Nevada County Grand Jury
• 2003-2004
Septic Systems Inquiry in Nevada County Reason for Investigation Over the past several years local newspaper articles
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 12 findings
F1
The 1967 Porter-Cologne Act established the State Water Quality Resource Control Board (SWB) and California Regional Water Quality Control Boards as principal state agencies responsible for water quality control.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
The Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVB) has the authority to regulate any wastewater system within a jurisdiction that includes western Nevada County. While the Porter-Cologne Act requires that any person discharging or proposing to discharge waste, even individual septic systems for single-family residences, file a report with the regional offices, it has been CVB’s practice since the early 1950s to regulate/monitor only systems with more than 99 connections. Recently the CVB has decided to regulate some systems in Nevada County with fewer than 99 connections where the proposed system design did not appear to protect water quality and meet existing standards.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
More stringent statewide requirements for the permitting/operation of on-site systems may be required as a result of Assembly Bill 885 (AB885), but no regulations or standards have been promulgated as of the date of this report.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
Beyond the policies and requirements of the regional water quality control boards, there are currently no statewide requirements for minimum lot sizes, placement, or use of on- site wastewater systems. California does not have statewide laws for pre-sale inspections or for regular inspections of on-site systems after initial construction. Requirements addressing these issues are left to the discretion of individual county health departments.
No recommendations for this finding
F5
Nevada County has established regulations for setbacks and replacement areas for on-site systems. Regardless of the zoning, all new parcels created in Nevada County that plan to use an on-site system must be large enough to accommodate the required system and an on-site system reserve/replacement area. The reserve area, required to be the same size as the primary septic system, is protected to the same extent as the primary septic system area.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
The LAFCO report states … “while on-site systems are often cited as a source of water quality degradation, there is little documentation to substantiate that claim. AB885 may require that the SWB adopt regulations for the permitting/operation of on-site systems.”
No recommendations for this finding
F7
County tracking of septic tank problems and leakage is only complaint-driven. Complaints are received and filed according to parcel number in manila folders in a records storage room. Older parcel data is stored on microfiche. To obtain a consolidated report of septic tank complaints, one would have to go through the parcel folders and microfiche and extract the complaints one-by-one. Without consolidated reports, the County lacks reference points to determine if the number of complaints is growing (and at what rate), staying the same, or decreasing.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
The Board of Supervisors should make certain that any new computer systems have the data required to provide essential management reports related to on-site septic system complaints, failures, testing, and maintenance.
F8
In response to a letter dated January 11, 2002 from the Alta Sierra Property Owners Association (ASPOA), the County Department of Transportation and Sanitation in September of 2002 conducted an investigation of sewage disposal in the Alta Sierra area. The study, based on a review of 309 randomly selected developed parcel files (with no on-site physical inspection), statistically estimated that over 40% of the septic tanks have not been pumped in the last 15 years compared to a recommended average pumping interval of 3-5 years. The study also concluded that no evaluation of ground water quality or health risks could be made as the study was done from historical data and lacked field-testing for bacteria.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
The Board of Supervisors should direct Environmental Health to assist ASPOA and similar communities to locate an affordable testing and pumping provider for residents’ septic systems.
F9
A report prepared for the Nevada County 1992 General Plan update noted: “Septic tank and leach field system problems have evolved in localized portions of western Nevada County for a variety of reasons including soil conditions, slope, small lot sizes and inadequate permit and construction practices … (and) areas such as the Alta Sierra subdivision and La Barr Meadows have a history of failing leach fields.”
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The Board of Supervisors should direct Sanitation and/or Environmental Health to commission a master plan to address on-site system testing and maintenance countywide and to educate the public about related health concerns.
F10
Regular testing of wells can determine if groundwater is contaminated. The LAFCO report states…“all wells be tested regularly.” Anecdotal information indicates that generally 27% of wells tested show levels of coliform bacteria in excess of acceptable levels. While wastewater disposal may be the primary cause of high coliform levels, a causal relationship between failing septic systems and high coliform levels in wells has not been established. Coliform bacteria are ubiquitous in soil and are only “indicators” of potential water contamination.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
The Board of Supervisors should establish an ongoing periodic licensing and testing program for all wells within the County to determine if the groundwater is contaminated. RESPONSES Nevada County Board of Supervisors – August 30, 2004 This document was created with Win2PDF available at http://www.daneprairie.com. The unregistered version of Win2PDF is for evaluation or non-commercial use only.
F11
The LAFCO report also states: “It may not be possible for all new development to connect to centralized, public wastewater systems; however, a series of larger sub- regional, centralized facilities may reach economies of scale not available with on-site systems. A method of evaluating the economic and environmental impacts of the various treatment options and providing direction to reduce the long-term reliance on on-site systems should be developed.”
No recommendations for this finding
F12
The County is developing a new computer system called “Encompass.” Encompass is expected to provide consolidated reports for parcel data that is entered into the system. It is not clear, however, that older parcel data stored on microfiche will be included. Older septic systems might be expected to be more problematic than newer systems constructed using longer-lasting materials CONCLUSIONS
No recommendations for this finding
Conclusions 3
-
CL1 Page 3While the regulatory details of AB885 have not yet been promulgated, the County can proactively anticipate that those details will require a new level of protection of the public health in areas of high population density that are currently served by on-site systems. There is no need to wait for AB885 to react to what is already known.
-
CL2 Page 3There is a potential health risk associated with coliform bacteria that is currently unmeasured. In addition to the health problems associated with bacteria, there is also a long-term problem associated with on-site systems’ dispersal of common household wastes containing contaminants that wastewater treatment plants are required to remove.
-
CL3 Page 3Thus, failure-reports from Encompass might not include the past data for parcels having the highest septic tank failure rate. Measurement is absolutely indispensable for improving wastewater treatment efforts. Without measurement, there is no effective way to judge the County’s wastewater efforts.
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Nevada County Board of Supervisors
Elected County Office