Title : Underground Freezer at Lake Bonney Type : Antarctic EAM NSF Org: OD / OPP Date : January 05, 1993 File : opp93099 DIVISION OF POLAR PROGRAMS OFFICE OF THE ENVIRONMENT 202/357-7766 MEMORANDUM Date: January 5, 1993 From: Environmental Officer, DPP Subject: Environmental Action Memorandum (Establishment of an Underground Freezer at Lake Bonney) To: Safety and Health Officer, DPP Manager, Polar Biology and Medicine Program, DPP Facilities Engineering Projects Manager, DPP Field Projects Manager, DPP Science Projects Manager, DPP Environmental Engineer, DPP Environmentalist, ASA J. Priscu, S-025 This Environmental Action Memorandum describes the need for, and location of, proposed actions to establish an in-ground holding freezer for food, and scientific supplies and specimens, for U.S. Antarctic Program Project S-025. 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 Dr. John C. Priscu, Principal Investigator for S-025 on January 4, 1993; the questions and responses are shown below: Environmental Assessment Queries and Responses GENERAL 1. What is the specific purpose of the proposed activity? To maintain food and samples in a frozen state during the latter part of the 1992-1993 austral summer season and subsequent seasons (i.e., annually from late November to January) at Lake Bonney. The proposed system would consist simply of a hole with approximate dimensions of 120 cm x 120 cm x 180 cm (depth x width x length). The hole would be lined with Hypalon (which is excess construction material not in use at McMurdo Station). The hole and lid would be insulated. A wooden floor would be installed above the water (ice) layer to avoid food and sample contamination. What alternatives to the proposed activity have the Investigator, the Program and the Contractor considered? Two alternatives have been considered: 1. the "no-action" alternative; and 2. constant use of a 6 kw or 12 kw diesel generator to power S-025's electric freezer. Have probable impacts of all alternatives been considered by the Investigator, the Program and the Contractor? Please explain how. The "no-action" alternative would require the use of an on-site freezer supplied to the science party with resultant use of fuels and potential for fuel spillage. Given the ambient characteristics of the area this alternative was rejected. The Principal Investigator discussed the merits of establishing an in-ground freezer with National Science Foundation staff and Antarctic Support Associates science support staff late in December 1992. It was agreed that the proposal had merit, was logistically tractable and would have potentially beneficial environmental effects. Any action that could reduce generator running time is considered a benefit for the antarctic environment. Should the chosen alternative involve potential impacts, how would these impacts be mitigated by the Investigator, the Program or the Contractor? There are no anticipated long-term or adverse impacts to the environment near Lake Bonney. Have measures to assess the indirect costs of the proposed activity been identified or considered by the Investigator, the Program or the Contractor? Please explain how. No measures have been proposed or taken to assess the indirect costs of the proposed activity. LAND USE AND PLANNING 2. Where would the proposed activity be located, specifically? The activity would take place at the current site of the semi-permanent camp at Lake Bonney, constructed under the supervision of the Principal Investigator and the Team Leader for S-025. Have alternative locations been considered by the Investigator, the Program or the Contractor? If yes, which are they; if no, explain why. No. The proposed location is specific to the proposed action and no other locations have been considered. 3. How would any aesthetic impacts to the area from the proposed activity be handled by the Investigator, the Program or the Contractor? The only readily visible impact would be an insulated cover placed over the freezer. This would have relatively little impact within the context of the current camp at Lake Bonney. If the freezer does not function as intended, the hole would be filled and covered with natural materials (e.g., gravel and rocks) blended in with the natural landscape. 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. No. The freezer would neither emit pollutants nor supply cumulatively contaminates to the surrounding area. Water to be frozen as the heat sink will come from the surface of the lake (located about 30 meters from the freezer). Current lake water chemistry reflects soil chemistry within the drainage of Lake Bonney. 5. Would the proposed activity change the traditional use(s) of the proposed (or chosen) site? If yes, how; if no, why. No. The site is a designated research camp. The activity would promote research and minimize the need for diesel generator use (reducing fuel consumption and potential environmental hazards involving shipment of fuel to Lake Bonney). 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. Past data collected by S-025 has shown that at Lake Bonney ice temperatures can reach -45§c during September. By allowing water to freeze during the austral winter, and insulating this heat sink during the warmer months, the system should work as planned. This idea materialized after the Principal Investigator began a study of the permanent ice on Lake Bonney. The entire system takes advantage of the physical and environmental characteristics endemic to the McMurdo Dry Valleys. 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])? Pollution to the environment would be non-existent. Construction material and waste would be minimal. All materials can be re-used if the system does not meet application expectations. Most of the materials required for the project are left-overs from other jobs at McMurdo Station. 8. Would the proposed activity change ambient air quality at the proposed (or chosen) site? If yes, how; if no, why. No. The system would produce no emissions. In fact, it should improve air quality by reducing generator running time. 9. Would the proposed activity change water quality or flow (drainage), at the proposed (or chosen) site? If yes, how; if no, why. No. The underground freezer would be located within the confines of the S-025 camp perimeter. The camp is isolated from major drainages within the Lake Bonney watershed. 10. Would the proposed activity change waste generation or management at the proposed (or chosen) site? If yes, how; if no, why. Yes. S-025 should burn less fuel resulting in lower air emission, and less empty fuel barrel retrograde. Also, the freezer would reduce food spoilage (a major concern during the warmer months of the austral summer). 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. Less direct fuel consumption (i.e., gasoline powered electric generation) and less helicopter use would be required for S-025 camp resupply. Life support systems, with respect to food storage, would be greatly enhanced. 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 activity should enhance scientific activity by allowing S-025 to maintain scientific samples in a frozen state. There would be no short- or long-term impacts on future science at the site. 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 is environmentally benign, operating in concert with the environment. Advantage is taken of the local environmental conditions to freeze water during the winter and insulate it from heat during the austral summer. 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)? The site does not support significant assemblages of antarctic wildlife. HUMAN VALUES 15. Would the proposed activity encroach upon any historical property of the site? If yes, how; if no, why. No sites of historical interest are located within the Lake Bonney drainage. 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 Principal Investigator foresees no other environmental impacts. If the system is decommissioned (which should take only a few hours), the hole would be filled in and covered with natural material to blend in with the surrounding landscape. 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 terrestrial and freshwater environments near Lake Bonney. The proposed activity is expected to have beneficial effects with respect to enhancement of domestic, and scientific supply and specimen management at S-025's camp; and, environmental benefits associated with decrease in fuel usage. The Investigator, the Program and the Contractor are authorized to undertake the proposed actions. Sidney Draggan