Rain Saturated Ground and Septic System

[Hakim]

Highbeam,

It is agreed that "effluent should NEVER surface" -- but the post was talking about something else ... clear water being released "downfield" -- AFTER is has been completely processed by the tank and leech field.

The term "effluents" usually means an outflow from a sewer or sewage system, in other words garbage and waste by-products, not clean water.

The word 'effluent" can refer to all substances that transit a septic system. Here it is used it to distinguish waste products from clean water.

If you re-read the post, you should see that it was not being suggested it was acceptable or desirable to have effluents "evaporate" away after having rising to the top of the soil.

If my description was unclear, I am sorry. You stated essentially the same thing, here: "Heck, you can have a creek within a good distance. The effluent is "treated" after falling through 18" of non-saturated soil, after that you just need to dispose of it."

My system was composed of soil, rock, sand and various pipes and channels. The effluents (wastes) were processed through the system, and ultimately a small amount of clean (and potable) water found its way out of the end of the system, and simply evaporated away, or ran into a small creek bed.

Systems like this are all over upstate NY, where there are a lot of very low/no perc soils. Upstate NY also has high water tables, and it is not uncommon to have septic problems.

Septic systems come in many, many configurations, as you know, and they do vary by what part of the country one is in. One really has to "manage" a septic system, as opposed to just flushing everything down the drain.

 

[Highbeam]

Agreed. I have had many, somewhat heated, discussions with people who believe that a) septic tanks never need to be pumped, and b) that a drainfield works by evaporation.

Effluent in this case is just the stuff leaving the system. The quality of the effluent is very good after leaving the drainfield of a functional system and passing through the 18" of non-saturated soil. Potable is a stretch, don't pour me a glass. It is still effluent and is branded with the "yuk" factor.

Here's the trick, the effluent has to pass vertically through the aerobic 18" of soil to qualify as receiving the secondary treatment. That's what the WA state EPA determined. So if the effluent hits hardpan a foot below the lowest drain rock and seeps horizontally out of the bank down hill then it hasn't been treated fully and is potentially hazardous.

For most cases if the seepage is clear and doesn't stink and the toilets keep flushing then life is good.

 

[Hakim]

Agreed. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[AndyM]

<font color="blue"> There is a difference between a septic "contractor" and a septic "engineer." (Like I need to tell you ). While there are probably many who are competent and honest septic contractors, I sometimes have trouble finding one with both qualities . </font>

This was a piece of advise you gave me a few years ago when I was having my septics issues.

A local local menonite man (I guess he couldn't be Amish, since he drove a truck?) installed my septic system. He was the septic contractor my builder used, and his job failed the county's inspection. A few months after he dug it up and fixed it, I started having problems again. I was made aware of septic engineers by Hakim and found someone in the yellow pages. This septic engineer came to my house, evaluated my situation, and told me how I could fix my issues. He didn't charge me for this, and I have since sent many referrals his way!

Here I learned the difference between my builder's contractor (the lowest bidder) and a septic engineer. This was a valuable lesson.

While I'm not able to offer any advise, I can offer good luck and hope everything works out.

 

[PhilNH5]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( The problem with letting the State know about your septic problems is that they can always issue an order that the house is not habitable )</font>

Hakim gave you good advice with that statement.

I have mentioned before on this board a problem with my septic field when I lived in MD. I noticed a wet spring 3 months after moving in. It was crystal clear but smelled of septic. I called the Board of Health for help. They came out and ran the standard dye test. Yep... it was my septic coming to the surface.

At this point I was expecting input and help from the B of H septic inspector. Know what I got - a citation to fix it w/in 90 days or the house would be condemned. The kicker is this inspector had just tested the system and signed my occupancy pernit 3 months earlier.

Anyway I had to get a lawyer and it was resolved (temporarily) by the builder. But I will not repeat that mistake and would only involve gov't inspectors after investigating it myself with contracors or the septic engineer Hakim mentions.


Phil

 

[Hakim]

Phil,

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( only involve gov't inspectors after investigating it myself with contracors or the septic engineer )</font>

Yes, and then there are always what I call "local politics" that can affect everything, especially in rural areas thast are undergoing an influx of "out of area" people.

The local "boards" and various authorities can and will do whatever they want with their powers. You just have to play it very cool and "get along." Don't ever barge into a "local" office of any kind (assessors, zoning, constable, etc.) or be prepared to "pay" for it for years. I oughtta write a book /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif...

 

[Hakim]

Andy,

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Here I learned the difference between my builder's contractor (the lowest bidder) and a septic engineer. This was a valuable lesson. )</font>

Thanks for sharing your experience.

I learned my "lesson" at a cost of nearly $10,000 --- after a non-expert "flagged" my field as failing. Even if done by an incompetent contractor, if you get flagged, you are unlikely to convince anyone it was done in error. Who wants sewage in their water?

 

[guyrj33]

Hakim wrote
"It is agreed that "effluent should NEVER surface" -- but the post was talking about something else ... clear water being released "downfield" -- AFTER is has been completely processed by the tank and leech field.
"
In Massachusetts this would be considered a failed system. A finding I agree with.
Guy

 

[Pilot]

Ultrarunner,

Just a couple ideas:

Here in Oregon they want us to have grass over the drainfield. Tree roots plug up the holes in the drainpipe, especially cottonwoods. Brush might do the same.

On your soil in general--outside the drainfield area-- is there restricted drainage? You could have a compacted layer that prevents drainage. If you have that, saturated soil uphill from your drainfield could be causing underground flow to your drainfield. Could be caused by natural or unnatural conditions--a clay layer down there only a couple of feet or by machine operation when the soil is not dry. A quick & dirty check on natural compaction could be done by looking at nearby road cuts, checking for layers that weep. Or check the county soil survey which should be available at the Soil Conservation Service Office. The sure way is to dig.

Could be that the septic requirements when the house was built weren't up to par. Do new homes in the area have sand filtration systems? If so, that may be what your place should have had, but they may not have required them at that time. Or maybe they require longer leach lines than they did when your place was built.

Don't know much about septic systems, but it seems to me that when the tank was pumped, the guy couldn't tell you much about the drainfield as he could only see what was in the tank. He can probably tell something about whether it was working with the loads it had when he pumped it, but I doubt if he oculd tell you if the entire drainfield was OK. This may be your clue that it might not be.

I hope the couple of dry days we have just had give you some improvement.