Title  : Waste Dairy Product-Disposal-McMurdo
Type   : Antarctic EAM
NSF Org: OD / OPP
Date   : February 10, 1992
File   : opp93060

                                       DIVISION OF POLAR PROGRAMS
                                        OFFICE OF THE ENVIRONMENT
                                                     202/357-7766
MEMORANDUM

   Date:  February 10, 1992

   From:  Environmental Officer, DPP

Subject:  Environmental Action Memorandum (Disposal of Waste
            Dairy Product at McMurdo Station, Antarctica)

     To:  Files (S.7 - Environment)

This Environmental Action Memorandum describes the need for, and
location of, proposed actions to dispose of waste dairy products
at McMurdo Station, Antarctica, during the 1992 austral winter
season.  The Environmental Officer posed a set of questions
relating to the proposed project, and to the potentially affected
environment.  These questions were responded to by the civilian
support contractor's Field Engineer (Environmental) on January
27, 1992; the questions and responses are shown below:

         Environmental Assessment Queries and Responses

GENERAL

The Naval Support Force Antarctica (NSFA) proposes to dispose of
5,000 gallons of waste dairy product (ice cream) through the
McMurdo sewer system.  The waste dairy product ingredients are as
follows:  nonfat milk, sucrose, cream, corn syrup, sweet whey
solids, cellulose gum, guar gum, carrageenan, artificial flavor,
vegetable mono and diglycerides, artificial color, and poly-
sorbate 80.

 1.  What is the specific purpose of the proposed activity?

     Disposal of 5,000 gallons of spoilt dairy product through
     the McMurdo sewer system is proposed.

         What alternatives to the proposed activity have the
         Program and the Contractor considered?

         Retrograding the spoiled dairy product to the United
         States for disposal has been considered.  However,
         according to NSFA waste food cannot be accepted under
         current NSFA waste disposal arrangements in Port
         Hueneme.

         Have probable impacts of all alternatives been
         considered by the Program and the Contractor?  Please
         explain how.

         The main impact of disposing of the waste dairy product
         through the sewer would be the addition of liquid
         containing nutrients and biological oxygen demand (BOD)
         to McMurdo Sound.  This addition may be quantified as
         follows:

         5,000 gallons of waste dairy product are contained in
         one-half gallon, waxed boxes on 40 pallets.  NSFA
         proposes to dispose of 250 gallons (two pallets) per day
         for 20 days.  A discharge rate of about 250 gallons per
         day constitutes an increase of about 0.5 percent of the
         estimated daily sewage flow discharged through the
         McMurdo sewer outfall.  The increase to the volume of
         sewered wastes which have high nutrient content and
         biological oxygen demand would be roughly 30 percent,
         assuming that 500 gallons of actual human waste (one-
         half gallon per person per day, 1000 people) and 180
         gallons of food waste are discharged on a typical day.

         Should the chosen alternative involve potential impacts,
         how could these impacts be mitigated by the Program or
         the Contractor?

         The impact would be mitigated by discharging the waste
         at a controlled rate.  The waste product would be thawed
         and discharged as liquid; liquids are characteristically
         more easily biologically digestible than particulate
         BOD, in addition to dispersing more readily.  Also, the
         waste is proposed to be discharged from late January
         through February when the least amount of ice cover
         exists in the vicinity of the sewer outfall.

         Have measures to assess the indirect costs of the
         proposed activity been identified or considered by the
         Program or the Contractor?  Please explain how.

         Discharge of the waste dairy product as proposed would
         require a certain amount of staff time to transport the
         waste, open containers and empty the contents.  NSFA
         would be responsible for this work.  The activity would
         generate some solid waste requiring disposal, as
         discussed below.
LAND USE AND PLANNING

 2.  Where would the proposed activity be located, specifically?

     NSFA proposes to thaw and discharge the spoiled product
     through a floor drain in the laundry room located in
     Building 155.  The floor drain feeds into the McMurdo sewer
     system, which discharges into McMurdo Sound.

         Have alternative locations been considered by the
         Program or the Contractor?  If yes, which are they; if
         no, explain why.

         Use of the drain in the galley in Building 155 where
         food waste is currently discharged has also been
         considered.  The laundry room offers a number of
         advantages, including more storage room for thawing the
         waste product and the potential to use laundry
         wastewater to wash down the drain at the end of each
         day.

 3.  How would any aesthetic impacts to the area from the propos-
     ed activity be handled by the Program or the Contractor?

     The main aesthetic concern associated with the activity is
     the production of odors.  The waste product is still located
     in the frozen foods warehouse and has been frozen since the
     power outage was repaired.  Although it does not meet NSFA
     medical requirements, the product has not degraded enough to
     produce odors which may be associated with sour milk
     products.  The thawing rate of the waste product would be
     determined so that it is not stored in the laundry room any
     longer than necessary.  Waste product which is thawed would
     be discharged as soon as possible without exceeding the
     approved discharge rate.

     Visual impacts would be minimal because the discharge
     activity would occur within a building.  The sewer outfall
     is submerged, currently located approximately 160 feet from
     the shore at a depth of 60 feet.  As the waste product would
     consist of less than 0.5 percent of the sewer flow, it is
     expected that dilution within the sewer system and at the
     outfall would be adequate to prevent the discharged product
     from being noticeable at the water surface.

 4.  Would the proposed activity have any other indirect impacts
     on the environment?  If yes, what are they; if no, explain
     why none are expected.

     Increasing the nutrient loading to McMurdo Sound could
     increase the growth rate of various marine plants and
     microorganisms near the sewer outfall.  The growth of these
     could attract wildlife to the area.  However, because the
     waste product discharge would be a relatively small
     quantity, would be temporary, and is expected to be
     effectively dispersed by currents, no detectable impact
     would be expected.

 5.  Would the proposed activity change the traditional use(s) of
     the proposed (or chosen) site?  If yes, how; if no, why.

     Yes.  The laundry room would temporarily be used for a non-
     typical use.  Discharge of food waste to the sewer would not
     be a new occurrence.

 6.  Are the physical and environmental characteristics of the
     neighboring environment suitable for the proposed activity?
     If yes, explain why; if no, explain why.

     Yes.  During the proposed discharge period the area around
     the sewer outfall should be relatively free of ice and allow
     the discharged waste product to disperse.  The sewage from
     McMurdo Station currently discharges into McMurdo Sound.
     The impact of this discharge is believed to be very localiz-
     ed and limited.  According to research by El-Sayed and
     Mandellie (1965) and Holm-Hansen (1985) nutrient levels in
     antarctic waters are usually high; only very high levels of
     nutrient input, warming, and seawater dilution could be
     expected to alter (negatively or positively) the character
     of benthic communities near the McMurdo Station wastewater
     outfall [source: Environmental Impact assessment for
     Improvement of Sanitary Wastewater Management at McMurdo
     Station, prepared by the NSF DPP, December 1, 1989].

IMPACT AND POLLUTION POTENTIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT:

 7.  How has protection of the environment and human health from
     unnecessary pollution or impact been considered for the
     proposed 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])?

     At this time NSFA does not plan to dispose of any other
     large quantities of food wastes other than galley waste (as
     is done now) through the sewer system.  It is in the
     interest of NSFA and ASA personnel responsible for
     maintaining food storage facilities to take steps to
     minimize food loss due to spoiling.  The importance of
     minimizing food spoilage to reduce waste production is also
     recognized.

 8.  Would the proposed activity change ambient air quality at
     the proposed (or chosen) site?  If yes, how; if no, why.

     No.  As discussed above, odor emissions would not be
     expected as the waste product would remain cold until it is
     discharged.  A minimal amount of heavy equipment time would
     be required to transport two pallets per day to the
     discharge location.  Relative to the total amount of cargo
     transport activity which occurs each day two short-distance
     trips would be insignificant.

 9.  Would the proposed activity change water quality or flow
     (drainage), at the proposed (or chosen) site?  If yes, how;
     if no, why.

     No.  Product discharge would occur inside a building. The
     increase in the volume of wastewater discharged through the
     sewer pipe would be insignificant (roughly 0.5 percent).

10.  Would the proposed activity change waste generation or
     management at the proposed (or chosen) site?  If yes, how;
     if no, why.

     Yes.  Each pallet holds 250 waxed cardboard containers of
     waste product.  The proposed discharge rate would result in
     500 containers per day requiring disposal.  Because they are
     waxed and contaminated by food the containers would not be
     recyclable.  NSFA proposes that the containers be processed
     in McMurdo through incineration.  Incineration of food-
     contaminated wastes is standard practice at McMurdo Station.

11.  Would the proposed activity change energy production or
     demand, personnel and life support, or transportation
     requirements at the site?  If yes, how; if no, why.

     No.  NSFA personnel already present on site would be tasked
     to empty the containers.  Energy would be required to trans-
     port two pallets per day to Building 155.  The discharge
     process would not require energy.

12.  Is the proposed activity expected to adversely affect
     scientific studies or locations of research interest (near
     and distant, in the short-term and in the long-term)?  If
     yes, how; if no, why.

     No.  Two science events gathered samples and/or made
     observations in the vicinity of the sewer outfall earlier in
     the season (Drs. McFeters and Oliver).  However, no further
     research sample collection is planned during the months of
     January, February and March according to the ASA Manager,
     Laboratory Services, McMurdo.  The proposed activity is not
     expected to have any long-lasting impacts on the sound which
     would affect future research.

     Wastewater samples are being collected every two weeks by
     the ASA Field Engineer, Environmental.  These samples are
     analyzed for organic and inorganic pollutants, in addition
     to such standard wastewater parameters as BOD.  If the
     proposed activity is approved the ASA Field Engineer,
     Environmental, would make note of whether spoilt waste
     product discharge is occurring when wastewater samples are
     collected.

13.  Would the proposed activity generate pollutants that might
     affect terrestrial, marine or freshwater ecosystems within
     the environs of the station or inland camp?  If yes, how; if
     no, why.

     As discussed above a small, temporary increase in the amount
     of nutrients and BOD released to McMurdo Sound may be
     expected.  However, the increase would not be expected to
     substantially affect the marine ecosystem.

14.  Does the site of the proposed activity serve as habitat for
     any significant assemblages of Antarctic wildlife (for
     example, mosses or lichens, or antarctic birds or marine
     mammals)?

     Seals (mainly Weddell) and skuas frequent the area around
     the wastewater outfall.

HUMAN VALUES

15.  Would he proposed activity encroach upon any historical
     property of the site?  If yes, how; if no, why.

     No.  The two places affected by the proposed activity, (the
     laundry room in Building 155 and the sewer outfall) are not
     considered historical property.

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

16.  What other environmental considerations may be potentially
     affected by the proposed activity at the proposed (or
     chosen) site?  For example, have impacts associated with
     decommissioning of the activity been considered (and how).

     Decommissioning would not present a problem as the proposed
     activity would not require erection of any permanent or
     temporary structures.

                             Finding

The Environmental Officer, after reviewing the information
presented above, believes that the proposed activity poses only
potentially minor and transitory effects to the nearshore marine
environment at McMurdo Station.  The contractor and the Program
are authorized to proceed with the proposed activity.

                                Sidney Draggan