Off the Grid, but Not the Radar: How Local Governments Can Engage with Onsite Water and Wastewater Users 

by Dr. Ahmed Rachid El-Khattabi & Amanda Peele

It is estimated that approximately 50% of households in North Carolina are served by on-site, private (decentralized) water and wastewater systems. Managing private septic systems and wells in North Carolina presents a number of challenges. Increased rainfall, more frequent hurricanes, and heightened vulnerability to flooding all underscore the importance of regular septic system maintenance. Proper maintenance is essential to preventing environmental contamination, protecting public health, and ensuring the long-term functionality of these systems.

Failing or poorly maintained systems can leach nutrients and pathogens into the surrounding environment, posing risks to residents and potentially degrading local water quality. This contamination can also affect the source waters that public utilities rely on, increasing the complexity and cost of drinking water treatment. In this way, the performance of private onsite septic systems can have direct implications for public utilities, even when those systems fall outside their direct jurisdiction.

This post outlines several options local government units have at their disposal to help residents maintain safe and effective onsite systems.

The Regulatory Landscape for Onsite Systems

Onsite systems in North Carolina are regulated primarily through county health departments. Since 2008, new residential drinking water wells must be permitted by the local health department, which oversees inspections and enforcement. However, many older wells predate these requirements and may not be documented. In most cases, they are not subject to routine monitoring after construction.

Septic systems and other onsite wastewater treatment systems are also permitted and inspected by local health departments. After installation, however, communication between health departments and system owners is often limited. Conventional septic systems are typically not monitored once installed unless there are signs of failure, while advanced systems may require periodic inspections depending on their design.

When septic system failures are reported, local health departments can investigate and require repairs, but they cannot provide financial assistance or directly pay for maintenance on private onsite systems. This limitation reflects the broader legal framework in North Carolina in which counties and municipalities have restricted authority to spend public funds on privately owned property. In other words, homeowners are generally responsible for their own maintenance and repairs.

As a result, many onsite users operate largely independently with varying levels of oversight, maintenance knowledge, and financial capacity to address system issues. When septic systems fail, the impacts (e.g., groundwater contamination, surface water pollution, or public health risks) can extend beyond individual properties and affect the broader community.

Methods of Engagement

Although local governments have limited authority to directly spend public funds on private septic systems, there are a variety of practical strategies they can use to support residents and protect public health. These methods range from improving data on existing systems to expanding centralized infrastructure, operating clustered systems, providing physical resources, and offering education and maintenance guidance. The following options highlight ways counties and municipalities can engage effectively with households that rely on onsite water and wastewater systems.

Develop a System Inventory or Permit Database

A key first step in supporting decentralized wastewater users is simply knowing where these systems are located. In North Carolina, there is no comprehensive statewide database or map of septic systems. This lack of information can make it difficult for utilities and local governments to identify potential risks to water quality or to plan outreach efforts. It can also complicate infrastructure planning, particularly when communities are evaluating future sewer expansions, watershed protection strategies, or resilience planning in flood-prone areas.

Several approaches can help local governments better estimate the extent of septic system use in their communities. Staff knowledge and institutional memory can be valuable starting points, particularly in smaller jurisdictions where utility staff are familiar with areas that lack sewer service. Local governments can also review historical permit records from county health departments to identify properties with documented septic systems.

More recently, some counties have explored the use of geospatial analysis and machine learning techniques to estimate the likelihood that parcels rely on onsite wastewater treatment. These approaches can combine parcel data, sewer service boundaries, and building characteristics to produce maps identifying areas likely served by septic systems. Even imperfect estimates can provide valuable data points, helping utilities and local governments identify areas where septic failures may pose risks to drinking water sources, surface waters, or future infrastructure investments.

Extend Centralized Systems

Local governments in North Carolina may expand centralized drinking water and wastewater systems through their enterprise authority. This authority allows counties and municipalities to plan, finance, and construct infrastructure extensions that bring public utility service to areas currently relying on private wells and septic systems.

In some communities, extending centralized service can improve reliability, reduce risks to public health, and help address environmental concerns associated with failing onsite systems. Expansions may also support future development and long-term land use goals.

However, extending water or sewer infrastructure can be costly, and projects are typically most practical in areas where population density is relatively high and where existing utility infrastructure is nearby. In these situations, adding new customers can strengthen the utility’s financial position by distributing system costs across a broader customer base.

At the same time, connection costs and new utility bills can present affordability challenges for households transitioning from private systems. In addition, many households on decentralized systems may have limited trust in government to provide services. Utilities considering system expansions should anticipate these concerns and explore ways to support affected residents as part of the planning process.

Notable examples of successful service extensions in North Carolina include the Rogers Road neighborhood (Orange County), as well as wastewater service expansions to the Ivanhoe (Sampson County), Rhoney Road (Burke County), and Irongate Drive (Wake County) neighborhoods.

Own and Operate Clustered Systems

Under North Carolina law, counties and municipalities also have the authority to develop and operate decentralized wastewater infrastructure, including clustered or shared septic systems, through their enterprise powers (G.S. 153A-274; G.S. 160A-311). Exercising this authority requires the local government to maintain full or partial ownership of the system, whether independently or in partnership with other entities. When a utility owns the infrastructure, it can oversee system operations, establish service charges, and implement maintenance practices that help ensure reliable long-term performance. This authority does not extend to county health departments whose role is limited to permitting, inspection, and enforcement.

While no examples exist yet in North Carolina, other states may provide models to consider, including clustered STEP/STEG systems with remote monitoring in Blacksburg, VA and STEP/STEG systems with low-pressure and gravity sewers serving 95 properties in Warren, VT.

Promote Maintenance

Education and outreach are among the most accessible tools local governments have for supporting residents who rely on onsite systems. Many septic system failures result from a lack of information about proper system care, infrequent pumping, or misunderstandings about what should and should not be flushed or drained into the system.

County health departments, local governments, utilities, and nonprofit organizations can help by providing clear guidance on septic system maintenance, encouraging routine inspections and pumping, and sharing information about warning signs of system failure. Outreach efforts may include informational mailers, community workshops, online resources, or maintenance reminder programs.

These efforts can help homeowners better understand their responsibilities while reducing the likelihood of system failures that can contaminate groundwater, impact nearby surface waters, or create public health risks. In addition to protecting individual households, proactive education can help communities reduce environmental risks and avoid the higher costs associated with emergency repairs or infrastructure expansion.

Providing Tangible Support for Low- and Moderate-Income Households

Local governments may be able to assist lower- or moderate-income households that rely on decentralized (onsite) wastewater systems by providing practical resources that help address septic system problems that create health or sanitation concerns. For example, a program might provide septic tank effluent filters or other components needed to maintain or correct a malfunctioning system. North Carolina law, specifically G.S. 160D-1311, authorizes counties and municipalities to establish programs that provide assistance to low- or moderate-income residents, which can include this type of targeted support.

Any such program must be structured carefully. Because decentralized septic systems are privately owned and not part of a public sewer utility, enterprise utility funds generally cannot be used to support this type of assistance. Municipalities may rely on general governmental revenues, including property tax funds, as well as grants. Counties, however, may use county tax revenues only if the program meets the statutory conditions in G.S. 160D-1311; otherwise counties typically must rely on grants or other authorized funding sources.

Although programs using this authority remain relatively uncommon in North Carolina, the statute provides a framework for local governments that want to offer targeted assistance to households struggling to maintain safe onsite wastewater systems.

Final Thoughts

Although North Carolina law restricts public spending on private septic systems, counties and municipalities still have a variety of tools to support residents and protect public health. These range from improving data and inventories, extending centralized infrastructure, and operating clustered systems, to providing physical resources and promoting education and maintenance. Even when direct financial assistance is limited, local governments can help homeowners maintain safe and effective onsite systems, reduce environmental and public health risks, and make long-term infrastructure planning more effective by using these strategies thoughtfully.

More examples of implementation can be found in Engagement with Onsite Users: A Primer for North Carolina Local Governments. Each example strives to include cost estimates and funding sources, internal and external processes, legal engagement, and insights for other units exploring each method of engagement.