ORDERS:
CONSENT ORDER
This matter is before me upon joint motion by the parties for entry
of a Consent Order. This contested case matter arose out of a denial of
a request for approval of a 10-lot subdivision for use of septic tanks
for wastewater disposal. The Petitioner requested approval for a proposed
subdivision known as Pinckney Street Dock, TMS # 766-00-021, 766-00-022,
766-00-023, 766-00-024, 766-00-025, 766-00-027, 766-00-034, and 766-00-035,
in Charleston County, South Carolina. The property in question is comprised
of fill material as a result of dredging activities that were performed
in the Intracoastal Waterway and Jeremy Creek. Additionally, there are
two existing septic tank systems currently in use and there is documentation
of three additional systems, which previously were operated on the property.
The Department staff commenced a review of the site to determine the
location of the Seasonal High Water Table ("SHWT"). On March 23, 2001,
the Department notified the Petitioners by letter that the subdivision
could not be approved as proposed, due to the fact that the Department
could not accurately determine the SHWT on a portion of the proposed subdivision
because of the existence of fill material on site. A copy of the March
23 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit A. In order to determine the SHWT
on the affected portions of the site, the Department informed the Petitioners
that a water table monitoring study would be required.
On July 27, 2001, the Petitioners submitted another plat to the Department,
showing a subdivision into five lots, on that area of the site where the
Department believed that the applicant met the minimum standards set forth
in R. 61-56. The Department has reviewed and approved this new subdivision
of five lots.
With regard to the remaining portion of the property, where the Department
was unable to determine the SHWT, the parties are in agreement that the
Petitioners can monitor the remaining property with the use of monitoring
wells, during the upcoming monitoring season, which runs from November
1, 2001 until March 31, 2002. The conditions of the monitoring are as follows:
a. If the Petitioners choose to be responsible for the monitoring and
resulting study, then Petitioners are responsible for all costs associated
with the study. The Department shall identify the location of the proposed
wells. At the Petitioners' request, the Department will, at no cost to
the Petitioner, monitor to determine the SHWT at this site. However, the
Department's monitoring data will be collected at a maximum frequency of
one time per week. Petitioners understand that DHEC has neither the equipment
nor the personnel to perform continuous monitoring of this site.
b. Should the Petitioners choose to be responsible for the collection
and interpretation of the monitoring data, Petitioners must use registered
professionals with expertise in engineering, hydrology, and soil science
to perform the site study, using only automated monitoring wells and rain
gauges. Reports shall be dated, sealed and signed by the professional in
the format specified by DHEC.
c. All parties agree to be bound by the Protocol for Monitoring the
Seasonal High Water Table (SHWT), a copy of which is attached
hereto as Exhibit B to this Consent Order.
d. The results of a monitoring study, done in accordance with this Order
and with the attached protocol, do not guarantee that a waste disposal
system permit will be issued by DHEC.
e. Cumulative rainfall for the monitoring period must not be below 15%
of average according to the nearest weather station(s) listed by the State
Climatology Office.
f. In the event that rainfall is below 15% of average for the period,
the data gathered by this monitoring period may be declared invalid. The
owner may request another study for the next monitoring period.
g. The depth to the seasonal high water table must be no less than 21
inches from the finished grade throughout the monitoring period.
h. If not completed before the monitoring began, additional shaping
and filling of the property may be needed. If necessary, this would be
needed to provide for required repair areas, buffers, tapers and offsets
as set forth in the Department's standards.
i. The Department may request other information as needed to assess
the effects of the modifications. Some examples are, but not limited to,
soil science reports, percolation tests, and topographic or engineering
data in addition to the hydrology data gathered by this site study.
j. A revised detailed site plan may be needed if the monitoring study
reveals conditions that will allow the issuance of a septic system construction
permit.
Should the monitoring study result in an unfavorable assessment of the
remaining property, the parties agree that the Petitioners reserve their
right to appeal the Department's decision.
THEREFORE, it is ORDERED Petitioners be issued approval for septic tanks
for the five-lot subdivision as shown in the plans submitted July 27, 2001.
If the Petitioner intends to make any further applications to increase
the density of this subdivision, Petitioner must perform the monitoring
specified in this order.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
______________________________________
C. DUKES SCOTT
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
October 4, 2001
|
