Title : Temporary incinerator, McMurdo < Type : Antarctic EAM NSF Org: OD / OPP Date : March 19, 1991 File : opp93026 DIVISION OF POLAR PROGRAMS OFFICE OF SAFETY, ENVIRONMENT AND HEALTH 202/357-7766 MEMORANDUM Date: March 19, 1991 From: Environmental Officer, DPP Subject: Environmental Action Memorandum (Installation of Temporary Incinerator at McMurdo Station, Antarctica) To: Files (S.7 - Environment) (S.7.1 - Hazardous Wastes) Background Near the close of the 1990-1991 austral summer research season in Antarctica, the Senior U.S. Representative, Antarctica, announced a set of decisions on waste reduction and waste management for McMurdo Station's operations. The decisions included calls for elimination of open burning and cessation of operation of the Fortress Rocks landfill at McMurdo Station. The decisions were made as part of NSF's five-year Safety, Environment and Health Initiative. During the antarctic winter period, which began March 1, 1991, with fewer U.S. Antarctic Program (USAP) personnel on station, less waste of all types is generated making the successful initiation of such waste management and clean up at McMurdo easier. Originally, plans called for a phasing out of open burning to be completed by the 1991-1992 summer season, beginning in October 1991. This would be coupled with USAP's continued and increasing removal of McMurdo's solid and liquid wastes from the continent. However, the need to properly dispose of accumulations of surface debris including asbestos-containing materials has accelerated this action to a 1991 winter beginning. The USAP is now building a temporary incinerator on site to serve for the remainder of this winter season with a more efficient, more permanent incinerator (possibly for interim use should the USAP decide, in the future, to cease all waste burning at the station) to be installed next fall. This environmental action memorandum focuses on USAP's environmental considerations for the site selection and installation of the temporary incinerator. Impacts on Station Operations The decisions noted above placed immediate restrictions on the disposal of solid wastes generated at the station. Activation of an alternate outdoor waste disposal site was not authorized. Burning of waste food, food-contaminated waste and selected domestic combustible wastes will be allowed to continue only until a working temporary incinerator is emplaced. To date the last waste burn at the Fortress Rocks landfill occurred on March 2, 1991. All other solid waste was ordered held in appropriate containers (construction wastes are being held in flat rack containers; recyclable solid wastes from other sites are being held in triwall cardboard containers). To assure proper disposal of these wastes, station-wide waste management and separation protocols were established along with programs of personnel re- education, quality control and enforcement. Overall, the impacts involve: 1) total shutdown of landfill operations; 2) fabrica- tion, procurement, or lease of waste shredders, balers and incinerators; and 3) reducing waste generation through reductions in Program scope and number of participants. The civilian contractor has been tasked to identify and gather pertinent quantitative information to prepare bid solicitations for a variety of remedial services. Argonne National Laboratory was tasked to research specifications for a commercially available incinerator for installation early in the 1991-1992 summer season. A review of the status of hazardous materials retrograde was initiated to identify unexpected barriers to removal of these wastes to the U.S. Waste Management and Separation Protocols. The success of the waste management and cleanup efforts rest primarily with individuals. To provide guidance on appropriate waste-related actions, protocols were developed and personnel education was initiated. The protocols established five distinct categories of solid waste: 1) burnable food wastes, and selected food-contam- inated and domestic wastes; 2) scrap metal; 3) construction- and demolition-related debris and scrap; 4) non-specific burnables (e.g., cardboard, scarp lumber and broken pallets); and, 5) recyclable cardboard. Category 1 would be processed through the temporary incinerator during winterover (some cardboard would be added to assist adequate combustion of food-related wastes normally having high water content). Assessment of the Location and Potential impacts of the Temporary Incinerator On March 11, 1991, the civilian contractor's Environmentalist concluded an assessment aimed at disclosing the potential impacts of the temporary incinerator. Questions based on environmental impact criteria had been posed by the Environmental Officer and included land use, pollution potential (impacts to environmental resources and biota), and human environmental values. Responses to the questions follow: LAND USE 1. What is the specific purpose of the proposed activity? NSF intends to install a temporary incinerator (for winter 1991 operations) which will handle less than 250 pounds per hour of waste following Universal Building Code (UBC) specif- ications. All non-burnable waste will be stored for handling during the 1991-1992 summer season. 2. What alternatives has the contractor considered? o Shutting down all construction activities except for the new science facility so as not to generate construction wastes. This alternative is not acceptable due to the amount of work which is needed to be completed during the winter season. o Storing all wastes over the winter season to be disposed of next summer. This would require the use of 75 flat racks as determined by ASA's Waste Management Specialist. Currently, there are not enough flat racks to handle this waste, nor is there sufficient indoor space to store it to avoid having trash blow about McMurdo Station. o Continued open burning of wastes at the Fortress Rock dump. This is not acceptable due to the present contam- ination of the dumpsite. o Burning winter season trash at another McMurdo location. o Storing all wastes for subsequent retrograde. 3. What is the specific location of the proposed activity? Building 340 on the outskirts of McMurdo. 4. What alternative locations has the contractor considered? o Building 185 was originally chosen to house the incinera- tor. This site was rejected because of objections by McMurdo's Fire Marshall. The building is located next to a flammable storage area and has a wooden floor. o Buildings 340, 341 and 342 were then assessed for housing the incinerator. Of the three, Building 340 was chosen because it has a gravel floor and is downwind from the other nearby buildings; and, it is upwind from the center of town. Also, the Fire Marshall also agreed to this location. 5. Will aesthetic impacts of the area be handled? If so, how? Aesthetic aspects have not been directly addressed. Place- ment of the incinerator indoors is expected to improve the overall aspect of McMurdo Station. 6. Will the activity have any other indirect impacts on the environment? No other indirect impacts are expected. Plans called for sensors (for incinerator stack temperature and carbon monoxide concentration). It was impossible to procure and ship these sensors before the station closed for winterover. 7. Will the activity change the traditional use of the chosen site? Yes. The site has been used as cold storage by NSFA Public Works. Public Works will move the material presently stored in Building 340 to Building 185. Building 185 has been used to store tires and the hovercraft during the winter. These items will be moved outside. 8. Are the physical or environmental characteristics of the land suitable for the proposed activity? Yes. POLLUTION 9. Has protection of the environment and human health from unnecessary pollution been considered for the activity (includes such considerations as pollution abatement or mitigation, and waste management [e.g., of noise, dust, fuel loss, disposition of one-time-use materials, construction wastes])? The purpose of constructing and using an incinerator at McMurdo Station is to avoid using the contaminated dump thereby reducing exposure of personnel to hazardous materials and to eliminate open burning. Generally, incineration will produce less toxic air pollutants than open burning through controlled combustion at high temperatures. 10. Will the activity change ambient air quality at the site? Yes. Incineration of combustible waste should actually improve the ambient air quality during burning by reducing the amount of toxic air pollutants released to the atmosphere as compared to open burning. The incinerator will have a secondary burning chamber which will allow for higher temperatures to more completely burn the waste materials. 11. Will the activity change water quality or flow (drainage), at the site? No. Water quality at the site will not be changed. 12. Will the activity change waste generation or management at the site? Yes. All activity at the site will be devoted to temporary (1991 season winterover) waste management. The building will not only house the incinerator, but will also house a waste bailer and compactor. 13. Will the activity change energy production or demand, personnel and life support, or transportation requirements at the site? Presently, there is no electricity supplied to Building 340. A line will need to be run to the building to supply electri- city for lights and to operate the bailer and compactor. Operating the incinerator will also increase the demand for fuel. Winter transportation to the site will increase, however, the overall amount of transportation within McMurdo will decrease due to the closer proximity to town. 14. Is the activity expected to adversely affect scientific studies or locations of research interest (near and distant, short-term and long-term)? No. 15. Will the activity generate pollutants that might affect terrestrial, marine or freshwater ecosystems within the environs of the station or inland camp? The activity will generate pollutants. The amount of pollutants will significantly decrease, however, when compared to those produced during open burning. 16. Does the site of the activity serve as habitat for any significant assemblages of antarctic wildlife? No. The site of activity is within McMurdo Station and no significant assemblages of antarctic wildlife (including substrate microorganisms, mosses or lichens) are known to be present. HUMAN VALUES 17. Will the activity encroach upon any historical property of the site? No. 18. What other environmental concerns are potentially affected by the activity at the site? Building 340 does not have a fire suppression system and does not meet UBC standards concerning this. It would be advisable to have a fire suppression system for the trash staging area and for the chimney. The temporary nature of this installation coupled with its import for disposition of wastes that could affect human health justifies its use under the circumstances. Specifications for Temporary Incinerator Designer: Mr. Mike Papula, Mechanical Engineer, Antarctic Support Associates. Size of Incinerator: Primary Chamber - 4' x 4' x 8' Secondary Chamber - 4' x 4' x 11' Total Height - 12.5' Size of Incinerator with Support Structure: 12'w x 19'l x 17'h Type of Brick: Refractory Firebrick. New and used firebrick purchased in New Zealand. Firebrick is capable of withstanding a temperature of approximately 5,000OøF. Expected Maximum Temperature Generated: Approximately 1,500OøF The figures appended to this Environmental Action Memorandum show the overall character of the temporary incinerator. FINDING In light of the need to adequately dispose of waste food, food- contaminated wastes and selected domestic wastes during the 1991 winter period, and the need to curtail access to the Fortress Rocks landfill area until the first phase of remediation efforts begin during the 1991-1992 season, the Environmental Officer believes that the proposed action is justified. In addition, the process of incineration (albeit in a device constructed on-site) is expected to lessen the potential for environmental impacts associated with open burning at McMurdo Station. The Environ- mental Officer recommends, therefore, that the construction of a temporary incinerator (for use until a more efficient device is emplaced at McMurdo Station) be approved. Sidney Draggan Attachments