2008-841-Minutes for Meeting July 07,2008 Recorded 9/11/2008DESCHUTES COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS Cd 100B.84i
NANCY BLANKENSHIP, COUNTY CLERK
COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL
1111111 oil 09/11/2048 09.47.19 AM
111■111111111~1~1~1i~
209644-1
Do not remove this page from original document.
Deschutes County Clerk
Certificate Page
If this instrument is being re-recorded, please complete the following
statement, in accordance with ORS 205.244:
Re-recorded to correct [give reason]
previously recorded in Book
or as Fee Number
and Page
~7~
ft!
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org
MINUTES OF PUBLIC HEARING
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
MONDAY, JULY 7, 2008
Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend
Present were Commissioners Dennis R. Luke, Michael M. Daly and Tammy
Melton. Also present were Dave Kanner, County Administrator; Tom Anderson,
Dan Haldeman and Barbara Rich, Community Development Department; Laurie
Craghead, Legal Counsel; various representatives of the media and approximately
60 other citizens.
The purpose of the meeting was to take testimony on a proposed, revised local rule
ordinance relating to South County groundwater protection issues.
Chair Luke opened the meeting at 5:30 p.m., at which time Tom Anderson read a
preliminary statement regarding the issue to be addressed. He explained the
documents that were made available to the public, including the revised ordinance,
a resolution, the staff report, a summary of questions and a summary of the
changes made. (Copies of these documents are attached as Exhibit A.)
He then went over the changes that have been made, including the dates of
compliance. The additional time is being a given to allow time to investigate
alternative systems and timing of general elections for those areas that may want to
look into creating a sewer district.
Also, the provision regarding compliance being required upon sale of the property
was removed. A provision concerned nitrogen reducing systems was clarified,
adding a threshold for nitrogen loading. Variance language was included so that
those people with a failing system could repair the old system in the event their
area may eventually be included in a sewer district.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Hearing regarding a Proposed Local Rule
Related to La Pine Groundwater Protection Issues
Monday, July 7, 2008 Page 1 of 13 Pages
He said that there is no variance allowance for those who would be considering a
remodel or expansion of their home that would be a major alteration and would
require an upgrade in the system. There is no choice with a failing system, but a
remodel or expansion is discretionary. Therefore, the new system needs to be
considered if a person wishes to remodel or alter the property. A minor alteration
would not trigger this; but a major alteration that adds capacity to the flow would.
Representative Whisnant asked for clarification on what constitutes a public health
hazard; those were taken from statute.
There would be first and second readings, and no emergency clause.
Dave Kanner said that a popular vote is not needed to form a sewer district; the
Commissioners can do that. However, a vote is required if the people want to
pursue funding.
Commissioner Melton asked about the hardship variance. Mr. Anderson explained
that this is not a change; the department director can already grant a variance for
severe financial hardship. From a practical standpoint, there are resources
available to people that can help - NeighborImpact allows for a deferred loan up to
$25,000 for improvements to their property. They would work with the property
owner and coordinate the process. No payment would be due until the property
changes hands. As part of the installation costs, a maintenance contract is included
for the first two years. If the applicant does not like the director's decision, it is
appealable to the Board.
Commissioner Daly said if a system is failing, will it trigger the new system. Mr.
Anderson stated that there are different kinds of failures. A major repair would
require an upgrade, which is replacement of the drainfield. A minor repair would
include the replacement of a tank, etc. as long as the drainfield is operational.
Dan Haldeman said that any replacement of the drainfield is a major repair, per
DEQ rules.
One question was about permanent and seasonal occupants. Mr. Anderson said
that a new system can be shut down by the maintenance company if it won't be
used for a while. This is typically part of the maintenance contract.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Hearing regarding a Proposed Local Rule
Related to La Pine Groundwater Protection Issues
Monday, July 7, 2008 Page 2 of 13 Pages
Another question was whether seasonal occupancy was considered in the USGS
study. This was included, based on percentages.
Another comment was about the Arenco systems and whether they work in cold
weather. There are two indicators that this is not true. Systems were tested during
two winters; and data from Arenco regarding systems in northern states and
Canada indicate there are no problems with that climate.
Also, in regard to test samples from the sub-oxic zone, it was asked if this was
included. He is told that they were used and were included as were all of the test
samples.
Commissioner Melton said she was asked about the sub-oxic zone and how that
relates to the aquifer cleansing itself. Barbara Rich explained that the USGS found
that there is oxic water, the top part of the aquifer, and the sub-oxic water below it.
The sub-oxic layer could be as close as ten feet the top of the aquifer or as deep as
100 feet. This depends on the area. This is the area that the well drillers try to tap.
The sub-oxic layer was something the USGS did not expect to find, and considered
this in that some natural denitrification occurs there. But most people do not want
to drink this water, as it stains plumbing fixtures, etc.
Commissioner Luke asked that public testimony be limited to about five minutes
each, and people should not give their time to others.
Mike Neary said that he lives between Sunriver and La Pine and moved there three
years ago. He worked for Boeing for a number of years, and has experience with
the use of computer programs for estimating what the future will bring. A program
is effective when properly programmed to anticipate the results of a particular
scenario. Boeing uses it all the time to design airplanes and it is very sophisticated.
They design wings and then test them, using a model in a wind tunnel. They have
ways of testing whether the computer program is correct. They keep doing it until
they know it is right.
He said what the Commissioners have now is a computer program that has not
been validated or tested. It could be right but it depends on the input data, and
needs to reflect the geology underground, could be different results. He has done a
lot of work to get a correct program to estimate the results but doesn't know that it
is true. It is like putting passengers in a plane that was never tested.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Hearing regarding a Proposed Local Rule
Related to La Pine Groundwater Protection Issues
Monday, July 7, 2008 Page 3 of 13 Pages
He would like to see this postponed until this is tested, and then retested again next
year to see if the program actually shows what was predicted. He doesn't think the
Board knows that now. It's an enormous financial burden based on an unverified
computer program.
Commissioner Daly stated that there is a lot of information that indicates the
scientific data gathered went through extensive peer review by other agencies. The
report talks about that to make sure the data is correct.
Mr. Neary said he looked at the USGS report, and doesn't feel it is necessarily
correct per peer review. They can't come out and verify the data that is given to
them. There is a lot of data that may or may not be correct or complete. This
program is a good one and is well recognized, but the data that is plugged into it
needs to be right or the predictions will be wrong.
Commissioner Daly submitted that there were many eyes that went into collecting
the data and reviewing the data.
Mr. Neary stated that the question is whether it complete or accurate. The only
way to know that is to test it in a year. He has no problem with the science, but
there is not sufficient development of the process. It is not complete.
Commissioner Daly asked how he knows that it is not complete. Mr. Neary
replied that no one knows until it is tested and verified.
Commissioner Melton stated that it was pointed out that the USGS report says to
continue testing. Barbara Rich agreed; drinking water levels would be tested again
in 2010.
Lee Wilkins, the Vice President of the citizens' advisory group, wanted to read a
letter from Gene Whisnant dated July 3 into the record. . Commissioner Luke
stated that the Board got this letter already and it is already in the record. She
asked to read it anyway.
Sunni Rounds said that the County constantly denies requests and is irresponsible,
given the current economy. Just getting this off the Board's plate is detrimental to
the citizens of the County.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Hearing regarding a Proposed Local Rule
Related to La Pine Groundwater Protection Issues
Monday, July 7, 2008 Page 4 of 13 Pages
Jerry Criss has questions about the science. There are no funds and no resources
for a project of this size or type. This is a large failure of public policy and an
environmental mistake. It is doomed to fail. Legal battles will cripple the County
for years to come. He suggested doing nothing. Do not pass the local rule, but
instead pass it on to the DEQ. A lot of citizens of South County looked at the
science and they would like someone to prove to them beyond a doubt that there
will be a problem later on. He would like the County to accept a group of citizens
to sit down with all of the agencies involved and examine this. The County needs
to realize that it has to work for the citizens. This is uncontrolled risk development
and citizens will not allow it. They will take back their government and the
Commissioners will be a victim of the coming changes.
Bob Sweeney said it is a question of fair play. Instead of saying that all of the
systems are adding to the problem, this should be taken on a case by case basis.
There are areas north of Sisters and in part of Tumalo that are saturated by
irrigation water. Property owners in South County should be dealt with in the
same way. There are good systems that are not in violation. The County needs to
establish a prudent testing system. He put in a sand filter system about three years
ago and does not need a retrofit.
He said he believes the Board will sign the local rule but the results will compel
property owners to spend a lot of money unnecessarily. The problem does not
exist. He inquired with a reputable excavator about an ATT system, and was told
it would not last longer than five years; and that current sand filters are better. The
same requirements are made of property owners with systems in good repair as
those that are failing. A Realtor has said this is causing irreparable damage to the
area. Studies done by the USGS and the DEQ should be open for review. The
County needs to back off, continue to monitor and handle on a case by case basis.
Commissioner Luke stated that the areas around Sisters and Tumalo have not had
the extensive testing that South County has. Mr. Kanner said that the context was
the geology of the area is very different. There are some areas near bodies of water
that have porous soils that require feasibility studies. But to apply a blanket order
to areas where there is extensive rock and the groundwater is 500 feet down does
not make sense.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Hearing regarding a Proposed Local Rule
Related to La Pine Groundwater Protection Issues
Monday, July 7, 2008 Page 5 of 13 Pages
Ms. Rich stated that Arenco, who provides some of the systems, has been in
business for thirty years, and some systems have been in place for twenty years in
other places. Oregon is late in coming into the market for systems that do
advanced treatment.
She explained that in general terms, historical data was entered into the model,
calibrated against history, and.compared with sampling information from a decade
ago. The model matched what came out of the ground almost perfectly. It has
been calibrated and compared to samples.
Commissioner Luke said that this is nothing new per the USGS. There are lots of
arras with similar ground structure. Ms. Rich stated that it began on the eastern
seaboard, and the environmental impacts have been examined for decades.
Dave Gillette, chair of the Ponderosa Pines Homeowners Association, said that in
regional problem solving done during the late 1990's, Ponderosa Pines was
excluded because of sediments in the soil. The water there is about 200 or 300 feet
down. Wild River was also excluded because there is a lot more strata. He asked
how this study could be accurate for those areas.
Ms. Rich replied that there were many partners in the problem solving process,
including the residential property owners, Fish and Wildlife, DEQ, federal
agencies and developers. They said they didn't think at the time that the outlying
subdivisions needed to be included. With the USGS study regarding groudnwater
movement, they were found to have more of an impact than expected; including
that Ponderosa Pines impacts the subdivision areas to the east.
Dave Gillette said that Wild River is a lot different. There are no test wells within
three or four miles of Ponderosa Pines, and the color indicated on the map was
changed from light green to white and back again. The wells are 200 to 300 feet
deep. This is inconsistent. A blanket feasibility was done by DEQ and each lot
was tested in some sections. The County doesn't have the manpower to handle this
thing.
A discussion about timing to get inspections scheduled and done then occurred.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Hearing regarding a Proposed Local Rule
Related to La Pine Groundwater Protection Issues
Monday, July 7, 2008 Page 6 of 13 Pages
Ted Scholer said he has been a resident for 22 years and has been involved in this
process for a long time. It seems that some people don't listed well. This is not a
personal attack, but a problem with bureaucracy. This type of thing becomes self-
sustaining and moves forward no matter how much scientific evidence is missing.
This is staff driven but he is not sure what is the driving force. He asked if
someone has a manufactured home but wants to put in a frame house, what is
required.
Tom Anderson stated that if it does not increase flow, it needs an authorization
notice and it needs to function properly. If it is working okay, nothing needs to be
done at that time.
Ms. Scholer said that in the past it was said that the groundwater would be polluted
by 2005. It didn't happen. Scientific fact is being ignored. DEQ tested 100 or
more wells about five years apart and they show a net reduction in nitrates, so
where is the problem.
Ms. Rich replied that without knowing which wells he referenced, she'd need to
see the information. She wants to be sure they are speaking about the same thing.
Laura Harvey talked about a newspaper article of July 2 about Pahlisch laying off
part of its work force, and that is where the money was coming from. Also, in the
Sunriver utility water report, nitrates are not even mentioned. This covers
Crosswater, Caldera Springs and Vandevert. Commissioner Luke pointed out that
they are on sewer and there is nothing built north of them.
Ms. Harvey said the 75% of the USGS tests were done north of Benham Falls.
The map is incoherent. She agreed with some speakers who are much smarter than
she is and can't figure out what the rush is. Not enough research has been done.
She asked where the plan is. This is the future of their lives and County. There are
rivers everywhere. She asked if any other counties in the country have addressed
this issue successfully. She believes they have failed. Deschutes River Recreation
Homesites residents are not sure they have a problem. The County is going to
cloud the title of properties and make them unsaleable. This is probably not legal.
She asked about address the areas in north Klamath County and Crescent.
Commissioner Luke said that there is nothing secret about land use and Deschutes
County has no control over what Klamath County does.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Hearing regarding a Proposed Local Rule
Related to La Pine Groundwater Protection Issues
Monday, July 7, 2008 Page 7 of 13 Pages
Ron Sharbaugh lives in the Wild River area. He is displeased with Ordinance No.
2008-019, which was a back door local rule. He urged the Board to repeal it. He
feels this is like selling a drug with no trial testing. He said that any public support
will be negligible.
He read a statement at this point regarding the USGS report. (His handout is
attached.)
He said that he was pleased to hear about how the USGS feels about the sub-oxic
layer. Nothing is getting to Sunriver. Newberry Estates' nitrates are gone before
they get to Highway 97. Mother nature will get rid of the nitrates for nothing.
They are being held hostage by the USGS. They are on the wrong track. The first
step in the public process is to identify the problem, and the responsibility for this
lies with the Commissioners. The USGS is out of line giving a policy statement
analysis. This charges everyone as guilty. Give it back to the State and let them
handle it in a reactive manner.
Commissioner Melton asked about the sub-oxic issue. Ms. Rich said that the input
into the ground needs to be stopped as it can only handle so much. It is unknown
how much the rivers can protect themselves. What is now in storage underground
is the concern.
Mr. Sharbaugh said people can use a filter. Everyone is assumed to be guilty.
Mother Nature can clear things up. He asked about global warming and the lack of
exemptions. The science shows it is a local issue.
Ed Criss said he has lived in Wild River for three years, and is a member at large
of the Citizens Action Group. On page 4 of the staff report, the USGS was to
complete the upgrades to the model in 2005. The final model has been modified.
His requests to USGS have been denied and his appeals were denied. He is
constantly denied access. The model cannot be found anywhere in the world. He
has heard no one say what the predictive capacity of the model is. Commissioner
Melton was at the last CAG meeting and this was discussed, and she said she
hadn't seen it either. He has read all of the reports back to 1990 and can't find it
anywhere, and has received no reply from Dave Morgan. He said that if it isn't
broken, does it need to be fixed.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Hearing regarding a Proposed Local Rule
Related to La Pine Groundwater Protection Issues
Monday, July 7, 2008 Page 8 of 13 Pages
He also asked if any further destination resorts are planned. Commissioner Luke
replied that none have been mapped. Mr. Criss said that Thornburgh will drop the
groundwater level. This will drive the wells into failure. Citizens will not tolerate
the financial impact and will go a long way in fighting this. He has talked with
folks who have similar concerns. He asked what will happen to those who inherit
property. He said Mr. Morgan at USGS said that no testing was done in Wild
River. It has a different geology. All of this is based on assumptions.
Commissioner Melton asked about the predictive capability issue. Ms. Rich said
that she didn't know off the top of her head but would get back to her.
Gayla Hayes asked to read a statement from Doug Farmer. Commissioner Luke
stated that the letter was already in the record.
Dan Varcoe stated that some modifications were made. Commissioner Luke said
that many of those came as a result of public hearings and citizen input. Mr.
Varcoe stated that it would be hard to find anyone who lives in Sunriver or south
as a proponent. If it is adopted, it will be against the will of the people. He talked
with Ms. Rich and she said there are some people in favor who were afraid to step
up.
He said that after the first meeting he investigated nitrates. It is questionable
whether there are even harmful, per the internet. He is not convinced that it is a
problem. He asked that the Board be as open minded as the residents are. At the
local Bi-Mart, people buy nitrogen for their lawns. If this is going to be controlled,
they need to look at other sources of nitrogen.
Ms. Rich said there is basically no difference between what goes on a lawn or in a
sewage system. The USGS looked at sources of nitrogen and where it is coming
from. The human impact through wastewater is the largest and most dominant.
Mr. Varcoe said he has his water tested regularly and has not seen an increase in
nitrate readings. The results are that there doesn't seem to be an indication of a
growing problem. He asked if the Board would be willing to modify this to take
more readings in five years.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Hearing regarding a Proposed Local Rule
Related to La Pine Groundwater Protection Issues
Monday, July 7, 2008 Page 9 of 13 Pages
Commissioner Luke said that the USGS recommended testing in 2011 and 2012.
The future Boards cannot be obligated, but a future Board will be hard pressed not
to look at it.
Mr. Varcoe asked that they follow the will of the people and vote no.
Commissioner Daly stated that there has been a tremendous amount of publicity on
the issue and the potential nitrate level. Whether the study ultimately is proven
right or wrong, publicity has an effect on the salability of property. If the Board
says it's done and doesn't want to deal with it anymore, the publicity still will be
there and the question still exists.
Mr. Varcoe stated that if the public is convinced, it will cooperate. Even outsiders
say there is no problem, and believe the locals. Sales would double immediately if
this issue went away.
Commissioner Luke stated that nitrates are not showing up in the wells yet, but
USGS testimony on that exists. Ms. Rich said that the USGS holds the data. The
last compilation from DEQ shows that 4% to 8% of local wells are above
acceptable levels. The vast majority show good water, but some are showing the
impacts. This is part of the difficulty of using real estate data. If there is a high
hit, they may drill a new one.
Mr. Varcoe said there is an increasing level of bad tests, but that doesn't tell you
much. He understands that there is a good possibility that there is movement of
nitrates, but most of the language says maybe, possibly or someday. The certainty
does not seem to be there. There is an implied certainty but it is not a reality.
Ms. Rich said the number of wells showing impacts is about 35% of the wells over
ten years, at the time of sale. The background level is greater than 1 ml per liter.
Naturally occurring is much less than that. This number is comparable to what the
USGS study says.
Carl Rossett, who worked at a Clackamas County water plant, provided a handout.
He explained that there are a lot of issues regarding the geological stratus. There
are many factors, such as rainfall, making it risky to predict. There is not a severe
nitrate problem, and if there was it would not kill you. He is not convinced that
anything needs to be done. Multi-flow systems can have maintenance problems.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Hearing regarding a Proposed Local Rule
Related to La Pine Groundwater Protection Issues
Monday, July 7, 2008 Page 10 of 13 Pages
He got schematics from Arenco, but would like to see the data from that in La
Pine. It's colder. The systems won't work for long. Some people live there all the
time, but some only a few days at a time. This needs constant flow of water or it
can get broken valves. There has not been enough study on this. It is based upon
USGS report but you don't have the experience to know if this makes sense. Staff
may have an agenda or a perception that they have to have a certain result.
Someone who is impartial and has epxerties needs to look at this.
Commissioner Luke said that the DEQ stands by the USGS report, and they are the
experts. Commissioner Daly added that the DEQ is the one who licenses the
systems and they go through extensive testing before allowing anyone to hook up.
Mr. Rossett said he won't disparage the DEQ, but a lot of them are people who just
do paperwork. This must have been someone in their laboratory who does minor
testing. He asked if there is really a problem, other than the CDC report. What is
there except the blue baby thing? The DEQ works under the EPA, and they are
mostly bureaucrats. They really don't have any idea of what level is dangerous.
(He went into great detail about fecal coliform and other contaminants, and his
expertise in this field.)
Karen Duncan said that Mr. Rossett is an example of an educated person. She
stated that there is no use in saying much to Commissioner Luke, who is
collaborating with staff on this issue. If it was in his back yard he would leave no
stone unturned to make sure a right decision is made, and would questions the
science and third-party testing. Joanie Hammond of the DEQ, when asked, agreed
with the model but not necessarily with what was put into the model.
Ms. Duncan stated that when she and others repeatedly asked for the raw data, they
were denied. Speaking of the 2400 petition signers, she said they have 40 to 100
years to deal with this and they don't want something passed that they will have to
clean up after the Commissioners leave office. She said to let the citizens of south
Deschutes County handle this issue. They have the time and won't need money for
staff, and only have the citizens in mind along with safe drinking water. (Her
statement is attached.)
Jay Duncan said that his testimony is relatively short and repetitious. He stated
that many times he has asked questions and did not get answers. It is difficult
because regarding Gene Whisnant's letter, it says it was received and noted, but
Mr. Duncan feels that nothing will be heard of it again.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Hearing regarding a Proposed Local Rule
Related to La Pine Groundwater Protection Issues
Monday, July 7, 2008 Page I 1 of 13 Pages
Jim Kester said he has lived in La Pine since 1994. He had not planned to testify
but after listening to some of the testimony and responses, some red flags popped
up. In regard to the probability factor of the model, there is a percentage attached
to every model. Staff was asked about the probability factor and said they would
have to look into it. He said if he was working with a model of this magnitude, he
would have the answer. This is very important. He would hesitate to approve
something unless he knew that staff knows what they are doing.
Commissioner Luke asked where the answer can be found. Ms. Rich replied that
she can review the report to find it; the USGS has that information. The model
was built using all of the findings that were available and obtainable. USGS put it
together and truthed it against the actual conditions. When they run it over the
historic period and it produces the exact same results, it is felt to be highly
accurate. It contains the most historic data and background information available,
and is one of the most studied in the nation. She takes it as high quality.
Commissioner Melton said she would like the answer herself to the question
regarding probability. She said there is some merit to the local rule as written in
allowing extra time for testing. If none of the answers show true, they can't really
make decisions for future Boards. She'd like the question answered, and asked
how long it might take.
Ms. Rich indicated she'd have to talk to the USGS and is not sure when they are
available.
Ms. Craghead stated that this is a public hearing, and the Board can choose to close
it or continue it to a date certain, and whether to close the written record. Getting
information from staff is acceptable if it is already part of the record.
Commissioner Luke suggested that the hearing and written record be closed, and
they can wait for the answer and go from there. Ms. Craghead indicated that if
they get anything after this point, it won't be part of the official record and can't be
part of the basis of the Board's decision.
Commissioner Luke closed the oral testimony, and continued the written record
until the business meeting of Wednesday, July 9. It can be continued again if there
is no answer to the question by that time.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Hearing regarding a Proposed Local Rule
Related to La Pine Groundwater Protection Issues
Monday, July 7, 2008 Page 12 of 13 Pages
Being no further discussion, Chair Luke adjourned the meeting at 8: 06 p.m.
DATED this 7th Day of July 2008 for the Deschutes County Board of
Commissioners.
f
De nis R. Luke, hair
i
i
Tam Baney) Melton, Vice Chair
ATTEST:
A~4/A~ '0~h
Michael M. Daly, o issioner
Recording Secretary
Attachments
Exhibit A:
Exhibit B:
Exhibit C:
Exhibit D:
Preliminary Statement, Summary of Changes to Proposed Local
Rule, Staff Report, Notice of Hearing and Proposed Ordinance,
USGS Report with Questions & Answers regarding Water Quality
Sign-in sheets
Statement given by Ron Sharbaugh
Statement given by Karen Duncan
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Public Hearing regarding a Proposed Local Rule
Related to La Pine Groundwater Protection Issues
Monday, July 7, 2008 Page 13 of 13 Pages
V
L..
A~
Community Development Department
Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Health Division
117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend Oregon 97701-1925
(541)388-6575 FAX(541)385-1764
http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners (Board) will hold a Public Hearing on
Monday, July 7, 2008 at 5:30 P.M. in the Board Hearing Room in the Deschutes Services
Building at 1300 NW Wall St., Bend.
The Board will consider adoption of the "Local Rule" ordinance, under which all residential
properties in the unincorporated areas of South Deschutes County that are not currently served
by sewer systems would be required to upgrade their septic systems to reduce nitrogen
discharges, connect to sewer systems or take some other nitrogen-reduction measure within 14
years of the effective date of the ordinance.
The Board may, at its discretion, impose time limits on oral testimony. Testimony of any
length may be submitted in writing. The Board may also, at its discretion, decline to hear
testimony on scientific investigations of groundwater quality conducted by the Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the United States Geological Survey, or
on the DEQ's determination of a public health hazard in south Deschutes County.
Any interested person may appear, be represented by counsel, or submit written, signed
testimony. Written testimony may be submitted to this department prior to the hearing
date or at the hearing.
Copies of the proposed amendments and staff report will be available on Monday, June 30,
2008 for inspection at no cost at the Deschutes County Community Development Department at
117 N.W. Lafayette Avenue and at the South Deschutes County Services Center at 51340 S.
Highway 97, La Pine. Copies of the draft amendment and findings report can be purchased at
the office for 25 cents a page. The documents are also available on the web at:
www.deschutes.org/cdd/gpp/
The meeting location is wheelchair accessible. For the deaf or hearing impaired, an interpreter
or assistant listening system will be provided with 3 business days notice. Materials in alternate
formats may be made available with 48 hours notice. For other assistance, please dial 7-1-1,
State Relay Service.
Staff Contact: Barbara Rich, Senior Environmental Health Planner, (541) 617-4713;
BarbaraR@co.deschutes.or.us
Dated this 27th day of June 2008
Quality Services Performed with Prime
REVIEWED
LEGAL COUNSEL
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
An Ordinance Adding Chapter 13.14 to Title 13,
Public Services, of the Deschutes County Code. * ORDINANCE NO. 2008-012
WHEREAS, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, in a letter date January 4, 2008,
determined that a public health hazard exists in the south Deschutes County area, the cause of which is pollution
discharged by conventional onsite wastewater treatment systems;
WHEREAS, "Pollution" is defined in OAR 340-071-0100 as "any alteration of the physical, chemical,
or biological properties of any waters of the state, including change in temperature, taste, color, turbidity, silt, or
odor of the waters, or any discharge of any liquid, gaseous, solid, radioactive, or other substance into any waters
of the state that, alone or in connection with any other substance, threatens to create a public nuisance or render
such waters harmful, detrimental, or injurious to public health, safety, or welfare or to domestic, commercial,
industrial, agricultural, recreational or other legitimate beneficial uses or to livestock, wildlife, fish, or other
aquatic life or the habitat thereof;"
WHEREAS, "Public health hazard" is defined in OAR 660-011-0060 as "a condition whereby it is
probable that the public is exposed to disease-caused physical suffering or illness due to the presence of
inadequately treated sewage;"
WHEREAS, Deschutes County Community Development Department staff proposed amendments to
the Deschutes County Code ("DCC") to require the use of nitrogen reducing onsite systems for permits issued
by the County; and
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed DCC text amendment was mailed in the Deschutes County tax
statements to 10,243 property owners in the South Deschutes County area; and
WHEREAS, the Deschutes County Planning Commission hosted an information session on the proposal
in November 2006, notice of which was published in The Bulletin on November 25, 2006 and the Newberry
Eagle on November 1, 2006; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners ("Board") held public hearings on March 13, 20 and
27, 2007 and on March 13, 2008, notice of which was published in The Bulletin on March 4, 2007; and
WHEREAS, the public record for the rule was open for written testimony between March 27, 2007 and
April 18, 2008; and
WHEREAS, the Board held a public hearing on March 19, 2008, a notice of which was published in the
Bend Bulletin on February 18, 2008;
WHEREAS, the Board mailed information about the proposed amendment entitled "Frequently Asked
Questions" to 9,484 property owners in south Deschutes County on April 18, 2008; and
PAGE 1 OF 2 - ORDINANCE NO. 2008-12 (M/D/YR)
s
WHEREAS, the Board finds that the public will benefit from changes to the Deschutes County
sanitation regulations to require better nitrogen reducing wastewater treatment systems in the south Deschutes
County area; now, therefore,
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON, ORDAINS
as follows:
Section 1. ADDING. That Deschutes County Code Title 13 is amended by the addition of a new
chapter as described in Exhibit "A," attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein.
Section 2. FINDINGS. That the Board adopts as its findings in support of this decision, the Staff
Report, attached as Exhibit "B" and incorporated by reference herein.
Dated this of 12008 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
DENNIS R. LUKE, Chair
ATTEST:
Recording Secretary
Date of I" Reading:
Date of 2„ d Reading
TAMMY (BANEY) MELTON, Vice Chair
MICHAEL M. DALY, Commissioner
day of 2008.
day of , 2008.
Record of Adoption Vote
Commissioner Yes No Abstained Excused
Dennis R. Luke
Tammy Melton
Michael M. Daly
Effective date: day of , 2008.
ATTEST:
Recording Secretary
PAGE 2 OF 2 - ORDINANCE NO. 2008-12 (M/D/YR)
Chapter 13.14. SOUTH COUNTY ONSITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT
13.14.010. Application.
13.14.020. Definitions.
13.14.030. Siting Criteria for New Development.
13.14.040. Groundwater Level Determinations.
13.14.050. Performance Standards.
13.14.060. Listing Nitrogen Reducing Systems. - Deleted: Upgrades at Change or
13.14.070. Approval of Other Groundwater Protection Wastewater Treatment Systems. Property Ownership
13.14.080. Variances. 13.14.070.
13.14.090. Appeals.
13.14.100. Fees.
13.14.110. Violation.
13.14.010. Application.
A. The provisions in DCC Chapter 13.14 are in addition to the requirements of ORS 454.605 to 454.755
and OAR chapter 340, divisions 071 and 073 and, in the event of an inconsistency, the more stringent
provisions shall apply.
B. The provisions in DCC Chapter 13.14 apply only to those wastewater treatment systems that treat flows
of residential strength wastewater, as defined in OAR 340-071, of 2,500 gallons per day or less.
(Ord. 2008-012 §1, 2008)
13.14.020. Definitions.
"Department" means, for purposes of this chapter, the Deschutes County Community Development
Department.
"Existing Development" means uses in South County on a Lot served by an Onsite System that does not
meet the performance standards contained in DCC 13.14.050(E) as of the effective date of Ordinance
2008-012.
"Lot" means lot or parcel as defined in ORS chapter 92. Tax lots may or may not be equivalent to legal
Lots of record.
"Maximum Nitrogen Reducing System" means pn Onsite System or Systems allowed for use by ODEQ
and listed by the Department in accordance with DCC 13.14.060 as having demonstrated at least 79%
nitrogen reduction and total nitrogen concentrations of less than 10 mg/I
"New Development" means the establishment of a use on a Lot in South County where there is no
existing use served by an Onsite System as of the effective date of Ordinance 2008-012.
"Nitrate Loading Management Model" means the model produced by the US Geological Survey ("USGS")
that specifies the performance standards that must be met by Onsite Systems in order to meet groundwater
protection goals.
"ODEQ" means the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality.
"Onsite System" means onsite wastewater treatment system as defined in OAR 340, division 71.
"Sewer System" means a system as defined in OAR chapter 660, division 11 that serves more than one
Lot or parcel, or more than one condominium unit or more than one unit within a planned unit
development, and includes pipelines or conduits, pump stations, force mains, and all other structures,
Deleted: the
Deleted: at the time the permit is issued'
Deleted: the highest level of
Formatted: Highlight
1 Formatted: Highlight
Deleted: of the Onsite Systems listed
pursuant to DCC 13.14.070
Chapter 13.14 1 (XX/2008)
devices, appurtenances and facilities used for treating or disposing of sewage or for collecting or
conducting sewage to an ultimate point for treatment and disposal. The following are not considered a
Sewer System for the purpose of this code:
A. A system provided solely for the collection, transfer and/or disposal of storm water runoff; or
B. A system provided solely for the collection, transfer and/or disposal of animal waste from a farm use
as defined in ORS 215.203.
"South County" means those unincorporated portions of Deschutes County contained in Townships 19,
20, 21, 22 and Ranges 9, 10, and 11, except those areas authorized for sewer.
"WPCF Permit" means Water Pollution Control Facility permit.
(Ord. 2008-012 §1, 2008)
13.14.030. Siting Criteria for New Development.
New Development shall meet the following criteria in order, for an Onsite System to be permitted and
constructed on the Lot:
A. For the purpose of site evaluation approval, any modification to the Lot, including the placement of fill
or the installation of groundwater interceptors, shall not be allowed.
B. For site evaluations applied for and approved after the effective date of Ordinance 2008-012, an Onsite
System, including the absorption facility, shall be installed on the Lot where the use to be served by the
system is located.
C. Locating the Onsite System or portion thereof on an adjoining Lot may be permitted if the Lots are
consolidated or the Lot line adjusted following a final land use decision by the County.
D. The absorption facility for the Onsite System shall be installed to provide a minimum 24 inch vertical
separation to the highest level attained by a groundwater table as measured from the bottom of the
absorption facility to the highest level of the groundwater table.
E. The provisions in DCC 13.14.030(A), (B) and (C) expire 3 years from the effective date of Ordinance
2008-012 unless amended by the Board of County Commissioners.
(Ord. 2008-012 §1, 2008)
13.14.040. Groundwater Level Determinations.
A. If the County, upon review of a site evaluation application for an Onsite System, finds that soil
characteristics indicating conditions associated with saturation as defined in OAR 340-071 are
inconclusive and groundwater levels cannot be determined, then groundwater levels shall be determined
using direct measurement of groundwater on the Lot and in the general area.
B. Direct measurements by the County shall be made during a spring following a winter (October through
March) with at least average Central Oregon historical total precipitation.
C. Application for groundwater level determinations shall be made to the Department no later than the
February 15 prior to the dates the groundwater measurements are to be conducted pursuant to DCC
13.14.040(A) and (B).,
D. If the winter precipitation for the year in which the application is made is not equal to at least average
precipitation levels described in DCC 13.14.040(B), then the application will be held and the
groundwater level determination made after the next winter with at least average Central Oregon
historical total precipitation.
(Ord. 2008-012 §1, 2008)
13.14.050. Performance Standards.
A. The following performance standards shall apply to:
1. New Development at time of application for site evaluation and permit issuance;
Chapter 13.14 2 (XX/2008)
2. Existing Development at time of application for an authorization notice, major alteration, or major
repair, and
3. Existing Development at the time of upgrade required under DCC 13.14.050(F).
B. New Development shall install a Maximum Nitrogen Reducing System.
_
Deleted: Beginning November 15,
C. Subject to DCC 13.14.050(F), Existing Development located on a Lot that does not meet the 24 inch
2012, c
vertical separation to groundwater shall install a Maximum Nitrogen Reducing System.
Deleted: upgrades at change of
D. Subject to DCC 13.14.050(F), Existing Development located on a Lot that meets the 24 inch vertical
property ownership.¶
separation to groundwater shall install an Onsite System that reduces nitrogen to at least the level
A.. A property with an Onsite system
specified for the area within which the Lot lies as specified in DCC 13
14
050(E)
approved or installed as of the effective
d
t
f o
di
2008
012
h
i
.
.
.
E. The Board shall adopt by resolution:
a
e o
r
nance
-
t
at
s not
the required nitrogen reducing system
1. The Nitrate Loading Management Model;
pursuant to DCC 13.14.050 or a
2. Minimum nitrogen reduction standards applicable to this chapter
and
groundwater protection wastewater
,
3. . The map depicting where standards for Existing Development apply. The Department shall
treatment system pursuant to DCC
13.14.080 shall upgrade the Onsite
maintain the map depicting where standards for Existing Development apply.
"
System upon any sale, grant, conveyance
F. Except as provided in DCC 13.14.050(G) and DCC 13.14.080, all Existing Development served by
or transfer of title of a property in South
Onsite Systems shall be upgraded with nitrogen reducing systems in accordance with DCC 13.14.050(C)
County.1
B. For each property with an Onsite
and (D) no later than November 15, 2022.
System approved or installed as of the
G. An Onsite System that was or is operating under a WPCF Permit from ODEQ shall not be required to
effective date of Ordinance 2008-012 that
meet the performance standards in DCC 13.14.050(D) until such time as a major alteration or major
is not the required nitrogen reducing
s
stem
r
t t
DCC 13
14
050
repair is needed in accordance with OAR 340, division 71.
y
pu
suan
o
.
.
or a
groundwater protection wastewater
(Ord. 2008-012 §1, 2008)
treatment system pursuant to DCC
13.14.080, Deschutes County shall
13.14.060. Xisting Nitrogen Reducing Systems.
record, in the Deschutes County Official
records, a notice of the requirement to
A. Onsite Systems used for upgrades to Existing and Ne.w Development in the South County shall be
upgrade the Onsite System in accordance
with DCC 13.14.050 or 13.17.080 upon
Onsite Systems allowed by the ODEQ.
sale, grant conveyance or transfer of title
B. Onsite Systems or components designed to reduce nitrogen, including Maximum Nitrogen Reducing
of property in south county.¶
Systems, shall be identified on a lisfmaintained by the Department
C. Upon an Onsite System upgrade to
i
h
i
.
1. The list shall categorize the systems or components by demonstrated nitrogen reduction capability.
e
t
er a n
trogen reducing system
approved pursuant to DCC 1114.070 or
2. The nitrogen reduction categories in this list shall correspond to the performance standards shown in
other groundwater protection wastewater
the legend on the map adopted under DCC 13.14.050(E) and which shows where the specific
treatment system pursuant to DCC
13
14
080
D
h
C
performance standards must be achieved.
.
.
,
esc
utes
ounty shall
provide the property owner with a release
C. Vendors or designers of Onsite Systems may apply to the County to have additional systems listed by
of the notice sufficient for recording in
the Department as nitrogen reducing systems.
the Deschutes County Official records.1
1. Applications must be submitted on a form specified by the Department and shall be accompanied by
D.. Exceptions. The sale, grant,
conveyance or transfer of title of property
the"fee established by the Board.
does not include:q
2. Applications must include documentation that the proposed Onsite System will meet the standards
1
contained in DCC 13.14:050(E) and 13.14.060(A).
Deleted: The sale, grant, conveyance or
a. An application by a vendor or designer to list an additional Onsite System as a nitrogen
transfer of tide of property does not
reducing system shall include, but is not limited to, the following information:
include t
i. The quality of the septic tank effluent or wastewater influent received by the system during
Deleted: The transfer into a living trust
the performance test;
for which the owner(s) of record as of the
effective date of Ordinance 2008-012
ii. The quality of the proposed Onsite System influent and effluent including the following:
is(are) the trustor(s); or¶
a. The quality of the proposed Onsite System nitrogen concentration including organic
2.. Property line adjustments.
and inorganic forms of nitrogen;
Deleted: The sale, grant, conveyance or
b. Biochemical oxygen demand (5-day), total suspended solids, pH, dissolved Oxygen,
'
transf
er
title of property does not
and temperature; and
h
incl
ude
the sale, grant, conveyance, or
transfer of title of the property from a
c. Measurements of wastewater flow to the system during the performance test.
trust to any beneficiary.¶
iii. Lists of installers and maintenance providers certified to work in Oregon;
Deleted: (Ord. 2008-012 §1, 2008)1
iv. List of distributors or qualified designers for the system in Oregon; and 1
9
1
13.14.070..
Chapter 13.14 3 (XX/2008)
v. Additional information and application fee as required by the Department.
b. Data submitted by vendors or designers in support of an application to list an additional Onsite
System as a nitrogen reducing system shall include at least one of the following:
i. Peer reviewed articles;
ii. Third party reports; or
iii. Papers and data presented and published in conference proceedings.
c. If data show the total nitrogen concentration of the influent to the proposed Onsite System is
less than 65 mg/L on average, then the system's nitrate reduction performance shall be
prorated accordingly unless the data show that nitrogen reduction increases as influent
increases.
G. Onsite Systems listed by the Department shall continue to be listed unless performance data indicates
that listing should be changed or revoked.
(Ord. 2008-012 §1, 2008)
13.14.070. Approval of Other Groundwater Protection Wastewater Treatment Systems.
A. A Sewer System is permitted when:
1. A Sewer System has been authorized pursuant to OAR 660-11-0060(9) and OAR 660, division 4,
including documentation that the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code have
been amended and acknowledged pursuant to ORS 197; or
2. A Sewer System has been authorized pursuant to OAR 660-011-0060(4) through (7), including
documentation that the Deschutes 'County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code have been
amended and acknowledged pursuant to CARS 197; and
3. The performance of the Sewer System reduces,total nitrogen loading for the area to be served, as
measured in kilograms per day, to the minimum level specified by the Nitrate Loading Management
Model and in DCC 13.14.050.
B. A property owner may propose to the County-~a system other than an Onsite System or a Sewer
System to reduce nitrogen loading to groundwater.,
1. The property owner shall have the burden of proof that the proposed system will perform equal to
or better than the performance standards established in DCC 13.14.050.
2. The system proposed to serve either New; Development or Existing Development shall meet the
minimum requirements adopted by the: Board per DCC 13.14.050.
(Ord. 2008-012 §l, 2008)
13.14.080..' V a ria n c es.
A. The Department Director or, if on appeal, the Board, may authorize a variance from the requirements of
DCC 13.14.050.
B. Applications to the Department for variances shall be submitted on a form specified by the Department
and accompanied by the fee established by the Board.
C. The application must state fully the grounds for the variance and facts relied upon by the applicant and
must demonstrate how strict compliance with the standard is impracticable.
D. The Department Director or the Board may grant a variance in one of the following situations:
1. The applicant provides a report of a detailed hydrogeologic investigation by a registered
hydrogeologist that demonstrates that the groundwater is protected from nitrogen contamination by
the presence of persistent oxygen-limited groundwater conditions that will reduce nitrogen in the
groundwater for the life of the system; or
2. The applicant demonstrates that an extreme or unusual financial hardship exists.
a. The following factors shall be considered by the Department or the Board in reviewing an
application for a variance based on financial hardship:
1) Applicant's advanced age or poor health;
Chapter 13.14 4 (XX/2008)
2) Applicant's financial ability to pay for a nitrogen reducing system;
3) Applicant's need to care for aged, incapacitated, or disabled relatives;
4) The availability of financial assistance that is sufficient to offset the cost of installing,
operating, or maintaining a nitrogen reducing Onsite System;
5) Environmental impacts from the variance.
b. Hardship variances granted by the Department shall include conditions that:
1) Limit permits to the life of the applicant;
2) Limit the number of permanent residents using the system;
3) Require that the system is retrofitted to a nitrogen reducing Onsite System at time of sale
of the property; and
4) Requiring that the compliance date specified in DCC 13.14.050(F) shall not apply until
time of sale of the property.
3. The applicant demonstrates that:
a. The onsite system serving the property is failing;
b. The application for the variance includes a legal commitment from the sewer district or other
legal entity to extend a sewer system that meets the requirements of DCC 13.14.050 to the
property covered by the application; and .
c. The connection of the property to the sewer will be complete within five years from the date
of application.
(Ord. 2008-012 §1, 2008)
13.14.090. Appeals.
A. Decisions of the Department made pursuant to this chapter may be appealed to the Board within twelve
days of the date the Department's decision was mailed.
B. The appeal shall be filed with, the Department using a form specified by the Department and fee
established by the Board.
C. The documentation supporting the appeal must state fully the grounds on which the applicant is
appealing the decision, the facts relied upon by = the . applicant and must demonstrate how strict
compliance with the standard is impracticable.
D. Decisions of the Board may be appealed. in accordance with DCC 13.40.
(Ord. 2008-012 §1, 2008)
13.14.100. Fees.
A. The Board.shall establish fees by resolution for permits and services under DCC 13.14.
(Ord. 2008-012;§l, 2008)
13.14.110. Violation.,
A. Violation of any provision of DCC 13.14 is a Class A violation.
(Ord. 2008-012 § 1, 2008) '
Chapter 13.14 5 (XX/2008)
1
Community Development Department
Planning Division Poildinq Safety Dlvl~lon Environmental Health Division
117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bead Oregon 97701-1925
(541)388-6575 FAX(541)385-1764
http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/
STAFF REPORT
Public Hearing July 7, 2008
The Board will consider adoption of the proposed "Local Rule," under which all residential
properties in the unincorporated areas of South Deschutes County that are not currently served
by sewer systems would be required to upgrade their septic systems to reduce nitrogen
discharges, connect to sewer systems or take some other nitrogen-reduction measure within 14
years of the effective date of the ordinance.
Highlighted areas in the staff report indicate the significant changes from previous versions.
PROPOSAL: Consider adoption of a Local Rule to require the use of nitrate reducing onsite
wastewater treatment systems or other approaches to achieve the same level
of groundwater protection in south Deschutes County to protect the primary
source of drinking water and surface waters of the upper Deschutes River
watershed.
The proposal includes requirements that:
1. New development installs systems that are Maximum Nitrogen Reducing
Systems (defined as systems that achieve a minimum of 79% reduction in
total nitrogen and discharge a maximum of 10 mg/L total nitrogen);
2. Existing systems upgrade within 14 years of the date the rule takes effect;
3. Existing systems meet a variable nitrogen reduction standard established
by the USGS Nitrate Loading Management Model
Other programs interacting with the proposal include financial assistance
programs funded by the sale and development of land within the La Pine
Neighborhood Planning Area and state rules governing the expansion or
creation of sewers in rural areas.
STAFF: Tom Anderson, Community Development Department Director
Dan Haldeman, Environmental Health Director
Barbara Rich, Senior Environmental Health Planner
Peter Gutowsky, Principal Planner
Todd Cleveland, Environmental Health Specialist
George Read, Management Analyst
Dated this 2nd day of July, 2008
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 1 of 35
Quality Services Petforined zvith Pritle
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
1.
EXISTING POLICY ...............................................................................................................3
II.
BASIC FINDINGS
.3
A.
Affected area
.3
B.
Affected uses
.3
C.
Purpose
.3
D.
History and background
.3
E.
Public involvement .........................................................................................................5
F.
Public comments ............................................................................................................7
III.
FINDINGS OF FACT ............................................................................................................8
A.
Impacts to water quality from conventional onsite systems ......................................8
B.
Nitrate Standards
12
C.
Nitrogen Reducing Systems
13
IV.
POTENTIAL GROUNDWATER PROTECTION APPROACHES
14
A.
Sewer Systems
14
B.
Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems
14
C.
Do Nothing
16
V.
PROPOSED LOCAL RULE
17
A.
Siting criteria for New Development
17
B.
Future Development on lots or parcels with high groundwater levels
18
C.
Limit the use of easements
19
D.
Groundwater level determinations
19
E.
Performance standards
19
F.
Compliance date: Fourteen years from the effective date of the proposed rule
20
G.
Listing nitrogen reducing systems
20
H.
Other approaches to groundwater protection
21
1.
Variances and Appeals
21
J.
Fees
21
K.
Violations
21
VI.
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
22
A.
Existing Financial Assistance Programs
22
B.
Planned Financial Assistance Programs
22
C.
Source of Funds
23
VII.
RECOMMENDATION
23
VIII.
REFERENCES
24
Appendix A ................................................................................................................................zf
Appendix B ................................................................................................................................31
Appendix C ................................................................................................................................33
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 2 of 35
I. EXISTING POLICY:
OAR 340-071, Onsite Wastewater Treatment System Rules
OAR 340-040, Groundwater Quality Protection
Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 23.44, Regional Problem Solving
Deschutes County Code Chapter 13.08, Onsite sewage disposal and septic systems
Deschutes County Code Chapter 11.12, Transferable Development Credit Program
Ordinance 2008-019
II. BASIC FINDINGS:
A. Affected area: The areas affected by the proposal are unsewered areas between
Sunriver and the Klamath County border, this area is formally defined as those
unincorporated portions of Deschutes County contained in Townships 19, 20, 21, and 22
and Ranges 9, 10 and 11, except those areas authorized for sewer.
B. Affected uses: Uses affected by the proposal are those generating less than 2,500
gallons of residential strength wastewater per day.
C. Purpose: The goal of the proposed rule is to reduce onsite wastewater treatment
system pollutants, particularly nitrogen, discharged to the sole source aquifer in order to
maintain and improve public waters in the La Pine basin of the upper Deschutes River
watershed. The proposed rule applies only to those systems for which the County has
permitting authority (systems that generate less than 2,500 gallons per day of residential
waste strength wastewater).
D. History and background: South Deschutes County has been the focus of extensive
local, state and federal attention beginning in the early 1980s with the identification of
significant groundwater impacts from onsite wastewater treatment systems in the La
Pine Unincorporated Community. Provided below is a timeline of events related to water
quality in the region.
1960's
125-square mile area of La Pine subdivided into over 12,000 lots
and
1970's
1982
La Pine Aquifer Study finds high nitrate levels in groundwater underlying
the core area of La Pine.
1986
La Pine core area sewered.
1994
Oregon DEQ finds increasing nitrate levels outside of the La Pine area.
1996
County receives a $157,250 Regional Problem Solving grant from DLCD to
identify regional problems and evaluate solutions.
1997
Sewer Feasibility Study determined that creating or expanding sewers in
the study areas to cost between $19,000 and $28,000 per household. A
20-year payback at 3% costs between $1,275 and $2,880 per household
per year. This estimate also assumed that the sewage treatment plant site
and related land could be purchased at $3,000 per acre.
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 3 of 35
1998
Water Quality Directives resulting from Regional Problem Solving:
■ Continue studying nitrates, well head protection, and alternative
sewage disposal systems.
■ Do not build a new sewer system in study areas
■ Reduce residential density to meet the carrying capacity of onsite
sewage disposal systems through a market-based Transfer of
Development Credit Program
■ Identify areas where existing community sewer systems can be
expanded (La Pine Sewer District).
■ Support Oregon Water Wonderland II (OWW2) efforts to upgrade
existing sewage treatment facilities for that subdivision
1999
Oregon DEQ received $5.5 million grant from US Environmental Protection
Agency to study the groundwater, model the aquifer, and field test nitrogen
reducing onsite systems
2000
Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amended to include these goals in
response to public involvement during Regional Problem Solving:
1. To preserve water and air quality, reduce wildfire hazards and protect
wildlife habitat.
2. To ensure that domestic water derived from groundwater meets safe
drinking water standards.
3. To develop an equitable, market-driven system, that reduces the
potential development of existing lots in floodplains, wetlands, mule
deer migration corridors and areas susceptible to groundwater
pollution.
4. To create a new neighborhood, primarily residential in character,
between La Pine and Wickiup Junction, that provides services
efficiently, sustains economic development and reduces adverse
impacts to groundwater quality in South Deschutes County.
5. To explore innovative sewage treatment and disposal methods
1999-
Field sampling of groundwater and onsite wastewater treatment system
2004
effluent. Results of studies reported at numerous national, regional and
state meetings.
2002
Transferable Development Credit Program adopted
2003
Findings of the La Pine National Demonstration Project groundwater
investigation and three-dimensional groundwater modeling presented at a
public meeting in La Pine.
2005
The US Geological Survey completes an upgrade to the three dimensional
groundwater model and produces the Nitrate Loading Management Model
2005
The County convenes the TDC Technical Advisory Committee to amend
the Transferable Development Credit Program to better focus the
resources created by the La Pine Neighborhood Planning Area on solving
the groundwater protection problem.
Dec 2005
The TDC Technical Advisory Committee recommends creating a Pollution
Reduction Credit program to work in conjunction with a local rule to require
the use of nitrogen reducing onsite wastewater treatment systems.
May 2006
The Planning Commission, after holding a public hearing in La Pine,
recommended that the Board of County Commissioners adopt
amendments to the Transferable Development Credit Program to create
Pollution Reduction Credits and financial assistance for homeowners
upgrading their existing onsite wastewater treatment systems to better
protect groundwater.
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 4 of 35
June The Board of County Commissioners adopted amendments to the
2006 Transferable Development Credit Program to create Pollution Reduction
Credits.
E. Public involvement: The Community Development Department developed a public
participation plan to solicit comments and suggestions for the proposed Local Rule while
the Pollution Reduction Credit program was being established. The first phase of the
public participation process was to develop a notice of the Groundwater Protection
Project to include with all site evaluation and permit application materials. The
Environmental Health Division began distributing this notice with permit materials in
March 2006.
Next, the Department developed the first of a series of public information brochures
about the issues and proposal:
• Project Overview Brochure, Spring 2006
• South County Groundwater Protection History, Spring 2006
• Why Not Sewer? Brochure, Spring 2006
These brochures were first distributed at an open house for the opening of the South
County Services building and at the Home Show at the Deschutes County Fairgrounds
in May 2006.
Next steps included revising the Groundwater Protection Project website and initiating
meetings with area onsite system installers and realtors.
Further public information materials were developed in late summer 2006 with monthly
articles in the Newberry Eagle beginning in September 2007. Additional public
information materials were developed at this time including the following notices and
brochures:
• Notice of Planning Commission meeting, November 30, 2006
• Notice of Local Rule - Tax Bill Insert, October 2006
• Notice of Groundwater Protection Project (distribution began March 2006)
• Groundwater Protection Project Update, September 2006
• But my water was just tested! November 2006
• Pollution Reduction Credit Program Brochure, Fall 2006
The Tax Bill Insert was mailed to 10,243 property owners to provide individual notice of
the proposed rule. Following this the Department held a series of public meetings to
present the reason for the proposed rule and solicit comments and suggestions about
the Local Rule Concepts. The public meetings began with two events held at the La
Pine Senior Center:
• November 9, 2006 (requested by the La Pine Senior Center)
• November 30, 2006 (hosted by the Deschutes County Planning Commission)
The attendees at the November 30 meeting requested a session specifically for
reviewing the scientific basis of the proposed rule. This session was held December 20,
2006 and was presented as the Groundwater Science Open House with the USGS in
attendance to answer questions about the groundwater investigation and models. The
open house format was used to allow interested persons to.move from station to station
and ask specific questions easily and quickly without having to wait through a lengthy
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 5 of 35
presentation. The Department decided to use this format after receiving feedback from
the November 30 meeting that some attendees felt intimidated about asking questions in
the lecture format when audience members were loudly responding to questions and
answers.
The Department, following the Groundwater Science Open House, scheduled additional
office hours to provide more opportunities for interested persons to drop by and obtain
more information about the science or other aspects of the proposal. The Department
scheduled office hours each week in January 2007 on different days of the week and at
different times during the day. The variation in locations, times and days were in
response to comments that all the meetings were held in the southern portion of the
affected area and that they were being held in the evening. By mixing the days,
locations and times, Department staff intended to create opportunities for interested
persons to be able to attend at least one session. Unfortunately, times and locations for
the office hour sessions in the northern portion of the affected area were constrained by
the available space. As a result these sessions were made twice as long as the
southern sessions.
• January 4, 2007, 5:00 - 7:00, Deschutes County office, La Pine
• January 9, 2007, 1:00-5:00, Village Properties office, Sunriver
• January 18, 2007, 1:00-5:00, Village Properties, Sunriver
• January 23, 2007 3:00 - 5:00, Deschutes County office, La Pine
The Board of County Commissioners held a public hearing over three nights on March
13, 20, and 27, 2007 on the proposed rule. The Board closed the hearing on March 27`n
but left the written record open for public comments. The Board re-opened the record
for verbal testimony on the amendments presented at the March 19, 2008 hearing. The
record was closed for verbal testimony at the end of the hearing and the written record
was left open until April 18, 2008. Because this is a legislative code amendment, the
Board has accepted all written testimony submitted after April 18, 2008.
The Board of County Commissioners held public work sessions with the Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality and the Oregon Department of Land Conservation
and Development on April 18, 2007 and January 30, 2008 to discuss the groundwater
science and modeling and next steps for protecting groundwater in the region.
The full list of notices, public information materials, and newspaper articles is available
as Appendix A. Appendix B provides a summary of the materials and information
provided at the Groundwater Science Open House. These materials were also provided
at the office hour sessions.
The Transferable Development Credit Technical Advisory Committee and the Deschutes
County Planning Commission have also been kept apprised of the Local Rule public
comment and participation process leading up the public hearing in March 2007.
On June 11, 2008, the Board of County Commissioners adopted Ordinance 2008-019 to
require the use of nitrogen reducing systems on all new development and existing
development at the time of major alteration (major house remodels or replacements) or
major repair at time of system failure. This ordinance acknowledges the existing Oregon
Administrative Rule that states that county permitting authorities acting on behalf of the
State, such as Deschutes County, may not authorize installation of a wastewater
treatment system that is likely to pollute public waters, but rather, must require the
installation of a wastewater treatment system that protects public waters or public health
(OAR 340-071-0130(1)). Ordinance 2008-019 is provided in Appendix C.
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 6 of 35
F. Public comments: As of this writing, the Department or the Board of County
Commissioners has been accepting public comments and inquiries on the proposal
Local Rule for nineteen months. The comments and inquiries are too numerous to
include (estimated 3,500 to 4,000 pages of material) in this report but are available for
review in the Community Development Department offices in Bend and La Pine or online
at http://www.deschutes.org/cdd/qpp / at the link to "Public Record for Local Rule." The
list below provides basic comment categories:
Cost: Affects on cost of living are too great, what kinds and quantity of financial
assistance are available, what is the cost of upgrades, what are cost
comparisons with other potential solutions, this will have a negative effect on the
real estate market, and ideas for additional financial assistance programs.
Science: What is the quantity and quality of science supporting the proposed rule, how
much sampling was conducted and where were the wells located, how was the
quality of the information assured, was the study design and the results peer
reviewed, what are the sources of nitrogen in the region, the proposal should be
to change drinking water wells instead of onsite systems.
Nitrogen Reducing System Performance: How will the performance of these systems
be verified, who can install and maintain the systems, what are the types of
available systems
Policy: Why not a moratorium, what happens with Klamath County (as part of the
groundwater system), are there case studies from other parts of the country, will
there be future changes to rule requirements, what are the public participation
plans, are there appeal procedures in the proposal, will there be a requirement of
time of property sale upgrades, what are the enforcement procedures, are there
recent installations, what are operation and maintenance requirements and costs
Sewer: Why not use sewer instead, what is Goal 11, use a combination of onsite and
clusters
Public Participation: How do interested persons receive notice of events, what is the
public participation plan, what is timing of events
DEQ jurisdiction: What are the treatment requirements for commercial and other large
systems, will Klamath County have requirements for their residents, how are
alternative systems approved, what are the Groundwater Management Area
requirements, why not adopt a Geographic Rule instead of a Local (County) Rule
Local Rule: What are the performance standards, what is the affected area, what is the
time period for upgrades, what are the standards for new development, what are
the variance and appeal options, are there time of sale requirements
Other: Are there financial reports of previous projects, work plans for previous projects,
the County should allow development on high groundwater lots, what is the effect
of La Pine incorporation
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 7 of 35
Ill. FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. Impacts to water quality from conventional onsite systems:
1. Aquifer-scale controls on the distribution of nitrate and ammonium in ground
water near La Pine, Oregon, USA. Hinkle, et al, Journal of Hydrology, (2007)
333, 486-503. (Available on the web at: http•/%% water.usps.gov/ roYor186n
FINDING: In order for the US Geological Survey to have a paper accepted for publication in the
Journal of Hydrology, the manuscript must pass review in two stages. First, the manuscript
must pass review by the editors. The editors have the option of accepting, rejecting or
forwarding the manuscript for further review. Those papers rejected at this stage are
insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or
are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria are passed
on to at least 2 experts for more thorough scientific review. The expert reviewers, or referees,
are matched to the paper according to their expertise. The Journal of Hydrology uses single
blind review, where the referees remain anonymous throughout the process. Referees are
asked, among other considerations, to evaluate whether the manuscript:
• Is original
• Is methodologically sound
• Follows appropriate ethical guidelines
• Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions
• Correctly references previous relevant work
In summary, the findings of this paper have been reviewed by experts of national and/or
international standing in the field of hydrology and these experts found the paper to be
methodologically sound and produced results supporting conclusions that:
1. groundwater in the region is slow moving
2. the source of nitrate in the groundwater is septic tank effluent,
3. the source of ammonium in the groundwater is natural,
4. denitrification can occur in the aquifer at depths where oxygen has been depleted,
5. the nitrate contamination that has entered the aquifer so far is concentrated in the
most shallow portions of the aquifer and is slowly moving to greater depths
6. the typical drinking water well produces water that is older than development in the
region and therefore is generally not currently contaminated.
2. Evaluation of Approaches for Management Nitrate Loading from On-Site
Wastewater Systems near La Pine, Oregon. Morgan et al, 2007, USGS Scientific
Investigations Report 2007-5237. (Available on the web at:
http✓/or. water. usgs.gov/proj/or180
FINDING: The US Geological Survey, in partnership with Oregon DEQ, developed the three-
dimensional groundwater and nutrient fate and transport model for the La Pine sub-basin of the
Upper Deschutes River watershed. This model built on the groundwater study and model
developed for the Deschutes River watershed by Gannett, et al (2001 and 2004).
The three-dimensional model simulates the aquifer and its response to recharge from
precipitation, discharge to streams and wells and certain geochemical loads.
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 8 of 35
Basic findings of the three-dimensional model are that:
1. using nitrogen reducing onsite systems can reduce the nitrogen load and protect the
aquifer;
2. using nitrogen reducing systems on new development alone won't adequately
protect groundwater quality;
3. upgrades occurring when systems fail or when houses are remodeled or replaced
(approximately 100/year) do not occur quickly enough to protect groundwater quality;
4. the aquifer's ability to remove nitrogen is incorporated into the model (via discharge
to rivers, pumping wells, or denitrification in the oxygen depleted portions of the
aquifer); and
5. time is of the essence in that as more development is allowed to occur without taking
action, more nitrogen enters the aquifer and more existing systems are created that
need upgrades.
Resource optimization is a technique used by the military to determine how many planes, tanks,
etc. can be constructed with available resources (for example, steel). When this technique is
applied to natural resources (like the groundwater in the La Pine sub-basin), the resulting tool
tells us how much nitrogen can be allocated to various locations with the region given the
different characteristics of each area.
The US Geological Survey (Morgan et al, 2007), developed the Nitrate Loading Management
Model by linking resource optimization methods to the three-dimensional simulation model.
This model provides a tool that can be used to evaluate alternative strategies for managing
nitrate loading to the shallow groundwater system. This model allows resource managers to
identify the desired outcome (for example, groundwater meets the Oregon groundwater quality
standard action level of 7 mg/L) and obtain, as a model output, the performance standards that
need to be met to achieve that desired outcome (for example, area X needs to meet a
performance standard of 58% to 78% reduction). Because this model can produce variable
performance standards by area, it can help keep the cost for upgrades to existing systems as
low as possible by avoiding a requirement that all systems install the highest level of treatment
available.
The findings of this study are summarized in US Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2007-3103
entitled, "Questions and Answers About the Effects of Septic Systems on Water Quality in the
La Pine Area, Oregon," (Williams et al, 2007).
Peer review processes for USGS Scientific Investigations Reports are comparable to the peer
review processes described above for the Journal of Hydrology paper. As a result, staff finds
that hydrogeologic expertise of both national and international caliber has reviewed the work
embodied in this report and determined that it is scientifically rigorous and defensible.
3. Ground Water Redox Zonation near La Pine, Oregon: Relation to River Position
within the Aquifer-Riparian Zone Continuum. Hinkle et al, 2007, USGS Scientific
Investigations Report 2007-5239. (Available on the web at.
http://or. water.usgs.gov/pro&r186n
FINDING: This study was initiated in order to study how nitrogen enriched groundwater can enter
nitrogen-limited surface water bodies in the upper Deschutes River watershed. Additions of
nitrogen to nitrogen-limited rivers can lead to increases in primary productivity (for example, algae
and aquatic plant growth) which then can reduce dissolved oxygen and change pH levels in the
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 9 of 35
river. Significant declines in dissolved oxygen have lead to fish and other aquatic life kills in other
similarly affected water bodies. This study found that oxic (and potentially nitrate-rich)
groundwater can enter rivers in south Deschutes County, which means that there are areas where
rivers are vulnerable to impacts from increased nitrogen loading if no corrective action is taken.
4. Drinking water well tests at time of property sale.
FINDING: Thirty-one percent (31%) of 8,756 samples collected from private drinking water
wells at the time of sale between September 1988 and November 2005 exceeded 1 mg/L nitrate
(exceeded background levels). The samples showing greater than background levels of nitrate
are shown in the table by concentration:
Number of '
Concentration of N03 samples
1 - 4.99 mg/L 2068
5.00 - 9.99 mg/L 540
>_10 mg/L 82
The samples equaling or exceeding 10 mg/L ranged from 10 to 72 mg/L.
This database, as received from the Oregon DEQ, contains multiple results reported for
individual properties because an individual property could have sold more than once during the
period between 1988 and 2005. In addition, the quality assurance/quality control of the sample
collection and analyses changed over time and could have changed from location to location.
There is no information available showing that sample collection and analysis protocols were
consistent over the record. While the dataset creates some concerns for the quality of data
presented therein, the dataset does show that, given the fact that onsite wastewater treatment
systems are the single largest source of nitrate in groundwater in the region, drinking water
wells can be and are impacted by onsite system effluent in the south Deschutes County region.
5. Drinking water well sampling in 2000.
FINDING: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality and Deschutes County Community
Development Department staff sampled a well network three times between June 2000 and
June 2001 as part of the La Pine National Demonstration Project. Data from these sampling
events showed 24% of the wells discharged water with nitrate concentrations greater than
background levels:
Number
N03 concentrations of wells Notes
<1.0 mg/L 128 Background N03 concentrations
1-6.9 mg/L 35 Showing human impacts
7.0-9.9 mg/L 5 Oregon Groundwater Management Area trigger
>_10 mg/L 0
Total 168
This dataset was collected in strict compliance with the Oregon DEQ's quality assurance/quality
control protocols and the laboratory analyses were conducted in compliance with the
Environmental Protection Agency's certification requirements for the DEQ lab, including specific
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 10 of 35
quality assurance and quality controls specifications. Therefore these data are considered high
quality.
6. Shallow monitoring well sampling
FINDING: The Oregon DEQ and Deschutes County installed and sampled a network of nearly
200 shallow monitoring wells between 2000 and 2004 as part of the La Pine National
Demonstration Project. The monitoring well locations were specified by a registered
hydrogeologist and the wells were installed by a licensed well driller in accordance with Oregon
Water Resources Department well construction standards.
The table below entitled "Network monitoring well data" shows the descriptive statistics of the
sample results from three years of sampling a network of 141 wells. These wells were located at
the periphery of the properties on which the field test system was located. These wells provided
information on groundwater flow direction, depth to water table, and ambient groundwater quality
conditions. The wells were screened at or near the water table in order to document conditions in
the shallow aquifer.
The total nitrogen, nitrate and chloride results show that on average, ambient conditions in the
shallow aquifer are already showing the effects of human sewage discharged to groundwater
because total nitrogen and chloride levels are greater than 1.0 mg/L. Chloride can be used as a
tracer for sewage plumes in the environment of south Deschutes County because human sewage
is the predominant source of this element.
The bacteria sample results (fecal coliform and E. coli) show that these bacteria are not present in
the aquifer.
Network monitoring well data
Nitrate-
Nitrite Dissolved Depth to Total
Mean of means As N TN Chloride Fecal Oxygen Water Phosphorus
141 Network Wells (mg/L) (m /L) (m /L) Coliform E coli (mg/L) Table (ft) (-91L)
Mean
3.7
4.0
12
N/A
N/A
5.1
13.1
0.2
Geometric Mean
0.7
1.3
6.5
N/A
N/A
3.3
12.0
N/A
Median
1.2
1.5
5.9
ND
ND
6.2
11.9
0.2
Standard Deviation
10.5
11
20
N/A
N/A
2.8
5.7
0.4
Minimum
0.005
0.1
0.5
ND
ND
0.1
4.6
ND
Maximum
99
99
139
41
41
8.3
29.9
3.8
Count
141
141
141
139
139
141
141
105
95% Confidence Level
1.7
1.8
3.3
N/A
N/A
0.5
0.9
0.08
99% Confidence Level
2.3
2.4
4.3
N/A
N/A
0.6
1.2
0.10
N/A = statistic not calculable
ND = nondetect
The table below shows data from three years of sampling 48 monitoring wells placed in drainfields
in the field test program. These wells provide information about the effect of the onsite system on
the shallow aquifer immediately below the drainfield. Data show that nitrate and chloride levels
are elevated in these wells, indicating the effects of the onsite system on the aquifer. There are
some bacteria results indicating that some contamination may be occurring; however, these
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 11 of 35
results were not repeated during subsequent sampling. Total phosphorus results indicate that the
soil removes most of the phosphorus from wastewater.
Nitrate-
Nitrite
Total
Dissolved
Depth to
Total
As N
Nitrogen
Chloride
Fecal
Oxygen
Water
Phosphorus
48 Draintield MW
(mg/L)
(mg1L)
(mg/L)
Coliform_
E. Coli
("mgiL)
Table (ft)
(mg/L)
Mean
9.0
9.2
17
33
47
5.3
12.6
0.18
Geometric Mean
2.4
3.6
12
N/A
N/A
3.7
11.6
0.16
Median
4.1
4.2
11 '
ND
ND
6.4
11.1
0.17
Standard Deviation
13
13
15
N/A
N/A
2.6
5.6
0.10
Minimum
0.003
0.1
0.7
ND
ND
0.1
4.9
0.04
Maximum
52
52
72
1502
2189
8.5
29.0
0.4
Count
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
37
95% Confidence Level
3.8
3.8
4.3
N/A
N/A
0.8
1.6
0.03
99% Confidence Level
5.0
5.0
5.8
N/A
N/A
1.0_
2.2
0.04
N/A = statistic not calculable
ND = nondetect
This dataset was collected in strict compliance with the Oregon DEQ's quality assurance/quality
control protocols and the laboratory analyses were conducted in compliance with the
Environmental Protection Agency's certification requirements for the DEQ lab, including quality
assurance and quality control specifications. Therefore these data are considered high quality.
B. Nitrate Standards
1. Safe Drinking Water Act standard
FINDING: The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has established the Maximum
Contaminant Level for nitrate as nitrogen (N) as 10 mg/L for municipal drinking water supplies.
This level is considered protective to prevent methemoglobinemia (blue baby syndrome) in
susceptible populations. As a point of comparison, the World Health Organization recommends
setting the drinking water standard at 45 mg/L nitrate. While these standards appear to be
different, the two concentrations are actually the same because 45 mg/L nitrate is equivalent to
10 mg/L nitrate as N. These two values (10 and 45) use different units to measure the amount
of nitrogen contained in a water sample.
The Maximum Contaminant Level does not apply to private drinking water wells but the EPA
encourages private well owners to test their wells annually to confirm that their drinking water
supply is safe.
2. Groundwater Quality Protection
FINDING: The Oregon DEQ establishes groundwater quality protection standards in.OAR 340-
040 (available at: http://www.deg.state.or.us/wq/onsite/ruies.htm). This rule sets the water
quality standard action level for nitrate as N in groundwater at 70% of the drinking water
standard, or 7 mg/L. The proposed rule is designed to maintain compliance with this standard
on average in south Deschutes County.
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 12 of 35
C. Nitrogen Reducing Systems
FINDING: The Oregon DEQ was awarded $5.5 million for the La Pine National Demonstration
Project. One of the main tasks of this project was to field test nitrogen reducing systems.
During the project, the DEQ partnered with Deschutes County to install and monitor 49 onsite
wastewater treatment systems. Nine of these systems were conventional systems that were
installed and monitored on the same schedule as the nitrogen reducing systems. The nitrogen
reducing systems included 14 different designs; each design was replicated in two or three
locations. Each onsite system was installed at a residential site and monitored monthly for a
year and every two months for the following 1.5 to 2 years.
The results from the field test were reported at national, regional and state meetings of onsite
wastewater treatment professionals. The field test demonstrated that nitrogen reducing
systems exist nationally or internationally that protect groundwater while eliminating the need for
the extensive infrastructure associated with centralized sewer systems. The La Pine National
Demonstration Project results indicate that nitrogen reducing systems currently available on the
market nationally range in performance between about 35% to 96% nitrogen reduction. Not all
of the systems performed adequately for nitrogen reduction and the systems that failed were
replaced. The chart on page 15 shows all of the systems participating in the project by their
performance for nitrogen reduction.
The Oregon DEQ used the results of this field test when the statewide onsite wastewater
treatment system rules were amended in 2005 to allow the use of nitrogen reducing at the
residential level under a construction-installation permit. This rule amendment allowed
Deschutes County to issue permits for nitrogen reducing systems rather than requiring that
homeowners obtain a Water Pollution Control Facility permit from the DEQ.
Since the Oregon DEQ amended OAR 340-071 in 2005, four companies have applied and been
approved for use of their product in Oregon. The Oregon DEQ listing process reviews system
performance for basic wastewater treatment capabilities (for example, biochemical oxygen
demand and total suspended solids reduction) but may not include a review for nitrogen
reduction. If nitrogen reduction is included in the review, the standard that systems must meet
is to discharge less than 30 mg/L total nitrogen. Deschutes County has reviewed data on the
approved systems and found that three of these companies produce nitrogen reducing systems
and the fourth does not. A fifth company with a product that is a nitrogen reducing add-on
component was approved for use in Oregon on February 12, 2007; however, this product has
limited availability because the distribution network has not been fully established in Oregon and
certification of installers and maintenance providers has not been completed. While additional
wastewater treatment systems have applied for listing in Oregon, until the DEQ completes
review of the current applications, staff does not know whether additional nitrogen reducing
systems will be available for use locally.
A non-proprietary system is also now available for installation under a construction-installation
permit from the County as a result of the 2005 DEQ rule amendment. Recirculating gravel
filters are available for use and data published by the National Small Flows Clearinghouse
indicates that these systems provide approximately 50% reduction in total nitrogen on a reliable
basis. Other research indicates the performance of these systems may achieve higher levels of
reduction. Data supporting this research is currently under review.
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 13 of 35
IV. POTENTIAL GROUNDWATER PROTECTION APPROACHES:
A. Sewer Systems
FINDING: The creation of new or the expansion of existing sewers is governed by state rule
(OAR 660-011-0060 available online at: http://www.oregon.,gov/LCD/adminrules.shtmi). This
rule defines any wastewater treatment system that serves two or more lots as a sewer system.
Two processes for creating or expanding sewers in rural areas could apply to the south
Deschutes County region and include OAR 660-011-0060(4), when the DEQ determines that a
public health hazard exists and that there is no practicable alternative to sewer (the problem
cannot be solved using onsite systems), and OAR 660-011-0060(9), when there is an imminent
health hazard for which there is no practicable alternative to sewer.
The County retained KCM, Inc. (now KCM-TetraTech, Inc.) to study the feasibility of extending
or creating new sewers in the region. The estimates developed in 1997 assumed that sewer
treatment plant sites could be acquired for $3,000 per acre and that the cost of financing the
treatment works and transmission system would be 3% per year over 20 years. The consultant
estimated in 1997 that each lot would be charged between $19,000 and $28,000 for a sewer
system hook-up.
Since 1997, land, material, and energy costs have increased significantly and would add to the
per lot estimated cost. Adjusting the 1997 costs using historic inflation rates between 1998 and
2008, the per household cost for sewer would be between $24,000 and $33,000. In
comparison, the City of Bend currently charges about $28,000 to hook up to the existing sewer
system plus about $22 per month for service charge. The City of Tualatin charges $40,000 to
hook up to sewer. Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 charges about $9,500 to hook up to the
sewer system and $42 per month for service. This low charge reflects the low price for the
sewer treatment plant site (about $500 per acre) and other financial assistance.
The creation or extension of sewer systems requires a large initial capital investment to
construct or upgrade the treatment site and install transmission facilities. Construction grants
are no longer available for creating or extending sewer systems. Construction loan programs
are in place with varying fund amounts available with repayment periods ranging from 5 to 20
years. Using the $19,000-$28,000 estimate above, the annual cost to a sewer system user for
a loan of this amount at 3% would be between $1,275 and $1,880 per household per year.
The amount of time required to establish extensions to existing sewers can be quite long. The
expansion of the existing Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 sewer took seven years from the
time the decision was made to proceed until the first new house was hooked to the system.
According to Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development records, no new
sewers in rural areas have been constructed in Oregon (White, personal communication).
B. Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems
FINDING: In response to the KCM study referenced above, public participation during the
Regional Problem Solving Project identified the creation or extension of sewers into the rural
areas as the least desired solution because of the cost. At that time, the public directed the
County to pursue the use of innovative kinds of onsite wastewater treatment systems to protect
groundwater quality. In response to this direction from the public, the Oregon DEQ sought and
obtained $5.5 million from the US Environmental Protection Agency to identify onsite
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 14 of 35
wastewater treatment systems that would solve the groundwater pollution problem.
Performance testing of onsite wastewater treatment systems shows they can be as effective as
sewer systems for protecting water quality while maintaining natural groundwater recharge
patterns.
The La Pine National Demonstration Project found that there are several commercially available
systems that will reduce nitrogen at levels greater than achievable using conventional onsite
systems like standard, pressure or sand filter systems. The figure below shows how the
systems participating in the La Pine Project can be ranked by nitrogen reduction. Of the
systems participating in the project, the AX-20, Puraflo, and NITREX systems have applied for
and been listed in Oregon for use under County-issued construction-installation permits. The
County has listed the AX-20 as a nitrogen reducing system and has received data on the
NITREX to be added to the list. The County has not yet received data on the Puraflo system's
nitrogen reducing capability.
.
100,0
Mean TN
90.fl
Median TN
- -ATT Treatrnent Std 2
80.9. Project Perfo iar" Std
- -
mo
60.9 ?
saa .
.W.o
30.0
. _ . ~,m m...
20,9 .
taA _ ~I, ,L__.
0,0 UE 1_", 1~
The onsite wastewater treatment systems currently available that reduce nitrogen range
between about $9,000 (standard drainfield) and $16,000 (bottomless sand filter) for upgrades to
existing systems depending on the condition of the existing system. Increased costs can be
incurred during upgrades if the existing septic tank is damaged or otherwise unsound or if the
drainfield is failing or inappropriately located. Maintenance costs range between $25 and $35
per month depending on the system chosen by the property owner. Operation costs will vary
depending on the type of system chosen and are largely dependent on electricity demand. In
comparison, a new standard system currently costs between $3,500 and $4,500 and a new
sand filter costs between $10,000 and $12,000. The added cost for the nitrogen reducing
system is between $4,500 and $5,500 for a site using a standard drainfield and between $4,000
and $6,000 for a site using a bottomless sand filter.
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 15 of 35
Some advantages of using onsite system upgrades are that groundwater protection can begin
immediately as compared to typical sewer hookup strategies of waiting until the treatment plant
or collection system is complete before water quality protection becomes effective. The figure
below shows the increasing nitrogen load to groundwater historically and into the future as the
area is built out under different scenarios. The capacity to reduce nitrate loading immediately
can be an important consideration because every new system installed in south Deschutes
County that does not reduce nitrogen increases pollutant loading while simultaneously
increasing the demand for financial assistance.
rs1~
9 rr1~
o
1+rst~€iCmml
a`t-, 70 f
' 4 U n,,,. 1 n~ ,
6 ulmp r, bit's
t L6 198 1+Y'! 2 W 260 i'0317 21W 2U 2140
YL`r A
Historical nitrate loading from onsite wastewater systems and eight nitrate loading scenarios
tested with the study-area model. (Morgan et al, 2007)
C. Do Nothing
FINDING: On January 4, 2008, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) issued
a letter determining that a public health hazard is being created in the region by continued use
of conventional onsite wastewater treatment systems. The DEQ states that potential solutions
to this health hazard may include a variety of approaches ranging from onsite wastewater
treatment systems to expanded or new sewer systems. In comments to the Board of County
Commissioners (Board) on January 30, 2008, the DEQ also indicated that doing nothing is not
an appropriate course of action in light of the developing public health hazard. The proposed
rule is an opportunity for the Board to decide on whether it is appropriate to undertake protective
action at the local level.
Environmental impacts of a "Do Nothing" scenario include large areas of the region's
groundwater contaminated with nitrate concentrations greater than 10 mg/L nitrate as N
(equivalent to 45 mg/L nitrate) and adverse impacts to surface water bodies in the region.
Surface water impacts include increased algae growth, fluctuations in dissolved oxygen levels,
and die-offs of aquatic organisms requiring cold, highly oxygenated water. (Morgan et, 2007;
Hinkle et al, 2007)
Financial impacts of a "Do Nothing" scenario are difficult to determine because, while the costs
of sewers or onsite system upgrades are avoided, there are other market impacts resulting from
declining property values because of groundwater quality degradation, impacts to the sport
fishing or recreational boating industry, or the possible imposition of a moratorium on building in
the region.
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 16 of 35
V. PROPOSED LOCAL RULE:
FINDING: The proposed amendment would require the use of nitrogen reducing systems in
south Deschutes County for systems permitted by Deschutes County Community Development
Department. While sewer may be a viable option in some circumstances, the county role is
largely that of reviewer for the land use process for creating or extending sewers in rural areas
under Goal 11 (OAR 660-011-0060, Sewer Service to Rural Lands). The county typically does
not have permit authority over sewer systems because the county can issue permits only for
wastewater treatment systems that discharge less than 2,500 gallons per day of residential
strength wastewater.
Staff finds that there may be a variety of approaches that can be used to protect groundwater
quality in south Deschutes County and that one of those approaches is to use nitrogen reducing
onsite systems that are appropriately located and installed. Another approach that may be
feasible is to use community or regional sewer systems or some other approach that provides
the same level of protection. All of these methods are potential actions and therefore need to
be reviewed and permitted by the appropriate authorities to ensure that groundwater protection
is achieved. With this proposed amendment to Deschutes County Code, the County proposes
to ensure that groundwater protection efforts undertaken at the local level meet the overall
groundwater protection goals.
A. Siting criteria for New Development.
The proposed Local Rule will allow onsite wastewater treatment systems serving
New Development to be sited on lots that are shown to provide 24 inches of natural
vertical separation between the bottom of the trench and the highest level reached
by groundwater.
FINDING: The County, in keeping with direction received during the public process conducted
during the Regional Problem Solving Project, proposes to codify its current practice of allowing
installation of onsite wastewater treatment systems when there is at least 24 inches vertical
separation. Based on this pattern of practice, lots or parcels with less than 24 inches of
separation will not be approved for onsite systems. The County further proposes to deny lots or
parcels that have been filled or dewatered for reasons described below.
Research conducted during the La Pine National Demonstration Project showed that one foot of
soil below the bottom of the trench provided significant protection for the groundwater from
contamination by pathogenic organisms. The table below shows data from samples taken from
the unsaturated zone one foot below the trench in a pressure distribution system. The geometric
mean and median values represent a 99.9% reduction in bacteria counts from the bacteria levels
discharged from the septic tank. The additional foot of soil (for a total of 24 inches) provides
added reduction, particularly for those events when higher bacterial counts are seen, when
groundwater mounding occurs and/or during times of high water use in the house (more
wastewater loaded to the drainfield or sand filter). This data shows how the soil performs an
important treatment function by protecting groundwater from bacterial contamination. These
findings are also corroborated by the findings of the USGS report, "Organic Wastewater
Compounds, Pharmaceuticals, and Coliphage in Ground Water Receiving Discharge from Onsite
Wastewater Treatment Systems near La Pine, Oregon: Occurrence and Implications for
Transport." (Hinkle et al, 2005; available online at: htt ubs.us s. ov/sir/2005/5055/index.html)
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 17 of 35
Bacteria samples taken one foot below a pressure distribution drainfield
Fecal Coliform
E. coli
Fecal Coliform
E. coli
One foot below trench
Septic tank effluent
Geometric mean
23
23
159,000
140,000
Median
10
10
102,000
100,000
Minimum
ND
ND
1,000
1,000
Maximum
100,000*
81,000"
5,800,000
4,400,000
Count
21
21
21
21
The maximum counts reported here were not replicated with subsequent sampling.
Further, preliminary research conducted on the performance of soil in reducing emerging
contaminants like pharmaceuticals, personal care products and household contaminants indicates
that the natural soil environment provides important treatment for many of these contaminants.
(Tchobanoglous & Leverenz, personal communication).
Groundwater interceptors are a method used to lower, or dewater, the groundwater level within a
specific area. These work by collecting groundwater and diverting it to the nearest surface water
drainage. While these systems may work physically, they tend to have adverse impacts on
surface water quality by diverting nutrient rich groundwater directly to rivers. The rivers in the
Deschutes River watershed are nitrogen limited. This means that diverting nitrate-rich
groundwater to surface water bodies can increase algae and aquatic plant growth, which in turn
affects the levels of dissolved oxygen available for other aquatic organisms, including fish.
Finally, developing high groundwater table lots will add nitrogen loading that can increase the
nitrogen reduction requirements for existing and other future development in the area. Increased
nitrogen reduction standards could translate into higher treatment costs for property owners based
on a preliminary evaluation using the Nitrate Loading Management Model.
B. Future Development on lots or parcels with high groundwater levels
FINDING: The County, funded by a grant from Oregon DLCD, will begin a public involvement
process to determine whether or how development should be allowed on properties with less
than 24 inches of separation from ground surface to the highest level reached by groundwater.
The County, in a work plan approved by Oregon DLCD, began this process during Fiscal Year
07-08. The process will bring together regional stakeholders, including natural resource
managers (Oregon DEQ, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Oregon Department of State
Lands, etc.) and property owners, to investigate the cumulative impacts of increasing
development in areas with high groundwater levels. Possible outcomes of this work program
could, for example, be increased performance standards for existing systems, increased
protection for wetland and riparian resources and/or maintain the existing pattern of practice.
Any changes to Deschutes County Code would require a legislative process to solicit pubic
comment and feedback on the proposal.
Staff proposes to reference this work program in the code language in the form of a sunset
clause for siting critieria. Standards contained in this portion of the rule would no longer be
enforceable as Deschutes County Code three years from the effective date of rule adoption
unless amended as a result of the high groundwater work program.
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 18 of 35
C. Limit the use of easements.
FINDING: The County proposes to eliminate the use of easements to establish a location for a
portion or all of the onsite wastewater treatment system on a lot or parcel separate from the lot or
parcel where the source of wastewater is located. The County has witnessed the dissolution of
easements to the detriment of the lot where the wastewater is generated. In addition, lots or
parcels that propose to use easements typically cannot maintain 24 inches of separation from the
bottom of the trench to groundwater. Developing these lots can impact wetlands and riparian
resources and is directly counter to the direction received from the public process of the Regional
Problem Solving Project. Further, developing high groundwater lots will add nitrogen loading that
could have the effect of increasing the nitrogen reduction requirements of, and potentially the cost
to, existing development in the area based on a preliminary evaluation using the Nitrate Loading
Management Model.
D. Groundwater level determinations.
FINDING: The County, at DEQ's suggestion, is proposing to codify existing practices used to
determine groundwater levels. This procedure is only used for those sites where soil
characteristics make it difficult to determine the highest level that groundwater reaches. This
procedure only applies to vacant sites seeking approval for development.
E. Performance standards.
FINDING: The US Geological Survey and Deschutes County, in a grant from the National
Decentralized Water Resources Capacity Development Project, developed the Nitrate Loading
Management Model. The development of this model is documented in Morgan et al, 2005 and
Morgan et al, 2007 (available on the web at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2007/5237/).
Performance standards are established by setting constraints for the region, such as:
1. Future Development installs the maximum nitrogen reducing system available (as
defined in the proposed code). This approach reduces the level of nitrogen reduction
required for existing systems in many management areas.
2. Existing Development upgrades to achieve a minimum 35% reduction
3. Shallow groundwater meets the 7 mg/L groundwater quality protection standard on
average.
Additional constraints may be set for the region using this model, including a constraint on the
amount of nitrogen reaching the rivers. No river protection constraints are proposed because it
appears that significant protection for the rivers is provided by reducing nitrogen discharges
from onsite systems. Future river protection projects may be considered to improve riparian
conditions to reduce nitrogen before it reaches the stream channel. If future resource
evaluation work indicates the need for increased performance standards for existing onsite
wastewater treatment systems, staff expects that it would not be necessary to further upgrade
the systems that have already been changed to nitrogen reducing systems in accordance with
the code in effect at the time.
F. Compliance date: Fourteen years from the effective date of the proposed rule.
FINDING: The groundwater studies and predictive models show that groundwater protection
actions should be implemented as soon as possible. The chart inserted below is taken from the
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 19 of 35
USGS Fact Sheet (Williams et al, 2007) and shows that the cumulative nitrate load already
discharged to the aquifer from existing development significantly exceeds the load needed to
exceed the Oregon groundwater quality action level and the federal safe drinking water
standard. In spite of the science that indicates a need for immediate action, staff has proposed
a fourteen year upgrade schedule to coordinate with projected build-out of south Deschutes
County, the sale of land in and platting of the Newberry Neighborhood, and the long term
average rate of home sales in the region. Fourteen years from 2008 should allow enough time
for the region to build out based on projections for south Deschutes County. Fourteen years
also allows significant financial assistance to be generated in the form of revenue from land
sales in the Neighborhood Planning Area in La Pine or some form of bonding. Finally,
practically speaking, the projected inspection workload for the County's Environmental Health
Division would average 400 to 500 systems per year.
ewe 324
L9 d
o Fly
w to
rs
a e4
d ~ ~f
za
rW t4
v>
Lnadinrtl T n➢ plannad hamos usn eianvar~anxl septic sla.'amx
i ESi natq(€3AR5lC3 ding
i- ---emu-- ~ SastainaHnloadis~.twmaxi;num
niiralp CnnCe+aYaiiuit ai
~ ~ 1Qpazi,+permillan
Sustainable 3aa ding-tur maximum
1 trtrate-ieerlvatrar,
7partxpenilGan
r3 3 Fe 'i5 25
MAXIMUM ACCEPTABLE GROUNDWATER NITRATE CONCENTRATION.
IN PARTS PER HI WON
The relation between maximum acceptable nitrate concentration in groundwater and the
sustainable nitrate loading capacity of the aquifer determined by the study-area model.
(Williams et al, 2007)
G. Listing nitrogen reducing systems.
FINDING: The Oregon DEQ must first approve any system before the County may issue a
construction-installation permit (OAR 340-071-0135 and -0345). During the listing process, the
DEQ reviews performance data and the National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) certification. The
only explicit nitrogen standard contained in Oregon DEQ rule is a listing criteria for an
Alternative Treatment Technology under Treatment Standard 2 (30 mg/L total nitrogen).
Because groundwater protection goals in south Deschutes County require nitrogen reduction
levels greater than that achieved by a system discharging 30 mg/L total nitrogen in the effluent,
the Oregon DEQ and Deschutes County agree that the County should require additional
information from system manufacturers or designers in order to determine which listed
Alternative Treatment Technologies can support the groundwater quality goals. And, because
the NSF certification process commonly uses influent wastewater that is lower strength (is more
dilute) than typical single-family residential wastewater, the Oregon DEQ and the County agree
that a system's nitrogen reduction capabilities should be defined by field tests of the treatment
system.
H. Other approaches to groundwater protection.
FINDING: The proposed rule is focused on performance standards for onsite systems within
the jurisdiction of Deschutes County and therefore does not limit the creation or expansion of
sewer systems. The creation or expansion of sewers is governed by rules contained in OAR
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 20 of 35
660-011-0060, Sewer Service to Rural Lands. The proposed code language has been modified
to acknowledge this existing process and ensure that the proposed rule does not inadvertently
eliminate sewers as an option.
Other approaches may also become available in the future that cannot be predicted at this time.
The proposed code language has been modified to ensure that these approaches are not
eliminated inadvertently as options and to create a mechanism by which these approaches can
be incorporated into the program to protect groundwater quality.
Variances and Appeals.
FINDING: The County received several comments on the Local Rule concepts that concerned
the opportunity to apply for variances or appeals of decisions make under the proposed rule.
The draft rule language includes variances in the case of economic or personal hardship or
where sewer systems are being established.
J. Fees.
FINDING: The Community Development Department is currently entirely fee supported. Other
means of offsetting the cost for permit fees have not been identified or proposed. Currently
retrofits of existing systems would be conducted under a repair permit. Repair permits are
currently $380 plus a $60 DEQ surcharge. The DEQ increased the surcharge from $40
effective July 1, 2008.
K. Violations.
FINDING: The County currently enforces the Deschutes County Code. The proposed rule
would be enforced in the same manner as any other code requirement and the existing County
code enforcement policies are expected to continue to apply for the foreseeable future.
Currently the county works with violators to achieve compliance in advance of going to court. In
the long run, the level of enforcement undertaken will be a decision for Board of County
Commissioners in 14 years. However, the Board will have a responsibility to honor the financial
commitment made by those who have complied, by not waiving the requirements of those who
have not.
VI. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE:
A. Existing Financial Assistance Programs
FINDING: There are existing mechanisms by which property owners can gain access to funds
available for home improvements, including onsite system repairs or upgrades. The County
proposes to coordinate with existing programs to the greatest extent possible.
1. Pollution Reduction Credit Rebates
FINDING: Developers in the Neighborhood Planning Area have the option of generating
Pollution Reduction Credits or paying into the County's Partnership a fee in lieu of credits. The
fee paid in lieu of generating Pollution Reduction Credits is $7,500 per credit. Currently, Elk
Horn Land Development is offering a rebate to homeowners upgrading to nitrogen reducing
systems in exchange for the Pollution Reduction Credit created by the upgrade.
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 21 of 35
2. USDA Rural Development Program
FINDING: The USDA offers loans and grants to low income and elderly residents for home
improvements. Onsite wastewater treatment system replacements or upgrades qualify for these
funds.
3. Neighborlmpact
FINDING: Neighborlmpact currently offers loans to residents at or below 80% of the county
median income bracket for home improvements. Homeowners must repay the loan once the
house is rented, sold or refinanced. As loans are repaid, proceeds are returned to the program
to provide loans for future homeowners. Projects include but are not limited to wastewater
treatment systems, roofs, heating systems, handicap accessibility, and exterior paint.
Neighborlmpact is partnering with Deschutes County during the current round of applications for
Community Development Block Grants with the goal of increasing the availability of funds for
Deschutes County residents.
B. Planned Financial Assistance Programs
FINDING: The Deschutes County Board of Commissioners has established an advisory
committee to produce recommendations on how financial resources should be allocated to
property owners faced with implementing groundwater protection measures. The following
sections provide an outline of the type of financial programs that could help homeowners offset
the cost of groundwater protection measures.
1. Low interest loans
FINDING: Funds generated by payment of fees for credits or from the sale of land in the
Newberry Neighborhood will be used to assist with groundwater protection measures. The
balance between using this fund for loans versus grants may be the subject of a
recommendation from the Financial Assistance Advisory Committee.
Funds earmarked for homeowner assistance from the La Pine National Demonstration Project
must be used for loans, which may include deferred payment loans, as specified by the grant
agreement.
2. Partnership Fund
FINDING: Developers in the Neighborhood Planning Area have the option of generating
Pollution Reduction Credits or paying into the County's Partnership a fee in lieu of credits. The
fee paid in lieu of generating Pollution Reduction Credits is $7,500 per credit. Any funds paid
into this fund are dedicated to assisting homeowners upgrading their onsite systems to nitrogen
reducing systems. The administration of this program will most likely be through a third party.
Funds may be disbursed either as conventional loans, payment deferred loans (liens), and/or
grants. A recommendation for how funds are disbursed may come from the Financial
Assistance Advisory Committee.
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 22 of 35
3. State Clean Water Revolving Loan Funds
FINDING: Oregon DEQ administers the program for the state revolving loan fund. Loans to
communities are available for loan periods of between 5 and 20 years at about 2% interest plus
an annual fee of 0.5% of the amount owed. This is a potential source of funds to help
homeowners upgrade their systems or for neighborhoods to extend or create sewers (more
information is available online at: http://www.de-q.state.or.us/wq/loans/loans.htm). Careful
consideration of the impacts of the cost of administering such funds on the interest rate and fees
is important. Staff proposes reviewing the potential for using this source of funds if the
proposed rule is adopted and after implementation of the County generated financial programs.
C. Source of Funds
FINDING: The County has existing assets of about $350,000 in funds for a low interest loan
program, the revenue from the Partnership Fund, and revenue from the sale of county-owned
land in the Newberry Neighborhood in La Pine. Estimates of the land value are based on 300
acres sold at $100,000 per acre for a total of $30 million. The funds can be made available over
time through the sale of property and the use of the Pollution Reduction Credit Program through
and/or through County bond sales or the loaned use of County interdepartmental fund transfers.
The estimated total cost of retrofits in south Deschutes County ranges between $43 million and
$65 million. Therefore, considerable financial assistance can be generated by using existing
County assets. Using County assets in addition to other programs like the state revolving loan
fund and partnering with organizations like USDA Rural Development and Neighborlmpact
could cover the majority of the projected need for financial assistance.
VII. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Adoption of the proposed Local Rule in coordination with the
development of additional financial assistance programs that target pollution reduction
actions.
BJR:slr
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 23 of 35
VIII. REFERENCES:
Bartholomew N, Gupta SC, Strock JS, 2005. Surface Drainage impacts on Tile Drain
Water Quality. Proceedings of the ASA-CSSA-SSSA International Annual Meetings,
November 6-10, 2005.
Burks, BD and Minnis, MM, 1994. Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems. Hogarth
House, Ltd., Madison, Wl.
Canter, LW and RC Knox, 1985. Septic Tank System Effects on Ground Water Quality.
Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea, Michigan.
Crites, R and Tchobanoglous, G, 1998. Small and Decentralized Wastweater
Management Systems. WCB/McGraw-Hill
Croen LA, Todoroff K, Shaw GM, 2001. Maternal exposure to nitrate from drinking water
and diet and risk for neural tube defects. American Journal of Epidemiology,
153(4):325-31.
De Roos AJ, Ward MH, Lynch CF, Cantor KP, 2003. Nitrate in public water supplies and
the risk of colon and rectum cancers. Epidemiology, 14(6):640-9.
Dorsch MM, Scragg RK, McMichael AJ, Baghurst PA, and Dyer KF. Congenital
malformations and maternal drinking water supply in rural South Australia: a case-
control study. Am. J. Epidemiol. 119: 473-486.
Ebeling J, Tsukuda S, Hankins J, Solomon C. Performance Evaluation of a Recirculating
Sand Filter and Peat Filter in West Virginia. Small Flows Quarterly 2003 4-1: 27-37.
Gannett, MW, and Lite, KE, 2004. Simulation of regional ground-water flow in the Upper
Deschutes Basin, Oregon. US Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations
Report 03-4195, 84p.
Gannett, MW, Lite, KE, Jr., Morgan DS, and Collins, CA, 2001. Ground-water hydrology
of the upper Deschutes Basin, Oregon. US Geological Survey Water Resources
Investigations Report 00-4162, 77p.
Gulis G, Czompolyova M, Cerhan JR, 2002. An ecologic study of nitrate in municipal
drinking water and cancer incidence in Trnava District, Slovakia. Environmental
Research, 88(3):182-7.
Hinkle SR, Weick RJ, Johnson JM, Cahill JD, Smith SG, Rich BJ, 2005. Organic
Wastewater Compounds, Pharmaceuticals, and Coliphage in Ground Water Receiving
Discharge from Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems near La Pine, Oregon:
Occurrence and Implications for Transport. US Geological Survey Scientific
Investigations Report 05-5055, 98 p.
Hinkle SR, Bohlke, JK, Duff, JH, Morgan DS, Weick RJ, 2007. Aquifer-scale controls on
the distribution of nitrate and ammonium in ground water near La Pine, Oregon, USA.
Journal of Hydrology, 333, 486-503.
Hinkle, S.R., Morgan, D.S., Orzol, LL, and Polette, DJ. Ground water redox zonation
near La Pine, Oregon - Relation to River Position within the Aquifer-Riparian Zone
Continuum. US Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5239, 30 p.
KCM, Inc. (now KCM/TetraTech, Inc.), 1997. Deschutes County: South County
Regional Cost/Benefit Analysis Regional Problem Solving Project. Final Report.
Consultant Report.
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 24 of 35
Land Improvement Contractors of Ontario, 1999. Factsheet No. 3: Drain Tile Water
Quality. hftp://www.drainage.o[g/factsheets/fs3.htm, downloaded January 23, 2006.
La Pine National Decentralized Wastewater Treatment Demonstration Project. Draft
Final Report, in review.
Mitchell JK, Walker SE, Hirschi MC, Mclsaac GF, 1996. Nitrate losses under various
nitrogen management systems. Proceedings of the 32"d Annual conference of the
American Water Resources Association, September 22-26, 1996.
Morgan, D. S. and R. Everett. 2005. Simulation-Optimization Methods for Management
of Nitrate Loading to Groundwater From Decentralized Wastewater Treatment Systems.
Project No. WU-HT-03-37. Prepared for the National Decentralized Water Resources
Capacity Development Project, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, by US Geological
Survey, Oregon Water Science Center, Portland, OR.
Morgan, DS, Hinkle, SR, and Weick, RJ, 2007. Evaluation of approaches for managing
nitrate loading from on-site wastewater systems near La Pine, Oregon. US Geological
Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5237, 66 p.
Nugent M, Kamrin M, Wolfson L, D'Itri FM. Nitrate - A Drinking Water Concern.
Michigan State University, 1989.
Ohio State University Extension, downloaded 2006. Agricultural Drainage: Bulletin 871-
98. http://ohioline.osu.edu/b871/b871 22.html, downloaded April 4, 2006.
Proceedings:
NOWRA Annual Conference 2000
NOWRA Annual Conference 2001
NOWRA Annual Conference 2002
NOWRA Annual Conference 2003
NEHA Annual Conference 2004
NOWRA Annual Conference 2004
NOWRA Annual Conference 2006
Tchobanoglous, G, and Leverenz, H., UC Davis, personal communication.
US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 2002. Onsite Wastewater Treatment
Systems Manual. EPA/625/R-00/008.
US Environmental Protection Agency, 2006. Consumer Factsheet on:
NITRATES/NITRITES.
http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/contaminants/dw contamfs/nitrates html, downloaded
March, 23, 2006.
Virtanen, SM, Jaakkola L, Rasanen I, Ylonen K. Aro A, Lounamaa R, Akerblo HK,
Tuomilehto J, 1994. Nitrate and nitrite intake and the risk for type 1 diabetes in Finnish
children. Childhood diabetes in Finland Study Group. Diabetes Medicine, 1994, 11(7):
656-62.
Weyer, PJ, Cerhan JR, Kross BC, Hallberg GR, Kantamneni J, Breuer G, Jones MP,
Zheng W, Lynch CF. Municipal Drinking Water Nitrate Level and Cancer Risk in Older
Women: The Iowa Women's Health Study. Epidemiology, 2001; 11: 327-338.
White, D., Department of Land Conservation and Development, personal
communication.
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 25 of 35
Williams, JS, Morgan, DS, and Hinkle, SR. Questions and Answers About the Effects of
Septic Systems on Waste Quality in the La Pine Area, Oregon. US Geological Survey
Fact Sheet 2007-3103, 6 p.
World Health Organization, 2003. Nitrate and nitrite in Drinking-water. Background
document for development of WHO Guidelines for Dinking-wafer Quality.
WHO/S D E/WS H/04.03/56
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 26 of 35
Appendix A: Updated June 27, 2008
Local Rule Communication Plan and Public Outreach Summary
Deschutes County Community Development Department
117 NW Lafayette Ave., Bend, OR 97701
PH: (541) 388-6575, FAX: (541) 385-1764
Web: www.deschutes.org/cdd/qpp/
~r
tt1~ / K V~
The goal of the Local Rule is to protect the sole source of drinking water for the residents of south
Deschutes County using the least cost option and creating financial assistance programs.
Web site
➢ www.deschutes.org/cdd/qpp. The documents listed below are available under "Project News."
Articles and reports
This list reflects articles published in print media. Television and radio spots are not included.
➢ Bend Bulletin 05-19-08
➢ Bend Bulletin 05-15-08
➢ Bend Bulletin 05-05-08
➢ Bend Bulletin 04-24-08
➢ Questions from the March 19, 2008 Hearing
➢ Bend Bulletin 04-03-08
➢ Bend Bulletin 04-03-08 Map
➢ Newberry Eagle April 2008
➢ Bend Bulletin 03-28-08
➢ Bend Bulletin 03-23-08
➢ Bend Bulletin 03-20-08 B
➢ Bend Bulletin 03-20-08 A
➢ Bend Bulletin 03-17-08
➢ Notice of Public Hearing 02-15-08
➢ Bend Bulletin 02-06-08
➢ Bend Bulletin 01-31-08
➢ Oregon DLCD Response, 01-30-08
➢ Questions from the Board to Oregon DEQ & DLCD, 01-30-08
➢ Bend Bulletin Clarification 12-05-07
➢ Bend Bulletin 11-06-07
➢ Bend Bulletin 11-04-07
➢ USGS Fact Sheet, Questions and answers about the effects of septic systems on water quality in
the La Pine area, Oregon
➢ USGS Report, Evaluation of approaches for managing nitrate loading from on-site wastewater
systems near La Pine, Oregon
➢ USGS Report, Ground Water Redox Zonation near La Pine Oregon: Relation to River Position
within the Aquifer-Riparian Zone Continuum
➢ Bend Bulletin 10-29-07
➢ Press Release 10-08-07
➢ Bend Bulletin 10-07-07
➢ Bend Bulletin 09-27-09
➢ Bend Bulletin 07-24-07
➢ Newberry Eagle Article, April 2007
➢ EH information, Newberry Eagle April 2007
➢ Bend Bulletin Article, March 30, 2007
➢ The Source Article, March 29, 2007
➢ Bend Bulletin Article, March 29, 2007
Bend Bulletin Article, March 28, 2007
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 27 of 35
➢
➢
➢
➢
➢
➢
➢
➢
➢
➢
Bend Bulletin Article, March 21, 2007
Bend Bulletin Article, March 19, 2007
Bend Bulletin Article, March 7, 2007
Bend Bulletin article, March 1, 2007
Bend Bulletin Article, February 22, 2007
Newberry Eagle article, February 2007
Bend Bulletin Article, February 1, 2007
Bend Bulletin Article, January 17, 2007
Citizen Update Newsletter, January 2007
Newberry Eagle articles, January 2007
Journal of Hydrology paper
o Supplement 1
o Supplement 2
o Supplement 3
o Supplement 4
Groundwater Science Open House Notice December 2006
Bend Bulletin article, December 21, 2006
Bend Bulletin article, December 20, 2006
Newberry Eagle article, December 2006
Bend Bulletin Article, December 1, 2006
Bend Bulletin Article, November 2006
Newberry Eagle article, November 2006
Newberry Eagle article, October 2006
Newberry Eagle article, September 2006
Newberry Eagle article, May 2006
Deschutes County Citizen Update, May 2006
Bend Bulletin article, May 2006
Bend Bulletin article, April 2006
Bend Bulletin article, February 2006
Notices (PDF files)
➢
➢
➢
➢
➢
Press releases issued prior to each public meeting
Notices of meetings posted at area stores, libraries, La Pine Senior Center, post office, etc.
Notice of Public Hearing, July 7, 2008
o Ordinance 2008-012
o Deschutes County Code Chapter 13.14
o Resolution 2008-021
o Exhibit A to Resolution 2008-021
Notice of Public Hearing - issued February 15, 2008
o Summary of Changes, 03-19-08
o Revised DCC 13.14, 2-15-2008 (Deletions are identified by strike-through and additions
are identified by underline.)
o DRAFT Ordinance 2008-012, 2-15-2008
o Revised Staff Report, 2-19-08 (Deletions are identified by strike-through and additions
are identified by underline.)
o DRAFT Resolution 2008-021, 2-15-2008
o Exhibit A to Resolution 2008-021, Map of Performance Standards for Existing Onsite
Systems with explanatory statement
Notice of Public Hearing on Proposed Local Rule
o Ordinance 2007-011
o Draft Local Rule
o Staff Report
o Resolution 2007-023
o Exhibit A to Resolution 2007-023
Office Hours Scheduled in January 2007
Notice of Planning Commission meeting, November 30, 2006
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 28 of 35
➢ Notice of Local Rule -Tax Bill Insert, October 2006
➢ Notice of Groundwater Protection Project (distribution began March 2006)
➢ Groundwater Protection Project Update, September 2006
Brochures, Handouts & Posters (PDF files)
➢ Application form - south county advisory committee - direct mailed to owners of property in south
Deschutes County, 10/09/07
➢ Proposed Local Rule documents
➢ Deschutes County memo on nitrate concerns
➢ Oregon Department of Human Services - Technical Bulletin on Nitrates
➢ Nitrogen Reducing Onsite Systems Poster
➢ Effects of onsite systems on groundwater poster
➢ Frequently Asked Questions
➢ Alternatives Analysis
➢ Retrofit Cost Scenarios, Winter 2007
➢ Proposed Local Rule Concepts
➢ But my water was just tested! November 2006
➢ Pollution Reduction Credit Program Brochure, Fall 2006
➢ Project Overview Brochure, Spring 2006
➢ South County Groundwater Protection History, Spring 2006
➢ Why Not Sewer? Brochure, Spring 2006
Other Outreach/Participation events:
➢ Installer meetings - typically held by Deschutes County Environmental Health staff
o August 22, 2006
o October 17, 2006
➢ Realtor meetings
o Regular weekly meetings with COAR representatives - typically held by Deschutes
County Community Development Director and Planning Director
o September 6, 2006 - conducted by County EH staff and the CDD Director
o November 27, 2006 (requested by realty office) - presentation provided by EH staff
o December 9, 2006 (requested by two realty offices) - two presentations provided by EH
staff
➢ Public meetings and events
o May 13, 2003, Presentation of results from the 3-D model, groundwater study and
nitrogen reducing system field test to the Board of County Commissioners in La Pine.
o May 11, 2006, Planning Commission meeting (part of TDC Amendment Hearing)
• All published materials leading up to and following up on TDC amendments also
referred to the need for a Local Rule (see "Project News" page of website)
o November 9, 2006 (requested by the La Pine Senior Center)
o November 30, 2006 (hosted by the Deschutes County Planning Commission)
o December 20, 2006 (Science Session requested at 11/30/2006 Planning Commission
meeting)
o Office Hours:
• January 4, 2007, 5:00 - 7:00, Deschutes County office, La Pine
• January 9, 2007, 1:00-5:00, Village Properties office, Sunriver
• January 18, 2007, 1:00-5:00, Village Properties, Sunriver
• January 23, 2007 3:00 - 5:00, Deschutes County office, La Pine
o Hearing before the Board of County Commissioners, March 13, 20, 27`h , 6:00 - 9:00 PM,
La Pine High School
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 29 of 35
o Written record for proposed Local Rule open from February 2007 to present (February
2008)
o Board of County Commissioners work session with Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality and Department of Land Conservation and Development, April 18, 2007
o Board of County Commissioners work session with Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality and Department of Land Conservation and Development, January 30, 2008
o Hearing before the Board of County Commissioners on March 19, 2008, La Pine High
School
o Board of County Commissioners public meeting on Ordinance 2008-019 on June 11,
2008, Deschutes County Services Building
o Hearing before the Board of County Commissioners on July 7, 2008, Deschutes County
Services Building
➢ Other public information contacts
o On-going one on one contacts with EH staff either in person or by phone/e-mail
o Deschutes County Home Show, May 2006
o Open House, May 6, 2006, Deschutes County office, 51340 S. Highway 97, La Pine
o Groundwater Science Open House, December 20, 2006, 4:00-6:00 PM, 51340 S
Highway 97, La Pine
o Presentations available upon request
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 30 of 35
Appendix B
Groundwater Science Open House December 20, 2006
Staff Available for Q&A:
Deschutes County: Tom Anderson, Dan Haldeman, Barbara Rich, Todd Cleveland,
Peter Gutowsky, Jerry Kathan, Jeff Freund
US Geological Survey: Dave Morgan, Steve Hinkle
Oregon DEQ: Bob Baggett
Posters/Info Stations:
➢ USGS Groundwater Model and Groundwater Investigation
➢ Nitrogen Reducing Systems
➢ Onsite Wastewater Treatment System Effects on Groundwater
➢ Background and History
➢ Physical model illustrating groundwater flow
➢ The increase in performance standards required as a result of added development between 1999
and 2005
➢ Map of monitoring and drinking water wells sampled in the region
Print Materials Available for Review:
➢ La Pine National Demonstration Project Draft Final Report
➢ La Pine National Demonstration Project Work Plan
➢ Data from the La Pine Project Innovative System Field Test including onsite system data and
monitoring well data
➢ South County Regional Cost Benefit Analysis - Regional Problem Solving, Final Report, August
1997, KCM
➢ CDC Health Water Fact Sheet, Nitrate and Drinking Water from Private Wells, Summer 2003
➢ Oregon DEQ Fact Sheet, Nitrate in Drinking Water, September 2002
➢ Oregon DEQ Fact Sheet, Southern Willamette Valley Groundwater Management Area Declared,
May 2004
➢ US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Consumer Fact Sheet on: Nitrates/Nitrites,
downloaded from http://www.epa.gov/cqi-bin/epaprintonly.c.gi on 12/15/06.
➢ US EPA web page print out, "Drinking Water from Household Wells,"
hftp://www.epa.gov/safewater/privatewells/booklet/concern.html downloaded 12/15/06.
➢ "Spontaneous Abortions Possibly Related to Ingestion of Nitrate Contaminated Well Water-
LaGrange County, Indiana, 1991-1994," Center for Disease Control, Morbidity and Mortality
Weekly Report, July 5, 1996/ 45(26); 569-572. Downloaded from
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00042839.htm on 7/16/01.
➢ "Municipal Drinking Water Nitrate Level and Cancer Risk in Older Women: The Iowa Women's
Health Study," Weyer et al, Epidemiology, May 2001, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp 327-338.
➢ "An Analysis of Nitrate-Nitrogen in Groundwater Beneath Unsewered Subdivisions," Tinker, J.R.,
Ground Water Monitoring and Remediation, Winter 1991, pp 141-150.
➢ "Overview of the occurrence of Nitrate in Ground Water of the United States," Madison, R.J. and
J.O. Brunett, National Water Summary 1984, Hydrologic Events, Selected Water-Quality Trends,
and Ground-Water Resources, US Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2275, pp 93-105.
➢ "Fate and Transport of Biological and Inorganic Contaminants from On-Site Disposal of Domestic
Wastewater," Reneau et al, Journal of Environmental Quality, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp 135 - 144.
➢ "Nitrate/Nitrite Toxicity - Additional Suggested Reading," Department of Health and Human
Services, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, downloaded from
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/HEC/CSEM/nitrate/additional reading html on 12/15/06.
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 31 of 35
➢ "Nitrate/Nitrite Toxicity," Case Studies in Environmental Medicine, Agency for Toxic Substances
and Disease Registry, Course SS3054, Revised January 2001.
➢ "A demonstration of innovative treatment and disposal technologies in environmentally sensitive
karst terrain near Rock Bridge Memorial State Park, Missouri," Solomon et al, National Onsite
Demonstration Program, downloaded from hftp://www.nesc.wvu.edu/nodp/nodp reports.htm on
12/15/06.
➢ "Evaluation of Movement of Septic System Effluent from Lake Development Into Near-Shore
Areas of Table Rock Lake, Midwest Environmental Consultants, December 2001.
Handouts
➢ Local Rule Concepts
➢ Local Rule Communication Plan and Public Outreach Summary
➢ Transferable Development Credit Technical Advisory Committee Summary of Accomplishments
and Direction excerpted from the minutes December 15, 2006
➢ Bend Bulletin Article, December 20, 2006
➢ "But my water was just tested!" Deschutes County CDD, November 2006
➢ "Pollution Reduction Credit Program," Deschutes County CDD, Fall 2006
➢ "Project Overview," Deschutes County CDD, Spring 2006
➢ "South County Groundwater Protection History," Deschutes County CDD, Spring 2006
➢ "How Contaminants Reach Groundwater," University of Florida Cooperative Extension Service,
SL143
➢ "Why Not Sewer?" Deschutes County CDD, Spring 2006
➢ "Septic tank waste strength and sampling onsite systems: The nuts and bolts," Rich, B.J., et al,
reprinted from 2004 Conference Proceedings, 13th Annual Technical Conference and Exposition
National Onsite Wastewater Recycling Association.
➢ Papers from the 2003 Conference Proceedings of the 12`h Annual Technical Conference and
Exposition of the National Onsite Wastewater Recycling Association:
o Denitrifying systems using forced aeration in the La Pine National Demonstration Project
o Denitrifying systems using packed bed filters in the La Pine National Demonstration
Project
o Denitrifying systems using sequencing batch reactors and rotating biological contactors in
the La Pine National Demonstration Project
➢ "Chemical and Algae Suffocating Lakes & Streams," Cone, M., Los Angeles Times, September 4,
2004.
Estimated Attendance: 60-80 persons
Press Coverage: Bend Bulletin, KTVZ
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 32 of 35
Appendix C: Ordinance 2008-019
REVIEWED
LEGAL CUURRSEL
BEFORE TIIE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
An Ordinance to Establish County Procedures r
Under Oregon Rule to Minimize Groundwater ORDINANCE NO. 2008-019
Pollution in South Deschutes County, and
Declaring an Emergency. •
WHEREAS, extensive monitoring and study by the United States Geological Survey ("USGS") and the
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality has shown that the groundwater underlying the south Deschutes
County region is threatened by discharges from conventional onsite wastewater treatment systems serving
development in the region, and
WHEREAS, south Deschutes County is identified as those unincorporated portions of Deschutes
County contained in'fownships 19, 20, 21, 22 and Ranges 9, 10, and 11, except those areas authorized by the
State for sewer; and
WHEREAS, recent studies have shown that the predominant source of nitrate contamination of the
groundwater in south Deschutes County is from onsite wastewater treatment systems; and
WHEREAS, OAR 3410-071-0130(l) states that county permitting authorities acting on behalf of the
State, such as Deschutes County, may not authorize installation of a wastewater treatment system that is likely
to pollute public waters, but rather, must require the installation of a wastewater treatment system that protects
public waters or public health; and
WHEREAS, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, in a letter dated January 4, 2008,
determined that a public health hazard exists in the south Deschutes County area; and
WHEREAS, Deschutes County Code 11.12.010 defines "Nitrogen Reducing System" as a wastewater
treatment system that reduces nitrogen loading to the groundwater in accordance with the Nitrate Loading
?Management Model and that is approved by Deschutes County" and defines "Nitrate I wading Management
Model" as "the groundwater model developed by the USGS to determine the nitrate loading capacity of the
drinking water aquifer underlying south Deschutes County;" and
WHEREAS, nitrogen reducing onsite wastewater treatment systems are available and effective to
reduce pollutants contributing to the public health hazard and protect public waters; and
WHEREAS, requiring nitrogen reducing systems for any new County permit for construction,
installation, major alteration or major repair helps reduce pollution contributing to the public health hazard; and
WHEREAS, on and after July 1, 2006 Deschutes County required property owners in south Desclutes
County who requested site evaluation report approvals for construction, installation, major alteration or major
repairs to wastewater treatment systems to install nitrogen reducing wastewater trcatment systems; and
WHEREAS, prior to July 1, 2006 owners of approximately 100 properties in south Deschutes County
had received county site evaluation report approvals for onsite wastewater treatment systems, for which the
PAGE i OF 3 - ORDINANCE NO. 2008-019 (06111108)
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 33 of 35
property owners have not received a permit to install the wastewater treatment system and for those site
evaluation report approvals, the onsite wastewater treatment system that would have been approved at the time
of the site evaluation report is for a system that will not protect the groundwater in South Deschutes County
from nitrogen discharges; and
WHEREAS, repairs, replacements or remodels of existing development comprise approximately ninety
percent (90%) of the permits currently being issued; now, therefore,
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF D1SCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON, ORDAINS
as follows:
Section . :Except as provided in Section 4 of this Ordinance, every owner of property with or without
an existing onsite wastewater treatment system site evaluation report approval must install a nitrogen-reducing
onsite wastewater treatment system in order to receive a County permit for construction, major alteration or
major repair, as defined in Section 3 of this Ordinance.
Sg6on 2. The requirements shall apply to onsite wastewater treatment system permit applications
submitted on and after the effective date of this Ordinance.
Scctir- The following definitions from OAR 340.071.0140 are applicable to this Ordinance:
a. "Alteration" means expansion or change in location of an existing system or any part thereof.
1) ]Major alteration is the expansion or change in location of the soil absorption facility or
any part thereof.
2) Minor alteration is the replacement or relocation of a septic tank or other components of
the system other than the soil absorption facility.
b. "Construction" includes the installation of a new system or part thereof or the alteration, repair,
or extension of an existing system. The grading, excavating, and earth-moving work connected
with installation, alteration, or repair of a system or part thereof is considered system
construction.
c. "Repair" means installation of all portions of a system necessary to eliminate a public health
hazard or pollution of public waters created by a failing system. Major repair is the replacement
of a sand filter, RGF, ATI, or soil absorption system.
d. "onsite Wastewater Treatment System" means any existing or proposed subsurface onsite
wastewater treatment and dispersal system including but not limited to a standard subsurface,
alternative, experimental, or nonwater-carried sewage system.
e. "Site Evaluation Report" means a report on the evaluation ofa site to determine its suitability
for an onsite system prepared in accordance with OAR 340-071-0150.
L "System" or "onsite system" means "onsite wastewater treatment system."
Section 4. The requirements of this Ordinance shall apply only to those unincorporated properties
within Townships 19, 20, 21, 22 and Ranges 9, 10, and 11, except those areas authorized by the State for a
sewer system.
Section 5. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is, for any reason,
held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of any remaining portion or
portions of this Ordinance, unless:
The remaining part or parts are so essentially and inseparably connected with and dependent upon
the unconstitutional or invalid part that it is apparent that the remaining part or parts would not
have been enacted without the unconstitutional or invalid part, or
PAGE 2 OF 3 - ORDINANCE NO. 200M 19 (06/ 11/08)
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 34 of 35
2. The remaining part or parts, standing alone, are incomplete and incapable Of being carried out in
accordance with the Board of County Commissioners' intent.
o , 2008
ecti EMERGENCY. This Ordinance being necessary for the immediate preservation of kite
public peace, health and safety, an emergency is declared to exist, and this Ordinance takes effect on its passage,
Dated this / A f
ATTEST:
Recording Secretary
Date of I" Reading: day of
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF DESCHUTEs COUNTY, OREGON
DE IS R. LUG, C rr -
T (B Y) L N, ice Chair
~DAL ,Co issioner
2008.
Date Oft a Reading: UL _ day of~ 2008.
Michael M. Daly
Effective date: 1 I__. day of 2008.
ATTEST:
Record of Adoption Vote
Commissioner Yes No Abstained Excused
Dennis R. Luke _
Tammy Melton
Recording Secretary
PAGE 3 OF 3 - ORDINANCE NO. 2008-019 (06f 11108)
Local Rule for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in South Deschutes County Page 35 of 35
REVIEWED
LEGAL COUNSEL
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
A Resolution Adopting the Nitrate Loading
Management Model to Establish Performance
Standards for Onsite Wastewater Treatment
Systems in South Deschutes County.
*
* RESOLUTION NO. 2008-021
*
*
WHEREAS, on DA 2008; the Board of County Commissioners ("Board") adopted Ordinance 2008-
012 to add Deschutes County Code ("DCC") Chapter 13.14 to protect public waters in south Deschutes County
from pollution by onsite wastewater treatment systems, and
WHEREAS, DCC 13.14.050(E) provides that the Board must adopt by resolution the minimum nitrogen
reduction standards and the map depicting the locations where these standards apply; and
WHEREAS, beginning in 1999, the United States Geological Survey ("USGS") and the Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality ("DEQ") conducted significant groundwater investigations in the Upper
Deschutes River watershed, in general; and the La Pine sub-basin in particular, and
WHEREAS, the USGS and the DEQ developed the three-dimensional groundwater and nutrient fate
and transport model of the La Pine sub-basin of the Upper Deschutes River watershed, and
WHEREAS, on or about 2007, the USGS and the DEQ published documentation of the development
and findings of the groundwater study, the three-dimensional groundwater and nutrient transport model and the
Nitrate Loading Management. Model, and
WHEREAS, the USGS developed the Nitrate Loading Management Model ("Model") as a groundwater
quality management tool for use in south Deschutes County;
WHEREAS the Model can be used to identi _performance standards for onsite systems that will
maintain no hieher than 7 mg/L nitrate as N average concentrations in the shallow groundwater in accordance
with OAR 340-040 Groundwater Quality Protection, now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES
COUNTY, OREGON, as follows:
Section 1. The Board adopts the Nitrate Loading Management Model published by the USGS in
December 2007 as the basis for approving the nitrogen reducing onsite wastewater treatment systems pursuant
to DCC Chapter 13.14.
PAGE 1 OF 2 - RESOLUTION NO. 2008-21 (1 WD/N)
Section 2. The minimum nitrogen reduction require pursuant to DCC Chapter 13.14.050(D) shall be
35% reduction of total nitrogen, which is approximately equal to a maximum of 30 mg/I total nitrogen in
wastewater treatment system effluent from a typical residence at average flows of 225 gallons per day.
Section 3. The maximum nitrogen reduction required pursuant to DCC Chapter 13.14.050(D) shall be
the nitrogen reduction achieved by a system approved by the DEQ and listed by Deschutes County as a
Maximum Nitrogen Reducing System pursuant to DCC 13.14.060.
Section 4. The locations, as produced by the Nitrate Loading Management Model, where the
performance standards for existing onsite systems must be achieved in the south Deschutes County region are
identified on the map attached as Exhibit "A," attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein.
Section 5. The Deschutes County Community Development Department shall maintain the map
identifying the locations where the above performance standards must be achieved for existing systems in south
Deschutes County.
DATED this day of
, 2008.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF DESCHU'fES COUNTY, OREGON
DENNIS R. LUKE, Chair
ATTEST:
Recording Secretary,
TAMMY (BANEY) MELTON, Vice Chair
MICHAEL M. DALY, Commissioner
PAGE 2 OF 2 - RESOLUTION NO. 2008-21 (M/D/Y)
Exhibit "A"
Nitrate Loading Management Model
Performance Standards for Ewsting Systems
Legend
Sewered Area
{ . a City of La Pine
MCounty Boundary
Nitrate Loading Managsrmnt Area
Minimum 35% reduction (<30 mg/LY
0 58%- 78% reduction (20-10 mg/L)
- Minimum 79% reduction (10 mg/L)
'Pll areas depicted without color as requred to newt Mnirum 35%eeductim.
stage stop
Meadows
The range of standards reflects the range of circumstances
(Including housing density, the proportion between exiisSng and
future development, and the ability of the aquHer to
assimilate pollution). sou N aw ea as
These performance standards
are based on the requirement
that new development
(development of vacant
land) uses the best !
performing system. j
w,a
oe+000
tb
rose
F 77R7~
City of
La Pine
~ St"er
Wyr pe
'0
V a 1.75 M.
Februay 27, 21X17 loamatn Co. mmoma
REVIEWED
LEGAL COUNSEL
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
An Ordinance Adding Chapter 13.14 to Title 13,
Public Services, of the Deschutes County Code. * ORDINANCE NO. 2008-012
WHEREAS, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, in a letter date January 4, 2008,
determined that a public health hazard exists in the south Deschutes County area, the cause of which is pollution
discharged by conventional onsite wastewater treatment systems;
WHEREAS, "Pollution" is defined in OAR 340-071-0100 as "any alteration of the physical, chemical,
or biological properties of any waters of the state, including change in temperature, taste, color, turbidity, silt, or
odor of the waters, or any discharge of any liquid, gaseous, solid, radioactive, or other substance into any waters
of the state that, alone or in connection with any other substance, threatens to create a public nuisance or render
such waters harmful, detrimental, or injurious to public health, safety, or welfare or to domestic, commercial,
industrial, agricultural, recreational or other legitimate beneficial uses or to livestock, wildlife, fish, or other
aquatic life or the habitat thereof;"
WHEREAS, "Public health hazard" is defined in OAR 660-011-0060 as "a condition whereby it is
probable that the public is exposed to disease-caused physical suffering or illness due to the presence of
inadequately treated sewage;"
WHEREAS, Deschutes County Community Development Department staff proposed amendments to
the Deschutes County Code ("DCC") to require the use of nitrogen reducing onsite systems for permits issued
by the County; and
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed DCC text amendment was mailed in the Deschutes County tax
statements to 10,243 property owners in the South Deschutes County area; and
WHEREAS, the Deschutes County Planning Commission hosted an information session on the proposal
in November 2006, notice of which was published in The Bulletin on November 25, 2006 and the Newberry
Eagle on November 1, 2006; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners ("Board") held public hearings on March 13, 20 and
27, 2007 and on March 13, 2008, notice of which was published in The Bulletin on March 4, 2007; and
WHEREAS, the public record for the rule was open for written testimony between March 27, 2007 and
April 18, 2008; and
WHEREAS, the Board held a public hearing on March 19, 2008, a notice of which was published in the
Bend Bulletin on February 18, 2008;
WHEREAS, the Board mailed information about the proposed amendment entitled "Frequently Asked
Questions" to 9,484 property owners in south Deschutes County on April 18, 2008; and
PAGE 1 OF 2 - ORDINANCE NO. 2008-12 (M/D/YR)
WHEREAS, the Board finds that the public will benefit from changes to the Deschutes County
sanitation regulations to require better nitrogen reducing wastewater treatment systems in the south Deschutes
County area; now, therefore,
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON, ORDAINS
as follows:
Section 1. ADDING. That Deschutes County Code Title 13 is amended by the addition of a new
chapter as described in Exhibit "A," attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein.
Section 2. FINDINGS. That the Board adopts as its findings in support of this decision, the Staff
Report, attached as Exhibit "B" and incorporated by reference herein.
Dated this of , 2008 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
DENNIS R. LUKE, Chair
ATTEST:
Recording Secretary
Date of I" Reading:
Date of 2nd Reading:
TAMMY (BANEY) MELTON, Vice Chair
MICHAEL M. DALY, Commissioner
day of , 2008.
day of , 2008.
Record of Adoption Vote
Commissioner Yes No Abstained Excused
Dennis R. Luke
Tammy Melton
Michael M. Daly
Effective date: day of , 2008.
ATTEST:
Recording Secretary
PAGE 2 OF 2 - ORDINANCE NO. 2008-12 (M/D/YR)
Exhibit "A"
Nitrate Loading Management Model
Performance Standards for Existing Systems
Legend
Sewered Area ED City of La Pine
L_ county Boundary
Nitrate Loaning Management Area
Minimum 35% reduction (<30 mg/L)"
58% - 78% reduction (20-10 mg/L)
® Minimum 79% reduction (10 ing/L)
-Ail areas depicted without color are required to nwet Mnitrum 35%reduction
The range of standards reflects the range of circumstances
(including housing density, the proportion between existing and
future development, and the ability of the aquifer to
assimilate pollution).
These performance standards
y8'.. rarR7~
are based on the requirement FalFflyer,
that new development ~sia~es
river -scu.'~ C-1 DR
i nreaD Snenn -
Cross•-
r-- water
. Geldeiia
Springs
7
t _ III y ,
ONIW;,' I y S~
Stage Stop
Meadows i~
" ,Sr
11 0
1' = 1.75 Mi.
(development of vacant
land) uses the best
performing system.
- \
Wild
BD WE55 aD ~i~r
i .
z _
N,"rry
-
ES66S
r
r
Ponderosa
`
-D
nes,
! _
-
City of
u
.
Pined---,
I
B
Lrd,~r>a
/
rr ~J
~
~T 11
1 k~. ~ T,g 1'~'
p I '1
i
T
1
i
......,_..k-.,..,,,..~...._ ...J.._.._. l
"
Deschutes Co.
.
Februay Z7, X107
N.\CU90m~0UDI 'W`FMNLMfrPMaiin 2Xi07WLMM Main ,nud
~
Klamath Co.
Chapter 13.14. SOUTH COUNTY ONSITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT
13.14.010. Application.
13.14.020. Definitions.
13.14.030. Siting Criteria for New Development.
13.14.040. Groundwater Level Determinations.
13.14.050. Performance Standards.
13.14.060. Listing Nitrogen Reducing Systems.
13.14.070. Approval of Other Groundwater Protection Wastewater Treatment Systems.
13.14.1180. Variances.
13.14.090, Appeals.
13.14.100. Fees.
13.14.110. Violation.
13.14.010. Application.
A. The provisions in DCC Chapter 13.14 are in addition to the requirements of ORS 454.605 to 454.755
and OAR chapter 340, divisions 071 and 073 and, in the event of an inconsistency, the more stringent
provisions shall apply.
B. The provisions in DCC Chapter 13.14 apply only to those wastewater treatment systems that treat flows
of residential strength wastewater, as defined in OAR 340-071, of 2,500 gallons per day or less.
(Ord. 2008-012 §l, 2008)
13.14.020. Definitions.
"Department" means, for purposes of this chapter, the Deschutes County Community Development
Department.
"Existing Development" means uses in South County on a Lot served by an Onsite System that does not
meet the performance standards contained in DCC 13.14.050(E) as of the effective date of Ordinance
2008-012.
"Lot" means lot or parcel as defined in ORS chapter 92. Tax lots may or may not be equivalent to legal
Lots of record.
"Maximum Nitrogen Reducing System" means fall Onsite System or Systems allowed for use by ODEQ
and listed by the Department in accordance with DCC 13.14 060 as having demonstrated Ott least 79%
nitrogen reduction and total nitroeen concentrations of less than 10 me/1
"New Development" means the establishment of a use on a Lot in South County where there is no
existing use served by an Onsite System as of the effective date of Ordinance 2008-012.
"Nitrate Loading Management Model" means the model produced by the US Geological Survey ("USGS")
that specifies the performance standards that must be met by Onsite Systems in order to meet groundwater
protection goals.
"ODEQ" means the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality.
"Onsite System" means onsite wastewater treatment system as defined in OAR 340, division 71.
"Sewer System" means a system as defined in OAR chapter 660, division I 1 that serves more than one
Lot or parcel, or more than one condominium unit or more than one unit within a planned unit
development, and includes pipelines or conduits, pump stations, force mains, and all other structures,
Deleted: Upgrades at Change of
Property Ownership.¶
13.14.070.
Deleted: the
Deleted: at the time the permit is issued
Deleted: the highest level of
Formatted: Highlight
Formatted: Highlight
Deleted: of the Onsite Systems listed
pursuant to DCC 13.14.070
Chapter 13.14 1 (XX/2008)
devices, appurtenances and facilities used for treating or disposing of sewage or for collecting or
conducting sewage to an ultimate point for treatment and disposal. The following are not considered a
Sewer System for the purpose of this code:
A. A system provided solely for the collection, transfer and/or disposal of storm water runoff; or
B. A system provided solely for the collection, transfer and/or disposal of animal waste from a farm use
as defined in ORS 215.203.
"South County" means those unincorporated portions of Deschutes County contained in Townships 19,
20, 21, 22 and Ranges 9, 10, and 11, except those areas authorized for sewer.
"WPCF Permit" means Water Pollution Control Facility permit.
(Ord. 2008-012 §1, 2008)
13.14.030. Siting Criteria for New Development.
New Development shall meet the following criteria in order for an Onsite System to be permitted and
constructed on the Lot:
A. For the purpose of site evaluation approval, any modification to the Lot, including the placement of fill
or the installation of groundwater interceptors, shall not be allowed.
B. For site evaluations applied for and approved after the effective date of Ordinance 2008-012, an Onsite
System, including the absorption facility, shall be installed on the Lot where the use to be served by the
system is located.
C. Locating the Onsite System or portion thereof on an adjoining Lot may be permitted if the Lots are
consolidated or the Lot line adjusted following a final land use decision by the County.
D. The absorption facility for the Onsite System shall be installed to provide a minimum 24 inch vertical
separation to the highest level attained by a groundwater table as measured from the bottom of the
absorption facility to the highest level of the groundwater table.
E. The provisions in DCC 13.14.030(A), (B) and (C) expire 3 years from the effective date of Ordinance
2008-012 unless amended by the Board of County Commissioners.
(Ord. 2008-012 §1, 2008)
13.14.040. Groundwater Level Determinations.
A. If the County, upon review of a site evaluation application for an Onsite System, finds that soil
characteristics indicating conditions associated with saturation as defined in OAR 340-071 are
inconclusive and groundwater levels cannot be determined, then groundwater levels shall be determined
using direct measurement of groundwater on the Lot and in the general area.
B. Direct measurements by the County shall be made during a spring following a winter (October through
March) with at least average Central Oregon historical total precipitation.
C. Application for groundwater level determinations shall be made to the Department no later than the
February 15 prior to the dates the groundwater measurements are to be conducted pursuant to DCC
13.14.040(A) and (B).
D. If the winter precipitation for the year in which the application is made is not equal to at least average
precipitation levels described in DCC 13.14.040(B), then the application will be held and the
groundwater level determination made after the next winter with at least average Central Oregon
historical total precipitation.
(Ord. 2008-012 §1, 2008)
13.14.050. Performance Standards.
A. The following performance standards shall apply to:
1. New Development at time of application for site evaluation and permit issuance;
Chapter 13.14 2 (XX/2008)
2. Existing Development at time of application for an authorization notice, major alteration, or major
repair, and
3. Existing Development at the time of upgrade required under DCC 13.14.050(F).
B. New Development shall install a Maximum Nitrogen Reducing System.
C. Subject to DCC 13.14.050(F), Existing Development located on a Lot that does not meet the 24 inch
vertical separation to groundwater shall install a Maximum Nitrogen Reducing System.
D. Subject to DCC 13.14.050(F), Existing Development located on a Lot that meets the 24 inch vertical
separation to groundwater shall install an Onsite System that reduces nitrogen to at least the level
specified for the area within which the Lot lies as specified in DCC 13.14.050(E).
E. The Board shall adopt by resolution:
1. The Nitrate Loading Management Model;
2. Minimum nitrogen reduction standards applicable to this chapter; and
3. The map depicting where standards for Existing Development apply. The Department shall
maintain the map depicting where standards for Existing Development apply.
F. Lxcept as provided in DCC 13.14.050(G) and DCC 13.14.080, all Existing Development served by
Onsite Systems shall be upgraded with nitrogen reducing systems in accordance with DCC 13.14.050(C)
and (D) no later than November 15, 2022.
G. An Onsite System that was or is operating under a WPCF Permit from ODEQ shall not be required to
meet the performance standards in DCC 13.14.050(D) until such time as a major alteration or major
repair is needed in accordance with OAR 340, division 71.
(Ord. 2008-012 §1, 2008)
13.14.060. Listing Nitrogen Reducing Systems.
A. Onsite Systems used for upgrades to Existing and New Development in the South County shall be
Onsite Systems allowed by the ODEQ.
B. Onsite Systems or components designed to reduce nitrogen, including Maximum Nitrogen Reducing
Systems, shall be identified on a list maintained by the Department.
1. The list shall categorize the systems or components by demonstrated nitrogen reduction capability.
2. The nitrogen reduction categories in this list shall correspond to the performance standards shown in
the legend on the map adopted under DCC 13.14.050(E) and which shows where the specific
performance standards must be achieved.
C. Vendors or designers of Onsite Systems may apply to the County to have additional systems listed by
the Department as nitrogen reducing systems.
1. Applications must be submitted on a form specified by the Department and shall be accompanied by
the fee established by the Board.
2. Applications must include documentation that the proposed Onsite System will meet the standards
contained in DCC 13.14.050(E) and 13.14.060(A).
a. An application by a vendor or designer to list an additional Onsite System as a nitrogen
reducing system shall include, but is not limited to, the following information:
i. The quality of the septic tank effluent or wastewater influent received by the system during
the performance test;
ii. The quality of the proposed Onsite System influent and effluent including the following:
a. The quality of the proposed Onsite System nitrogen concentration including organic
and inorganic forms of nitrogen;
b. Biochemical oxygen demand (5-day), total suspended solids, pH, dissolved oxygen,
and temperature; and
c. Measurements of wastewater flow to the system during the performance test.
iii. Lists of installers and maintenance providers certified to work in Oregon;
iv. List of distributors or qualified designers for the system in Oregon; and
Deleted: Beginning November 15,
2012, e
Deleted: Upgrades at Change of
Property Ownership.$
A.. A property with an Onsite System
approved or installed as of the effective
date of Ordinance 2008-012 that is not
the required nitrogen reducing system
pursuant to DCC 13.14.050 or a
groundwater protection wastewater
treatment system pursuant to DCC
13.14.080 shall upgrade the Onsite
System upon any sale, grant, conveyance
or transfer of title of a property in South
County.$
B. For each property with an Onsite
System approved or installed as of the
effective date of Ordinance 2008-012 that
is not the required nitrogen reducing
system pursuant to DCC 13.14.050 or a
groundwater protection wastewater
treatment system pursuant to DCC
13.14.080, Deschutes County shall
record, in the Deschutes County Official
records, a notice of the requirement to
upgrade the Onsite System in accordance
with DCC 13.14.050 or 13.17.080 upon
sale, grant conveyance or transfer of title
of property in South County,$
C. Upon an Onsite System upgrade to
either a nitrogen reducing system
approved pursuant to DCC 13.14.070 or
other groundwater protection wastewater
treatment system pursuant to DCC
13.14.080, Deschutes County shall
provide the property owner with a release
of the notice sufficient for recording in
the Deschutes County Official records.$
D. Exceptions. The sale, grant,
conveyance or transfer of title of property
does not include:$
I.
Deleted: The sale, grant, conveyance or
transfer of title of property does not
include t
Deleted: The transfer into a living trust
for which the owner(s) of record as of the
effective date of Ordinance 2008-012
is(are) the trustor(s); oil
2. Property line adjustments.
Deleted: The sale, grant, conveyance or
transfer of title of property does not
include the sale, grant, conveyance, or
transfer of title of the property from a
trust to any beneficiary.$
Deleted: (Ord. 2008-012 §l,2oos)¶
1
13.14.070.
Chapter 13.14 3 (XX/2008)
V. Additional information and application fee as required by the Department.
b. Data submitted by vendors or designers in support of an application to list an additional Onsite
System as a nitrogen reducing system shall include at least one of the following:
i. Peer reviewed articles;
ii. Third party reports; or
iii. Papers and data presented and published in conference proceedings.
c. If data show the total nitrogen concentration of the influent to the proposed Onsite System is
less than 65 mg/L on average, then the system's nitrate reduction performance shall be
prorated accordingly unless the data show that nitrogen reduction increases as influent
increases.
G. Onsite Systems listed by the Department shall continue to be listed unless performance data indicates
that listing should be changed or revoked.
(Ord. 2008-012 §1, 2008)
13.14.1170. Approval of Other Groundwater Protection Wastewater Treatment Systems.
A. A Sewer System is permitted when:
1. A Sewer System has been authorized pursuant to OAR 660-11-0060(9) and OAR 660, division 4,
including documentation that the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code have
been amended and acknowledged pursuant to ORS 197; or
2. A Sewer System has been authorized pursuant to OAR 660-011-0060(4) through (7), including
documentation that the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code have been
amended and acknowledged pursuant to ORS 197; and
3. The performance of the Sewer System reduces total nitrogen loading for the area to be served, as
measured in kilograms per day, to the minimum level specified by the Nitrate Loading Management
Model and in DCC 13.14.050.
B. A property owner may propose to the County a system other than an Onsite System or a Sewer
System to reduce nitrogen loading to groundwater.
1. The property owner shall have the burden of proof that the proposed system will perform equal to
or better than the performance standards established in DCC 13.14.050.
2. The system proposed to serve either New Development or Existing Development shall meet the
minimum requirements adopted by the Board per DCC 13.14.050.
(Ord. 2008-012 §1, 2008)
1 13.14.080. Variances.
A. The Department Director or, if on appeal, the Board, may authorize a variance from the requirements of
DCC 13.14.050.
B. Applications to the Department for variances shall be submitted on a form specified by the Department
and accompanied by the fee established by the Board.
C. The application must state fully the grounds for the variance and facts relied upon by the applicant and
must demonstrate how strict compliance with the standard is impracticable.
D. The Department Director or the Board may grant a variance in one of the following situations:
I. The applicant provides a report of a detailed hydrogeologic investigation by a registered
hydrogeologist that demonstrates that the groundwater is protected from nitrogen contamination by
the presence of persistent oxygen-limited groundwater conditions that will reduce nitrogen in the
groundwater for the life of the system; or
2. The applicant demonstrates that an extreme or unusual financial hardship exists.
a. The following factors shall be considered by the Department or the Board in reviewing an
application for a variance based on financial hardship:
1) Applicant's advanced age or poor health;
Chapter 13.14 4 (XX/2008)
2) Applicant's financial ability to pay for a nitrogen reducing system;
3) Applicant's need to care for aged, incapacitated, or disabled relatives;
4) The availability of financial assistance that is sufficient to offset the cost of installing,
operating, or maintaining a nitrogen reducing Onsite System;
5) Environmental impacts from the variance.
b. Hardship variances granted by the Department shall include conditions that:
1) Limit permits to the life of the applicant;
2) Limit the number of permanent residents using the system;
3) Require that the system is retrofitted to a nitrogen reducing Onsite System at time of sale
of the property; and
4) Requiring that the compliance date specified in DCC 13.14.050(F) shall not apply until
time of sale of the property.
3. The applicant demonstrates that:
a. The onsite system serving the property is failing;
b. The application for the variance includes a legal commitment from the sewer district or other
legal entity to extend a sewer system that meets the requirements of DCC 13.14.050 to the
property covered by the application; and
c. The connection of the property to the sewer will be complete within five years from the date
of application.
(Ord. 2008-012 §l, 2008)
13.14.090. Appeals.
A. Decisions of the Department made pursuant to this chapter may be appealed to the Board within twelve
days of the date the Department's decision was mailed.
B. The appeal shall be filed with the Department using a form specified by the Department and fee
established by the Board.
C. The documentation supporting the appeal must state fully the grounds on which the applicant is
appealing the decision, the facts relied upon by the applicant and must demonstrate how strict
compliance with the standard is impracticable.
D. Decisions of the Board may be appealed in accordance with DCC 13.40.
(Ord. 2008-012 §1, 2008)
1 13.14.100. Fees.
A. The Board shall establish fees by resolution for permits and services under DCC 13.14.
(Ord. 2008-012 §1, 2008)
13.14.110. Violation.
A. Violation of any provision of DCC 13.14 is a Class A violation.
(Ord. 2008-012 §1, 2008)
Chapter 13.14 5 (XX/2008)
Response to Questions from the
South County Financial Assistance Advisory Committee (FAAC)
Based on Meeting with Board of County Commissioners (BOCC)
June 30, 2008, La Pine Senior Center
Questions
Do nitrogen reducing systems need full-time residents in order to function?
No, in fact most systems can be shut down and restarted by the maintenance provider for
seasonal residents in order to ensure good performance and save energy.
Did the model account for seasonal residents?
Yes, the model actually reduces the pollution load in consideration of seasonal residents (if there
is no resident in a house there is no pollution being discharged). The percentage of the
population that is seasonal residents has changed from 1980 (about 46%) to 2000 (about 20%).
Do Orenco systems work in the snow?
Yes, data from the La Pine National Demonstration Project show that AX-20 systems function
well even in winter conditions. Representatives from Orenco Systems, Inc. state that there are
properly functioning systems installed in British Columbia, Alberta, Pennsylvania, Michigan,
Wisconsin, Rhode Island, Vermont, Colorado, which all can have colder winters than Central
Oregon.
Were data from the monitoring wells in the sub-oxic zone used?
Yes, the data from the sub-oxic wells was used, especially in the groundwater model. This is
important information that tells us how the groundwater system may be able to clean itself over
time once the pollution loading is reduced.
What kind of repairs would trigger a system upgrade?
Ordinance 2008-019 and the proposed rule specify that upgrades will be triggered at time of
major repair or major alteration. For example, a major repair permit is required if the drainfield is
no longer accepting sewage or is damaged. Replacing a steel tank is a minor repair and would
not trigger an upgrade. The term "repair," including both major and minor repair, is defined in
OAR 340-071-0100(125).
What kind of variance is available if an area is in the process of getting served by sewer?
The proposed rule provides for a variance to the upgrade requirement if a failing system is in an
area where sewer is available or will be available within five years.
Deschutes County
Summary of Changes to Proposed Local Rule
Public Hearing, March 19, 2008
The US Geological Survey and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) have
conducted scientific investigations that show that groundwater in the south Deschutes County
region will become increasingly polluted over time by discharges from conventional onsite
wastewater treatment systems. The Board of County Commissioners (Board) does not
presume to have the same technical knowledge and expertise as the scientists that participated
in these investigations and relies on their findings that, as stated by the Oregon DEQ, the
science is valid and doing nothing to protect groundwater quality is not an option. The Board, at
this hearing, is considering the question of what action can be taken at the local level to address
the groundwater pollution issue.
July 7, 2008
Changes based on public comments on the March 2008 proposal:
• Compliance Date: Based on specific testimony received at the March 19, 2008 hearing,
the Board changed the grace period before the compliance date from 10 years to 14 years
to provide additional time for residents to pursue other methods of protecting groundwater.
• Definition of Maximum Nitrogen Reducing System: The change to this definition
ensures that a monopoly is not created for one system meeting the standard.
• Variance: Based on testimony related to the potential expansion or creation of sewers, a
provision was created to allow granting of a variance in the event that a failing system is
located in an area where a sewer is being established.
• Ordinance 2008-012: Two definitions ("Pollution" and "Public Health Hazard") were
inserted into the ordinance. These definitions were not included in the proposed rule
language because the terms are not used.
Proposed changes not included in the proposed rule:
• Time Sale Upgrade: The Board of County Commissioners discussed the feasibility of
requiring upgrades at the time that property ownership changes. Because of issues related
to putting this concept into practice, the proposal was rejected.
March 19, 2008
Changes based on public comments on the March 2007 proposal:
• Sewer: To ensure that the proposed rule does not eliminate the possibility of using existing
state processes related to the expansion or creation of sewers, the revised proposed rule
language (Proposed DCC 13.14.070) and revised staff report both identify the state rule
process for expanding or creating sewers in rural areas as a viable option to using onsite
systems. The County is working actively with DEQ/DLCD to:
For more information:
Phone: Barbara Rich, 541-617-4713, E-mail: BarbaraR@co.deschutes.or.us
Web: http://Www.deschutes.org/cdd/gpp/
o Streamline land use review for the Goal 11 process
o Draft policies and language to establish a Health Hazard Sewer Overlay Zone
Cost: The Board has established a Financial Assistance Advisory Committee to
recommend how best to assist homeowners with the cost of using groundwater protection
measures using an estimated $35 million of County-owned assets that are dedicated to this
purpose. (Revised staff report, page 21)
Sewer district language/map conflict (Proposed DCC 13.14.020)
o A conflict exists between the proposed rule language and the draft map proposed for
Exhibit A to Resolution 2008-21. The proposed language defines the affected area
as, "those portions of Deschutes County contained in Townships 19, 20, 21, 22 and
Ranges 9, 10, and 11, except those areas within existing sewer districts." The map
proposed as Exhibit A to Resolution 2008-21 shows the city limits of La Pine as the
same as the sewer district boundary, which is untrue.
To resolve the conflict, staff recommends that the rule and staff report language, if
adopted, be changed to read as follows (added text in underline): "South County"
means those unincorporated portions of Deschutes County contained in Townships
19, 20, 21, 22 and Ranges 9, 10, and 11, except those areas that are authorized for
sewer.
• Provision for other wastewater treatment approaches (Proposed DCC 13.14.070)
o Added to allow alternative treatment techniques such as composting toilets or other
systems that meet the groundwater protection goal but are not defined as an onsite
wastewater treatment system or a sewer system.
• Published reports: The staff report has been updated with information on USGS reports
and a fact sheet published since March 2007. (Revised staff report, page 10)
• High groundwater lots/Sunset clause: A sunset clause for siting standards has been
added to highlight the County's commitment to investigating the potential for new
development in high groundwater areas (groundwater less than 24 inches from ground
surface). (Proposed DCC 13.14.030)
• Compliance date: The staff report has been revised using reports published since March
2007 and provides additional information about the 10-year timeframe for decisions. This
compliance period will provide an extended time line during which residents may make
decisions and plan for the approach they believe is best for them. (Revised staff report,
page 19)
Other changes:
Additional grammatical and non-substantive changes to the revised staff report have been
made.
For more information:
Phone: Barbara Rich, 541-617-4713, E-mail: BarbaraR@co.deschutes.or.us
Web: http://www.deschutes.org/cdd/gpp/
R
Prepared in cooperation with Deschutes County and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Questions and Answers About the Effects of Septic Systems on
Water Quality in the La Pine Area, Oregon
Nitrate levels in the ground-water aquifer underlying the central Oregon city of La Pine and
the surrounding area are increasing due to contamination from residential septic systems.
This contamination has public health implications because ground water is the sole source of
drinking water for area residents. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with Deschutes
County and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, studied the movement and
chemistry of nitrate in the aquifer and developed computer models that can be used to predict
future nitrate levels and to evaluate alternatives for protecting water quality. This fact sheet
summarizes the results of that study in the form of questions and answers.
121°40' 35' 30'
t0 2. 4 6 MLLES
f o- 10 2 KIL0M0-tW's ~
43° i - L ~r r
55 Desrhutes
Basin
L F '111e i , - e~ea -Bend
ter.
43°
35'
25' 121°20'
97
s
S
r,
lver
T
20
S
T
21
4 S
T
1 s
?os_
The population of rural residential areas near La Pine in
southern Deschutes County and northern Klamath County,
Oregon, has grown rapidly since the 1960s. Most of these areas
lie within a tract adjacent to the Deschutes and Little Deschutes
Rivers that extends roughly 25 miles south of Sunriver (fig. 1).
Existing and future homes on more than 9,300 residential lots in
the area now use or will use individual, on-site septic systems for
wastewater disposal and shallow wells for water supply. At least
50 percent of these wells draw ground water from the upper 50
feet of the shallow aquifer that underlies the area (Morgan and
others, 2007).
Vulnerability of the shallow aquifer to contamination has
led to concern by residents, County planners and resource
managers, and State regulators that wastewater from septic
systems may pose a threat to the primary drinking water supply
if residential development continues at planned densities using
conventional septic systems. Another concern is the quality
of local streams (Hinkle, Morgan, and others, 2007). The
Deschutes and Little Deschutes Rivers, which flow through the
developed areas near La Pine, already have excessive algae in
some reaches, possibly due to nutrient (nitrogen and phosphorus)
contributions from ground water (Anderson, 2000; Jones, 2003).
T
23
S
U.S. Department of the Interior
U.S. Geological Survey ® Printed on recycled paper Fact Sheet 2007-3103
December 2007
Figure 1. Residential development near La Pine, Oregon, is proceeding at
a rapid pace. This map of the area shows the boundary of a USGS study
to examine the processes that affect the movement and chemistry of
nitrogen in the ground-water system.
Septic system being installed near La Pine, Oregon.
Conventional residential septic systems are the principal
source of nitrogen to the shallow aquifer in the La Pine area
(Century West Engineering, 1982; Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality, 1994; Hinkle, B6hlke, and others, 2007),
and the nitrate contribution (loading) to the aquifer from these
septic systems has increased rapidly as a result of ongoing
residential development (fig. 2). Conventional septic systems,
including sand filter and pressure distribution systems, are
not designed to remove nitrogen from wastewater. Nitrate is a
human health concern because it can cause methemoglobinemia
(Blue-Baby Syndrome) in infants (http://Www.atsdr.cdc.gov/
HEC/CSEM/nitratel). The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency has established 10 parts per million (ppm) of nitrogen
as the maximum allowable nitrate concentration in drinking
water for public water supply systems. Oregon law sets a nitrate
concentration of 7 ppm as the level at which regulatory action
must be taken to control water-quality degradation.
The city of La Pine was the location of the first concentrated
development within the area. The first building permits,
recorded in what was then called the core area, date from
1910. In 2006, the core area was incorporated as the City of
La Pine. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
(ODEQ) issued an administrative rule requiring community
sewage treatment for the core area after studies in 1979 and
1982 documented nitrate contamination in drinking water wells
(Century West Engineering, 1982; Cole, 2006).
Surveys of wells outside of the core area by ODEQ between
1993 and 1995 found unnaturally elevated nitrate concentrations
in several of the most densely developed parts of the region
LL
Q
z
0
d
O
C' a
0
z>
CW
C1_
CDz
=w
zo
Z Z
o¢
0
a
0
z
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
Loading if all planned homes use -----r-------
conventional septic systems - .1 .1
Projected loading
Historical loading
01' i i 1 1
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040
Figure 2. The rapid increase in nitrate loading to the aquifer that supplies
drinking water to homes in the La Pine area is due to the rapid pace of
residential development.
(R.J. Weick, ODEQ, written commun., 1998; Cole, 2006).
The high concentrations were attributed to contamination by
effluent from septic systems.
In 1999, Deschutes County and ODEQ identified the need for a
better understanding of the processes that affect the movement
and chemistry of nitrogen in the aquifer underlying the La Pine
area in order to develop strategies for managing ground-water
quality. In response, the USGS, in cooperation with Deschutes
County and ODEQ, began a study in 1999 to examine the
hydrologic and chemical processes that affect the movement
and fate (chemical transformation) of nitrogen within the aquifer
(Hinkle, B6hlke, and others, 2007; Morgan and others, 2007).
A primary objective was to provide tools for evaluating the
effects of existing and future residential development on water
quality. The study has provided area residents and local and
State agencies the information and tools needed to make informed
decisions about the future of development in the La Pine area.
Results from the study have been published in several reports (see
References Cited). This fact sheet summarizes the results that
relate to the effects of septic systems on water quality in the area.
As part of the La Pine area ground-water study, the USGS drilled wells to collect
geologic and water-quality data.
Geologists examined drill-core samples to define the geology at different depths.
Conventional residential septic systems are the principal
source of nitrogen to the shallow aquifer in the La Pine area
(Century West Engineering, 1982; Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality, 1994; Hinkle, B6hlke, and others, 2007),
and the nitrate contribution (loading) to the aquifer from these
septic systems has increased rapidly as a result of ongoing
residential development (fig. 2). Conventional septic systems,
including sand filter and pressure distribution systems, are
not designed to remove nitrogen from wastewater. Nitrate is a
human health concern because it can cause methemoglobinemia
(Blue-Baby Syndrome) in infants (http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/
HEC/CSEM/nitratel). The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency has established 10 parts per million (ppm) of nitrogen
as the maximum allowable nitrate concentration in drinking
water for public water supply systems. Oregon law sets a nitrate
concentration of 7 ppm as the level at which regulatory action
must be taken to control water-quality degradation.
The city of La Pine was the location of the first concentrated
development within the area. The first building permits,
recorded in what was then called the core area, date from
1910. In 2006, the core area was incorporated as the City of
La Pine. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
(ODEQ) issued an administrative rule requiring community
sewage treatment for the core area after studies in 1979 and
1982 documented nitrate contamination in drinking water wells
(Century West Engineering, 1982; Cole, 2006).
Surveys of wells outside of the core area by ODEQ between
1993 and 1995 found unnaturally elevated nitrate concentrations
in several of the most densely developed parts of the region
0
v
z
0
a
0
C3<
C3 w
z >
Cw
~z
=w
Zo
zZ
°a
0
W
a
z
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
Loading if all planned homes use
conventional septic systems
Projected loading
Historical loading
0 r- I I I I I I 1 1
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040
Figure 2. The rapid increase in nitrate loading to the aquifer that supplies
drinking water to homes in the La Pine area is due to the rapid pace of
residential development.
(R.J. Weick, ODEQ, written commun., 1998; Cole, 2006).
The high concentrations were attributed to contamination by
effluent from septic systems.
In 1999, Deschutes County and ODEQ identified the need for a
better understanding of the processes that affect the movement
and chemistry of nitrogen in the aquifer underlying the La Pine
area in order to develop strategies for managing ground-water
quality. In response, the USGS, in cooperation with Deschutes
County and ODEQ, began a study in 1999 to examine the
hydrologic and chemical processes that affect the movement
and fate (chemical transformation) of nitrogen within the aquifer
(Hinkle, B6hlke, and others, 2007; Morgan and others, 2007).
A primary objective was to provide tools for evaluating the
effects of existing and future residential development on water
quality. The study has provided area residents and local and
State agencies the information and tools needed to make informed
decisions about the future of development in the La Pine area.
Results from the study have been published in several reports (see
References Cited). This fact sheet summarizes the results that
relate to the effects of septic systems on water quality in the area.
As part of the La Pine area ground-water study, the USGS drilled wells to collect
geologic and water-quality data.
Geologists examined drill-core samples to define the geology at different depths.
Prepared in cooperation with Deschutes County and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Questions and Answers About the Effects of Septic Systems on
Water Quality in the La Pine Area, Oregon
Nitrate levels in the ground-water aquifer underlying the central Oregon city of La Pine and
the surrounding area are increasing due to contamination from residential septic systems.
This contamination has public health implications because ground water is the sole source of
drinking water for area residents. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with Deschutes
County and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, studied the movement and
chemistry of nitrate in the aquifer and developed computer models that can be used to predict
future nitrate levels and to evaluate alternatives for protecting water quality. This fact sheet
summarizes the results of that study in the form of questions and answers.
121°40' 35' 30' 25' 121°20'
43°
35'
Figure 1. Residential development near La Pine, Oregon, is proceeding at
a rapid pace. This map of the area shows the boundary of a USES study
to examine the processes that affect the movement and chemistry of
nitrogen in the ground-water system.
1s
s
T
s
T
21
S
2z
S
T
23
S
The population of rural residential areas near La Pine in
southern Deschutes County and northern Klamath County,
Oregon, has grown rapidly since the 1960s. Most of these areas
lie within a tract adjacent to the Deschutes and Little Deschutes
Rivers that extends roughly 25 miles south of Sunriver (fig. 1).
Existing and future homes on more than 9,300 residential lots in
the area now use or will use individual, on-site septic systems for
wastewater disposal and shallow wells for water supply. At least
50 percent of these wells draw ground water from the upper 50
feet of the shallow aquifer that underlies the area (Morgan and
others, 2007).
Vulnerability of the shallow aquifer to contamination has
led to concern by residents, County planners and resource
managers, and State regulators that wastewater from septic
systems may pose a threat to the primary drinking water supply
if residential development continues at planned densities using
conventional septic systems. Another concern is the quality
of local streams (Hinkle, Morgan, and others, 2007). The
Deschutes and Little Deschutes Rivers, which flow through the
developed areas near La Pine, already have excessive algae in
some reaches, possibly due to nutrient (nitrogen and phosphorus)
contributions from ground water (Anderson, 2000; Jones, 2003).
U.S. Department of the Interior Fact Sheet 2007-3103
U.S. Geological Survey ® Printed on recycled paper December 2007
R 9 E R10E R11E
Septic system being installed near La Pine, Oregon.
Is shallow ground water in the vicinity of La Pine vulnerable to contamination from
on-site wastewater systems?
Yes, several factors contribute to the vulnerability:
1. The ground-water table is shallow, typically less than 20 feet below land surface and seasonally rising to within
2 feet in low-lying areas (fig. 3).
2. The sandy soils allow rapid infiltration of septic system effluent to the water table.
3. The amount of rain and snowmelt that enters the aquifer is small, which limits dilution of septic system effluent.
4. Most existing drinking-water wells draw water from shallow sand and gravel deposits within 50 feet of land surface.
These deposits form the primary aquifer in the area.
5. Fifty-eight percent of lots are less than 1 acre and 82 percent are less than 2 acres, making residential densities
relatively high for an area where homes are dependent on individual septic systems and wells.
A
A
R
Drain line
Septic
tank
Plume
Stem e iuen i
es
~reGhd waterfio~y _ p~IfE~ € Screen
DIAGRAM NOT TO SCALE ? Well
Screen
Well
Figure 3. Wastewater from septic systems contains nitrogen in the forms of ammonia and organic nitrogen. As wastewater leaves the septic
system drainfield and percolates through the unsaturated zone, these forms of nitrogen are converted to nitrate. When the wastewater reaches
the water table it forms plumes of elevated nitrate within the aquifer. The plumes move downward with the ground water and slowly spread.
Currently, relatively few wells have water with high nitrate concentrations because these plumes have not had time to reach the depths where
most domestic supply wells draw water. As more homes are built, and as plumes move deeper and spread, many more supply wells will be affected.
Why don't more domestic wells in the area have high nitrate levels?
Ground water moves slowly through the shallow aquifer. Because ground water moves slowly,
it takes a long time for nitrate to appear in well water.
For example, the severity of nitrate contamination in the La Pine core area did not become evident until 1979, nearly
70 years after development of that area began. Away from the core area, most wells currently provide drinking water that
percolated to the water table decades ago, when there were very few homes and septic systems. Nitrate plumes, however,
are beginning to affect a significant number of drinking-water wells. Of nearly 200 well samples collected by ODEO. in 2000,
over 10 percent had nitrate concentrations above 4 ppm, indicating contamination from septic systems.
Much of the nitrate in the aquifer currently is confined to plumes less than about 30 feet below the water table, so not all
supply wells are drawing water from affected areas of the aquifer (fig. 3). As development proceeds and the nitrate plumes
expand and move deeper into the aquifer, more wells will be affected. Age dating of ground water in the La Pine area provides
additional insight into this process. USGS scientists determined the age of ground water by sampling special monitoring wells
and analyzing the water for tracers called chlorofluorocarbons (common refrigerant gases found in the atmosphere). These
tracers indicate that nitrate from septic systems is moving downward into deeper parts of the aquifer where more wells will
be affected in the future (Hinkle, Bohlke, and others, 2007; Morgan and others, 2007).
How much nitrate can be put into
the aquifer while still protecting
water quality?
The computer model is a tool that can be used to
help answer this question.
The capacity of the aquifer to receive nitrate
varies throughout the area and depends on factors
related to geology, climate, chemistry, and nearby
development. These factors are accounted for by the
model, allowing it to compute the maximum sustainable
nitrate loading capacity in each of 95 subareas ranging
in size from 160 to 640 acres. The maximum sustainable
loading capacity also depends on the water-quality
protection goals for the aquifer. Model users set
the values of water-quality goals, which can be the
maximum acceptable nitrate concentration in ground
water, the maximum acceptable discharge of nitrate to
streams, or both. Goals that are more protective, such
as limiting nitrate concentrations in ground water to 7
ppm instead of 10 ppm, reduce the sustainable loading
capacity of the aquifer (fig. 5). The model can be used
to examine the trade-offs between more stringent
water-quality goals and the costs of limiting nitrate
loading. Planners and resource managers also can use
the model to identify areas where loading from planned
or existing development exceeds the sustainable nitrate
loading capacity of the aquifer and devise appropriate
strategies for reducing loading.
160
140 Loading if all planned homes use conventional septic systems
aw
~w1zo
CM a
Z 0 100 Estimated 20051oading-
az
0 80 - - - - - Sustainable loading for maximum
nitrate concentration of
10 parts per million
z o 60
Z
0 40 i Sustainable loading for maximum
I nitrate concentration of
z 7 parts per million
N z 20 I
`n 0
0 5 10 15 20 25
MAXIMUM ACCEPTABLE GROUND WATER NITRATE CONCENTRATION,
IN PARTS PER MILLION
Figure 5. This graph shows the relation between maximum
acceptable nitrate concentration in ground water and the
sustainable nitrate loading capacity of the aquifer, as determined
using the computer model. The graph illustrates that there is a
trade-off between the sustainable loading capacity and
water quality goals.
References Cited
Anderson, C.W., 2000, Framework for regional, coordinated
monitoring in the middle and upper Deschutes River basins,
Oregon: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 00-386, 81 p.
Century West Engineering, 1982, La Pine aquifer management
plan: Bend, Oregon, Century West Engineering, 597 p.
Cole, D.L., 2006, Groundwater quality report for the Deschutes
basin, Oregon: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Laboratory and Water Quality Division, 54 p.; also available
online at http://Wwwdeq.state. or us/lab/techrpts/groundwater/
dbgroundwater/dbgwreport.pdf, last accessed November 9, 2007.
Hinkle, S.R., Bohlke, J.K., Duff, J.H., Morgan, D.S., and Weick, R.
J., 2007, Aquifer scale controls on the distribution of nitrate
and ammonium in ground water near La Pine, Oregon, USA:
Journal of Hydrology, v. 333, p. 486-503.
Hinkle, S.R., Morgan, D.S., Orzol, L.L., and Polette, D.J., 2007,
Ground water redox zonation near La Pine, Oregon-Relation
to river position within the aquifer-riparian zone continuum:
U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report
2007-5239, 28 p.; last accessed November 9, 2007, at http://
pubs. usgs. gov/sir12007152391.
Jones, Lesley, 2003, Characterization of select water quality
parameters within the upper Deschutes and Little Deschutes
study areas: Upper Deschutes Watershed Council Bend,
Oregon: 2003, 127 p.
Morgan, D.S., Hinkle, S.R., and Weick, R.J., 2007, Evaluation
of approaches for managing nitrate loading from on-site
wastewater systems near La Pine, Oregon: U.S. Geological
Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5237, 64 p.; also
available online at http://pubs.usgs.govlsirl2007l52371, last
accessed November 9, 2007.
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 1994, Statewide
groundwater monitoring program, La Pine area groundwater
investigation, Deschutes County, Oregon: Portland, Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality, v.11, variously paginated.
Base Credits for figures 1 and 4.
Base modified from U.S. Geological Survey
1:500,000 state base map, 1982 with digital data from U.S. Bureau of the Census,
TIGER/Line A, 1990 and U.S. Geological Survey Digital Line Graphs published at 1:100,000
Publication projection is Lambert Conformal Conic, Standard parallels 42 20' and 44°40;
central meridian -120 30'. Datum is NAD83
John S. Williams, David S. Morgan, and Stephen R. Hinkle
Illustrations by Jacqueline Olson and Robert Crist
Editing by Debra Grillo
Graphic Design by Bill Gibbs
For more information, contact:
U.S. Geological Survey
Oregon Water Science Center
2130 SW 50 Ave., Portland, OR 97201
(503) 251-3200 http://or.water.usgs.gov
GLO U.S. GPO: 2008 - 760-340 / 44003 Region No. 8
Could other sources of nitrate, like agriculture, animals, golf courses, or lawns,
cause water-quality problems?
Probably not. Several lines of evidence point to septic systems as the main source of the nitrate
(Hinkle, Bdhlke, and others, 2007):
1. Agriculture (primarily pasture) represents only about 4 percent of the study area. The four golf courses in the area
cover less than 0.4 percent of the study area and are located where they would affect few if any wells. Animal waste
contribution is much less than that of humans, and it is deposited on the land surface, where various processes
remove nitrogen. Most homes in the area have natural landscaping or small lawn areas; assuming fertilizer is applied
at recommended rates, very little nitrogen infiltrates below the root zone and into the ground water.
2. Nitrogen isotope ON) concentrations can be used to identify the source of nitrate in ground water; nitrogen isotope
data for the La Pine area indicate that septic systems are the source of nitrate in the shallow ground water.
3. The occurrence of nitrate in distinct plumes is consistent with localized sources (individual septic systems) and is not
consistent with dispersed sources, such as agricultural fields, golf courses, or livestock pasture.
4. Chloride, a wastewater component, is present in the shallow aquifer at higher concentrations than seen outside of the
La Pine area or in deep ground water beneath the area, Other sources of chloride, such as agriculture or road salt,
are not common in the area. Therefore, the elevated chloride concentrations indicate that the shallow ground water
contains a proportion of septic system effluent.
The USGS measured water levels in the aquifer under the La Pine
area to determine the direction of ground-water flow.
What will happen to water quality if nitrate loading from septic systems continues
at projected rates?
Large areas of the shallow aquifer will have nitrate concentrations above 10 ppm, and more nitrate will be
carried into streams by ground water.
If residential development proceeds as planned and no efforts are made to reduce the rates of nitrate loading from septic systems,
loading is projected to increase 52 percent above 2005 rates (fig. 2). Computer model simulations of this future scenario show that:
1. Peak nitrate concentrations will exceed 10 ppm over large areas of the shallow aquifer (fig. 4). On average, drinking
water in those areas will be composed of at least 22 percent septic system effluent.
2. The highest nitrate concentrations will be near the water table, but many wells that draw water from the upper 50 feet
of the aquifer will be at risk for nitrate contamination.
3. It will take decades for peak concentrations to occur and decades for concentrations to subside if nitrate loading
is reduced.
4. Increasing amounts of nitrate from septic systems will be carried into the Deschutes and Little Deschutes Rivers by
ground water.
The computer model integrates the current understanding of nitrogen geochemistry, hydrology, and geology of the
aquifer underlying the La Pine area. The model was tested by simulating past ground-water levels, ground-water travel
times, ground-water discharge to streams, and ground-water-quality conditions and then comparing the model results
with measurements made in the study area. The simulated conditions, including past ground-water nitrate concentrations,
matched measured conditions within acceptable limits. These results indicate that the model has sufficient accuracy
to be a valid tool for evaluating the potential effects of septic systems on future ground-water quality.
These scientists are measuring the flow of ground water into the
Little Deschutes River through the streambed.
121'40' 35' 30' 25' 121'20'
43°55'
50'
45'
40'
43°35'
EXPLANATION
Nitrate concentration
xtent
nearthewatertable,
pf
.
in milligrams N per liter
''••..s
. •
1
4~
. ea
~i
pd
97
f
5
.
f
~
~
Sunriver
10
f
Road
River
f
iy
~ S~t~r9 ~ri
20
Ci~e
•
O
"
f
'
50 :
Ce"t
•
•
1d r
1.~ i
Soar
•
100
w
'
f
r
t
'
s
Qwa }
Creek
•
k
i a
► La
W"ckiu
Pine
'
Finley
Reservoir
Road;
Bu~re
•
s
f
• o
•
yen
s
~
c,
a
DESCHUTES CO.
31
KLAMATH CO.
U
•
4 .
T23 S x
•
.
o
L'k
0 2
~ I I
4 6 8MILES
•
I
~ ~ ~ 1
SCC' 97
0 2
T
4 6 8 10 12 KILOMETERS
Gee`
R 9 E R10E R11E
T
20
S
T
21
S
T
22
S
T
23
S
Figure 4. Ground water in much of the shallow aquifer underlying residential areas will exceed State and Federal water-quality
standards for nitrate if existing and future homes continue to use conventional septic systems.
121°40' 35' 30' 95' if) io?n,
43°55
50'
45'
40'
43°35'
EXPLANATION
Nitrate concentration
•
E
~
t
ea
l
S
'
'
entof
t
in milligrams
N per
liter
q~
••am~a
e~..•
97
5
4
•
~
.
~Sunriver
10
:
Road :
• River
: i1,
•
20
•
•
•
50
Gent ~rY
v
,
1
So~tb
100
x
;
'7V -
tP~
A
e
•
•
• i9NS,
d
:
AQt~ ft
.
~1
Creek
• ti
;
:
•
IV/, kivp
•
La
Pine
:
•
he cervoix ;
tittle!li
:Fin/e
Y
•
Road 4111,
Butte
,
p'
f
: ce
to
'
d
o
®
4®
DESCHUTES CO.
' Sr
-41
31
KLAMATH CO.
p
•
U
T 23 S1
x
ek
0 2
4 6 8MILES
~
UesGG 97
i i , i i'
0 2 4
i 'i
6 8 10 12 KILOMETERS
R 9 E R10E R11E
T
19
S
T
20
S
T
22
S
Figure 4. Ground water in much of the shallow aquifer underlying residential areas will exceed State and Federal water-quality
standards for nitrate if existing and future homes continue to use conventional septic systems.
Could other sources of nitrate, like agriculture, animals, golf courses, or lawns,
cause water-quality problems?
Probably not. Several lines of evidence point to septic systems as the main source of the nitrate
(Hinkle, Bdhlke, and others, 2007):
1. Agriculture (primarily pasture) represents only about 4 percent of the study area. The four golf courses in the area
cover less than 0.4 percent of the study area and are located where they would affect few if any wells. Animal waste
contribution is much less than that of humans, and it is deposited on the land surface, where various processes
remove nitrogen. Most homes in the area have natural landscaping or small lawn areas; assuming fertilizer is applied
at recommended rates, very little nitrogen infiltrates below the root zone and into the ground water.
2. Nitrogen isotope (t5N) concentrations can be used to identify the source of nitrate in ground water; nitrogen isotope
data for the La Pine area indicate that septic systems are the source of nitrate in the shallow ground water.
3. The occurrence of nitrate in distinct plumes is consistent with localized sources (individual septic systems) and is not
consistent with dispersed sources, such as agricultural fields, golf courses, or livestock pasture.
4. Chloride, a wastewater component, is present in the shallow aquifer at higher concentrations than seen outside of the
La Pine area or in deep ground water beneath the area. Other sources of chloride, such as agriculture or road salt,
are not common in the area. Therefore, the elevated chloride concentrations indicate that the shallow ground water
contains a proportion of septic system effluent.
-4
The USGS measured water levels in the aquifer under the La Pine
area to determine the direction of ground-water flow.
What will happen to water quality if nitrate loading from septic systems continues
at projected rates?
Large areas of the shallow aquifer will have nitrate concentrations above 10 ppm, and more nitrate will be
carried into streams by ground water.
If residential development proceeds as planned and no efforts are made to reduce the rates of nitrate loading from septic systems,
loading is projected to increase 52 percent above 2005 rates (fig. 2). Computer model simulations of this future scenario show that:
1. Peak nitrate concentrations will exceed 10 ppm over large areas of the shallow aquifer (fig. 4). On average, drinking
water in those areas will be composed of at least 22 percent septic system effluent.
2. The highest nitrate concentrations will be near the water table, but many wells that draw water from the upper 50 feet
of the aquifer will be at risk for nitrate contamination.
3. It will take decades for peak concentrations to occur and decades for concentrations to subside if nitrate loading
is reduced.
4. Increasing amounts of nitrate from septic systems will be carried into the Deschutes and Little Deschutes Rivers by
ground water.
The computer model integrates the current understanding of nitrogen geochemistry, hydrology, and geology of the
aquifer underlying the La Pine area. The model was tested by simulating past ground-water levels, ground-water travel
times, ground-water discharge to streams, and ground-water-quality conditions and then comparing the model results
with measurements made in the study area. The simulated conditions, including past ground-water nitrate concentrations,
matched measured conditions within acceptable limits. These results indicate that the model has sufficient accuracy
to be a valid tool for evaluating the potential effects of septic systems on future ground-water quality.
These scientists are measuring the flow of ground water into the
Little Deschutes River through the streambed.
How much nitrate can be put into
the aquifer while still protecting
water quality?
The computer model is a tool that can be used to
help answer this question.
The capacity of the aquifer to receive nitrate
varies throughout the area and depends on factors
related to geology, climate, chemistry, and nearby
development. These factors are accounted for by the
model, allowing it to compute the maximum sustainable
nitrate loading capacity in each of 95 subareas ranging
in size from 160 to 640 acres. The maximum sustainable
loading capacity also depends on the water-quality
protection goals for the aquifer. Model users set
the values of water-quality goals, which can be the
maximum acceptable nitrate concentration in ground
water, the maximum acceptable discharge of nitrate to
streams, or both. Goals that are more protective, such
as limiting nitrate concentrations in ground water to 7
ppm instead of 10 ppm, reduce the sustainable loading
capacity of the aquifer (fig. 5). The model can be used
to examine the trade-offs between more stringent
water-quality goals and the costs of limiting nitrate
loading. Planners and resource managers also can use
the model to identify areas where loading from planned
or existing development exceeds the sustainable nitrate
loading capacity of the aquifer and devise appropriate
strategies for reducing loading.
160
i!f
Q 140 Loading if all planned homes use conventional septic systems
aw
120
ra 1
E o 100 Estimated 20051oading
az
° 80 - - - - - Sustainable loading for maximum
U, EL
nitrate concentration of
° - - - 10 parts per million
z cn 60
Z
at Sustainable loading f
v or maximum
a o 40 I nitrate concentration of
Q ~ 20 ' 7 parts per million
C z
v' 0
0 5 10 15 20 25
MAXIMUM ACCEPTABLE GROUND WATER NITRATE CONCENTRATION,
IN PARTS PER MILLION
Figure 5. This graph shows the relation between maximum
acceptable nitrate concentration in ground water and the
sustainable nitrate loading capacity of the aquifer, as determined
using the computer model. The graph illustrates that there is a
trade-off between the sustainable loading capacity and
water quality goals.
References Cited
Anderson, C.W., 2000, Framework for regional, coordinated
monitoring in the middle and upper Deschutes River basins,
Oregon: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 00-386, 81 p.
Century West Engineering, 1982, La Pine aquifer management
plan: Bend, Oregon, Century West Engineering, 597 p.
Cole, D.L., 2006, Groundwater quality report for the Deschutes
basin, Oregon: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Laboratory and Water Quality Division, 54 p.; also available
online at http://Wwwdeq.state. or.us/lab/techrpts/groundwater/
dbgroundwater/dbgwreport.pdf, last accessed November 9, 2007.
Hinkle, S.R., Bohlke, J.K., Duff, J.H., Morgan, D.S., and Weick, R.
J., 2007, Aquifer scale controls on the distribution of nitrate
and ammonium in ground water near La Pine, Oregon, USA:
Journal of Hydrology, v. 333, p. 486-503.
Hinkle, S.R., Morgan, D.S., Orzol, L.L., and Polette, D.J., 2007,
Ground water redox zonation near La Pine, Oregon-Relation
to river position within the aquifer-riparian zone continuum:
U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report
2007-5239, 28 p.; last accessed November 9, 2007, at http://
pubs. usgs. gov/sir/2007/5239/.
Jones, Lesley, 2003, Characterization of select water quality
parameters within the upper Deschutes and Little Deschutes
study areas: Upper Deschutes Watershed Council Bend,
Oregon: 2003, 127 p.
Morgan, D.S., Hinkle, S.R., and Weick, R.J., 2007, Evaluation
of approaches for managing nitrate loading from on-site
wastewater systems near La Pine, Oregon: U.S. Geological
Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5237, 64 p.; also
available online at http://pubs.usgs.govlsirl2OO7l52371, last
accessed November 9, 2007.
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 1994, Statewide
groundwater monitoring program, La Pine area groundwater
investigation, Deschutes County, Oregon: Portland, Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality, v. II, variously paginated.
Base Credits for figures 1 and 4.
Base modified from U.S. Geological Survey
1.•500,000 state base map, 1982 with digital data from U.S. Bureau of the Census,
TIGER/Line lRl, 1990 and U.S. Geological Survey Digital Line Graphs published at 1:100,000
Publication projection is Lambert Conformal Conic, Standard parallels 42 20'and 44 40;
central meridian -120 30'. Datum is NAD83
John S. Williams, David S. Morgan, and Stephen R. Hinkle
Illustrations by Jacqueline Olson and Robert Crist
Editing by Debra Grillo
Graphic Design by Bill Gibbs
For more information, contact:
U.S. Geological Survey
Oregon Water Science Center
2130 SW 5th Ave., Portland, OR 97201
(503) 251-3200 http://or.water.usgs.gov
G:KY U.S. GPO: 2008 - 760-340 / 44003 Region No. 8
Is shallow ground water in the vicinity of La Pine vulnerable to contamination from
on-site wastewater systems?
Yes, several factors contribute to the vulnerability:
1. The ground-water table is shallow, typically less than 20 feet below land surface and seasonally rising to within
2 feet in low-lying areas (fig. 3).
2. The sandy soils allow rapid infiltration of septic system effluent to the water table.
3. The amount of rain and snowmelt that enters the aquifer is small, which limits dilution of septic system effluent.
4. Most existing drinking-water wells draw water from shallow sand and gravel deposits within 50 feet of land surface.
These deposits form the primary aquifer in the area.
5. Fifty-eight percent of lots are less than 1 acre and 82 percent are less than 2 acres, making residential densities
relatively high for an area where homes are dependent on individual septic systems and wells.
Drain line
Septic
tank
DIAGRAM NOT TO SCALE
s
MOM
alliIIIIIIII&
~Pt~
T rt,~~m efflCent ph
Grobh mes~
d`water flow
$ a
Plume
c;
Figure 3. Wastewater from septic systems contains nitrogen in the forms of ammonia and organic nitrogen. As wastewater leaves the septic
system drainfield and percolates through the unsaturated zone, these forms of nitrogen are converted to nitrate. When the wastewater reaches
the water table it forms plumes of elevated nitrate within the aquifer. The plumes move downward with the ground water and slowly spread.
Currently, relatively few wells have water with high nitrate concentrations because these plumes have not had time to reach the depths where
most domestic supply wells draw water. As more homes are built, and as plumes move deeper and spread, many more supply wells will be affected.
Why don't more domestic wells in the area have high nitrate levels?
Ground water moves slowly through the shallow aquifer. Because ground water moves slowly,
it takes a long time for nitrate to appear in well water.
For example, the severity of nitrate contamination in the La Pine core area did not become evident until 1979, nearly
70 years after development of that area began. Away from the core area, most wells currently provide drinking water that
percolated to the water table decades ago, when there were very few homes and septic systems. Nitrate plumes, however,
are beginning to affect a significant number of drinking-water wells. Of nearly 200 well samples collected by ODEQ in 2000,
over 10 percent had nitrate concentrations above 4 ppm, indicating contamination from septic systems.
Much of the nitrate in the aquifer currently is confined to plumes less than about 30 feet below the water table, so not all
supply wells are drawing water from affected areas of the aquifer (fig. 3). As development proceeds and the nitrate plumes
expand and move deeper into the aquifer, more wells will be affected. Age dating of ground water in the La Pine area provides
additional insight into this process. USGS scientists determined the age of ground water by sampling special monitoring wells
and analyzing the water for tracers called chlorofluorocarbons (common refrigerant gases found in the atmosphere). These
tracers indicate that nitrate from septic systems is moving downward into deeper parts of the aquifer where more wells will
be affected in the future (Hinkle, Bohlke, and others, 2007; Morgan and others, 2007).
3
i
JU42ary r\l o
e -
-------c- - r Lc r~r~ vita K-,~duC l J~► rem eon _
- _ "ear
- _ - - - - ° r e 4Q Kc[C,7~
44av- ~/e
m C l~$ S Cc-ICA cp
C. cck ~
-
-
G
- - - O - t~ ~t Caa!L--------
1
_ 1-, - - J ' yv~
KeS -
r
t
o { BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest - G~ L 1 Date
Name M , ~ ~ e_"---,t V- L4
Address
12
Phone #s ~'3 4 5q ~ 5-
E-mail address lu d o
In Favor Neutral/Undecided Opposed`
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? R Yes Z No
o { BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest Date 7-7 ~
Name Aq i t
Address V
LF._ t
Phone #s
E-mail address-
F1 In Favor F-1 Neutral/Undecided
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? F~ Yes
Opposed
No
JTCS h
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest _ eolf 6*( ~ f L ttDate -
7--
Name
v
Address F /
i
Phone #s _
E-mail address
In Favor F] Neutral/Undecided
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? N Yes
X5 Opposed
F]No
o af<<, ~ BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest
Name
Address
CAA-P
Date L
Phone #s (o
E-mail address I t U l1 7 e _V0
In Favor Neutral/Undecided Opposed
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? 1-1 Yes F1No
J-res ,.zu { BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest ~o t N(41141JC, Date 17
r,
Name
Address
_
~
A.
W F. ~k f r"`: r f
1-1 Opposed
R No
Phone #s
E-mail address
.Q~
,
1-1 In Favor 1-1 Neutral/Undecided
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? r_1 Yes
Opposed
No
oc ? BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest Date
Name "
Address ` FF !
r-;
Phone #s
E-mail address
1-1 In Favor Neutral/Undecided
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? Yes
o BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest ' 7 0
t-, Date
_ , _7:)
Name
()V
Address_X_j V-/(?9 mi7 tLAR~
l6i1_~I) 97707
Phone #s
E-mail address oS t j r-, cv C~_)
C_
F] In Favor Neutral/Undecided
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? r_1 Yes
l Opposed
ZNo
TE-~ h
{ BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
1 REQUEST TO SPEAK
o-r(5' i fA-ti(
Agenda Item of Interest Ro I tw a( o,Wc y) Walte 7 7-6,?
Name I J
Address t 4 'i q'--2) L e o L,4 P P\l!e A, 9 7 735
Phone #s
E-mail address
sryl _ _s 3 ~ 06 -7 6
In Favor F-1 Neutral/Undecided
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? 1-1 Yes
Opposed
No
? BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of interest proacisc,I 1- co Date I J
5
Name
Address 76 `0 ❑ Dur
ct- 1 ll° ~l~ F d 7
Phone #s K`
E-mail address ' A-
❑ In Favor ❑ Neutral/Undecided 0 Opposed
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? ❑ Yes a No
1'r~n
t. r
o' BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
J~ REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest
Name / al-7 V❑
Address A
f`
Phone#s--. c-5
E-mail address:_,. A
❑ In Favor
Date 7-0d-
10r
77❑
If DI
❑ Neutral/Undecided
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? ❑ Yes
G
Opposed
No
\T\ T ES- r^''
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest ~ f 4...-,. ~ Date d a
Name /ill kl~ 51 Z~
Address
Phone #s
E-mail address
F] In Favor F-1 Neutral/Undecided
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? F]Yes
4 Opposed
No
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item o Interest l O 1 IN4 Date -7 7 CO
I
Name1~
Address 9~,5 0 0
e~t~... R►
X11Z
Phone #s :;-0-S ~ q
E-mail address Vt'
EJ In Favor Neutral/Undecided Opposed
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? ~es I
No
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
t,{
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest ® 9 /
Name ("i
Address
Date 2 c7g'
i
Phone #s
E-mail address v,
e, 0, 7,111 Z~~4 , Cat-11-
❑ In Favor ❑ Neutral/Undecided
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? ~ Yes
/P~~f Opposed
No
* { BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
❑`i" REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest LCC Date J17 6e
Name `-J l _ -
Address yv ~fl 1
lacy Pi V
Phone #s j Y/ _,5 ?4
E-mail address T L r-= L V4
2-
3 vuv
In Favor Neutral/Undecided Opposed
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? es No
JT
o BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
11 !
Agenda Item of Interests Date
Clqzl~
JName
Address
Phone #s
E-mail address
1-1 In Favor F-] Neutral/Undecided
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? FlYes
Opposed
No
1', r
("1 41 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest A'L.'r, Date 7
Name
Address _;~~0 7~ Aise- 30"f e
Phone #s y/-- 6 f "l
E-mail address
F1 In Favor F-] Neutral/Undecided
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? ❑ Yes
Opposed
No
TO: Board of County Commissioners July 7, 2008
FR: Ron Sharbaugh, La Pine Resident
SJ: Testimony for July 7, 2008 hearing on the "local rule"
Commissioners:
My name is Ron Sharbaugh. I reside in the Wild River area of La Pine, and am a registered to voter.
Thank you for this opportunity to testify.
I was very displeased with the recent passage of ordinance 2008-019 (the backdoor local rule as I call it),
and urge you tonight: do _NOT pass the "local rule". I further urge you to repeal that back door local
rule as soon as possible.
As a background note, I spent most of the 1990s developing software to detect mass lesions in
wo~
mammogram images. The company 1 was withIIthe 15` company to successfully get computer aided
diagnosis FDA approved, and their product has gone on to become accepted by the health insurance
industry as reimbursable due its effectiveness.
I did not get a copy of the USGS final report 2007-5237 until late 2007, and at every public hearing since
then the hearing notice has had wording like: "The Board may also, at its discretion, decline to hear
testimony on scientific investigations of groundwater quality..". I object. This is prima facie evidence
that we are not engaged in a public process. Until open discussion of the science is allowed, be advised
that the public will continue to feel that the questionability of the results of the USGS study are so huge
that any public support for any legislation based on its results will continue to be negligible.
What is much, much worse than my disagreeing with the USGS "scientific results", is that should I take
the USGS results as being valid, then I completely disagree with the policy statements being derived
from those results.
Both Commissioners Daly and Melton have visited the CAG recently, and during their presentations to the
CAG both commissioners expressed concern with the problem of septic nitrates migrating to the lower
aquifers in the La Pine sub-basin. Trouble is, the USGS fact sheet 2007-3103 (titled "Questions and
Answers About the Effects of Septic Systems on Water Quality in the La Pine Area, Oregon") that these
commissioners trusted to inform them of this nitrate issue failed to mention that the USGS research very
clearly shows that septic nitrates in the La Pine basin can NOT migrate to the lower aquifers
USGS report 2007-5237 page 38
Equilibrium occurs when loading is balanced by the sum of the rates of denitrification and discharge of
nitrate to streams. The simulation model suggests that it could take more than 140 years to reach
equilibrium for scenario 1. At equilibrium, 78 percent of nitrogen entering the system (114,000 Ib/yr) will
be transported to the suboxic part of the aquifer and removed by denitnfrcation. The remaining 22 percent
(33, 000 Ib/yr) will be transported into the near-stream areas adjacent to the Little Deschutes and
Deschutes Rivers. This should be considered an upper bound on the amount of nitrate reaching the rivers
Page 1 of 2
E)c "A~ C,
because the current study area model cannot account for processes (denitrification, plant uptake,
microbial uptake) that may remove nitrate from ground water before it discharges to the rivers.
: Had the commissioners and their staff fully understood the significance of this awesome
finding, I feel they would have asked for analysis of additional policy statements which would
explore the possibilities of exploiting this terrific artifact of the La Pine sub-basin into part of the
solution.
The public process was additionally held hostage in that the USGS report 2007-5237 (titled "Evaluation
of Approaches for Managing Nitrate Loading from On-Site Wastewater Systems near La Pine, Oregon")
was conducted by the USGS in an inappropriate fashion. The title alone shows that the USGS was on the
wrong track for involving the public in a timely manner. The 1st step in the public process should have
been to identify the problem, and immediately publish the results to get the public involved in possible
solutions. The USGS failed to do this. Instead, after they completed their computer simulations for the
problem analysis, the USGS embarked on the additional task of analyzing the policy that "septic
discharge over the entire La Pine shall have its nitrate concentrations reduced solely by advanced onsite
systems". Responsibility for this policy statement lies solely with the BOCC, and as such the USGS was
out of line analyzing a policy statement which the BOCC had not yet gotten public support for. Indeed,
by publishing the policy statement analysis together with the basic problem analysis, not only did the
USGS delay the combined final report, they confused the heck out of many Deschutes residents
(including a few commissioners) who to this day mistake "science" for "policy statement". The policy
statement(s) need to come to the BOCC from the public process, not from the USGS.
As a Wild River resident, l want to bring up that I live on the east side of the Big Deschutes River. My
water well is on the west side of the Big Deschutes. To me, the current scientific evidence from the USGS
report clearly shows that no nitrates from my septic can ever get to the water table for our well. The
proactive stance of the local rule creates this environment of charging everyone as being guilty - even
those of us who feel we are scientifically justifiably innocent.
The local rule has no support from me. Give it back to the state and let it be done in re-active manner -
at this point in time this is the only scientifically justifiable action you can take.
Page 2 of 2
rZ-7 - 08
I would like to address Commissioner Melton and Commissioner Daly. There is
no use to say anything to Mr. Luke as he has been in calibrations with county staff
since day one of trying to pass this so called local rule, But from seeing Mr. Luke
in action for almost two years now. You see that he has no regard for the citizens of
South Deschutes county residents, but you can also see that, if this was in his
backyard that he would leave no stone unturned to make sure that a right decision is
being made, before he would put any money out for any of these systems. You can
bet that he would be questioning the science just like we are, and he would be
asking for a third party testing and accurate science.
If you remember DEQ's, Joannie Hammond said when asked," that she agreed with
the model, but not necessarily what was PUT into the model". We, the Citizens
Action Group have repeatedly asked for the raw data that was put into the model
and we have been denied.
I ask you Tammy and you Mike, speaking with the voice of 2400 plus petition
signers, to not pass this local rule or ordinance or whatever you are going to call it.
We have 40 to 100 years, so don't pass something that we will just have to clean up
after you people are out of office.
Let the Advisory Committee in partnership with the citizens of South Deschutes
County handle this issue. We have the time and we won't be worried about getting
or keeping grant money to pay for our salaries like the county has been doing and is
doing now. We would only have the citizen's welfare in mind along with safe
drinking water.
I submit this for public testimony.
Karen Duncan
South County resident
D