Keeping the Homeowner on the Hook

1
Keeping the Homeowner on the Hook

• Enforcement of Operations and Maintenance
  Contracts at the Local Level
• A Study of Massachusetts

By Kimberly Monsini, V.P. of Operations
Clearwater Recovery
2
Please hold your questions until the end
3
Agenda

• Introductions
• Background
• Research
• Conclusions
• Solution
• How you can participate
• Questions

4
Proposal

• The proposed issue
• Why this is occurring
• The idea

5
The Facts

• Proper Management
• Homeowner cooperation/compliance
• Well trained certified operators

6
Focus
Prevention of Ground Water Pollution
7
Masters Thesis Idea

• To solve the current problem of enforcing
  contracts and contract renewals between service
  providers and homeowners as required under Title
  5.

8
Requirements

• Maintained on a quarterly basis
• Contract that meets the requirements under Title
  5
• Tracking

9
Process

• Determined the need
• Developed a game plan
• Designed and sent out the survey
• Looked at the responses
• Determined that in fact that the state of MA
  needs a way to monitor contracts

10
Results
3/5/2004 364 surveys out to all Boards of
Health and DEP 3/17/2004 Received 70
questionnaires back 3/19/2004 Completed second
mailing to 288 remaining Boards of Health.
4/21/2004 received another 55 surveys 125
surveys returned in all
11
Boards of Health (A-M) that Responded
(A) Acton, Adams, Agawam, Arlington, Ashfield,
Ashland,Atho, Attleboro, Auburn, Avon,(B) Becket,
Bedford, Bellingham, Belmont, Billerica, Bolton,
Bourne, Braintree, Brockton Buckland, Burlington,
(C) Canton, Carver, Chatham, Chelsea, Chester,
Chicopee, Chilmark, Concord, (D)D.E.P. Dartmouth,
Dennis, (E) E.Longmeadow, Easthampton, Egremont,
Essex, (F) Fall River, Fitchburg, Foxboro, (G)
Gardner, Gill,Gloucester,Goshen, Gosnold, Granby,
Granville, (H)Hadley, Halifax, Hamilton,
Hampden,Hanover,Hardwick, Hingham, Holbrook,
Holyoke, Hopedale,Hopkinton,Hubbardston, Hyannis,
(I) Ipswich, (L)Lanesborough, Lawrence,
Leominster, Lexington, Longmeadow, (M) Mansfield,
Marion, Maynard, Melrose, Merrimac,
Middleborough, Middlefield, Middleton, Milford,
Milton
12
Boards of Health (N-Z) that responded

• (N) Nashoba, Natick, Needham,New Bedford,New
  Salem, Newton, N. Andover, N. Attleboro, N.
  Brookfield,Norwell, Norwood (P)Peabody, Pelham,
  Pembroke, Pepperell, Petersham, Plainfield,
  Princeton,(Q)Quincy, (R) Rehoboth, Richmond,
  Rockland, Rutland, (S) Salem, Savoy, Scituate,
  Sheffield, Shrewsbury, Shutesbury, Somerset,
  South Hadley, Southborough, Springfield,
  Sterling, Stoughton, Stow, Sunderland,
  Swampscott, (T) Taunton, Tewksbury,
  Truro,Tyrington, (W) W. Springfield, W.
  Stockbridge, Walpole, Ware, Warwick, Watertown,
  Wellesley, Wenham, West Boylston, West Newbury,
  Westborough, Westfield, Westford, Westhampton,
  Westport, Westwood, Weymouth, Whately, Whitman,
  Wilbraham, Willmington

13
Question How do you know when a contract has
expired
14
QuestionAfter Contract expiration when do you
become involved
15
Question Are you satisfied with your current
I/A program
16
Question What in specific are you dissatisfied
with in your I/A Program

• Amount of time for review. Tracking system to
  tell when a report is due. No time to set up
  such a program.

• Amount of time needed to monitor, and no town or
  dedicated account funded to pay for proper
  oversight.

• Like to get a cover letter with summation of
  report that points out any problems or states
  that there are no problems

• No time to follow up to make sure maintenance and
  testing is being done according to the regs.

17
Question What in specific are you dissatisfied
with
18
The Answer

• EISEnvironmental Information Systems

19
The Answer

• Bottom up approach
• Inexpensive
• No duplication of effort
• Time saver

20
(No Transcript)
21
(No Transcript)
22
Location Summary Page
23
(No Transcript)
24
Residential System details Page
25
(No Transcript)
26
Memos
27
Reporting

• Board of Health
• Homeowners
• Carmody

28
(No Transcript)
29
Provider Concerns Debugged

• Keeping information safe
• Reassurance
• Existing systems

30
Board of Health 1
Board of Health 2
Board of Health 3
Barnstable County
EIS Web Based Sequal Server
Carmody
OM Provider A
OM Provider B
OM Provider C
31
How you can participate

• Beta Tester
• Susan Bradshaw, Bradbase Services
• Cell 617-901-8872
• For more Information
• Kimberly Monsini, Clearwater Recovery
• Office 781-878-3849
• Email Kimberly_at_clearwaterrecovery.com
• Website www.clearwaterrecovery.com
• A copy of this presentation will be available on
  our site after today

32
Questions?
33
References

• Arora, M.L., et al. 1985. Technology evaluation
  of sequencing batch reactors. Journal of the
  Water Pollution Control Federation 57867.
• Ayres Associates. 1998. Florida Keys Onsite
  Wastewater Nutrient Reduction Systems
  Demonstration Project. HRS Contract No. LP988.
  Florida Department of Health, Gainesville, FL.
• Buhr, H.O., et al. 1984. Making full use of step
  feed capability. Journal of the Water Pollution
  Control Federation 56325.
• Deeny, K.J., and J.A. Heidman. 1991.
  Implementation of Sequencing Batch Reactor
  Technology in the United States. Paper presented
  at the 64th Annual Meeting of the Water Pollution
  Control Federation, Toronto, Canada.
• Eikum, A.S., and T. Bennett. 1992. New Norwegian
  Technology for Treatment of Small Flows. In
  Proceedings of Seventh Northwest Onsite
  Wastewater Treatment Short Course, ed. R.W.
  Seabloom. University of Washington, Seattle.
• Olson K., Chard B.I., Hickman, D., Malchow, D.
  2002.Small Community Wastewater Solutions A
  Guide to Making Treatment, Management and
  Financing Decisions.

34
References

• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
  1986. Summary Report, Sequencing Batch Reactors.
  EPA 625/8-86-001. Technology Transfer,
  Cincinnati, OH.
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
  1987. Analysis of a Full-Scale SBR Operation at
  Grundy Center, Iowa. EPA 600/J-87-065. U.S.
  Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH.
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
  1993. Process Design Manual for Nitrogen Removal.
  EPA 625/R-93-010. U.S. Environmental Protection
  Agency, Cincinnati, OH.
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
  2002. Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems Manual.
  EPA/625/R-00/008. Office of Research and
  Development. Cincinnati, OH.
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
  2003. Draft Handbook for Management of Onsite
  and Clustered (Decentralized) Wastewater
  Treatment Systems. EPA 832-D-03-001. Office of
  Research and Development. Cincinnati, OH.
• Water Environment Federation. 1998. Design of
  Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants. Manual of
  Practice No. 8. Water Environment Federation,
  Alexandria, VA.