Groundwater in the Great Lakes Basin

that the OWTS would last until it was replaced by
a municipal sewer system (Gorman and Halvorsen,
2006). In some Great Lakes jurisdictions (e.g., Ohio),
regulators are still operating under the 1977 code
(Gorman and Halvorsen, 2006).
In many rural areas the transition to a central sewage
system has been postponed for multiple reasons.
Central sewage systems are costly, and much of the
financial burden is borne by homeowners (e.g. for
Billings Township, approximately $9,300 per homeowner
for a new sewage plant and hook-up into the
new system) (Kart, 2006). In an effort to restrict urban
sprawl, some jurisdictions have implemented growth
management legislation banning municipal sewers in
rural areas near urban centers (e.g., Washington State
Growth Management Act) (Laschever, 2006).
In 1999, Karen Mancl from the Department of Food,
Agriculture and Biological Engineering conducted a
study to assess the approval practices for on-site wastewater
treatment in Ohio. She concluded that programs
implemented by the local health departments lack
uniformity, modern practice and technology and do not
have in place a system of checks and balances to protect
public health from the approval of inappropriate
sewage treatment plants.
Similar conclusions were drawn from a survey of U.S. and
Canadian administrators in Great Lakes jurisdictions. The
survey was designed to assess the capabilities of OWTS
regulator programs to meet the U.S. EPA Voluntary
National Guidelines for Management of On-site and
Clustered (Decentralized) Wastewater Treatment
Systems. The survey revealed that the capacity to meet
the guidelines varies. In fact, some jurisdictions (e.g.,
Michigan) have no statewide regulation for septic system
installation, inspection and maintenance (Falardeau,
2006; Michigan Office of the Governor, 2004). Most
states do not require on-site inspection of septic systems.
It has been estimated that between 60% and 70% of all
on-site systems in the U.S. are not inspected (Rafter,
2005). In Ontario, regulations for septic systems are
currently found under the building code, with no mention
of environment, nitrogen, pathogens or groundwater
protection. It is delivered by municipalities and building
departments and therefore is highly variable across the
province (Doug Joy, personal communication).
Door County, Wisconsin, is the peninsula separating
Green Bay from Lake Michigan. It has the greatest
length of shoreline of any county in the United States
and is a major tourism location. The geological setting
includes generally shallow soil over heavily fractured,
karst dolomite bedrock. Travel times of groundwater
through the crevices of the bedrock are very short
and hence there is a high potential for immediate
and widespread contamination of groundwater from
surface sources. Contaminated groundwater has been
a major problem. Agricultural chemicals, manure and
wastewater from houses are the principal sources.
There are 14,000 septic-tank systems in the county
and about 3,500 holding tanks. Publicity about
contaminated water has created difficulty for the
tourism industry (Chris Olson, Assistant to the County
Sanitarian, personal communication, 2006 Milwaukee
Groundwater Consultation).
Recognizing the health hazard posed by failing septic
systems, Door County acted to protect groundwater
by enacting an ordinance requiring inspection of the
wastewater system before sale of a property could be
completed. The state advised that such an ordinance
was beyond the power of the county but did not challenge
the ordinance in court. This inspection requirement
initially detected a high proportion of failing
systems, and replacement was almost always required.
More recently the proportion of defective systems
in the point-of-sale inspections has been dropping
about 20% every five years and is now well under 50%.
County Realtors originally opposed the ordinance but
now regard it as a very effective measure (Chris Olson,
personal communication).
In 2004, Door County expanded the program to include
inspection of all systems. Using overlays of depth to
bedrock, type of soil and type of bedrock five classes
of risk of contamination were identified. Mapping was
done to show which parcels of land fell within each risk
class. Site inspections were begun for properties that fell
within parcels with the highest risk. Inspections have
now progressed to the second (lower) risk category. Full
inspection of all systems is expected to be completed by
2009. Any system that fails must be replaced by the landowner.
After inspection, whether the system has passed
or been replaced, the landowner must follow the maintenance
schedule required by the county and keep records
of the maintenance operations done on the system (Chris
Olson, personal communication).
Ingham County, Michigan, adopted a similar set of
regulations entitled the Ingham County Regulation
for the Inspection of Residential On-Site Water and
Sewage Disposal Systems at Time of Property Transfer.
Under this rule, homeowners are required to hire
certified private inspectors or contact the Health
Department to inspect and evaluate septic systems
before any residential home property is transferred.
Ingham County charges $300 for a full inspection plus
a $150 administration fee (Ingham County Health
Department, 2006).
Similar programs have not been implemented universally
in the Great Lakes Basin states. Ontario plans to
follow suit with a similar regulation as, in part two of
63