Disable the Macerator Rule/Law

[Nacho Boat]

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.

Jack F,

Do you ever take your boat out of the water? If so, you can check the operation of your overboard discharge while it's on your trailer. You just need to figure out "where its going to blow" and catch it in a bucket. The overboard discharge does not shoot out hard, so its not hard to do.

When you are bobbing in the water, it's can be tough to confirm that the overboard discharge is actually working (unless you watch the tank level in the engine compartment - which can be tough when its hot, and your boat is bobbing).

 

[Jack F]

Jack F,

Do you ever take your boat out of the water? If so, you can check the operation of your overboard discharge while it's on your trailer. You just need to figure out "where its going to blow" and catch it in a bucket. The overboard discharge does not shoot out hard, so its not hard to do.

When you are bobbing in the water, it's can be tough to confirm that the overboard discharge is actually working (unless you watch the tank level in the engine compartment - which can be tough when its hot, and your boat is bobbing).

I don't have a trailer, it’s stored inside at the marina for the winter.

 

[Lazy Daze]

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.

Nick,

Thank you very much. I will take a look at those links later tonight in depth (looked quickly just now) and probably submit a question, too.

I think *logically* that electrically disabling the mac should work. But I agree with your line of thinking that it depends on who is doing the inspection and that sometimes it hard to teach an old dog a new trick.

I know I can simply install an inline shut-off valve and be done with the whole thing. But, it just seems a waste of money and an unneeded step, along with making things more complicated than it needs to be.

Thanks again!

 

[dpmulvey]

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.

Here is what I found.

http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg5/cg5213/msd.asp

Under the "Additional Information" section.

"
No discharge zone. While operating a vessel in an EPA designated no discharge zone, flow-through devices are only permitted if adequately secured to prevent discharges of all treated and untreated sewage. For example, closing the seacock and padlocking, using a non-releasable wire tie, or removing the seacock handle are considered to be sufficient in most cases. For short voyages, locking the door to the head with a padlock or a door handle key lock is another acceptable method. For vessels that routinely operate in no discharge zones a Type III MSD is recommended. For more information see 33 CFR 159.7 and 40 CFR Part 140. " HTH

 

[Woody]

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

You might find this EPA map and brochure interesting, especially the last paragraph of the New England Boaters Guide. From other reading on the EPA site it sounds like the whole New England coastline will be EPA NDZ in the not to distant future.
www.epa.gov/ne/eco/nodiscrg/ma.html

www.epa.gov/ne/eco/nodiscrg/pdfs/nda-boaters-guide.pdf

 

[Lazy Daze]

Here is what I found.

http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg5/cg5213/msd.asp

Under the "Additional Information" section.

"
No discharge zone. While operating a vessel in an EPA designated no discharge zone, flow-through devices are only permitted if adequately secured to prevent discharges of all treated and untreated sewage. For example, closing the seacock and padlocking, using a non-releasable wire tie, or removing the seacock handle are considered to be sufficient in most cases. For short voyages, locking the door to the head with a padlock or a door handle key lock is another acceptable method. For vessels that routinely operate in no discharge zones a Type III MSD is recommended. For more information see 33 CFR 159.7 and 40 CFR Part 140. " HTH

Thanks again, David. Based on the difficulty of finding information related to my my specific case, I guess I'm dealing with a sort of "rarity".

I submitted a question to the site that Nick linked to. I also left a message with our local USPS and USCG-Aux. With what Nick stated, and hoping these other guys say something similar (I'm thinking that the more that say it's OK, the better my odds are), I think I'll be content with what I'm doing.

I mean, if the purpose of the law is to say you must render your vessel unable to discharge, then disconnecting the power to the macerator should suffice. I hope.... :smt101

 

[Nacho Boat]

I mean, if the purpose of the law is to say you must render your vessel unable to discharge, then disconnecting the power to the macerator should suffice. I hope.... :smt101

Dennis,

The real issue is to be able to demonstrate to anyone who boards your boat that the macerator is disabled. So, when you do this, you may need to label the wiring or give some type of visual display the the macerator is actually disabled. It's all in the presentation!

Please let me know if and when you hear anything from the VSE website. If you do not get a reply, let me know and I can attempt to send your question via my local coordinator.

Good Luck!

Nick

 

[Lazy Daze]

Dennis,

The real issue is to be able to demonstrate to anyone who boards your boat that the macerator is disabled. So, when you do this, you may need to label the wiring or give some type of visual display the the macerator is actually disabled. It's all in the presentation!

Please let me know if and when you hear anything from the VSE website. If you do not get a reply, let me know and I can attempt to send your question via my local coordinator.

Good Luck!

Nick

EXCELLENT point about the presentation! I will certainly make it obvious and easy to see.

I'll let you know about the VSE, too. Thanks for your input, Nick. It's much appreciated.

 

[Woody]

When I read thru some of the regs I get the impression they are looking for a physical barrier to prevent operation of the discharge system, removing handles, locking head doors, plugs, locking ties, padlocks etc. My guess is it's intended to make accidental discharge and/or cheating a little more difficult. When you disconnect the power are these wires dead, a breaker flipped off or something. If they would accept a power supply disconnected by simply pulling apart the leads to the pump why wouldn't they accept a dedicated circuit with a keyed disconnect switch.

 

[jeffk]

Where do I find the "Legal" discharge area in Florida gulf coast?

 

[Lazy Daze]

When I read thru some of the regs I get the impression they are looking for a physical barrier to prevent operation of the discharge system, removing handles, locking head doors, plugs, locking ties, padlocks etc. My guess is it's intended to make accidental discharge and/or cheating a little more difficult. When you disconnect the power are these wires dead, a breaker flipped off or something. If they would accept a power supply disconnected by simply pulling apart the leads to the pump why wouldn't they accept a dedicated circuit with a keyed disconnect switch.

That's what's confusing. I mean, if a simple plastic zip tie satisfies the requirement...

But, yes, my plan would be to physically disable the wires at the mac. In my view, I would think this would be more sufficient than simply a separate, keyed switch. But, then locking the door only requires a key, too... And we're right back to confusing! :smt101

 

[Asureyez]

Where do I find the "Legal" discharge area in Florida gulf coast?

Generally three miles off shore

 

[chuck1]

Generally three miles off shore

Yep, beat me to it!:thumbsup:

 

[AKBASSKING]

Wow after reading this post, they have hammered you guys hard on the east coast. I guess they don't want your poop mixing with the big city poop....:grin:

 

[Henry Boyd]

Wow after reading this post, they have hammered you guys hard on the east coast. I guess they don't want your poop mixing with the big city poop....:grin:

Actually, there isn't much BCP in Massachusetts Bay. I don't want to enter into a political discussion, but huge improvements have been made to water quality in large part by regulating the level of water treatment. I know from my volunteer work for our town that the outflow from our water treatment plant that goes into Ipswich Bay is actually cleaner than the inflow via town wells.

As for Dennis' issue, installing a locking switch to disconnect the pump might be a better solution than simply unplugging the pump. These plugs are not really made for repetitive connections, and a key can be stowed somewhere away from the pump clearly showing it has been disabled.

Henry

 

[Lazy Daze]

installing a locking switch to disconnect the pump might be a better solution than simply unplugging the pump. These plugs are not really made for repetitive connections, and a key can be stowed somewhere away from the pump clearly showing it has been disabled.

Henry

Very interesting idea - thanks for the suggestion. Following Nick's line of thinking, this would show a potential inspector that even more thought has gone into the process. I could use a switch that has an on/off label and I could even add a small green LED to show when it's active/on.

 

[Asureyez]

Boats in inland waters with macerator discharge systems would be smart to leave the pump, remove the sea cock handle but install a lock out switch on the panel.

If you boat in coastal waters I'd recommend wire tieing the handle in the closed position. maintain the tank " Y " valve(s) in the pump out position and wire tie them in that position, and occasionally to pay for a pump out and save the receipt. Having a history of pumping out can demonstrate "good faith".

The skippers duty is to not allow discharge in coastal waters, and that includes accidental discharge when the skipper isn't looking. Having tag out and lock out procedures in place should be sufficient to pass any courtesy inspection.

If you are found in the above condition and written up, make the officers show you the exact violation, photograph the alleged violation and ask the officer to point out in the regulations how your situation created the violation.

Appeal the citation if you are in the right.

The general federal Law is that you must prevent accidental discharge not prevent the ability to make a lawful discharge.

I keep a bundle of wire ties and a pair of nippers in the bilge for just such use. One can not accidentally cut the sea cock wire tie, then accidentally open the sea cock and accidentally, and then accidentally cut the wire tie to open the Y Valve and then accidentally energize the macerator pump that has a double switch lock out.

The logic is a million monkeys banging on a million keyboards for a million years, one could actually write the Gettysb urg address, right!

 

[Nacho Boat]

The logic is a million monkeys banging on a million keyboards for a million years, one could actually write the Gettysburg address, right!

Chad,

Great Points! Unfortunately, logic does not always prevail.

#1 rule when being boarded - never argue with a person carrying a gun.

#2 rule when being boarded - never argue with an idiot, because they will drag you down to their level, and then beat you up with experience!

 

[dpmulvey]

Here is the law.


§ 159.7 Requirements for vessel operators.

top
(a) No person may operate any vessel equipped with installed toilet facilities unless it is equipped with:
(1) An operable Type II or III device that has a label on it under §159.16 or that is certified under §159.12 or §159.12a; or
(2) An operable Type I device that has a label on it under §159.16 or that is certified under §159.12, if the vessel is 19.7 meters (65 feet) or less in length.
(b) When operating a vessel on a body of water where the discharge of treated or untreated sewage is prohibited by the Environmental Protection Agency under 40 CFR 140.3 or 140.4, the operator must secure each Type I or Type II device in a manner which prevents discharge of treated or untreated sewage. Acceptable methods of securing the device include—
(1) Closing the seacock and removing the handle;
(2) Padlocking the seacock in the closed position;
(3) Using a non-releasable wire-tie to hold the seacock in the closed position; or
(4) Locking the door to the space enclosing the toilets with a padlock or door handle key lock.
(c) When operating a vessel on a body of water where the discharge of untreated sewage is prohibited by the Environmental Protection Agency under 40 CFR 140.3, the operator must secure each Type III device in a manner which prevents discharge of sewage. Acceptable methods of securing the device include—
(1) Closing each valve leading to an overboard discharge and removing the handle;
(2) Padlocking each valve leading to an overboard discharge in the closed position; or
(3) Using a non-releasable wire-tie to hold each valve leading to an overboard discharge in the closed position.
[CGH 95–028, 62 FR 51194, Sept. 30, 1997]

Here is the source.

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/tex....1.5.28;idno=33;cc=ecfr#33:2.0.1.5.28.1.179.5

DO NOT piss off the boarding officer. If you are cited ask him or her to be very specific (asa mentioned earlier) so you can fix it to his or her satisfaction to comply with the law. Deal with the problem in court later if necessary. Most in this area are pretty understanding. As long as you are making an attempt, they are good with it.

If you wire the discharge switch inline with a key switch and have the keys in your pocket or removed from the area of the key switch, that is usually satisfactory.

 

[Lazy Daze]

This all sounds very good. Dave, I will print out that info - as it seems to give examples of how to do it, but the main purpose (as you guys have said, as well) is to somehow "prevent discharge".

What has been said also agrees with what some local authorities have said. In the end, I will have:

-- Mac above the tank (no chance of leaking)
-- In-line Keyed-switch for the mac, clearly labeled on/off; with the key kept in a secure location.
-- Thru-hull (actually transom) will need a tool to remove the cap.

Thank you, everyone, for sticking with this thread - I truly appreciate all your help!

Happy New Year!
Dennis