wind energy guidelines fws ~voluntary 3/23/2012

8/2/2019 Wind Energy Guidelines FWS ~Voluntary 3/23/2012

1/82

U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceLand-Based Wind Energy Guidelines

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service


2/82

Cover Photo:

Wind Turbine. Photo by Stefanie Stavrakas, USFWS


3/82

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines

U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceLand-Based Wind Energy Guidelines

OMB Control No, 1018-0148Expiration Date: 09/30/2012

March 23, 2012


4/82

ii


The U.S. Fish and Wildlie Service (Service) would like to recognize and thank the Wind Turbine GuidelinesAdvisory Committee or its dedication and preparation o its Recommendations. The Recommendations have servedas the basis rom which the Services team worked to develop the Services Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines.The Service also recognizes the tireless eorts o the Headquarters, Regional and Field Oce sta that helped toreview and update these Guidelines.

Acknowledgements

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement: The Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines contain reporting and recordkeepingrequirements that require Oce o Management and Budget approval in accordance with the Paperwork ReductionAct o 1995. Your response is voluntary. We collect this inormation in order to provide technical assistance relatedto addressing wildlie conservation concerns at all stages o land-based wind energy development. For eachresponse, we estimate the time necessary to provide the inormation as ollows:

Tier 1 83 hoursTier 2 375 hoursTier 3 2,880 hoursTier 4 2,550 hoursTier 5 2,400 hours

The above estimates include time or reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining data, and preparing andtransmitting reports. Send comments regarding these estimates or any other aspect o the requirements to theService Inormation Collection Clearance Ocer, U.S. Fish and Wildlie Service, 4401 N. Fairax Drive, MS 2042-PDM, Arlington, VA 22203.

We may not conduct and you are not required to respond to a collection o inormation unless it displays a currentlyvalid OMB control number.


5/82

ii


Table of Contents

Executive Summary vi

Chapter 1 - General Overview 1

Statutory Authorities 1

Migratory Bird Treaty Act 2Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act 2Endangered Species Act3

Implementation o the Guidelines 4

Consideration o the Guidelines in MBTA and BGEPA Enorcement 6Scope and Project Scale o the Guidelines 6Service Review Period 7

Introduction to the Decision Framework Using a Tiered Approach 7

Considering Risk in the Tiered Approach 10

Cumulative Impacts o Project Development 10

Other Federal Agencies 10

Relationship to Other Guidelines 11

Chapter 2: Tier 1 Preliminary Site Evaluation 12

Tier 1 Questions 13

Tier 1 Methods and Metrics 13

Tier 1 Decision Points 13

Chapter 3: Tier 2 Site Characterization 14

Tier 2 Questions 14

Tier 2 Methods and Metrics 15


Chapter 4: Tier 3 Field Studies to Document Site Wildlife and Habitat and Predict Project Impacts 19

Tier 3 Questions 19

Tier 3 Study Design Considerations 24

Assessing Presence 24Assessing Site Use/Behavior 24Duration/Intensity o Studies 25Assessing Risk to Species o Concern 25

Tier 3 Technical Resources 26

Tier 3, Question 1 26Tier 3, Question 2 27


6/82

iv


Tier 3, Question 3 28


Chapter 5: Tier 4 Post-construction Studies to Estimate Impacts 34

Tier 4a Fatality Studies 34

Tier 4a Questions 35Tier 4a Protocol Design Considerations 35

Tier 4a Study Objectives 37

Tier 4b Assessing direct and indirect impacts o habitat loss, degradation, and ragmentation 40

Tier 4b Protocol Design Considerations 41Tier 4b Decision Points 41

Chapter 6: Tier 5 Other Post-construction Studies 43

Tier 5 Questions 43

Tier 5 Study Design Considerations 44

Tier 5 Examples 44Tier 5 Studies and Research 46

Chapter 7: Best Management Practices 49

Site Construction and Operation 49

Retrotting, Repowering, and Decommissioning 51

Retroftting 51Repowering 51Decommissioning 52

Chapter 8: Mitigation 53

NEPA Guidance on Mitigation 53

Compensatory Mitigation 54

Migratory Birds and Eagles 54

Endangered Species 54

Chapter 9: Advancing Use, Cooperation and Effective Implementation 55

Confict Resolution 55

Bird and Bat Conservation Strategies (BBCS) 55

Project Interconnection Lines 55

Condentiality o Site Evaluation Process as Appropriate 56

Collaborative Research 56

Service - State Coordination and Cooperation 56


7/82

v


Service Tribal Consultation and Coordination 57

Tribal Wind Energy Development on Reservation Lands 57Tribal Wind Energy Development on Lands that are not held in Trust57Non-Tribal Wind Energy Development Consultation with Indian Tribal Governments 57

Non-Governmental Organization Actions 58

Non-Governmental Organization Conservation Lands 58

Appendix A: Glossary 59

Appendix B: Literature Cited 64

Appendix C: Sources of Information Pertaining to Methods to Assess Impacts to Wildlife 70

List of Figures and Tables

Table 1. Suggested Communications Protocol 5

Figure 1. General Framework o Tiered Approach 9

Table 2. Decision Framework or Tier 4a Fatality Monitoring o Species o Concern. 39

Table 3. Decision Framework to Guide Studies or Minimizing Impacts to Habitat and Species oHabitat Fragmentation (HF) Concern. 42


8/82

vi


Executive Summary

As the Nation shits to renewableenergy production to supplant theneed or carbon-based uel, windenergy will be an important sourceo power. As wind energy productionincreases, both developers andwildlie agencies have recognizedthe need or a system to evaluateand address the potential negativeimpacts o wind energy projects onspecies o concern. These voluntaryGuidelines provide a structured,scientic process or addressingwildlie conservation concerns at all

stages o land-based wind energydevelopment. They also promoteeective communication among windenergy developers and ederal, state,and local conservation agencies andtribes. When used in concert withappropriate regulatory tools, theGuidelines orm the best practicalapproach or conserving specieso concern. The Guidelines havebeen developed by the InteriorDepartments U.S. Fish and WildlieService (Service) working with theWind Turbine Guidelines Advisory

Committee. They replace interimvoluntary guidance published by theService in 2003.

The Guidelines discuss variousrisks to species o concern romwind energy projects, includingcollisions with wind turbines andassociated inrastructure; lossand degradation o habitat romturbines and inrastructure;ragmentation o large habitatblocks into smaller segments thatmay not support sensitive species;

displacement and behavioralchanges; and indirect eects suchas increased predator populationsor introduction o invasive plants.The Guidelines assist developersin identiying species o concernthat may potentially be aected bytheir proposed project, includingmigratory birds; bats; bald and

golden eagles and other birds oprey; prairie and sage grouse;and listed, proposed, or candidateendangered and threatenedspecies. Wind energy developmentin some areas may be precludedby ederal law; other areas maybe inappropriate or developmentbecause they have been recognizedas having high wildlie value basedon their ecological rarity andintactness.

The Guidelines use a tiered

approach or assessing potentialadverse eects to species o concernand their habitats. The tieredapproach is an iterative decision-making process or collectinginormation in increasing detail;quantiying the possible risks oproposed wind energy projectsto species o concern and theirhabitats; and evaluating those risksto make siting, construction, andoperation decisions. During thepre-construction tiers (Tiers 1, 2,and 3), developers are working to

identiy, avoid and minimize risks tospecies o concern. During post-construction tiers (Tiers 4 and 5),developers are assessing whetheractions taken in earlier tiers toavoid and minimize impacts aresuccessully achieving the goals and,when necessary, taking additionalsteps to compensate or impacts.Subsequent tiers rene and buildupon issues raised and eortsundertaken in previous tiers. Eachtier oers a set o questions to helpthe developer evaluate the potential

risk associated with developing aproject at the given location.

Briefy, the tiers address:

Tier 1 Preliminary siteevaluation (landscape-scalescreening o possible projectsites)

Tier 2 Site characterization(broad characterization o oneor more potential project sites)

Tier 3 Field studies todocument site wildlie andhabitat and predict projectimpacts

Tier 4 Post-constructionstudies to estimate impacts1

Tier 5 Other post-construction studies and

research

The tiered approach provides theopportunity or evaluation anddecision-making at each stage,enabling a developer to abandon orproceed with project development,or to collect additional inormationi required. This approach doesnot require that every tier, orevery element within each tier, beimplemented or every project.The Service anticipates that manydistributed or community acilities

will not need to ollow the Guidelinesbeyond Tiers 1 and 2. Instead, thetiered approach allows ecient useo developer and wildlie agencyresources with increasing levels oeort.

I sucient data are availableat a particular tier, the ollowingoutcomes are possible:

1. The project proceeds to thenext tier in the developmentprocess without additional

data collection.

2. The project proceeds to thenext tier in the developmentprocess with additional datacollection.

3. An action or combinationo actions, such as project

1The Service anticipates these studies will include atality monitoring as well as studies to evaluate habitat impacts.


9/82

vi


modication, mitigation,or specic post-constructionmonitoring, is indicated.

4. The project site is abandonedbecause the risk is consideredunacceptable.

I data are deemed insucientat a tier, more intensive study isconducted in the subsequent tieruntil sucient data are availableto make a decision to modiy theproject, proceed with the project, orabandon the project.

The most important thing adeveloper can do is to consult withthe Service as early as possible inthe development o a wind energyproject. Early consultation oersthe greatest opportunity or

avoiding areas where developmentis precluded or where wildlieimpacts are likely to be highand dicult or costly to remedyor mitigate at a later stage. Byconsulting early, project developerscan also incorporate appropriatewildlie conservation measures andmonitoring into their decisions aboutproject siting, design, and operation.

Adherence to the Guidelines isvoluntary and does not relieve anyindividual, company, or agency othe responsibility to comply withlaws and regulations. However, ia violation occurs the Service willconsider a developers documentedeorts to communicate withthe Service and adhere to theGuidelines. The Guidelines includea Communications Protocol which

provides guidance to both developersand Service personnel regardingappropriate communication anddocumentation.

The Guidelines also provideBest Management Practices orsite development, construction,retrotting, repowering, anddecommissioning. For additionalreerence, a glossary o terms andlist o literature cited are included inthe appendices.

Wind Resource Map. Credit: NREL


10/82

viii



11/82


1

Chapter 1 - General Overview

The mission o the U.S. Fish andWildlie Service (Service) is workingwith others to conserve, protect andenhance sh, wildlie, plants andtheir habitats or the continuingbenet o the American people. Aspart o this, the Service implementsstatutes including the EndangeredSpecies Act, Migratory Bird TreatyAct, and Bald and Golden EagleProtection Act. These statutesprohibit taking o ederally listedspecies, migratory birds, and eaglesunless otherwise authorized.

Recent studies have documentedthat wind energy acilities can killbirds and bats. Mortality ratesin atalities per nameplate MWper year vary among acilities andregions. Studies have indicated thatrelatively low raptor (e.g., hawks,eagles) atality rates exist at mostmodern wind energy developmentswith the exception o some acilitiesin Caliornia and Wyoming. Turbine-related bat deaths have beenreported at each wind acility to

date. Generally, studies in the Westhave reported lower rates o batatalities than acilities in the East.There is still much uncertaintyregarding geographic distributionand causes o bat atalities (NWCC2010).

These Guidelines are intended to:

(1) Promote compliancewith relevant wildlie lawsand regulations;

(2) Encourage scienticallyrigorous survey, monitoring,assessment, and researchdesigns proportionate to therisk to species o concern;

(3) Produce potentiallycomparable data across theNation;

(4) Mitigate, including avoid,minimize, and compensateor potential adverse eectson species o concern andtheir habitats; and,

(5) Improve the ability topredict and resolve eectslocally, regionally, andnationally.

As the United States moves toexpand wind energy production,it also must maintain and protectthe Nations wildlie and theirhabitats, which wind energyproduction can negatively aect.As with all responsible energydevelopment, wind energy projectsshould adhere to high standardsor environmental protection. Withproper diligence paid to siting,operations, and management oprojects, it is possible to mitigate

or adverse eects to wildlie,and their habitats. This is bestaccomplished when the wind energyproject developer communicates asearly as possible with the Serviceand other stakeholders. Suchearly communication allows or thegreatest range o development andmitigation options. The ollowingwebsite contains contact inormationor the Service Regional and Fieldoces as well as State wildlieagencies: http://www.ws.gov/oces/statelinks.html.

In response to increasing windenergy development in the UnitedStates, the Service released a seto voluntary, interim guidelines or

reducing adverse eects to sh andwildlie resources rom wind energyprojects or public comment in July2003. Ater the Service reviewed thepublic comments, the Secretary othe Interior (Secretary) establisheda Federal Advisory Committee2 toprovide recommendations to revisethe guidelines related to land-based wind energy acilities. InMarch 2007, the U.S. Departmento the Interior established theWind Turbine Guidelines AdvisoryCommittee (the Committee).

The Committee submitted itsnal Recommended Guidelines(Recommendations) to the Secretaryon March 4, 2010. The Service usedthe Recommendations to developits Land-Based Wind EnergyGuidelines.

The Service encourages projectproponents to use the processdescribed in these voluntary Land-based Wind Energy Guidelines(Guidelines) to address risks tospecies o concern. The Service

intends that these Guidelines, whenused in concert with the appropriateregulatory tools, will orm the bestpractical approach or conservationo species o concern.

Statutory Authorities

These Guidelines are not intendednor shall they be construed tolimit or preclude the Service romexercising its authority under anylaw, statute, or regulation, or romconducting enorcement action

against any individual, company,or agency. They are not meant torelieve any individual, company, oragency o its obligations to complywith any applicable ederal, state,

2Committee membership, rom 2008 to 2011, has included: Taber Allison, Massachusetts Audubon; Dick Anderson, Caliornia EnergyCommission; Ed Arnett, Bat Conservation International; Michael Azeka, AES Wind Generation; Thomas Bancrot, National Audubon; KathyBoydston, Texas Parks and Wildlie Department; Ren Braud, EDP Renewables; Scott Darling, Vermont Fish and Wildlie Department; MichaelDaulton, National Audubon; Aimee Delach, Deenders o Wildlie; Karen Douglas, Caliornia Energy Commission; Sam Eneld, MAP Royalty;Greg Hueckel, Washington Department o Fish and Wildlie; Jeri Lawrence, Blackeet Nation; Steve Lindenberg, U.S. Department o Energy;

Andy Linehan, Iberdrola Renewables; Rob Manes, The Nature Conservancy, Kansas; Winired Perkins, NextEra Energy Resources; StevenQuarles, Crowell & Moring; Rich Rayhill, Ridgeline Energy; Robert Robel, Kansas State University; Keith Sexson, Association o Fish and

Wildlie Agencies; Mark Sinclair, Clean Energy States Alliance; David Stout, U.S. Fish and Wildlie Service; Patrick Traylor, Hogan Lovells.


12/82


2

tribal, or local laws, statutes, orregulations. The Guidelines do notprevent the Service rom reerringviolations o law or enorcementwhen a company has not ollowed theGuidelines.

Ultimately it is the responsibilityo those involved with the planning,design, construction, operation,maintenance, and decommissioningo wind projects to conduct relevantwildlie and habitat evaluation anddetermine, which, i any, speciesmay be aected. The results othese analyses will inorm all eortsto achieve compliance with theappropriate jurisdictional statutes.Project proponents are responsibleor complying with applicable stateand local laws.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act(MBTA) is the cornerstone omigratory bird conservation andprotection in the United States. TheMBTA implements our treaties thatprovide or international protectiono migratory birds. It is a strictliability statute, meaning that prooo intent, knowledge, or negligence

is not an element o an MBTAviolation. The statutes languageis clear that actions resulting in ataking or possession (permanentor temporary) o a protected species,in the absence o a Service permitor regulatory authorization, are aviolation o the MBTA.

The MBTA states, Unless andexcept as permitted by regulations it shall be unlawul at any time,by any means, or in any mannerto pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill

possess, oer or sale, sell purchase ship, export, import transport or cause to be transported any migratory bird, any part,nest, or eggs o any such bird .[The Act] prohibits the taking,killing, possession, transportation,import and export o migratorybirds, their eggs, parts, and nests,except when specically authorizedby the Department o the Interior.16 U.S.C. 703. The word take isdened by regulation as to pursue,

hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap,capture, or collect, or attempt topursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap,capture, or collect. 50 CFR 10.12.

The MBTA provides criminalpenalties or persons who commitany o the acts prohibited by thestatute in section 703 on any o thespecies protected by the statute.See 16 U.S.C. 707. The Servicemaintains a list o all speciesprotected by the MBTA at 50 CFR10.13. This list includes over onethousand species o migratory birds,including eagles and other raptors,waterowl, shorebirds, seabirds,wading birds, and passerines. TheMBTA does not protect introducedspecies such as the house (English)sparrow, European starling, rockdove (pigeon), Eurasian collared-dove, and non-migratory uplandgame birds. The Service maintainsa list o introduced species notprotected by the Act. See 70 Fed.Reg. 12,710 (Mar. 15, 2005).

Bald and Golden Eagle ProtectionAct

Under authority o the Bald andGolden Eagle Protection Act

(BGEPA), 16 U.S.C.668668d, bald eagles andgolden eagles are aordedadditional legal protection.BGEPA prohibits the take,sale, purchase, barter,oer o sale, purchase, orbarter, transport, exportor import, at any time orin any manner o any baldor golden eagle, alive ordead, or any part, nest, oregg thereo. 16 U.S.C. 668.BGEPA also denes take

to include pursue, shoot,shoot at, poison, wound,kill, capture, trap, collect,molest, or disturb, 16U.S.C. 668c, and includescriminal and civil penaltiesor violating the statute.See 16 U.S.C. 668. TheService urther dened theterm disturb as agitatingor bothering an eagle to adegree that causes, or islikely to cause, injury, or

either a decrease in productivity ornest abandonment by substantiallyinterering with normal breeding,eeding, or sheltering behavior. 50CFR 22.3. BGEPA authorizes theService to permit the take o eaglesor certain purposes and undercertain circumstances, includingscientic or exhibition purposes,religious purposes o Indian tribes,and the protection o wildlie,agricultural, or other interests, solong as that take is compatible withthe preservation o eagles. 16 U.S.C.668a.

In 2009, the Service promulgateda nal rule on two new permitregulations that, or the rsttime, specically authorize theincidental take o eagles and eaglenests in certain situations underBGEPA. See 50 CFR 22.26 &22.27. The permits authorizelimited, non-purposeul (incidental)take o bald and golden eagles;authorizing individuals, companies,government agencies (includingtribal governments), and otherorganizations to disturb orotherwise take eagles in the courseo conducting lawul activities suchas operating utilities and airports.

Bald Eagle, Credit: USFWS


13/82


3

Removal o active eagle nests wouldusually be allowed only when it isnecessary to protect human saety orthe eagles. Removal o inactive nestscan be authorized when necessaryto ensure public health and saety,when a nest is built on a human-engineered structure rendering itinoperable, and when removal isnecessary to protect an interestin a particular locality, but only ithe take or mitigation or the takewill provide a clear and substantialbenet to eagles.

To acilitate issuance o permitsunder these new regulations,the Service has drated EagleConservation Plan (ECP) Guidance.The ECP Guidance is compatiblewith these Land-Based WindEnergy Guidelines. The Guidelinesguide developers through theprocess o project development andoperation. I eagles are identiedas a potential risk at a project site,developers are strongly encouragedto reer to the ECP Guidance. TheECP Guidance describes specicactions that are recommendedto comply with the regulatoryrequirements in BGEPA or an eagletake permit, as described in 50 CFR

22.26 and 22.27. The ECP Guidanceprovides a national ramework orassessing and mitigating risk specicto eagles through development oECPs and issuance o programmaticincidental takes o eagles at windturbine acilities. The Servicewill make its nal ECP Guidanceavailable to the public through itswebsite.

Endangered Species Act

The Endangered Species Act (16

U.S.C. 15311544; ESA) was enactedby Congress in 1973 in recognitionthat many o our Nations nativeplants and animals were in danger obecoming extinct. The ESA directsthe Service to identiy and protectthese endangered and threatenedspecies and their critical habitat, andto provide a means to conserve theirecosystems. To this end, ederalagencies are directed to utilizetheir authorities to conserve listedspecies, and ensure that their actions

are not likely to jeopardize thecontinued existence o these speciesor destroy or adversely modiy theircritical habitat. Federal agenciesare encouraged to do the same with

respect to candidate species thatmay be listed in the near uture. Thelaw is administered by the Serviceand the Commerce DepartmentsNational Marine Fisheries Service(NMFS). For inormation regardingspecies protected under the ESA,see: http://www.ws.gov/endangered/.

The Service has primaryresponsibility or terrestrial andreshwater species, while NMFSgenerally has responsibilityor marine species. These two

agencies work with other agenciesto plan or modiy ederal projectsso that they will have minimalimpact on listed species and theirhabitats. Protection o species isalso achieved through partnershipswith the states, through ederalnancial assistance and a system oincentives available to encouragestate participation. The Servicealso works with private landowners,providing nancial and technicalassistance or management

actions on their lands to benet bothlisted and non-listed species.

Section 9 o the ESA makes itunlawul or a person to take a

listed species. Take is dened as ...to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot,wound, kill, trap, capture, or collector attempt to engage in any suchconduct. 16 U.S.C. 1532(19). Theterms harass and harm are urtherdened in our regulations. See 50CFR 17.3. However, the Servicemay authorize incidental take(take that occurs as a result o anotherwise legal activity) in two ways.

Take o ederally listed speciesincidental to a lawul activity may

be authorized through ormalconsultation under section 7(a)(2) othe ESA, whenever a ederal agency,ederal unding, or a ederal permitis involved. Otherwise, a person mayseek an incidental take permit undersection 10(a)(1)(B) o the ESA uponcompletion o a satisactory habitatconservation plan (HCP) or listedspecies. Developers not receivingederal unding or authorizationshould contact the Service to obtainan incidental take permit i a wind

Indiana bat. Credit: USFWS


14/82


4

energy project is likely to resultin take o listed threatened orendangered wildlie species. Formore inormation regarding ormalconsultation and the requirementso obtaining HCPs, please see theEndangered Species ConsultationHandbook at http://www.ws.gov/

endangered/esa-library/index.html#consultations and theServices HCP website, http://www.ws.gov/endangered/what-we-do/hcp-overview.html.

Implementation o the Guidelines

Because these Guidelines arevoluntary, the Service encouragesdevelopers to use them as soonas possible ater publication. Toreceive the considerations discussedon page 6 regarding enorcement

priorities, a wind energy projectwould all into one o three generalcategories relative to timing andimplementation:

Forprojectsinitiatedafterpublication, the developer hasapplied the Guidelines, includingthe tiered approach, through siteselection, design, construction,operation and post-operationphases o the project, and hascommunicated and shared

inormation with the Service andconsidered its advice.

Forprojectsinitiatedpriortopublication, the developer shouldconsider where they are in theplanning process relative to theappropriate tier and inorm theService o what actions they willtake to apply the Guidelines.

Forprojectsoperatingatthetime o publication, the developershould coner with the Serviceregarding the appropriate periodo atality monitoring consistentwith Tier 4, communicate andshare inormation with theService on monitoring results,and consider Tier 5 studiesand mitigation options whereappropriate.

Projects that are already underdevelopment or are in operationare not expected to start over orreturn to the beginning o a specictier. Instead, these projects shouldimplement those portions o theGuidelines relevant to the currentphases o the project per the bulletsabove.

The Service is aware that it willtake time or Service sta andother personnel, including windenergy developers and theirbiologists, to develop expertisein the implementation o theseGuidelines. Service sta and manysta associated with the windenergy industry have been involvedwith developing these Guidelines.Thereore, they have a workingknowledge o the Guidelines. Tourther rene their training, theService will make every eort to

oer an in-depth course within 6months o the nal Guidelines beingpublished.

The Communications Protocol onpage 5 provides guidance to Servicesta and developers in the exchangeo inormation and recommendationsat each tier in the process. Althoughthe advice o the Service is notbinding, a developer should reviewsuch advice, and either accept orreject it. I they reject it, they

should contemporaneously documentwith reasoned justication why theydid so. Although the Guidelinesleave decisions up to the developer,the Service retains authority toevaluate whether developer eortsto mitigate impacts are sucient,to determine signicance, and toreer or prosecution any unlawultake that it believes to be reasonablyrelated to lack o incorporationo Service recommendations orinsucient adherence with theGuidelines.

Utility-Scale Wind turbine with an anemometertower in the background. Credit: University o

Minnesota College o Science and Engineering


15/82


5

Table 1. Suggested Communications ProtocolThis table provides examples o potential communication opportunities between a wind energy project developer andthe Service. Not all projects will ollow all steps indicated below.

TIER Project Developer/Operator Role Service Role

Tier 1:Preliminary siteevaluation

Landscape level assessment o habitat orspecies o concern

Request data sources or existing inormationand literature

Provide lists o data sources and reerences,i requested

Tier 2: Sitecharacterization

Assess potential presence o species oconcern, including species o habitatragmentation concern, likely to be on site

Assess potential presence o plantcommunities present on site that may providehabitat or species o concern

Assess potential presence o criticalcongregation areas or species o concern

One or more reconnaissance level site visit by

biologist Communicate results o site visits and otherassessments with the Service

Provide general inormation about the sizeand location o the project to the Service

Provide species lists, or species o concern,including species o habitat ragmentationconcern, or general area, i available

Provide inormation regarding plantcommunities o concern, i available

Respond to inormation provided aboutndings o biologist rom site visit

Identiy initial concerns about site(s) basedon available inormation

Inorm lead ederal agencies ocommunications with wind projectdevelopers

Tier 3: Fieldstudies and impactprediction

Discuss extent and design o eld studies toconduct with the Service

Conduct biological studies Communicate results o all studies to Service

eld oce in a timely manner Evaluate risk to species o concern rom

project construction and operation Identiy ways to mitigate potential direct and

indirect impacts o building and operating theproject

Respond to requests to discuss eld studies Advise project proponent about studies to

conduct and methods or conducting them Communicate with project proponent(s)

about results o eld studies and riskassessments

Communicate with project proponents(s)ways to mitigate potential impacts obuilding and operating the project

Inorm lead ederal agencies o

communications with wind projectdevelopers

Tier 4: Postconstructionstudies to estimateimpacts

Discuss extent and design o post-constructionstudies to conduct with the Service

Conduct post-construction studies to assessatalities and habitat-related impacts

Communicate results o all studies to Serviceeld oce in a timely manner

I necessary, discuss potential mitigationstrategies with Service

Maintain appropriate records o data collectedrom studies

Advise project operator on study design,including duration o studies to collectadequate inormation

Communicate with project operator aboutresults o studies

Advise project operator o potentialmitigation strategies, when appropriate

Tier 5: Otherpost-construction

studies andresearch

Communicate with the Service about the needor and design o other studies and research to

conduct with the Service, when appropriate,particularly when impacts exceed predictedlevels

Communicate with the Service about waysto evaluate cumulative impacts on specieso concern, particularly species o habitatragmentation concern

Conduct appropriate studies as needed Communicate results o studies with the

Service Identiy potential mitigation strategies to

reduce impacts and discuss them with theService

Advise project proponents as to need orTier 5 studies to address specic topics,

including cumulative impacts, based oninormation collected in Tiers 3 and 4 Advise project proponents o methods and

metrics to use in Tier 5 studies Communicate with project operator and

consultants about results o Tier 5 studies Advise project operator o potential

mitigation strategies, when appropriate,based on Tier 5 studies


16/82


6

Consideration o the Guidelines inMBTA and BGEPA Enorcement

The Service urges voluntaryadherence to the Guidelines andcommunication with the Servicewhen planning and operating a

acility. While it is not possible toabsolve individuals or companiesrom MBTA or BGEPA liability, theOce o Law Enorcement ocusesits resources on investigatingand prosecuting those who takemigratory birds without identiyingand implementing reasonable andeective measures to avoid thetake. The Service will regard adevelopers or operators adherenceto these Guidelines, includingcommunication with the Service, asappropriate means o identiyingand implementing reasonable andeective measures to avoid thetake o species protected under theMBTA and BGEPA.3 The Chie oLaw Enorcement or more seniorocial o the Service will makeany decision whether to reer orprosecution any alleged take o suchspecies, and will take such adherenceand communication ully into accountwhen exercising discretion withrespect to such potential reerral.Each developer or operator will beresponsible or maintaining internalrecords sucient to demonstrateadherence to the Guidelines andresponse to communications romthe Service. Examples o theserecords could include: studiesperormed in the implementation othe tiered approach; an internal orexternal review or audit process; abird and bat conservation strategy;or a wildlie management plan.

I a developer and operator are notthe same entity, the Service expects

the operator to maintain sucientrecords to demonstrate adherence tothe Guidelines.

Scope and Project Scale o theGuidelines

The Guidelines are designed orutility-scale land-based wind

energy projects to reduce potentialimpacts to species o concern,regardless o whether they areproposed or private or publiclands. A developer o a distributedor community scale wind projectmay nd it useul to consider thegeneral principles o the tieredapproach to assess and reducepotential impacts to species oconcern, including answering Tier1 questions using publicly availableinormation. In the vast majorityo situations, appropriately sitedsmall wind projects are not likely topose signicant risks to species oconcern. Answering Tier 1 questionswill assist a developer o distributedor community wind projects, as wellas landowners, in assessing the needto urther communicate with theService, and precluding, in manycases, the need or ull detailedpre-construction assessments ormonitoring surveys typically calledor in Tiers 2 and 3. I landownersor community/distributed winddevelopers encounter problemslocating inormation about specicsites they can contact the Serviceand/or state wildlie agencies todetermine potential risks to specieso concern or their particularproject.

The tiered approach is designedto lead to the appropriate amounto evaluation in proportion tothe anticipated level o risk thata project may pose to specieso concern and their habitats.Study plans and the duration andintensity o study eorts shouldbe tailored specically to theunique characteristics o each siteand the corresponding potentialor signicant adverse impactson species o concern and theirhabitats as determined throughthe tiered approach. This is whythe tiered approach begins withan examination o the potentiallocation o the project, not the sizeo the project. In all cases, studyplans and selection o appropriatestudy methods and techniques maybe tailored to the relative scale,location, and potential or signicantadverse impacts o the proposed site.

The Service considers a projectto include all phases o windenergy development, including,but not limited to, prospecting, siteassessment, construction, operation,and decommissioning, as well asall associated inrastructure andinterconnecting electrical lines.A project site is the land andairspace where development occurs

Communication with Christy Johnson-Hughes. Credit: Rachel London, USFWS

3With regard to eagles, this paragraph will only apply when a project is not l ikely to result in take. I Tiers 1, 2, and/or 3 identiy a potential totake eagles, developers should consider developing an ECP and, i necessary, apply or a take permit


17/82


7

or is proposed to occur, includingthe turbine pads, roads, powerdistribution and transmissionlines on or immediately adjacentto the site; buildings and relatedinrastructure, ditches, grades,culverts; and any changes or

modications made to the originalsite beore development occurs.Project evaluations should considerall potential eects to species oconcern, which includes species 1)protected by the MBTA, BGEPA, orESA (including candidate species),designated by law, regulation orother ormal process or protectionand/or management by the relevantagency or other authority, or thathave been shown to be signicantlyadversely aected by wind energydevelopment; and 2) determined to

be possibly aected by the project.

These Guidelines are not designed toaddress power transmission beyondthe point o interconnection to thetransmission system.

Service Review Period

The Service is committed toproviding timely responses.Service Field Oces shouldtypically respond to requestsby a wind energy developer orinormation and consultation onproposed site locations (Tiers 1and 2), pre- and post-constructionstudy designs (Tiers 3 and 4), andproposed mitigation (Tier 3) within60 calendar days. The requestshould be in writing to the FieldOce and copied to the RegionalOce with inormation aboutthe proposed project, location(s)under consideration, and point ocontact. The request should containa description o the inormationneeded rom the Service. TheService will provide a response,even i it is to notiy a developer oadditional review time, within the60 calendar day review period. Ithe Service does not respond within60 calendar days o receipt o thedocument, then the developer canproceed through Tier 3 withoutwaiting or Service input. I theService provides comments at a

later time, the developer shouldincorporate the comments i easible.It is particularly important that idata rom Tier 1-3 studies predictthat the project is likely to producesignicant adverse impacts onspecies o concern, the developer

inorm the Service o the actions itintends to implement to mitigatethose impacts. I the Service cannotrespond within 60 calendar days,this does not relieve developers romtheir MBTA, BGEPA, and ESAresponsibilities.

The tiered approach allows adeveloper in certain limitedcircumstances to move directly romTier 2 to construction (e.g., adequatesurvey data or the site exists). Thedeveloper should notiy the Service

o this decision and give the Service60 calendar days to comment on theproposed project prior to initiatingconstruction activities.

Introduction to the DecisionFramework Using a Tiered Approach

The tiered approach provides adecision ramework or collectinginormation in increasing detail toevaluate risk and make siting andoperational decisions. It providesthe opportunity or evaluationand decision-making at each tier,enabling a developer to proceed withor abandon project development,or to collect additional inormationi necessary. This approach doesnot require that every tier, orevery element within each tier, beimplemented or every project.Instead, it allows ecient use odeveloper and wildlie agencyresources with increasing levels oeort until sucient inormation andthe desired precision is acquired orthe risk assessment.

Figure 1 (General Framework oTiered Approach) illustrates thetiered approach, which consists o upto ve iterative stages, or tiers:

Tier 1 Preliminary siteevaluation (landscape-scalescreening o possible projectsites)

Tier 2 Site characterization(broad characterization o one ormore potential project sites)

Tier 3 Field studies to documentsite wildlie and habitat andpredict project impacts

Tier 4 Post-construction studiesto estimate impacts4

Tier 5 Other post-constructionstudies and research

At each tier, potential issuesassociated with developing oroperating a project are identiedand questions ormulated to guidethe decision process. Chapters Twothrough Six outline the questions tobe posed at each tier, and describe

recommended methods and metricsor gathering the data needed toanswer those questions.

The rst three tiers correspondto the pre-construction evaluationphase o wind energy development.At each o the three tiers, theGuidelines provide questions thatdevelopers should answer, ollowedby recommended methods andmetrics to use in answering thequestions. Some questions arerepeated at each tier, with successivetiers requiring a greater investmentin data collection to answer certainquestions. For example, while Tier2 investigations may discover someexisting inormation on ederal orstate-listed species and their use othe proposed development site, itmay be necessary to collect empiricadata in Tier 3 studies to determinethe presence o ederal or state-listed species.

Developers decide whether toproceed to the next tier. Timelycommunication and sharing oinormation will allow opportunitiesor the Service to provide, anddevelopers to consider, technicaladvice. A developer should base thedecision on the inormation obtainedrom adequately answering thequestions in this tier, whether themethods used were appropriate orthe site selected, and the resulting

4The Service anticipates these studies will include atality monitoring as well as studies to evaluate habitat impacts.


18/82


8

assessment o risk posed to specieso concern and their habitats.

I sucient data are availableat a particular tier, the ollowingoutcomes are possible:

1. The project proceeds to the nexttier in the development processwithout additional data collection.

2. The project proceeds to the next

tier in the development processwith additional data collection.

3. An action or combinationo actions, such as projectmodication, mitigation, or specicpost-construction monitoring, isindicated.

4. The project site is abandonedbecause the risk is consideredunacceptable.

I data are deemed insucient

at a tier, more intensive study isconducted in the subsequent tieruntil sucient data are availableto make a decision to modiy theproject, proceed with the project, orabandon the project.

The tiered approach used inthese Guidelines embodiesadaptive management bycollecting increasingly detailedinormation that is used to makedecisions about project design,

construction, and operation asthe developer progresses throughthe tiers. Adaptive managementis an iterative learning processproducing improved understandingand improved management overtime (Williams et al 2007). DOIhas determined that its resourceagencies, and the natural resourcesthey oversee, could benet romadaptive management. Use oadaptive management in DOI

is guided by the DOI Policy onAdaptive Management. DOI hasadopted the National ResearchCouncils 2004 denition o adaptivemanagement, which states:

Adaptive management promotesfexible decision making thatcan be adjusted in the ace ouncertainties as outcomes rommanagement actions and otherevents become better understood.Careul monitoring o theseoutcomes both advances scientic

understanding and helps adjustpolicies or operations as part o aniterative learning process. Adaptivemanagement also recognizes theimportance o natural variability incontributing to ecological resilienceand productivity. It is not a trialand error process, but ratheremphasizes learning while doing.Adaptive management does notrepresent an end in itsel, but rathera means to more eective decisionsand enhanced benets. Its true

measure is in how well it helps meetenvironmental, social, and economicgoals, increases scientic knowledge,and reduces tensions amongstakeholders.

This denition gives special

emphasis to uncertainty aboutmanagement eects, iterativelearning to reduce uncertainty, andimproved management as a resulto learning. The DOI AdaptiveManagement Technical Guide islocated on the web at:www.doi.gov/initiatives/AdaptiveManagement/index.html.

Wind turbines in Caliornia. Credit: Rachel London, USFWS


19/82


20/82


10

Considering Risk in the TieredApproach

In the context o these Guidelines,risk reers to the likelihood thatadverse impacts will occur toindividuals or populations o species

o concern as a result o windenergy development and operation.Estimates o atality risk can beused in a relative sense, allowingcomparisons among projects,alternative development designs,and in the evaluation o potential riskto populations. Because there arerelatively ew methods available ordirect estimation o risk, a weight-o-evidence approach is oten used(Anderson et al. 1999). Until suchtime that reliable risk predictivemodels are developed regardingavian and bat atality and windenergy projects, estimates o riskwould typically be qualitative, butshould be based upon quantitativesite inormation.

For the purposes o theseGuidelines, risk can also be denedin the context o populations, butthat calculation is more complicatedas it could involve estimating thereduction in population viabilityas indicated by demographicmetrics such as growth rate, sizeo the population, or survivorship,either or local populations,metapopulations, or entire species.For most populations, risk cannoteasily be reduced to a strictmetric, especially in the absence opopulation viability models or mostspecies. Consequently, estimatingthe quantitative risk to populationsis usually beyond the scope oproject studies due to the dicultiesin evaluating these metrics, andthereore risk assessment will be

qualitative.

Risk to habitat is a component o theevaluation o population risk. In thiscontext, the estimated loss o habitatis evaluated in terms o the potentialor population level eects (e.g.,reduced survival or reproduction).

The assessment o risk shouldsynthesize sucient data collectedat a project to estimate exposureand predict impact or individualsand their habitats or the species

o concern, with what is knownabout the population status o thesespecies, and in communication withthe relevant wildlie agency andindustry wildlie experts. Predictedrisk o these impacts could provideuseul inormation or determining

appropriate mitigation measuresi determined to be necessary. Inpractice in the tiered approach, riskassessments conducted in Tiers 1and 2 require less inormation toreach a risk-based decision thanthose conducted at higher tiers.

Cumulative Impacts o ProjectDevelopment

Cumulative impacts are thecomprehensive eect on theenvironment that results rom theincremental impact o a projectwhen added to other past, present,and reasonably oreseeableuture actions. Developers areencouraged to work closely withederal and state agencies earlyin the project planning process toaccess any existing inormationon the cumulative impacts oindividual projects on species andhabitats at risk, and to incorporateit into project development andany necessary wildlie studies. Toachieve that goal, it is importantthat agencies and organizations takethe ollowing actions to improvecumulative impacts analysis:

reviewtherangeofdevelopment-related signicant adverseimpacts;

determinewhichspeciesofconcern or their habitats withinthe landscape are most at risk osignicant adverse impacts romwind development in conjunction

with other reasonably oreseeablesignicant adverse impacts; and

makethatdataavailableforregional or landscape levelanalysis.

The magnitude and extent o theimpact on a resource depend onwhether the cumulative impactsexceed the capacity or resourcesustainability and productivity.

For projects that require a ederalpermit, unding, or other ederalnexus, the lead ederal agency isrequired to include a cumulativeimpacts analysis in their NationalEnvironmental Policy Act (NEPA)review. The ederal action agency

coordinates with the developer toobtain the necessary inormation orthe NEPA review and cumulativeimpacts analysis. To avoid projectdelays, ederal and state agenciesare encouraged to use existingwildlie data or the cumulativeimpacts analysis until improved dataare available.

Where there is no ederal nexus,individual developers are notexpected to conduct their owncumulative impacts analysis.However, a cumulative impactsanalysis would help developersand other stakeholders betterunderstand the signicance opotential impacts on species oconcern and their habitats.

Other Federal Agencies

Other ederal agencies, such asthe Bureau o Land Management,National Park Service, U.S.Department o Agriculture ForestService and Rural Utility Service,Federal Energy RegulatoryCommission and Department oEnergy are oten interested inand involved with wind projectdevelopments. These agencieshave a variety o expertise andauthorities they implement. Windproject developers on public landswill have to comply with applicableregulations and policies o thoseagencies. State and local agenciesand Tribes also have additionalinterests and knowledge. The

Service recommends that, whereappropriate, wind project developerscontact these agencies early in thetiered process and work closely withthem throughout project planningand development to assure thatprojects address issues o concernto those agencies. The denitiono species o concern in theseGuidelines includes species whichare trust resources o States ando ederal agencies (See Glossary).In those instances where a projectmay signicantly aect State trust


21/82


11

resources, wind energy developersshould work closely with appropriateState agencies.

Relationship to Other Guidelines

These Guidelines replace the

Services 2003 interim voluntaryguidelines. The Service intendsthat these Guidelines, when usedin concert with the appropriateregulatory tools, will orm the bestpractical approach or conservationo species o concern. For instance,when developers nd that a project

may aect an endangered orthreatened species, they shouldcomply with Section 7 or 10 othe ESA to obtain incidental takeauthorization. Other ederal,state, tribal and local governmentsmay use these Guidelines to

complement their eorts to addresswind energy development/wildlieinteractions. They are not intendedto supplant existing regional orlocal guidance, or landscape-scaletools or conservation planning,but were developed to provide ameans o improving consistency

with the goals o the wildlie statutesthat the Service is responsible orimplementing. The Service willcontinue to work with states, tribes,and other local stakeholders onmap-based tools, decision-supportsystems, and other products to

help guide uture development andconservation. Additionally, projectproponents should utilize anyrelevant guidance o the appropriatejurisdictional entity, which willdepend on the species and resourcespotentially aected by proposeddevelopment.

Pronghorn Antelope. Credit: Steve Hillebrand, USFWS


22/82


12

Chapter 2: Tier 1 Preliminary Site Evaluation

For developers taking a rst lookat a broad geographic area, apreliminary evaluation o the generalecological context o a potentialsite or sites can serve as useulpreparation or working with theederal, state, tribal, and/or localagencies. The Service is availableto assist wind energy projectdevelopers to identiy potentialwildlie and habitat issues and shouldbe contacted as early as possiblein the company's planning process.With this internal screening process,

the developer can begin to identiybroad geographic areas o highsensitivity due to the presenceo: 1) large blocks o intact nativelandscapes; 2) intact ecologicalcommunities; 3) ragmentation-sensitive species' habitats; or 4)other important landscape-scalewildlie values.

Tier 1 may be used in any o theollowing three ways:

1. To identiy regions where wind

energy development posessignicant risks to specieso concern or their habitats,including the ragmentation olarge-scale habitats and threats toregional populations o ederal- orstate-listed species.

2. To screen a landscape or set omultiple potential sites to avoidthose with the highest habitatvalues.

3. To begin to determine i a single

identied potential site posesserious risk to species o concernor their habitats.

Tier 1 can oer early guidanceabout the sensitivity o the sitewithin a larger landscape context; itcan help direct development awayrom sites that will be associatedwith additional study need, greatermitigation requirements, anduncertainty; or it can identiy thosesensitive resources that will need

to be studied urther to determinei the site can be developed withoutsignicant adverse impacts tothe species o concern or localpopulation(s). This may acilitatediscussions with the ederal,state, tribal, and/or local agenciesin a region being considered ordevelopment. In some cases, Tier 1studies could reveal serious concernsindicating that a site should not bedeveloped.

Developers o distributed or

community scale wind projectsare typically considering limitedgeographic areas to install turbines.Thereore, they would not likelyconsider broad geographic areas.Nevertheless, they should considerthe presence o habitats or species oconcern beore siting projects.

Development in some areas maybe precluded by ederal law. Thisdesignation is separate rom adetermination through the tieredapproach that an area is not

appropriate or development dueto easibility, ecological reasons,or other issues. Developers areencouraged to visit Service andother publicly available databases

or other available inormationduring Tier 1 or Tier 2 to see ia potential wind energy area isprecluded rom development byederal law. Some areas may beprotected rom development throughstate or local laws or ordinances,and the appropriate agencyshould be contacted accordingly.Service eld oces are available toanswer questions where they areknowledgeable, guide developers todatabases, and reer developers toother agency contacts.

Some areas may be inappropriateor large scale developmentbecause they have been recognizedaccording to scientically credibleinormation as having high wildlievalue, based solely on theirecological rarity and intactness (e.g.,Audubon Important Bird Areas,The Nature Conservancy portoliosites, state wildlie action planpriority habitats). It is importantto identiy such areas through thetiered approach, as refected in

Tier 1, Question 2 below. Many oNorth America's native landscapesare greatly diminished, with someexisting at less than 10 percent otheir pre-settlement occurrence.

Attwaters prairie chicken. Credit: Gary Halvorsen, USFWS


23/82


13

Herbaceous scrub-shrub steppein the Pacic Northwest and oldgrowth orest in the Northeastrepresent such diminished nativeresources. Important remnants othese landscapes are identied anddocumented in various databasesheld by private conservationorganizations, state wildlie agencies,and, in some cases, by the Service.Developers should collaborate withsuch entities specically about suchareas in the vicinity o a prospectiveproject site.

Tier 1 Questions

Questions at each tier helpdetermine potential environmentalrisks at the landscape scale orTier 1 and project scale or Tiers 2and 3. Suggested questions to beconsidered or Tier 1 include:

1. Are there species o concernpresent on the potentialsite(s), or is habitat (includingdesignated critical habitat)present or these species?

2. Does the landscape containareas where development isprecluded by law or areas

designated as sensitiveaccording to scientifcallycredible inormation?Examples o designated areasinclude, but are not limitedto: ederally-designatedcritical habitat; high-priorityconservation areas or non-government organizations(NGOs); or other local, state,regional, ederal, tribal, orinternational categorizations.

3. Are there known critical areas

o wildlie congregation,including, but not limited to:maternity roosts, hibernacula,staging areas, winter ranges,nesting sites, migrationstopovers or corridors, leks,or other areas o seasonalimportance?

4. Are there large areas o intacthabitat with the potential orragmentation, with respect tospecies o habitat ragmentation

concern needing largecontiguous blocks o habitat?

Tier 1 Methods and Metrics

Developers who choose to conductTier 1 investigations would generallybe able to utilize existing public orother readily available landscape-level maps and databases romsources such as ederal, state, ortribal wildlie or natural heritageprograms, the academic community,conservation organizations, orthe developers or consultantsown inormation. The Servicerecommends that developersconduct a review o the publiclyavailable data. The analysis oavailable sites in the region ointerest will be based on a blendo the inormation available inpublished and unpublished reports,wildlie range distribution maps, andother such sources. The developershould check with the Service FieldOce or data specic to windenergy development and wildlie atthe landscape scale in Tier 1.

Tier 1 Decision Points

The objective o the Tier 1 process

is to help the developer identiy asite or sites to consider urther orwind energy development. Possibleoutcomes o this internal screeningprocess include the ollowing:

1. One or more sites are oundwithin the area o investigationwhere the answer to each o theabove Tier 1 questions is no,indicating a low probability osignicant adverse impact towildlie. The developer proceedsto Tier 2 investigations and

characterization o the siteor sites, answering the Tier 2questions with site-specic datato conrm the validity o thepreliminary indications o lowpotential or signicant adverseimpact.

2. I a developer answers yesto one or more o the Tier 1questions, they should proceedto Tier 2 to urther assess theprobability o signicant adverse

impacts to wildlie. A developermay consider abandoning the areaor identiying possible means bywhich the project can be modiedto avoid or minimize potentialsignicant adverse impacts.

3. The data available in the sourcesdescribed above are insucientto answer one or more o theTier 1 questions. The developerproceeds to Tier 2, with a specicemphasis on collecting the datanecessary to answer the Tier 2questions, which are inclusive othose asked at Tier 1.


24/82


14

Chapter 3: Tier 2 Site Characterization

At this stage, the developer hasnarrowed consideration down tospecic sites, and additional datamay be necessary to systematicallyand comprehensively characterizea potential site in terms o the riskwind energy development wouldpose to species o concern and theirhabitats. In the case where a siteor sites have been selected withoutthe Tier 1 preliminary evaluation othe general ecological context, Tier2 becomes the rst stage in the siteselection process. The developer

will address the questions askedin Tier 1; i addressing the Tier 1questions here, the developer willevaluate the site within a landscapecontext. However, a distinguishingeature o Tier 2 studies is that theyocus on site-specic inormationand should include at least one visitby a knowledgeable biologist to theprospective site(s). Because Tier 2studies are preliminary, normallyone reconnaissance level site visitwill be adequate as a ground-truth o available inormation.

Notwithstanding, i key issues areidentied that relate to varyingconditions and/or seasons, Tier 2studies should include enough sitevisits during the appropriate timeso the year to adequately assessthese issues or the prospectivesite(s).

I the results o the site assessmentindicate that one or more specieso concern are present, a developershould consider applicableregulatory or other agency

processes or addressing them. Forinstance, i migratory birds and batsare likely to experience signicantadverse impacts by a wind project atthe proposed site, a developer shouldidentiy and document possibleactions that will avoid or compensateor those impacts. Such actionsmight include, but not be limitedto, altering locations o turbines orturbine arrays, operational changes,or compensatory mitigation. Assoon as a developer anticipates that

a wind energy project is likely toresult in a take o bald or goldeneagles, a developer should preparean ECP and, i necessary, applyor a programmatic take permit.As soon as a developer realizesendangered or threatened speciesare present and likely to be aectedby a wind project located there, aederal agency should consult withthe Service under Section 7(a)(2) othe ESA i the project has a ederalnexus or the developer should applyor a section 10(a)(1)(B) incidental

take permit i there is not a ederalnexus, and incidental take o listedwildlie is anticipated. State, tribal,and local jurisdictions may haveadditional permitting requirements.

Developers o distributed orcommunity scale wind projectsare typically considering limitedgeographic areas to install turbines.Thereore, they would likely beamiliar with conditions at the sitewhere they are considering installinga turbine. Nevertheless, they should

do preliminary site evaluations todetermine the presence o habitatsor species o concern beore sitingprojects.

Tier 2 Questions

Questions suggested or Tier 2can be answered using credible,publicly available inormation thatincludes published studies, technicalreports, databases, and inormationrom agencies, local conservationorganizations, and/or local experts.Developers or consultants workingon their behal should contact theederal, state, tribal, and localagencies that have jurisdictionor management authority and

responsibility over the potentialproject.

1. Are known species o concernpresent on the proposed site, oris habitat (including designatedcritical habitat) present orthese species?

2. Does the landscape containareas where development isprecluded by law or designatedas sensitive accordingto scientifcally credible

inormation? Examples odesignated areas include, butare not limited to: ederally-designated critical habitat;

Open landscape with wind turbines. Credit: NREL


25/82


15

high-priority conservation areasor NGOs; or other local, state,regional, ederal, tribal, orinternational categorizations.

3. Are there plant communities oconcern present or likely to be

present at the site(s)?

4. Are there known critical areaso congregation o specieso concern, including, butnot limited to: maternityroosts, hibernacula, stagingareas, winter ranges, nestingsites, migration stopovers orcorridors, leks, or other areas oseasonal importance?

5. Using best available scientifcinormation has the developer

or relevant ederal, state, tribal,and/or local agency identifedthe potential presence o apopulation o a species ohabitat ragmentation concern?

6. Which species o birds and bats,especially those known to be atrisk by wind energy acilities,are likely to use the proposedsite based on an assessment osite attributes?

7. Is there a potential or

signifcant adverse impacts tospecies o concern based on theanswers to the questions above,and considering the design othe proposed project?

Tier 2 Methods and Metrics

Obtaining answers to Tier 2questions will involve a morethorough review o the existingsite-specic inormation than inTier 1. Tier 2 site characterizationsstudies will generally contain threeelements:

1. A review o existing inormation,including existing published oravailable literature and databasesand maps o topography, landuse and land cover, potentialwetlands, wildlie, habitat, andsensitive plant distribution. Iagencies have documentedpotential habitat or species ohabitat ragmentation concern,

this inormation can help with theanalysis.

2. Contact with agencies andorganizations that have relevantscientic inormation to urtherhelp identiy i there are bird,

bat or other wildlie issues. TheService recommends that thedeveloper make contact withederal, state, tribal, and localagencies that have jurisdiction ormanagement authority over theproject or inormation about thepotentially aected resources.In addition, because key NGOsand relevant local groups areoten valuable sources o relevantlocal environmental inormation,the Service recommends thatdevelopers contact key NGOs,

even i condentiality concernspreclude the developer romidentiying specic projectlocation inormation at thisstage. These contacts alsoprovide an opportunity to identiyother potential issues and datanot already identied by thedeveloper.

3. One or more reconnaissancelevel site visits by a wildliebiologist to evaluate currentvegetation/habitat coverageand land management/use.Current habitat and land usepractices will be noted to help indetermining the baseline againstwhich potential impacts romthe project would be evaluated.The vegetation/habitat will beused or identiying potentialbird and bat resources occurringat the site and the potentialpresence o, or suitable habitator, species o concern. Vegetationtypes or habitats will be notedand evaluated against availableinormation such as land use/landcover mapping. Any sensitiveresources located during the sitevisit will be noted and mapped ordigital location data recorded oruture reerence. Any individualsor signs o species o concernobserved during the site visitwill be noted. I land accessagreements are not in place,access to the site will be limited topublic roads.

Specic resources that can helpanswer each Tier 2 question include:

1. Are known species o concernpresent on the proposed site, oris habitat (including designatedcritical habitat) present or

these species?

Inormation review and agencycontact: locations o state andederally listed, proposed andcandidate species and specieso concern are requentlydocumented in state and ederalwildlie databases. Examplesinclude published literature suchas: Natural Heritage Databases,State Wildlie Action Plans, NGOspublications, and developer andconsultant inormation, or can

be obtained by contacting theseentities.

Site Visit: To the extentpracticable, the site visit(s) shouldevaluate the suitability o habitatat the site or species identiedand the likelihood o the projectto adversely aect the species oconcern that may be present.

2. Does the landscape containareas where development isprecluded by law or designated

as sensitive accordingto scientifcally credibleinormation? Examples odesignated areas include, butare not limited to: ederally-designated critical habitat;high-priority conservation areasor NGOs; or other local, state,regional, ederal, tribal, orinternational categorizations.

Inormation review and agencycontact such as: maps o politicaland administrative boundaries;National Wetland Inventorydata les; USGS National LandCover data maps; state, ederaland tribal agency data on areasthat have been designated topreclude development, includingwind energy development; StateWildlie Action Plans; StateLand and Water Resource Plans;Natural Heritage databases;scientically credible inormationprovided by NGO and local


26/82


16

resources; and the additionalresources listed in Appendix C:Sources o Inormation Pertainingto Methods to Assess Impactsto Wildlie o this document, orthrough contact o agencies andNGOs, to determine the presenceo high priority habitats orspecies o concern or conservationareas.

Site Visit: To the extentpracticable, the site visit(s) shouldcharacterize and evaluate theuniqueness o the site vegetationrelative to surrounding areas.

3. Are plant communities oconcern present or likely to bepresent at the site(s)?

Inormation review and agencycontact such as: Natural HeritageData o state rankings (S1, S2, S3)or globally (G1, G2, G3) rankedrare plant communities.

Site Visit: To the extentpracticable, the site visit shouldevaluate the topography,physiographic eatures anduniqueness o the site vegetationin relation to the surroundingregion. I plant communities oconcern are present, developersshould also assess in Tier 3whether the proposed projectposes risk o signicant adverseimpacts and opportunities ormitigation.

4. Are there known critical areaso wildlie congregation,including, but not limited to,maternity roosts, hibernacula,staging areas, winter ranges,nesting sites, migrationstopovers or corridors, leks,

or other areas o seasonalimportance?

Inormation review and agencycontact such as: existingdatabases, State Wildlie ActionPlan, Natural Heritage Data, andNGO and agency inormationregarding the presence oImportant Bird Areas, migrationcorridors or stopovers, leks, bathibernacula or maternity roosts,or game winter ranges at the siteand in the surrounding area.

Site Visit: To the extentpracticable, the site visit should,during appropriate times toadequately assess these issuesor prospective site(s), evaluatethe topography, physiographiceatures and uniqueness o thesite in relation to the surroundingregion to assess the potential orthe project area to concentrateresident or migratory birds andbats.

5. Using best available scientifcinormation, has the relevantederal, state, tribal, and/or local agency determinedthe potential presence o apopulation o a species ohabitat ragmentation concern?

I not, the developer need notassess impacts o the proposedproject on habitat ragmentation.

Habitat ragmentation is dened

as the separation o a blocko habitat or a species intosegments, such that the geneticor demographic viability o thepopulations surviving in theremaining habitat segments isreduced; and risk, in this case,is dened as the probability thatthis ragmentation will occur as aresult o the project. Site clearing,access roads, transmission linesand turbine tower arrays removehabitat and displace some species

Tall grass prairie. Credit: Amy Thornburg, USFWS


27/82


17

o wildlie, and may ragmentcontinuous habitat areas intosmaller, isolated tracts. Habitatragmentation is o particularconcern when species requirelarge expanses o habitat oractivities such as breeding and

oraging.

Consequences o isolating localpopulations o some speciesinclude decreased reproductivesuccess, reduced genetic diversity,and increased susceptibility tochance events (e.g. disease andnatural disasters), which may leadto extirpation or local extinctions.In addition to displacement,development o wind energyinrastructure may result inadditional loss o habitat or somespecies due to edge eectsresulting rom the break-up ocontinuous stands o similarvegetation resulting in an interace(edge) between two or more typeso vegetation. The extent o edgeeects will vary by species andmay result in adverse impactsrom such eects as a greatersusceptibility to colonization byinvasive species, increased risk opredation, and competing speciesavoring landscapes with a mosaico vegetation.

Site Visit: I the answer to Tier2 Question 5 is yes, developersshould use the generalramework or evaluating habitatragmentation at a project site inTier 2 outlined below. Developersand the Service may use thismethod to analyze the impactso habitat ragmentation at winddevelopment project sites onspecies o habitat ragmentationconcern. Service eld oces may

be able to provide the availableinormation on habitat types,quality and intactness. Developersmay use this inormation incombination with site-specicinormation on the potentialhabitats to be impacted by apotential development and howthey will be impacted.

General Framework or EvaluatingHabitat Fragmentation at a ProjectSite (Tier 2)

A. The developer should denethe study area. The study areashould not only include theproject site or the proposedproject, but be based on thedistribution o habitat or thelocal population o the species o

habitat ragmentation concern.

B. The developer should analyzethe current habitat quality andspatial conguration o the studyarea or the species o habitatragmentation concern.

i. Use recent aerial and remoteimagery to determine distincthabitat patches, or boundaries,within the study area, andthe extent o existing habitatragmenting eatures (e.g.,highways).

ii. Assess the level oragmentation o the existinghabitat or the species ohabitat ragmentation concernand categorize into threeclasses:

High quality: little or noapparent ragmentation ointact habitat

Medium quality: intacthabitat exhibiting somerecent disturbance activity

Low quality: Extensiveragmentation o habitat(e.g., row-croppedagricultural lands, activesurace mining areas)

C. The developer should determinepotential changes in quality andspatial conguration o the habitatin the study area i development

were to proceed as proposedusing existing site inormation.

D. The developer should provide thecollective inormation rom stepsA-C or all potential developmentsto the Service or use in assessingwhether the habitat impacts,including habitat ragmentation,are likely to aect populationviability o the potentially aectedspecies o habitat ragmentationconcern.

6. Which species o birds and bats,especially those known to be atrisk by wind energy acilities,are likely to use the proposedsite based on an assessment osite attributes?

Inormation review and agencycontact: existing publishedinormation and databases romNGOs and ederal and stateresource agencies regarding thepotential presence o:

Raptors:speciespotentiallypresent by season

Prairiegrouseandsagegrouse: species potentiallypresent by season and locationo known leks

Otherbirds:speciespotentially present by seasonthat may be at risk o collisionor adverse impacts to habitat,including loss, displacementand ragmentation

Bats:specieslikelytobeimpacted by wind energyacilities and likely to occur onor migrate through the site

Site Visit: To the extentpracticable, the site visit(s)should identiy landscapeeatures or habitats that couldbe important to raptors, prairiegrouse, and other birds thatmay be at risk o adverseimpacts, and bats, includingnesting and brood-rearinghabitats, areas o high preydensity, movement corridorsand eatures such as ridgesthat may concentrate raptors.Raptors, prairie grouse, and

other presence or sign ospecies o concern seen duringthe site visit should be noted,with species identication ipossible.

7. Is there a potential orsignifcant adverse impacts tospecies o concern based on theanswers to the questions above,and considering the design othe proposed project?


28/82


18

The developer has assembledanswers to the questions aboveand should make an initialevaluation o the probabilityo signicant adverse impactsto species o concern and theirhabitats. The developer should

make this evaluation based onassessments o the potentialpresence o species o concernand their habitats, potentialpresence o critical congregationareas or species o concern, andany site visits. The developer isencouraged to communicate theresults o these assessments withthe Service.

Tier 2 Decision Points

Possible outcomes o Tier 2 include

the ollowing:

1. The most likely outcome o Tier 2is that the answer to one or moreTier 2 questions is inconclusive toaddress wildlie risk, either dueto insucient data to answer thequestion or because o uncertaintyabout what the answers indicate.The developer proceeds to Tier 3,ormulating questions, methods,and assessment o potentialmitigation measures based onissues raised in Tier 2 results.

2. Sucient inormation isavailable to answer all Tier 2questions, and the answer toeach Tier 2 question indicatesa low probability o signicantadverse impact to wildlie (orexample, inll or expansion o anexisting acility where impactshave been low and Tier 2 resultsindicate that conditions aresimilar, thereore wildlie risk islow). The developer may thendecide to proceed to obtain state

and local permit (i required),design, and construction ollowingbest management practices (seeChapter 7: Best ManagementPractices).

3. Sucient inormation is availableto answer all Tier 2 questions, andthe answer to each Tier 2 questionindicates a moderate probabilityo signicant adverse impactsto species o concern or their

habitats. The developer shouldproceed to Tier 3 and identiymeasures to mitigate potentialsignicant adverse impacts tospecies o concern.

4. The answers to one or more

Tier 2 questions indicate a highprobability o signicant adverseimpacts to species o concern ortheir habitats that:

a) Cannot be adequatelymitigated. The proposed siteshould be abandoned.

b) Can be adequately mitigated.The developer shouldproceed to Tier 3 and identiymeasures to mitigate potentialsignicant adverse impacts

to species o concern or theirhabitats.

Greater sage grouse, Credit: Stephen Ting, USFWS


29/82


19

Chapter 4: Tier 3 Field Studies to Document SiteWildlie and Habitat and Predict Project Impacts

Tier 3 is the rst tier in whicha developer would conductquantitative and scienticallyrigorous studies to assess thepotential risk o the proposedproject. Specically, these studiesprovide pre-construction inormationto:

Furtherevaluateasitefordetermining whether thewind energy project should bedeveloped or abandoned

Designandoperateasitetoavoidor minimize signicant adverseimpacts i a decision is made todevelop

Designcompensatorymitigationmeasures i signicant adversehabitat impacts cannot acceptablybe avoided or minimized

Determinedurationandlevelo eort o post-constructionmonitoring. I warranted,provide the pre-construction

component o post-constructionstudies necessary to estimate andevaluate impacts

At the beginning o Tier 3, adeveloper should communicatewith the Service on the pre-construction studies. At theend o Tier 3, developers shouldcommunicate with the Serviceregarding the results o the Tier 3studies and consider the Servicescomments and recommendationsprior to completing the Tier 3decision process. The Service willprovide written comments to adeveloper that identiy concernsand recommendations to resolve the

concerns based on study results andproject development plans.

Not all Tier 3 studies will continueinto Tiers 4 or 5. For example,surveys conducted in Tier 3 orspecies o concern may indicate oneor more species are not present atthe proposed project site, or sitingdecisions could be made in Tier 3that remove identied concerns, thusremoving the need or continuedeorts in later tiers. Additionaldetail on the design issues or post-

construction studies that begin inTier 3 is provided in the discussion omethods and metrics in Tier 3.

Tier 3 Questions

Tier 3 begins as the other tiers,with problem ormulation: whatadditional studies are necessary toenable a decision as to whether theproposed project can proceed toconstruction or operation or shouldbe abandoned? This step includesan evaluation o data gaps identiedby Tier 2 studies as well as thegathering o data necessary to:

Designaprojecttoavoidor

minimize predicted risk

Evaluatepredictionsofimpact and risk through post-construction comparisons oestimated impacts

Identifycompensatorymitigationmeasures, i appropriate, to osetsignicant adverse impacts thatcannot be avoided or minimized

The problem ormulation stageor Tier 3 also will include an

assessment o which speciesidentied in Tier 1 and/or Tier 2 willbe studied urther in the site riskassessment. This determination isbased on analysis o existing datarom Tier 1 and existing site-specicdata and Project Site (see Glossaryin Appendix A) visit(s) in Tier 2, andon the likelihood o presence and thedegree o adverse impact to speciesor their habitat. I the habitat issuitable or a species needing urtherstudy and the site occurs withinthe historical range o the species,

or is near the existing range o thespecies but presence has not beendocumented, additional eld studiesmay be appropriate. Additionalanalyses should not be necessary ia species is unlikely to be presentor is present but adverse impact isunlikely or o minor signicance.

Tier 3 studies address many othe questions identied or Tiers1 and 2, but Tier 3 studies dierbecause they attempt to quantiy

Turkey vulture and wind turbine. Credit: Rachel London, USFWS


30/82


20

the distribution, relative abundance,behavior, and site use o species oconcern. Tier 3 data also attemptto estimate the extent that theseactors expose these species to riskrom the proposed wind energyacility. Thereore, in answering Tier

3 questions 1-3, developers shouldcollect data sucient to analyze andanswer Tier 3 questions 4-6. Highrisk sites may warrant additionalyears o pre-construction studies.The duration and intensity o studiesneeded should be determinedthrough communication with theService.

I Tier 3 studies identiy specieso concern or important habitats,e.g., wetlands, which havespecic regulatory processes andrequirements, developers shouldwork with appropriate state,tribal, or ederal agencies to obtainrequired authorizations or permits.

Tier 3 studies should be designed toanswer the ollowing questions:

1. Do feld studies indicate thatspecies o concern are presenton or likely to use the proposedsite?

2. Do feld studies indicatethe potential or signifcantadverse impacts on aectedpopulation o species o habitatragmentation concern?

3. What is the distribution,relative abundance, behavior,and site use o species oconcern identifed in Tiers 1 or2, and to what extent do theseactors expose these species torisk rom the proposed windenergy project?

4. What are the potential riskso adverse impacts o theproposed wind energy projectto individuals and localpopulations o species oconcern and their habitats? (Inthe case o rare or endangeredspecies, what are the possibleimpacts to such species andtheir habitats?)

5. How can developers mitigateidentifed signifcant adverseimpacts?

6. Are there studies that shouldbe initiated at this stage thatwould be continued in post-

construction?

The Service encourages the use ocommon methods and metrics inTier 3 assessments or measuringwildlie activity and habitat eatures.Common methods and metricsprovide great benet over thelong-term, allowing or comparisonsamong projects and or greatercertainty regarding what will beasked o the developer or a specicproject. Deviation rom commonlyused methods should be careullyconsidered, scientically justiableand discussed with ederal, tribal,or state natural resource agencies,or other credible experts, asappropriate. It may be useul toconsult other scientically credibleinormation sources.

Tier 3 studies will be designed toaccommodate local and regionalcharacteristics. The specicprotocols by which common methodsand metrics are implemented in Tier3 studies depend on the questionbeing addressed, the species orecological communities being studiedand the characteristics o the studysites. Federally-listed threatenedand endangered species, eagles, andsome other species o concern andtheir habitats, may have specicprotocols required by local, stateor ederal agencies. The need orspecial surveys and mapping thataddress these species and situationsshould be discussed with theappropriate stakeholders.

In some instances, a single methodwill not adequately assess potentialcollision risk or habitat impact. Forexample, when there is concernabout moderate or high risk tonocturnally active species, such asmigrating passerines and local andmigrating bats, a combination oremote sensing tools such as radar,and acoustic monitoring or batsand indirect inerence rom diurnal

bird surveys during the migrationperiod may be necessary. Answeringquestions about habitat use bysongbirds may be accomplished byrelatively small-scale observationalstudies, while answering the samequestion related to wide-ranging

species such as prairie grouse andsage grouse may require moretime-consuming surveys, perhapsincluding telemetry.

Because o the points raised aboveand the need or fexibility inapplication, the Guidelines do notmake specic recommendationson protocol elements or Tier 3studies. The peer-reviewed scienticliterature (such as the articles citedthroughout this section) containsnum

wind energy guidelines fws ~voluntary 3/23/2012

Documents