Public sewerage and amalgamation processing septic tank

Will you think that the effluent charge is high recently?The report of raising the price again is anxious yet. Has it been thought it has become it like this why?

Difference between public sewerage and amalgamation processing septic tank

After water is cleaned, living drainage and the plant effluent exhausted from the rest room, the kitchen, and the bath have been discharged to the river. It is a public sewerage and an amalgamation processing septic tank at home to do this processing.

The BOD removal rate of the public sewerage and the amalgamation processing septic tank is about 90-95%, and it is possible to make it to water beautiful even if it processes it by either. There is no public sewerage goodness or more.

The amalgamation processing septic tank the installation in each home and processing, and processing it bringing the drain of each home and the factory together are the public sewerages.

Feature of public sewerage

Feature of amalgamation processing septic tank

Problem of public sewerage in the future

The public sewerage is jurisdiction of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, and the Ministry of the Environment has jurisdiction over the living drainage measures. Therefore, it is a current state in each municipality that the necessity and the economy of the public sewerage are made without being thoroughly examined.

The maintenance of drainage is promoted in a lot of municipalities in the farm village part where the population density is low though the individual processing like the amalgamation processing septic tank is originally suitable, and a lot of non-economical businesses are done. The finance of the municipality has been pressed by the repayment ..enormous amount.. expense of the construction cost and the running cost.

The deficit of the drainage it is possible to cover business is only about 60% of the drainage business expense more abundant in the rental charge income of the public sewerage in an average municipality in the whole country.

There are a lot of homes that do not connect it with the public sewerage by economical reasons even if the public sewerage is maintained that the additional blow is put on it. It falls into the vicious circle to which this pushes up the effluent charge further. *Note 1

There is no subsidy in the operation and maintenance of drainage though the ample grant of money has come out from the country for the construction of drainage. Money more than the cost of construction is necessary for the operation and maintenance of drainage. It is worried that finance will fail in a lot of municipalities in the future.

*Note 1

Sewage law   Article 10  (installation of facilities for drainage etc.)

When the use of the public sewerage is begun, the owner of land in the drain district in public drainage concerned, the user or the occupant should set up drainage in the land without abode according to the following division and a necessary drainpipe, culvert for the public sewerage to flow in, and other drain facilities (Hereafter, it is said, "Facilities for drainage") be set up. However, when providing by the government ordinance besides the case to obtain the public drainage manager's permission by special circumstances, it is not this. The future omission

The type of taking into consideration lavatory in the sewage disposal district has the remodeling obligation to the flush toilet within three years, and has the penal regulations of 300,000 yen or less at the violation though is seems to penal regulations to this Article 10.

Problem of sewage law Article 10

It is provided that it is necessary to connect drain with the public sewerage in the drain district when the use of the public sewerage is begun according to the sewage law Article 10. I think that the law is amusing of this.

Because it is requested not to use this even when the amalgamation processing septic tank is used in the drain district and to connect it with the public sewerage.

When the amalgamation processing septic tank is used from these in the use district in the public sewerage, it is necessary to exclude the obligation to connect drain with the public sewerage.

Thus, I think that there is incompleteness in this law. I cannot help saying that Diet member who doesn't understand this is negligent.

Summary of my opinion

I think that you should make the population center a public sewerage, and make it to the amalgamation processing septic tank in other places. It is waste of money in the district sparsely inhabited like today that builds the public sewerage. It is necessary to stop it at once.

Moreover, when the amalgamation processing septic tank is used in the use district in the public sewerage, I think that I should entrust the resident with the judgment whether to connect drain with the public sewerage. The profit of the public drainage business is reviewed by doing so, and I think that this business should put the brakes.

I think that I should not press applying public works against the resident in the future as today. The local government will fail really like Yubari City the way things are going.

False declaration problem of spread of sewage of Okayama City

Okayama City calculated from "Daytime population" that not "Settling down population" because the spread of sewage for 29 years from fiscal year 1970 was shown higher in which the country provided "Drain population of present" that became a standard for calculating distribution of tax revenues to local governments but also commuters added, reported on a lot of about 20,000-100,000 people every year, and received a lot of tax money allocated to local governments about two billion yen.

Afterwards, the payment of about 4.1 billion yen was ordered by the country. Okayama City lost about 2.1 billion yen.

"Ombudsman Okayama City," the senior officials sued the mayor and then made a return to the city court and asked a total of 17,127 million yen.

May 17, 2006, Okayama District Court decision in what is "knowing the number is high penetration rates, continue to receive tax grants excessive drift" to certify and negligence, 17 people from the Ataka Takeshi Motoiti Takashi Yuu In contrast, ordered to return to the city a total of 16,108 million yen.

Afterwards, all defendants seem to have appealed.