Michigan Votes Forum

Discuss issues, ideas and legislation related to the Great Lake State.
Welcome to Michigan Votes Forum Sign in | Join | Help
in Search
Latest post 03-24-2009 2:19 PM by bugman. 41 replies.
Page 1 of 2 (42 items) 1 2 Next >
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 01-01-2001 12:00 AM

    • admin
    • Top 10 Contributor
    • Joined on 11-22-2008

    2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    Introduced in the Senate on January 27, 2009

    Click here to view bill details.
  • 02-04-2009 10:54 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    What a shame and Jenny just promised cutting down the gubbermint...... What's next you going to come out and put a meter on our private wells????

  • 02-05-2009 3:32 AM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

     careful how you say that...

    your PRIVATE well might just become a PUBLIC well....

    michigan constitution,  article 1. Sec. 6.

    Every person has a right to keep and bear arms for the defense of himself and the state.

     keep your powder dry.

    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." Bovard 1994

  • 03-16-2009 10:59 AM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    Why doesn't the Government get out of the septic tank business. Like they know anything about the business. They know how to get elected and that's it.What happened didn;t Detroit get enough of our money with the sewrs they proposed?

  • 03-16-2009 11:08 AM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    This is just one more nutty way to spend taxpayer money to control taxpayers! This bunch of socialists wont be happy until we all live in a subsidized high-rise with video cameras to watch how we interract. Again, yet another attack on rural Americans. Any idiot can tell when a septic tank is backing up or a drain field isnt doing it's job-it becomes very obvious very quickly!

    In looking at the huge budget deficits facing both the state and the nation, I would suggest people look at the increasing amounts being spent under the guise of environment: there's a continual shrill propaganda campaign to convince us we're all gonna die any minute because some expert hasnt controlled how we live, eat, get our water and dispose of our waste. Putting a moratorium on this big money flush for a year or two would go a long way toward balancing all of the shortfalls.Fact is, in most of the instances of true 'pollution', individual households have almost NOTHING to do with it! This is control and nothing more!

    Part-time legislature is definitely needed-keep them there only long enough to vote in their yearly pay raise and send them home. It would be cheaper in the long run.

     

  • 03-16-2009 11:24 AM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

     This latest septic bill really stinks!

  • 03-16-2009 11:28 AM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    Time to "clean house" AND SENATE. We need to get rid of all of the big spenders in government. Very few are listening to the voters so it is time we take government back to what it was intended to be. It is supposed to be "We the people" not "We the government." These politicians are infringing, if not abolishing our constitutional right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It's time we do something about it.

  • 03-16-2009 11:32 AM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

     All this measure will do is increase cost to the taxpayer and stifle progress.  Not a good idea.

  • 03-16-2009 11:44 AM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

     The latest septic bill and all others that propose to SPEND, SPEND, SPEND are a pure insult. Michigan is hurting financially BIG TIME, people are leaving the state with the poor judgment of our Governor and state reps because all YOU want to do is think of ways to SPEND, SPEND, SPEND.  Take measures down to the individual level. THINK. hOW NECESSARY ARE THESE PORK BILLS? DO WE REALLY NEED THIS AT THIS TIME? Help the heavy burdened citizen and don't continue to SPEND! HOLD THE LINE AND BE PROUD OF IT!!! ADVERTISE HOW CONSIDERATE YOU ARE TO US MICHIGANDERS.  Maybe you will be re-elected! SPEND, SPEND, SPEND AND YOU CAN FIND YOURSELF IN THE UNEMPLOYMENT LINE with us Michiganders NOT voting you back in office. THINK!!!!

  • 03-16-2009 11:49 AM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    Could we actually get any more burocartic than this?  We are taxed on the money we make to buy our food; the vehicle we purchase to go to the store; the gas we use to fuel the vehicle; the land we own to put the septic tank; the purchase and installation of the septic system and now you want to tax our human waste!  This is absurd to say the least.  It is time to restructure and regroup our government at all levels.

  • 03-16-2009 12:22 PM In reply to

    • polly
    • Top 500 Contributor
    • Joined on 03-16-2009

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    Those sponsoring senators seem to be from counties in the southeast corner of Michigan, an area a bit more heavily populated than most of Michigan.  Perhaps they should consider LOCAL regulations rather than roping in the whole state in order to correct their LOCAL problems?  You don't suppose their problems might be different from those of residents of, say, Leelanau or Alpena counties?

  • 03-16-2009 12:22 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    Be sure to check out the usage meter or yearly fee on private wells,  that they are talking about for using their water

  • 03-16-2009 12:31 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

     

    The hidden agenda is to require all Michigan residents to be on municiple sewage systems.  This is another huge increase in bureaucracy and another tax increase on the citizens of Michigan.  Most importantly, this is another indication of why we need a part time legislature.  These people have way too much time on their hands.

  • 03-16-2009 12:37 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    More government manure.  Don't they know we have to much government dung as it is.  What gets me is we actually pay these people to shovel more manure on us.  Wouldn't it be nice if a few of these hired gov officials started getting rid of some of the excess and not adding to it.   It appears to me that a part-time legislature would make more sense, as they obviously have to much time to think up junk.

  • 03-16-2009 12:38 PM In reply to

    • polly
    • Top 500 Contributor
    • Joined on 03-16-2009

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    johnhurd,

    This only makes sense.  In a state surrounded by Great Lakes and filled with smaller lakes, anyone with the audacity to provide for their own water (by going to the expense of having a well drilled rather than insisting that their nearest city do it for them) should certainly be forced to pay for every ounce of water they use.  Why?  Because our government CAN.

    Try to take comfort in the fact that (so far) no one has suggested forcing all Michigan residents to capture the carbon dioxide we exhale, then dispose of it in an environmentally-correct manner--at a per-pint charge, most likely, and metered by a new bureaucracy.  

  • 03-16-2009 12:57 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

     easy polly... let's not give them any ideas...

  • 03-16-2009 1:08 PM In reply to

    • sw40
    • Not Ranked
    • Joined on 03-16-2009

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    this is a great idea. we can cut these senators salary down to $10.00  an hour , like the rest of us , to pay for it. Why cant you

    people use your tome to bring jobs to this state, then we might put something in a septic tank.

     

  • 03-16-2009 1:59 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    When I bought my house it was on a septic so I paid to have it inspected by the city to make sure that it was in good working order and it passed with flying colors. After a week and a half it started backing up into my yard. So, who’s going to inspect and how are they going to know if there's a problem unless they walk in some sh*t. I know from experience that our city and state doesn’t have what it takes to do these inspections. The way I see it this just opens the door for our government to pass taxpayer’s dollars to their buddies. There's no way for our building inspectors to tell unless they see septic waste backing up into someone’s yard and what chance you think they will happened upon a bad field at the same time it’s backing up into the yard.

    I say make it mandatory that people on septic have their tanks and fields inspected by a pro once a year after the septic tank and/or field is 10 years olds starting at the beginning of year 11. It's their system make them maintain it. Require them to submit the report from a pro when they pay their city and/or county taxes. If they fail to furnish this report to the city then have the city order a pro to inspect their system and fine them just like most cities fine and/or have a pro clean someone's property if don't maintaining it. Place a large fine on any pro that provides a inspection cert on a field and/or septic tank that is bad at the time. These pros know when someone needs a new field and or a septic tank by how many times they have to pump the septic tank out each year. Also have the pros report every time they pump out someone septic tank and go after the problem ones not every taxpayer. This is just wrong and will do nothing to fix the problem. Work smarter not harder.

     

  • 03-16-2009 2:35 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    The addition of more INSPECTIONS will NOT be productive. No inspector can determine the condition of any underground system without opening it up or entering the system. We would be much better served with legislation allowing us to recover costs for items that were: misrepresented with intent... not originally installed to code. These things must be traceable to a contractor. The contractor is responable for keeping a record of their inspections.

    JSC

    Filed under:
  • 03-16-2009 2:47 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    I have a septic field and I think I can be a judge of whether or not it needs service without having to pay the State to come out.  Why in the world would it be necessary for me to pay someone to inspect my septic system every year?  If the point is to keep people from polluting, I believe their are current laws and penalties for improper discharge.  This is a revenue enhancement bill and another way to grow government by turning it into an expensive baby sitting operation.

  • 03-16-2009 2:58 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

     By the way, your idea would "create" a whole new industry of septic tank inspectors.  Then we could charge them to get a "septic inspection license".  Of course the incidence of new septic construction will skyrocket creating hundreds of new jobs since the inspectors will fail large numbers of systems to avoid the "large fine" they might incur if they deem a system safe and it later fails.  This would be a true stimulus, Kind of like Ex Lax for the economy ;- )

  • 03-16-2009 3:36 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

     sounds like the last 'baby step' before banning septic tanks and mandating that everyone be on 'taxpayer provided public sewerage lines'.

  • 03-16-2009 3:44 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

     MORE GOVERNMENT SPENDING

    plus

    MORE GOVENMENT REGULATIONS

    equals

    MORE SH*T FOR US TAXPAYERS

    STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP

  • 03-16-2009 3:55 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    We don’t need another fee increase.  STOP the additional taxation!

  • 03-16-2009 4:21 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    Would someone please explain the reasoning & justification for this Bill?
  • 03-16-2009 4:22 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    Part of the reason Michigan is in the financial doldrums now is because our taxes are out of hand. Quit dreaming up waps to stick it to we diehard Michiganders and start doing some serious budget cutting in Lansing.

  • 03-16-2009 4:31 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

     You know the old saying, "you've got to $#%#% your friends because your enemies don't come around"

  • 03-16-2009 4:34 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    Such as demanding an IMMEDIATE Constitutional change to a part-time Legislature with appropriate pay cuts. No more travel budgets. No more entertainment budgets. Bring back Workfare. Cut all legislative & gubernatorial staff by 50%. I could go on & on but I know you can think of your own ideas.
  • 03-16-2009 5:40 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    Indiana has used a system to evaluate soils and septic site locations for about 30 years, using private soil consultants who are on a list of Indiana Registered Soil Scientists reviewed by the governors committee on soil scientists which passes on their qualifications.  The nominal fee for an on-site soil survey ranges from $150 to >$3,000 for residential and commercial sites respectively.  Indiana has a rule 401  that all land bought and sold must have an on-site soil survey submited to the county health department for residential; and the Indiana State Department of Health for commercial developments, prior to issuance of a building permit.  As a soil scientist, I see great benefit in this system since the competition of private businesses and the oversight of county and state health officials is a check against fraud and incompetence.  More information can be examined from the Indiana State Website or Purdue University.

     

     

  • 03-16-2009 5:54 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    uber-liberal:

     sounds like the last 'baby step' before banning septic tanks and mandating that everyone be on 'taxpayer provided public sewerage lines'.

    Hillsdale County tried to ram through sewers and we got together a Stop the Sewer Committee to assure no "back door sneak through" by power hungry local officials.  They paid $60,000 for a three township study by an engineerring firm.  The engineering study was based on the county soil survey and the statement by Gov. Grandholm that whenever possible residences should be served with public sewers.  We publicized the issues very well and the people excoriated the trustees for wasting our tax dollars.  Lake lots are the primary reason, and they wanted to attach liens against properties that did not pay the initial installation fee $16000 and the monthly $100 or so fee in perpetuity.  They tried to do all this without much public knowledge by not advertising town board meetings and special meetings on the study.  Money talks.  But if the people get together and protest we can win.  Frankly, I am not so much concerned about a ione-time soil survey for septic systems on new construction.  I see the midnight connections as being the problem . . . people who run raw sewage into an open waterway, pond or lake.

     

  • 03-16-2009 6:28 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    It's been standard in most of the state for MANY years that, in order to get a building permit, you have to have a site survey to judge ground permeability and appropriateness for  septic system already. The placement of the system is also determined by officials, NOT the property owner. The problem is not that there isnt oversight-it's that they really want to charge everyone an arm and a leg to connect to sewage treatment plants across township lines-sewage treatment plants that already have problems maintaining standards and are always hurting for cash (read that, they want YOUR cash!).

    Something I've never been able to figure out: every large sewage treatrment plant has an overflow system into a major creek or river. In times of heavy rains, guess where that untreated sewage goes-in huge quantities? It's the equivalent of thousands of substandard septic tanks and drain fields-which likely arent anywhere near a waterway, due to the original site surveys.Furthermore, these private home systems arent full of heavy metals, pesticides and industrial resedue like the sewage that goes to the treatment plants. My tank is full of Crap-but that's ALL that's in it! If anybody ever did an HONEST study of these treatment plants, I think they'd find that they contribute more to pollution than thousands of private septic systems do. This is just another slap at getting cash from the property owner under the guise of environment. It's a scam!

  • 03-16-2009 6:28 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    You may be right; maybe even a responsible citizen that would take the steps to insure your septic field is working properly. The only thing I have to say is you are one out of how many thousands of people on septic system. Three of my neighbors are still on septic systems and I know for a fact that at least one need to be connected to the city sewer and their field is only 12 to 15 years old. Most of the companies that pump septic tanks will come out once a day, week, month, year or whenever you call them. These companies know when fields have failed, and they don't care because they make more money pumping them out than they do if you put in a new septic system or hook up to city sewer. After 10 to 15 years most fields start failing, some even sooner; so it’s only right to make people with these systems pay for policing them, not every taxpayer. I'm not on a septic field anymore and I'm sure that I should have connected to the city sewer at least one or two years before I finally bit the bullet and spent the $10,000 to connect. As far as I'm concern if the cost of enforcing people with septic system to take the necessary steps to ensure they don't pollute our water systems is not passed to the people which have these system then it will be just like the auto insurance that I pay on every vehicle I own (even though I can only drive one at a time) just because so many people in Michigan drive without insurance, by the way this part of my insurance cost me more than $800 a year and goes straight to the state of Michigan to cover people who’s injured that’s not insured. I’m not saying and would strongly am against state or local city/county inspectors should be used. These should be private licensed companies just like other private home and/or business inspectors that inspect homes/businesses when they’re sold. Implementing this type of policing system is the only way to put a stop to the knowingly and non-knowingly polluter and really make a difference.

  • 03-16-2009 8:26 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

     how long should a septic system work? one, five, fifteen, twenty five, the life of the house? at what point should a house be put on a sewer system? and, if it is 'for the good of the people', shouldn't the city running the system foot the bill to hook up the citizens? ten grand is a lot of money to dump your stuff into a city system that may, or may not be more efficient in cleaning it up than your septic tank.

  • 03-16-2009 10:03 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    uber-liberal:

     how long should a septic system work? one, five, fifteen, twenty five, the life of the house? at what point should a house be put on a sewer system? and, if it is 'for the good of the people', shouldn't the city running the system foot the bill to hook up the citizens? ten grand is a lot of money to dump your stuff into a city system that may, or may not be more efficient in cleaning it up than your septic tank.

     My main point is that I don’t and I think that most taxpayers don’t want to pay for policing the septic systems in Michigan when it should be the responsibility of the owner of the septic system. As to how long a septic system last there's too many variables to say all septic systems should function for X number of years. Because soil condition can vary from one house to another house right next door, and the habits of the occupants can increase or decrease the life of a septic system, even the installation can increase or decrease a septic system life, that's why each system has its own life span.

     Ten Grand is what I paid because I have 178' of frontage and I paid it over time to the city, it was included in my water bill. Usually cities place a lean on the property based on your frontage which has to be paid when you hookup to the city sewer or sale your house/business whichever comes first. Usually it around $50 +/- a frontage foot (I think I was charged $54 a frontage foot). Also you have the cost for some company to connect you to the city sewer or do it yourself (I think I paid like $1,800). As far as I know most cities do not require a license to make the connection because you have to have a city inspector on site while the connection is made.

     An engineered septic field usually starts at around Ten Grand, and I think that most cities require an engineer’s stamp before they will issue a permit among other requirements and/or cost. I also think that the engineer is on the hook for a period of time but not sure how long and to what extent. Also if city sewer is available to you they won’t allow you to repair and/or install a septic system.

     Another thing that would help clean up our water systems is to force these so call treatment plants to clean up their act and make previsions for handling the heavy rains we get here in Michigan besides dumping the overflow into our waterways. I think they should tackle the treatment plants & businesses first and then see if anything needs to be done with all the private septic systems. Like I said in my first post; I think this issue needs some attention but we DO NOT need to add tax dollars to address this when it can be addressed with regulation and private companies. This should fall on the property owner NOT THE TAXPAYER.

     

  • 03-17-2009 5:07 AM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

     

    Formula for Determining Scheduled Maintenance









    Pumping Interval in Years = P

    P = D x (C/1000)
    Residents occupying house = R
    R

    Capacity of Septic Tank in Gallons = C


    Garbage Disposal Factor: 7 if you use a garbage disposal; 10 if you do not








    Septic Pumping Interval for 1000 Gallon Septic Tank


    Interval
    Interval


    P=pumpoing interval in years
    Years
    Years
    Residents Capacity Disposal Disposal
    Disposal
    No Disposal

    gal Yes No
    6 years 9 years 1 1000 7 10
    3 years 4 years 2 1000 7 10
    1 years 2 years 3 1000 7 10
    1 years 2 years 4 1000









    Septic Pumping Interval for 1250 Gallon Septic Tank With and Without a Garbage Disposal
    Interval
    Interval




    Years
    Years
    Residents Capacity Disposal Disposal
    Disposal
    No Disposal

    gal Yes No
    8 years 12 years 1 1250 7 10
    3 years 5 years 2 1250 7 10
    2 years 3 years 3 1250 7 10
    1 years 2 years 4 1250 7 10
    1 years 2 years 5 1250 7 10
    0 years 1 years 6 1250 7 10








    Septic Pumping Interval for 1500 Gallon Septic Tank With and Without a Garbage Disposal
    Interval
    Interval




    Years
    Years
    Residents Capacity Disposal Disposal
    Disposal
    No Disposal

    gal Yes No
    10 years 14 years 1 1500 7 10
    4 years 7 years 2 1500 7 10
    3 years 4 years 3 1500 7 10
    2 years 3 years 4 1500 7 10
    1 years 2 years 5 1500 7 10
    1 years 2 years 6 1500 7 10








    Septic Pumping Interval for 2000 Gallon Septic Tank With and Without a Garbage Disposal
    Interval
    Interval




    Years
    Years
    Residents Capacity Disposal Disposal
    Disposal
    No Disposal

    gal Yes No
    13 years 19 years 1 2000 7 10
    6 years 9 years 2 2000 7 10
    4 years 6 years 3 2000 7 10
    3 years 4 years 4 2000 7 10
    2 years 3 years 5 2000 7 10
    1 years 2 years 6 2000 7 10
    1 years 2 years 7 2000 7 10








    Septic Pumping Interval for 2500 Gallon Septic Tank With and Without a Garbage Disposal
    Interval
    Interval




    Years
    Years
    Residents Capacity Disposal Disposal
    Disposal
    No Disposal

    gal Yes No
    17 years 24 years 1 2500 7 10
    8 years 12 years 2 2500 7 10
    5 years 7 years 3 2500 7 10
    3 years 5 years 4 2500 7 10
    3 years 4 years 5 2500 7 10
    2 years 3 years 6 2500 7 10
    2 years 3 years 7 2500 7 10








  • 03-17-2009 5:16 AM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

     

    Annual septic tank inspections are not needed if people maintain their systems on schedule.  The following tank pumping schedule gives the time interval for doing this.  This was derived from the Small Flows Journal from West Virginia State University and the Small Flows Clearinghouse which has many useful publications regarding septic systems.

    I assume by pro you mean an ARCPACS certified soil scientist.

     

     

     

    Formula for Determining Scheduled Maintenance









    Pumping Interval in Years = P

    P = D x (C/1000)
    Residents occupying house = R
    R

    Capacity of Septic Tank in Gallons = C


    Garbage Disposal Factor: 7 if you use a garbage disposal; 10 if you do not








    Septic Pumping Interval for 1000 Gallon Septic Tank


    Interval
    Interval


    P=pumpoing interval in years
    Years
    Years
    Residents Capacity Disposal Disposal
    Disposal
    No Disposal

    gal Yes No
    6 years 9 years 1 1000 7 10
    3 years 4 years 2 1000 7 10
    1 years 2 years 3 1000 7 10
    1 years 2 years 4 1000









    Septic Pumping Interval for 1250 Gallon Septic Tank With and Without a Garbage Disposal
    Interval
    Interval




    Years
    Years
    Residents Capacity Disposal Disposal
    Disposal
    No Disposal

    gal Yes No
    8 years 12 years 1 1250 7 10
    3 years 5 years 2 1250 7 10
    2 years 3 years 3 1250 7 10
    1 years 2 years 4 1250 7 10
    1 years 2 years 5 1250 7 10
    0 years 1 years 6 1250 7 10








    Septic Pumping Interval for 1500 Gallon Septic Tank With and Without a Garbage Disposal
    Interval
    Interval




    Years
    Years
    Residents Capacity Disposal Disposal
    Disposal
    No Disposal

    gal Yes No
    10 years 14 years 1 1500 7 10
    4 years 7 years 2 1500 7 10
    3 years 4 years 3 1500 7 10
    2 years 3 years 4 1500 7 10
    1 years 2 years 5 1500 7 10
    1 years 2 years 6 1500 7 10








    Septic Pumping Interval for 2000 Gallon Septic Tank With and Without a Garbage Disposal
    Interval
    Interval




    Years
    Years
    Residents Capacity Disposal Disposal
    Disposal
    No Disposal

    gal Yes No
    13 years 19 years 1 2000 7 10
    6 years 9 years 2 2000 7 10
    4 years 6 years 3 2000 7 10
    3 years 4 years 4 2000 7 10
    2 years 3 years 5 2000 7 10
    1 years 2 years 6 2000 7 10
    1 years 2 years 7 2000 7 10








    Septic Pumping Interval for 2500 Gallon Septic Tank With and Without a Garbage Disposal
    Interval
    Interval




    Years
    Years
    Residents Capacity Disposal Disposal
    Disposal
    No Disposal

    gal Yes No
    17 years 24 years 1 2500 7 10
    8 years 12 years 2 2500 7 10
    5 years 7 years 3 2500 7 10
    3 years 5 years 4 2500 7 10
    3 years 4 years 5 2500 7 10
    2 years 3 years 6 2500 7 10
    2 years 3 years 7 2500 7 10








  • 03-17-2009 6:40 AM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    How about licensing septic pumpers to do this inspection since they are the ones who do it routinely and first to know who needs a new system.  Pumpers, in order to do this would be trained at workshops around the state and would have to pass a proficiency test on licensing to be a septic pumper.  Michigan is quite specific in who they indicate capable of designing and writing specifications for new systems.  They should have a state list of licensed soil scientists to do this work since that is they do and have been doing for years in other states.  Indiana has a good system that has worked for 30 years.  Soil scientists are on a governors list which provides licensing and standards of professional practice that enables control so that people who demonstrate incompetence or lack of professionalism can be culled from the list.

  • 03-17-2009 6:40 AM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

     Anything that raises taxes in this economy needs to be defeated.  If our "elected" officials cannot work within a budget, they need to be replaced by someone who can

  • 03-17-2009 12:12 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    Shearwater!  I SO MUCH appreciate your publishing that schedule-that's something I've never been able to get my hands on! The problem is, most septic pumpers either give you NO idea-or tell you that you need pumping EVERY year! Thats' self-perpetuating repeat business.  A properly-maintained septic and drain field system should last MANY,MANY years with regular household use! Likely as long if not longer than the the treatment plant before the treatment plant needs a major and expensive upgrade-which you will pay for! Here in southern Jackson county, we sit on one of the largest gravel beds in the state-a perfect place for a septic system. There are no sewer systems within 15 miles-and our lakes, regardless of the propaganda, are CLEAN! We're still cleaning up the residues of Henry Ford's small local plants that left here in the 30's- 40's-some of which will never be cleaned up, simply silted over. If you disturb the silt, you find heavy metals-which didnt come from a septic system or a farm! That is not the fault of our septic tanks.

    This whole 'clean water' propaganda has taken on the trappings of a religion: if the 'planners' and federal and state 'control freaks' get their way, water will become the perview of the UN and never the right of the people. It's an end run around property rights-the clear purpose in most areas is to move people away from lakefront property because it will soon become the right only of the federal government to control all water. Now, the focus isnt just lakefronts and rivers, it's "watersheds"-EVERY BIT OF LAND IS A WATERSHED!! This is all being done under the guise of 'clean water'. I dont know of anyone who is against clean water, but people need to realize they've been hookeyboo'd on the conditions of water in Michigan. Our surface and ground water, generally, is cleaner here than in most of the world and getting better all the time as we clean up industrial pollution.The average homeowner was never the problem and when he was, his specific-point pollution footprint was extremely small and usually self-remediating. However, if people weren't controlled by the fear of polluted water and convinced they were the cause of it, they'd never fight to get expensive sewer systems that threatened their very rights to be able to own property they had bought and paid for.Forced sewer installation and the attendant leins penalize the elderly, those on fixed incomes and the lower incomes. Having a 'Septic Tank Czar'is unnecessary-having regular inspections is also unnecessary. All you need is an available schedule of recommended maintenance.These are just ways to get money from people who arent already paying a huge sewer bill! Also, really investigate the data on the condition of our water and it's improvements over the last thirty years before you buy into this whole scheme-we're being taxed senseless by propaganda with an ulterior motive.

  • 03-22-2009 8:42 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 Senate Bill 45 (Require inspection of “on-site” wastewater treatment systems )

    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.

Page 1 of 2 (42 items) 1 2 Next >
Powered by Community Server (Commercial Edition), by Telligent Systems