What's the requirement on "securing" waste valve?

[Peggie Hall HeadMistress]

A choice??

By our choice, the first mod we made to our H37c was to add a holding tank.

The law requires that you have either a holding tank or a treatment device. So your choice to go with a holding tank instead of a treatment device could not have been due solely to your desire to protect the environment... because the discharge from treatment devices is cleaner than the discharge from sewage treatment plants--even IF they treat it before a storm results in a spill--which is where the contents of your holding tank goes and then into the water you're trying to protect.

(That oughta stir the pot a bit!) :dance:

And btw, jalapeno...the REASON you don't have any potty police is because, in your part of Canada there aren't any potty laws for 'em to enforce! Yet...

And zeehag..." i found out my head is actually not 100percent jabsco-- is half something else--bowl is crittendon something.... what is that--any good???"

It's not bad...at least 90% of tmarine toilet bowls are made the same company (Bemis)...some mfrs (Wilcox-Crittenden among 'em) chose to private label 'em with their own brand name...so it sounds like your toilet started life as a W-C and a PO replaced with pump with a Jabsco. No matter what brand name is on any bowl...if it fits the base, isn't cracked and doesn't leak, what more can you expect from a crockery basin with a few holes in it???

 

[Sailm8]

Aside from removing the handle, how do you secure it so you are in compliance? Everything goes into my holding tank for either pump through the deck fitting out or out by way of the macerator pump. There is a valve between the pump and the hull. This is the valve that must be secured. How does everyone do it besides remove the handle?

 

[Chuckbear]

Aside from removing the handle, how do you secure it so you are in compliance? Everything goes into my holding tank for either pump through the deck fitting out or out by way of the macerator pump. There is a valve between the pump and the hull. This is the valve that must be secured. How does everyone do it besides remove the handle?

You can put a padlock on it if it will accept one, you can lock the cabinet it is in or you can use a wire tie that can only be removed by cutting, or you can remove the handle. This includes the seacock and not just the Y-valve. The regulations are pretty specific. Chuck

 

[Peggie Hall HeadMistress]

One more time...

Aside from removing the handle, how do you secure it so you are in compliance?

If you'll read the WHOLE thread, and not just the posts on the 2nd page that are the only ones which show up now when you click on the most recent reply, you'll find the federal regulations spelling out the acceptable ways to secure the system in post #5.

Btw, your y-valve is NOT the only valve that must be secured...and locking any cabinet that it's in is NOT one of the acceptable ways to secure a Type III (holding tank) system... You're confusing it with acceptable ways to secure a Type I or II system and not getting that quite right either.

 

[dparilla]

Re: One more time...

As expressed above, the easiest solution...remove the seacock handle and stow it elsewhere. The only time mine comes out of the drawer is for servicing when inland, and when offshore. Though I ran into an overszealous inspector last year who said I was not supposed to keep the handle on board. When I explained that it would be foolhardy to have a fitting that could not be operated in an emergency, he agreed and said he would check the letter of the law again. This is not to mention that any valve handle from the other seacocks could be used as well...etc. etc. etc.

 

[Stu Jackson]

Handles

Before U all go removing your handles, read this:

http://c34.org/bbs/index.php/topic,2729.0.html

The concept of being a "doo (poo?) gooder" by bring your crap back home and putting into your sewage treatment plant is such nonsense.

More sewage treatment plants discharge their stuff than boaters. Maine Sail covered this quite well recently on a post about this cr*p.

I am constantly amazed at the lack of information that people have about general "pollution" issues. Your boat's effluent is not a drop in a bucket, it's a drop in the ocean.

The LEO msd - nazis should spend some time at their local sewage treatment plants when it rains!

 

[catsailor]

So I guess relocating it would be just too much effort...so it will stay open all the time. You can't lube it or rebed it...or even check the hose connections...so you'll just keep your fingers crossed that WHEN your sinks, it'll be in her slip when no one's aboard, not at sea with children aboard.

I can't speak for zeehag, but if you were referring to my post, please read it completely before commenting. I can and do lube them. I can remove the hoses and do on occasion; I replaced one last year as I did not like its looks; it was not a difficult job, taking perhaps 15 minutes. As for the the safety issues and implying I endanger children, my boat will not take on more than 5 gallons of water with the valves open and the hoses removed.

It is the requirement to secure both valves that is legalistic and without benefit. The boat was built 10 years ago in Canada, which could explain why quick access was a lower priority, while safety and solid construction was a high priority.

"Waving the bloody shirt" is undignified.

 

[Stu Jackson]

I can't speak for zeehag, but if you were referring to my post, please read it completely before commenting.

"Waving the bloody shirt" is undignified.

Don't take it personally, it's a warning for the greater group.

And, BTW, here's the link to the LAST discussion of this topic, "Disgusting & Unnecessary": (this link goes to the middle, suggest you start at the beginning)

http://forums.catalina.sailboatowners.com/showthread.php?p=758193&highlight=sewage

Much useful info there.

 

[kenn]

The concept of being a "doo (poo?) gooder" by bring your crap back home and putting into your sewage treatment plant is such nonsense.

More sewage treatment plants discharge their stuff than boaters. Maine Sail covered this quite well recently on a post about this cr*p.

I am constantly amazed at the lack of information that people have about general "pollution" issues. Your boat's effluent is not a drop in a bucket, it's a drop in the ocean.

The LEO msd - nazis should spend some time at their local sewage treatment plants when it rains!

Clearly you don't sail inland waters.

If your municipality is dumping raw sewage, do something about it. My city has spent alot to create catchbasins and other techniques that have sharply reduced the fecal coliform count in the water. We can actually swim most of the summer, now.

Law sez you can dump your offerings offshore, in the big ole ocean. Have fun. Please don't do it close to shore, and please don't belittle the efforts of those trying to keep the shoreline and their inland waterways clean.

 

[ffaubert]

Clearly you don't sail inland waters.

Law sez you can dump your offerings offshore, in the big ole ocean. Have fun. Please don't do it close to shore, and please don't belittle the efforts of those trying to keep the shoreline and their inland waterways clean.

I don't think anyone was belittling the law enforcement officers, just questioning the need to pull a gun for a poo offence.

And to say "he might have been reaching for a weapon", let's be logical. You have another armed officer on deck and still another one on a high speed pursuit boat, you're in a sailboat.

You honestly think someone is going to risk the Florida death penalty because they didn't close a seacock?

 

[Stu Jackson]

Clearly you don't sail inland waters.

If your municipality is dumping raw sewage, do something about it. My city has spent alot to create catchbasins and other techniques that have sharply reduced the fecal coliform count in the water. We can actually swim most of the summer, now.

Law sez you can dump your offerings offshore, in the big ole ocean. Have fun. Please don't do it close to shore, and please don't belittle the efforts of those trying to keep the shoreline and their inland waterways clean.

kenn,

Please be considerate of your fellow forum members. It's quite clear from my avatar that I do NOT sail on a lake. And if I did, I would be considerate to my fellow boaters and use the proper facilities.

The discussion I linked to, for those who took the time to read it, discusses the issue of sewage treatment plants and the double whammy we get as ratepayers when the plants get fined the taxpayers get dinged DOUBLE.

So, kenn, just because I think it's criminal that these folks continue to pollute, please, please, please, don't blame me.:naughty: Where you got the idea I was belittling any efforts at cleaning up our waters is simply beyond me, and completely misinterprets all of my posts on this subject. And MY municipality is not the one dumping the raw sewage. Any ideas, as how a citizen of community X can affect the activities of community Y? I'm all ears.

Have you ever personally tried to change a sewage treatment plant and the laws? I'd love to hear the details.

I suggest those of you who haven't read Maine Sail's well-put discussion in the link I provided.

 

[Bill1565]

The law requires that you have either a holding tank or a treatment device. So your choice to go with a holding tank instead of a treatment device could not have been due solely to your desire to protect the environment...

Yeah it was. I could have rewired the 110, added the inverter, built the bimini, replaced the winches etc etc first. Boat is 1979, was tankless for years, could have stayed that way.. In 60 years of boating no one has ever boarded any of my boats to check the plumbing.


I can control my boat. Can't control the cities up and down the coast.
Serenity prayer is heavy on knowing the difference between the things you can change and the things you cannot

 

[kenn]

Did you, or did you not, say the following?

The concept of being a "doo (poo?) gooder" by bring your crap back home and putting into your sewage treatment plant is such nonsense.

This topic was started by a question on regulations for inland waterways.

Have you ever personally tried to change a sewage treatment plant and the laws? I'd love to hear the details.

Enough people, including me, raised it as an issue. I'm not vain enough to think that I had influence, I think it was just a matter of city people getting around to it, in our case.

If enough boaters , their clubs and marinas, their suppliers, all raised this to the city as an issue, stuff happens. It can be justified on purely selfish grounds - swimmable/sports-friendly beaches are big business and tourism draws.

 

[kenn]

I don't think anyone was belittling the law enforcement officers, just questioning the need to pull a gun for a poo offence.

I hear you. No forum is big enough to contain a discussion around guns.

I am still interested to know whether there have been numerous "drawn gun" episodes with regard to MSDs, or whether we're being played for just one isolated incident because some people resent being told where they can dump waste.

Silliness all round, it seems.

 

[Peggie Hall HeadMistress]

Actually, it wasn't...

This topic was started by a question on regulations for inland waterways.

It was started by a question about regulations on the ICW, which is a coastal interstate waterway, not an inland waterway. The federal law--33 CFR 159.7--that spells out the acceptable ways to secure a system in the ICW and any other coastal waters within 3 miles of the nearest point on the whole US coastline are in post #5 on the first page of this thread.

Nor did the owner of the vessel who was allegedly held at gunpoint have any intention of dumping waste overboard. He'd switched his y-valve to flush in to the tank...he just hadn't "secured" it and the seacock as required by law.

Inland waterways are fresh water lakes and rivers, which are subject to a different set of federal regulations: 40 CFR 140.3 Most lakes are INTRAstate waters (contained entirely within the boundaries of a single state), and are almost all "no discharge" (holding tank emptied only by pumpout) waters. In many states it's illegal on a lake even to have a macerator or other tank discharge pump installed or any toilet or holding tank plumbing except a head intake connected to a thru-hull. Most navigable rivers are INTERstate waterways where the discharge of treated waste from a USCG certified Type I MSD (onboard treatment device) is legal.

And, fwiw, there are more than 100 east coast municipalities, mostly in New England, who were granted waivers by the EPA more than 25 years ago that allow 'em to discharge sewage that doesn't meet EPA standards because their systems are too old, too small to handle the population increase since they were installed, or otherwise unable to meet EPA standards and those municipalities can't afford to upgrade 'em. I've always thought it was the ultimate irony that the very DAY Rhode Island's state wide "no discharge" went into effect, a sewage treatment plant spill closed all the shellfish beds and beaches in Narragansett Bay for a week!

 

[kenn]

It was started by a question about regulations on the ICW, which is a coastal interstate waterway, not an inland waterway.

Correction appreciated. Thanks.

 

[Stu Jackson]

kenn, yes, I did type that

which meant I said it. It was about people who think that returning from the over 3 miles out limit to put their stuff in a sewage treatment plant that spews it directly back into the same waters are nuts. NOT for inland lakes.

That's all, and that's what happens here in the Bay area, specifically in Marin County. I live in Alameda County.

Take a look at a map, two separate worlds on different sides of the Bay.

As I said, I wouldn't dump into your lake.

But I just didn't appreciate your attitude towards what you seem to misinterpret as my point of view.

It's simple: picking on boaters instead of the messy sewage treatment plants is nonsense. Period.

That said, I agree wholeheartedly that boaters shouldn't pollute.

If enough boaters , their clubs and marinas, their suppliers, all raised this to the city as an issue, stuff happens. It can be justified on purely selfish grounds - swimmable/sports-friendly beaches are big business and tourism draws.

This, too, is heartfelt, but simply doesn't work here or in Maine, again if you read what Maine posted on that link. Our water is too cold to swim regularly, but sometimes it gets hot and there are lotsa kayakers, too. There's a beach less than half a mile away from the Marin County STP. It's inside a marina. The marina operator owns a big chunk of land in the county. They don't listen to him either, and keep spewing sewage. I think, perhaps, that you have a somewhat "rosy" approach to how things work. I sure wish you were right about this, and I hate that phrase "in this economy." But doing good has never been the way of big business, you know, kinda like guns.

All I'm saying is: Let's Get Real. Stop hounding boaters, who, like Maine said are more like flies on a windshield, and go after the REAL polluters.

Sorry, ain't gonna happen, 'cuz it hasn't happened yet. I sure wish YOU were right in this case. But the reason they DO pick on us boaters is that we're a small group, even if you include the suppliers, too.

 

[MrBill_FLL]

the silly part of this is the cities along the coast have refused to clean their sewage outfall pipes, due to cost reasons.

many many and counties (broward / ft lauderdale included) have refused to comply with the EPA requirments to clean the sewage released into the ocean.

 

[kenn]

the silly part of this is the cities along the coast have refused to clean their sewage outfall pipes, due to cost reasons.

...so what kind of projects have all the "stimulus" funds been spent on, if not infrastructure projects like this?

many many and counties (broward / ft lauderdale included) have refused to comply with the EPA requirments to clean the sewage released into the ocean.

As responsible boaters, we can help point the spotlight at this. How about a web contest for "sh!ttiest" harbour? With photos and voting?

 

[mel22]

Another point of view:

http://www.boatermouth.com//index.php?view=article&catid=2&id=2830&option=com_content&Itemid=3

I have no firm conclusion at this point who is telling the truth.

After reading the official response how do you feel about this. We know some drivers are carring dope so therefore we are going to stop every car on our roads to do a search. Next we know that some people produce contraband drugs in their home thorefore we are going to do away with probable cause and search warrents and enter homes as we like anytime we like. Now here is the real one as exposed in last presidential efforts to fill cabinet post, some congress people cheat on taxes and we know they are realy nice people so we will forgive them. Now do you think the IRS is going to forgive you for following their example. We also know that some police are as crooked as the worst criminals but we will be willing to take anything they say as honest truth. What happend to protect and to serve. Before the age of computers police quite offten gave warning fix it tickets. Now with the touch of a key board they can check a person out at will but the warnings seem to have gone the way of the honest protect and to serve officer. By the way I was once a millitary marxhal at law and never enterd a soldiers home with a wepon even though I could have. It was called respect.