DOCSLIB.ORG

1 National Science Foundation Office of Polar Programs Arlington, Virginia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1 National Science Foundation Office of Polar Programs Arlington, Virginia National Science Foundation Office of Polar Programs Arlington, Virginia ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT CONCURRENCE Activity: Relocating Williams Field and Cleaning up the Current Location at McMurdo Station, Antarctica MCWF1801.IEE I have read the attached document and concur with the findings and recommendation. I concur that the proposed activity can commence. 1 National Science Foundation Office of Polar Programs Arlington, Virginia ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT AND FINDING OF NOT MORE THAN MINOR OR TRANSITORY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Relocating Williams Field and Cleaning up the Current Location at McMurdo Station, Antarctica MCWF1801.IEE FINDING The U.S. Antarctic Program (USAP) proposes to relocate Williams Field. The airfield would be moved approximately 3.35 km from its existing location and therefore would be 14.6 km from McMurdo Station. The relocation would include cleaning up and closing the existing airfield. The proposed action would include constructing two skiways and an apron and setting up the town site at the new location. In addition, the existing site would be cleaned up; structures, debris, and any residual spill material would be removed. Operations and maintenance of Williams Field were assessed in prior IEEs and no changes have been made to those proposed actions. Therefore, they are not part of this IEE. Based on the analyses in the environmental document, the National Science Foundation (NSF) Office of Polar Programs (OPP) has determined that implementing the actions listed would not create more than a minor or transitory effect on the Antarctic environment, within the meaning of NSF's implementing requirements for the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty. Therefore, a comprehensive environmental evaluation will not be prepared. I recommend the activity proceed based on implementation of the proposed action. The proposed action provides for constructing and setting up the new Williams Field and closing the existing Williams Field. This proposed action is consistent with NSF's efforts to promote scientific investigation and provide for the safety of its participants, while protecting the Antarctic environment. 01/10/2018 ________________________1/11/2018 Recommending Official Date Recommending Official Date Polly Penhale Margaret Knuth Environmental Officer Manager, Operations Polar Environment, Safety and Health Antarctic Infrastructure and Logistics 2 National Science Foundation Office of Polar Programs Arlington, Virginia ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT AND FINDING OF NOT MORE THAN MINOR OR TRANSITORY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Relocating Williams Field and Cleaning up the Current Location at McMurdo Station, Antarctica MCWF1801.IEE 1.0! INTRODUCTION The National Science Foundation (NSF) Office of Polar Programs (OPP) operates Phoenix Airfield and Williams Field, which are both located in the McMurdo Station area. United States Antarctic Program (USAP) aircraft provide essential logistical support by transporting personnel and cargo from Christchurch, New Zealand to McMurdo and then on to South Pole Station and field sites. Fixed-wing aircraft (including wheeled C-17, A- 319, B-757, and C-130 aircraft) use McMurdo area airfields for intercontinental flights, primarily during the austral summer (October through February). Intracontinental flights out of McMurdo Station (from Williams Field) are made by LC-130, Twin Otter, and Basler aircraft, which are equipped with both skis and wheels. The existing Williams Field is located approximately 11.25 km from McMurdo Station, directly adjacent to the snow road to Phoenix Airfield, near milepost 5 (Figure 1). NSF/OPP proposes to relocate Williams Field. The new location would be approximately 14.6 km from McMurdo Station, placing it farther from the ice shelf edge and the Long Duration Balloon Facility (LDB). Relocation would require constructing two new skiways and establishing a new apron, aircraft refueling area, town site, and an access road. In addition, the existing Williams Field location would be closed and debris removed. Since 2009, NSF/OPP has prepared four Initial Environmental Evaluations (IEEs) that describe McMurdo Station airfields (Table 1). These prior IEEs address construction and closure of select airfields and the operation of all airfields, including Williams Field. The proposed actions described in these IEEs are similar to the proposed action for the relocation of Williams Field. Therefore, the impacts described in these earlier IEEs are applicable to this proposed action. Table 1. List of IEEs that address McMurdo Station airfields (NSF, 2017; 2015; 2014a; 2009) Date Title Document Number 1/26/2017 Establishing Phoenix Airfield Town Site and MCST1601.IEE.AM1 Closing Pegasus Airfield at McMurdo Station, Antarctica 8/21/2015 Alpha Site Runway Construction & Operation MCST1601.IEE 3 10/7/2014 Operate Airfield Facilities at McMurdo Station, MCST1001.IEE.AM1 Antarctica 11/17/2009 Operate a Single Airfield Facility at McMurdo MCST1001.IEE Station, Antarctica 4 Figure 1. Proposed location of the new Williams Field in relation to the current location (Figure is best viewed on-screen and enlarged) 5 2.0! PURPOSE AND NEED Williams Field is located on the McMurdo Ice Shelf, which moves approximately 30 cm per day toward the ice shelf edge. The part of the shelf that reaches the edge collapses annually. Operations would be seriously affected if Williams Field is allowed to continue to move closer to the ice shelf edge. Therefore, Williams Field must be moved to ensure uninterrupted flight operations. 3.0! PROPOSED ACTION The proposed action to relocate Williams Field would include constructing a new access road, two skiways, a refueling area, and an aircraft apron; relocating the town site; and cleaning up debris from the current Williams Field site (Figures 2 through 4). Relocation and construction activities would be initiated as early as January 2018 and completed by October 2018. Cleaning up the existing airfield would be completed by April 2019. The design and dimensions of the new Williams Field (Figure 2) would be similar to the existing Williams Field. Approximately 7.7 km2 of snow surface would be compacted before moving equipment onto the site. Both the main skiway and crosswind skiway would be 3,000 m by 67 m (Figure 2). The apron and town site would be contained within a 275 m by 670 m area (Figures 3 and 4). The aircraft taxiway would be 300m by 50 m, and the access road would be approximately 3.35 km long and 30 m wide. These snow surfaces would be sheepsfooted and compacted using multiple passes and then groomed to a smooth surface. Williams Field support facilities would include a cargo staging area, a fuel pit, a passenger terminal, an air operations building, a bathroom, storage buildings, and an aerospace ground equipment (AGE) storage building. Power would be supplied by on-site generators with wiring buried along the runway and apron and strung on poles at the town site. The power infrastructure would include approximately 735 m of aerial cable on 19 poles spaced approximately 39 m apart. In addition, approximately 1,860 m of trench would be dug to bury 4,400 m of cable. Aircraft operation systems would also be deployed, including a Microwave Landing System (MLS), a tactical air navigation (TACAN), a simplified short approach lighting on rails (SSALR), a precision approach path indicator lights (PAPI), runway end indicator lights (REILS), automated weather stations, and runway markers for day time operations. It is anticipated the town site would support flight operations from October through February and would be set up and removed annually. All airfield structures would be mounted on skis or built on wooden supports so they can be moved and stored for winter. Other items, such as cargo containers (milvans), pallets, and waste storage boxes or drums may be placed on ski-mounted platforms or directly on the snow surface. ! The infrastructure at the current Williams Field (Figure 1) would be removed by April 2019. This infrastructure includes TACAN, MLS, and PAPI navigational aids; runway edge and lead-in markers on bamboo poles; and power poles and overhead power wiring. 6 Personnel would conduct a visual survey of the airfield to locate and remove any debris. Any snow discolored from past spills would be removed. All underground wiring (several thousand meters) would be abandoned in place. Overhead and underground wiring would be maintained until flight operations are completed. All work associated with relocating Williams Field would be completed by existing staff and heavy equipment (dozers, tractors, sheepsfoot, landplane, etc.). Approximately 19,000 L of fuel would be required to prepare the site and move equipment and structures. ! 4.0! ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION Under the proposed action alternative (Alternative A), Williams Field would be relocated to the new site and clean-up would occur at the current site. 4.1! Alternative B (No Action) Under the No Action alternative (Alternative B), Williams Field would not be relocated to the new site. However, this alternative does not meet the purpose and need of the project and would not allow Williams Airfield to be used in the long-term. 4.2! Alternatives Considered but Not Analyzed Two other sites were considered besides the proposed action site (Figure 1). Proposed location A was farther from McMurdo Station compared to the selected site and therefore would be less efficient to support, requiring more fuel and time to transport people, equipment, and cargo. Location
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Office of Polar Programs
    DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF SURFACE TRAVERSE CAPABILITIES IN ANTARCTICA COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION DRAFT (15 January 2004) FINAL (30 August 2004) National Science Foundation 4201 Wilson Boulevard Arlington, Virginia 22230 DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF SURFACE TRAVERSE CAPABILITIES IN ANTARCTICA FINAL COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Purpose.......................................................................................................................................1-1 1.2 Comprehensive Environmental Evaluation (CEE) Process .......................................................1-1 1.3 Document Organization .............................................................................................................1-2 2.0 BACKGROUND OF SURFACE TRAVERSES IN ANTARCTICA..................................2-1 2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................2-1 2.2 Re-supply Traverses...................................................................................................................2-1 2.3 Scientific Traverses and Surface-Based Surveys .......................................................................2-5 3.0 ALTERNATIVES ....................................................................................................................3-1
    [Show full text]
  • DRAFT COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (CEE) for ANDRILL Mcmurdo Sound Portfolio Madrid, 9/20 De Junio 2003
    XXVI ATCM Working Paper WP-002-NZ Agenda Item: IV CEP 4a NEW ZEALAND Original: English DRAFT COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (CEE) FOR ANDRILL McMurdo Sound Portfolio Madrid, 9/20 de junio 2003 ANDRILL - The McMurdo Sound Portfolio An international research effort with the participation of Germany, Italy, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. DRAFT COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (CEE) FOR ANDRILL McMurdo Sound Portfolio Antarctica New Zealand Private Bag 4745, Christchurch Administration Building International Antarctic Centre 38 Orchard Road, Christchurch January 22, 2003 2 CONTENTS 1. NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY.....................................................................................11 2. INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................13 2.1 What is ANDRILL?...............................................................................................13 2.2 The CEE process.................................................................................................15 2.2.1 What is a CEE and why is it needed?....................................................15 2.2.2 Process for preparing the Draft CEE .....................................................15 3. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTIVITES ..............................................................17 2.1 Purpose and Need...............................................................................................17 3.1.1 Scientific justification..............................................................................17
    [Show full text]
  • A NEWS BULLETIN Published Quarterly by the NEW ZEALAND ANTARCTIC SOCIETY (INC)
    A NEWS BULLETIN published quarterly by the NEW ZEALAND ANTARCTIC SOCIETY (INC) An English-born Post Office technician, Robin Hodgson, wearing a borrowed kilt, plays his pipes to huskies on the sea ice below Scott Base. So far he has had a cool response to his music from his New Zealand colleagues, and a noisy reception f r o m a l l 2 0 h u s k i e s . , „ _ . Antarctic Division photo Registered at Post Ollice Headquarters. Wellington. New Zealand, as a magazine. II '1.7 ^ I -!^I*"JTr -.*><\\>! »7^7 mm SOUTH GEORGIA, SOUTH SANDWICH Is- . C I R C L E / SOUTH ORKNEY Is x \ /o Orcadas arg Sanae s a Noydiazarevskaya ussr FALKLAND Is /6Signyl.uK , .60"W / SOUTH AMERICA tf Borga / S A A - S O U T H « A WEDDELL SHETLAND^fU / I s / Halley Bav3 MINING MAU0 LAN0 ENOERBY J /SEA uk'/COATS Ld / LAND T> ANTARCTIC ••?l\W Dr^hnaya^^General Belgrano arg / V ^ M a w s o n \ MAC ROBERTSON LAND\ '■ aust \ /PENINSULA' *\4- (see map betowi jrV^ Sobldl ARG 90-w {■ — Siple USA j. Amundsen-Scott / queen MARY LAND {Mirny ELLSWORTH" LAND 1, 1 1 °Vostok ussr MARIE BYRD L LAND WILKES LAND ouiiiv_. , ROSS|NZJ Y/lnda^Z / SEA I#V/VICTORIA .TERRE , **•»./ LAND \ /"AOELIE-V Leningradskaya .V USSR,-'' \ --- — -"'BALLENYIj ANTARCTIC PENINSULA 1 Tenitnte Matianzo arg 2 Esptrarua arg 3 Almirarrta Brown arc 4PttrtlAHG 5 Otcipcion arg 6 Vtcecomodoro Marambio arg * ANTARCTICA 7 Arturo Prat chile 8 Bernardo O'Higgins chile 1000 Miles 9 Prasid«fTtB Frei chile s 1000 Kilometres 10 Stonington I.
    [Show full text]
  • Management Plan for Antarctic Specially Protected Area No. 116 NEW COLLEGE VALLEY, CAUGHLEY BEACH, CAPE BIRD, ROSS ISLAND
    Management Plan For Antarctic Specially Protected Area No. 116 NEW COLLEGE VALLEY, CAUGHLEY BEACH, CAPE BIRD, ROSS ISLAND 1. Description of values to be protected In 1985, two areas at Cape Bird, Ross Island were designated as SSSI No. 10, Caughley Beach (Recommendation XIII-8 (1985)) and SPA No. 20, New College Valley (Recommendation XIII-12 (1985)), following proposals by New Zealand that these areas should be protected because they contained some of the richest stands of moss and associated microflora and fauna in the Ross Sea region of Antarctica. This is the only area on Ross Island where protection is specifically given to plant assemblages and associated ecosystems. At that time, SPA No. 20 was enclosed within SSSI No. 10, in order to provide more stringent access conditions to that part of the Area. In 2000, SSSI No. 10 was incorporated with SPA No. 20 by Measure 1 (2000), with the former area covered by SPA No. 20 becoming a Restricted Zone within the revised SPA No. 20. The boundaries of the Area were revised from the boundaries in the original recommendations, in view of improved mapping and to follow more closely the ridges enclosing the catchment of New College Valley. Caughley Beach itself was adjacent to, but never a part of, the original Area, and for this reason the entire Area was renamed as New College Valley, which was within both of the original sites. The Area was redesignated by Decision 1 (2002) as Antarctic Specially Protected Area (ASPA) No. 116 and a revised Management Plan was adopted through Measure 1 (2006).
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 84, No. 78/Tuesday, April 23, 2019/Rules
    Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 16791 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require Agricultural commodities, Pesticides SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The any special considerations under and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978, as Executive Order 12898, entitled requirements. amended (‘‘ACA’’) (16 U.S.C. 2401, et ‘‘Federal Actions to Address Dated: April 12, 2019. seq.) implements the Protocol on Environmental Justice in Minority Environmental Protection to the Richard P. Keigwin, Jr., Populations and Low-Income Antarctic Treaty (‘‘the Protocol’’). Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16, Director, Office of Pesticide Programs. Annex V contains provisions for the 1994). Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is protection of specially designated areas Since tolerances and exemptions that amended as follows: specially managed areas and historic are established on the basis of a petition sites and monuments. Section 2405 of under FFDCA section 408(d), such as PART 180—[AMENDED] title 16 of the ACA directs the Director the tolerance exemption in this action, of the National Science Foundation to ■ do not require the issuance of a 1. The authority citation for part 180 issue such regulations as are necessary proposed rule, the requirements of the continues to read as follows: and appropriate to implement Annex V Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. to the Protocol. et seq.) do not apply. ■ 2. Add § 180.1365 to subpart D to read The Antarctic Treaty Parties, which This action directly regulates growers, as follows: includes the United States, periodically food processors, food handlers, and food adopt measures to establish, consolidate retailers, not States or tribes.
    [Show full text]
  • Balloons up and Away
    Published during the austral summer at McMurdo Station, Antarctica, for the United States Antarctic Program December 21, 2003 Home away Balloons up and away from Dome By Kris Kuenning TRACER Sun staff As steel and plywood panels continue to go up at the new takes flight Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station building, this season’s By Brien Barnett residents are living out the transi- Sun staff tion from old Dome to new sta- Inside TRACER mission tion. control, Patrick “JoJo” Boyle With the summer crew set- sits in the six-foot square tling into the first two occupied office listening to music and sections of the new station, there watching computer monitors is some nostalgia for Dome life, for incoming data and mes- but the large new dining facility, sages. with windows overlooking the Every now and then Boyle ceremonial South Pole, has won points to the monitor where a a lot of hearts over already. string of bright red pixels “I don’t miss the old galley suddenly appear, indicating a one bit,” said cargo technician recent high-energy cosmic Scot Jackson, “and I really ray event. The tone of his thought I would.” voice shows excitement. Head chef “Cookie” Jon “Oooh, that’s a big Emanuel is enjoying the new event… That’s an iron event facilities, too, but is feeling the for sure … There’s another pangs of the transition when it one.” comes to getting supplies up to Behind him, in the office the second floor kitchen. Despite at McMurdo Station’s Crary the limiting size and aging facil- Laboratory is a map of ities of the old kitchen, the food Antarctica with a semicircle stores were always in easy reach of sticky notes stuck to it.
    [Show full text]
  • CAPE EVANS, ROSS ISLAND (Including Historic Site and Monument Nos
    Measure 8 (2010) Annex Management Plan For Antarctic Specially Protected Area No. 155 CAPE EVANS, ROSS ISLAND (including Historic Site and Monument Nos. 16 and 17, the historic Terra Nova hut of Captain Robert Falcon Scott and its precincts and the Cross on Wind Vane Hill) 1. Description of Values to be Protected The significant historic value of this Area was formally recognised when it was listed as Historic Site and Monument Nos. 16 and 17 in Recommendation 9 (1972). An area containing both sites was designated as Specially Protected Area No. 25 in Measure 2 (1997) and redesignated as Antarctic Specially Protected Area 155 in Decision 1 (2002). The Terra Nova hut (Historic Site and Monument No. 16) is the largest of the historic huts in the Ross Sea region. It was built in January 1911 by the British Antarctic Terra Nova Expedition of 1910-1913, led by Captain Robert Falcon Scott, RN. It was subsequently used as a base by the Ross Sea party of Sir Ernest Shackleton’s Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition of 1914-1917. Historic Site and Monument No. 17 consists of the Cross on Wind Vane Hill, erected in the memory of three members of Shackleton’s Ross Sea party who died in 1916. In addition to this, two anchors from the ship Aurora of the Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition, two instrument shelters (one on Wind Vane Hill and the other near the Terra Nova hut), several supply dumps and numerous artefacts are distributed around the site. Cape Evans is one of the principal sites of early human activity in Antarctica.
    [Show full text]
  • Continental Field Manual 3 Field Planning Checklist: All Field Teams Day 1: Arrive at Mcmurdo Station O Arrival Brief; Receive Room Keys and Station Information
    PROGRAM INFO USAP Operational Risk Management Consequences Probability none (0) Trivial (1) Minor (2) Major (4) Death (8) Certain (16) 0 16 32 64 128 Probable (8) 0 8 16 32 64 Even Chance (4) 0 4 8 16 32 Possible (2) 0 2 4 8 16 Unlikely (1) 0 1 2 4 8 No Chance 0% 0 0 0 0 0 None No degree of possible harm Incident may take place but injury or illness is not likely or it Trivial will be extremely minor Mild cuts and scrapes, mild contusion, minor burns, minor Minor sprain/strain, etc. Amputation, shock, broken bones, torn ligaments/tendons, Major severe burns, head trauma, etc. Injuries result in death or could result in death if not treated Death in a reasonable time. USAP 6-Step Risk Assessment USAP 6-Step Risk Assessment 1) Goals Define work activities and outcomes. 2) Hazards Identify subjective and objective hazards. Mitigate RISK exposure. Can the probability and 3) Safety Measures consequences be decreased enough to proceed? Develop a plan, establish roles, and use clear 4) Plan communication, be prepared with a backup plan. 5) Execute Reassess throughout activity. 6) Debrief What could be improved for the next time? USAP Continental Field Manual 3 Field Planning Checklist: All Field Teams Day 1: Arrive at McMurdo Station o Arrival brief; receive room keys and station information. PROGRAM INFO o Meet point of contact (POC). o Find dorm room and settle in. o Retrieve bags from Building 140. o Check in with Crary Lab staff between 10 am and 5 pm for building keys and lab or office space (if not provided by POC).
    [Show full text]
  • Immediate Scientific Report of the Ross Sea Iceberg Project 1987-88
    SCIENCE AND RESEARCH INTERNAL REPORT 9 IMMEDIATE SCIENTIFIC REPORT OF THE ROSS SEA ICEBERG PROJECT 1987-88 by J.R. Keys and A.D.W. Fowler* This is an unpublished report and must not be cited or reproduced in whole or part without permission from the Director, Science and Research. It should be cited as Science and Research Internal Report No.9 (unpublished). Science and Research Directorate, Department of Conservation, P.O. Box 10 420 Wellington, New Zealand April 1988 *Division of Information Technology, DSIR, Lower Hutt. 1 Frontispiece. NOAA 9 infrared satellite image of the 160 km long mega-giant iceberg B-9 on 9 November, four weeks after separating from the eastern front of Ross Ice Shelf. The image was digitized by US Navy scientists at McMurdo Station, paid for by the US National Science Foundation and supplied by the Antarctic Research Center at Scripps Institute. Several other bergs up to 20 km long that calved at the same time can be seen between B-9 and the ice shelf. These bergs have since drifted as far west as Ross Island (approx 600 km) whereas B-9 has moved only 215 km by 13 April, generally in a west-north-west direction. 2 CONTENTS Frontispiece 1 Contents page 2 SUMMARY 3 INTRODUCTION 4 PROPOSED PROGRAMME 5 ITINERARY 6 SCIENTIFIC ACHIEVEMENTS RNZAF C-130 iceberg monitoring flight 6 SPOT satellite image and concurrent aerial Photography 8 Ground-based fieldwork 9 B-9 iceberg 11 CONCLUSION 13 FUTURE RESEARCH 13 PUBLICATIONS 14 Acknowledgenents 14 References 14 FIGURES 15 TABLES 20 3 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Antarctic Treaty
    ! ! ! ! ! ! The Antarctic Treaty ! ! ! ! Measures adopted at the Thirty-ninth Consultative Meeting held at Santiago, Chile 23 May – 1 June 2016 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs by Command of Her Majesty November 2017! Cm 9542 © Crown copyright 2017 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available at www.gov.uk/government/publications Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at Treaty Section, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, King Charles Street, London, SW1A 2AH ISBN 978-1-5286-0126-9 CCS1117441642 11/17 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum Printed in the UK by the APS Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty!s Stationery Office MEASURES ADOPTED AT THE THIRTY-NINTH ANTARCTIC TREATY CONSULTATIVE MEETING Santiago, Chile 23 May – 1 June 2016 The Measures1 adopted at the Thirty-ninth Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting are reproduced below from the Final Report of the Meeting. In accordance with Article IX, paragraph 4, of the Antarctic Treaty, the Measures adopted at Consultative Meetings become effective upon approval by all Contracting Parties whose representatives were entitled to participate in the meeting at which they were adopted (i.e. all the Consultative Parties). The full text of the Final Report of the Meeting, including the Decisions and Resolutions adopted at that Meeting and colour copies of the maps found in this command paper, is available on the website of the Antarctic Treaty Secretariat at www.ats.aq/documents.
    [Show full text]
  • Living and Working at USAP Facilities
    Chapter 6: Living and Working at USAP Facilities CHAPTER 6: Living and Working at USAP Facilities McMurdo Station is the largest station in Antarctica and the southermost point to which a ship can sail. This photo faces south, with sea ice in front of the station, Observation Hill to the left (with White Island behind it), Minna Bluff and Black Island in the distance to the right, and the McMurdo Ice Shelf in between. Photo by Elaine Hood. USAP participants are required to put safety and environmental protection first while living and working in Antarctica. Extra individual responsibility for personal behavior is also expected. This chapter contains general information that applies to all Antarctic locations, as well as information specific to each station and research vessel. WORK REQUIREMENT At Antarctic stations and field camps, the work week is 54 hours (nine hours per day, Monday through Saturday). Aboard the research vessels, the work week is 84 hours (12 hours per day, Monday through Sunday). At times, everyone may be expected to work more hours, assist others in the performance of their duties, and/or assume community-related job responsibilities, such as washing dishes or cleaning the bathrooms. Due to the challenges of working in Antarctica, no guarantee can be made regarding the duties, location, or duration of work. The objective is to support science, maintain the station, and ensure the well-being of all station personnel. SAFETY The USAP is committed to safe work practices and safe work environments. There is no operation, activity, or research worth the loss of life or limb, no matter how important the future discovery may be, and all proactive safety measures shall be taken to ensure the protection of participants.
    [Show full text]
  • Flnitflrclid
    flNiTflRClID A NEWS BULLETIN published quarterly by the NEW ZEALAND ANTARCTIC SOCIETY (INC) A New Zealand geochemist, Dr W. F. Giggenbach, descends into the inner crater of Mt Erebus on December 23 last year in an unsuccessful attempt to take gas samples. Behind him in the lava lake of the volcano where the temperature is 1000deg Celsius. On his rucksack he carries titanium gas sampling rods. Photo by Colin Monteath VOl. 8, NO. 1 1 . Wellington, New Zealand, as a magazine. o6pt61*11061% I 979I ' . SOUTH SANDWICH Is SOUTH GEORGIA f S O U T H O R K N E Y I s x \ *#****t ■ /o Orcadas arg \ - aanae s» Novolazarevskaya ussr XJ FALKLAND Is /*Signyl.uK ,,'\ V\60-W / -'' \ Syowa japan SOUTH AMERICA /'' /^ y Borga 7 s a "Molodezhnaya A SOUTH , .a /WEDDELL T\USSR SHETLAND DRONNING MAUD LAND ENOERBY \] / Halley Bay^ ununn n mMUU / I s 'SEA uk'v? COATS Ld LAND JJ Druzhnaya ^General Belgrano arg ANTARCTIC %V USSR *» -» /\ ^ Mawson MAC ROBERTSON LANO\ '■ aust /PENINSULA,' "*■ (see map below) /Sohral arg _ ■ = Davis aust /_Siple — USA Amundsen-Scott / queen MARY LAND gMirny [ELLSWORTH u s a / ; t h u s s i " LANO K / ° V o s t o k u s s r / k . MARIE BYRD > LAND WILKES LAND Scott kOSS|nzk SEA I ,*$V /VICTORIA TERRE ' •|Py»/ LAND AOEilE ,y Leningradskaya X' USSR,''' \ 1 3 -------"';BALLENYIs ANTARCTIC PENINSULA ^ v . : 1 Teniente Matienzo arg 2 Esperanza arc 3 Almirante Brown arg 4 Petrel arg 5 Decepcion arg 6 Vicecomodoro Marambio arg ' ANTARCTICA 7 Arturo Prat chile 8 Bernardo O'Higgins chile 1000 Miles 9 Presidents Frei chile * ? 500 1000 Kilometres 10 Stonington I.
    [Show full text]