Title : Improvements to Scott Base Road Type : Antarctic EAM NSF Org: OD / OPP Date : September 15, 1992 File : opp93074 DIVISION OF POLAR PROGRAMS OFFICE OF THE ENVIRONMENT 202/357-7766 MEMORANDUM Date: September 15, 1992 From: Environmental Officer, DPP Subject: Environmental Action Memorandum (Improvements to Scott Base Road) To: Facilities Engineering Projects Manager, DPP Files (S.7 - Environment) This Environmental Action Memorandum describes the need for, and location of, proposed actions to make improvements to the road between McMurdo Station and New Zealand's Scott Base during the 1992-1993 and 1993-1994 austral summer seasons. The Environ- mental Officer posed a set of questions relating to the proposed project, and to the potentially affected environment. These questions were responded to by the civilian support contractor's Fleet Operations Supervisor, Environmental Engineer, and Environmentalist on August 28, 1992; the questions and responses are shown below: Background Antarctic Support Associates (ASA) Operations proposes to make two modifications to the existing Scott Base Road: 1) placement of median safety barricades on an approximately 152.4 meter stretch of the road from the Cosmic Ray Laboratory to the top of the hill, and 2) construction of a more gentle radius on the 90-degree curve up the hill from Scott Base. The intent is to improve the safety of personnel using the road. A number of vehicles have gone over the edge of the road in the area of the proposed barricade. The hill just below the proposed barricade is extremely steep. Because of the steep grade of the road going up from Scott Base, vehicles have at times lost traction driving up this road and slid backward. The new road section would have a less steep grade in addition to eliminating a sharp curve. The proposed road work would occur during the austral 1992-93 and 1993-94 summer seasons. GENERAL 1. What is the specific purpose of the proposed activity? The purpose of the road improvements is to improve safety by reducing the potential for serious accidents on the road from McMurdo Station to New Zealand's Scott Base. What alternatives to the proposed activity have the Program and the Contractor considered? Four alternatives have been considered: 1) the proposed activities, 2) construction of a metal guardrail, 3) widening the road, and 4) no action. Have probable impacts of all alternatives been considered by the Program and the Contractor? Please explain how. Yes. The impacts of the proposed work are limited to potential dust generation during road work. Fill necessary to construct the new road section at grade would be taken from the existing road section. Use of some off-site fill may be required. The amount of off-site fill required, if any, would be determined through a site survey, would adhere to U.S. Antarctic Program policies for earth fill use, and would be kept to a minimum. The top of the new road section would be covered with the grey fines used typically on McMurdo's roads because of their ability to form a well-compacted surface that is less subject to wind erosion. A guardrail would not be as effective as the proposed concrete barricades and would require such permanent, more environmentally-disruptive structures as pilings to hold it in place. Widening the road would be difficult (due to the steep slope on either side), would disturb more area, and would not meet the intent of preventing vehicles from going over the edge. If no road improve- ments are made the potential for a serious accident to occur would remain high. The impacts of such an accident include loss of life, equipment and release of fuel or hazardous materials that might be carried in a vehicle. Should the chosen alternative involve potential impacts, how would these impacts be mitigated by the Program or the Contractor? Water would be used during construction of the new road section to prevent dust emissions and to improve fill compaction. Have measures to assess the indirect costs of the proposed activity been identified or considered by the Program or the Contractor? Please explain how. The proposed activity may prevent loss of life and decrease operating costs by reducing damage to vehicles and by preventing potential spills. LAND USE AND PLANNING 2. Where would the proposed activity be located, specifically? The concrete barricades would be placed along the steep embankment up the hill from the Cosmic Ray Laboratory. The road construction would replace an existing 90-degree curve up the hill from Scott Base. See attached map. Have alternative locations been considered by the Program or the Contractor? If yes, which are they; if no, explain why. No. The location of the barricades is dictated by the location of the embankment. The location of the proposed new road section follows the path of a previous road. (The previous road was abandoned because it was below the surrounding grade and tended to accumulate snow.) This location minimizes impact on previously undisturbed areas and accomplishes the goals of decreasing the steepness of the road and smoothing the curve. 3. How would any aesthetic impacts to the area from the proposed activity be handled by the Program or the Contractor? The existing road section with the 90-degree curve and any areas that are disturbed by construction would be returned to a natural appearance. The barricades would be placed so that they line up neatly, both for appearance and safety. 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. No. A small crew would be required for a relatively short period of time to complete the project, so the indirect impacts associated with people such as waste generation would be minimal. Two people could place the barricades in one day. The proposed road construction would require six people for approximately two weeks. 5. Would the proposed activity change the traditional use(s) of the proposed (or chosen) site? If yes, how; if no, why. No. The new road section would be located where a road was previously constructed by the Navy. 6. Are the physical and environmental characteristics of the neighboring environment suitable for the proposed activity? If yes, explain why; if no, explain why. Yes. The new road section would be located in a physically more suitable location because of the less steep grade. IMPACT AND POLLUTION POTENTIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: 7. How has protection of the environment and human health from unnecessary pollution or impact 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 concrete barricades are not expected to deteriorate and thus may be used indefinitely at the proposed location, or at other locations. The proposed activities would decrease the likelihood of fuel spills by reducing the potential for vehicle accidents. Although a section of road would be moved closer to Scott Base, the existing road section closest to Scott Base would be unaffected; and, noticeable increase in noise at that base is not expected. 8. Would the proposed activity change ambient air quality at the proposed (or chosen) site? If yes, how; if no, why. No. Dust emissions generated by road construction activities would be minimized by using water. 9. Would the proposed activity change water quality or flow (drainage), at the proposed (or chosen) site? If yes, how; if no, why. Water flow would be rerouted through a new ditch on the upper side of the new road section. This ditch would capture water that previously flowed through the ditch alongside the existing road section, which would be regraded to a smooth, natural state. The new ditch would direct water to the same surface water system consisting of culverts along the lower road just before the Transition Road. Snow drifting on the road may be increased by the barricades. Such drifts would be cleared as necessary. The activities are not expected to affect water quality. 10. Would the proposed activity change waste generation or management at the proposed (or chosen) site? If yes, how; if no, why. No. By reducing damage to equipment the changes may decrease waste generation associated with vehicle repair and retrograde. There would be no construction debris generated by the proposed activities; and, the appearance of the natural areas surrounding the improvements would be returned to their original aspect. 11. Would the proposed activity change energy production or demand, personnel and life support, or transportation requirements at the site? If yes, how; if no, why. The activity may temporarily affect transportation. A fork lift would be used to place the barricades. This activity may interfere with traffic at times during the one day required to place the barricades. The existing road would continue to be used during construction of the new road. The work would not change energy production or demand, or personnel and life support requirements. The crew doing the work would consist of the regular operations crew. 12. Is the proposed activity expected to adversely affect scientific studies or locations of research interest (near and distant, in the short-term and in the long-term)? If yes, how; if no, why. No. 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. No. Pollutant generation would be limited to dust. Through water use dust emissions are expected to be minimal. 14. Does the site of the proposed activity serve as habitat for any significant assemblages of Antarctic wildlife (for example, mosses or lichens, or antarctic birds or marine mammals)? No. Although skuas fly through the area there are no known nesting grounds in the area of the new or existing road. HUMAN VALUES: 15. Would the proposed activity encroach upon any historical property of the site? If yes, how; if no, why. No. The roadway is not listed as an historical 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). The concrete barricades would be set on top of the roadway. No permanent structures would be associated with either the barricades or the new road section. 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. In fact, there are recognized safety benefits that would accrue from completion of the proposed project. The civilian contractor is authorized to proceed with the proposed activity. Sidney Draggan Attachment Map of Scott Base Road Improvements cc: Terry Johnson, ASA Craig Martin, ASA