[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 180 (Wednesday, September 17, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48823-48825]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-24719]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Navy


Notice of Availability of an Environmental Assessment and Finding 
of No Significant Impact for the Disposal of U.S. Navy Submarine Solid 
Waste

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 102(2) of the National Environmental 
Policy Act

[[Page 48824]]

(NEPA) of 1969, the Council on Environmental Quality regulations 
implementing NEPA procedures (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508), and Executive 
Order (EO) 12114 ``Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal 
Actions,'' the Department of the Navy gives notice that an 
Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared and an Environmental 
Impact Statement is not required for the disposal of non-hazardous 
biodegradable solid waste (paper, cardboard and food), and non-
hazardous non-biodegradable solid wastes (metal and glass) from U.S. 
Navy submarines.
    The provisions of NEPA apply to federal actions that occur in the 
United States and within the contiguous territorial sea. The provisions 
of EO 12114 apply to major federal actions that occur beyond the 
territorial seas of the United States, in the global commons, or within 
the jurisdiction of a foreign government.

Background

    The Navy is developing a Submarine Solid Waste Management Plan in 
response to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 
which required the Secretary of the Navy to submit to Congress, no 
later than November 30, 1996, a plan for compliance by Navy ships with 
Regulation 5 of Annex V of the International Convention for the 
Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL), which pertains to disposal 
of shipboard solid waste in ``special areas.'' The Navy submitted a 
Special Areas Compliance Report for Surface Ships by the November 30, 
1996 deadline. That report, however, did not address submarine solid 
waste management in detail, because, at that time, the Navy was still 
evaluating options for addressing submarine solid waste.
    The MARPOL Convention, formulated in 1973 and amended in 1978, 
contains five annexes, each dealing with a particular type of 
discharge. Solid waste is addressed in Annex V, ``Regulations for the 
Prevention of Pollution by Garbage from Ships.'' MARPOL prohibits some 
discharges altogether, restricts some discharges to particular 
distances from land, and establishes ``special areas'' within which 
additional discharge limitations apply, based on the oceanographic 
characteristics and ecological significance of those areas.
    Eight ``special areas'' have been designated by Annex V: the Baltic 
Sea, portions of the North Sea, the Antarctic Area, the Red Sea, the 
Black Sea, the Gulf area (including the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of 
Aden), the wider Caribbean (including the Gulf of Mexico), and the 
Mediterranean Sea. To date, only the first three are ``in effect'' 
based on an assessment of the waste management capabilities of each 
area's littoral countries.
    The MARPOL Convention limitations on ocean discharges do not 
expressly apply to warships or naval auxiliaries. It does require, 
however, that signature countries ensure their warships and auxiliaries 
operate consistent with the Convention so far as is ``reasonable and 
practicable.''
    The United States became a signatory to MARPOL Annex V in 1987 and 
enacted implementing laws by amending the Act to Prevent Pollution from 
Ships (APPS). In the 1987 amendment (known as the Marine Plastic 
Pollution Research and Control Act), Congress did not adopt the 
Convention's ``reasonable and practicable'' requirement for U.S. 
warships, but instead affirmatively required full compliance by U.S. 
Navy vessels with all Annex V requirements by 1994. In 1993, the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (DAA 94) 
allowed the Navy to petition Congress for relief from the legislatively 
imposed requirements of Annex V, if the Navy demonstrated that full 
compliance for U.S. warships and auxiliaries may not be technologically 
feasible while maintaining the necessary level of operational 
capability.
    The DAA 94 also provided that, if the plan demonstrates that 
compliance by certain ships (submarines included) under certain 
conditions is not technologically feasible, Congress may modify the 
applicability of the special area requirements for Navy warships and 
auxiliaries.
    The development of a management plan for the disposal of submarine 
solid waste must incorporate the unique nature of warships, a fact 
recognized by MARPOL. Submarine characteristics and operations are 
significantly different from surface ships, necessitating a different 
approach to solid waste management. As space in submarines is highly 
constrained, historic emphasis on solid waste management for the 
submarine fleet has been on source reduction. Crews work hard to 
conserve limited storage space by minimizing the amount of plastic and 
paper material brought on-board, a practice which in turn, minimizes 
the amount of waste generated at sea.
    Submarine design characteristics including critical space, weight, 
shock, acoustic and atmospheric control constraints, and operations are 
significantly different from surface ships, so much so that operational 
and technological opportunities for submarine solid waste management 
are far fewer than for surface ships. Factors in developing a submarine 
solid waste management strategy include the operation and deployment of 
the submarine fleet, storage space aboard ship, the totally self-
contained atmosphere of the vessel while submerged, waste generation 
rates and characteristics, and current Navy solid waste management 
policies and practices.

Proposed Action and Alternatives

    After careful analysis of several alternatives and their associated 
impacts, the proposed action for solid waste management for U.S. Navy 
submarines involves a three-pronged approach: (1) for food wastes, 
garbage grinders would be installed on submarines to grind food waste 
for disposal (to virtually eliminate the need for discharging plastic 
wet bags, so called because ``wet'' food wastes are placed in disposal 
bags), while non-grindable food wastes would be discharged via the 
Trash Disposal Unit (TDU) in non-plastic wet bags or containers; (2) 
the discharge of all plastics from submarines will be eliminated by 
December 31, 2008 through source reduction, use of new non-plastic wet 
bags (currently under development), and compaction technology to 
facilitate ease of on-board storage using the very limited space 
available for that purpose; and (3) the discharge of all other non-
hazardous components of the submarine solid waste stream (paper, 
cardboard, metal and glass) via the TDU. Discharge of solid waste from 
submarines would occur world-wide under the proposed action, but would 
be limited by ``distance from shore'' criteria, e.g., greater than 25 
nm from shore or between 12 nm and 25 nm only when water depths are 
6,000 feet or greater.
    Implementation of this proposed action will benefit the environment 
by retaining all plastic waste for shore disposal and grinding food 
waste, which will reduce the requirement for discharging wet bags and 
associated iron weights, and results in submarine operational, 
environment and quality of life improvements.

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

No At-Sea Discharge in Special Areas Alternative

    This alternative was rejected because submarines are not designed 
to accommodate solid waste storage, do not utilize underway transfers 
or replenishments, and cannot be modified

[[Page 48825]]

to provide adequate waste storage space. Routinely storing waste on-
board would adversely impact mission accomplishment, ability to recover 
from emergencies, and crew's health, welfare, and quality of life.

Pulp and Shred Alternative

    This alternative would involve the installation of pulpers to 
process cardboard and paper into a non-floating slurry and shredders to 
process (shred) metal and glass. The paper and cardboard slurry would 
be discharged into the submarine's sanitary tank for subsequent release 
to the ocean, while the shredded metal and glass would be discharged 
via the TDU. This alternative was rejected because equipment 
installation would use space for mission-essential equipment and crew 
berthing. This would adversely impact mission accomplishment, with no 
offsetting increase in environmental benefit.

Use of Extended-Life TDU Cans

    This alternative would involve the use of TDU cans made of less 
corrodible material (than in current use) allowing the TDU can to 
remain intact and be silted over on the ocean floor. This alternative 
was rejected because use of alternative materials for extended life TDU 
cans would represent a significant increase in cost to the Navy without 
producing an increase in environmental benefit.

On-Board Destruction

    This alternative focused on technologies that would result in the 
destruction of wastes aboard the submarine. On-board destruction was 
rejected because of the limited and confined space on submarines to 
install this equipment and the inability to exhaust resultant fumes and 
gases while submerged.

No Action Alternative

    The current waste management practices for submarines (assumed as 
the no action alternative) adhere to stipulated minimum distances where 
solid waste may be discharged from land, and the forms in which various 
types of solid waste may be discharged within those defined distances. 
Compacted solid waste is currently discharged from submarines in cans 
utilizing the TDU. The Navy has implemented plastics waste discharge 
management measures which include limiting discharges to the minimum 
amount practicable and retaining plastics on-board while the submarine 
is less than 50 nautical miles (nm) from shore. The continuation of 
current practices was rejected because it lacks the environmental 
benefits of retaining plastic material for shore disposal, and does not 
take advantage of the operational, environmental, and quality of life 
benefits resulting from the grinding of food waste.

Impacts of the Proposed Action

    Under the proposed action, cardboard, paper, metal and glass would 
continue to be discharged utilizing the TDU; plastics would be stored 
on-board for disposal/recycling on shore; and food wastes would be 
processed through a garbage grinder and discharged.
    The discharge of these wastes in MARPOL Special Areas and/or the 
oceans of the world will not significantly impact the plants, animals, 
or environment of these areas. With regard to plastic wastes, the 
proposed action would have a positive impact globally because all 
plastics will be retained for shore disposal. Further, plastics 
retention would reduce the weight of solid wastes discharged by 
approximately 15 percent.
    The proposed action similarly would not have a significant impact 
on the submarine environment. Management of cardboard, paper, metal and 
glass solid waste by discharge through the TDU is a continuation of 
waste management practices that are inherent in the way submarines were 
designed to manage these solid waste streams; as such, the proposed 
action (which includes the retention onboard of plastic waste) 
represents a minor change in the waste management practices aboard 
submarines and would not impact the submarine environment. However, 
there would be some limited impact on stowage space aboard the 
submarine and crew quality of life because of the retention of all 
plastics. The addition of garbage grinders, on submarines not currently 
equipped with them, will provide submarines with a more efficient means 
of disposing of food waste, virtually eliminating the use of wet bags 
and the associated TDU weights, and enhance the quality of life of the 
crew.
    Implementation of the proposed action will have some minor 
shoreside impacts with respect to on-shore waste disposal capacity and 
costs because of the need to manage additional plastic wastes retained 
on submarines for shore disposal.
    The discharge of non-hazardous, non-plastic, negatively buoyant 
compacted solid waste via the TDU will have no associated cumulative 
impacts to the marine environment. From a basin-wide perspective, the 
discharge of submarine solid waste should have no adverse environmental 
impact.
    It is not expected that the proposed action will have any adverse 
effects on threatened and endangered species. The distance that waste 
is discharged from shore, extremely low spatial density of the TDU cans 
on the sea floor, the short time span in the water column (TDU cans 
sink rapidly to the bottom), and the tendency of the threatened or 
endangered species to congregate in shallow water near coastlines, will 
minimize exposure of the TDU cans and their contents to these species.
    It is not expected that the proposed action will have any adverse 
impacts on coral reefs. Submarines usually operate in the vicinity of 
coral reefs only when transiting into or out of port. By Navy policy, 
submarines discharge TDU cans beyond 25 nm from land, or between 12 nm 
and 25 nm only when the depth of water is 6,000 feet or greater, where 
coral reefs are unlikely to be found.
    The proposed action does not comply with the Special Area discharge 
provisions of APPS, and an amendment would be necessary to implement 
the proposed action.
    EO 12898 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in 
Minority and Low-Income Populations) directs that all federal 
departments and agencies make achieving environmental justice part of 
their mission. The proposed action will not cause disproportionate 
adverse environmental or health impacts specific to any group or 
individual from minority or low-income populations.
    Based on information gathered during the preparation of the EA, the 
Navy finds that implementation of the proposed action will not result 
in significant adverse impacts to the environment.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: The EA addressing this action may be obtained 
from: Commanding Officer, Northern Division, Naval Facilities 
Engineering Command, 10 Industrial Highway, MS 82, Lester, PA 19113-
2090 (Attn: Mr. Robert Ostermueller, Code 202, telephone 610-595-0759). 
A limited number of copies of the EA are available to fill single copy 
requests.

    Dated: September 9, 1997.
Thomas J. Peeling,
Special Assistant for Environmental Planning, Environmental Protection, 
Safety, and Occupational Health Division, Deputy Chief of Naval 
Operations (Logistics).
[FR Doc. 97-24719 Filed 9-16-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P