A COMPREHENSIVE STATE-WIDE SURVEY AND A COMPREHENSIVE STATE-WIDE SURVEY AND EVALUATIONEVALUATION

OF THE ONSITE WASTEWATER INDUSTRY AND OF THE ONSITE WASTEWATER INDUSTRY AND REGULATIONS REGULATIONS IN COLORADOIN COLORADO

PHASE IPHASE I

Scheffe, B.L., Jatcko, J.D., Gallaudet, S.Scheffe, B.L., Jatcko, J.D., Gallaudet, S.Front Range Precast Concrete, IncFront Range Precast Concrete, Inc

Boulder, Colorado, USABoulder, Colorado, USA2005-20062005-2006

INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION

– Change in Colorado Onsite Wastewater Change in Colorado Onsite Wastewater industryindustry•New technologiesNew technologies•New ideasNew ideas•Outdated regulations and guidelinesOutdated regulations and guidelines

– StEPP Foundation - Jefferson County StEPP Foundation - Jefferson County

– Four phase study - COREFour phase study - CORE

CORE PHASES I-IVCORE PHASES I-IV

• Phase I-Phase I- – Peer Reviewed Questionnaire Peer Reviewed Questionnaire

• Phase II-Phase II- – Establish Criteria for local Onsite Program, evaluation of Establish Criteria for local Onsite Program, evaluation of

codescodes

• Phase III-Phase III-– Options outlined for statewide system performance Options outlined for statewide system performance

improvement programimprovement program

• Phase IV- Phase IV- – Action plan for implementationAction plan for implementation

METHODSMETHODS

• Development of Questionnaire toolDevelopment of Questionnaire tool– Peer developedPeer developed– Peer reviewedPeer reviewed– Changes incorporatedChanges incorporated

• Outlined question relationshipsOutlined question relationships

• Database created in ArcView 9.0Database created in ArcView 9.0®®

• Survey published with QuestionProSurvey published with QuestionPro®®

METHODSMETHODS

• Data coded and entered into ArcView Data coded and entered into ArcView 9.09.0®®

• QA/QC of datasetQA/QC of dataset

• Data Processed into geographic Data Processed into geographic layouts and statistical summarieslayouts and statistical summaries

RESULTSRESULTS

• 55 Responsive Counties = 86% 55 Responsive Counties = 86% response rate or 98.6% of state response rate or 98.6% of state population representedpopulation represented– Geographic background informationGeographic background information– County record keeping and permittingCounty record keeping and permitting– Program regulationsProgram regulations

•EducationEducation

•OpinionsOpinions

PLAINS = 36%MTN. FT. & PLN = 40%FOOT & PLAIN = 5 %MTN. FOOT = 1 %MTN. = 6 %

GENERAL GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTIONSGENERAL GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTIONS

PERCENTAGE OF WASTEWATER PERCENTAGE OF WASTEWATER TREATED BY ONSITETREATED BY ONSITE

CONTAMINATION FROM WASTEWATERCONTAMINATION FROM WASTEWATER

26 COUNTIES

47.3 % OF RESPONDENTS

GEOGRPAHICALLY DISPERSED

RECORDS AND PERMITTING:RECORDS AND PERMITTING:COUNTY FILING SYSTEMCOUNTY FILING SYSTEM

MANUAL & ELEC = 72.55 %

MANUAL = 17.65 %

ELECTRONIC = 7.84 %

NOT KEPT = 1.96 %

TOTAL NUMBER OF ONSITE SYSTEMSTOTAL NUMBER OF ONSITE SYSTEMS

TOTALTOTAL MAXMAX MINMIN AVGAVG MEDMED STD DEVSTD DEV NN

259,570259,570 35,00035,000 5959 58875887 32003200 +/-3,200+/-3,200 4545

ESTIMATED STATE TOTAL = 371,423 OR 20.42 % OF POPULATION

TOTAL ONSITE PERMITS 2005TOTAL ONSITE PERMITS 2005

NEW NEW SYSTEMSYSTEMSS

6687 =6687 =

79.4 %79.4 %

REPAIRSREPAIRS 1542 =1542 =

18.3 %18.3 %

NON NON ENGENG

ANAEROANAEROBB

4504 =4504 =

53.5 %53.5 %

ENG ENG

ANAEROANAEROBB

2800 =2800 =

33.3 %33.3 %

ADVANCADVANCEE

AEROBICAEROBIC

272 =272 =

3.2 %3.2 %

SERVICE POLICIES FOR ADVANCED SERVICE POLICIES FOR ADVANCED TREATMENT UNITSTREATMENT UNITS

60.4 % DO NOT REQUIRESERVICE POLICY FOR ADVANCED TREATMENT

INSTALLER CERTIFICATIONINSTALLER CERTIFICATION

INSTALLER CERTIFICATION EXAMINATION

FIELD REDUCTIONSFIELD REDUCTIONS

40 COUNTIES

REQUIRED USE OF ADVANCED REQUIRED USE OF ADVANCED TREATMENTTREATMENT

REQUIRED USE OF ADVANCED REQUIRED USE OF ADVANCED TREATMENTTREATMENT

REQUIRED USE OF ADVANCED REQUIRED USE OF ADVANCED TREATMENTTREATMENT

REQUIRED USE OF ADVANCED REQUIRED USE OF ADVANCED TREATMENTTREATMENT

REGULATORY ISSUES:REGULATORY ISSUES:UNDERSTANDING STATE CODEUNDERSTANDING STATE CODE

COMPLETE = 35.4 %

GOOD = 52.1 %

MOD/LIM = 12.5 %

PRESCRIPTIVE AS EFFECTIVE AS PRESCRIPTIVE AS EFFECTIVE AS

PERFORMANCEPERFORMANCE

> 50 % CHOSE NEUTRAL STANCE OR AGREED

ADOPTION OF STATE TECHNICAL ADOPTION OF STATE TECHNICAL COMMITTEECOMMITTEE

79 % AGREE OR STRONGLY AGREE

ADOPTION OF A $20 FEE FOR STATE ADOPTION OF A $20 FEE FOR STATE LEVEL ONSITE FUNDINGLEVEL ONSITE FUNDING

DISAGREE = 40.5 %

AGREE = 38.1 %

NEUTRAL = 21.4 %

ADOPTION OF A NEW STATE ADOPTION OF A NEW STATE REGULATIONREGULATION

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

AGREEDISAGREENEUTRAL

CONCLUSIONSCONCLUSIONS

• Valuable insights for evaluationValuable insights for evaluation

• Lack of commonality between Lack of commonality between regulationsregulations

• Regulations can be more influenced by Regulations can be more influenced by industry than traditional policy makersindustry than traditional policy makers

• Must get the word out Must get the word out

• Need for decision making bodyNeed for decision making body

• Counties support a state-wide policyCounties support a state-wide policy

CONCLUSIONSCONCLUSIONS

• Current procedures and practices are Current procedures and practices are not conducive to providing the best not conducive to providing the best available technology to available technology to environmentally sensitive areas.environmentally sensitive areas.

RECOMMENDATIONSRECOMMENDATIONS

• Utilize information to create logical Utilize information to create logical policy, based upon proven modelspolicy, based upon proven models

• Revise surveyRevise survey

• Re-survey every 2-3 yrs. To examine Re-survey every 2-3 yrs. To examine trendstrends

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

• Strategic Environmental Pipeline FoundationStrategic Environmental Pipeline Foundation• Jefferson County Department of Health and EnvironmentJefferson County Department of Health and Environment• Craig Sanders, Jefferson County Department of Health and Craig Sanders, Jefferson County Department of Health and

EnvironmentEnvironment• Jim Dale, Jefferson County Department of Health and EnvironmentJim Dale, Jefferson County Department of Health and Environment• Warren Brown, Tri-County Environmental HealthWarren Brown, Tri-County Environmental Health• Jim Rada, Garfield County Public HealthJim Rada, Garfield County Public Health• Ed Church, Church and AssociatesEd Church, Church and Associates• Kent Kuster, Colorado Department of Health and EnvironmentKent Kuster, Colorado Department of Health and Environment• Dr. Robert Seigrist, Colorado School of MinesDr. Robert Seigrist, Colorado School of Mines• Charity Brochman, Colorado Municipal LeagueCharity Brochman, Colorado Municipal League• Jody Erwin, Tri-County Health and EnvironmentJody Erwin, Tri-County Health and Environment• All Fifty-Five Survey ParticipantsAll Fifty-Five Survey Participants

A COMPREHENSIVE STATE-WIDE SURVEY AND A COMPREHENSIVE STATE-WIDE SURVEY AND EVALUATIONEVALUATION

OF THE ONSITE WASTEWATER INDUSTRY AND OF THE ONSITE WASTEWATER INDUSTRY AND REGULATIONS REGULATIONS IN COLORADOIN COLORADO

PHASE IPHASE I

Scheffe, B.L., Jatcko, J.D., Gallaudet, S.Scheffe, B.L., Jatcko, J.D., Gallaudet, S.Front Range Precast Concrete, IncFront Range Precast Concrete, Inc

Boulder, Colorado, USABoulder, Colorado, USA