Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for Reconstruction of the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station, Antarctica

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for

Reconstruction of the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station, Antarctica

AGENCY: National Science Foundation.

SUMMARY: The National Science Foundation proposes to reconstruct the

Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station over eight to ten years utilizing

serviceable portions of the existing facilities while continuing

ongoing science and education projects. The site, at the geographic

south pole, has been occupied year-round by U.S. citizens since 1956.

Due to the condition of the station and the need to provide for

increased capacity to conduct ongoing and to develop new science and

education projects at the South Pole, reconstruction of the station is

necessary. A reconstructed station will enable science and education

projects to continue to 2030.

The Director of the Office of Polar Programs of the National

Science Foundation intends to prepare an environmental impact

statement, under the implementing regulations for the National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and a comprehensive environmental

evaluation, within the procedures of the Protocol on Environmental

Protection to the Antarctic Treaty, for the decision to reconstruct the

Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station.

DATES: The final environmental impact statement is expected to be

available to the public in August, 1995. The record of decision is

expected to be available in October 1995. Comments on this notice of

intent will be of most use if they are received before July 30, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be submitted to: Robert S.

Cunningham, Office of Polar Programs, Room 755 National Science

Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert S. Cunningham, Peter Karasik, or Allison Cook at the Office of

Polar Programs, National Science Foundation TEL: (703) 306-1031, FAX:

(703) 306-0139, EMAIL: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The National Science Foundation (NSF)

manages and funds United States activities in Antarctica. The NSF is

responsible for operation of three active U.S. research stations in

Antarctica (two coastal stations as well as the Amundsen-Scott South

Pole Station and the U.S. Antarctic Research Program). The South Pole

is a geophysically unique site for important research in a number of

disciplines. Since the 1956-57 International Geophysical Year, the

United States has maintained excellence in merit-reviewed, year-round

science projects at the South Pole that include measuring events in

deep space to monitoring the changes that human actions are making in

the stratospheric ozone layer.

Scientists at the South Pole are pursuing technically challenging

studies in astronomy and astrophysics, the areas of inquiry currently

being emphasized at the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station. The stable,

dry, cold atmosphere; clear ice; and location on the Earth's axis

provide opportunities for such research not available elsewhere. Very

distant phenomena such as the formation of stars and galaxies, and the

growth and structure of the universe are examined from what is the best

inhabited site on Earth for most of these studies. Current

instrumentation research includes development of several specialized

telescopes, including the world's most promising neutrino telescope

prototype. International collaborative research is welcomed, and it is

anticipated that there will be five or six large telescopes (i.e., with

apertures of several meters) operated at the station as a result of

such collaboration within the next decade. Participation in this

research also furthers the educational objectives of the graduate

students who participate.

Research on the physics of the upper atmosphere and near-Earth

space is another important area of inquiry at the South Pole. The

purpose of such research is to understand how the energy carried from

the Sun interacts with Earth systems, and how it can produce magnetic

storms and ionospheric disturbances. Better understanding of these

phenomena can improve our knowledge of how to improve communications.

Importance of such upper atmosphere studies increase as the world

depends more and more on high volume communications. The South Pole is

also the best site on Earth to observe dayside aurora (lights in the

upper atmosphere at an altitude between 90 and 300 kilometers).

Researchers also monitor changes in the atmosphere's composition at

this station as well, including the concentration of stratospheric

ozone in the upper atmosphere. Ozone is a natural shield that protects

life on Earth from ultraviolet radiation. Research indicates that it is

destroyed by chlorine from chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), man-made

chemicals that have been used as refrigerants, aerosol propellants, and

cleaning agents. The South Pole Station has proved to be an excellent

place to measure seasonal variation in atmospheric ozone because of its

strategic location near the center of the ozone hole, high elevation,

and lack of heavy cloud cover throughout the year.

Some seismologic research is also performed at the South Pole. The

location of the Amundsen-Scott Station on the axis of rotation of the

Earth and the nearly aseismic nature of Antarctica make it an excellent

location for studying the Earth's deep interior. The station also

serves an important logistical purpose as a staging site for field

research and operations surrounding the Pole.

Without extensive reconstruction, the Amundsen-Scott South Pole

Station cannot continue to support current and developing research that

can best or only be pursued at the South Pole. Utilities and buildings

at the station have exceeded their 15- to 20-year design life and are

rapidly deteriorating due to age, intensive use, and climatic

conditions. The facilities comprise 3,504 square meters (37,724 square

feet) of heated space and 4,118 square meters (44,332 square feet) of

unheated space. Many of the facilities do not meet current standards

for buildings in the United States and modern engineering practices.

Many potential hazards are mitigated through procedural controls on

use, rather than more efficient and effective engineering solutions.

These limitations are constraining scientists and are likely to further

limit research activities.

Accommodations are crowded, and lack of berthing space limits the

number of scientists who can undertake research at the Station. In the

summer most of the population is housed in Jamesways (canvas-covered

temporary field quarters manufactured in the 1950's). Electrical power,

and the fuel used to generate it, will constrain installation of newer

and more powerful telescopes and other instruments limiting data

collection and processing. Structural weaknesses in the buildings, fuel

lines, and heating systems require labor intensive repairs and other

remedial efforts that detract from support to research.

Year-round accumulation of snow around buildings at the South Pole

Station now requires significant fuel and labor for removal. In spite

of snow removal, snowdrift accumulation on top of the present station

has led to structural damage to some portions of the station.

A reconstructed station would incorporate architectural and

engineering improvements which would reduce risks to health and improve

the safety of station occupants. New structures would be elevated from

the ground, allowing snow to blow under rather than pile up on them,

reducing snow removal costs. Technological improvements would also

enable the reconstructed station to operate more efficiently, therefore

reducing the proportion of personnel devoted to facilities maintenance

and minimizing the need to implement inefficient procedural controls to

address safety risks.

The proposed reconstruction would generally be concentrated in the

austral summer of each year (October through February), but some

interior construction would be carried out during the winter months.

During reconstruction, portions of the existing station would remain in

use for science and education purposes, but would be phased out as

replacement facilities become available. All unused buildings,

equipment, and construction materials would be removed from Antarctica

for reuse, recycling, or disposal. All materials, equipment, and

support would be provided by airlift from McMurdo Station, Antarctica.

Most materials and equipment would be transported to McMurdo Station by

ship.

The proposed improvements include: construction of elevated

buildings (specifically, space for laboratories, dormitories, and

offices); upgrading the heat, power, water, wastewater, and fuel

systems; and demolition and removal of old structures and utilities. At

the conclusion of the reconstructed station's useful life (about 25

years), NSF intends to either dismantle and remove the facility from

Antarctica or replace all or most of the station. Either decision,

removal or replacement, would be accompanied by appropriate

environmental review.

Several individuals familiar with activity at the station have

commented on the reconstruction of the station. These include station

residents, scientists, program administrators, and members of the

public. From these comments, five categories of issues were identified

for consideration in the environmental impact statement for the

Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station. These categories, useful in

developing possible alternatives and in organizing the discussion of

environmental effects, are:

1. Health and safety of station personnel;

2. Energy sources and consumption;

3. Cost of reconstruction and operation;

4. Treatment and disposal of wastes; and

5. Capacity to support current and anticipated science and

education at the station and throughout Antarctica during and after

reconstruction.

The NSF considered a number of alternative approaches for

reconstructing the Amundsen-Scott station. Four alternatives that are

proposed for further analysis range from a low-level investment--

maintaining the current station and replacing only the least efficient

portions of the infrastructure--to building a renewed, up-to-date

station able to support significantly more science and education

activities to 2030. Other alternatives were considered, but they do not

appear reasonable at this time.

For example, NSF considered the option of constructing a completely

separate, new station adjacent to the present one while maintaining all

usual activities. In this scenario, construction would take place

supported by temporary facilities for berthing, water supply, galley,

material storage, and equipment housing and maintenance. While this

option is technically feasible, it appears more expensive than

replacing the current station because cost savings can be made by

utilizing the remaining serviceable portions of the current station.

Also, it would require more people at the South Pole than in other

alternatives, and arguably generate more environmental impact during

construction because of transportation, housing, heating, and electric

power requirements.

Construction of the station at other locations further from the

geologic South Pole was also considered. One possible location was the

High Plateau of Antarctica. While a higher altitude site would provide

additional advantages for astronomy, the construction and operation

would be much more arduous than at the South Pole. The additional cost

of airlifting all construction materials from McMurdo Station and the

inability to re-use serviceable portions of the old station were other

deterrents to further consideration of this alternative. In addition,

the Presidential Memorandum assigning NSF responsibility to manage and

fund United States interests in Antarctica (Memorandum #6646, signed in

1982) directs that the United States continue to occupy a station at

the South Pole.

The four possible alternatives for the reconstruction of the

Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station proposed for further consideration

are:

Alternative A, Low-level investment or No Action. In this

alternative no action would be taken to replace the station. Only the

replacement of the most inefficient structures, utilities, and

equipment would take place over the next decade. If this alternative

were selected, it is anticipated that the station would have to close

or that the science and education programs would have to be severely

curtailed by the end of the decade. This alternative is the status quo

or ``no action'' alternative required by NEPA regulations;

Alternative B. The station would be reconstructed over eight to ten

years. The capacity to support science and education programs would

remain at the 1994-level as measured by the number of scientist in

residence. However, in this alternative and in and Alternatives C and

D, the technical sophistication and telecommunications capabilities to

support scientists would increase;

Alternative C. In this alternative, the station would be

reconstructed over eight to ten years with year-long capacity to

support science programs increased by 2 to 3 fold; and

Alternative D. The station would be reconstructed as in Alternative

C, except over five years, rather than eight to ten years.

The public is invited to comment on any aspect of the proposal. The

comment period on the draft environmental impact statement

(comprehensive environmental evaluation) will be a minimum of 90 days

from the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice

of availability in the Federal Register.

Dated: June 17, 1994.

Dr. Carol A. Roberts,

Deputy Director, Office of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation.

[FR Doc. 94-15317 Filed 6-22-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-M