JPL Publication 87-4 June 15, 1988

Environmental Projects: Volume 6

Environmental Assessment:

New 34-Meter Antenna at Venus Site

(kASA-Ce-182y22 ) BNVIBCNMEfcaA L EECJECTS. N86-23919

VLxOH b 6 : ENVI£(.M<EN1A I A£££££tENl . NEW

2^-METE E ANTENN A A l VEKU S £11£ (Jet

irepulsion Lat.) 8C p CSCL 13B Unclas

G3/31 0

,

Goldstone Deep Space Communications Complex

Je

JP

t Propulsion Laborator

L

y

NASA

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration
JPL Publication 87-4 . June 15, 1988

Environmental Projects: Volume 6

Environmental Assessment:

New 34-Meter Antenna at Venus Site

Goldstone Deep Space Communications Complex

JPL NASA

Jet Propulsion Laboratory National Aeronautics and

California Institute of Technology • Space Administration
The work described in this publication was carried out under the direction of the

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, and was supported by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade

name, or manufacturer does not necessarily constitute an endorsement by the

United States Government, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration,

or the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology.
ABSTRACT

The Goldstone Deep Space Communications Complex (GDSCC), located in the

Mojave Desert about 45 miles north of Barstow, California, and about 150 miles

northeast of Pasadena, is part of the National Aeronautics and Space

Administration's (NASA's) Deep Space Network, one of the world's largest and

most sensitive scientific telecommunications and radio navigation networks.

The Goldstone Complex is managed, technically directed, and operated for NASA

by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) of the California Institute of

Technology in Pasadena, California. A detailed description of the GDSCC is

presented in Section II of this report.

The GDSCC includes five distinct operational areas named Echo Site, Venus

Site, Mars Site, Apollo Site, and Mojave Base Site. Within each site is a

Deep Space Station (DSS) that consists of a large parabolic dish antenna and

its support facilities.

At present, the Venus Station, known as DSS-13, has a 26-meter (85 ft)

antenna. In conjunction with NASA, JPL is proposing to replace this antenna

with a new 34-meter (111.5 ft) antenna.

The proposed construction of this new antenna at the Venus Site required

an Environmental Assessment (EA) document that would record the existing

environmental conditions at the Venus Site, that would analyze the

environmental effects that possibly could be expected from the construction,

installation and operation of the new proposed antenna, and that would

recommend measures taken to mitigate any possibly deleterious environmental

effects. M. B. Gilbert Associates (MBGA), Long Beach, California, was

retained by JPL, under Contract No. 957925-71070, to prepare the EA document.

This present report is an expanded JPL-version of the EA document

submitted to JPL by MBGA on February 15, 1988. The conclusion of the

MBGA-prepared environmental assessment is that there would be no significant

adverse effects on the environment due to the construction, installation and

operation of the new 34-meter antenna at the Venus Site.

Preceding Page Blank

iii
GLOSSARY

AICP American Institute of Certified Planners

BLM Bureau of Land Management

CDFG California Department of Fish and Game

CEQ (Federal) Council on Environmental Quality

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CNDDB California Natural Diversity Data Base

CNPS California Native Plant Society

DSCC Deep Space Communications Complex

DSN Deep Space Network

DSS Deep Space Station

EA Environmental Assessment

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency

FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact

FWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (see USFWS)

GDSCC Goldstone Deep Space Communications Complex

JPL Jet Propulsion Laboratory

MBGA M.B. Gilbert Associates

MSL Mean Sea Level

NAS National Audubon Society

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NEPA National Environmental. Policy Act

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

NTC National Training Center (U.S. Army)

RON Rural Conservation

^RECEDING PAGE BLANK Wfci
SEDAB Southeast Desert Air Basin

USC United States Code

USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (see FWS)

VI
CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION 1-1

A. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 34-METER ANTENNA

AT THE VENUS SITE 1-1

B. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED 34-METER ANTENNA

AT THE VENUS SITE 1-1

C. REQUIREMENT OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 1-2

D. SUMMARY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 1-3

E. CONCLUSIONS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 1-3

II. THE GOLDSTONE DEEP SPACE COMMUNICATIONS COMPLEX (GDSCC) 2-1

A. LOCATION OF THE GDSCC 2-1

B. FUNCTIONS OF THE GDSCC 2-1

C. FACILITIES AT THE GDSCC 2-3

D. ANTENNA STATIONS AT THE GDSCC 2-3

1. Echo Site (DSS-12) . . . 2-3

2. Venus Site (DSS-13) 2-7

3. Mars Site (DSS-14 and DSS-15) 2-7

4. Apollo Site (DSS-16) 2-8

5. Mojave Base Site (NOAA Antenna) 2-8

E. SUPPORT FACILITIES AT THE GDSCC 2-8

1. Goldstone Dry Lake Airport 2-8

2. Microwave Test Facility and Fire Training Area 2-8

3. Miscellaneous Buildings in the GDSCC Area 2-8

4. Off-Site Facility at Barstow, California 2-9

F. NON-STRUCTURAL SUPPORT FACILITIES AT THE GDSCC 2-9

1. Transportation Network 2-9

2. Utilities and Services 2-9

vii
CONTENTS (Contd)

G. WASTE-MANAGEMENT FACILITIES AT THE GDSCC . . . . f 2-9

H. OPERATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE GDSCC AND FORT IRWIN . . 2-11

I. NATURAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS OF THE GDSCC 2-11

1. Geology 2-11

2. Hydrology 2-11

3. Climatic Conditions 2-11

III. PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 34-METER ANTENNA

AT THE VENUS SITE OF THE GDSCC 3-1

A. PURPOSE OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW 34-METER ANTENNA ... 3-1

B. NEED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW 34-METER ANTENNA .... 3-1

IV. CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED NEW ANTENNA AT THE

VENUS SITE AND A CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS . . . . . . . 4-1

A. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 4-1

B. ALTERNATIVES TO CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW 34-METER

ANTENNA AT THE VENUS SITE AT THE GDSCC 4-10

1. Alternative One: Non-Construction

of the 34-Meter Antenna 4-10

2. Alternative Two: Relocation of the

34-Meter Antenna within the Venus Site 4-10

3. Alternative Three: Relocation of the

34-Meter Antenna Within the GDSCC but

at a Site Other Than the Venus Site 4-11

4. Alternative Four: Relocation of the

34-Meter Antenna at a Site other than the GDSCC 4-12

5. Preferred Alternative: Construction of

the 34-Meter Antenna at the Venus Site 4-12

viii
CONTENTS (Contd)

V. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS AT THE GDSCC THAZMUST BE

ASSESSED IN THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION

OF A NEW 34-METER ANTENNA AT THE VENUS SITE 5-1

A. GEOLOGICAL SETTING 5-1

B. CLIMATIC CONDITIONS . . . . 5-1

C. SEISMOLOGY 5-1

D. LITHOLOGY 5-2

E. GEOLOGICAL HISTORY OF THE GDSCC AREA 5-2

F. TYPES OF SOILS AT THE GDSCC 5-5

G. WATER RESOURCES AND FLOODPLAINS 5-6

1. Water Resources 5-6

2. Floodplains 5-6

H. BIOTIC RESOURCES, ENDANGERED SPECIES, AND WETLANDS 5-6

1. Biotic Resources 5-6

2. Vegetation 5-7

a. Creosote Bush Scrub 5-7

b. Desert Wash Scrub 5-7

3. Wildlife 5-8

a. Amphibians and Reptiles 5-8

b. Birds 5-8

c. Mammals 5-9

4. Impacts upon the Biotic Resources of the

Proposed Project Site and Their Mitigations 5-9

5. Endangered Species 5-9

6. Wetlands 5-10

IX
CONTENTS (Contd)

I. AIR RESOURCES 5-13

1. Meteorology 5-13

2. Air Quality 5-13

J. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT 5-13

1. Land Use and Socioeconomics 5-13

2. Vehicular Traffic and Circulation 5-14

3. Noise 5-14

4. Cultural Resources 5-15

5. Radio Interference, Electromagnetic

Radiation, and Microwaves 5-16

6. Solid and Hazardous Waste,

Toxic Substances, and Pesticides 5-17

a. Solid Wastes 5-17

b. Toxic Substances and Hazardous Wastes 5-17

c. Pesticides 5-18

d. Summary of Hazardous Materials Use,

Generation of Solid and Hazardous Wastes,

and the Use of Pesticides at the Proposed

New 34-Meter Antenna at the Venus Site 5-18

7. Health and Safety 5-18

8. Aesthetics 5-19

VI. CONCLUSIONS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CONCERNING

THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A NEW 34-METER ANTENNA

PROPOSED FOR THE VENUS SITE AT THE GDSCC 6-1

VII. CERTIFICATION 7-1
CONTENTS (Contd)

APPENDIXES

A. INDIVIDUALS AND AGENCIES CONSULTED IN PREPARATION

OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT A-l

B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: BIBLIOGRAPHY B-l

C. JET PROPULSION LABORATORY SAFETY PRACTICE

BULLETIN 12-4-6, EFFECTIVE DATE: JUNE 15, 1978 C-l

D. HIGH-POWER RADIATION CONCERNS FOR THE NEW DSS-13

34-METER ANTENNA: INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM

BAG 87-VENUSHP, JULY 30, 1987 D-l

E. ARCHAEOLOGICAL APPROVAL OF THE NEW VENUS 34-METER ANTENNA:

INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM ENVOK34M.NTC, DECEMBER 18, 1987 .... E-l

Figures

1. Geographic Relationship of the Goldstone Deep Space

Communications Complex to JPL in Pasadena 2-2

2. The Three-Continent NASA Deep Space Network as it

Existed in 1987 2-4

3. Schematic Map of the Goldstone DSCC Showing Locations

of the Six NASA Deep Space Stations (DSSs) 2-5

4. Major Roads Leading to and at the Goldstone DSCC 2-10

5. Venus Site: Existing Site Plan 4-2

6. Looking Northeast from Existing 26-Meter Antenna

at the Venus Site 4-3

7. View to Northeast with Proposed Site for New 34-Meter

Antenna in Foreground 4-4

8. Venus Site: Site Plan for Proposed New 34-Meter Antenna . . . 4-6

9. Artist's Drawing of the Proposed New 34-Meter Antenna

at the Venus Site . 4-7

10. Looking Southwest from the Existing 26-Meter Antenna

,at the Venus Site . . . . . 4-8

11. Photo of Existing 34-Meter Antenna (Uranus Station)

at the Mars Site. Antenna is Similar to Antenna

Proposed for the Venus Site 4-9

XI
Tables

1. Major Facilities at the GDSCC 2-6

2. Existing Structures at the Venus Site at the GDSCC 4-5

3. Generalized Strategraphic Sequence in the Goldstone

Area (after Kieffer, 1961) 5-3

4. Sensitive Plant Species that Potentially Could Occur

at the GDSCC 5-11

5. Sensitive Wildlife Species Known from the Vicinity

of the GDSCC 5-12

xii
SECTION I

INTRODUCTION

The Goldstone Deep Space Communications Complex (GDSCC), located in the

Mojave Desert about 45 miles north of Barstow, California, and about 150 miles

northeast of Pasadena, is part of the National Aeronautics and Space

Administration's (NASA's) Deep Space Network, one of the world's largest and

most sensitive scientific telecommunications and radio navigation networks.

The Goldstone Complex is managed, technically directed, and operated for NASA

by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) of the California Institute of

Technology in Pasadena, California. A detailed description of the GDSCC is

presented in Section II of this report.

The GDSCC includes five distinct operational areas named Echo Site, Venus

Site, Mars Site, Apollo Site, and Mojave Base Site. Within each site is a

Deep Space Station (DSS) that consists of a large parabolic dish antenna and

its support facilities.

A. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 34-METER ANTENNA AT THE VENUS SITE

At present, the Venus Station, known as DSS-13, has a 26-meter (85 ft)

antenna. In conjunction with NASA, JPL is proposing to replace this antenna

with a new 34-meter (111.5 ft) antenna. The reasons for construction of the

new antenna are to create an advanced facility to improve:

(1) Antenna pointing

(2) Spacecraft tracking

(3) Spacecraft navigation

(4) Antenna microwave optics

(5) Transmission capability

(6) Reception capability

(7 The return of scientific data

The technology developed from the implementation of the proposed Venus

antenna would be of use to the existing Deep Space Network (DSN) antennas

located not only at the GDSCC but also at other Deep Space Communications

Complex (DSCC) facilities in Spain and Australia.

B. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED 34-METER ANTENNA AT THE VENUS SITE

The proposed antenna, to be located at the existing Venus Site, would be

a high-performance, 34-meter wheel-and-track type, azimuth-elevation antenna

located approximately 200 feet south of the existing 26-meter antenna. The

1-1
proposed project includes construction and installation of the antenna

structure, a below-grade foundation and equipment enclosure, mechanical drive

and controls, optical elements, and may include a minor ancillary support

building. The proposed Venus Station antenna is similar in size and structure

to the 34-meter Uranus antenna located at the Mars Station, in the northern

portion of the 6DSCC (see Figure 11).

C. REQUIREMENT OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

The proposed construction of this new antenna at the Venus Site required

an Environmental Assessment (EA) Document that would record the existing

environmental conditions at the Venus Site, that would analyze the

environmental effects that possibly could be expected from the construction,

installation and operation of the new proposed antenna, and that would

recommend measures that could be taken to mitigate any possibly deleterious

environmental effects.

The need for an Environmental Assessment Document had its origin in 1978,

when the Federal Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) issued regulations

under 40 CFR Parts 1500 - 1508 to implement the procedural requirements of the

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Following this action, the National

Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) procedures to implement NEFA were

published in 14 CFR Subparts 1261.1 and 1261.3. The NASA procedures now have

been incorporated in the NASA Directives System as NMI 8800.7.

Thus, NASA installations planning qualifying projects must prepare an

Environmental Assessment Document (14 CFR 1216.304). As defined in 40 CFR

Subpart 1508.9 (Preparation of Environmental Assessments), the purpose of the

Environmental Assessment is to provide sufficient evidence and analysis to

permit the determination whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS) or a Finding Of No Significant Impact (FONSI).

The EA report must be completed and a decision made as to whether or not

an Environmental Impact Statement is required before a decision can be made to

begin detailed project definition and planning (NASA, 1980). Evaluation of

environmental impacts, therefore, must commence at the onset of project

conception. In addition to assessing the probable impacts resulting from the

proposed project, the EA must provide an evaluation of alternatives to the

proposed project, including the alternative of "no action." While there is no

requirement to select the alternative having the least environmental impact,

the rationale for selecting the favored alternative must be provided.

M. B. Gilbert Associates (MBGA), Long Beach, California, was retained by

JPL, under Contract No. 957925-71070, to prepare this EA document according to

Section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 United States Code,

USC 4321); Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for Implementing the

National Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR Code of Federal Regulations,

1500-1508); NASA Policy on Environmental Control (14 CFR 1216.1); NASA

Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (14 CFR

1216.3); and NASA Handbook 8800.11. MBGA submitted its prepared EA Document

to JPL on February 15, 1988. The MBGA document serves as the Environmental

Assessment for the 34-meter antenna proposed to be constructed at the Venus

Site at the GDSCC.

1-2
This present report is an expanded JPL-version of the EA document

submitted to JPL by MBGA. The conclusion of the MBGA-prepared Environmental

Assessment is that there would be no significant adverse effects on the GDSCC

environment due to the construction, installation and operation of the new

34-meter antenna at the Venus Site.

D. SUMMARY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

The environmental consequences of the proposed construction of a new

34-meter antenna at the Venus Site are minimal. The construction and

operation of the proposed antenna will not result in any significant impacts

to the natural environment (geology, seismic conditions, soils, water

resources, floodplains, biotic resources, and air quality). Similarly, there

are minimal human environmental impacts (socioeconomics, traffic and

circulation, noise, cultural resources, solid and hazardous waste, toxic

substances and pesticides, and aesthetic), because the proposed antenna is

replacing an existing antenna operation. The only potential area of concern

is high-power radio transmission and its effects on surrounding land uses and

aircraft operations. NASA/JPL has yet to evaluate restrictions of antenna

operation imposed by neighboring Fort Irwin and the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA). Furthermore, a Safety Review of New Operations must be

completed before a final decision can be rendered on health and safety impacts

from planned high-power radio transmissions.

E. CONCLUSIONS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

The Environmental Assessment (EA), concerning the construction and

operation of a new 34-meter antenna proposed to be located at the Venus Site

at the GDSCC, has analyzed and focused upon many areas of possible

environmental concern.

Key issues associated with potential impacts were identified during

preliminary discussions with NASA, JPL, Fort Irwin and Goldstone contractor

personnel. The conclusion of the EA analysis is that the proposed action

would cause no significant adverse impacts to the natural or human environment

provided that NASA/JPL can provide evidence that operations will not result in

emissions of radiation exceeding safety standards established by NASA/JPL, and

will not produce interferences with Fort Irwin and FAA operations. Upon

determination that these standards and conditions will not be exceeded or

violated, a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) would be appropriate in

accordance with NASA procedures in 40 CFR 1216.306(b).

1-3
SECTION II

THE GOLDSTONE DEEP SPACE COMMUNICATIONS COMPLEX (GDSCC)

A. LOCATION OF THE GDSCC

The Goldstone Deep Space Communications Complex (GDSCC) is located in

southern California in a natural, bowl-shaped depression in the Mojave Desert,

in San Bernardino County about 40 miles north of Barstow, California, and

about 170 miles northeast of Pasadena, California, where the Jet Propulsion

Laboratory (JPL) is located.

As indicated in Section I, the GDSCC is part of the National Aeronautics

and Space Administrations's (NASA) Deep Space Network (DSN), one of the world's

largest and most sensitive scientific telecommunications and radio navigation

networks. The Goldstone Complex is managed, technically directed, and operated

for NASA by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory of the California Institute of

Technology in Pasadena, California.

The 52-square-mile Goldstone Complex lies within the western part of the

Fort Irwin Military Reservation (Figure 1). A Use Permit for the use of the

land was granted to NASA by the U.S. Army. The Complex is bordered by the

Fort Irwin Military Reservation on the north, east and southeast, the China

Lake U.S. Naval Weapons Center on the northwest, and state and Federal lands

managed by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) on the south.

B. FUNCTIONS OF THE GDSCC

After the Space Act of 1958 had accelerated U.S. plans and programs for

space exploration, JPL initiated construction work at Goldstone to build the

first tracking station of what is now known as the Deep Space Network (DSN).

The primary purpose of the DSN is to support the tracking of both manned and

unmanned spacecraft missions and to provide instrumentation for radio and

radar astronomy in the exploration of the solar system and the universe.

As indicated above, in addition to its participation in numerous

scientific explorations, Goldstone performs the following functions in support

of DSN operations:

(1) Tracking: Locating the spacecraft, measuring its distance,

velocity and position, and following its course.

(2) Data Acquisition: Gathering information coming in from the

spacecraft.

(3) Command: Sending of instructions from the ground that guide the

spacecraft in its flight to the target. Commands also tell the

spacecraft when to perform required operations, including the

switching on and off of instruments for performance of the

mission's scientific experiments.

Goldstone also is a research and development center to extend the

communication range and to increase the data acquisition capabilities of the

DSN. It serves as a proving ground for new operational techniques. Prototypes

2-1
KINGS CANTON

NATL PARK

DEATH VALLEY

NAT'L MONUMENT

SEQUOIA NAT'L PARK

CHINA LAKE NAVAL

WEAPONS CENTER

FORT IRWIN

GOLDSTONE

SAN BERNARDINO CO.

AIR FORCE BASE

TWENTYNINE PALMJ

MARINE CORPS BASI

LOS ANGELES CO.

PASADENALos Xngales

San Bernardino

JOSHUA TREE

NAT'L MONUMENT

Figure 1. Geographic Relationship of the Goldstone Deep

Space Communications Complex to JPL in Pasadena

2-2
of all new equipment are thoroughly tested at Goldstone before they are

duplicated for installation at overseas stations (see Section II, C below).

C. FACILITIES AT THE GDSCC

The GDSCC is a self-sufficient, working community with its own roads,

airstrip, cafeteria, electrical power, and telephone systems and is equipped

to conduct all necessary maintenance, repairs, and domestic support services.

Facilities at the GDSCC include about 100 buildings and structures that were

constructed during a 30-year period from the 1950s through the 1980s. The

construction of additional buildings and structures continues today as the

GDSCC increases its activities and operations.

Goldstone is one of three Deep Space Communications Complexes (DSCCs)

operated by NASA/JPL that are located on three continents: at Goldstone in

Southern California's Mojave Desert; in Spain, near Madrid; and at Tidbinbilla,

in Australia, near Canberra. Because these three DSCCs are approximately 120

degrees apart in longitude, a spacecraft always is in view of one of the DSCCs

as the Earth rotates on its axis (Figure 2).

Activities at the GDSCC operate in support of six, large, parabolic dish

antennas, at sites called Deep Space Stations (DSSs): four DSSs are

operational, one is devoted to research and development (R&D) activities, and

one has been deactivated. There also are four, similar, operational DSSs in

Spain and in Australia. Thus, the NASA DSN consists of a worldwide network of

12 operational DSSs. One of the six parabolic dish antennas at Goldstone is

operated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

Total facilities at the GDSCC (Figure 3) include the six large, parabolic

dish antennas, an airport, a microwave test facility, miscellaneous support

buildings, and a remote support facility in Barstow located about 45 miles

southwest of the GDSCC. The GDSCC support staff consists of 246 personnel

on site and 55 personnel located at the Barstow facility. Table 1 summarizes

the major facilities, buildings (number and square footage), and antennas

(construction date and size). Three sites within the GDSCC have antennas

(referred to as stations) devoted to NASA operations (Echo Site, Mars Site,

and Apollo Site). Two other sites have antennas devoted to research and

development: (Venus, operated by the GDSCC, and Mojave, operated by the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). A 26-meter (85 foot)

antenna, located at the Pioneer Site was deactivated in 1981. In 1985, the

Pioneer antenna was designated a National Historic Landmark by the U.S.

Department of Interior and the Pioneer Site was returned to the U.S. Army.

Each of the Goldstone sites is briefly described below.

D. ANTENNA STATIONS AT THE GDSCC

1. Echo Site (DSS-12)

The Echo Site, as the administration center and operations

headquarters of the GDSCC, is the most extensively developed site on the

complex. It has one 34-meter antenna and 24 support buildings having a

combined area of 86,622 f.t^ (SF). Support buildings include administration

and engineering offices, cafeteria and dormitory facilities, transportation

2-3
OOO_O O

— O .=• CM

oo

cr.

•3

U]

CO

§

(U

O

cd

ex

CO

ex

a)

(U

O

g

gO

(U

a)

H

(U

^3

H

&0

•H

2-4
MARS

(DSS-14)

(64-METER)

URANUS

(DSS-15)

(34-METER)

-NAIRPORT

GOLDSTONE

DRY LAKE

MOJAVE

BASE

STATION

(12-METER)

MICROWAVE

TEST FACILITY

ECHO

(DSS-12)

(34-METER)

GUARD GATE

APOLLO

(DSS-1 6)

(26-METER a

9-METER) VENUS

(DSS-1 3)'

(26-METER &

9-METER)

TO FORT IRWIN

TO BARSTOW

PROPOSED VENUS ANTENNA (34-METER)

Figure 3. Schematic Map of the Goldstone DSCC Showing

Locations of the Six NASA Deep Space Stations (DSSs)

2-5
Table 1. Major Facilities at the GDSCC

Buildings

Station

Site Number

Echo Site DSS-12

Venus Site DSS-13

Mars Site DSS-14

DSS-15

Apollo Site DSS-16

Mojave Site

Airport6

Microwave MTF

Test Facility

Miscellaneous —

Bars tow

Facilityf

Number

24

12

11

23

5

2

1

3

1

SF (ft2)

86,662

12,502

36,834

43,985

11,850

710

2,880

1,430

28,343

Antennas

Date of

Construction

1961a

1962b

1966

1984

1965C

1964

1963/1970

1963

—

—

Size

(Meters)

34

26

9

64

34

26

9

12d

—

—

—

—

aOriginal antenna, built in 1959, was moved to Venus Site in 1962. A new

26-meter antenna, built in 1961, was extended to 34 meters in 1978.

"Antenna was constructed at Echo Site in 1959 and moved to the Venus Site

in 1962.

cAntenna originally was constructed for the NASA Goddard Space Tracking and

Data Network. JPL/GDSCC/DSN operation of the antenna began in October 1984.

is antenna is operated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA).

eThe airport is located at the Goldstone Dry Lake.

^This site, a leased facility, is located in Barstow, California about

45 miles southwest of the GDSCC.

Source: Directory of Goldstone DSCC Buildings and Supporting Facilities

(Gold Book, Document 890-165, JPL internal document), Jet Propulsion

Laboratory and National Aeronautics and Space Administration,

December 1, 1985.

2-6
and maintenance facilities, storage areas, and warehouses. Echo Station

originally was built in 1959 as a 26-meter (85 foot) antenna. The antenna was

first used in 1960 in support of the Echo Project, an experiment to transmit

voice communications coast-to-coast by bouncing radio signals off the

reflective Mylar surface of a passive balloon-type satellite. In 1962, this

original 26-meter antenna was moved to the Venus Site. In anticipation of

this move, a newer 26-meter antenna had been built at the Echo Site in 1961.

In 1978, this antenna was enlarged to 34 meters (111.5 ft).

2. Venus Site (DSS-13)

The Venus Site consists of a 26-meter (85 ft) antenna, a 9-meter

(29.5 ft) antenna, and 11 buildings having a combined area of 12,502 SF. The

support buildings provide space for operations control, laboratories, offices,

security, workshops, warehouses, and mechanical equipment. The 26-meter

antenna, which was originally located at Echo Site, was moved to the Venus Site

in 1962. The antenna was used for a radar astronomy study of the planet Venus.

Currently, its primary function is research and development and performance and

reliability testing of high power radio-frequency transmitters and new systems

and equipment prior to their introduction into the Deep Space Network. A new

34-meter (111.5 ft) antenna has been proposed to replace the 26-meter antenna.

An Environmental Assessment concerning this new antenna is the subject of this

present report.

3. Mars Site (DSS-14 and DSS-15)

The Mars Site consists of 2 antennas and 13 buildings with a

combined area of 36,834 SF. The support buildings provide facilities for

operations control, offices, training, mechanical equipment, storage, and

security.

The Mars Station Antenna (DSS-14), at 64-meters (210 ft) in diameter, is

one of the larger antennas of its kind in the world (see Front Cover).

The antenna, which was constructed in 1966, is 6.5 times more powerful and

sensitive than a 26-meter antenna, extending the range of deep space

communications by 2.5 times. It can maintain communications with spacecraft

even to the edge of the solar system. Standing more than 234 ft high, this

antenna is one of the most striking features in the geographic area.

Currently under construction is the extension of the 64-meter parabolic dish

to 70 meters to be ready for the Voyager 2 spacecraft's encounter with the

planet Neptune in August 1989.

The Uranus Station Antenna (DSS-15) is a 34-meter, high efficiency (HEF)

antenna, located approximately 1,600 ft southeast of the Mars Station Antenna.

Built in 1984, this latest antenna-addition at the GDSCC first was used to

support the encounter of the Voyager 2 spacecraft with the planet Uranus in

January 1986. The new, proposed 34-meter antenna to be constructed at the

Venus Site is similar in size and structure to this Uranus antenna.

2-7
4. Apollo Site (DSS-16)

The Apollo Site has a 26-meter (85-ft) antenna, a 9-meter (29.5

ft) antenna, and 18 buildings having a combined area of 43,985 SF. The

buildings provide space for operations, equipment, storage, and warehousing.

The 26-meter antenna originally was constructed in 1965 by the NASA Goddard

Space Tracking and Data Network to support the manned Apollo missions to the

moon. Operation of this antenna under the JPL/GDSCC/DSN began in October

1984. Both the 26-meter and the 9-meter antennas now are used to support the

missions of the Space Shuttle (STS) and satellites in both low and high Earth

orbits.

5. Mojave Base Site (NOAA Antenna)

The Mojave Base Site has five buildings with a combined area of

11,850 SF. At one time, these buildings provided support facilities for

operations, equipment, and maintenance. Except for the NOAA operations

buildings, however, these buildings now are not in use.

The Mojave Base Station Antenna is a 12-meter (40-ft) antenna operated

by NOAA. The antenna is involved in several programs including monitoring of

shifts in the Earth's plates, monitoring weather changes, and retrieving

information from very low orbiting Earth satellites.

E. SUPPORT FACILITIES AT THE GDSCC

1. Goldstone Dry Lake Airport

The airport consists of an approximately 6,000 ft by 100 ft paved

runway. There are two buildings at the airport site, both of which are

presently not in use. An open hangar is used to provide shelter for a single

aircraft. For its personnel, NASA operates three scheduled shuttle flights

per week to the GDSCC that originate from the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena

Airport. In addition, the Goldstone airport is used infrequently by

administrative Army flights. Both NASA and the U.S. Army use propeller-driven

aircraft.

2.v Microwave Test Facility and Fire Training Area

The Microwave Test Facility (MTF) and Fire-Training Area consists

of a single building of 2,880 SF along with areas identified for fire fighting.

The MTF is used for research and development testing of antenna equipment.

Fire training includes procedures for the quenching of fires.

3. Miscellaneous Buildings in the GDSCC Area

Three buildings and structures at the GDSCC that fall into this

category include the main gatehouse, pump house, and radio spectrum monitor.

Total area of these three buildings/structures is 1,430 SF.

2-8
A. Off-Site Facility at Barstow, California

In addition to the above-mentioned on-site facilities, the GDSCC

leases an office and warehouse support facility in the nearby city of Barstow.

The facility is a single story, 28,343 SF structure located at 850 Main Street.

F. NON-STRUCTURAL SUPPORT FACILITIES AT THE GDSCC

1. Transportation Network

The major roadways in the area are shown in Figure 4. The only

surface public transportation route to the GDSCC is by the Fort Irwin Road

that leads to Fort Irwin. The NASA Road cutoff from Fort Irwin Road leads

into the GDSCC. NASA Road merges with Goldstone Road, which is the only

north-south paved access road within the complex. Both NASA and Goldstone

Roads are paved two-lane roads and are maintained by the Ft. Irwin Post

Engineer. Two-lane paved access roads also lead to each of the sites and

major facilities.

2. Utilities and Services

The Southern California Edison Company provides electricity for

the Goldstone Complex. The GDSCC provides its own backup diesel-engine

generators for operations during emergencies and to ensure continuity of

electrical service for prescheduled periods of time. Gasoline, diesel oil,

and hydraulic oil are stored in underground storage tanks. Water is supplied

by Fort Irwin from groundwater basin wells. Sanitary sewage is discharged

through septic tank systems to a leaching field. The Echo and Mars Sites also

discharge wastewater to evaporation ponds.

G. WASTE-MANAGEMENT FACILITIES AT THE GDSCC

At the Echo Site, the GDSCC operates its own 6-acre, Class III solidwaste landfill. This facility, soon to be expanded to 20 acres, accepts only

non-hazardous, solid wastes.

Most of a small quantity of hazardous waste, generated at the GDSCC each

year, is sent to off-site commercial facilities for reclamation and eventual

reuse. The remainder is transported to off-site commercial treatment or

disposal facilities within 90 days of generation. The GDSCC maintains several

properly managed waste-accumulation points, but operates no facilities

requiring a hazardous waste permit. In accordance with its environmental

management program, the GDSCC conducts all of its waste-management operations

in strict compliance with environmental regulations, in a manner consistent

with protection of human health and the environment.

2-9
CHINA LAKE NAVAL WEAPONS

CENTER

Figure 4. Major Roads Leading to and at the Goldstone DSCC

2-10
H. OPERATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE GDSCC AND FORT IRWIN

Because the GDSCC is located within the Fort Irwin property, the two

installations potentially can affect each other's roles and missions. Fort

Irwin is a U.S. Array installation serving as the U.S. Army National Training

Center (NTC). The remote desert environment allows military task forces to

practice large-scale training maneuvers that could affect natural, historic,

and cultural resources at the GDSCC. This especially is true when the

maneuvers involve the movement of heavy equipment (tanks, large trucks) within

the GDSCC. Most maneuvers occur at the eastern border of the GDSCC and every

effort is made by both the GDSCC and Ft. Irwin personnel to avoid the use of

sensitive areas for such maneuvers.

I. NATURAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS OF THE GDSCC

1. Geology

The GDSCC is located in a naturally-occurring bowl-shaped

depression bounded on three sides by geological faults. The Garlock Fault

lies to the north, while the Blackwater and Calico Faults lie, respectively,

to the west and south. The GDSCC is bounded on the east by the Tiefort

Mountains. Each antenna site at the GDSCC is located on natural alluvial

material, ranging in thickness from 15 feet at the Venus Site to more than

70 feet at the Echo Site. The alluvium is derived from the surrounding hills.

2. Hydrology

Groundwater in the Goldstone area is generally confined and is

found at depths ranging from 170 ft near the Minitrack Site to approximately

1,000 ft below the Echo Site. Chemical analyses of the groundwater have

yielded total dissolved solids (TDS) values in excess of 1,000 ppm indicating

the groundwater is brackish. The Goldstone Complex currently obtains potable

water from a group of wells located at Fort Irwin, approximately ten miles to

the southeast.

3. Climatic Conditions

The GDSCC lies within the U.S. Naval Weather Service's Southwest

Desert, Climatic Area A. Mean annual temperatures for the area range from

50° to 80°F. Temperatures can climb as high as 114°F during the summer

months, and drop as low as 11°F during the winter months. Mean annual

precipitation for the area is approximately 2.5 inches with most precipitation

falling between November and February.

2-11
SECTION III

PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 34-METER ANTENNA

AT THE VENUS SITE OF THE GDSCC

The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), in conjunction with the National

Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), proposes to construct a 34-meter,

beam waveguide antenna at the Venus Site, Goldstone Deep Space Communications

Complex (GDSCC) Goldstone, California. See Figures 1 and 3 for regional and

vicinity maps.

A. PURPOSE OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW 34-METER ANTENNA

The purpose of the construction of the new antenna is to further develop

deep space communications knowledge by constructing an antenna that would

increase scientific data returns, improve antenna microwave optics, improve

performance of transmitting and receiving capability, and improve antenna

pointing, spacecraft tracking, and spacecraft navigation. The technology

developed from implementing the proposed Venus antenna would be utilized by

the existing Deep Space Network (DSN) antennas located at the GDSCC and

eventually by other Deep Space Communications Complex (DSCC) facilities in

Spain and Australia. The proposed antenna-upgrading would improve the

efficiency of existing DSN equipment and allow for the execution of projects

not currently possible using existing technology.

B. NEED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW 34-METER ANTENNA

The GDSCC is the largest of three DSN complexes located on three

continents. As part of the NASA Deep Space Network, these three complexes

represent one of the world's largest and most sensitive scientific

telecommunications and radio navigation networks. The major purpose of

expanding deep space communications technology is to support the tracking of

manned and unmanned spacecraft missions and to provide means for radio and

radar astronomy to explore the solar system and universe. ^

There are six antenna stations at the GDSCC. The antennas were built

between 1961 and 1985, with three built before 1965. As a result, the

technology utilized in the early antennas is relatively outdated. Several

technological advances have occurred recently that make possible the proposed

new Venus antenna as a prototype of future antennas that would permit advanced

deep space communications capabilities.

Construction of the proposed new antenna at the Venus Site at the GDSCC

is necessary because the required concentration of resources and capable

personnel is available only at the GDSCC.

3-1
SECTION IV

CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED NEW ANTENNA AT THE VENUS SITE AND A

CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS

A. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

The proposed Venus Station antenna is located at the southern end of the

GDSCC within the Fort Irwin National Training Center in San Bernardino County,

California (Figures 1 and 3). The GDSCC is approximately 45 miles north of

Barstow, California in the Mojave Desert. The complex covers 52 square miles

and consists primarily of hilly topography with a desert scrub habitat.

Access to the proposed antenna site is via NASA Road and Venus Road.

The proposed antenna would be located at the Venus Site and would replace

an existing 26-meter antenna that had been built at the Echo Site in 1959 and

moved to the Venus Site in 1962. The existing Venus Site facilities comprise

11 buildings, along with a small 9-meter research and development antenna, and

the 26-meter Deep Space Station-13 antenna. The existing on-site structures

provide for operations control, laboratories, offices, security, workshops,

warehouses, and mechanical equipment. The existing 26-meter antenna

originally was developed for a radar astronomy study of the planet Venus.

Currently, its primary function is for research and development, and

performance and reliability testing of new systems and equipment for the DSN.

See Figure 5 for the existing Venus Site plan and Figures 6 and 7 for

photographs of the 26-meter antenna.

The Venus site is located within a natural topographical bowl on ground

that slopes to the east at an approximate 4 percent decline. The existing

26-meter antenna is located toward the western end of the Venus site and is

supported by offices, workshops and other facilities located on Venus Road.

The existing Venus Deep Space Station-13 antenna is on a concrete foundation

adjacent to the hydromechanical building/pump room, transmitter building, and

equipment room. The control building, laboratory and office building,

security building, and 9-meter antenna are located toward the eastern end of

the Venus Site (see Figure 5 for structure locations). The uses of the

existing buildings at the Venus Site and their associated areas (in square

feet) are provided in Table 2. Twelve employees presently support the

existing Venus antenna and facilities.

Electrical power for existing Venus Site operations is provided by the

Southern California Edison Company, while on-site generators at the site

provide for a limited amount of backup power. A cable tray, which follows the

south side of Venus Road, provides an interface between the Venus Deep Space

Station-13 antenna and the facilities toward the eastern end of the Venus Site.

4-1
U

J

111u. ooCMooCcd

rt PM

tod a•HXwa) 4J •Hen3

u~i

0)Md60 •H

4-2
•H

CO

W

3

a

a

o

•H

o

o

q a

<3 -H

U-l

(-1 -rl

Q) O 4-i a)

0) P.

2 en

60

4-1 a

w o

•H -H

X 4J

W nj

* 8 O ,J

(-1

14-1 O

4-1

4-1 O

03 f.

tfl PM

0)

42 •

4-> OO

M

O d)

Z V4

3

00 00

C3 -H

•H PLH

o

o

a)

<u

en

cu

M

bO

•H

4-3 ORIGINAL PAGE IS

QE £QOR QUALITY
ORIGINAL PAGE IS

OF POOR QUALITV1

-a

c

00

QJ

J-J

O

pL(

a

•H

C

c

(U

3 « a) O

<?t Rs)

« o

O

•H

14-1 <J

0)

<U &

4-1 CD.

•H

CO H

O

-d «4-l

0)

co PQ

o

* -U

4J O

(0 J3

tfl PL,

0)

-C «

4-1 OO

o <u

0)

0)

3

60

•H

.

• . *• "• i»> / ,'

•' ' %

4-4
Table 2. Existing Structures at the Venus Site at the GDSCC

Building

Number

G-51

G-52

G-53A

G-53B

G-54

G-55

G-56

G-57

G-58

G-60

G-61

G-62

G-63

G-67

Description of Structure

Operations Control

26m Antenna (85 feet)

Transmitter

Hydromechanical Building for 85-foot antenna

Collimation Tower

9m Antenna (30 feet)

Security

Collimation Tower

Hydromechanical Building and Transmitter

for 30-foot antenna

Laboratory and Office

100-kW Transmitter

Fire Line Pump House

Workshop and Warehouse

Distilled Water Building

Square Feet

2,960

1,912

944

169

100

96

960

2,520

400

360

1,800

281

^Structure numbers correlate with Figure 5.

Source: Directory of Goldstone Buildings and Facilities.

(Gold Book, Document Number 890-165, JPL internal document,

December 1985).

The proposed Venus Station antenna is a high-performance, 34-meter,

wheel-and-track type, azimuth-elevation antenna located approximately 200 feet

south of the existing 26-meter antenna (see Figures 8 through 10 for the

proposed site plan of the new Venus Station antenna, the antenna's general

configuration, and photograph of the proposed antenna location). The proposed

project includes construction and installation of the antenna structure, a

below-grade foundation and equipment enclosure, the mechanical drive and

controls, and the optical elements and ancillary support buildings. The

proposed Venus Station antenna would be similar in size and structure to the

34-meter Uranus antenna located at Deep Space Station-15 in the northern

portion of the GDSCC (see Figure 11).

The new high-performance 34-meter antenna would have a new configuration

that would allow effective technology transfer to the operational DSN. It

would provide a means for the demonstration of high-reliability cryogenics for

improved frequency and timing technology, and for increased efficiency of

radio frequency transmitting and receiving equipment and techniques.

Developments from this antenna would result in increased capability for data

return, more precise tracking, navigation and control, and improvements in

associated sciences for the DSN. This antenna also would provide emergency

high-power transmitter backup communications for Deep Space Station-14 for use

in commanding spacecraft for navigational and operational maneuvers (TIW

Systems, Inc., 1986).

4-5
c0)0) u<Ir rnOJ MC0. o

1-1

PL, MO9H-0) 4J •HCO0) win100-JMDO

4-6
UJ

UJ

Q

CO

UJ

LU

oc

'J1

en

I

>

O)

u

-§

-

T3

OJ

en

o

ex

o

OJ

M

C

•H

3

nj

M

Q

•H

4J

1-J

0)

(-1

so

4-7

ORIGINAL PAGE IS

OS EOOR QUALITY
ORIGINAL PAGE IS

OF POOR QUALITY,

$

i%*V;^'.

>*§P.ih '•; - *M ;«.

i

1

*} • 5

' •'•:

 r

'"' '* *V

<

•H

CO

to

a

a

a)

>

OJ

,c

«

ca c

S ° a -H

(!) 4J

t! « g a

•? o

^

 J

a> o

w -H

V^O

i

 Q

 a^J

CM ex

to

60

G Vj

•H o

JJ tn

W

•H O

3 G

<1) -H

J5 4J

4J CB

e §

2

 J

•W o

4-J

*J o en ,c

0) (X,

2

£ „

w eo

O 0)

V) ^

3

toO 00

C -H

3 ^

O OJ

O 0)

i-J C/3

(UM

3

M

•H

Pn

4-8
CO

cu

.£ CU

4-1 4J

•H

4J CO

CO

CO

'd' d 0 cu

4-1

03 CU

C/} 4J

CO V-l

3 O

a M-I

to

>-t T3

1=1 cu

*-> CO

o

tO (X

c o

C M

CU P-i

4J

^ ss M cu

CU 4J

4J d

cu <

s

1 o

ro

60 CO

5d4J e

CO -H

•H W

W CO

•H

M-l

O n)

o d

4J CU

O 4J

3

60

4-9 ORIG4NAL PAGE IS

OS EOOR QUALITY
The proposed 34-meter antenna at the Venus Station would be supported by

the 12 employees presently operating the existing Deep Space Station-13

facilities. Technical descriptions of the proposed Venus Station antenna and

associated components may be found in the Advanced Engineering Study Report

for Design and Construction of a Beam Waveguide 34-Meter X-Band AZ-EL Antenna

(TIW Systems, Inc., 1986).

B. ALTERNATIVES TO CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW 34-METER ANTENNA AT THE VENUS

SITE AT THE GDSCC

A number of alternatives to the proposed Venus Station 34-meter antenna

were considered as part of this environmental assessment.

1. Alternative One: Non-Construction of the 34-Meter Antenna

Discussion of the alternative involving not constructing the new

antenna is required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). No

action would mean the GDSCC would remain as it presently exists, with five

NASA/JPL antenna stations and the existing National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration antenna. The existing 26-meter Venus Deep Space Station-13

antenna would remain and not be replaced. This would preclude the opportunity

to greatly improve upon deep space communications technology and to transfer

information derived from the proposed 34-meter antenna prototype technology to

other DSN antennas in the world-wide NASA Deep Space Network.

With respect to environmental considerations, the No-Action alternative

would not require physical alteration to the Venus Site. Thus, removal of

animal and plant habitats and construction-related effects associated with the

proposed action would not occur. Yet, in spite of the minimal impact of these

construction-related issues, their avoidance by the No Action alternative does

not present a substantial environmental advantage.

The No-Action alternative would not eliminate the concern regarding

antenna operating constraints, since the proposed antenna is replacing an

existing antenna which also operates under constraints. While operating

conditions would be different for the existing and proposed antennas, there

are standard safety practices in place to minimize radiation hazards. Thus

the No-Action alternative would not provide a substantial environmental

advantage.

The primary disadvantage of the No-Action alternative is the loss of

opportunity to greatly improve NASA deep-space communications technology

world-wide and provide a means to advance specific scientific knowledge to a

level not possible with the existing technology.

2. Alternative Two: Relocation of the 34-Meter Antenna within the

Venus Site

One potential alternative to the proposed project would be to locate the

new 34-meter antenna 200 to 300 feet west of the existing antenna instead of

to the south as proposed. This is the only potentially viable alternative at

the Venus Site because of the proximity of hills to the north, the potential

4-10
floodplain further to the south, and the existing infrastructure and buildings

to the east. The proposed minor ancillary support building, discussed under

Section I B, could be constructed in the same general location. The operational constraints at the alternative location to the west would be

essentially the same as for the presently proposed antenna location. The

environmental effects of the antenna at this alternative location would be

similar to the proposed site, except that the storm flow from a small sandy

wash approximately 100 ft west of the presently proposed site would have to be

controlled and a 200-to-300-ft extension of the access road also would be

necessary.

With respect to environmental considerations, the move of the proposed

antenna to a different location within the Venus Site would not result in

benefits to the environment. The topography, geology, biology, and visual

setting of other sites in the immediate vicinity of the Venus Site would be

similar to the proposed location. Because of the presence of washes near the

Venus Site, certain options for antenna siting could encroach into storm flow

areas, causing a potentially adverse drainage impact and possible flood

hazard. Other environmental impact issues associated with the antenna's

operation would be similar regardless of its location within the Venus Site.

3. Alternative Three: Relocation of the 34-Meter Antenna Within the

GDSCC but at a Site Other Than the Venus Site

Relocation of the proposed new antenna project to a site at the

GDSCC other than the Venus Site would require performing the necessary soils

and geologic investigations and the identification of operational limitations

at each candidate site. In 1973, JPL investigated three candidate locations

(Pioneer, Echo, and Venus Sites) for construction of a 64-meter antenna

(Pacific Engineering Soils, Inc., 1973). The Pioneer Site no longer is an

option since it has been turned over to the Army. The Echo Site was

determined to be usable based on foundation conditions and geologic

environment, but less desirable than the Venus Site because of transmission

constraints imposed by local topography. Other sites would most likely be

unsuitable candidates because the orientation of these sites would severely

restrict antenna operations.

Relocation of the proposed Venus antenna also would require the construction

of an infrastructure at the alternative site and reconstructing all existing

support facilities presently on site at Venus. It also would involve the

preparation of environmental impact statements. Congressional approval for a

major increase in funding would need to be obtained, undoubtedly resulting in

a delay in project construction and operation of several years.

With respect to environmental considerations, the environmental impacts

from locating the proposed project at the Venus Site would be minimal. Thus,

there is little to gain by relocating the project at another site within the

GDSCC. There are no known sensitive environmental conditions at other GDSCC

antenna sites that would preclude relocation of the antenna. To add the Venus

antenna, however, there would be a need for reconstructing much of the

infrastructure at other sites. The additional construction necessary for the

relocated infrastructure would be an environmental disadvantage as compared to

the proposed site.

4-11
4. Alternative Four: Relocation of the 34-Meter Antenna at a Site

other than the GDSCC

Locating the proposed antenna outside the GDSCC is a possible

alternative to the proposed Venus Site. Although this alternative would

require the relocation of the entire complex along with the Venus antenna,

this concept has been considered by NASA/JPL in the past. Likely locations

for a new complex similar in size and function to the GDSCC include sites

within Arizona and New Mexico. Minimum requirements would include locating a

substantial area of undeveloped land within the critical tracking range that

is geographically compatible with DSN operations in Spain and Australia.

Relocating the new antenna off-site is not the preferred alternative

because of environmental concerns, excessive relocation costs, years of delays

in project implementation incurred while seeking the necessary Congressional

approval, and time incurred to redevelop a base of operating and maintenance

capabilities.

With respect to environmental considerations, the relocation of the

antenna project to an off-site location (e.g., Arizona, New Mexico), cannot be

characterized sufficiently to provide a detailed environmental review. Moving

the project to a distant location, however, likely involves substantial

additional construction activity, compared to the action now proposed to build

the new 34-meter antenna at the Venus Site.

5. Preferred Alternative: Construction of the 34-Meter Antenna at the

Venus Site

Location of the proposed antenna at Venus Site is the preferred

alternative since it will not result in significant environmental impacts,

will result in the shortest implementation schedule, is the most economical of

the alternatives, and is anticipated to provide the United States with a much

needed improved deep-space communications technology.

4-12
SECTION V

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS AT THE GDSCC THAT MUST BE ASSESSED

IN THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A

NEW 34-METER ANTENNA AT THE VENUS SITE

A. GEOLOGICAL SETTING

The GDSCC is located in the north central section of the Mojave Desert

Province, a wedge-shaped, down-faulted, block that is bounded by mountain

ranges to the north-northwest and south-southwest (Sharp, 1972). The

structure and topography of the Province are largely fault controlled (Norris

and Webb, 1976). The Mojave Desert is bounded on the south-southwest by the

San Andreas Fault, which is the principal fault of a northwesterly trending

shear zone at least 600 miles in length with 350 miles of right-lateral

displacement. The Garlock Fault trends to the northwest and has left-lateral

displacement.

Typically, the Mojave Desert Province is characterized by broad, flat

plains with occasional low (1,000 to 2,000-ft high) mountains. The Goldstone

area, situated within one of these low mountain areas, trends in the

northwest-southeast direction (parallel to the regional structural trend).

Elevations in the Goldstone area range from 2,895 to 4,491 ft above Mean Sea

Level (MSL). GDSCC lies within a 70-square mile internal drainage area that

includes Goldstone Lake, the largest of several dry lakes in the area. The

elevation of Goldstone Lake is 3,021 ft above MSL (Kieffer, 1961).

B. CLIMATIC CONDITIONS

The climate at the GDSCC is arid with characteristic wide ranges in daily

and seasonal temperatures, as well as high variability of precipitation.

Average annual rainfall is approximately 5.5 in. Recorded annual precipitation

ranges from a low of 0.5 to a high of 15 in. Precipitation is typified by

shortlived, high-intensity storms that may produce local flash floods. More

than one-half of the average annual precipitation has been known to fall in a

three day period, during which peak rainfall may be as high as two inches in

one hour (Kieffer, 1961).

C. SEISMOLOGY

The Mojave Block is broken by several major vertical to near-vertical shear

faults. The primary fault system in the GDSCC area trends northwest, from the

southern boundary of the facility to the the southern tip of Goldstone Lake.

This fault system follows the regional structural trend that is characteristic

of that portion of the Mojave Desert Province south of the GDSCC, which

roughly parallels the San Andreas Fault zone. The Goldstone area is located

in a transition zone between the northwest-trending area to the south, and an

east-west-trending structural area to the north that roughly parallels the

Garlock fault. Minor faults in the Goldstone area trend in nearly all

directions, the main directions being west, northwest, and north. The general

relationships between the two structural systems enclosing the Goldstone area

5-1
are not known, but both systems are active, and neither predominates over the

other. The closest fault to the project site, a north-south directional

fault, is located approximately 1.25 miles east of the proposed Venus antenna.

The GDSCC, including the Venus Site, is located within an area that has

recently been reclassified from Zone 3 to Zone 4, seismic risk (Uniform

Building Code, 1985, International Conference of Building Officials,

Earthquake Regulations, Chapter 23). Zone 4 is defined as a zone susceptible

to damage corresponding to a Modified Mercalli Scale Intensity VIII or greater

earthquake. (The Mercalli Scale is an arbitrary scale of earthquake intensity,

ranging from I for an earthquake detectable only with instruments, to XII for

an earthquake resulting in total destruction).

In 1973, a shallow seismic refraction survey conducted by Pacific Soils

Engineering, Inc. defined the subsurface structure of the Venus Site.

Structure in the area does not appear to be controlled by faulting. It was

determined, however, that the Venus Site would be exposed to considerable

seismic shaking and a potential for structural damage to occur at the site

from a major earthquake. The extent of impact would be a function of soil

composition, design of the structures, and their joint response to seismic

shaking. Based on the findings of this study, however, the Venus Site is in

an area of acceptable seismic risk as long as the seismic considerations are

incorporated into the design and construction of the proposed antenna.

D. LITHOLOGY

Table 3 describes a generalized stratigraphic sequence of the Mojave

Desert Province in the Goldstone area, giving maximum thickness of each of the

units and a brief lithologic description. It should be noted that this is a

generalized sequence and that at any given site some of the units may or may

not be present or may or may not be present in the given thickness. The

general stratigraphic data in Table 3 were constructed from information

obtained from Kieffer (1961).

E. GEOLOGICAL HISTORY OF THE GDSCC AREA

The following is a brief summary of geologic events that have occurred in

the Goldstone area (Kieffer, 1961):

(1) The Granitic Complex crystallized during Precambrian or early

Paleozoic time. These rocks underwent metamorphic recrystallization, and were later intruded (cut into) by granitic (pegmatite)

dikes (thin injections of molten rock).

(2) Sediments of the Rustic Formation were deposited and metamorphosed

(recrystallized) during Late Paleozoic time.

(3) Magma (molten rock) of the Jack Spring Quartz Monzonite intruded

the existing older rocks probably during Cretaceous time.

(4) Uplift and erosion of the area occurred and most Paleozoic and

Precambrian rocks were eroded away.

5-2
Table 3. Generalized Strategraphic Sequence in the Goldstone Area

(after Kieffer, 1961)

Series

Stratigraphic

Unit

Maximum

Thickness

(ft) Description

Quaternary

(Pleistocene)3

Gravel Deposit 300+ Composed of cobbles and

boulders of volcanic

rocks; occurs in extreme

northern part of area;

alluvial fan deposit, has

been uplifted, moderately

cemented in a caliche

matrix.

Quaternary

(Pleistocene )a

Basalt Flow Vesicular olivine basalt;

resistant to erosion,

caps several ridges, dips

gently north; offset by

faults only in the southeast part of area.

Quaternary

to Tertiary

Conglomeratic

Sandstone

Overlies andesite southeast of Pink Canyon.

Quaternary

to Tertiary

Black Glass Dikes General trend N70E,

intrude andesite flows

only; assumed they

occurred near end of

andesite extrusion.

Tertiary Andesite Flows 1000+ Thick sequence of lava

flows; composed of

andesite, hornblende

andesite, and porphyritic

plagioclase; flowed from

several volcanic vents,

very resistant.

Tertiary Andesite Breccia 600+ Angular blocks of volcanic

(with rock, set in a matrix of

Tuff) volcanic ash; coarse

grained with large clasts,

resistant to erosion;

common cap rock.

5-3
Table 3. Generalized Strategraphic Sequence in the GoIdstone Area

(after Kieffer, 1961) (Continued)

Series

Stratigraphic

Unit

Maximum

Thickness

(ft) Description

Tertiary Andesite Tuff 600+ Volcanic ash; well bedded,

(with soft, and nonresistant to

Breccia) erosion.

Cretaceous Jack Spring Quartz

Monzonitec

Quartz monzonite pluton

that extends over 85

square miles; has an

orthogonal fracture system,

parallel jointing, very

solid and homogeneous.

Paleozoic Rustic Formation Limestones and metamorphic

rocks derived from finegrained sediments;

foliated, very hard, and

moderately fractured,

containing several quartz

veins with gold and

tungsten.

Paleozoic

to

Precambrian

Granitic Complex Metamorphic and intrusive

granitic rocks; schists

and gneisses, highly

shattered, low resistance

to erosion.

a This unit is apparently of Pleistocene age, but its exact age has not

been confirmed.

b Thickness was undocumented in the available source literature.

c Thickness cannot be determined for this type of rock body.

5-4
(5) A broad basin formed in Tertiary (probably Miocene) time. Volcanic

fragments composed of andesite tuffs and breccias erupted as ash

and covered the basin floor with a deposit 600 ft thick. Up to

1,000 ft of andesite lava flows originating from several volcanic

vents covered the ash. Black glass dikes intruded the andesite

flows.

(6) Conglomeratic sandstone was deposited atop the andesite lava beds

in places.

(7) The region was uplifted and extensively faulted in Late Tertiary

and Quaternary time.

(8) Lava composed of olivine basalt partially covered the region.

Since deposition, the basalt has been tilted slightly to the north

and extensively faulted in the southern part of the region.

(9) Quaternary alluvial deposits include the following: dry lake bed

sediments; low lying sand and gravel alluvium in the main valleys;

gravel and boulder alluvial fans and debris slope deposits;

unconsolidated sand, gravel and boulders in stream channels; and

windblown sand. Alluvium is 500 to 1,000 ft thick.

F. TYPES OF SOILS AT THE GDSCC

The following three soil types predominate at the GDSCC:

(1) Silty, sandy gravel derived from granitic rocks,

(2) Silty gravel derived from decomposing volcanic rocks,

(3) Very rocky soils derived from older, dissected alluvial deposits

and terrace gravels.

Both the volcanic and granitic soils have medium to low permeability.

Desert pavement (a residual layer of large soil particles left on the

ground surface after the finer particles have been carried off by wind and

water), has developed over virtually all soil surfaces. This layer is made up

of lag gravels that protect the surface against further erosion. These

gravels are often coated with oxides of iron and manganese, known as desert

varnish, that give the surface a shiny appearance.

In July, 1973, a geological, geophysical, and foundation-engineering

survey of the Venus Site was conducted to determine the feasibility of

constructing a 64-meter antenna (Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc., 1973). The

study concluded that good foundation support exists at the Venus Site, with

bedrock within reach (approximately 20 feet below the surface) of the pedestal

and instrument tower foundations for the subject design. In addition, JPL has

studied the foundation designs of existing structures similar to the one

proposed for the Venus Site, that were located at the GDSCC Mars Site and at

sites in Spain and Australia. Based on these studies, soils at the Venus Site

are suitable for construction of the proposed 34-meter diameter antenna.

5-5
G. WATER RESOURCES AND FLOODPLAINS

1. Water Resources

There are no permanent streams at the GDSCC. Surface water flow

occurs only after intense rainfall periods, and the water quickly infiltrates

into the dry desert soils or evaporates. During heavy rainfall, water reaches

Goldstone Lake, which becomes inundated for short periods. This intermittent

water supply is inappropriate for domestic and other planned uses due to its

high levels of suspended and dissolved solids and very short-term availability.

The entire Mojave River Basin (which includes the GDSCC), draws its water

supply from the Mojave River groundwater basin, which in turn is recharged by

only two sources: rainfall and the Mojave River (Department of the Army,

1979). The GDSCC receives potable water from a group of six wells located

within the vicinity of Fort Irwin. These wells draw from the Bicycle Lake

groundwater basin and from the Irwin groundwater basin. About 1,000,000 to

2,000,000 gallons of water are pumped monthly from Fort Irwin to the GDSCC.

2. Floodplains

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has not mapped

floodplains for the Fort Irwin Reservation, including the GDSCC. Ninety

percent of the area in the southeast desert of California, however, is

classified as Zone D, in accordance with FEMA definitions (A. Russell 1987).

Therefore, the GDSCC is most likely to be classified as Zone D, an area of

undetermined but possible flood hazard. Two washes (intermittent stream beds)

are located near the existing Venus Station: a large wash several hundred

feet to the north, and a much smaller wash located approximately 100 feet to

the west. Flooding, however, has not been experienced in the vicinity of the

existing antenna. The site proposed for the new antenna, which would be

immediately south of the existing Venus antenna, similarly has not experienced

any previous flooding problems.

H. BIOTIC RESOURCES, ENDANGERED SPECIES, AND WETLANDS

1. Biotic Resources

The biotic composition at the site of the proposed new Venus

Station 34-meter antenna was determined from information compiled through

field reconnaissance, supplemented by information obtained from the existing

literature. The site was surveyed in May 1987 by 4-wheel drive vehicle and on

foot by the MBGA project team. Weather at the time of the survey was warm,

with temperatures ranging from 80°F to 85°F, occasional thunderstorms, and

moderately strong winds.

The physical nature of the proposed antenna site permitted a direct

systematic examination of all terrain within its confines. Floral

constituents encountered were recorded in terms of relative abundance and

habitat type. Faunal constituents were determined through the use of field

identification, combined with documented habitat preferences of regional

wildlife species that, whether or not detected during the survey, are thought

5-6
to include the site within their range. The overall biotic composition of the

site was derived from this information.

2. Vegetation

The vegetation of the project site is typical of the mid-elevation

Mojave Desert. Two dominant plant communities that are present on or

immediately adjacent to the proposed project site are the heat-tolerant,

perennial shrubs known as creosote bush scrub and desert wash scrub.

A total of 32 plant species representing 18 families was recorded during

the site survey. A survey conducted during the height of the spring flowering

season would likely disclose as much as a 10 to 15 percent greater diversity

due to the presence of annual herbs. Of the recorded species, three (nine

percent) are not native. A list of all plant species recorded during the

survey is available from the GDSCC. The floral composition of each plant

community on the site is described as follows:

a. Creosote Bush Scrub. The creosote bush scrub found on the

project site represents, for the most part, an example of the most common

plant community of the Mojave Desert. The dominant plant species is creosote

bush (Larrea tridentata), which is usually widely and regularly spaced with

burro-weed (Ambrosia dumosa) scattered in the interstices. Plant cover is

typically as low as 10-20 percent in this community.

On the proposed project site, portions of which have been slightly to

moderately disturbed, creosote bush and burro-weed are interspersed with

goldenhead (Acamptopappus sphaerocephalus), cheese-bush (Hymenoclea salsola).

brittle-bush (Encelia farinosa), little-leaved ratany (Krameria parvifolia),

Anderson thornbush (Lycium andersonii), and tharnnosma (Thairniosma montana).

Several Joshua trees (Yucca brevifolia) also are located within the immediate

project vicinity.

In the spring of each year, the interstices of the creosote bush scrub

community may display diverse assemblages of annual plant species. Although

the spring of 1987 was not conducive for growth of annuals due to sparse

winter rainfall, and the time of the survey did not coincide with the peak of

spring-flowering, a few annual species were still in evidence on the site.

These included the desert dandelion (Malacothrix glabrata), tessellate

fiddleneck (Amsinckia tessellata) and cryptantha (Cryptantha sp.). The dried

remains of several introduced annual species, including red-stemmed filaree

(Erodium cicutarium), red brome (Bromus rubens), and Arabian schismus

(Schismus arabicus), also were in evidence.

b. Desert Wash Scrub. Localized variations in substrate or

topography within the creosote bush scrub community can give rise to marked

changes in species composition. Such is the case with sandy washes, where the

association of plants supported by the sandy substrate is sufficiently

distinct from that of the creosote bush scrub to warrant independent

designation. The plant association seen in these sandy washes commonly is

5-7
termed "desert wash scrub". Plant diversity in these washes is often greater

than in the creosote bush scrub community; creosote typically remains present,

but is usually not dominant. The sandy soil of these washes tends to store

the limited runoff generated from rainfall events, providing a relatively

mesic (moderately moist) environment that is critical to the desert

ecosystem. Though the desert wash scrub community is often common with the

creosote bush scrub community, its comparatively limited ground coverage

results in little effect on the predominant visual uniformity of the creosote

bush scrub community.

A small sandy wash runs roughly north-south about 100 feet west of the

proposed project site. The dominant desert wash scrub species present are

similar to those of the creosote bush scrub. Diversity is higher, however,

including such perennial species as Nevada ephedra (Ephedra nevadensis),

beavertail cactus (Opuntia basilaris), winter fat (Ceratoides lantana),

bladder sage (Salazaria mexicana) and California buckwheat (Eriogonum

fasciculatum). Several specimens of Mojave indigo bush (Psorothamnus

arborescens) also were present. Although low in numbers, the annual species

present in the wash at the time of survey, included pebble pincushion

(Chaenactis carphoclinia), desert aster (Machaeranthera tortifolia), small

wreathplant (Stephanomeria exigua) and brown-eyed evening primrose (Camissonia

claviformis). A percentage of this increased diversity may be due to the

undisturbed nature of the wash relative to the higher ground.

3. Wildlife

Based upon both field observations and literature searches, the

varieties of wildlife expected or observed to regularly occur in the habitats

of the projected project site, are described below. A complete list of

expected and observed fauna is available from the GDSCC.

a. Amphibians and Reptiles. No amphibians are expected, or have

been observed due to the absence of surface water at the proposed project site

or in its vicinity. A variety of lizards and snakes are expected to occur in

the project vicinity. Common lizards include the western whiptail

(Cnemidophorus tigris), zebra-tailed lizard (Callisaurus draconoides), and

side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana). Other reptile species found with

some frequency throughout the creosote bush scrub community are desert iguana

(Dipsosaurus dorsalis), common leopard lizard (Gambelia wislizenii), coachwhip

(Masticophis flagellum), gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucus), and sidewinder

(Crotalus cerastes).

The desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizi), a state-listed threatened

species, is known to occur on the GDSCC (Kirtland, 1987). No sign (tracks or

burrows) of this species was observed, however, during the May 1987 survey of

the Venus Site.

b. Birds. A number of bird species are expected to breed in the

creosote bush scrub community within the vicinity of the proposed project.

These include the black-throated sparrow (Amphispiza bilineata), Say's phoebe

(Sayomis saya), Le Conte's thrasher (Toxostoma lecontei), mourning dove

5-8
(Zenaida macroura), loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), and horned lark

(Eremophila alpestris). No breeding activity was observed, however, on the

proposed project site.

Four species of raptors (birds of prey) may breed in the vicinity of the

proposed project site, and may utilize the site for forage. Common barn owls

(Tyto alba) nest in the crevices and caves found in butte faces and canyons.

Red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis), which are more frequent in winter, may

breed locally. Prairie falcons (Falco mexicanus) are an uncommon breeding

resident in the area, nesting primarily on steep cliff faces, which are more

frequent in the northern portion of the GDSCC. Golden eagles (Aquila

chrysaetos) may also inhabit the area.

c. Mammals. Small mammals, most of them nocturnal, are common

in the Mojave Desert. The long-tailed pocket mouse (Perognathus formosa),

canyon mouse (Peroroyscus crinitus), and desert wood rat (Neotoma lepida) are

expected in the vicinity of the proposed project. In the sandy wash, the

little pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris) is an expected resident.

Merriam's kangaroo rats (Dipodomys merriami) are likely the most abundant and

widespread small mammal within the project area. Black-tailed jackrabbits

(Lepus californicus) and desert cottontails (Sylvilagus audubonii) are also

common throughout the area. Predators expected in the proposed project area

include the coyote (Canis latrans), kit fox (Vulpes macrotis), ringtail

(Bassariscus astutus), and bobcat (Felix rufus).

4. Impacts upon the Biotic Resources of the Proposed Project Site and

their Mitigations

Impacts to the biotic resources of the proposed project site and

its vicinity are expected to be minimal due to the small size of the area to

be altered by the proposed project and its proximity to existing roads.

Project implementation may result in the removal of one mature Joshua tree,

which may be too large to be transplanted, and one to several individual

Mojave indigo bushes. Wildlife, for the most part in the form of small

rodents, would be permanently displaced from the area of construction, and

population numbers would likely continue to be lower in the immediate vicinity

of the project. This decline in rodent numbers may have a minor effect on

predators presently foraging in the area. None of these biological impacts

would be significant.

During construction of the new 34-meter antenna, efforts should be made

to disturb as small an area of vegetation as possible. The desert flora

recovers very slowly, and unnecessary clearing will be visible for many

decades. No fill or construction debris should be placed in the adjacent wash.

5. Endangered Species

Several species present in the vicinity of the proposed project

have been given special recognition by Federal, state, or local resourceconservation agencies and organizations due to declining, limited, or

5-9
threatened populations, resulting in most cases from habitat reduction.

Sources used for determination of sensitive biological resources are as

follows:

(1) Wildlife: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) (1986), California

Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) (1987), California Department

of Fish and Game (CDFG) (1980, 1986), Remsen (1978), National

Audubon Society (NAS) (Tate and Tate 1986), and Bureau of Land

Management (BLM) (1980).

(2) Plants: FWS (1986), CDFG (1985), CNDDB (1987), and Smith and York

(1984).

Species considered sensitive in other parts of their range but not

in the California deserts are not included in this discussion. No

Federally-listed threatened or endangered species were located on

the proposed site, nor are any expected to occur. Of the nine

plant, one reptile, three bird, and one mammal species listed by

one or more of the above agencies as rare, or of limited

distribution, only one, the Mojave indigo bush, was located during

the recent survey (Tables 4 and 5). This plant is listed by the

California Native Plant Society (CNPS) as being of limited

distribution, but not presently considered rare or threatened.

No significant impacts to sensitive, rare, threatened, or

endangered plant or animal species are expected to result from

project implementation. One to several Mojave indigo bushes may be

removed as a result of project implementation. The loss of these

few individual plants, however, is not considered significant.

There will be no effects to Federally-protected rare, threatened,

or endangered species.

6. Wetlands

No wetlands in the form of springs, seeps, or streams are found in

the vicinity of the proposed project. No playas (dry lakes) or areas where

standing water may accumulate during or after a storm are evident on or in the

immediate vicinity of the project site. The small and large washes, described

earlier in this section, are two washes near the proposed site. Both of these

washes show evidence of recent water movement. No vegetation associated with

a relatively sustained water supply, such as mesquite (Prosopis spp.) or

desert willow (Chilopsis linearis) were found, however, in these washes,

indicating that water movement and storage in the washes are highly ephemeral.

No direct impacts to the nearby washes are expected to result from

implementation of the project. During construction, however, no activities

should be allowed within the area of the wash whereby a storm could cause

debris to be deposited in the wash. As these conditions will not be allowed,

no impacts to wetlands are anticipated during construction

 Fbf the new 34-meter

antenna.

5-10
Table 4. Sensitive Plant Species that Potentially Could Occur at the GDSCC

Species

Status3

FWS CNPS Habitat

Androstephium brevif lorum

Small-flowered androstephium

Astragalus jaegerianusc

Jaeger's locoweed

Chorizanthe spinosa

Mojave spiny-herb

Cymopterus deserticolus

Desert cymopterus

Dudleya saxosa ssp. saxosa

Panamint dudleya

Eriophyllum mohavense

Mohave eriophyllum

Linanthus arenicola

Sand linanthus

Psorothamnus arborescens

Mojave indigo bush

var. arborescens (Dalea a.)c

Sclerocactus polyancistrus

Mojave fish-hook cactus

C2

C2

C2

C2

C3c8

C3c

C2

IB6

4*

IB

IB

Gravelly to rocky

soils below

7,000 ft

Sandy to gravelly

soils below

4,000 ft

Same

Same

Same

Same

Deep sandy soils

Same

Rocky soils

a Listing agencies/organizations:

FWS: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS, 1986).

CNPS: California Native Plant Society.

Note: The California Fish and Game Department has no listing for

this area.

b Rare or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere.

c This species is located on the proposed project site,

d Federal Category 2 candidate in which a decline of the species is

suspected. Insufficient data exist, however, to support a proposed

listing.

e Considered rare and endangered throughout its range.

* Species has limited distribution.

8 Species is too widespread to warrant listing.

5-11
Table 5. Sensitive Wildlife Species Known from the Vicinity of the GDSCCa

Statusb

Species FWS CDF GPS NAS Habitat

Gopherus agassizii

Desert tortoise

Aquila chrysaetos

Golden Eagle

Falco mexicanus

Prairie falcon

Clc — Sd

SC3e PSf

SC3

Creosote bush scrub

Nests in cliffs

forages over

creosote bush scrub

Same

Athene cunicularia

Burrowing Owl

Spermophilus mohavensis

Mojave ground squirrel

SC2 — 2h Nests in banks of

washes and road cuts

T

1

 — — Creosote bush scrub

a None of the listed species actually were identified at the project

site during the MBGA survey,

b Listing agencies:

FWS: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS, 1986).

CDFG: California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG 1980, 1985, 1986).

BLM: Bureau of Land Management (BLM, 1980).

NAS: National Audubon Society (NAS, 1986).

c Federal Category 1 candidate in which sufficient data exist to propose

species for listing as threatened or endangered.

^ BLM considers this species to be sensitive due to small population size,

limited distribution, or threat from human activities.

e State Species of Special Concern, List 3: species not in immediate

danger of expiration. Small population sizes, however, warrant

observation,

f BLM-proposed sensitive species, pending the accumulation of sufficient

data to support concern.

8 State Species of Special Concern, List 2: Species warrants active

monitoring due to population decline,

k NAS second priority species: Special concern due to observed decline

in population.

1 State-listed as threatened.

5-12
I. AIR RESOURCES

1. Meteorology

Climatic conditions at the GDSCC are those typical of high desert.

Summers are hot and arid while winters are relatively cool with little

precipitation and frequent strong westerly winds. Occasionally there are

summer showers and thunderstorms that result in flash flooding. During the

winter months, strong winds may occur often accompanied by local dust storms.

2. Air Quality

The project site is located in the Southeast Desert Air Basin

(SEDAB), an area that complies with environmental limits for all primary air

pollutants except ozone. Air pollutant emissions from the GDSCC are primarily

from use of fuel tanks, a spray booth and degreaser, generators, and

wipe-solvents.

The proposed project would increase present building square footage by

about 82 SF, which will not substantially increase fuel consumption for

heating purposes. Additionally, two motors would be replaced with smaller

motors (a planned reduction of 65 HP), and there are no plans to increase fuel

consumption for other purposes or to add new equipment that would increase the

present level of emissions. Thus, it is not anticipated that the proposed

project would result in any significant impact on basin air quality from

stationary sources.

There will be no substantial increase in mobile-source emissions as a

result of the proposed project, since daily vehicle usage is not anticipated

to significantly increase as compared to current usage.

Emissions generated during site preparation and construction of the

proposed antenna and support structures would be primarily from exhaust

emissions from construction equipment and fugitive dust generated as a result

of soil movement. These emissions would be of short-term duration, and, for

the most part would be confined to the Venus Site, resulting in an

insignificant impact on local air quality.

J. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT

1. Land Use and Socioeconomics

The GDSCC is located within the Fort Irwin Military Reservation, a

U.S. Army installation under the control of the U.S. Armed Forces. The GDSCC

is an extremely low-density development for a 52-square-mile complex. Because

of its mission, the GDSCC is highly sensitive to physical and electromagnetic

interference and thus requires large surrounding areas with minimal activity

and development.

With Fort Irwin bordering the GDSCC on the north, east, and southeast,

the potential for incompatible activities and actions exists unless both

facilities operate in a cooperative manner. Of primary concern are the 20 to

5-13
25 "critical" and 35-40 "semi-critical" days per year when GDSCC transmissions

require absolute freedom from physical and electromagnetic interference.

While critical-day activities have not been violated up to this time, this is

still an area of concern. Memoranda of understanding have been signed

addressing the responsibilities of both Fort Irwin and the GDSCC.

The GDSCC, including the Venus site, is designated as Rural Conservation

(RCN) in the County of San Bernardino General Plan (San Bernardino County,

1986). The RCN designation permits a variety of low intensity land uses such

as agricultural croplands, mining areas, national forest, wilderness, and

residential units on minimum lot sizes of 40 acres. The area is zoned DL-40,

restricting subdivisions to no less than 40 acres. The proposed 34-meter

antenna at the Venus Site is included in the GDSCC development plans. The

proposed antenna project is consistent with the County's General Plan.

The proposed 34-meter antenna would also be compatible with existing uses

at the GDSCC and would complement and support the existing Deep Space

Network. The antenna would be constructed over an 18-month time period. The

existing 26-meter antenna would be dismantled and removed from GDSCC within

approximately one year from completion of the 34-meter antenna.

The existing Venus Station has 12 full-time employees who exclusively

support operation of the existing Venus 26-meter antenna. The proposed

34-meter antenna and associated facilities would also require 12 employees,

shifting the existing employees' workspace south by 200 feet. No new

employees would be required for the proposed project. Therefore, no long term

socioeconomic impact from the proposed project on GDSCC or regional

demographics is expected.

2. Vehicular Traffic and Circulation

Vehicular access to the Venus Site at the GDSCC is provided via

Venus Road. Venus Road is an east-west road intersecting NASA Road and

traversing westerly approximately 1.5 miles to DSS-13. Venus Road is a

two-lane road that goes through DSS-13 and terminates at the existing 26-meter

antenna.

The employment level at the Venus Site will remain the same when the

34-meter antenna is placed in operation. No increases to local vehicular

traffic, therefore, would result from the proposed project. The proposed

antenna would be located approximately adjacent to the existing antenna, and

thus would only require construction of about 100 feet of additional access

road.

Some temporary construction traffic would occur. The small number of

trips, relatively short duration of construction activity, and low level of

roadway usage would preclude any significant impacts to local roadways.

3. Noise

The GDSCC noise environment is typical of quiet desert locations.

The sparsely developed complex and restricted airspace, which are required to

5-14
minimize interference with communications, serve to promote a quiet

environment.

Noise sources originating from the GDSCC include minor, intermittent

surface traffic, occasional aircraft operations, and activities at other

remote GDSCC operating sites. Surface traffic, and its associated noise impact,

is relatively low with a total staff of only about 217 people at the GDSCC.

Air traffic at the airport at Goldstone Dry Lake is limited to propellerdriven aircraft. Flights include three scheduled NASA flights per week and

infrequent flights of military administrative personnel. Mechanical equipment

in use at the GDSCC also contributes to the overall noise environment. Even

the loudest of generators, pumps and other types of mechanical equipment

present at any particular site produces a highly localized noise impact,

however, that does not extend more than a few hundred feet from its source.

Off-site noise sources include some minimal occasional disturbance by

Fort Irwin military training exercises and military aircraft sonic booms.

Since antenna operations are restricted during hours when troop maneuvers and

military aircraft have scheduled operations, these noise sources should not

have an adverse impact on the various NASA missions.

Over the short term, noise impacts at the proposed project site would

involve additional construction traffic noise and noise from site preparation

(earth moving and excavation), materials handling, fabrication, and erection

of facilities. Since the project location is in a remote area with no

noise-sensitive land uses within miles, however, short-term noise impacts are

expected to be insignificant. Long-term noise generation can be expected from

the antenna mechanical system, engineering shop activities, heating/ventilation

systems, generators, and motor vehicles. Since the proposed project is

replacing existing comparable facilities and a staff of approximately the same

size, no significant change to the existing noise environment is expected.

4. Cultural Resources

An abundance of archaeologic and historic resources exists in the

Mojave Desert, and especially within the boundary of Fort Irwin and the GDSCC.

Since access to these installations is controlled, only a few archaeologic

sites have been discovered and recorded. Fort Irwin has employed a resident

archaeologist who has documented areas of archaeologic, prehistoric, and

historic interest as well as fossil areas within the Fort Irwin and GDSCC

boundaries. A large area within the GDSCC has been designated as an area of

archaeologic and historic interest. This site is located in the northern

portion of the GDSCC, in and around Goldstone Lake, approximately 8 miles

northwest of the Venus Site. Areas with surface scatter and evidence of

historic battle have been located approximately three miles north of the Venus

Site. The Fort Irwin archaeologist has recently conducted a survey of the

Venus Site and has found no archaeologic or historic resources to exist at the

site.

5-15
5. Radio Interference, Electromagnetic Radiation, and Microwaves

The GDSCC operates several large, high-powered, microwave, ground

transmitters used in deep space communications. These transmitters are

capable of transmitting radiation ranging in frequency from 10 megahertz to

100 gigahertz. Transmission in this frequency range produces radiation

potentially hazardous to persons working nearby. The power density in the

direct beam may cause severe biological damage. The energy density in the

feeding system is considered potentially lethal. Currently, DSS-14 (Mars

Station) is the only GDSCC antenna station that radiates high-power on a

routine basis.

The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) has issued Safety Practice Bulletin

12-4-6 that sets standards for safely operating antennae during transmissions.

The bulletin addresses exposure hazards, exposure limits, and procedures for

ensuring that all safety precautions are taken prior to and during a

transmission event. In addition, the bulletin contains a requirement that JPL

Form 0284-S, A Safety Review of New Operations, be completed prior to

modification of an existing antenna or construction of a new radio frequency

transmitter. This bulletin is included in this Environmental Assessment

Document as Appendix C. Although this review has not as yet been conducted

for the proposed antenna, it will be required prior to construction and will

ensure that the facility meets safety standards.

High-power microwave transmissions also can generate effects at greater

distances, potentially exposing aircraft to radiation. In accordance with

standard practice, procedures will be established with neighboring military

installations and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to prevent

exposure of aircraft to radiation levels greater than 10 mW/cm. These

procedures include restricting the permissible angles of radiation and

avoidance of the supersonic corridor, establishing a pre-arranged schedule for

transmissions, and providing airspace avoidance contour plots to cognizant

external agencies. By following prescribed policies and procedures for

existing antenna, the GDSCC has maintained a record of safe transmissions

since it began operations in 1981.

During the project-planning phase for the proposed 34-meter Venus

antenna, specific requirements will be negotiated and coordinated with nearby

military installations and the FAA. It is anticipated that these requirements

for operation of the proposed antenna will be much more restrictive than those

already in place for the Mars antenna, since the Venus Site has limited GDSCC

airspace except to the north and northeast. Transmissions to the southeast,

south, and west would likely be restricted because of the potential effect

upon existing military supersonic air corridors, and would be restricted to

the east and southeast because of potential impact to FAA commercial air

corridors. Restrictions for the proposed Venus antenna would include a limit

of 25 degrees elevation, +/-25 degrees declination, and no radiation from 180

- 300 azimuth from 0600 - 1800 hours local time weekdays. Present plans are

for high-power transmission to commence in about 1992 concurrent with the 400

kW Ka band installation (See Appendix D: Interoffice Memorandum, BAG

87-VENUSHP, July 30, 1987).

5-16
Two radiation issues remain unresolved at this time. These include:

(1) Uncertainties regarding high power transmission and its effect on

surrounding land uses and aircraft operations.

(2) Lack of information on health and safety impacts from planned high

power transmissions and from more frequent ("routine")

transmissions.

Both matters will be resolved prior to final project approval, through

the standard procedures of negotiation of transmission restrictions with the

military and FAA and completion of the required safety review.

6. Solid and Hazardous Waste, Toxic Substances, and Pesticides

a. Solid Wastes; Goldstone operates one 10-acre, Class III

solid waste landfill. The landfill, which is located at the Echo Site, is

properly permitted and has a projected remaining life of five years. Only

non-putrescible, non-liquid solid wastes are accepted for burial. Adverse

impacts from solid waste generation are not anticipated as a result of the

proposed project because:

(1) Additional staff will not be required to operate the proposed

antenna.

(2) Operation of the proposed antenna will not result in generation of

quantities of solid waste that are greater than quantities

generate <TonoT*at"od^ b Viyv th t-Heo ovioh-ino existing- antenna onf-Aiino.

(3) Types of solid waste generated are not expected to change from

those generated at the present time.

b. Toxic Substances and Hazardous Wastes; The GDSCC does not

store or use large quantities of toxic or hazardous substances. The

substances used in greatest quantities are fuels and oils. Purchase of

drummed liquids is kept to a minimum. The GDSCC operates one main drum

storage area at the Apollo site. This facility consists of drums stored on

locked, metal, dispensing racks situated on a concrete pad. The facility is

properly equipped with warning signs, fire extinguishers, and materials for

spill cleanup. Small quantities of containerized substances are stored

throughout the complex in a manner consistent with procedures established by

the GDSCC Environmental Office. Storage locations are inspected on a routine

basis. Typically, only the quantity of material needed to support operations

is distributed for storage at each workplace.

Bulk products (primarily fuels and oils) are stored in permitted

underground tanks in conformance with prevailing underground tank

regulations. There currently are 15 underground tanks in use for storage of

bulk fuels and oils at the GDSCC. Underground tanks are monitored daily for

leakage.

5-17
Hazardous waste generated at the GDSCC is collected in drums at

designated accumulation points throughout the complex. Accumulation points

are maintained in conformance with procedures established by the GDSCC

Environmental Office, and are inspected on a routine basis. Waste is

transported from each accumulation point to a central staging facility located

at the Echo Site. At this facility, all hazardous waste containers are

readied for off-site transport to a commercial, permitted Hazardous Waste

Management Facility for either treatment, recycle, or disposal, as

appropriate. GDSCC policy requires minimizing waste generation and supports

detoxification, reclamation, and reuse of wastes as compared to their disposal.

Materials to be stored at the Venus Site to support the proposed

operations are not expected to be substantially different in quantity or type

from what is stored to support current operations. The waste-generation rate

presently is very low (primarily oily waste), and also is not expected to

substantially differ if this proposed antenna project is implemented.

Furthermore, the GDSCC has an active environmental program that includes

routine monitoring of hazardous materials and waste management practices at

each antenna station by the GDSCC Environmental Coordinator. Consequently, no

adverse hazardous substances impacts are anticipated.

c. Pesticides: The GDSCC does not directly purchase, store, or

use pesticides. All pesticide application is by a licensed contract firm that

brings spray applicators containing pre-mixed pesticide to the Complex,

applies the pesticide under the direction of the Complex's Environmental

Officer, and leaves the premises with all remaining product and spent

canisters. Virtually all pesticide application is to the interior of

buildings. In the event that it is necessary to spray outside areas prior to

initiating new construction, Natural Resource Management personnel from Fort

Irwin or from the private sector are consulted to ensure that spraying will

not impact environmental resources.

d. Summary of Hazardous Materials Use, Generation of Solid and

Hazardous Wastes, and the Use of Pesticides at the Proposed New 34-Meter

Antenna at the Venus Site; The proposed Venus antenna project would not

require expansion over the current level of operations or an increase in

manpower. It is not, therefore, anticipated that hazardous materials use,

solid waste generation, or hazardous waste generation would increase

significantly as a result of implementation of the proposed project.

Pesticide use inside of buildings may increase slightly because of the

proposed increase in building space (about 82 SF of additional working space

will be added). This slight increase in pesticide use would not create

conditions which are radically different from existing conditions at the Venus

Site.

7. Health and Safety

The 34-meter antenna design is required to meet the health and

safety standards of prevailing health and safety codes.

5-18
According to the Advanced Engineering Study Report for Design and

Construction of a Beam Waveguide 34-Meter X-Band AZ-EL Antenna, prepared by

TIW Systems, 1986, safety provisions would be provided at the proposed

antenna site. At a minimum, provisions would include the following:

(1) Lighting: Incandescent lighting would be provided to give a

minimum of five foot-candles in all work areas. Battery-powered

emergency lights would also be provided wherever frequent

maintenance and service is required.

(2) Grounding: The antenna would be grounded and would have lightning

protection. All grounding and bonding shall conform to prevailing

codes and good engineering practice.

(3) Travel Limits: Redundant antenna travel limits would be supplied

at both limits of travel on each axis. Azimuth bumper contact

switches also would be provided on the azimuth access stairway

structure to prevent damage in periphery around the antenna at

ground level. Emergency stop switches would be installed at the

following locations:

(a) Elevation Drives

(b) Antenna Access Stairway

(c) Each Azimuth Drive Wheel

(d) Reflector Surface

(e) Provisions for Future Lower Quadripod Leg.

No project-related health and safety impacts are anticipated with

implementation of the above and other essential safety measures. A review of

safety issues specific to operation of the proposed antenna should, however,

be initiated prior to project approval.

8. Aesthetics

Typical views at the Venus Site can be seen in Figures 6, 7 and 10

in Section IV. The proposed project site is approximately 1.5 miles west of

NASA Road and thus is not clearly visible to vehicle occupants traveling to

the main work area of the Echo Station. The existing antenna and the location

of the proposed antenna are within a natural topographic bowl and thus are

shielded from distant viewpoints. Although the proposed antenna facility will

be approximately 30 feet taller than the existing Venus 26-meter antenna, no

residential, commercial or public uses are located near the site. Therefore,

the proposed antenna is not expected to have an effect on area aesthetics.

5-19
SECTION VI

CONCLUSIONS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

CONCERNING THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A NEW 34-METER ANTENNA

PROPOSED FOR THE VENUS SITE AT THE GDSCC

The Environmental Assessment (EA) for the proposed 34-meter antenna to be

constructed at the Venus Site has examined the full range of potential

environmental impacts that may result from implementation of this project.

The conclusion of this EA is that the proposed antenna and its operation would

not result in significant adverse impacts to the physical or human

environment. It will, however, be necessary to manage electromagnetic

transmissions from the antenna in such a manner as to ensure safe operation,

in accordance with existing JPL standard procedures and external interface

agreements.

Thus, in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA),

the Council on Environmental Quality implementing regulations, and the NASA

implementing provisions, the proposed project is eligible for a Finding of No

Significant Impact (FONSI).

6-1
SECTION VII

CERTIFICATION

I hereby certify that all work performed by M. B. Gilbert Associates,

Long Beach, California, in its environmental assessment of the construction

and operation of a new 34-meter antenna proposed for the Venus Site at the

Goldstone Complex of the Ft. Irwin Military Reservation, San Bernardino

County, California, as described in this report, was performed in compliance

with Federal, state, and local regulations, and in accordance with good

engineering and investigative practice.

Leonard H. Kushner

Registered Professional Engineer

Signature

Date Signed: IS.

Registration No. E9003, Electrical

SF1086, Safety

State: California

California

Stamp/Seal

7-1
APPENDIX A

INDIVIDUALS AND AGENCIES CONSULTED

IN PREPARATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

A-l
PREPARERS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

(1) Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology

Office of Telecommunications and Data Acquisition:

Leonard H. Kushner, Safety and Environmental Compliance Engineer

Glen G. Kroll, Cognizant Safety and Environmental

Compliance Engineer

Documentation Section 648:

Irving S. Bengelsdorf, Technical Writer/Specialist

(2) M. B. Gilbert Associates (Contractor):

Marsha B. Gilbert, Principal-in-charge

Marcia R. Baverman, Staff Engineer

Eva B. Hett, Senior Scientist

Cameron Toyne, Staff Geologist

Robert Lunche, Senior Engineer

William Girolamo, Staff Hydrologist

Paul Moening, Staff Engineer

Curtis E. Ailing, American Institute of Certified Planners

(AICP), NEPA Environmental Specialist, Consultant

Thomas W. Fitzwater, AICP, Environmental Consultant

Ellen Millie, Human Resources Consultant

Karen Swirsky, Biologist, Consultant

Julie McCall, Environmental Scientist, Consultant

PRECEDING PAGE BLANK NOT FILMED

A-3
INDIVIDUALS AND AGENCIES CONSULTED IN

PREPARATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

Alderson, Harold. Allied Bendix Aerospace. Environmental Compliance

Coordinator. May/June 1987.

Fryell, Chuck. San Bernardino County, Air Pollution Control District,

telephone conversation on May 22, 1987.

Fort Irwin National Training Center (contacted through Mr. Benhart A. Gaudian,

JPL), May 1987.

Gaudian, Benhart A. Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Goldstone Radio Spectrum

Coordinator. May 1987.

Kirtland, Karen. Consulting Biologist, telephone conversation on December 15,

1986.

Norstedt, Carl S. San Bernardino County Air Pollution Control District.

Meeting on May 8, 1987.

Roberts, David. Allied Bendix Aerospace. Environmental Compliance

Inspector. May/June 1987.

Russell, Al. San Bernardino County, Drainage Section of Environmental Public

Works Agency, telephone conversation on May 22, 1987.

Turner, Keith. Lahontan Region, California Regional Water Quality Control

Board, Engineering, telephone conversation on August 11, 1987.

A-4
APPENDIX B

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: BIBLIOGRAPHY

B-l
APPENDIX B

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abrams, L. 1923. Illustrated Flora of the Pacific States. Stanford University

Press, Stanford, California.

American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1983. The A.O.U. Check-List of North

American Birds. 6th ed. Allen Press, Lawrence, Kansas.

Barbour, M., and J. Major (eds.). 1977. Terrestrial Vegetation of

California. John Wiley and Sons. New York.

Battelle-Columbus Division. Prepared for the Office of Economic Development,

Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense. Economic Adjustment Program,

Barstow, California. 1980.

Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 1980. The California Desert Conservation

Area Plan. California State Office, Sacramento, California.

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 1980. At the Cross roads: A

Report on the Status of California's Endangered and Rare Fish and Wildlife.

State of California Resources Agency, Sacramento, California.

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 1986. "Endangered, Rare and

Threatened Animals of California." Revised October 1, 1986. State of

California Resources Agency, Sacramento, California.

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 1985. "Designated Endangered

or Rare Plants." Summary list from Section 1904, Fish and Game Code (Native

Plant Protection Act). Revised June 19, 1985. State of California Resources

Agency, Sacramento, California.

California Natural Diversity Data Base (.CNDDB). 1987. Data Base Record

Search for Information on Threatened, Endangered, Rare or Otherwise Sensitive

Species and Communities in the Vicinity of Goldstone and Lane Mountain.

California Department of Fish and Game, State of California Resources Agency,

Sacramento, California.

California National Guard, Headquarters, Reserve Components Training Center.

Joint Environmental Impact Assessment, Fort Irwin, California. 1978.

Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for Implementing the Procedural

Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act. 40 CRF Parts 1500-1508.

1978.

Department of the Array, Headquarters, U.S. Army Forces Command. Final

Environmental Impact Statement, National Training Center, Fort Irwin Site.

1979.

Jaeger, E. 1941. Desert Wild Flowers. Stanford University Press, Stanford,

California.

B-3

PRECEDING PAGE BLANK NOT FILMED
Jennings, M. R. 1983. "An Annotated Check List of the Amphibians and

Reptiles of California." California Fish and Game 69(3):151-171.

• sh .'.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology. Environmental

Projects: Volume 1, Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) Abatement Program Final

Report. JPL Publication 87-4, 1987.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory and National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

Directory of Goldstone Buildings and Facilities (Gold Book) (Report 890-165,

JPL internal document). 1985.

Jones, J.K., Jr., D.C. Carter, H.H. Genoways, R.S. Hoffman and D.W. Rice.

1982. "Revised Checklist of North American Mammals North of Mexico, 1982."

Occas. Pap. Mus. Texas Tech Univ., No. 80.

Kartesz, J. T., and R. Kartesz. 1980. A Synonymized Checklist of the

Vascular Flora of the United States, Canada and Greenland. Volume II. The

Biota of North America. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.

Kieffer, Hugh (Jet Propulsion Laboratory). Geology of the Goldstone Area.

1961.

Kizysik, Anthony J. Ecological Assessment of the Effects of Army Training

Activities on a Desert Ecosystem: National Training Center, Fort Irwin,

California. Report Number CERL-TR-N-85/13. 1985.

Koebig and Koebig, Inc. Prepared for Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California

Institute of Technology. Preliminary Engineering Report, FY 1974, Solid Waste

Collection and Disposal: Sewerage and Sewage Treatment, NET, NASA Project

Number 9233. 1972.

Michael Brandman Associates, Inc. Draft Report, Fort Irwin Installation

Compatible Use Zone (ICUZ) Study. 1986.

Munz, P.A. 1974. A Flora of Southern California. University of California

Press, Berkeley, California.

Munz, P.A., and D.D. Keck. 1959. A California Flora. University of California

Press, Berkeley, California.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration Procedures for Implementing the

National Environmental Policy Act. 14 CFR 1216.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Implementing the Provisions of

the National Environmental Policy Act. 1980.

Niehaus, T.F., and C.L. Ripper. 1976. A Field Guide to Pacific States

Wildflowers. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, Massachusetts.

Norris, R.M., and Webb, R.W., 1976, Geology of California: John Wiley & Sons,

N.Y., 365p.

B-4
Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc. Engineering Report, Engineering Services

Required to Meet the Requirements of the California Regional Water Board for

Waste Discharge. JPL Contract No. 955646. 1980.

RMS Corporation. Prepared under the direction of Department of the Army,

Sacramento District Corps of Engineers. Analytical/ Environmental Assessment

Report, National Training Center, Fort Irwin, California. 1982.

Remsen, J.V. 1978. "Bird Species of Special Concern in California: An

Annotated List of Declining or Vulnerable Bird Species." Nongame Wildlife

Investigations, Wildlife Management Branch, California Department of Fish and

Game. Administrative Report No. 78-1.

. Robbins, W.W., M.K. Bellue and W.S. Ball. 1951. Weeds of California. State of

?fGalifornia Department of Agriculture.

'VSantos, Richard, T., AIA. Preliminary Engineering Report, Goldstone Deep

Space Communications Complex Maintenance and Integration Building. JPL

Contract No. 957004. 1986.

Sharp, R.P., 1972, Geology Field Guide to Southern California: Kendall/Hunt

Publishing Co., Dubuque, IA, 208 p.

Smith, J. P., Jr., and R. York. 1984. Inventory of Rare and Endangered

Vascular Plants of California. Special Publication No. 1 (3rd Edition),

California Native Plant Society.

Tate, J. 1986. "The Blue List for 1986." American Birds. 4(2):227-236.

Tate, J. and D. Tate. 1982. "The Blue List for 1982." American Birds.

36(2):126-135.

TIW Systems, Incorporated. Prepared for the Jet Propulsion Laboratory.

Advanced Engineering Study Report for Design and Construction of a Beam

Waveguide 34-Meter X-Band AZ-EL Antenna. Volume I: Requirements, Analysis

and Costs. 1986.

Uniform Building Code, 1985. International Conference of Building Officials,

Earthquake Regulations, Chapter 23.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). 1986. Endangered and

Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Federal Register 50 CFR 17.11 and 17.12.

U.S. Department of the Interior.

B-5
APPENDIX C

JET PROPULSION LABORATORY SAFETY PRACTICE BULLETIN 12-4-6,

EFFECTIVE DATE: JUNE 15, 1978

C-l
SAFETY PRACTICE

RADIO FREQUENCY/MICROWAVE TRANSMITTERS 12-4-6

EFFECTIVE DATE june 15, 1978 Page 1 of 3

I. GENERAL

A. Microwave transmitters have extensive application in industry and

in the home. They are used for: curing certain adhesivea, ionizing

gases, treating physical ailments, detecting optically invisible

objects, cooking, spacecraft communications, etc.

B. Potential dangers are associated with microwave transmitter operations.

High-powered ground transmitters used in spacecraft communications

are potentially hazardous to persons working nearby. The power

density in the direct beam may cause severe biological damage, and

the energy density in the feeding system is considered potentially

lethal.

C. Any known accidental exposure must b'e reported immediately to the

First Aid Office.

D. For the purpose of this Safety Practice, the microwave frequency

spectrum extends from 10 megahertz to 100 gigahertz.

II. HAZARDS

A. Radio frequency radiation heat affects specific parts of the human

body. At a particular frequency, the amount of radiation heating

is determined by the power density of the field and duration of

exposure. The absorbed energy results in heating the body tissue

which induces a temperature rise capable of producing biological

damage, while no pain is experienced.

B. Users of radio frequency/microwave transmitters are required to

be thoroughly familiar with associated hazards and the safety precautions

to be taken. Biological damage occurring to the body, without physical

warning, must always be kept In mind.

C. Looking into or standing in front of an antenna, waveguide horn,

or open waveguide, while the transmitter is on, is extremely dangerous

and can cause biological damage.

III. EXPOSURE LIMITS

A. The power density must not exceed one milliwatt per centimeter squared

(1 mw/cm2) in areas where employees are working eight hours a day

or forty hours a week.

B. In areas where the power density exceeds 1 mw/cm2, but is not more

_than 10 mw/cm2f employees are restricted to working for no longer

than one hour in any twenty-four hour period.

Preceding Page Blank C-3

JPL 2810 1/77
SAFETY PRACTICE

i

RADIO FREQUENCY/MICROWAVE TRANSMITTERS 12-1-6

EFFECTIVE DATE June,15, 1978 Page 2 of 3

IV. PROCEDURE

A. All radio frequency/microwave transmitter operation areas must be

posted with the necessary warning signs and devices.

B. A Safety Review of New Operation, JPL Form 0281-S, must be completed

when a new radio frequency transmitter is installed for operation

or an existing one is modified.

C. If at the time of initial operation the calculated power density

exceeds 1 mw/cm2 at 1 meter, a survey must be made of the electromagnetic radiation density. The antenna must be rotated, leaving

the survey meter stationary while the side lobes are checked. A

copy of this survey report must be sent to the Safety Office.

D. Klystrons and magnetrons are to be monitored for X-rays.

E. Certain pulse and transmit/receive tubes contain small amounts of

radioactive material and must be handled carefully if broken.

F. 'The types of waveguide fill gases should be checked to see if a

hazard would be created during arcing or accidental release.

G. High-voltage leads must be properly contained to ensure that they

cannot come into direct contact (accidentally) with persons in the

area.

H. High-voltage capacitors must be enclosed or covered to prevent accidental

contact by persons in .the area. They must also be provided with

an automatic bleed-off system, to prevent the retention of a charge

after the equipment is shut off.

I. Combustible materials may not be kept in areas where electrical

or radio frequency arcing can occur.

J. Concentrated microwave beams must never be pointed or aimed where

flashbulbs, squibs, or other types of electronic explosive devices

are in use.

V. MEDICAL REQUIREMENTS

The Laboratory requires that persona, working in areas where exposure

to radio frequency energy of 1 mw/cm^ could occur, have an eye examination

when the work assignment is made, and annually thereafter, as long

as assigned to this type of work.

C-4

JPL 2S10 1/77
-jpl SAFETY PRACTICE

RADIO FREQUENCY/MICROWAVE TRANSMITTERS 12-H-6

EFFECTIVE DATE June 15, 1978 Page 3 of 3

B. Annual eye•examinations are required of persons working on radio

frequency/microwave systems where the total average output power

of the transmitter exceeds 500 watts including:

1. Large, microwave tracking antennas during transmission.

2. Antenna testing ranges.

3. Laboratories where transmitters of this output power are being

used.

NOTE: Should a break in the waveguide occur with systems of

this power level, the resulting leakage could cause damage

to the eyes.

Charles H. Terhune, Jr.

Deputy Director

OFFICE OF PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY

Assistant Laboratory Director for Administrative Divisions

SUPERSEDES

Safety Practice 12-4-6, Microwave Transmitters, dated May 13, 1976.

C-5

JPL 2810 1/77
JPL OPERATIONAL SAFETY REVIEW

TO

FROM

NO. I

DATE

Cognizant Section Manager

Cognizant Engineer

EXT. SECTION

PROGRAM

OR/AD (~~) FLIGHT PROJECT ( ] CIVIL PROGRAMS f~] DEFENSE PROGRAMS [~] OTHER

LOCATION | 1 | L QJPL QDSN BLOG

Qj TM [ 1 EF [_] OTHER ROOM

| | PHE-OPERATIONAL REVIEW

noeooTIOM STARTINf, DATF

npCRATION COMPLETION DATF

(~~) OPERATIONAL REVIEW f~] ANNUAL REVIEW

NAM£ OF OPERATION OR PROJECT

NAMES OF QUALIFIED PERSONNEL ASSIGNED TO THE OPERATION

(or clarity.

OPERATION D ATTEN°

E

°

1 | UNATTENDED

WHEN

FMFBI-.Fwrv NAME PHONE

NOTIFICATION: ALTERNATE PHONE

WILL THIS OPERATION REQUIRE USE OF THE BUDDY SYSTEM OR OTHER SURVEILLANCE (T.V.. AUDIO. ETC.I

( | HO | | YES. TYPE

IS AC5QUATE WRITTEN INFORMATION [JPLI AVAILABLE TO ASSIST IN SAFELY CARRYING OUT THIS OPERATION

| | * SS | | ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED AND WILL BE AVAILABLE PRIOR TO OPERATION

LIST HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. PRESSURE

HAZA.-O 1 -TOXIC

TYPE 2-CORROSIVE

* 3-EXPLOSIVE

LIST DISCHARGE PRODUCTS AND WASTE

MATERIAL

TEMPERATURES. POWER. VOLTAGES. FREQUENCIES. ETC. TO BE USED

PRESSURE - VOLTAGE

4-PYROPHORIC

5-RAOIATION

6-ACOUSTIC

TEMPERATURE -

FREQUENCY - ETC.

QUANTITY H47iBn

AT SITE IN RIG *

7-ELECTRICAL 10-PRESSURE I3-CONTAMINATION

8-FIRE 11. LASER 14-

9-SUFFOCATION 12- ENERGY SOURCES

FROM OPERATION IFOR BOTH NORMAL AND ABNORMAL CONDITIONS!

QUANTITY CONOITIOr

NORMAL

ABNORMA

NORMAL

ABNORMA

NORMAL

ABNORMA

J MEANS OF DISPOSAL

L

L

L

DISCHARGE PRODUCTS

^

LIST PERSONNEL SAFETY EQUIPMENT REQUIRED FOR THIS OPERATION

LIST OF DOCUMENTS. BY TITLE. THAT PERTAIN TO THIS OPERATION

JPL 0284 S R 3/86

C-6 ORIGINAL PAGE IS

OF POOR-QURQ9QI
JPL

YES

D

D

D

D

D

D

a

D

D

D

D

D

D

a

a

a

D

a

D

a

a

a

NO

D

D

a

D

D

a

a

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

a

D

D

TEST PREPARATION CHECK LIST

N/A

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

a

a

D

D

D

a

a

D

D

PERSONNEL SAFETY

1 . Location of personnel during test and in adjacent areas is safe.

2. Provisions exist to avoid unsafe contamination of materials (spills, hypergolic, catalyst, etc.)

3. Emergency procedures exist for protecting personnel in case of fire, spill, explosion, etc.

4. Pertinent personnel protection exist (protective clothing, breathing apparatus, eye and ear

protection, medical check, first aid, etc.)

5. Shielding against high frequency or particle radiation, splash, blast exposure, heat, cold,

etc., is provided.

6. Additional training is required for this test.

TEST OPERATION

7. Operating procedure has been prepared. Existing procedure reviewed/revised.

8. Operating procedure has been reviewed with operating personnel.

9. "Fail safe" means exist in case of power, pressure, combustion or personnel failure.

10. Protective means exist in case of over-temperature, over-pressure, over-speed, explosion, fire, etc.

1 1 . Provisions in case of failure of vessel or system from evacuation or pressure are provided

(drains, deluge, ventilation, etc.)

1 2. Electrical and/or static grounding and bonding is adequate (electrical equipment, test systems,

work bench, drums, building grounds, etc.)

1 3. Live parts are suitably guarded (electrical, belts, vent/burst pipes, bldg. sprinklers).

14. Provisions exist for purging of equipment or area after test (water, nitrogen, freon, etc.)

TEST FACILITY

1 5. Sprinklers and/or other fire extinguishing equipment installed and operating.

1 6. Fire protection valves, detection, and warning devices or switches sealed in operating

position.

1 7. Equipment for detection and monitoring of hazardous conditions installed and operating

(radiation, toxicity', insufficient oxygen).

1 8. Pressure vessel is certified. Pressure Vessel number:

19. Protection from ignition sources (space heaters, automatic electrical, contamination, etc.) exists.

20. Warning system installed and operational (horn, lights, observer, personnel barriers, signs

.indicating presence of hazards, etc.)

21 . Adequate work area around equipment and electric power panels (aisles, exits, doors, etc.)

22. Adequate ventilation (windows, doors, fans, exhaust systems) provided.

ADDITIONAL ITEMS

D Brain Tickler: Consider pressure relief devices, vents, moving equipment, automatic equipment, storage, instrumentation, transportation, sample analysis, material compatibility, proof

testing, clean equipment, lifting, tripping hazards, etc.

23.

24. .

CC: Cognizant Engineer

Division Safety Coordinator

Safety Office

Supervisor Cognizant Engineer

Group Supervisor

Section Safety Coordinator

REVERSE SIDE JPt 0284-S R 3/86

C-7

ORIGINAL PAGE IS

OF. POOR QUALITX
APPENDIX D

HIGH-POWER RADIATION CONCERNS FOR THE NEW DSS-13 34-METER ANTENNA:

INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM BAG 87-VENUSHP, JULY 30, 1987

D-l
JET PROPULSION LABORATORY INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM

BAG 87-VENUSHP

July 30, 1987

TO: L. Kushner

FBOM: Goldstone Radio Spectrum and Airspace Coordinator - B. Gaudian

t

SUBJECT: . HIGH POWER RADIATION CONCERNS FOR THE NEW DSS-13 34 METER ANTENNA

In response to the Environmental Assessment document for the planned new 34

meter antenna for DSS-13 there are environmental considerations to be

resolved in the area of high power radiation outside of Goldstone airspace,

before high power radiation can take place from that location.

Currently DSS-14 is the only Goldstone station that radiates high power on

a routine basis for planetary radar and on occasion for spacecraft support.

Procedures have been established with the military neighbors and the FAA to

prevent exposure of aircraft to radiation levels greater than 10 mw/cm2.

The procedures require advance scheduling and require that we do not impact

military activities on a repeated basis.

The basic requirements for DSS-14 high power radiation are:

1. No radiation below 15 degrees elevation angle.

2. No radiation outside of +/-2S degrees declination.

3. 4 weeks advance notice on radiation of Bore than 2 days/week.

4. A minimum of 72 hours notice on late changes.

5. All radiation requests require airspace avoidance contour plots to

provide the avoidance information to external agencies.

6. Avoid the supersonic corridor and coordinate its use on a case by case

basis.

If future planning includes DSS-13 for planetary radar and spacecraft

uplink support then a similar set of requirements would have to be negotiated and coordinated, but would most likely be much more restrictive because DSS-13 has almost no Goldstone airspace except north and northeast.

The major impacts would be that DSS-13 transmissions to the southeast,

south and west would be restricted because of impact to existing nilitary

supersonic air corridors and to the east and southeast because of impact to

FAA commercial air carriers.

The current limit of 15 degrees elevation for DSS-14 and the +/- 25 degree

declination restrictions maintain the radiated beam pointing within the

military R2508 complex and minimal coordination is required for the FAA for

commercial aircraft. A like restriction for DSS-13 would be a limit of 25

degrees for elevation, +/-25 degrees declination and no radiation from 180-

300 azimuth from 0600-1800 local time weekdays.

°~3 PRECEDING PAGE BLANK WOT FILLED
Some of these concerns were discussed with J. Smith, Manager of 420 TDA

PLANNING, on July 30, 1987. He indicated there are no plans for a high

power transmitter at DSS-13 until the 400 Kw Ka band installation in about

1992 and TDA Planning will consider the potential for conflict and restrictions to high power radiation from the Venus Site.

Distribution: R. J. ABOrose

L. E. Butcher

D. W. Johnston

A. Price

J. G. Smith

Max Wyatt

D-4
APPENDIX E

ARCHAEOLOGICAL APPROVAL OF THE NEW VENUS 34-METER ANTENNA:

INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM ENVOK3AM.NTC, DECEMBER 18, 1987

E-l
JET PROPULSION LABORATORY INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM

ENVOK34M.NTC

December 18, 1987

TO: DISTRIBUTION

FROM: B. A. Gaudian

SUBJECT: Environmental and archaeological approval of new Venus 34M

antenna

Attached is the environmental and archaeological compliance approval

from Ft. Irwin for the new 34M antenna at the Venus site.

cc: H. Alderson

F;. J. Arnarose

L. E. Butcher

G. Kroll

J. E. Mepartland

A. L. Price

F. Stoll^r

PAGE BLANK WOT FILMED

E-3
for UM of inn lorm. t*« A R 1*0-1 J: in* prooon«nt igtncy It TAGO.

REFERENCE OR OFFICE SYMBOL

- Goldstor.e

SUBJECT

Construction of a

Venus Site.

new 34 meter antenna at the Goldstone

TO

Director, DEH Ft. Irwin

ATTN: W. Cassidy^--"

FROM

Goldstone

B. A. Gaudian

DATE

11/20/87

CMT1

1. Goldstone requests EHE archaeological and environmental compliance approval for the

construction of a neiv 34 meter antenna at the Venus Site. The new antenna will be

located approximately 200 ft. Southeast of the existing Venus antenna and construction

is planned for March 1989.

The antenna location and environmental concerns are addressed in the attached material.

Action on this requirement is needed by January 20, 1988.

cc: H. Alderson

L. E. Butcher

J. E. McPartland

A. L. Price

AFZJ-EHE-S (JPL - Goldstone/11-20-87)

SUBJECT: Construction of a new 34 meter antenna at the Goldstone

Venus Site

TO Goldstone FROM

ATTN: B.A. Gaudian

Staff Archaeologist

W.L. Cassidy

DATE 10 Dec 87 CMT 2

1. An archaeological and environmental compliance field reconnaissance was

conducted on 8 Dec 87.

• 2. The project as proposed will not adversely affect any observed environ-

| mental factors.

i

I 3. I am in agreement with the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) as

i stated in the Environmental Assessment prepared for NASA/JPL.

WALTER L. CASSIDY

Staff Archaeologist

DA

FORM

AUG.VI

PREVIOUS EDITIONS WILL BE USED

E-4

OU.S. Co—r
TECHNICAL REPORT STANDARD TITLE PAGE

1. Report No. 87_4> Vol> 6

/

2. Government Accession No.

4. Title and Subtitle

Environmental Projects: Volume 6, Environmental

Assessment: New 34-Meter Antenna at Venus Site

7. Author ($)

L. Kushner

9. Performing Organization Name an

JET PROPULSION LABC

California Institut

4800 Oak Grove Dri\

Pasadena, Calif orna

d Address

)RATORY

:e of Technology

re

.a 91109 .

12. Sponsoring Agency Nome and Address

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

Washington, D.C. 20546

3. Recipient's Catalog No.

5. Report Date

'June 15, 1988

6. Performing Organization Code

8. Performing Organization Report No.

10. Work Unit No.

11. Contract or Grant No.

NAS7-918

13. Type of Report and Period Covered

JPL Publication

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. Supplementary No res Sponsored by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration

(RTOP RE-211-BG-314-40-31-30-Z1).

16. Abstract

The Goulds tone Deep Space Communications Complex (GDSCC), located in the

Mojave Desert about 45 miles north of Bars tow, California, and about 150 miles

northeast of Pasadena, is part of the National Aeronautics and Space

Administration's (NASA's) Deep Space Network, one of the world's largest and

most sensitive scientific telecommunications and radio navigation networks.

The GDSCC includes five distinct operational areas named Echo Site, Venus

Site, Mars Site, Apollo Site, and Mojave Base Site. Within each site is a

Deep Space Station (DSS) that consists of a large parabolic dish antenna and

its support facilities.

At present, the Venus Station, known as DSS-13, has a 26-meter (85 ft)

antenna. In conjunction with NASA, JPL is proposing to replace this antenna

with a new 34-meter (111.5 ft) antenna.

The proposed construction of this new antenna at the Venus Site required

an Environmental Assessment (EA) document that would record the existing

environmental conditions at the Venus Site, that would analyze the

environmental effects that possibly could be expected from the construction,

installation and operation of the new proposed antenna, and that would

recommend measures taken to mitigate any possibly deleterious environmental

effects.

17. Key Words (Selected by Author(s))

Methods and Equipment

Safety Engineering

18. Distribution Statement

Unclassified-Unlimited

19. Security Clossif. (of this report)

Unclassified

20. Security Clossif. (of this page)

Unclassified

21. No. of Pages

90

22. Price

JPL 0184 R 9183