• _. )

JPL Publication 87-4

!

(JrL) ,j- ::

' -_(:1 ] 3 _

0._ 7] 1 01

January 15, 1990

Environmental Projects: Volume 10

Environmental Assessment:

New 34-Meter Antenna at Apollo Site

,,JetPropulsion Laboratory

California Institute of Technology

_-- ".

r

"_aoo lm

SpaceAdministration
JPL Publication 87-4 January 15, 1990

Environmental Projects: Volume 10

Environmental Assessment:

New 34-Meter Antenna at Apollo Site

Goldstone Deep Space Communications Complex

JPL

Jet Propulsion Laboratory

California institute of Techno)ogy

I I/'LSA

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration
ABSTRACT

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

Mojave Desert about 40 miles north of Barstow, California, and about 160 miles

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

Administration's (NASA's) 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 (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 of the first four

sites is a Deep Space Station (DSS) that consists of at least one parabolic dish

antenna and support facilities. Although there are four DSN operational sites at

the GDSCC, there now are six operational parabolic dish antennas because two

antennas are located at the Mars Site and two are at the Apollo Site.

At present the Venus Station has an unused 9-meter antenna and a 26-meter

(85 ft) antenna known as DSS-13. Construction of a new 34-meter (111.5 ft)

antenna at the Venus Site is under way to replace the present DSS-13 26-meter

antenna.

This report deals with the proposed construction at the Apollo Site of a

new, high-efficiency, 34-meter, multifrequency beam waveguide-type antenna to

replace the aging, 29-year old, DSS-12 34-meter antenna located at the Echo Site.

This new 34-meter antenna, to be constructed at the Apollo Site and to be known as

DSS-18, will be of a design similar to the new DSS-13 34-meter antenna now being

constructed at the Venus Site. When the new 34-meter antenna is completed and

operational at the Apollo Site (planned for 1993), the old DSS-12 34-meter antenna

at the Echo Site will be decommissioned, dismantled, and removed.

The proposed DSS-18 antenna will be the third parabolic dish antenna at the

Apollo Site. The other two antennas are DSS-16, a 26-meter (85 ft) antenna, and

DSS-17, a 9-meter (24.5 ft) antenna.

The proposed construction of a new antenna at the Apollo Site requires an

Environmental Assessment (EA) document that records the existing environmental

conditions at the Apollo Site, that analyzes the environmental effects that

possibly could be expected from the construction, installation and operation of

the new proposed antenna, and that recommends measures to be 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 in May 1989. 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 Apollo Site.

iii
GLOSSARY

BLM

CDFG

CEQ

CFR

CNDDB

CNPS

dB

DSCC

DSN

DSS

EA

EIS

FAA

FEMA

FONSI

FWS

GDSCC

GHz

HEF

JPL

MBGA

MSL

MSRS

MTF

NAS

NASA

U.S. Bureau of Land Management

California Department of Fish and Game

(Federal) Council on Environmental Quality

Codeof Federal Regulations

California Natural Diversity Data Base

California Native Plant Society

Decibel

DeepSpace CommunicationsComplex

DeepSpace Network

Deep SpaceStation

Environmental Assessment

Environmental Impact Statement

Federal Aviation Administration

Federal EmergencyManagementAgency

Finding of No Significant Impact

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

Goldstone Deep SpaceCommunicationsComplex

Gigahertz (one billion cycles/second)

High efficiency (antenna)

Jet Propulsion Laboratory

M.B. Gilbert Associates

MeanSea Level

Mars Sampleand Return/Survey Mission

Microwave Test Facility

National AudubonSociety

National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration

iv
NEPA

NOAA

NTC

RCN

RFI

SEDAB

STD

STS

TDS

USC

USCS

USFWS

National Environmental Policy Act

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

National Training Center (U.S. Army)

Rural Conservation

Radar Frequency Interference

Southeast Desert Air Basin

Standard Network of the DSN

Space Transportation System (Space Shuttle)

Total dissolved solids

United States Code

Unified Soil Classification System

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (see FWS)
I°

II.

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

A.

B.

C°

D.

E.

I-i

PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 34-METER ANTENNA

AT THE APOLLO SITE ...................... I-i

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED 34-METER ANTENNA

AT THE APOLLO SITE ...................... 1-3

REQUIREMENT OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT .......... 1-3

SUMMARY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ........... 1-5

CONCLUSIONS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ......... 1-5

THE GOLDSTONE DEEP SPACE COMMUNICATIONS COMPLEX (GDSCC)

A.

B.

C.

D.

E°

...... 2-1

LOCATION OF THE GDSCC .................... 2-1

FUNCTIONS OF THE GDSCC .................... 2-1

FACILITIES AT THE GDSCC ................... 2-3

ANTENNA STATIONS AT THE GDSCC ................ 2-6

i. Echo Site (DSS-12) ................... 2-6

2. Venus Site (DSS-13) ................... 2-6

3. Mars Site (DSS-14 and DSS-15) .............. 2-6

4. Apollo Site (DSS-16 and DSS-17) ............. 2-7

5. Mojave Base Site (NOAA Antenna) ............. 2-7

SUPPORT FACILITIES AT THE GDSCC ............... 2-8

I. 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 ........ 2-8

NON-STRUCTURAL SUPPORT FACILITIES AT THE GDSCC ........ 2-8

I. Transportation Network ................. 2-8

2. Utilities and Services ................. 2-8

F.

vi
CONTENTS(Contd)

C.

H.

I.

J.

SOLID-WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES AT THE GDSCC ........ 2-I0

WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES AT THE GDSCC ........ 2-10

OPERATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE GDSCC AND FORT IRWIN 2-10

NATURAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS OF THE GDSCC .......... 2-11

,

2.

3.

Geology ......................... 2-11

Hydrology ........................ 2-11

Climatic Conditions ................... 2-11

III. PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW DSS-18

34-METER ANTENNA AT THE APOLLO SITE OF THE GDSCC ......... 3-1

A. PURPOSE OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW DSS-18

34-METER ANTENNA ....................... 3-1

B. NEED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW DSS°I8

34-METERANTENNA ....................... 3-1

IV. CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED NEW ANTENNA AT THE

APOLLO SITE AND CONSIDERATIONS 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 APOLLO SITE AT THE GDSCC ........... 4-8

i. Alternative One: Non-Construction

of the 34-Meter Antenna ................. 4-8

.

.

,

Alternative Two: Relocation of the

34-Meter Antenna Within the Apollo Site ......... 4-8

Alternative Three: Relocation of the

34-Meter Antenna Within the GDSCC but

at a Site Other than the Apollo Site .......... 4-9

Alternative Four: Relocation of the

34°Meter Antenna at a Site Other than the GDSCC ..... 4-9

. Preferred Alternative: Construction of

the 34-Meter Antenna at the Apollo Site ......... 4-10

vii
V.

CONTENTS (Contd)

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS AT THE GDSCC THAT MUST BE

ASSESSED IN THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION

OF A NEW 34-METER ANTENNA AT THE APOLLO SITE ........... 5-i

A. GEOLOGICAL SETTING ...................... 5-i

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 ................. 5-6

G. WATER RESOURCES AND FLOODPLAINS ............... 5-6

i. Water Resources ..................... 5-6

2. Floodplains ....................... 5-7

H. BIOTIC RESOURCES, ENDANGERED SPECIES, AND WETLANDS ...... 5-7

I. Biotic Resources .................... 5-7

2. Vegetation ....................... 5-8

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 ........................ 5-12

viii
VI.

VII.

CONTENTS(Contd)

I .

J .

AIR RESOURCES ........................ 5-12

I. Meteorology ....................... 5-12

2. Air Quality ....................... 5-1B

HUMAN ENVIRONMENT ...................... 5-13

I. 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 ................ 5-15

6. Solid and Hazardous Wastes,

Toxic Substances, and Pesticides ............ 5-16

a. Solid Wastes .................... 5-16

b. Toxic Substances and Hazardous Wastes ....... 5-17

c. Pesticides ..................... 5-20

d. Summary of Hazardous Materials Use,

Generation of Solid and Hazardous Wastes,

and the Use of Pesticides at the Proposed

New DSS-18 34-Meter Antenna at the Apollo Site 5-20

7. Health and Safety .................... 5-20

8. Aesthetics ....................... 5-21

CONCLUSIONS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CONCERNING

THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A NEW 34-METER ANTENNA

PROPOSED FOR THE APOLLO SITE AT THE GDSCC ............. 6-1

CERTIFICATION ........................... 7-1

ix
CONTENTS (Contd)

APPENDIXES

A.

B.

C.

D.

Figures

i.

.

°

.

5.

6.

7.

8.

ii.

INDIVIDUALS AND AGENCIES CONSULTED AND CONTACTED

IN PREPARATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ........

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: BIBLIOGRAPHY ...........

ARCHEOLOGICAL APPROVAL FOR INSTALLATION OF UNDERGROUND

POWER LINE RUNNING FROM THE ECHO SITE TO THE

APOLLO SITE .........................

JET PROPULSION LABORATORY SAFETY PRACTICE

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

A-I

B-I

C-I

D-I

Schematic Map of the Goldstone DSCC Showing Locations

of the Five NASA Deep Space Stations (DSSs) and the Mojave

Base Station Operated by NOAA ................

1-4

Geographic Relationship of the Goldstone Deep Space

Communications Complex to JPL in Pasadena .......... 2-2

The Three-Continent NASA Deep Space Network as It

Exists in 1990 ........................ 2-4

Major Roads Leading to and at the Goldstone DSCC ....... 2-9

Apollo Site: Existing Site Plan ............... 4-2

Apollo Site: Existing 26-Meter Antenna ........... 4-3

Apollo Site: Existing 9-Meter Antenna ............ 4-4

Artistfs Drawing of the New 34-Meter Antenna Under Construction

at the Venus Site. This Antenna Is Similar to the Antenna

Proposed for the Apollo Site ................. 4-6

Apollo Site: Site Plan for Proposed New 34-Meter Antenna 4-7

Apollo Site" Substandard Storage Area for Hazardous Materials

and Wastes Will Be Replaced by New, Environmentally Acceptable

Storage Facility in 1990 ...................

5-18

Echo Site: Completed Storage Facility for Hazardous Materials

and Wastes. The New Hazardous Materials and Wastes Storage

Facility to Be Constructed at the Apollo Site Will Be Similar

to This Echo Site Facility .................. 5-19
Tables

12. Apollo Site:

13. Apollo Site:

i.

2.

3.

4.

°

CONTENTS (Contd)

View Towards Goldstone Dry Lake ......... 5-22

View From the West ............... 5-23

Major Facilities at the GDSCC ................ 2-5

Existing Structures at the Apollo Site at the GDSCC ..... 4-5

Generalized Stratigraphic Sequence in the Goldstone

Area (after Kieffer, 1961) .................. 5-3

Sensitive Plant Species that Potentially Could Occur

at the GDSCC ......................... 5-10

Sensitive Wildlife Species Known From the Vicinity

of the GDSCC ......................... 5-11

xi
SECTION I

INTRODUCTION

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

Mojave Desert about 40 miles north of Barstow, California, and about 160 miles

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

Administration's (NASA's) 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 (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 of the first four

sites is a Deep Space Station (DSS) of the DSN that consists of at least one

parabolic dish antenna and support facilities. Although there are four

operational DSN sites at the GDSCC, there now are six operational parabolic dish

antennas because two antennas are located at the Mars Site and two are at the

Apollo Site. The Mojave Base Site, while it is part of the GDSCC, is not part of

the DSN.

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

At present, the Apollo Site has two parabolic dish antennas: a 26-meter

(85 ft) antenna known as DSS-16, and a 9-meter (29.5 ft) antenna designated as

DSS-17. The 26-meter antenna originally was constructed in 1965 by NASA_s Goddard

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

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

Transportation System (STS, Space Shuttle) and satellites in both low- and highEarth orbits.

JPL/NASA now proposes to add a third parabolic dish antenna to the Apollo

Site: a new, high-efficiency, 34-meter (111.5 ft) multifrequency beam waveguidetype antenna. This new antenna at the Apollo Site will replace the aging, 29-year

old DSS-12 34-meter antenna now operating at the Echo Site. This old DSS-12

antenna was constructed in 1961.

The new 34-meter antenna, to be constructed at the Apollo Site and to be

known as DSS-18, will be of a design similar to the new DSS-13 34-meter antenna

now being constructed at the Venus Site (see Environmental Projects: Volume 6,

Environmental Assessment: New 34-Meter Antenna at Venus Site, JPL Publication 87-

4, June 15, 1988). When the new 34-meter antenna is completed and operational at

the Apollo Site (planned for 1993), the old DSS-12 34-meter antenna at the Echo

Site will be decommissioned, dismantled, and removed.

The reasons for the construction of the new 34-meter antenna are as follows:

(i) Mechanical and Structural Problems: The 29-year old DSS-12 antenna at

the Echo Site is part of what is called the Standard Network (STD) of

the DSN. The rest of the STD consists of two more antennas: DSS-42 in

Australia and DSS-61 in Spain.

i-I
The presently 29-year old DSS-12antenna at the Echo Site will be 32

years old by the time it is replaced and dismantled in 1993.

Each of the STDantennas has severe mechanical and structural problems,

due to aging and metal fatigue, that can lead to catastrophic failures.

These failures, in turn, can result in the antennas being downand

inoperative for extended periods. Engineering modifications needed to

correct the most severe metal fatigue and mechanical problems of the

DSS°I2 antenna could cost more than $5 million. But, even if these

costly modifications were made, the refurbished antennas still would be

operationally inadequate to support future missions now projected by

NASA. Thus, these economic and performance considerations point to the

needed construction of a new 34-meter antenna at the Apollo Site at the

GDSCC.

(2) Performance: The old DSS-12 antenna at the Echo Site now operates with

radio frequencies knows as S-band frequencies [transmission at 2.1

gigahertz (GHz) and reception at 2.3 GHz] and X-band frequencies

(reception only at 8.4 GHz). The new 34-meter antenna to be constructed

at the Apollo Site also will operate with the same S-band and X-band

radio frequencies. The new 34-meter antenna, however, will have the

capability for the future addition of transmission with X-band

frequencies (7.1 GHz) as well as the reception of Ku-band frequencies

(14.0 GHz) and Ka-band frequencies (reception at 32.0 GHz and

transmission at 35.0 GHz). Thus, the new beam-waveguide STD antennas,

with this multifrequency capability, would allow the 34-meter antennas

to support more sophisticated, future NASA missions including the

proposed Mars Rover mission, the Cassini Saturn Mission, or the Mars

Sample and Return/Survey Mission (MSRS). Such future mission support

cannot be provided by the old STD antennas. Thus, a new 34-meter

antenna, designed with the latest technological capabilities, would ease

the DSN support problem for NASA because it could be used for space

missions that now require the use of a 70°meter antenna. This would

reduce the constraint for those future space missions that would require

the availability of a 70-meter antenna.

In addition, the beam waveguides in the new antennas will permit better

performance even during inclement weather (rain, snow, sleet, etc.).

(3) Increase of Availability to the DSN: Because the same antenna beam in

the new 34-meter STD antennas can handle multifrequency bands, several

missions can be supported by rapidly switching the antenna's support

from one particular mission to another. In addition, the loss of

tracking of any given mission, during the time it now takes to

reconfigure radio frequency reception, will be greatly reduced. Thus,

the new 34-meter STD antennas will greatly increase the amount of time

the DSN is available for NASA-mission support.

(4) Effects of a Delay in Construction of the New 34-Meter Antenna: The old

DSS-12 antenna at the Echo Site is near the end of its useful life.

Failures of structure, bearings and gearing are becoming more frequent.

The costs of operating the DSN will be reduced by the elimination of the

extensive maintenance program now required to keep the STD antennas in

operating condition. In addition, the new antenna design also will

reduce the time and cost to maintain and repair the complex antenna

1-2
electronics. With the new, beam-waveguideantenna design, the antenna

electronics no longer are placed onto a small crowded area on the moving

part of the antenna, but are located in a non-moving, large laboratorylike area. Thus, both maintenance and modification of the antenna

electronics can be performed even during tracking operations.

B. DESCRIPTIONOF THEPROPOSED34-METERANTENNAAT THEAPOLLOSITE

The proposed DSS-18antenna, to be located at the existing Apollo Site, will

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

located approximately 700 feet south-southwest of the existing DSS-1626-meter

antenna. The proposed project includes construction and installation of the

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

drive and controls, and optical elements. The proposed antenna at the Apollo Site

is similar in size and structure to both the DSS-1534-meter Uranus antenna

located at the Mars Site in the northern portion of the GDSCC,and to the DSS-13

34-meter antenna currently under construction at the VenusSite in the southern

portion of the GDSCC(Figure I).

C. REQUIREMENTOFAN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

The proposed construction of the new DSS-18antenna at the Apollo Site

requires an Environmental Assessment (EA) Documentthat records the existing

environmental conditions at the Apollo Site, that analyzes the environmental

effects that possibly could be expected from the construction, installation and

operation of the new proposed antenna, and that recommendsmeasures that could be

taken to mitigate any possibly deleterious environmental effects.

The need for an Environmental AssessmentDocumenthad its origin in 1978,

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

40 Codeof Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 1500 1508 to implement the procedural

requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Following this

action, the National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration (NASA)procedures to

implement NEPAwere published in 14 CFRSubparts 1261.1 and 1261.3. The NASA

procedures nowhave been incorporated in the NASADirectives System as NMI 8800.7.

Thus, NASAinstallations planning qualifying projects must prepare an

Environmental AssessmentDocument(14 CFR1216.304). As defined in 40 CFRSubpart

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 EAreport must be completed and a decision madeas to whether or not an

Environmental Impact Statement is required before a decision can be madeto begin

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

environmental impacts, therefore, must commenceat the onset of project

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

proposed project, the EAmust provide an evaluation of alternatives to the

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

requirement to select the alternative having the least environmental impact, the

rationale for selecting the favored alternative must be provided.

1-3
MARS

(DSS-14)

(70-METER)

URANUS

(DSS-15)

(34-METER)

AIRPORT

GOLDSTONE

DRY LAKE

MOJAVE

BASE

STATION

(12-METER)

APOLLO

(DSS-16,

26-METER)

(DSS-17,

9-METER) VENUS

AND (

PROPOSED NEW 2S-METER),

34-METER 9-METER,

ANTENNA AND NEW 34-METER

UNDER CONSTRUCTION)

MICROWAVE

TEST FACILITY

ECHO

(DSS-12)

(34-METER)

GATE

TO FORT IRWIN

TO BARSTOW

Figure i. Schematic Map of the Goldstone DSCC Showing Locations of the

Five NASA Deep Space Stations (DSSs) and the Mojave Base

Station Operated by NOAA

1-4
M. B. Gilbert Associates (MBGA), Long Beach, California, was retained by JPL

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 in May 1989. The MBGA document serves as the

Environmental Assessment for the DSS-18 34-meter antenna proposed to be

constructed at the Apollo Site at the GDSCC.

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 DSS-18 34-meter antenna at

the Apollo Site.

D. SUMMARY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

The environmental consequences of the proposed construction of the new DSS-18

34-meter antenna at the Apollo 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

aesthetics), because the proposed antenna is replacing an existing antenna

operation.

E. CONCLUSIONS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

The Environmental Assessment (EA), concerning the construction and operation

of the new DSS-18 34-meter antenna proposed to be located at the Apollo 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. A

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

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

1-5
SECTIONII

THEGOLDSTONEDEEPSPACECOMMUNICATIONS 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 160

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 2). A Use Permit for the use of the land

was granted to NASA by the UoS. 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 UoS. 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). Thus, for

more than three decades, the primary purpose of the DSN has been and continues

today 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:

(i) Tracking: Locating a spacecraft, measuring its distance from Earth,

its velocity and position, and following its course.

(2) Data Acquisition: Gathering information coming in from a spacecraft.

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

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

spacecraft when to perform required operations, including the

switching on and off of instruments for performance of the mission's

scientific experiments.

2-1
KINGS

NAT'L PARK \

DEATH VALLEY

NAT'L MONUMENT

SEQUOIA NAT'L PARK

INYO CO.

TULARE CO.

CHINA LAKE NAVAL

WEAPONS CENTER

KERN CO.

EDWARDS

AIR FORCE BASE

LOS ANGELES CO.

Figure 2.

FORT IRWIN

GOLDSTONE

DSCC

SAN BERNARDINO CO.

Barstow

Vlctorville

SanBemardino

TWENTYNINE PALMS

MARINE CORPS BASE

JOSHUA TREE

NAT'L MONUMENT

RIVERSIDE CO.

Geographic Relationship of the Goldstone Deep

Space Communications Complex to JPL in Pasadena

2-2
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 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 I00 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 that are located on three continents: at Goldstone in Southern

CaliforniaSs Mojave Desert; in Spain, about 60 kilometers (37 miles) west of

Madrid at Robledo de Chavela; and near the Tidbinbilla Nature Reserve, in

Australia, about 40 kilometers (25 miles) southwest of 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 3).

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

at five sites called Deep Space Stations (DSSs): Four sites are operational,

while one is devoted to research and development (R&D) activities. 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. In addition, a seventh

parabolic dish antenna at the Venus Site now is unused, while an eighth parabolic

dish antenna at Goldstone is operated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA).

A Network Operations Control Center (NOCC), located at JPL in Pasadena,

controls and monitors the DSN. A Ground Communications Facility (GCF) of the DSN

operates to link together the NOCC at JPL with the three DSCCs at Goldstone,

Spain, and Australia.

Total NASA/JPL facilities at the GDSCC (see Figure i) include the six DSN

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

support buildings, and a remote support facility in Barstow located about 40 miles

south of the GDSCC. The GDSCC support staff consists of about 260 personnel

on site and at the Barstow facility. Table I 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 Station, Mars Station, Uranus Station, and Apollo Station

[two antennas]). 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 ft) antenna, located at the Pioneer Site, was deactivated in

1981. In 1985, the Pioneer antenna (DSS-II) 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.

2-3
0

0

0 0

,0

o .......... ii!iiiiiiiiiiiii!iiiiiiiii

:i:!:i:!:i_i:i:!:!:!_!_i:i:!:

_ o o o°_ o o_ °_ _

I 1 I I I

0

¢0

I

0

0'_

0'_

(n

_-_

u]

,,-.i

F-t

0

q)

Z

o

o

_3

13.

o

<

<

Z

0

.,-.i

o

0

i

o

o

,n

c_

t_

.,-4

2-4
Table i. Major Facilities at the GDSCC

Site

Buildings Antennas

Station Date of

Number Number (ft 2) Construction

Size

(Meters)

Echo Site

Venus Site

Mars Site

Apollo Site

Mojave Site

Airport g

Microwave

Test Facility

Miscellaneous

Barstow

h

Facility

DSS-12 24 86,662 1961 a

DSS-13 12 12,502 1962 c

(present antenna)

DSS-13 (now under construction)

DSS-14 Ii 36,834

DSS-15

DSS-16 23

DSS-17

DSS-18 (proposed)

1966

1984

MTF

43,985 1965 e

5 11,850 1964

2 710 1963/1970

1 2,880 1963

3 1,430

I 28,343

34 b

26

9

34

70 d

34

26

9

34

12 f

aoriginal antenna, built in 1959, was moved to Venus Site in 1962.

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

bThis antenna is to be dismantled and removed after the DSS-18 antenna at the

Apollo Site becomes operational in 1993.

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

in 1962.

doriginally constructed as a 64-meter antenna in 1966. Enlarged to a 70-

meter antenna in 1988.

eAntenna originally was constructed for the NASA Goddard Space Tracking and

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

fThis antenna is operated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA).

gThe airport is located at the Goldstone Dry Lake.

hThis site, a leased facility, is located in Barstow, California about

40 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,

Revised Edition, October 1989.

2-5
D. ANTENNASTATIONSAT THEGDSCC

i. 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 (111.5 ft) antenna and 24 support buildings having a combined

area of 86,622 ft 2. Support buildings include administration and engineering

offices, cafeteria, dormitory, transportation and maintenance facilities, storage

areas, and warehouses. Echo Station originally was built in 1959 as a 26-meter

(85 ft) 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 movedto 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). The

present antenna is approximately 35 meters (113 ft) high and weighs about 270,000

kilograms (300 tons). It is to be replaced by the new DSS-1834-meter antenna

proposed to be constructed at the Apollo Site.

2. VenusSite (DSS-13)

The Venus Site consists of two antennas: a 26-meter (85 ft) antenna,

and a 9-meter (29.5 ft) antenna. The smaller antenna is no longer used. There

are ii buildings having a combined area of 12,502 ft 2. 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 movedto 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 SpaceNetwork.

A new 34-meter (111.5 ft) antenna is now under construction to replace the

26-meter antenna. The new DSS-13antenna is planned to begin research and

development activities in 1991. An Environmental Assessment concerning this new

antenna is the subject of JPL Publication 87-4, Volume 6, Environmental Assessment:

New 34-Meter Antenna at Venus Site (June 15, 1988).

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

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

combined area of 36,834 ft 2. The support buildings provide facilities for

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

security. In May 1989, M.B. Gilbert Associates (MBGA), Long Beach, California,

submitted to JPL an Environmental Assessment concerning the construction work

needed for a proposed addition to the Operations Building (Bldg. G°86) at the Mars

Site. This environmental assessment will be the subject of a future JPL report in

this continuing series of reports dealing with Environmental Projects at the

GDSCC.

2-6
The Mars Station Antenna (DSS-14), at 70 meters (230 ft) in diameter, is

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

antenna, which was constructed as a 64-meter antenna in 1966 and enlarged to

70 meters in 1988, is 7.25 times more powerful and sensitive than a 26-meter

antenna, extending the range of deep space communications by 2.7 times. It can

maintain communications with spacecraft to the edge of the solar system. Standing

more than 235 ft high, this antenna is one of the more striking features to be

seen in the GDSCCgeographic area. The 70-meter antenna was used in August 1989

for the Voyager 2 spacecraft's encounter with the planet Neptune, which is located

at a distance from Earth of 4.5 billion kilometers (2.8 billion miles).

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

precision-shaped antenna, located approximately 1,600 ft southeast of the Mars

Station Antenna. Built in 1984, this latest antenna-addition at the GDSCCfirst

was used in January 1986 to support the encounter of the Voyager 2 spacecraft with

the planet Uranus, which is located at a distance of more than 3 billion

kilometers (1.8 billion miles) from Earth. The new, proposed 34-meter, precisionshaped antennas, now under construction at the Venus Site (see above) and proposed

for the Apollo Site (see below), are similar in size and structure to this Uranus

antenna.

4. Apollo Site (DSS-16and DSS-17)

The Apollo Site has a 26-meter (85-ft) antenna (DSS-16), a

9-meter (29.5 ft) antenna (DSS-17), and 18 buildings with a combined total

site-area of 43,985 ft 2. The buildings provide space for operations, equipment,

storage, and warehousing. The 26-meter antenna originally was constructed in 1965

by NASA'sGoddard SpaceTracking and Data Network to support the mannedApollo

missions to the moon. Operation of this antenna under JPL managementbegan in

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

the missions of the SpaceShuttle (STS) and satellites in both low° and high-Earth

orbits. In May 1989, M.B. Gilbert Associates, Long Beach, California, submitted

to JPL an Environmental Assessmentconcerning the construction work needed for a

proposed new 34°meter (111.5 ft) antenna (DSS-18) at the Apollo Site. This

environmental assessment, concerning the new DSS-1834-meter precision-shaped

antenna at the Apollo Site, is the subject of this expandedJPL report in a

continuing series of reports concerning Environmental Projects at the GDSCC.

5. Mojave Base Site (NOAAAntenna)

The Mojave Base Site has one antenna and five buildings with a

combined area of 11,850 ft 2. 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 Site Antenna is a 12-meter (40 ft) antenna operated by the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The antenna is involved

in several programs including monitoring of shifts in the Earthes tectonic plates,

monitoring weather changes, and retrieving information from very low-orbiting

Earth satellites.

2-7
E. SUPPORTFACILITIESAT THEGDSCC

I. Goldstone Dry Lake Airport

The airport consists of an approximately 6,000 ft by I00 ft paved

runway. There are two buildings at the airport site, neither of which is

presently in use. An open hangar is used to provide shelter for a single

aircraft. For its personnel, NASAoperates three scheduled shuttle flights per

week to the GDSCCthat originate from the Burbank-Glendale-PasadenaAirport. In

addition, the Goldstone airport is used infrequently by administrative Army

flights. Both NASAand the U.S. Army use propeller-driven aircraft.

2. Microwave Test Facility and Fire-Training Area

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

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

The MTFis used for research and development testing of antenna microwave

equipment. Fire training includes procedures for the quenching of fires.

3. Miscellaneous Buildings in the GDSCCArea

Three buildings and structures at the GDSCCthat fall into this

category include the main gatehouse, pumphouse, and radio spectrum monitor.

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

4. 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-ft z structure located at 850 Main Street.

F. NON-STRUCTURAL SUPPORT FACILITIES AT THE GDSCC

i. 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

2-8
CHINA LAKE NAVAL WEAPONS

CENTER

I

!

I

I

L

GOLDSTONE

DSCC

@

i

|

I

|

FORT IRWIN

L

• HINK LEY

CALICO

• LENWOO0

• YERMO

BARSTOW

1-40

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

2-9
for prescheduled periods of time. Gasoline, diesel oil, and hydraulic oil are

stored in double-walled underground storage tanks fitted with sensors between the

walls to detect leaks. Water is supplied by Fort Irwin from groundwater basin

wells. Sanitary sewage is discharged through septic tank systems to leaching

fields. The Echo and Mars Sites discharge wastewater to evaporation ponds (see

Environmental Projects: Volume 8, Modifications of Wastewater Evaporation Ponds,

JPL Publication 87-4, October 15, 1989).

G. SOLID-WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES AT THE GDSCC

At the Echo Site, the GDSCC operates its own 10-acre, Class III solidwaste landfill. This facility 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 now has two, new,

properly managed storage facilities for hazardous materials and wastes, one at

Echo Site and the other at Venus Site, but operates no facilities requiring a

hazardous waste permit. Details concerning the construction of these two new

storage facilities for hazardous materials and wastes at the Echo and Venus Sites

are described in Environmental Projects: Volume 9, Construction of Hazardous

Materials Storage Facilities, JPL Publication 87-4, November 15, 1989. Two more

storage facilities for hazardous materials and wastes, one at Mars Site and the

other at Apollo Site, are to be completed early in 1990. 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.

H. WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES AT THE GDSCC

Four functioning sewage evaporation ponds one pair at the Echo Site and

another pair at the Mars Site - are designed to receive effluent from upstream

septic tank systems. Extensive work was completed in the spring of 1989 to repair

and reshape the previously eroded embankments of the wastewater evaporation ponds.

Details of this construction work are recorded in Environmental Projects: Volume

8, Modifications of Wastewater Evaporation Ponds, JPL Publication 87-4, October

15, 1989.

I . 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. Army 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.

2-10
J. NATURAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS OF THE GDSCC

i. Geology

The GDSCC is located in the North Central section of the Mojave

Desert Province. Typically, the Mojave Desert Province consists of broad, flat

plains separated by low mountains (I,000 to 2,000 ft of topographic relief). The

GDSCC is situated within one of these low mountain areas.

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 l14°F during the summer months, and drop

o

as low as ii 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-ii
SECTIONIII

PURPOSEOFANDNEEDFORCONSTRUCTIONFA NEWDSS-1834-METERANTENNA

AT THEAPOLLOSITE OFTHEGDSCC

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

Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration (NASA), proposes to construct a new,

precision-shaped, 34-meter, beamwaveguide antenna at the Apollo Site, Goldstone

DeepSpace CommunicationsComplex (GDSCC),Goldstone, California. See Figures i

and 2 for vicinity and regional maps. The new antenna is to be known as DSS-18.

A. PURPOSEOFTHECONSTRUCTIONFTHENEWDSS-1834-METERANTENNA

The GDSCCis the largest of three DSNcomplexes located on three continents.

As part of the NASADeepSpace 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 mannedand unmannedspacecraft missions

and to provide meansfor radio and radar astronomy to explore the solar system and

universe. During the last 27 years of operation of the GDSCC,the DSNhas

supported numerous spacecraft missions including Explorer, Ranger, Mariner,

Surveyor, Pioneer, Viking, Helios and Voyager.

The purpose of the construction of the new DSS-18antenna is not only to

replace the aging, metal-fatigued DSS-12antenna, but also to further develop deep

space communications knowledgeby constructing an antenna that will 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 proposed new DSS-18antenna will improve

the efficiency, performance and availability of existing DSNequipment and allow

for the execution of space-exploration projects not currently possible using

existing technology. See Section IA of this report for further details.

B. NEEDFORTHECONSTRUCTIONFTHENEWDSS-1834-METERANTENNA

There now are six DSNantenna stations at the GDSCC.An additional

(12-meter, 40 ft) antenna is operated by NOAA. The DSNantennas were built

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

antennas not only have structural and mechanical problems due to aging, but also

operate with technology that is relatively outdated. To adequately meet the

technological challenges of the 21st century in space exploration, upgrades of the

DSNare required. The new proposed DSS-18antenna, to be constructed at the

Apollo Site, is to replace the existing 34-meter antenna at the Echo Site. The

latter is an aging antenna suffering from metal fatigue, mechanical, and

structural problems. It was constructed in 1961, 29 years ago. Several

technological advanceshave occurred recently that makepossible the proposed new

Apollo antenna with resultant improvements in deep space communications

capabilities.

3-1
SECTIONIV

CONSTRUCTIONFTHEPROPOSEDNEWANTENNAAT THEAPOLLOSITE AND

CONSIDERATIONS OFALTERNATIVEACTIONS

A. DESCRIPTIONOFTHEPROPOSEDCONSTRUCTION

The proposed Apollo Site antenna is located in the central section of the

GDSCCwithin the Fort Irwin National Training Center in SanBernardino County,

California (Figure I). The GDSCCis approximately 40 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 GoddardRoadand Covington Road.

The proposed DSS-1834-meter antenna will be located at the Apollo Site and

will replace an existing 34-meter antenna that was built at the Echo Site in 1961.

The existing Apollo Site facilities comprise 16 buildings, along with the

DSS-1626-meter antenna and the DSS-179-meter antenna. The on-site existing

structures provide for operations control, administration, fire fighting, storage,

power generation, and equipment maintenance and repair. The existing DSS-16

26-meter antenna was originally constructed in 1965 to support the mannedApollo

missions to the moon. Currently, its primary function is to support the missions

of the SpaceShuttle (STS) and satellites in both low- and high-Earth orbits. See

Figure 5 for the existing Apollo Site plan and Figures 6 and 7 for respective

photographs of the presently existing DSS-1626-meter and DSS-179°meter antennas

and surrounding support structures.

The Apollo Site is located on ground that slopes to the west at an

approximate 2 percent decline. The existing Apollo DSS-16and DSS-17antennas are

located in the central portion of the Apollo Site and are supported by offices,

workshops and other facilities. The existing DSS°I6 26-meter antenna is on a

concrete foundation adjacent to the operations and administration buildings, the

DSS-179-meter antenna, and associated electrical and storage facilities. The

existing building uses at the Apollo Site and their associated areas (in square

feet) are provided in Table 2. There are presently 42 employees supporting the

existing Apollo Site antennas and facilities.

Electrical power for existing site operations is provided by the Southern

California Edison Company. The GDSCCon-site generators will provide back-up

power. Archeological approval has been obtained for running a new underground

power line between the Echo Site and the Apollo Site to support DSS-18

(Appendix C).

The proposed Apollo Site DSS-18antenna is a high-performance, 34-meter,

wheel-and-track type, azimuth-elevation beam-waveguideantenna to be located

approximately 700 feet south-southwest of the existing DSS-1626-meter antenna.

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. The proposed Apollo Site DSS-18antenna

will be similar in size and structure to both the DSS-1534°meter Uranus antenna

located in the northern portion of the GDSCC,and the DSS-1334-meter Venus

antenna now being constructed at the Venus Site in the southern portion of the

GDSCC(see Figure I).

4-1
Administration

_, " ' . t. j

Apollo Road

9..j gSt Or.g_" J B_ui'dr'n°lg rSE_t_b__ " _'0rt_i_"

Gas Pumps

: Chiller Unit

--7

Existing 26-meter

i-i t--t Antenna DSS-16

°l_ RCA Antenna

Existing Underground

Water Supply

PAVED AREAS

SCALE: 1"= 125'

North

Figure 5. Apollo Site: Existing Site Plan

4-2
ORIGINAE PAGE

BLACK AND WHITE PHO[OGRAi_.H

Figure 6. Apollo Site: Existing 26-Meter Antenna

4-3
ORIGINATE PAGE

BLACK AND WHITE PHOTOGRAPH

4J

AJ

4J

C,O

4J

r./)

°_

4-1

O

,--t

,-4

CI

<_

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

Building

Number Description of Structure Square Feet

A-I

A-2

A-3

A-4

A-5

A-6

A-7

A-8

A-12

A-14

A-85

A-87

M-I

M-2

M-3

M-4

M-6

M-7

M-9

M-IO

M-17

Operations 17,409

Cafeteria and Administration 6,134

Hydromechanical Building 576

Collimation Tower for 26-meter antenna 242

Hydro-repair Building 473

Microwave 660

Equipment House for 9-meter antenna ---

Collimation Tower for 9-meter antenna 128

Fire Pump House 754

Logistics storage 400

26-meter Antenna (85 feet) ---

9-meter Antenna (29.5 feet) 360

Minitrack 3,226

Warehouse 1,536

Utility Building 440

Camera Shelter 247

Telemetry 4,729

Transmitter 166

Generator 5,911

Flammable Storage 200

Fire Pump House 754

Source: Directory of Goldstone Buildings and Facilities. (Gold Book,

Document Number 890-165, JPL internal document, Revised Edition

October 1989).

The new high-performance DSS-18 34-meter antenna will have a beam waveguide

configuration that will allow for multiple frequency use and future frequency

additions. This antenna will have the capability for multiple frequency reception

and transmission within one antenna beam, and for more precise tracking,

navigation and control. Technical descriptions of the proposed Apollo Site DSS-18

antenna are similar to those of the Venus DSS-13 34-meter antenna now under

construction at the Venus site and are described in Advanced Engineering Study

Report for Design and Construction of a Beam Waveguide 34-meter X-Band AZ-EL

Antenna (TIW Systems, Inc., 1986) (see Figure 8).

The proposed Apollo Site 34-meter DSS-18 antenna (Figure 9) will require the

transfer of employees from the Echo Site to the Apollo Site. No net increase in

employees is foreseen at this time. Approximately 400 ft of roadway will be

constructed to provide access to the proposed antenna, along with 400 ft of

underground water supply pipeline and 500 ft of power cables in a 4-inch rigid

conduit. Approximately 400 ft of aboveground cable tray and 125 ft of cable

trench will be installed to provide for communications between the antenna and

front-end computer facilities. No ancillary support buildings are anticipated to

be constructed in conjunction with this proposed project.

4-5
ORIGINAL PAGE IS

OF POOR QUALITy

tl)

j.J

O O

o_

4-) r-_

O <3

4J

O

O

r_

O

•_ JJ

i

3

O

.-4

m

_.x::

_d

,,..4

4-6
Administration

• • Existi ng 9-meter Bul

Antenna DSS17_

, HI

, Cable

Operations

Control > 0

Building

"-1----1 _ % Chillerunit

I

Existing 26-meter

"1 I I--1 Antenna DSS16 Buried

Water 00_ /

Pipe "_ o I

//-_-Buried Power Cables

,' _ /,4,"

/ Z //,/'_"/_ Cable Tray (Above Ground)

I_ \ /,/'"

\ _ '_ _A/c;ad--

_ i _ _ SCALE: 1"= 12S'

_r _ "6" High Chain Link Fence

Proposed 34-meter Antenna (DSS18} I ! i

North

Figure 9. Apollo Site: Site Plan for Proposed

New 34-Meter Antenna

4-7
m. ALTERNATIVES TO CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW 34-METER ANTENNA AT THE APOLLO SITE

AT THE GDSCC

A number of alternatives to the proposed Apollo Site DSS-18 34-meter antenna

were considered as part of the environmental assessment. These included the

alternative of nonconstruction of the proposed antenna, along with the

alternatives of construction of the proposed antenna at other locations inside and

outside the GDSCC. The environmental advantages and disadvantages of these

alternatives are described in more detail in the following paragraphs.

I. 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 the five

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

Atmospheric Administration antenna. The existing 34-meter Echo DSS-12 antenna

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

greatly improve upon deep space communications capabilities.

With respect to environmental considerations, the No-Action alternative

would not require physical alteration to the Apollo 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, if any, 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, if any, environmental advantage.

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

opportunity to greatly improve NASA deep-space communications capability worldwide

and provide a means to advance specific scientific knowledge to a level not

possible with the existing technology.

. Alternative Two: Relocation of the 34-Meter Antenna Within the Apollo

Site

One potential alternative to the proposed project would be to locate

the new 34-meter antenna several hundred feet north or northeast of the existing

DSS-16 antenna instead of 700 feet to the south-southwest as proposed. This is

not feasible, however, because the proposed site is the only potentially viable

alternative at the Apollo Site due to the topographic constraints. The

operational constraints at the alternative location would be essentially the same

as for the proposed antenna location.

4-8
With respect to environmental considerations, the moveof the proposed

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

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

of other areas within the Apollo Site would be similar to the proposed location.

Therefore, environmental impact issues associated with the antenna's operation

would be similar, regardless of its location within the Apollo Site.

The primary disadvantage of relocating the proposed antenna to another

location within the Apollo Site is radar frequency interference (RFI). JPL

studies indicate the proposed location, 700 ft south-southwest of the existing

26-meter antenna, would result in the minimumamount of RFI between the proposed

34-meter antenna and other DSNantennas at the GDSCC.

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

GDSCC but at a Site Other than the Apollo Site

Locating the proposed 34-meter antenna at a GDSCC site other than the

Apollo Site is a potential alternative. The most likely candidate would be the

Echo Site, where it would replace the existing DSS-12 34°meter antenna. Other

existing sites were considered but were found to be unsuitable based on

operational constraints, such as the presence of more powerful antennas,

unsuitable topography, and radar interference.

Relocation of the proposed Apollo antenna to an undeveloped area would

require the reconstruction of all existing support facilities presently on site at

Apollo. Congressional approval for a major increase in funding would need to be

obtained, resulting in a delay in project construction and operation of several

years. Relocating the proposed antenna to an undeveloped site within the GDSCC

would pose a significant environmental disadvantage due to the need to construct

new support buildings and roadways.

With respect to environmental considerations, the environmental impacts from

locating the proposed project at the Apollo 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,

however, that would preclude relocation of the antenna.

JPL personnel recently completed a study of possible relocation of

facilities and resources within the GDSCC as part of a program to consolidate

operations and reduce operating costs. Based on considerations of costeffectiveness and operational constraints, the study concluded that the proposed

new 34-meter antenna should be located at either the Apollo or the Echo Site. A

recent radar interference study by JPL concluded that the antenna configuration

causing the least amount of interference would result from the construction of the

proposed antenna at the Apollo Site rather than at the Echo Site.

. 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 Apollo Site. Although this alternative would require

4-9
the relocation of the entire complex, along with the new proposed Apollo antenna,

this concept has been considered by NASA/JPLin the past. Likely locations for a

new complex similar in size and function to the GDSCCinclude sites within Arizona

and NewMexico. Minimumrequirements would include locating a substantial area of

undeveloped land within the critical tracking range that is geographically

compatible with DSNoperations 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, NewMexico) cannot be

characterized sufficiently to provide a detailed environmental review. Moving the

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

construction activity, comparedto the action now proposed to build the new

34-meter antenna at the Apollo Site. This additional construction would pose a

significant environmental disadvantage.

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

Apollo Site

Location of the proposed antenna at Apollo 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.

4-10
SECTIONV

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORSAT THEGDSCCTHATMUSTBEASSESSED

IN THEPROPOSEDCONSTRUCTION ANDOPERATIONOFA

NEW34-METERANTENNAAT THEAPOLLOSITE

A. GEOLOGICALSETTING

The GDSCCis located in the north central section of the Mojave Desert

Province, a wedge-shaped, down-faulted block that is boundedby 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 SanAndreas Fault. The

SanAndreas Fault, which is the principal fault of a northwesterly trending shear

zone is at least 600 miles in length with 350 miles of right-lateral displacement.

The Garlock Fault, at the northern boundary of the Province, trends to the

northeast and east and has left-lateral displacement.

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

with occasional low (i,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 meansea level (MSL). The 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. CLIMATICCONDITIONS

The climate at the GDSCCis 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

short-lived, high-intensity storms that may produce local flash floods. More than

one-half of the average annual precipitation has been knownto fall in a three day

period, during which peak rainfall maybe 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 GDSCCarea trends northwest, from the

southern boundary of the facility to 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 structural 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

5-1
between the two structural systems enclosing the Goldstone area are not known, but

both systems are active, and neither predominates over the other.

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

recently been reclassified from Seismic Zone 3 to Seismic Zone 4 (Uniform Building

Code, 1988, International Conference of Building Officials, Earthquake

Regulations, Chapter 23). A Seismic Zone 4 is defined as a zone close to major

fault zones and is within an area susceptible to damagecorresponding 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.)

Two intersecting faults are located within 0.25 miles of the Apollo Site.

An east-west trending fault has been mappedapproximately 500 feet south of the

operations building at the Apollo Site. A north-south trending fault is truncated

by the east-west fault, and the intersection of the faults is approximately 1,000

feet southwest of the operations building at the Apollo Site. The structure of

the north-south trending ridge located to the west of the Apollo site appears to

have been controlled by faulting along the north-south trending fault

(CDMG,1963).

It appears likely that the Apollo Site could be exposed to seismic shaking

during an earthquake event. The potential exists for structural damageto occur

at the site from an earthquake. The extent of damagewould be a function of soil

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

(Engineering-Science, 1987).

D. LITHOLOGY

Table 3 describes a generalized stratigraphic sequence of the Mojave Desert

Province in the Goldstone area, giving maximumthickness of each of the units and

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

sequenceand that at any given site someof the units may or maynot be present or

mayor maynot be present in the given thickness. The general stratigraphic data

in Table 3 were constructed from information obtained from Kieffer (1961).

E. GEOLOGICALHISTORYOFTHEGDSCCAREA

The following is a brief summaryof the currently accepted interpretation of

the geologic history of the Goldstone area (Kieffer, 1961, and Fife and

Brown, 1980):

(I) The Precambrian crystalline basementwas formed through the

accumulation of extrusive and intrusive igneous units and subsequent

sedimentation on an evolving continental crustal plate. During late

Precambrian and Paleozoic times, these rocks underwent folding,

faulting and metamorphic recrystallization, and were later intruded by

granitic (pegmatite) dikes (thin injections of molten rock).

5-2
Table 3. Generalized Stratigraphic Sequencein the Goldstone Area

(after Kieffer, 1961)

Maximum

Stratigraphic Thickness

Series Unit (ft) Description

Quaternary

(Pleistoa

cene)

Alluvial fan and

channel gravels;

lag gravels; and

lacustrine deposits

300+ Composed of sand, cobbles,

and boulders derived from

intrusive and extrusive

igneous rocks; alluvial fan

and lag gravels moderately

cemented in a caliche

matrix. Lacustrine (playa

lake) deposits are

primarily silt and clay.

Quaternary

(Pleistoa

cene)

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,

intruded andesite flows

only; assumed they

occurred near end of

andesite extrusion.

Tertiary Andesite Flows I000+ Thick sequence of lava

flows; composed of

andesite, with porphyritic

hornblende and plagioclase_

flowed from several volcanic

vents; very resistant to

erosion.

Tertiary Andesite Breccia 6OO+

(with

Tuff)

Angular blocks of volcanic

rock, set in a matrix of

volcanic ash; variably

resistant to erosion.

Tertiary Andesite Tuff 600+

(with

Breccia)

Volcanic ash that is welded

to loose; some pyroclasts;

variable resistance to

erosion.

5-3
Table 3 (Cont_d). Generalized Stratigraphic Sequencein the Goldstone Area

(after Kieffer, 1961)

Maximum

Stratigraphic Thickness

Series Unit (ft) Description

Cretaceous Jack Spring Quartz c

Monzonite

Quartz monzonite pluton

that extends over 85

square miles; relatively

homogeneous;has an

orthogonal fracture system

and parallel jointing_

resistant to erosion.

Paleozoic Rustic Formation b Sedimentary and metasedimentary units derived

from fine-grained marine

sediments; foliated and

moderately fractured:

containing occasional quartz

veins with gold and

tungsten.

Paleozoic

to

Precambrian

Granitic Complex c Metamorphic and intrusive

crystalline rocks_ schists,

gneisses, and granites highly

fractured, low to moderate

resistance to erosion.

a Deposition of alluvial and lag gravels and lacustrine deposits is believed to

have begun during the Pleistocene Age. The olivine basalt is considered to

be Pleistocene Age, but isotope dating to confirm the age of the basalt has

not been conducted.

b Maximumthickness was not reported in available source literature.

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

5-4
(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

(i0)

Sedimentary units of the Rustic Formation were deposited within the

Cordilleran geosyncline which had formed at the western boundary of

the North American continental plate. The Cordilleran geosyncline was

a complex of marginal and shallow marine depositional environments,

along with island-arc volcanic terrains.

Sedimentary units of the Rustic Formation and older Precambrian

basement units were metamorphosed (subjected to high pressures and

temperatures) during the late Paleozoic and Mesozoic eras. East-west

compression of the Cordilleran geosyncline produced metamorphism,

folding, and thrust-faulting (displacement of older rock units on top

of younger rock units) within sedimentary units deposited within the

geosyncline. Although thrust-faulting appears to have been most

intense during the late Paleozoic and early Mesozoic eras, the

juxtaposition of Precambrian units over Tertiary terrestrial sediments

indicates that thrust-faulting occurred as late as Tertiary time (Fife

and Brown, 1980).

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

existing older rocks probably during Cretaceous time.

Uplift and erosion of the area occurred, and most Paleozoic and

Precambrian rocks were eroded away.

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

deposits composed of ash tuffs and andesite breccias covered the basin

floor in layers up to 600 ft thick. Up to 1,000 ft of andesite lava

flows originating from several volcanic vents covered the ash flow and

breccia deposits. Black glass dikes intruded into the andesite flows.

Conglomeratic sandstone containing clasts weathered from the

surrounding mountains was deposited discontinuously on the andesite

lava beds during Tertiary and Quaternary times.

The region was uplifted and extensively faulted in Late Tertiary and

Quaternary times. Faulting during Late Tertiary and Quaternary times

was primarily normal. Transverse faulting was associated with the

development of the San Andreas and Garlock fault zones.

Olivine basaltic flows covered parts of the region during the

Pleistocene era. Since deposition of the basalt, the area has been

tilted slightly to the north and extensively faulted in the southern

part of the region.

Alluvium was deposited during Quaternary time, including: dry lake

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

gravel and boulder alluvial fans, lag gravels, and debris slope

deposits; unconsolidated sand, gravel and boulders in stream channels;

and windblown sand. The thickness of alluvial cover ranges from 0 feet

on ridge crests and rock outcrops to 1,000 feet within the valleys.

5-5
F. TYPESOF SOILSAT THEGDSCC

The following four soil types described in accordance with the Unified Soil

Classification System (USCS)occur at the GDSCC:

(i) Poorly to Well-Graded Gravels (GP to GW) with variable silt, and sand

derived from granitic rocks;

(2) Poorly to Well-Graded Gravels (GP to GW) with variable silt, and sand

derived from decomposing volcanic rocks;

(3) Poorly Graded Gravels (GP) derived from earlier, dissected alluvial

deposits and terrace gravels (includes lag deposits); and

(4) Clayey Silt (ML) to Clay (CL) deposited in lacustrine (playa lake)

environments.

Unconsolidated volcanic and granitic soils have medium to high porosity and

permeability. Development of caliche layers (calcium carbonate cementing of soil

layers), however, can greatly decrease the permeability of the soil.

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.

A study to define the engineering properties of the soils at the proposed

project location at the Apollo Site has not yet been undertaken, but will be

completed prior to final site selection and foundation design. Soil properties at

the Apollo Site are likely to be similar to those at the Venus Site, where a

34-meter antenna is currently under construction. In July, 1973, a geological,

geophysical, and foundation-engineering survey of the Venus Site was conducted to

determine the feasibility of constructing the 34-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

at the Mars Site that are similar to the one proposed for the Apollo Site. Based

on these studies, it is assumed that soils at the Apollo Site are suitable for

construction of the proposed 34-meter antenna.

G. WATER RESOURCES AND FLOODPLAINS

i. 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.

5-6
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 Fort Irwin groundwater basin, which are subunits of the Mojave

River Groundwater Basin. About 1,000,000 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. In the desert environment, in general, high-intensity storms may produce

flash flooding. The GDSCC, however, has not experienced flood-related problems in

the past.

Two intermittent streambeds (dry washes) are located near the Apollo Site:

a wash located several hundred feet to the north of the buildings at the site, and

a much smaller wash located immediately south of the site proposed for the new

antenna. The wash located north of the Apollo Site provides drainage for most of

the area upslope from the site, and appears to provide adequate diversion of

drainage away from the operational areas. The small wash located to the south of

the proposed project site appears to provide adequate drainage diversion of a

small area upslope of the location proposed for the new antenna. Since the

initiation of operations at the GDSCC, damage to structures due to flooding has

not been reported.

H. BIOTIC RESOURCES, ENDANGERED SPECIES, AND WETLANDS

I. Biotic Resources

The biotic composition at the site of the proposed new Apollo Site

DSS-18 34-meter antenna was determined from information compiled through field

reconnaissance, supplemented by information obtained from the existing literature.

The site was surveyed on foot by the MBGA project team on April 24, 1989. Weather

at the time of the survey was cool, with temperatures of 74°F and moderately

strong winds of I0 to 20 miles per hour.

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 to include the site within their

range. The overall biotic composition of the site was derived from this

information.

5-7
2. Vegetation

The vegetation of the project site is typical of a diverse

mid-elevation Mojave Desert creosote bush scrub community. The dominant plant

species are creosote bush (Larrea tridentata), burrow-weed (Ambrosia dumosa),

goldenhead (Acamptopappus sphaerocephalus), cheese-bush (Hymenoclea Salsola), and

brittlebush CEncelia farinosa). Other perennial plants which were present in high

abundance included Nevada ephedra (Ephedra nevadensis), winter fat (Ceratiodes

lanata), bladder sage (Salazaria mexicana), Anderson's thornbush (L_ycium

Andersonii), desert trumpet (Eriogonum inflatum), California buckwheat (E.

fasciculatum), and Mojave indigo bush (Psorothamnus arborescens). Some Joshua

trees (yucca brevifolia), jumping cholla (Opuntia Bigelovii) and beavertail cactus

(Opuntia basilaris) were also present. Annual species present at the time of the

survey included pincushion flower (Chaenactis carphoclinia), desert aster

(Machaeranthera tortifolia), fiddleneck (Amsinckia tessellata), red-stemmed filare

(Erodium cicutarium), and coreopsis (Coreopsis Bigelovii). Grasses present

included arabian schismus (Schismus arabicus), Indian ricegrass (Oryzopsis

hymenoides), and galleta grass (Hilaria ri ig_).

3. Wildlife

Based on field observations and literature search, 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 have been observed or

are expected, 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

_), 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), desert

tortoise (Gopherus agassizi), common leopard lizard (Gambelia wislizenii),

coachwhip (Masticophis flagellum), gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucus),

sidewinder (Crotalus cerastes), and Mojave green rattlesnake (Crotalus

scutulatus).

Due to the low ambient temperatures at the time of the survey, no reptiles

were observed on the 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 (Sayornis

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

(T_,yto 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

5-8
the area, nesting primarily on steep cliff faces, which are more frequent in the

northern portion of the GDSCC.Golden eagles (A___uilachrysaetos) 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), the deer

mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), Mojave ground squirrel (Sphermophilus mohavensis),

and desert wood rat (Neotoma lep__) are expected in the vicinity of the proposed

project. Merriam's kangaroo rats (Dipodomys merriami) are likely the most

abundant and widespread small mammal within the project area. Black-tailed

jackrabbit (LeDus 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 (Vul_es macrotis), ringtail (Brassariscus astutus) and

bobcat (Felix rufus).

. 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 several mature Joshua trees, 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 will be made to

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

very slowly, and unnecessary clearing would be visible for many decades.

5. Endangered Species

Several species present in the vicinity of the proposed project have

been given special recognition by Federal, state, or local, resource-conservation

agencies and organizations due to declining, limited, or threatened populations,

resulting in most cases from habitat reduction (see Tables 4 and 5). Sources used

for determination of sensitive biological resources are as follows:

(i) 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).

5-9
Table 4. Sensitive Plant Species that Potentially Could Occur at the GDSCCa

Status

Species FWS CNPS Habitat

Androstephium breviflorum

Small-flowered androstephium

2b

Astragalus jaegerianus c C2 c IB d

Jaeger's locoweed

Chorizanthe spinosa

Mojave spiny-herb

Cymopterus deserticolus

Desert cymopterus

Dudleya saxosa ssp. saxosa

Panamint dudleya

Eriophyllum mohavense

Mojave eriophyllum

Linanthus arenicola

Sand linanthus

Psorothamnus arborescens

Mojave indigo bush

var. arborescens (Dalea a.)

Gravelly to rocky

soils below

7,000 ft

Sandy to gravelly

soils below

4,000 ft

C3 e 4 f Same

C2 IB Same

C2 4 Same

C2 IB Same

C3 c 2

Sclerocactus polyancistrus

Mojave fish-hook cactus

Deep sandy soils

C3 c 4 Same

C2 4 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

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

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

listing.

d

Considered rare and endangered throughout its range.

e

Species is too widespread to warrant listing.

f

Species has limited distribution.

5-10
Table 5. Sensitive Wildlife Species KnownFrom the Vicinity of the GDSCCa

Status b

Species FWS CDF GPS NAS Habitat

Gopherus agassizii

Desert tortoise

Aquila chrysaetos

Golden Eagle

Falco mexicanus

Prairie falcon

Athene cunicularia

Burrowing Owl

Spermophilus mohavensis

Mojave ground squirrel

C2 c __ S d

SC3 e ps f

Creosote bush scrub

Nests in cliffs_

forages over

creosote bush scrub

SC3 .... Same

SC2 g -- 2h

T i

Nests in banks of

washes and road cuts

Creosote bush scrub

a

d

e

f

None of the listed species actually were identified at the project

site during the MBGA survey.

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).

Federal Category 2 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.

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

danger of extinction. Small population sizes, however, warrant

observation.

BLM-proposed sensitive species, pending the accumulation of sufficient

data to support concern.

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

monitoring due to population decline.

h

NAS second priority species: Special concern due to observed decline

in population.

i

State-listed as threatened.

5-11
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. Thus, no effects to federally-protected rare, threatened or

endangered species would occur as a result of implementation of the proposed

project.

The desert tortoise is a BLM"sensitive" species. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service (FWS)has categorized the desert tortoise as a Category II species

(Federal Register January 6, 1989:554) (i.e., a species for which sufficient data

are available to suggest that "Threatened" or "Endangered" status maybe

warranted), but listing has been precluded by other priorities (Federal Register

December5, 1985:49868). The desert tortoise has been petitioned for candidacy

for state "Threatened" status in California, and the petition has been accepted by

the California Fish and GameCommission(FCG-670.1January, 1986); it has not yet

been determined, however, whether listing is warranted. Tortoise density in the

GDSCCarea is expected to be 0 to 20 per square mile (Berry et al., 1987). No

sightings or sign (such as scat or burrows) of the desert tortoise were observed

at the time of the MBCAsite survey.

No significant impacts to California-listed sensitive, rare, threatened, or

endangered plant species are expected to result from project implementation. The

Mojave indigo bush has been listed by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS)

as being of limited distribution; it is a Federal category III species (considered

too widespread to warrant Federal listing). Several Mojave indigo bushes maybe

removed as a result of project implementation_ the loss of these few individual

plants, however, is not significant.

No significant impacts to State-listed sensitive, rare, threatened, or

endangered wildlife species are expected to occur as a result of implementation of

the project. The CDGFhas listed the Mojave ground squirrel as threatened, and

this species is known to occur at the GDSCC.

L

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 proposed project site.

I. AIR RESOURCES

I. 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 and local dust storms often accompany the strong

winds.

5-12
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 GDSCCare primarily from storage

and use of hydrocarbon fuels, a spray booth and degreaser, Diesel-engine

generators, and wipe-solvents.

The proposed project will not substantially increase fuel consumption for

heating purposes. An air-conditioning unit, to cool specific antenna equipment,

will be installed at the proposed project location. 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 will 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 increase

as comparedto 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 Apollo Site, resulting in an insignificant impact on local air

quality.

J. HUMANENVIRONMENT

i. Land Use and Socioeconomics

The GDSCCis located within the Fort Irwin Military Reservation, a

U.S. Army installation under the control of the U.S. ArmedForces. The GDSCCis a

52-square-mile complex with an extremely low-density development. Because of its

mission, the GDSCCis highly sensitive to physical and electromagnetic

interference and thus requires large surrounding areas with minimal activity and

development.

With Fort Irwin bordering the GDSCCon 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 25 "critical"

and 35-40 "semi-critical" days per year whenGDSCCtransmissions 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. Memorandaof understanding have been signed addressing the

responsibilities of both Fort Irwin and the GDSCC.

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

(RCN) in the County of SanBernardino General Plan (San Bernardino County, 1986).

The RCNdesignation permits a variety of low-intensity land uses such as

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

units on minimumlot sizes of 40 acres. The area is zoned DL-40, restricting

5-13
subdivisions to no less than 40 acres. The proposed 34-meter antenna at the

Apollo Site is included in the GDSCCdevelopment plans. The proposed antenna

project is consistent with the County's General Plan.

The proposed DSS-1834-meter antenna will be compatible with existing uses

at the GDSCCand will complementand support the existing DeepSpace Network. The

antenna will be constructed in two phases. The foundation will be constructed

over a 6-month time period span during the first phase; the antenna then will be

erected over a 9-month span during the second phase. The existing DSS-1234-meter

antenna at the Echo Site will be dismantled and removedfrom the GDSCCwithin

approximately one year from completion of the new antenna.

The existing Apollo Station has 42 full-time employeeswho exclusively

support operation of the existing Apollo DSS-1626-meter and DSS-179-meter

antenna. The proposed DSS-1834-meter antenna and associated facilities will

require the transfer of employees from the Echo Site to the Apollo Site. The

number of employees that will be involved in this transfer is not known at this

time. No new employeeswill be required for the proposed project. Therefore, no

long term socioeconomic impact from the proposed project on GDSCCor regional

demographics is expected.

2. Vehicular Traffic and Circulation

Vehicular access to the Apollo Site at the GDSCCis provided via

Covington Road, a two-lane, paved surface road. Covington Road intersects Goddard

Road and runs south-southeast approximately one mile to the Apollo Site.

The employmentlevel at the Apollo Site will increase when the new

DSS-1834-meter antenna is placed in operation. Total employmentlevel at the

GDSCC,however, will not change as a result of the proposed project. Changes in

traffic patterns, therefore, will occur but there will be no increases to total

local traffic. The proposed antenna will be located close to the existing

infrastructures, and thus will only require construction of about 400 feet of

additional access road.

Some temporary construction traffic will occur. The small number of trips,

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

usage, however, will 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

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 at a

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

Air traffic at the airport at Goldstone Dry Lake is limited to propeller-driven

aircraft. Flights include three scheduled NASA flights per week and infrequent

flights of military administrative personnel. Mechanical equipment in use at the

5-14
GDSCCalso contributes to the overall noise environment. Even the loudest of

generators, pumpsand 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 someminimal occasional disturbance by Fort

Irwin military training exercises and military aircraft sonic booms. Since

antenna operations are restricted during hours whentroop maneuversand military

aircraft have scheduled operations, these noise sources should not have an adverse

impact on the various NASAmissions.

Over the short term, noise impacts at the proposed project site will 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, short-term noise impacts are expected to

be insignificant. Long-term noise generation can be expected from the antenna

mechanical system, engineering shop activities, cooling/ventilation

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

existing comparable facilities and a staff of approximately the samesize, no

significant change to the existing noise environment is expected.

4. Cultural Resources

An abundanceof 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 documentedareas of archaeologic, prehistoric, and historic

interest as well as fossil areas within the Fort Irwin and GDSCCboundaries. A

large area within the GDSCChas 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 1 mile north of the Apollo Site. The

Fort Irwin archaeologist has been requested to conduct a survey of the Apollo Site

to verify that no archaeologic or historic resources exist at the site.

5. Radio Interference, Electromagnetic Radiation, and Microwaves

The GDSCCoperates several large, high-powered, microwave, ground

transmitters used in deep space communications. These transmitters are capable of

transmitting radiation ranging in frequency from I0 megahertz to i00 gigahertz.

Transmission in this frequency range produces radiation potentially hazardous to

persons working nearby. The power density in the direct beammay cause severe

biological damage. The energy density in the feeding system is considered

potentially lethal. Currently, DSS-14 (Mars Station) is the only GDSCCantenna

station that radiates high-power on a routine basis. The proposed new DSS-18

34°meter antenna, to be located at the Apollo Site, will duplicate the

electromagnetic functions of the existing DSS-12antenna at the Echo Site:

reception in both S- and X-bands, and transmission in the S-bands.

5-15
The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) has issued Safety Practice Bulletin

12-4-6 that sets standards for safely operating antennas 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,

Optional Safety Review, be completed prior to modification of an existing antenna

or construction of a new radio frequency transmitter. This bulletin is included

in this Environmental AssessmentDocumentas Appendix D. Although this review has

not as yet been conducted for the proposed antenna, it will be performed 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 I0 mW/cm. These procedures include

restricting the permissible angles of radiation and avoidance of the supersonic

corridor, establishing a prearranged schedule for transmissions, and providing

airspace avoidance contour plots to cognizant external agencies. By following

prescribed policies and procedures for existing antennas, the GDSCC has maintained

a record of safe transmissions since it began high-power transmissions in 1981.

During the project-planning phase for the proposed 34-meter Apollo 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 less restrictive than those already

in place for similar antennas at the GDSCC, because no transmissions are expected

for the proposed new DSS-18 34-meter antenna at the Apollo Site.

The radiation issue remains unresolved at this time because of lack of

information on health and safety effects from low-power transmissions. This

matter 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 Wastes, Toxic Substances, and Pesticides

a. Solid Wastes: Goldstone operates one lO-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 four years. Only non-putrescible,

non-liquid solid wastes are accepted for burial.

Materials generated by the dismantling of the DSS-12 antenna at the Echo

Site would be sold as parts or recycled to the greatest extent possible. Solid

waste generated during this dismantling activity would not have a long-term effect

on the solid-waste disposal capabilities of the GDSCC. Other adverse impacts from

solid waste generation are not anticipated as a result of the proposed project

because:

(i)

(2)

Additional staff will not be required to operate the proposed antenna.

Operation of the proposed antenna will not result in generation of

quantities of solid waste that are greater than quantities generated

by the existing antenna.

5-16
(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 now operates one main drum storage area at the Apollo Site. This

facility which is environmentally substandard consists of drums stored on locked,

metal, dispensing racks situated on a concrete pad (Figure I0). 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.

A new storage facility for hazardous materials and wastes is to be

constructed at the Apollo Site in 1990. The new facility will be similar to the

new facility constructed at the Echo Site as described in Environmental Projects:

Volume 9, Construction of Hazardous Materials Storage Facilities, JPL Publication

87-4, November 15, 1989. An illustration of the new, environmentally acceptable

storage facilities for hazardous material and wastes, as it now exists at the Echo

Site, is depicted in Figure ii.

Bulk products (primarily fuels and oils) are stored in permitted underground

tanks in conformance with prevailing underground tank regulations. There

currently are 13 underground tanks in use for storage of bulk fuels and oils at

the GDSCC. All 13 tanks are of recent installation and are of double-wall

construction with leak-detection systems.

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 regular 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, recycling, or

disposal, as appropriate. GDSCC policy requires minimizing waste generation and

supports detoxification, reclamation, and reuse of wastes in preference to their

disposal.

Materials to be stored at the Apollo 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 effects from hazardous

substances are anticipated.

5-17
ORIGINAl.: PAGE

BLACK AND WHITE PI'tOTOGRAPH

k,ll.,lt

i

J

!

|

4

,¥

|

P_

,.-.a

(D

0",

0",

°,.-I

,--I

bl

0

0

_1 r...O

0 .,.0

q._

.<

ub >.,

0

¢)

0

_g

7.

,r.-I

rm "_

0 0

,--.4 r--I

0 _

.,-4

5-18
ORIGINAl PAGE

BLACK AND WHITE PHOTOGRAP_

J

i

i

u)

3: 4J

.,4 .,"4

_o_

,,4

(.3 .,4

0 _ r.,,3

o

[-.4

•,.-.t 1-1

r---t

U_ C

t_0 r_

_2

roq ,---4

_ ,--4

_ _._

o_ o

_ _ ,--4

N ,--4

0 "_

,...-4

,.....4

1.4

,,..4

5-19
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 premixed pesticide to the GDSCC, applies the

pesticide under the direction of the GDSCC'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 affect environmental resources.

d. Summary of Hazardous Materials Use, Generation of Solid and

Hazardous Wastes, and the Use of Pesticides at the Proposed New DSS-18 34-Meter

Antenna at the Apollo Site: The proposed Apollo antenna project will not require

expansion over the current level of operations or an increase in manpower. It is

not anticipated, therefore, that hazardous materials use, solid waste generation,

or hazardous waste generation will increase significantly as a result of

implementation of the proposed project.

7. Health and Safety

The DSS-18 34-meter antenna design is required to meet the health and

safety standards of prevailing health and safety codes.

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, similar to those that now are required to be

provided for the 34-meter antenna now being constructed at the Venus Site, would

be provided at the proposed antenna at the Apollo Site. At a minimum, provisions

will include the following:

(i) Lighting: Incandescent lighting will be provided to give a minimum of

five footcandles in all work areas. Battery-powered emergency lights

also will be provided wherever frequent maintenance and service are

required.

(2) Grounding: The antenna will be grounded and will have lightning

protection. All grounding and bonding shall conform to prevailing

codes and good engineering practice.

(3) Travel Limits: Redundant antenna travel limits will be supplied at

both limits of travel on each axis. Azimuth bumper contact switches

also will be provided on the azimuth access stairway structure to

prevent damage around the antenna at ground level. Emergency stop

switches will be installed at the following locations:

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Elevation Drives

Antenna Access Stairway

Each Azimuth Drive Wheel

Reflector Surface

(e) Future Lower Quadripod Leg.

5-20
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 Apollo Site can be seen in Figures 12 and 13.

The proposed project site is approximately i mile south of GoddardRoad and thus

is not clearly visible to vehicle occupants traveling to the airport. 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 DSS-18antenna facility will be approximately 30 feet taller than the

existing Apollo DSS-1626-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.

5-21
ORIGINAIZ PAGE

_L.ACK AI'_D WHITE PHOTOGRAPH

.,,,,

<

i ̧_ _i

0

r--I

o

o

°,-.t

°_I

o

o

C_

5-22
|

ul

Q_

Q>

¢J0

Q_

.,-I >

_J

.-I0

r-40<

r_

C}

bO

.r-I

5-23
SECTION Vl

CONCLUSIONS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

CONCERNING THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A NEW 34-METER ANTENNA

PROPOSED FOR THE APOLLO SITE AT THE GDSCC

The Environmental Assessment (EA) for the proposed 34-meter antenna to be

constructed at the Apollo Site has examined the full range of potential

environmental effects 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 natural, 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
SECTIONVII

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 Apollo Site at the Goldstone

Complexof the Fort Irwin Military Reservation, SanBernardino 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: January 15, 1990

Registration No. E9003, Electrical

SFI086, Safety

REA0078Environmental

Assessor

State" California

California

California

Stamp/Seal

7-1
APPENDIX A

INDIVIDUALS AND AGENCIES CONSULTED AND CONTACTED

IN PREPARATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

A-I
APPENDIX A

INDIVIDUALS AND AGENCIES CONSULTED

IN PREPARATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

PREPARERS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

(i) Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology

Office of Telecommunications and Data Acquisition:

Leonard H. Kushner, P.E., TDA Safety and Environmental Compliance

Engineer

Glen G. Kroll, Cognizant Safety and Environmental Compliance Engineer

Ezra Abrahamy, P.E., TDA Safety and Environmental Compliance Engineer

Documentation Section 648:

Irving S. Bengelsdorf, Ph.D., Technical Writer/Specialist

(2) M. B. Gilbert Associates (Contractor):

Marsha B. Gilbert, Principal-in-charge

Susan Reynolds, Ph.D., Environmental Impact Specialist

Robert Coale, P.E., Senior Engineer

Brian Beck, R.G., Senior Scientist

Rob Hartman, Hydrogeologist

Marcia R. Baverman, Health and Safety Specialist

Robert Lunche, P.E., Air Emissions Specialist

Curt Uptain, Biologist

Rachel Fischer, Paleontologist

A-2
INDIVIDUALSANDAGENCIESCONTACTEDIN

PREPARATIONOFTHEENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

Alderson, Harold. Allied Bendix Aerospace. Environmental Compliance Coordinator.

April 1989.

Forman, Larry. Bureau of Land Management. Wildlife Biologist. Telephone

Conversation on April 25, 1989.

Fort Irwin National Training Center (contacted through Mr. Benhart A. Gaudian,

JPL), April 1989.

Fryxell, Chuck. San Bernardino County, Air Pollution Control District, Telephone

conversation on April 25, 1989.

Gaudian, Benhart A. Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Goldstone Radio Spectrum

Coordinator. April 1989.

Hydrologic Section. United States Geologic Survey. April 1989.

Lal, Kris. California Department of Fish and Game,Long Beach, California.

Telephone conversation on April 25, 1989.

McGregor, Betty. San Bernardino County, Environmental Health, Groundwater

Division. April 1989.

Minton, Cindy. Lahontan Region, California Regional Water Quality Control Board.

April 1989.

Riewe, Tony. Jet Propulsion Laboratory. April 1989.

Van Hek, Ronald A. Jet Propulsion Laboratory. April 1989.

A-3
APPENDIX B

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: BIBLIOGRAPHY

B-I
APPENDIX B

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abrams, L. 1923. lllustrated 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.

ASTM, Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils, Designation:

D2488-84, 1984.

Barbour, M., and J. Major (Eds.), 1977. Terrestrial Vegetation of California.

John Wiley and Sons. New York, 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 Crossroads: 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 i, 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 Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Map, Trona Sheet, 1:250,000

scale, 1963.

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 Army, Headquarters, U.S. Army Forces Command. Final

Environmental Impact Statement, National Training Center, Fort Irwin Site. 1979.

B-2
Engineering-Science, Inc., PasadenaCalifornia, Subsurface Investigation ReportGoldstone DeepSpace CommunicationsComplex, December1987.

Fife and Brown, (Eds.), Geology and Mineral Wealth of the California Desert,

Southcoast Geological Society, 1980.

Jaeger, E. 1941. Desert Wild Flowers. Stanford University Press, Stanford,

California.

Jennings, M. R. 1983. "An Annotated Check List of the Amphibians and Reptiles of

California." California Fish and Game69(3):151-171.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology. Statement of Work

#332-SW-935,Preliminary Engineering Report for the 34MAz°EI Multifrequency

Antenna with Centerfed BeamWaveguideSystem (Ha-Dec Replacement).

March 24, 1989.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Office of Telecommunications and Data Acquisition,

California Institute of Technology. Goldstone Facilities Relocation Study.

March 1989.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology. Environmental

Projects: Volume 7, Environmental Resource Document, Goldstone Deep Space

CommunicationsComplex. JPL Publication 87-4, 1988.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory and National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration.

Directory of Goldstone Buildings and Facilities, Revised Edition (Gold Book).

1989.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Environmental Impact Statement for the 64-mAntenna

DeepSpace Subnet (Programmatic Statement). 1972.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Environmental Impact Statement for the NASADeepSpace

Network (Programmatic Statement). 1972.

Jones, J.K., Jr., D.C. Carter, H.H. Genoways, R.S. Hoffman and D.W. Rice.

1982. "Revised Checklist of North American MammalsNorth of Mexico, 1982." Occas.

Pap. Mus. Texas Tech Univ., No. 80.

Kartesz, J. T., and R. Kartesz. 1980. A SynonymizedChecklist of the Vascular

Flora of the United States, Canadaand Greenland. Volume II. The Biota of North

America. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

Kieffer, Hugh (Jet Propulsion Laboratory). Geology of the Goldstone Area. 1961.

Kizysik, Anthony J. Ecological Assessmentof the Effects of Army Training

Activities on a Desert Ecosystem: National Training Center, Fort Irwin,

California. Report NumberCERL-TR°N-85/13. 1985.

Koebig and Koebig, Inc.

Institute of Technology.

Collection and Disposal:

9233. 1972.

Prepared for Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California

Preliminary Engineering Report, FY 1974, Solid Waste

Sewerageand SewageTreatment, NET, NASAProject Number

B-3
Michael BrandmanAssociates, 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 SpaceAdministration Procedures for Implementing the

National Environmental Policy Act. 14 CFR1216.

National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration. 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, New

York, NewYork, 365 p.

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.

RMSCorporation. Prepared under the direction of Department of the Army,

SacramentoDistrict 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." NongameWildlife Investigations,

Wildlife ManagementBranch, California Department of Fish and Game.

Administrative Report No. 78-1.

Robbins, W.W., M.K. Bellue and W.S. Ball. 1951. Weedsof California. State of

California Department of Agriculture.

Santos, Richard, T., AIA. Preliminary Engineering Report, Goldstone Deep Space

CommunicationsComplexMaintenance and Integration Building. JPL Contract No.

957004. 1986.

Sharp, R.P., 1972, Geology Field Guide to Southern California: Kendall/Hunt

Publishing Co., Dubuque, Iowa, 208 p.

Smith, J. P., Jr., and R. York. 1984. Inventory of Rare and EndangeredVascular

Plants of California. Special Publication No. i (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.

36(2):126-135.

1982. "The Blue List for 1982." American Birds.

B-4
TIW Systems, Incorporated. Prepared for the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Advanced

Engineering Study Report for Design and Construction of a BeamWaveguide 34-Meter

X-BandAZ-ELAntenna. Volume I: Requirements, Analysis and Costs. 1986.

Unified Soil Classification System, 1952.

Uniform Building Code, 1988. International Conference of Building Officials,

Earthquake Regulations, Chapter 23.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). 1986. Endangeredand Threatened

Wildlife and Plants. Federal Register 50 CFR17.11 and 17.12. U.S. Department of

the Interior.

B°5
APPENDIX C

ARCHEOLOGICAL APPROVAL FOR INSTALLATION OF UNDERGROUND

POWER LINE RUNNING FROM THE ECHO SITE TO THE APOLLO SITE

C-I
JET PROPULSION LABORATORY INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM

November 15, 1989

FILE: POWEROK.NTC

TO: J. Dorman

FROM: B.A. Gaudian_,

SUBJECT: Archaeological, Environmental and EOD range clearances for

the underground power line route between Echo and Apollo

REFERENCE: My letters to Ft. Irwin requesting Archaeological

Environmental and EOD range clearances dated July II, 1989.

As shown on the attached correspondence from Ft. Irwin we have received

Archaeological, Environmental and Explosive Ordnance range clearances

for the Echo to Apollo underground power line route.

Please be advised that if at anytime during surveys, digging or

construction suspected ordnance is noticed you should contact the

Goldstone Safety office. Do not attempt to do anything that will

disturb the object and take action to keep personnel well away

from the area until proper disposal action has been taken.

cc: H

L

P

G

J

G

A

W

R. Alderson

E. Butcher

Glenn

G. Kroll

E. McPartland

A. Morris

Price

Schnittger

L. Sturgis

c-2
DISPOirrlON FORM

F_ vl_ o_ mill form. elm AIq 340-11k"the pcegOmml 0gency Ie TAGO

_'niFEnl_ct on o_F0ct eYue_. SUSJlCT

JPL - Barstow Underground power line between Echo and Apollo

TO FROM

Director, DEH Ft. Irwin B.A. Gaudian

Attn: EHP-S Jet Propulsion Lab

Mr. Cassidy 850 E. Main St.

Mr. Demars Barstow, CA 92311

DATE CMT 1

July 11, 1_89 (619) 386-8218

Goldstone requests archaeological and environmental compliance approval of the route for an

underground power line between Echo and Mars sites. The route will depart the Echo site

along the road and follow the Southwest side of the road beside the buried communications

cables. After the road turns Westward the power line route will continue to follow the

buried communications route into the Apollo site.

The location of the route should have no adverse impact to the physical or human environment

because most of the area has previously been exposed to trenching for communications cables

or for water lines.

CC: Without Attachments

H. Alderson

L. E. Butcher

J. Dorman

P. Glenn

L. Kushner

J. E. McPartland

W. Schnittger

L. Sturgis

kFZJ-EHE-SP

FO B.A. Gaudian FROM DEll DATE November 13, 1()89

Jet Propulson Lab Cassidy/tl/3737

850 E. Main St.

Barstow, CA 92311

I. The above proposed project was field checked on 8,9 November 1989 for archaeological and

environmental concerns. The underground power line between Echo and Apollo sites will not

adversely Impact the environment.

2. As proposed, the project may proceed.

/

Walt Cassidy j

NTC _;I.iff Ar('ll;la'(_ll,},i:;I

DA FOAM 2496 IMPErIOuS EDITIONS WILL OE USED lu,S Gowf|_m! illtlnllq OflNl; III_I_I0 4 q

C-3
APPENDIX D

JET PROPULSION LABORATORY SAFETY PRACTICE BULLETIN 12-4-6,

EFFECTIVE DATE: JUNE 15, 1978

D-I
SAFETY PRACTICE

RADIO FREQUENCY/MICROWAVE TRANSMITTERS 12-4-6

EFFECTIVE DATE June 15, 1978 Page I of 3

I. GENERAL

A. Microwave transmitters have extensive application in industry and

in the home. They are used for: curing certain adhesives, 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 be 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.

If. 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

(i mw/cm2) in areas where employees are working eight hours a day

or forty hours a week.

B. In areas w_ere the power density exceeds I mw/cm 2, but is not more

than 10 mw/cm2, employees are restricted to workin_ for no lon_er

-than one hour in any twenty-four hour period.

D-2
SAFETY PRACTICE

RADIO FREQUENCY/MICROWAVE TRANSMITTERS 12-4-6

EFFECTIVE DATE June 15, 1978 Page 2 of 3

IV.

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 0284-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 I mw/cm 2 at I 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 muat 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. HiEh-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 REOUIREMENT$

A. The Laboratory requires that persons A working in areas where exposure

to radio frequency energy of I mw/cm L could occur, have an eye examination

when the work assignment is made, and annually thereafter, as long

as assigned to this type of work.

D-3
SAFETY PRACTICE

RADIO FREQUENCY/MICROWAVE TRANSMITTERS 12-4-6

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:

I. 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 wavegulde occur with systems of

th_s 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.

D-4
Jl_L OPERATIONAL SAFETY REVIEW NO

TO

FRO_._

Cognizant Section Manager

ExT

Cognizant Engineer

DATE

SECTIO _.

PROG=AM

[--] R,'AO [--J EL,GHTPROJECt [_ CIV,L PROGRAMS [_ DEEENSEPROGRAMS [_ DINER

LOCATION r-] JPL N DSN

_ 8LOG OPERATION STARTING DATE

[_ TM [] EF [] OTHER ROOM

OPERATION COMPLETION DATE

_,PRE OPERATIONAL REVrEW [] OPERATIONAL RE'vqEW [] ANNUAL REVIEW

NAME OF OPERATION OR PROJECT

NAMES OF QUALIFIEQ PERSONNEL ASSIGNED TO THE OPERATION

DESC=IPTION OF OPERATION [NUMBER OF RUNS. OURATION OF RUNS, ETC i Attach block diag/am$, layout, etc , =f needed

for cla r,ty

{'--7 ATTENDED WHEN

OPERATION EMERGENCY NAME PHONE

[_] UNATTENOED NOTIEfCATION ALTERNATE PH 0,',1E

WILL THIS OPERATION REQUIRE USE OF THE BUODY SYSTEM OR OTHER SURVEILLANCE it V, AUDIO, ETC }

[] ',O [] YES, TYPE

IS AC£QUATE YqRITTEt_; INFORMATION fJPL) AVAILABLE TO ASSIST JN SAFELY CARRYING OUT THIS OPERATION

]" ES l_ AO'31TIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED AJ%D _,%'ILL 8E AVAILABLE PRIOR TO OPERATION

LIST -AZARDOUS MATERIALS PRESSURE, TEMPERATURES. POWER VOLTAGES. FREQUENCIES ETC TO BE USED

QUANTITY

',_ATERIAL -- POV_ER - ETC PRESSURE - VOLTAGE -- ETC

HAZAPD I TOXIC

TYPE 2-CORROSIVE

* 3 EXPLOSIVE

TEMPERATURE -

FREQUENCY - ETC

4 PYRQPHQR_C 7 ELECTRICAL I0 PRESSURE

S-RADIA TiON B-FIRE I I LASER

6 ACOUSTIC B-SUFFOCATION 12 ENERGY SOURCES

AT SiTE IN RIO

L

HAZARD

1 3 CONTAMINATION

14

LIST ©ISCHARGE PRODUCTS ANO WASTE FROM OPERATION (FOR BOTH tqORMAL AND ABNORMAL CONOITIONSI

MATERIAL QUANTITY CONDITION l

NORMAL

ABNORMAL

NORMAL

ABNORMAL

NORMAL

ABNORMAL

LIST PERSONNEL SAFETY EQUIPMENT REQUIRED FOR THIS OPERATION

MEANS OF OISPOSAL DISCHARGE PRODUCTS

LIST O; DOCUMEr'_TS BY TITI E THAT PERTAItJ TO THIS OPERATION

JPt 0284 S R 385

D-5
JlOL

YES NO

[] D

[] [2

_D O

S [3

[] []

[] []

[] [] []

[] [] []

[3 [] []

[] [] []

E3 [] []

L2_ D

[2 []

[] []

[] []

[] []

TEST PREPARATION CHECK LIST

N/A PERSONNEL SAFETY

1 Location of personnel during test and in adiacent areas is safe.

[_ 2 Provisioqs exist to avoid unsafe contamination of materials (spills, hypergolic, catalyst, etc.)

r_ 3 Emergency procedures exist for protecting personnel in case of fire, spill, explosion, ere

[_ 4. Pertinent personnel protection exist (protective clothing, breathing apparatus, eye and ear

protection, medical check, first aid, etc.)

h_ 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.

11. Provisions in case of failure of vessel or system from evacuation or pressure are provided

(drains, deluge, ventilation, etc.)

12. Electrical and/or static grounding and bonding is adequate (electrical equipment, test systems,

work bench, drums, building grounds, etc.)

13. 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 FACiLI?Y

[] 15. Sprinklers and/or other fire extinguishing equipment installed and operating.

[] 16. Fire protection valves, detection, and warning devices or switches sealed in operating

position.

El} 17. Equipment fo, detection and monitoring of hazardous conditions installed and operating

(radiation, toxicity, insufficient oxygen).

[] 18. 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

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 JPL 0284-S R 3/86

]3-6