I recently sold my h37 cutter and the only issue that came up on survey was the lack of a Y-valve and a connection to the through-hull for the waste system. I had removed that connection and the Y-valve a year ago while cleaning out a clog at the obttom of the tank, and since we sail mostly in inshore and coastal waters of North Carolina, we never discharged into the rivers and sounds but simply pumped out at marina stations. The buyer's surveyor insisted that "to be legal" as he put it, the Y-valve and connection to the through-hull should be reinstalled. Doesn't matter to me now since the boat has been sold, but I'm curious as to wehtehr anyone has every heard this before. Peggy?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
E
Ed Schenck
Illegal?
Here on Lake Erie it is illegal to HAVE the Y-valve. Never heard the inverse for coastal waters. Did you get another boat Jack?
Here on Lake Erie it is illegal to HAVE the Y-valve. Never heard the inverse for coastal waters. Did you get another boat Jack?
D
Don
Not illegal
I may be wrong but I'm told by our friendly DEM folks that the only problem is lack of a means to lock it IF you do have one. Since this is a state agency, it may not be true nationwide and since state regs supercede Federal regs, it's essentially a state-by-state matter. Don
I may be wrong but I'm told by our friendly DEM folks that the only problem is lack of a means to lock it IF you do have one. Since this is a state agency, it may not be true nationwide and since state regs supercede Federal regs, it's essentially a state-by-state matter. Don
P
Peggie Hall/HeadMistress
If I understand correctly...
Your toilet only flushes into the tank...and the tank is plumbed only for pumpout--only one hose in, only one hose to the deck fitting out (plus a vent line, of course). If that's illegal, so is every boat in "no discharge" waters in the country. If the boat were plumbed to dump overboard, I understand why he'd want a y-valve in the pumpout/dumpout line instead of just a tee or wye fitting...because the law does require a means of securing the system from "accidental discharge." But why would any competent surveyor insist that a tank has to BE "dumpable" at sea to be legal?
Your toilet only flushes into the tank...and the tank is plumbed only for pumpout--only one hose in, only one hose to the deck fitting out (plus a vent line, of course). If that's illegal, so is every boat in "no discharge" waters in the country. If the boat were plumbed to dump overboard, I understand why he'd want a y-valve in the pumpout/dumpout line instead of just a tee or wye fitting...because the law does require a means of securing the system from "accidental discharge." But why would any competent surveyor insist that a tank has to BE "dumpable" at sea to be legal?
J
Jack Betts
Peggy- that's what I thought. Thanks
I had an idea it was a fairly creative item on the survey, but everything else went so well that I had no reason even to protest. I'm happy, the new owner's happy and all's well.
I had an idea it was a fairly creative item on the survey, but everything else went so well that I had no reason even to protest. I'm happy, the new owner's happy and all's well.
E
Ed
State regs do not superceded Fed regs.
State can be stricter than Federal regulations, and they can be more lax than Fed regs, but then the Fed regs would take precident. In other words, you must abide by the strictest regs that apply. They could be Fed, State, County, City or those imposed on private property, whichever apply. ~ Happy sails to you ~ _/) ~
State can be stricter than Federal regulations, and they can be more lax than Fed regs, but then the Fed regs would take precident. In other words, you must abide by the strictest regs that apply. They could be Fed, State, County, City or those imposed on private property, whichever apply. ~ Happy sails to you ~ _/) ~
P
Peggie Hall/HeadMistress
It's the other way around, Ed
State regs can be more lax than federal regs, but they can't be more stringent. A state can opt, or not, to enforce federal laws (although the feds can and do bring pressure to bear...i.e. "enforce this or we'll cut federal funding to that")...but no state "or political subdivision thereof" can enact any legislation that's more stringent than federal law. For instance, local "no discharge" zones...the state, county or municipality can't just decide to do it...federal law (40 CFR 140.4) prescribes the procedure that has to be followed, which comes down to, they have to apply to the feds (EPA) actually create the new NDZ. Otoh, although federal marine sanitation laws have been in place for more than 20 years, AL and AR still haven't succeeded in passing state legislation to enforce 'em that's within federal guidelines...so neither state has any marine sanitation laws, nor any means of enforcing the federal laws except on interstate waterways that are under USCG jurisdiction. GA and TN had to "go back to the drawing board" twice before they finally wrote state laws that didn't supercede federal marine sanitation laws...the lawyer that overturned GA's first one was a member of my YC. What a state, county or municipality CAN do is enact any legislation they want to as long as there is no federal law pertaining to it. For instance, a local ban against smoking in any public building, office building, restaurant or bar. There is no federal law that dictates where it's legal to smoke and where it isn't, so the state, county or municipality can make any rules it wants to. Private property is another matter...within limits, that is. I can't use banned pesticides on my lawn, but no local law forbidding the sale of alcohol can prevent me from buying it where it is legal and consuming it in my own home. Etc...
State regs can be more lax than federal regs, but they can't be more stringent. A state can opt, or not, to enforce federal laws (although the feds can and do bring pressure to bear...i.e. "enforce this or we'll cut federal funding to that")...but no state "or political subdivision thereof" can enact any legislation that's more stringent than federal law. For instance, local "no discharge" zones...the state, county or municipality can't just decide to do it...federal law (40 CFR 140.4) prescribes the procedure that has to be followed, which comes down to, they have to apply to the feds (EPA) actually create the new NDZ. Otoh, although federal marine sanitation laws have been in place for more than 20 years, AL and AR still haven't succeeded in passing state legislation to enforce 'em that's within federal guidelines...so neither state has any marine sanitation laws, nor any means of enforcing the federal laws except on interstate waterways that are under USCG jurisdiction. GA and TN had to "go back to the drawing board" twice before they finally wrote state laws that didn't supercede federal marine sanitation laws...the lawyer that overturned GA's first one was a member of my YC. What a state, county or municipality CAN do is enact any legislation they want to as long as there is no federal law pertaining to it. For instance, a local ban against smoking in any public building, office building, restaurant or bar. There is no federal law that dictates where it's legal to smoke and where it isn't, so the state, county or municipality can make any rules it wants to. Private property is another matter...within limits, that is. I can't use banned pesticides on my lawn, but no local law forbidding the sale of alcohol can prevent me from buying it where it is legal and consuming it in my own home. Etc...
E
Ed
Then why
Is the California automotive emission standards the most stringent in the USA? Even more than the EPA standards! Clearly, State regs can be MORE stringent that Fed regs, but they cannot be less so. Otherwise, Fed regs apply. ~ Happy sails to you ~ _/) ~
Is the California automotive emission standards the most stringent in the USA? Even more than the EPA standards! Clearly, State regs can be MORE stringent that Fed regs, but they cannot be less so. Otherwise, Fed regs apply. ~ Happy sails to you ~ _/) ~
P
Peggie Hall/HeadMistress
I think you'll find that CA emission standards
Were actually granted by the feds (EPA)...using essentially the same kind of legal process RI used to make the whole state "no discharge."
Were actually granted by the feds (EPA)...using essentially the same kind of legal process RI used to make the whole state "no discharge."
R
Richard Briggs
Mis- Understanding?
I am the new owner of your Hunter 37. I believe you may have mis-interpreted the survey. Jon the surveyor never stated that it was "Illegal" not to have a y valve in the black water ststem. I will quote his only ref. to the system. On page #9 "note: the existing system did not allow for overboard discharge where it is legal to do so". This was probably the finest boat I looked at and as you saw the surveyor said it was above average. I hope you will join us for a last sail before we head to Guatemala with her, Regards. Richard
I am the new owner of your Hunter 37. I believe you may have mis-interpreted the survey. Jon the surveyor never stated that it was "Illegal" not to have a y valve in the black water ststem. I will quote his only ref. to the system. On page #9 "note: the existing system did not allow for overboard discharge where it is legal to do so". This was probably the finest boat I looked at and as you saw the surveyor said it was above average. I hope you will join us for a last sail before we head to Guatemala with her, Regards. Richard
P
Peggie Hall/HeadMistress
Aha...that's different...
The surveyor was only alerting you that you'd be wasting your time trying to figure out how to dump the tank. A good move on his part...'cuz you'd be amazed at the number of new owners who post on a forum or email me that they can't find the switch for the macerator, or there is one but nothing happens... It never occurs to 'em to take a look to see if there is one, or even whether they'd have to open a seacock to use it. I'm starting to really like this surveyor...not only that notation, but at least a 9 page survey report. You don't indicate where you are, but if you're in New England, "Jon" wouldn't by any chance be Jonathan Klopmann? If so, he's one of the best surveyors in the country. Congratulations on your new boat...and welcome aboard!
The surveyor was only alerting you that you'd be wasting your time trying to figure out how to dump the tank. A good move on his part...'cuz you'd be amazed at the number of new owners who post on a forum or email me that they can't find the switch for the macerator, or there is one but nothing happens... It never occurs to 'em to take a look to see if there is one, or even whether they'd have to open a seacock to use it. I'm starting to really like this surveyor...not only that notation, but at least a 9 page survey report. You don't indicate where you are, but if you're in New England, "Jon" wouldn't by any chance be Jonathan Klopmann? If so, he's one of the best surveyors in the country. Congratulations on your new boat...and welcome aboard!
R
Richard Briggs
Thanks Peggy
Hi Peggy, I don't want to get to far from the topic but the survey was 18 Pages and the surveyor is Jon Roop in Beufort NC, a wonderful person and certainely un-biased as they all should be. I am tickled to death with the boat and many people trying to sell boats should take a class from Jack on how to properly maintain a boat and what to do to make it show. The boats new name is "La Vida Feliz" and will be kept on the Rio Dulce in Guatemala. The discharge system is being restored with the Y valve for direct overboard discharge while off shore or deck pump out when in port and/or areas that do not allow direct discharge or areas that I do not wish to discharge in even if permitted..Regards
Hi Peggy, I don't want to get to far from the topic but the survey was 18 Pages and the surveyor is Jon Roop in Beufort NC, a wonderful person and certainely un-biased as they all should be. I am tickled to death with the boat and many people trying to sell boats should take a class from Jack on how to properly maintain a boat and what to do to make it show. The boats new name is "La Vida Feliz" and will be kept on the Rio Dulce in Guatemala. The discharge system is being restored with the Y valve for direct overboard discharge while off shore or deck pump out when in port and/or areas that do not allow direct discharge or areas that I do not wish to discharge in even if permitted..Regards
- Status
- Not open for further replies.