I. FINDING

The National Science Foundation (NSF) has prepared an Initial Environmental Evaluation (IEE) and an Environmental Assessment (EA) as a combined environmental document, for the placement of a prefabricated helicopter landing pad at the Lake Bonney field camp in the Taylor Valley, Antarctica. Based on the analyses in the environmental document (IEE/EA), the NSF Office of Polar Programs (OPP) has 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. The action is not one which would have more than a minor or transitory effect on the Antarctic environment, within the meaning of the NSF's implementing regulations for the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty. Therefore, an environmental impact statement and/or a comprehensive environmental evaluation will not be prepared.

The selected alternative, B provides for constructing and placing a prefabricated helicopter landing pad which would allow for the safe operation of the aircraft while landing and taking-off from the site. The action is consistent with the NSF's efforts to promote scientific investigations and provide a safe working environment while protecting the Antarctic environment. The action is also consistent with the Environmental Code of Conduct for Field Work in the McMurdo Dry Valleys¹ which strives to minimize impacts on land, water, and ice to protect them for future generations.

/s/ D.D. Fisher12/18/96
Mr. Dwight FisherDate
Acting Head, Polar Research Support
Office of Polar Programs

¹The Environmental Code of Conduct for Field Work in the McMurdo Dry Valleys is a guidance document developed in conjunction with Antarctica New Zealand, and adopted for the 1996-97 season.

II. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION

The National Science Foundation/Office of Polar Programs (NSF/OPP) proposes to improve the most frequently used helicopter pad at the Lake Bonney Field Camp located in the Taylor Valley, Antarctica. At present, there are three pads on which support helicopters can land; an upper pad which has not been used for the past two research seasons, a middle pad, and the lowest pad which is near the edge of the lake. The pad near the lake is used as the primary landing site until the first or second week of December, at which time it becomes too saturated with melt water to provide a stable landing area. When this occurs, the helicopter pilots begin using the middle pad as the primary landing site because it is high enough above the lake shore as to be unaffected by seasonal melting.

Using the middle pad presents a helicopter safety concern (Figure 1). Industry standards dictate a minimum vertical and horizontal clearance around the rotors to insure safe operation of the aircraft and insure the safety of individuals in the vicinity of the helicopter. A technical representative from the Office of the Secretary of the Department of the Interior, Office of Aircraft Services, stated that the current configuration of the middle pad poses an unacceptable safety risk to both the helicopter pilots and passengers. The middle pad provides roughly six feet of vertical clearance on the uphill side. With the absence of a crew chief to observe and direct personnel embarking and disembarking the helicopter, as well as to observe the proximity of the rotor to the ground during landing and takeoff, the current configuration is unacceptable.

Several issues have been identified and considered with the proposed action:

• Safety of personnel. This issue is described in the Purpose and Need above.
• Impact on science. Whether or not improvements are made to the middle helicopter pad can have a significant impact, positive or negative, on the program's ability to adequately support scientific investigations at Lake Bonney.
• Short-term environmental effects.
• Long-term and cumulative effects.

III. ALTERNATIVES

Alternaive A. Expand the Middle Pad to 9 Meters X 9 Meters by Excavating Into the Hillside.

The present landing pad is a 5 meter X 6.4 meter bench cut into the sloping hillside. This allows only a maximum 2 meter clearance between the blade and the ground when a helicopter lands. This alternative would enlarge the pad to a 9 square meter area (Figures 2 and 3). This would allow the helicopter to land further from the hillside increasing the distance between the blade and the ground, thus providing an acceptable zone of safety. Expanding the middle helicopter pad would require the movement of approximately 38 m³ of soil. The soil would be redistributed on the pad to raise the elevation. All work would be manually performed. No power equipment would be used.

Alternative B. Construct a Portable Landing Platform for Placement on the Middle Pad.

In this alternative, a portable landing platform would be prefabricated from existing materials in McMurdo Station and would be transported to the Lake Bonney field camp in sections to be placed on the site of the existing lower pad. The platform would be constructed of wood and placed on footers to provide a level, sturdy landing surface capable of supporting the weight of a helicopter (Figures 4 and 5). The design would be similar to that used for buildings currently at Lake Hoare, a nearby field camp also in the Taylor Valley. There would be only one set of wood cuts made on site. These would be on the main footer blocks which need to be cut at the site based on surveyed elevations and other on site considerations. These cuts would be done in one of the camp buildings with a circular saw. All sawdust would be collected to prevent the release into the local environment. A gas-powered jackhammer would be used to place the t-bar stock spikes for the cable tie downs. With the exception of an electric drill and the aforementioned equipment, all other work would be done with hand tools. The pad would be designed to be easily decommissioned when no longer needed.

Alternaive C. No Action

In this alternative, nothing would be done to improve the current condition of the landing pads at the Lake Bonney field camp. Helicopters could continue to land at the site nearest the lake until soil conditions become too soft to safely land. At that time, helicopter operations would cease for the majority of the remainder of the season as it has been determined the lower pad presents too high a safety risk to continue using it. Operations would continue at season end once temperatures have solidified the lakeside pad.

Other alternatives considered but rejected included enlarging the upper pad. This pad would take more time and labor to enlarge since it is smaller than the lower pad and is on a steeper slope. This, compounded by the fact that it is located a further distance from the camp, makes this alternative less desirable. Also, building an all new pad was considered, but rejected because there is no reason to abandon the existing pad and there is no area in the vicinity which has physical features more beneficial from the area where the current middle pad is located which would reduce the amount of labor and excavation required to build it.

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

A. Safety of Personnel

Alternatives A and B would provide an area large enough for helicopters to safely land and take off to deliver passengers and supplies to the Lake Bonney field camp. Both alternatives would satisfy the safety concerns noted in the Purpose and Need section. With Alternative C, the helicopter services subcontractor would not consider Lake Bonney a safe place to land during a majority of the season and helicopter service may cease. Landing on the lake ice or on the naturally sloping ground are both unacceptable from a safety standpoint. Landing on the naturally sloped terrain is beyond the capabilities of the aircraft and is therefore unacceptable from a safety standpoint.

B. Impact on Science

Alternatives A and B could possibly have a minor impact on science during the enlargement of the pad or during construction of a landing platform should the landing area near the lake become unusable due to saturation with water during that time. Should the area continue to be usable throughout the construction period, there would be no impact on science.

Alternative C would have a major impact on science. Once the landing area near the lake is determined to be unusable, all science support using helicopters would cease for the duration of the research season. This would drastically cut the amount of time research could be conducted at the camp.

C. Short-term Effects

Alternative A would require approximately 38 m³ of soil to be excavated and redistributed to construct a 9 m X 9 m pad (Figure 3). This would result in increased erosion in the short term due to the exposure of fine grained particulates. These would be susceptible to both wind and water erosion until the natural system regained equilibrium.

Alternative B would have less impact than Alternative A. No substantial excavation would be required to enlarge the pad. Some minor work would be required to set footers and to sufficiently anchor the platform to withstand wind and erosion. This would amount to clearing a 0.6 meter square area roughly 15 cm into the ground for each of the approximately 12 to 16 footers. The cleared soil would be piled around the footers for added stability (Figure 4).

Alternative C would have no increase on erosion since no further excavation would be required. However, the impacts on personnel safety and science noted above could be substantial.

D. Long-term and Cumulative Effects

In Alternative A, most of the impacts would be short-term. The area would be reclaimed at the end of its useful life by regrading the area to as natural a state as practical.

In Alternative B, the area affected would be much smaller and the amount of reclamation required at the end of its useful life would be less. The platform could be easily disassembled for reuse in another area or to be returned to McMurdo Station.

In Alternative C, the area would require the same amount of reclamation as in Alternative B. However, the long-term effects on science would be substantial due to the severely shortened time the area near the lake could be used to land helicopters.

In all alternatives, once a landing pad has fallen into disuse, the site will be reclaimed to near natural conditions, to the extent practical. This practice is consistent with the Dry Valleys Code of Conduct, as well as other USAP practices.

V. CONSULTATION WITH OTHERS

National Science Foundation/Office of Polar Programs:
(703) 306-1030

Dr. David Bresnahan	Senior NSF Representative, Antarctica dbresnahan@nsf.gov
Ms. Kristin Larson	Environmental Compliance Manager (contractor) klarson@nsf.gov
Mr. Robert Cunningham	Environmental Compliance Manager rcunning@nsf.gov

Antarctic Support Associates:
(303) 790-8606

Ms. Robin Abbott	Helicopter Operations Coordinator abbottro.asa@asa.org
Mr. Terry Johnson	Environmentalist johnsote.asa@asa.org
Mr. Scott Perkins, PE	Environmental Engineer perkinsc.asa@asa.org

Petroleum Helicopters, Inc.:

Mr. Jack Hawkins	On Site Manger hawkinja.mcmurdo@mcmurdo.gov
Mr. Christopher Dean	Helicopter Pilot deanch.mcmurdo@mcmurdo.gov

Office of the Secretary of the Department of the Interior, Office of Aircraft Services:
(208)387-5778

Mr. Mark Reese Representative/T-379

Contracting Office's Technical mark_reese@ios.doi.gov

V. APPENDICES OR ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENT 1:	CURRENT CONFIGURATION OF MIDDLE PAD
ATTACHMENT 2:	TOP VIEW OF ALTERNATIVE A
ATTACHMENT 3:	CROSS SECTION VIEW OF ALTERNATIVE A
ATTACHMENT 4:	SIDE VIEW, HELICOPTER PAD
ATTACHMENT 5:	WOOD HELICOPTER PAD DESIGN