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