Holding Tank with Lectra/San

[FOG]

My Prairie 36 has 2 toilets with each one connected to a Lecrta/San Marine Sanitation Device (MSD). Each MSD output hose is connected to a seacock/thru hole then overboard. I'm in a No Discharge Zone so I can't use the toilets.

So I'm planning to install a holding tank. My initial idea was to go from each of the MSDs to a "Y" valve with one leg going overboard as they are now and the other leg into the holding tank. The holding tank output would go to another "Y" valve with one leg going to a macerator and then overboard and the other leg going to a deck pump out.

Then I remembered how much I dislike "Y" valves in a sewage system. Especially when they fail. So I have decided not to use any "Y" valves and go from the MSDs directly to the holding tank with 2 separate outputs from the tank. One output of the tank to the macerator and the other to the deck pump out.

I wanted to keep the MSDs because the sewage sanitation starts just a couple of feet from each toilet and then goes into the holding tank already sanitized. But now I'm not sure if I want to keep the MSDs onboard.

Is the additional power consumption, maintenance, etc. of the MSDs worth their benefit? I like the idea of being able to dump the holding tank without having to go 3 miles out or finding a pump out station.

And the Admiral thinks the thought of carrying around sanitized waste verses raw sewage, is better. But I'm not sure if the benefits outweigh some of the other issues. Anyone been through this exercise? What are your thoughts?

 

[dhays]

My Prairie 36 has 2 toilets with each one connected to a Lecrta/San Marine Sanitation Device (MSD). Each MSD output hose is connected to a seacock/thru hole then overboard. I'm in a No Discharge Zone so I can't use the toilets.



So I'm planning to install a holding tank. My initial idea was to go from each of the MSDs to a "Y" valve with one leg going overboard as they are now and the other leg into the holding tank. The holding tank output would go to another "Y" valve with one leg going to a macerator and then overboard and the other leg going to a deck pump out.



Then I remembered how much I dislike "Y" valves in a sewage system. Especially when they fail. So I have decided not to use any "Y" valves and go from the MSDs directly to the holding tank with 2 separate outputs from the tank. One output of the tank to the macerator and the other to the deck pump out.



I wanted to keep the MSDs because the sewage sanitation starts just a couple of feet from each toilet and then goes into the holding tank already sanitized. But now I'm not sure if I want to keep the MSDs onboard.



Is the additional power consumption, maintenance, etc. of the MSDs worth their benefit? I like the idea of being able to dump the holding tank without having to go 3 miles out or finding a pump out station.



And the Admiral thinks the thought of carrying around sanitized waste verses raw sewage, is better. But I'm not sure if the benefits outweigh some of the other issues. Anyone been through this exercise? What are your thoughts?

You are in a no discharge area now, but will your normal cruising grounds allow the MSD? For a while I was considering adding a Lectrosan to my sailboat. At the time Peggy helped explain some of the best ways to do it. My memory sucks but I believe that she recommended the use of a Y valve between the head and MSD which would direct the waste to either the MSD or the holding tank.

The problem that I see with directing the treated waste to the holding tank is that while the waste would be treated, it wouldn't be sterile. If the waste sat in the holding tank you would still need to pump out the holding tank rather than discharge it (inside the 3 mile limit). Beyond the regulatory compliance issue, I am not sure that the Lectrosan would function properly when not in a NDZ if its output goes to the holding tank rather than overboard.

Hopefully Peggy will jump in and set me straight.

 

[johnrupp]

It is not legal to discharge treated waste overboard that that has been stored. You can store it then treat it just prior to discharging overboard. Raritan sells the HNT, hold and treat, control that allows you to use your current holding tank and MSD.

 

[Art]

With twp heads... I recommend one with large holding tank and low flush toilet. Other having lectra/san. Best of both worlds... I believe!

Peggy where are you?!?!

 

[dhays]

With twp heads... I recommend one with large holding tank and low flush toilet. Other having lectra/san. Best of both worlds.

But he already has two MSDs and probably doesn't want to trash one.

 

[HeadMistress]

Your memory is pretty good, Dave.

There is no real advantage to sending treated waste to a holding tank, 'cuz once it goes anywhere from the treatment device except directly overboard it's no longer treated waste. Which makes it just as illegal to dump a tank full of waste that's been through a treatment device as it is to dump a tank full of waste straight from the toilet. Reason: The L/S doesn't render it sterile, it macerates to the required "no visible solids" and reduces the bacteria count to < 10/100 milliliter. Only one bacterium has to survive in the tank to multiply into a zillion. The tank requires the same amount of maintenance and odor management whether the waste going into it has been treated or not. So in the interest of simplicity, I'd put the y-valve ahead of the L/S to offer a choice of flushing into the tank or overboard through the L/S.

Then there's the matter of where to put the tank...there's a limit to how far most toilets can move bowl contents in the amount of time most people will spend flushing it. So depending on how far apart the toilets are, a single tank for both may not be a good plan. You might consider only adding a tank to the toilet that will be used the most while in NDZ waters and leave the other toilet set up as it is.

Yes, the L/S is definitely worth the power consumption (on average < 20 AH/day for a liveaboard couple) and minimal amount of maintenance required...a LOT less than a tank!

If you'd like some one-on-one help sorting out all the details, give me shout via PM .

Peggie
http://www.amazon.com/New-Get-Rid-Boat-Odors/dp/1892399784/
"If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't completely understand it yourself." --Albert Einstein

 

[Art]

But he already has two MSDs and probably doesn't want to trash one.

Replacement parts... 4 sale on CL... or??

 

[FOG]

Oh crap! It appears that using "Y" valves is going to give me the best functionality.

Thanks to all for your comments and suggestions. In my reading research I must have missed the part about that it's illegal to store treated waste in a holding tank and then at a later date dump it overboard as though it is still treated waste.

Back to the drawing board to figure out a NEW plan for our use. Fortunately still only a paper project at this point.

Peggy, thanks for the offer. Once I diagram the best installation locations for everything, you may see a PM from me.

 

[HeadMistress]

It might be worthwhile for us to chat before you do all the work to diagram what you consider the best locations, 'cuz there are factors like distance from toilets and tank venting you may not know you need to consider.

Peggie
http://www.amazon.com/New-Get-Rid-Boat-Odors/dp/1892399784/
"If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't completely understand it yourself." --Albert Einstein

 

[FOG]

It might be worthwhile for us to chat before you do all the work to diagram what you consider the best locations, 'cuz there are factors like distance from toilets and tank venting you may not know you need to consider.

Peggie
http://www.amazon.com/New-Get-Rid-Boat-Odors/dp/1892399784/
"If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't completely understand it yourself." --Albert Einstein

OK. I'll get some preliminary measurements before I send you a PM. Thanks.

 

[FF]

A more modern method is to use two discharge outlets in the holding tank..

One hooked direct to the deck fitting the other to the lectra san or direct to overboard discharge.

AS almost all the poop pump problems I have had come from the unit drying out and paper holding the suction valve open just a tiny bit , I would have a tank built with a bottom drain hookup .

A Dupree valve would allow the tank to be closed and the pump removed if required.

Manual Valve and Parts - Dupree Products

https://www.dupreeproducts.com/SearchResults.asp?Cat=3


Requires disassembly and reuse of valve gate,end cap, o-rings, spring, ... The Twis-Loc termination system provides a truly durable sewer hose connection.

 

[FOG]

A more modern method is to use two discharge outlets in the holding tank..

One hooked direct to the deck fitting the other to the lectra san or direct to overboard discharge.

AS almost all the poop pump problems I have had come from the unit drying out and paper holding the suction valve open just a tiny bit , I would have a tank built with a bottom drain hookup .

A Dupree valve would allow the tank to be closed and the pump removed if required.

Manual Valve and Parts - Dupree Products

https://www.dupreeproducts.com/SearchResults.asp?Cat=3


Requires disassembly and reuse of valve gate,end cap, o-rings, spring, ... The Twis-Loc termination system provides a truly durable sewer hose connection.

Years ago I installed a Ronco holding tank on my sail boat that previously had a stinky bladder. I followed their installation instructions & diagram and it worked great.

However, this time I'm planning to use 2 discharge outlets from the tank as you have suggested if it is physically possible.

 

[FF]

Overboard discharge is only allowed miles out at sea , so why is the discharge sea cock underwater?

 

[FOG]

Overboard discharge is only allowed miles out at sea , so why is the discharge sea cock underwater?

I don't know the answer. It's a Ronco diagram, but I have had other boats with the discharge sea cock underwater installed by the factory. Maybe it's to keep the smell down during discharge

 

[foggysail]

Am I missing something??? I read that treated waste is prohibited from being discharged in no discharge zones. So why is there any interest at all to install an expensive system to treat waste?

OK........so you say it is best to treat waste no matter where it is discharged. Well here in Massachusetts the radical environmentalists have succeeded to get just about all water declared no discharge areas including Buzzard's Bay, Vineyard Sound, Nantucket Sound. These actions force the so call 3 mile to begin almost 15-20 miles off the mainland.

Personally I firmly believe that holding tanks can result in greater harm than boats without them. Consider a potty macerated dump of 2 quarts or so vs 40 gallons of the same. If environmentalists had their way they would require diapers on poop dumping seals and gulls. CRAZY!

 

[garrobito]

let's go for compost type head!!

 

[HeadMistress]

Am I missing something??? I read that treated waste is prohibited from being discharged in no discharge zones. So why is there any interest at all to install an expensive system to treat waste?

Because although there are a few places where well-intentioned but misguided "no discharge" zeal have triumpher over common sense (New England is one), the discharge of treated waste is legal in more places than you think. On the east coast the only NDZ of any size between Connecticut and the Keys are parts of the VA and NC coast. Contrary to popular belief, although all the harbors on LIS are NDZs, LIS itself is not. The only NDZ on the whole Chesapeake Bay is Herring Bay--a small harbor about halfway between Annapolis and Solomons. The Keys are the only NDZ in FL...in fact, there are only two in the entire Gulf--The Keys and Destin Harbor. On the west coast, SoCal is a "hotbed" of NDZs, but north of Santa Barbara there's only one--a small harbor off SF Bay called Richardson Bay--on the whole west coast.

Inland, although all the non-navigable inTRAstate lakes are NDZs, the discharge of treated waste is legal on almost all of the navigable interstate waterways (rivers).

And there are a number of equally well-meaning but short-sighted marinas who think that putting waste in a tank and sending it to a sewage treatment plant to dump in the water is "doing the right thing"....the discharge of treated waste IS legal in most coastal waters.

As for NDZs...they're all just political. We've had laws on the books for 30 years that require all vessels to either hold or treat toilet waste...fewer than 5% have ever, or are every likely to, installed treatment devices...the other 95% should already be holding! And 5 boats out of every 100 who are discharging "waste" that's actually cleaner than the water it's going do not have ANY noticeable environmental impact!

 

[foggysail]

Peggy--

You have not justified spending $3K+ for on board treatment. Other than having a "feel good, I just saved the waterways" sensation there is no justification. If an installed, working system was allowed to dump into NDZs, I would bite my tongue, say no more against crack pot environmentalists and just install one.

 

[psneeld]

Simple to install and way less than $3K depending on all the frills or particular boat peculiarities.

$1080.95 on sale right now for the basic unit.

I have seen one boat after another do 3K in damages to themselves or others moving to the pumpout weekly (whatever) if they are at a marina a where there is no portable, honey boat or in slip pumpout ability.

 

[foggysail]

Simple to install and way less than $3K depending on all the frills or particular boat peculiarities.

$1080.95 on sale right now for the basic unit.

I have seen one boat after another do 3K in damages to themselves or others moving to the pumpout weekly (whatever) if they are at a marina a where there is no portable, honey boat or in slip pumpout ability.

If the cost was only $100 there remains no justifiable reason to install such a system other than to think you are saving the environment. Here in Massachusetts there are only two legal ways to rid waste. First is to go beyond the three mile limit......that means 3 miles south of Matha's Vineyard, about 18 miles from slip and another 18 miles to return to slip OR call the pump out boat.

So your approach to prevent damage to neighbors is to subject yourself risking receiving an environmental citation from one of our many gun carrying environmental police operating in $250K+ taxpayer paid boats.

 

[psneeld]

If the cost was only $100 there remains no justifiable reason to install such a system other than to think you are saving the environment. Here in Massachusetts there are only two legal ways to rid waste. First is to go beyond the three mile limit......that means 3 miles south of Matha's Vineyard, about 18 miles from slip and another 18 miles to return to slip OR call the pump out boat.

So your approach to prevent damage to neighbors is to subject yourself risking receiving an environmental citation from one of our many gun carrying environmental police operating in $250K+ taxpayer paid boats.

Classic TF....

What works for me and is worth it may not be to you....

All I did was blow giant holes I your statements about cost and some justification.

But I agree that in YOUR case and some others, they might be a waste of money...in fact I agonized over it too till I saw the benifits for me.

Not all things o TF are absolute...no matter how some try to make them...

And poking fun at some of the folks that may risk their lives dealing with a problem you might have is in bad taste...but you do have that right.

 

[foggysail]

Classic TF....

What works for me and is worth it may not be to you....

All I did was blow giant holes I your statements about cost and some justification.

But I agree that in YOUR case and some others, they might be a waste of money...in fact I agonized over it too till I saw the benifits for me.

Not all things o TF are absolute...no matter how some try to make them...

And poking fun at some of the folks that may risk their lives dealing with a problem you might have is in bad taste...but you do have that right.

Maybe if you read one of my earlier posts on this topic you will read that if such systems were approved in lieu of a pump out, I would go forward with a purchase and installation. And just what do you mean with "TF???"

And cry on my shoulder.....environmental police risking their lives??? REally??? Coast Guard for sure along with very much needed law enforcement officers patrolling crime ridden cities. Enough! Enjoy your needless poop system

 

[78puget-trawler]

Hi Peggy, this is timely for me. Living in the Puget Sound area which you may know is being considered by the EPA to become a NDZ, I will be looking at some repairs in my CHB. I currently have a holding tank that needs to be replaced, a macerator that works I guess, it makes noise when I flip the switch, and as you may recall, 2 new toilets. Both toilets have Y valves and are plumbed to the tank. With the EPA decision pending and could take months, beyond replacing my bad HT is there anything else I can do or should do to be more compliant or just be sure to pump into the HT and then a pump out station? I take it the macerator only chews up what's in the HT, is that right, then over board? I am sure others here in the PS area are wondering too. Thanks!!!

 

[HeadMistress]

If the cost was only $100 there remains no justifiable reason to install such a system other than to think you are saving the environment.

It's those who are committed to turning every waterway into an NDZ who think they're saving the environment! But treated waste doesn't harm the environment...in fact, 1000 boats anchored in the same area, all flushing through a PuraSan or ElectroScan would do less environmental damage to that area than just ONE illegally dumped holding tank.

Federal law requires that the discharge from a Type I MSD have a max. bacteria count of 1000/100mltr...the discharge from a a PuraSan or ElectroScan is <10/100 mltr--well below the federal standard of 200/100 mltr for safe swimming conditions. The BOD from each flush is less than that from 4 oak leaves landing in the water.

Representative Jim Saxton (R-NJ)--now retired--tried to amend the federal law to reduce the allowable bacteria count and BOD to those levels and allow boats equipped with devices that meet that standard to use them in all waters including NDZs. He introduced bills to do that for five consecutive years, but none ever even made it to the floor of the House for a vote.... The environmental lobby prevented every one of them from ever making it out of committee.

So Instead of dealing with onboard sewage in any way that makes sense, we have to "do the right thing" by turning our boats into honey wagons...putting toilet waste in tanks to be carted off to sewage treatment plants that dump it along with millions more gallons of a lot more damaging sewage into the water every time there's a heavy rain. As I posted in another thread here recently, I've always considered it to the ultimate irony that the very DAY Rhode Island's statewide NDZ law went into effect, a massive treatment plant spill in Providence closed all the beaches and shellfish beds at that end of Narragansett Bay for a week.

Peggie
http://www.amazon.com/New-Get-Rid-Boat-Odors/dp/1892399784/
"If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't completely understand it yourself." --Albert Einstein

 

[HeadMistress]

Overboard discharge is only allowed miles out at sea , so why is the discharge sea cock underwater?

Because most people don't enjoy smelling the contents of their holding tank spewing out the side of their boat.

Peggie
http://www.amazon.com/New-Get-Rid-Boat-Odors/dp/1892399784/
"If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't completely understand it yourself." --Albert Einstein

 

[Art]

Classic TF....

What works for me and is worth it may not be to you....

All I did was blow giant holes I your statements about cost and some justification.

But I agree that in YOUR case and some others, they might be a waste of money...in fact I agonized over it too till I saw the benifits for me.

Not all things o TF are absolute...no matter how some try to make them...

And poking fun at some of the folks that may risk their lives dealing with a problem you might have is in bad taste...but you do have that right.

Whatever any of us do regarding human waste; i.e. holding, treatment, or disposal... we must be sure to never do anything illegal!

 

[BruceK]

Federal law requires that the discharge from a Type I MSD have a max. bacteria count of 1000/100mltr...the discharge from a a PuraSan or ElectroScan is <10/100 mltr--well below the federal standard of 200/100 mltr for safe swimming conditions. The BOD from each flush is less than we have to "do the right thing" by turning our boats into honey wagons...putting toilet waste in tanks to be carted off to sewage treatment plants that dump it along with millions more gallons of a lot more damaging sewage into the water every time there's a heavy rain...

Peggie

You`re right, it is near madness compelling little boats to find install and maintain an onboard sewerage system. Even cruise ships struggle to keep them working. Sydney Water has just upgraded their system for diverting sewage to the harbor in heavy rain, I often saw "brown sludge" on the water in the bay near home where we used to moor. To think I once swam there,"undeterred".

 

[78puget-trawler]

I grew up on a houseboat on Lake Union in Seattle in the 50's and early 60's before the houseboats were hooked up to the sewer system. I can clearly remember pushing various and sundry unsanitary items out of the way while we swam off the house in the summer. All the houseboats just dumped their toilets into the lake, straight shot. We never thought anything of it. I remember my dad squealed like a stuck pig when the city mandated that the houseboats had to get onto the sewer system for a cost, that to my often semi broke dad was horrendous. Lake is much cleaner now though.

 

[psneeld]

Still classic TF and in all my travels...the only LEO guys on the water I have run across were the guys you needed when the chips were down.

Yep....easy to figure out....

 

[Art]

I grew up on a houseboat on Lake Union in Seattle in the 50's and early 60's before the houseboats were hooked up to the sewer system. I can clearly remember pushing various and sundry unsanitary items out of the way while we swam off the house in the summer. All the houseboats just dumped their toilets into the lake, straight shot. We never thought anything of it. I remember my dad squealed like a stuck pig when the city mandated that the houseboats had to get onto the sewer system for a cost, that to my often semi broke dad was horrendous. Lake is much cleaner now though.

1960's... My dad was hopping mad when in NY things began to be mentioned regarding treatments and holding tanks and other means of caring for pleasure boat waste sanitation. I've many times swam in waters where waste debris was too often encountered. Then again, I've had strong immune system rest of my life. I guess, exposure is not always bad - at least in the long run!