Clean Vessel Act: Pumpout Station and Dump Station Technical Guidelines

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