperakws; and, • Governing and Regulatory/Advisory Boards. Modules should include (in varying detail): i• 'Introduction (purpose, goals of WIMP, learning objectives) ii. overview of county policies and WIMP fees, incentives iii. Explanation of. alternative systems conventional systems iv. Generally recommended schedule of checks and pumping V. Referral list of resources (including `preferred" list) vi. Sample forms vii. Sample homeowner tip sheet (e.g. maintenance, "do's and don'ts") viii. Expected outcomes ix. Measures of evaluation July 14,1999 12 It is suggested that representatives from each of the target audiences participate in the development of the module. Also, it would be very valuable to recruit volunteers from each target audience group to train others and act as liaisons for information. These volunteers can be trained by the health educator to teach the educational modules. These individuals will be health department staff, community volunteers and representatives from the target audiences. The program materials necessary to complete the educational plan (developed or adapted from other source) (see examples): 1. Homeowner guide (volume 1- basic and, volume 2 -certification) 2. Tip sheet (to be posted in garage/shed) 3. Brochure for community distribution 4. Flyers for Information Day 5. Outline for presentations to Civic groups/organizations 6. Follow-up survey for homeowners (after training) 7. Five (5) question teaser for school/utility mailing 8. Newspaper articles 9. Sample forms 10. Brochure to recruit participants for training The specific septic tank materials to be developed or adapted: 1. Technical/mechanical guide (for homeowners) 2. Check or Pumping Schedule 3. Reference List 4. List of `referred pumpers" 5. Troubleshooting - signs of failing system and what to do 6. Most common repairs (how and. who to asks for help) 7. Videos on home maintenance July 14,1999 Phase III: and Tracking System and Staff Preparation 13 Phase III has two distinct but related components: computer database management and staff development. The computer database is important to track the progress of the WIMP program. The staff development component is important for orienting county staff to the new program, the educational materials and the new county policies regarding wastewater treatment. For evaluation purposes it is important to track the level of participation in the WTIVIP educational plan. Fortunately, the OCHD has a GIS workstation for environmental health. With this system, environmental health staff can target water quality critical areas and identify the most urgent (defined as containing failing systems)- neighborhoods needing intervention. Also, staff can track participants in the educational sessions and then compare improvements to those areas receiving the education and follow-up. Phase III Purpos : The purpose :ofyhase t?iree is.to: • Estaban efficient system of tracking and record bmpbW, • Utilize available technology (GIS system) to mrpport public health initiatives; • Establish a system with ongoing monitoring of initiatives activities (businesses, homeowners); and • Track changes in practices of installers and pummpen. The GIS system wV be used to graphically display baseline data and periodic updates on the following: a. Location of septic tanks in Orange County, b. Identity of priority neighborhoods (based on number of failing systems in the critiiak areas selected); C. Tracking of education and training; d. Tracking of pumping/septic tank checks (before training and after training); e. Tracking of failed systems. The second component in phase three is the staff orientation. The staff education and orientation consists of an overview of the VnW plan and, the educational plan. It includes clarification of changes in policies and procedures, the GIS tracking and the evaluation procedures. July 14,1999 Phase IV: Educational implementation 14 The largest component of the WTMP educational plan is the implementation phase. This phase involves the environmental health staff,. community volunteers, and the environmental health educator in conducting the educational programs for homeowners, governing and regulatory/advisory boards, installers, pumpers, other businesses and wastewater system operators- Phase IV Goal: To promote and protect public health, preserve. water resources, assure proper septic system functionality, extend the average life of septic systems in Orange County reduce or delay repair costs and minimize "loss of sale" possibilities for homes on the market. Phase IV Purpose: The purpose of the implementation phase is to: • Increase knowledge about wastewater treatment; + Change behavior to ensure optimal fimcdoning of individual septic systems in Orange County • Protect the health of Orange County resides through better protection of water supplies. Objective 1: To educate homeowners about the care and maintenance of septic systems and train homeowners to be knowledgeable in basic and advanced septic system maintenance. Year 2 Train 5% of homeowners (in priority neighborhoods) in basic (volume 1). Train 5% of new homeowners in Orange County (bought home within last 3 years). Visit 10'/6 of homeowner associations. Train 5% of homeowners in advanced (volume 2) for certification. Year 3 Same as above. Send follow-up survey to trained homeowners. Measures . Number of homeowners trained. Number of homeowners certified. Number of associations visited. % of associations actively participating in educational program (recruiting). Length of time between system installation, pumping schedule and needed repairs. Objective 2: To educate 1® proper mainte for education, Year 2 Reach 10'/0 of Reach 5% of L Year 3 Reach an additi Follow-up with Measures: % trained (dev, °/.homeowners % develovers/1 Objective 3: To educate septic Year 2 Educate 5% of Establish volum Ensure 100'/o c Year 3 Conduct random i Others activities s Measures- Number trained. Number complex Number on prefi Compliance rate Percentage of in, July 14,1999 1s institutions personnel, developers, builders, realtors and attorneys regarding of septic systems, indications of system failures and homeowner resources ical, and possible financial assistance for septic system operation and repairs. pens, builders with education and training in septic systems. institution personnel, realtors and attorneys with education and training. 10% of developers and 5% of leaders. : trained in year 1 to identify any problems or gaps in training. y lenders etc.). lag Lof?IDatlonal packet. including discussion of septic systems in their transactions. install ers about WTMp program and educational resources available. `preferred list" for those completing training. fete training evaluation. ction of Vla to ensure compliance. as above evaluation. I list. t installation standards. rs slurring educational materials with homeowners. July 14,1999 Objective 4: 16 To educate septic system pumpers regarding measurement of biosolids and indicated pumping, Year 2 Educate 5% of pumpers. Establish voluntary `prefem ed list" for those completing training. Ensure 100% complete training evaluation. Conduct survey with at least 50% of pumpers to establish baseline data regarding the frequency of checking vs. pumping. Survey 20% of homeowners to identify frequency of pumping, Use OWASA dumping slips to track pumping. Year 3 Same as above. Follow-up with pumpers to assess utilization of forms and check changes in pumping/checking behavior. Meares: Number trained. Number on preferred list. Participation in pumpers survey/ frequency of pumping. Participation in homeowner survey regarding pumping frequency. Objective 5: To educate the wastewater system operators and management entities to accept septage and support only appropriate transactions. Year 2 Send informational packet to 100% of operatics. Meet with 100'/0 of operators to ensure policies are umderstood. Establish a method (working with the operators) of lracldng transactions in frequency and appropriateness (e.g. form for record keeping, sign-in information etc.). ear 3 Follow-up with operators to identify system changes. Identify other training needs. Mea.?aes: Number trained (% of operator systems employees trained). Use of record keeping system by pumpers and operators. July 14,19" Phase V; An evaluation b public health ism meets the goals E environmental h4 component of "c evaluations after annual or biannu Process indcc atoi indicators include maintenance. Improved se rvic4 Reduced preman Reduced frequen Increased frequa Increased homeo Number of appro Number of indivi Number of organ Changes in practi Percentage of prc (Improved water and Measurement 17 essential to ensure the activities implemented are appropriate to address the es, that the activities reach the target audiences and that the educational plan ad objectives (of increasing knowledge and changing attitudes) to improve the alth of Orange County residents. The evaluation plan must have an ongoing kntinuous quality improvement" to allow feedback into the system (e.g.- ach training session) as well as overall annual or biannual component The 1 evaluation consists of process and outcome standard indicators of success. include the number trained, number of groups visited by staff etc. Outcome improved services, frequency of pumping, changes in homeowner of installers, pumpers, environmental health staff septic tank failures of pumping y of septic tank checks rier maintenance activities (homeowner logs) d septic systems (identified by Envr. Staff) ials trained fiom each target audience (homeowners, pumpers etc.) ations visited (Civic groups etc.) W of pumpers etc. ssionals receiving education (e.g. realtors, lenders, installers etc.) iality M) The evaluation plan has been woven throughout the educational plan including activities at each phase. It is suggested that an annual evaluation is conducted and report submitted by environmental health staff to measure program effectiveness. Staff Dedicated health content informati, skills in media fat development, sw prepared health et acation staff is necessary to complete this educational outline with detailed plan, implement and evaluate the WTMP educational plan. Knowledge and atioan, community organization, public speaking, teaching, materials design and evaluation are necessary to ensue program success. A master's ator is recommended for this position. July 14,1999 Page 12 Timeline for VnW Educational Plan (general overview estimates) Months Phase Jan 00 Apr 00 July 00 Jan 01 A Phase it (Year One) Public Awareness News articles Brochures Distributed Community meetings Visit Civic groups/Focus groups Target mailings Phase 11 (Year One) Planning & Development Materials Development Module Development Scheduling Trainings Recruitment of Volunteers Phase III (Year Two, then ongoing) Computer & Sr4,,sf' Baseline data collection (GIS) Ongoing Data collection Train staff Phase IV (Year Two, then ongoing) Educational Implementation Homeowner training Business training Installer/Pumper training Governing board education System Operator Education Phase V Evaluation & Measurement Public Awareness Efforts Module Development Computer System (valid & reliable?) Trainings Annual Assessment x x X x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X X 19 W Orange County Health Department r Treatment Management Program Expansion Discussion Paper and Proposal Orange County Board of Health Adopted November 19, 1998 20 WTMP Expansion Proposal . Board of Health Decision Summary November 19, 1998 BACKGROUND The discussion paper that follows was presented to the Board of Health at its regular meeting on November 19, 1998. After deliberation, the Board decided that it would forward the following options for Presentation to the Board of County Commissioners for its goal setting retreat in December 1998. The Board directed the staff to place emphasis on why the expansion is needed in Orange County. EXPANSION NEEDED TO 1. Protect and promote public health and preserve natural resources by. • Protecting watersheds and all other surface waters. • Protecting groundwater. • Lessening the chance of disease transmission from failing septic. systems. 2. To lessen the financial impact of repairing individual septic systems by- • Extending the average septic system life countywide. • Preserve all available repair strategies an individual sites. 3. Public sewer moons into certain areas of the County will not be a viable option in most instances in the future. Septic systems must then be viewed as a perpetual utility; not a stopgap until sewer arrives. BOARD OF HEALTH DECISIONS FROM DISCUSSION PAPER 1. Entry into the Program: The Board chose option 3 (Water Quality Critical Areas) as the preferred starting point The following reasons were cited • This approach best effects the actions necessary to meet the goals of protection and promotion of public health for all citizens of the County and to preserve the natutal resources by tackling older neighborhoods with higher rates of failures and also by starting with the water quality critical areas of the designated watersheds and expanding to coverage outward from the impouadments. Both rural and town dwellers benefit immediately from this approach and may realize cost savings over the long haul fi om increased average septic system life or relatively lower water treatment costs. • The latest dram of the Water and Sewer Boundary Task Force agreement allows for sewed extension only in dire circumstances in many areas of the County. This approach may be the best method for discovery of situations that are degrading but are still fixable so that public sever extensions are not indicated. It also sets the stage for those systems going in, either new or replacement, to realize a maximum life span and provides better assurance that all repair strategies are kept intact • New and repaired system owner, while not set for re-inspection before 5-10 years form the date of installation approval, would still receive tailored educational materials at the time they begin to use their system. 21 z. elements the need 3. 4. Funding. with gene fees for x the percea method a : Pkrn: The Board supported the full education plan as presented with intended for general and target specific audiences. Emphasis was placed on ar this comprehensive plam rwn Frequency: The. Board agreed with the committee that the five-year with the homeowner incentive to extend it to ten years with proper cc was the preferred option. The Board chose the hybrid approach of partially paying for the expansion gal fends and making up the rest of the costs with annual operations permit bmission to the Board of Commissions. The Board did not stipulate what tage breakdown should be but felt that this would be the most equitable ' distritaing the costs of the program to all those who will benefit from its 22 ORANGE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT .. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION WTMP EXPANSION CO]VIl UME MEETINGS September 3% 1998 October 21, 1998 November 3,1998 "In our zeal to promote onsite and duster systems as a more. cost-effective method of wastewater management in small communities, we have focused too much on technologies. . Our interest in technologies is performance and cost, while the potential user's interest is in service. To gain the attention of potential users, we have often denigrated central sewerage in favor of decentralized treatment systeme This is a mistaken approach because onske and duster systems are not perceived by the public as providing equal service... What is good about central sewerage-cen&d management-is what is bad about onsite system& .. . When we are able to show that onsite systems can be designed and operated over extended planning periods to meet water quality and public health objectives, onske technologies will gain stature equal to conventional sewerage This will be achieved only through centralized management. While decentralization of treatment is the outcome centralization of management must be the approach. Richard J. Otis, P.F. Y.P., Ayres Associates, Madison , WI 1998 ASAE Onsite Conference SUMMARY On Septemmber 30, 1998, the ad-hoc WTMP Expansion Committee met at the Sow Human Services Building in its first session to forge details for the proposal. In attendance were Brenda Crowder-Gaines and Rick M ins w of the Orange County Board of Health, Margaret Brown of the Orange County Board of Commissioners, Pat Davis and Barry Jacobs of the OWASA Board, John Lank and Paul Thames of the Orange County Manager's office, Gene Bell of the Orange County Planning'Department, Ed Kerwin of the OWASA A4 and Rosie Summers, Ron Holdway, Tom Konsler and Cornelia Ramsey of the Orange County Health Department. A work group also met on October 21 to hither discuss details of the expansion. A final meeting of the full committee met on November 3 and finalized some of the details for the proposal. perry 1 Mr 11 23 This group was formed under a directive from the Orange County Board of Health to provide input to the three main, components of the expansion to include gravity flow septic systems in the VVTlVIP framework, The components are education, homeowner incentives and re-inspections. Outlines of the history of the current WIMP initiatives and the expansion were presented to the cxnnmittee for cansidesatian and guidance. Rosie Summers and Ran Holdway fidItated the The impjetus to explore the expansion came from a joint meeting of the Board of Commissioners and the OWASA Board and an ensuing meeting of the Board of Health. All three boards recognize that existing fadurw rates (& 10%) are not likely to improve without action and that centralized wastewater disposal will not be a repair option in many areas of the county in the fareseceble fit=. Failures are cause d by a variety of facto9r% mast notably-poor soils conditions, wetter seasons and individual household water habits To pu vvent premature failures, long tern management must be implemented to extend the usable lives of systems and preeserve repair strategies. Since there are no programs. in place in North Carolina which include managemat for all on-site systems, staff looked at example: from several other localities nationwide with a full management approach in place or under consideration. These localities included Georgetown Divide in Califorrk Ten Towns jurisdiction in New Jersey, Cuyahoga, County in Ohio and??, Jwn, Rhode Island, EPA recommendations were also reviewed for reference, and applicability as well as information fiom state level agencies in North Carolina, Michigan, and Hawaii. After discussion by the. committee, the proposal will be presented to the Board of Health fair action pumm t to NCGS §13oA-39. If apparoved, the 8o to the BOCC for ? will then funding consideratio®.. Staff would like for the BOCC to have the putuipoW for this consideration at their December retreat. In the meantime, staff will explorre the posffi'b ty of pig maps of recent septic system repairs both by township and in the OWASA service area. Current wort & The e6t0onal efforts in use in the WTW area, today are by individual contact, printed m?uGerial given at the time of occupancy of new homes, other brochures for existing homes, and the Internet site. Mass mailin are also used, but are not routine- The emphases of the edughanal efforts are to promote and protect public health, pre sme water resources, and eartend the average life of septic systems in . Orange Ca?unty- One of the main facts that must be cotinually emphasized in this effort is that the systems must be viewed by all parties--homeowners, government and private sector contmctors -.as a perpetual utility which must fimction for the life of the house, not just as a stopgap until public sewer arrives. Pa aP7nf10) 24 Individual contact with the system owner is the most effective means of education, but it is also the most labor intensive and sometimes difficult to coordinate. It is the surest way to familiarise homeowners with the location and fimctional aspects of their septic system to where they become more competent in its continued optimal operational performance. In many instances, this type of interaction reduces both the perception of intrusion and the feelings of animosity while providing something more than a technical report in the mail to learn from. The dissemination of printed material, both for new septic systems and existing situations, is in place, but several aspects of its use need retooling. A primary problem is that, in many situations, the ultimate owners of the properly are not known when the Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the home and therefore they do not get the initial packet of information for their septic system. This same problem also holds true when a property is sold or otherwise transferred from one Party to another. Part of the solution to this dilemma will be targeting special - groups for education as mentioned below in the future efforts section. Another way to approach this problem is the periodic use of mass mailings stressing the benefits of understanding and properly maintaining septic systems. The mailings can be individually sent or incorporated into the tax bill.mailings. Regardless of the future of the WTMP expansion, reviews and reworks of both the printed materials and the Internet site are. underway and should be complete by the and of the year. Future Efforts General - It is the opinion of the committee that several options should be explored to better "marker the educational materials. These included: • Videos on septic systems, especially maintenance • Education level oriented materials • Promoting a "conservation lifestyle" • Yellow'Pages ads for repair advice and contact numbers • Promotion of septic systems as a safe and ecologically sound method of wastewater disposal • Promotion of onsite wastewater technologies as an integral part of the county's 2 Better Rem - Future post-inspection reports should be geared toward enhancing long-term performance of the system and education of the owner, not just providing advice for discovered non-compliance and failures. This effort will be made regardless of the WTIVIP expansion. Target Grouos - Several specialized groups targeted for specific educational efforts will help eliminate some of the current problems and prevent future problems in the expansion. Because of the health department unique role in the n--,2 -01,1 25 involve in all aspects of wastewater systems, it will become the local educational resource for technicians, homeowners, pumpers and other groups with motions to permitting and management issues. 1. Lending Insdmaons, Developers, Builders, Realtors and Attorneys: These groups are targeted for education because they are crucial in passing on information about septic systems during property transactions, home sales, closings or even listings of property. The first: seep of the education could be accomplished by the Environmental Health staff asking far an appearance before executive comet Um or frill session meetings of local affiliate groups on al periodic basis. Update meetings and regular mailings of specific printed literature will be needed to keep all members current. The committee wanted somehow to include Realtors and lending institutions in the chain of disclosure of system type and management rents, but there was no firm agreement on haw this could be accomplished. In the work group session, a focus group with repreaenta?tives from this array of professions was suggested by Margaret Brown to elicit ideas on' onal efforts, 2. Honftowwi?s Associations. All of these associations would be targeted for eduction and all will be encouraged to view ongoing septic system Maintenance as a community effort and, a community benefit. The group also wanted to explore whether, in new developments, requirements for system operation can be incorporated into subdivision covenantL A listing may be available from the "Community Watch" program. 3. Septic System Installers: These contractors are now suj&cted to a simple registration process before they can install septic systems in Ormp County. There is no current requirement for lic ensure or certification. either here or eleere in North Carolina If the expansion goes forward, routine continuing educational sessions sponsored by the Health Department could be considered either as a condition of the registration process or to be put on a "preferred list" of contractors and his information would be provided to permit applicants. Si' method of sanction and removal of renegade or incompetent contractors must also be implemented so that frequent violators of installation standards can be effectively managed, 4. Septic System Pwnpers: Whm a citizen calls a septic pumper today for routine roam tix? of a system, the pumper, inmost cases, empties the tank without regard far the actual level of the biosolids. In some instances, the removal of biosae before they reach a detrimental depth is weeny and may adversely affect the biology of the tank. The pumpers would be encouraged throu#h education to check the biosolids and empty them only when necessary. An upside of this process is that the pumper could charge a lesser fee when the tank is not cleaned because they save the costs of disposal at the accepting wastewater treatment plant phis the travel there to dump the load. The homeowner saves by paying a lesser amount for the pumper's service and the ev" increase of the volume of septage needing'disposal is minimized. The startup and equipment costs for the pumpers to implement this practice are minimal. The group went further to say that more information is needed from each pumper on the origins of the septage and on those systems which are bens A ,.-' 7'$ 26 fitly pumpe& Staff could prepare and provide to the pumpers a simple, self carbon, standardized report form to use and submit as they check and empty septic tanks. This information might give clues to where the septic system "trouble spots" are in the county. Pumpers are the logical choice to provide this information as part of the dump report to the accepting utility. As the information from these reports is compiled, homeowners with frequent pumps would be sent educational mailers on how to deal with problem systems. 5. Wastewater System Operatm and Management Entities: These groups are mentioned because of their wide range of activities and impacts in multiple areas. All area municipal wastewater treatment plants will be encouraged to accept septage, principally because, if the expansion is implemented, the volume of this material will increase manifold. There may also be some grant monies available for construction upgrades for municipal plants in the near future which might be available for a septage receiving station. Other operators and managemem entities are included for periodic education because of the ever changing technologies in the wastewater disposal field. A preferred list of these firms could also be produced in conjunction with a quality - assurance program crafted by stall HOMEOWNER INCENTIVES Types of Incentives: Many incentives were discussed and the following were put forth as options for consideration. These incentive examples generally assume that fees will be the sole or partial base of fwuling the expansion. Extension of the Re inMpWM Frequency -- Homeowners who check and pump their systems according to recommended guidelines would be eligible for an extension of the minimum review period for inspection by the Health Department For example, if the review frequency is set at 5 years, any septic system checked and pumped as necessary would not be inspected by the Health Department for 10 years provided the owner supplies proper documentation to our office. The extension would be granted only once during each re-inspection cycle, meaning the Health Depar' I would inspect the system at least every 10 years. Similarly, owners who opt to become certified m. system operation, manage their systems and report findings to the Health Department could be granted extensions, but not exclusions. This certification generally requires attendance to a school for 4 days and passing a exam an the presented. material. Checking the system would involve measuring the solids depths in the septic tank and pumping if necessary, assessing the condition of the filter and cleaning or replacing as needed and reporting this information either directly or indirectly to the Health Department Community Benefits - Another type of benefit discussed was reduction of septage dumping costs for citizens located in designated watersheds. This benefit is a consideration because the individual watersheds will be further protected with the T_-_ c . n4^ 27 strictly OWAS would l before and itation of the VnW expansion. The granting of this benefit would be the discretion of the owner of the particular impoundment, either the Town of Hillsborough or the City of Durham. Each governing board approached and asked about its willingness to entertain such a move y details are worked out It is probably not feasible to consider flits in the case of Jordan Lake because of the multi-jurisdictional watersheds allocations. v onm. for In to the Pro - It was suggested that one incentive to draw existing systems into the program could be the waiving of fees for the first consultation and inspection for volunteering ownem Slidin Fee Scale - This incentive was mentioned not only in the context of having differing fees for various sizeltypes of systems, but also when the ability to pay is a factor. At this time, Enviromneeutal Health does have varying fee charges in permitting of syst®s based on the design-wasWwatw flow of the structure and, this procedure can easily be ortended to re-inspections. Cully, all systems sized at 600 gallbns per day and under are assessed like fees and those above that figure are based on the total gallonage. The issue of developing sliding fee scales based on ability to pay preserits a different' challenge however, as there is no staff ability in place for qualifying applicants. Even if some method of initial qualification evolves, the ability and mechanics for re-certification for each round of hapections is onerous and MANAGENUM RE-INSPECTIONS Eatry into the Program There seemed to be consensus on new and repaired systems being automatically entered i4to the program and that taking on all systems in the county immediately or in a short period of time is not practical. Volunteers will always be accepted as staffing allows, even without the expansion being approved. Requiring entrance for properties having just been transferred was also discussed, but there was no agreement on this option because the housing tuunover rate for rural Orange county was not known by any member of the committee and therefore the impact of this regM=ent is not known. Staff will try to extract some figures from the overall county turnover rate and then estimate the yearly nwnber of homes this requirement would affect. The mechanics. for this re T*ement are still discussed below. New 3yMons -- In the current W nMp rules, all newly installed alternative and Pump systems are automatically entered into the re-inspections cycle as-part of the permitting process. The main classes of systems which now require entry are low pressure pipe systems (LPPs), pump conventional systems and large residential Dftmr iC _-V In 28 and non-residential systems. The frequency of the re-inspection cycle can vary from every six months to once per five. years. This proposal would add all new gravity flow systems and the review frequency time would start at the time the operation permit (final approval) is issued for the system. In the past few yearn, the average number of new gravity flow systems lies been approximately 500 per year. Repaired Sys - As with the new systems, all repaired systems can be included in the programs during the permitting and implementation of the repair strategy. In the past few years, the average number of repaired systems has been approximately 90 per year. Volunteers - As stated above, there will be nothing to pprohi`bit volunteers from entering into the program, and, in practice, it will be encouraged. There will need to be some type of perpetual legal authorization given by the owner for the right of entry to avoid during the xe-inspections in the future. A yearly "cap" on volunteers may be needed so that resources can be adequately maintained, Post Sale - The cause for the requiz=ent of an inspection at or after title transfer for homes with septic systems is touted by EPA in their on site wastewater recommendations for State and local government' consideration. According to. EPA, many states are considering this mandate and all states. or localities should "develop a program for regular inspection" of on site systems. It must be decided whether the post sale inspection, if adopted, should happen immediately or within a given time window after the transfer (e.g., six months) or if the home should enter into the program and have its first inspection at the first review fieequency. If an inspection is to be required immediately, the cost could be integrated into the closing fee. The work group also suggested that the type and age of the systems might determine whether the inspection is immediate or delayed. The advantage of making the requirement at transfer or post sale is that the Health Department will not be .a party to the transaction negotiations between the buyer and seller and consequently not be subjected to the artificial pressures of closings and other financial transactions. There are now adequate private sector inspectors available for the pm-sale 'functionality assessment and systems needing repairs should be flagged during that process. Qptions - At the last meeting, the committee decided the following dree options should be considered for implementation. New and repaired systems (option 1) should be a part of either of the other two options, if selected.. 1. Only New anal Repaired System - This option offers the easiest transition into management of gravity flow systems and is similar to the way alternative systems are entered into management now. But it does not address the issue of immediate watershed protection nor is there any consideration for Aaao7nf19 29 2. 3. targeting neighborhoods with older systems or those with poor sods. All of the funding options would be feasible for this optiem. Slystems at the Time of Sale of the Horse - This option was explored by the group with the funding method being the assessment of an inspection fee at closing and a&rwards, the fimdmg for future inspections could come from tune variety listed below. With the housing turnover in the State estimated at just over seven years, and the County's rely higher, most homes' should be included by the end of the second tumover period or approximately 15 years. A 1 t the end of this 15 year period, all non-participating homes would be entered into the program. S, 6tww Radiating from the Designated Watemha* - In this option, the systems in the water quality critical areas of all designated weds would fig under inspection in the first 5 years. In the next 5 years, the systems in the rest of the designated watersheds would be brought in and in the next 5 years, the rest of the systems in the County would be imspected. This approach is most effective for watershed quality management, Subdivisions with older homes and poorer soils could also be defined and prioritized for inchision, also. The group discussed that this method might be best funded with an annual operations permit fee charged to all those affected households. Eventually, all homes in the County with on-site systems would bel assessed this annual fee. Frequency - Perhaps the most difficult aspect of this proposal to define is how often the gravity now systems should be inspected. There are varying opinions on the recommended frequency of pumping usually based on tank size and population served, but most sources recommend checking an average septic tank every 3-5 Years and Pumping if necessary. Additionally, a new State General Statate, effective) 1-1-99; requires that each new or repaired septic system installed in North Caroliwa be equipped with an effluent filter on the outlet end of the septic tank. These filters are to "Be d?gned and. ? so as not to require maintenance more freuerrtty than once in any three-year period under normally anticipated use. (House Bin 1462). These conditions lend considerable argument to establish ng the re-inspections frequency at three years. T?e co"Pittee debged extensively whether to set the review ftw=cy at 3 years or 5 Years dining the meeting. It was finally decided that 5 years would be the more i'easamable, approach if the standards for e$luat filters met certain design andmamGenance standards beyond the minimum required in the State rules. The agreement an the best way to approach the visit was to set the re-inspection frequency at 5 years with a notice going to each homeowner in the initial mice packet and also in the second year of operation. These documents would state the necessity of checking/pumping the septic tank and the allowance of a 5 year eon if the tank is checked. If the homeowner provides evidence of PA on 2 of II 30 checlong/pumPing before the fifth year of operation, the inspection would be postponed until the end of the tenth year and a new cycle starts from that inspection The extension would be granted only once during each inspection cycle, so the longest period of time a system would go without departmental inspection is 10 years. It may also be prudent to not grant exemptions to systems over a certain age (e.g., 15-20 years) because aging systems present more problems, and are more susceptible to failure. If no response is received by the Health Department, the fifth year visit from the health departrnent would proceed on schedule. Once the expansion began, a sampling of systems could be inspected in 2-3 years to determine if the filters will be problematic before the fifth year inspections are due. If the sampling indicates high numbers of problems with the filters, then the review frequency could be revised as appropriate by the Board of Health. It is important to keep in consideration that this expansion will require a commitment to significant resources, especially personnel, in the coming yews, if re-inspections are part of the framework. There will also be some start up personnel costs involved which may not be subsidized if fees are the payment basis. Some models detailing resource needs will be put together by staff for review on the entry mechanism is established.. Other lames Mat and Sewer Bo Task Force Document - This agreement will allow water and sewer extensions to many areas of the county only to alleviate declared adverse public health conditions. In some areas, extensions may not be a possibility under any circumstances. Therefore on-site sewage systems must be considered the primary and perpetual method of wastewater treatment and disposal in any unsewered area. With the fam Ezation-of this document supposedly imminent; it is imperative that all aspects of on site sewage disposal, from permitting to installation to long-term management, be given proper consideration to assure system life is maximized, repair areas maintained and users educated as to their responsibilities in helping achieve these goals. Accordingly, the "toollat" which matches repaid-sponse options for failing systems to all designaxed areas of the county must be put into place concurrently with the WSBTF document and understood by all governmentallutility agencies with jurisdictional authority m those areas. S Race for Housing Personnel -- If approved and implemented, this expansion will require additional personnel. Presently, the space to house additional employees in the Environmental Health office is severely limited. Additional office space will be needed for this expansion. 31 CONSIDERATIONS When the aoisdng W'rW proposal was presented in the late 19$0's, David M. Griffith and Associates conducted the study to establish the fee level and other related financial considerations. The fees approved for the implementation of the program wen approxumately one-half of the DMG recommendation and one FTE was fimded to start the work At present, the direct fees account far approximately one fourth of the FTE salary costs and the percentage of fee reimbursement gradmIly increases each year. Because the DMG methodology was based Ply on direct costs, staff doesn't believe it to be the best way to approach the 6timatian of costs for the expansion. The bsOtM of Government is conducting a study of the costs fir health services -m several counties across North Carolina which is based on a mare comprehensive cost allocation model. The first draft of this study is due out soon and shd offer a more accurate way to look at the actual costs of providing education and moons. When fmalized and if fees are part of the finding mechanism, staff will prepare a fee schedule for the committee's review based on the I06methodology and findings. ClP needs such as computers, technical eTnpm t and vehicles will also be figured into the fee base. The direct casts for each inspector will be salary and fides, vehicle, computer equipnxi it, field equipment, and office finaium Funding -- Theere are several options for paying for this program expansion. It is staf ns recommendation that the option selected also be used to fimd the existing wnm p VZMAW fund - The general fiord is the first option for covering the expenses of this PlOi? - The FmciPd argument against using the general fiord is that would be payin g for inspection of c?mty resident's septic it must be considered that the watersheds for the three main =M?=, mftents (and a proposed fourth) serving the Towns of Carr 3wo, Chapel Hill and Hiillsbm- ugh are mostly comprised of county lands served by an-site septic systems. This expansion will be a benefit in the protection of those reservoirs. The general fiord approach would also eliminate take the "ability to pay" and non Payment issues and be much easier to administer from the Health Department's S ecial EWd - Although a special fund, even an enterprise fimd, could be cMWW6 =wo here wa s not much support for its use with the committee. This methd allow for the charging of a monthly fee to each enrolled owner for n-- .1 f% _r'1 .n 32 the management oversight of their system. One of the localities studied in California use this method and the monthly fee was $12.50 in 1992. Service 'strict - The county engineer proposed a "sewer tax district" for consideration. Although there are limitations for its use, it would help address the inequities and ability to pay issues. This tux district would be developed as a service district as prescnbed in GS 153A-300 and applies only to certain parts of the County. If the district extends into municipalities, it must be approved by those affected towns or cities. The formation of these districts is a BOCC responsibility and there is a limit on the amount of tax that can be levied in their use. Fees - wnA p was originally approved to be a fee-sponsored program with the first years augmented by the general fund until the numbers of inspections reached a sustaining leveL If the expansion is to be financed by fees, an accuratie cost . allocation model, developed with help fiom the Institute of Government study, should be used. Advantages to using fees are: they can be structured differentially so that larger or more complex systems pay more; they are easily adjusted to meet operational cpenses; and have little or no impact an the County's tax rate. Disadvantages to using fees are the cost and methods of their collection, delinquent and non-payment remedies, and that benefits are realized by citizens who don't participate in the fee payment. There were two basic models of fees discussed by the group. The first was a `Per inspection fee which is billed after the inspection service is rendered. The second was an annual "operations permit" fee which would be part of the annual tax bill and spreads the cost of the re-inspection over the length of the 5 years review fre4uenc3''• . Hybrid - During the first meeting, the committee seemed to support a combination of fees and general fund monies to finance the program. The advantage to this approach is that all citizens, as beneficiaries, help support the costs of the work but, the individual system owns bears the majority of the costs. The disadvantages of fee administration, payment collections and non-payment/delinquencies remain with this system. It must be also be assured that the proportions and mechanisms of fimding are well understood by everyone involved and that the eommaitment to using general find monies for this purpose is strong. At the final meeting, however, the group was leaning more towards the annual "operations permit" fee with the caveat of providing some relief or options to those with limited ability to pay. Fee Collection Methods Current Method - Fees are now assessed, billed and collected through the Environmental Health office. There are some type inspections which are not being 33 billed ( payma Manna, as a vel billings collecti the Coll remedie both the Mmandal So The fine &ancia re quireo replacer interest The cox all systm impleme should b income c replace the plans advice from the county attorney. No remedies for delinquencies and non- are being used, also based on the attorney's advice. Ls Method " The manager has suggested the use of the annual tax mailin icle for billing and collecting the fees. According to him, this is similar to from other county agencies on the tax bill. While all the remedies for m of delinquent taxes would not apply if the fees go unpaid in this setup, Ction rate would probably be much higher than it now is and can Tnt s for non-payment would not be lost. This method would be applied to "Per inspection" and the annual "operations permit" options. aspect of the expansion proposal discussed by the committee was the security for repair of septic systems when they fad.. The types of security e?ts discussed were bonding,-revolving funds, escrow accounts, up front art money, initial dual drawfield won, and a low kkreWno xtal reserve fund coating from fee augmentation. mittee reached no agreem09 on whether a security plan was necessary for ns, which method would be better or how any plan would be rated. There was general agreement that larger and higher risk systems under some sort of secaty plan for eventual repairs and that lower itizm should have access to grants or low interest loans for system ent. The county attorney will also provide guidance on this matter before are &Wized Para 1) of 17