Boarded by coast guard

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
M

Mgtgrafix

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2018
Messages
93
Location
United States
So. We made a quick trip today from Tacoma to gig harbor and were boarded by the couast guard on the way back. Super cool dudes except for the fact one of the new guys lost my driver's license and new registration overboard. I would bitch but they overlooked my lack of compliance with my macerator lock.... Be aware folks. They will be out until Saturday and then to Seattle. Were heading to bell harbor tomorrow at about 10am if anyone want to hang.
 
Interesting. I’ve never seen them do boarding this far South. They normally seem to ignore Tacoma.
 
I agree. Everytime I've been boarded, which has been 3 other times, always have been Seattle. Again they were cool, but it was clear a got a free pass on my pump because of them losing my stuff overboard.
 
Mgtgrafix said:
Super cool dudes except for the fact one of the new guys lost my driver's license and new registration overboard.
Click to expand...

Are they free over there?
Cost me $170 for a new one here good for 5 years.
 
Mgtgrafix said:
Ok...thought it was already enforced. Good to know..thank you ASD
Click to expand...

unless you have a type 1 MSD going overboard...

I would think your overboard discharge from a head or holding thank has to be "locked" out by one of the approved methods when down by Tacoma.
 
dhays said:
Interesting. I’ve never seen them do boarding this far South. They normally seem to ignore Tacoma.
Click to expand...

Really?
When I lived in Gig Harbor, there was an 82-footer based at the foot of Stinson St.
 
psneeld said:
unless you have a type 1 MSD going overboard...



I would think your overboard discharge from a head or holding thank has to be "locked" out by one of the approved methods when down by Tacoma.
Click to expand...



Last time I was boarded by the USCG, they noted that my Y-valve was not secured in the holding tank position. Rather than cite me, they put a wire seal on the Y-valve and called it good.
 
I wonder what the outcome of that case in PA will be. I would love to see a Fed case make it all the way to SCOTUS where it could possibly be ruled as unconstitutional under the 14th. It really shouldn't be allowed as it is, as for instance what is the interest of the CG to enforce state laws regarding Y valves? Nothing about safety there, or rum running, or slave hiding or commerce or anything that was the original intent of the carve out for the CG. Its baloney!
 
78puget-trawler said:
..... what is the interest of the CG to enforce state laws regarding Y valves? Nothing about safety there, or rum running, or slave hiding or commerce or anything that was the original intent of the carve out for the CG. Its baloney!
Click to expand...

Aren't most of the pollution laws regarding marine heads federal laws ? Who would you rather have enforcing federal laws on the waters ? You want the FBI to have to develop a marine unit ??

As for pollution not being in the original intent of the CG, a lot has changed since 1790. In 1790 they probably didn't mention that the CG would help train astronauts, maintain weather stations, or maintain the Loran System. Heck...they didn't even have helicopters back when they started the Coast Guard....why do they have them now !?!?!?

(I also think you could argue that preventing sewage discharge is a safety issue.)
 
78puget-trawler said:
I wonder what the outcome of that case in PA will be. I would love to see a Fed case make it all the way to SCOTUS where it could possibly be ruled as unconstitutional under the 14th. It really shouldn't be allowed as it is, as for instance what is the interest of the CG to enforce state laws regarding Y valves? Nothing about safety there, or rum running, or slave hiding or commerce or anything that was the original intent of the carve out for the CG. Its baloney!
Click to expand...


I was operating my vessel in an area where overboard discharge of raw waste is illegal under federal laws. The boat had a Y-valve that could direct waste from the toilet either overboard or to the holding tank. In the waters that I was operating, having a functional Y-valve in that location was not in compliance with Federal laws. Therefore the USCG personnel secured it to meet federal requirements. That isn’t a state law issue.

On my current boat, I may or may not be in compliance with Federal Law. I have the switch to the macerator that empties the holding tank overboard secured with a zip tie. However, the thruhull is still functional, ie it has a handle on a valve that is not secured. The coming state law simply makes more clear the requirements necessary to meet the state laws. However, even without that, I could be cited by the USCG for the way my current system is configured.

FWIW, I’m going to remove the handle on the thruhull fitting. That should put me clearly in compliance with both the state and federal laws.
 
Benthic2 said:
Aren't most of the pollution laws regarding marine heads federal laws ? Who would you rather have enforcing federal laws on the waters ? You want the FBI to have to develop a marine unit ??

As for pollution not being in the original intent of the CG, a lot has changed since 1790. In 1790 they probably didn't mention that the CG would help train astronauts, maintain weather stations, or maintain the Loran System. Heck...they didn't even have helicopters back when they started the Coast Guard....why do they have them now !?!?!?

(I also think you could argue that preventing sewage discharge is a safety issue.)
Click to expand...
Well of course one can argue about it all day long and come up with up with whatever arguments suit your side of it. None of which has to do with why it is or isn't a good thing that the CG can board YOUR boat anytime THEY choose for NO reason, and WITHOUT YOUR permission. And while I often don't agree with the fights the ACLU gets involved in, I think they are on the right course with the PA fight. We shall see how the court rules on it, it may have legs. Its easy to make excuses for things that are not right when we are powerless to do anything about them. Besides as is often mentioned in these threads, they have more and bigger guns, like that somehow is a good thing that we need fear the CG because they have bigger guns, so lame.
 
dhays said:
I was operating my vessel in an area where overboard discharge of raw waste is illegal under federal laws. The boat had a Y-valve that could direct waste from the toilet either overboard or to the holding tank. In the waters that I was operating, having a functional Y-valve in that location was not in compliance with Federal laws. Therefore the USCG personnel secured it to meet federal requirements. That isn’t a state law issue.

On my current boat, I may or may not be in compliance with Federal Law. I have the switch to the macerator that empties the holding tank overboard secured with a zip tie. However, the thruhull is still functional, ie it has a handle on a valve that is not secured. The coming state law simply makes more clear the requirements necessary to meet the state laws. However, even without that, I could be cited by the USCG for the way my current system is configured.

FWIW, I’m going to remove the handle on the thruhull fitting. That should put me clearly in compliance with both the state and federal laws.
Click to expand...
Similar situation here. My macerator does not work, so I have disconnected the wires to it, but the thru hull valve is still operational, even though the macerator blocks whatever comes to it and wont let it advance to the valve. So will either lock the handle or take it off the thru hull valve.
 
Have no wye valve. To empty the blackwater, one must open the hanging closet, pop open a panel, remove items stored, to reach the valve emptying the "bad" tank. Don't see how installing a lock provides more security, because there were not more than a handful of people in this world who knew how to access!
 
Last edited:
Simi 60 said:
Are they free over there?
Cost me $170 for a new one here good for 5 years.
Click to expand...

Here it is not the cost but the time waiting in line at the DMV
 
78puget-trawler said:
Similar situation here. My macerator does not work, so I have disconnected the wires to it, but the thru hull valve is still operational, even though the macerator blocks whatever comes to it and wont let it advance to the valve. So will either lock the handle or take it off the thru hull valve.
Click to expand...



Actually, the handle that is on the thruhull on my boat is off half the time anyway. The valve is located underneath the head sink and is located right next to the head sink drain. The PO unscrewed the retaining screw on the black water discharge to give more room on the shelf under the sink. So all I need to do is take that handle and move it it elsewhere.
 
jleonard said:
15 minutes max where I live in Florida.

In Connecticut it's several hours, Thanks to the new computer system they put in 3 years ago.
Click to expand...

yes New Port I bet is fast here in South Georgia not bad but growing up in the St pete area that was horrible
 
dhays said:
FWIW, I’m going to remove the handle on the thruhull fitting. That should put me clearly in compliance with both the state and federal laws.
Click to expand...

I would vote against removing the handle since you're possibly going to need to find it in a hurry...
 
dhays said:
Last time I was boarded by the USCG, they noted that my Y-valve was not secured in the holding tank position. Rather than cite me, they put a wire seal on the Y-valve and called it good.
Click to expand...

Not required unless you are in a NDZ.......
 
FoxtrotCharlie said:
Wow, this will be interesting to follow. But may have no impact on Coast Guard boardings, since this case is about State Police boardings.
Click to expand...
ONLY USCG can board legally for any reason.

This guy says other agencies boardings are like an act of piracy if they have no cause.
I agree with him.
https://gilwellbear.wordpress.com/category/boat-ownership-items/boardings-by-law-enforcement/
What individual boaters choose to do with this information is a personal choice. I consider boarding without consent, and in the case of law enforcement officers, without probable cause, to be an act of “piracy.” Piracy is, “an act of robbery or criminal violence at sea.” For myself, I have learned to ask, “am I obligated by law to allow you to board?” Officers know that I am not so obligated, and usually will not press the point. If they do, I do not affirmatively grant permission to non-Coast Guard agencies to board. That said, I certainly cooperate if law enforcement officers choose to board. Non-cooperation would only make things worse. Much worse.
Click to expand...
 
79, it would be interesting to see the Pen State like case make it to the US Supreme Court. Why don't you finance that effort?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Buying a Boat
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
Trawler Micki
T

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom