A Survey of Small Sewage Treatment Facilities in Ohio

In 1987, a small sewage treatment facilities survey was conducted of all county and local health departments in Ohio. The objectives were to learn how local sewage treatment facilities programs are managed, the types of systems in use, the numbers of permits issued, and the number of systems that are failing. The survey results indicate that urban areas in Ohio have the largest health departments and had over 13,000 permits issued in 1986 which accounted for the greatest number of permits. Site evaluation procedures varied greatly across the state. In 25 counties, permits were issued without a visit to the site. Sanitarians estimated that 27% of the septic systems are failing. Aerobic systems are used heavily in Ohio, while alternative systems have limited use. To address the problems of failing systems and unsuitable sites for septic systems, more information is needed at the county level about alternative sewage systems and on-site system management. OHIO J. SCI. 90 (4): 112-117, 1990 INTRODUCTION Close to one million homes in Ohio are located in areas not served by a public sewer system (Bureau of Census 1983). Homeowners in rural areas must treat the 50 to 100 gallons of wastewater generated per person per day on the lot through the use of a septic system or some other type of on-site sewage treatment system. Septic systems are the most common type of on-site sewage treatment system. Sewage from the home enters a septic tank where the solids and greases a-re allowed to separate from the wastewater and are retained in the tank. The clarified wastewater then flows into a soil absorption system. A typical soil absorption system consists of a series of perforated pipes, buried in a layer of gravel 6-18 inches below the ground surface. The septic tank effluent is distributed beneath the soil surface through the perforated pipes and is absorbed into the soil for treatment and disposal (US EPA 1980). The use of septic systems is limited by the characteristics of the soil and the lot. The site limitations are fully described in the Ohio Administrative Code (1988) in Chapter 3701-29. In Ohio, a minimum of 4 feet of soil is required between the soil absorption system and either bedrock or groundwater. The rate at which water is absorbed by the soil can also restrict the use of septic systems. In Ohio, the soil must have a percolation rate of between 3 and 60 minutes per inch to be suitable for septic systems. This rate can be measured with a percolation test (Machmeier 1985). The slope of the lot cannot exceed 15%, and the lot must be sufficiently large to provide area for the septic tank, the soil absorption system, and future replacement of the soil absorption system, and to provide setbacks from wells, ponds or streams, and lot boundaries. If the lot is not suitable for a septic system, alternative on-site systems can be used to treat wastewater. The Ohio Administrative Code (1988) has provisions for the use of sand filter systems and aerobic systems for on-site treatment. 'Manuscript received 4 August 1989 and in revised form 5 February 1990 (#89-21) Mound systems can be used to treat septic tank effluent in areas with thin soils or a high percolation rate. In a mound system, a special sand fill is used to augment the natural soil in wastewater treatment (Converse et al. 1977). Unfortunately, the use of mound systems is not included in the Ohio Administrative Code and, therefore, its use is limited in Ohio to that of an experimental system, requiring a variance for installation. A variation of the typical soil absorption system to treat septic tank effluent was introduced in Ohio in the early 1980s. The use of large diameter cloth covered pipe was proposed to replace the gravel used in soil absorption systems (Barnes 1981). These systems are called gravelless systems. In Ohio, the discharge of sewage is regulated by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency as stated in Section 6111.04 of the Ohio Revised Code (1988). The only exception to this is listed in subsection F which exempts septic tanks and other disposal systems serving singlefamily, two-family, and three-family dwellings. The discharge of untreated sewage from a private residence is considered a public nuisance, and is under the jurisdiction of the local Board of Health as specified in Sections 3707.01, 3709.20, and 3709.21 of the Ohio Revised Code. The Ohio Board of Health has adopted minimum standards for on-site sewage disposal in Chapter 3701-29 of the Ohio Administrative Code (1988). However, local boards of health can adopt more stringent standards. Little information has been documented about the use of septic systems and alternative wastewater treatment systems in Ohio. In 1987, a survey was conducted of all county and local health departments in the state to gather information about small sewage treatment facilities. The objectives were to determine how local health departments were managing their sewage treatment facilities program, and to ascertain which alternatives were being used for sites not suitable for septic systems. Estimates were also obtained of the number of permits issued for septic systems in 1986 and of the number of septic systems which are failing to operate in the state. OHIO JOURNAL OF SCIENCE K. MANCL 113 MATERIALS AND METHODS A 16-question survey was prepared using the procedure described by Dillman (1978). The 6 x 8-1/2 in. questionnaire booklet consisted of a front cover with an illustration of a home with a septic system and 11 pages of multiple-choice and fill-in-the-blank questions. Prior to distribution, the questionnaire was tested by four former county sanitarians to insure that the questions were clear and appropriate. The complete questionnaire is available from the author. Following Dillman's technique, the surveys were distributed to all 88 county and 67 city health departments through a four-part mailing. The first mailing contained a personally addressed and signed cover letter, the questionnaire booklet, copies of new Ohio State Extension Service publications on septic systems, and a pre-addressed and stamped return envelope. After 10 days, a reminder postcard was sent to all who did not respond to the first mailing. Two weeks later a second personally addressed and signed letter, the questionnaire booklet, and return envelope were sent to all who did not respond. Finally, one week later, a second reminder postcard was sent to all who had not responded. RESULTS In total, 82 (93%) of the county health departments and 53 (79%) of the city health departments responded to the survey. The response to the first mailing was only 29%. By simply sending the first reminder postcard, the response was raised to 46%. Twenty-four city health departments indicated that they were operating a small sewage treatment facilities program. The cities of Cincinnati, Columbus, Toledo, and Akron, as well as a number of medium and small communities, are included in this group. These communities are depending on as many as 6,500 on-site sewage systems for wastewater treatment. One city health department issued as many as 490 permits in 1986. Permit fees ranged from nothing in four communities to $75 in one. The median fee was $20. The management of small sewage treatment facilities programs in Ohio rests primarily in the hands of the county health departments. County health departments range in size from 1 to 30 full-time sanitarians with as many as three part-time sanitarians (Fig. 1). The average FIGURE 2. Number of septic system permits issued by county health departments in 1986. Less than 5 Sanitarians [ 1 5 to 10 **** Sanitarians More than 10 Sanitarians [• • I Less than $5( p i l l $ 5 0 t 0 S99 [ffff l $100 to $149