Laserfiche WebLink
Inspection Program. The rules, in 7080.0315, require the local municipality conduct an <br />inspection program to enforce the rules. The inspection program must specify the frequency and <br />times of inspections, the requirements of an inspection and an inspection protocol if an <br />inspection cannot be completed within a timely manner. Sections 4.20 through 4.23 outline a <br />basic inspection program. Specific details may be added to this section such as listing out what <br />components of the system must be inspected, determining the number of inspections required, <br />additional fees for multiple inspections, defining times for required inspections, such as on a <br />mound at scarification and material delivery, etc. A different or more detailed protocol for <br />missed inspections could also be developed at the discretion of the City. Staff is recommending <br />adopting the language suggested by the M.P.C.A. which limits the minimum number of <br />inspections to one. <br /> <br />Stop work orders. Section 4.30 provides a basic procedure for dealing with work that is being <br />done contrary to the ordinance. A different procedure for dealing with violations may be used at <br />the discretion of the City. Staff is recommending adopting the language suggested by the <br />M.P.C.A. <br /> <br />Who can do compliance inspections on existing systems. Section 4.40 contains language as to <br />who may do compliance inspections for existing systems. The model states that anyone qualified <br />who works for the City, is under contract to do that work for the City or who has a Designer I or <br />Inspector license from the state can do this inspection (as opposed to inspections for new <br />construction). This language allows greater flexibility for the City in that it allows qualified <br />outside parties to perform these inspections. Staff recommends retaining the wording suggested <br />by the M.P.C.A. <br /> <br />Replacement of failing septic system time limit. The rules require that local governments set a <br />reasonable time limit to require the replacement of a failing septic system. Section 4.41 A is <br />where the time limit is set in this ordinance. This model has it set at one year. It is staff's <br />understanding that this limit may be set for a longer period. It is staff recommendation to adopt <br />the one year period suggested by M.P.C.A. There is a mandatory ten month limit to upgrade <br />imminent public health threat systems. Section 4.42 B states the mandatory ten month limit to <br />upgrade imminent public health threat systems. The City may set a shorter time limit for this. It <br />is Staff's recommendation that the ten month limit suggested by M.P.C.A. be adopted. <br /> <br />Certificate of Compliance at point of property transfer. The rules require that a compliance <br />inspection be done when a bedroom permit is requested. The law requires that when a house is <br />sold, the seller disclose to the buyer what they know about the system, but the law does not <br />required the system be upgraded absent the issuance of a notice of non-compliance. Sections <br />4.43 through 4.46 all cover requiring a certificate of compliance (as distinct from a disclosure) <br />at the point of property transfer. Section 4.45 deals with sales that occur during a time when a <br />compliance inspection may not be able to be done. Wording could be added to this section to <br />require escrow accounts to be set up or some other method to ensure that the buyer and seller <br />have agreement on how a compliance inspection and upgrade, if needed, will be paid for. The <br />inspections department reports that many system failures which are reported occur shortly after <br />the transfer of property ownership, usually when the new owner water use is greater than that of <br />the former owner. Staff recommends adopting this language requiring mandatory inspection <br />upon transfer of property. <br /> <br /> <br />