Overview: Decentralized Approach and Community Process

Laurie Brown Cloquet Regional Center888-241-0724; 218-726-6475; brow1198@umn.edu

Doug Malchow Rochester Regional Center888-241-4536; 507-280-5575; malch002@umn.edu

Valerie Prax Mora Regional Center888-241-4528; 320-225-5054; malmq002@umn.edu

http://septic.umn.eduwww.extension.umn.edu

Regional Extension Educators

Please turn off or silence your cell phone

Thanks!

• Professional Training – Designers, Inspectors, Pumpers, Installers

• Research and Demonstration• Homeowner Operation & Maintenance• Small Community Wastewater

Education Program

Sewage Treatment Options

•Three Approaches to Wastewater Treatment

•Conducting a Complete Assessment

•Community Process for Making Wastewater Treatment Decisions

Community solution criteria Effective treatment –

protect health & environment

Affordable life-cycle costs: installation, operation, maintenance, repairs, monitoring, replacement

Sustainable – water supply & economics

Esthetically acceptable

Reliable Manageable Adequate space Flexible – flow & waste

strength Consistent with

community values & culture

Consistent with land use plan

Fits a long range plan

Three approaches to wastewater treatment -

• 1) Centralized:– Collection network

(many homes)– Central treatment

facility(ies)– Discharge - surface

• 2) Decentralized:– Individual or small

group of homes– On-site treatment

facilities (near site)– Discharge -

subsurface

• 3) Combination

Typical Cost Range per Connection in Low Density

Areas

• Design & Installation:– Decentralized -

$6000 to $15,000– Centralized -

$13,000 to $40,000+

Anatomy of a Septic System• Plumbing: wastewater collection• Septic tank: primary treatment• Soil treatment system: final

treatment/dispersal

EPA: “Decentralized approach will work”

• 1997 - EPA suggested ‘decentralized’ systems as a solution to many sewage treatment problems

• Why?– Now have good on-site

treatment systems

– Cost is usually lower than centralized

• Report:– www.epa.gov/ow-

owm.html/decent/index

Decentralized systems:

• Individual or multi-household (cluster)

• Standard - trenches, mounds, at-grades

• Alternative Systems-– pre-treatment– final treatment/dispersal– separation

• Water supply options

Determining ‘decentralized’ feasibility

Typical assessment:

Compliant

&

Non-compliant

More complete assessment:

Compliant

&

‘Could be’ Compliant

&

‘Can’t be’ Compliant

Conducting a more complete assessment

• Map of parcels• Records:

– Permits– Age of systems– Maintenance

• Identify:– Likely compliant– Spot check

• Properties to be checked:– No records– Older than XX years– Suspected problems

• Map of findings– Well location– Property boundaries– Setbacks– Other (Soils, ?)

Comply (10) Don’t Comply (25)

Minnesota Lake35 parcels

Typical Assessment

Comply (10) Can’t Comply (10)Could Comply (15)

Minnesota Lake35 parcels

More Complete Assessment

Comply (10) Don’t Comply (25)

Minnesota Lake35 parcels

Typical Assessment w/Central Treatment

Cost to Community

$15,000 per parcel

Total Cost =

$525,000

Comply (10) Can’t Comply (10)Could Comply (15)

Minnesota Lake35 parcels

Complete Assessment w/Decentralized

TreatmentCost to Community

10 x $0 =0

15 x $10,000 = $150,000

10 x $15,000 =

$150,000

Total Cost =

$300,000

Jefferson German Septic StatusGreen= ’96/later Red= pre-’96 White= no record

Small Community:

• Communities not currently served by centralized systems - “unsewered”

• Include:– incorporated– unincorporated– villages – shore lands– ‘groups of homes’

What might be ‘unique’ about these small communities?

– Small lots– Low overall density

(perimeter of a lake)– Poor Soils– Especially valuable natural

resource (I.e. lake, river)– Mix of seasonal & full-time

residents– Growing or decreasing

population– Income levels

How is wastewater currently being handled in ‘unsewered’ areas?

• On-site Disposal - – pipe to ditch/lake– non-compliant system– other?

• On-site Treatment - – compliant system

Characteristics of Successful Communities

• Understand current situation clearly before looking at possible solutions

• Use the ‘civic engagement’ model to involve diverse interests/views from the community

• Have or develop effective leadership from within the community

Characteristics continued

– Recognize the bias’s and self-interests of professionals they’re working with

– Defines an appropriate goal and boundaries

– Identify and examine all options – Keep all affected parties informed

Success or failure?

Success or failure in finding a viable solution is frequently more dependent on a sound community process than on the availability of treatment options and financing!

Exploring Small Community Wastewater Treatment

• Treatment Options

• Management

• Community Structures

• Costs & Financing

Form a Task Force

• Wide range of interests

• Citizens and local leaders

• Provides leadership for process

• Oversees the process (i.e. gathers information, point of contact)

• Shares information with stakeholders (especially residents)

Develop a Community Vision for Treatment

• Socially acceptable

• Cost effective

• Provides viable

treatment option(s)

Down the Road. . .

1. Develop work plan2. Keep citizens informed3. Gather and evaluate

information4. Keep citizens informed

Establish Appropriate Boundaries

That provides: Effective treatment - protects human & environmental

health

Reasonable cost - Life cycle costs = capital costs & O & M Remember homeowners need to move from costs of

occasional tank pumping to regular maintenance costs.

Socially acceptable - community values, culture, esthetics

Is well managed.

The Community ProcessFinding a Viable

Solution

Managing Small Community Wastewater Involves Education Process for community to select options Treatment Options Management of Systems Community Structures Costs & Financing Working with Professionals Community Process

Citizens of communities that succeed … Clearly understand their current situation

before they start looking for solutions Know that only they can make the best

decisions for their community Take responsibility for and ownership of the

problem Have or develop members with strong

leadership abilities Have a clearly defined vision and mission,

and set appropriate goals

Citizens of communities that succeed … Take the time and energy to identify and

examine all options before making decisions Gather information from as many sources as

possible before taking action Keep all affected parties involved and

informed all along the way Identify criteria for making decisions and

use all identified criteria.

Communities do not succeed … When a small group makes the decisions

and expects everyone to agree – and pay the bill

When the community lets engineers, consultants or funding sources dictate their choices

Result in chaos, bickering among neighbors, elected officials getting “un-elected,” and a loss of sense of community.

Keys to Success A community ‘vision’ or plan Civic engagement –

Responsibility Ownership

Setting the appropriate goals: Treatment Affordable Community values/

character

Effective leadership Understanding that all

professionals have biases & self interests

Identify & evaluate all options

Involve all interests at the table

Keep everyone informed.

Remember:This is a LOCAL project not the funders not the

consultantsnot the engineers

It belongs to the residents

Message from all of this

Heading towards everyone having a properly operating system and improved management at an affordable cost (ISTS/community)

Goal: protect human health and environment

The Pitfalls of Improper Planning!