The Changing Focus of Onsite Sewage Treatment in Virginia

Or

Why I am NOT on everyone’s

Christmas List!

04/01/2016

History - 1998

Existing “Sewage Handling & Disposal Regulations are dated 1984, are totally Proscriptive in design – no leeway towards “Performance” based treatment systems Updates of new technology approvals are handled by issuing “Guidance Memoranda & Policy Documents” (GMP’s) for EVERY Alternative Treatment System approval! Regulation update begins, along with creating a “New” regulation dealing with Alternative Onsite Sewage Systems!

04/01/2016

History - 2000

New Onsite Regulations (12-VAC-5-610) passed by the General Assembly and enacted in 2000. – Opened the door for any NSF Standard 40 system to be Installed with footprint reductions and decreased stand-offs and NO additional testing.

This change / update to the original 1984 regulations opened the door for thousands of installations and building growth that would not have been allowed previously. This regulation was designed and written to be in association with the new “Alternative Onsite Sewage Regulations”

04/01/2016

History - 2000

Alternative Onsite Regulations (12-VAC-5-613) requiring perpetual Maintenance, reporting, sampling and “Certified”

Operators

FAILED! To be passed by Legislature!

The Public, and Building Community was up in arms regarding perceived expense of routine maintenance, lack of credentialed

providers, etc.

04/01/2016

History - 2005 State Health Department approaches VOWRA for a partnership in developing MANDATORY maintenance regulations with NO GRANDFATHERING!

Basically the HD asked for industry support in developing a program for mandatory maintenance that the Legislature would be happy with AND that the Health Department WON’T get crucified by the general public!

Health Department estimated between 15,000 and 30,000 Alternative OWTS installed in a five year period!

Numbers were “Unknown” as there was no online database!

04/01/2016

Four Things Needed to Happen

A working group was formed and it was determined that FOUR things needed to happen! 1. Dust off 12-VAC-5-613, make some editing changes and it should be good to go –

EASY

2. Develop a DATA BASE and an INVENTORY of what was permitted! – Not so Easy

3. Switch from “Criminal” enforcements to “Civil Penalties” – big regulation change

and paradigm shift!

4. Have “Certified” Operators available so when #1 goes into effect, the property owners can’t holler – much!

And, we recognized that this was going to be a long process … we put a timeline of

TEN (10) years to get full implementation!

04/01/2016

Re-Inventing the Wheel

So What type of Certification or HOW did we want to “Certify” or Credential Operators? Require Manufacturer Certification for ALL? - 44 manufacturers listed on NSF! What type of age / education / experience? Who handles the paperwork? – Application / Fees / TESTING? What type and how much Continuing Education? How frequently does the Certification get renewed? How do you discipline the “Bad Actors”? What type of Sanctions? Who does the Investigations? Who foots the bill for the Investigations? Where does the money come from? Who sets the “Standard of Practice”?

04/01/2016

First Thought

The original thought was to track ALL Operators and REQUIRE Operators to have Manufacturer certifications for the treatment systems they were providing services to.

This died a slow and agonizing death as it was pointed out:

1. Not all manufacturers WANT everyone to be certified as an operator for their system(s).

2. There are / were 44 manufacturers with NSF standard 40 systems. 3. There are systems out there that have two or more manufactured systems

installed (ATU / ATU / Polishing Filter / Dis-infection / Dispersal) 4. Manufacturers or their dealers can be “Fickle” in certifying and de-certifying

individuals or companies 5. Under this paradigm, the property owner MAY NOT have a choice of what

company services their system! 6. An ATU is an ATU is an ATU … Media Filters are Media Filters are Media

Filters, and Drip is Drip!

04/01/2016

Second Thought

Was to develop a program, where the ONUS of education and responsibility was solely on the Operator. As such, it was agreed that the certification / credentialling process would be broken up into two parts …

The first part being an “Interim Certification” which was open to anyone who could produce a manufacturers certificate as a service provider; NSF or NAWT Inspector Certification; or a completion certificate of the CIDWT Residential O&M program. The Interim Certificate would be good for 48 to 54 months depending on the date that the regulation change took effect.

We hoped that this would provide a larger initial population of operators available for the homeowners to work with.

It also allowed time for an operator to obtain specific manufacturer certifications, develop their math skills, and gain the knowledge of how and why Alternative OWTS operate, and how they fit into the framework of the regulation(s).

04/01/2016

Second Thought – Part Two

After an Operator gained the requisite “experience, then they could make application for “THE CREDENTIAL” which would require minimum qualifications such as age, education and experience, and WOULD require that the applicant take a written test to demonstrate knowledge of basic operation and maintenance of Alternative OWTS and demonstrate knowledge of the regulations.

This also allowed time to actually develop a written multiple choice examination, further develop the “Ethics” portion of the program, and further develop “Standards of Practice” guidelines.

Hey … this stuff is “EASY” when sitting in committee … the debate of what we wanted was complete, we had a rough guideline of what we wanted, now we had to put it all on paper!

04/01/2016

Qualifications for “The Credential” 1. 18 years of age – Why? Because that is the legal age to vote!

2. High School Diploma or GED Equivalent – Why? – because you need to know Algebraic Math, read formal plans and specifications, read control panel schematics, etc.

3. One year experience – Why? – solely based on my experience in training my technicians. It takes me 8 to 12 weeks to train a technician for basic Preventive Maintenance, then it is another 6 months before they have that “AHA” moment where everything finally clicks.

4. Pass a multiple test examination that tests your basic knowledge of the Regulations, basic maintenance principles for ATU’s, Media Filters, Soil Absorption Fields, Safety, Math, Microbiology.

5. Maintain 20 hours of Continuing Education per Credentialing Cycle.

The Nitty Gritty - Qualifications

04/01/2016

The original proposal was that the Health Department would be the administrator of the program.

This means they had to create a budget, and proposed staffing.

They would process the applications, verify the applicant had the appropriate initial certifications, and issue the credential.

They would have to develop and maintain security for an examination and the examination test sites (local health departments).

The Nitty Gritty - Administration

04/01/2016

Why define Standard of Practice? First, it sets a base standard of what ALL operators should be doing when conducting maintenance. Second, it gives a base line standard for the Investigator to utilize WHEN the complaint from the homeowner is filed.

We used the Consortium of Institutes for Decentralized Wastewater Training “National Operation and Maintenance Program for Residential Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems” as a primary reference for the examination and as our baseline for written SOP’s!

Just chock full of useful information, plus CHECKLISTS for what the new service provider should be looking for when conducting maintenance visits.

Hey, this ain’t too bad … things are just falling into place!

The Nitty Gritty Standard of Practice

04/01/2016

This was fairly easy to develop as there are written “Ethical” guidelines already established in code for such professions as Engineers, Physicians, Nurses, etc.

So a lot of this was just cut and paste what we wanted to see …

Really, developing this program is a piece of cake …

The Nitty Gritty - Ethics

04/01/2016

Have to lump Investigation into this as well. We pulled information on “sanctions” and “investigations” again from professional Engineers, Physicians and Nursing licensing programs.

The most difficult part was developing who was going to “Investigate” … to keep the investigation impartial, it couldn’t involve any of the EH personnel in the district where the complaint was filed. So arrangements and protocols were discussed about pulling a responsible party in from outlying districts.

The Nitty Gritty Complaint Resolution

04/01/2016

Expense was a big part of this, as you had to provide for travel, possible overnight accommodations for interviews, etc.

We felt that the majority of this could be handled via Email as none of the complaints were going to be “an Emergency” and though you want the complaint handled in a “timely” manner, time itself was not a factor.

The committee never got into the financial considerations, figuring some of the offset would come from licensing fees.

The Nitty Gritty Complaint Resolution – part 2

04/01/2016

While we spent a lot of time focused on developing a “Credentialing” program, we also continued to work on the other three elements of the overall program.

The HD contracted with a firm to develop a database that would be “web based” allowing Operators to file their required reports electronically.

We also built in a $1.00 fee per report filed to fund the data reporting system, payed by the operators.

And the reporting system is capable of accepting reports from “other” reporting systems such as Carmody & Online RME!

Elsewhere and Elsewhen

04/01/2016

We dusted off 12-VAC-5-613 and made it so it was more “performance” based vs. “proscriptive”.

We made reporting and inspection mandatory – NO system was GRANDFATHERED! ALL AOSS required a minimum of Annual inspection and reporting, with the reporting tied to the new online data reporting system.

All NEW construction had required laboratory sampling requirements!

Elsewhere and Elsewhen

04/01/2016

We also wrote proposed legislation that allowed the HD to switch from “Criminal” prosecution of code / regulation violations to “Civil Penalties”.

This allows the local HD to issue a “Ticket” to the property owner for failure to have their system inspected / reported, versus having to actually prosecute them in Criminal Court.

Surprisingly, this has actually met with resistance from quite a few HD’s, and took much longer to implement and get the details worked out with the Court system than expected.

Elsewhere and Elsewhen

04/01/2016

It is now June, 2006 … the committee thought we had a pretty good program laid out. We had a “Certification Program” developed, we had tweaked the Alternative Onsite Regulations, We had a regulatory proposal written for “Civil Penalties”, the HD was well on their way to having an online database, so now we put it all in front of the Commonwealth Attorney for review.

The Attorney liked everything, but said that the chances of VDH revoking someone’s credential, or having a fine paid by a “Credentialed” Operator was probably slim to NONE!

W H A T ?

Let’s See What the Attorney’s Have to Say!

04/01/2016

It seems that we overlooked or didn’t think of one teeny tiny little thing! In the course of developing a credentialing program, managed by the Health Department, we created a “Conflict of Interest” within the Health Department.

The Health Department in short was going to be … a partner in training, the credentialing agency, the primary complainant, the investigator, the judge, the jury and the executioner of a credentialed operator!

All an Operator had to do was scream “Conflict of Interest” and any sanction would probably NEVER be held up in court.

Conflict of Interest!

04/01/2016

Luckily NO – The attorney asked a simple question – Did we run the credentialing program or the idea of a credentialing program past the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation?

Answer – NO! We got tunnel vision and never looked outside the initial proposal of the Health Department managing a credentialing program.

Turns out that all the work we did in developing the program is or was already in place!

Back to Square ONE?

04/01/2016

The Health Department submitted a major legislative package in December 2006 for the 2007 Legislative Session.

The Legislature passed all of the proposed regulatory changes, with delayed timelines for implementation of certain sections.

They expanded the Board for Waterworks and Wastewater Works Operators to include Onsite Sewage System Professionals and the Governor appointed one Designer (AOSE), one Installer (AOSSI) and one Operator (AOSSO) to the board.

So What Happened?

04/01/2016

Licensing for AOSS Designers, Installers and Operators became mandatory July 1, 2009. Interim Licenses expired December 31, 2013.

The Health Department has a so / so online database and inventory of the treatment systems installed and currently permitted which went online and active April 2010.

Mandatory maintenance “Interim” regulations became effective April 2010 and the final rule became active December 2011.

Civil penalties went into effect September 2014.

Aftermath Timeline

04/01/2016

Not surprisingly there has been a lot of Fall Out received on the public side, particularly from Onsite Evaluators and Installers who either want “Business as Usual”, or who want the Health Department out of the Onsite Business in it’s entirety.

We still have a few Installers, Pumpers out there that are not in Compliance with the licensing requirements.

We have however been finding treatment systems damaged during installation or that have “structural” flaws that are needing to be replaced – COSTLY for the property owner.

Fall Out?

04/01/2016

As a result of the Onsite Community being licensed professionals:

The Health Department has reduced their inspections of “Privately” designed systems to “Quality Assurance” inspections.

The “Indemnification Fund” that was created to assist homeowners in repairing “Bad Designs” and “Bad Installations” has pretty much been withdrawn for use on the “Private” side – That is what Professionals have Liability Insurance for!

Un-Intended Consequences

04/01/2016

A portion of the “Indemnification Fund” is being withdrawn from the Health Department and will be used to help fund “Betterment Loans” to assist low income property owners with repairing failed onsite systems.

This doesn’t fund 100% of the costs, but is based on financial “Needs” assessment

A portion of the “Fines” from Civil Penalties will go to the local HD to offset the costs of court, etc. The remainder goes into the “Betterment Loan” fund.

Un-Intended Consequences

04/01/2016

As a result of having “Licensed Professionals”, there is a push for the Health Department to get out of the soil evaluation and design business entirely.

“SHIFT” Committee with industry representatives met throughout 2013 to help chart the course for this and to make recommendations.

We have lost a few good installers who have decided they have gotten too old for the game and that the rules are changing too fast so they have chosen NOT to become licensed and retired.

Un-Intended Consequences

04/01/2016

New construction and repair installations are up – good economic driver!

Operations Permits WON’T be issued without a service agreement in place! Ergo, a Certificate of Occupancy won’t be issued!

Systems that haven’t been operating properly are now receiving the TLC they deserve.

Local Governments appear to be more comfortable with Alternative Systems now that there is mandatory maintenance – “Zoning by Septic” complaints are down.

Over All However

04/01/2016

Even though the regulations for licensing and for Alternative Onsite Systems are relatively new, they are already up for review.

The Licensing Board is strengthening the Conflict of Interest, Standards of Practice and Ethics portions of the regulations for designers, installers and operators. This is of course meeting with resistance from some of the licensees who think that the licensing program is not / was not necessary to begin with.

In Closing

04/01/2016

The online data reporting system the HD developed is weak, in what is being reported and how it is being reported. Both of which makes it difficult to obtain trending data.

There are several companies that have the experience and programs already in place for Online Data Reporting – such as Carmody Data Systems (www.carmody.biz) and Online RME (www.onlinerme.com) Both of which provide several states (such as Wisconsin & Florida) with their data reporting systems.

In Closing

04/01/2016

With Civil Penalties finally in place, the local HD’s should be ARE sending out notices to all the property owners who have not yet obtained a service provider that they have run out of time.

Regretfully, I can say that we are still weak on licensed, knowledgeable service providers to cover the inspection requests that we are anticipating ARE being called in!

Coastal Plains Environmental Group currently has just over 1,300 active clients in 33 counties. It is currently estimated by the HD that there are over 80,000 Alternative Systems installed and operating in Virginia!

In Closing

04/01/2016

In the Beginning - Life Was Easy, You just had to have a position in Management!

04/01/2016

Thank You

Coastal Plains Environmental Group, llc P.O. Box 236 New Kent, Virginia 23124 Office: 804-966-9190 Facsimile: 804-966-2739 Email: krdavis@cpegllc.com Web: www.cpegllc.com