[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 47 (Thursday, March 10, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-5530]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: March 10, 1994]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
RIN 1018-AC06

 

Clean Vessel Act: Pumpout Station and Dump Station Technical 
Guidelines

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of final guidelines.

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

SUMMARY: These final technical Guidelines are being published in 
response to section 5605, Guidance and Notification, of the Clean 
Vessel Act of 1992, which requires the issuance of draft technical 
guidelines for public comment within 3 months after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, and the issuance of final technical guidelines 
within 6 months after the date of enactment. The technical guidelines 
should be used by States to conduct surveys and develop plans for 
pumpout stations and dump stations, to develop education/information 
programs, and to construct pumpout stations and dump stations.

DATES: These final technical guidelines are effective April 11, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the final guidelines may be obtained by mailing a 
request to the Division of Federal Aid, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. 
Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street, NW. (Mailstop 140 ARLSQ), 
Washington, DC 20240, or by picking it up at the Division of Federal 
Aid, Fish and Wildlife Service, room 140, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, 
Arlington, Virginia 22203.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Columbus Brown, Chief, Division of Federal Aid, (703) 358-2156.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Findings

    The Congress found that there is currently an inadequate number of 
pumpout stations for Type III marine sanitation devices (MSD) (holding 
tanks) where recreational vessels normally operate; and, sewage 
discharged by recreational vessels, because of an inadequate number of 
pumpout stations, is a substantial contributor to localized degradation 
of water quality in the United States.

Purpose of the Act

    The purpose of the Clean Vessel Act (Act) Pub. L. 102-587, subtitle 
F)'' is to provide funds to States for the construction, renovation, 
operation, and maintenance of pumpout stations and dump stations.''

Purpose of the Technical Guidelines

    The purpose of these guidelines is to provide States with technical 
information on adequacy of and appropriate types and location of 
pumpout stations and dump stations, disposal of sewage from these 
facilities, and waters most likely to be affected by the discharge of 
sewage from vessels. They also provide information to the States in 
completing the surveys, developing plans, and developing an education/
information program. The guidelines will let States know what options 
are available and provide them with basic information upon which to 
base their choices. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regional 
offices, regulatory agencies, equipment suppliers and marina operators 
are another valuable source of information. The guidelines, however, 
are not to be used as a design manual or a substitute for the 
preparation of a design for a specific facility.

Consultation

    As required in section 5605 of the Act, the Secretary of the 
Interior (Interior) has consulted with the Administrator of the EPA, 
the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere (NOAA), and 
the Commandant of the Coast Guard (USCG), in the development of these 
guidelines. In addition, Interior has consulted with coastal States, 
local municipalities, boat users, manufacturers of pumpout equipment, 
marina operators, conservation groups, and others in obtaining 
information necessary to develop these guidelines. Three scoping 
meetings were held in January 1993, with various constituents. A 
scoping document was sent to nearly 100 people, and 45 comment letters 
were received. Draft guidelines were published in the Federal Register 
June 17, 1993, Vol. 58, No. 115, pages 33447-33457, and comment letters 
were received. EPA, NOAA, and USCG assisted in the review of these 
comments and finalization of these guidelines.

Relationship to the Grant Process

    The technical guidelines are interim guidelines that will be later 
codified. They should be used by coastal States in conducting surveys, 
developing plans and education/information programs, and constructing 
pumpout/dump stations. However, grant guidelines will be needed for 
States to properly apply for funds under this grant program. The grant 
guidelines will provide criteria for the Fish and Wildlife Service 
(Service) to use in prioritizing grant proposals for funding. Such 
information as priorities, national pumpout symbols, other signs, fee 
restrictions, and monitoring success of projects, will be placed in the 
grant guidelines. Grant guidelines are being developed separately, and 
were published in the Federal Register July 8, 1993, Vol. 58, No. 129, 
pages 36619-36623. Funds are made available through a competitive 
process to coastal States to complete the surveys and develop plans, 
and, for all States, to apply for construction grants and education 
funds.

Statement of Effects

    These guidelines have been reviewed under EO 12866. The guidelines 
do not involve ``taking'' as described in Executive Order 12630. The 
guidelines allow eligible States to make decisions regarding the 
development and submission of proposed grants for surveys, plans, 
construction/renovation and education. Therefore, they are consistent 
with Executive Order 12612 on Federalism. The Department certifies that 
this document will not have a significant economic effect on a 
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) The effects of these guidelines occur to 
agencies in the States, Puerto Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands, American 
Samoa, the District of Columbia and the Northern Mariana Islands. Some 
small entities, mainly marina operators, may be the recipient of 
grants.

Summary of Comments and Recommendations

    In the June 17, 1993, Notice of Public Review of Technical 
Guidelines, all interested parties were requested to submit comments 
that might contribute to the development of a final rule for a 45 day 
period ending August 2, 1993. Appropriate State and Federal agencies, 
local governments, boaters and boating organizations, marina owners/
operators, marine equipment manufacturers and retailers, conservation 
organizations, and other interested parties were contacted and 
requested to comment.
    A total of 8 written comment letters on the proposed guidelines 
were received by the Service, 4 from State agencies, 1 from a boating 
organization, 1 from a marina organization, 1 from a conservation 
organization, and 1 from a marine equipment manufacturer. All comment 
letters made suggestions to clarify and recommendations to modify some 
of the language and guidance. One verbal comment suggesting 
clarification was recorded from a State official. In addition to the 
comments received, four changes were made. The first change is in the 
Backgrounds. Definitions were relocated to the Technical Guidelines 
portion, just ahead of section 1. The second change is in the Technical 
Guidelines portion, section 2., first paragraph, and the Technical 
Guidelines portion, section 4., first paragraph, third sentence. 
Surveys and Plans should be submitted to the appropriate Regional 
Office. Addresses are provided. The third change, Technical Guidelines, 
section 2., is an addition to the second paragraph, first sentence, to 
indicate that all marinas should be surveyed. The fourth change is an 
addition of two paragraphs in the Information Packet, section 6., Off-
Site Treatment, between the first and second paragraphs. These two 
paragraphs were inadvertently left out of the draft guidelines.
    A total of 44 issues were identified by the commenters. The Service 
considered all suggestions and recommendations. This final guideline 
revises the proposed guidelines based on the issues raised by the 
commenters and makes other changes to clarify the requirements in the 
proposed guidelines. Those comments adopted are included in the final 
guidelines in the appropriate Sections. The following is a discussion 
of the issues raised by the commenters, the Service's responses to 
those issues, and a summary of changes made to the proposed guidelines.
    Issue 1. Raritan Engineering Co., Inc.: Background, Findings, 
Raritan Engineering said the word ``may be'' does not correspond to the 
wording in the Act, which states that ``sewage discharged * * * is a 
substantial contributor * * *.''
    Response: The words ``may be'' have been deleted, and the word 
``is'' has been substituted.
    Issue 2. International Marina Institute (IMI): Other issues, 
Technical Guidelines, first paragraph, first sentence: The IMI states 
that the program should be handled by State administrators who know, 
and are known by, the marina industry. Inappropriate State program 
managers may not work as aggressively or successfully to facilitate 
pumpout installations. According to the IMI, some of the official State 
contacts have little or nothing to do with marinas or boat sewage 
controls. These contracts must move beyond traditional turf and foster 
inter- and intra-agency cooperation, planning and management.
    Response: The Service agrees that the State should select the most 
appropriate State administrators to ensure the highest interest in the 
program, and encourages them to do so. The Service has been working 
closely with each State administrator identified. However, the actual 
selection process, according to statute, is up to the Governor of each 
State.
    Issue 3. International Marina Institute (IMI): Technical 
Guidelines, first paragraph, second sentence: The IMI states that, 
unless the prohibition by a number of State laws to grant funds to 
private marinas is overcome, the intent of Congress will not be 
achieved. Guidelines need to be strengthened requiring grants be 
available to private facilities as well. The IMI said that States must 
identify restrictions on giving grants to private marinas in their 
application and what will be done to overcome this problem. States must 
explain in their plan how they will seek private applications and what 
proportion of the slip/mooring capacity is in public vs. private 
marinas. The IMI states that the Service should caution that inability 
of any State to give grants to private marinas will significantly lower 
that State's priority for funds. Funds should go to public and private 
marinas in approximate ratio to the public/private ratio in each State. 
Should the private marinas choose to not apply for grants during the 
first four years, then the IMI states that the funds should be released 
for use by the public sector in the fifth year of the program. 
Similarly, in the Information Packet, section 8. Other Information That 
is Considered: The IMI states that this Section should include language 
that such States with legal roadblocks to this public/private 
partnership must be required, as a condition of receiving any program 
funds, to change their law, and/or seek legal ways to bypass the 
serious impediment. IMI is very worried about this issue, and asks the 
Service to take affirmative action to keep private business a full 
partner in this program.
    Response: The Service agrees that it is very important for States 
to overcome any prohibition of States to fund private marinas, and has 
added language in the Technical Guidelines portion, first paragraph, 
fourth sentence, and in the Technical Guidelines portion, section 4. 
Plans, (4)(e). States are already required to identify any restrictions 
to funding private marinas in the technical guidelines portion, section 
4. Plans, (4)(e). The priority system identified in the final grant 
guidelines gives higher priority to those projects with public/private 
partnerships. Regarding the comment that funds should go to public and 
private marinas in approximate ratio to the public/private ratio and 
the comment that funds be released to the public sector in the fifth 
year if private marinas do not apply, priority will be given by the 
Service to those facilities that solve resource problems identified in 
the State's Plan rather than public/private ratios, which may not match 
resource problems. Regarding the suggestion that States with legal 
roadblocks to funding private marinas should be required to change 
their laws before funds will be granted to them, the Service has no 
legal authority to require States to change their laws.
    Issue 4. Center for Marine Conservation and States Organization of 
Boating Access, Technical Guidelines, first paragraph, second and third 
sentences, ``Both public and private marinas are eligible to 
participate in this program and should conform to these technical 
guidelines. Other marinas would not have to conform.'': Both groups 
asked what other types of marinas there are other than public and 
private?
    Response: This statement has been corrected to read that public and 
private marinas that participate must conform to these guidelines. 
Marinas that do not participate do not have to conform.
    Issue 5. Center for Marine Conservation (Center): Technical 
Guidelines, Definitions (4) Waste reception facility: In the Center's 
work with vessel-generated garbage and the Marine Plastic Pollution 
Research and Control Act, ``reception facility'' refers to garbage 
cans, dumpsters, and recycling containers at ports and marinas. 
``Adequate reception facilities'' are required under MPPRCA, and are 
referred to quite often. The Center wants to make sure that the phrase 
``waste reception facilities'' referred to in the Clean Vessel Act 
guidelines is not going to confuse boaters or marina operators who are 
also exposed to provisions of the garbage laws dealing with garbage 
reception facilities. The Center suggests using another term, such as 
``portable toilet dump station'' or ``sewage reception facility''.
    Response: The Service agrees and has changed the term to agree with 
the term used in the grant guidelines: Dump stations.
    Issue 6. Oregon State Marine Board (Marine Board): Technical 
Guidelines, Definitions (4) Dump Station: The Marine Board states that 
floating restrooms should be eligible for federal aid. They suggest 
that they are an eligible ``dump station'' which meets the intent of 
the Act to reduce vessel sewage pollution. Although landside restrooms 
should be ineligible, floating restrooms are not upland facilities and 
are used solely by boaters as dump stations. The Marine Board states 
that floating restrooms provide the only means to reasonably 
accommodate human waste from boaters using smaller recreational 
watercraft 12-18 ft. that do not carry portable toilets or do not have 
holding tanks.
    Response: The Service agrees, and has added language in the 
guidelines to incorporate this suggestion, provided the facility is in 
the water, not connected to the shore.
    Issue 7. International Marina Institute (IMI): Technical 
Guidelines, Definitions, (9) Coastal zone: the IMI suggests Printing 
out the full definition for coastal zone as given in the CZM Act of 
1972 under Definitions.
    Response: The Service agrees, and has printed it in full in the 
final guidelines.
    Issue 8. International Marina Institute (IMI): Technical 
Guidelines, section 2. Surveys, Facility Survey, second paragraph, 
first sentence: The IMI states that survey of marinas for pumpout 
stations/dump stations should indicate whether the facility is public 
or private.
    Response: The Service agrees and has added this survey question to 
the text.
    Issue 9. Michigan Department of Natural Resources (Michigan DNR): 
Technical Guidelines, section 2. Surveys, second paragraph, first 
sentence, discussion of survey by specific coordinates: The Michigan 
DNR states that the Clean Vessel Act does not require the States to 
identify marinas by North American Datum Standard, nautical charts, 
etc. According to the law, section 5603 entitled ``Charts (1) In 
General--the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere 
shall indicate, on charts published by the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) for the use of operators of 
recreational vessels, the locations of pumpout stations and dump 
stations.'' The Michigan DNR asks that this portion of the technical 
guidelines be taken out and be replaced by the specifications of the 
Act.
    Response: The Service agrees and has rephrased this portion to 
agree with the Act. The Service suggests that obtaining specific 
coordinates for marinas may be helpful to determine location of marinas 
for development of plans.
    Issue 10. International Marina Institute (IMI): Technical 
Guidelines, section 2. Boat Survey, third paragraph: The IMI states 
that most States do not have the ability to quickly determine which 
boats have toilets and what type MSD they are. The IMI states that the 
Service should request that the USCG require States to ask all boat 
owners if they have a MSD and what type, and include the data in their 
annual boating statistics reports. According to the IMI, States should 
list MSD use as part of their annual reports to the USCG and the USCG 
needs to correlate its own Federal documentation program (assume all 
documented vessels have toilets).
    Response: The Service recognizes that this information may not be 
readily available, and has advised States in section 2. of the 
technical guidelines and Information Packet portion of these guidelines 
that reasonable estimates are acceptable. The Packet also advises 
States of alternative means of obtaining this information. The USCG 
would require legislative authority to require States to ask all boat 
owners if they have a MSD and include the data in their annual boating 
statistics report, since the purpose of the report is now boat safety. 
Regarding the comment that the USCG correlate its own Federal 
documentation, this would not result in obtaining a sufficient number 
of boats for the States to adequately complete their survey.
    Issue 11. Oregon State Marine Board (Marine Board): Technical 
Guidelines, section 3., first paragraph, first sentence: The Marine 
Board requests the Service to add ``/or''. The sentence should read: 
``As a general guide, at least one pumpout station and `/or' dump 
station should be provided for every 300 to 600 boats (not considering 
length or toilets).'' In Oregon, according to the Marine Board, the 
number of boats under 26 ft. is over 90% of the registered boats in the 
State. Therefore, the requirement of one pumpout as the sole means for 
vessel waste reception and not including dump stations or other means 
of waste disposal for every 300 to 600 boats, regardless of boat 
length, would be impracticable to meet in Oregon, according to the 
Marine Board.
    Response: This formula is guidance only, not a requirement. States 
should use their judgment as to when this formula should be modified, 
or even used.
    Issue 12. International Marina Institute (IMI): Technical 
Guidelines, section 3. Adequate Pumpouts, first paragraph, first 
sentence: According to the IMI, this section must be directly linked to 
the number and location of boat toilets. Otherwise, States may count 
all boats whether or not capable of holding a MSD toilet. Boat count 
guide for the number of pumpout stations now includes all canoes, 
dinghies, rowboats, etc., and all other boats without toilets, which 
distorts boat toilet use patterns and location of pumpout needs. The 
IMI states that the word ``not'' in the following sentence should be 
deleted: ``As a general guide,  . . . 300 to 600 boats (not considering 
length or toilets).'' The IMI requests adding the following: ``The 
number and location of pumpouts be based on counts of boats with 
toilets and/or boats 22 feet in length and larger capable of having 
installed MSDs.''
    Response: The Service agrees that canoes, dinghies, etc., should 
not be included in the assessment of need, and has added language to 
that effect. The amended method now suggested in the guidelines is a 
general guide only, and can be further amended by adding the language 
suggested by the commenter, or by any of the factors listed in that 
Section.
    Issue 13. Oregon State Marine Board (Marine Board): Technical 
Guidelines, Section 3., first paragraph, second sentence: The Marine 
Board states that there needs to be a better breakdown of the 
requirement for vessel dump stations and pumpouts for marinas 
accommodating over 50 boats. The Marine Board suggests the following 
language: ``Marina with 50 slips or more that are capable of mooring 26 
ft. + boats install at least one pumpout station. Marinas with 50 slips 
or more that are capable of mooring 16-26 ft. boats install at least 
one pumpout or portable toilet dump station.''
    Response: This Section has been rewritten to incorporate the 
suggested language. Because the guideline is not a requirement, but 
guidance, which States should use or modify as needed, additional 
language has been added which clarifies this point. States should 
assess each particular situation to determine the pumpout stations and 
dump stations needed.
    Issue 14. Oregon State Marine Board (Marine Board): Technical 
Guidelines, Section 3., second paragraph: The Marine Board requests 
adding the following to better clarify where to install waste reception 
facilities: ``Waste reception facilities should be sited in conjunction 
with marinas, parking lot harbor or where vessels congregate or are 
used, such as transient harbors or launching ramps.''
    Response: The statement has been amended to better clarify where 
dump stations should be installed.
    Issue 15. International Marina Institute (IMI): Technical 
Guidelines, section 4. (3) Expected Results or Benefits: To the end of 
that sentence the IMI requests adding ``* * * and how results will be 
monitored and benefits will be measured.''
    Response: Although States have the option to monitor and measure 
benefits, and are encouraged to do so when necessary, requiring this 
step of the States goes beyond the intent of the Act and conveys an 
unnecessary burden to the States. There may be so many other factors, 
such as municipal sources of pollution, that it may be extremely 
difficult and expensive to measure the specific benefit of installing 
pumpouts. Pumpouts should be viewed as a Best Management Practice 
which, when installed, will help clean up the water by preventing one 
source of pollution.
    Issue 16. International Marina Institute (IMI): Technical 
Guidelines, section 4. (4) (c), Approach/Strategy: The IMI suggests 
mentioning here or in section 8. that grants should not go for endless 
repairs of existing pumpouts which have proven to be located in 
inappropriate sites, under failed government control, or which has a 
history of unreasonably low use and performance. The IMI states that 
the State strategy must address the question of whether or not an 
existing pumpout station is worth upgrading, and how demonstrated 
problem pumpout services will be upgraded or eliminated.
    Response: The Service agrees and has added language in section 4. 
(4) (c).
    Issue 17. International Marina Institute (IMI): Technical 
Guidelines, section 4. (4) (d): To the list following ``How States will 
ensure that * * *'' the IMI requests adding ``(iii) facilitate speedy 
permits for pumpout station construction or improvement.'' The IMI 
states that Federal and State agencies must facilitate, speed, and make 
less expensive the process of granting permits for pumpout stations. 
The IMI requests that the guidelines ask States to tell the Service how 
the permit process will be expedited, and to document the average time 
it takes for a pumpout permit. The IMI believes the Service should give 
high priority to those States who speed the process.
    Response: The Service encourages States to expedite the permit 
processes required by State and local governments, so that facilities 
will be installed as soon as possible. However, requiring the requested 
information is beyond the scope of the Act and the authority of the 
Service.
    Issue 18. International Marina Institute (IMI): Technical 
Guidelines, section 4. (4) Approach: The IMI requests adding ``(i) 
Describe methods to be used to measure program costs and benefits to 
the boating public; and (j) How the State will evaluate and monitor the 
program effectiveness and make changes to approaches as weaknesses and/
or unanticipated opportunities become apparent.'' The IMI believes that 
program evaluation needs to be given greater emphasis, to assure 
quality products.
    Response: Section ``(i) Describe methods to measure costs and 
benefits * * *'' is beyond the scope of the Act. Section (j) is 
included in the grant guidelines, Sec. 85.42(c), which requires States 
to ensure that facilities are operated and maintained and used for the 
stated grant purpose. A paragraph at the end of section 3. of the 
Technical Guidelines has been added to give program evaluation greater 
emphasis.
    Issue 19. Center for marine Conservation (Center): Technical 
Guidelines, section 5. Education/Information: The Center considers 
education as a critical component in the ability of the Clean Vessel 
Act to keep boater's sewage out of the water. They are concerned that 
all education efforts will be done State by State, and that there is no 
plan for national development of model education programs or materials 
which can then be used by the States. With the Center's marine debris 
work, they have seen the effective use of a national information 
office, and have seen that it minimizes duplication at the State level, 
and enhances coordination and communication between educators. The 
Center believes something similar for the Clean Vessel Act would 
enhance the ability of the Act and reduce costly duplication.
    Response: The Service is planning a workshop with Federal, State 
and local agencies, the marine industry, boaters, conservation 
organizations, and interested parties, early in 1994, to identify gaps 
in the education program, and responsibilities for filling those gaps. 
The Service encourages any organization interested to attend. Notice of 
the date, time, and place will be published in the Federal Register. In 
addition, the EPA is developing two reports on the subject, both still 
in draft: (1) Framework for a Public Outreach Strategy on Sewage 
Discharges from Boats and Marinas; and, (2) INTERIM REPORT: Summary of 
Federal Programs and Tools; Summary of State and Local Programs and 
Tools; Identification of Missing and Needed Information for Guidance 
Development on Boat and Marina Pollution Control; List of Contacts.
    Issue 20. Oregon State Marine Board (Marine Board): Technical 
Guidelines, section 6. (1) (a) and (b), discharge of wastewater to 
treatment facilities and transport by licensed septage haulers: The 
Marine Board has found that time and again with Oregon there has been 
non-acceptance of vessel wastes by many small municipal wastewater 
treatment facilities. Therefore, the Marine Board recommends that USFWS 
or others conduct a detailed study on the effects of vessel waste 
treated by municipal wastewater systems and provide States technical 
guidance on this matter.
    Response: When developing the State Plan, States are asked to 
identify any problems with municipal treatment plant operators 
accepting marine sewage. When the extent of the problem is ascertained, 
the Service will then consider solutions to the problem. At this time, 
a number of studies have been done to show that vessel sewage should 
not be a problem to waste treatment plants. Education may be the best 
tool for overcoming this perceived problem.
    Issue 21. International Marine Institute (IMI): Technical 
Guidelines, section 7., third paragraph, after first sentence: The IMI 
requests adding a sentence: ``When pumpouts are installed on or near 
boat fueling areas, explosion proof motors and switches must be used.''
    Response: The Service agrees and has added language to that effect.
    Issue 22. International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet, 
section 1. (5) Nursery Areas: The IMI states that this section is 
misleading, unsupported, and subject to regulatory abuse, and should be 
deleted. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC): 
The DEC requests expanding ``Nursery areas of indigenous aquatic life'' 
in section 1., item (5) to make reference to State and Federally 
designated significant habitats such as are designated in Coastal Zone 
programs.
    Response: The Service agrees that the definition is too broad and 
has deleted it, substituting the definition suggested by New York State 
DEC in the Information Packet and section 1. (5) of the technical 
guidelines.
    Issue 23. International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet, 
section 1., Discussion of the effects of vessel sewage on these waters, 
first paragraph, third sentence: The IMI requests changing the word 
from ``several'' to ``many'' in the sentence ``While vessel sewage 
discharges represent only one of `several' sources * * *''
    Response: The Service agrees and has made the change.
    Issue 24. International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet, 
Section 1., Discussion of the effects of vessel sewage * * * second 
paragraph, second sentence: The IMI requests adding the word 
``uncooked'' to text: ``Humans are put at risk by eating `uncooked' 
contaminated shellfish. * * *'' According to the IMI, cooking kills the 
pathogens.
    Response: Although the discussion is primarily about pathogens, 
cooking does not destroy all forms of contaminants. Therefore, the 
conservative approach is taken.
    Issue 25. International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet, 
Section 1., Discussion of the effects of vessel sewage * * * second 
paragraph, last sentence: The IMI requests deleting ``and swimming 
beaches'' from text. According to the IMI, the statement is not true 
for most beaches.
    Response: The Service agrees that the statement is not true for 
most beaches, and has modified the statement accordingly.
    Issue 26. International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet, 
Section 1., Discussion of the effects of vessel sewage * * * third 
paragraph, last 2 sentences: The IMI requests deleting the last two 
sentences: ``Sewage discharged from holding tanks will thus increase 
the biological oxygen demand (BOD) in the vicinity of boats. When this 
occurs in poorly flushed waterbodies, the dissolved oxygen 
concentration of the water may decrease (Milliken and Lee, 1990.'' 
According to the IMI, this is misleading and faulty logic. If kept, the 
IMI requests fully qualifying this statement as to the number of 
holding tanks which must be dumped to make it significant.
    Response: The sentences are general, informational statements. The 
statements have been qualified to ensure that they are not misleading.
    Issue 27. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health & 
Natural Resources (DEHNR): Information Packet, section 1., last 
paragraph, first, fourth and fifth sentences, and Information Packet, 
Section 6., second paragraph, last sentence: It is the DEHNR's 
understanding that zinc sulphate was voluntarily taken off the market 
10 years ago when its degrading effects on waste treatment were 
discovered. According to the DEHNR, plant operators and regulators 
should not be given the implication that heavy metals or other severe, 
lingering toxics can be expected. The holding tank chemicals in use 
today are generally biodegradable and if even marginally diluted, have 
little effect on treatment systems. The DEHNR requests that the 
Information Packet be written to describe why the waste can be treated 
in existing systems rather than helping to panic regulatory agencies 
that are not familiar with the research, or the rate and volumes of 
present demands.
    Response: Zinc sulphate has been deleted from the discussion, and 
the discussion modified in both places to indicate the lack of real 
problems noted from use of these chemicals.
    Issue 28. International Marina Institute (IMI): The IMI requests 
that the Service credit IMI for its contributions in the guidelines. 
Information Packet, section 3., first and second paragraphs: The IMI 
requests the following be appended to these paragraphs: ``(Ross & 
Amaral, 1992)'', to give credit for this text to the IMI survey of New 
England pumpout stations mentioned previously. Information Packet, 
section 7., third paragraph, ``Equipment failure * * * '': The IMI 
requests the following be appended to this paragraph: ``(Ross & Amaral, 
1992)''. Also, Information Packet, section 8., first paragraph, Public/
private partnerships: IMI totally agrees with the importance of private 
involvement, and requests that the record show that the 80% is based on 
the 1986-87 National Boating Facilities Survey IMI/URI conducted for 
NMMA.
    Response: Credits have been added for each of the sources.
    Issue 29. International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet, 
section 3., fourth paragraph, next to last sentence: The IMI requests 
deleting the sentence ``Some States require installation of pumpouts 
for all new marinas.'', because it may encourage regulators to mandate 
pumpouts everywhere without consideration of other factors, or add `` * 
* * regardless of any measured need or lack of potential use.'' at the 
end of that sentence.
    Response: The Service agrees, and has deleted the sentence.
    Issue 30. International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet, 
section 3. (2): The IMI requests changing the ``45%'' peak occupancy 
rate to ``40%'' in the sentence ``It is assumed every boat which is 
occupied * * * the occupancy rate during peak periods is 45%.'' Also, 
Information Packet, section 3. (3) Calculation for Estimating Need for 
Dump Stations, and, Calculation for Estimating Need for Pumpout 
Stations: The IMI recommends changing the peak occupancy rate from 
``45%'' to ``40%'', to match the sentence above in section 3. (2). 
According to the IMI, the 45% comes from the 1989 IMI national auto 
parking and boat use study of 142 public and private marinas in 24 
States. The highest use day (July 4th weekend) was 46% of all boats in 
use, but quickly dropped to 33% on non-holiday weekends. (Reference: 
Ross, N. Auto Parking in Marinas. International Marina Institute, 
Wickford, RI. 1989. 13 pp. According to the IMI, holding tanks are 
often pumped during the week. National engineering standards for 
parking lot size for theaters, restaurants, and shopping malls call for 
using the 5th highest use day. The IMI states that it would be more 
reasonable to use the 33% to be high weekend use rate. The IMI suggests 
using the difference between the 46% and 33% or 40%, which is the most 
reasonable national number in the formula calculations.
    Response: The Service agrees and has made the changes in the 
sentence and in both calculation formulas, giving credit to the source.
    Issue 31. International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet, 
section 3. (3): Hours of operation: The IMI requests adding ``peak 
boating season'' to ``* * * assumes facilities will be in operation for 
twelve hours per day during `peak boating season' weekends and * * *''.
    Response: The statement has been added to the sentence.
    Issue 32. Massachusetts Department of Fish, Wildlife and 
Environmental Law Enforcement (DEWELE): Information Packet, section 3., 
Calculation for Estimating Need for Pumpout Stations: The DFWELE 
suggests adding open brackets and open parentheses before ``No. of 
Boats 26'-40''', close parentheses after ``No. With Holding Tanks 
(50%)'', and close brackets after ``No. of Boats 40'+'', to clarify the 
calculation.
    Response: The Service agrees and has added the brackets and 
parentheses.
    Issue 33. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health & 
Natural Resources: Information Packet, section 6.: The DEHNR is 
concerned with the discussion of waste treatment alternatives. 
According to the DEHNR, relatively few marinas are in a stage of 
construction where major waste treatment system modifications are 
readily feasible. It is likely, according to the DEHNR, that a marina 
waste disposal system is already in place. The best use of the grants, 
according to the DEHNR, will be to install as many dockside pumpout 
units as possible. The DEHNR states that, under certain circumstances, 
funding new or replacement waste treatment systems may be appropriate. 
But in most cases, research indicates that existing systems should be 
able to handle anticipated loads.
    Response: The Service agrees with this assessment, and encourages 
States to install as many pumpout stations and dump stations as are 
needed as the highest priority. The discussion of waste treatment 
alternatives is informational, and not meant to imply a priority for 
new or upgraded waste treatment systems.
    Issue 34. International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet, 
section 6., Vessel Sewage Characterization, second paragraph, first 
sentence, Effects of holdings tank additives: The IMI asks the 
following: What are the harmful additives? What chemicals should be 
regulated? Where is the list of products which can be used? Is there a 
government sanctioned list? Who is doing testing on products for 
holding tanks? If no government list exists, can the Service encourage 
the States to regulate them? If the list exists, publish it.
    Response: This paragraph is an information paragraph which 
characterizes chemical holding tank additives. No statement is made 
that they are harmful or that they should be regulated. The Service has 
no list of products which can be used, and there is no government 
sanctioned list.
    Issue 35. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health & 
Natural Resources (DEHNR): Information Packet, section 6. On-Site 
Treatment: According to the DEHNR, North Carolina law does not allow 
holding tanks as an acceptable sewage treatment and disposal system.
    Response: A statement has been added to this section cautioning 
that marinas should consult State law before installing any of these 
measures.
    Issue 36. Center for Marine Conservation (Center): Information 
Packet, section 7., first paragraph, sixth sentence: ``Stationary or 
portable dockside pumps cost in the range of $2,000 to $10,000, and 
typical complete installations may be as high as $20,000.'' The Center 
believes these numbers sound high, and requests that the Service 
clarify what is covered here, and separate out costs for live aboard 
permanent installations.
    Response: This information was obtained from the marine industry. 
Average costs, including sewage connection and other accessories, for 
the first application period, were close to $20,000 per unit. Some 
costs were in the range of $60,000.
    Issue 37. International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet, 
section 7. (1) The IMI states that stationary units can also be 
discharged into septic systems if the State allows. According to the 
IMI, their advantages also include ``speed of use''.
    Response: Although it may be true that the unit contents may be 
discharged into septic systems, this type of connection is not 
encouraged. Speed of use has been added as an advantage.
    Issue 38: International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet, 
section 7. (2) Portable units on wheels, fourth sentence: While moving 
about the marina requires more time, the IMI believes that also is an 
advantage for pumping out boats during slow weekdays, especially after 
a busy weekend.
    Response: This advantage has been added.
    Issue 39: International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet, 
section 7. (3) Portable units on a vessel, last sentence. Range of 
operation is not a problem, according to the IMI, since one vessel can 
service an entire harbor of several marinas, etc.
    Response: The Service agrees. This statement has been deleted.
    Issue 40: International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet, 
section 7. (4) Remote operated multi-station systems, last sentence: 
According to the IMI, the last sentence talks about he problems of 
winter freezing. Freezing affects every pumpout in northern climates, 
but is less of a problem for multi-station systems because they 
generally depend on a vacuum tank system which keeps the lines free of 
all standing water. The IMI recommends dropping the issue, or making a 
general statement such as: ``All pumpout systems in northern States 
subject to freezing may need winterization.''.
    Response: The Service agrees. The statement has been deleted.
    Issue 41: International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet, 
section 7., next to last paragraph, fourth sentence, under Other 
Factors to Consider for Pumpout Stations, ``* * * and disinfect suction 
connection.'': The IMI states that this sounds like a good idea, but 
how do you do it? Would not the disinfectant used, e.g., chlorine, pose 
a more significant threat to aquatic life than sewage bacteria inside 
the hose connector? Recommend dropping the words.
    Response: The Service agrees. The statement has been deleted, and a 
suggestion added to use a dedicated system for flushing and rinsing 
hoses.
    Issue 42: International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet, 
section 7., last paragraph, third sentence under Other Factors to 
Consider for Pumpout Stations: The IMI states that the statements ``EPA 
has found * * *'' the need for ``maintenance contracts * * *'' and 
``dedicated funds * * *'', are misquoted from the final Nonpoint 
Pollution Marinas Chapter 5, boat sewage section pp 5-42 to 5-46. The 
IMI states that the statements are based on a preliminary practices 
draft which was discarded in the final text. If maintenance contracts 
were necessary anywhere, according to the IMI, they would be needed at 
the public marinas do not need such government required contracts or 
dedicated funds since they will fix the problem themselves or hire 
someone. The IMI recommends deleting the entire last sentence beginning 
``EPA has found * * *'', or specify that this ``only applies to public 
marinas which are unable to do their own maintenance.''.
    Response: The reference to EPA has been dropped. The paragraph has 
been kept as a suggestion.
    Issue 43: International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet, 
section 8., fifth paragraph, Rental Contracts: The IMI recommends 
adding ``waters'' to the text of ``(1) prohibit boat sewage discharge 
into the marina `waters' to keep the water clean.'' to otherwise allow 
discharge into a pumpout or sanitary waste system.
    Response: The word has been added.
    Issue 44: International Marina Institute (IMI): Information Packet, 
section 8., fifth paragraph, Rental Contracts: The IMI is not sure 
marinas can legally force boat owners to covert to holding tanks (2) 
without new legislation since Federal law allows use of all three types 
of MSDs. The IMI does not feel the Service can issue (2) in the 
Guideline at this time without a change in Federal law.
    Response: The Service agrees. The statement has been deleted.

Technical Guidelines

    The Fish and Wildlife Service will administer the Clean Vessel Act 
grant program through State agencies only. Both public and private 
marinas are eligible to participate in this program and should conform 
to these technical guidelines if they do participate. Marinas that do 
not participate in this program would not have to conform to these 
guidelines. The Service believes that public/private partnerships are a 
very important part of the success of this program, and will give 
higher priority to those projects that provide such partnership. 
Inability of a State to give grants to private marinas will result in a 
lowering of that State's priority for funds. Those States that have 
legal/administrative roadblocks are strongly encouraged to overcome 
them through changes in their law or procedures.
    These technical guidelines should be followed when doing surveys, 
developing a plan and education program, and constructing pumpout 
stations and dump stations. Technical guidelines are presented here by 
section. At the end of these guidelines, an information packet is 
presented, which contains a general discussion of each section and 
provides greater detail.

Definitions

    For the purposes of these technical guidelines the term: (1) Type 
III marine sanitation device (holding tank) means any equipment for 
installation on board a vessel which is specifically designed to 
receive, retain, and discharge human body wastes; (2) pumpout station 
means a facility that pumps or receives human body wastes out of Type 
III marine sanitation devices installed on board vessels; (3) 
recreational vessel means a vessel (a) manufactured for operation, or 
operated, primarily for pleasure; or (b) leased, rented, or chartered 
to another for the latter's pleasure; (4) dump station means an upland 
or floating waste reception facility specifically designed to receive 
wastes from portable toilets carried on vessels, or floating restrooms 
in the water, not connected to land or structures connected to the 
land, used solely by boaters, and does not include upland restroom 
facilities; (5) marina means a facility with ten or more wet slips and/
or dry land storage; (6) Parking lot harbor means a harbor which is 
home port to many boats kept on swing moorings or in marina docks. Most 
of the time, most of the boats are unoccupied and unused; (7) Transient 
harbor means ``destination'' harbor where boaters go during day trips 
or berth overnight; (8) Portable toilet means toilets that are not 
installed toilets. They are designed to be removed from a vessel and 
their contents emptied into shoreside receptacles; (9) Coastal zone has 
the same meaning that term has in section 304(1) of the Coastal Zone 
Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1453 (1). Section 1453 defines 
``coastal zone'' as follows: ``The term `coastal zone' means the 
coastal waters (including the lands therein and thereunder) and the 
adjacent shorelands (including the waters therein and thereunder), 
strongly influenced by each other and in proximity to the shorelines of 
the several coastal states, and includes islands, transitional and 
intertidal areas, salt marshes, wetlands, and beaches. The zone 
extends, in Great Lakes waters, to the international boundary between 
the United States and Canada and, in other areas, seaward to the outer 
limit of the United States territorial sea. The zone extends inland 
from the shorelines only to the extend necessary to control shorelands, 
the uses of which have a direct and significant impact on the coastal 
waters. Excluded from the coastal zone are lands the use of which is by 
law subject solely to the discretion of or which is held in trust by 
the Federal Government, its officers or agents.''
Section 1. Waters Most Likely To Be Affected by the Discharge of Sewage 
From Vessels
    Guidelines for States to use in identifying waters most likely to 
be affected by the discharge of sewage from vessels are those waters 
frequented by large numbers of boaters and include: (1) Sheltered 
waters that are generally poorly flushed systems; (2) Waters identified 
to be of National Significance; (3) Waters of significant recreational 
value; (4) Waters supporting designated shellfish harvest areas; (5) 
State and federally designated Nursery areas of indigenous aquatic 
life; (6) Waters designated by the EPA as ``No Discharge Areas'' under 
section 312(f)(3) and (4) (A) & (B) of the Clean water Act, and (7) 
Waters that do not meet State designated usage.
Section 2. Surveys of Pumpout Stations and Dump Stations
    Only coastal States are required to do a survey. Coastal States 
should submit surveys to the Federal Air official at the appropriate 
Fish and Wildlife Service Regional Office, as follows:
    (1) Region 1 coastal States include California, Commonwealth of the 
Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington: Deputy 
Assistant Regional Director, Division of Federal Aid, U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, Eastside Federal Complex, 911 NE 11th Avenue, 
Portland, Oregon 97232-4181, (503) 231-6128.
    (2) Region 2 coastal State includes Texas: Deputy Assistant 
Regional Director, Division of Federal Aid, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, P.O. Box 1306, 500 Gold Avenue, SW., Albuquerque, New Mexico 
87103, (505) 766-2095.
    (3) Region 3 coastal States include Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, 
Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin: Deputy Assistant Regional Director, 
Division of Federal Aid, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bishop Henry 
Whipple Federal Building, 1 Federal Drive, Fort Snelling, Minnesota 
55111-4056, (612) 725-3596.
    (4) Region 4 coastal States include Alabama, Florida, Georgia, 
Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, 
and the Virgin Islands: Deputy Assistant Regional Director, Division of 
Federal Aid, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1875 Century Boulevard, 
suite 324, Atlanta, Georgia 30345, 404/679-4159.
    (5) Region 5 coastal States include Connecticut, Delaware, District 
of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, 
New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Virginia: Deputy Assistant 
Regional Director, Division of Federal Aid, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, 300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley, Massachusetts 01035-9589, 
(413) 253-8501.
    Pumpout station/dump station survey: All marinas, moorages, docks, 
etc., should be surveyed. The survey should include whether the marina 
has pumpout stations, dump stations, or both; how many pumpout and dump 
stations; which ones are operational; and, the specific coordinates of 
each operational pumpout and dump station. For pumpout and dump 
stations not located in the above marinas, moorages, etc., such as at 
ramps, the specific coordinates should be obtained for these facilities 
also. Specific coordinates, i.e., latitude and longitude, should be 
reported in North American Datum 1983 (NAD 83) standard. Other 
alternatives include (a) State Plane Coordinate Values, and (b) A 
portion of a NOAA nautical chart identified by chart number, edition, 
and edition date that marks clearly the pumpout station/dump station. 
Specific coordinates for all pumpout and dump stations should be 
submitted to the appropriate Regional Office of the Fish and Wildlife 
Service for inclusion on NOAA charts. Suggested survey questions 
include the following for each facility: (1) Name and address of 
marina, moorage, dock, etc.; (2) whether the marina is public or 
private; (3) telephone number; (4) location of marina, etc., by county, 
water body and specific coordinates; (5) whether the marina has pumpout 
stations, dump stations, or both; (6) how many pumpout and dump 
stations; and, (7) whether the pumpout and dump stations are 
operational.
    Boat survey: The survey should include the following: (1) Total 
number of boats by water body and county; (2) How many boats have Type 
III MSD holding tanks; (3) How many boats have portable toilets.
    A complete survey of all boaters is not necessary. States should 
obtain only as much information as is necessary to determine, within 
reasonable confidence limits, numbers of boats, how many boats have 
Type III MSD holding tanks or portable toilets, and where boaters are 
most likely to congregate by water body and county. Sample surveys are 
acceptable. Recent surveys are acceptable if they answer all the 
questions needed.
Section 3. What Constitutes Adequate and Reasonably Available Pumpout 
Stations and Dump Stations in Boating Areas
    As a general guide, at least one pumpout station and dump station 
should be provided for every 300 to 600 boats over 16 feet length 
overall. This is not a requirement, but guidance only, and should be 
modified depending on the situation. For instance, if most boats in an 
area are under 26 feet, many more dump stations would be required than 
pumpout stations. Another question is the minimum number of boats that 
should have pumpout stations and dump stations. Again, there is no one 
answer. it is suggested that marinas with 50 slips or more that are 
capable of mooring 26 feet + boats have access to at least one pumpout 
station, and marinas with 50 slips or more that are capable of mooring 
16-26 feet boats have access to at least one dump station. This does 
not mean that every marina with 50 + slips should have a pumpout 
station or dump station. Where marinas are adjacent (within two miles 
of each other), pumpout stations can be shared. Other factors should be 
considered, such as whether the marina is a parking lot or transient 
harbor, or the amount of fuel dock use. In determining the installation 
of any pumpout station or dump station, such factors as boat size, 
boating use patterns, coastal water characteristics, sensitive areas, 
flushing capacity, etc., should play a large role in establishing needs 
for facilities. Due to the variability in each State, States must have 
the flexibility to provide criteria that addresses their specific 
needs. See the discussion in the Information Packet, section 3, for 
alternative approaches to determining need.
    Dump stations should be sited in conjunction with pumpout stations, 
but should also be located where there are no pumpout stations but 
where boats with portable toilets congregate or are used, such as 
launching ramps.
    Program evaluation should be given great emphasis to assure quality 
products. States should evaluate and monitor the program effectiveness 
to determine that facilities are operated and maintained, and used for 
their intended purpose. Changes to approaches should be made as 
weaknesses and/or opportunities become apparent.
Section 4. Plans for Construction Pumpout Stations and Dump Stations
    Only coastal States are required to develop a plan. Coastal States 
should work with the recreational marina industry and others in 
developing the plan. Coastal States should submit the plan to the 
appropriate Fish and Wildlife Service Regional Office, same address as 
in section 2 above. Following is an outline which should be used by 
States when developing the plan:
    (1) Need. This section should establish the justification for the 
proposed work based on (a) the results of the surveys of existing 
pumpout stations and dump stations and the number of recreational 
vessels; (b) that part of the guidance relating to determining the 
adequacy and reasonable availability of pumpout stations and dump 
stations and, (c) that part of the guidance describing the waters most 
likely to be affected by the discharge of sewage from vessels.
    (2) Goals and objectives. The purpose of the plan should be to 
ensure the availability of adequate and reasonably available pumpout 
stations and dump stations to the boating public throughout the coastal 
zone of a State.
    (3) Expected results or benefits. This section should describe in 
general how water will be improved by making pumpout and dump stations 
available.
    (4) Approach. In this section, describe the following: (a) How the 
plan addresses all coastal zone waters of the State, and gives priority 
to waters most likely affected; (b) How the plan complements plans of 
adjacent States for shared waters; (c) The strategy for locating and 
constructing, renovating and maintaining pumpout and dump stations. 
Address the question of whether or not an existing pumpout or dump 
station is worth upgrading, and how demonstrated problem facilities 
will be upgraded or eliminated. Include the general location and 
priority of projects; (d) How States will ensure that (i) waste will be 
disposed of properly, and (ii) that municipal waste treatment plants 
will accept waste; (e) What proportion of the slip/mooring capacity is 
in public vs. private marinas, how States will seek public/private 
partnerships for siting, constructing and operating pumpout stations 
and dump stations, any issues/problems, such as legislative/regulatory 
barriers, and what will be done to overcome these barriers; (f) 
Innovative techniques to increase the availability and use of pumpout 
stations/dump stations; (g) Approaches to educate and inform the public 
and the boating industry on the sue of, and need for, disposal of 
vessel waste; and, (h) Total estimated cost of the Statewide plan.
Section 5. Education/Information
    Guidelines for States to consider when developing an education/
information plan include:
    (1) Audience: Consider six audiences when developing your 
education/information program regarding vessel sewage disposal, 
handling, and treatment, as follows: (a) Boat owners and operators; (b) 
Marina owners and operators; (c) Sewage treatment plan owners and 
operators; (d) Federal (where applicable), State and local governmental 
authorities and organizations; (e) Boating supply and retailers; (f) 
The general public.
    (2) Communication media: There are a variety of media that States 
may use for disseminating this information. Common methods to consider 
are: brochures, workshops/symposiums, educational videos, TV/radio, 
signs, boat shows, etc. Innovative methods are encouraged.
    (3) Distribution: States have options for distribution of 
educational information related to boating and pumpout issues. Options 
include magazines, radio public interest spots, environmental groups, 
association and federation newsletters, National Estuary Program 
forums, State and local education programs, local citizens groups, and 
student groups. New and innovative ways of educating the boating 
community and the general public are encouraged.
Section 6. Appropriate Methods for Disposal of Vessel Sewage From 
Pumpout Stations and Dump Stations
    Disposal methods will vary among States depending on a number of 
factors, including: State and local sanitation codes; the number of 
recreational vessels and where the vessels are concentrated; the 
availability and geographic proximity of existing treatment facilities 
to boating centers; and hydrogeologic characteristics, including soil 
types and groundwater flows towards drinking water sources and these 
coastal waters. Depending on these factors, States may consider the 
following methods: (1) Off-site treatment: (a) Discharge to a public 
wastewater collection system and treatment facility; (b) discharge to a 
holding tank with removal and transport by a person licensed to haul 
septage waste to a municipal septage receiving/treatment facility; (2) 
On-site treatment at marinas: (a) Discharge to a package treatment 
plant; (b) discharge to a septic system.
Section 7. Types of Marine Boat Sewage Pumpout Stations and Dump 
Stations That May Be Appropriate for Construction, Renovation, 
Operation, or Maintenance, and Appropriate Location of the Stations and 
Facilities Within a Marina or Boatyard
    Pumpout stations and dump stations should provide an efficient 
means of removing sewage from boats and a means of disposing of that 
sewage in a safe and sanitary manner. These facilities should include 
all the equipment, structures, and disposal facilities necessary to 
ultimately discharge or dispose of boat sewage in an efficient, safe 
and sanitary manner without causing an actual or potential public 
health hazard. Pumpout stations should include equipment for rinsing 
boat holding tanks. Pumpout stations and dump stations should be 
adequate to meet the peak use demand for such services. Facilities 
should be operated and maintained to provide adequate service, and to 
be maintained to function as intended.
    Pumpout stations and dump stations should be reliable, corrosion 
resistant, easy to use, neat and tidy to clean and use, conveniently 
located, with low maintenance. Pumps should be specifically designed 
for handling sewage. Land-based restrooms are not an acceptable option 
for emptying portable toilets.
    All pumps should be safe, functional and efficient. Motors and 
switches should be ignition protected. Pumps should be able to pump 
against the maximum head developed by elevation change and line losses. 
In addition, the suction connection to the boat should be a tight fit 
and adjustable by adapters to service boat discharge connections. Pumps 
should be able to transport flows out of the holding tank. Pumps 
exceeding 45 gallons per minute may cause tanks to collapse.
    Factors in determining pumpout station holding tank capacity 
include boat size and use patterns. Sizing should be done on a case-by-
case basis using documented demand, if possible. Holding tanks should 
be designed and installed to meet local regulations.
    For all vessels manufactured after December 31, 1994, a standard 
deck fitting for removal of sewage should be constructed to the 
``International standard ISO 4567 Shipbuilding--Yachets--Waste water 
fittings'' for holding tanks, which is a female 38.1 mm (1\1/2\'') pipe 
size with 11 threads per 25.4 mm (inch). These threads could utilize a 
quick-disconnect or cam lock fitting. For existing vessels, an adapter, 
such as a tapered cone, should be used for non-standard deck fittings. 
All pumpout connectors should fit the standard deck fitting.
    For all vessels manufactured after December 31, 1994, because of 
possible confusion between waste, fuel and water deck fittings, the 
deck fittings should be identified with the words ``WASTE'', ``GAS'', 
``DIESEL'', and ``WATER'', and color code the fittings with black caps 
for waste, red caps for gas and diesel, and blue caps for water.
    The ultimate location for the station should be based on the unique 
conditions of the marina, boatyard, mooring field or other anchorage. 
Stationary pumpout stations should be located for the convenience of, 
and to encourage boaters to use the facility. Mobile pumpout stations 
should have reasonable access to boaters.
Section 8. Other Information (No Technical Guidelines)

Information Packet

    This information packet is not technical guidelines. It has been 
recommended to provide additional information to States, and to marinas 
and others who participate in this program. The information packet 
presents general information on surveys, plans, education/information, 
pumpout facilities and other information helpful in promoting 
establishment of facilities. It provides a more detailed discussion of 
the technical guidelines, with examples and explanations. This 
information packet is also by Section, which corresponds to the 
sections in the technical guidelines.
Section 1. Waters Most Likely To Be Affected by the Discharge of Sewage 
From Vessels
    The following coastal waters, including the Territorial Seas, 
estuaries, bays, and sounds, and then U.S. lakes and rivers as defined 
below, are considered waters most likely to be affected by the 
discharge of sewage from vessels. These definitions are not ranked in 
priority order.
    (1) Sheltered waters that are generally poorly flushed systems.
    (2) Waters of National significance: Waters identified by the 
Environmental Protection Agency under the National Estuary Program, 
waters identified by the NOAA under the Estuarine Reserve program, and 
Marine Sanctuaries program where appropriate.
    (3) Waters of significant recreational value: A water body with 
unusual value as a resource for outdoor recreation activities, e.g., 
fishing, boating, canoeing, water skiing, swimming, scuba diving, or 
nature observation. The significance may be in the intensity of present 
usage, in an unusual quality of recreational experience, or in the 
potential for unusual future recreational use or experience.
    (4) Shellfish harvest waters: Waters designated as shellfish 
producing and harvesting areas.
    (5) Nursery areas of indigenous aquatic life: State and federally 
designated significant habitats such as are designated in Coastal Zone 
programs.
    (6) Waters designated by the EPA as ``No Discharge Areas'' under 
Section 312(f)(3) and (4)(A) & (B) of the Clean Water Act.
    (7) Waters that do not meet State designated usage.

Discussion of the Effects of Vessel Sewage on These Waters

    Waters previously designated by the EPA under the Clean Water Act 
as ``No Discharge Areas'' are eligible for renovation, maintenance and 
further construction funds under this program. The discharge of sewage 
from boats may degrade water quality by (1) introducing microbial 
pathogens into the environment and (2) locally increasing biological 
oxygen demand (U.S. EPA, 1985). While vessel sewage discharges 
represent only one of many sources of point and non-point pollution, 
the number of boats using coastal waters has increased substantially 
during the past decade. The contribution of boat sewage to total 
pathogen loadings and local BOD has grown proportionately.
    A potentially serious problem resulting from vessel sewage 
discharges is the introduction of disease-carrying microorganisms from 
fecal matter into the coastal aquatic environment. Humans are put at 
risk by eating contaminated shellfish and by swimming in contaminated 
waters. The major disease-carrying agents are bacteria and viruses, and 
the most common serious ailment is acute gastroenteritis. Other 
waterborne diseases include hepatitis, typhoid, and cholera (Milliken 
and Lee, 1990). The indicators used to detect sewage pollution are not 
the pathogens themselves, but, rather, coliform bacteria. These 
bacteria are always present in the human intestinal tract and are thus 
considered reliable indicators of the presence of human waste (U.S. 
EPA, 1985). Studies conducted in Puget Sound, Long Island Sound, 
Narragansett Bay, and Chesapeake Bay have demonstrated that boats can 
be a significant source of fecal coliform bacteria in coastal waters, 
particularly in areas with high boat densities and low hydrologic 
flushing (Milliken and Lee, 1990; JRB Associates, 1980). If coliform 
levels exceed allowable thresholds, shellfish beds and swimming beaches 
may be closed to minimize the threat of public health problems. In 
addition, shellfish beds and some swimming beaches in the immediate 
vicinity of marinas are often closed because of the potential of 
contamination from vessel sewage discharges.
    These organic-rich wastes also have the potential to depress oxygen 
levels as they decay in the marine environment. Biological oxygen 
demand is a measure of the dissolved oxygen required to decompose the 
organic matter in the water by aerobic processes. When the loading of 
organic matter increases, the BOD increases, and there is a consequent 
reduction in the dissolved oxygen available for respiration by aquatic 
organisms (U.S. EPA, 1985). Although the volume of wastewater 
discharged from boats is relatively small, the organics in the 
wastewater are concentrated, and therefore the BOD (1700-3500 mg/l) is 
much higher than that of raw municipal sewage (110-400 mg/l) or treated 
municipal sewage (5-100 mg/l) (JRB Associates, 1981). Sewage discharged 
from holding tanks will thus increase the BOD in the vicinity of boats. 
When this occurs in poorly flushed waterbodies, the dissolved oxygen 
concentrations of the water may decrease (Milliken and Lee, 1990). The 
amount of the decrease in dissolved oxygen concentrations, and 
therefore the significance to the water, depends on the amount of 
sewage discharged into the system.
    Chemical additives such as chlorine and formaldehyde are used to 
disinfect or control odors of on-board sewage. There is little 
indication that these chemicals have any harmful effects on the 
environment. The holding tank chemicals in use today are generally 
biodegradable and, if even marginally diluted, have little effect on 
treatment systems. No heavy metals or other severe, lingering toxics 
can be expected. However, some discussion of possible problems should 
be mentioned here. Of the two major disinfectant chemicals used--
chlorine and formaldehyde--only chlorine has been shown to be toxic in 
the aquatic environment. While formaldehyde is considered a toxic 
substance, it is completely miscible in water and is readily 
degradable. While a direct link between MSD holding tank disinfectants 
and effects on the environment has not been documented, the presence of 
these chemicals in sufficient concentrations may be of concern (JRB 
Associates, 1981). Use of these chemicals as directed by the 
manufacturer should not result in problems. However, since the amounts 
of chemicals added are controlled by the boat owner or operator, excess 
use may occur.
Section 2. Surveys of Pumpout Stations and Dump Stations
    The Clean Vessel Act of 1992 calls for surveys by coastal States 
within three months of notification to the States of the final 
technical guidelines to determine: (1) The number and location of all 
operational pumpout stations and dump stations at public and private 
marinas, mooring areas, docks, and other boating facilities within the 
coastal zone of a State; and (2) the number of recreational vessels in 
the coastal waters of the State with Type III marine sanitation devices 
(holding tanks) or portable toilets and the areas where those vessels 
congregate.
    Survey information may be obtainable from the boat registration 
process or files; contacts with trade associations or boating 
organizations; from national surveys if available; or from mail or 
telephone surveys of boaters or marina/mooring field facility 
operators. Some States have surveyed boaters at marinas on high 
concentration days. The U.S. Coast Guard, telephone 202/267-1497, can 
provide the following information regarding Documented Vessels (5 net 
tons and larger): The vessel's port of documentation, vessel length, 
beam, net tonnage, and whether or not the vessel is equipped with 
mechanical propulsion.
Section 3. What Constitutes Adequate and Reasonably Available Pumpout 
Stations and Dump Stations in Boating Areas
    Factors affecting pumpout use: Potential demand for pumpouts and/or 
dump stations is a function of several variables. First is the number 
of boats of a size that use sewage holding tanks or portable toilets 
and where they are stored. Second, accessibility of pumpouts and dump 
stations affects their use. Distance from routes of travel or from the 
home port as well as the likely waiting time once at the facility can 
affect the willingness of boaters to use pumpouts and dump stations. A 
third factor to consider is boat use. High use at moorages is related 
to transient versus ``parking lot'' customers, year-round versus 
seasonal users, and the frequency of overnight use of boats. High boat 
use is seasonal, correlated with good weather, weekends and holidays. 
Fourth is the fee charged, with higher use related to lower fees (Ross 
& Amaral, 1992).
    High use of pumpouts and dump stations has also been related to 
aggressive management practices, active enforcement of ``No Discharge 
Areas'', perception of need by the public (related to the environmental 
sensitivity of the area and educational efforts), and good maintenance 
(Ross & Amaral, 1992).
    Determining adequate and reasonably available station/facility 
needs: Boat numbers, boat size, boating use patterns, numbers and 
distribution of existing facilities, and where boats are kept during 
boating season (i.e., in a marina, yacht club, private dock, mooring, 
home on a trailer, etc.), determine the need for pumpout stations and 
dump stations. Moorages that receive high transient use, have mooring 
fields for large boats, are visited by large numbers of boats for 
refueling, and/or have a large number of people sleeping overnight or 
living on their boats should have high priority. Yacht clubs, boatyards 
and large capacity private docks should also be considered for priority 
installation of pumpouts and dump stations. Other situations that might 
be considered for the installation of facilities include marinas that 
provide fuel or service vessels equipped with MSD holding tanks. In 
addition to distributing stations/facilities in the above types of 
boating moorages, additional stations/facilities may be warranted where 
boat use impacts poorly flushed bays, coves, or sloughs and 
environmentally sensitive sites. After new facilities have been 
installed, subsequent patterns of use will indicate where and if 
additional pumpouts are needed. Periodic surveys should be conducted to 
ensure adequate numbers of pumpout stations and dump stations exist for 
boaters in the future.
    Requirements for pumpout and dump stations vary by State and 
harbor. Some examples are as follows: Delaware requires a pumpout for 
marinas harboring 100 or more boats with marinas of 25-100 sharing a 
pumpout and those with less than 25 not required to install facilities. 
For New England, EPA Region I guidelines suggest a pumpout for 300-600 
boats with toilets. A minimum of one pumpout per 300 boats with toilets 
is recommended in transient harbors with a high percentage of large 
vessels, while one pumpout per 600 boats with toilets should be 
provided in ``parking lot'' harbors where most boats are less than 25 
feet long. In California's Richardson Bay, the pumpout guidelines is 
one station for every 300 boats. Launching ramps, marinas, etc., that 
cater to small craft (under 26 feet) or are too shallow for larger 
vessels may not need pumpouts, but may still require dump stations to 
receive portable toilet waste.
    EPA's assessment (EPA, 1981) estimated that 20% of the boats 
between 16 and 26 feet, 50% of the boats between 26 and 40 feet, and 
all of the vessels over 40 feet had installed toilets with some type of 
MSD. So, if exact data are not available, an estimate could be 
calculated. The following is a method for estimating Statewide need for 
pumpout stations and dump stations (McKiernan, pers. comm.). It is not 
intended as a guide for determining requirements for a specific marina 
or harbor. The following assumptions underlie this method and can be 
adjusted where statistically valid information is available relating to 
a State's unique boating population characteristics.
    (1) Given the availability of boat length information gathered 
during boat registration, assumptions can be made regarding the type of 
on-board sanitation equipment.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Number                                                      
             with                                                       
  Boat     toilets                      Type of system                  
 length   (percent)                                                     
                                                                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
16'-26..         20  Portable toilets.                                  
26'-40..         50  Holding tanks.                                     
40'+....        100  Holding tanks.                                     
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) It is assumed every boat which is occupied will require service 
once a weekend and that the occupancy rate during peak periods is 40% 
(Ross, N. Auto Parking in Marinas, IMI, Wickford, RI, 1989).
    (3) This method also assumes facilities will be in operation for 
twelve hours per day during peak boating season weekends and that the 
average time to service a boat's system will be 15 minutes for holding 
tanks and 5 minutes for portable toilets. Therefore:

TN10MR94.020


TN10MR94.021

Section 4. Plans for Constructing Pumpout Stations and Dump Stations
    The Clean Vessel Act calls for coastal States, within six months 
after notification of the final technical guidelines, to develop a plan 
for any construction or renovation of pumpout stations and dump 
stations. For efficiency of review and approval by the Fish and 
Wildlife Service, coastal States should complete the plan in the 
standardized format identified in the technical guidelines.
Section 5. Education/Information
    A clearly defined education/information program that will support 
the timely implementation of a State plan should be presented by the 
State as a part of that plan. This guidance provides States with some 
ideas and information useful in developing an education/information 
program effective at informing the public, the boating community, the 
boating industry, local government officials, public interest groups, 
and other audiences the State identifies. Ultimately, the State 
education/information program should provide information and 
understanding that will encourage the use of and installation of 
pumpout and dump stations.
    Education of the boating, marina owner, and vessel sewage handling 
and treatment communities is important to the potential success of this 
program. An effective education/information program will help to 
realize both short term and long term goals of the Act. The goals of 
education are as broad as the audiences they should be targeted to 
reach, yet, these goals can be achieved with increased dialogue between 
and information to these groups.
    Six audiences should be considered when developing an education/
information program regarding vessel sewage disposal, handling, and 
treatment, as follows: (1) Boat owners and operators; (2) Marina owners 
and operators; (3) Sewage treatment plant owners and operators; (4) 
Federal (where applicable), State and local governmental authorities 
and organizations; (5) Boating supply and retailers; (6) The general 
public.
    There are a variety of media that States may have available for 
disseminating this information. Common methods to consider are; 
brochures, workshops/symposiums, educational videos, TV/radio, signs, 
boat shows, etc. Innovative methods are encouraged.
    Issues to consider when developing education/information material 
targeted to a specific audience:
    Issues on which education/information programs for boat owners and 
operators, as well as, boating supply and retailers, might focus would 
include: (1) Environmental impacts of boater sewage and the benefits of 
pumping out at a pumpout station and using a dump station; (2) How a 
pumpout station operates; (3) Pumpout hose connections/adapters; (4) 
Pumpout locations and fees; (5) ``Green'' boat toilet chemicals, i.e., 
short term biodegradable or less environmentally-damaging treatment 
chemicals. Encourage manufacturers through demand to market only 
environmentally responsible products; (6) Proper operation and 
maintenance of boat toilets; (7) The value of responding to boater 
surveys and requests for information.
  
    Marina owners and operators are important participants in the 
implementation of this program. This group is making a commitment for 
the long term by agreeing to install, maintain, and operate pumpout and 
dump stations. Issues States should consider (where applicable) when 
developing education/information programs for marina owner and 
operators include: (1) Benefits to marinas under this program; (2) The 
application process for receiving funds to construct, renovate, 
maintain, and operate pumpout and dump stations; (3) What are adequate 
and reasonably available pumpout facilities; (4) Reasonable fees; (5) 
Environmental benefits of providing pumpout stations and dump stations; 
(6) How to obtain a permit for a municipal hookup and options for 
disposal of pumpout waste; (7) Where to locate pumpout and dump 
stations; (8) Methods of encouraging boater compliance with pumpout 
requirements; (9) Types of pumpouts and dump stations currently on the 
market; (10) Encourage manufacturers to provide demonstrations for and 
training of marina personnel responsible for operating these devices; 
(11) Highlighting Those marinas that have done an excellent job in 
installing and maintaining facilities.
    Wastewater collected from pumpout facilities must be discharged 
from the marina to an appropriate treatment facility. Waste treatment 
plant owners and operators should be made aware of the options 
available to them for receiving and treating waste from boat holding 
tanks and portable toilets. Issues for States to consider when 
developing education/information programs for wastewater treatment 
facility owners and operators include: (1) Effects of this waste stream 
on waste treatment plant's normal operations and how to mitigate any 
negative effects; (2) Volume of waste from boats in proportion to 
normal ``household'' loading standard; (3) Experience of waste system 
operators in areas designated ``No Discharge''.
    States may find it necessary to develop education/information 
programs that address issues related to Federal, State and local 
government agencies. Issues to consider for education/information 
programs for this audience include: (1) Awareness of environmental 
requirements and enforcement options for vessel sewage disposal and 
treatment (particularly for incoming harbor masters); (2) Encouraging 
the development of technical guidelines for design, installation, and 
use of pumpout facilities; (3) Encouraging the appropriate Federal 
agencies to support a national standard on pumpout and boat fittings; 
(4) Environmental benefits of reducing the amount of waste water 
discharged from boats in localized areas, e.g., shellfish beds; (5) 
Encouraging vessel manufacturers to include procedures for proper 
operation of vessel holding tanks and shoreside pumpout facilities in 
new owners' manuals; (6) The value of enforcement in implementing this 
program; (7) Value of educating the public; (8) Informing Federal and 
local governments on how to access Federal informational sources, and 
encouraging them to do so; (9) Working with local governments to 
mandate, after a reasonable period of time, the installation of pumpout 
facilities at marinas, as a condition of marina licensure or operation.
    Education of the general public has an important role to play. 
Issues to consider for education/information of this audience include: 
(1) The environmental impacts of boater waste; (2) Importance of the 
coastal resource; (3) Efforts by the boating community to reduce waste 
discharges.
    States have options for distribution of educational information 
related to boating and pumpout issues. Options include magazines, radio 
public interest spots, environmental groups, association and federation 
newsletters, National Estuary Program forums, State and local education 
programs, local citizens groups, and student groups. New and innovative 
ways of educating the boating community and the general public are 
encouraged.
    Representatives of the various groups could meet together at the 
State/local level to determine what information and education materials 
and strategies are needed to accomplish the objective. Private 
conservation and education groups could provide suggestions and 
materials once the needs are defined.
Section 6. Appropriate Methods for Disposal of Vessel Sewage From 
Pumpout Stations and Dump Stations
    Introduction: The safe and sanitary disposal of vessel sewage waste 
must be provided for when constructing and operating pumpout stations 
and dump stations. Boaters will not want to spend time and money 
pumping out unless they can be assured that their efforts will help 
improve water quality.

Vessel Sewage Characterization

    Vessel sewage is more concentrated than domestic sewage for almost 
all the standard parameters used to measure the quality of wastewater, 
including suspended solids, BOD, and total nitrogen. For example, the 
typical concentration of BOD in vessels is between 1700-3500 mg/l, 
while typical sanitary wastewater ranges from 110-400 mg/l for raw 
sewage and 5-100 mg/l for treated sewage. Raw municipal sewage has a 
lower concentration because people on land use more water for sanitary 
purposes than do people on boats. In addition, the proportion of gray 
water (defined as water from baths, showers and kitchens) is greater in 
municipal sewage, and municipal collection systems are subject to 
inflow and infiltration of storm water.
    Another characteristic of vessel holding tank waste is the presence 
of chemical additives used to disinfect and deodorize the waste. These 
same additives are used to treat sanitary wastes in recreational 
vehicles (RVs), trains, and aircraft. Ideally, the odor-control 
chemicals should be biodegradable when diluted. These chemical 
additives commonly contain an active disinfectant along with dyes and 
perfumes. Some of the more common disinfectants include formaldehyde, 
paraformaldehyde, and quaternary ammonium chloride; formaldehyde is the 
most popular because of its effectiveness.
    There is some concern from operators of small municipal and package 
sewage treatment plants and some marina operators with septic systems 
that vessel sewage holding tank waste may adversely affect performance 
of their sewage treatment systems by destroying the bacterial 
population, thereby reducing plant efficiency. A second concern, 
particularly of operators of municipal treatment plants operating at or 
near capacity, is that the additional volume of waste will cause the 
plant to exceed its capacity to treat wastewater effectively.
    Research into the effects of chemical additives on sewage treatment 
processes indicates that these problems have been greatly overstated, 
and that, in general, most municipal sewage treatment plants can handle 
vessel holding tank waste without difficulty. In addition to relatively 
low volumes generated by sewage pumpout stations, the weekly and 
seasonal usage of marina facilities protects treatment systems from 
failing or exceeding capacity. Marinas receive their largest pumpout 
volumes on weekends and, in many parts of the country, only during the 
summer season. Therefore, treatment plants generally are able to 
assimilate such intermittent waste loading and no serious operational 
problem occurs.
    Despite the negligible effects of holding tank additives on sewage 
treatment processes, general concern about toxic contaminants in the 
environment has led to the development of non-toxic, environmentally 
benign holding tank deodorants and disinfectants such as quarternary 
ammonium compounds, enzymes and adamantane. Holding tank chemicals in 
use today are generally biodegradable and if even marginally diluted, 
have little effect on treatment systems. No heavy metals or other 
severe, lingering toxics can be expected. States should encourage the 
use of these biodegradable products through education and, if 
necessary, regulation.

Disposal Methods

    Disposal methods will vary depending on a number of factors, 
including: State and local sanitation codes; the number of recreational 
vessels and where the vessels are concentrated; the availability and 
geographic proximity of existing treatment facilities to boating 
centers; and hydrogeologic characteristics, including soil types and 
groundwater flows. Depending on these factors, States may consider the 
following methods: (1) Off-site treatment: (a) Discharge to a public 
wastewater collection system and treatment facility; (b) discharge to a 
holding tank with removal and transport by a licensed septage hauler to 
a municipal septage receiving/treatment facility.
    (2) On-site treatment at marinas: (a) Discharge to a package 
treatment plant with subsequent discharge back into coastal waters (a 
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit would be 
required); (b) discharge to a septic system, where no other alternative 
is available.
    The following is a description of the relative merits of each of 
these methods. It should be noted that each State has its own 
regulations and policies regarding what it considers ``appropriate'' 
disposal methods. What one State considers appropriate or even 
desirable, another may prohibit.

Off-Site Treatment

    There are hundreds of existing municipal wastewater treatment 
facilities serving coastal areas throughout the country. Most provide 
at least secondary treatment utilizing an activated sludge process, but 
they vary greatly in size and details of treatment structures, sludge 
handling capability, and success in meeting current permit terms and 
conditions. In addition, many also incorporate septage receiving and 
treatment facilities into the overall treatment system.
    Public Wastewater Collection Systems: The best option for the safe 
and sanitary disposal of vessel sewage is through a direct connection 
to an approved wastewater treatment facility. Most municipal treatment 
plants should have no problem accepting vessel holding tank waste. The 
relatively small volume of holding tank waste, bled into the sanitary 
waste stream, is effectively diluted by municipal sewage. The 
relatively large volume of wastewater routinely handled by these plants 
also mitigates against plant upset, and the treatment process can also 
break down or volatilize certain of the trace organic chemicals. Sewage 
treatment plants with a long history of accepting holding tank waste 
have reported no problems with this practice. However, States should 
exercise caution in designating sewage treatment plants that are over-
capacity, have operational problems, or violate permit conditions on a 
regular basis.
    Shoreside Holding Tanks/Septage Treatment Facilities: Many boating 
facilities are located where connection to a wastewater collection 
system is difficult or infeasible. In these cases, connection of the 
pumpout or dump station to a shoreside holding tank is the next best 
option. Holding (or tight) tanks provide a means for sanitary storage 
of vessel sewage until it can be transported by a licensed septage 
hauler to an approved septic waste receiving/treatment facility. The 
holding tank may be above or below ground, depending on State or local 
requirements, but should be located on solid land and secured to 
minimize potential storm damage or vandalism.
    Septage receiving/treatment facilities are designed specifically to 
pretreat these wastes before introducing them to the wastewater 
treatment system. Because vessel holding tank and portable toilet waste 
is similar in nature to domestic septage, although more concentrated 
with variable amounts of organic chemicals, a properly operating 
municipal treatment plant with septage receiving/treatment facilities 
should not be adversely affected by the introduction of holding tank 
waste.
    Modifications to Wastewater/Septage Treatment Facilities: Some 
wastewater treatment plants and septage receiving/treatment facilities 
may require modification to accommodate vessel sewage. These 
modifications may include increased capacity, construction of adequate 
septage receiving/treatment facilities, holding and bleed-in 
facilities, pretreatment facilities, and additional analytical 
capability. To determine which plants have the capability to 
effectively process holding tank waste, and whether additional 
facilities (or modifications to existing ones) are required, States may 
need to conduct a survey of the existing capabilities and limitations 
of their existing sewage treatment plants. A matrix to determine these 
capabilities might include the following elements, for which many 
States have available data as file information: (1) List all sewage 
treatment plants; (2) Eliminate plants that are over capacity, have 
operational problems, or violate permit conditions regularly; (3) 
Evaluate the balance for existing capacity and treatment methodology; 
(4) Estimate the available capacity; (5) Develop a short list of 
candidates for vessel sewage treatment; (6) Develop list of potential 
needs for modifications to those plants, including: (a) Receiving 
stations; (b) holding/bleed-in tanks, and associated piping; (c) 
pretreatment needs; (d) associated sludge handling needs; and, (e) 
additional staff and analytical capabilities.

On-Site Treatment

    On-site treatment at a marina may be a viable alternative when the 
marina is not located near sewer lines, when transport of waste is 
prohibitively expensive, when the local sewage treatment plant is 
unable to accept additional discharges, and when groundwater and 
coastal waters can be protected. Prior to installing these systems, 
State law should be reviewed for legality. On-site treatment eliminates 
the need to transport waste. However, the proliferation of small, 
potentially troublesome treatment systems often creates more water 
quality problems than the collection of vessel sewage is intended to 
solve, including coastal and groundwater contamination.
Package Treatment Plants
    Package treatment plants offer an alternative for the treatment of 
both vessel sewage and waste generated by marina restrooms and other 
shoreside sanitary facilities. Package treatment plants are usually 
small, prefabricated sewage treatment plants that provide secondary 
treatment, generally utilizing the extended air mode of operation. In 
this process, treatment is accomplished by introducing air into the 
wastewater to encourage the growth of aerobic bacteria which digest the 
sewage, providing a high degree of treatment.
    Discharging vessel sewage to a package treatment plant should only 
be considered by boating facilities with large treatment systems that 
can handle the increased shock loading and chemical additives present 
in this type of waste. The typical problems with such systems are 
exacerbated by the nature of holding tank waste. Like septic systems, 
package plants are designed to deal with sewage with a low solids 
content, and the treatment process itself is highly dependent on an 
environment that is not toxic to the treatment bacteria. Holding tank 
waste is concentrated, which may raise treatment and sludge handling 
issues. Normal difficulties with treatment variability would be 
worsened by the slug flow nature of the discharges to a package 
treatment plant, though they can be eliminated by ``bleeding'' the 
influent into the plant. In addition, the waste may contain metals and 
hydrocarbons which can destroy the treatment process in a small plant.
    Based on these concerns, States may not want to encourage the 
development of a multiplicity of small sewage treatment plants, due to 
the variability of effluent quality as well as substantial difficulty 
in ensuring proper operation and maintenance of the mechanical 
components of such systems.
Septic Systems
    Septic systems are the conventional on-site sewage treatment 
systems throughout the United States. They consist of a septic tank 
where primary treatment (physical operations) predominate. These 
operations are floatation, settling, and the digestion of the sludge 
that accumulates in the bottom of the tank. Effluent from the tank is 
directed to a subsurface leaching system which provides additional 
treatment by establishment of a biological crust; its resultant 
permeability is a direct function of the BOD and suspended solids in 
the effluent stream. Once effluent leaves the crust zone it enters a 
soil environment where, if the septic system has been properly sited, a 
number of treatment processes will result in a high quality final 
effluent. The size and location of the leaching system (or drainfield) 
is extremely important because of the quality of the final treatment is 
highly dependent on the type and quantity of the soil through which the 
effluent will pass.
    In general, septic systems are not a favorable option for the 
disposal of vessel sewage, because they are not designed to treat the 
high solids content, high strength, and possibly toxic content of these 
wastes. They are not very effective at removing trace organic 
chemicals, and are ineffective at removing nutrients. The chemical 
additives used to disinfect and deodorize holding tank waste may kill 
the bacteria that aerobically digest the sewage, allowing solids to 
pass through the septic tank and causing the drainfield to clog and 
overflow. Nutrients leaching from the drainfield may stimulate algal 
growth in receiving waters, which can reduce the amount of sunlight 
necessary for submerged aquatic vegetation to grow and use up oxygen 
needed for fish and other aquatic life. In marine waters nitrogen is 
the nutrient most likely to cause these adverse effects, while 
phosphorous is the problem in fresh water.
    Vessel sewage should be discharged to a septic system only if no 
other options exist and the system is specifically designed and sited 
to receive such waste. This design includes: Using large tanks to 
manage and ``bleed'' in increased flows from pumpout stations; 
combining flows from ordinary bathroom facilities on-shore and the 
pumpout stations to dilute pumpout wastes; providing two septic tanks 
in series to help segregate solids in the first tank and increase 
retention time in the system; a large single drainfield or use of 
alternating drainfields, and proper siting to assure the leach field 
does not drain into the coastal waters or contaminate groundwater. In 
addition to following specific design criteria, septic systems should 
be inspected regularly and properly maintained.
Section 7. Types of Marine Boat Sewage Pumpout Stations and Dump 
Stations That may be Appropriate for Construction, Renovation, 
Operation, or Maintenance, and Appropriate Location of the Stations and 
Facilities Within a Marina or Boatyard
    There are four basic types of pumpout stations on the market. Each 
one has its advantages and disadvantages. Since every marina is unique, 
there is no one solution that will work in all cases. Therefore, each 
case should be examined individually, and the pumpout that will work 
best in any particular situation should be selected. Costs for 
equipment and installation can vary greatly, depending on need for 
sewage lift stations to accommodate widely fluctuating tides, need for 
special onshore holding tanks to hold concentrated waste, cost of 
connection to a sewer system, and other factors. Stationary or portable 
dockside pumps cost in the range of $2,000 to $10,000, and typical 
complete installations may be as high as $20,000. Following is a list 
of pumpout station types with a discussion of advantages and 
disadvantages.
    (1) Stationary pumpout unit: Stationary units include a connector 
hose and pump, and are connected directly to a local or municipal 
sewage treatment facility or a holding tank. The unit is usually 
located at the end of a pier or floating dock, often near the fueling 
facilities. Vessels access the pumpout station by approaching and 
securing to the dock or pier. Advantages are convenience, efficiency 
and speed of use. Principal disadvantage is that the unit restricts 
pumpout service to a single area of the marina, which may cause 
congestion.
    (2) Portable pumpout unit on wheels: This unit may be a wheeled 
device, consisting of a holding tank, hose and mechanical or hand pump, 
that is pushed along a dock to the vessel's location to pump out vessel 
sewage. The advantage is the unit is brought to the boat rather than 
the boat to the station. When full of sewage, however, the unit can be 
heavy and cumbersome. Since it must be moved from boat to boat, the 
time required to complete the pumpout operation can be somewhat greater 
than that of fixed units. Being able to move the unit can also be an 
advantage for pumping out boats during slow weekdays, especially after 
a busy weekend. The unit is also limited by its storage capacity.
    (3) Portable pumpout unit on vessel: This unit is a boat with 
pumpout station on board, consisting of a pump and holding tank, that 
may be radio-dispatched or respond to a signal flag, to pump vessel 
holding tanks. The advantage is the convenience of having the pumpout 
station come directly to the boat.
    (4) Remote operated multi-station system: This system has a pump 
which transports wastes via a main sewer to central collection and 
treatment. This unit can provide pumpout capabilities at any number of 
locations throughout the marina. This system, which provides wastewater 
collection anytime, combines the convenience and efficiency of fixed 
units with the versatility offered by portables. This system must be 
specifically designed to individual project requirements.
    There are five basic types of pumps used in pumpout systems. 
Following is a description of each.
    (1) Centrifugal pump (rotary or impeller types): This pump works 
when sewage in its impeller is spun to the outside of the impeller by 
centrifugal force, which creates a low pressure area at the impeller as 
it pumps. Most centrifugal pumps require priming. This pump is usually 
employed in lift station situations.
    (2) Reciprocating pump (diaphragm and piston types): This pump, 
mechanical or hand operated, creates suction by mechanically lifting a 
diaphragm up and pushing it down in a pump body. The diaphragm works in 
conjunction with two or four check valves. As the diaphragm lifts, the 
low pressure area under it causes sewage to be sucked into the body 
through the inlet check valve; when it is pushed down the pressure 
under the diaphragm closes the inlet check valve and forces sewage out 
the outlet check valve. This pump is self-priming.
    (3) Vacuum pump: This pump does not directly contact sewage, but 
draws air out of a tank which creates the necessary low pressure area 
or vacuum to cause the sewage to flow in. When the accumulator tank is 
full, pressurized air enters the accumulator tank and the pressure 
pushes the sewage out to a sewer or holding tank. This pump allows 
pumping over longer distances.
    (4) Flexible vein impeller pump: This pump has suction lift. It is 
easy to repair and needs no priming. A switch device is needed to 
prevent the pump from running dry and damaging the impeller.
    (5) Progressive cavity pump: This pump consists of stainless steel 
rotor or screw surrounded by a tight fitting rubber sleeve. As the 
rotor turns the sewage is progressively moved to the discharge line. 
This pump is self-priming.
    Equipment failure can occur with any of the above equipment. Most 
common causes are mechanical failure, followed by clogging of hose and/
or pump, loss of hose prime, and hose failure (Ross & Amaral, 1992).
    In addition to pumpout stations, there are facilities to receive 
sewage waste from portable toilets. A dump station consists of a 
receiving receptacle for sewage from portable toilets, and includes 
associated equipment and storage tank or sewer line connection. This 
facility is not a land-based or floating restroom, but can be made a 
part of such. Floating dump stations should be considered at mooring 
fields and other strategic locations. The device typically includes a 
receiving basin, which should be a minimum of 12 inches in diameter, 
and with a lid that completely covers the receiving unit (to control 
odors and insect access), with provisions for rinsing the portable 
toilet following emptying of the contents. If the unit is designed to 
drain, the drain should be a minimum of 3 inches in diameter and 
equipped with an insect-tight cover. Dump stations should be equipped 
with a washdown system to allow cleaning of the portable toilet. The 
washdown system should be clearly marked as unfit for drinking water. 
Wand attachments may be connected to a pumpout station to empty 
portable toilets, rather than building a separate facility.
    Following is a description of other equipment that is part of the 
pumpout station.
    Pumpout station holding tanks: Holding tanks should be sized 
appropriately for the volume of sewage generated and the frequency of 
removal of material from the holding tank. State and local requirements 
may govern the size of holding tanks. Generally, a 1,500-gallon holding 
tank can serve up to 100 boats with holding tanks. In terms of the 
number of boats serviced with a normal removal schedule, the following 
minimum sizes are suggested:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Recommended 
                                                           holding tank 
    Total number of boats serviced with holding tanks         volume    
                                                             (gallons)  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-20....................................................             300
21-40...................................................             600
41-60...................................................             900
61-80...................................................            1200
81-100..................................................            1500
100+....................................................            2000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pipes/hoses: Discharge piping should be rigid or noncollapsing 
flexible, with locking connections. Corrugated or ribbed hoses are not 
recommended. The line should be watertight and appropriately fastened 
or secured to the dock or pier. Local building codes should be checked 
for specific piping requirements, but the following materials are 
generally accepted for pumpout station service: Polyvinyl chloride 
(pvc), and polyethylene. Expansion joints should be included where 
appropriate. Force main systems may require ``thrust blocks'' and other 
security fastenings.
    Fittings: A deck fitting (sewage removal fitting) is a flanged 
fitting permanently mounted on the vessel and connecting to the onboard 
holding tank. A connector is a nozzle or coupling permanently attached 
to the suction hose of a pumpout station. An adapter is a fitting 
designed to facilitate adapting a pumpout connector to a vessel deck 
fitting.
    When the requirement for vessels with an installed toilet to have a 
certified marine sanitation device went into effect under 33 CFR 159 on 
January 30, 1975, there was a requirement for sewage removal fittings 
or adapters to be 1.5 inch for boats less than 65 feet in length. The 
expected types of acceptable fittings included threaded, flanged, or 
quick disconnect fittings. However, 33 CFR 159 was amended on January 
3, 1977 to allow holding tanks to be certified by definition if they 
store sewage and flushwater only at ambient air pressure and 
temperature. As a result, boats have been put on the market with many 
sizes of sewage removal connector fittings, requiring the use of 
adapters in order to assure a clean, tight connection when a pumpout 
occurs.
    There are several adapters on the market today. A black rubber 
nozzle is used by most boaters. Another adapter, the fuel hose fitting 
or cam-activated connector, consists of a male portion which fits into 
the connector, and a female portion which locks onto the male portion.
    A suction nozzle or fitting such as a friction nozzle (right angle 
preferred) or cam-activated quick connector positive locking attachment 
should be provided on the end of the suction hose. Adapters should be 
provided to fit the 1.5 inch discharge connector. A valve should be 
provided on the suction hose at the nozzle. A valve should be provided 
on the pump end of the suction line if the line is to be installed in a 
manner such that sewage would discharge from the line when the pump is 
removed for service. Positive locking connections on the end of the 
discharge line should be provided to prevent it from coming loose 
during discharge. The discharge line should be protected from freezing, 
and prevented from leaking into the water. Suction hoses should be 
equipped with a clear tubing or a sight glass on the suction end of the 
hose to allow the pumpout station operator to determine when the 
pumping is complete.
    Other factors that should be considered when installing pumpout 
stations/dump stations include the following.
    Convenient location enhances use. Stationary pumpout stations 
should generally be located as close to a boat off-loading point as 
possible and/or where boats need to maneuver the least. The end of a 
dock is a good location because it is accessible. Many facilities are 
located at the fuel dock, so boaters only have to go to one location 
for both of these activities. Water level changes should be considered 
when installing pumpout stations.
    Operation and maintenance: Proper operation and maintenance of 
pumpout stations and dump stations are critical to provide adequate and 
reasonable service. An individual should be assigned responsibility for 
operation and maintenance of pumpout and dump stations. Consider 
appropriate protective clothing, such as gloves, and hand washing, to 
protect the operator. Washing facilities should be readily available.
    Convenience for boaters and operators is a major factor. Hours of 
operation for pumpout stations should be keyed to general operating 
hours for vessels in the area. Specific maintenance and winter storage 
requirements depend on the system and the location. However, the 
following minimum maintenance is suggested to maintain sanitary 
conditions: Use dedicated system for flushing and rinsing hoses; flush 
hoses; pump clean water through the system, and empty into disposal 
area, never onto the ground or into the water.
    An event or hour meter could be installed on the pump to monitor 
its use. Monitoring of pumpouts should be an integral part of a marina 
management program to ensure that the facilities are operating 
effectively. The following practices can be applied successfully to 
maintain pumpout facilities: arrange maintenance contracts with 
contractors competent in the repair and servicing of pumpout 
facilities; develop regular inspection schedules; maintain a dedicated 
fund for the repair and maintenance of facilities.
Section 8. Other Information That is Considered Necessary to Promote 
the Establishment of Pumpout Facilities to Reduce Sewage Discharges 
From Vessels and to Protect United States Waters
    Public/private partnerships: Since approximately 80 per cent (based 
on the 1986-87 National Boating Facilities Survey, IMI/URI conducted 
for NMMA) of the marinas in the United States are privately owned, 
States are encouraged to develop partnerships, within State laws and 
regulations, with private marinas to construct pumpout stations at 
these facilities.
    ``No Discharge Areas'': Sections 312(f) (3) and (4) (A) and (B) of 
the Clean Water Act of 1987 enable States to apply to the EPA for 
designation of certain water bodies as ``No Discharge Areas''. In doing 
so, States must meet specific criteria outlined in 40 CFR 140.4 
including demonstrating to the EPA Administrator that adequate and 
reasonably available facilities exist for the safe and sanitary removal 
of boat sewage. States should not consider ``adequate and reasonably 
available'' under the Clean Vessel Act to satisfy all requirements for 
determining ``No Discharge Areas'' under the Clean Water Act. A 
separate review and determination would have to be made by the EPA for 
Clean Water Act designation of a ``No Discharge Area''.
    Holding tank bypass: Discharge of raw sewage from a vessel in U.S. 
Territorial Seas (within the three mile limit) is illegal. Holding 
tanks are frequently bypassed with the use of valves, commonly called 
Y-valves. A valve may be installed on any marine sanitation device 
holding tank to provide for the direct discharge of raw sewage when the 
vessel is beyond the baseline of the Territorial Seas, which is more 
than three miles from shore. The valve must be secured in the closed 
position while operating in Territorial Seas. Use of a padlock, non-
releasable wire-tie, or removal of the valve handle would be considered 
adequate securing of the device. The method chosen must be one that 
presents a physical barrier to the use of the valve or the toilet. All 
Y-valves should be standardized, so that the handle points in the 
direction that the sewage flows and/or indicates the open and closed 
position. The Y-valve should be place after the holding tank rather 
than between the toilet and holding tank.
    Upland and floating restrooms: Clean, well-maintained restrooms are 
very desirable for boaters. Many boaters would rather use these when 
available than use holding tanks. Restrooms should be constructed at 
marinas and other strategic locations.
    Rental Contracts: Marinas could add language in rental contracts to 
prohibit discharge of sewage into the marina waters.
    Disinfectants, perfumes: Industry should produce only products 
which will not harm waste treatment plants or septic tanks. A symbol 
should be placed on the label of these products indicating they may be 
discharged into treatment plants or septic tanks if correctly used in a 
properly designed treatment system.
    Additional information: For additional information on pumpout 
stations, refer to: (1) ``A Guidebook For Marina Owners and Operators 
On the Installation and Operation of Sewage Pumpout Stations'', 
Maryland Department of Natural Resources Boating Administration, 
Coastal Technology, Inc., February 1990; (2) ``Commonwealth of Virginia 
Sanitary Regulations for Marinas and Boat Moorings'', State Department 
of Health, Richmond, VA, 1990; (3) ``Guidance for States and 
Municipalities Seeking ``No Discharge Area'' Designation for New 
England Coastal Waters'', Rev. 4/92, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region 1, Boston, MA; (4) ``State of the Art Assessment of Boat 
Sewage Pumpout Program in Washington State'', 12/91, Howard Edde, Inc., 
Bellevue, WA, for Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, 
Olympia, WA. For further information on pumpout stations and dump 
stations, consult ``Marina Pump Out Facilities'', Joseph Wettemann, 1/
89, and ``Types of Pump Out Facilities'', Natchex, 7/92.

    Dated: February 11, 1994.
George T. Frampton, Jr.,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 94-5530 Filed 3-9-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-M