Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems (SSTS) Technical Advisory Panel (TAP) for Product Registration

Transcription

1 January 22, 2009, TAP Meeting Draft Notes Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems (SSTS) Technical Advisory Panel (TAP) for Product Registration Meeting Notes January 22, 2009 MPCA St. Paul Office Meeting Attendees Committee Members Present on January 22 Guests Present on January 22 Ed Kerzinski x Jeff Iverson, Infiltrator x Mitch Johnson Carl Thompson, Infiltrator x Loren Kohnen x Dick Bachelder, ADS/Hancor x Kemp Ritter Mike Sundberg, Bord Na Mona x Sara Christopherson x Ron Suchecki, Hoot x Chad Viland Tony Birrittieri, Peterson Supply x Bob Whitmyer x Ben Berteau, Ring Industrial x Group Greg Halling x Bennette Burks, Consolidated x Industries Joe Enfield Vacant 1 MPCA Staff Barb McCarthy x Bill Priebe x Gretchen Sabel x Mark Wespetal x Brett Ballavance Leah Hedman, Attorney General Office x December 12, 2009 Meeting Notes review and Approve Motion to approve minutes, Halling, second Kerzinski. Unanimous. Website Update, SSTS Advisory Committee Feedback on Drainfield Rock Document and Next Steps Barb McCarthy reviewed proposed MPCA website layout and related documents. Comment on the Rock Guidance document need to get the word out to all gravel pits and need to do some outreach beyond the members of the Aggregate and Ready-Mix Association of Minnesota (ARM). MPCA agreed to look into this.

2 January 22, 2009, TAP Meeting Draft Notes Proprietary Distribution Media Carl Thompson with Infiltrator provided some additional information (see powerpoint presentation). Question soil intrusion in Infiltrator installation experience. Answer - this occurred in very fine soils with no structure (blow sand); Infiltrator dealt with this by developing an installation spec that fabric cover would be required in this setting. Question sizing data was combined that included 1:1 systems and systems installed at the 40% reduction allowed as Warrantied? Answer - Yes. Ben Berteau with Ring Industrial Group presented information on mound design. They have re-thought the application of proprietary distribution technologies since the last presentation. For mounds, they are now requesting a 10% reduction on the width (so that three - 3 ft wide products equals one 10 ft rock bed) and a 10% reduction in product length (a net reduction of 19%). For at-grades, they would request a simple 25% reduction. Question will water flow from one chamber to another when placed side by side in an at-grade if a pressure lateral was installed in only one of the three chambers? Answer they should be connected. But wouldn t this result in overloading of the bottom trench? Pressure would be better. Discussion of linear loading rate. Comment so the equivalency factor for a mound would be Answer yes. 2 Carl Thompson with Infiltrator then distributed a revised draft Recommended Standards & Guidance Document (RS&G) for synthetic media. Chair Whitmyer then noted that the manufacturers have provided two good presentations and other supplemental material. Their request for an equivalency factor is based on the fact that embedment and fines in aggregate systems reduce the amount of infiltration that occurs. The material that was presented includes both juried and non-juried articles. The juried articles are either based on bench studies or failure studies and for the most part do not look at long-term performance. The three arguments that have been offered in support of downsizing are embedment, fines and that other states allow it. The question to answer is does the information provided support use of an equivalency factor. There are three types of data in the papers modeling, bench tests, and failure analysis. Many studies were loaded at a high loading rate to simulate long term performance. But does this actually simulate longterm performance? There is not an agreed-upon protocol to be followed for side by side testing, which is what is really needed. Comment by Carl Thompson with Infiltrator This TAP is not the first TAP-like group to address this issue. Others have decided in favor of an equivalency factor. Comment Dick Bachelder with ADC/Hancor the State of Maine has consistently used and reaffirmed chambers at 50% reduction in sizing. Chair Whitmyer provided a summary of the documentation. The documents indicate that embedment and fines can impact aggregate system efficiency. The Keyes paper did show differences of a 5-10% increase in infiltration for open bottom media, however, the hydraulic gradient for these products was 6% higher than for the aggregate systems, so this is inconclusive. The Walsh study was good research but documents effects at extreme level of embedment. The Lowe field scale study used a higher loading rate in the tests to simulate long-term performance. Question whether this is valid since resting is

3 January 22, 2009, TAP Meeting Draft Notes important to keeping systems working effectively. Extrapolation of the model predicts a four year life for aggregate systems, which Minnesota experience has shown is not the case. Amerson s report demonstrated a 5% reduction in Ksat due to fines; again, loading was artificially high. White used sand with 1% fines Ksat loading rate was 7-9 times the rates allowed in Minnesota. Regarding failure studies these generally don t measure flow, which is a critical flaw. Unless you are measuring flow, you can t use a failure analysis to prove that reduction is not an impact on performance. In the King study, all were designed on 450 gpd, yet most households were only 3 persons therefore, these systems likely had capacity to start with before the reductions. Comment Carl Thompson with Infiltrator regarding the Keyes study need to remember that this was with clean water, which performs differently in terms of development of a clogging mat. Question is the reduction proposed only for septic tank effluent (not pretreated)? Answer Carl Thompson yes. 3 Chair Whitmyer summarized his comments, saying that while there are studies indicating that embedment and fines are problems, we don t have field experience that shows us this. Minnesota s loading rates were developed and revised over time based on research and experience. The early Bouma work related loading rates to soil types and is still valid today. Many factors went into these loading rates. We are talking about tweaking loading rates that may already consider the impacts of embedment and fines this will result in loss of safety factors. Actual scientific proof is needed, not just information that other regulators are allowing reductions. Comment Carl Thompson with infiltrator If you were able to compare gravel systems sized at 1000 feet vs gravel systems sized at 500 feet at 6 years, 12 years, 24 years, you would see a difference. The King study was done in Oregon, where systems are ½ the size of Minnesota systems. A failure study here shows that reductions are acceptable. The one study that actually does prove this is the Lowe field study. Mr. Thompson further stated that the Lowe study was built to be a simulation of actual trenches, and that it should be viewed as more than a bench test. Comment Christopherson with the University of Minnesota the Lowe study raised more questions for her. It took much longer for the rock trench to reach the end state (failure) at the 4 cm/day rate; she questions whether the 8 cm/day rate actually is realistic. Carl Thompson didn t agree, he feels that the 8 cm/day rate is applicable in Minnesota. Comment Dick Bachelder with ADS/Hancor they are being asked to justify their reduction against a moving target since states are constantly changing loading rates for rock, and without scientific justification. Comment Dick Bachelder with ADS/Hancor Minnesota is ahead of other states in that we have a rock guidance document. The problem with Dr. Seigrist s work is that it s only one soil type. Minnesota s TAP needs to consider the risk. Does a 25% reduction actually raise the risk level to an unacceptable level? Comment Ed Kerzinski there wasn t anything in these studies that definitively proved downsizing is OK, or that downsizing is a problem or is not a problem in the short term. St. Louis County has been looking at longevity for years, and this is why they reduced loading rates, and failure rates for mounds have dropped. They now pressurize their trenches, which has greatly increased longevity. He is

4 January 22, 2009, TAP Meeting Draft Notes not at all comfortable with downsizing trenches in heavy soils or in mounds. Comment Loren Kohnen agrees with Mr. Kerzinski. Size is a key factor in longevity, this is the main concern. He does not see justification for downsizing. Comment letter was sent in by Chad Viland see attached. Comment Whitmyer enforcement of the rock guidance will increase the price competitiveness of synthetic media. Concern Christopherson the 40% downsized with Warrantied is really a concern. There would be less risk in the 25% reduction. Comment Carl Thompson with Infiltrator there is a 2004 memo from Mark Wespetal that recommends a 28% reduction for chambers. Gretchen Sabel agreed to make copies of this document for the attendees. This issue will be discussed at the February 19th meeting before the TAP makes a decision and provides a recommendation. 4 Lunch The panel broke for lunch and the media manufacturer s representatives departed. After lunch, the spreadsheet that Mr. Thompson referred to earlier was distributed. Mark Wespetal provided some comments to the group. He explained that this spreadsheet is an internal MPCA discussion document, not an official MPCA policy. The spreadsheet was, however, distributed at a meeting with media manufacturer s several years ago. The analysis was developed based on Mark s professional judgment, not actual testing data or engineering calculations. He noted that the concept of rock shadow was included in the attached table not because MPCA agrees that rock shadow is a concern, rather it was included just to show what rock shadow s impact might be if it were an issue. When reviewing the spreadsheet, TAP members should remember that the rock trench width in the table is 30 inches, not 36 inches. This was done for comparability purposes to the 30 inch wide chamber products. Consolidated Treatment Systems A presentation was made by Bennette Burks, representing Consolidated Treatment Systems. Mr. Burks explained how Multi-Flow s treatment device works. Question how often should the socks be washed? The settlabitliy test should be performed every six months. If it exceeds 50%, the system should be cleaned. Performance should be watched. Anytime the system is pumped, it s good to replace the socks. Service providers launder the socks and reuse them. Flow distribution is left up to designers. Question how many of each of these products are installed in Minnesota? Answer there are about 200 Multiflows, very few Nyadics. Question are there applications where Nyadic is preferred over Multiflow? Answer the Enviro-Guard system is effective at nitrogen reduction of up to 60% and it is used a lot in Florida. Maintenance is easier for the Nyadics; it s a matter of preference. The Multi-flow provides more consistent treatment because it is a fixed-film process. Question do you have testing data that documents fecal reductions? Answer - Yes, but just for the EnviroGuard. The company also sampled 50 Multi-flow systems for a month in Ohio and then submitted the bacteria testing. Question does Nayadic have a product for high-strength waste? They manage it by adding more air; both products have information on high strength waste. Question are they similar

5 January 22, 2009, TAP Meeting Draft Notes in cost? Answer Multi-flow costs about $500 more, and maintenance costs more. Question is a primary tank needed? Answer this has been a bone of contention these devices were tested by the National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) without primary treatment. Company policy is that whether to require primary treatment is a private decision between homeowner, installer, and regulator. More discussion; it seems that trash traps are required in Minnesota. Are the test centers using raw sewage? No, all are either screened or pumped so large solids are reduced. If the primary treatment is too large, a weaker influent gets to the treatment unit and then bulking occurs. Barb McCarthy reviewed the checklist for Multi-Flow. Question How is Multi-Flow used for high strength waste? Answer - At this point it is being registered for residential applications only. 5 Hoot Systems Ron Suchecki with Hoot Systems provided a copy of the application for his product at Treatment Level B, dated January 20, These systems are tested with an in-line trash trap because this is integral to the unit. These products offer a longer detention time and consequently greater fecal removal. Fecal testing without UV showed that it consistently met the 10,000 col/100 ml, assuming that MPCA agrees that the testing is equivalent. Comment Christopherson indicated the testing appears equivalent. No one on the committee disagreed. Discussion on why there are spikes in the fecal data. Mr. Suchecki then distributed copies of the application for the Hoot products at Treatment Level A, dated January 21, He stated that upscaling of UV is covered on pages of this document. Question if two UV disinfection units are used, should they be in series or parallel? Hoot recommends they be connected in series. Also, the UV disinfection units are rated for a flow of 6 gpm for a single unit and 10 gpm for two units, and the unit flows treated effluent to the Salcor at 1 gpm, an additional safety margin. Question doesn t performance of the UV degrade over time? Answer the bulbs have an effective life of about 8000 hours, and regular maintenance is required. Discussion occurred on the maintenance of the UV disinfection unit. Mr. Suchecki will send two additional pieces of information a regulator checklist and a recommended installation design that will show a cover over the blower. Barb McCarthy will review this and ensure that all the required parts are covered. Operating Permit Template Sara Christopherson, Joe Enfield and Barb McCarthy drafted an operating permit template. The supplied example is mocked up for the ECOPOD treatment device with UV disinfection. Barb reviewed the draft with TAP. It will be sent to selected counties and practitioners for comment, and then be forwarded to the SSTS Advisory Committee for their March 12 meeting. Question how do Management Plans fit in? Answer the University of Minnesota is considering changing their Type I Management Plan templates to include a check box to indicate whether there is a pretreatment unit and to note that the Management Plan for that unit also is part of the document.

6 January 22, 2009, TAP Meeting Draft Notes Open Forum, Topic 1: Disinfection Tony Birrittieri (Peterson Supply) - since UV disinfection units are approved only as part of the treatment train, this is a problem. Discussion ensured regarding the mis-match between UV sizing and system sizing. Comment the rule does not allow for use of equivalent UV products. As the rule is written, the rule does not allow for other UV products or other disinfection methods. It would be good for the rule to allow a method for testing of disinfection products separately. Question would NSF be willing to issue equivalency? Not likely. Check to see if Wisconsin is allowing UV units at higher flows. Comment Gretchen Sabel the rule will need to be changed if we wanted to have a way to swap out UV or other disinfection. MPCA staff will consider this and bring it to the TAP at the February meeting. 6 Open forum, Topic 2: High Strength Waste Sara Christopherson indicated that there is a problem; no products have been certified through the Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) testing protocol for High Strength Waste (HSW). Discussion followed. One possible way to handle this would be for the product vendor to certify that the design using their product is suitable for the waste, and then to have follow up monitoring to verify operation. A member noted an example where an approval like this was problematic. In addition to monitoring, there should be an upfront requirement for some level of third party testing to demonstrate baseline performance of the units. Illinois requires that the vendor have 15 systems in the state that are being monitored before they can apply for certification. One option may be to collect data from manufacturers and other sources and have a third-party analyze this data. Mr. Birrittieri with Peterson Supply suggested that a subcommittee of the TAP be formed to consider this issue. Sara Christopherson volunteered to serve on this committee. There was a discussion of variability in wastes, and the problems that variable operation within the business affects wastewater strength. Next steps Conference call Friday at 3 pm to start things off. Meeting adjourned at 4:20pm. Next meeting will be February 19, 2009 in Conference Room 2A and 2B at MPCA s St. Paul offices.

7 Rock Trench 6 SW loaded to pipe Infiltrator Quick-4 Hancor Standard Chamber BioDiffuser Standard Geometry and Surface Area Determination Bottom Width (in) Sidewall Height (in) Sidewall efficency Sidewall credit (in) Top width (in) Raw Absorption Area (ft2/ft) % fines % % % % % % % % Cultec % % 12 O.D % % Gravelless Pipe (Prisnco, EZ1203H % % Elgin InDrain % % Drip Dispersal % %

8 % fines reduction % Remaining Absorption Area Disturbed soil at sidewall Disturbed soil reduction % Remaining Absorption Area Construction Compaction Compaction Reduction % Remaining Absorption Area Shadow 10% 3.04 no 0% 3.45 yes 0% 3.72 yes 0% % 3.11 falling rock and foot traffic 15% 2.59 yes foot traffic 10% 2.80 no 0% 3.45 yes 0% 4.33 yes 0% 2.16 yes 10% 3.35 foot traffic 10% 3.01 no 10% 3.11 foot traffic 10% 2.80 no 10% 3.90 foot traffic 10% 3.51 no 0% 3.73 yes 0% 4.03 no 0% 0.00 no 10% 1.95 foot traffic 10% 1.75 yes 10% 3.36 foot traffic 10% 3.02 yes 0% 4.03 foot traffic 10% 3.62 yes 0% % 0.00 no

9 % of area shadow effectiveness of shadow Shadow Reduction % Final Sizing 33% 50% 17% % 50% 0% 2.80 Rock Trench Quick-4 Hancor 0% 50% 0% % 50% 0% % 50% 0% % 50% 15% % 50% 5% % 0% 3.62 BioDiffu ser Cultec Gravelle ss EZ Flow Elgin Drip 50% 0% 0.00

10 Draft prepared for discussion purposes at Feb 19, 2009 TAP Meeting. High Strength Waste (HSW) Proprietary Treatment Products A. Provisional Registration Process 1. Companies with treatment products registered with the MPCA or another state (list?) with similar registration process for treatment of residential wastewater are eligible for provisional registration for high-strength waste proprietary treatment products. Discussion needed. 2. The manufacturer submits to the MPCA for engineering review: 1) an application for product registration, 2) a High Strength Waste Provisional Registration addendum, 3) engineering designs and calculations for treatment products/models and 4) testing information to substantiate performance (type of testing data required needs discussion). The submitted documentation must show that the technology is scientifically and technically capable of providing the needed treatment; there is reasonable assurance the product(s) will perform as designed. 3. MPCA engineers review the submitted documentation. The TAP would also review submittals and provide recommendations. The manufacturer of high-strength waste products will prepare Minnesota specific manuals (similar to residential products). The manufacturer must also provide training to practitioners as condition of product registration. 4. Products registered for HSW would be established as provisional registration for a certain number of systems (up to 50) for three years. Products would be listed as meeting Treatment Level C for at least the first three years with a provisional product registration. There should be limited environmental risk with the systems as designed as per soil requirements and loading rates associated with Treatment Level C. B. Use of Provisionally Registered Products at Specific Sites Overview of Process: Advanced Designers would complete a waste characterization worksheet (developed by the manufacturer and the worksheet provided in the Design Guidance) and design the system. This information (and whatever else is needed) would be submitted to the manufacturer for review and certification. The certification by the manufacturer would be submitted to the Advanced Designer, the LGU and MPCA. When installed and/or at startup, a manufacturer s rep. would verify that the installation is according to the certified design. The system is covered with a local operating permit. Annual reports on the system are provided to both the LGU and MPCA. Specific roles and steps: 1. Manufacturer s engineering staff provides design review proper size. certify the HSW design (see form below). 2. Manufacturer s representative would provide start-up (construction) inspection to ensure the system was properly installed and start-up bugs resolved and certify the HSW install/start-up procedure (see form below). 3. The systems would be operated under an operating permit. The manufacturer would have responsibility to ensure proper O/M occurs (service provider) and that monitoring data is being properly collected under the provisional registration. 02/11/09 1

11 Draft prepared for discussion purposes at Feb 19, 2009 TAP Meeting. 4. Yearly (or every 3 years), the manufacturer would provide a Report to the MPCA on product use and performance, along with monitoring data and issue summaries. The Report and data would help substantiate performance of treatment device, organic loading to the soil, etc There many be a system audit, at the manufacturer s expense, to field verify product performance at any time during the provisional registration period. 6. After three years and TAP/MPCA review of the annual data submittals and any other supplemental testing or information submitted by the manufacturer, the manufacturer may request provisional registration of the product for Treatment Level B or A. Submittal High Strength Waste 1. Same General Information - as residential products 2. Specific Engineering Review (documents) Designs Calculations Constituents (i.e. lbs CBOD, O&G, etc ) 3. Specific Testing Protocol Review First-party testing data (least weight) Manufacturer Second-party testing data (medium weight) Service Provider Third-party testing data (most weight) NSF, University Guidance on Best Data Sets (Provisional Registration): Paired sampling with wastewater flow (inflow and outflow samples), flow weighted best Many systems with different HSW fast food, restaurant, grocery store, etc Multiple years of data for systems Data from multiple states 4. Operating Permit Requirements 02/11/09 2

12 Draft prepared for discussion purposes at Feb 19, 2009 TAP Meeting. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection Title 5 Program Provisional Use Approval Certification Forms Exhibit A: Certification Statement for System Design Important: When filling out forms on the computer, use only the tab key to move your cursor - do not use the return key. I, Name attest under the pains and penalties of perjury: (i) that I am the agent for in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and am employed by Company-Technology Name ; Company Name (ii) that based on the information supplied to us by the designer of record of which we relied, the plans and specifications for the Name of Technology have been prepared in accordance with the for the Name of Facility Name of Company-Technology design specifications and technology approval dated and Date ; (iii) that the technology, as designed, is capable of meeting the required effluent standards, provided the system is properly operated, described in the technology approval dated. Date I am aware that there are significant penalties including, but not limited to possible fines and imprisonment for willfully submitting false, inaccurate, misleading or incomplete information. I am also aware that submitting false, inaccurate misleading or incomplete information could lead to modification, suspension or revocation of any technology approval granted to the. Name of Company-Technology Signature Title Date 02/11/09 3

13 Draft prepared for discussion purposes at Feb 19, 2009 TAP Meeting. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection Title 5 Program Provisional Use Approval Certification Forms Exhibit B: Certification Statement for System Installation I, Name attest under the pains and penalties of perjury: (i) that I am the agent for Company-Technology Name in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and am employed by ; Company Name (ii) that I have inspected the installation for the for the wastewater disposal system located at Name of Technology Name of Facility and have found at the time of inspection the installation of the technology to be in accordance with the Company Name installation specifications and technology approval dated I am aware that there are significant penalties including, but not limited to possible fines and imprisonment for willfully submitting false, inaccurate, misleading or incomplete information. I am also aware that submitting false, inaccurate misleading or incomplete information could lead to modification, suspension or revocation of any technology approval granted to the. Name of Company-Technology Date. Signature Title Date 02/11/09 4

14 02/19/09 Draft 2 Technical Advisory Panel Meeting Listing of Registered Treatment and Distribution Products for Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems (SSTS) Manufacturers of Registered Category A (Residential) Proprietary Treatment Products Bio-Microbics, Inc Cole Parkway Shawnee, KS Phone: Phone: Fax: jbell@biomicrobics.com Web: Product Name Model Design Flow Treatment Process Treatment Level(s) Product Information FAST Wastewater Treatment System RetroFAST Model (? Model 0.15, Model 0.25) FAST Wastewater Treatment System MicroFAST Model 0.5 MicroFAST Model 0.75 MicroFAST Model 0.9 MicroFAST Model 1.5 FAST Wastewater Treatment System MicroFAST Model 3.0 MicroFAST Model 4.5 MicroFAST Model Attached and Suspended Growth Attached and Suspended Growth Attached and Suspended Growth C and TN C and TN C Upscale for TN? Notice of Product Listing FAST Manual for Minnesota (all together or divided up?) Submitted Drawings Known Limitations Installation Information Operation and Maintenance Owners Information Service Contract Regulators Checklist Sampling protocol good to list? FAST Wastewater Treatment System with Salcor 3G UV disinfection unit(s) FLOW SPLITTING to UV? Operating Permit Template MicroFAST Model 0.5 with 1 Salcor UV unit MicroFAST Model 0.75 with 2 Salcor UV units MircoFAST Model 0.9 with 2 Salcor UV units MicroFAST Model 1.5 with 3 Salcor UV unit Attached and Suspended Growth and Ultraviolet (UV) Light Disinfection A and B and TN Blue indicates link to an address, the manufacturer s webpage, and documents on the MPCA website

15 TAP February 19, 2009 Draft NSF Certified Proprietary Treatment Products Product Registration Upscaling and Flow Splitting Domestic Strength Wastewater The National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) currently certifies proprietary treatment products for domestic strength wastewater with design rated capacities to 1500 gallons per day (gpd). Treatment products are typically tested by NSF at flows between 500 and 600 gallons per day for CBOD and TSS removal. NSF typically tests the smallest model (i.e. 500 gpd) and then provides an upscale review of the treatment product to 1500 gpd. The products are then listed on the NSF website and are certified to 1500 gpd. Upscaling For flows >1500 gpd, NSF can also provide an engineering review for upscaling based on a comparison of larger systems designs with those of the smaller, certified systems. The proportional equivalency evaluation by NSF engineering staff typically includes a review of media volume, tank volumes, hydraulic retention time, sludge storage, and aeration for both oxygen and mixing demands. For flows >1500 gpd, where multiple modules or pods would be used (i.e. 4 modules used, each rated at 500 gpd for a total of 2000 gpd), upscaling does not appear to be an issue. However, flow splitting becomes important when multiple modules are used. MPCA is in agreement with the approach used by NSF in providing an upscale review of treatment products, based on proportional equivalency for the removal of CBOD and TSS. This is a common engineering practice. As part of the product registration process, MPCA would provide engineering oversight of each NSF upscale letter to verify proportional equivalency used in the scale up to the desired flow. At this time, the upscale approach does not work for the UV disinfection device currently being used by manufacturers. Splitting Flows For module treatment and disinfection devices, a review of flow splitting devices will be needed as part of product registration. Flow splitting may be used to: 1) split flow among multiple module treatment devices and 2) split flows among multiple disinfection devices. For treatment systems that require multiple pods for design flows that exceed 500 gallons per day, flow splitting to a treatment device may be required. Manufacturers will be required to submit the technical information for at least one option of flow splitting when it is required for wastewater products, as part of the product registration process. As part of the review process, MPCA engineering review will include an evaluation of potential flow splitting 1

16 TAP February 19, 2009 Draft devices identified by the manufacturer to ensure designs will include proper flow splitting techniques. The manufacturer will need to demonstrate the flow splitting devices are: designed specifically to split wastewater flows readily accessible for ongoing operation and maintenance easily adjustable after construction is complete and settlement occurs have finite or continuous adjustment (some older gate-type products don't have continuous adjustment feature) To be added as a Condition of Product Registration (Letter to Manufacturer): When flow splitting is required, this requirement will be included in the Product Registration listing. The manufacturer, along with the Advanced Designer and Installer, is responsible to ensure that proper flow splitting devices are used in splitting flows to either treatment and distribution products. The flow splitting device can be one that was included in the submittal, or an equivalent product, that meets the following criteria: 1) designed specifically for wastewater flows, 2) readily accessible for on-going operation and maintenance, 3) easily adjustable after construction is complete and settlement occurs, and 4) have infinite or continuous adjustment features. Checklist: Need to add piece in the Checklist review of the application 2

17 Septic System Management Plan for Below Grade Systems The goal of a septic system is to protect human health and the environment by properly treating wastewater before returning it to the environment. Your septic system is designed to kill harmful organisms and remove pollutants before the water is recycled back into our lakes, streams and groundwater. This management plan will identify the operation and maintenance activities necessary to ensure long-term performance of your septic system. Some of these activities must be performed by you, the homeowner. Other tasks must be performed by a licensed septic maintainer or service provider. However, it is YOUR responsibility to make sure all tasks get accomplished in a timely manner. The University of Minnesota s Septic System Owner s Guide contains additional tips and recommendations designed to extend the effective life of your system and save you money over time. Proper septic system design, installation, operation and maintenance means safe and clean water! Property Owner Property Address Property ID System Designer License # System Installer License # Service Provider/Maintainer Phone Permitting Authority Phone Permit # Date Inspected Keep this Management Plan with your Septic System Owner s Guide. The Septic System Owner s Guide includes a folder to hold maintenance records including pumping, inspection and evaluation reports. Ask your septic professional to also: Attach permit information, designer drawings and as-builts of your system, if they are available. Keep copies of all pumping records and other maintenance and repair invoices with this document. Review this document with your maintenance professional at each visit; discuss any changes in product use or water-use appliances. For a copy of the Septic System Owner s Guide, call or go to

18 Septic System Management Plan for Below Grade Systems Homeowner Management Tasks These operation and maintenance activities are your responsibility. Use the chart on page 6 to track your activities. Identify the service intervals recommended by your system designer and your local government. The tank assessment for your system will be the shortest interval of these three intervals. Your pumper/maintainer will determine if your tank needs to be pumped. System Designer: check every months Local Government: check every months State Requirement: check every 36 months My tank needs to be checked every months Seasonally or several times per year Leaks. Check (listen, look) for leaks in toilets and dripping faucets. Repair leaks promptly. Surfacing sewage. Regularly check for wet or spongy soil around your soil treatment area. If surfaced sewage or strong odors are not corrected by pumping the tank or fixing broken caps, call your service professional. Untreated sewage may make humans and animals sick. Alarms. Alarms signal when there is a problem; contact your maintainer any time the alarm signals. Lint filter. If you have a lint filter, check for lint buildup and clean when necessary. Effluent screen. If you have an effluent screen, inspect and clean it twice a year or per manufacturer recommendations. Annually Water usage rate. A water meter can be used to monitor your average daily water use. Compare your water usage rate to the design flow of your system (listed on the next page). Contact your septic professional if your average daily flow over the course of a month exceeds 70% of the design flow for your system. Caps. Make sure that all caps and lids are intact and in place. Inspect for damaged caps at least every fall. Fix or replace damaged caps before winter to help prevent freezing issues. Water conditioning devices. See Page 5 for a list of devices. When possible, program the recharge frequency based on water demand (gallons) rather than time (days). Recharging too frequently may negatively impact your septic system. Review your water usage rate. Review the Water Use Appliance chart on Page 5. Discuss any major changes with your pumper/maintainer. During each visit by a pumper/maintainer Ask if your pumper/maintainer is licensed in Minnesota. Make sure that your pumper/maintainer services the tank through the manhole. (NOT though a 4 or 6 diameter inspection port.) Ask your pumper/maintainer to accomplish the tasks listed on the Professional Tasks on Page

19 Septic System Management Plan for Below Grade Systems Professional Management Tasks These are the operation and maintenance activities that a pumper/maintainer performs to help ensure long-term performance of your system. Professionals should refer to the O/M Manual for detailed checklists for tanks, pumps, alarms and other components. Call for more details. Written record provided to homeowner after each visit. Plumbing/Source of Wastewater Review the Water Use Appliance Chart on Page 5 with homeowner. Discuss any changes in water use and the impact those changes may have on the septic system. Review water usage rates (if available) with homeowner. Septic Tank/Pump Tanks Manhole lid. A riser is recommended if the lid is not accessible from the ground surface. Insulate the riser cover for frost protection. Liquid level. Check to make sure the tank is not leaking. The liquid level should be level with the bottom of the outlet pipe. (If the water level is below the bottom of the outlet pipe, the tank may not be watertight. If the water level is higher than the bottom of the outlet pipe of the tank, the effluent screen may need cleaning, or there may be ponding in the drainfield.) Inspection pipes. Replace damaged caps. Baffles. Check to make sure they are in place and attached, and that inlet/outlet baffles are clear of buildup or obstructions. Effluent screen. Check to make sure it is in place; clean per manufacturer recommendation. Alarm. Verify that the alarm works. Scum and sludge. Measure scum and sludge in each tank, pump if needed. Pump Pump and controls. Check to make sure the pump and controls are operating correctly. Pump vault. Check to make sure it is in place; clean per manufacturer recommendations. Alarm. Verify that the alarm works. Drainback. Check to make sure it is operating properly. Event counter or run time. Check to see if there is an event counter or run time log for the pump. If there is one, calculate the water usage rate and compare to the anticipated average daily flow listed on Page 4. Soil Treatment Area Inspection pipes. Check to make sure they are properly capped. Replace caps that are damaged. Surfacing of effluent. Check for surfaced effluent or other signs of problems. Gravity trenches. Check the number of gravity trenches with ponded effluent. Identify the percentage of the system in use. Determine if action is needed. All other components inspect as listed here: - 3 -

20 Septic System Management Plan for Below Grade Systems Your Septic System Septic System Specifics System is subject to operating permit* System Type: I II III IV* V* System uses UV disinfection unit* (Based on MN Rules Chapter ) Type of advanced treatment unit *Additional Management Plan required Dwelling Type Number of bedrooms: System capacity/ design flow (gpd): Anticipated average daily flow (gpd): Comments In-home business? What type? Well Construction Well depth (ft): Cased well Casing depth: Other (specify): Distance from septic (ft): Is the well on the design drawing? Y N Septic Tank One tank Tank volume: gallons Pump Tank (if one) gallons Does tank have two compartments? Y N Effluent Pump type: Two tanks Tank volume: gallons TDH Feet of head Tank is constructed of Pump capacity GPM Effluent Screen type: Alarm visual audible Soil Treatment Area Trenches: total lineal feet Pressure Gravity distribution distribution Number of trenches: at feet each Drainbed size (length x width): ft x ft Inspection ports Cleanouts - 4 -

21 Septic System Management Plan for Below Grade Systems Water-Use Appliances and Equipment in the Home Appliance Impacts on System Management Tips Garbage disposal Washing machine 2 nd floor laundry Dishwasher Grinder pump (in home) Large bathtub (whirlpool) Uses additional water. Adds solids to the tank. Finely-ground solids may not settle. Unsettled solids can exit the tank and enter the soil treatment area. Washing several loads on one day uses a lot of water and may overload your system. Overloading your system may prevent solids from settling out in the tank. Unsettled solids can exit the tank and enter the soil treatment area. The rapid speed of water entering the tank may reduce performance. Powdered and/or high-phosphorus detergents can negatively impact the performance of your tank and soil treatment area. New models promote no scraping. They have a garbage disposal inside. Finely-ground solids may not settle. Unsettled solids can exit the tank and enter the soil treatment area. Large volume of water may overload your system. Heavy use of bath oils and soaps can impact biological activity in your tank and soil treatment area. Use of a garbage disposal is not recommended. Minimize garbage disposal use. Compost instead. To prevent solids from exiting the tank, have your tank pumped more frequently. Add an effluent screen to your tank. Choose a front-loader or water-saving top-loader, these units use less water than older models. Limit the addition of extra solids to your tank by using liquid or easily biodegradable detergents. Install a lint filter after the washer and an effluent screen to your tank Wash only full loads. Limit use of bleach-based detergents. Think even spread your laundry loads throughout the week. Install an effluent screen in the septic tank to prevent the release of excessive solids to the soil treatment area. Be sure that you have adequate tank capacity. Use gel detergents. Powdered detergents may add solids to the tank. Use detergents that are low or no-phosphorus. Wash only full loads. Scrape your dishes anyways to keep undigested solids out of your septic system. Expand septic tank capacity by a factor of 1.5. Include pump monitoring in your maintenance schedule to ensure that it is working properly. Add an effluent screen. Avoid using other water-use appliances at the same time. For example, don t wash clothes and take a bath at the same time. Use oils, soaps, and cleaners in the bath or shower sparingly. Clean Water Uses Impacts on System Management Tips High-efficiency furnace Water softener Iron filter Reverse osmosis Surface drainage Footing drains Drip may result in frozen pipes during cold weather. Salt in recharge water may affect system performance. Recharge water may hydraulically overload the system. Water from these sources will likely overload the system. Re-route water into a sump pump or directly out of the house. Do not route furnace recharge to your septic system. These sources produce water that is clean; clean water should not go into your septic system. Reroute water from these sources to another outlet, such as a dry well or old drainfield. When replacing, consider using a demand-based recharge vs. a time-based recharge. Check valves to ensure proper operation; have unit serviced per manufacturer directions - 5 -

22 Septic System Management Plan for Below Grade Systems Maintenance Log Track maintenance activities here for easy reference. See list of management tasks on page 2. Activity Date accomplished Check frequently: Leaks: check for plumbing leaks Soil treatment area check for surfacing Lint filter: check, clean if needed Effluent screen: if owner-maintained Check annually: Water usage rate (monitor frequency ) Caps: inspect, replace if needed Water use appliances review use Other: Notes: I understand it is my responsibility to properly operate and maintain the sewage treatment system on this property, utilizing the Management Plan. If requirements in this Management Plan are not met, I will promptly notify the permitting authority and take necessary corrective actions. If I have a new system, I agree to adequately protect the reserve area for future use as a soil treatment system. Property Owner Signature: Designer Signature: Permitting Authority Signature: Date Date Date 2009 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All rights reserved. The University of Minnesota is an equal opportunity educator and employer. This material is available in alternative formats upon request. Contact the Water Resources Center, The Onsite Sewage Treatment Program is delivered by the University of Minnesota Extension Service and the University of Minnesota Water Resources Center

23 Septic System Management Plan for Above Grade Systems The goal of a septic system is to protect human health and the environment by properly treating wastewater before returning it to the environment. Your septic system is designed to kill harmful organisms and remove pollutants before the water is recycled back into our lakes, streams and groundwater. This management plan will identify the operation and maintenance activities necessary to ensure long-term performance of your septic system. Some of these activities must be performed by you, the homeowner. Other tasks must be performed by a licensed septic maintainer or service provider. However, it is YOUR responsibility to make sure all tasks get accomplished in a timely manner. The University of Minnesota s Septic System Owner s Guide contains additional tips and recommendations designed to extend the effective life of your system and save you money over time. Proper septic system design, installation, operation and maintenance means safe and clean water! Property Owner Property Address Property ID System Designer License # System Installer License # Service Provider/Maintainer Phone Permitting Authority Phone Permit # Date Inspected Keep this Management Plan with your Septic System Owner s Guide. The Septic System Owner s Guide includes a folder designed to hold maintenance records including pumping, inspection and evaluation reports. Ask your septic professional to also: Attach permit information, designer drawings and as-builts of your system, if they are available. Keep copies of all pumping records and other maintenance and repair invoices with this document. Review this document with your maintenance professional at each visit; discuss any changes in product use or water-use appliances. For a copy of the Septic System Owner s Guide, call or go to

24 Septic System Management Plan for Above Grade Systems Homeowner Management Tasks These operation and maintenance activities are your responsibility. Use the chart on page 6 to track your activities. Identify the service intervals recommended by your system designer and your local government. The tank assessment for your system will be the shortest interval of these three intervals. Your pumper/maintainer will determine if your tank needs to be pumped. System Designer: check every months Local Government: check every months State Requirement: check every 36 months My tank needs to be checked every months Seasonally or several times per year Leaks. Check (listen, look) for leaks in toilets and dripping faucets. Repair leaks promptly. Surfacing sewage. Regularly check for wet or spongy soil around your soil treatment area. If surfaced sewage or strong odors are not corrected by pumping the tank or fixing broken caps, call your service professional. Untreated sewage may make humans and animals sick. Alarms. Alarms signal when there is a problem; contact your maintainer any time the alarm signals. Lint filter. If you have a lint filter, check for lint buildup and clean when necessary. Effluent screen. If you have an effluent screen, inspect and clean it twice a year or per manufacturer recommendations. Annually Water usage rate. A water meter can be used to monitor your average daily water use. Compare your water usage rate to the design flow of your system (listed on the next page). Contact your septic professional if your average daily flow over the course of a month exceeds 70% of the design flow for your system. Caps. Make sure that all caps and lids are intact and in place. Inspect for damaged caps at least every fall. Fix or replace damaged caps before winter to help prevent freezing issues. Water conditioning devices. See Page 5 for a list of devices. When possible, program the recharge frequency based on water demand (gallons) rather than time (days). Recharging too frequently may negatively impact your septic system. Review your water usage rate. Review the Water Use Appliance chart on Page 5. Discuss any major changes with your pumper/maintainer. During each visit by a pumper/maintainer Ask if your pumper/maintainer is licensed in Minnesota. Make sure that your pumper/maintainer services the tank through the manhole. (NOT though a 4 or 6 diameter inspection port.) Ask your pumper/maintainer to accomplish the tasks listed on the Professional Tasks on Page

25 Septic System Management Plan for Above Grade Systems Professional Management Tasks These are the operation and maintenance activities that a pumper/maintainer performs to help ensure long-term performance of your system. Professionals should refer to the O/M Manual for detailed checklists for tanks, pumps, alarms and other components. Call for more details. Written record provided to homeowner after each visit. Plumbing/Source of Wastewater Review the Water Use Appliance Chart on Page 5 with homeowner. Discuss any changes in water use and the impact those changes may have on the septic system. Review water usage rates (if available) with homeowner. Septic Tank/Pump Tanks Manhole lid. A riser is recommended if the lid is not accessible from the ground surface. Insulate the riser cover for frost protection. Liquid level. Check to make sure the tank is not leaking. The liquid level should be level with the bottom of the outlet pipe. (If the water level is below the bottom of the outlet pipe, the tank may not be watertight. If the water level is higher than the bottom of the outlet pipe of the tank, the effluent screen may need cleaning, or there may be ponding in the drainfield.) Inspection pipes. Replace damaged caps. Baffles. Check to make sure they are in place and attached, and that inlet/outlet baffles are clear of buildup or obstructions. Effluent screen. Check to make sure it is in place; clean per manufacturer recommendation. Alarm. Verify that the alarm works. Scum and sludge. Measure scum and sludge in each tank, pump if needed. Pump Pump and controls. Check to make sure the pump and controls are operating correctly. Pump vault. Check to make sure it is in place; clean per manufacturer recommendations. Alarm. Verify that the alarm works. Drainback. Check to make sure it is operating properly. Event counter or run time. Check to see if there is an event counter or run time log for the pump. If there is one, calculate the water usage rate and compare to the anticipated average daily flow listed on Page 4. Soil Treatment Area Inspection pipes. Check to make sure they are properly capped. Replace caps that are damaged. Surfacing of effluent. Check for surfaced effluent or other signs of problems. Lateral flushing. Check lateral distribution; if cleanouts exist, flush and clean as needed. Ponding. Check for ponding. Excessive ponding in mounds indicates a problem. All other components inspect as listed here: - 3 -