Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wastewater Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Garfield County public health unveils draft on-site wastewater rule updates to align with state Regulation 43
Summary
Public health staff presented a red-lined draft of updated on-site wastewater treatment system (OWTS) regulations — aligning local rules with state 'Regulation 43' changes — and outlined key technical changes, stakeholder engagement steps and a proposed Board of Health hearing in mid-March.
Garfield County Public Health staff presented the Board with a red-lined draft of proposed updates to county on-site wastewater treatment system (OWTS) regulations. Staff said the changes are intended to align county requirements with updated state rules (referred to in the presentation as Regulation 43) and to clarify local administrative processes.
Staff highlighted the principal revisions: new technical definitions to improve consistent interpretation and enforcement; a change requiring septic tank cleanouts within 50 feet of a structure (previously 5 feet); prohibition of serial distribution systems; revised soil classification and design criteria (including new evaluation standards for rock-type soils); and the addition of new treatment levels (TL3 and TL4) that include disinfection and reduced vertical separation allowances. The draft also clarifies ADU and short-term rental standards, elevates documentation and sand gradation testing requirements, and outlines required inspection reports for repair and alteration permits.
Public-health staff said the draft avoids creating a county licensure requirement for contractors; instead it establishes competency criteria and multiple pathways for demonstrating qualification — including national certification, professional engineer certification or documented on-site wastewater experience — aimed at allowing experienced local excavators and system professionals to continue working while ensuring technical rigor.
Commissioners and attendees raised concerns about potential burdens on small local contractors and whether long-standing, practical installers would be sidelined. The staff acknowledged the concern and pointed to the draft’s experience-based third pathway as a way to retain local practitioners. Staff asked the commissioners for direction to proceed with a stakeholder outreach period (targeted Feb. 4–Mar. 16) and a Board of Health hearing around March 16; commissioners generally directed staff to proceed and to include industry representatives on advisory or technical review groups.
Staff said further work will include taking stakeholder feedback, adjusting draft language as needed, and submitting the draft to CDPHE for review in alignment with the stated state timelines.
