Bill In MD legislature to ban treatment systems in MD

Status
Not open for further replies.
Oct 2, 2007
131
- - Millville, NJ
Boaters Note: There has been a bill submitted in both houses of the Maryland State Legislature to make all the waters in the State of Maryland a No Discharge Zone. this would make the use of Lectra/San units illegal on most of the Chesapeake Bay. While the legislators, who haven't a clue, think they're doing something good - it won't likely turn out that way if the bill is passed. Making the Bay holding tank-only will simply force the boaters to empty their tanks into the bay UNTREATED when they are full, rather than discharging small amounts of treated sewage in various places.

There aren't nearly enough pumpout stations on the Chesapeake to service the boats with installed heads, and a good percentage of those that are there aren't operable or aren't available year-round. So what's a guy to do when his holding tank is full? Look left. Look right. If the coast is clear and nobody's looking, turn on the macerator pump and empty the tank into the Bay. Pumpout stations are usually next to the fuel dock, and the water isn't always deep enough to accomodate a sailboat...

Here's an article, writeen by Tom Neale that was published in the May, 1998 issue of Cruising World Magazine, that was written in opposition to the State of Rhode Island going No discharge, back in 1998. He owns the rights to the article and gave me permission to use it in any way I felt might be beneficial to the cause,

Tom Neale article from Cruising World Magazine, from their May, 1998 issue. This was originally written in opposition to the entire state of Rhode Island going No Discharge (which they did anyway). It's a good read, and the same basic issues and concerns still apply today, 12 years later.

I contacted Tom recently, and he still owns the rights to the article, and gave me persission to use it in any way I thought might be beneficial to the cause. It's a pretty good read.

http://www.raritaneng.com/information/news/Tom_Neale.htm

Any of you that have a Type I or Type II treatment system on your boat, would no longer be allowed to use them on the Chesapeake if this bill is passed. Only holding tanks would be permitted. I'd encourage those of you who boat on the Chesapeake, and have treatment systems, to contact the appropriate legislators and committe members and try and nip this in the bud. It's scheduled for introduction in early March, so time is short! I'll try and get a list of the legislators who are pushing the bill and post them later.
 
Oct 22, 2008
3,502
- Telstar 28 Buzzards Bay
Unfortunately, this kind of stupidity is pretty common in government. They want to be seen as doing something, but don't realize what they're proposing, while sounding fine on paper, is going to be a nightmare in reality.
 
Oct 2, 2007
131
- - Millville, NJ
Particulars to note regarding the propsed new Maryland law:

It will not include grey water (sinks/showers). It covers black water from installed toilets.

The proposed fine for a violation is $10,000, while the state’s fine for manslaughter is $500 or bribing a voter is $500.

There is no grandfather clause for current owners of Type I or Type II MSD’s.

Here is a list of the bill’s current co-sponsors:

Senator Joan Carter Conway, District 43
Senator Ulysses Currie, District 25
Senator Jennie M. Forehand, District 17
Senator Brian E. Frosh, District 16
Senator David C. Harrington, District 47
Senator Verna L. Jones, District 44
Senator Nancy J. King, District 39
Senator Katherine Klausmeier, District 8
Senator Rona E. Kramer, District 14
Senator Mike Lenett, District 19
Senator Richard S. Madaleno, Jr., District 18
Senator Thomas M. Middleton, District 28
Senator Thomas V. Mike Miller, Jr., District 27
Senator C. Anthony Muse, District 26
Senator Douglas J. J. Peters, District 23
Senator Paul G. Pinsky, District 22
Senator Catherine E. Pugh, District 40
Senator Jamie Raskin, District 20
Senator Bobby A. Zirkin, District 11
Additional information and the text of the legislation can be found at the following link:
http://mlis.state.md.us/2010rs/billfile/sb0513.htm
To contact your legislator:
http://mlis.state.md.us/mgaweb/mail32.aspx

If you boat on the Chesapeake and want to see this stopped, particularly if you are a Maryland resident, flood your legislator's office with letters, e-mails and phone calls. Be sure to mention that "Boaters are Voters" and remind them about the recent senatorial upset in Massachusetts! Don't leave it for someone else to do - join in and have your voice heard!
 
Dec 1, 1999
2,391
Hunter 28.5 Chesapeake Bay
Herring Bay, just off of Deale, Md and the Chesapeake, near my marina, has been designated an NDZ for a number of years. It remains as polluted as ever....
 
Oct 2, 2007
131
- - Millville, NJ
Warren, that pretty much makes my point - declaring an area a No Discharge Zone offers no guarantees that it will keep the water clean.
 
Dec 2, 1997
8,950
- - LIttle Rock
That's only the proposed effective date. Although that's the date specified in the Bill, it's still just a Bill--a PROPOSED new law...it's not a law yet. In fact, hasn't even been introduced in the MD legislature yet.

I'm not sure they can make the Bay an NDZ because it's an interstate navigable waterway, under federal jurisdiction...and except for municipal reservoir impoundments on fresh water rivers, the discharge of treated waste is legal in all interstate waterways. But what they can do is make every harbor, bay and cove on it an NDZ, which would pretty much accomplish the same thing.

The most irritating part of NDZ mentality is that it only impacts about 5% of boat with toilets...that's the number who have installed treatment devices. The other 95% are already supposed to be using a tank...under a law that went into effect 30 years ago! If they can't enforce it against 95% of boats, what makes 'em think they can enforce it against another 5%. The right solution: enforce the law already on the books and make the fines bigger...don't punish people who are already doing more to protect the environment than is required!

That's my $.02 worth anyway.
 

KD3PC

.
Sep 25, 2008
1,069
boatless rainbow Callao, VA
Sadly since MD owns the water up to the VA shore, this hammers us pretty well, too...

hopefully common sense will prevail

dave
 
Dec 2, 1997
8,950
- - LIttle Rock
Welll...get off your afts and fight it! If the "tea parties" and town hall meetings of the last year were able to stop the US congress in its tracks, surely there are enough boat owners in MD and VA to stop this! Stop whining and get busy!
 
Jan 10, 2009
590
PDQ 32 Deale, MD
It makes sense because it is not about results...

That's only the proposed effective date. Although that's the date specified in the Bill, it's still just a Bill--a PROPOSED new law...it's not a law yet. In fact, hasn't even been introduced in the MD legislature yet.

I'm not sure they can make the Bay an NDZ because it's an interstate navigable waterway, under federal jurisdiction...and except for municipal reservoir impoundments on fresh water rivers, the discharge of treated waste is legal in all interstate waterways. But what they can do is make every harbor, bay and cove on it an NDZ, which would pretty much accomplish the same thing.

The most irritating part of NDZ mentality is that it only impacts about 5% of boat with toilets...that's the number who have installed treatment devices. The other 95% are already supposed to be using a tank...under a law that went into effect 30 years ago! If they can't enforce it against 95% of boats, what makes 'em think they can enforce it against another 5%. The right solution: enforce the law already on the books and make the fines bigger...don't punish people who are already doing more to protect the environment than is required!

That's my $.02 worth anyway.
... other than feeling good.

Wastewater plant design is a part of my job. I actually receive a draft permit once that contained negative numbers for treatment goals! I was told that was because the waterway was not clean enough. Never mind that we were building a replacement fro an existing plant that was overloaded.

Yeah, I feel your pain. I am quite certain (insider knowledge - used to operate a part of the waste treatment system) that ISW alone (old Bethlehem Steel) at Sparrows Point has ALL of the marine discharge in the Bay buried. They do NO TREATMENT for BOD. But they lobby.
 
Oct 2, 2007
131
- - Millville, NJ
Proposed NDZ for State of Maryland

Received this morning from our Manager in Florida:

Please read this article as it puts some things into a proper perspective. Keep in mind that the area where this occurred is already a NDZ and has been for years. 2.5 million gallons of raw sewage discharged is the eqivalent of 62,000 boats each with a 40 gallon holding tank being discharged all at once. The officials know that sewage is dumped into the nation's waters all the time and they know they can't prevent these events from happening. The notion of banning responsible use of TYPE I & II MSD's under the pretense that this will improve water quality is nothing more than an emotional/political ploy that would never stand up to a scientific justification.

http://www.heraldnews.com/news/x531838549/Officials-respond-to-sewage-spill-in-Mount-Hope-Bay

Note that this just happened last week!

Also, I've been notified that the Maryland Marine Trades Assn., after receiving additional information, has changed their sympathies and now OPPOSES the proposed law.
 

ronbo

.
Jan 2, 2009
46
gozzard 44B mkll md
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Maryland moves to Establish a No Discharge Zone in the Chesapeake Bay[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In my opinion, if you care about clean waters, if you're tired of being made a scapegoat as a boater so that politicians can avoid going after the real polluters and if you want to help with facts and science rather than to allow misinformation to diminish the ways that we can achieve clean water. Click here to read more about this issue. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Thank you,
Tom Neale[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The linked article on No Discharge Zones and Type I Marine Sanitation Devices was written by Tom Neale, a well known cruising writer and ongoing columnist for BoatUS.com. BoatUS members have a wide array of strong opinions on this topic. This article represents Tom's views; it does not reflect a BoatUS policy position. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]*****

PLEASE NOTE: If you prefer not to receive Tom & Mel Neale's East Coast Alerts, click here to unsubscribe. Click here to forward to a friend

© 2010 Boat Owners Association of The United States
880 S. Pickett St.
[/FONT]
 
Mar 16, 2010
2
Catalina 375 Toronto
A Canadian perspective. Can't believe that not one reply to this thread mentions that you are arguing for the right to dump your s#!t into what is potentially your drinking water. If this passes (no pun intended) and pump out becomes mandatory, the marinas that supply us fuel, water, etc and charge for these services will install very dependable systems to pump out your holding tanks and the waste will be dealt with in the same way as your waste at home. The reason they are not everywhere now is because you are dumping your s#!t in the lakes & oceans and getting away with it. Once yacht clubs can build the cost into membership and marinas can charge $5.00 for the service, they will be popping up everywhere. North of the 49th parallel (Canadian waters) there is a NO DUMP AT ALL POLICY - PUMP OUT ONLY. Virtually every yacht club has facilities as well as all of the marinas. The system works really well and it allows ALL users of recreational waters the confidence of water as clean as we can keep it.

You are arguing that, if your neighbor at home saved his waste in a barrel, as long as he treated it with type 1,2, chemicals, you would not have a problem with him spreading it down the street. I'm not a tree hugger, and it may not be in our lifetime, but our water supply will one day be more valuable to our survival than oil is today. Imagine having the ability to look ahead fifty or a hundred years from now and seeing the New York Times headline "US Invades Canada for Water Rights". Wouldn't that be crappy! (pun totally intended)
 

ronbo

.
Jan 2, 2009
46
gozzard 44B mkll md
There's no problem with Victoria, Vancouver, and Nanaimo sewage plants dumping raw sewage in pristine waters?
 
Dec 2, 1997
8,950
- - LIttle Rock
No one is arguing for that

A Canadian perspective. Can't believe that not one reply to this thread mentions that you are arguing for the right to dump your s#!t into what is potentially your drinking water. )
Where do you think the discharge from sewage treatment plants goes???

However, no one is arguing for the right to dump UNTREATED toilet waste into the water. US marine sanitation laws requiring all vessels to use holding tanks or CG certified treatment devices have been in effect since 1980. The only vessels that new "NO discharge" laws impact are the fewer than 5% that have installed or would install treatment devices...the other 95% should already be holding waste for pumpout or dumping in open ocean the "3 mile limit" as required by laws that have been on the books for 30 years. And the discharge from today's treatment devices is actually cleaner than the discharge from most sewage plants...the discharge from the most popular treatment devices has a bacteria count of <10/100 ml--almost potable.

Are there still boats who either don't have a holding tank or a treatment device? Yep. And it's also true that more tanks are illegally dumped than are pumped out. New "no discharge" laws aren't gonna change that...a few more boat owners who should already have tanks will finally install 'em, but no law can make those people use a tank or prevent 'em from illegally dumping 'em.

What's needed is enforcement of existing laws, not new laws...'cuz if states can't manage to enforce existing laws that require 95% of boats to hold waste for pumpout, what makes the politicians who push for new "NO discharge" think they can do any better job of enforcing a new law requiring another 5% of boats to hold? If they claim they CAN enforce a new law, why haven't they been enforcing the law that's been on the books for 30 years?

And THAT's what's wrong with new "no discharge" laws...they're nothing more than a way for politicians to pretend they're "doing something for the environment" while actually accomplishing nothing at all.
 
Feb 26, 2004
23,054
Catalina 34 224 Maple Bay, BC, Canada
Some folks just don't get it. Gee, ya think they're budding politicians?
 
Jan 22, 2008
8,050
Beneteau 323 Annapolis MD
I was anchored in the Annapolis harbor last July 3/4/5. An official looking inflatable boat came by and waved, circled us, and as we chatted to the helmsman, the other said, "dot 5". Measuring for pee in the sea, no doubt.

A big problem is not enough pumpout stations. Everyone comes in on Sunday afternoon and would like to pump, but the docks are tied up with people getting fuel.
 
Oct 22, 2008
3,502
- Telstar 28 Buzzards Bay
Unfortunately, just enforcing the existing laws doesn't make as good an impression as passing new, basically useless laws do.... Politicians are really good at coming up with new ways to not solve the problem while appearing to be doing something... and accomplishing nothing but wasting our tax dollars.

Where do you think the discharge from sewage treatment plants goes???

However, no one is arguing for the right to dump UNTREATED toilet waste into the water. US marine sanitation laws requiring all vessels to use holding tanks or CG certified treatment devices have been in effect since 1980. The only vessels that new "NO discharge" laws impact are the fewer than 5% that have installed or would install treatment devices...the other 95% should already be holding waste for pumpout or dumping in open ocean the "3 mile limit" as required by laws that have been on the books for 30 years. And the discharge from today's treatment devices is actually cleaner than the discharge from most sewage plants...the discharge from the most popular treatment devices has a bacteria count of <10/100 ml--almost potable.

Are there still boats who either don't have a holding tank or a treatment device? Yep. And it's also true that more tanks are illegally dumped than are pumped out. New "no discharge" laws aren't gonna change that...a few more boat owners who should already have tanks will finally install 'em, but no law can make those people use a tank or prevent 'em from illegally dumping 'em.

What's needed is enforcement of existing laws, not new laws...'cuz if states can't manage to enforce existing laws that require 95% of boats to hold waste for pumpout, what makes the politicians who push for new "NO discharge" think they can do any better job of enforcing a new law requiring another 5% of boats to hold? If they claim they CAN enforce a new law, why haven't they been enforcing the law that's been on the books for 30 years?

And THAT's what's wrong with new "no discharge" laws...they're nothing more than a way for politicians to pretend they're "doing something for the environment" while actually accomplishing nothing at all.
 
Jan 22, 2009
133
Hunter 31 '83_'87 Blue Water Marina
West/Rhode Riverkeeper comes with pump-out boat to pump you out at your slip.
Nominal donation required. Free to members of RiverKeeper.
Just because we can't stop all the municipal dumping is not a reason to stop trying to stop other polluting.
Most boaters will ignore the ndz like they do now. Haven't met a single sailor on the bay who bothers with the holding tank now, ndz or otherwise.
Two years on the bay and haven't met a single sailor who doesn't pump over the side.
The bay is completely developed from Norfolk to Havre de Grace and no more than a couple miles wide at the widest and everyone is acting like they can't possibly be required to find a place to pump. JUST TOO MUCH TROUBLE and besides, others do so much worse.
yeah
 
Last edited:

Mulf

.
Dec 2, 2003
400
Hunter 410 Chester, MD (Kent Island)
Don't know about the company you keep, but..

I can see the Castle Marina fuel and pumpout dock from my slip and they have a steady stream of traffic to their pumpout stations, myself included. My experience is contrary to yours, the pumpout stations are used a lot. It only takes a little planning to do you part for the bay and all of the people who benefit from keeping it clean.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.