Eastham board hears plan to phase out cesspools, require targeted septic inspections

At its July 20 meeting the Eastham Select Board heard a detailed presentation from Hilary Greenberg Lemos and Katie O'Neil on draft Board of Health regulations that would phase out cesspools in environmentally sensitive areas and require targeted septic inspections.

Katie O'Neil, shared services coordinator for the Outer Cape Wellness Collaborative, told the board the four Outer Cape towns — Eastham, Truro, Wellfleet and Provincetown — received $300,000 from the Public Health Excellence grant to expand regional public-health services and planning. The collaborative work helped produce the draft regulation and the public outreach behind it, O'Neil said.

Greenberg described the BOH's outreach: an initial mailing to cesspool owners in November 2024, two public workshops on the draft regulations and two subsequent public hearings. She said town council is reviewing the draft and that the BOH will schedule at least one additional public hearing before setting effective dates.

Under the draft, septic inspections would be required before the issuance of any non-de minimis building permit and as a condition of property transfer if an inspection has not been done in the preceding two years. Greenberg told the board the requirement is not intended to trap routine repairs such as new shingles or windows. The draft also targets properties with older 78/95-code systems that are 20 years or older for inspection and potential upgrade.

Greenberg described a phased schedule: Phase 1 would require replacement or connection for cesspools in environmentally sensitive areas within two years of the regulation taking effect; additional upland areas would follow within three years. The BOH would retain options such as administrative consent orders in certain sewer districts to allow a temporary delay until sewer connection becomes available.

Board members and residents pressed on scale and cost. Greenberg said the town's mapping tool shows roughly 145 older systems of the 78/95 type in town and that 54 parcels in the environmentally sensitive area currently have cesspools; another 192 upland parcels were cited in materials as part of the broader category. She estimated typical costs for alternative/IA systems in the community could range roughly from $20,000 for a basic system up to about $40,000 for higher-end IA installations, and noted that service-contract testing commonly runs about $1,000–$1,500 per year for four annual samplings (seasonal systems twice yearly).

Those figures prompted concern about what some board members called an unfunded mandate. Select board members said requiring upgrades without clearer funding for lower-income or seasonal-property owners would impose a heavy financial burden. One member said, "This whole thing makes my chest tight because it is enormously expensive," and asked staff to identify a clear path for financial assistance before moving forward.

Staff and board members noted some programs already exist: the Aqua Fund (a low-interest county loan program) is available to many property owners, and the town will provide outreach about potential state tax rebates and other assistance. Board member Rich noted the Aqua Fund can offer loans with rates ranging from 0% (income-eligible) to about 2% for higher incomes; staff also said some state tax incentives have been increased (the board asked staff to confirm the current percentage and repayment details for public distribution).

Greenberg said the BOH also added other regulatory changes: PFAS testing for private wells outside the public water system (proposed at once every five years for commercial, residential and leased properties not connected to the town water system), nuisance-rule extensions (dust, noise and odor), a bundled-pricing requirement for trash/recycling pickup to qualify for additional grant funding, and a new kratom regulation after public testimony raised concerns about labeling, unknown contents and local retail availability.

Greenberg urged the public to review the map overlays and requested feedback; she said the BOH will return the regulation to the board after the town council review and additional public hearing(s). The board asked staff to explore clearer funding pathways, provide precise cost and rebate information and return with a recommended communication plan. The BOH told the board it will consider adjusting phased priorities if the select board or community requests narrowing the initial list of properties to limit short-term impacts.

The BOH presentation will be followed by at least one more public hearing once draft language returns from town council; the board did not vote on the regulation at the July 20 meeting.