Agenda - 04-12-2005-6c - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

NORTH CAROLINA ~XN=BIT 6 io ASSOCIATION of LOCAL HEALTH DIRECTORS Ara Affiliate of tlae Nortl: Carolina Association of County Conanrissioners P.O. Box 41487, Raleigh, North Carolina 27629-1487 April 4, 2005 Honorable Members of the House Health Committee: The North Carolina Association of Local Health Directors requests your consideration of our concerns with H900 "Enhance On-site Wastewater System Approvals". This is a major restructure of the On-Site Wastewater Program. The State Division of Environmental Health and your local health departments were not consulted, though both state and local governments will be greatly impacted. We are concerned with the liability, accountability, longevity and public service issues in the bill: 1. The permitting process for on-site wastewater disposal systems has long been a public agency mandate, These agencies have permanence and a responsibility to the public that does not have an equivalent in the private sector.. There is no provision for financial surety.. There is no guarantee that a private entity will be in business, or remain so, if problems should occur with a wastewater system, and the facility owner seeks financial remedies.. Public agencies, on the other hand, are permanent and responsible and accountable to the public. Local government would be lefr to deal with the problem and potential liability should a system failure occur because of negligent evaluation/permitting. Under the proposed bill, the health department (county/state) will retain the liability. 2. The Bill does not adequately address the issue of accountability of private consultants and the oversight of their work performance. It is very difficult to maintain total objectivity in a process by wlilch one pays a private entity with the assumed outcome to be the issuance of a permit. Public agencies have no vested interest in this process that would interfere with objectivity. There is also potentially a great deal of pressure that would be brought upon the private consultant to issue a permit, The Bill provides that the ultimate determination of accountability and penalty would be vested in the Commission. The Commission, as currently structured, does not provide for the technical expertise or the time to effectively deal with these issues. It would seem to require a completely new bureaucracy or major overhaul of current Commission agency structure to address these issues. 3. There also exist several economic issues associated with this Bill. If the Local Health Department (LHD) does not, or cannot, complete an evaluation of an application within the "10 day" time frame, a facility would likely be constmcted before the LHD observed the site. If problems were encountered at tlils stage, the cost of any remedy to the homeowner could be quite significant. 4. The Bill requires that a LHD contract with or employ a licensed soil scientist (LSS) in order to question the work of the private L.SS, resulting in an additional economic burden on local government to assure the work of private sector.. The majority of health departments do not have licensed soil scientists on staff. Local Health Departments do have environmental health specialists who are trained in soils and on site sewage technology, and would be competent and capable of reviewing data submitted by the private soil scientists and engineers 5. Monetary remedies in the proposed bill for individuals Found by the Commission to be in violation ($10,000) may not be sufficient in dealing with problems associated with septic systems not working properly due to negligent evaluation permitting. Repair permits for some residential systems can carry a $.30,000 price tag. Other situations may not allow a repair option, resulting in the property owner having to vacate or perpetually pump and haul their waste, which is extremely expensive, Again, Counties and the State will retain the liability. Local Health Departments are required by statue to provide ten essential public health services including On-sight Domestic Sewage Disposal. The public health perspective is the entire community, notjust an individual homeowner, and the protection of our envirorunent in general. We ask that you support us in this effort by opposing this bill in the current form and allow us to work with the bill sponsors to address the needs of the building industry, the liability issue and the protection of the public's health and the environment, Sincerely, Donald Yousey, President