Sparsely, Sage and Timely
Marin’s septic sultans v. the public
By David V. Mitchell
Part of Marin’s septic-system industry has responded with a snarl to what this column had to say on Nov. 14 about the non-scientific manner in which private consultants and their counterparts in county government determine whether septic systems are failing.
Paul Tanner, Vince Meglio, and Bob Penner, who claim they are joined by unnamed people in other septic-building and consulting companies, use a guest column on Page 6 to in essence dismiss the ability of the public to comment intelligently on public affairs. Although Norm Hantzsche of Questa Engineering did not put his name on the guest column, its e-mail heading indicated it was sent from his computer.
Let’s examine the columnists’ claims and – for convenience – do it in reverse order:
• The columnists accuse The Light of distorting the facts with our own unique scientific and economic theories, so let us begin our response there. In order for there to be an informed, scientific debate, both sides have to present their sources for review, not merely make arguments ex cathedra, as the guest columnists do. The columnists do not rebut a single source mentioned in Sparsely Sage and Timely. We, on the other hand, documented all the ones we used. Nor are our statements "unique and distorted"; instead the were based federal, state, and local government reports, along with manufacturers specifications and various other written sources. In effect, the guest columnists are asking readers to merely take them at their word rather than provide anyone with facts to make an informed decision.
• Overnight "expert." Disregarding the guest columnists’ condescension and going to the heart of the matter, the columnists are trying to create confusion where none exists. Darcy's Law describes the flow of liquid through any porous material; the biomat is certainly porous, and sewage certainly flows through it in accordance with physical laws.
Increasing the area of the biomat certainly does increase the ability of a given size of leachfield to handle the flow of wastewater while still providing treatment. If any readers want a good, layman’s description of this effect, they can look at the infiltrator manufacturer’s website <www.infiltratorsystems.com> or at any of numerous state sites (such as Oregon’s or even Texas’) that list what new septic technology they allow.
The cost savings that the guest columnists allude to (but don't document) is the saving in the size of leachfields – with the reduced length of trench made possible by the increased area of biomat. The right to use such new technology as infiltrators can be critical to some sites.
• Personal disparagement. The Light’s source of information is a referral to the site by Phil Smith of the county Environmental Health Division. Isn’t there a comprehensive California State site to which he could have referred us? (There isn’t, of which more later.)
• Rewriting history. The guest columnists partly caught us here. Our comments about Peter Warshall’s role in helping defeat a huge Bolinas-Stinson sewer proposal in 1971 were accurate; however, although The Light was told by Bolinas Utility District staff that Questa designed the huge system, the Questa proposal which townspeople actually rejected was for a $5 million project that involved numerous shared leachfields. Questa (at county expense) designed it for Bolinas in 1986. We apologize for the mixup in proposals, but it doesn’t take away from the point we were making: "Consulting firms, such as Questa Engineering...specialize in designing expensive systems."
• Affordable Housing. The Light’s figure is based on what it costs to fully install a system of the type usually proposed in West Marin. It’s a simple matter of mortgage calculations and does not include the county fees, of which more later. Money is money.
• Septic-system design. Is the unique geology of Marin sufficient to require special engineering? According to the EPA Small Flow Information Clearing House, the process of design is quite basic, simply measuring the permeability of the soil as determined by a "Perc" test (Darcy's Law again), counting the number of bedrooms, and sizing the leachfield according to the appropriate design handbook or manufacturer’s specifications. Cookbook engineering. Naturally, there are local conditions and site-specific matters that are taken into account, but this is true everywhere, including Kentucky, Arkansas and Missouri.
Marin’s geography, in fact, is pretty easy on septic systems in comparison with areas that receive much more rainfall or extensive flooding and freezing – such as Oregon or Wisconsin where the mound system originated. The Light is would be very interested in reviewing any scientific documentation on the history of septic-tank failures to which the guest columnists allude, as well as the unique geologic conditions that differentiate Marin from, say, Mendocino County. (Try it in plain English, please. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality website, for example, has shown these matters can be discussed in everyday language).
System costs. Okay, let’s have a debate. Let the public look at documented costs of permits, engineering, equipment, labor, and profit margins. For a mound system, the pumps and equipment and pipe are virtually the same everywhere in the country. So why are mound systems immensely more expensive here? From The Light’s investigations, it is hard to see why there is such a huge difference in costs between Marin and other places. For instance, the County of Mendocino will design and permit a mound system for a small house for a measly $1,200.
The public must also get value for the fees paid. In Marin, where new houses are frequently a bit larger (e.g. three bedrooms), what value does the fee-paying public get at $1,600 for a perc-test permit and $3,000 for a mound-system permit on top of the contractor’s perc test and the engineering fees?
And on a larger front, what scientific evidence justifies all this effort? The Light is working to obtain documented sources on how much coliform in Tomales Bay comes from septic tanks, agricultural runoff, land-based wildlife, and waterfowl?
Our concern is that there is a long history of using water and septic restrictions to limit homebuilding in West Marin. This inevitably leads to the loss of workforce housing. Many West Marin residents are diligently trying to ensure that a balance of housing is maintained in the community. The lack of clarity in septic-tank laws has been a major problem for the EAH affordable-housing project in Point Reyes Station, to which the guest columnists allude.
Which brings us to the heart of the matter. Good government is transparent. The public must be able to see and understand the regulatory process, and that just isn’t the case in Marin County. Nor does a single State of California website present the information clearly, all in one place, in a way that interested people throughout California can easily have access to it. The best way to gain West Marin residents’ support for any new septic-system regulations would be to give people the facts.