Does Florida allow Y-valves?
- Thread starter p38
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
mbevins
Guru
You are allowed to have a Y valve on the Great Lakes. It just has to be mechanically fastened in the " no discharge" position, ie: bolted, pad locked.
Theoretically you could use tie wraps but I'm not sure the USCG is really happy with that solution.
Ok. Did some research myself. Pls correct me if I am wrong:
1 you can have a Y-valve, doesn't need to be permanently sealed like in chicago.
2 the valve needs to be closed in inland water or NDZ
3 the valve can be opened 3 miles out in atlantic ocean and 9 miles out in the gulf side.
1 you can have a Y-valve, doesn't need to be permanently sealed like in chicago.
2 the valve needs to be closed in inland water or NDZ
3 the valve can be opened 3 miles out in atlantic ocean and 9 miles out in the gulf side.
It's illegal to discharge a toilet or dump a tank in all INLAND US waters and the Great Lakes. Illinois is inland, and while federal law doesn't prohibit y-valves, any state can do so. NY even goes so far as to ban any overboard discharge plumbing on Lake Champlain.
FL coastal waters provide easy access to "open sea" beyond the "3 mile (12 miles on the Gulf side of the Keys) limit where it's legal to flush directly overboard and/or dump a tank. So y-valves and overboard discharge pumps are legal there provided they're "secured" as described in federal law 33 CFR 159.7 while the vessel is INSIDE the "3 mile limit." The same is true of all coastal states where there's access to waters beyond 3 miles--which, btw, does NOT mean 3 miles from the nearest shore in a Bay or river...it means open ocean at least 3 miles from the nearest point on the whole US coast line or any island that's part of the state.
From the above link
Here is my question which I've never been able to get a definitive answer to:
My head empties into the holding tank. From the holding tank there's one hose to the deck pumpout fitting and another to the macerator and then overboard. There is no Y valve or seacock. In the hopes of meeting the requirements of the law, I replaced the switch for the macerator with a key switch and keep the key out of the switch and hidden away. Without the key, it's not possible to empty the holding tank overboard.
Does this meet the requirements of the law?
Here is my question which I've never been able to get a definitive answer to:
My head empties into the holding tank. From the holding tank there's one hose to the deck pumpout fitting and another to the macerator and then overboard. There is no Y valve or seacock. In the hopes of meeting the requirements of the law, I replaced the switch for the macerator with a key switch and keep the key out of the switch and hidden away. Without the key, it's not possible to empty the holding tank overboard.
Does this meet the requirements of the law?
The law was written before there were key switch macerators and hasn't been updated since. The USCG accepts 'em. But that doesn't mean you can't run into a "local yokel" with an advanced case of Barney Fife syndrome...they're rare, but do exist.
Apparently your tank has two discharge fittings--one to the deck pumpout fitting, the other to the macerator--and your thru-hull above waterline. In systems that discharge below waterline, it's not only any y-valve that must be secured, the seacock must be too. Plastic tie wraps are acceptable on both.
Apparently your tank has two discharge fittings--one to the deck pumpout fitting, the other to the macerator--and your thru-hull above waterline. In systems that discharge below waterline, it's not only any y-valve that must be secured, the seacock must be too. Plastic tie wraps are acceptable on both.
High Wire
Guru
In lieu of the keyswitch, two momentary switches where BOTH had to be held for the pump to run used to be acceptable. I remember at least 2 boats that had a dual switch panel from the boat manufacturer set up that way. The whole point was to prevent ACCIDENTAL discharge. It cant be accidental if you have to push and hold 2 seperate buttons. Im out of the Auxiliary now and cannot verify if it is still acccepted.
Yes, two. One for a pumpout station and the other a macerator and above the waterline discharge.
We have been stopped and boarded by the USCG twice on the Chesapeake Bay. They did not check our sanitation system, only paperwork and safety items. One guy asked what was under a floor panel and I said "holding tank". He raised the panel, looked and put it back down.
I figured "Acceptable methods of securing the device include - " was not exclusive. I just wanted a more trusted opinion.
I believe VT has the same regulation. Any overboard plumbing must must be completely disconnected. (Paper mills and municipal sewage plants are directly connected.)
DHeckrotte
Guru
Canada, too, allows no connection between the holding tank and the waters beneath the boat. Since we plan to do the mini-loop this summer in NY, VT and Canadian waters, and my holding tank plumbing looks lousy, ripping out all the offending bits and pump will happen this spring. The seacock will remain, I think left open so that it drains when the boat's pulled, and plumbed with a cap.
I can hardly imagine tootling out to sea to empty the holding tank just to save $5.
I can hardly imagine tootling out to sea to empty the holding tank just to save $5.
There is a thread with lots of info on this very topic
Overboard Discharge of Holding tank
There is a lot of incorrect info on the net about Lk Champlain...
The Lake Champlain Committee publishes a brochure and publishes on the net that grey discharge is not permitted on Lk Champlain - That is NOT TRUE - I have researched NY regs and contacted them twice to request they cite any NY or VT regs that substantiate what they publish and they will not (can not?) respond to any correspondence on this topic.
They appear to have extrapolated the Fed no discharge to include grey water which is absolutely false and the wrong interpretation of a NO DISCHARGE zone.
NY regs do cite the need to disconnect any BLACK overboard discharge hose vs just securing (locking) the valve. Peggy Hall (Headmistress) has indicated that states cannot supersede federal regs but it's probably easier to comply that risk a court fight w/ either NY or Vt.
I've traversed Lk Champlain twice and was never checked - never known or heard of anyone that was checked and cited for a connected hose that otherwise complied w/ the Fed regs for securing the valve.
psneeld
Guru
In some places it might be a 15 mile run to the only working pumpout and a $20 charge when you get there as opposed to a 3 mile dash outside the close by inlet.
There are plenty of reasons not to use a pumpout facility as opposed to dumping.
A little imagination on long distance cruising and choosing to loiter in places is all that is needed to imagine where dumping is lots easier than motoring to a pumpout that the person on the phone days sure it's working .....until you get there.
Last edited:
They appear to have extrapolated the Fed no discharge to include grey water which is absolutely false and the wrong interpretation of a NO DISCHARGE zone.
Or, as I've seen many people do, they think that "gray water" is sewage. So I'd contact 'em one more time and ask them to define "gray water." If they answer, I'd bet real money they'll tell you it's toilet waste/sewage.
They wouldn't be the only people who make that kind of mistake...I was a consultant to the state of AR in the '90s when they were writing the legislation to enforce marine sanitation laws on their inland lakes. For some reason the powers-that-be decided to put the AR Health Department in charge of the program instead of Natural Resources or Fish and Wildlife where it really belongs...and to them anything that goes down a sewer pipe from any source is "sewage." They had an awful time wrapping their heads around the idea that the CFR definition of sewage on a vessel is limited to "human body wastes and the wastes from toilets and other receptacles intended to receive or retain body waste" and that it's the only definition that can be applied to marine sanitation laws.
Or, as I've seen many people do, they think that "gray water" is sewage. So I'd contact 'em one more time and ask them to define "gray water." If they answer, I'd bet real money they'll tell you it's toilet waste/sewage.
They wouldn't be the only people who make that kind of mistake...I was a consultant to the state of AR in the '90s when they were writing the legislation to enforce marine sanitation laws on their inland lakes. For some reason the powers-that-be decided to put the AR Health Department in charge of the program instead of Natural Resources or Fish and Wildlife where it really belongs...and to them anything that goes down a sewer pipe from any source is "sewage." They had an awful time wrapping their heads around the idea that the CFR definition of sewage on a vessel is limited to "human body wastes and the wastes from toilets and other receptacles intended to receive or retain body waste" and that it's the only definition that can be applied to marine sanitation laws.
Bigsfish
Guru
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2016
- Messages
- 2,987
- Location
- USA
- Vessel Name
- Gotcha
- Vessel Make
- Grand Banks. Heritage. 54
All this begs the question, have you been checked to see if you comply with the law? I've boated 50 + years mostly in Florida and I've only been checked ONCE and that was in Hilton Head where they added dye to my toilet and they flushed while checking outside the boat.
RT Firefly
Enigma
Greetings,
Mr. cal. Is that a rhetorical question or do you have a porpoise for asking?
Mr. cal. Is that a rhetorical question or do you have a porpoise for asking?
Greetings,
Mr. cal. Is that a rhetorical question or do you have a porpoise for asking?
I see what you did there.
Acheron2010
Senior Member
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2017
- Messages
- 151
- Location
- United States
- Vessel Name
- Saoirse
- Vessel Make
- 1983 Nauticat 44 Ketch
St. Petersburg's 'black cloud' of sewage woes grows by 58 million gallons | Tampa Bay Times
128 million gallons. That would be just a few pushes of that macerator button to match.
128 million gallons. That would be just a few pushes of that macerator button to match.
sdowney717
Guru
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2016
- Messages
- 2,264
- Location
- United States
- Vessel Name
- Old Glory
- Vessel Make
- 1970 Egg Harbor 37 extended salon model
The problem is cities decided years ago to capture all runoff, sewer and storm drain and treat it all together as one.
If they just treated black sewer water, there would be no massive billion gallon sewage releases all over the country when big storms hit.
So they bit off more than they could chew and that philosophy of water treatments decision costs you a lot more money on your sewer bills for their infrastructure capacity increases, and costs us when they dump sewage cause they cant handle the water flow due to storms.
If they just treated black sewer water, there would be no massive billion gallon sewage releases all over the country when big storms hit.
So they bit off more than they could chew and that philosophy of water treatments decision costs you a lot more money on your sewer bills for their infrastructure capacity increases, and costs us when they dump sewage cause they cant handle the water flow due to storms.
DHeckrotte
Guru
S Downey has it right about the combined storm-sanitary sewers in many, if not most, cities. That design made perfect sense in the decades, centuries, past when all such fluids were then simply dumped into rivers and the sea. And that was a vast improvement on the centuries past when sewage, trash and everything else went in the streets, and rain washed it away.
Today's sanitary engineers have little choice but to treat all the flow from the combined system, usually by collecting the outflows of all the sewers where they used to dump and sending it to treatment plants. There's some pretty heroic engineering involved here since treatment plants are unwelcome neighbors and expensive; huge, deep tunnels, pumping systems. And, being engineers, they have to pick/judge some maximum flow to treat and accept that there will be events that will overpower the system.
Today's sanitary engineers have little choice but to treat all the flow from the combined system, usually by collecting the outflows of all the sewers where they used to dump and sending it to treatment plants. There's some pretty heroic engineering involved here since treatment plants are unwelcome neighbors and expensive; huge, deep tunnels, pumping systems. And, being engineers, they have to pick/judge some maximum flow to treat and accept that there will be events that will overpower the system.
Just wondering,what does a pod of 30, 300lb dolphin do with there poop?
And where does Aquaman poop?
FF
Guru
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2007
- Messages
- 22,552
Our solution is a simple Y under the deck discharge .
Remove the cover plate and pumping is impossible.
Added air cuts down any aroma and a pail of water will prime the macerator .
Remove the cover plate and pumping is impossible.
Added air cuts down any aroma and a pail of water will prime the macerator .
foggysail
Guru
If that was only the case. For example, here in Massachusetts environmental zealots have successfully lobbied our legislators to impose NDZs onto the waters of Buzzard's Bay, Nantucket and Matha's Vineyard Sounds. This imposes a 30 (NOT 3) mile trip to legally dump wastes.
Sure, free pumpouts are offered in most harbors. For instance, our harbor provides this service on Saturday and Sunday mornings only. I don't want to get carried away here. Sure I do recognize the importance of clean waters but if states get away making unrealistic impositions on those who boat, they will be rewarded with contempt.
Personally I would spend the $3-4K for reliable on board waste processing to be able to legally dump where ever I wish. Unfortunately, zealots refuse to even consider such systems.
