another case of the legislature attempting to remove and usurp rights. a pattern of abuses.
2) Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems ) by Vipster on March 24, 2009
As it is written, this is almost too asinine to comprehend.
I could see only, & I mean ONLY, if there’s “proof” that a system is malfunctioning & causing visible harm to neighboring properties, people & animals should an inspection be “required”. Of course this process of providing “proof” should be limited to a strict protocol, validating the “proof” in the complaint. Secure the permission of the property owner & insure that property rights are honored. Yaaaa Right! A bill like that will never get through congress with such common sense provisions attached to it.
No bones about it: This is a tax….It will reduce Property Rights…….The Bill will be poorly written & wrought with abuses.
Makes the case for a part-time legislature!
3) Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems ) by shearwater on March 22, 2009
A gravel bed may seem to be the best location for a septic system. Actually, gravel subsoil that is within less than 38" of the soil surface is not. The reason for this is that the first few holes in the drain field tile receive thye bulk of the infiltratyion and form a biomat which then causes the septic system to back up. One correction for this is apresure dosing systems which assures that every hole in the septic drain tile receive an approximately equal amount of septic effluent. If the infiltration rate is greater than 1.2 gallons per square foot per day, an elevated sand mound will be required or a shallow trench pressure dosing system. An elevated sand mound is about triple the price of a conventional gravity flow system but is stll less expensive that a public sewer.
View pre-2013 Comments.