septic info including alternate septic site plan

Home Browse Search

• Property Owner(s)_Jamie Lowe Fire No./ Parcel No. System Components (Please describe the system components):_2-1000+gi septic tanks, 1000+gi lift station, mound system What methods were used to make the determinations for the compliance inspection? (Note:No standard protocol exists. The following list is not exhaustive, not in sequential order nor indicates which combinations are necessary to make a determination) Watertight tank(s) Hydraulic Functioning Vertical Separation Distance A( Probed tank bottom 0 Searched for surface outlet 0 Conducted soil borings ❑ Observed low liquid level ❑ Performed hydraulic test Depth to limiting layer:_EIv.=94.0_ ❑ Examined const. records 0 Searched for seeping in yard Depth to system bottom:_Elv.=98.17_ ❑ Examined empty(pumped)tank ❑ Checked for back-up in home 0 Examined records d Probed outside tank for"black soil" ❑ Excessive ponding in soil system/D-boxes ❑ LGU Limiting Layer Verification ❑ Pressure/vacuum check ❑ Homeowner testimony ❑ Other ❑ Other ❑ Examined for surging in tank ❑ "Black soil"above soil system ❑ Other Status of the system Based on the compliance criteria,the system status is: (check one) ❑ failing (to protect groundwater) ❑ an imminent threat to public health or safety (ITPHS), ❑ non-compliant (monitoring issue). 2 compliant (non-of the 3 previous conditions). Is this system a EPA Class V Injection Well? ❑ yes 2 no Therefore, this document is a: a Certificate of Compliance ❑ Notice of Noncompliance Certification I hereby certify as a state of Minnesota licensed Inspector and/or Designer I or Qualified Employee Inspector and/or Qualified Employee Designer I that I conducted an investigation that accurately determined the compliance status of this system and that my recorded observations are accurate as of this date. No determination of future hydraulic performance has been nor can be made due to unknown conditions during system construction, abuse of the system, inadequate maintenance, or future water usage. Inspector's name (print)_Bernie Miller Phone (320) 398-2705 License and/or Registration Number_19 1 Address_9075 155th St. Kimball 55353 Employed by_MSTS I Address Signature ` Date `�./ /-06 Upgrade Requirements Ederived from Minnesota Statutes§115.55) An ITPHS must be upgraded, replaced, or its use discontinued within ten months of receipt of this notice or within a shorter period if required by local ordinance. If the system fails to provide sufficient groundwater protection, then the system must be upgraded, replaced, or its use discontinued within the time required by rule or the local ordinance. If an existing system is not failing as defined in law, and has at least two feet of design soil separation, then the system need not be upgraded, repaired, replaced, or its use discontinued, notwithstanding any local ordinance that is more strict. This does not apply to systems in shoreland areas, wellhead protection areas, or those used in connection with food, beverage, and lodging establishments as defined in law. Suggested Attachments 1) Site sketch which includes the system location (mandatory). Other items could include: well, well setback to system, dwelling or other buildings,tank(s),reservedsoil treatment area, surface water and soil boring locations. Include as-built drawing if available. 2) Soil boring logs, showing each horizon. Indicate the texture, color, redoximorphic features depth to bedrock, standing water and whether the material is fill. 3) A list of any and all requirements of the local ordinance that are different from the state requirements referred to on this form. 4) A homeowner survey of system performance,signed by the homeowner as being factual. 5) Monitoring data as appropriate. Page 2 of 2