Title : Resiting of Seventy-Two Person Berthing Facilities Type : Antarctic EAM NSF Org: OD / OPP Date : January 7, 1994 File : opp94012 National Science Foundation Office of Polar Programs Arlington, Virginia Environmental Document and Finding of No Significant and Not More than Minor or Transitory Effect Resiting of Two Seventy-Person Berthing Facilities and the Relocation of the Materials Control Center (MCC) at McMurdo Station, Antarctica January 7, 1994 I. FINDINGS The National Science Foundation (NSF) has prepared an Initial Environmental evaluation (IEE) and an Environmental Assessment (EA) as a combined document for the relocation of two new 70- person berthing facilities from the initially selected site which required the demolition of Building 192 to a site which overlaps the current location of Building 61. Building 61 will be demolished and its functions will be relocated to Building 140, which will be remodelled. Placing the new berthing facilities where building 61 is presently located will situate more living quarters in one of the "residential" sections of McMurdo and reduce pedestrian road crossings to and from the galley. Building 61 is old and in need of extensive repairs. By demolishing Building 61 and moving the cargo and passenger management, heated storage, and post office functions of this facility to Building 140, the functions will still be accessible within a short distance of where they are now located. Building 61 is approximately 3,800 square feet of warehouse and office space. A 2,400-square foot warehouse will be connected to Building 140 to replace the warehouse space of Building 61. Building 61 will then be dismantled, temporarily stored, and removed from Antarctica. In addition, part of Building 140 will be remodelled as office space and part of it will serve as a logistics warehouse facility. When the berthing facilities have reached their design life of 20 to 25 years, they will be dismantled and removed from Antarctica. Continued use of the facilities would require appropriate environmental evaluation and decision documentation, considering the condition of the facility and needs. Based on the analyses in this IEE/EA, the NSF Office of Polar Programs (OPP) determined that implementation of Alternative B is not a major federal action which would have a significant effect on the human environment, within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 nor is the action one which would have more than a minor or transitory effect on the antarctic environment within the meaning of the NSF implementing requirements for the Protocol on Environmental Protection in Antarctica. The selection of Alternative B provides for the relocation of the construction site for the proposed new berthing facilities. An ancillary benefit of this decision is the relocation of the activities currently in Building 61, prior to its demolition to more energy efficient space. The selected actions are consistent with the NSF's efforts to promote scientific investigations, provide a safe and efficient working and living environment for personnel, and protect the antarctic environment. /s/ 1/07/94 Erick Chiang Date Manager, Operations Section Office of Polar Programs National Science Foundation 4201 Wilson Blvd. Arlington, VA 22230 II. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROPOSED ACTION The National Science Foundation (NSF) proposes to relocate the construction site for two new berthing facilities from the edge of an industrial area to a site which overlaps the footprint of the present location of Building 61 at McMurdo Station, Antarctica. The relocation of the construction site for the two 70-person dormitories would improve the positioning of the dormitories to reduce the flow of pedestrians across a heavily traveled road, centralize living areas, and minimize modifications to existing roadway and drainage infrastructure. An ancillary benefit would be the demolition of the Materials Control Center (MCC) in Building 61 and the construction of a more energy efficient MCC which would be located in an expanded and remodelled Building 140. An Environmental Action Memorandum, dated August 19, 1993 (Reference A), addressed the construction of two new berthing facilities to replace the facilities at Williams Field. The option of demolishing building 61 and using that site for locating the new berthing facilities was not available at that time. Sites outside a central core area of living quarters, both open sites and sites involving the demolition of older buildings, were not considered because they were inconsistent with the objective of maintaining and developing the living facilities at McMurdo Station within a central core area. Issues related to the proposed action are: . safety concerns; . energy conservation; . demolition, temporary storage and retrograde of materials; . disturbance of existing roadway and drainage systems; and . earthwork requirements. III. ALTERNATIVES A. No action This alternative is to stay with the proposed actions in the August 19, 1993 EAM. One berthing facility would be located where Building 192 is presently located and the other would be situated adjacent to Building 175 (Attachment A). B. Build the two new berthing facilities on a site which overlaps the footprint of Building 61, adjacent to other dormitory facilities. This alternative entails siting the two new berthingfacilities on a site which overlaps the current location of Building 61 (Attachment B). Building 61 would be demolished and its activities moved to an expanded and remodelled Building 140. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS AND MITIGATING MEASURES The environmental effects refer to Alternative B unless otherwise noted. A. Safety concerns In Alternative A, there will be increased pedestrian movement across a heavily traveled road from the dormitories to the galley and other facilities providing living type functions. This increase in pedestrian traffic increases the risk of an accident. Alternative B eliminates the increase in pedestrian traffic. B. Energy conservation The activities in Building 61 would be transferred to an expanded and remodelled Building 140. In addition, the new area in Building 140 would be constructed using more insulation. Therefore, heating fuel requirements would be substantially reduced. The net energy savings from demolishing Building 61 and moving its activities to a remodelled Building 140 is estimated to be approximately 240,000 kW-hr/yr. C. Demolition, temporary storage, and retrograde of materials Generation of dust during demolition of Building 61 would be minimized by disassembling instead of crushing materials. In addition, dust emissions will be kept to a minimum by wetting the area with brine water when weather conditions warrant its use. Asbestos-containing floor tiles will either be removed, packaged, labelled and stored for retrograde in accordance with procedures specified by ASA Procedure 70.10 and the contractor's waste management guidelines, or sealed and overlain with non-asbestos containing floor covering. The disassembled materials will be secured or contained in a temporary storage area until scheduled for retrograde with other materials being shipped out of Antarctica. When the two new berthing facilities reach the end of their design life in 20 to 25 years, they will be dismantled and removed from Antarctica. No special problems are anticipated with respect to the future removal of these facilities given that they will be constructed of modular, asbestos-free materials. D. Short-term effects Environmental impacts are expected from demolishing Building 61 and new construction. Some grading and trenching will be required which will produce dust. Dust control measures, as described above, will be used when necessary. The remodelling of Building 140 will use prefabricated materials which will reduce waste and construction time. Soil excavation is needed to construct the new berthing facilities as well as to create the addition to Building 140. In Alternative A, over 2500 m3 of excavation would be needed, substantially more than the approximately 430 m3 required for Alternative B. For earthwork, explosives need to be used to loosen frozen soils. Procedures will be followed in accordance with the safety and health manual. Noise will be mitigated by hearing protection provided to construction personnel. The proposed construction area is in the center of McMurdo Station. Neither seals nor penguins have been observed in this area. Skuas may fly over this area but are not known to nest in the vicinity of the proposed construction site. Therefore, the use of small quantities of explosives to loosen frozen soils is not anticipated to have any adverse effects on wildlife. Soil sampling and analysis has been completed at the Building 140 addition site. No contamination was found below the detection limit of 10 parts per million. Some contamination was found near a fuel tank berm, but this sample was not representative of the construction site for the Building 140 addition. Therefore, excavated soils from the site would be available for use as fill in other locations at McMurdo Station. In Alternative A, approximately 900 m3 of contaminated soils would not be available for reuse and would require treatment or removal from Antarctica. The number of personnel at the site will increase during construction but will sharply decline after construction has ceased. Aside from the 140 people who will be housed in the completed dormitories, personnel will only be at the site to perform maintenance and repairs to equipment No change in water quality or flow would occur at the site. E. Long-term and cumulative effects The long-term effects are beneficial. There will be immediate and long-term energy savings from the improved use of space and the transfer of activities currently in Building 61 to a more energy efficient structure. Locating the two new berthing facilities in the area overlapping the footprint of Building 61 will keep as many residential facilities as possible in a "neighborhood" location. Also, pedestrian movement will be safer, since fewer road crossings will be required. V. CONSULTATION WITH OTHERS Mr. Robert Cunningham NSF/OPP, NEPA Compliance Manager Dr. Jane Dionne NSF/OPP, Environmental Officer Mr. Dennis Hannan Senior Vice President, Central Gulf Lines Mr. Doug Gleason ASA, Architect Mr. Peter Karasik NSF/OPP, Associate Compliance Manager Ms. Victoria Kraus ASA, Environmental Engineer Mr. Matt Lesiak ASA, Electrical Engineer Mr. Craig Martin ASA, Director of Engineering Mr. Jeff Montroy ASA, Engineer References A. National Science Foundation (NSF), 1993. Environmental Action Memorandum (Construction of Williams Field Replacement Berthing in McMurdo Station/Decommissioning of Building 192). August 19. B. NSF, 1991. Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the U.S. Antarctic Program, Washington, DC. October.