The Positive Aspects of Title 5

by Paul Saulnier

No. I cannot list all the good things about Title 5 in only five words or less. While it is true that Title 5 has had a serious effect on the real estate market, some areas more so than others, the new Title 5 represents a significant improvement over the old Title 5.

One of the most positive benefits is uniformity, especially with respect to inspection of existing systems. Under the old Title 5 every inspector had his own technique and his own criteria for what constituted a failed system. A buyer could easily end up with a failed or failing system and be faced with unexpected repair or replacement costs soon after moving in. A careful inspection which follows the format prescribed, should reduce the number of surprises to unsuspecting buyers.

In many cases, the new regulations actually reduce the size of mounded systems. This is because the overdig requirement, the amount of topsoil and subsoil excavated around the soil absorption system (SAS), has been reduced from 25 feet to only 5 feet. The introduction of soil morphology as a basis of determining the seasonal high groundwater is more accurate than the correction factor used previously. When applied accurately, soil morphology can result in a lower mound and a savings to the owner. Although never aesthetically pleasing, a lower mound is less disruptive to the landscape than a higher one.

Variances are now easier to pursue, thanks to the Local Upgrade Approval section of Title 5. Boards of Health can make decisions at the local level which help the homeowner repair a failed system at a lower, more affordable cost.

From a designer’s standpoint, the most interesting aspect of the new Title 5 is the section on Innovative/Alternative (I/A) Technology. A totally new concept in Massachusetts, I/A has been used in other states for years. Although the use of I/A is strictly controlled, it can be a life saver, especially when applied to repair of failed systems in poor soil or environmentally sensitive areas. The use of a tight tank, instant death to property value, can often be avoided by using one of the I/As available to the designer. In other applications, I/A can be used to lower the height of a mound by two feet or to reduce the size of the SAS by 50 percent.

These benefits come with a different price, however. Strict treatment standards and perpetual monitoring and reporting of system performance, along with the threat of having to remove and replace an inadequate system, can discourage both buyer and seller from utilizing these options. It seems ironic that the Department of Environmental Protection would require the removal of a treatment system which normally provides 3 to 5 times the level of treatment of a standard Title 5 system because it may only be providing 2 to 4 times as much treatment as the standard system.

Title 5 is due to be revised in March 1998. The opportunity is there to improve the regulation by providing more incentives for the use of I/A technologies and allowing local boards of health more freedom to vary the requirements of Title 5 to suit local conditions.

For more information, contact Paul Saulnier of Civilized Solutions at 508-429-7192.