Title : USAP's Mngmnt. of Food Wastes-McMurdo Type : Antarctic EAM NSF Org: OD / OPP Date : June 29, 1993 File : opp93098 INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION OF THE U.S. ANTARCTIC PROGRAM'S MANAGEMENT OF FOOD WASTES AT MCMURDO STATION, ANTARCTICA FOR 1993-1995 Prepared by the Division of Polar Programs National Science Foundation Washington, D.C 1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED The National Science Foundation (NSF) is responsible for the U.S. Antarctic Program (USAP) that supports a substantial scientific research program in Antarctica, often in cooperation with other countries. The USAP maintains three year-round stations in Antarctica: McMurdo Station on Ross Island, the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station, and Palmer Station on the Antarctic Peninsula. McMurdo Station is the major base for providing logistics support to scientific and operational personnel working at McMurdo and South Pole and at numerous scientific field camps on the continent each austral summer. Logistic and operational support are provided by the Department of Defense [the Naval Support Force Antarctica (NSFA), U.S. Army, and U.S. Air Force], the U.S. Department of Transportation [U.S. Coast Guard], and a civilian contractor [currently Antarctic Support Associates, Inc. (ASA)]. Management of food waste at McMurdo presents unique challenges. NSF has been managing McMurdo's food waste in accordance with a decision document dated August 2, 1991, which covered food waste management through December 31, 1992. This Initial Environmental Evaluation (IEE) assesses the reasonably foreseeable potential effects on the antarctic environment of various alternatives, including the preferred alternative of incinerating, grinding, and one-time retrograding to the U.S. on the annual supply ship, of food wastes at McMurdo Station from January 1, 1993 to June 30, 1995. This IEE is prepared pursuant to Executive Order 12114 and NSF's environmental assessment procedures for proposed NSF actions in Antarctica, 45 C.F.R. Part 641. 2.0 BACKGROUND NSF recognizes the importance of protecting the environment in its waste minimization, management and disposal plans. USAP has taken significant steps towards revising its operations to be environmentally sensitive and towards correcting environmental problems inherited from earlier times. Its recent significant efforts include the USAP's Environmental Protection Agenda (NSF 1988), NSF's 1989 Five Year Initiative for Antarctic Safety, Environmental and Health, a 1990 Interagency Agreement for a comprehensive waste management study, NSF's 1991 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) on the Antarctic Program, as well as specific environmental documents recently prepared in connection with food waste management and disposal at McMurdo. 2.1 USAP's Environmental Protection Agenda A significant portion of the USAP's logistic and scientific research activities at McMurdo Station focus on the supply of needed materials and the handling and processing or disposal of materials that no longer have a use in on-site program support: wastes, in general. The USAP, under the NSF's Special Five-Year initiative for Antarctic Safety, Environment and Health, has made substantial progress in rapidly changing the way it manages wastes. See infra at 2.2. The effort at effecting such change was first articulated formally in USAP's Environmental Protection Agenda (NSF 1988). The Agenda called for appraisal of waste production and management at McMurdo Station, with a focus toward development of minimal-impact waste management systems as well as monitoring and identification of potential impacts of waste processing and disposal procedures. The Agenda recognized solid waste as the most visible, and seemingly one of the least tractable, of antarctic environmental management problems. Ice, cold, and unique geology make ground disposal difficult. Antarctica's unique value to science makes ground disposal undesirable as well. Also, in 1987 USAP adopted a policy precluding ice staging and ocean dumping of solid wastes or any toxic or hazardous wastes or substances. The USAP has achieved increasingly extensive retrograde (i.e., removal) of such solid waste categories as metal scrap, old vehicles, pipe and tubing, broken tools, wiring, batteries, tires, and construction materials and debris. Due to their inherent health risk and rapid decay properties, food-related wastes remain a problem for USAP in developing and implementing appropriate processing methods. At the time of the Agenda's publication, food wastes generated at McMurdo Station were burned outdoors and feasible, practical and environmentally- compatible technologies had neither been tailored nor proven for effective use in the Antarctic. 2.2 NSF's Special Five-Year Initiative for Antarctic Safety, Environment and Health and Implementation The Initiative In Fiscal Year 1989, the NSF instituted a major, multi-year Safety, Environment, and Health Initiative. The goals of the Initiative, now in its fourth year, continue to be: Safety: to achieve year-round operations in the Antarctic with modern technology and acceptable risk; Environment: to clean up the debris of past operations, and to bring present operations into agreement with current regulations, prevailing attitudes, and current technology; Health: to improve medical facilities and to provide field parties with safety experts who have medical training. Implementation of the Initiative Under the environmental component of the Initiative, NSF has undertaken a variety of projects, including: Wastewater Treatment and Outfalls. The discharge of raw sewage and other wastewater into the ocean at the McMurdo and Palmer Stations while scientifically-defensible is highly controversial. The Code of Conduct adopted by the Antarctic Treaty parties recommends, at a minimum, that all sewage be macerated and disposed of at a location where there is ample opportunity for dispersal. NSF has installed a macerator at McMurdo. To achieve maximum dispersion and mixing of the waste in the receiving waters, NSF has installed an extended and submerged outfall. Over the past three years, monitoring of biological, toxic, and other harmful pollutant parameters have been undertaken to determine the impact of wastewater discharges on the local marine environments and on the sea water used to provide fresh water at McMurdo, and if additional wastewater treatment is needed. A summary of these parameters appears in Table 1. Ambient Air Monitoring. Studies to help develop both baseline information and data on the potential environmental impact of incineration technologies, vehicle emissions, fuels handling and storage, and generation of fugitive dust within and near McMurdo Station. Assessment of the Current Solid-Waste System. Argonne National Laboratory Environmental Assessment and Information Sciences Division completed a solid-waste management study of McMurdo in 1992. The study evaluated current solid-waste production and administrative and procedural alternatives. The study developed information on alternative techniques and resources for improving waste management. It recommended disposal of food waste by incineration. The USAP began a program to separate aluminum, glass and scrap steel from the waste stream in October 1989, and a year later began to segregate office paper. Since February, 1991, all solid wastes at McMurdo Station other than food-related wastes are stored in appropriate containers for retrograde, i.e. removal, to the U.S. Early in the 1991-1992 austral season, USAP INSERT TABLE 1 discontinued the use of plastic and paper containers, cups and plates in the McMurdo's galley to reduce the total volume of food-contaminated waste originating from the galley. Tables 1 and 2 of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) on USAP Management of Food Wastes during 1991-1992 at McMurdo Station, Antarctica dated August 2, 1991 (August 2, 1991 EIA) (NSF 1991b) depicted methods of handling food and domestic waste, and con- struction waste, respectively, at McMurdo Station (See Appendix). In addition, USAP clarified its station-wide waste management and separation policies and protocols in February 1991 in order to provide enhanced waste management guidance to USAP personnel and promote the proper disposal of wastes (USAP 1991). Specifically, the protocols provide for five distinct categories of solid waste: 1) food wastes; 2) scrap metal; 3) construction and demolition-related debris and scrap (including plastic and rubber); 4) non-specific burnables (e.g., cardboard, scrap lumber and broken pallets); and, 5) recyclable cardboard. In addition to the protocols, USAP enhanced and expanded upon established programs for personnel education and enhanced quality control and enforcement. Prior to February 8, 1991, USAP disposed of food-related wastes by burning them outdoors at the Fortress Rocks area of McMurdo Station. USAP suspended burning at the Fortress Rocks area on March 2, 1991, when asbestos was discovered at the site. Remediation efforts, which included removing asbestos laden material and all other surface debris from the site was completed the following year. Since that time most food wastes have been incinerated in the temporary and interim incinerators at McMurdo Station and the incinerator at Scott Base, or retrograded to New Zealand. Small quantities have been ground and macerated. Thirty tons are currently stockpiled at McMurdo Station. 2.3 Waste Management Study As part of the SEH Initiative, the USAP entered into an Interagency Agreement with the Department of Energy's Argonne National Laboratory in Fiscal Year 1990. Under the agreement Argonne was to conduct a comprehensive study to support USAP assessment of feasible and practical materials and waste minimization, waste handling, and waste processing and disposal options that could be available to the USAP in developing a new waste management strategy and system. The study identified four solid waste categories. The category of food and food- contaminated wastes accounted for about 50% of all solid wastes handled at the station (Table 2). TABLE 2 Estimated Quantities of Solid Waste Generated, Handled, and/or Disposed of Annually at McMurdo Station Solid Waste Quantity (tons)a Percent Food and food-contaminated wastes (includes tray scrapings, food prepar- ation wastes, spoiled and excess food, food-contaminated packaging and card- board boxes) 799.1 50.3 Nonhazardous solid wastes Cardboard Wood Paper Scrap Metal Aluminum cans Steel cans Glass Plastics Construction debris (non-wood) Miscellaneous personal products 118.1 86.2 39.4 340.0 4.2 21.5 5.0 6.3 (?) (?)b 7.4 5.4 2.5 21.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 Hazardous and nonhazardous POLSc Fuels Spill clean-up residues Slop Fuel Used oil Used glycol Used solvents 43.1 34.5 45.5 10.4 11.0 2.7 2.2 2.9 0.7 0.7 Hazardous wastesc Paint related wastes Laboratory chemicals Acids, caustics and batteries Radioactive wastes Medical/infectious wastes Other 6.1 0.8 8.8 (?) 7.5 (?) 0.4 0.0 0.6 0.5 Total 1,587.5 100.0a Based upon ASA estimates of waste densities and volumes of dumpster deliveries to Fortress Rocks landfill (1990/1991), ANL estimates of galley waste densities and deliveries to Fortress Rocks landfill (1990/91). NSFA estimates of POLs and Hazardous Waste Retrograde (1990/91). b No data available. c Quantities in tons based upon gross estimates for waste densities. During the Argonne study, the study group was also tasked with identifying if any incinerator technology was practical and feasible for use at McMurdo Station. Given knowledge of the characteristics of the station's waste stream and the context of antarctic operation, the study group researched such technologies and developed recommended specifications for a High-Temperature Thermal Oxidation System (Pearson 1991) to be discussed later under Interim Incinerator. USAP's approach to managing food-related wastes requires looking at the broad situation--in this instance not only at the waste and its effects, but also at the sources of the waste and waste minimization methods. It requires looking at the possible impacts of proposed solutions in a systematic manner. USAP has learned that when its food-related waste stream is carefully analyzed, various possibilities for solutions appear. Examples beyond conventional disposal methods include restrictions on materials brought into Antarctica; different methods of waste- handling for different wastes; and using education to change personnel expectations and behavior that otherwise exacerbate the problem. As a result, USAP has taken several steps to minimize the production of food waste. The civilian support contractor assumed responsibility for the food services operation at McMurdo Station on October 1, 1992. The contractor's detailed meal planning and improved management has resulted in a decrease in food waste. This includes preparation of quantities carefully calculated to match the station population and better planning for use of excess food at subsequent meals. A reduction in food waste has also been achieved through an innovative procurement scheme for vegetable produce: vegetables are cleaned and prepared for cooking by a vendor in Christchurch, New Zealand. All excess leaf, stalk, and peelings are removed and the produce is then placed in nitrogen flushed packaging prior to shipment. The McMurdo galley is experiencing near zero loss of vegetable produce as all preparation is accomplished in New Zealand: a concrete example of waste minimization. Another reduction is occurring in the area of cooking oils. USAP is designing and implementing extraction/filter devices that enable the capture of fatty acids from cooking oils. Recovery of reconstituted oil will enable reuse of the product. 2.4 Supplemental Environmental Impact Assessment In October, 1991, NSF published a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) on the U.S. Antarctic Program (NSF 1991a) that contains descriptions of the materials and waste situations existing at McMurdo Station during the 1989-1990 austral summer research season as well as on-going efforts to improve USAP's system of materials and waste management. The SEIS evaluated four alternatives for continued operation of the USAP. The recommended alternative called for completion of the ongoing Five Year Safety, Environment and Health Initiative, completion of an ongoing materials and waste management study, and implementation of the resulting recommendations. The SEIS's recommended alternative called for combustible waste, including food waste, to be incinerated or retrograded to the United States or another country. 2.5 Food Management Decision at McMurdo The August 2, 1991 EIA evaluated alternatives for food waste management, including an assessment of on-site incineration technologies for October 1, 1991 through December 31, 1992. Based on that assessment, a decision was issued on August 2, 1991 to install and operate an interim three-chambered incinerator for disposal of food waste and use the existing temporary incinerator to incinerate food wastes until the interim incinerator became operational. USAP procured the interim incinerator system described in the August 2, 1992 EIA, and began installation and testing during the 1992 winter-over period. The August 2, 1991 EIA anticipated that the Interim Incinerator would be installed and operational at McMurdo Station in approximately December 1991. Due to numerous unforeseeable delays, the Interim Incinerator will not be not fully operational until January, 1993. The logistical constraints of transporting equipment and personnel to McMurdo Station as well as the need to customize the complex components of the Interim Incinerator to the unusual and harsh conditions of Antarctica in order to obtain optimal operation contributed to the delay. As of December 15, 1992, USAP is in the final stages of testing and resolving minor operational problems with the system, and expects the system to be fully operational shortly. Due to the delay in installment of the interim incinerator, a large backlog of food waste accumulated. This excess food waste was incinerated at the Scott Base incinerator, and retrograded to New Zealand by aircraft. In the process of test burning the interim incinerator, some additional food waste was burned. Despite these efforts, there is currently a backlog of accumulated food waste, as mentioned above this is estimated at approximately 30 tons. 3.0 THE MCMURDO ENVIRONMENT McMurdo Station Land Use McMurdo Station (77ø55'S, 166ø40'E), the major support station for the USAP, is located on Ross Island, Antarctica. The U.S. Navy began constructing and operating McMurdo Station in 1955. It was intended to be a logistics base for the United States' expeditionary presence at the time. Since that time, the station evolved from a temporary logistics base into an established, year-round station supporting both Antarctic scientific research and the logistics needed to conduct that research. Currently, the station is situated on approximately 200 acres (exclusive of outlying buildings), and consists of more than 100 structures, extensive storage yards, an ice pier, an annual sea-ice runway, a skiway, a helicopter landing area, and other ancillary structures and features (e.g., communications antennae and unpaved roads). In recent years, the average population at McMurdo ranged from about 1150 in November to about 600 in February. During the austral winter (late February through early October), the population at McMurdo usually ranges from 100 to 270 people, depending on science support activities, and construction and maintenance operations. Climate and Weather McMurdo Station is located on a southward-projecting peninsula of Ross Island, which is on the edge of the Ross Ice Shelf. Due to its location between the frigid interior of Antarctica and the more temperate open ocean, its weather is affected by cold air drainage flowing off the continent and ice shelf and by strong cyclones from the Ross and Amundsen Seas. McMurdo shares Ross Island with an active volcano, Mt. Erebus, and a New Zealand station, Scott Base. Mean monthly temperatures at McMurdo range from -3øC (26øF) in December and January to -28øC (-18øF) in August. Extreme maximum and minimum temperatures of 7øC (42øF) and -51øC (-59øF), respectively, were recorded during a 13-year period at McMurdo. The mean annual temperature is approximately -18øC (0øF). Wind speeds at McMurdo may vary substantially in a short period but are persistent in direction. The persistence of east winds at McMurdo appears to be primarily a function of the local terrain channeling air around Ross Island (O'Connor and Bromwich 1988; Schwerdtfeger 1984). Peak wind gusts are generally around 20 meters/second (45 mph) in the summer months and 35 meters/second (78 mph) in the winter months. Although strong winds are relatively common, so are light winds; for example, over 13% of the observations for the 10-year period from 1973 through 1982 were reported as calm. The average annual wind speed at McMurdo is 5.27 meters/second (11.8 mph). Precipitation occurs only as snowfall, at an average rate of 17.4 cm (6.84 in.) of water equivalent annually; ice fog is common throughout the year. Operations and Causes of Isolation Work at McMurdo occurs throughout the year. During the winter months, however, activities are greatly curtailed. The station population is reduced to a minimum by out-going flights at the end of February. No flight operations occur from the end of February until the end of August, except for a mid-June austral winter airdrop of mail and supplies (i.e., no landings). Airplanes cannot safely land at McMurdo Station during the austral winter because a variety of hazardous conditions including darkness, lack of adequate navigation and landing aids, and severe cold and winds, add great risks to normal aircraft and airfield operations. Only a few flights have been risked during the winter, and then only in cases of extreme medical emergencies. The first opportunity to reach McMurdo Station by air after station closure in late February normally occurs during the last two weeks of August. This high-risk window of opportunity, known as WINFLY, is the first time during the austral winter period that there is sufficient daylight at McMurdo Station to support targeted aircraft landings. WINFLY is limited to 6-8 flights over a period of 3-4 days (depending on favorable weather conditions). Only key station personnel, supplies and equipment essential to preparing McMurdo Station facilities for the new austral summer research season are transported during WINFLY. The austral summer research season traditionally begins on October 1 of each year (weather permitting) with the phased arrival of USAP participants--the "main body" of USAP personnel participating in a given austral summer season. That phased entry is termed MAINBODY. Beginning in October of each year, wheeled aircraft (C-141s, C-5s and C-130s) begin to provide access to McMurdo Station on a regular basis (weather permitting). These aircraft land on a sea ice runway. Almost all science and support personnel and cargo must be transported to McMurdo during October, November and early December when the ice runway is thick enough to support these aircraft. After December 1, the chances of being able to land an aircraft on sea ice begin to decrease rapidly and are virtually non-existent by the end of December. For the remaining two months of the austral summer, ski-equipped LC-130 aircraft provide the sole method of air transport to and from McMurdo. LC-130s have much smaller payloads than C-5s and C-141s, and, as a result, personnel transported and material and cargo supply decreases dramatically during this period. Resupply operations to McMurdo Station by sea begin in early January with the arrival of a U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) icebreaker, that opens a channel in the sea ice covering McMurdo Sound for in-coming resupply ships. Two resupply ships, one for cargo and one for fuel are able to reach McMurdo Station through this channel. Prior to the window for sea entry to McMurdo, sea ice conditions and severe weather preclude entry, even by icebreaker, to the Ross Sea. Because of the harsh antarctic climate and resulting isolation of McMurdo Station from late February through late August, USAP has only a short window of opportunity within which to transport personnel, equipment and materials to Antarctica. As a result, USAP determines when personnel, equipment and materials must arrive in Antarctica, and then plans meticulously to coordinate science, construction, personnel, and procurement schedules with the transportation limitations during the Antarctic's short window of opportunity. A year's delay in any given project could result from a failure to manage logistics to meet this crucial window of opportunity. Air Quality 1. Natural, Ambient Air Constituents. The dominant factor affecting regional air quality in the vicinity of McMurdo Station is Mount Erebus -- an active volcano, located approximately 25 miles north of McMurdo, on Ross Island. Data from Kyle et al. (1990) indicate that Mount Erebus' sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions range from 230 Mg/day (507,000 pounds per day or 185,000,000 pounds per year) in 1983 to 25 Mg/day (55,000 pounds per day or 20,000,000 pounds per year) in 1984, 16 Mg/day (35,000 pounds per day or 13,000,000 pounds per year) in 1985, and 51 Mg/day (110,000 pounds per day or 41,000,000 pounds per year) in 1987. In 1983, inferred hydrogen chloride (HCl) and hydrogen fluoride (HF) emissions from the volcano were 1200 Mg/day (2,646,000 pounds per day or 965,600,000 pounds per year) and 500 Mg/day (1,100,000 pounds per day or 402,000,000 pounds per year), respectively (Kyle et al. 1990). These amounts of pollutants affect not only regional air quality on Ross Island but also McMurdo air quality. For example, it is estimated, using an EPA screening model, that an important fraction of the total SO2 at McMurdo (perhaps as much as 50 percent for the short-term under worst case conditions) may come from Mount Erebus. (Kyle et al. 1990). 2. Anthropogenic Sources. In addition to the air emissions from Mount Erebus discussed above, there are anthropogenic emissions and air constituents at McMurdo (Pearson 1991). Boilers, furnaces, space heaters, electric generators, motor vehicle engines, fugitive dust, petroleum storage tank vapors, aircraft operations, and ships all emit atmospheric pollutants at or near McMurdo Station. Quantitative estimates of air pollutant emissions are provided in Table 4 of the August 2, 1991 EIA at McMurdo for the above sources (with the exception of sporadic ship operations and fugitive dust emissions. These estimates were made with emission factor data from AP-42 (USEPA 1985a and 1985b) for each of the source types in Table 4, except for aircraft operations (See Appendix). Estimated emissions of fixed-wing aircraft set forth in Table 4 of the August 2, 1991 EIA were based on data that give amounts for the landing-takeoff cycle for different aircraft (Seitchek 1985) and represent only those that occur on the ground and during takeoff, climbout, approach and landing. Main air pollutants emitted by the above are nitrogen oxides (NO and NO2, collectively referred to as NOx), SO2, carbon monoxide (CO), unburned hydrocarbons (HC), and particulate matter under 10 microns in diameter (PM-10). The PM-10 emission estimates in the August 2, 1991 EIA's Table 4 are conservative, as total suspended particulate (TSP) matter emission factors were used to generate the estimates. Although other trace pollutants such as metals would also be emitted by some of these activities, their levels in fuels is highly dependent on the characteristics of the parent crude oil. Another contribution to air emissions is the approximately 400 vehicles other than aircraft used at McMurdo. These include such diesel-powered, heavy equipment as front-end loaders, caterpillar tractors, cranes, and scrapers. There are trucks, vans, tracked-vehicles, a hovercraft, and snowmobiles. The exact number of vehicles varies from year to year as program requirements change. Loose soil disturbed by vehicle traffic on unpaved roads, heli- copter landings and takeoffs at an unpaved area, and wind erosion in areas used for collection of construction fill are the major sources of airborne particulates at McMurdo Station. Because the amounts of dust generated by these activities are difficult to model and have not been measured, they are not estimated here. Another source of emissions is power generation at McMurdo, which is provided by six diesel-electric generators, each having a capacity of 800 to 900 kVa. Some of these units are in maintenance or stand-by status at any one time. Fuel Transportation and Storage A fuel tanker vessel arrives annually at McMurdo in late January and refuels McMurdo Station. McMurdo has 18 steel bulk fuel storage tanks, which have a combined capacity of approximately 34 million L (9 million gallons). Each year, fuel is unloaded from the tanker through a pipeline that connects the ice pier to the bulk storage tanks. Fuel is transported from the bulk storage tanks to its ultimate destinations by pipelines, hoses and wheeled tanker trucks. Fuel for the sea-ice runway and Williams Field is moved by truck or tractor or by portable hose that connects the McMurdo fuel distribution system to storage tanks and bladders at the two runways. As part of its program of environmental management, the USAP has instituted several improvements in fuel handling at McMurdo Station. NSF records show that a common cause of fuel spills were from leaks from rubber bladders and seals and fitting. In response, NSF took several measures to diminish the chances of oil leakage from these sources. NSF replaced the flexible hose for the fuel transport line between McMurdo and Williams Field with a new "dry break" fuel hose in December, 1990. The new "dry break" fuel hose has only 13 fittings, compared to over 700 in the old fuel transport line. NSF is also upgrading the fuel storage facilities at South Pole, Williams Field, and Marble Point. In addition to improving transport and storage facilities, USAP has developed and implemented a Station Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasures Plan and Station Spill Contingency Plan. McMurdo Sanitary Waste Disposal System Wastewater at McMurdo Station has been consolidated into one outfall with a subsurface discharge into McMurdo Sound. McMurdo's galley, located in Building 155, is incorporated into this system. The system incorporates a macerator in the discharge line that grinds solids passing through the system, and dilution with excess brine, a byproduct of power generation. The outfall discharge has been monitored for the past three seasons to determine plume characteristics and to collect data for future assessment of any need for additional treatment. Ecological Resources 1. Marine ecosystems. The ocean waters at McMurdo Station are cold, nutrient rich, and have naturally high dissolved oxygen concentrations (Table 3). McMurdo Sound has dramatic spatial variations in primary production, current patterns, and benthic marine populations. Although conditions vary widely across the Sound, regional conditions are stable. For example, because the eastern part of the Sound near McMurdo Station has southward-moving currents that are rich in nutrients, the benthic populations that occur there are diverse. INSERT TABLE 3 2. Marine mammals and birds. Ross Island and adjacent McMurdo Sound provide breeding sites for such marine mammals and bird species as Weddell seals, Adelie penguins, and Emperor penguins. About 1500 adult Weddell Seals use Erebus Bay each year to raise pups (Testa and Siniff 1987). Each year about 150,000 pairs of Adelie penguins and 36,000 pairs of Emperor penguins use this area for breeding (Wilson 1983). The closest penguin rookery to McMurdo Station is located approximately twelve miles north of McMurdo at Cape Royds. Because penguins require access to unfrozen waters for survival, penguins do not appear at McMurdo Station during the austral winter. Penguins are sporadically sighted at McMurdo during the austral summer following the ice breaker's opening of the channel. Weddell seals and migratory skuas are the most conspicuous wildlife in the immediate vicinity of McMurdo Station. Laws (1990) notes that guano and feces from bird and seal colonies on land enter the antarctic marine environment at levels substantially greater than does human sewage from antarctic facilities. Antarctic skuas were regular avian scavenger visitors to McMurdo Station during the austral summer, in search of food until the closure of the Fortress Rocks area. 3. Terrestrial ecosystems. Because more than 97% of Antarctica's 14-million-km2 (5.4-million-square miles) land mass is covered by ice, exposed rock and other substrate available to support terrestrial ecosystems is limited. Surface materials in the immediate vicinity of McMurdo Station have been disturbed by human activity. Little vegetation exists in the immediate vicinity of McMurdo Station because of surface disturbance. A study of plant communities has recognized six plant associations in the Ross Island area, ranging from lichens and mosses to algae (Longton 1973). Laws (1991) notes that airborne pollution effects on antarctic vegetation are localized and very limited. Using data from a monitoring survey near one fairly large station, he noted that after 10 years of station operation heavy metal accumulations in lichens were evident only within 250 meters downwind. The terrestrial fauna of the Ross Island area are invertebrates; no terrestrial vertebrates are native to the area. The invertebrate groups range from protozoans to insects and mites. Historic Sites and Monuments Historic sites and monuments are recognized as part of the continent's scenic, aesthetic, and historic values. Historic sites and monuments within walking distance of McMurdo include Scott's "Discovery" Hut and Vince's Cross on Hut Point, the Richard E. Byrd Memorial at McMurdo Station, and the Polar Party Cross on Observation Hill. Other Ross Island historic sites include the huts at Cape Royds, Cape Evans, and Cape Crozier and the cross on Wind Vane Hill, all accessible by helicopter from McMurdo. Specially Protected Areas (SPAs) and Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) The most heavily protected areas in Antarctica are SPAs. Antarctic Treaty member nations designate SPAs to "preserve their unique natural ecological system". Also, Antarctic Treaty members have designated SSSIs, for which management plans are prepared. These areas are protected if there is "a demonstrable risk of interference" with scientific research or if the site is of "exceptional scientific interest". The only protected area in or near McMurdo Station is the Arrival Heights SSSI located one mile from the center of McMurdo. This site is designated as an SSSI because it is an electromagnetically quiet area, offering an ideal site for recording data associated with auroral and geomagnetic investigations. Incinerator emissions should not effect these features. The next closest protected site is the Cape Royds SSSI located about 12 miles from McMurdo Station. Since prevailing winds at McMurdo are easterly, the winds over McMurdo head west, away from the Arrival Heights SSSI. There are no SPAs in the vicinity of McMurdo. 4.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED o Alternative I. Incinerate most food waste in a three- chambered incineration system; dispose of limited amounts of ground food waste through waste water system; and retrograde portion of accumulated food waste by ship to the U.S. The preferred alternative. o Alternative II. Incinerate food wastes in both the temporary, two-chambered incinerator and the three-chambered, incineration system. o Alternative III: Utilize the two-chambered incinerator now in operation at New Zealand's Scott Base. o Alternative IV: Storage, Handling and Retrograde of all food wastes to New Zealand o Alternative V. Ice Staging or Ocean Dumping within the Antarctic Treaty Area of food waste and food-contaminated wastes accumulated at McMurdo Station. o Alternative VI. Open Ocean Dumping outside of the Antarctic Treaty Area of food waste and food-contaminated wastes accumulated at McMurdo Station. o Alternative VII. Storage, Handling and Retrograde of all food wastes to the U.S. on the Annual Supply Ship. o Alternative VIII: Storage, Handling and Retrograde of all food wastes to the U.S. via Aircraft. o Alternative IX: Open Burning o Alternative X. No action. Assessment of Alternatives Alternative I. The Proposed Alternative. Incinerate most food wastes in a three-chambered incineration system; dispose of limited amounts of ground food waste through waste water system; and retrograde portion of accumulated food waste by ship to the U.S. USAP preferred alternative consists of a combination of three waste disposal methods--incineration of most food wastes in the three-chambered interim incinerator system, disposal of limited amounts of ground food waste through the waste water system at McMurdo Station, and retrograde of portion of accumulated food waste by ship to the United States. Discussions of each of the three methods follow. INTERIM INCINERATOR The intended use of the Interim Incinerator is destruction of organic material in the food-contaminated wastes generated at McMurdo Station through the use of a high-temperature oxidation combustion process, while long-term solutions to the food waste management problem are developed. Argonne's extensive studies of McMurdo's materials and waste characteristics strongly suggested that use of such combustion in processing McMurdo's food- contaminated wastes would be the most practical and reliable (i.e., in the context of antarctic operations), the least costly, and the most likely of other approaches considered to process such wastes in an environmentally-compatible manner. According to waste management studies performed by Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne National Laboratory 1992), and based upon engineering design, technical and operational specifications developed by Antarctic Support Associates, Inc., a High- Temperature Thermal Oxidation System (i.e., Interim Incinerator) was fabricated by Brule Engineering of Blue Island, IL. As described in the August 2, 1991 EIA, the incinerator system has been designed to destroy food-waste related organic matter. The incinerator includes a third combustion chamber to reduce oxides of nitrogen produced by burning. In addition, larger than normal combustion chambers provide for more time for complete combustion, and a gas clean-up system is provided which will scrub acid gases from exit gases and filter out remaining particulates. It also includes opacity, SO2/NOx and O2 monitors. The incinerator system also includes components which prepare the appropriate feedstock and collect ash residues. (Figure 1). The incinerator system is designed to achieve 99.99% destruction of all organics. A detailed description of the interim incinerator system may be found in the August 2, 1991 EIA. The incinerator system has been installed at McMurdo Station and tested, and is undergoing some minor adjustments before becoming fully operational. insert figure 1 McMurdo Station Feedstock. As noted in the August 2, 1991 EIA, the interim incinerator includes a system to provide for the inspection and removal of unsuitable items from the feedstock. Feedstock items are limited to food waste (i.e., preparation wastes, plate scrapings), food-contaminated waste (e.g., napkins, food packaging materials), and selected wastes from dormitories and other administrative buildings (e.g., tissues, paper towels, and other similar wastes). USAP is considering adding human fecal material from field camps to the incinerator feedstock because of the difficulty experienced with disposal by other alternatives. This will reduce handling and health risks, as well as problems with introducing the frozen waste into the wastewater macerator. Addition of this relatively small quantity of waste to the feedstock will have no adverse impact on the incinerator emissions as the fecal materials are residues of food from digestion. Pollution producing materials are removed from the incinerator feedstock. Prohibited items include materials known to contain concentrations of toxic metals, such as batteries, metal scrap and cans including aerosol cans, and newspaper and magazine paper. Any item containing polyvinyl chloride (PVC) is excluded from the feedstock. This includes plastics containing PVC and high concentrations of chlorine. High-density plastics are also excluded. Minimization of Dioxins and Furans. While any act of combustion produces trace quantities of dioxins and furans as unwanted by- products (Acharya, et al. 1991), their control in incineration technologies relies on control of the nature of the feedstock as well as of the combustion process. While scientific opinion on the human health and environmental risks of dioxins and furans is, as yet, inconclusive (Gallo, et al. 1991; Roberts 1991), the USAP intends to minimize their generation in its waste processing activities. The Interim Incinerator has been engineered to provide design features (that include components allowing human feedstock item discrimination), combustion controls and gas monitors which effectively minimize the formation of dioxins and furans. Chlorine in the feedstock is of primary concern in connection with the formation of dioxins and furans. The amount of chlorine will be minimized since: 1) polyvinyl chloride containing items and chemically-treated lumber will not enter the feedstock; and 2) the incineration system itself is designed with this goal in mind (i.e., there is no copper in the ducting or components in the heat recovery and gas cleanup systems to catalyze the formation of dioxins and furans); and a dry gas scrub is included). As a result, the releases of dioxins and furans should be well below detectable limits when the Interim Incinerator is fully operational. Testing results are not yet available. Disposition of McMurdo Station Ash. All residual ash generated from the incinerator is removed from McMurdo Station pursuant to provisions of the Antarctic Treaty. Incinerator ash is bagged indoors to avoid dispersal, and then staged in either metal waste barrels or triwall cardboard boxes for retrograde from Antarctica and proper disposal in the United States. The ash handling system described in Pearson (1991), which proposed incorporating the ash into concrete blocks for retrograde has not been implemented. Performance Acceptance Testing. ASA ordered the incinerator from Brule Engineering with the condition that it be operationally tested in the U.S. prior to shipment to Antarctica. Clean Air Engineering of Palatine, IL was employed by Antarctic Support Associates, Inc. to conduct performance acceptance testing of the Interim Incinerator fabricated by Brule Engineering. The performance acceptance testing took place on November 8, 1991. Emissions-related parameters estimated included levels of particulate, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide and opacity. Operations-related parameters included process conditions, and time. Over an 8.5 hour time period consisting of two runs, about 1800 pounds of waste were oxidized. The waste burned during the test was designed to simulate McMurdo Station waste. (Clean Air Engineering, 1991) The acceptance test burn system did not include any of the post- incineration components which were installed at the McMurdo Station facility, including the dry scrubber, bag house, heat exchanger, and induced draft fan. In particular, the lack of the induced draft fan precluded attaining the desired combustion temperature of 1600 degrees. The average temperature during the test burn was 1350 degrees F. The emissions from the installed incinerator system are expected to be significantly lower than the results of the acceptance test, as a result of the addition in Antarctica of these emission control devices. TABLE 4 Parameters and Results of Performance Acceptance Testing Interim Incinerator [Using Methods 3A, 5, 7E, 9 and 10] Run 1 Run 2 Average Start Time (approx.) 1:04 pm 3:50 pm Stop Time (approx.) 2.21 pm 4:55 pm Process Conditions Auxiliary Burners Kerosene Usage (gal/hr) Main Incinerator Maximum Waste Burn Rate (lb/hr) Chamber Temperature (§F) 5 300 1350 5 300 1350 Gas Conditions Temperature (§F) Moisture (volume %) O2 (dry volume %) CO2 (dry volume %) 1,256 8.9 11.7 7.5 1,258 7.9 13.1 5.5 1,257 8.4 12.4 6.5 Volumetric Flow Rate acfm dscfm 2,635 735 2,643 745 2,639 740 Particulate gr/dscf lb/hr 0.0203 0.128 0.0219 0.140 0.0211 0.134 Nitrogen Oxides ppm lb/hr 77 0.404 79 0.424 78 0.414 Opacity Percent 5 5 5 Carbon Monoxide ppm lb/hr 39 0.125 10 0.033 25 0.079 TABLE 5 Summary of "Standards of Performance for Municipal Waste Combustors" [From 56 Federal Register 5506; February 1991] Parameters ------------------ Dioxins/Furans Particulate Matter Opacity Oxygen Carbon Dioxide Sulfur Dioxide Hydrogen Chloride Nitrogen Oxides Carbon Monoxide ----------------- Emissions Limit and Section ----------------- 30 ng/dscm 60.53 34 mg/dscm 60.52a 10 % 60.52(b) No Limit 60.58b(3) No Limit 60.58b(3) 80 % reduction or 30 ppm, whichever is less stringent 60.54a 95 % reduction or 25 ppm, whichever is less stringent 60.54d 180 ppm 60.55a 50 ppm 60.56a ------------------ Test and Section ----------------- Method 23 60.58d(1) Methods 1, 3 & 5 60.58b(1), (2) and (3) Method 9 (Opacity Limit) 60.58b(7) Method 5 [Either Oxygen or Carbon Dioxide must be run simultaneously with Method 5 Method 19, 5.4 Method 19, 4.3 60.58e(1) & (2) Method 26 60.58f(2) Method 19, 4.1 60.58g(1) No Method Listed; 60.58h requires CEMS ----------------- TABLE 6 Conversion of Performance Acceptance Testing Data to Form Comparable to Standards of Performance for Municipal Waste Combustors Parameter Actual Reading Corrected to 7% Oxygen Dry Basis Emission Standard Particulate 0.0211 gr/dscf 47.8 mg/dscm 0.0345 gr/dscf 78.2 mg/dscm 0.015 gr/dscf Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) 78 ppm 128 ppm 180 ppm Carbon Monoxide (CO) 25 ppm 41 ppm 50 ppm Opacity 5% no correction 10% Conversion Equation: Where C = Concentration of Parameter Corrected To 7 Percent Oxygen On A Dry Basis CS = Measured Concentration of Parameter O2 = Oxygen Content of Gas = 12.4% (Dry Volume) Example Calculation: NOx = 78 ppm (20.9 - 7) / (20.9 - 12.4) = 128 ppm All of the testing parameters were within the guideline emission standards except for particulates. As noted above, as of the date of the acceptance test, the dry scrubber and baghouse components of the incinerator had not been installed. These pollution control components, subsequently installed at McMurdo Station, are expected to significantly lower the level of particulate emissions. Installation of Interim Incinerator. The combustion chamber components arrived at McMurdo in December, 1991, but additional critical components of the incinerator system did not arrive until late February, 1992. During March and April 1992, USAP installed various components of the incinerator system and completed fabrication of supporting facilities. Combustion chamber firing and testing began in May, 1992. Installation progressed slower than scheduled due to necessary modifications to ancillary equipment and limited space in the enclosing structure. Construction and installation of supporting equipment continued during May and June, 1992. In late July and August 1992, testing with representative waste began, and problems were experienced with the conveyors, shredders, and mills feeding materials to the incinerator chambers (Figure 1). Work on required modifications continued into November to increase the system's efficiency. During November, engineering staff ensured that continuous emissions monitoring systems were calibrated and functioning correctly. Interim Incinerator Operational and Emissions Testing. Although some testing was performed in the U.S. as part of acceptance tests, both operational and emissions testing has continued in the Antarctic. 1. Operational Testing. The contractor conducted numerous operational tests on the interim incinerator between May and November, 1992. The most recently collected operational data is contained in Table 7. This data demonstrates that the interim incinerator is reaching desirable combustion temperatures, also an important component in emissions control. The contractor has determined that operating the second and third chambers at the highest temperatures (as opposed to the first chamber) maximizes combustion of the organic gases volatized in the primary chamber and minimizes nitrous oxide emissions. For this reason, the data in Table 7 show daily average temperatures for chamber one decreasing over time. Determining the best mix of wet and dry feedstocks has been important to operation of the incinerator. The current feedstock mix consists of approximately .7 pounds of galley waste to each pound of dry burnable waste which has resulted in a capacity of approximately 220 pounds per hour. At that burn rate, during the austral summer when the McMurdo population is at peak, the interim incinerator is expected to be operated two shifts per day. The contractor has established numerous procedures for operating the interim incinerator, including safety guidelines (such as hearing and eye protection) and data collection. During incinerator operation, the operators continuously record temperatures in the incinerator chambers, temperatures at various points in the duct work between the incinerator and the stack exit, pressures, and charge rates. Based on the operational testing results, USAP is currently fine- tuning the waste mixing methods and considering procurement of a commercial dewatering system to remove water from the feedstock and increase processing efficiency. 2. Stack Emission Testing. No U.S. emissions standards exist for incinerators with as small a capacity as that of the interim incinerator. As noted earlier, USAP chose to used EPA standards for larger municipal solid waste incinerators (greater than 250 tons per day) located in the United States as guidelines for evaluating the performance of the interim incinerator. These standards are found at 56 Federal Register 5506 (February, 1991). To evaluate emissions from the incinerator, USAP's civilian contractor engaged a testing firm certified in: 1) incinerator performance acceptance testing (previously discussed) ; and (2) the sampling, analysis and interpretation of incinerator stack gas emissions. The continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS) became operational in mid-November, and will monitor the incinerator emission for oxygen, opacity, and nitrogen oxide, and sulfur dioxide. The emissions testing subcontractor certified the accuracy of the CEMS, and it is routinely operated by ASA contract employees. During operation of the incinerator, the operators continuously record readings from the CEMS. In November, 1992, USAP, utilizing the CEMS, reported testing results for opacity, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides. (Table 7). The results for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides were well within acceptable standards. (Tables 8 and 9). With respect to opacity, two readings exceeded the standards--one was attributable to an equipment failure and the other to a testing error. (Table 10). The contractor reports that the Dynatron 1100M Opacity Monitor installed on the stack had read zero or one percent over 95% of the time since installation in mid-November. The emissions subcontractor conducted additional stack monitoring testing for CO2, opacity, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, particulate emissions, hydrochloric acid, lead, cadmium, mercury, dioxins and furans in early December, 1992, in accordance with the new source performance standards for municipal solid waste incinerators located in the U.S. greater than 250 tons. This testing was completed on December 10, 1992 and a report is currently being prepared. Dioxin samples from the interim incinerator have been shipped to the EPA laboratories for analysis. In addition, the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) has been tasked to collect, analyze and interpret ambient air quality during the 1992-1993 season. The INEL Team's ambient air monitoring plan (Lugar 1992), includes arrangements for the monitoring of: 1) Particulate Matter Less Than 10 Microns (PM- 10); 2) Total Suspended Particulates; 3) Sulfur Dioxide; 4) Nitrogen Oxides; 5) Carbon Monoxide; 6) Metals; and 7) Dioxins and Furans. Dioxins analysis is a complicated and costly process. Through an arrangement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA) Environmental Chemistry, and Atmospheric Research and Assessment Laboratories, USAP received specialized dioxin and furan sampling supplies for INEL's use at McMurdo Station. Dioxin samples from various locations at McMurdo will be analyzed by USEPA laboratories using High-Resolution Gas Chromato- graphy/High-Resolution Mass Spectroscopy. The estimated sampling and analysis cost of one dioxin/furan sample is about $8,000. TABLE 7 SUMMARY OF INTERIM INCINERATOR OPERATING DATA: DAILY AVERAGES AND RANGES 16 NOV 92 17 NOV 92 18 NOV 92 19 NOV 92 20 Nov 92 21 NOV 92 Parameter Temperature §C (§F) Chamber 1 Minimum Maximum 971§C (1781§F) 852§C (1568§F) 897§C (1649§F) 1070§C (1960§F) 899§C (1652§F) 750§C (1383§F) 1029§C (1886§F) 819§C (1507§F) 603§C (1119§F) 1051§C (1926§F) 709§C (1309§F) 584§C (1085§F) 912§C (1675§F) Chamber 3 Minimum Maximum 800§C (1474§F) 788§C (1452§F) 733§C (1353§F) 785§C (1447§F) 454§C ( 850§F) 853§C (1569§F) 783§C (1443§F) 478§C ( 893§F) 862§C (1586§F) 795§C (1464§F) 596§C (1105§F) 864§C (1588§F) Chamber 5 Minimum Maximum 763§C (1407§F) 741§C (1368§F) 660§C (1222§F) 738§C (1362§F) 486§C ( 907§F) 809§C (1489§F) 744§C (1373§F) 531§C ( 988§F) 816§C (1502§F) 763§C (1407§F) 594§C (1102§F) 815§C (1500§F) Stack Minimum Maximum 59§C ( 139§F) 143§C ( 290§F) 149§C ( 301§F) 153§C ( 308§F) 92§C ( 197§F) 184§C ( 364§F) 152§C ( 306§F) 153§C ( 308§F) 171§C ( 340§F) CEMS Data O2-PAN Minimum Maximum 11.9% 12.4% 13.7% 10.9% 7.2% 13.2% 11.7% 8.6% 18.7% 12.0% 10.8% 13.6% Combustibles Minimum Maximum 42.3 ppm 92.9 ppm 103.5 ppm 80.0 ppm 120.0 ppm 67.6 ppm 30.0 ppm 130.0 ppm 96.9 ppm 70.0 ppm 140.0 ppm Opacity Minimum Maximum 0% 0% 05 0% 1% 2% 0% 24%a 7% 0% 100%b SO2 Minimum Maximum 0 1 2 0 5 3 0 12 2 0 5 NO Minimum Maximum 7 13 18 11 21 15 8 22 14 10 18 O2-LS Minimum Maximum 7.72 16.99 15.9 15.2 17.o 16.3 14.7 19.2 16.5 15.7 17.3 Number of Data Points 24 26 21 17 16 16 Footnotes: a The maximum reading of 24% opacity was likely caused by a bag breaking in the bag house. The fly ash that was caked on the bag was released when it burst and temporarily covered the opacity monitor window in the stack, causing high readings for an extended period. According to the strip chart the deviation of opacity readings above the 0% lasted one hour and twenty minutes. b The opacity reading of 100% is believed to have occurred during the daily automatic calibration check; the incinerator operators are currently receiving training to familiarize them with how the CEMS function and how to read and interpret the output the bag house air pollution control equipment. Number of data points = the number of data points recorded that day; readings are recorded every half hour, so the total number for the day varies depending on the number of hours of operation Key: All numbers are Daily Averages unless noted as Minimuma or Maxima. CEMS = CONTINUOUS EMISSION MONITORING SYSTEMS O2-PAN = OXYGEN CONCENTRATION AS MEASURED BY THE FLUE GAS MONITOR MANUFACTURED BY PANAMETRICS WHICH IS LOCATED IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE FIFTH BURN CHAMBER COMBUSTIBLES = COMBUSTIBLES READING OFF PANAMETRICS FLUE GAS ANALYZER; COMBUSTIBLES INCLUDE CO, H2 AND ORGANIC GASES. OPACITY = OPACITY AS MEASURED BY THE DYNATRON 1100M STACK MONITOR SO2 = SULFUR DIOXIDE, AS MEASURED BY THE SM8100 STACK MONITOR NO = NITRIC OXIDE, AS MEASURED BY THE SM8100 STACK MONITOR O2-LS = OXYGEN CONCENTRATION AS MEASURE BY THE LEAR SIEGLER DYNATRON 401 MONITOR BEFORE THE ID FAN INSERT TABLES 8 INSERT TABLE 9 INSERT TABLE 10 Effects on the Environment. The preliminary monitoring data indicates that the interim incinerator emissions for sulfur dioxide, opacity and nitrogen oxides are below the guidelines for incinerator emissions and meet the design specifications. The interim incinerator would contribute an approximate 1% addition to the SO2 concentrations at McMurdo. Testing results also indicate that the incinerator temperatures are adequate to result in 99.9% destruction of organics. The testing results indicate that the interim incinerator system is meeting the performance requirements to minimize the potential for degradation of the environment. Whenever the incinerator is operated, CEMS data will be collected to ensure that the desired level of performance continues. In addition, at the present time, data is being analyzed on dioxins, furans, CO2, opacity, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, particulate emissions, hydrochloric acid, lead, cadmium, and mercury. Unless this additional data contradicts the earlier CEMS measurements, the incremental and cumulative impact of incineration of food wastes in the proposed three-chambered incineration system is extremely small. DISPOSAL OF FOOD WASTE THROUGH THE WASTEWATER SYSTEM Another component of the proposed alternative is processing and disposal of limited amounts of food waste through grinders into the wastewater system at McMurdo Station. This category of food wastes is predominantly water and therefore cannot be efficiently incinerated. Historically, liquid food waste and water with food residue from the galley was discharged into the McMurdo waste water system. Examples include: leftover coffee, juices, and soups; water from food preparation and kitchen clean-up. For convenience, this category of food waste is referred to as liquid food waste. The August 2, 1991 EIA examined the alternative of installing food grinders in McMurdo's galley to accommodate disposal of solid food waste through the wastewater system. Since food grinding equipment was not available at the time of the assessment and there was limited understanding of its potential impacts, this was not a preferred alternative. The Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the USAP examined some aspects of wastewater quality at McMurdo Station; and two unresolved issues were identified: 1) the advisability of introducing additional amounts of food waste into the wastewater system, elevating concentrations of such nutrients as carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus in McMurdo's near shore marine environment; and 2) the advisability of introducing additional amounts of particulate matter into the wastewater system, elevating concentrations of suspended solids in McMurdo's nearshore marine environment. USAP installed new grinders in the food galley in October, 1991 to provide an additional step in processing liquid food wastes and water with food residue prior to maceration and dilution with brine in the wastewater system. USAP estimates that during the austral summer when the McMurdo population is the highest, the daily quantities of this liquid waste are as follows: Residue coffee 10 gallons Residue juices 7 gallons Residue soups 5 gallons Milk 3 gallons Dishwater 50 gallons Steamkettle water 200 gallons Water from galley cleaning 200 gallons Vegetable rinsewater 60 gallons Food preparation water 70 gallons Estimated daily total 605 gallons These numbers reflect the minimization efforts discussed above and vary from day to day. Solid food waste, the bulk of food waste produced at McMurdo, is stored for incineration or possible retrograde. Effect on the Environment. Total daily wastewater production at McMurdo Station during the austral summer is approximately 100,000 gallons per day (SEIS Appendix F, Table F.1), of which the liquid food waste is a small component. The liquid food waste and water with food residues from the galley constitutes approximately .6% of the total wastewater output. The additional grinding that this waste receives prior to maceration and dilution with brine further reduces food particle size which is expected to enhance assimilation. A recent analysis of the McMurdo wastewater components is contained in Table 1. USAP has instituted a wastewater analysis and sampling plan to examine the potential impacts of McMurdo's wastewater system, including the liquid food waste component (Crockett 1992). An INEL team deployed in November 1992 and are currently reviewing data; preliminary data on dissolved oxygen content is contained in Table 2. Any adverse impact from increased nutrient levels from the liquid food waste in such a relatively large nearshore environment with a large wildlife population is unlikely. These waters are characteristically high in nutrients of concern (i.e, nitrogen, phosphorus and carbon), have very high concentrations of dissolved oxygen (and are not prone, therefore, to eutrophication) and exhibit unexpectedly high productivity. The INEL study should help to clarify the implications of inputs of ground liquids and high-water content food residues. RETROGRADE TO U.S. ON ANNUAL SUPPLY SHIP Because of the delay in getting the interim incinerator operational, approximately 29 tons (54 triwalls) of backlogged food waste have accumulated at McMurdo Station. At the present rate of accumulation, USAP estimates a total backlog of approximately 38 tons (75 triwalls) by time of resupply vessel departure from McMurdo (mid-February). USAP is currently exploring the feasibility of retrograding this material to the U.S. on the annual supply ship in mid-February. Upon return to the U.S., U.S. Department of Agriculture regulations mandate certain disposal procedures. These require food waste to be properly contained in leakage proof containers, and removed to an appropriate disposal facility for incineration, sterilization or grinding. There are several unresolved implementation issues. USAP must identify appropriate packaging materials, a land transportation contractor, and an approved incinerator facility on the west coast. Because the vessel would transit warm climates in which the waste would decompose, transport of the food waste by ship raises serious health issues. For this reason, the food waste may require refrigeration. USAP is therefore exploring the feasibility of placing the garbage in refrigerated vans. Costs for implementing this plan are still unknown. If successful, this effort would provide useful data for retrograding as a long-term solution for McMurdo food waste disposal. Management of food waste disposal at McMurdo Station in both the short-term and long-term is not a closed issue for USAP. USAP's short-range approach includes incineration technologies; but the long-term goal is to continue examining further alternatives to allow an appropriate mix of minimization and environmentally-compatible, on-site processing of such wastes, as well as removal of those components of food-related wastes that cannot be handled feasibly in the Antarctic. Effect on Environment. A substantial stockpile of food waste currently exists at McMurdo because of problems in getting the interim incinerator fully operational. This stockpile is located outdoors because there are inadequate facilities to store food waste indoors. Failure to reduce the stockpile increases the risk of dispersion by high winds and scavenging Antarctic birds. The stockpile could also interfere with the birds' normal eating habits and could lead to them developing dependence on human activity at McMurdo for their food supply. Removal of the current backlog of food waste on the annual supply ship this February for disposal in the U.S. would have a positive environmental effect on McMurdo because it would eliminate these risks in a timely manner. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Alternative II. Incinerate food wastes in both the temporary, two-chambered incinerator and the three-chambered, incineration system. After the closing of the Fortress Rocks landfill in February of 1991 and the cessation of open burning, USAP was confronted with the problem of a growing backlog of food-related waste. Following preparation of environmental documentation assessing the possible impacts, USAP authorized the incineration of food- related wastes in a Temporary Incinerator on June 14, 1991. The temporary incinerator is described in the August 2, 1991 EIA. Operation testing of the temporary incinerator and engineering changes continued to be made throughout the 1991 winterover period. Even with some incineration of food-related wastes occurring, these wastes continued to accumulate throughout the 1991 winterover period as the two chamber incinerator lacked the capacity to handle the total volume of food waste. The August 2, 1991 EIA determined that the temporary incinerator lacked the capacity to address the entire food waste requirements of McMurdo Station. This was confirmed at season opening when domestic waste was being produced at McMurdo Station at the rate of about 10 dumpsters per day but the Temporary Incinerator was only able to process this domestic waste at a rate of about 4 dumpsters per day. On August 2, 1991, USAP decided to utilize the temporary incinerator until the interim incineration system became operational. Temporary Incinerator Emissions Testing. On January 7, 1992, a combustion analyzer probe was placed in the exhaust gas stack of the Temporary Incinerator to monitor three parameters: percent oxygen, carbon monoxide, and temperature. The Temporary Incinerator had been pre-heated using its auxiliary fuel burners. Testing was done as three loads of waste were fed into the incinerator and as each of these loads completed burning. TABLE 11 Results of Temporary Incinerator Emissions Testing Performed at McMurdo Station on January 7, 1992 Time Percent CO Combustion Temp Remarks Oxygen (ppm) Efficiency (§F) 0915 First load of waste added. 0920 13.0 950 0921 0.7 3530 --- 1180 Waste loaded. 0922 3.8 3528 --- 0924 14.3 1860 67% 0925 0.6 3167 --- Waste loaded 0926 3330 1132 0930 3549 Air compressor turned on. Key: CO = Carbon monoxide ppm = parts per million --- = display shown on analyzer In January, 1992, a fan was installed on the stack to improve draft. Use of the fan in combination with feeding waste into the charge hopper at a steady, controlled rate rather than overstuffing the hopper, has raised the oxygen levels high and lowered the emissions levels. In November, 1992, stack opacity of the temporary incinerator averaged five percent. Effect on the Environment. Although there have been some improvements in minimizing the emissions output from the Temporary Incinerator, it remains inferior to the Interim Incinerator because the latter has a third chamber, gas clean-up system which reduces the emissions of particulates or pollutants, and an extensive continuous monitoring system. Operating both incinerators simultaneously is not the preferred alternative because of the additional emissions which would be generated by the temporary incinerator. The temporary incinerator should be deactivated as soon as final stack emissions testing and final field modifications have been completed on the Interim Incinerator. Once deactivated, the Temporary Incinerator should not be dismantled until the Interim Incinerator has demonstrated consistent operational reliability. Alternative III. Utilize the two-chambered incinerator now in operation at New Zealand's Scott Base. One of the alternatives (Alternative II-E) examined in the August 2, 1991 EIA was to utilize the two-chambered incinerator regularly used at Scott Base by the New Zealand Antarctic Programme. This base is about two miles from the McMurdo Station and is about one-twentieth the size of the U.S. Station. The capacity of this incinerator is 680 pounds per 8 hour day. Scott Base's Incinerator lacks any emissions control or monitoring equipment (Department of Scientific and Industrial Research 1987; Geddes 1990), but has been used by the New Zealand Antarctic Program for the processing of combustible wastes including food- related wastes. The installation and operation of the Scott Base Incinerator has never been environmentally assessed by the New Zealand program. Wastes processed by the New Zealand program in their incinerator include: 1) food scraps; 2) paper waste and products; 3) untreated timber; 4) hydroponic plant remains; and 5) low density plastic rubbish bags (containing burnable wastes). The August 2, 1991 EIA considered the capacity of the Scott Base Incinerator inadequate for the total quantity of food-related waste produced at McMurdo. It was recognized, however, that a portion of that waste might be processed at Scott Base, if permission were granted by the New Zealand Antarctic Programme. Last year, during the 1991-1992 austral summer research season, New Zealand officials granted USAP permission to use Scott Base's two-chambered incinerator to allow the processing of a rapidly accumulating backlog of food-related wastes. Between November, 1991 and January, 1992, USAP sporadically disposed of some of its food waste in the Scott Base incinerator. The incinerator had difficulty handling the high water content of the food waste, which made the effort highly labor intensive. TABLE 12 Scott Base Incinerator Specifications Component Specification Primary Chamber Total Capacity Waste Capacity 1.5 cubic meters 1.2 cubic meters Waste Type Paper, wet kitchen garbage, plastics Calorific Value Type '2' 9400 Kilojoules/Kilogram Capacity for Burning 310 Kilograms/hour/day Fuel Type Arctic Diesel Burners Primary - Type - Supplier - Output - Quantity - Nozzle Secondary - Type - Supplier - Output - Quantity - Nozzle Nuway C2 Heating Services Ltd. 500,000 Kilojoules/hour 1 3 gallons/hour 45§ Nuway C2 Heating Services Ltd. 500,000 Kilojoules/hour 1 2.75 gallons/hour 70§ Combustion Air Fans MacDonald Industries 200 cubic feet/minute 6§ w.g. Electrical Control System Supplier Voltage Cameron Electrical 240, 1 ph Component Settings Burn Timer 2MT Burn Out Timer 1MT Primary Temp. Controller Secondary Temp. Controller Panel Temperature Panel Low Temperature 60 minutes 150 minutes Red - 400§C Green - 1000§C Red - 1050§C Green - 1200§C +/- 15§C + 05§C The NSF Winterover Representative, McMurdo Station, did not continue to process food wastes in the Scott Base Incinerator during the 1992 winterover period. This was due to a requirement to have, at least, one waste management worker spend the entire day at Scott Base's Incinerator to attend to the processing operation. This requirement could not be fulfilled as there were only three waste management workers at McMurdo Station during the 1992 winterover period; and their work schedules at McMurdo Station were full because they were working on the interim incinerator, making them unavailable for duty at Scott Base. The NSF Winterover Representative anticipated that McMurdo Station's Interim Incinerator would be operational shortly, and capable of reducing the accumulating backlog of food-related wastes. McMurdo's Interim Incinerator did not become operational on May 1, 1992, as originally planned. Although the majority of the backlog was retrograded to New Zealand, a single load of food- related waste was burned at the Scott Base Incinerator on September 15, 1992. All ashes were removed from the Scott Base Incinerator and packaged for retrograde to the United States. Effect on Environment The New Zealand program was unable to supply any information about the emissions from the Scott Base incinerator and the device does not incorporate any monitoring equipment. Because it lacks a third chamber and the pollution control equipment found on the interim incinerator system, it appear to be a less desirable alternative. In addition, based on program experience, the older design and smaller capacity of the Scott Base incinerator clearly preclude its use as a primary means of food- waste disposal for the USAP. Alternative IV. Storage, Handling and Retrograde to New Zealand. One of the alternatives (Alternative IV-C) examined in the August 2, 1991 EIA, considered the storage, handling and retrograde to third countries (other than the U.S.). This alternative would have required the concurrence of the host country, taking into account public opinion surrounding such a retrograde. As noted above and in the August 2, 1991 EIA, USAP and its contractor (Argonne National Laboratory) had conducted exploratory discussions with government and private sector representatives in New Zealand and Australia (third party receipt of food-related wastes). That assessment estimated the direct and indirect costs and logistics considerations associated with retrograde using the annual supply vessel. The USAP continued to examine and discuss this alternative with foreign government and waste management company officials after the publication of the August 2, 1991. That assessment did not, however, consider this annual supply vessel transport alternative feasible for the 1991- 1992 season because USAP had not yet obtained permission from New Zealand for the retrograde and logistic restraints. 1991-1992 Austral Summer Season. At the beginning of the 1991- 1992 austral summer season (October 3, 1991), the Senior U.S. Representative Antarctica declared that a critical, emergency situation with respect to accumulated food-related wastes existed at McMurdo Station. Approximately 31,500 kilograms (70,000 pounds or 35 tons) of food-related wastes had accumulated since the close of the 1990-1991 season. In addition, the food-related waste was thawing due to the rise in temperature, and the influx of austral summer personnel had begun. Due to budgetary developments, the USAP faced the possibility of being shut down on short notice. The USAP needed to take swift action to ensure the proper disposal of the accumulated waste in the event of an unplanned evacuation. USAP staff in Washington, Christchurch and at McMurdo Station were tasked with investigating options for processing or disposal of this waste, and choosing and implementing a workable option under these emergency conditions. Discussions between the NSF Representative, New Zealand and the Christchurch City Council on these emergency circumstances led to an agreement, subject to the approval of the New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (MAF) for a shipment of food-related waste to be retrograded from McMurdo Station to Christchurch, New Zealand. The MAF granted USAP a permit (R91/BIO/347) to retro- grade food wastes to Christchurch. On October 23, 1991, eighty- six (86) food waste filled triwall cardboard containers were retrograded to Christchurch. The waste load weighed approxi- mately 32,814 kilograms (72,920 pounds) [31,082 net kilograms (69,070 net pounds)]. The operation was successful with all parties stating satisfaction with the outcome. A second shipment of similar food waste weighing about 9,000 kilograms (20,000 pounds, 10 tons), which eliminated the backlog, was made on November 14, 1991. This shipment experienced some thawing of the frozen waste with subsequent leakage apparent from 4 of 24 triwall boxes. Solutions to this problem of containment of any future shipments offered at the time were to: 1) enclose each triwall box in plastic; and 2) deliver leak-proof dumpsters to McMurdo. Subsequent discussions and correspondence (Christchurch City Council 1991; National Science Foundation Representative, New Zealand 1991a) between the NSF Representative, New Zealand and the Christchurch City Council led the USAP to request approval for the retrograde of an additional three to four shipments between December 19, 1991 and February 22, 1992. An agreement was reached wherein USAP would be allowed to retrograde food- related wastes to Christchurch, New Zealand until October 16, 1994. In addition, two analysts from the New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries visited and inspected food operations at McMurdo Station between November 29-30, 1991 (National Science Foundation Representative, New Zealand 1991b). The audit report prepared by the analysts indicate that the retrograde of food- related wastes from McMurdo Station, Antarctica should entail insignificant risks of exposing New Zealand biota to exotic disease agents. Also, they recommended that the permit (R91/BIO/347) remain in force subject to monitoring of each consignment to ensure compliance with conditions of the permit. 1992 Winterover Period. Food-related wastes generated by the 280 personnel on station during the 1992 winterover period (182 days) was estimated at about 0.68-0.90 kilograms per person per day (1.5-2.0 pounds). Continuing problems associated with efficient processing of food-related wastes in the Temporary Incinerator, delays in bringing the Interim Incinerator to full operation, and a decision not to use the Scott Base Incinerator during that period led to accumulating food-related wastes as during the 1991 winterover period. By July 12, 1992, the NSF Representative on station estimated there were 65 triwall cardboard boxes (about 21 metric tons) of combustible food-related waste at McMurdo. He projected that this number of food-related waste filled triwall boxes would rise to about 114 (about 40 metric tons) by the beginning of October 1992. On October 2, 1992, 59 triwall boxes of food-related wastes were retrograded to New Zealand, using C-5 air transport. The weight of the shipment was about 28,200 kilograms (62,665 pounds, 31 tons). TABLE 13 Dates and Amounts of Food Waste Retrograded to New Zealand for Landfill Disposal Dates Approximate Weight in Kilograms (Tons) October 23, 1991 31,500 kilograms (35) November 14, 1991 9,000 kilograms (10) October 2, 1992 27,000 kilograms (30) Total 67,500 kilograms (75) Logistical considerations. Aircraft could be used to transport food waste to New Zealand in October and November while the ice runway is in operation. Food wastes could also be shipped to New Zealand on the annual supply ship in February. The food waste would have to be stockpiled outside during the winter-over period and then again between November and February, once the ice runway closed. In addition, USAP would need to transport the food waste in a frozen state to avoid leakage, a government condition for retrograde. USAP's experienced difficulties meeting these conditions during past retrogrades by aircraft to New Zealand. If the food waste were retrograded by ship, freezer containers would be required. Effect on Environment. Retrograding food waste to New Zealand by aircraft and/or supply ship would have a positive effect on the McMurdo environment because disposal would occur outside the Antarctic Treaty area. Retrograding the waste would not avoid any impacts from landfilling in New Zealand. Due to the logistic constraints discussed above, stockpiling problems would result. Because there are inadequate facilities indoors to store the food waste, the food waste would be subject to dispersal by wind and scavenging Antarctic birds. The presence of stockpiled food waste could also alter their normal eating habits and result in them developing dependence on human activity at McMurdo Station for their food supply. These risks could be mitigated by storing the waste in any available shipping containers. No containers are currently available. Stockpiling of food could diminish the aesthetic surroundings at McMurdo, and odors during the warmer austral summer months could degrade the quality of life at the station. Regardless of the environmental consequences of retrograding food waste to New Zealand, this alternative is not practical. Political implications associated with the 1991 and 1992 retrograde of food-related wastes to New Zealand has led the New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries to impose additional restrictions on the original permit. (i.e., provision of 14 days notice and approval process before any subsequent shipments). New Zealand officials have advised USAP that they authorized the retrograde of USAP food waste to New Zealand because of emergency circumstances, and that retrograde to New Zealand is not acceptable as the primary food waste disposal option for the USAP. Alternative V. Ice Staging or Ocean Dumping within the Antarctic Treaty Area of food waste and food-contaminated wastes accumulated at McMurdo Station. The USAP has adopted a policy against such practices, making this alternative unavailable. Alternative VI. Open Ocean Dumping outside of the Antarctic Treaty Area of food waste and food-contaminated wastes accumulated at McMurdo Station. Open ocean dumping of food waste (i.e., pulped trash and pulped garbage) would be permissible under the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-220, Title II) if done beyond 50 nautical miles of 60øS. However, the USAP has adopted a policy against such practices, making this alternative unavailable. Alternative VII. Storage, Handling and Retrograde to the U.S. on the Annual Supply Ship. This alternative would involve disposal of all food waste by retrograding to the U.S. on the annual supply ship in February. The major difference between this Alternative and Alternative I would be the significant increase in total weight of the food waste which would be transported, and associated complications. Annual food waste production at McMurdo Station has been estimated at 150 tons. Effect on Environment. Retrograding food waste to the U.S. by ship would have a positive effect on the McMurdo environment because disposal would occur outside the Antarctic Treaty area. The stockpiling problem discussed in Alternative VI would be exacerbated by the sheer volume of food waste which would accumulate annually, as well as degradation of the aesthetic values in the McMurdo area. USAP has no operational experience retrograding food waste to the U.S. However, once operational experience is gained through the preferred alternative, this alternative could be reconsidered. Alternative VIII. Storage, Handling and Retrograde to the U.S. via Aircraft. This alternative would retrograde all food waste by aircraft to the U.S. for disposal. Under this alternative, C-141s would be used because they are more readily available than other aircraft and have demonstrated their ability to perform such tasks. Retrograding could take place only during the approximately eight weeks the ice runway is open to wheeled aircraft (from October to the first week in December). Disposal in the U.S. would follow the same procedures as previously discussed in Alternative I. Retrograding 150 tons of food waste would require approximately six round-trip C-141 flights between McMurdo Station and the United States. This alternative poses problems similar to those provided in Alternatives VI and VII. In addition, during the austral summer season, USAP aircraft play an important role in deploying personnel, supplying Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station with provisions and fuel and otherwise supporting scientific research. Runway and parking space for aircraft at McMurdo is already overtaxed by previously scheduled flights. Each of the essential activities supported by currently scheduled flights would have to be significantly curtailed to make room for flights retrograding food wastes. Effect on Environment. Retrograding food waste to the U.S. by aircraft would have a positive effect on the McMurdo environment because disposal would occur outside the Antarctic Treaty area. However, the stockpiling problem discussed in Alternative VI would be exacerbated by the sheer volume of food waste which would accumulate annually, as well as degradation of the aesthetic values in the McMurdo area. The additional flights departing McMurdo would require that additional fuel be transported, stored, and transferred to the aircraft at McMurdo, providing some additional risk of petroleum spills. This is not the preferred alternative because of the high cost of flying food waste to the U.S. Aircraft would have to be secured through the military airlift command which may not give this mission a high priority. This alternative is much more costly than retrograding by ship and offers no environmental benefits. Alternative IX: Open Burning. This alternative is unacceptable to USAP and is less environmentally sound than incineration. In addition, it is contrary to the principles of the Environmental Protocol to the Antarctic Treaty to phase out open burning; when signed in October of 1991, USAP stated that we would make all efforts to voluntarily comply with the Protocol until its enters into force. Alternative X. No action. This alternative would allow food waste and food-contaminated wastes to accumulate indefinitely at the station. Effect on the Environment. Annual accumulation of food waste would total approximately 300,000 pounds. USAP considers this level of accumulation year after year unacceptable because of environmental as well as safety and human health concerns. There is insufficient storage capacity for this food waste; and once ambient temperatures warmed above 32øF during the austral summer, there would be an unacceptable stench. NSF's experience has been that occasional high winds have caused some dispersion of stored food wastes. Also, with increasing warm austral summer temperatures, scavenging antarctic birds could exacerbate dispersion. Scavenging by these birds could also interfere with their normal eating habits. This is not the preferred alternative because it would not provide a solution to the existing problem. 4.0 RECOMMENDATION The Environmental Officer recommends Alternative I as the near- term approach to management and disposal of food waste at McMurdo Station, which provides as follows: 1) Continue implementation and enhancement of waste minimization; 2) Continue use of the interim incinerator and ongoing emission monitoring; 3) Discontinue use of the temporary incinerator once the interim incinerator is fully operational; 4) Continue grinding, maceration, dilution and discharge into the Ross Sea of limited amounts of liquid food wastes and water with food waste residue, with implementation of impact monitoring; 5) Determine the feasibility of retrograding the backlogged waste to the United States on the annual supply ship, and if possible, begin implementation of this waste disposal mechanism. In light of the emission levels from the interim incinerator, the negligible amounts of food waste disposed of through the wastewater system, and the positive environmental impact which would result from the retrograde of accumulated food waste to the U.S., the Environmental Officer finds that this proposed action will have less than a minor and less than a transitory impact on the environment near McMurdo Station. However, since analysis of recently collected interim incinerator emissions monitoring data will be available by February, 1993, the Environmental Officer recommends that this Decision on Disposal of Food Waste be reevaluated in light of that analysis. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: ___/ "I find that the proposed action will have less than a minor and transitory impact on the environment near McMurdo Station." ___/ "I find that the proposed action will have less than a minor and transitory impact on the environment near McMurdo Station provided that it is modified by the following mitigation measures. . . ." ___/ "I find that the proposed action will have a minor and transitory impact on the environment near McMurdo Station." This Decision will be reevaluated after receipt of the analysis of recently collected incinerator emissions monitoring data. ______________________________ Date:_________________ Dr. Peter E. Wilkniss Director, Division of Polar Programs References Acharya, P., S. G. DeCicco and R. G. Novak. 1991. Factors that can influence and control the emissions of dioxins and furans from hazardous waste incinerators. Journal of the Air Waste Management Association 41:1605-1615. Argonne National Laboratory. 1992. Final ReportþWaste Minimization, Handling, and Disposal for McMurdo Station: Findings and Recommendations. Argonne, IL. Christchurch City Council. 1991. Letter from K. D. Prusas (Senior Officer, Environmental Health) to C. K. Paul. Dated December 12, 1991. Crockett, A. B. 1992. Fiscal Year 1993 Environmental Sampling and Analysis Plan for Wastewater discharge, McMurdo Station, Antarctica. Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. 36pp. Department of Scientific and Industrial Research. 1987. Operating and Maintenance Instructions for Controlled Air Incinerator CA15 Special (MacDonald Industries Limited; P.O. Box 57-059; Auckland, New Zealand). Antarctic Division, Scott Base, Antarctica. 5pp. Gallo, M. A., R. J. Scheuplein and K. A. van der Heijden. 1991. Biological Basis for Risk Assessment of Dioxins and Related Compounds. Proceedings of a Banbury Center Meeting (Banbury Report 35). Papers presented at the 1990 Banbury conference on Biological Basis for Risk Assessment of Dioxins and Related Compounds. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Plainview, NY. 501 pp. Geddes, David. 1990. New Zealand Antarctic Research Programme Waste Management Procedures. Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Antarctic Division. Christchurch, New Zealand. 7pp. Kyle, P. H., K. Meeker and D. Finnegan. 1990. Emission rates if sulfur dioxide, trace gases and metals from Mount Erebus, Antarctica. Geophysical Research Letter 17 (12): 1225-2128. Laws, R. 1991. Talking Point: Unacceptable threats to antarctic science. New Scientist (No. 1762; 30 March 1001) Page 4. Longton, R.E. 1973. A classification of terrestrial vegetation near McMurdo Sound, continental Antarctica. Canadian Journal of Botany 51:2339-2346. Lugar, R. M. 1992. Fiscal Year 1993 Ambient Air Monitoring Plan for McMurdo Station, Antarctica. Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. 33pp. National Science Foundation (NSF). 1988. Environmental Protection Agenda for the U.S. Antarctic Program. Division of Polar Programs, Washington, DC. National Science Foundation (NSF). 1991a. Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the U.S. Antarctic Program. Division of Polar Programs, Washington, DC. National Science Foundation (NSF). 1991b. Environmental Impact Assessment: The U.S. Antarctic Program's Management of Food Wastes During 1991-1992 at McMurdo Station, Antarctica. Division of Polar Programs, Washington, DC. National Science Foundation (NSF). 1991c. Environmental Action Memorandum (Installation of Temporary Incinerator at McMurdo Station, Antarctica). Division of Polar Programs, Washington, DC. National Science Foundation (NSF). 1991d. Supplemental Environ- mental Analysis to Environmental Action Memorandum (Installation of Temporary Incinerator at McMurdo Station, Antarctica). Divi- sion of Polar Programs, Washington, DC. National Science Foundation Representative, New Zealand. 1991a. Letter from C. K. Paul to K. D. Prusas, Dated December 19, 1991. National Science Foundation Representative, New Zealand. 1991b. Memorandum from C. K. Paul to P. E. Wilkniss (with attached Supplement to the Audit Report on Disposal of Food Garbage from Antarctica), Dated December 19, 1991. Pearson, C. V. 1991. Technology Assessment, Evaluation, and Design of a High-Temperature Incinerator for Treatment of Solid Wastes at McMurdo Station, Ross Island, Antarctica. Part I: Role and Requirements for Incineration in the Waste Management Program. Part II: Reference System Description for the Interim Incinerator Facility. Environmental Assessment and Information Sciences Division. Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL. Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty. Madrid, October 1991. Reed, S. C. and R. Sletten. 1988. Waste Management Practices of the U.S. Antarctic Program. U.S. Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. Hanover, NH. 27pp. Roberts, L. 1991. EPA Moves to Reassess the Risk of Dioxin. Science 252(5008):911. Schwerdtfeger, W. 1984. Weather and Climate of the Antarctic. Elsevier Science Publishing Co., New York, NY. Testa, J.W. and D.B. Siniff. 1987. Population dynamics of Weddell seals (Leptonychotes weddelli) in McMurdo Sound, Antarctica. Ecological Monographs 57(2):149-165. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1985a. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume I: Stationary Point and Area Sources, 4th Ed. EPA Publication No. AP-42. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1985b. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume 2: Stationary Point and Area Sources, 4th ed. EPA Publication No. AP-42. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. Wilson, G.J. 1983. Distribution and Abundance of Antarctic and Sub-Antarctic Penguins: A Synthesis of Current Knowledge. Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research, Cambridge, England. 46pp. APPENDIX