Disable the Macerator Rule/Law

[Lazy Daze]

I've been looking all the over the place for the answer to this. I looked at the USCG site, even emailed them - no response, yet. That was about a week ago. I can't find a phone number.

Anyways, I know you're supposed to either lock-off or remove the handle to the thru-hull when you're in an area where overboard discharge is illegal.

But... would physically/electrically disabling the macerator be sufficient? In other words, my macerator (actually, T-pump) has quick-connects. If I disconnected it, would be that be OK?

 

[Groucho]

Mine is electrically disabled as well as the valve is zip tied shut. As I remember this is legal. (Came that way from dealer)

 

[Lazy Daze]

Thanks, Groucho.

Ooops. I wasn't as clear as I should have been. Let's say that I don't even have a seacock - meaning the macerator, it's lines and the waste fitting/deck-plate will all be above the water line (the "deck plate" will actually be through the transom).

 

[mwph]

My surveyor told me that you can have it zip tied by the CG with a ID numbered tag. Take that with a grain of salt though. Knowing what I know now I would rate his overall performance a B- at best.

Dennis, you should have pretty easy access to those guys don't you?

 

[jcoll]

Dennis,
Try this link, it's from Maryland's DNR website. Notice it says only 2 things are acceptable - Lock the door to the head (which to me is unacceptable !) or diable the seacock. Everything else, even though it would make the system inoperable, is probably not acceptable (translated = fineable violation). :smt089

http://dnr.maryland.gov/boating/cleanmarina/Guidebook/ts5sewage.pdf

 

[Bill Z]

I boat in Lake George NY and the requirement is to have the macerator disconnected and the thru hulls plugged. My 320 does not have plugs but it is very clear that all my discharge it to the the holding tank which makes for regular pump outs.

 

[Jimmy Buoy]

I've removed the discharge hose connecting the macerator/pump to the thru hull and disabled the pump by unpluging the connector. Just as a safeguard, the end of the macerator/pump is plugged off as well.

 

[dpmulvey]

To answer your question, yes. If completely bypassing the means by which you can discharge overboard eliminates the possibility of discharge, you will be OK. Unplugging the macerator would not hurt either. You might want to have a laminated diagram of what you did and be able to explain that to the CG if boarded. It shows them you have thought through the problem and did not just rip the hoses off as they were pulling you over.

 

[katricol]

What a disparity from locale to locale...another example of how our gov. makes things hard. I was boarded by the ct. enviromental police a few weeks ago and they were happy with the fact that I had the handle off my discharge seacock. No mention of disconnecting hoses or plugging thru hulls.

 

[Henry Boyd]

What a disparity from locale to locale...another example of how our gov. makes things hard. I was boarded by the ct. enviromental police a few weeks ago and they were happy with the fact that I had the handle off my discharge seacock. No mention of disconnecting hoses or plugging thru hulls.

I think the big issue comes down to boats located in regions where overboard discharge is either impossible, or unrealistic. In those locations local jurisdictions are taking the view that disabling macerator systems that can't be legally used is a good way to ensure compliance.

Up here in MA where we are on the Atlantic and 3nm is a straight shot, our boats only have to have the seacock closed when not being used (it should be anyways from a safety standpoint) to prevent accidental discharge.

Henry

 

[Lazy Daze]

Thanks, everyone, for all the help and suggestions.:smt001

MWPH: Not as easy as you'd think (access to USCG). But, I do have extremely easy access to the CG Aux and Power Squadrons - I didn't even think about that - thanks!

Dave: I can foresee a time when, during a boarding, I may need to have something in writing (official) showing that electrically disconnecting the mac would suffice. Any chance you have someone's phone number that I can call? Or, maybe, can you just point me in the right direction? Don't go out of your way - I'll do all the leg work.

Jim: That's crazy that locking the head door would suffice!

Bill: Lake George was one of the places I was specifically thinking of that might give me a hard time.

 

[giff1]

First year with my 1987 340 my waste thru hull seacock leaked and water would slowly fill the waste tank while under way. I removed the seacock and plugged the thru hull and the mancerator discharge end. The following year the mancerator rusted thru. I replumed the whole system to just a holding tank with pump out.

 

[MaddyDean]

This will be my first year with a boat that has a head. I read that some of you are forgoing with a mac altogether.

My question, don't you need a mac to pump the "stuff" out of the waste DockSide Pump-out?:huh:

 

[Jack F]

This will be my first year with a boat that has a head. I read that some of you are forgoing with a mac altogether.

My question, don't you need a mac to pump the "stuff" out of the waste DockSide Pump-out?:huh:

The DockSide Pump-out..sucks it out of your holding tank.

 

[Lazy Daze]

First year with my 1987 340 my waste thru hull seacock leaked and water would slowly fill the waste tank while under way. I removed the seacock and plugged the thru hull and the mancerator discharge end. The following year the mancerator rusted thru. I replumed the whole system to just a holding tank with pump out.

Thanks, Giff. While I'm eliminating the use of the seacock/thru-hull (bottom of hull), I'm keeping the T-pump to use as a home pump-out (which is why I'm moving the thru-hull to below the swim platform - easy access).

 

[sbw1]

Maybe a little late to chime in but.....my boat has a mascerator that must be operated with the seacock open and with an electrical dc breaker in the closed position. The seacock has a loop hole beneath it that a sturdy electrical tie wrap goes through and then over the handle. This method of securing the discharge has passed one CG boarding and two auxiliary inspections.

 

[Jack F]

Maybe a little late to chime in but.....my boat has a mascerator that must be operated with the seacock open and with an electrical dc breaker in the closed position. The seacock has a loop hole beneath it that a sturdy electrical tie wrap goes through and then over the handle. This method of securing the discharge has passed one CG boarding and two auxiliary inspections.

That's what I have. When I took delivery last year the mechanic went over everything with me, he wanted to cut the tie wrap and open the seacock, I told him he didn't have to.

If he did and I got stopped by the CG would I have gotten a fine, I know it's a no discharge area until 3 miles out?

 

[Nacho Boat]

MWPH: Not as easy as you'd think (access to USCG). But, I do have extremely easy access to the CG Aux and Power Squadrons - I didn't even think about that - thanks!

Dave: I can foresee a time when, during a boarding, I may need to have something in writing (official) showing that electrically disconnecting the mac would suffice. Any chance you have someone's phone number that I can call? Or, maybe, can you just point me in the right direction? Don't go out of your way - I'll do all the leg work.

Jim: That's crazy that locking the head door would suffice!

Bill: Lake George was one of the places I was specifically thinking of that might give me a hard time.

Dennis,

I am USPS Vessel Safety Examiner. I can tell you a couple of things.

One - You are not going to find what you want in writing. The regulations state that the overboard discharge must be disabled. So, basically, you are depending on the "common sense" of the boarding party to make that determination. Some boarding parties do NOT exhibit common sense and only will accept what they are used to or want to see. (I have my overboard discharge closed and the valve handle removed, however despite that, one inspector told me that the key that goes into the head (controls the pump) must be removed from the head)

Two - As a Vessel Examiner, I would accept your method. The primary drive behind securing the system in to ensure that someone does not "accidentally" discharge the system. Actually, locking the head door is an accepted method (a very poor method, but has been accepted). I have instructed some boaters that physically removing the fuse would meet this requirement. Before everyone starts flaming me, yes, there are better methods, and again, another inspector could make a different determination.

You may want to try another Coast Guard location for a phone call. However, my experience with the Coast Guard on VSE's has not been positive. The Coast Guard does a great job in its primary mission, but they do not provide extensive training on small craft safety inspections. I witnessed a couple of Coast Guard boardings, and have seen these fine young professionals make some mistakes in the applications of these rules.

Check out this website for VSE questions and answers:

http://safetyseal.net/

You can post your question here:

http://safetyseal.net/askquestion.asp

Please let me know if I can assist in any manner.

 

[Henry Boyd]

That's what I have. When I took delivery last year the mechanic went over everything with me, he wanted to cut the tie wrap and open the seacock, I told him he didn't have to.

If he did and I got stopped by the CG would I have gotten a fine, I know it's a no discharge area until 3 miles out?

Jack,
I think the post by Nacho about sums up the situation, it depends. I know (although not with our present 280), that the USCG that cover the North Shore, as well as Mass Environmental Police have been satisfied as long as the seacock is closed. But I guess it comes down to the guy doing the inspecting. In any event, wire ties can be cut and replaced after doing a discharge.

We have not had any problems with our macerator-less 280 as the pump out service between southern NH and Boston, is widely available and free. How are things in the Boston to Cape stretch?

Henry

 

[Jack F]

Jack,
I think the post by Nacho about sums up the situation, it depends. I know (although not with our present 280), that the USCG that cover the North Shore, as well as Mass Environmental Police have been satisfied as long as the seacock is closed. But I guess it comes down to the guy doing the inspecting. In any event, wire ties can be cut and replaced after doing a discharge.

We have not had any problems with our macerator-less 280 as the pump out service between southern NH and Boston, is widely available and free. How are things in the Boston to Cape stretch?

Henry

This was our 1st year with a boat and have stayed close to Hyannis, we have a pump out at the marina so I haven’t used the overboard discharge, the heads only been used 3-4 times, no solids. I just wanted to try it before the warranty runs out. It seems like it would be hard to go out 3miles open the bilge reach down next to a hot engine, cut the tie wrap pump out then tie wrap it again.

I was boarded my 1st time out this spring, when they asked about it, I told them it was tie wrapped, they never looked in the bilge.