Yellow water overboard?

[Jehr]

Hi Peggy and all,

Legally speaking, can you dump pure urine (say, out of a lug-a-loo) within inland lakes or the 3 mile limit? Is it classified as Black Water?

Thanks!

 

[CalebD]

You are going to laugh.
As I understand it, it is not ILLegal to pee off of your boat but NOT legal to dump any urine or fecal matter within the 3 mile limit or no-discharge-zones (NDZ) from a container or through your marine sanitation device (MSD).
So, if a Coast Guard or other patrol sees you peeing off your boat they are not likely to issue any summons. If they found turds floating in the path of your boat they could board you and issue you a violation.
So, tell your wife she should just pee over the side of the boat as you (probably) do. In all seriousness though one can pee in a bucket in the cabin and if there happens to be a sink with an overboard drain in it then there is very little evidence that any urine has been left behind. Of course you will need to rinse the sink drain after said usage.
The easiest low-tech low tech urine toilet is a bucket with a laniard tied to it.
The most legal solution is a port-a-potty or a head with a holding tank which you should have aboard in case you are boarded by the authorities. If you sail in a NDZ like the Great Lakes, LI Sound, Chesapeake and other places your marine plumbing should be in compliance as you are likely to be boarded and checked out at some point. There is no law against having a bucket with a line tied to it but there is a law requiring a proper MSD on your vessel.
Edit to add: dumping urine in an inland lake is not a great idea if you like to swim in it or if people drink the water from it.

 

[Franklin]

I think there should be a international "Pee off Bow" day/time. Say every year at high noon on June 1st, we all heave-to and go to the bow and pee in protest.

For real though....as long as you aren't in a small water area, we can't even come close to what the fish put in the water, so I think these rules are a bit too much. There are million and billions of fish out there every day peeing and popping in the water. Should we make them go out 3 miles too

 

[Don S/V ILLusion]

As silly as it sounds, the statutes prohibiting the release, spilling, dumping or discharging of sewage (including urine) overboard are not limited to method. It is equally prohibited to discharge directly as it is to do so through a head discharge. Whether or not a harbormaster, warden, marine police or CG chooses to do anything upon seeing it is another issue.
Interestingly enough, t is also equally prohibited to release fresh water into salt water, i.e., you cannot legally run a garden hose running drinking water quality water from the faucet on the dock, as an example, into the water.
Obviously, no one will likely ever take punitive action against either and both contribute only a trivial amount of the total daily load on a water body but that too is irrelevant.

I've heard intelligent people explain the rationale for both but comparing it to fish waste was never articulated.

 

[Peggie Hall HeadMistress]

Illegal to pour any container of urine overboard.

Federal law makes it illegal to discharge "sewage," defined in the CFR as "human body wastes and the wastes from toilets and other receptacles intended to receive or retain body wastes"...and "discharge" is defined in the CFR as "includes, but is not limited to, any spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying, or dumping."

So while it's legal to urinate, or even poop, over the side directly into the water or while in the water...if you put it in any container first---even a coffee can--you cannot legally empty that container into any inland waters or coastal waters within 3 miles of the nearest point on the whole US coastline.

I'm just the messenger, btw. The logic escapes me too.

Am I right in guessing that you've installed an Airhead and were hoping you could legally dump the urine jugs instead of having to carry the d'd things ashore to pour 'em into a toilet?

 

[Benny]

All the combined pee and fecal matter generated in small pleasure boats just adds to a drop in a bucket as far as coastal pollution is concerned. A floating turd in the water does more to incite beach goers than EPA readings. Politics drive the cart.

 

[Bill Roosa]

Inland water help

If you really want to help the inland waters don't fertilize your lawn or eat chicken. Those two sources are the predominant sources of nutrients going into the Chesapeake Bay.
There are also some feeder rivers that have so many houses around them that they routinely have bacteria warnings. Don't know if you could fix that but we could insist that the sewage treatment plants not dump the sewage into the bay untreated after a rain storm.

 

[alexco38]

Pee in the water

This is very interesting. When the weather is warm enough, why not stop the boat and go for a swin? Do whatever you like in the water and that's nobody's business. If you can face the mirror in the morning that you just pee in the water someone might drink from it, so be it.

BTW, I never ever swim in a public pool.

 

[Don S/V ILLusion]

So while it's legal to urinate, or even poop, over the side directly into the water or while in the water...if you put it in any container first---even a coffee can--you cannot legally empty that container into any inland waters or coastal waters within 3 miles of the nearest point on the whole US coastline.

I'm just the messenger, btw. The logic escapes me too.

Actually, as I mentioned, this is not correct - the method by which sewage enters the water is irrelevant. Recognizing this might help to obviate the apparent inconsistency.

 

[CalebD]

I would like to see farmers decrease the amount of fertilizer polluting the rivers of the Chesapeake as much as anyone but I doubt that we can get folks to stop eating chicken and pork for that matter (more farms upland from the Pamlico Sound then the Chessy).
My last visit to the Chessy on my friends 32' sail boat found us sailing with him swimming alongside naked or nearby just north of Herrington Harbor with the Patrol boat scanning us. We chose to dump his swimming shorts into the water while passing families who were anchored out for a fine afternoon so he could regain the boat in full sartorial garb (fully dressed that is).
Fortunately the Patrol boat seemed to lose interest as my friend climbed aboard wearing pants. At least our boat was equipped with a holding tank and we were not stopped or cited for any violations and we sailed into our slip in the Rhode River.
It is kind of common sense. Don't pee in your drinking water and you are ok. Don't flash your neighbors with young kids and expect to be ignored. If you must go naked and dump urine overboard please do it where you are not likely to be seen by other boats (the satellites may still get you though). It is a small price to pay for the freedom to do so that I willingly accept.
Don,
Are you a maritime lawyer? If so I will accept your hypothesis but as far as I understand it is still legal for me to feel the wind between my balls while relieving myself.

 

[r.w.landau]

Peggie, are you serious that going over the side is legal?

But if it is captured and released it is not?
r.w.landau

 

[CalebD]

RW,
In the GL region I am not sure that what I read in Peggy's book applies but that was my understanding of the legalities of the matter. I am sure it is a bit like airport security these days; it only matters who is in power and enforcing the laws they choose to.
Us salt water sailors like to use the head off the aft end of the boat when it is not dangerous.

 

[Franklin]

Well, if you are seen by any authority, at the very least, you can be given a ticket for exposure, so it doesn't really matter, does it.

 

[Peggie Hall HeadMistress]

I'm very serious

And it's not a matter of selective enforcement...there is NO prohibition in ANY federal law pertaining to vessels against "direct deposit," only against "catch and release." However, laws pertaining to indecent exposure may apply.

And Don, if you were correct that you cannot legally run a garden hose from the fresh water faucet on the dock into the water, it would be illegal to wash a boat in the water...and I think iit would be hard to convince the CG or the Navy that swabbing the decks of their boats is illegal...though it might be welcome news to the deck hands who have to do the swabbing.

A lot of misinformation gets circulated as "fact" and a lot of facts get twisted into misinformation by well meaning people...I suspect you've fallen prey to one or the other.

 

[Don S/V ILLusion]

Peggy

I won't dispute the issues with you other than to say that I was the director of the EPA Boston office of hazardous waste which included RCRA, CERCLA (Superfund), the CWA, emergency response and Brownfields programs for close to 30 years. We implemented and enforced the provisions of each of these statutes in coordination with the CG and state environmental programs and although you may not believe it, what I said is indeed true. Frankly, I do not appreciate being accused of providing "mis-information" and although I don't expect an apology, I do expect mutual respect as do we all here.

Feel free to email me directly if you would like to pursue this discussion further or obtain the relevant reference docs

 

[Chuckbear]

I won't dispute the issues with you other than to say that I was the director of the EPA Boston office of hazardous waste which included RCRA, CERCLA (Superfund), the CWA, emergency response and Brownfields programs for close to 30 years. We implemented and enforced the provisions of each of these statutes in coordination with the CG and state environmental programs and although you may not believe it, what I said is indeed true. Frankly, I do not appreciate being accused of providing "mis-information" and although I don't expect an apology, I do expect mutual respect as do we all here.

Feel free to email me directly if you would like to pursue this discussion further or obtain the relevant reference docs

No personal insult intended Don, but being an official at the EPA does not make one an expert in all things environmental as we have all seen examples in the past. Chuck

 

[bv]

show

Don please show us the data. Puffing your chest about who you worked for serves little purpose. End this now with more data and less ego.

 

[Peggie Hall HeadMistress]

No lack of respect, Don

However, the EPA legal dept in Atlanta arrived at some strange conclusions...

In one instance they decided that detergents and boat wash products are "pollutants" and therefore using ANYthing but water to wash boats is illegal...and enforced it for a while. The boat dealers who have sales docks on the lake had to get a federal judge to convince 'em they'd misinterpreted the law.

Another instance had to do with the definition of "navigable" vs. "non--navigable." 40 CFR 140.3 designates "freshwater reservoirs or other freshwater impoundments whose inlets or outlets are such as to prevent the ingress or egress by vessel traffic subject to this regulation, or in rivers not capable of navigation by interstate vessel traffic" as no-discharge waters. The EPA legal dept decided that "ingress" and "egress" included boat ramps...that a freshwater lake was "navigable" even if boat ramps were the ONLY way any boat could get in or out of it. When I asked the director why there'd be any need for a marine sanitation law on a lake on which it was impossible for any boats to be on it, his answer was, "you'll have to ask our legal dept."

So with all due respect, the EPA isn't always correct in its interpretation of federal law.

 

[Don S/V ILLusion]

nothing ego related or "chest puffing" going on - it's just that I get defensive when accused on making false statements. I don't pretend to be an expert in anything but I do rely on those whom I do consider experts and had the opportunity to work with a number of such people who's advice I am citing here.

Sec 311 of the CWA defines "discharge", "vessel" and "person" to included, among other things, any "person" "emitting" "waste" including biological waste.
The statute and it's implementing regs are far too large to cite in their entirety here but are easily found.

With respect to inland v. coastal and navigable v. non navigable, the case law is extensive and no single example is indicative of every circumstance, however, this is largely a moot point as the statute is mirrored in virtually every state law applicable to inland and non-navigable waterbodies. States are essentially forced to mirror federal statute as a prerequisite to federal funding of their programs.

Regarding fresh water discharge to estuaries and salt water, this prohibition is based upon state water quality standards which prohibit releases which affect marine life adversely and clearly most shellfish and marine species are so effected.

Lastly, there is such a thing as "intuitive toxicology" demonstrated here by some who think fresh water discharges are okay so it must be so.

Sorry I ever mentioned it...

 

[Rick Webb]

Sounds Like We are Going to be Required to shower Before Jumping into the Water

When the EPA guy tries to write me a citation for peeing in the water I'll just pee on his shoes intead.