Hershel Vineyard and Jeff Little John, representing On-Site Performance, introduced their technology as a solution to the impaired water quality in the lagoon caused by septic tanks. They argued that their system is cost-effective compared to traditional sewer systems and is already in use in Apopka, where it serves 30 homeowners without complaints regarding noise, vibration, or environmental disruption.

Rob Fiser questioned the speed of decision-making, given conflicting information about water quality and system effectiveness. Similarly, Mary Freighttag expressed worries about the environmental and community impacts of the system’s operation.

Further adding to the debate, a company representative detailed the advanced septic system’s features, including its ability to treat wastewater without producing unpleasant odors and its capability for continuous monitoring and remote oversight. They addressed concerns regarding the system’s interaction with medications and chemicals, emphasizing that units are closely monitored for any disruptions caused by excessive substances like oil and grease. The representative elaborated on the system’s financial aspects, stating there is no initial cash outlay for participating homeowners, who instead agree to a monthly billing structure. The money for the program flows from the state to the community, with grant availability and a community-led approach to selecting approved vendors for the program.

Questions were raised about the system’s reliability in situations such as power outages, especially given weak cell service in some areas. The company assured that they have response rates ranging from 24 to 96 hours for equipment failures and would provide new drain fields or electrical systems at no cost to residents if theirs were inadequate, with grants covering these expenses.

The council also tackled the issue of easements for maintaining equipment, with a focus on legal mechanisms for access. Amidst these deliberations, a resident queried the reliance on technical consultants for advice on the system’s effectiveness and the correlation between septic tanks and environmental problems in the area. The council expressed confidence in the system and cited support from regulatory agencies.

The discussion then turned to the environmental impact of effluent from the systems, with references to a study where isotopes from a County Park toilet were found in Wakaa Springs, prompting concerns about the system’s ability to reduce nitrates and fecal matter effectively. The lack of a performance standard for nitrate and fecal reduction in regulations was debated, acknowledging that this could lead to increased costs for monitoring and compliance. However, the company emphasized the importance of getting ahead of state mandates to phase out septic tanks and securing future grants by addressing pollution.

The potential risk to the county if the contracted company were to fail was a topic of significant concern. The implications of such a scenario, including the county’s capacity to find a replacement provider and whether the county would cover costs for drain field failures, were discussed. A timeline for residents to decide on participating in the program was proposed, and there was debate regarding a potential state mandate for septic system conversions.

During the public comments, the issue of seasonal residents and the monitoring of septic systems was raised, explaining that units enter “starvation mode” if inactive but can reactivate once wastewater flows again. The flat fee structure, electrical requirements, setbacks related to wells and surface waters, and the system’s reliability in varying conditions were also topics of concern. The council committed to further discussions and the possibility of another workshop before making any decisions.