A Luddite in America or Pottie Training for Idle Brits.

[ianwright]

What do I need to do to slide round the law on holding tanks in the US?
My little wooden Vertue has a Baby Blake but no holding tank, and no place to fit one. How can I at least look as though I'm legal?
If I remove the Baby and wire up the sea cocks will that do?
The Bucket from which I normally Chuckit lives out of sight in a locker. Am I safe to assume that what the eye doesn't see the heart doesn't grieve over?
Are the Rhode Island Poop Patrols particularly thick on the ground?
Peggie, I need you,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif
IanW

 

[Salty John]

If you have an installed Marine Sanitation Device and you are under 65 feet long it must be a type I, II or III MSD. Type I and II treat the sewage, Type III is the normal marine heads, such as yours, and it must be connected to a holding tank. If you have no installed MSD then the regulations do not concern you, they relate only to installed MSD's. A dinghy, for instance, would have no installed MSD and is, therefore, not required to comply with the MSD regs. So, remove the heads.
Of course, there are regulations concerning discharge of material from your boat and you should carry a placard that informs your crew and guests of these regulations - you can buy such a placard at all the boat stores. So, toss a bucket of s**t into your marina and you will be prosecuted for polluting the waters, but your boat will be legal as far as the potty regs are concerned.

 

[FullCircle]

ianwright,
Isn't this like cars that were built before seat belts were invented? No need to retrofit? Why not ring some official several hundred miles down the coast for advice, and then maybe you won't get rumbled!
Other than that I sympatise entirely. You would need to demount the Blake and put in a Porta Potti, which actually aren't as bad as they seem, esp if you use a bucket offshore for use. I have a Porta Potti on my 23 footer and its cassette is easy to carry ashore and empty. They don't smell if the right fluids are used.They are about 60 quid, but dont get the smallest one. A mistake.

 

[Anonymous]

Are the rules for foreign-flagged vessels the same as for US-flagged vessels? I don't know, maybe they are the same, but it doesn't follow that you necessarily have to be strictly in accordance with local regs. I see on the Cruising Association website Cruising Association that there is an Honorary Local Representative of the Cruising Association in Rhode Island with name address, email and phone.

 

[AndrewB]

You can't just ignore this, neither legally nor I think morally, given many US waterways are slow-flowing, environmentally sensitive and stressed.

Foreign registered vessels are not exempt. It is possible you might get a random check - I've heard it's most likely in Florida though even there it is not that common and it has not happened to us.

Previously, we fitted a temporary holding tank arrangement when we visited, not very efficient and smelly so we threw it out afterwards. Next time we plan to seal off the heads and rely on a PortaPotti which we now carry. I believe this is acceptable provided it is quite clear the heads are not in use.

PS Does this mean your ambitions now extend beyond the Azores? /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif

 

[ianwright]

[ QUOTE ]
Does this mean your ambitions now extend beyond the Azores? /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
Might do,,,,,, /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif Patience was built for a transatlantic trip and if I don't do it soon I'm going to be to old. The Jester Challange in 2006 looks like it might be fun,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
IanW /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

 

[danera]

How about you remove the baby blake & fit a chemical toilet in its place?

 

[PaulS]

There's no room for one of those little holding tanks that wraps around the base of a toilet?
If not then the seacock needs to be closed and lockeded in such a way as would prevent inadvertent opening while in protected waters. That would mean wiring it in place or padlocking it. No real need to remove it completely.

 

[Scubafill]

The yanks don't see to be too bothered about polluting the atmosphere and to date have not taken part in the Kyoto protocol yet they are worried about a single handed Yachtsman potential pollution!

Seems to me to be about not sh**ing on your own door step.

Sorry to bring politics into the forum, I just feel strongly about the USA global policing!

Phil

 

[HeadMistress]

Ian, m'love...unfortunately you will have to install some kind of tank to hold waste. RI waters are "no discharge" (holding tank fitted for pumpout or portable toilet only), and the authorities there are real sticklers about it. So you have only two viable choices: carry a small portapotty and lock the head door while in port...or find a place where you can put even a small tank, and plumb your toilet to it using a y-valve so you can still flush overboard at sea. The laws in coastal "no discharge" waters don't require that any ability to flush directly overboard at sea be removed, only "secured" while inside the "3 miles limit" (see page 4 in my book, which I know you already have).

Paul may have the best solution: one of the 5 gal tanks that wraps around the toilet bowl...it would require the least plumbing. You can see one and access all the installation instructions etc here: http://www.raritaneng.com/products/holding_tanks/compact_tanks.html You'll need to take some measurements to see if it will fit your Blake...they're designed to fit compact toilets only. I'd also check with Tek-tank to see if they have one.

jimdew asked, "Isn't this like cars that were built before seat belts were invented? No need to retrofit?" Unfortunately, no. Our marine sanitation laws (and Canada's) apply to ALL vessels...retrofitting IS required. In fact, years ago even the (now former) Royal Yacht Britannia had to be retrofitted with holding tanks for her first visit to the Great Lakes.

Lemain asked "Are the rules for foreign-flagged vessels the same as for US-flagged vessels?" Yes...they are. But that's also true for all vessels in all countries. A US flagged vessel is required to obey all the rules of whatever country it visits too.

So...when are you coming over???

 

[Salty John]

Peggy,
But it is true, is it not, that if Ian removes the heads (as he suggests) the boat will be legal? Regulations pertaining to MSD installation only apply if you actually have one. He could have a colostomy bag for all the authorities care, as long as he doesn't have an illegal MSD installation.
Hmmm. Colostomy bag. A strap-on personal holding tank. With a Y-valve for when you go ashore. Eureka!!

 

[Gunfleet]

Wosser Jester Challenge, Ian?

 

[ianwright]

Re: The Jester Challenge

Is a single handed transatlantic race for the sort of boats that started the
original OSTAR, Folkboats, Vertues, that sort of thing , because they can't
get an entry in the events that are run today.
I had a plan to sail the middle route direct to the US, the way that Vertue
XXXV went. Then heard of the Jester Challenge and thought that might fill
the bill just as well. My wife is OK with the idea, she likes the way the
house stays tidy while I'm sailing, so,,,,,,,,,, /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
IanW

 

[ianwright]

Ta Peggie,
All understood.
I really can't find room for a holding tank. Just as well 'cos I hate the
idea. It must be genetic, my grandad never used the inside loo even after he
had one fitted for Granma and the kids,,,,,,,
I think that I'll unbolt the Baby Blake, bucket and chuckit until I get to
the US and then run to the Porta Pottie shop for a good deal once I arrive.
Will that serve?
IanW

 

[BrendanS]

Diarrhea Dan

Peggie, you ever played this game? - if anyone can get the high score - answering questions on toilet related topics, it should be you!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/lookaroundyou/programmes/computers/dd.shtml

 

[HeadMistress]

Re: Diarrhea Dan...

OMIGAWD...ROFL!!! No, I hadn't seen it before...but it's a keeper. I've bookmarked it and shall pass it on to several friends in the industry! Who thinks up this stuff??? /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Ok...now for the serious replies...

"But it is true, is it not, that if Ian removes the heads (as he suggests) the boat will be legal? Regulations pertaining to MSD installation only apply if you actually have one."

Yes...that is true--except for "housboats," which are defined as "a vessel which, for a period of time determined by the State in which the vessel is located, is used primarily as a residence and is not used primarily as a means of transportation"--a state can require that marine sanitation equipment be installed on "houseboats"...which would include any permanently moored vessel or floating structure, but not any cruising vessel unless it sits in one spot too long. On all other vessels marine sanitation laws only apply to vessels that have a toilet and any other related equipment/plumbing already installed. However, just removing the toilet altogether is not the best solution, 'cuz it would be VERY hard to convince any inspector that someone staying aboard a boat with sleeping and cooking accomodations--but no toilet facility whatever--never has to go...so it's likely to get you closely watched. And while "direct deposit," either off the lee rail or while taking a swim, does not violate any marine sanitation laws, it could result in a charge of indecent exposure. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

So Ian, I think your plan to remove the Blake and set down a portapotty in its place once you make landfall here is likely to be the least expensive and most acceptable solution. Also a bit more pleasant to use than the lee rail when it's raining.