No Discharge Zone in Puget Sound

Below is some internal communication between RBAW and Washingtion DoE:


FW: Ecology completes rulemaking process to make Puget Sound a No Discharge Zone
Yahoo/Inbox
• Wayne Gilham <wayne@flowdesignsurvey.com>
To:'Thomas Teseniar'
Apr 12 at 12:30 PM
Tom: pursuant to your concerns, RBAW’s lobbyist Doug Levy just obtained today, answers from DoE on implementation and enforcement of the NDZ… reaffirming the info I provided you yesterday. All the attached is a matter of public record, so we feel quite comfortable sharing this with you. It’s up to you how far you want to “dive into the weeds”, but the various DoE documents are an interesting read… We intend to do some outreach to our constituents, on just what actions are required of boaters to meet these NDZ requirements, once some of the “unknowns” are clarified.
Regards,
Wayne Gilham
President RBAW
Tacoma WA
cell: 253 318 9873

From: Doug Levy <Doug@Outcomesbylevy.onmicrosoft.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2018 8:41 AM
To: 'wayne@flowdesignsurvey.com' <wayne@flowdesignsurvey.com>; 'stevefinney@comcast.net' <stevefinney@comcast.net>; lawalker3@comcast.net; Chuck <cdgii@aol.com>; Linda <newlan2dl@aol.com>; Peter Schrappen (Peter@nmta.net) <Peter@nmta.net>
Subject: FW: Ecology completes rulemaking process to make Puget Sound a No Discharge Zone

RBAW Board Officers – also copying Peter @ NMTA:

Steve Finney asked me to check on enforcement plans vis-à-vis NDZ if it indeed takes effect May 10th. Here’s what I received from Amy Jankowiak. She also links the implementation plan – here’s a refreshed link to the 22-page strategy document I reviewed:

https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/documents/1610016.pdf

This leaves a fair # of unknowns. It does re-affirm what we heard in our meeting a few months back – where education/outreach/awareness will be points of emphasis in early years.

Doug Levy, Owner
Outcomes By Levy, LLC
(425)922-3999 – office/cell
Doug@outcomesbylevy.onmicrosoft.com


From: Jankowiak, Amy (ECY) <AJAN461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 9:17 AM
To: Doug Levy <Doug@Outcomesbylevy.onmicrosoft.com>
Cc: Bartlett, Heather (ECY) <heba461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Subject: RE: Ecology completes rulemaking process to make Puget Sound a No Discharge Zone

Doug,

I am responding on Heather’s behalf as she is at offsite meetings for a couple of days and we wanted to get back to you right away.

Thanks for the question. Ecology’s approach is first and foremost outreach and education, as we work with partners in the NDZ Enforcement Committee and NDZ Outreach and Education Committee. The Rule does include enforcement authorities for Ecology, the USCG, and potentially others such as Washington State Fish and Wildlife as authorized. And while the rule does include enforcement, Ecology’s commitment is to emphasize in the near term (next year or two) outreach and education for those who aren’t exempt as we coordinate with the outreach and education committee. And, we are working with the enforcement committee on a practical and efficient approach to enforcement now and in the out years.

Further information on the implementation can be found at:

Ecology’s Rule Implementation Plan: https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/SummaryPages/1810012.html

Ecology’s No Discharge Zone Implementation Strategy, A Framework for Action document: https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/SummaryPages/1610016.html

Let me know if you need anything else.

Sincerely,
Amy

Amy Jankowiak
Department of Ecology, Northwest Regional Office
Water Quality Program
3190 160th Avenue SE, Bellevue WA 98008
Desk: (425) 649-7195 Cell: (425) 429-4259
amy.jankowiak@ecy.wa.gov

From: Doug Levy [mailtooug@Outcomesbylevy.onmicrosoft.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2018 2:39 PM
To: Bartlett, Heather (ECY) <heba461@ECY.WA.GOV>; Jankowiak, Amy (ECY) <AJAN461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Subject: FW: Ecology completes rulemaking process to make Puget Sound a No Discharge Zone

Heather and Amy:

When we met with you a few months back the whole question of enforcement and who does what was still being sorted out.

You folks also let us know that the focus to the maximum extent practicable would be on voluntary compliance, education and awareness, and the like.

Can either/both of you update on where all that stands?

Doug Levy, Owner
Outcomes By Levy, LLC
(425)922-3999 – office/cell
Doug@outcomesbylevy.onmicrosoft.com

From: Galleher, Stacy (ECY) <sgal461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2018 10:15 AM
To: Jankowiak, Amy (ECY) <AJAN461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Subject: Ecology completes rulemaking process to make Puget Sound a No Discharge Zone

On April 9, 2018, the Department of Ecology adopted Chapter 173-228 WAC, Vessel Sewage No Discharge Zones, as directed by chapter 90.48.RCW.

What does WAC 173-228 do?
Chapter 173-228 WAC prohibits the release of sewage (black water) from vessels, whether treated or not into the Puget Sound No Discharge Zone. The rule applies to all vessels in the Puget Sound No Discharge Zone.
The Puget Sound No Discharge Zone covers approximately 2,300 square miles of marine waters of Washington State inward from the line between New Dungeness Lighthouse and the Discovery Island Lighthouse to the Canadian border, and fresh waters of Lake Washington, Lake Union, and connecting waters between and to Puget Sound.

When does the rule become effective?
This chapter becomes effective May 10, 2018.

Where can I find the rule language and other documents for the adopted chapter?
The rule language, and other supporting documents are available on the No Discharge Zone Rule Webpage.
The adoption documents include:
• Rule adoption form (CR-103)
• Adopted rule language
• Final Regulatory Analyses
• Rule Implementation Plan
• Concise Explanatory Statement - contains our responses to public comments
You can read all the comments we received here.

What changed from the proposed rule to the adopted rule?
We made changes to the rule in response to comments received during the formal comment period.
The changes to the rule:
• Clarified Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) reference for vessels with installed and operable toilets.
• Specified which subsection of 33 C.F.R. that pertains to this rule.

We made the following edits to the rule language. The strikethrough text was removed from the language, and the underlined text was added to the language.
WAC 173-228-040 Vessel sewage management in no discharge zones.
Vessel sewage must be managed in no discharge zones.
(1) Vessels with installed and operable toilets must have a Type III marine sanitation device to allow for complete and adequate sewage holding capacitybe in compliance with 40 C.F.R Part 140 with the ability to hold or stop discharges of sewage while in a no discharge zone.
(2) Vessels with marine sanitation devices must secure the devices to prohibit the discharge of sewage per 33 C.F.R. 159.7(b) while in no discharge zone waters.
What do vessels need to do once WAC 173-228 is effective?
Vessels are required to comply with this chapter on the effective date of May 10, 2018, with a delayed implementation for certain commercial vessels as defined in the rule. There is no change for graywater discharges. Information about delayed implementation, pumpout options, how to manage vessel sewage, a map of the Puget Sound No Discharge Zone and additional information is available on the No Discharge Zone webpage.
For assistance with compliance, please contact your regional Water Quality Program.
• Central Regional Office, Water Quality Administration: 509-454-7888
• Eastern Regional Office, Water Quality Administration: 509-329-3557
• Northwest Regional Office, Water Quality Administration: 425-649-7105
• Southwest Regional Office, Water Quality Administration: 360-407-6270
Can I appeal the adoption of this chapter?
You may appeal this adoption under procedures described in the Administrative Procedure Act (RCW 34.05), including those found in RCW 34.05.330.

What if I need special accommodations?
To ask about the availability of this document in a version for the visually impaired, call the Water Quality Program at 360-407-6600. Persons with hearing loss, call 711 for Washington Relay Service. Persons with a speech disability, call 877-833-6341.

Who can I contact for more rulemaking information?
For more information, please contact Amy Jankowiak at 425-649-7195 or amy.jankowiak@ecy.wa.gov.

Email communication between RBAW:

• Wayne Gilham <wayne@flowdesignsurvey.com>
To:Thomas.Teseniar
Apr 11 at 4:37 PM

Tom: though it appears that DoE is ready to implement the Puget-Sound-wide No Discharge Zone (which effectively only dis-allows discharge of TREATED sewage, as it was always Federally illegal to discharge RAW sewage), there are some wrinkles, which may delay implementation – some of the Washington Code provisions establishing and enforcing this new regulation are blatantly counter to Federal Law – USCG has formally registered these concerns, but the State has not taken this into account yet. We expect there will be some further wrangling before this NDZ goes into effect and is being enforced. Further, the Commercial Maritime side (which has far more “skin in the game”, as retrofitting a tug or small excursion ship with a big enough holding tank to “make operational sense” is VERY expensive, if not impossible for some vessels) is still pursuing some legal challenges… and we recreational boaters are “riding on the coat-tails” of these challenges. We at RBAW have been following this carefully, and will keep our members and member clubs advised whenever there is breaking news on this. We continue to assert that there is no scientific basis confirming the State’s declaration of a NEED for a NDZ.

Regards,
Wayne Gilham,
Preseident RBAW – and owner of a vessel with “LectraSan” onboad treatment!
Accredited Marine Surveyor (member SAMS)
FlowDesign Marine Surveying
Tacoma WA
cell: 253 318 9873




RE: your comment/inquiry thru RBAW website
Yahoo/Inbox
• Wayne Gilham <wayne@flowdesignsurvey.com>
To:'Thomas Teseniar'
Apr 11 at 10:54 PM
Unacceptable? Agreed. We’ve fought the good fight, alongside NMTA, on behalf of recreational boaters…. For well-nigh five years of untold meetings and testimonies, including financing legit scientific studies rebutting DoE’s flawed science establishing “Need” of this NDZ.

Though technically you could be liable for a citation and fine any time after May 10 implementation, if your vessel is absent a type III (holding tank) installed and secured from discharge (or with discharge from a type I on-board treatment plant not “secured”), in the one meeting RBAW has had with DoE since the declaration of the NDZ -- regarding implementation – (yes, we still have a “seat at the table”) -- they advised us that education and outreach would take precedence over citation for the first years of this new regulation (no specific timeline) …. Though I must admit we have come to not trust anything from this division of DoE. So we can only advise, proceed as you see necessary.

Regards,
Wayne Gilham
President RBAW
Tacoma WA
cell: 253 318 9873



From: Thomas Teseniar
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 6:04 PM
To: Wayne Gilham <wayne@flowdesignsurvey.com>
Subject: Re: your comment/inquiry thru RBAW website

Thank you Wayne for the response. However, the implementation of the NDZ is May 10th which means I must start making changes to my boat NOW to avoid any fines on or after May 10th.

This is just unacceptable when Seattle, Tacoma, Olympia and other cities around Puget Sound are dumping raw sewage on a regular bases and are not required to meet the same standards.

Tom



Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

-------- Original message --------
From: Wayne Gilham <wayne@flowdesignsurvey.com>
Date: 4/11/18 4:37 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: Thomas.Teseniar
Subject: your comment/inquiry thru RBAW website

Tom: though it appears that DoE is ready to implement the Puget-Sound-wide No Discharge Zone (which effectively only dis-allows discharge of TREATED sewage, as it was always Federally illegal to discharge RAW sewage), there are some wrinkles, which may delay implementation – some of the Washington Code provisions establishing and enforcing this new regulation are blatantly counter to Federal Law – USCG has formally registered these concerns, but the State has not taken this into account yet. We expect there will be some further wrangling before this NDZ goes into effect and is being enforced. Further, the Commercial Maritime side (which has far more “skin in the game”, as retrofitting a tug or small excursion ship with a big enough holding tank to “make operational sense” is VERY expensive, if not impossible for some vessels) is still pursuing some legal challenges… and we recreational boaters are “riding on the coat-tails” of these challenges. We at RBAW have been following this carefully, and will keep our members and member clubs advised whenever there is breaking news on this. We continue to assert that there is no scientific basis confirming the State’s declaration of a NEED for a NDZ.

Regards,
Wayne Gilham,
Preseident RBAW – and owner of a vessel with “LectraSan” onboad treatment!
Accredited Marine Surveyor (member SAMS)
FlowDesign Marine Surveying
Tacoma WA
cell: 253 318 9873

So long as I am permitted to dump my gray water, I am fine.
Even in the Great Lakes they allow dumping of gray water.

Response From the State

Below is an email I received regarding the dumping of raw sewage from Seattle, Tacoma and other cities in Puget Sound:

Mr. Teseniar,



Thank you for your questions and comments. Raw sewage discharge from land based wastewater treatment plants and combined sewer overflows are not affected by this No Discharge Zone (NDZ). The NDZ per the Clean Water Act is specific to vessel sewage only. The land-based discharges are covered under our National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and State Waste Discharge Permits and pertinent laws and regulations separate from the NDZ.



More information on the NDZ can be found at: www.Ecology.wa.gov/NDZ.



Amy



Amy Jankowiak

Department of Ecology, Northwest Regional Office

Water Quality Program

3190 160th Avenue SE, Bellevue WA 98008

Desk: (425) 649-7195 Cell: (425) 429-4259

amy.jankowiak@ecy.wa.gov

Al said:

Having read most of the thread to gather the thinking/solutions. One has to wonder. "What does the couple off shore in a open skiff with a low horse power ob, say a mile or so, away from public facilities do for bathroom requirements? Asked from the 'Bear in the woods' view.
I again want to express my exasperation for all those who are faithful in finding a pumpout station in the Puget Sound, who coming to Alaska, are never seen at either of the two federally required for harbor improvement grants, pump out stations.
Just saying-

Al-Ketchikan

Click to expand...

Right on the spot Al!!

Well Al, the next deal down here in la la land is to try and herd Orcas and Humpbacks to urinate and poop in only certain designated areas of Puget Sound!

Sound Puget Sound doesn't get nearly as much flushing action as the Sound north of Bainbridge Island and that gets less than much of the waters in BC or AK. As such, I think that forbidding the discharge of raw waste from boats in Puget Sound is a good idea and has been that way for several decades. There are plenty of pump-outs available in Puget Sound now. It wasn't that way even 15 years ago.

If it is important to AK, then they will also provide adequate pump-out facilities.

I am stumped. Why not just find a pump out station or move 3 miles out and pump the tank out?

dhays said:

S
I think that forbidding the discharge of raw waste from boats in Puget Sound is a good idea and has been that way for several decades. There are plenty of pump-outs available in Puget Sound now. It wasn't that way even 15 years ago.

Click to expand...

And to that couple in the open skiff off shore Puget Skound a mile or so?
Interested to hear solutions.

Al

Al said:

And to that couple in the open skiff off shore Puget Skound a mile or so?
Interested to hear solutions.

Al

Click to expand...

Bucket and take it to bathroom on shore

Never mind, I can anticipate the response.
(1) take a porta potty along
(2) contain with in a covered coffee can (bailing bucket with lid) and take it to facility
(3) Depends
(4) sell the boat
(5) ask a passing equipped craft to use their approved system (Good neighbor supporting the cause will willingly agree)
(6) take a chance on peeing overboard or a clever 'Toss'

In light of the volumes of afflunats given as contributing by boating over governmental statistics provided within the thread, common sense like so much of life in these United States, has escaped the circus tent.

befuddled the mind of this high school grad. You smarter felles apparently have it figured.
Ranks up there with climate change,and Art Bell.

Al-Ketchikan

OldDan1943 said:

Bucket and take it to bathroom on shore

Click to expand...

Bing Go!!

Reminds me of an article I read about 4 wheeling.
Naturally you always travel with at least one other or more 4 wheeler. For men, not a problem just turn your back. Women, more difficult. The remedy was, put a sack over your head and squat down. Everyone will know what you are doing but no one will know who you are. SHRUG
Hey, that's what the article said, honest. LOL

Greetings,
Mr. ASD. I sort of lost track of who was who in the correspondence you posted between the various govt. agencies but was ANYONE on the side of the recreational boater? If so, who is/was it?

I can readily appreciate your frustration surrounding the fact that the "little guy" is taking all the flack for pollution while municipalities seem to be able to dump at their leisure.

The reason I'm asking about who is supporting an exemption for those boaters with a proper treatment system is the possibility of them launching a class action lawsuit on behalf of the boaters the next time a city dumps sewage. It won't change the legislation but it will even out the playing field. Classic revenge, in a way.

Technically, an NDZ applies only to a "marine sanitation device." Hanging over the side to do your business is not addressed, and (in theory) is not by itself illegal.

An NDZ also (as noted) only applies to treated (e.g.; Lectrasan) waste. If you only have a holding tank (as required before the NDZ was established) you're not really affected.

I have not yet heard of any successful legislation against grey water discharge in US federal navigable waters.

Welcome to what those of us on the other coast have been living with for years.

CaptTom said:

Technically, an NDZ applies only to a "marine sanitation device." Hanging over the side to do your business is not addressed, and (in theory) is not by itself illegal.

An NDZ also (as noted) only applies to treated (e.g.; Lectrasan) waste. If you only have a holding tank (as required before the NDZ was established) you're not really affected.

I have not yet heard of any successful legislation against grey water discharge in US federal navigable waters.

Welcome to what those of us on the other coast have been living with for years.

Click to expand...

------------

Brother and friend were out in friends small boat in Lake St Clair.... NDZ....a ways off from Jefferson Beach. Friend stood up, relieved himself, about a week later he got a citation along with a picture. LOL Those long range HD cameras are every where.
Daymned hull numbers. LOL

RT Firefly said:

...I can readily appreciate your frustration surrounding the fact that the "little guy" is taking all the flack for pollution while municipalities seem to be able to dump at their leisure...

Click to expand...

The municipalities and even government agencies within Puget Sound I don’t think are able to dump at their leisure, if they do it comes at a price. They are are being watched and sued pretty regularly for exceedances. I worked in the environmental business, for private industry, in the PNW prior to retirement.

The Puget Soundkeepers is one group that is on a mission to clean up Puget Sound. They were one of the big drivers behind the NDZ. I don’t agree with there tactics and they can very difficult to deal with. I know this from personal experience. They have a lot of clout and partially fund their organization through lawsuits and settlements. Heck, they’ve sued the WDOE and won. They’ve sued many municipalities for storm water exceedances of their NPDES permits. Of the 150 plus lawsuits they've filed, they have never lost.

Google Puget Soundkeepers Alliance lawsuits and you’ll get a few hits or check out their web site.

Puget Sounds NDZ is a different set of laws and regulations than what governs point sources; waste water treatment plants, stormwater run-off and industrial discharges. The later fall under the Clean Water Act and the NPDES permit program.

https://www.epa.gov/npdes

Al said:

And to that couple in the open skiff off shore Puget Skound a mile or so?
Interested to hear solutions.

Click to expand...

Pee over the side. Poop in a bucket and take it to shore.

I don't care if boaters pee over the side. I don't even care if they pee in a cup and toss it overboard (although that is illegal). I seriously doubt that the USCG or local LEOs care either.

Bob Cofer said:

That’s bullshit. Municipalities can dump millions of gallons of raw sewage into the sound with impunity every time there is a major storm or equipment malfunction. But a recreational vessel with a treatment system that pumps clean water overboard must now secure the system so it is inoperable? Why not fix the real polluters first? Wonder who has the bigger lobbyist budget?

Click to expand...

Exactly.
What makes this worse is that offenders are now more likely to offend big time. In other words, why bother with Type II.

THis makes waters worse, not better. But then that would take common sense.

Folks, I have a holding tanks so I and my company can use that.

I'm done. Ya'll feel free to continue this discussion.

I strongly believe there is large scale ongoing quite civil disobedience pertaining to the many NDZs here in Massachusetts. People do not talk about it, they just disobey. I believe most avoid dumping in the harbors but Buzzard’s Bay, the Sounds & Cape Cod Bay are another matter.

Like it or not, “just say it ain’t so, Sam!” doesn’t change reality. I back up my thoughts by pointing out there are close to 1000 boats moored/docked in the harbor where I keep our boat. These are serviced by one tiny pump out boat available each Saturday and Sunday.....mornings only during the boating season.

Sometimes I see a “Save the Bay” pump out boat providing service at Cuttyhunk Harbor. Cuttyhunk is a small island about 10 miles from shore that sits between Buzzard’s Bay and Vinyard Sound in Massachusetts waters. This tiny boat’s waste capacity is probably limited to less than 300 gallons. Now to legally dispose of the waste requires a round trip of 20 miles minimum to the main land with 30+ more likely. Sure, they could power to where pump outs are legal, but that would be about 10 miles from Cuttyhunk and of course there is the return trip.

Yes, we do need NDZs but they should be realistic.

Just post a No Swimming sign near the boats. LOL

dhays said:

Sound Puget Sound doesn't get nearly as much flushing action as the Sound north of Bainbridge Island and that gets less than much of the waters in BC or AK. As such, I think that forbidding the discharge of raw waste from boats in Puget Sound is a good idea and has been that way for several decades. There are plenty of pump-outs available in Puget Sound now. It wasn't that way even 15 years ago.

If it is important to AK, then they will also provide adequate pump-out facilities.

Click to expand...

I know Hood Canal is a restricted dump area. There is plenty of flow in Puget Sound at least for recreational boaters. If all the boats in Puget Sound on July 5th opened their valves and pumped raw waste overboard, what effect would that have on the water quality of the sound?

None. No effect at all. It's deluded to a point it would not have any damage.

The cities dumping millions of gallons of raw sewage has more chance of damaging the environment than a few recreational boaters. That reality.

RT Firefly said:

Greetings,
Mr. ASD. I sort of lost track of who was who in the correspondence you posted between the various govt. agencies but was ANYONE on the side of the recreational boater? If so, who is/was it?

Click to expand...

It is a combination of both. RBAW is suppose to be a recreational boater lobbing group. But they are a speaking post for those in King County.

The other was from the State of Washington Department of the Environment.

foggysail said:

I strongly believe there is large scale ongoing quite civil disobedience pertaining to the many NDZs here in Massachusetts. People do not talk about it, they just disobey. I believe most avoid dumping in the harbors but Buzzard’s Bay, the Sounds & Cape Cod Bay are another matter.

Like it or not, “just say it ain’t so, Sam!” doesn’t change reality. I back up my thoughts by pointing out there are close to 1000 boats moored/docked in the harbor where I keep our boat. These are serviced by one tiny pump out boat available each Saturday and Sunday.....mornings only during the boating season.

Sometimes I see a “Save the Bay” pump out boat providing service at Cuttyhunk Harbor. Cuttyhunk is a small island about 10 miles from shore that sits between Buzzard’s Bay and Vinyard Sound in Massachusetts waters. This tiny boat’s waste capacity is probably limited to less than 300 gallons. Now to legally dispose of the waste requires a round trip of 20 miles minimum to the main land with 30+ more likely. Sure, they could power to where pump outs are legal, but that would be about 10 miles from Cuttyhunk and of course there is the return trip.

Yes, we do need NDZs but they should be realistic.

Click to expand...

In the main, you have stated reality. Even the USCG are knowing.


Well Old Dan that was a short exit, welcome back, need your input.

Al-Ketchikan

Al said:

In the main, you have stated reality. Even the USCG are knowing.


Well Old Dan that was a short exit, welcome back, need your input.

Al-Ketchikan

Click to expand...

My input is in my holding tanks

To be on the safe side, we fast and drink no liquids for 3 days before we venture into Puget Sound, and then stay only until we start losing consciousness.

Alaskan Sea-Duction said:

Below is an email I received regarding the dumping of raw sewage from Seattle, Tacoma and other cities in Puget Sound:

Mr. Teseniar,



Thank you for your questions and comments. Raw sewage discharge from land based wastewater treatment plants and combined sewer overflows are not affected by this No Discharge Zone (NDZ). The NDZ per the Clean Water Act is specific to vessel sewage only. The land-based discharges are covered under our National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and State Waste Discharge Permits and pertinent laws and regulations separate from the NDZ.



More information on the NDZ can be found at: www.Ecology.wa.gov/NDZ.



Amy



Amy Jankowiak

Department of Ecology, Northwest Regional Office

Water Quality Program

3190 160th Avenue SE, Bellevue WA 98008

Desk: (425) 649-7195 Cell: (425) 429-4259

amy.jankowiak@ecy.wa.gov

Click to expand...

Interesting. I guess if land based discharges of raw sewage aren't a worry to DoE, perhaps a catapult system that simply lobs the stuff onto shore may be a feasible option of compliance.

OldDan1943 said:

My input is in my holding tanks

Click to expand...

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

Delfin said:

Interesting. I guess if land based discharges of raw sewage aren't a worry to DoE, perhaps a catapult system that simply lobs the stuff onto shore may be a feasible option of compliance.

Click to expand...

Could it be that the effluent was diluted by rain water? Would flushing twice solve the holding tank problem?