Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutC.054.93008_1340 (2)113.93 BRYAN: Mr. Parker, all other things being equal, what is better, in your opinion as an expert, for Lake Norman as far sewer systems are concerned? Is it package plant, to dump the effluent in the lake? Or would it be the ground absorption units? PARKER: That's very difficult for me to answer. You are pretty much putting me on the spot when you ask me a question like that. They both have good and bad points. Information we've seen in the past has indicated that in some situations ground absorption systems can cause elevated levels of bacteria in lakes simply because they are placed in very close proximity to the lake itself, and the ground water is essentially a part of the lake once it moves underground and moves into the lake. The bacteria can move out there with it, so we've seen problems in that aspect. If a wastewater treatment plant was allowed to be improperly and maintained, obviously you would have problems, too. But I would have to say or interject that the experiences that I have had with package treatment plants and some of the ones I have seen operated on some of the other lakes that we have, not just Lake Norman, but some of the other lakes, have been producing very good quality effluent, and we haven't had any problems or any, what we would call complaints, as far as people having problems with water quality. BRYAN: Do you base that on imperial data or do you base that upon, are there any polluted lakes in North Carolina? PARKER: Every package treatment facility, every permitted facility, the operators and the owners are required to submit monitoring reports and that details the deficiency of the plant (not clear), and we can base our review and base our observations on the information that is submitted. BRYAN: So your personal opinion is that Lake Norman is better off with package treatment plants? PARKER: No, that's not my personal opinion, no sir. BRYAN: Well I asked for your personal opinion. PARKER: I don't know how relevant personal opinion, in this particular case, I don't know if it's going to make a difference. In this particular situation, since it is a zoning issue. BRYAN: Well, if there is enough land available and the septic tanks do not have to be placed in close proximity to the lake itself, which would be better, if you're not concerned with septic tanks? PARKER: We are evaluating the proposal as has been submitted, and we haven't been asked to evaluate the other proposal. If the other proposal was submitted, obviously we would give it the same consideration, but as it stands right now, the only thing we have to evaluate is the proposal that Crosland submitted for a package treatment plant. If they decided to turn around and go with a subsurface non -discharge system, we would evaluate that also. I can't sit here and say whether one is better than the other. A. STEWART: I have a question: What would be considered "close proxomity" to the lake when it comes to a subsurface treatment facility? Once it enters the groundwater, how far away from the lake would it have to be, and I can only assume that no matter how far away it is, if it is on a ridge traveling in that direction, it would ultimately reach the lake, although it would go through some clarifying and cleansing process on the way. PARKER: The easiest way to answer that question would be to find out the depth to groundwater at that particular site. I have seen, now this is not from the standpoint of my job, but I have, in ,. discussion with some of the county sanitarians that have had to look at what we consider borderline sites that septic tanks were borderlined whether they should have been installed or not, the instal- lation of these facilities has been such a case that the septic tank drainlines were very, very close to the level of ground water, and in that case you do not have enough soil to provide optimum treatment of the wastewater prior to it entering ground water. An optimum distance would be far enough back where you had reasonable soil depth to treat the water prior to it entering the ground water table. All your septic tank effluent enters the ground water at some point in time, but if it is generally sufficiently treated, the bacteria has been stabilized in the soil, and it is not considered a pollutant once it enters the ground water at that point. I don't think there's an X amount of feet setback from a lake or what have you. POPE: Any other questions of Mr. Parker? Thank you, Mr. Parker. Any more testimony from the opponents? BRYAN: Will this be the only time of testimony? POPE: Well, I'm considering adjourning this. BRYAN: This is the last chance to address the board? POPE: The commissioners can decide to continue the hearing to as many dates as they wish. At this point I don't know of any reason why we would consider extending beyond today, if you want to. BRYAN: I'm only asking the question because if there's going to be another opportunity, I'll wait. If not, I would like to sort of sum up what I've said.