Current through Register Vol. 39, No. 6, September 16, 2024
(a)
Experimental, controlled demonstration, and innovative wastewater systems
(hereinafter referred to as E & I systems) are any wastewater systems,
system components, or devices that are not specifically described in Rules
.1955, .1956, .1957, or .1958 of this Section, including any system for which
reductions are proposed in the minimum horizontal or vertical separation
requirements or increases are proposed to the maximum long-term acceptance
rates of this Section; or any E & I systems as defined by
G.S.
130A-343(a) and approved
pursuant to applicable laws and this Rule. Accepted systems are as defined by
G.S.
130A-343(a). This Rule shall
provide for the approval and permitting of E & I and accepted
systems.
(b) APPLICATION: An
application shall be submitted in writing to the State for an E & I system.
The application shall include the information required by
G.S.
130A-343(d),(e),(f), and
(g), and the following, as applicable:
(1) specification of the type of approval
requested as either innovative, controlled demonstration, experimental, or a
combination;
(2) description of the
system, including materials used in construction, and its proposed
use;
(3) summary of pertinent
literature, published research, and previous experience and performance with
the system;
(4) results of any
available testing, research or monitoring of pilot systems or full-scale
operational systems and shall identify whether the testing, research or
monitoring provided was conducted by a third party research or testing
organization;
(5) specification of
system evaluation protocol as either an approved and listed protocol by the
State or the applicant shall submit an alternative protocol for the evaluation
of the performance of the manufacturer's system. National Sanitation Foundation
(NSF) Standard 40 has been approved as an evaluation protocol pursuant to
G.S.
130A-343(d);
(6) verification that a system being
submitted for approval has been tested and certified in accordance with an
approved evaluation protocol, if applicable. For systems with no prior approval
pursuant to this Rule, the manufacturer shall provide an affidavit certifying
that the product submitted for approval is the same as the certified or listed
product or identify any modifications made to the submitted product.
(7) identity and qualifications of any
proposed research or testing organization and the principal investigators, and
an affidavit certifying that the organization and principal investigators have
no conflict of interest and do not stand to gain financially from the sale of
the E & I system;
(8)
objectives, methodology, and duration of any proposed research or
testing;
(9) specification of the
number of systems proposed to be installed, the criteria for site selection,
and system monitoring and reporting procedures;
(10) operation and maintenance procedures,
system classification, proposed management entity and system
operator;
(11) procedure to address
system malfunction and replacement or premature termination of any proposed
research or testing;
(12)
notification of any proprietary or trade secret information, system, component,
or device;
(13) in the case of a
request for innovative system approval intended by the applicant to be
subsequently reclassified from an innovative to an accepted system, monitoring,
reporting and evaluation protocols to be followed by the manufacturer, the
results of which shall be submitted in its future petition for accepted status;
and
(14) fee payment as required by
G.S.
130A-343(k), by corporate
check, money order or cashier's check made payable to: North Carolina On-Site
Wastewater System Account or NC OSWW System Account, and mailed to the On-Site
Wastewater Section, 1642 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1642 or hand
delivered to Rm. 1A-245, Parker Lincoln Building, 2728 Capital Blvd., Raleigh,
NC.
(c) REVIEW: The
State shall review all applications submitted as follows:
(1) the completeness of the application shall
be determined, and a determination shall be made whether additional information
is needed to continue the review. The State shall inform the applicant of the
acceptance or rejection of the application, or of any additional information
needed to continue the review, within 30 days. When an application is rejected,
the State shall inform the applicant in writing of the reasons for rejection
and whether additional information is required for the application to be
reconsidered. Acceptance of the application does not constitute a qualitative
review of the information provided, nor the approval or denial of the proposed
system designation. Additional requested information for the application to be
considered complete shall be received within 180 days, or the application file
shall be closed. Notwithstanding a prior rejection or denial, an applicant may
reapply pursuant to Paragraph (b) of this Rule;
(2) the determination shall be made for a
complete application whether the system meets the standards of an experimental
system under
G.S.
130A-343(a)(4),
G.S.
130A-343(e) and Paragraph
(d) of this Rule; a controlled demonstration system under
G.S.
130A-343(a)(2),
G.S.
130A-343(f) and Paragraph
(e) of this Rule; or whether the system meets the standards of an innovative
system under
G.S.
130A-343(a)(5),
G.S.
130A-343(g), and Paragraph
(g) of this Rule, as applicable. This review shall be completed in accordance
with the following time frame:
Table VI: Time Frame For State Review of Completed E &
I System Applications
Type of Approval Requested
|
Normal Review
|
Fast Track Review
|
Rule Reference
|
Experimental
|
90 days
|
45 days
|
.1969(d)(2) of this Section
|
Controlled Demonstration
|
120 days
|
60 days
|
.1969(e)(4) of this Section
|
Innovative
|
180 days
|
120 days
|
.1969(g)(2) of this Section
|
and:
(3) The State shall notify the applicant and
local health department of the approval or denial of an E & I system. Such
notice shall include conditions for permitting, siting, installation, use,
monitoring, operation and maintenance, and number of systems which can be
installed, as applicable.
(d) APPROVAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SYSTEMS: A
system may be approved for use as an experimental system as follows:
(1) the system shall be part of a research or
testing program which has been approved by the State. The research or testing
program shall be conducted by a third party research or testing organization
which has knowledge and experience relevant to the proposed research or testing
and has no conflict of interest and does not stand to gain financially from the
sale of the proposed system. To be approved by the State, the proposed research
or testing program shall:
(A) Be designed
such that, if the objectives were met, the system would satisfy the standards
for approval as a controlled demonstration or an innovative system under
Paragraph (e) or Paragraph (g) of this Rule, respectively; and
(B) Be designed and include research and
testing methodology that shall have a reasonable likelihood of meeting the
objectives, and
(C) Include in the
proposal for evaluation all information required pursuant to
G.S.
130A-343(e).
(2) Applications for an
experimental system shall be "Fast Track" approved or denied within 45 days
from the acceptance of a complete application when the proposed research or
testing program is a prior approved evaluation protocol.
(e) APPROVAL OF CONTROLLED DEMONSTRATION
SYSTEMS: A system may be approved for use as a controlled demonstration system
as follows:
(1) Acceptable research is
provided from prior evaluation of the system in North Carolina as an
experimental system or from any comparable evaluations of the system in other
states, including any prior evaluation pursuant to an approved evaluation
protocol, which supports the proposed use of the system; and
(2) Documentation is provided of at least 50
installations operational for at least 12-months, unless:
(A) data have been collected that show all
other requirements for controlled demonstration approval have been met from a
lesser number of North Carolina installations in conjunction with an approved
experimental research or testing program; or
(B) documentation is provided of the system's
design and functional similarity to another approved system and that
substantiates performance in a manner equal or superior to the comparable
approved system in terms of structural integrity, chemical durability,
hydraulic performance and wastewater treatment; or
(C) the provisions for "Fast-Track" approval
of Subparagraph (4) of this Paragraph are met; and
(3) The system shall be part of a research or
testing program which has been approved by the State. To be approved by the
State, the proposed research or testing program shall:
(A) Be designed such that, if the objectives
were met, the system would satisfy the standards for approval as an innovative
system under Paragraph (g) of this Rule, and
(B) Be designed and include testing
methodology that shall have a reasonable likelihood of meeting the objectives,
and
(C) Include in the proposal for
evaluation all information required pursuant to
G.S.
130A-343(f).
(4) Applications for a controlled
demonstration shall be "Fast Track" approved or denied within 60 days from the
acceptance of a complete application when the application includes TS-I or
TS-II compliant certification data collected under NSF Standard 40 or another
prior-approved evaluation protocol, and all other available field verification
data provided under Subparagraph (b)(4) of this Rule are consistent with TS-I
or TS-II performance standards.
(f) PERMITTING OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROLLED
DEMONSTRATION SYSTEM: A local health department shall issue an Improvement
Permit and Construction Authorization and an Operation Permit for an
experimental or controlled demonstration system when the following conditions
are met:
(1) There is an application for an
Improvement Permit and Construction Authorization in accordance with
15A NCAC
18A .1937(c), with the
proposed use of an experimental or controlled demonstration system
specified;
(2) The proposed site is
included as part of an approved research or testing program and any conditions
specified for use of the system have been met;
(3) When an experimental or controlled
demonstration system is proposed to serve a residence, place of business or
place of public assembly, there shall be a designated area for a repair system
in accordance with the provisions of
15A NCAC
18A .1945(b) or an
innovative or accepted system of this Rule, except:
(A) When an existing and properly functioning
wastewater system is available for immediate use, including connection to a
public or community wastewater system; or
(B) When the experimental or controlled
demonstration system is used as a repair to an existing malfunctioning system
when there are no other approved or accepted repair options; or
(C) As provided in
G.S.
130A-343(f) for Controlled
Demonstration Systems;
(4) When an experimental or controlled
demonstration system is proposed which shall not serve a residence, place of
business, or place of public assembly, a repair area or backup system shall not
be required.
(5) The application
for an experimental system shall include statements that the property owner is
aware of its experimental nature, that the local health department and State do
not guarantee or warrant that these systems will function in a satisfactory
manner for any period of time, that use of the system may need to be
discontinued if the system research or testing program is prematurely
terminated, and that the site and system are to be accessible during reasonable
hours for monitoring and evaluation by the research or testing organization.
Such statements shall be signed by the owner;
(6) Provisions shall be made for operation
and maintenance of the system;
(7)
Any special conditions required for the installation of the experimental or
controlled demonstration system shall be specified in the Improvement Permit
and the Construction Authorization. Use of an experimental or controlled
demonstration system and any conditions shall be described on the Improvement
Permit, Construction Authorization and any subsequent operation permits, with
provisions for a repair area and backup system specified;
(8) The State shall be notified of a proposed
Improvement Permit, Construction Authorization and any subsequent operation
permits for experimental or controlled demonstration systems prior to issuance
by the local health department. The State shall notify the manufacturer and
local health department if the proposed use is found to be inconsistent with
the approved research or testing program.
(9) Upon completion of the installation and
prior to use, an Experimental or Controlled Demonstration System Operation
Permit (ESOP or CDSOP) shall be issued by the local health department. The ESOP
or CDSOP shall be valid for a specified period of time based upon the projected
duration of the research and testing program, not to exceed five years.
Maintenance, monitoring and testing requirements shall be specified as permit
conditions, in accordance with the approved research or testing program.
Failure to carry out these conditions shall be grounds for permit suspension or
revocation.
(10) Prior to
expiration of the ESOP (CDSOP) and based upon satisfactory system performance
as determined during the research or testing program, the local health
department shall issue an Operation Permit. Premature termination of the
research or testing program shall be grounds for ESOP (CDSOP) suspension or
revocation.
(11) Upon completion of
monitoring, research and testing, the research or testing organization shall
prepare a final report to the State including recommendations on future use of
the system. If the State determines that the results indicate that the
standards of Paragraph (e) or (g) of this Rule are met, the State shall approve
the use as a controlled demonstration or an innovative system,
respectively.
(g)
INNOVATIVE SYSTEMS: Innovative systems, technologies, components, or devices
shall be reviewed and approved by the State, and the local health department
shall permit innovative systems in accordance with the following:
(1) The State shall approve the system as an
innovative system when there has been successful completion of a prior
evaluation of the system in North Carolina as an experimental or controlled
demonstration system or when sufficient documentation is provided from any
comparable evaluations of the system in other states which support the proposed
use of the system, and when the performance requirements for an innovative
system of
G.S.
130A-343(a) and
G.S.
130A-343(g) and the
following conditions have been met:
(A) The
system, shall have been demonstrated to perform equal or superior to a system,
which is described in Rules .1955, .1956, .1957, or .1958, of this Section,
based upon controlled pilot-scale research studies or statistically-valid
monitoring of full-scale operational systems;
(B) Materials used in construction shall be
equal or superior in physical properties and chemical durability, compared to
materials used for similar proposed systems, specifically described in Rules
.1955, .1956, .1957, or .1958 of this Section; and
(C) Documentation is provided of at least 100
installations operational for at least 12-months unless data have been
collected that show all other requirements for innovative approval have been
met from a lesser number of North Carolina installations in conjunction with an
approved experimental or controlled demonstration research or testing
program.
(2) In lieu of
the requirements specified in Subparagraph (1) of this Paragraph, applications
for innovative approval shall be "Fast Track" approved or denied within 120
days from the acceptance of a complete application when the application
includes TS-I or TS-II compliant evaluation data collected under NSF Standard
40 or another prior approved evaluation protocol; and the following:
(A) The system, shall have been demonstrated
to perform equal or superior to a system, which is described in Rules .1955,
.1956, .1957, or .1958, of this Section, and to comply with TS-I or TS-II
standards, based upon statistically valid third-party field verification data
which include at least 50 data points from a minimum of 15 sites, with a
minimum of two data points per site, collected over at least a 12-month period,
and with no data excluded from the field sampling sites; and
(B) Materials used in construction shall be
equal or superior in physical properties and chemical durability, compared to
materials used for similar proposed systems, specifically described in Rules
.1955, .1956, .1957, or .1958 of this Section.
(3) Approved innovative systems shall be
assigned a unique code for tracking purposes. Prior to making a request for
reclassification of a system from innovative to accepted, the manufacturer
shall have a system in place to keep track of the number and location of new
system installations, and of any system installations it becomes aware of which
were required to be repaired, and to provide this information to the State upon
request and in any subsequent petition for accepted status.
(4) A local health department shall issue an
Improvement Permit and a Construction Authorization for any innovative system
approved by the State upon a finding that the provisions of this Section
including any conditions of the approval are met. Use of an innovative system
and any conditions shall be described on the Improvement Permit, Construction
Authorization, or Operation Permit.
(5) Manufacturers of proprietary innovative
systems which include an advanced pretreatment component may choose to comply
with the performance audit requirements as stipulated in Subparagraph (h)(8) of
this Rule, in lieu of routine effluent sampling for each system on an annual
basis as may otherwise be required, and shall comply with those performance
audit requirements prior to being granted accepted system status. The approved
audit procedure shall be carried out annually until receipt of Accepted System
approval by the Commission.
(h) ACCEPTED SYSTEMS: A petition to the
Commission for reclassification of a proprietary innovative system to an
accepted system, as defined in
G.S.
130A-343(a)(1), shall be
submitted by the manufacturer for review to the State, accompanied by the fee
payment as required by
G.S.
130A-343(k) and as
stipulated in Paragraph (b) of this Rule. The State shall review all petitions
submitted and evaluate the following: the completeness of the petition, and
whether additional information is needed to continue the review; and whether
the system meets the standards of an accepted system under
G.S.
130A-343(a)(l),
G.S.
130A-343(h), and this
Section. The State shall inform the petitioner if the petition is determined to
be complete or of any additional information needed to continue the review,
within 30 days. When a petition is determined to be incomplete, the petitioner
shall be informed in writing why and whether additional information is required
for the petition to be reconsidered. This review of the petition for
completeness does not constitute a qualitative review of the information
provided, nor the approval or denial of the proposed system designation.
Additional requested information for the petition to be considered complete
shall be received within 180 days, or the petition file shall be closed. Upon
request of the petitioner, the Commission may modify this 180 day time frame if
the Commission determines that more time is necessary to obtain the additional
information requested by the State and it can be provided within the requested
modified time frame. The petitioner may also request Commission review of the
State's determination that a petition is incomplete or a request by the State
for additional information. The State may also initiate a review of a
nonproprietary innovative system pursuant to G.S. l30A-343(i)(2). The State
shall submit to the Commission findings and recommendations based upon its
review for final Commission action on system designation. The State's findings
and recommendations for a proprietary innovative system shall be presented to
the Commission within 120 days of receipt of a complete petition. The
Commission shall designate a wastewater system technology, component or device
as an accepted system when it finds that the standards set forth by
G.S.
130A-343(a)(1) and G.S.
l30A-343(h) have been met. The following factors shall be considered prior to
granting accepted system status:
(1)
documentation provided that there have been at least 300 systems installed
statewide and the system has been in use as an approved innovative system for
more than five years;
(2) data and
findings of all prior evaluations of the system performance as provided by the
manufacturer;
(3) results of prior
performance surveys of innovative systems in use in North Carolina for at least
the five year period immediately preceding the petition, including any
information available to the manufacturer pertinent to the accuracy and
validity of performance surveys not completed under their control;
(4) review(s) of records on system use and
performance reported by local health departments and other information
documenting the experiences with performance of the system in North Carolina,
including information collected and reported pursuant to Subparagraph (g)(1)
and Paragraph (p) of this Rule. Upon request of the manufacturer, the State and
manufacturer shall meet to discuss the accuracy and validity of performance
data and surveys to be considered for inclusion in the review. Local health
departments shall be invited to participate in the discussion;
(5) for proprietary nitrification trench
systems, a statistically valid survey of system performance shall be performed,
as follows:
(A) The manufacturer shall provide
a proposed survey plan for State concurrence prior to carrying out the survey.
This plan shall specify the number of systems to be evaluated, period of
evaluation, method to randomly select systems to be evaluated, methods of field
and data evaluation, and proposed survey team members, including proposed
cooperative arrangements to be made with State and local health department
on-site wastewater program staff. The State shall facilitate local health
department participation with any performance review or survey. The State shall
utilize the Division of Public Health's State Center for Health Statistics for
assistance in evaluating the statistical validity of proposed evaluation
protocols.
(B) The survey shall
include the field evaluation of at least 250 randomly selected innovative
systems compared with 250 comparably-aged randomly selected conventional
systems, with at least 100 of each type of surveyed system currently in use and
in operation for at least five years. Systems surveyed shall be distributed
throughout the three physiographic regions of the state (Mountain, Piedmont and
Coastal Plain) in approximate proportion to the relative usage in the three
regions. The survey shall determine comparative system failure rates, with
field evaluations completed during a typical wet-weather season (February
through early April), with matched innovative and conventional systems sampled
during similar time periods in each region. The petitioner shall provide a
statistical analysis of the survey results showing a "one-sided" test where, if
the failure rate in the sample of 250 innovative systems is at least five
percentage points higher than the failure rate in the sample of 250
conventional systems, there is only a five percent chance that a difference
this large would occur by chance (95% confidence level). If a statistically
significant higher failure rate in the innovative system is not detected, the
Commission shall find that the innovative system performs the same as or better
than the conventional system.
(6) The Commission shall grant accepted
status to an innovative system based upon a showing by the manufacturer that
there have been at least 10,000 operational systems installed in the state, in
more than one county of the state, over at least an eight year period with a
total reported failure rate statewide based on records provided by the
manufacturer and local health departments of less than one percent. However,
the granting of accepted status based upon this criteria shall be conditioned
on the manufacturer successfully completing an approved field survey pursuant
to Parts (h)(5)(A) or (h)(5)(B) of this Rule within no more than 24 months of
being granted accepted status;
(7)
The manufacturer of a proprietary innovative system, which includes an advanced
pretreatment component designed to achieve NSF-40, TS-I or TS-II effluent
quality standards requesting accepted status shall document that the system has
received certification under NSF Standard 40 or another prior approved
evaluation protocol. A certified system which has been modified pursuant to
Paragraph (i) of this Rule or as otherwise necessary to be approved for use in
North Carolina shall still be considered in compliance with this certification
requirement. For approved innovative systems in general use in North Carolina
for more than five years prior to January 1, 2006, which only lack
certification under NSF Standard 40 or another approved evaluation protocol but
meet all other requirements for Accepted System status, the Commission shall
grant conditional accepted status provided such certification is obtained
within 24 months from the date this conditional status is granted;
(8) Performance Audit: Prior to Accepted
System approval by the Commission of a proprietary innovation system which
includes an advanced pretreatment component, a performance audit shall be run
for a minimum of three consecutive years or until data have been collected from
at least 30 separate operational North Carolina systems. The performance audit
shall consist of third-party random sampling of a minimum of 10 separate
operational North Carolina sites by an approved field evaluation protocol. The
manufacturer shall propose the third-party, and the third-party shall submit a
plan for system evaluation to include their third-party credentials and the
number of systems to be sampled, the method for randomly selecting the sites to
be sampled, and details of the procedure for sample collection and analysis,
which shall be prior-approved by the State. Samples shall be collected by
24-hour composite sampling (grab sampling for fecal coliform) and analyzed by a
wastewater laboratory certified by the Division of Water Quality for all
applicable performance parameters. All systems to be included in the
performance audit shall be found by the third-party to be in compliance with
the design requirements of the Innovative Approval. In order to be granted
accepted status, the following conditions shall be met:
(A) the mean values of sample data from all
sites statewide in each sampling year shall meet NSF-40, TS-I or TS-II effluent
quality standards for each parameter, as applicable;
(B) no more than 20 percent of these randomly
sampled sites during each sampling year shall exceed the designated NSF-40,
TS-I or TS-II effluent quality standards for any parameter, as
applicable;
(C) the sampled systems
for the purposes of evaluation for Accepted System status shall be operational
for at least three years, with at least 10 systems in operation for at least
five years, and results from no more than 20 percent of these sampled systems
over five years old shall exceed the designated NSF-40, TS-I or TS-II effluent
quality standards for any parameter, as applicable;
(D) no data collected and analyzed pursuant
to Parts (A) through (C) of this Subparagraph shall be considered as part of
the audit that is collected before April 1, 2006;
(E) operation, maintenance or sampling
activities that have taken place or are proposed by the third-party at the
audited sites, including Operator reports, maintenance logs and projected
sample collection days and laboratory reports for samples analyzed, shall be
provided to the local health department and the State;
(F) if the performance criteria in Parts (A)
and (B) of this Subparagraph are not met in any sampling year, the sites from
which substandard samples are obtained shall be resampled for any non-compliant
parameter. If the performance criteria in Parts (A) and (B) of this
Subparagraph are still not met using the results from the resampled data, at
least 20 new sites or twice as many as were initially sampled, not to exceed
30, shall be sampled for all applicable performance parameters. If this second
set of sample results does not meet performance criteria stipulated in Parts
(A) and (B) of this Subparagraph, the accepted system status shall be
denied.
(9) Provisions
shall be in place for the manufacturer of a proprietary accepted system which
include an advanced pretreatment component to remain certified and listed under
NSF Standard 40 or another prior State approved evaluation, certification and
listing protocol that includes routine audits of the system manufacturing
facilities and of the performance of operational systems that verifies ongoing
conformity with the approved protocol.
(10) Other criteria for determining whether
the proposed system has been in general use, and other surveys, including
evaluations of different numbers of innovative and conventional systems,
designed to verify equal or superior performance of the innovative system
compared to the conventional system under actual field conditions in North
Carolina shall be approved by the state when they are demonstrated to have
comparable statistical validity as described in Subparagraphs (5) or (8) of
this Paragraph, as applicable. The State's review and approval of proposed
alternate criteria for determining whether the system has been in general use,
or of other proposed surveys are subject to review and concurrence by the
Commission.
(i) APPROVAL
AND PERMITTING OF ACCEPTED SYSTEMS: The following conditions apply to the
approval and permitting of accepted systems:
(1) When a petition or recommendation for an
accepted wastewater system designation is approved by the Commission, the State
shall notify local health departments and publish a listing of accepted
systems. The Commission shall impose any use, design, installation, operation,
maintenance, monitoring, and management conditions pursuant to
G.S.
130A-343.
(2) The local health department shall permit
systems designated as accepted nitrification trench systems that meet the
requirements of this Section, laws, and conditions of its accepted system
approval in an equivalent manner as a conventional system. The Owner may choose
to substitute an accepted system for a conventional system or another accepted
system without prior approval of the health department as long as no changes
are necessary in the location of each nitrification line, trench depth, or
effluent distribution method.
(3)
The owner may choose to substitute an accepted advanced pretreatment system for
another accepted advanced pretreatment system provided the owner applies to the
local health department and receives a revised Construction Authorization prior
to its installation.
(4) The type
of accepted system installed shall be indicated on the Operation Permit,
including designation of the manufacturer and model or unique code.
(j) MODIFICATION OF APPROVED
SYSTEMS: Where a manufacturer of an approved E & I or accepted system seeks
to modify such system or its conditions of approval (including siting or sizing
criteria) and retain its approved status, the manufacturer shall submit to the
State a request for approval of the proposed modification. If the manufacturer
demonstrates that the modified system will perform in a manner equal or
superior to the approved system in terms of structural integrity, chemical
durability, hydraulic performance and wastewater treatment, the state shall
approve the modified system with the same status as the previously approved
system. Approvals of proposed modifications to E & I systems pursuant to
this Paragraph shall be made by the State. Approvals of proposed modifications
to accepted systems pursuant to this Paragraph shall be made by the Commission
when the manufacturer's demonstration provides clear, convincing and cogent
supporting evidence. In order to confirm the satisfactory performance of an
approved modified accepted system, the manufacturer shall conduct a survey or
audit of installed modified systems in accordance with Subparagraphs (h)(5) or
(h)(8) of this Rule, as applicable, within one year of the fifth anniversary of
the approval of the modified system and shall submit the results of the survey
to the State. The State may modify, suspend, or revoke its approval of the
modified system based on the survey results or any other information that
supports a finding that the modified system does not perform in a manner equal
or superior to the previously approved E & I system. The Commission may
similarly modify, suspend, or revoke its approval of a modified accepted
system.
(k) The State may modify,
suspend or revoke the approval of a system as provided for in
G.S.
130A-343(c), and as follows:
(1) The system approval shall be modified as
necessary to comply with subsequent changes in laws or rules which affect their
approval.
(2) The approval of a
system may be modified, suspended or revoked upon a finding that:
(A) subsequent experience with the system
results in altered conclusions about system performance, reliability, or
design;
(B) the system or component
fails to perform in compliance with performance standards established for the
system; or
(C) the system or
component or the system applicant fails to comply with wastewater system laws,
rules or conditions of the approval.
(3) The State shall notify the Commission of
any action required for Commission approval of any modifications to the status
of an accepted system. The Commission may require the manufacturer or the State
to complete a follow-up survey of a proprietary nitrification trench system or
a performance audit of an advanced pretreatment system such as described in
this Rule if the Commission determines further information is necessary prior
to rendering a final decision on modification of the status of an accepted
system.
(l)
Modification, suspension or revocation of a system approval shall not affect
systems previously installed pursuant to the approval.
(m) Reductions in total nitrification trench
length allowed for systems, as compared to the system sizing requirements
delineated in Rule .1955 of this Section for conventional systems based upon
excavated trench width, apply only to drainfields receiving septic tank
effluent of domestic strength or better quality. The system may be used for
facilities producing non-domestic strength wastewater with nitrification trench
length and trench bottom area determined based upon excavated trench width
equal to what is required by Rule .1955 of this Section for a conventional
gravel trench system, with no reduction or application of an equivalency
factor. However, reductions up to 25 percent when allowed for approved
innovative or accepted system models may be applied for facilities producing
higher strength wastewater following a specifically approved pretreatment
system designed to assure effluent strength equal to or better than domestic
septic tank effluent, with a five-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) less than
150 milligrams per liter (mg/l), total suspended solids (TSS) less than 100
mg/l and fats, oil and grease (FOG) less than 30 mg/l.
(n) A Performance Warranty shall be provided
by the manufacturer of any approved innovative or accepted wastewater system
handling untreated septic tank effluent which allows for a reduction in the
total nitrification trench length of more than 25 percent as compared to the
total nitrification trench length required for a 36-inch wide conventional
wastewater system, pursuant to
G.S.
130A-343(j). The Department
shall approve the warranty when found in compliance with the applicable laws
and this Paragraph. When a wastewater system warranted according to
G.S.
130A-343(j) (warranty
system) is proposed to serve a residence, place of business, or place of public
assembly, the site shall include a repair or replacement area in accordance
with Rule .1945(b) of this Section or an innovative or accepted system approved
under this Rule with no more than a 25 percent reduction in excavated trench
bottom area. The following conditions are applicable for the performance
warranty and a system approved pursuant to this Paragraph:
(1) The Manufacturer shall provide the
approved Performance Warranty in effect on the date of the Operation Permit
issuance to the owner or purchaser of the system. The warranty shall be valid
for a minimum of five-years from the date the warranty system is placed into
operation.
(2) The Manufacturer
shall issue the Performance Warranty to the property owner through its
authorized installer who shall sign the Performance Warranty indicating the
system has been installed in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications,
any conditions of the system approval granted by the Department, and all
conditions of the Authorization to Construct a Wastewater System by the local
health department. The installer or contractor shall return a copy of the
signed Performance Warranty to the Manufacturer within 10 days indicating the
physical address or location of the facility served by the warranty system,
date the system was installed or placed into use, and type and model of system
installed.
(3) The Performance
Warranty shall provide that the manufacturer shall furnish all materials and
labor necessary to repair or replace a malfunctioning warranty system as
defined in Rule .1961(a) of this Section or a warranty system that failed to
meet any performance conditions of the approval. The system shall be repaired
or replaced with a fully functional wastewater system at no cost to the Owner,
in accordance with this Section and applicable laws.
(4) Performance Warranty repairs such as full
replacement of the nitrification system, extension of the nitrification system
or other repairs shall be completed pursuant to a repair Authorization to
Construct that is issued by the local health department in accordance with this
Section.
(5) The Performance
Warranty shall be attached to the Operation Permit issued by the Health
Department for the wastewater system. The Performance Warranty shall remain in
effect, notwithstanding change in ownership, to the end of the five-year
warranty period.
(o)
Manufacturers of proprietary systems approved under this Rule shall provide a
list of manufacturer's authorized installers to the Department and applicable
local health departments, and update this list whenever there are additions or
deletions. No Operation Permit shall be issued for a proprietary system
installed by a person not authorized by the Manufacturer, unless the
Manufacturer of the proprietary system specifically approves the installation
in writing.
(p) The local health
department shall include in its monthly activity report submitted to the State
the number of new system Operation Permits issued for E & I and accepted
systems. Additionally, the number of Operation Permits issued for repairs of E
& I and accepted systems, and repair system type shall be reported to the
State as part of the monthly activity report. The State shall accumulate and
store this installation data for future reference and surveys, including site
locations.
(q) The State shall
provide assistance and training to its authorized agents to assure approved E
& I and accepted systems are permitted, installed, operated and evaluated
in accordance with the system approval.
Authority
G.S.
130A-335(e),(f);
130A-343;
Eff. April
1, 1993;
Temporary Amendment Eff. June 24, 2003; February 1,
2003;
Amended Eff. June 1, 2006; February 1, 2005; May 1,
2004.