Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994/09/01 - Board of Health i MASON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH SEPTEMBER 1, 1994 The Board of Health was called to order at 10:04 a.m. by Chairperson William O Hunter. Board Member Porter in attendance, Board Member Faughender absent. ATTENDANCE: William O. Hunter, Chairperson JoAnn Strozyk, Timbers Laura E. Porter, Board Member Curt Owen, Allyn Inn Dr. Mark E. Trucksess, Health Officer Sheila Guevia, Allyn Inn Brad Banner, General Services Director Barbara Nelson Steve Kutz, Director of Nursing Jody Lund Pam Denton, Health Department Staff Carl Mease Will Satak, Health Department Staff Daniel Frishman Nancy LaMusga, Health Services Educator Harry Comer, Town Pub & Deli Sean Hanlon, Journal John Post, Spencer Lake Tavern Jerry Carter, JR's Restaurant Mark Tran Jim Manning, Mill Creek Inn Al Adams Ralph Wingert Henry Minch Russ Austin Philip Barnett, Runway Cafe Richard & Ann Scroggs Geraldine Pinckney Howard N. Godat, Godat & Assoc. Kathy Geist, City of Shelton Ron Seller RECESS/RECONVENING Board Member Porter moved for a recess to allow their meeting location to be changed from its current location in the Building#3 Conference Room to the Memorial Hall in order to provide sufficient seating capacity for those in attendance. Motion seconded by Chairperson Hunter and carried unanimously. Vote: Porter yes; Hunter yes; Faughender absent. Chairperson Hunter reconvened the meeting at 10:20 a.m. He noted that public comment would be held at the end of the meeting. MEETING MINUTES Board Member Porter moved that the minutes of the July 7th and August 4th meetings be approved as circulated. Seconded by Chairman Hunter and carried unanimously. Vote: Porter yes; Hunter yes; Faughender absent. APPEAL - SCROGGS Board Member Porter asked if those parties present for the appeal hearing requested by Richard and Ann Scroggs would be willing to waive their right as first priority on today's agenda in order for the Board to hear public comment on the tobacco use regulation. Waiver was given. Board Member Porter moved that the Board alter their agenda and take public comment on the Tobacco Use Regulation first. Seconded by Chairperson Hunter and carried unanimously. Porter yes; Hunter yes; Faughender absent. MASON COUNTY BOARD OF IJEALTH September 1, 1994 - Page 2 of 12 TOBACCO-USE REGULATION Dr. Trucksess presented the Board and audience members with copies of his tobacco-use proposal for restaurants located. in Mason County. He noted that this document was a broad outline on how the proposal could work, and he would want to refer the matter to a citizens advisory board and/or the Restaurant Advisory Committee so that a more detailed approach could be developed. Chairperson Hunter advised than at a previous Board of Health meeting they had agreed to send this matter to the Restaurant Advisory Committee for review before the Board took any action and he would still prefer that route. Will Satak informed that the next meeting of the Restaurant Advisory Committee would be on September 20th at 10:00 a.m. in Building 3. Brad Banner stated that he would secure the Memorial Hall so there would be sufficient seating. He encouraged those present today to attend this advisory committee meeting, noting that the committee would appreciate their input. He advised that a public notice would be placed in the newspaper confirming the location. Board Member Porter commented that she was willing to hear public comments at this time. Chairperson Hunter stated he was also, however, no action would be taken today. He reported that Barb Nelson gave each Board Member a copy of the EPA report entitled Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking: Lung Cancer and Other Disorders, which she asked them to read. Board Member Porter advised the audience that on page 3 of Dr. Trucksess's report was a summary of the recommendations he was making to the Board. Jody Long who stated she was a taxpayer in the city and county commented that she was absolutely in favor of the proposal, noting that she did not visit most establishments because of the smoking and the fact that the smoking and non-smoking areas were not separated. She noted that Dr. Trucksess' recommendations asked that a restaurant allowing smoking declare they were a smoking establishment. They would not ban smoking outright. Harry Comer, Town Pub & Deli, commented that they were all adults who pay taxes, and as business owners, they could decide what they do according to the law. They could make their establishments smoking or nonsmoking and let the public decide if they wanted to come to their establishment. In reading the proposal, there was nothing stating bars and taverns were to be exempt, which he felt should be incorporated. Curt Owen of the Allyn Inn stated that he had a-payroll in a small community, and that a smoking ban would take about 30% of his business away. He was against regulation by any government entity and against increased health fees. He was sick of seeing everyone make more money than they were. They do not need any more regulations, he was totally against the proposal. Carl Mease commented that he was a nonsmoker and he did not own a business. However, he was against the regulation. He does not like breathing other people's smoke, and he agrees with the statistics even though there were probably some statistics not as strong as the ones quoted _ by Dr. Trucksess. Even though it bothered him that the smoke was in the same air space, he questioned who owned this air space. It was not Mason County and not the Health Department. �{ He believed the matter was a personal property right, and if a business wanted to have smoking, that should be their choice. A private citizen could decide whether or not to go into the r MASON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH September 1, 1994 - Page 3 of 12 establishment. If the nonsmoking area was not adequate, they could mention that but the business owner had the right to take this advice or leave it. No one has to go into any bar or restaurant in the county, they are not forced to do so. This would be a matter of government intervention. If it was believed that this matter was the state's leading hazard, he had a problem with the Health Department. If it really was the leading hazard, they were doing well, considering all the sexual diseases. He wondered who would enforce this policy: They wouldn't have smoke police, but the Health Department would be fining the businesses who already pay taxes. He stated he was against the proposal. Jim Manning, Mill Creek Inn, commented that they have a very difficult time attracting and maintaining the restaurant dollar in this county, and if a nonsmoking ban was enforced it would be detrimental to the restaurants in our town. He stated he was also a nonsmoker, and if people who smoke are a minority, minorities are something we should take care of. John Post, Spencer Lake Tavern, stated he was also a non-smoker who was against the proposal. The county has to determine if this is a health issue or a cigarette prohibition act, which it looks like. He agreed with the last four speakers who do not see a need for the ordinance. Phil Barnett, local business owner of the Runway Cafe, remarked that he has a payroll and pays taxes and was totally opposed to a nonsmoking ban. The lounge businesses have suffered during the last five years since the stricter DWI laws have been instituted. The businesses in Puyallup where a similar ban has been passed, have been hit extremely hard in a very short time. He suggested that the Board look at the Puyallup ban for a period of time to see what the outcome there was. He stated that this was too much power held by a small body of people whose actions affect thousands more people. He remarked that carcinogens were not only found in tobacco smoke but also in mother's milk and in the air we breath. It was impossible to protect themselves from all of them. He stated that this proposal was based on fear, and that carcinogens did not necessarily cause cancer, but fear itself causes cancer. Geraldine Pinckney stated she was a housewife who was not concerned with statistics. There are many in the world, and they cannot all be controlled. She wondered where the statistics were quoted from. Ms. Pinckney stated that these statistics cannot all be contributed to smoking, that genes that go back for generations have an impact. What the family has eaten for generations also has an affect. She did not believe the ban was the right thing to do. JoAnn Strozyk, Timbers Restaurant, remarked that she felt like they were taking away their freedom of choice. If someone doesn't want to come into a particular restaurant because they allow smoking, they don't have to. She noted that there were a few nonsmoking establishments now, and she did not go to them because she was a smoker. Chairperson Hunter reminded the audience that this was just a proposal. Nancy LaMusga, Health Educator, commented that a non-smoking ban was not being proposed, but instead a compromise in which people could make a conscious choice of taking in smoke or not. The proposal was not saying that smoking was banned, but it was saying that there needed to be a sign declaring that they were entering an establishment where smoking was allowed. If you look at the fact that it was not a ban but choices to make a decision, we could enter into a phase to do what was right for the community. r; MASON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH September 1, 1994 - Page 4 of 12 Kathy Geist, City of Shelton, stated that people were not understanding that this was just a proposal. She agreed that the wording was a little strong, however, if you read the summary it was clear that any establishment could make the choice to be a smoking establishment if they clearly state this fact so that anyone walking in was aware of it. She did not agree that the statistics were wrong, noting that she had five close family members who smoked and also died of lung cancer. People can make a conscious choice, and she as a non-smoker, makes a choice to frequent establishments which have separate non-smoking areas. Some restaurants have smoking and nonsmoking areas, but they are not adequately separated so it makes no difference. These establishments do not care about the patrons who do not want to breathe in a lot of smoke. She does not go to these places and she does not take people from out of town there. Ms. Geist asked that those establishments who choose to have a nonsmoking area in their restaurants to really make it a nonsmoking area. She noted that there were two places in Shelton which were designated as nonsmoking establishments and they are packed all the time. Harry Comer, Town Pub & Deli, asked where it stops in the making of laws. Is a law forthcoming which says you cannot smoke in your own home when there are children under the age of 18? Ron Seller remarked that he delivers beverages to taverns and lounges across the state, and represents these establishments. Other areas have tried this and even though it may be admirable, it was also very detrimental to their business. The proposal was not working in these areas, not being enforced. Chairperson Hunter remarked that this matter would be going to the Restaurant Advisory Committee, and that no decision would be made today. Mr. Seller stated that he had difficulty with employees signing a statement that they understood the risks of working in a tobacco-smoke environment. As a tavern owner, this would be like admitting there was a risk or problem and if someone were to get a disease this signed statement could come back to haunt the establishment. Chairperson Hunter commented that when any ordinance was being considered, the wording of the document was scrutinized by the Prosecuting Attorney. Barb Nelson stated she was a private citizen who gave copies of the EPA report to the Board, hoping they would read the document and see that there was a controversy on whether or not second-hand smoke was a health risk. She stated that one of Dr. Trucksess' statements disagreed with the EPA findings. Additional hearings reviewing this study and its findings would be held, and she was interested in seeing those findings before the Board considered this matter further. She stated she could not be admitted to the local hospital as a smoker, and she would like the Board to take further thought on this issue before closing further avenues to her. Chairperson Hunter stated the Board appreciated all the comments made today on this subject. APPEAL - SCROGGS At the hour of 10:55 a.m., Chairperson Hunter swore in everyone wishing to testify in the Scroggs appeal hearing. It was decided that the Health Department staff would present their report first. Ms. Pam Denton, lead on-site staff person for the Mason County Environmental Health Department, gave a brief chronological summary beginning in February, 1994, at which time her department had been notified in writing by Howard Godat's office that the Scroggs' home in MASON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH September 1, 1994 - Page 5 of 12 Union had burned down and that they were requesting that the Health Department review their records. The Scroggs wanted to rebuild, being allowed to hook into the existing system. In a record search, they came upon a 1970 application made by the Scroggs but it had no final asbuilt or approval. In order to determine what system was in the ground, an asbuilt was needed. In May, the Department received an asbuilt showing two 1000 gallon septic tanks and 50-55 lineal feet of drainfield. It did not specify if the trench was 2 or 3 feet wide, but they could assume that the drainfield absorption area was approximately 100 to 155 square feet. A letter was sent out stating that the tanks needed to be pumped as well as additional information being requested. It was found that the reserve area was placed in the area of the pickleball cemented court. Since this location was not allowed, the Scroggs were informed that a variance was necessary to locate the reserve area under the pickleball court. The variance request came in and was reviewed by Brad Banner, Health Services Director. According to policy, he expressed his concerns on the system, Those being that a 100-155 square foot absorption area was extremely undersized for a 5 bedroom home, as well as strong concerns that the system would not adequately treat and dispose of effluent. Board Member Porter asked if their concerns were with the variance request or the system as a whole. Ms. Denton replied that the concerns were regarding the system as a whole. At this point, an environmental review was requested so that test holes could be dug to determine the soil type and depth to the restrictive layer. This environmental review was done in July, and Ms. Denton inspected the site again herself because the original inspector was newly hired and she wanted to verify the results. Ms. Denton met with Mr. Godat and Mr. Scroggs on site to inspect `— the test holes. Three holes had been dug in the area of the drainfield. The one in the center had 10 inches of useable soil over very compacted to cemented sandy loam which appeared to be fill from the old highway placed there to create the lot. Another hole into the drainfield showed 24 to 34 inches below grade exposed drainrock from the existing drainfield where the pipe could be seen. Standing water was found at 34 inches, during late July after a period of extremely hot weather. She noted they were very concerned with the compactness and also what appeared to be direct discharge into the water table. Ms. Denton conveyed this information to Mr. Banner, and it was determined that the system was very far out of compliance. The system was undersized, there was a cemented layer, and the biggest concern was the discharge into the soil; the fact that there was inadequate treatment and disposal. In summary, Ms. Denton stated that based on the fact that the system was so far out of compliance, there were two possible choices to consider; either to require compliance before the Scroggs rebuilt or to consider it as a repair and follow repair guidelines. Pre-treatment standard 1 would be needed to place the system in full compliance which would require additional drainfield, the removal of the pickleball court, conforming reserve area, and the reduction in the number of bedrooms. She noted that five bedrooms on an extremely small lot which was encumbered with cement parking and drives which had a very limited area for a drainfield could not be approved. The other option would be to call it a repair which would not require the reserve area or reduce the number of bedrooms but it would require a statement of nonconforming repair be placed on the deed so a potential purchaser would be aware of the nonconformance. She stated they had concerns with a non-compliance repair because it would allow the building of the home, with an investment of thousands of dollars, and there would be no reserve system. If the system failed, they would have an expensive home with no place to go for repair. MASON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH September 1, 1994 - Page 6 of 12 _ Chairperson Hunter asked if there were questions of Ms. Denton. Board Member Porter asked about the inspection of the test holes. Ms. Denton responded that the original inspection was made by Jim Tobey who was not familiar with the case and was not aware of the intent of the inspection. After it was explained, Mr. Tobey returned on July 13th with extremely cautious results. On July 26th the site was reinspected by Ms. Denton. Chairperson Hunter asked if anyone else from the Health Department wished to testify. Ms. Denton stressed the need for a full design of the system whether full compliance or repair was made. Board Member Porter asked what decision was being appealed by the Scroggs. Ms. Denton replied that the Department was requiring the Scroggs to bring their system into compliance either by repair or by complete compliance. Board Member Porter asked if it was a decision with two options. Dr. Trucksess stated it was his understanding that the Scroggs wanted to use the current septic system as it exists, and that request had been denied. Mr. Russell Austin, Jr., appellant's attorney, called Mr. Scroggs to testify. Mr. Austin asked the following questions of Mr. Scroggs. A: Where do you live? S: Aberdeen, WA. A: Do you own property on the south shore of Hood Canal? S: yes, since 1968. A: When you had a problem with your septic system in 1970 how did you determine the problem existed? S: Soap suds from washing were found on the beach. A: What did you do when this leaching was seen? S: I filed for a permit, and put in a new system. A: Was there ever any signs that this new system of two 1000 gallon septic tanks and drainfield were not functioning properly? S: No. A: Were tests performed on the oysters on your beach? S: Yes, they were tested seven times between 1987 and 1993. A: What were the results? S: Substantially below the 230 level of fecal coliform which would be considered dangerous; the last year of testing showed 40 out of a possible 230. Mr. Austin stated,that he had left a copy of these tests results for each of the Board of Health members at their office this morning. A: Was your home burned? S: Yes, it was totally destroyed by fire in 1993. A: Do you plan to rebuild? S: Yes. A: Have you hired an architect to design your new home? S: Yes. A: What was the square footage of the old home? S: Almost 4,000 square feet. A: Is this home similar? S: It is designed substantially the same, with the same number of bedrooms. A: Is anything significantly different from before? S: No, the interior has been restructured but it will be more of the same house than different. A: Did you retain a civil engineer? S: Yes, Mr. Godat. A: Do you desire to cooperate with the Health Department to endeavor to comply even though you do not think it is equired. S: Yes. A: Do you want a safe and sanitary system? S: Yes. A: Do you believe you have a safe system, based on the advice from Mr. Godat? S: Yes. A: Have you tentatively approved a new fall back proposal that Mr. Godat will make? S: Yes. A: Are you willing to place a covenant on the property placing the reserve area under the pickleball court? S: Yes.. A: Was there anything suggested that you were not willing to do? S: I was not willing to tear up the pickleball court unless it was established that it was necessary. We understood it would be a reserve and if necessary, it would be torn up, and agreed to this; writing a letter to that affect. A: Is your parcel of property small? S: We have more space than our neighbor on one side, on the other side it is the same size. Our system is located in the back, while our neighbors' systems are in the front of their property, about seven feet from the water. MASON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH September 1, 1994 - Page 7 of 12 Mr. Howard Godat, President of the Howard Godat Engineering Firm, was called next by Mr. Austin. Mr. Godat explained that he was a licensed engineer in the States of Washington and Oregon, with a good ideal of experience in Mason County with waste water systems and their designs. He was the City Engineer for Shelton for 17 1/2 years on retainer. A: Did you supervise the uncovering of the system? G: Tony Godat, a licensed designer was present and observed the test holes and details on site, then a report was submitted to the Scroggs in March, a copy was left in the Commissioners' Office. A: What did the report find? G: A reasonable request was made by the Health Department to find out what kind of system it was because there was no asbuilt. A backhoe was brought on site, holes were dug, and the septic tank pumping was observed. The tanks appeared to be in good condition and the drainfield looked like it was working. The waste water facilities were working with no sign of failure. A: Was additional work requested to be done? G: Since that time, they were required to do more work, additional testing was done, which was reviewed and re-reviewed, and logs were prepared by Pam Denton. You heard only two choices in regard to the system. Right or wrong, it was a matter of law. If Ms. Denton is right, a system one would be required, that is her judgment and the position of the Health Department. Initially, we found the system in tact, it had functioned for a number of years and had not failed. The owner's volunteered to increase or better the facilities there. Tony Godat had made a recommendation on upgrading; initially for a treatment one and utilization of the existing drainfield. After review by the Health Department, they would not accept the existing drainfield, stating treatment one with utilization of pressure distribution and as much lawn area as available for the drainfield would be required. At that time, that would have been satisfactory and acceptable to the Health Department, but it turned out later it was not satisfactory. To this date, the only thing we have advising us is that we have to do treatment one and are only allowed to utilize the number of bedrooms justified by the drainfield area. Without removal of the pickleball court it would provide under normal conditions, a 2 bedroom home. There was no reason or justification for treatment one, they are well beyond the water setback, and it was not a repair because the system has never failed. The testing they performed did not indicate the system had failed, but he had heard that the Health Department had said it failed. Mr. Austin asked if, in working with grandfathered properties, had he ever seen an instance where the Health Department had proposed these types of conditions. Mr Godat responded no, but that it had to be qualified because they were not operating under regulations then that they are now. Mr. Austin asked if he was surprised at the number of hoops to be jumped through. Mr. Godat replied that he was quite surprised by the lack of direction to begin with. They never really had any specific design criteria from the Health Department. Mr. Austin asked if his office had designed an alternative system that would be acceptable to the Scroggs. Mr. Godat answered that they have prepared a concept drawing using the existing tanks, with a bio max treatment one facility with a pumping station and utilization of yard area for a disposal bed of 420 square feet. Mr. Austin asked if, in Mr. Godat's professional opinion, would this be adequate for a 5 bedroom summer home. Mr Godat replied that yes it would be. Mr. Austin asked if he had an indication from the Health Department if this system would be approved. Mr. Godat did not know if it had been submitted yet. Mr. Godat gave out copies of the design, and Chairperson Hunter listed it as Exhibit I. Mr. Austin commented that he would like a copy of his document to the Board entered as an article of evidence for statement of law. This document was retrieved from the Commissioners' Office and marked as Exhibit II. MASON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH September 1, 1994 - Page 8 of 12 Board Member Porter asked if the Scroggs were appealing the denial of their variance request. Mr. Austin replied that they had asked for a variance to use the pickleball court area as a reserve area along with the existing system, and that had been denied by Mr. Banner and by 'Dr. Trucksess. Ms. Denton commented that she would get a copy of the variance request for the Board. Mr. Austin stated they were asking the Board to approve the variance, and as a second choice, if they were so inclined, to direct the Health Department to review the design rapidly since six to seven months of time had been wasted. He stated he was not blaming the county, however, the building season was getting away from them and they may be denied the whole building season. He asked that the Board of Health act quickly and assist them in getting the Scroggs' home rebuilt. Mr. Godat remarked that one major issue was the ground water table. He was present with Ms. Denton during the inspection, and there was no argument with the classification of the soil, but their first site inspection did not show the ground water level as indicated by Ms. Denton's report. Ms. Denton read aloud the original test results. She stated that the comments were brief and other known items had not been included. That is why she did another inspection at no cost to the Scroggs. Mr. Godat stated they may not have seen the water if the area had not been disturbed. There was heavy watering done by Mrs. Scroggs the day before, and a good deal of water might have run into the hole. The material from above would have accounted for the standing water. It would seem logical that if there was a problem in July that it would have been -' more than evident during the rainy season and there was no indication that occurred. Board Member Porter asked Mr. Godat how he determined that there was no evidence of a failing system. Mr. Godat replied that when the testing was completed on the drainfield, the area was exposed, the tanks were pumped, and they appeared to be functioning as designed. There was no evidence of failure on site. A failure indication would be that the drainfield had heavy dark green grass, odor, and leaching on the beach as witnessed in 1970. There was none of these indications that the system was not functioning properly. Mr. Austin remarked that they were faced with conflicting positions by the same government. In their capacity as Commissioners, they make laws and as such are familiar with these laws. Under the Shoreline Master Program Chapter 7.13 on development near shorelines, Section .050 deals with permit applications and Subsection (k) deals with the issuance of septic systems. Section 7.13.020 applies to nonconformance and contains the grandfathering clause. Mr. Austin read aloud this section. He stated that this was the essence of their request. They were not seeking an application for a new system, they were seeking a building permit to reconstruct a home which does require the Health Department to sign off. This system has operated very well for 24 years, and passed testing with flying colors. They wanted to reinstate usage of a system with no record of failure or defect whatsoever, and they were being blocked. He asked that the Board overrule the Health Department's decision on the grounds they made a mistake of law. And, if they vary from their law, to have the courtesy extended that the Department operates with reasonableness, if it was possible under the circumstances, and speed in granting relief. Ar MASON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH September 1, 1994 - Page 9 of 12 Mr. Banner stated that the Scroggs have been extremely courteous and cooperative with the staff even though this has been very trying for them. The Health Department staff has worked with the Godats in the past and have high regard for their professionalism and expertise. He noted that they disagree with the Godats on this matter, but it was not indicative of how they felt about them. The Department did talk to the Deputy Prosecuting Attorney about the shoreline act quoted by Mr. Austin and the deputy had indicated that there was another section beyond the one quoted by Mr. Austin which related to this matter. The Board was given a staff summary table which was labeled Exhibit III. Mr. Banner stated that one concern was the fact that this would be a five bedroom home. Conceptually it would be adequate for summer residence, but there was a concern whether it would work if it was used full time. It may work at the existing conditions, but may not in the future. What the Department approves has to be consistent with state regulations. Exhibit III compares full conformance with marine repair. The Scroggs do not have a permit; the design submitted today was the first design submitted. In looking at the site again this past Monday, there was still standing water in one test hole. Ms. Denton commented that the oyster tests completed were strictly of oyster meat on that particular day, it was not on water quality, just that particular oyster on that particular day for fecal coliform. She noted that water temperature reflects the recycling ability of the oysters. According to their policies, direct discharge was considered a failure, and their letter to Tony Godat on March 2nd indicated that by definition it was a failing system. She noted that this was not the first mention of this fact, that it was consistent with what the Department was requiring because of the non-conformance. Mr. Austin remarked that they were being forced into a very uncomfortable box calling this a non-conforming system on the deed. It was his experience that this would make it difficult if not impossible to finance the purchase of this property because lending institutions were not interested in dealing with non-conforming systems. This system has 24 years of experience of non-failure, and now the Department was saying it was failing. Mr. Godat, who has more experience, says there was no failurg. The Scroggs were asking to rebuild, which request was consistent with the Shorelines Management Act which deals with septics. Mr. Austin stated he did not disagree with the section noted by Mr. Banner as told by the Prosecutor's Office. However, he felt it did not relate to this matter because there was no sign of failure. Mr. Godat commented that the regulation the staff was relating to in their staff summary was a State of Washington .regulation, which goes through the definitions which constitute non- conformance. He believed they were on the borderline for requiring nonconforming designation. There was no acknowledgment of the separation between system and water and that the system' had worked all these years. A non-conforming marine repair does not allow an owner to operative without a great deal of testing and monitoring. Board Member Porter stated that it appeared there were two different positions regarding the water in the test holes. Ms. Denton presented the soil logs which were marked as Exhibit IV. She also presented a letter from her to Mr. and Mrs. Scroggs dated August 1, 1994, which was marked as Exhibit V. L�l MASON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH September 1, 1994 - Page 10 of 12 l Allen Adams commented that he was testifying for and on behalf of water quality as chairman of the Lower Hood Canal Action Plan. He stated that many systems were installed prior to regulations, some installed without permits and inspections. Past practices by residents and regulators alike have contributed to current conditions. His committee was made up of two dozen residents and they have identified certain problem statements. Two of these apply to this particular case. Number 1 - Many on-site sewage systems are located in soils with severe limitations for standard on-site system applications and number 7 - Grandfathered on-site sewage systems are being subjected to use beyond original design specifications. Some of the goals established by his committee are to eliminate failures in the Lower Hood Canal Water Shed and to encourage state and county agencies to provide information and assistance to landowners with regard to alternative on-site sewage systems. Their number one action step states that all on-site sewage system repairs and new construction result in on-site sewage systems in full compliance with WAC 246-272. Mr. Adams commented that within the next three years there would probably be on-site system dye testing as part of the Clean Water District's work on polluted waters. He noted that it would be well for the Scroggs to make sure their system was perfect. Mr. Allen presented written documentation which was marked Exhibit VI. Mr. Austin remarked that water quality was very important and there were ways to test failed systems. He stated the Board should grant the variance. If the system failed in the future, they would deal with it at that time. Henry Minch stated he would like to testify on behalf of the County Health Board. Chairperson Hunter stated they would hear his testimony, but they would have to ask the Prosecutor if his testimony could be accepted. Mr. Minch commented that Hood Canal was one of his favorite places, and that he was a member of the Subarea Planning Committee for North Mason. He stated he wrote a letter to the Belfair Herald entitled "Grandfather is Killing the Canal" which refers to the problem with the grandfather clause as it pertains to septic systems. He asked to read the letter. Mr. Austin objected, stating they also want clean water, and agree with Mr. Minch in this regard but disagree that they were polluting. Chairperson Hunter advised that the Board had read his letter. Mr. Minch stated that in his experience with on-site septic systems which have water in the trench the next morning after watering was completed, it meant that the site was not perking and that the subsoil was not conducive to the system. Chairperson Hunter closed the appeal hearing at 12:00 noon. He stated they would have their written ruling as soon as possible. Usually it was within 4-6 weeks but they would try to have it released within 2-3 weeks. He thanked everyone for their testimony. Board Member Porter stated that she did not have a copy of the variance. She asked if Mr. Austin would permit it to be entered as a piece of evidence; he concurred. Ms. Denton supplied a copy of the variance which was marked Exhibit VII. Chairperson Hunter stated they would see that a copy of what was submitted by Ms. Denton be forwarded to Mr. Austin. HEALTH OFFICER'S REPORT ( Dr. Trucksess reported that the first death related to the Hanta Virus occurred at St. Peters Hospital. The man was from Lewis County, and it was suspected that he acquired the virus while out-of-state. He submitted information regarding the prevention of this virus by the proper handling of rodents. � 1 aS MASON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH September 1, 1994 - Page 11 of 12 Dr. Trucksess reported that a second case of rabies from a rabid animal had been reported in the county. This was from a bat in the Matlock area. Communicable Disease Report was reviewed. CONDOM DISTRIBUTION PROGRAM Nancy LaMusga gave a brief description of the educational/distribution program she has developed pertaining to the safe use of latex condoms. She stated there could be community mobilization in the way of community forums to discuss concerns. There would be resistance to this proposal as well as support. A portion of the program would entail the county purchasing vending machines to dispense condoms. She had a list of the companies which provide these, along with their prices and pictures of the machines. She noted that the Health Department would not be encouraging youth to have sex but would rather be informing those who were sexually active how to use the condoms safely. Another portion of the program would be the formation of peer educators for outreach education. This would enable individuals to be educated in abstinence, delay of the beginning of sexual activity, and also the usage of condoms in preventing sexually transmitted diseases and aids. Ms. LaMusga stated she was available to answer the Board's questions, noting she would like to present a more detailed report. The Board instructed her to give another report during their briefing meeting, noting, however, that any decision regarding this matter would be made during a Board of Health meeting. PUBLIC HEARING SET - SOLID WASTE HANDLING & FACILITIES REGULATION Brad Banner reported that it was the Prosecutor's Office opinion that the Health Officer and then the Hearings Board should hear appeals. He noted that a public hearing to consider changes to the regulation would be necessary. Board Member Porter moved that a public hearing to consider changes to the Solid Waste Handling and Facilities Regulation be held on Thursday, October 6th at 10:00 a.m. She then withdrew her motion, noting that the Board would be attending a conference out of town on that date. Board Member Porter moved that the next regular Board of Health meeting be rescheduled to September 29th at 10:00 a.m. in Building #3. Seconded by Chairperson Hunter and carried unanimously. Vote: Porter yes; Hunter yes; Faughender absent. Board Member Porter moved that a public hearing to consider changes to the Solid Waste Handling and Facilities Regulation be set at 10:15 a.m. on September 29th. Seconded by Chairperson Hunter and carried unanimously. Vote: Porter yes; Hunter yes; Faughender absent. Board Member Porter moved that the Board of Health meeting be adjourned at 12:20 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Vote: Porter yes; Hunter yes; Faughender absent. i MASON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH September 1, 1994 - Page 12 of 12 MASON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH William O. Hunter, Chairperson Laura E. Porter, Boar tuber (absent) M. L. Faughender, Board Member Respectfully submitted, Lorraine Coots