[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 47 (Thursday, March 10, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-5530]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: March 10, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
RIN 1018-AC06
Clean Vessel Act: Pumpout Station and Dump Station Technical
Guidelines
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of final guidelines.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: These final technical Guidelines are being published in
response to section 5605, Guidance and Notification, of the Clean
Vessel Act of 1992, which requires the issuance of draft technical
guidelines for public comment within 3 months after the date of the
enactment of this Act, and the issuance of final technical guidelines
within 6 months after the date of enactment. The technical guidelines
should be used by States to conduct surveys and develop plans for
pumpout stations and dump stations, to develop education/information
programs, and to construct pumpout stations and dump stations.
DATES: These final technical guidelines are effective April 11, 1994.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the final guidelines may be obtained by mailing a
request to the Division of Federal Aid, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S.
Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street, NW. (Mailstop 140 ARLSQ),
Washington, DC 20240, or by picking it up at the Division of Federal
Aid, Fish and Wildlife Service, room 140, 4401 North Fairfax Drive,
Arlington, Virginia 22203.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Columbus Brown, Chief, Division of Federal Aid, (703) 358-2156.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Findings
The Congress found that there is currently an inadequate number of
pumpout stations for Type III marine sanitation devices (MSD) (holding
tanks) where recreational vessels normally operate; and, sewage
discharged by recreational vessels, because of an inadequate number of
pumpout stations, is a substantial contributor to localized degradation
of water quality in the United States.
Purpose of the Act
The purpose of the Clean Vessel Act (Act) Pub. L. 102-587, subtitle
F)'' is to provide funds to States for the construction, renovation,
operation, and maintenance of pumpout stations and dump stations.''
Purpose of the Technical Guidelines
The purpose of these guidelines is to provide States with technical
information on adequacy of and appropriate types and location of
pumpout stations and dump stations, disposal of sewage from these
facilities, and waters most likely to be affected by the discharge of
sewage from vessels. They also provide information to the States in
completing the surveys, developing plans, and developing an education/
information program. The guidelines will let States know what options
are available and provide them with basic information upon which to
base their choices. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regional
offices, regulatory agencies, equipment suppliers and marina operators
are another valuable source of information. The guidelines, however,
are not to be used as a design manual or a substitute for the
preparation of a design for a specific facility.
Consultation
As required in section 5605 of the Act, the Secretary of the
Interior (Interior) has consulted with the Administrator of the EPA,
the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere (NOAA), and
the Commandant of the Coast Guard (USCG), in the development of these
guidelines. In addition, Interior has consulted with coastal States,
local municipalities, boat users, manufacturers of pumpout equipment,
marina operators, conservation groups, and others in obtaining
information necessary to develop these guidelines. Three scoping
meetings were held in January 1993, with various constituents. A
scoping document was sent to nearly 100 people, and 45 comment letters
were received. Draft guidelines were published in the Federal Register
June 17, 1993, Vol. 58, No. 115, pages 33447-33457, and comment letters
were received. EPA, NOAA, and USCG assisted in the review of these
comments and finalization of these guidelines.
Relationship to the Grant Process
The technical guidelines are interim guidelines that will be later
codified. They should be used by coastal States in conducting surveys,
developing plans and education/information programs, and constructing
pumpout/dump stations. However, grant guidelines will be needed for
States to properly apply for funds under this grant program. The grant
guidelines will provide criteria for the Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) to use in prioritizing grant proposals for funding. Such
information as priorities, national pumpout symbols, other signs, fee
restrictions, and monitoring success of projects, will be placed in the
grant guidelines. Grant guidelines are being developed separately, and
were published in the Federal Register July 8, 1993, Vol. 58, No. 129,
pages 36619-36623. Funds are made available through a competitive
process to coastal States to complete the surveys and develop plans,
and, for all States, to apply for construction grants and education
funds.
Statement of Effects
These guidelines have been reviewed under EO 12866. The guidelines
do not involve ``taking'' as described in Executive Order 12630. The
guidelines allow eligible States to make decisions regarding the
development and submission of proposed grants for surveys, plans,
construction/renovation and education. Therefore, they are consistent
with Executive Order 12612 on Federalism. The Department certifies that
this document will not have a significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) The effects of these guidelines occur to
agencies in the States, Puerto Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands, American
Samoa, the District of Columbia and the Northern Mariana Islands. Some
small entities, mainly marina operators, may be the recipient of
grants.
Summary of Comments and Recommendations
In the June 17, 1993, Notice of Public Review of Technical
Guidelines, all interested parties were requested to submit comments
that might contribute to the development of a final rule for a 45 day
period ending August 2, 1993. Appropriate State and Federal agencies,
local governments, boaters and boating organizations, marina owners/
operators, marine equipment manufacturers and retailers, conservation
organizations, and other interested parties were contacted and
requested to comment.
A total of 8 written comment letters on the proposed guidelines
were received by the Service, 4 from State agencies, 1 from a boating
organization, 1 from a marina organization, 1 from a conservation
organization, and 1 from a marine equipment manufacturer. All comment
letters made suggestions to clarify and recommendations to modify some
of the language and guidance. One verbal comment suggesting
clarification was recorded from a State official. In addition to the
comments received, four changes were made. The first change is in the
Backgrounds. Definitions were relocated to the Technical Guidelines
portion, just ahead of section 1. The second change is in the Technical
Guidelines portion, section 2., first paragraph, and the Technical
Guidelines portion, section 4., first paragraph, third sentence.
Surveys and Plans should be submitted to the appropriate Regional
Office. Addresses are provided. The third change, Technical Guidelines,
section 2., is an addition to the second paragraph, first sentence, to
indicate that all marinas should be surveyed. The fourth change is an
addition of two paragraphs in the Information Packet, section 6., Off-
Site Treatment, between the first and second paragraphs. These two
paragraphs were inadvertently left out of the draft guidelines.
A total of 44 issues were identified by the commenters. The Service
considered all suggestions and recommendations. This final guideline
revises the proposed guidelines based on the issues raised by the
commenters and makes other changes to clarify the requirements in the
proposed guidelines. Those comments adopted are included in the final
guidelines in the appropriate Sections. The following is a discussion
of the issues raised by the commenters, the Service's responses to
those issues, and a summary of changes made to the proposed guidelines.
Issue 1. Raritan Engineering Co., Inc.: Background, Findings,
Raritan Engineering said the word ``may be'' does not correspond to the
wording in the Act, which states that ``sewage discharged * * * is a
substantial contributor * * *.''
Response: The words ``may be'' have been deleted, and the word
``is'' has been substituted.
Issue 2. International Marina Institute (IMI): Other issues,
Technical Guidelines, first paragraph, first sentence: The IMI states
that the program should be handled by State administrators who know,
and are known by, the marina industry. Inappropriate State program
managers may not work as aggressively or successfully to facilitate
pumpout installations. According to the IMI, some of the official State
contacts have little or nothing to do with marinas or boat sewage
controls. These contracts must move beyond traditional turf and foster
inter- and intra-agency cooperation, planning and management.
Response: The Service agrees that the State should select the most
appropriate State administrators to ensure the highest interest in the
program, and encourages them to do so. The Service has been working
closely with each State administrator identified. However, the actual
selection process, according to statute, is up to the Governor of each
State.
Issue 3. International Marina Institute (IMI): Technical
Guidelines, first paragraph, second sentence: The IMI states that,
unless the prohibition by a number of State laws to grant funds to
private marinas is overcome, the intent of Congress will not be
achieved. Guidelines need to be strengthened requiring grants be
available to private facilities as well. The IMI said that States must
identify restrictions on giving grants to private marinas in their
application and what will be done to overcome this problem. States must
explain in their plan how they will seek private applications and what
proportion of the slip/mooring capacity is in public vs. private
marinas. The IMI states that the Service should caution that inability
of any State to give grants to private marinas will significantly lower
that State's priority for funds. Funds should go to public and private
marinas in approximate ratio to the public/private ratio in each State.
Should the private marinas choose to not apply for grants during the
first four years, then the IMI states that the funds should be released
for use by the public sector in the fifth year of the program.
Similarly, in the Information Packet, section 8. Other Information That
is Considered: The IMI states that this Section should include language
that such States with legal roadblocks to this public/private
partnership must be required, as a condition of receiving any program
funds, to change their law, and/or seek legal ways to bypass the
serious impediment. IMI is very worried about this issue, and asks the
Service to take affirmative action to keep private business a full
partner in this program.
Response: The Service agrees that it is very important for States
to overcome any prohibition of States to fund private marinas, and has
added language in the Technical Guidelines portion, first paragraph,
fourth sentence, and in the Technical Guidelines portion, section 4.
Plans, (4)(e). States are already required to identify any restrictions
to funding private marinas in the technical guidelines portion, section
4. Plans, (4)(e). The priority system identified in the final grant
guidelines gives higher priority to those projects with public/private
partnerships. Regarding the comment that funds should go to public and
private marinas in approximate ratio to the public/private ratio and
the comment that funds be released to the public sector in the fifth
year if private marinas do not apply, priority will be given by the
Service to those facilities that solve resource problems identified in
the State's Plan rather than public/private ratios, which may not match
resource problems. Regarding the suggestion that States with legal
roadblocks to funding private marinas should be required to change
their laws before funds will be granted to them, the Service has no
legal authority to require States to change their laws.
Issue 4. Center for Marine Conservation and States Organization of
Boating Access, Technical Guidelines, first paragraph, second and third
sentences, ``Both public and private marinas are eligible to
participate in this program and should conform to these technical
guidelines. Other marinas would not have to conform.'': Both groups
asked what other types of marinas there are other than public and
private?
Response: This statement has been corrected to read that public and
private marinas that participate must conform to these guidelines.
Marinas that do not participate do not have to conform.
Issue 5. Center for Marine Conservation (Center): Technical
Guidelines, Definitions (4) Waste reception facility: In the Center's
work with vessel-generated garbage and the Marine Plastic Pollution
Research and Control Act, ``reception facility'' refers to garbage
cans, dumpsters, and recycling containers at ports and marinas.
``Adequate reception facilities'' are required under MPPRCA, and are
referred to quite often. The Center wants to make sure that the phrase
``waste reception facilities'' referred to in the Clean Vessel Act
guidelines is not going to confuse boaters or marina operators who are
also exposed to provisions of the garbage laws dealing with garbage
reception facilities. The Center suggests using another term, such as
``portable toilet dump station'' or ``sewage reception facility''.
Response: The Service agrees and has changed the term to agree with
the term used in the grant guidelines: Dump stations.
Issue 6. Oregon State Marine Board (Marine Board): Technical
Guidelines, Definitions (4) Dump Station: The Marine Board states that
floating restrooms should be eligible for federal aid. They suggest
that they are an eligible ``dump station'' which meets the intent of
the Act to reduce vessel sewage pollution. Although landside restrooms
should be ineligible, floating restrooms are not upland facilities and
are used solely by boaters as dump stations. The Marine Board states
that floating restrooms provide the only means to reasonably
accommodate human waste from boaters using smaller recreational
watercraft 12-18 ft. that do not carry portable toilets or do not have
holding tanks.
Response: The Service agrees, and has added language in the
guidelines to incorporate this suggestion, provided the facility is in
the water, not connected to the shore.
Issue 7. International Marina Institute (IMI): Technical
Guidelines, Definitions, (9) Coastal zone: the IMI suggests Printing
out the full definition for coastal zone as given in the CZM Act of
1972 under Definitions.
Response: The Service agrees, and has printed it in full in the
final guidelines.
Issue 8. International Marina Institute (IMI): Technical
Guidelines, section 2. Surveys, Facility Survey, second paragraph,
first sentence: The IMI states that survey of marinas for pumpout
stations/dump stations should indicate whether the facility is public
or private.
Response: The Service agrees and has added this survey question to
the text.
Issue 9. Michigan Department of Natural Resources (Michigan DNR):
Technical Guidelines, section 2. Surveys, second paragraph, first
sentence, discussion of survey by specific coordinates: The Michigan
DNR states that the Clean Vessel Act does not require the States to
identify marinas by North American Datum Standard, nautical charts,
etc. According to the law, section 5603 entitled ``Charts (1) In
General--the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere
shall indicate, on charts published by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) for the use of operators of
recreational vessels, the locations of pumpout stations and dump
stations.'' The Michigan DNR asks that this portion of the technical
guidelines be taken out and be replaced by the specifications of the
Act.
Response: The Service agrees and has rephrased this portion to
agree with the Act. The Service suggests that obtaining specific
coordinates for marinas may be helpful to determine location of marinas
for development of plans.
Issue 10. International Marina Institute (IMI): Technical
Guidelines, section 2. Boat Survey, third paragraph: The IMI states
that most States do not have the ability to quickly determine which
boats have toilets and what type MSD they are. The IMI states that the
Service should request that the USCG require States to ask all boat
owners if they have a MSD and what type, and include the data in their
annual boating statistics reports. According to the IMI, States should
list MSD use as part of their annual reports to the USCG and the USCG
needs to correlate its own Federal documentation program (assume all
documented vessels have toilets).
Response: The Service recognizes that this information may not be
readily available, and has advised States in section 2. of the
technical guidelines and Information Packet portion of these guidelines
that reasonable estimates are acceptable. The Packet also advises
States of alternative means of obtaining this information. The USCG
would require legislative authority to require States to ask all boat
owners if they have a MSD and include the data in their annual boating
statistics report, since the purpose of the report is now boat safety.
Regarding the comment that the USCG correlate its own Federal
documentation, this would not result in obtaining a sufficient number
of boats for the States to adequately complete their survey.
Issue 11. Oregon State Marine Board (Marine Board): Technical
Guidelines, section 3., first paragraph, first sentence: The Marine
Board requests the Service to add ``/or''. The sentence should read:
``As a general guide, at least one pumpout station and `/or' dump
station should be provided for every 300 to 600 boats (not considering
length or toilets).'' In Oregon, according to the Marine Board, the
number of boats under 26 ft. is over 90% of the registered boats in the
State. Therefore, the requirement of one pumpout as the sole means for
vessel waste reception and not including dump stations or other means
of waste disposal for every 300 to 600 boats, regardless of boat
length, would be impracticable to meet in Oregon, according to the
Marine Board.
Response: This formula is guidance only, not a requirement. States
should use their judgment as to when this formula should be modified,
or even used.
Issue 12. International Marina Institute (IMI): Technical
Guidelines, section 3. Adequate Pumpouts, first paragraph, first
sentence: According to the IMI, this section must be directly linked to
the number and location of boat toilets. Otherwise, States may count
all boats whether or not capable of holding a MSD toilet. Boat count
guide for the number of pumpout stations now includes all canoes,
dinghies, rowboats, etc., and all other boats without toilets, which
distorts boat toilet use patterns and location of pumpout needs. The
IMI states that the word ``not'' in the following sentence should be
deleted: ``As a general guide, . . . 300 to 600 boats (not considering
length or toilets).'' The IMI requests adding the following: ``The
number and location of pumpouts be based on counts of boats with
toilets and/or boats 22 feet in length and larger capable of having
installed MSDs.''
Response: The Service agrees that canoes, dinghies, etc., should
not be included in the assessment of need, and has added language to
that effect. The amended method now suggested in the guidelines is a
general guide only, and can be further amended by adding the language
suggested by the commenter, or by any of the factors listed in that
Section.
Issue 13. Oregon State Marine Board (Marine Board): Technical
Guidelines, Section 3., first paragraph, second sentence: The Marine
Board states that there needs to be a better breakdown of the
requirement for vessel dump stations and pumpouts for marinas
accommodating over 50 boats. The Marine Board suggests the following
language: ``Marina with 50 slips or more that are capable of mooring 26
ft. + boats install at least one pumpout station. Marinas with 50 slips
or more that are capable of mooring 16-26 ft. boats install at least
one pumpout or portable toilet dump station.''
Response: This Section has been rewritten to incorporate the
suggested language. Because the guideline is not a requirement, but
guidance, which States should use or modify as needed, additional
language has been added which clarifies this point. States should
assess each particular situation to determine the pumpout stations and
dump stations needed.
Issue 14. Oregon State Marine Board (Marine Board): Technical
Guidelines, Section 3., second paragraph: The Marine Board requests
adding the following to better clarify where to install waste reception
facilities: ``Waste reception facilities should be sited in conjunction
with marinas, parking lot harbor or where vessels congregate or are
used, such as transient harbors or launching ramps.''
Response: The statement has been amended to better clarify where
dump stations should be installed.
Issue 15. International Marina Institute (IMI): Technical
Guidelines, section 4. (3) Expected Results or Benefits: To the end of
that sentence the IMI requests adding ``* * * and how results will be
monitored and benefits will be measured.''
Response: Although States have the option to monitor and measure
benefits, and are encouraged to do so when necessary, requiring this
step of the States goes beyond the intent of the Act and conveys an
unnecessary burden to the States. There may be so many other factors,
such as municipal sources of pollution, that it may be extremely
difficult and expensive to measure the specific benefit of installing
pumpouts. Pumpouts should be viewed as a Best Management Practice
which, when installed, will help clean up the water by preventing one
source of pollution.
Issue 16. International Marina Institute (IMI): Technical
Guidelines, section 4. (4) (c), Approach/Strategy: The IMI suggests
mentioning here or in section 8. that grants should not go for endless
repairs of existing pumpouts which have proven to be located in
inappropriate sites, under failed government control, or which has a
history of unreasonably low use and performance. The IMI states that
the State strategy must address the question of whether or not an
existing pumpout station is worth upgrading, and how demonstrated
problem pumpout services will be upgraded or eliminated.
Response: The Service agrees and has added language in section 4.
(4) (c).
Issue 17. International Marina Institute (IMI): Technical
Guidelines, section 4. (4) (d): To the list following ``How States will
ensure that * * *'' the IMI requests adding ``(iii) facilitate speedy
permits for pumpout station construction or improvement.'' The IMI
states that Federal and State agencies must facilitate, speed, and make
less expensive the process of granting permits for pumpout stations.
The IMI requests that the guidelines ask States to tell the Service how
the permit process will be expedited, and to document the average time
it takes for a pumpout permit. The IMI believes the Service should give
high priority to those States who speed the process.
Response: The Service encourages States to expedite the permit
processes required by State and local governments, so that facilities
will be installed as soon as possible. However, requiring the requested
information is beyond the scope of the Act and the authority of the
Service.
Issue 18. International Marina Institute (IMI): Technical
Guidelines, section 4. (4) Approach: The IMI requests adding ``(i)
Describe methods to be used to measure program costs and benefits to
the boating public; and (j) How the State will evaluate and monitor the
program effectiveness and make changes to approaches as weaknesses and/
or unanticipated opportunities become apparent.'' The IMI believes that
program evaluation needs to be given greater emphasis, to assure
quality products.
Response: Section ``(i) Describe methods to measure costs and
benefits * * *'' is beyond the scope of the Act. Section (j) is
included in the grant guidelines, Sec. 85.42(c), which requires States
to ensure that facilities are operated and maintained and used for the
stated grant purpose. A paragraph at the end of section 3. of the
Technical Guidelines has been added to give program evaluation greater
emphasis.
Issue 19. Center for marine Conservation (Center): Technical
Guidelines, section 5. Education/Information: The Center considers
education as a critical component in the ability of the Clean Vessel
Act to keep boater's sewage out of the water. They are concerned that
all education efforts will be done State by State, and that there is no
plan for national development of model education programs or materials
which can then be used by the States. With the Center's marine debris
work, they have seen the effective use of a national information
office, and have seen that it minimizes duplication at the State level,
and enhances coordination and communication between educators. The
Center believes something similar for the Clean Vessel Act would
enhance the ability of the Act and reduce costly duplication.
Response: The Service is planning a workshop with Federal, State
and local agencies, the marine industry, boaters, conservation
organizations, and interested parties, early in 1994, to identify gaps
in the education program, and responsibilities for filling those gaps.
The Service encourages any organization interested to attend. Notice of
the date, time, and place will be published in the Federal Register. In
addition, the EPA is developing two reports on the subject, both still
in draft: (1) Framework for a Public Outreach Strategy on Sewage
Discharges from Boats and Marinas; and, (2) INTERIM REPORT: Summary of
Federal Programs and Tools; Summary of State and Local Programs and
Tools; Identification of Missing and Needed Information for Guidance
Development on Boat and Marina Pollution Control; List of Contacts.
Issue 20. Oregon State Marine Board (Marine Board): Technical
Guidelines, section 6. (1) (a) and (b), discharge of wastewater to
treatment facilities and transport by licensed septage haulers: The
Marine Board has found that time and again with Oregon there has been
non-acceptance of vessel wastes by many small municipal wastewater
treatment facilities. Therefore, the Marine Board recommends that USFWS
or others conduct a detailed study on the effects of vessel waste
treated by municipal wastewater systems and provide States technical
guidance on this matter.
Response: When developing the State Plan, States are asked to
identify any problems with municipal treatment plant operators
accepting marine sewage. When the extent of the problem is ascertained,
the Service will then consider solutions to the problem. At this time,
a number of studies have been done to show that vessel sewage should
not be a problem to waste treatment plants. Education may be the best
tool for overcoming this perceived problem.
Issue 21. International Marine Institute (IMI): Technical
Guidelines, section 7., third paragraph, after first sentence: The IMI
requests adding a sentence: ``When pumpouts are installed on or near
boat fueling areas, explosion proof motors and switches must be used.''
Response: The Service agrees and has added language to that effect.
Issue 22. International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet,
section 1. (5) Nursery Areas: The IMI states that this section is
misleading, unsupported, and subject to regulatory abuse, and should be
deleted. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC):
The DEC requests expanding ``Nursery areas of indigenous aquatic life''
in section 1., item (5) to make reference to State and Federally
designated significant habitats such as are designated in Coastal Zone
programs.
Response: The Service agrees that the definition is too broad and
has deleted it, substituting the definition suggested by New York State
DEC in the Information Packet and section 1. (5) of the technical
guidelines.
Issue 23. International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet,
section 1., Discussion of the effects of vessel sewage on these waters,
first paragraph, third sentence: The IMI requests changing the word
from ``several'' to ``many'' in the sentence ``While vessel sewage
discharges represent only one of `several' sources * * *''
Response: The Service agrees and has made the change.
Issue 24. International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet,
Section 1., Discussion of the effects of vessel sewage * * * second
paragraph, second sentence: The IMI requests adding the word
``uncooked'' to text: ``Humans are put at risk by eating `uncooked'
contaminated shellfish. * * *'' According to the IMI, cooking kills the
pathogens.
Response: Although the discussion is primarily about pathogens,
cooking does not destroy all forms of contaminants. Therefore, the
conservative approach is taken.
Issue 25. International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet,
Section 1., Discussion of the effects of vessel sewage * * * second
paragraph, last sentence: The IMI requests deleting ``and swimming
beaches'' from text. According to the IMI, the statement is not true
for most beaches.
Response: The Service agrees that the statement is not true for
most beaches, and has modified the statement accordingly.
Issue 26. International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet,
Section 1., Discussion of the effects of vessel sewage * * * third
paragraph, last 2 sentences: The IMI requests deleting the last two
sentences: ``Sewage discharged from holding tanks will thus increase
the biological oxygen demand (BOD) in the vicinity of boats. When this
occurs in poorly flushed waterbodies, the dissolved oxygen
concentration of the water may decrease (Milliken and Lee, 1990.''
According to the IMI, this is misleading and faulty logic. If kept, the
IMI requests fully qualifying this statement as to the number of
holding tanks which must be dumped to make it significant.
Response: The sentences are general, informational statements. The
statements have been qualified to ensure that they are not misleading.
Issue 27. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health &
Natural Resources (DEHNR): Information Packet, section 1., last
paragraph, first, fourth and fifth sentences, and Information Packet,
Section 6., second paragraph, last sentence: It is the DEHNR's
understanding that zinc sulphate was voluntarily taken off the market
10 years ago when its degrading effects on waste treatment were
discovered. According to the DEHNR, plant operators and regulators
should not be given the implication that heavy metals or other severe,
lingering toxics can be expected. The holding tank chemicals in use
today are generally biodegradable and if even marginally diluted, have
little effect on treatment systems. The DEHNR requests that the
Information Packet be written to describe why the waste can be treated
in existing systems rather than helping to panic regulatory agencies
that are not familiar with the research, or the rate and volumes of
present demands.
Response: Zinc sulphate has been deleted from the discussion, and
the discussion modified in both places to indicate the lack of real
problems noted from use of these chemicals.
Issue 28. International Marina Institute (IMI): The IMI requests
that the Service credit IMI for its contributions in the guidelines.
Information Packet, section 3., first and second paragraphs: The IMI
requests the following be appended to these paragraphs: ``(Ross &
Amaral, 1992)'', to give credit for this text to the IMI survey of New
England pumpout stations mentioned previously. Information Packet,
section 7., third paragraph, ``Equipment failure * * * '': The IMI
requests the following be appended to this paragraph: ``(Ross & Amaral,
1992)''. Also, Information Packet, section 8., first paragraph, Public/
private partnerships: IMI totally agrees with the importance of private
involvement, and requests that the record show that the 80% is based on
the 1986-87 National Boating Facilities Survey IMI/URI conducted for
NMMA.
Response: Credits have been added for each of the sources.
Issue 29. International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet,
section 3., fourth paragraph, next to last sentence: The IMI requests
deleting the sentence ``Some States require installation of pumpouts
for all new marinas.'', because it may encourage regulators to mandate
pumpouts everywhere without consideration of other factors, or add `` *
* * regardless of any measured need or lack of potential use.'' at the
end of that sentence.
Response: The Service agrees, and has deleted the sentence.
Issue 30. International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet,
section 3. (2): The IMI requests changing the ``45%'' peak occupancy
rate to ``40%'' in the sentence ``It is assumed every boat which is
occupied * * * the occupancy rate during peak periods is 45%.'' Also,
Information Packet, section 3. (3) Calculation for Estimating Need for
Dump Stations, and, Calculation for Estimating Need for Pumpout
Stations: The IMI recommends changing the peak occupancy rate from
``45%'' to ``40%'', to match the sentence above in section 3. (2).
According to the IMI, the 45% comes from the 1989 IMI national auto
parking and boat use study of 142 public and private marinas in 24
States. The highest use day (July 4th weekend) was 46% of all boats in
use, but quickly dropped to 33% on non-holiday weekends. (Reference:
Ross, N. Auto Parking in Marinas. International Marina Institute,
Wickford, RI. 1989. 13 pp. According to the IMI, holding tanks are
often pumped during the week. National engineering standards for
parking lot size for theaters, restaurants, and shopping malls call for
using the 5th highest use day. The IMI states that it would be more
reasonable to use the 33% to be high weekend use rate. The IMI suggests
using the difference between the 46% and 33% or 40%, which is the most
reasonable national number in the formula calculations.
Response: The Service agrees and has made the changes in the
sentence and in both calculation formulas, giving credit to the source.
Issue 31. International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet,
section 3. (3): Hours of operation: The IMI requests adding ``peak
boating season'' to ``* * * assumes facilities will be in operation for
twelve hours per day during `peak boating season' weekends and * * *''.
Response: The statement has been added to the sentence.
Issue 32. Massachusetts Department of Fish, Wildlife and
Environmental Law Enforcement (DEWELE): Information Packet, section 3.,
Calculation for Estimating Need for Pumpout Stations: The DFWELE
suggests adding open brackets and open parentheses before ``No. of
Boats 26'-40''', close parentheses after ``No. With Holding Tanks
(50%)'', and close brackets after ``No. of Boats 40'+'', to clarify the
calculation.
Response: The Service agrees and has added the brackets and
parentheses.
Issue 33. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health &
Natural Resources: Information Packet, section 6.: The DEHNR is
concerned with the discussion of waste treatment alternatives.
According to the DEHNR, relatively few marinas are in a stage of
construction where major waste treatment system modifications are
readily feasible. It is likely, according to the DEHNR, that a marina
waste disposal system is already in place. The best use of the grants,
according to the DEHNR, will be to install as many dockside pumpout
units as possible. The DEHNR states that, under certain circumstances,
funding new or replacement waste treatment systems may be appropriate.
But in most cases, research indicates that existing systems should be
able to handle anticipated loads.
Response: The Service agrees with this assessment, and encourages
States to install as many pumpout stations and dump stations as are
needed as the highest priority. The discussion of waste treatment
alternatives is informational, and not meant to imply a priority for
new or upgraded waste treatment systems.
Issue 34. International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet,
section 6., Vessel Sewage Characterization, second paragraph, first
sentence, Effects of holdings tank additives: The IMI asks the
following: What are the harmful additives? What chemicals should be
regulated? Where is the list of products which can be used? Is there a
government sanctioned list? Who is doing testing on products for
holding tanks? If no government list exists, can the Service encourage
the States to regulate them? If the list exists, publish it.
Response: This paragraph is an information paragraph which
characterizes chemical holding tank additives. No statement is made
that they are harmful or that they should be regulated. The Service has
no list of products which can be used, and there is no government
sanctioned list.
Issue 35. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health &
Natural Resources (DEHNR): Information Packet, section 6. On-Site
Treatment: According to the DEHNR, North Carolina law does not allow
holding tanks as an acceptable sewage treatment and disposal system.
Response: A statement has been added to this section cautioning
that marinas should consult State law before installing any of these
measures.
Issue 36. Center for Marine Conservation (Center): Information
Packet, section 7., first paragraph, sixth sentence: ``Stationary or
portable dockside pumps cost in the range of $2,000 to $10,000, and
typical complete installations may be as high as $20,000.'' The Center
believes these numbers sound high, and requests that the Service
clarify what is covered here, and separate out costs for live aboard
permanent installations.
Response: This information was obtained from the marine industry.
Average costs, including sewage connection and other accessories, for
the first application period, were close to $20,000 per unit. Some
costs were in the range of $60,000.
Issue 37. International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet,
section 7. (1) The IMI states that stationary units can also be
discharged into septic systems if the State allows. According to the
IMI, their advantages also include ``speed of use''.
Response: Although it may be true that the unit contents may be
discharged into septic systems, this type of connection is not
encouraged. Speed of use has been added as an advantage.
Issue 38: International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet,
section 7. (2) Portable units on wheels, fourth sentence: While moving
about the marina requires more time, the IMI believes that also is an
advantage for pumping out boats during slow weekdays, especially after
a busy weekend.
Response: This advantage has been added.
Issue 39: International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet,
section 7. (3) Portable units on a vessel, last sentence. Range of
operation is not a problem, according to the IMI, since one vessel can
service an entire harbor of several marinas, etc.
Response: The Service agrees. This statement has been deleted.
Issue 40: International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet,
section 7. (4) Remote operated multi-station systems, last sentence:
According to the IMI, the last sentence talks about he problems of
winter freezing. Freezing affects every pumpout in northern climates,
but is less of a problem for multi-station systems because they
generally depend on a vacuum tank system which keeps the lines free of
all standing water. The IMI recommends dropping the issue, or making a
general statement such as: ``All pumpout systems in northern States
subject to freezing may need winterization.''.
Response: The Service agrees. The statement has been deleted.
Issue 41: International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet,
section 7., next to last paragraph, fourth sentence, under Other
Factors to Consider for Pumpout Stations, ``* * * and disinfect suction
connection.'': The IMI states that this sounds like a good idea, but
how do you do it? Would not the disinfectant used, e.g., chlorine, pose
a more significant threat to aquatic life than sewage bacteria inside
the hose connector? Recommend dropping the words.
Response: The Service agrees. The statement has been deleted, and a
suggestion added to use a dedicated system for flushing and rinsing
hoses.
Issue 42: International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet,
section 7., last paragraph, third sentence under Other Factors to
Consider for Pumpout Stations: The IMI states that the statements ``EPA
has found * * *'' the need for ``maintenance contracts * * *'' and
``dedicated funds * * *'', are misquoted from the final Nonpoint
Pollution Marinas Chapter 5, boat sewage section pp 5-42 to 5-46. The
IMI states that the statements are based on a preliminary practices
draft which was discarded in the final text. If maintenance contracts
were necessary anywhere, according to the IMI, they would be needed at
the public marinas do not need such government required contracts or
dedicated funds since they will fix the problem themselves or hire
someone. The IMI recommends deleting the entire last sentence beginning
``EPA has found * * *'', or specify that this ``only applies to public
marinas which are unable to do their own maintenance.''.
Response: The reference to EPA has been dropped. The paragraph has
been kept as a suggestion.
Issue 43: International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet,
section 8., fifth paragraph, Rental Contracts: The IMI recommends
adding ``waters'' to the text of ``(1) prohibit boat sewage discharge
into the marina `waters' to keep the water clean.'' to otherwise allow
discharge into a pumpout or sanitary waste system.
Response: The word has been added.
Issue 44: International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet,
section 8., fifth paragraph, Rental Contracts: The IMI is not sure
marinas can legally force boat owners to covert to holding tanks (2)
without new legislation since Federal law allows use of all three types
of MSDs. The IMI does not feel the Service can issue (2) in the
Guideline at this time without a change in Federal law.
Response: The Service agrees. The statement has been deleted.
Technical Guidelines
The Fish and Wildlife Service will administer the Clean Vessel Act
grant program through State agencies only. Both public and private
marinas are eligible to participate in this program and should conform
to these technical guidelines if they do participate. Marinas that do
not participate in this program would not have to conform to these
guidelines. The Service believes that public/private partnerships are a
very important part of the success of this program, and will give
higher priority to those projects that provide such partnership.
Inability of a State to give grants to private marinas will result in a
lowering of that State's priority for funds. Those States that have
legal/administrative roadblocks are strongly encouraged to overcome
them through changes in their law or procedures.
These technical guidelines should be followed when doing surveys,
developing a plan and education program, and constructing pumpout
stations and dump stations. Technical guidelines are presented here by
section. At the end of these guidelines, an information packet is
presented, which contains a general discussion of each section and
provides greater detail.
Definitions
For the purposes of these technical guidelines the term: (1) Type
III marine sanitation device (holding tank) means any equipment for
installation on board a vessel which is specifically designed to
receive, retain, and discharge human body wastes; (2) pumpout station
means a facility that pumps or receives human body wastes out of Type
III marine sanitation devices installed on board vessels; (3)
recreational vessel means a vessel (a) manufactured for operation, or
operated, primarily for pleasure; or (b) leased, rented, or chartered
to another for the latter's pleasure; (4) dump station means an upland
or floating waste reception facility specifically designed to receive
wastes from portable toilets carried on vessels, or floating restrooms
in the water, not connected to land or structures connected to the
land, used solely by boaters, and does not include upland restroom
facilities; (5) marina means a facility with ten or more wet slips and/
or dry land storage; (6) Parking lot harbor means a harbor which is
home port to many boats kept on swing moorings or in marina docks. Most
of the time, most of the boats are unoccupied and unused; (7) Transient
harbor means ``destination'' harbor where boaters go during day trips
or berth overnight; (8) Portable toilet means toilets that are not
installed toilets. They are designed to be removed from a vessel and
their contents emptied into shoreside receptacles; (9) Coastal zone has
the same meaning that term has in section 304(1) of the Coastal Zone
Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1453 (1). Section 1453 defines
``coastal zone'' as follows: ``The term `coastal zone' means the
coastal waters (including the lands therein and thereunder) and the
adjacent shorelands (including the waters therein and thereunder),
strongly influenced by each other and in proximity to the shorelines of
the several coastal states, and includes islands, transitional and
intertidal areas, salt marshes, wetlands, and beaches. The zone
extends, in Great Lakes waters, to the international boundary between
the United States and Canada and, in other areas, seaward to the outer
limit of the United States territorial sea. The zone extends inland
from the shorelines only to the extend necessary to control shorelands,
the uses of which have a direct and significant impact on the coastal
waters. Excluded from the coastal zone are lands the use of which is by
law subject solely to the discretion of or which is held in trust by
the Federal Government, its officers or agents.''
Section 1. Waters Most Likely To Be Affected by the Discharge of Sewage
From Vessels
Guidelines for States to use in identifying waters most likely to
be affected by the discharge of sewage from vessels are those waters
frequented by large numbers of boaters and include: (1) Sheltered
waters that are generally poorly flushed systems; (2) Waters identified
to be of National Significance; (3) Waters of significant recreational
value; (4) Waters supporting designated shellfish harvest areas; (5)
State and federally designated Nursery areas of indigenous aquatic
life; (6) Waters designated by the EPA as ``No Discharge Areas'' under
section 312(f)(3) and (4) (A) & (B) of the Clean water Act, and (7)
Waters that do not meet State designated usage.
Section 2. Surveys of Pumpout Stations and Dump Stations
Only coastal States are required to do a survey. Coastal States
should submit surveys to the Federal Air official at the appropriate
Fish and Wildlife Service Regional Office, as follows:
(1) Region 1 coastal States include California, Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington: Deputy
Assistant Regional Director, Division of Federal Aid, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Eastside Federal Complex, 911 NE 11th Avenue,
Portland, Oregon 97232-4181, (503) 231-6128.
(2) Region 2 coastal State includes Texas: Deputy Assistant
Regional Director, Division of Federal Aid, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, P.O. Box 1306, 500 Gold Avenue, SW., Albuquerque, New Mexico
87103, (505) 766-2095.
(3) Region 3 coastal States include Illinois, Indiana, Michigan,
Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin: Deputy Assistant Regional Director,
Division of Federal Aid, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bishop Henry
Whipple Federal Building, 1 Federal Drive, Fort Snelling, Minnesota
55111-4056, (612) 725-3596.
(4) Region 4 coastal States include Alabama, Florida, Georgia,
Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Puerto Rico, South Carolina,
and the Virgin Islands: Deputy Assistant Regional Director, Division of
Federal Aid, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1875 Century Boulevard,
suite 324, Atlanta, Georgia 30345, 404/679-4159.
(5) Region 5 coastal States include Connecticut, Delaware, District
of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey,
New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Virginia: Deputy Assistant
Regional Director, Division of Federal Aid, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley, Massachusetts 01035-9589,
(413) 253-8501.
Pumpout station/dump station survey: All marinas, moorages, docks,
etc., should be surveyed. The survey should include whether the marina
has pumpout stations, dump stations, or both; how many pumpout and dump
stations; which ones are operational; and, the specific coordinates of
each operational pumpout and dump station. For pumpout and dump
stations not located in the above marinas, moorages, etc., such as at
ramps, the specific coordinates should be obtained for these facilities
also. Specific coordinates, i.e., latitude and longitude, should be
reported in North American Datum 1983 (NAD 83) standard. Other
alternatives include (a) State Plane Coordinate Values, and (b) A
portion of a NOAA nautical chart identified by chart number, edition,
and edition date that marks clearly the pumpout station/dump station.
Specific coordinates for all pumpout and dump stations should be
submitted to the appropriate Regional Office of the Fish and Wildlife
Service for inclusion on NOAA charts. Suggested survey questions
include the following for each facility: (1) Name and address of
marina, moorage, dock, etc.; (2) whether the marina is public or
private; (3) telephone number; (4) location of marina, etc., by county,
water body and specific coordinates; (5) whether the marina has pumpout
stations, dump stations, or both; (6) how many pumpout and dump
stations; and, (7) whether the pumpout and dump stations are
operational.
Boat survey: The survey should include the following: (1) Total
number of boats by water body and county; (2) How many boats have Type
III MSD holding tanks; (3) How many boats have portable toilets.
A complete survey of all boaters is not necessary. States should
obtain only as much information as is necessary to determine, within
reasonable confidence limits, numbers of boats, how many boats have
Type III MSD holding tanks or portable toilets, and where boaters are
most likely to congregate by water body and county. Sample surveys are
acceptable. Recent surveys are acceptable if they answer all the
questions needed.
Section 3. What Constitutes Adequate and Reasonably Available Pumpout
Stations and Dump Stations in Boating Areas
As a general guide, at least one pumpout station and dump station
should be provided for every 300 to 600 boats over 16 feet length
overall. This is not a requirement, but guidance only, and should be
modified depending on the situation. For instance, if most boats in an
area are under 26 feet, many more dump stations would be required than
pumpout stations. Another question is the minimum number of boats that
should have pumpout stations and dump stations. Again, there is no one
answer. it is suggested that marinas with 50 slips or more that are
capable of mooring 26 feet + boats have access to at least one pumpout
station, and marinas with 50 slips or more that are capable of mooring
16-26 feet boats have access to at least one dump station. This does
not mean that every marina with 50 + slips should have a pumpout
station or dump station. Where marinas are adjacent (within two miles
of each other), pumpout stations can be shared. Other factors should be
considered, such as whether the marina is a parking lot or transient
harbor, or the amount of fuel dock use. In determining the installation
of any pumpout station or dump station, such factors as boat size,
boating use patterns, coastal water characteristics, sensitive areas,
flushing capacity, etc., should play a large role in establishing needs
for facilities. Due to the variability in each State, States must have
the flexibility to provide criteria that addresses their specific
needs. See the discussion in the Information Packet, section 3, for
alternative approaches to determining need.
Dump stations should be sited in conjunction with pumpout stations,
but should also be located where there are no pumpout stations but
where boats with portable toilets congregate or are used, such as
launching ramps.
Program evaluation should be given great emphasis to assure quality
products. States should evaluate and monitor the program effectiveness
to determine that facilities are operated and maintained, and used for
their intended purpose. Changes to approaches should be made as
weaknesses and/or opportunities become apparent.
Section 4. Plans for Construction Pumpout Stations and Dump Stations
Only coastal States are required to develop a plan. Coastal States
should work with the recreational marina industry and others in
developing the plan. Coastal States should submit the plan to the
appropriate Fish and Wildlife Service Regional Office, same address as
in section 2 above. Following is an outline which should be used by
States when developing the plan:
(1) Need. This section should establish the justification for the
proposed work based on (a) the results of the surveys of existing
pumpout stations and dump stations and the number of recreational
vessels; (b) that part of the guidance relating to determining the
adequacy and reasonable availability of pumpout stations and dump
stations and, (c) that part of the guidance describing the waters most
likely to be affected by the discharge of sewage from vessels.
(2) Goals and objectives. The purpose of the plan should be to
ensure the availability of adequate and reasonably available pumpout
stations and dump stations to the boating public throughout the coastal
zone of a State.
(3) Expected results or benefits. This section should describe in
general how water will be improved by making pumpout and dump stations
available.
(4) Approach. In this section, describe the following: (a) How the
plan addresses all coastal zone waters of the State, and gives priority
to waters most likely affected; (b) How the plan complements plans of
adjacent States for shared waters; (c) The strategy for locating and
constructing, renovating and maintaining pumpout and dump stations.
Address the question of whether or not an existing pumpout or dump
station is worth upgrading, and how demonstrated problem facilities
will be upgraded or eliminated. Include the general location and
priority of projects; (d) How States will ensure that (i) waste will be
disposed of properly, and (ii) that municipal waste treatment plants
will accept waste; (e) What proportion of the slip/mooring capacity is
in public vs. private marinas, how States will seek public/private
partnerships for siting, constructing and operating pumpout stations
and dump stations, any issues/problems, such as legislative/regulatory
barriers, and what will be done to overcome these barriers; (f)
Innovative techniques to increase the availability and use of pumpout
stations/dump stations; (g) Approaches to educate and inform the public
and the boating industry on the sue of, and need for, disposal of
vessel waste; and, (h) Total estimated cost of the Statewide plan.
Section 5. Education/Information
Guidelines for States to consider when developing an education/
information plan include:
(1) Audience: Consider six audiences when developing your
education/information program regarding vessel sewage disposal,
handling, and treatment, as follows: (a) Boat owners and operators; (b)
Marina owners and operators; (c) Sewage treatment plan owners and
operators; (d) Federal (where applicable), State and local governmental
authorities and organizations; (e) Boating supply and retailers; (f)
The general public.
(2) Communication media: There are a variety of media that States
may use for disseminating this information. Common methods to consider
are: brochures, workshops/symposiums, educational videos, TV/radio,
signs, boat shows, etc. Innovative methods are encouraged.
(3) Distribution: States have options for distribution of
educational information related to boating and pumpout issues. Options
include magazines, radio public interest spots, environmental groups,
association and federation newsletters, National Estuary Program
forums, State and local education programs, local citizens groups, and
student groups. New and innovative ways of educating the boating
community and the general public are encouraged.
Section 6. Appropriate Methods for Disposal of Vessel Sewage From
Pumpout Stations and Dump Stations
Disposal methods will vary among States depending on a number of
factors, including: State and local sanitation codes; the number of
recreational vessels and where the vessels are concentrated; the
availability and geographic proximity of existing treatment facilities
to boating centers; and hydrogeologic characteristics, including soil
types and groundwater flows towards drinking water sources and these
coastal waters. Depending on these factors, States may consider the
following methods: (1) Off-site treatment: (a) Discharge to a public
wastewater collection system and treatment facility; (b) discharge to a
holding tank with removal and transport by a person licensed to haul
septage waste to a municipal septage receiving/treatment facility; (2)
On-site treatment at marinas: (a) Discharge to a package treatment
plant; (b) discharge to a septic system.
Section 7. Types of Marine Boat Sewage Pumpout Stations and Dump
Stations That May Be Appropriate for Construction, Renovation,
Operation, or Maintenance, and Appropriate Location of the Stations and
Facilities Within a Marina or Boatyard
Pumpout stations and dump stations should provide an efficient
means of removing sewage from boats and a means of disposing of that
sewage in a safe and sanitary manner. These facilities should include
all the equipment, structures, and disposal facilities necessary to
ultimately discharge or dispose of boat sewage in an efficient, safe
and sanitary manner without causing an actual or potential public
health hazard. Pumpout stations should include equipment for rinsing
boat holding tanks. Pumpout stations and dump stations should be
adequate to meet the peak use demand for such services. Facilities
should be operated and maintained to provide adequate service, and to
be maintained to function as intended.
Pumpout stations and dump stations should be reliable, corrosion
resistant, easy to use, neat and tidy to clean and use, conveniently
located, with low maintenance. Pumps should be specifically designed
for handling sewage. Land-based restrooms are not an acceptable option
for emptying portable toilets.
All pumps should be safe, functional and efficient. Motors and
switches should be ignition protected. Pumps should be able to pump
against the maximum head developed by elevation change and line losses.
In addition, the suction connection to the boat should be a tight fit
and adjustable by adapters to service boat discharge connections. Pumps
should be able to transport flows out of the holding tank. Pumps
exceeding 45 gallons per minute may cause tanks to collapse.
Factors in determining pumpout station holding tank capacity
include boat size and use patterns. Sizing should be done on a case-by-
case basis using documented demand, if possible. Holding tanks should
be designed and installed to meet local regulations.
For all vessels manufactured after December 31, 1994, a standard
deck fitting for removal of sewage should be constructed to the
``International standard ISO 4567 Shipbuilding--Yachets--Waste water
fittings'' for holding tanks, which is a female 38.1 mm (1\1/2\'') pipe
size with 11 threads per 25.4 mm (inch). These threads could utilize a
quick-disconnect or cam lock fitting. For existing vessels, an adapter,
such as a tapered cone, should be used for non-standard deck fittings.
All pumpout connectors should fit the standard deck fitting.
For all vessels manufactured after December 31, 1994, because of
possible confusion between waste, fuel and water deck fittings, the
deck fittings should be identified with the words ``WASTE'', ``GAS'',
``DIESEL'', and ``WATER'', and color code the fittings with black caps
for waste, red caps for gas and diesel, and blue caps for water.
The ultimate location for the station should be based on the unique
conditions of the marina, boatyard, mooring field or other anchorage.
Stationary pumpout stations should be located for the convenience of,
and to encourage boaters to use the facility. Mobile pumpout stations
should have reasonable access to boaters.
Section 8. Other Information (No Technical Guidelines)
Information Packet
This information packet is not technical guidelines. It has been
recommended to provide additional information to States, and to marinas
and others who participate in this program. The information packet
presents general information on surveys, plans, education/information,
pumpout facilities and other information helpful in promoting
establishment of facilities. It provides a more detailed discussion of
the technical guidelines, with examples and explanations. This
information packet is also by Section, which corresponds to the
sections in the technical guidelines.
Section 1. Waters Most Likely To Be Affected by the Discharge of Sewage
From Vessels
The following coastal waters, including the Territorial Seas,
estuaries, bays, and sounds, and then U.S. lakes and rivers as defined
below, are considered waters most likely to be affected by the
discharge of sewage from vessels. These definitions are not ranked in
priority order.
(1) Sheltered waters that are generally poorly flushed systems.
(2) Waters of National significance: Waters identified by the
Environmental Protection Agency under the National Estuary Program,
waters identified by the NOAA under the Estuarine Reserve program, and
Marine Sanctuaries program where appropriate.
(3) Waters of significant recreational value: A water body with
unusual value as a resource for outdoor recreation activities, e.g.,
fishing, boating, canoeing, water skiing, swimming, scuba diving, or
nature observation. The significance may be in the intensity of present
usage, in an unusual quality of recreational experience, or in the
potential for unusual future recreational use or experience.
(4) Shellfish harvest waters: Waters designated as shellfish
producing and harvesting areas.
(5) Nursery areas of indigenous aquatic life: State and federally
designated significant habitats such as are designated in Coastal Zone
programs.
(6) Waters designated by the EPA as ``No Discharge Areas'' under
Section 312(f)(3) and (4)(A) & (B) of the Clean Water Act.
(7) Waters that do not meet State designated usage.
Discussion of the Effects of Vessel Sewage on These Waters
Waters previously designated by the EPA under the Clean Water Act
as ``No Discharge Areas'' are eligible for renovation, maintenance and
further construction funds under this program. The discharge of sewage
from boats may degrade water quality by (1) introducing microbial
pathogens into the environment and (2) locally increasing biological
oxygen demand (U.S. EPA, 1985). While vessel sewage discharges
represent only one of many sources of point and non-point pollution,
the number of boats using coastal waters has increased substantially
during the past decade. The contribution of boat sewage to total
pathogen loadings and local BOD has grown proportionately.
A potentially serious problem resulting from vessel sewage
discharges is the introduction of disease-carrying microorganisms from
fecal matter into the coastal aquatic environment. Humans are put at
risk by eating contaminated shellfish and by swimming in contaminated
waters. The major disease-carrying agents are bacteria and viruses, and
the most common serious ailment is acute gastroenteritis. Other
waterborne diseases include hepatitis, typhoid, and cholera (Milliken
and Lee, 1990). The indicators used to detect sewage pollution are not
the pathogens themselves, but, rather, coliform bacteria. These
bacteria are always present in the human intestinal tract and are thus
considered reliable indicators of the presence of human waste (U.S.
EPA, 1985). Studies conducted in Puget Sound, Long Island Sound,
Narragansett Bay, and Chesapeake Bay have demonstrated that boats can
be a significant source of fecal coliform bacteria in coastal waters,
particularly in areas with high boat densities and low hydrologic
flushing (Milliken and Lee, 1990; JRB Associates, 1980). If coliform
levels exceed allowable thresholds, shellfish beds and swimming beaches
may be closed to minimize the threat of public health problems. In
addition, shellfish beds and some swimming beaches in the immediate
vicinity of marinas are often closed because of the potential of
contamination from vessel sewage discharges.
These organic-rich wastes also have the potential to depress oxygen
levels as they decay in the marine environment. Biological oxygen
demand is a measure of the dissolved oxygen required to decompose the
organic matter in the water by aerobic processes. When the loading of
organic matter increases, the BOD increases, and there is a consequent
reduction in the dissolved oxygen available for respiration by aquatic
organisms (U.S. EPA, 1985). Although the volume of wastewater
discharged from boats is relatively small, the organics in the
wastewater are concentrated, and therefore the BOD (1700-3500 mg/l) is
much higher than that of raw municipal sewage (110-400 mg/l) or treated
municipal sewage (5-100 mg/l) (JRB Associates, 1981). Sewage discharged
from holding tanks will thus increase the BOD in the vicinity of boats.
When this occurs in poorly flushed waterbodies, the dissolved oxygen
concentrations of the water may decrease (Milliken and Lee, 1990). The
amount of the decrease in dissolved oxygen concentrations, and
therefore the significance to the water, depends on the amount of
sewage discharged into the system.
Chemical additives such as chlorine and formaldehyde are used to
disinfect or control odors of on-board sewage. There is little
indication that these chemicals have any harmful effects on the
environment. The holding tank chemicals in use today are generally
biodegradable and, if even marginally diluted, have little effect on
treatment systems. No heavy metals or other severe, lingering toxics
can be expected. However, some discussion of possible problems should
be mentioned here. Of the two major disinfectant chemicals used--
chlorine and formaldehyde--only chlorine has been shown to be toxic in
the aquatic environment. While formaldehyde is considered a toxic
substance, it is completely miscible in water and is readily
degradable. While a direct link between MSD holding tank disinfectants
and effects on the environment has not been documented, the presence of
these chemicals in sufficient concentrations may be of concern (JRB
Associates, 1981). Use of these chemicals as directed by the
manufacturer should not result in problems. However, since the amounts
of chemicals added are controlled by the boat owner or operator, excess
use may occur.
Section 2. Surveys of Pumpout Stations and Dump Stations
The Clean Vessel Act of 1992 calls for surveys by coastal States
within three months of notification to the States of the final
technical guidelines to determine: (1) The number and location of all
operational pumpout stations and dump stations at public and private
marinas, mooring areas, docks, and other boating facilities within the
coastal zone of a State; and (2) the number of recreational vessels in
the coastal waters of the State with Type III marine sanitation devices
(holding tanks) or portable toilets and the areas where those vessels
congregate.
Survey information may be obtainable from the boat registration
process or files; contacts with trade associations or boating
organizations; from national surveys if available; or from mail or
telephone surveys of boaters or marina/mooring field facility
operators. Some States have surveyed boaters at marinas on high
concentration days. The U.S. Coast Guard, telephone 202/267-1497, can
provide the following information regarding Documented Vessels (5 net
tons and larger): The vessel's port of documentation, vessel length,
beam, net tonnage, and whether or not the vessel is equipped with
mechanical propulsion.
Section 3. What Constitutes Adequate and Reasonably Available Pumpout
Stations and Dump Stations in Boating Areas
Factors affecting pumpout use: Potential demand for pumpouts and/or
dump stations is a function of several variables. First is the number
of boats of a size that use sewage holding tanks or portable toilets
and where they are stored. Second, accessibility of pumpouts and dump
stations affects their use. Distance from routes of travel or from the
home port as well as the likely waiting time once at the facility can
affect the willingness of boaters to use pumpouts and dump stations. A
third factor to consider is boat use. High use at moorages is related
to transient versus ``parking lot'' customers, year-round versus
seasonal users, and the frequency of overnight use of boats. High boat
use is seasonal, correlated with good weather, weekends and holidays.
Fourth is the fee charged, with higher use related to lower fees (Ross
& Amaral, 1992).
High use of pumpouts and dump stations has also been related to
aggressive management practices, active enforcement of ``No Discharge
Areas'', perception of need by the public (related to the environmental
sensitivity of the area and educational efforts), and good maintenance
(Ross & Amaral, 1992).
Determining adequate and reasonably available station/facility
needs: Boat numbers, boat size, boating use patterns, numbers and
distribution of existing facilities, and where boats are kept during
boating season (i.e., in a marina, yacht club, private dock, mooring,
home on a trailer, etc.), determine the need for pumpout stations and
dump stations. Moorages that receive high transient use, have mooring
fields for large boats, are visited by large numbers of boats for
refueling, and/or have a large number of people sleeping overnight or
living on their boats should have high priority. Yacht clubs, boatyards
and large capacity private docks should also be considered for priority
installation of pumpouts and dump stations. Other situations that might
be considered for the installation of facilities include marinas that
provide fuel or service vessels equipped with MSD holding tanks. In
addition to distributing stations/facilities in the above types of
boating moorages, additional stations/facilities may be warranted where
boat use impacts poorly flushed bays, coves, or sloughs and
environmentally sensitive sites. After new facilities have been
installed, subsequent patterns of use will indicate where and if
additional pumpouts are needed. Periodic surveys should be conducted to
ensure adequate numbers of pumpout stations and dump stations exist for
boaters in the future.
Requirements for pumpout and dump stations vary by State and
harbor. Some examples are as follows: Delaware requires a pumpout for
marinas harboring 100 or more boats with marinas of 25-100 sharing a
pumpout and those with less than 25 not required to install facilities.
For New England, EPA Region I guidelines suggest a pumpout for 300-600
boats with toilets. A minimum of one pumpout per 300 boats with toilets
is recommended in transient harbors with a high percentage of large
vessels, while one pumpout per 600 boats with toilets should be
provided in ``parking lot'' harbors where most boats are less than 25
feet long. In California's Richardson Bay, the pumpout guidelines is
one station for every 300 boats. Launching ramps, marinas, etc., that
cater to small craft (under 26 feet) or are too shallow for larger
vessels may not need pumpouts, but may still require dump stations to
receive portable toilet waste.
EPA's assessment (EPA, 1981) estimated that 20% of the boats
between 16 and 26 feet, 50% of the boats between 26 and 40 feet, and
all of the vessels over 40 feet had installed toilets with some type of
MSD. So, if exact data are not available, an estimate could be
calculated. The following is a method for estimating Statewide need for
pumpout stations and dump stations (McKiernan, pers. comm.). It is not
intended as a guide for determining requirements for a specific marina
or harbor. The following assumptions underlie this method and can be
adjusted where statistically valid information is available relating to
a State's unique boating population characteristics.
(1) Given the availability of boat length information gathered
during boat registration, assumptions can be made regarding the type of
on-board sanitation equipment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number
with
Boat toilets Type of system
length (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
16'-26.. 20 Portable toilets.
26'-40.. 50 Holding tanks.
40'+.... 100 Holding tanks.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) It is assumed every boat which is occupied will require service
once a weekend and that the occupancy rate during peak periods is 40%
(Ross, N. Auto Parking in Marinas, IMI, Wickford, RI, 1989).
(3) This method also assumes facilities will be in operation for
twelve hours per day during peak boating season weekends and that the
average time to service a boat's system will be 15 minutes for holding
tanks and 5 minutes for portable toilets. Therefore:
TN10MR94.020
TN10MR94.021
Section 4. Plans for Constructing Pumpout Stations and Dump Stations
The Clean Vessel Act calls for coastal States, within six months
after notification of the final technical guidelines, to develop a plan
for any construction or renovation of pumpout stations and dump
stations. For efficiency of review and approval by the Fish and
Wildlife Service, coastal States should complete the plan in the
standardized format identified in the technical guidelines.
Section 5. Education/Information
A clearly defined education/information program that will support
the timely implementation of a State plan should be presented by the
State as a part of that plan. This guidance provides States with some
ideas and information useful in developing an education/information
program effective at informing the public, the boating community, the
boating industry, local government officials, public interest groups,
and other audiences the State identifies. Ultimately, the State
education/information program should provide information and
understanding that will encourage the use of and installation of
pumpout and dump stations.
Education of the boating, marina owner, and vessel sewage handling
and treatment communities is important to the potential success of this
program. An effective education/information program will help to
realize both short term and long term goals of the Act. The goals of
education are as broad as the audiences they should be targeted to
reach, yet, these goals can be achieved with increased dialogue between
and information to these groups.
Six audiences should be considered when developing an education/
information program regarding vessel sewage disposal, handling, and
treatment, as follows: (1) Boat owners and operators; (2) Marina owners
and operators; (3) Sewage treatment plant owners and operators; (4)
Federal (where applicable), State and local governmental authorities
and organizations; (5) Boating supply and retailers; (6) The general
public.
There are a variety of media that States may have available for
disseminating this information. Common methods to consider are;
brochures, workshops/symposiums, educational videos, TV/radio, signs,
boat shows, etc. Innovative methods are encouraged.
Issues to consider when developing education/information material
targeted to a specific audience:
Issues on which education/information programs for boat owners and
operators, as well as, boating supply and retailers, might focus would
include: (1) Environmental impacts of boater sewage and the benefits of
pumping out at a pumpout station and using a dump station; (2) How a
pumpout station operates; (3) Pumpout hose connections/adapters; (4)
Pumpout locations and fees; (5) ``Green'' boat toilet chemicals, i.e.,
short term biodegradable or less environmentally-damaging treatment
chemicals. Encourage manufacturers through demand to market only
environmentally responsible products; (6) Proper operation and
maintenance of boat toilets; (7) The value of responding to boater
surveys and requests for information.
Marina owners and operators are important participants in the
implementation of this program. This group is making a commitment for
the long term by agreeing to install, maintain, and operate pumpout and
dump stations. Issues States should consider (where applicable) when
developing education/information programs for marina owner and
operators include: (1) Benefits to marinas under this program; (2) The
application process for receiving funds to construct, renovate,
maintain, and operate pumpout and dump stations; (3) What are adequate
and reasonably available pumpout facilities; (4) Reasonable fees; (5)
Environmental benefits of providing pumpout stations and dump stations;
(6) How to obtain a permit for a municipal hookup and options for
disposal of pumpout waste; (7) Where to locate pumpout and dump
stations; (8) Methods of encouraging boater compliance with pumpout
requirements; (9) Types of pumpouts and dump stations currently on the
market; (10) Encourage manufacturers to provide demonstrations for and
training of marina personnel responsible for operating these devices;
(11) Highlighting Those marinas that have done an excellent job in
installing and maintaining facilities.
Wastewater collected from pumpout facilities must be discharged
from the marina to an appropriate treatment facility. Waste treatment
plant owners and operators should be made aware of the options
available to them for receiving and treating waste from boat holding
tanks and portable toilets. Issues for States to consider when
developing education/information programs for wastewater treatment
facility owners and operators include: (1) Effects of this waste stream
on waste treatment plant's normal operations and how to mitigate any
negative effects; (2) Volume of waste from boats in proportion to
normal ``household'' loading standard; (3) Experience of waste system
operators in areas designated ``No Discharge''.
States may find it necessary to develop education/information
programs that address issues related to Federal, State and local
government agencies. Issues to consider for education/information
programs for this audience include: (1) Awareness of environmental
requirements and enforcement options for vessel sewage disposal and
treatment (particularly for incoming harbor masters); (2) Encouraging
the development of technical guidelines for design, installation, and
use of pumpout facilities; (3) Encouraging the appropriate Federal
agencies to support a national standard on pumpout and boat fittings;
(4) Environmental benefits of reducing the amount of waste water
discharged from boats in localized areas, e.g., shellfish beds; (5)
Encouraging vessel manufacturers to include procedures for proper
operation of vessel holding tanks and shoreside pumpout facilities in
new owners' manuals; (6) The value of enforcement in implementing this
program; (7) Value of educating the public; (8) Informing Federal and
local governments on how to access Federal informational sources, and
encouraging them to do so; (9) Working with local governments to
mandate, after a reasonable period of time, the installation of pumpout
facilities at marinas, as a condition of marina licensure or operation.
Education of the general public has an important role to play.
Issues to consider for education/information of this audience include:
(1) The environmental impacts of boater waste; (2) Importance of the
coastal resource; (3) Efforts by the boating community to reduce waste
discharges.
States have options for distribution of educational information
related to boating and pumpout issues. Options include magazines, radio
public interest spots, environmental groups, association and federation
newsletters, National Estuary Program forums, State and local education
programs, local citizens groups, and student groups. New and innovative
ways of educating the boating community and the general public are
encouraged.
Representatives of the various groups could meet together at the
State/local level to determine what information and education materials
and strategies are needed to accomplish the objective. Private
conservation and education groups could provide suggestions and
materials once the needs are defined.
Section 6. Appropriate Methods for Disposal of Vessel Sewage From
Pumpout Stations and Dump Stations
Introduction: The safe and sanitary disposal of vessel sewage waste
must be provided for when constructing and operating pumpout stations
and dump stations. Boaters will not want to spend time and money
pumping out unless they can be assured that their efforts will help
improve water quality.
Vessel Sewage Characterization
Vessel sewage is more concentrated than domestic sewage for almost
all the standard parameters used to measure the quality of wastewater,
including suspended solids, BOD, and total nitrogen. For example, the
typical concentration of BOD in vessels is between 1700-3500 mg/l,
while typical sanitary wastewater ranges from 110-400 mg/l for raw
sewage and 5-100 mg/l for treated sewage. Raw municipal sewage has a
lower concentration because people on land use more water for sanitary
purposes than do people on boats. In addition, the proportion of gray
water (defined as water from baths, showers and kitchens) is greater in
municipal sewage, and municipal collection systems are subject to
inflow and infiltration of storm water.
Another characteristic of vessel holding tank waste is the presence
of chemical additives used to disinfect and deodorize the waste. These
same additives are used to treat sanitary wastes in recreational
vehicles (RVs), trains, and aircraft. Ideally, the odor-control
chemicals should be biodegradable when diluted. These chemical
additives commonly contain an active disinfectant along with dyes and
perfumes. Some of the more common disinfectants include formaldehyde,
paraformaldehyde, and quaternary ammonium chloride; formaldehyde is the
most popular because of its effectiveness.
There is some concern from operators of small municipal and package
sewage treatment plants and some marina operators with septic systems
that vessel sewage holding tank waste may adversely affect performance
of their sewage treatment systems by destroying the bacterial
population, thereby reducing plant efficiency. A second concern,
particularly of operators of municipal treatment plants operating at or
near capacity, is that the additional volume of waste will cause the
plant to exceed its capacity to treat wastewater effectively.
Research into the effects of chemical additives on sewage treatment
processes indicates that these problems have been greatly overstated,
and that, in general, most municipal sewage treatment plants can handle
vessel holding tank waste without difficulty. In addition to relatively
low volumes generated by sewage pumpout stations, the weekly and
seasonal usage of marina facilities protects treatment systems from
failing or exceeding capacity. Marinas receive their largest pumpout
volumes on weekends and, in many parts of the country, only during the
summer season. Therefore, treatment plants generally are able to
assimilate such intermittent waste loading and no serious operational
problem occurs.
Despite the negligible effects of holding tank additives on sewage
treatment processes, general concern about toxic contaminants in the
environment has led to the development of non-toxic, environmentally
benign holding tank deodorants and disinfectants such as quarternary
ammonium compounds, enzymes and adamantane. Holding tank chemicals in
use today are generally biodegradable and if even marginally diluted,
have little effect on treatment systems. No heavy metals or other
severe, lingering toxics can be expected. States should encourage the
use of these biodegradable products through education and, if
necessary, regulation.
Disposal Methods
Disposal methods will vary depending on a number of factors,
including: State and local sanitation codes; the number of recreational
vessels and where the vessels are concentrated; the availability and
geographic proximity of existing treatment facilities to boating
centers; and hydrogeologic characteristics, including soil types and
groundwater flows. Depending on these factors, States may consider the
following methods: (1) Off-site treatment: (a) Discharge to a public
wastewater collection system and treatment facility; (b) discharge to a
holding tank with removal and transport by a licensed septage hauler to
a municipal septage receiving/treatment facility.
(2) On-site treatment at marinas: (a) Discharge to a package
treatment plant with subsequent discharge back into coastal waters (a
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit would be
required); (b) discharge to a septic system, where no other alternative
is available.
The following is a description of the relative merits of each of
these methods. It should be noted that each State has its own
regulations and policies regarding what it considers ``appropriate''
disposal methods. What one State considers appropriate or even
desirable, another may prohibit.
Off-Site Treatment
There are hundreds of existing municipal wastewater treatment
facilities serving coastal areas throughout the country. Most provide
at least secondary treatment utilizing an activated sludge process, but
they vary greatly in size and details of treatment structures, sludge
handling capability, and success in meeting current permit terms and
conditions. In addition, many also incorporate septage receiving and
treatment facilities into the overall treatment system.
Public Wastewater Collection Systems: The best option for the safe
and sanitary disposal of vessel sewage is through a direct connection
to an approved wastewater treatment facility. Most municipal treatment
plants should have no problem accepting vessel holding tank waste. The
relatively small volume of holding tank waste, bled into the sanitary
waste stream, is effectively diluted by municipal sewage. The
relatively large volume of wastewater routinely handled by these plants
also mitigates against plant upset, and the treatment process can also
break down or volatilize certain of the trace organic chemicals. Sewage
treatment plants with a long history of accepting holding tank waste
have reported no problems with this practice. However, States should
exercise caution in designating sewage treatment plants that are over-
capacity, have operational problems, or violate permit conditions on a
regular basis.
Shoreside Holding Tanks/Septage Treatment Facilities: Many boating
facilities are located where connection to a wastewater collection
system is difficult or infeasible. In these cases, connection of the
pumpout or dump station to a shoreside holding tank is the next best
option. Holding (or tight) tanks provide a means for sanitary storage
of vessel sewage until it can be transported by a licensed septage
hauler to an approved septic waste receiving/treatment facility. The
holding tank may be above or below ground, depending on State or local
requirements, but should be located on solid land and secured to
minimize potential storm damage or vandalism.
Septage receiving/treatment facilities are designed specifically to
pretreat these wastes before introducing them to the wastewater
treatment system. Because vessel holding tank and portable toilet waste
is similar in nature to domestic septage, although more concentrated
with variable amounts of organic chemicals, a properly operating
municipal treatment plant with septage receiving/treatment facilities
should not be adversely affected by the introduction of holding tank
waste.
Modifications to Wastewater/Septage Treatment Facilities: Some
wastewater treatment plants and septage receiving/treatment facilities
may require modification to accommodate vessel sewage. These
modifications may include increased capacity, construction of adequate
septage receiving/treatment facilities, holding and bleed-in
facilities, pretreatment facilities, and additional analytical
capability. To determine which plants have the capability to
effectively process holding tank waste, and whether additional
facilities (or modifications to existing ones) are required, States may
need to conduct a survey of the existing capabilities and limitations
of their existing sewage treatment plants. A matrix to determine these
capabilities might include the following elements, for which many
States have available data as file information: (1) List all sewage
treatment plants; (2) Eliminate plants that are over capacity, have
operational problems, or violate permit conditions regularly; (3)
Evaluate the balance for existing capacity and treatment methodology;
(4) Estimate the available capacity; (5) Develop a short list of
candidates for vessel sewage treatment; (6) Develop list of potential
needs for modifications to those plants, including: (a) Receiving
stations; (b) holding/bleed-in tanks, and associated piping; (c)
pretreatment needs; (d) associated sludge handling needs; and, (e)
additional staff and analytical capabilities.
On-Site Treatment
On-site treatment at a marina may be a viable alternative when the
marina is not located near sewer lines, when transport of waste is
prohibitively expensive, when the local sewage treatment plant is
unable to accept additional discharges, and when groundwater and
coastal waters can be protected. Prior to installing these systems,
State law should be reviewed for legality. On-site treatment eliminates
the need to transport waste. However, the proliferation of small,
potentially troublesome treatment systems often creates more water
quality problems than the collection of vessel sewage is intended to
solve, including coastal and groundwater contamination.
Package Treatment Plants
Package treatment plants offer an alternative for the treatment of
both vessel sewage and waste generated by marina restrooms and other
shoreside sanitary facilities. Package treatment plants are usually
small, prefabricated sewage treatment plants that provide secondary
treatment, generally utilizing the extended air mode of operation. In
this process, treatment is accomplished by introducing air into the
wastewater to encourage the growth of aerobic bacteria which digest the
sewage, providing a high degree of treatment.
Discharging vessel sewage to a package treatment plant should only
be considered by boating facilities with large treatment systems that
can handle the increased shock loading and chemical additives present
in this type of waste. The typical problems with such systems are
exacerbated by the nature of holding tank waste. Like septic systems,
package plants are designed to deal with sewage with a low solids
content, and the treatment process itself is highly dependent on an
environment that is not toxic to the treatment bacteria. Holding tank
waste is concentrated, which may raise treatment and sludge handling
issues. Normal difficulties with treatment variability would be
worsened by the slug flow nature of the discharges to a package
treatment plant, though they can be eliminated by ``bleeding'' the
influent into the plant. In addition, the waste may contain metals and
hydrocarbons which can destroy the treatment process in a small plant.
Based on these concerns, States may not want to encourage the
development of a multiplicity of small sewage treatment plants, due to
the variability of effluent quality as well as substantial difficulty
in ensuring proper operation and maintenance of the mechanical
components of such systems.
Septic Systems
Septic systems are the conventional on-site sewage treatment
systems throughout the United States. They consist of a septic tank
where primary treatment (physical operations) predominate. These
operations are floatation, settling, and the digestion of the sludge
that accumulates in the bottom of the tank. Effluent from the tank is
directed to a subsurface leaching system which provides additional
treatment by establishment of a biological crust; its resultant
permeability is a direct function of the BOD and suspended solids in
the effluent stream. Once effluent leaves the crust zone it enters a
soil environment where, if the septic system has been properly sited, a
number of treatment processes will result in a high quality final
effluent. The size and location of the leaching system (or drainfield)
is extremely important because of the quality of the final treatment is
highly dependent on the type and quantity of the soil through which the
effluent will pass.
In general, septic systems are not a favorable option for the
disposal of vessel sewage, because they are not designed to treat the
high solids content, high strength, and possibly toxic content of these
wastes. They are not very effective at removing trace organic
chemicals, and are ineffective at removing nutrients. The chemical
additives used to disinfect and deodorize holding tank waste may kill
the bacteria that aerobically digest the sewage, allowing solids to
pass through the septic tank and causing the drainfield to clog and
overflow. Nutrients leaching from the drainfield may stimulate algal
growth in receiving waters, which can reduce the amount of sunlight
necessary for submerged aquatic vegetation to grow and use up oxygen
needed for fish and other aquatic life. In marine waters nitrogen is
the nutrient most likely to cause these adverse effects, while
phosphorous is the problem in fresh water.
Vessel sewage should be discharged to a septic system only if no
other options exist and the system is specifically designed and sited
to receive such waste. This design includes: Using large tanks to
manage and ``bleed'' in increased flows from pumpout stations;
combining flows from ordinary bathroom facilities on-shore and the
pumpout stations to dilute pumpout wastes; providing two septic tanks
in series to help segregate solids in the first tank and increase
retention time in the system; a large single drainfield or use of
alternating drainfields, and proper siting to assure the leach field
does not drain into the coastal waters or contaminate groundwater. In
addition to following specific design criteria, septic systems should
be inspected regularly and properly maintained.
Section 7. Types of Marine Boat Sewage Pumpout Stations and Dump
Stations That may be Appropriate for Construction, Renovation,
Operation, or Maintenance, and Appropriate Location of the Stations and
Facilities Within a Marina or Boatyard
There are four basic types of pumpout stations on the market. Each
one has its advantages and disadvantages. Since every marina is unique,
there is no one solution that will work in all cases. Therefore, each
case should be examined individually, and the pumpout that will work
best in any particular situation should be selected. Costs for
equipment and installation can vary greatly, depending on need for
sewage lift stations to accommodate widely fluctuating tides, need for
special onshore holding tanks to hold concentrated waste, cost of
connection to a sewer system, and other factors. Stationary or portable
dockside pumps cost in the range of $2,000 to $10,000, and typical
complete installations may be as high as $20,000. Following is a list
of pumpout station types with a discussion of advantages and
disadvantages.
(1) Stationary pumpout unit: Stationary units include a connector
hose and pump, and are connected directly to a local or municipal
sewage treatment facility or a holding tank. The unit is usually
located at the end of a pier or floating dock, often near the fueling
facilities. Vessels access the pumpout station by approaching and
securing to the dock or pier. Advantages are convenience, efficiency
and speed of use. Principal disadvantage is that the unit restricts
pumpout service to a single area of the marina, which may cause
congestion.
(2) Portable pumpout unit on wheels: This unit may be a wheeled
device, consisting of a holding tank, hose and mechanical or hand pump,
that is pushed along a dock to the vessel's location to pump out vessel
sewage. The advantage is the unit is brought to the boat rather than
the boat to the station. When full of sewage, however, the unit can be
heavy and cumbersome. Since it must be moved from boat to boat, the
time required to complete the pumpout operation can be somewhat greater
than that of fixed units. Being able to move the unit can also be an
advantage for pumping out boats during slow weekdays, especially after
a busy weekend. The unit is also limited by its storage capacity.
(3) Portable pumpout unit on vessel: This unit is a boat with
pumpout station on board, consisting of a pump and holding tank, that
may be radio-dispatched or respond to a signal flag, to pump vessel
holding tanks. The advantage is the convenience of having the pumpout
station come directly to the boat.
(4) Remote operated multi-station system: This system has a pump
which transports wastes via a main sewer to central collection and
treatment. This unit can provide pumpout capabilities at any number of
locations throughout the marina. This system, which provides wastewater
collection anytime, combines the convenience and efficiency of fixed
units with the versatility offered by portables. This system must be
specifically designed to individual project requirements.
There are five basic types of pumps used in pumpout systems.
Following is a description of each.
(1) Centrifugal pump (rotary or impeller types): This pump works
when sewage in its impeller is spun to the outside of the impeller by
centrifugal force, which creates a low pressure area at the impeller as
it pumps. Most centrifugal pumps require priming. This pump is usually
employed in lift station situations.
(2) Reciprocating pump (diaphragm and piston types): This pump,
mechanical or hand operated, creates suction by mechanically lifting a
diaphragm up and pushing it down in a pump body. The diaphragm works in
conjunction with two or four check valves. As the diaphragm lifts, the
low pressure area under it causes sewage to be sucked into the body
through the inlet check valve; when it is pushed down the pressure
under the diaphragm closes the inlet check valve and forces sewage out
the outlet check valve. This pump is self-priming.
(3) Vacuum pump: This pump does not directly contact sewage, but
draws air out of a tank which creates the necessary low pressure area
or vacuum to cause the sewage to flow in. When the accumulator tank is
full, pressurized air enters the accumulator tank and the pressure
pushes the sewage out to a sewer or holding tank. This pump allows
pumping over longer distances.
(4) Flexible vein impeller pump: This pump has suction lift. It is
easy to repair and needs no priming. A switch device is needed to
prevent the pump from running dry and damaging the impeller.
(5) Progressive cavity pump: This pump consists of stainless steel
rotor or screw surrounded by a tight fitting rubber sleeve. As the
rotor turns the sewage is progressively moved to the discharge line.
This pump is self-priming.
Equipment failure can occur with any of the above equipment. Most
common causes are mechanical failure, followed by clogging of hose and/
or pump, loss of hose prime, and hose failure (Ross & Amaral, 1992).
In addition to pumpout stations, there are facilities to receive
sewage waste from portable toilets. A dump station consists of a
receiving receptacle for sewage from portable toilets, and includes
associated equipment and storage tank or sewer line connection. This
facility is not a land-based or floating restroom, but can be made a
part of such. Floating dump stations should be considered at mooring
fields and other strategic locations. The device typically includes a
receiving basin, which should be a minimum of 12 inches in diameter,
and with a lid that completely covers the receiving unit (to control
odors and insect access), with provisions for rinsing the portable
toilet following emptying of the contents. If the unit is designed to
drain, the drain should be a minimum of 3 inches in diameter and
equipped with an insect-tight cover. Dump stations should be equipped
with a washdown system to allow cleaning of the portable toilet. The
washdown system should be clearly marked as unfit for drinking water.
Wand attachments may be connected to a pumpout station to empty
portable toilets, rather than building a separate facility.
Following is a description of other equipment that is part of the
pumpout station.
Pumpout station holding tanks: Holding tanks should be sized
appropriately for the volume of sewage generated and the frequency of
removal of material from the holding tank. State and local requirements
may govern the size of holding tanks. Generally, a 1,500-gallon holding
tank can serve up to 100 boats with holding tanks. In terms of the
number of boats serviced with a normal removal schedule, the following
minimum sizes are suggested:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recommended
holding tank
Total number of boats serviced with holding tanks volume
(gallons)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-20.................................................... 300
21-40................................................... 600
41-60................................................... 900
61-80................................................... 1200
81-100.................................................. 1500
100+.................................................... 2000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pipes/hoses: Discharge piping should be rigid or noncollapsing
flexible, with locking connections. Corrugated or ribbed hoses are not
recommended. The line should be watertight and appropriately fastened
or secured to the dock or pier. Local building codes should be checked
for specific piping requirements, but the following materials are
generally accepted for pumpout station service: Polyvinyl chloride
(pvc), and polyethylene. Expansion joints should be included where
appropriate. Force main systems may require ``thrust blocks'' and other
security fastenings.
Fittings: A deck fitting (sewage removal fitting) is a flanged
fitting permanently mounted on the vessel and connecting to the onboard
holding tank. A connector is a nozzle or coupling permanently attached
to the suction hose of a pumpout station. An adapter is a fitting
designed to facilitate adapting a pumpout connector to a vessel deck
fitting.
When the requirement for vessels with an installed toilet to have a
certified marine sanitation device went into effect under 33 CFR 159 on
January 30, 1975, there was a requirement for sewage removal fittings
or adapters to be 1.5 inch for boats less than 65 feet in length. The
expected types of acceptable fittings included threaded, flanged, or
quick disconnect fittings. However, 33 CFR 159 was amended on January
3, 1977 to allow holding tanks to be certified by definition if they
store sewage and flushwater only at ambient air pressure and
temperature. As a result, boats have been put on the market with many
sizes of sewage removal connector fittings, requiring the use of
adapters in order to assure a clean, tight connection when a pumpout
occurs.
There are several adapters on the market today. A black rubber
nozzle is used by most boaters. Another adapter, the fuel hose fitting
or cam-activated connector, consists of a male portion which fits into
the connector, and a female portion which locks onto the male portion.
A suction nozzle or fitting such as a friction nozzle (right angle
preferred) or cam-activated quick connector positive locking attachment
should be provided on the end of the suction hose. Adapters should be
provided to fit the 1.5 inch discharge connector. A valve should be
provided on the suction hose at the nozzle. A valve should be provided
on the pump end of the suction line if the line is to be installed in a
manner such that sewage would discharge from the line when the pump is
removed for service. Positive locking connections on the end of the
discharge line should be provided to prevent it from coming loose
during discharge. The discharge line should be protected from freezing,
and prevented from leaking into the water. Suction hoses should be
equipped with a clear tubing or a sight glass on the suction end of the
hose to allow the pumpout station operator to determine when the
pumping is complete.
Other factors that should be considered when installing pumpout
stations/dump stations include the following.
Convenient location enhances use. Stationary pumpout stations
should generally be located as close to a boat off-loading point as
possible and/or where boats need to maneuver the least. The end of a
dock is a good location because it is accessible. Many facilities are
located at the fuel dock, so boaters only have to go to one location
for both of these activities. Water level changes should be considered
when installing pumpout stations.
Operation and maintenance: Proper operation and maintenance of
pumpout stations and dump stations are critical to provide adequate and
reasonable service. An individual should be assigned responsibility for
operation and maintenance of pumpout and dump stations. Consider
appropriate protective clothing, such as gloves, and hand washing, to
protect the operator. Washing facilities should be readily available.
Convenience for boaters and operators is a major factor. Hours of
operation for pumpout stations should be keyed to general operating
hours for vessels in the area. Specific maintenance and winter storage
requirements depend on the system and the location. However, the
following minimum maintenance is suggested to maintain sanitary
conditions: Use dedicated system for flushing and rinsing hoses; flush
hoses; pump clean water through the system, and empty into disposal
area, never onto the ground or into the water.
An event or hour meter could be installed on the pump to monitor
its use. Monitoring of pumpouts should be an integral part of a marina
management program to ensure that the facilities are operating
effectively. The following practices can be applied successfully to
maintain pumpout facilities: arrange maintenance contracts with
contractors competent in the repair and servicing of pumpout
facilities; develop regular inspection schedules; maintain a dedicated
fund for the repair and maintenance of facilities.
Section 8. Other Information That is Considered Necessary to Promote
the Establishment of Pumpout Facilities to Reduce Sewage Discharges
From Vessels and to Protect United States Waters
Public/private partnerships: Since approximately 80 per cent (based
on the 1986-87 National Boating Facilities Survey, IMI/URI conducted
for NMMA) of the marinas in the United States are privately owned,
States are encouraged to develop partnerships, within State laws and
regulations, with private marinas to construct pumpout stations at
these facilities.
``No Discharge Areas'': Sections 312(f) (3) and (4) (A) and (B) of
the Clean Water Act of 1987 enable States to apply to the EPA for
designation of certain water bodies as ``No Discharge Areas''. In doing
so, States must meet specific criteria outlined in 40 CFR 140.4
including demonstrating to the EPA Administrator that adequate and
reasonably available facilities exist for the safe and sanitary removal
of boat sewage. States should not consider ``adequate and reasonably
available'' under the Clean Vessel Act to satisfy all requirements for
determining ``No Discharge Areas'' under the Clean Water Act. A
separate review and determination would have to be made by the EPA for
Clean Water Act designation of a ``No Discharge Area''.
Holding tank bypass: Discharge of raw sewage from a vessel in U.S.
Territorial Seas (within the three mile limit) is illegal. Holding
tanks are frequently bypassed with the use of valves, commonly called
Y-valves. A valve may be installed on any marine sanitation device
holding tank to provide for the direct discharge of raw sewage when the
vessel is beyond the baseline of the Territorial Seas, which is more
than three miles from shore. The valve must be secured in the closed
position while operating in Territorial Seas. Use of a padlock, non-
releasable wire-tie, or removal of the valve handle would be considered
adequate securing of the device. The method chosen must be one that
presents a physical barrier to the use of the valve or the toilet. All
Y-valves should be standardized, so that the handle points in the
direction that the sewage flows and/or indicates the open and closed
position. The Y-valve should be place after the holding tank rather
than between the toilet and holding tank.
Upland and floating restrooms: Clean, well-maintained restrooms are
very desirable for boaters. Many boaters would rather use these when
available than use holding tanks. Restrooms should be constructed at
marinas and other strategic locations.
Rental Contracts: Marinas could add language in rental contracts to
prohibit discharge of sewage into the marina waters.
Disinfectants, perfumes: Industry should produce only products
which will not harm waste treatment plants or septic tanks. A symbol
should be placed on the label of these products indicating they may be
discharged into treatment plants or septic tanks if correctly used in a
properly designed treatment system.
Additional information: For additional information on pumpout
stations, refer to: (1) ``A Guidebook For Marina Owners and Operators
On the Installation and Operation of Sewage Pumpout Stations'',
Maryland Department of Natural Resources Boating Administration,
Coastal Technology, Inc., February 1990; (2) ``Commonwealth of Virginia
Sanitary Regulations for Marinas and Boat Moorings'', State Department
of Health, Richmond, VA, 1990; (3) ``Guidance for States and
Municipalities Seeking ``No Discharge Area'' Designation for New
England Coastal Waters'', Rev. 4/92, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 1, Boston, MA; (4) ``State of the Art Assessment of Boat
Sewage Pumpout Program in Washington State'', 12/91, Howard Edde, Inc.,
Bellevue, WA, for Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission,
Olympia, WA. For further information on pumpout stations and dump
stations, consult ``Marina Pump Out Facilities'', Joseph Wettemann, 1/
89, and ``Types of Pump Out Facilities'', Natchex, 7/92.
Dated: February 11, 1994.
George T. Frampton, Jr.,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 94-5530 Filed 3-9-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-M