Title : Liquor Storage Facility -McMurdo Type : Antarctic EAM NSF Org: OD / OPP Date : December 19, 1991 File : opp93041 DIVISION OF POLAR PROGRAMS OFFICE OF THE ENVIRONMENT 202/357-7766 MEMORANDUM Date: December 19, 1991 From: Environmental Officer, DPP Subject: Environmental Action Memorandum (New Liquor Storage Facility at McMurdo Station, Antarctica) To: Files (S.7 - Environment) This Environmental Action Memorandum describes the need for, and location of, an newly proposed liquor storage facility at McMurdo Station, Antarctica. The Environmental Officer posed a set of questions relating to the proposed project, and to the poten- tially affected environment. These questions were responded to by the civilian contractor's Environmental Engineer on December 17, 1991; the questions and responses are shown below: Environmental Assessment Queries and Responses GENERAL Currently, liquor is stored in a small room in Building 155 at McMurdo Station. Rehabilitation plans for Building 155 call for expanding its galley into the space currently used for liquor storage. Construction of a new building immediately adjacent to Building 121 is proposed to provide a new liquor storage area. The proposed action would serve to consolidate similar functions in one area, as Building 121 is used for storage of beer and soda. The building is to be constructed using on-site stock materials. 1. What is the specific purpose of the proposed activity? Construction of a new building, as described above, to store liquor is proposed. What alternatives has the contractor considered? Use of existing space for liquor storage was considered. This included space in Building 155 (currently used as berthing space); and, the old chapel building behind Building 155. It was determined, however, that the berthing space in building 155 could not be spared, and the old chapel building was destroyed by fire during the 1991 austral winter. Construction of a new building, therefore, was considered necessary. Have the probable impacts of all alternatives been considered? Please explain how. The potential impacts of the proposed activity are limited to those associated with fuel use and from emissions from gasoline or diesel fuel powered construc- tion equipment. Regrading of the site would only require leveling the existing grade by rearranging on-site fill. No new fill or removal of fill from the location would be required. Should the chosen alternative involve potential impacts, how would these impacts be mitigated? The proposed building will draw fuel from the existing Building 121 fuel tank to heating purposes. To reduce the potential for fuel leaks, the location of the heater in the proposed building will be selected to minimize the length of fuel line required. Actual fuel consumption will be minimized by insulating the building to conserve energy. The proposed building design minimizes construction debris by spacing support members such that full lengths of construction materials can be used. Disturbing the asbestos-containing walls of building 121 will be avoided by constructing a "free-standing" building adjacent to existing Building 121 rather than an addition to Building 121. Have measures to assess the indirect costs of the proposed activity been identified or considered? Please explain how. No, the indirect costs of the proposed action have neither been identified nor considered. LAND USE AND PLANNING 2. What is the specific location of the proposed activity? The new building is located directly adjacent to existing Building 121, between Building 121 and a road. See attached map. What alternative locations has the contractor considered? Relocating liquor storage to a location within an existing building was considered as discussed above. 3. How will aesthetic impacts to the area be handled? By constructing the proposed building in an unused space within the main existing group of structures at Mcmurdo Station the unaesthetic nature of "urban sprawl" has been avoided. Also, the proposed new building will include space for patrons to stand inside. The small size of the current warehouse makes it necessary for patrons to wait in a line outside of Building 155, where they block the entrance to the Library or stand in the roadway, presenting a safety hazard. 4. Will the activity have any other indirect impacts on the environment? No, none are anticipated. 5. Will the activity change the traditional use of the chosen site? No. Except for occasional use as a temporary storage area the proposed site is currently not used; it is a vacant area between a building and road. 6. Are the physical or environmental characteristics of the site suitable for the activity? Yes. IMPACT OR POLLUTION POTENTIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 7. Has protection of the environment and human health from unnecessary pollution been considered for the 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])? Yes. Materials originally ordered for use in a cancelled project will be used for the proposed building, eliminating the need to retrograde those materials and import new materials. The design will minimize the amount of construction debris generated. 8. Will the activity change ambient air quality at the site? Yes. A minor increase in air emissions from fuel powered equipment and from fugitive dust would occur during con- struction, although the area is characterized by frequent use of heavy equipment. The change, therefore, will likely be unnoticeable. 9. Will the activity change water quality or flow (drainage), at the site? Yes. Plans require the area beneath the building to be graded smooth. A new ditch between the road and building will direct water toward the existing surface water drainage system to prevent standing water beneath the building, which would degrade the building materials. 10. Will the activity change waste generation or management at the site? No permanent increase in waste generation due to the proposed activity is expected. Some construction debris will be produced. Actions, however, will be taken to minimize the amount and to assure proper disposition of such debris by the contractor. 11. Will the activity change energy production or demand, personnel and life support, or transportation requirements at the site? A slight increase in fuel and electricity use will be required to heat and provide light to the proposed building. The building will be insulated to minimize the amount of fuel used. Eventually, liquor storage may be combined with beer and soda storage in Building 121. The new building would then be used to replace an existing, virtually uninsulated building such as Building 64. In this case, overall fuel use would not be increased, and may actually be decreased due to improved energy efficiency. 12. Is the activity expected to adversely affect scientific studies or locations of research interest (near and distant, short-term and long-term)? No. 13. Will the activity generate pollutants that might affect terrestrial, marine or freshwater ecosystems within the environs of the station or inland camp? No. 14. Does the site of the activity serve as habitat for any important assemblages of antarctic wildlife (for example, mosses or lichens, or antarctic birds or marine animals)? No. HUMAN VALUES 15. Will the activity encroach upon any historical property of the site? No. 16. What other environmental concerns are potentially affected by the activity at the site? For example, have impacts associated with decommissioning of the activity been considered (and how)? Footings will be placed directly on the ground and therefore be removable to restore the area to its current condition if the building is decommissioned. Finding The Environmental Officer, after reviewing the information presented above, believes that the proposed activity poses neither potentially minor nor transitory impacts to the antarctic environment. The contractor is authorized to proceed with the proposed activity. Sidney Draggan Attachment Map