Title : Radarsat power plan Type : Antarctic EAM NSF Org: OD / OPP Date : July 28, 1993 File : opp93110 OFFICE OF POLAR PROGRAMS ENVIRONMENT SECTION 202/357-7766 MEMORANDUM Date: July 28, 1993 From: Acting Environmental Officer Subject: Environmental Action Memorandum (Radarsat Earth Station/Auxiliary Power Plan) To: Director, Office of Polar Programs Manager, Polar Operations Section Safety and Health Officer Manager, Safety Environment Heath Implementation Team Electronic Engineer Head, Polar Science Section Facilities Engineering Project Manager Environmental Engineer Environmentalist, ASA Ref: McMurdo SAR Facility, Report of The Ad Hoc Science Working Team Miller, G.D., G.E. Wallace, B.M. Keimel, and P. Martin. 1992. "South Polar Skuas at McMurdo Station, Ross Island, 1991-1992." Biology Department, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT QUERIES and RESPONSES BACKGROUND The proposed RADARSAT earth station is a joint project of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the National Science Foundation (NSF). Its purpose would be to provide a link with the future SARSAT (synthetic aperture radar) satellite. A ground receiving station located at McMurdo Station would capture data in realtime as the satellite passes overhead. The Station is uniquely located to fill a void in realtime coverage that exists in the Ross Sea sector of Antarctica, where coverage provided by the German ground station at O'Higgins Station in the antarctic peninsula and the Japanese ground station at Syowa Station does not extend. The presence of the ground station at McMurdo has been validated in a report by the U.S. science community. The ground station antenna would consist of a ten-meter dish enclosed in a radome. The site would include an approximately 130 square meters (1400 sq ft) support building to house equipment and provide work space for technicians. A fiber optic line would provide a communications link to an operating room within the Crary Science and Engineering Center (CSEC). A boresight antenna with electronics equipment would be located near Building 126 on the lower side of Observation Hill to communicate with the CSEC by telephone modem. The addition of the RADARSAT would also require upgrades to McMurdo's power plant in order to supply 150 KW of power to RADARSAT. The potential environmental impacts of this project are discussed as part of answering the following queries. GENERAL 1. What is the specific purpose of the proposed activity? The specific purpose of the proposed activity would be to construct an earth station near McMurdo Station to house equipment and an antenna capable of recovering remote sensing data from the future SARSAT satellite. Data received would be used for scientific research pertaining to the antarctic land mass and surrounding oceans. What alternatives to the proposed activity have the Program and the Contractor considered? "No action" and the use of alternate energy sources for the proposed power upgrade using diesel generators were considered. Alternate energy sources include active photovoltaic power, wind power, fuel cells and a hybrid power system. Photovoltaic Cells (PV): PV cells are a well-developed, extremely reliable method of harnessing solar energy, making them ideal for small, remote, unattended installations. The efficiency of commercial PV cells is about 10% to 15%. Their life expectancy is about 20 years. Initial cost of a PV installation is about $4000 per KW, which is not competitive with other sources in normal applications. Total cost to provide 1000 KW at McMurdo Station, the amount to be supplied by the proposed upgrade, would be approximately $4,000,000. Although a relatively quick payback period could be seen from fuel savings, the PV system cannot be relied upon during the winter months. Wind Power: A perfect wind turbine would convert about 60% of the potential energy in wind into useful energy. Depending upon the aerodynamic, electrical, and mechanical efficiencies of the turbine, more realistic values range from 20% to 40%. Wind power is an attractive alternative to diesel generators, and small units have proven to be reliable at the USAP's Black Island facility. However, large wind turbines capable of supplying the amount of energy required for RADARSAT have not been tested in Antarctica's harsh environment. Fuel Cells: Although fuel cells use petroleum fuels, their efficiency is higher than that of an internal combustion engine (nearly 60% compared to about 35% for a diesel generator). The emission rates of nitrous oxide and sulfur dioxide for fuel cells is very low they create no noise. Fuel cells are still in the developmental and prototype stage and are not suitable for reliable operation at a remote. Hybrid Power System: A combination of alternate energy sources discussed above to create a hybrid system, much like that used at Black Island, could be explored as an alternative. However, Black Island's total power requirement of 5 KW is considerably less than the 150 KW needed to operate RADARSAT. It has not known if such a system would meet specifications needed to supply uninterrupted power for the RADARSAT facility. Further study and demonstration is required to confirm this. Have probable impacts of all alternatives been considered by the Program and the Contractor? Please explain how. Yes. The only alternative considered for RADARSAT is "no action". This alternative would have no adverse environmental impacts as no site preparation or power upgrade would be required. However, the "no action" alternative would result in the inability to capture highly valuable scientific data from a unique space-based remote sensing satellite. "No action" would represent a negative impact to proposed antarctic science dependent on using the satellite. This would result in a significant loss in gaining maximal use of the data. This proposed activity is a component to an in-kind agreement with the national satellite owner, Canada, for access to RADARSAT data for research purposes. All of the alternatives to diesel generators have qualities which make them environmentally superior, such as the reduction of air emissions associated with burning fossil fuels and the reduction in spills and leaks during their storage and handling. Unfortunately, there is insufficient information on their reliability to adequately and safely serve facilities such as McMurdo Station to justify their capital costs. This, however, should not deter further study of their applicability in Antarctica. Should the chosen alternative involve potential impacts, how would these impacts be mitigated by the Program or the Contractor? The chosen alternative would have potential environmental impacts. Some of these impacts would be temporary, primarily involving construction activities. The proposed activity involves the construction of antenna and radome foundations, a 130 square meter support building to house electronic equipment, the construction of an access road from the main road to the RADARSAT site, the installation of a fiber optics line from the CSEC to the RADARSAT site, the installation of a power line from the station grid to the site, the installation of a boresight antenna, and an upgrade of the existing power plant to provide for the increase power demands. The impacts associated with these construction activities would be mitigated as follows: Construction of the antenna and radome foundations: The proposed location of the antenna and radome foundations would require site preparation. An area approximately 335 square meters capable of accommodating the approximately 17 m (56 ft) diameter radome would be cleared of rock debris larger than 15.24 cm (6 in). The area would then be graded level and fill material would be removed and used later as backfill. Some use of explosives may be required to open a trench approximately 3.05 m in the bedrock for placement of 1.5 m (5 ft) diameter tube connecting the radome to the support building. The tube would be used to house communications and electrical wiring in a tench created by blasting. An additional area of approximately 1500 square meters would be impacted by the movement and set up of a 70 ton Grove crane used to erect the radome. The impacts would be mitigated by confining these activities within the areas cited above. Backfill would be compacted using brine water from the water plant to maintain a satisfactory compaction density. The water would also be used to control dust emissions from the site. Precast, reinforced, concrete slabs manufactured in the United States would be used for the foundations eliminating the need to manufacture them on-site and reducing generation of construction debris. Construction of the RADARSAT support building: A 130 square meter support building would be erected approximately 30.5 m from the site of the radome. An area approximately 2790 square meters would be impacted by construction activities. The proposed site for the building would require regrading to lower the existing grade a maximum of approximately 1.22 m. An area approximately 1045 square meters would be regraded. As with the site of the radome, construction activities would be confined to the designated area to mitigate environmental impacts. Brine water would be used to control dust emissions when weather conditions warrant its use. The building would be prefabricated in the United States, thereby reducing or eliminating waste generated during on-site construction by using raw materials. The building would have no water or sewer requirements. Construction of a site access road: An access road approximately 245 m in length would be required to link the proposed RADARSAT site to the main road. Construction of the road would require little more than grading to provide a smooth surface for vehicles to pass over. No roadbed would be constructed. A culvert would be installed to allow for natural drainage to occur and prevent damage to the road. The road would have heavy use during the construction phase. After construction ceases, the road would be used only periodically by maintenance vehicles. Installation of a fiber optics (FO) line: A fiber optics line would be installed from the RADARSAT site to the CSEC, a distance of approximately two kilometers. The FO line would have 24 single-mode fibers in Uniduct. It would be placed on the ground to near Building 143, then on existing poles and stanchions to the CSEC. No environmental impact is expected from the this activity as the areas have been disturbed by previous activities. Installation of a power line: A power line would be installed from the existing power line to Arrival Heights to the RADARSAT site, approximately 396 m. The line will lay on the ground. No environmental impact is expected from this activity as the areas have been disturbed by previous activities. Installation of the boresight antenna: A boresight antenna would be installed on the side of Building 126, near Observation Hill. The associated electronics would require 110 volt power and two pairs of phone lines. No environmental impact is expected. Power plant upgrade: The RADARSAT facility would demand an increase in power which the power plant would be unable to supply at its current output. The power requirements for RADARSAT are as follows: Antenna and radome Utility power: three phase 208 Volt Y-connection with five wires, three phases, neutral and separate ground. Technical power: single phase 115 Volt required with a maximum of 30 amps current drain. Stationary antenna 8 amps per phase. Peak turn-on transient: 100 amps per phase. Antenna rapid motion in both axes 100 amps per phase for 1 second per 15 minute pass. 70 amps per phase for 5 seconds per 15 minute pass. 30 amps per phase nominal per 15 minute pass. Support building Three phase 208 Volt for UPS; single phase 110 Volt for most internal applications. 50 amps per phase for electronics and fans at 110 Volt not including the UPS. 50 KV of UPS with three phase 208 volt input. CSEC control room 3000 watts maximum. The upgrade would consist of two stand-alone generators enclosed in a single powerhouse, with independent switchgear enclosed in a separate structure. The power rating would be 1020 EKW for each generator. The units would operate in parallel with each other and the existing six generators. Only one generator would be running at a time; the other would serve as a backup. The generators would also act as an emergency power system in case of a catastrophic outage of the main power plant. Environmental impacts would be expected from the preparation of a site to erect the enclosures. Some grading would be required near the power plant which would produce dust. Dust emissions would be kept to a minimum by wetting the area with brine water when weather conditions warrant its use. Because the structures are prefabricated, little to no waste would be generated. Longer term environmental impacts would consist of increased emissions as a result of bringing the new generators into operation. Table 1 shows emission test results from existing power plant generators to estimate the amount of this increase. The new diesel generators would be supplied by Caterpillar which also furnished the existing generators. The new units use fuel more efficiently and emissions would be expected to be lower than those of the existing generators. 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. In addition to the capital equipment and installation costs, bringing another generator on line would require additional fuel. According to ASA weekly reports from McMurdo Station, the current generators consume an average of 166 liters of JP-8 per hour. Although a new generator would consume fuel more efficiently, it has a larger electrical output and is estimated to consume approximately the same amount of fuel as one of the existing generators. Based upon a unit cost of $.33/L of JP-8, an additional generator would increase to cost of fuel usage by approximately $480,000/year, assuming continual operation . Continual operation is not expected, especially during the austral winter. Power requirements are reduced and the new generator would shut down to serve as an emergency backup source. Actual annual fuel costs should be approximately to half that amount. LAND USE AND PLANNING 2. What is the specific location of the proposed activity? The proposed activity would be located north of McMurdo Station near Arrival Heights (see Attachments A, B & C). McMurdo Station is located on Ross Island, 77O51'S 166O40'E. Have alternative locations been considered by the Program or the Contractor? If yes, which are they; if no, explain why. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) was initially consulted as the NASA representative for possible site selection. A primary concern was finding a site that minimized the degree of horizon obstruction beyond that of a smooth and flat view. Of particular interest was an azimuth bearing so that the view towards Pine Island Bay would not be obstructed. The definition of horizon visibility thresholds for site location used a horizon profile on record for the rooftop of Building 165, located within the downtown complex of McMurdo Station, represented a worst case horizon due to the immediate surrounding hills. JPL indicated that this site was not optimal because it obstructed the Pine Island Bay horizon clearance. JPL indicated that this site, or one similar to it, would be a last choice if other alternatives available. The evaluation process also examined prospective hilltop locations on the perimeter of McMurdo. The availability of sites was constrained by existing land use and by pertinent safety, environment and cost trade-offs. The trade-offs included: close proximity to roads and McMurdo for year around personnel access, minimal site preparation, horizon visibility, and land use conflicts (existing explosives storage yard, Arrival Heights Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) No. 2 radio quiet zone and HF radion receiving antennae). No horizon elevation clearance data existed for any of the available locations; a situation requiring a physical site investigation to collect such information. For purposes of this investigation, several sites were examined so that comparative evaluations of the trade-offs could be made: 1. the summit of First Crater (now the site of the New Zealand Telecom satellite communications earth station), 2. the summit of a knoll directly overlooking McMurdo Station and located near the intersection of the Arrival Heights access road and the main service road leading from McMurdo up the overlooking terrain, and also directly above a proposed relocation site for the explosives storage site, 3. the site of the existing HF receiving antenna (Rosette phased array loop antenna) adjacent to the existing explosives storage site, and 4. the summit of Crater Hill. JPL indicated all of these sites met improved visibility to Pine Island Bay visibility. The proposed sites were then evaluated for additional parameters of concern. The primary eliminating factor(s) for the alternatives dismissed were: 1. First Crater: this represented a conflict with the management plan for SSSI No. 2, 3. HF Receiving Antenna/Existing Explosives Storage Site: this was a conflict of land use and a safety issue, and 4. Crater Hill: this area was too remote and represented a high cost for construction. There was also a concern over safety issues. Alternative Site No. 2 had the least number of concerns. It had good horizon clearance, good proximity to developed roads, close proximity to McMurdo Station, reasonable site preparation requirements, and no conflicts with land use. Alternative Site No. 2 had been considered as a possible site for the exisitng explosives storage site. However, a decision has been made with respect to the adequacy of the existing storage site and it will remain in its current location, with some modifications. There are no remaining uses of Alternative Site No. 2 3. How would any aesthetic impacts to the area from the proposed activity be handled by the Program or the Contractor? There would be several aesthetic impacts from the proposed activity. The addition of the antenna radome would have a significant impact on the overall aesthetics of McMurdo Station because it would be highly visible from long distances. The support building would also be visible. Transmission lines would be visible, although less so in comparison with the radome and building. The addition of the power plant modules would also increase the number of buildings at McMurdo Station. The size, shape and general appearance of the antenna radome is dictated by its function. Little can be done to alter this other than changing the color to it blend into the local scenery. The industry standard color is white. This is primarily for increased solar deflection to keep minimum interior temperatures to avoid damaging the equipment housed inside. The colors can be changed, but would significantly add to the capital cost and would do little to camouflage such a large structure. The support building would be dominated by the size of the radome making it less obtrusive. The top of the building would be below the antenna so as not obstruct the antenna's view of the horizon. This, would make it less visible from observation points below the site. A neutral color for the exterior would be selected to blend with the natural environment. Transmission lines would be placed on top of the ground. Although visible from points below, the alternative would be to place them on stanchions or below ground level. However, there are performance risks when FO lines are supported above ground. The trenching is required to place the lines below ground. This is the preferred method for FO, but it would increase the overall environmental impacts associated with the project. Placing the modules for the power plant upgrade near the existing power plant is anticipated to have little disruption to the aesthetic qualities of McMurdo Station. 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. After the facility has been constructed, RADARSAT, would have no significant indirect environmental impacts. Transportation of personnel to maintain and repair equipment would add to exhaust and fugitive dust emissions. These movements would not occur on a regular basis. 5. Would the proposed activity change the traditional use(s) of the proposed or chosen site? If yes, how; if no, why? The location of the RADARSAT radome and support building would change the traditional use of the proposed site. Although the site has been disturbed by past fill gathering activities, structures have never been placed there. The proposed site for the structures to house the generators would do little to change its traditional use as it would be very near the site of the existing power plant. 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 there would be a change in the traditional use of the proposed site, the physical and environmental characteristics of the neighboring environment are suitable for the proposed activity. The proposed site is located high above McMurdo. However, it is accessible from an established road leading to Arrival Heights. A short access road would be required to link the site with this road. The physical and environmental characteristics of the neighboring environment are suitable for the proposed power plant upgrades. The area has been dominated by similar activities in support of USAP activities for several decades. IMPACT AND POLLUTION POTENTIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 7. How has protection of the environment and human health from unnecessary pollution 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])? The RADARSAT facilities would be designed to be unmanned and would not require utilities for supplying water or handling wastewater. Few wastes would be generated. All facilities would be prefabricated to reduce construction debris associated with on-site fabrication. All wastes that would be generated during construction would be handled in accordance with established USAP waste management guidelines. 8. Would the proposed activity change ambient air quality at the proposed or chosen site? If yes, how; if no, why? Yes. The proposed activity would contribute to an increase in air emissions at McMurdo Station. Table 1 provides results of the power plant emission test conducted during the 1992-1993 season. It is predicted that the proposed generators would produce similar amounts of these emissions. 9. Would the proposed activity change water quality or flow (drainage), at the proposed or chosen site? If yes, how; if no, why? No change in water quality or flow would occur at the site. There is no significant drainage pattern at the site that would be altered by the construction of the proposed facilities. A culvert would be placed under the proposed road at a point where drainage does occur. 10. Would the proposed activity change waste generation or management at the proposed or chosen site? If yes, how; if no, why? Yes. Because the proposed site has never been used to support structures, some waste management would be required which was not a requirement in the past. The site would not house personnel, so the amount of waste produced would be minimal. U-barrels would be provided to collect human urine. Construction debris and solid waste produced from maintenance and repairs would be removed and included in McMurdo's waste management system. 11. Would the proposed activity change energy production or demand, personnel and life support, or transportation requirements at the proposed or chosen site? If yes, how; if no, why? Yes. Changes in energy production and demand have been discussed in previous sections. The number of personnel at the site would increase during construction, but would sharply decline after construction has ceased. Personnel would only be at the site to perform maintenance and repairs to equipment. Transportation would also increase during the construction stage. After construction is completed, transportation would only be required to transport maintenance and repair personnel to and from the site. 12. Is the proposed activity expected to adversely affect scientific studies or locations of research interest (near and distant, short-term and long-term)? If yes, how; if no, why? The proposed RADARSAT site is located very close toSSSI No. 2 at Arrival Heights (see Attachment D). RADARSAT is a receive-only facility which would not create any high frequency interference. The boresight antenna would transmit at three discrete frequencies in the range of 2250 Mhz and it would also transmit at three discrete frequencies in the range of 8025 to 8400 Mhz with a 3 Db bandwidth of 2 degrees at 8213 Mhz. There are no current or proposed science projects based at SSSI No. 2 that operate in the electromagnetic spectrum used by the boresight system. Therefore no adverse effects are expected for the short-term. Long-term effects are unpredictable because it is difficult to anticipat future science activities. Present research interests would not indicate any sensitivities to this spectrum area, especially with the emitter located outside the SSSI boundaries and isolated by the natural terrain. In addition, the boresight would not continuously emit energy. It would be used for a short period of time prior to a tracking operation. The present level of tracking anticipated would indicate the boresight would be used no more than a few times a day. These events are highly deterministic, and could be logged for later effects impact correlation analyses suspected for existing or proposed science projects. An Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) survey around the site of SSSI #2 was conducted in January, 1993. A summary of that survey is included as Attachment E. 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? The only potential pollutant stored at the site would be the fuel required to operate an oil fired furnace. The furnace is needed to maintain proper temperatures for equipment housed in the facility. The fuel would be stored in a day tank similar to those in use around McMurdo. Standard operating procedures would be employed to refill and maintain the tank to prevent spills from occurring. Hazardous materials that could be released to the environment would not be used or stored at the site. Human waste from personnel temporarily working at the site would be collected and disposed of through McMurdo's human waste disposal facility. 14. Does the site of the proposed activity serve as habitat for any significant assemblages of Antarctic wildlife (for example, mosses, lichens, antarctic birds or marine animals)? The proposed site does not serve as habitat for any significant assemblages of wildlife. The area has been visited by South Polar Skuas which occasionally nest in this area. Since the McMurdo landfill closed, and with the improvements in food waste handling, skua populations around McMurdo Station have noticeable decreased. Dr. Gary Miller, et. al., has noted if a population has increased when garbage was available, after that source was removed, there would likely be a reduction in the population. Thus it is assumed that skuas nesting in this area would be substantially reduced as a result of declining food sources. The area is also disturbed by annual fill gathering activities so there are no permanent nesting areas. In the unlikely event of nesting pairs in the area, precautions would be required by workers to avoid disturbing them. HUMAN VALUES 15. Would the proposed activity encroach upon any historical property of the proposed or chosen site? If yes, how; if no, why? No. There is no historical property at or near the proposed site. 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)? Environmental impacts could also be expected from decommissioning activities if the facility is no longer be useful to the program. Heavy equipment would be required to dismantle the radome and support building. Should decommissioning be required, all materials would be retrograded from Ross Island, and the area would be returned to as close to a natural state as possible. OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH CONCERNS 17. What occupational safety and health related issues may have to be addressed during this activity (for example, OSHA standards or consensus standards) ? If none, explain why. The following is a list of possible hazards that may be encountered on the RADARSAT project. Rigging for crane operations Blasting operations Heavy equipment operations High voltage Welding operations What step could be taken to eliminate any problems, risks or hazards associated with those issues? Explain why? Rigging for crane operations would follow the guidelines and requirements provided in the Safety and Health Manual under the Hoisting and Rigging Program. Blasting operations would follow established procedures utilizing containment mats to prevent debris from being dispersed into the work area. The use of ear and eye protection is required during these operations under the guidelines provided in the Hearing Conservation and Personal Protective Equipment Programs contained in the ASA Safety and Health Manual. (ASA Explosive Safety Program is currently under development. Guidelines from NSF are currently being established prior to the development of the ASA program). Heavy equipment operators would pay special attention to visibility problems, such as icing, fogging of windows, by scraping ice from cab windows until adequately defrosted. Redesign of the interior of the dome surface has eliminated the depression in the center of the dome floor. High voltage concerns for the 150kw cables to be laid on the ground presents no new problems because of the existing cables that have been laid previously. The same precautions will be followed. The installation of the new generators and the required lockouts are covered under the Lockout/Tagout Program contained in the ASA Safety and Health Manual. The welding operations concerns about proper eye protection is addressed in the Personal Protective Equipment Program contained in the ASA Safety and Health Manual. 18. Are staff or participants aware of the potential safety and health issues or problems; and, are they prepared to deal with them effectively? If yes, explain how. If no, why not? Yes. All staff participating in these operations are experienced and trained in these activities. 19. Identify all potentially hazardous materials, chemicals, or equipment that are proposed for use? Welding operations would use oxygen and acetylene tanks, high pressure hoses, and flammable liquids (mogas). Heavy equipment operations would use rigging cables, hydraulic lines, and their vehicles contain diesel fuel and oil. 20. If any physical hazards would be present, how would they be controlled. Potentially high winds and rugged terrain present the dominant physical hazards. Extreme caution shall be displayed during operations being conducted during windy conditions or on rugged terrain. Finding The Acting Environmental Officer, after reviewing the information presented above, believes that the proposed activity poses at least potentially minor and transitory/significant impacts to the antarctic environment. This finding is based on the potential cumulative impacts caused by a substantial increase in power requirements and fuel use, the construction of a 130 square meter support building, antenna, and radome, and their aesthetic impacts, and blasting activities. The Acting Environmental Officer has requested an Initial Environmental Evaluation/ Environmental Assessment be completed to address the proposed activity. Jane Dionne ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: RADARSAT Site Location Attachment B: RADARSAT Site Plan Attachment C: RADARSAT Site Profile Attachment D: Sites of Special Scientific Interest No. 2 Arrival Heights, Hut Peninsula, Ross Island Attachment E: NAVELEX EMI Survey Quick Look, January 1993 Table 1: Power Plant Emission Test Results, 1992