OTSEGO LAKE - Half the property owners around Otsego Lake may be faced with paying for the repair or replacement of their septic systems in the next few years.

Alan Machenberg, who owns a camp on the lake, worries the cost involved may create financial problems for him and some others.

Considering today's prices, many people assume that ownership of a camp or home on the lake is an indication of an income that would not be bothered by paying for a new septic system, but that's not necessarily the case.

Machenberg's Oneida Camp has been in his wife's family since 1902. It has been handed down through the generations and will eventually pass to his son. His lakefront real estate is valuable, but it doesn't mean he is wealthy.

The septic system at his camp has not yet been inspected, but according to the results of the almost sixty inspections completed so far this summer, there is an almost one-in-two chance it will fail.

He said he has no argument with the need to test the systems for the health of the lake and protection of Cooperstown's drinking water supply. Like many other camps around the lake, he also gets his drinking water from the lake.

But Machenberg said this week that what he would like to see is a moratorium on the inspection program until officials can investigate the possibility of state or federal money that would assist property owners.

"They [the federal government} can come with a pot of money for a parking lot; you'd think they could come up with some for the village's water supply," he said.

The village is the lead agency for the inspection program which is overseen by its watershed supervisory committee and water board, but there are no properties in the village with septic systems to be tested because they are all on the municipal wastewater system.

"I know there are some legacy camps around the lake," watershed coordinator Win McIntyre said Monday.

Some of those people, he said, don't have a lot of cash, but they do have a lot of value.

"The committee is trying to work with people and not hit them over the head with a sledge hammer. They're willing to work with people," McIntyre said.

The cost of system replacement ranges between $10,000 and $20,000, but can go higher, he said.

In some cases there is not much room to work with and it requires some sophisticated technology which can be expensive.

The financial impact of having to replace a system was given consideration, McIntyre said, but no outside source of funding was available. Government money for wastewater treatment dried up in recent years, but there has been new attention given to on-site wastewater treatment that may lead to the possibility of grant money which he plans to look into.

McIntyre said property owners have one year to replace a failed system and if there are extenuating circumstances the committee is willing to work with people.

Village trustee Paul Kuhn, the chair of the watershed supervisory committee, said Tuesday that he knows there are property owners, like Machenberg, for whom septic system replacement could be an economic hardship

"We fully understand that," Kuhn said.

The committee has talked about trying to work with a local lending institution to get a low interest loan to spread the cost out over time.

"Honestly, we haven't had a chance to pursue that," he said, adding that once the inspection program slows down this fall, they will take a look at it.

Kuhn said he doubts if grant money would be available to assist property owners.

There are, however, some lower cost alternatives available to property owners including composting and incinerating toilets, he said.

According to McIntyre, the watershed committee is also trying to save property owners some money by establishing some pre-engineered system designs which could be sized to fit individual conditions.

The required engineering can typically account for $1,000 to $2,000 or more of the cost for a new system. The committee is working to get a local waiver from the Department of Health for some standard designs so that where they are applicable, owners could save most the engineering cost.

According to a report released by McIntyre this week, of the 59 systems inspected by mid-August, 30 passed and 29 failed. With scheduling still in progress, it is estimated that close to 80 systems will be inspected by the end of September.

The 49 percent failure rate to date is on the high side of the pre-inspection estimate of 40-50%, he said.

The main reason systems fail inspection is that septic tanks are not water tight. Most of the failed tanks are constructed of metal and were installed more than 20 years ago. Metal tanks, which have not been permitted since 1990, corrode over time and begin to leak.

A system with a leaking tank may work well hydraulically, meaning the wastewater moves through the system, but not work properly biologically. Ideally, septic system waste water is treated in an absorption field by percolating down through the soil. A leaking septic tank can potentially contaminate ground water.

Another reason for failure is that waste lines carrying tgrey waterv are not tied into the septic tank. Grey water is any waste water other than from a toilet. Older systems were set up with grey water lines directed to the absorption area, by-passing the septic tank, a practice not permitted today. Connecting the grey water to the septic tank is a much less expense fix than replacing the entire system.

The goal of the septic system management program is to inspect approximately 65 systems each season over a 5-year period. This will cover the 325 systems around the lake and along the lake's tributaries.

McIntyre said that so far, lakeside homeowners have been very cooperative and most realize the importance of maintaining the lake's water quality not only for their own enjoyment, but for generations to come.

Property owners with questions about the program can call the watershed office at 607-547-6057.