DIVISION OF POLAR PROGRAMS MEMORANDUM Date: July 29, 1992 From: Environmental Officer, DPP Subject: Environmental Action Memorandum (Proposed Installation of a Portable Communications Repeater System in the Dry Valleys Near McMurdo Station, Antarctica) To: Electronics Engineer, DPP
This Environmental Action Memorandum (EAM) describes the need for, and location of, testing and installation of a portable
communications repeater system during the 1992-1993 season. The installation has been proposed by the Naval Electronic Systems
Engineering Center (NAVELEXCEN) so as to provide on-site testing of the apparatus during November 1992. The on-site testing
would occur after cold chamber testing in the United States. The Environmental Officer posed a set of questions to the
project's leaders, Messrs. R. R. Rzepkowski and M. Peebles, relating to the proposed project, and the potentially affected
environment. These questions were responded to on May 21, 1992; the questions and responses are shown below.
GENERAL The purpose of the proposed activity is to install a portable communications repeater system for the 140-150 MHz
frequency range in the Dry Valleys region of Antarctica. The objective is to improve the system of communications between
McMurdo Station and field camps in the Dry Valleys. See attached map. What alternatives have the Program and the Navy considered? The following alternatives were considered:
Have probable impacts of all alternatives been considered by the Program and the Navy? Please explain how. Yes. Adoption of the "no-action" alternative would not satisfy the U.S. Antartcic Programs' objectives for improving
communications and personnel safety. Satellite-based systems are attractive from an environmental standpoint as ground-based
equipment can be easily carried by one individual; the orbits of satellites available do not provide sufficient coverage,
however, to ensure reliable, continuous coverage. These considerations leave the USAP with the currently available option of
installing the portable repeater system. Should the chosen alternative involve potential impacts, how would these impacts be mitigated by the Program or
the Navy? As the portable system is self-contained, and expected to be environmentally-benign, no impacts are
anticipated. Have measures to assess the indirect costs of the proposed activity been identified or considered by the Program
or the Navy? Please explain how. LAND USE AND PLANNING The repeater system has been designed to be mobile. On-site antarctic testing, each of approximately two weeks
duration, is proposed at:
Have alternative locations been considered by the Program or the Navy? If yes, which are they; if no, explain why.
Several sites were surveyed during the 1991-1992 austral summer operating season using a helicopter and geographic information system. The three sites noted above were found to satisfy on-site test criteria for the system.
The repeaters are not expected to cause any aesthetic impact as the test areas are isolated and the test durations are short-term (i.e., two weeks).
None are anticipated. The repeater units are sealed and portable.
Yes. None of the sites chosen have been used as communications repeater sites. There would be two factors that would change the traditional use of the area--system installation and recovery, and operation:
Yes. The units comprising the system are small and can be placed to avoid environmentally--or scientifically-sensitive areas. The physical characteristics of the test areas were selected specifically for their physical characteristics that support communications.
IMPACT AND POLLUTION POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT:
The sealed and self contained design of the system creates no waste, uses no fuel, requires no construction materials, and has no one-time-use materials.
No. No emissions into the air of any kind are expected.
No. The system's repeater units must be installed on high ground in order to be effective, so drainage of the sites will not be affected. Additionally, as the components are in a sealed enclosure no impact on water quality is expected.
No. No waste products are expected from the repeaters, nor are any waste products expected during installation or recovery.
Energy production and demand would be affected. The repeater system consumes a maximum of 61 Watt/Hr of energy supplied by a combination of self-contained, photovoltaic cells and sealed batteries. None of these energy sources would be left at test sites.
The site would be unattended. The only personnel and life support requirements would be during deployment and recovery. The ground stay in each case is expected to be one hour or less.
Transportation by helicopters would be required to deploy and recover the repeaters.
No. The repeater placement is flexible enough to avoid areas of scientific interest. Additionally, the repeater does not require any mountings that would disturb the ground.
No. The repeater has no products other than radio frequency energy and a small amount of heat generated by the radio.
Yes. Certain sites in the Dry Valleys provide habitats for important assemblages of algae, mosses, lichens and cryptoendolithic microorganisms. The repeater system is not expected to have any impact on these antarctic wildlife.
HUMAN VALUES:
No. No known historical artifacts are located at any of the proposed sites.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
No impact associated with removal of the portable system is expected.
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. There are recognized science support and safety benefits associated with completion of the proposed project. The Navy is authorized to proceed with the proposed activity.
Sidney Draggan
Attachment
Go to: