Just what the h*ll is a No Discharge Zone (NDZ)?

This EPA report was brought to my attention in March 2010 and was discussed on the forum during Maryland's attempt at making the Chesapeake Bay a NDZ. Tom Neale, an attorney, has written about this (and other things) on his BoatUS blog.

Ronbo

Tom Neale, respected maritime writer and author, wrote the following:

ii. The report found some nutrient in the effluent but at an inconsequential level. The Australian government commissioned a test for nutrients from a LectraSan discharge. It found from samples taken from water immediately outside the discharge port, at flushing, to be of no measurable relevant value. (Appendix 1)

iii. The EPA has failed to make public this test, even though it is aware that the legislature of Maryland is now considering legislation concerning this issue. An EPA official stated on March 5, 2010 that the report is “working its way through the final approval phase.” Addendum: as of March 12, 2010 we’ve received information that the EPA has finally posted this report on its site.

The full EPA Report:

http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/pubs/600r10008/600r10008.pdf

Tom Neale's Article:

http://www.boatus.com/cruising/TomNeale/article_156.asp
 
Here's an updated article by Mr. Neale. Before I post that link, let me post this from the article:

Did You Know?

Once the EPA designates a No Discharge Zone, outlawing the use of marine sanitation device treatment systems, it's permanent, regardless of advancements in MSD technology.

http://www.boatus.com/magazine/2012/april/TakingCareOfBusiness.asp

It appears, at least to me, that EPA tried to run Type I MSDs through tests to show how "bad" they were. But instead got slapped in the face with facts they didn't like: Type I MSDs are good. No Discharge Zones are bad.
 
I'm mystified on this issue. It seem so simple. What is a no-discharge zone? It's a method of outlawing the use of sewage treatment systems that ensure that our waterways stay clean. It's the only method that addresses the problem of truly incensing boaters to do the right thing with their holding tanks when away from marina facilities as pump outs only work for boats in a marina.

Make no mistake, this is an issue around politics, not science. The science is clearly in favor of treatment systems. But the political potential to appear to be beating up 1%'s is just too tempting.

NDZ's are the poster child of the failure of the boating community to more effectively get "ahead" of the politics of the issue. This is an issue where we should have the green movement BEHIND us, not against us. We should be packaging this up by pushing incentives via federal & State to push the mandatory use of these devices for boats over 50 feet and incentive discounts for boats under 50 feet for owning one. Doing so would prevent shenanigans in the politics by removing the arguments before they are even made. Let the politicians beat up the 1%'s by mandating these systems, not by outlawing them. How the boating movement ever allowed these clowns to very very effectively control the argument such that the lay person thinks that this issue is about yachts dumping their raw sewage on top of them, well that's just a failure of the boating community to ignore the issue.
 
We recently visited the new St Petersburg Fl mooring field. It is designated a no-discharge zone, even for gray water.

So how is one expected to deal with the gray water issue? Most boats aren't so equipped.
 
We may be getting allies for the use of treatment sanitation systems in boats in the Chesapeake.

Read the March and April editions of Chesapeake Bay Magazine which has an editorial and article on this issue.
If you remember, when MD was trying to push through a bill to make the Bay a NDZ we couldn't get any support from CBM.
Now, Tim Sayles in his editorial, says there may be a middle ground in the use of MSD type I devices, certainly not in harbors and marinas, but for open waters.

That sounds like progress.

Ronbo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top