Title : Wood Waste Staging Pile-McMurdo Type : Antarctic EAM NSF Org: OD / OPP Date : February 09, 1993 File : opp93101 OFFICE OF POLAR PROGRAMS ENVIRONMENT SECTION 202/357-7766 MEMORANDUM Date: February 9, 1993 From: Environmental Officer, OPP Subject: Environmental Action Memorandum (Relocation of McMurdo Station's Pre-Retrograde Wood Waste Staging Pile) To: Safety and Health Officer, OPP Facilities Engineering Projects Manager, OPP Environmental Engineer, OPP Environmentalist, ASA REF: Environmental Action Memorandum (Installation of New Bulk Fuel Storage Tanks in the Pass, McMurdo Station), Dated January 6, 1993. This Environmental Action Memorandum describes the need for a proposed action to relocate McMurdo Station's existing, pre- retrograde wood waste staging pile. The Environmental Officer posed a set of questions relating to the proposed actions, and to the potentially affected environment. These questions were responded to by Antarctic Support Associates, Inc.'s (ASA) Environmental Engineer, Carol Andrews on January 15, 1993; background information about the proposed relocation action as well as the questions and responses are shown below: Background As part of McMurdo Station's current materials and waste management system waste wood is collected, stored and staged until it can be densified, placed in containers, and retrograded from Antarctica. Wood waste from station activities consists mainly of broken crates and pallets. The existing wood waste pile must be moved to accommodate installation of new bulk fuel storage tanks. The proposed activity calls for pushing the wood waste pile approximately 90 meters away from the site for the new tanks using bulldozers. During the 1993-94 austral summer season this wood waste is to be ground using an industrial grinder, containerized, and retrograded from Antarctica. Environmental Assessment Queries and Responses GENERAL 1. What is the specific purpose of the proposed activity? The Program and Contractor propose to move the wood waste from its current location to another location nearby to create room for the construction of two new bulk fuel tanks that will have secondary containment berms. What alternatives to the proposed activity have the Program and the Contractor considered? The Program and Contractor considered four alternatives to the proposed activity: 1) moving the wood pile to a different location in McMurdo Station, such as Fortress Rocks waste staging area; 2) draining an area of the station that now exhibits ponded water and placing the wood pile in the low, drained area (the preferred alternative); 3) moving the pile and reducing its volume through burning; and 4) the "no-action" alternative. Have probable impacts of all alternatives been considered by the Program and the Contractor? Please explain how. The impacts of the proposed and preferred activity include creating dust emissions, litter; and possibly, affecting the quality of surface water in a small pond adjacent to the new site. Staging the wood waste at the Fortress Rocks Area would have negative aesthetic impacts, as it may recreate the appearance of the former dump. This would detract from the success of the Fortress Rocks Area cleanup that took place during the 1991-1992 austral summer season. Draining the low area identified under the preferred alternative (No. 2 above) would reduce the likelihood of contact between staged wood waste and water. This would constitute a change in water flow. The pond, however, is not a habitat for significant assemblages of antarctic wildlife; and, its hydrologic characteristics are, in part, the consequence of past human activity. Because of existing drainage patterns, the Contractor believes it may not be possible to keep the area free of water without frequent pumping of water. This would be difficult to perform during winter months. During the winter the wood might become frozen into the ice, making its removal virtually impossible. Impacts of burning the wood waste are dominated by the emission of air pollutants. Emissions would include particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, unburned hydrocarbons, and carbon monoxide. In addition, the U.S. Antarctic Program has ceased burning of combustible wastes outdoors. Should the chosen alternative involve potential impacts, how would these impacts be mitigated by the Program or the Contractor? Litter (debris), that would be produced when the wood breaks up as it is pushed by bulldozers, would be picked up and placed with wood waste at the new staging site. Have measures to assess the indirect costs of the proposed activity been identified or considered by the Program or the Contractor? Please explain how. Yes. The Contractor has considered whether placing the wood waste in a new location would make wood grinding operations more laborious or equipment-intensive next year. LAND USE AND PLANNING 2. Where would the proposed activity be located, specifically? The new wood waste staging area would be located roughly 90 meters east of the current wood pile location, still in the area known as "The Pass." See attached map. Have alternative locations been considered by the Program or the Contractor? If yes, which are they; if no, explain why. Yes. As noted above, placing the wood in a low area or at Fortress Rocks was considered. 3. How would any aesthetic impacts to the area from the proposed activity be handled by the Program or the Contractor? Debris created by the proposed activity would be picked up. The pile would be made as neat as possible, and removed from its new location for retrograde as soon as equipment, time, and weather permit during the 1993-94 season. 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. Yes. Moving the wood pile farther from the bulk fuel tanks indirectly improves the safety of the fuel storage system by reducing the proximity of a potential fire hazard. 5. Would the proposed activity change the traditional use(s) of the proposed (or chosen) site? If yes, how; if no, why. No. The area has been used for materials storage and pre- retrograde staging of various items, and is already characterized by a high degree of human activity. 6. Are the physical and environmental characteristics of the neighboring environment suitable for the proposed activity? If yes, explain why; if no, explain why. Although it would be preferable to be able to afford greater assurances that the wood waste and surface water would be kept separated, the low location is advantageous in that it decreases the potential for the wood to be blown by wind. 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])? To minimize potential water quality impacts the wood would be kept from coming into contact with water as much as possible. To improve the waste management system, as it relates to wood waste, the Contractor is considering options to reduce the quantity of wood waste generated in the future and to explore whether there are beneficial uses for the wood. 8. Would the proposed activity change ambient air quality at the proposed (or chosen) site? If yes, how; if no, why. Moving the wood pile may temporarily create dust emissions. After it is moved the pile would not change ambient air quality. 9. Would the proposed activity change water quality or flow (drainage), at the proposed (or chosen) site? If yes, how; if no, why. Yes. The wood pile may block or slow drainage into the low area. As water passes through the wood pile or wood soaks in the water some wood constituents may leach into the water. This includes nutrients, such as nitrogen and carbon, organic matter, and potentially compounds used as wood glues or preservatives. Wood may also contain extremely low levels of metals because trees uptake trace metals from surrounding soils as they grow. Such metals naturally occur in soils at various concentrations. However, metals typically do not leach easily from organic materials, and would not be expected to adversely affect water quality in this context. The Contractor plans to process the wood pile and remove it from Antarctica early in the 1993-1994 austral summer season before temperatures rise and surface water flow begins. In this way the amount of work required to manage the site and the potential water quality impacts would be reduced. 10. Would the proposed activity change waste generation or management at the proposed (or chosen) site? If yes, how; if no, why. Waste generation would not be affected, although currently the difficulty of dealing with the wood waste has created added incentive to reduce the amount of waste produced. Waste management would only be changed in that different equipment may be required for transferring wood from the pile into the grinder. 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. Yes. Three bulldozers and operators would be required for one to two days to move the pile and cleanup after the move. No permanent changes would occur. 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. The nearest scientific research location, the Cosmic Ray Laboratory, would not be affected by dust emissions because of the nature of the experiments there and the fact that it is upwind. 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. No. The activity would not generate amounts of any pollutants of concern. The water in the area has already been exposed to relatively small amounts of wood and other debris from past storage and staging activities. 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)? No, the area does not serve as wildlife habitat. HUMAN VALUES 15. Would he proposed activity encroach upon any historical property of the site? If yes, how; if no, why. No, there is no historical property in the vicinity of either the current or proposed pre-retrograde staging locations. 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). The wood pile would be processed and removed. The site would be restored to a natural condition after the pile is removed. Finding The Environmental Officer, after reviewing the information provided above, believes that the proposed activity will pose less than minor and less than transitory impacts to the environment near McMurdo Station. The proposed activity is expected to have beneficial impacts with respect to enhancement of waste management at the station; and the relocation of the wood waste would allow enhancement of secondary containment for the Station's bulk fuel storage. The Program and the Contractor are authorized to undertake the proposed actions. Sidney Draggan Attachment Location Map