These regulations allow treated sewage effluent to be discharged directly into the water table.  And they require an O&M visit only once per year as previously noted in a comment posted by Mr. Crooks.  Sewage treatment devices frequently develop problems resulting in the release of poorly treated effluent.  Perhaps someone should demand that a study be conducted of the performance of existing discharging systems that require quarterly O&M.  The results of that study should prove to be very enlightening.  I would expect the study to show that over 50% of discharging systems that are monitored on a quarterly basis are not in compliance with DEQ’s General Permit (i.e. they are not treating the sewage adequately).  What makes anyone think that an onsite system monitored only once per year will function any better?  It’s been proven that pathogens can travel significant distances in a saturated environment.  Where do you think your well water comes from?  Be prepared to drink your own (and your neighbor’s) sewage.

These regulations also allow sewage absorption fields to be placed on or in soils that are restrictive.  The sewage will mound and rise to the ground surface.  A previous posted comment indicated that water mounding calculations should not be required.  I agree but for a different reason.  For small systems these calculations are a joke and can be manipulated to obtain any desired result.  Water mounding calculations contain too many variables and should be considered useless when used in conjunction with the typical site and soil evaluation.  Be sure to have a winch ready to pull your riding lawn mower out of your muddy absorption field.

Your builder’s engineer will state in his plans and specifications that he is not responsible for the soil evaluation (as he should).  Your builder’s soil evaluator will state that he not responsible for the design of the system (as he should).  When the system fails (and many do) the health department will slap you with a Notice of Violation.  You’ll be required to resolve the problem in a timely manner.  Your builder will point the finger at you (system abuse) or the engineer or the evaluator.  The other parties will deflect the blame as well.  Don’t expect the health department to referee.  This is your problem and you’ll need to fix it.

Cost to pump your tank: $150 to $500 per week.

Cost of an evaluator: $750 to $1500.

Cost of an engineer: $1000 to $4000

Cost of a new system (if even possible): $15,000 to $40,000

Cost of an attorney: A lot.

Probability that you’ll collect any money from any of the finger pointers: Nearly zero.

Best solution for you: Possibly foreclosure.

You’ll ask the health department “how could you let this happen”?  The health department is not a consumer protection agency.  Site and soil evaluations, system design, and system inspections are now performed by the private sector.  Most private practitioners do a great job.  However, there are some bad apples out there.  The health department does not have the resources to ‘find’ these bad practitioners and hold them accountable.  The affects of bad practitioners are usually not discovered for years.  It is likely that the affects of bad regulations will also not be discovered for years.

We have entered an era of performance based onsite sewage treatment and dispersal.  What does this mean?  It means that anything goes if the soil evaluator and designer are willing to risk YOUR money.  There are basically no enforceable site and soil requirements any more.  The health department will give a permit for the ugliest of ugly soils.  You can now get your building permit and build that dream home.  But remember, your onsite sewage system must ‘perform’.  If it doesn’t you’re it a heap of you know what.  And, realistically it’ll be entirely YOUR problem as it appears there’s no accountability with onsite practitioners.

These regulations are a compilation of cut and paste gibberish.  I support O&M but I can’t support a regulation that focuses on an ‘end-of-pipe’ standard while virtually ignoring dispersal field standards.  When these systems surface during the wet season do they become a discharging system?  Will DEQ need to ‘invent’ a seasonal General Permit?

The ‘evolution’ of the onsite program has been driven primarily by the private sector.  However, I predict that in less than five years VDH will be blamed for the failure of this program.  The onsite program may eventually be shifted to DEQ or the Department of Housing and Community Development were it will further erode (regardless of what JP thinks).

In conclusion, keep the kids out of the wet spot in the backyard and boil your drinking water.