Holding tank requirements USA

[somanyboats]

we have a boat that was from the east coast, it does not have a holding tank, and the previous owner used adult diapers. He said they were legal.

[john61ct]

Pics or it didn't happen!

[ccannan]

Originally Posted by freakytiki

The Federal Clean Water Act requires that all boats with an installed head have one of three types of Coast Guard approved marine sanitation devices (MSD's) attached to the toilet. Failure to comply can result in a $2,000 fine. Type I and II MSD's are flow-through systems that treat the sewage using chemical, electrical and/or incineration methods before discharging the waste overboard; i.e., Lectra-San or Microphor. A macerator pump is not an MSD. Type III MSD's are holding tanks that store sewage on the boat. The waste is not treated in a Type III device, even if odor-reducing chemicals are added. It is illegal to discharge or empty the contents of your boat's holding tank in U.S. territorial water ( within a three-mile limit). Some boats are equipped with a "Y" -valve that allows for the direct discharge of raw sewage. This valve can only be used outside the three-mile limit. Coast Guard regulations require that the "Y"-valve must be secured in the closed position (by padlock, non-resealable tie, removal of handle or other physical barrier) when the boat is within three miles of shore. Boaters can be fined for non-compliance. If you use a portable toilet, remember it is illegal to dump it overboard. Use shore side facilities to empty it. SPECIAL NOTE: Waste treated by Type I and II MSD's is unhealthy for marine waters because (1) chemical treatment often sanitizes only the outer surfaces of waste clumps, (2) chemicals routinely used in MSD's are harmful to sea life and water quality (chlorine, formaldehyde, formaline, phenol derivatives, ammonia compounds), (3) poorly maintained MSD's may not treat effluent to the prescribed standards, and (4) even treated sewage contributes nutrients and lowers dissolved oxygen levels in water, lowering water quality for marine lif

This is the correct answer.

[boatman12]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

Every time I read this I wait for the poster to prove it by hanging their butt over the side and dropping a load in front of a water cop type.

I just find it such an insulting and twisted “taking the high ground” position

If you and Dave would carefully read my post that you responded to, you would notice that it read "Federal law". Only an idiot would take a dump overboard in front of a local LEO.

Look up the Federal law and read it carefully.

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by boatman12

If you and Dave would carefully read my post that you responded to, you would notice that it read "Federal law". Only an idiot would take a dump overboard in front of a local LEO.

Look up the Federal law and read it carefully.

I’ve read it many times. You are one of those take the position that if the law doesn’t specifically say you can’t do something it must be ok.

You suggestion of “bucket and chuck it” is given all the time on forums and says much about the poster. IMO of course as I don’t wish to hurt your feelings.

[boatman12]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

I’ve read it many times. You are one of those take the position that if the law doesn’t specifically say you can’t do something it must be ok.

You suggestion of “bucket and chuck it” is given all the time on forums and says much about the poster. IMO of course as I don’t wish to hurt your feelings.

I did not suggest "bucket and chuck it". That would be a violation of Federal law as the bucket would become an "MSD" (holding tank) once you peed or pooped in it. You have to pee or poop directly from your body into the water to not be in violation of Federal marine sanitation laws. (BTW: Marine mammals do this routinely.)

I did not post this loophole in the marine sanitation law as a recommendation, nor did I post it as an invitation to an argument, I posted it so people would know about this loophole.

And yes, anything that is not against the law is legal. That's how laws work.

[sailorboy1]

Ok if that’s how you feel that a “loophole” is ok. Of course a loophole is just an end around and I still look forward to your real life experience telling the judge etc.

[john61ct]

"Legal" does not mean morally, or ethically OK.

There are billions of acres of ocean where direct dumping is both.

In places where you regularly and increasingly are sighting other boats, then you may be fine with the former but not the latter.

[CaptTom]

It is indeed illegal to discharge untreated waste within 3 NM of any US land (with a few exceptions where it's more than 3.)

The area I'd be unsure about is whether a foreign-flagged vessel needs to comply with the rules about installed MSDs. For starters, I'm pretty sure you'd have to comply with the laws of the flag state. For example, you used to need USCG approved life jackets on US vessels, but Canadian vessels in the US were fine with Canadian CG approved.

Much of the pollution and waste regulations are based on international treaties, so there may be some overlap of US and UK requirements anyway.

It could be, if your boat is legal in the UK, and you can prove that you do not discharge raw waste within 3 NM, you'll be fine. But you want to check with someone more knowledgeable than "some guy on the internet."

[Liber]

This poo/pee issue is getting more and more complex.... In Europe you are not required to have a holding tank currently. I am not sure for new production boats but older (mine is from 1985) do not require to be retrofitted...

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by CaptTom

...

It could be, if your boat is legal in the UK, and you can prove that you do not discharge raw waste within 3 NM, you'll be fine. But you want to check with someone more knowledgeable than "some guy on the internet."

That is essentially what you are doing by locking the through hull or removing y-valve handle.

[Bean Counter]

To post #1 . It would seem there is no law saying you must have a holding tank. But then you are not permitted to discharge untreated sewerage from your head directly into the sea within 3 miles of the US coast. So the solution for smaller vessels is to a) install a holding tank and get it pumped out (usually at a marina or in some harbors a pump out boat will attend) or venture 3 miles out, dump it and come back or b)install a marine sanitation device (such as Raritan's Electro san http://raritaneng.com/on-board-waste...-lectrasan-mc/ )
which basically creates chlorine from salt water to kill the bugs - like a salt water swimming pool chlorinator) - about $1000 + plumbing. It uses a bit of electricity though.

The problem with a) is that you are continually looking for a pump out unless you have a large tank. Option b) removes the pumpout requirement in most areas that do not fall within a special "No Discharge Zone" - these are found on government website https://www.epa.gov/vessels-marinas-...nes-ndzs-state

If you plan to visit marinas a lot then pump outs are easy to come by, if you want to anchor out a lot then you will need to come into a dock occasionally to get pumped out. There is usually a charge for this, but may be free from some government run establishments.

With option b) in low salinity areas (which is up most rivers and estuaries, the ICW) may need a salt injection to allow the electrolysis to work - so a bit more expense.

[CaptTom]

BeanCounter summarized it best.

I just want to point out that the pump-out in most places is limited to a nominal fee (usually $5) by the agency that paid for the equipment. Often it's free.

See, our illustrious politicians love feel-good legislation which, while nonsensical, appeals to most voters and is only opposed by a few odd-ball boaters. But to get a no-discharge zone established, you have to prove that there are sufficient shoreside pump-out facilities.

The solution is to accept federal grants ("free" money, what politician doesn't want that?) and give pump-out stations to marinas, fuel docks and other shoreside facilities.

This money often comes with the caveat that the facility can't charge more than some set, nominal fee.

Anyway, that's a very long-winded way to say that I don't think pumping out is all that inconvenient if you're staying inside the 3-mile boundary. But by all means, if you install a holding tank, include some way to pump it out when you're outside. That's even easier.

[boatman12]

Is the USA the only major country with such strict boat sewage regulations?

I find it odd that boats in the UK aren't equipped with holding tanks or sewage treatment systems. A livaboards marina must be an unpleasant place.

[Bean Counter]

Originally Posted by boatman12

Is the USA the only major country with such strict boat sewage regulations?

I find it odd that boats in the UK aren't equipped with holding tanks or sewage treatment systems. A livaboards marina must be an unpleasant place.

See RYA summary
Holding Tanks | Boating Abroad | Knowledge & Advice | Knowledge & Advice | RYA