[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
