Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-12-2018, 03:14 PM   #41
Guru
 
HeadMistress's Avatar


 
City: AR
Country: USA
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,971
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjwilliams11741 View Post
Interesting. I was under the impression that only the Federal Government (EPA) could declare any waters to be No Discharge Zones. I see references to Washington State Law but nothing has, to date, been listed in the Federal Register nor the Federal list of No Discharge Zones. Has the EPA actually approved Washington's request to make Puget Sound a No Discharge Zone or are they still in the process of applying for such?
You're correct that only the Federal EPA can create a NDZ. The state petitions EPA, attesting that there are sufficient pumpout facilities...public "discussion" period ensues...EPA rubber stamps the state's request. The state then enacts legislation that covers how it will enforce the new reg-- amounts of any fines, which state agencies will have enforcement authority etc. and repeat what's in the federal law. So all the literature and information will come from the state. A few states have tried to re-invent the wheel by coming up with creative ways to superceed federal law, but have been slapped down by lawsuits.
__________________
Advertisement

__________________
© 2020 Peggie Hall
Specializing in marine sanitation since '87.
Author "The NEW Get Rid of Boat Odors"
HeadMistress is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2018, 03:22 PM   #42
Guru
 
OldDan1943's Avatar
 
City: Aventura FL
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Kinja
Vessel Model: American Tug 34 #116
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 5,769
I have been told, every marina on the Michigan coast has free or near free pump out stations.
Pssst, rememeber to tip.
__________________

__________________
Did Noah have a get home-engine?
Which weather app did Noah and Columbus use?
OldDan1943 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2018, 05:42 PM   #43
Guru
 
dhays's Avatar
 
City: Gig Harbor
Country: United States
Vessel Name: Kinship
Vessel Model: North Pacific 43
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 8,637
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunchaser View Post
Sticking with the argument that the 3 mile limit is "magical", nearly all of Puget Sound is within the 3 mile limit. Straits of Juan de Fuca not so.

As to the question of BC recreational boating poop policies? It seems well thought out by rational people. Many areas are and have been deemed NDZ. They are clearly labeled as such on the charts and Parks literature.

Washington's politicians have not been kind towards recreational boaters. It will only get worse for oh so many reasons.
I agree. Canada has a more rational approach, but frankly should be improving their infrastructure to allow a tightening of regulations.
__________________
Regards,

Dave
SPOT page
dhays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2018, 05:57 PM   #44
Guru
 
dhays's Avatar
 
City: Gig Harbor
Country: United States
Vessel Name: Kinship
Vessel Model: North Pacific 43
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 8,637
Quote:
Originally Posted by twistedtree View Post
I'm assuming Yes, and that the publications just haven't caught up yet. WA applied for the NDZ some time ago and it was discussed here. For or against it, that was the time to get incensed, not after it's all done.
Very true. I, along with a whole lot of other boaters in WA sent comments the State as well as my legislators. It was an exercise in futility. It is a case where public perception and ignorance trumped science and common sense.

Getting upset now does no good. However, I think it is important to inform those that are confused by the issue and make sure they understand it. Unfortunately, the public perception is that it has been perfectly legal for boaters to dump raw sewage into Puget Sound and that now they can't. The statement on the WA State Dept of Ecology continues to intentionally confuse the issue.

Quote:
The new rule takes effect May 10 and bans the discharge of any type of sewage (blackwater), treated or untreated, within Puget Sound. There is no change to graywater requirements. Vessels looking to empty their loads will need to use a pump-out station or wait until they are out of the NDZ.
Note that they failed to mention that discharging of untreated waste has been illegal and vessels without onboard treatment need to use a pump-out anyway. They don't mention the number of recreational vessels effected by this law and in the research they NEVER identified the amount of treated waste that recreational boaters discharged into the Sound.

They justify the actions by this paragraph.

Quote:
The rule comes after a robust five-year public outreach and evaluation effort, including multiple public comment periods. To put the no discharge zone in place, the Department of Ecology had to submit a proposal to the Environmental Protection Agency. In 2014, the draft proposal alone drew more than 26,000 comments, of which more than 25,000 were in support and about 525 expressed opposition or concerns. In 2016, EPA received more than 40,000 comments in support of Washington’s proposal. EPA approved Ecology’s no discharge zone proposal in February 2017.
The reason they got those types of comments in opposition is because the public commenting on it didn't have a clue as to what they were talking about. All the public comments I ever read supporting an NDZ were assuming that boaters were dumping raw sewage into the Sound.

I'm not an anti-government guy, and generally think WA State does a good job, but this has been an example of bad information leading to bad policy.

However, I voiced my opinion over the past few years by submitting comments on the proposal. It is done. Unless of course I can bribe the current EPA administrator to change the EPA decision to approve it. I hear he is amenable to such things.
__________________
Regards,

Dave
SPOT page
dhays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2018, 07:52 PM   #45
Guru
 
City: Carefree, Arizona
Country: usa
Vessel Name: sunchaser V
Vessel Model: DeFever 48
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 8,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by dhays View Post
I agree. Canada has a more rational approach, but frankly should be improving their infrastructure to allow a tightening of regulations.
DH

What regulations are you proposing they tighten? The same one's you are against in WA?
sunchaser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2018, 08:18 PM   #46
Guru
 
dhays's Avatar
 
City: Gig Harbor
Country: United States
Vessel Name: Kinship
Vessel Model: North Pacific 43
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 8,637
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunchaser View Post
DH

What regulations are you proposing they tighten? The same one's you are against in WA?
No.

I don't mind the requirement for the use of a MSD such as we have had here in Puget Sound. I have a holding tank (MSD III). I'd like to be able to use a MSD I system but never will as the new regulations preclude it.

As near as I can tell (and some of our CA friends can correct me) is that some parts of BC require a MSD, there are some NDZs, and much of BC waters do allow discharge of untreated sewage if done in a proper manner. I think that because of the increase in boaters in BC and the importance of the fisheries industry, that BC should start to look at making some areas require a MSD and not allow dumping of untreated waste. We made that switch a long time ago in Puget Sound and have survived the process. I would imagine that the folks in BC would do it more intelligently and first establish adequate pump-out facilities before making them mandatory.
__________________
Regards,

Dave
SPOT page
dhays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2018, 08:22 PM   #47
Guru
 
tiltrider1's Avatar
 
City: Seattle
Country: USA
Vessel Name: AZZURRA
Vessel Model: Ocean Alexander 54
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 2,021
I come back to my earlier statement. Nothing has changed. Recreational boaters have not been allowed to dump in the Puget Sound for years. You have had to secure your y valve for years. Only the USCG can board your boat and they have no budget for this. There will be no enforcement but the State EPA will pat themselves on the back and say what a great job they have done.(local jurisdiction can write you a ticket but can’t board your boat with out your permission, of course most people say yes when they ask to board, they are not being polite they are tricking you into giving up your rights)

The real reason this has all come down is due to commercials having been given an exemption to dump in the Puget Sound. Tugs have continued to dump for years.
tiltrider1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2018, 09:51 PM   #48
Guru
 
City: Carefree, Arizona
Country: usa
Vessel Name: sunchaser V
Vessel Model: DeFever 48
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 8,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by dhays View Post
No.

I don't mind the requirement for the use of a MSD such as we have had here in Puget Sound. I have a holding tank (MSD III). I'd like to be able to use a MSD I system but never will as the new regulations preclude it.

As near as I can tell (and some of our CA friends can correct me) is that some parts of BC require a MSD, there are some NDZs, and much of BC waters do allow discharge of untreated sewage if done in a proper manner. I think that because of the increase in boaters in BC and the importance of the fisheries industry, that BC should start to look at making some areas require a MSD and not allow dumping of untreated waste. We made that switch a long time ago in Puget Sound and have survived the process. I would imagine that the folks in BC would do it more intelligently and first establish adequate pump-out facilities before making them mandatory.
As of 2012 recreational vessels in BC must have holding tanks. They can be dumped in salt water but only if 3 or miles from shore. Lots of regs in BC covering boat discharges, but easier to manage because water is bigger. And, unlike Puget Sound, flushing occurs from two ends. BC is just a different situation, with smarter regulators. BC boaters IMHO are much better stewards of the waters and bays, in real world terms.
sunchaser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2018, 10:19 PM   #49
Guru
 
OldDan1943's Avatar
 
City: Aventura FL
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Kinja
Vessel Model: American Tug 34 #116
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 5,769
Boats without holding tanks? What are the bilges for?
Boats without an expensive high end sanitary systems?
Better have a bucket containing proof you have not been peeing over the side.
Those long range cameras caught a friend of my brothers. LOL picture with the clarity to identify the boat and the face of the offender. He got a post card in the mail..... with fine and picture
__________________
Did Noah have a get home-engine?
Which weather app did Noah and Columbus use?
OldDan1943 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2018, 10:35 PM   #50
Guru
 
HeadMistress's Avatar


 
City: AR
Country: USA
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,971
Nothing has changed. Recreational boaters have not been allowed to dump in the Puget Sound for years.

It has changed. It's been illegal for 38 years to discharge raw untreated toilet waste into the Sound--into ALL U.S. waters. But the discharge of TREATED waste from a USCG certified Type I or II MSD (onboard device that treats toilet waste to at least the level prescribed by 40 CFR 140.3 PART 140--MARINE SANITATION DEVICE STANDARD has been legal for those 38 years. Iow, all boats with toilets have been required to either hold or treat. Making the Sound a NDZ (no discharge zone), makes holding for pumpout the only legal option. Does it make sense? No...because only 5% of recreational boats have treatment devices, the other 95% were already supposed to be holding...and most were. It's purely political..."doing something for the environment" whether it's needed or not.

Peggie
"If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't completely understand it yourself." --Albert Einstein
__________________
© 2020 Peggie Hall
Specializing in marine sanitation since '87.
Author "The NEW Get Rid of Boat Odors"
HeadMistress is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2018, 11:38 PM   #51
Moderator Emeritus
 
ksanders's Avatar
 
City: SEWARD ALASKA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: LISAS WAY
Vessel Model: BAYLINER 4788
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,674
Peggy is right.

This new NDZ only affects thouse with sewage treatment devices like the Raritan electroscan, or Purasan units.

No other boat has been allowed to dump their untreated waste in any of these waters prior to this as the waters are not outside of the 3NM line.

In reality the rule is not going to be enforced very well just like the old rules were not enforced very well. People are still going to dump their waste regardless of the rules.

The main problem here is that boats that use a treatment system are now going to have to also be holding tank equipped as well.
__________________
Kevin Sanders
Bayliner 4788
Seward, Alaska
ksanders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2018, 12:12 AM   #52
Guru
 
HeadMistress's Avatar


 
City: AR
Country: USA
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,971
This new NDZ only affects thouse with a type 2 MSD like the Raritan electroscan, or Purasan units.

The LectraSan, ElectroScan and PuraSan are Type I MSDs, Kevin. Type I are legal on boats up to 66'. Only boats 66' + are required to use a Type II, The Raritan ManaGerm Raritan ManaGerm is one, Microfor is another. Boats < 66' may use either a Type I or a Type II, but few do because of the size, cost, power demand and maintenance required. The promo sheet (see it under Product Documentation at the link I provided will give you a idea of how different a Type II is from an ElectroScan or PuraSan.

Btw...holding tanks including portapotties and "composting" toilets, are Type III MSDs.
__________________
© 2020 Peggie Hall
Specializing in marine sanitation since '87.
Author "The NEW Get Rid of Boat Odors"
HeadMistress is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2018, 03:20 AM   #53
Moderator Emeritus
 
ksanders's Avatar
 
City: SEWARD ALASKA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: LISAS WAY
Vessel Model: BAYLINER 4788
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadMistress View Post
This new NDZ only affects thouse with a type 2 MSD like the Raritan electroscan, or Purasan units.

The LectraSan, ElectroScan and PuraSan are Type I MSDs, Kevin. Type I are legal on boats up to 66'. Only boats 66' + are required to use a Type II, The Raritan ManaGerm Raritan ManaGerm is one, Microfor is another. Boats < 66' may use either a Type I or a Type II, but few do because of the size, cost, power demand and maintenance required. The promo sheet (see it under Product Documentation at the link I provided will give you a idea of how different a Type II is from an ElectroScan or PuraSan.

Btw...holding tanks including portapotties and "composting" toilets, are Type III MSDs.
Yes you are correct. I saw the typo and I think was correcting it when you replied.

I need to proofread propr to hitting post.
__________________
Kevin Sanders
Bayliner 4788
Seward, Alaska
ksanders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2018, 07:59 AM   #54
Guru
 
twistedtree's Avatar
 
City: Gloucester, MA
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,756
What about he exemption for various commercial boats? This law would appear to exempt them in the whole area. Does the federal law provide such an exemption, or is the WA law granting an exemption that didn't exist before?
__________________
MVTanglewood.com
twistedtree is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2018, 08:32 AM   #55
Guru
 
dhays's Avatar
 
City: Gig Harbor
Country: United States
Vessel Name: Kinship
Vessel Model: North Pacific 43
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 8,637
Quote:
Originally Posted by twistedtree View Post
What about he exemption for various commercial boats? This law would appear to exempt them in the whole area. Does the federal law provide such an exemption, or is the WA law granting an exemption that didn't exist before?


That would really be unfortunate, as commercial vessels (cruise ships) were an issue. Not the few recreational boaters with treatment systems.
__________________
Regards,

Dave
SPOT page
dhays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2018, 09:03 AM   #56
Guru
 
OldDan1943's Avatar
 
City: Aventura FL
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Kinja
Vessel Model: American Tug 34 #116
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 5,769
Calif is so bad, if the govt could figure out a way, they'd require the fish krap in a reusable plastic bag and then charge the fishing industry and the fish a disposal fee.
__________________
Did Noah have a get home-engine?
Which weather app did Noah and Columbus use?
OldDan1943 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2018, 09:14 AM   #57
Guru
 
OldDan1943's Avatar
 
City: Aventura FL
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Kinja
Vessel Model: American Tug 34 #116
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 5,769
JustBob, I've got your wifi connection right here, (scratching)
__________________
Did Noah have a get home-engine?
Which weather app did Noah and Columbus use?
OldDan1943 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2018, 09:33 AM   #58
Guru
 
HeadMistress's Avatar


 
City: AR
Country: USA
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,971
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksanders View Post
Yes you are correct. I saw the typo and I think was correcting it when you replied. I need to proofread propr to hitting post.
Happens to all of us. I use the "edit" function at the bottom of posts a LOT!

A surprising number of people are confused about the 3 types of marine sanitation devices, even which type they have. You gave me an opportunity to explain 'em all.

Peggie
"If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't completely understand it yourself." --Albert Einstein
__________________
© 2020 Peggie Hall
Specializing in marine sanitation since '87.
Author "The NEW Get Rid of Boat Odors"
HeadMistress is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2018, 09:42 AM   #59
Senior Member
 
wwestman's Avatar
 
City: Bellingham, WA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Excellent Adventure
Vessel Model: 1995 Jefferson Ker Shine 45
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 395
And no one has mentioned the exemption for the BGB (big gray boats). All military vessels are exempt and pump their raw sewage directly overboard. And there are a few of those here in the Sound.
wwestman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2018, 09:53 AM   #60
Guru
 
OldDan1943's Avatar
 
City: Aventura FL
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Kinja
Vessel Model: American Tug 34 #116
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 5,769
Quote:
Originally Posted by wwestman View Post
And no one has mentioned the exemption for the BGB (big gray boats). All military vessels are exempt and pump their raw sewage directly overboard. And there are a few of those here in the Sound.
The newer BGB are becoming 'more' (wink wink) environmentally aware and sensitive, to a point.
They have been restricted to where they can use their fancy new RADAR too but, all bets are off in time of hostilities, I hope.

I am reasonable sure Calif has attempted to impose their own environmental rules on the US Navy..... and the Navy will comply, if convenient. If not, I am sure the Navy tells Calif to 'pound sand' with a "See you in court.", too. Court cases can drag on for many many years.
In case you haven't noticed, I think the Calif govt has an unnecessarily over inflated opinion of themselves and importance to national security, not to forget the economic benefits of one aircraft carrier and their escorts coming in for a visit.

Press 1 for English.
__________________

__________________
Did Noah have a get home-engine?
Which weather app did Noah and Columbus use?
OldDan1943 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012
×