Greene County Solar Facility Case No. 17-F-0617
Appendix 22-E
Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report
Article 10 Application Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report for the
Greene County Solar Facility Coxsackie, Greene County, New York
December 2019
Prepared for: Hecate Energy Greene 1 LLC, Hecate Energy Greene 2 LLC, and Hecate Energy Greene 3 LLC 621 W. Randolph Street Chicago, Illinois 60661
Prepared by:
Tetra Tech, Inc. 301 Ellicott Street Buffalo, New York 14203 Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ...... 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 1 METHODS ...... 3 Study Project Identification...... 3 Land Cover Assessment ...... 3 Additional Reviews ...... 4 ADDITIONAL DATA REVIEW ...... 5 Agency Data ...... 5 Protected Species and Habitats ...... 5 Horned Lark...... 5 Grasshopper Sparrow ...... 6 Northern Harrier ...... 6 Short-eared Owl ...... 6 On-Site Grassland Bird Surveys ...... 6 Grassland Breeding Bird Survey ...... 6 Winter Grassland Raptor Survey ...... 7 NYSDEC Survey Data ...... 7 Literature Review ...... 8 Potential Effects on Grassland Birds ...... 8 DESKTOP REVIEW RESULTS ...... 9 Site Background Information ...... 9 Historical Land Use ...... 9 Coxsackie Creek Grassland Preserve ...... 9 Grassland Study Area ...... 9 Facility and Cumulative Impacts to Grassland Habitat ...... 10 DISCUSSION ...... 12 Grassland Bird Use ...... 12 Potential Effects to Grassland Birds ...... 13 CUMULATIVE EFFECT DETERMINATION ...... 15 REFERENCES ...... 16
i Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. NLCD Land Cover Data for the Facility Area and Grassland Study Area...... 11
LIST OF GRAPHICS
Graphic 1. Changes in New York State’s Forest Land Area ...... 12
FIGURES
Figure 1. Project Location and Evaluation Area
ii Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report
LIST OF ACRONYMS/ABBREVIATIONS
% percent AC alternating current BBA Breeding Bird Atlas C-CAP Coastal Change Analysis Program CHGE Central Hudson Gas and Electric Corporation CR County Route DC direct current Facility equipment and infrastructure associated with the Greene County Solar Facility Facility Area 827-acre area being leased ft feet GIS Geospatial Information System Grassland Study Area 100-mile radius around the Facility Area, but within New York State GSA Grassland Study Area Hecate Hecate Energy Greene 1 LLC, Hecate Greene 2 LLC, and Hecate Greene 3 LLC IPaC Information, Planning, and Conservation System kV kilovolts LOD limit of disturbance MW megawatt NLCD National Land Cover Data NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NYNHP New York Natural Heritage Program NYS New York State NYSDEC New York State Department of Environmental Conservation NYSDPS New York State Department of Public Service NLEB Northern Long-eared Bat PSS Preliminary Scoping Statement PV photovoltaic ROW right-of-way Tetra Tech Tetra Tech, Inc. US United States USFS United States Forest Service USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service USGS United States Geological Survey
iii Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report
INTRODUCTION
Hecate Energy Greene 1 LLC, Hecate Energy Greene 2 LLC, and Hecate Energy Greene 3 LLC (Hecate) is proposing to construct the Greene County Solar Facility (the Facility), a 50-megawatt (MW) photovoltaic (PV) solar generation facility within approximately 827 acres of privately-owned land (Facility Area) pursuant to Article 10 of the Public Service Law. Facility components will occupy only approximately 379 acres. The Facility’s Stipulations, last dated on August 28, 2019, detail the components of each Article 10 Application Exhibit. The focus of this report is to satisfy Stipulation 22(d)(10). The full text of that Stipulation reads as follows: A cumulative impact analysis will be done to evaluate the actual and expected impacts from the construction, operation and maintenance of the Facility on federally and State-listed T&E species, particularly grassland birds, as they relate to proposed and operating solar energy projects with nameplate capacities greater than or equal to 5 MW occupying grassland habitat within 100 miles of the Facility Area based upon information provided by NYSDEC (Study Projects), but not beyond New York State borders (Grassland Study Area). The Co-Applicants are not required to perform any avian studies at the Study Projects. This analysis will include, at a minimum: (i) Examination of publicly available grassland habitat data on the Study Projects within the Grassland Study Area; (ii) Estimated take of state-listed birds at the Facility, if any, and a description of methods used and sources consulted to estimate take; (iii) Estimates of available grassland habitat within the Grassland Study Area, including the Coxsackie Flats Grasslands; (iv) Estimates of acres of grassland breeding bird habitat lost directly through installation of panels and other project components at the Study Projects, using best available information and through consultation with NYSDEC; (v) Estimates of acres of grassland habitat indirectly affected by the Study Projects due to functional loss/degradation of habitat, to the extent applicable; and (vi) Cumulative impacts of grassland habitat use, particularly potential impacts on state-listed grassland bird species, within the Facility Area. On behalf of Hecate, Tetra Tech, Inc. (Tetra Tech) completed desktop and field surveys to support an evaluation of the potential impacts from construction and operation of the Facility on any protected species with potential to occur near or within the Facility Area. Specific discussion and analysis of species protected at a federal or state level is provided under separate cover in the Habitat Assessment and Preliminary Impact Determination for Federal and State Protected Species (Tetra Tech 2019) (provided as Appendix 22-C to the Article 10 Application). That report is structured to provide an evaluation of the potential impacts and the preliminary impact determinations for each protected species, including potential impacts. Based on the details and conclusions provided in that report, any impacts, including cumulative impacts, to protected species are either insignificant or not anticipated at all. The following sections of this report discuss the potential cumulative impacts that the Facility in combination with other solar projects (Study Projects) may have on grassland birds and habitats. This assessment included solar projects with nameplate capacities greater than or equal to 5 MW within 100 miles of the Facility Area, but only within New York State (the Grassland Study Area [GSA]).
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Hecate is proposing to construct the Facility on approximately 827 acres of privately-owned located in the Town of Coxsackie along Farm to Market Road, between United States Route 9W and New York State Route 385, approximately 21 miles south of the City of Albany, New York. The Facility will have a nameplate capacity of
1 Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report
approximately 50 MW (alternating current [AC]) and is expected to generate approximately 93,406 megawatt-hours of energy annually. The Facility will consist of solar arrays and associated infrastructure and have a footprint that occupies approximately 379 acres (46 percent [%]) of the total 827-acre Facility Area. The design of the Facility consists of the following components: A solar field of PV panels producing direct current electricity mounted on single-axis tracking structures that will follow the sun throughout the day; Inverters within weather rated enclosures dispersed throughout the Facility (amongst the solar arrays) to convert direct current electricity to alternating current electricity; Medium voltage transformers that will raise the low voltage from the inverters to medium voltage cable collection systems (13.8 kilovolt [kV] and 34 kV) that will extend underground to collection points for connection to the transmission grid; New on-site adjacent collection substations to which the solar 34 kV medium voltage collection systems will connect to and be raised to the 69 kV transmission voltage; New Central Hudson Gas and Electric Corporation (CHGE) built switchyard to be located adjacent to the solar collection substation on lands within the Facility Area that will connect to the Facility to the CHGE 69 kV transmission line located directly adjacent to the Facility Area; A new 13.8 kV pole mounted electrical recloser switch which will connect the 13.8 kV medium voltage solar collection system to the CHGE grid; A new CHGE-built, approximately 0.85 mile long offsite 13.8 kV distribution line that will connect a portion of the Facility to the existing offsite Coxsackie Substation that is connected to the CHGE 69 kV transmission line; Monitoring, control, and protection systems to remotely control the solar Facility to reliably operate on the New York State grid; Internal civil infrastructure, including parking, permanent gravel access roads and grass pathways, security fencing around Facility equipment, and landscape screening vegetation; Temporary laydown, construction office trailers, and other temporary facilities and equipment staging areas during construction of the Facility, all within the planned limit of disturbance within Facility Area; and Conservation areas planned for continued agricultural uses, or potentially for habitat conservation. The Facility will use the same type of PV panels installed on over one million homes in the United States. The PV panels for the Facility will be ground-mounted on a low-profile racking system that will be supported by I-beam posts driven into the ground. The result is an extremely small ground disturbance footprint associated with the panels. A portion of the Facility output (the two 20-MW outputs) will connect to the be on CHGE’s 69 kV transmission line that extends between the existing North Catskill and Coxsackie Substations. The remaining portion of the Facility output (the 10 megawatt output) will connect to CHGE’s grid at the Coxsackie 13.8 kV Substation, via a new CHGE-built and owned 0.85-mile long, offsite 13.8 kV distribution line to be located within an existing CHGE right-of-way along Stacy Road.
2 Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report
METHODS
Tetra Tech used a combination of desktop assessment, field surveys, and post-field data analysis to develop the cumulative impact assessment for grassland birds and grassland habitats within the Grassland Study Area. Projects within the Study Area that are 5 MW and greater in size were considered for this assessment. The Grassland Study Area is shown on Figure 1.
STUDY PROJECT IDENTIFICATION
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) provided Hecate with a geospatial database containing all of the solar projects known in New York State. Tetra Tech identified a total of 378 projects within the database that fall within the Grassland Study Area. Tetra Tech removed those projects which were documented below 5 MW. Where MW size of projects was not defined, Tetra Tech removed projects with a project area of less than 20 acres. or were under 20 acres in size, based on the industry standard of 1 MW requiring about 5 acres of development; this resulted in a total of 285 projects in the Grassland Study Area. Five projects classified as “cancelled” in the database were removed, leaving 280 projects to be assessed within the Grassland Study Area. These 280 projects are considered the Study Projects. Tetra Tech identified that only 36 of these 280 projects are currently tracked with some sort of permitting reference number, either an identification code by NYSDEC or a Case Number for Article 10 projects. These 36 projects were evaluated separately and identified as the Tracked Projects.
LAND COVER ASSESSMENT
The National Land Cover Database (NLCD) (MRLCC 2016) was used to determine the extent of grassland habitat within the Grassland Study Area (GSA) and within each of the Study Projects. NLCD data is compiled by several federal agencies based on decadal Landsat satellite imagery and supplementary datasets to illustrate major land use types for the continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. NLCD data released in 2016 was used in this analysis. Land use classifications within the NLCD can be used to quantify the approximate area available for species with certain habitat preferences. Grassland birds naturally utilize lands classified as “Grassland/Herbaceous” (value 71) in the NLCD. However, grassland birds may also utilize additional land cover classes depending available resources and seasonal changes. For example, “Cultivated Crops” may provide foraging opportunities for some species in the breeding season and for others during the winter. Similarly, “Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands” may serve as valuable nesting habitat for species such as the northern harrier during the breeding season. To account for variation in life histories and habitat preferences within the broad group of grassland birds, multiple NLCD land cover classifications were used to represent habitat that may be used by grassland birds.. The term “grassland habitat” will heretofore refer to these four NLCD classes. Due to these different conditions and parameters for each component to be described in this report, when grassland is discussed, it reflects “Grassland/Herbaceous” and “Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands” (values 71 and 95, respectively) in the NLCD. When discussing potential habitat for grassland birds, “Grassland/Herbaceous”, “Pasture/Hay”, “Cultivated Crops”, and “Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands” (NLCD values 71, 81, 82, and 95, respectively) are considered. These slight differences are intentional, as agricultural lands would generally not meet the ecological definition of grasslands, even though they may serve as habitat for grassland bird species. Using these data sets and Geospatial Information Systems (GIS) software, Tetra Tech then assessed recent trends in land cover data for both the Grassland Study Area and each of the Study Projects’ locations. Primarily, the most
3 Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report
valuable component of this dataset is identifying trends and changes of grasslands and habitat for grassland birds in ways that can be measurable and quantified, appropriate from which to draw conclusions.
ADDITIONAL REVIEWS
Tetra Tech also reviewed publicly available federal and state databases and any agency correspondence for the Facility to identify any rare, threatened, or endangered grassland bird species. Specifically, the following sources were reviewed: United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information, Planning, and Conservation (IPaC) module; Winter raptor survey data provided by NYSDEC per special request; Route-level data from the USGS North American Breeding Bird Survey for survey routes within the vicinity of the Facility; County-level data from the New York Natural Heritage Program (NYNHP) Nature Explorer online system for Greene County; and NYSDEC’s Environmental Resource Mapper. Additionally, previous meetings and site surveys were used to ensure that protected grassland bird species were evaluated where necessary. NYSDEC did not provide information in response to a March 11, 2019 request for an official list of protected species that are known or expected to occur in the vicinity of the Facility, indicating their intent to review and comment on related issues as a part of their review of the Article 10 application.
4 Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report
ADDITIONAL DATA REVIEW
AGENCY DATA
The USFWS IPaC module determined that there are no federally listed threatened or endangered grassland bird species in the vicinity of the Facility Area. The NYNHP Nature Explorer online system (NYNHP 2019a) indicated the presence of two species of concern within the Facility Area, the state-threatened northern harrier (Circus cyaneus) and the state-endangered short-eared owl (Asio flammeus), as well as an “animal assemblage” feature of a “Raptor Winter Concentration Area; Nonbreeding”. In a meeting on March 14, 2018, NYSDEC identified the northern harrier, the short-eared owl, and the state-listed special concern horned lark (Eremophilia alpestris) as species of concern.
PROTECTED SPECIES AND HABITATS
Populations of grassland birds in the northeastern US have declined significantly in the last 40 years (Murphy 2003; Sauer et al. 2008). The cause of this decline can be traced primarily to loss of grassland habitat in the region, which has declined by about 60% since the 1930s (Vickery et al. 1994). Specifically, the abandonment of agricultural lands, decline of hayfield area, earlier and more frequent crop rotations, reversion to later successional stages, and conversion to development/sprawl have all contributed to these losses (Morgan and Burger 2008). Many grassland bird species are particularly vulnerable to habitat loss and fragmentation associated with these types of land cover conversions (Herkert 1994; Vickery et al. 1994). In light of these declines, researchers have highlighted the need for a regional conservation plan for grassland birds, as well as wider coordination between federal/state agencies and nongovernmental organizations (such as land trusts) to protect grassland birds and habitat in the region (Morgan and Burger 2008; Norment 2002). To address losses of grassland habitat in New York State, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), in conjunction with Audubon New York, has identified eight “Grassland Focus Areas”, regions of the state that support key, residual populations of grassland birds (Morgan and Burger 2008). Efforts aimed at grassland bird and habitat conservation should be prioritized within those areas in order to maximize opportunities for success, given limited funding and continually changing landscape-level factors. The Facility Area is not within any designated Grassland Focus Area. It lies approximately 50 miles from Grassland Focus Area 4 (Central Leatherstocking and Mohawk River Valley) and approximately 60 miles from Grassland Focus Area 6 (Ft. Edward Grasslands Important Bird Area [IBA]). The Mohawk Valley was also found to be an important area for Eastern Meadowlarks in the Northeast United States (Shriver et al. 2005). The Mohawk Valley was also found to be an important area for Eastern Meadowlarks in the Northeast United States (Shriver et al. 2005).
Horned Lark
Horned larks (Eremophilia alpestris) favor bare, dry ground and areas of short, sparse vegetation, including prairies, deserts, tundra, beaches, dunes, and grazed pastures. They are also common in cleared agricultural fields, mowed expanses, roadsides, and feedlots. They feed primarily on seeds and insects, which they forage from the ground. They may also pluck and eat sprouting lettuce, wheat, and other crop seedlings in agricultural fields. Horned lark nest on bare ground in a natural depression (Cornell 2019) and breed in northern North America in summer and move into the lower 48 states for winter, though some populations are year-round residents in northern North America. Horned lark is found throughout New York State, but primarily in central/western New York State and along the St. Lawrence River valley; absent in Adirondacks (NYS BBA 2008).
5 Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report
Grasshopper Sparrow
The entirety of New York State is within the breeding range of the grasshopper sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum), although the observed distribution of the species occurs primarily in low elevation areas of the state within suitable grassland habitats, outside of the interior mountainous regions (Fink et al. 2019). Preferred habitat within the breeding range includes large tracts of dense grasslands, such as hayfields, upland meadows, and pastures with little to no shrub cover and some bare ground (NYSDEC 2019d; Vickery 1996). Under favorable breeding conditions, it is common for the grasshopper sparrow to have two brood cycles per year, with egg laying beginning in late May, even in northern regions. Summer diet consists primarily of grasshoppers, but is usually augmented by other insects and seeds (Vickery 1996).
Northern Harrier
Northern harriers (Circus cyaneus) are found in large, undisturbed tracts of wetlands and grasslands with low, thick vegetation, where they hunt small mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and birds. They breed in freshwater marshes, lightly grazed meadows, old fields, tundra, dry upland prairies, drained marshlands, shrubsteppe, and riverside woodlands. Their summer range is Canada and the northern US, and winter range is the southern US, Mexico, and Central America, but year-round resident populations exist in the western US. Winter habitat includes deserts, coastal sand dunes, pasturelands, croplands, dry plains, grasslands, old fields, estuaries, open floodplains, and marshes (Cornell 2019). They are found widely throughout New York State, but less densely in the Adirondacks and Catskills (NYS BBA 2008).
Short-eared Owl
Short-eared owls (Asio flammeus) are found in large, open areas with low vegetation, including prairie and coastal grasslands, heathlands, meadows, shrub steppe, savanna, tundra, marshes, dunes, and agricultural areas. At dawn and dusk, they emerge from roost areas to hunt small mammals and adult or nestling shorebirds and songbirds, using acute hearing to locate prey while flying silently overhead. They are migratory, breeding primarily in Canada and wintering in the lower 48 states, though there is some overlap between breeding and wintering ranges from the northern Great Plains and Northern Rockies to the Pacific Northwest (Cornell 2019). In New York State, they are widely distributed and primarily observed in the central/western portions of the state and along the St. Lawrence River corridor and Lake Champlain (NYS BBA 2008).
ON-SITE GRASSLAND BIRD SURVEYS
On-site grassland bird surveys for the Study Projects were evaluated wherever that data was available. Both wintering raptor and breeding grassland bird surveys were performed for the Facility, and those surveys are described below.
Grassland Breeding Bird Survey
A total 652 observations of grassland birds representing five species were recorded within the Facility Area over the course of the 9-week survey from May 24 to July 19, 2018 (bobolink, savannah sparrow, grasshopper sparrow, eastern meadowlark, and northern harrier). This included birds observed during surveys within and outside of the 100-meter radius circular plot and birds observed while traveling between count circles. Bobolinks (n=437) were the most commonly observed species and comprised 67.0% of all grassland birds observed. Mean use (# of birds/100-meter/per 5-minute count) was highest for bobolinks (3.58) followed by savannah sparrow (1.35), grasshopper sparrows (0.16 birds), and eastern meadowlark (0.02). A total of 15 observations of grasshopper
6 Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report sparrows, a New York State species of Special Concern, and a single northern harrier, a Threatened species New York State, were documented during the 9-week survey. There were no other non-raptor grassland species observed during the surveys. Complete results of these surveys are provided as an appendix to the Habitat Assessment and Preliminary Impact Determination Report, provided as Appendix 22-C to the Article 10 Application.
Winter Grassland Raptor Survey
Tetra Tech conducted survey of wintering winter grassland birds at the Facility Area from March 26 through April 11, 2018. to determine presence and estimate site use by the state-listed grassland raptors as required by NYSDEC. Three target species were identified by NYSDEC for surveys: short-eared owl, northern harrier, and horned lark. The NYSDEC Survey Protocol for State-listed Wintering Grassland Raptor Species (Draft – 2015) was not used for establishing survey methodology, but through communication with NYSDEC, methods for the survey were determined to be appropriate for evaluating the presence of the target species in the Facility Area. A total of 14 birds from six species were observed within the Facility Area. Northern harriers had the highest number of occurrences (n=5), accounting for 31% of all observations; however, two of the documented northern harrier observations are presumed to be duplicate observations. Three short-eared owls, two Cooper’s hawks (Accipiter cooperii), two red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis), one eastern screech owl (Megascops asio), and one northern goshawk (Accipiter gentilis) were also observed within the Facility Area. One of the Cooper’s hawk observations and a goshawk northern harrier observation occurred on the northern parcel outside of the Facility Area. Observed protected species included the five northern harriers (state-listed threatened), three short-eared owls (state-listed endangered), and two Cooper’s hawks (state-listed special concern) were observed during the 2017-2018 winter grassland raptor surveys. Complete results from both surveys are provided as appendices to the Habitat Assessment and Preliminary Impact Determination Report, under separate cover.
NYSDEC Survey Data
In addition to the avian surveys completed in support of the Facility, NYSDEC biologists completed surveys from November 1–March 31, 2008–2019. Although the Draft methods NYSDEC distributes for surveyors are dated 2015, it is assumed that the surveys for this entire period generally follow NYSDEC’s Survey Protocol for State-listed Wintering Grassland Raptor Species. NYSDEC conducted periodic surveys between 2008 and 2019 targeting the state-listed endangered short eared owl and the state -listed threatened northern harrier. Data collected by NYSDEC was provided to and summarized by Tetra Tech to gain a better understanding of use of the Facility Area by these state-listed species. Both short-eared owls and northern harriers were present within and near the Facility Area during the winter surveys from December to March 2008–2019. Northern Harriers were observed within or near the Facility Area every survey year with the total number of observations ranging from 41 (2014/15) to 135 (2018/19). No short-eared owls where observed within or near the Facility Area in two survey-years (2014/15, 2015/16) and the highest number of observations (n=30) were made in 2012/13. Behavior data recorded for the observations show that most northern harriers and short-eared owls were either perched, hunting (foraging), or in- flight traversing through the survey areas. In addition, short-eared owl telemetry surveys involving 22 individuals were conducted in 2008/09 and 2010/11. Home range size varied greatly among individuals and differences were attributed to cycles in the small mammal prey population (e.g., mice, voles), snow conditions, and overall habitat conditions (e.g., natural fields compared to crops). Fields used for foraging had a significantly greater number of vole runways and significantly greater forb cover than either roost fields or non-use fields.
7 Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report
LITERATURE REVIEW
Scientific research on the overall impacts of solar facilities on grassland bird species is “severely limited” (Northrup and Wittemeyer 2011), and there are examples of both detrimental and beneficial effects on different various bird taxa in the available literature (DeVault et al 2014; Visser 2016). On potential impacts, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) said in a briefing, “If correctly sited (so as not to impact sensitive species) and with appropriate land/habitat management and other mitigation measure [sic] employed, the deployment of solar might be of benefit to birds in the wider countryside. There is no scientific evidence of fatality risks to birds associated with solar PV arrays. Collision is most likely to be a risk for waterfowl, which may be attracted to PV panels (though there is little evidence for this).” (RSPB 2011) Based on a thorough review of the available scientific literature, there is no conclusive evidence that PV arrays or facilities, when appropriately designed and operated, detrimentally impact populations of sensitive grassland birds or habitats. Impacts are highly variable and difficult to generalize, and depend largely on local conditions such as ecoregion/climate, surrounding land use, disturbance history, and existing species in the area. In addition, still much remains unknown, and further research is needed on, for example, methods and data for modeling grassland land cover, the impacts of management on the productivity of grassland birds, and the potential benefits of native grass species versus non-native cool season grasses (Morgan and Burger 2008).
Potential Effects on Grassland Birds
In general, construction, operation, and maintenance of solar facilities may theoretically result in loss or degradation of grassland habitat, specifically in the form of mowing/clearing, digging, and heavy equipment use (Jenkins et al. 2015). This may lead to direct loss of young or adult birds or habitat used for foraging or nesting. Other potential impacts include increased flight hazards and/or collision risks associated with overhead power transmission lines, fencing, and panel surfaces. Birds unfamiliar with solar infrastructure may be at risk for collision with or electrocution from unmarked or unprotected electrical features or infrastructure (Turney and Fthenakis 2011). Some birds, such as waterfowl, may also confuse the reflective surfaces of PV panels for bodies of water and become confused or attracted to them (BSG Ecology 2014; Jenkins et al. 2015). Additionally, secondary effects such as habitat fragmentation may be exacerbated by installation of solar facilities (Jenkins et al. 2015). Tree clearing, road construction, and installation of PV arrays may result in changes in landscape connectivity, resource availability, and mobility for birds (Visser 2016), which may require large home ranges and a mosaic of habitat types. Last, installation of solar infrastructure may have effects on local microclimates (e.g., shade, wind, humidity), altering bird behavior (Northrup and Wittemeyer 2011) or use of the site for foraging, roosting, and nesting. Potential impacts to grassland birds and habitats can be minimized through proactive measures employed during construction and operation. For example, use of anti-collision marking devices on new or existing power lines or fences can reduce collision mortality, while bird-friendly designs of electrical infrastructure can deter bird use of those areas and prevent electrocution. In addition, landscape management practices that preserve and enhance grassland bird habitat at the sites can be adopted, such as minimizing the amount clearing of natural vegetation, avoiding creating conditions that will attract birds (e.g., standing water and waste), and minimizing the use of outdoor lighting, especially at night (Smit [undated]).
8 Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report
DESKTOP REVIEW RESULTS
SITE BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The Facility Area is located within the Hannacroix Creek-Hudson River (Hydrologic Unit Code [HUC] 0202000604) and Saw Kill-Hudson River (HUC 0202000611) watersheds. Within a 2-mile radius around the Facility Area are various commercial and residential developments, with the nearest residential neighborhood located immediately to the south, along Sleepy Hollow Road. Several rural residences are also located adjacent to the Facility Area, but are more sparsely amongst the agricultural fields and forested areas. The Coxsackie-Athens Junior and Senior High Schools are located approximately one half mile north of the Facility Area, and the town of Coxsackie is located approximately 0.5 mile to the northeast. Figure 1 depicts the Facility location in New York State. According to Descriptions of the Ecosystem Regions of the United States (Bailey 1995), the Facility Area is entirely within the Eastern Broadleaf Forest (Oceanic) Province, which is characterized by a temperate deciduous forest dominated by tall broadleaf trees. These trees typically provide a high canopy that is dense and continuous in the summer months, then shed their leaves in winter (United States Forest Service [USFS] 2014). Topography can be characterized as flat to moderate slopes with occasional steep-sided stream valleys dispersed throughout. Soils within the Facility Area are predominantly silt loam, sandy loam, and silty clay loam (USDA 2019).
Historical Land Use
Early European settlement of New York State brought about dramatic changes in land use. As previously forested areas were cleared and converted for other purposes, forest cover in New York declined precipitously, declining from about 27 million acres in 1600 to a low of about 6 million acres by 1875 (NYSDEC 2019a). Most of the lost forest area was converted for agricultural production or cleared for timber harvesting. Since that time, however, forested land area in the state has rebounded substantially, up to a current total of about 18.9 million acres, or about 63% of the total land area (NYSDEC 2019b). NYSDEC data also indicates that since the 1970s, small- and medium- diameter forests in the state have been allowed to mature into later successional, large-diameter forests (Albright and Olsen 2017), meaning that most forested area that has been reestablished has remained intact.
Coxsackie Creek Grassland Preserve
The Coxsackie Creek Grassland Preserve is an approximately 500-acre protected wildlife sanctuary located in the town of Coxsackie, 1.5 miles north of the Facility Area. Established in 2004 and owned and operated by the Greene Land Trust, the preserve operates on a three-year mowing cycle to manage grassland habitat for migratory and overwintering grassland birds. Primary species targeted for conservation are the northern harrier and short-eared owl, both cited as focal species in the Greene County Grassland Management Plan (Strong et al. 2014), but other species such as upland sandpiper are also considered in management practices. The preserve consists of a mix of habitat types, including approximately 20% wet clay meadow, 37% upland heath meadow, 38% riparian, 1% deciduous shrub swamp, and 3% hardwood swamp (Greene Land Trust 2019).
GRASSLAND STUDY AREA
Land cover within the Study Area is largely similar to that of the Facility Area. Central and eastern New York State, including the Mohawk and Hudson Valleys, are primarily rural, with land being used for a mix of agricultural
9 Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report purposes. The most heavily developed area of the state within the 100-mile buffer area are the downstate counties of Rockland and Westchester, just north of New York City.
Facility and Cumulative Impacts to Grassland Habitat
According to NLCD, land use within the Facility Area is dominated by cultivated crops (accounting for almost 66%) of the Facility Area (Table 1). When this class is combined with other additional classes which are likely more valuable to grassland birds, the area of grassland habitat within the Facility Area increases to 789.95 acres or 89%. In comparison, the Grassland Study Area contains approximately 1,947,312 acres of grassland habitat, meaning the Facility Area contains approximately 0.041% of grassland habitats within the Grassland Study Area (Table 1). The 280 Study Projects total 39,380 acres within the 11,534,230-acre GSA (0.34% of the total area). The Study Projects provide a total of 20,123 acres of grassland habitat within the GSA, which accounts for 1.03% of all grassland habitat within the GSA. Grassland habitat within the Study Projects accounts for about 51% of the proposed area of development among the Study Projects. The 36 Tracked Projects total 16,576 acres (0.14%) within the GSA. The Tracked Projects provide a total of 10,786 acres of grassland habitat in the GSA, accounting for 0.55% of the total grassland habitat available. Grassland habitat within the Tracked Projects accounts for about 65% of the proposed area of development for these projects. The differences in the grassland habitat coverage between the Study Projects and the Tracked Projects is expected. Solar developers prefer those areas requiring less clearing and tree-cutting, for both cost efficiency of project development and maximizing solar exposure to generate more electricity.
10 Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report
Table 1. NLCD Land Cover Data for the Facility Area and Grassland Study Area
Relative Relative NYSDEC Percent of Relative Percent of Grassland Study Percent of Tracked NLCD Land Cover Class Facility Area Facility NYSDEC Tracked Study Area Projects Study Projects Study Area to Projects to GSA3 to GSA2 Projects GSA1 Open Water 483,902.20 0.22 0.000% 64.94 0.013% 10.67 0.002% Developed, Open Space 649,988.30 16.59 0.003% 1,067.05 0.164% 478.15 0.074% Developed, Low Intensity 266,602.70 4.30 0.002% 399.20 0.150% 174.80 0.066% Developed, Medium Intensity 132,746.10 0.61 0.000% 161.68 0.122% 33.80 0.025% Developed, High Intensity 46,727.60 0.89 0.002% 49.59 0.106% 14.90 0.032% Barren Land 26,182.90 0.00 0.000% 41.59 0.159% 8.00 0.031% Deciduous Forest 4,679,453.60 54.69 0.001% 8,934.93 0.191% 2,517.06 0.054% Evergreen Forest 938,889.80 0.66 0.000% 1,446.23 0.154% 382.74 0.041% Mixed Forest 1,654,843.60 0.00 0.000% 4,180.80 0.253% 938.28 0.057% Shrub/Scrub 49,847.90 0.00 0.000% 195.04 0.391% 90.74 0.182% Herbaceuous 92,580.60 0.22 0.000% 451.91 0.488% 114.53 0.124% Hay/Pasture 1,459,095.90 190.79 0.013% 13,778.91 0.944% 7,487.58 0.513% Cultivated Crops 327,600.00 587.32 0.179% 5,436.66 1.660% 3,037.69 0.927% Woody Wetlands 657,733.10 20.61 0.003% 2,716.33 0.413% 1,141.11 0.173% Emergent Herbaceuous Wetlands 68,035.40 11.62 0.017% 455.02 0.669% 146.34 0.215% Total "Grassland" Land Cover Classes 1,947,311.90 789.95 0.041% 20,122.50 1.033% 10,786.14 0.554% Total of all Land Cover Classes 11,534,229.70 888.53 39,379.88 16,576.39
Percent “Grassland” Land Cover 16.88% 88.91% 51.10% 65.07% Classes
1 – Overall contribution of Facility Area acres to NLCD class within the GSA 2 – Overall contribution of Study Project acres to NLCD class within the GSA 3 – Overall contribution of Tracked Project acres to NLCD class within the GSA
11 Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report
DISCUSSION
The changes in land cover in New York State have led to an overall trend of decreasing grassland habitat area in New York State in the last century. As areas devoted to agriculture have decreased in New York State, associated grassland habitats, such as successional old fields, pastures, emergent wetlands, and row or field crop areas themselves have also declined. Grassland bird populations have undergone significant declines over that time period (NYSDEC 2008; USGS 2019), with the loss of grassland habitats generally associated with agriculture likely to be a major contributing factor. When looked at through the lens of species development and habitat dependency, decreases in grassland bird populations and habitats have only occurred very recently in New York State. The loss of grassland habitats are generally reflective of the decline in agricultural production and the following return to pre-settlement conditions in the state, when forests covered approximately 90% of New York State, and open grassland areas were far more rare relative to the settlement periods of the 1800 and 1900s. Graphic 1 illustrates the change of forest land in New York. Graphic 1. Changes in New York State’s Forest Land Area
Source: https://www.dec.ny.gov/lands/42065.html It is likely that, with the onset of intensive clearing and conversion of forested areas to agriculture during the 18th and 19th centuries, grassland birds expanded their range and populations in New York State, given the newly available habitat area and resources. The reversion and loss of much agricultural land documented since the early 20th century is primarily a return to the forested natural land conditions prior to human intervention in the landscape.
GRASSLAND BIRD USE
Of the focal species included in NYSDEC protocols for State-listed Breeding Grassland Birds and Wintering Grassland Raptors, presence of the following species was confirmed in the Facility area in 2017-2018: short-eared owl, northern harrier, grasshopper sparrow, American kestrel, bobolink, eastern meadow lark, and savannah sparrow. Within the breeding season, bobolink was the species most commonly observed species, followed by
12 Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report savannah sparrow and grasshopper sparrow. Northern harrier was observed in both the breeding and wintering surveys and short-eared owl observations were only made during the winter survey. Availability of seasonally specific resources is likely the largest factor determining species presence in the Facility as habitat and food requirements vary by species (NRCS 1999). For example, nesting structure during the breeding season is most important summer variable for grassland bird species and availability of food sources (i.e. rodents) is the most important variable for raptors during the winter (Novak et al. 2014). Quantifying the precise area of habitat loss as a result of development within the Facility is difficult to determine because of generalizations within land cover types and actual land uses. For example, cultivated crops do not serve as nesting habitat but was included in this analysis because it is potential foraging habitat although the relative value may be low. Similarly, hayfields, which do provide nesting habitat, may not functionally add to reproductive success due to timing of mowing. On the contrary, lands within a developed solar facility may be counted as “habitat loss” but still serve as valuable foraging areas for wintering raptors if an adequate prey base is present. Little information is available on long-term use of solar facilities by grassland birds (Waltson et al. 2016). The use of solar facilities by grassland bird species is not well studied, and conclusions cannot be reached from published, peer-reviewed data. Speculation based on the analysis of many similar factors can, however, lead to reasonable prediction of outcomes and long term effects. Specifically, it is likely that conversion of agricultural areas to utility-scale solar facilities will provide a net benefit to grassland bird species, especially passerine species.
POTENTIAL EFFECTS TO GRASSLAND BIRDS
Most solar site construction plans, including the Facility’s, require reseeding of row and field crop areas beneath PV panels with an appropriate native herbaceous upland or wetland vegetation seed mix. Revegetation beneath and surrounding the PV panel area, as potential to provide more-permanent grassland habitat that was not previously available when the area was used for agricultural production. Row and field crop areas are not traditional grasslands that these species have evolved to depend on. Though some agricultural activities in moderation are good management tools for grassland habitats when completed at appropriate times and intervals, typical agricultural activities such as frequent disturbance (especially plowing/disking/tilling during breeding bird season), vegetation monocultures, low structural heterogeneity, and fertilizer/pesticide application are all generally undertaken without respect to grassland habitats or grassland bird species populations, and will decrease the value of the habitat for these species. At solar sites, disturbance to revegetated areas below panels will be infrequent and low-intensity. These activities are generally limited to mowing with small (residential-sized, commercial grade) equipment, weed whacking, and occasional selective and targeted application of biocides to ensure the integrity of the site components. If necessary, solar sites that are designed with an effort to retain and manage grassland habitat through detailed mowing and maintenance schedules are used for the majority of groundcover maintenance have the potential to be long-term safety nets for grassland bird species, because the habitat will remain in a grassland state for as long as the sites are producing energy. It is possible that the panel installation into grasslands may create conditions that are not suitable for grassland raptors because of the decreased sightlines for hunting prey. It is also possible that the protection offered by the stationary panels, including fencing to minimize predator presence in the Facility Area, may make the habitat more beneficial to many passerine grassland bird species, and populations may thrive in that situation. Visser (2016) further points out that “…solar developments replacing previously degraded lands, such as old landfills or agricultural sites, can play an important role in promoting biodiversity”. In that sense, solar sites can become productive and valuable habitats for grassland birds following construction, as reseeding with native grassland vegetation can encourage recolonization by migrant, breeding or winter occupant grassland bird species.
13 Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report
Compared to other industrial or commercial development or natural habitat succession, solar facilities have small percentages of permanent changes to the operating area. At most solar sites, there is overall very little area being converted from a vegetated land cover, and most of the more permanent components (e.g., roads and concrete footers in electrical components) are easily converted back to a state that can be vegetated. In general, decommissioning of solar sites involves removal of the panels, racking, and most of the other aboveground components, which immediately provides an almost natural land cover and availability to function as a traditional grassland habitat, or be able to be converted back to agricultural use – both of which may serve as habitat for grassland bird species. While it is possible that large expanses of lands are purchased for conservation value and managed in their natural state separately by a public or private entity, that is a rare case. In most situations, retired farm land is left unmanaged or is sold to developers and turned into residential or commercial buildings. Based on the information presented and discussed in this report, a solar facility is likely the most preferable outcome for grassland birds, specifically because it is reasonable to assume that they may increase available habitat and quality for passerine grassland bird species, and the successional state of the land is preserved during the operation period of the facility.
14 Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report
CUMULATIVE EFFECT DETERMINATION
Most grassland habitat that has been lost, in New York State and within the Grassland Study Area, has been due to reforestation where grassland habitats were permanently converted to a different successional state that is inherently incongruous with grassland bird species habitat requirements. These permanent changes also alter the functional structure and connectivity of the overall landscape. Conversely, solar facilities in agricultural areas retain many characteristics of grassland habitat preventing the succession of agricultural areas to scrub-shrub or forested, which would be a loss of grassland bird species habitat. In general, the vast majority of grassland habitat lost is due to consolidation of the farming industry to large farms in other parts of the US. These abandoned farm lands are generally left fallow, and without any land management activities, woody species begin to grow. As the historic natural land cover of New York State (including the Grassland Study Area) is forest, abandoned farmlands rapidly progress through natural successional stages, from meadow and old-field to scrub-shrub or young forest. Some grassland habitats are lost through development, whether it is residential, commercial, or industrial – however, few utility-scale solar facilities have been developed in New York State and they have had no effect on the documented loss of grassland habitat and observations of declining grassland bird populations to date. Since Study Project limits of disturbance are not public, the total impact to potential grassland habitat cannot be calculated, but it is reasonable to state the impacts in the final developed areas of the Study Projects are expected to be significantly lower. As there are documented reasons why grassland bird habitat has been in decline long before solar was in development, the relatively low percent of habitat available within the Grassland Study Area, to be used by the Facility, and the beneficial effect solar may have for habitat, solar projects, and specifically the Facility, do not present a significant adverse cumulative impact to grassland habitats and grassland bird populations in the Grassland Study Area, and in fact may help promote the creation and preservation of habitat.
15 Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report
REFERENCES
Albright, T. A. and A. C. Olsen. 2017. Forests of New York, 2016. Resource Update FS-141. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station. Newtown Square, PA.
Bailey, Robert G. 1995. Description of the ecoregions of the United States. 2d ed. rev. and expanded (1st ed. 1980). Misc. Publ. No. 1391 (rev.), Washington, DC: USDA Forest Service. 108 p. with separate map at 1:7,500,000.
BSG Ecology. 2014. Potential ecological impacts of ground-mounted photovoltaic solar panels in the UK: An introduction and literature review. Baker Shepherd Gillespie, LLP. Monmouth, UK.
Cornell Lab of Ornithology. 2019. All About Birds online database. Available at https://www.allaboutbirds.org. Accessed 13 May, 2019.
DeVault, T. L., T. W. Seamans, J. A. Schmidt, J. L. Belant, B. F. Blackwell, N. Mooers, L. A. Tyson, and L. Van Pelt. 2014. Bird use of solar photovoltaic installations at US airports: Implications for aviation safety. Landscape and Urban Planning 122: 122-128.
Herkert, J. R. 1994. The effects of habitat fragmentation on midwestern grassland bird communities. Ecological Applications 4:461-471.
Jenkins, A. R., S. Ralston, and H. A. Smit-Robinson. 2015. Birds and Solar Energy: Best Practice Guidelines. BirdLife South Africa. Johannesburg, South Africa.
Morgan, M. and M. Burger. 2008. A plan for conserving grassland birds in New York: Final report to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation under contract #C005137. Audubon New York, Ithaca, NY.
Multi-Resolution Land Cover Characteristics Consortium [MRLCC]. 2016. National Land Cover Data, 2006-2016. Available at: https://www.mrlc.gov/data. Accessed May 8, 2019.
Murphy, M. T. 2003. Avian population trends within the evolving agricultural landscape of eastern and central United States. Auk 120:20-34.
NOAA. 2019. C-CAP Land Cover Atlas. Available at: https://coast.noaa.gov/ccapatlas/. Accessed May 24, 2019.
NYNHP. 2019a. Nature Explorer online tool. Available at: http://www.dec.ny.gov/natureexplorer/app/. Accessed May 15, 2019.
NYNHP. 2019b. Online Conservation Guide for Circus hudsonius. Available at: https://guides.nynhp.org/northern- harrier/. Accessed March 14, 2019.
NYNHP. 2019c. Online Conservation Guide for Asio flammeus. Available from: https://guides.nynhp.org/short- eared-owl/. Accessed March 14, 2019.
New York State Breeding Bird Atlas (NYS BBA). 2008. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Available at https://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/7312.html. Accessed 13 May 2019.
NYSDEC. 2008. NYS Breeding Bird Atlas. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Available at: https://www.dec.ny.gov/cfmx/extapps/bba/. Accessed May 23, 2019.
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation [NYSDEC]. 2015a. Survey Protocol for State-listed Wintering Grassland Raptor Species (Draft – 2015). NYS Department of Environmental Conservation. Division of Fish, Wildlife, and Marine Resources. Albany, NY. 3p.
16 Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report
NYSDEC. 2015b. Survey Protocol for State-listed Breeding Grassland Bird Species. Draft -2015. NYS Department of Environmental Conservation. Division of Fish, Wildlife, and Marine Resources. Albany, NY. 3p.
NYSDEC. 2019a. Changes in New York’s Forest Land Area – Graph by New York Center for Forestry Research & Development, SUNY ESF and Empire State Forest Products Association. Available at: https://www.dec.ny.gov/lands/42065.html. Accessed May 23, 2019.
NYSDEC. 2019a. Environmental Resource Mapper. Available at: http://www.dec.ny.gov/gis/erm/. Accessed May 15, 2019.
NYSDEC. 2019b. Forests. Available at: https://www.dec.ny.gov/lands/309.html. Accessed May 23, 2019.
NYSDEC. 2019b. Horned Lark Fact Sheet. Available at: https://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/60055.html. Accessed March 14, 2019.
Norment, C., C. D. Ardizzone, and K. Hartman. 1999. Habitat relations and breeding biology of grassland birds in New York. Studies in Avian Biology 19: 112-121.
Norment, C., 2002. On grassland bird conservation in the Northeast. The Auk 110(1): 271-279.
Northrup, J. M. and G. Wittemyer. 2012. Characterising the impacts of emerging energy development on wildlife, with an eye towards mitigation. Ecology Letters Sept. 2012: 1-14.
Novak, P., A Ross, C. Rosenburg. 2014. Population monitoring and habitat identification for wintering raptors. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation; Matthew Schlesinger, New York Natural Heritage Program. New York State Wildlife Grant T-12, Project 6. Final Report. December 2014
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 1999. Grassland Birds. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Leaflet. October 1999, Number 8. Available online at: https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs144p2_054067. Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB). 2011. Solar Power. RSPB briefing.
Sauer, J. R., J. E. Hines, and J. Fallon. 2008. The North American breeding bird survey results and analysis 1966-2007. Version 5.15.2008. USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, MD. Available at: http://www.mbr-pwrc.usgs.gov/bbs/
Smit, H. A. [undated]. Guidelines to minimise the impact on birds of solar facilities and associated infrastructure in South Africa. BirdLife South Africa. Johannesburg, South Africa.
Tetra Tech, Inc. [Tetra Tech]. 2019. Habitat Assessment and Preliminary Impact Determination for Federal and State Protected Species. Submitted May 2019.
Turney, D. and V. Fthenakis. 2011. Environmental impacts from the installation and operation of large-scale solar power plants. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 15(2011): 3261-3270.
United States Department of Agriculture [USDA]. 2017. Web Soil Survey. Available at: https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/. Accessed March 13, 2019.
United States Federal Register. 2016. Title 50 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Species Status for the Northern Long-Eared Bat With 4(d) Rule; Final Rule. Volume 81, No. 9. Thursday, January 14, 2016. (23 pp.)
United States Geological Survey [USGS]. 2019. Breeding Species List for New York, United States. North American Breeding Bird Survey. USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, MD. Available at: https://www.pwrc.usgs.gov/BBS/PublicDataInterface/index.cfm. Accessed May 23, 2019.
17 Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report
United States Forest Service [USFS]. 2014. Eastern Broadleaf Forest (Oceanic) Province. Available at: https://www.fs.fed.us/land/ecosysmgmt/colorimagemap/images/221.html. Accessed March 13, 2019.
Vickery, P. D., M. L. Hunter, Jr., and S. M. Melvin. 1994. Effects of habitat area on the distribution of grassland birds in Maine. Conservation Biology 8:1087-1097.
Visser, E. 2016. The impact of South Africa’s largest photovoltaic solar energy facility on birds in the Northern Cape, South Africa. MS Thesis. University of Cape Town, South Africa.
Walston Jr, L. J., Rollins, K. E., LaGory, K. E., Smith, K. P., & Meyers, S. A. (2016). A preliminary assessment of avian mortality at utility-scale solar energy facilities in the United States. Renewable Energy, 92, 405-414.
18 Greene County Solar Facility Avian Cumulative Impact Assessment Report
FIGURES
Vermont
Massachusetts )*
Connecticut
Pennsylvania
New Jersey µ Prepared For: Figure 1. Project Location and Eva ation Area. Greene County Solar Facility, Greene County, New York. Hecate Energy LLC
Legend Prepared By: New York State Facility Location Boundary )* Project NYSDEC-Tracked Date: Sheet: Location NYSDEC Region Projects Boundaries All Study Projects 12/2019 1 of 1 100-mile Evaluation Area
Miles Source: ESRI World Imagery. 025 50 100 Scale = 1:1,500,000 1 inch = 24 miles Greene County Solar Facility Case No. 17-F-0617
Appendix 22-F
Vernal Pool Survey Technical Memorandum
Article 10 Application Greene County Solar Facility Vernal Pool Survey Report
For the
Greene County Solar Facility Coxsackie, Greene County, New York
November 2019
Prepared for:
Hecate Energy Greene 1 LLC, Hecate Energy Greene 2 LLC, and Hecate Energy Greene 3 LLC 621 W. Randolph Street Chicago, Illinois 60661
Prepared by:
Tetra Tech, Inc. 301 Ellicott Street Buffalo, New York 14203 Greene County Solar Facility Vernal Pool SurveyReport
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ...... 1 METHODS ...... 3 RESULTS ...... 4 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ...... 5 REFERENCES ...... 6
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Obligate Vernal Pool Species of New York State...... 2 Table 2. Summary of Vernal Pool Surveys at Greene County Solar Facility, Greene County, New York...... 4
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Photographic Documentation Appendix B Vernal Pool Data Form
i Greene County Solar Facility Vernal Pool SurveyReport
ACRONYMS/ABBREVIATIONS
Acronym/Abbreviation Definition Facility Greene County Solar Facility, a proposed 50-megawatt solar photovoltaic facility GPS Global Positioning System Hecate Energy Greene 1 LLC, Hecate Energy Greene 2 LLC, and Hecate Co-Applicants Energy Greene 3 LLC CTH Critical terrestrial habitat; area between 100 and 750 feet of a vernal pool NYSDEC New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Approximately 827 acres of privately owned land in the Town of Coxsackie, Facility Area Greene County, New York on which the Greene County Solar Facility is proposed Tetra Tech Tetra Tech, Inc. VPE Vernal pool envelope; area within 100 feet of a vernal pool.
ii Greene County Solar Facility Vernal Pool Survey Report
INTRODUCTION
Hecate Energy is proposing to construct the Facility on approximately 827 acres of privately-owned located in the Town of Coxsackie along Farm to Market Road, between United States Route 9W and New York State Route 385, approximately 21 miles south of the City of Albany, New York. The Facility will have a nameplate capacity of approximately 50 MW (alternating current [AC]) and is expected to generate approximately 93,406 megawatt-hours of energy annually. The Facility will consist of solar arrays and associated infrastructure and have a footprint that occupies approximately 379 acres (46 percent [%]) of the total 827-acre Facility Area. Appendix A shows the location of the currently-proposed Facility. The design of the Facility consists of the following components: A solar field of photovoltaic (PV) panels producing direct current electricity mounted on single-axis tracking structures that will follow the sun throughout the day; Inverters within weather rated enclosures dispersed throughout the Facility (amongst the solar arrays) to convert direct current electricity to AC electricity; Medium voltage transformers that will raise the low voltage from the inverters to medium voltage cable collection systems (13.8 kilovolt [kV] and 34 kV) that will extend underground to collection points for connection to the transmission grid; New on-site adjacent collection substations to which the solar 34 kV medium voltage collection systems will connect to and be raised to the 69 kV transmission voltage; New Central Hudson Gas and Electric Corporation- (CHGE-) built switchyard to be located adjacent to the solar collection substation on lands within the Facility Area that will connect to the Facility to the CHGE 69 kV transmission line located directly adjacent to the Facility Area; A new 13.8 kV pole mounted electrical recloser switch which will connect the 13.8 kV medium voltage solar collection system to the CHGE grid; A new CHGE-built, approximately 0.85 mile long offsite 13.8 kV distribution line that will connect a portion of the Facility to the existing offsite Coxsackie Substation that is connected to the CHGE 69 kV transmission line; Monitoring, control, and protection systems to remotely control the solar Facility to reliably operate on the New York State grid; Internal civil infrastructure, including parking, permanent gravel access roads and grass pathways, security fencing around Facility equipment, and landscape screening vegetation; Temporary laydown, construction office trailers, and other temporary facilities and equipment staging areas during construction of the Facility, all within the planned limit of disturbance within Facility Area; and Conservation areas planned for continued agricultural uses, or potentially for habitat conservation. The Facility will use the same type of PV panels installed on over one million homes in the United States. The PV panels for the Facility will be ground-mounted on a low-profile racking system that will be supported by I-beam posts driven into the ground. The result is an extremely small ground disturbance footprint associated with the panels. A portion of the Facility output (two, 20-megawatt output portions) will connect to the Central Hudson Gas and Electric Corporation’s 69 kV transmission line that extends between the existing North Catskill and Coxsackie Substations. Another portion the Facility output (10 megawatt output portion of the Facility) will connect to CHGE’s grid at Coxsackie 13.8 kV Substation, via a new CHGE-built and owned 0.85-mile long, offsite 13.8 kV distribution line to be located within an existing CHGE-owned right-of-way along Stacy Road. This technical Memorandum summarizes the results of a Vernal Pool Survey completed to support the Article 10 Certification process for the Greene County Solar Facility (Facility). The proposed Facility includes a 50-megawatt solar photovoltaic facility to be built on portions of approximately 827 acres of privately owned land located in the Town of Coxsackie, Greene County, New York (Facility Area). Vernal Pool Surveys were conducted by Tetra Tech, Inc. (Tetra Tech) on behalf of Hecate Energy Greene 1 LLC, Hecate Energy Greene 2 LLC, and Hecate Energy Greene County 3 LLC (the Co-Applicants) on April 9-10, April 16 and May 1, 2019.
1 Greene County Solar Facility Vernal Pool Survey Report
The Facility is subject to review under the Article 10 process. As a part of that process, stipulations outlining technical requirements of the application were developed. Exhibit 22(e) of the Greene County Solar Facility Stipulations includes the following vernal pool requirement: To the extent that vernal pools and their functions (including the surrounding upland habitat) may be impacted by construction, operation or maintenance of the Facility, these impacts shall be identified and assessed in the Application. Such impacts may require, in consultation with NYSDEC [New York State Department of Environmental Conservation] and NYSDPS [New York State Department of Public Service], the development and implementation of site-specific surveys for amphibian and reptile species under appropriate seasonal conditions in order to fully quantify the level of impact from the Facility. The Applicant shall submit to NYSDEC detailed location maps and ecological characterization data for all vernal pools located within 500 feet of all proposed areas of disturbance, if any, based on existing wetland delineation field reconnaissance.
Therefore, Tetra Tech has conducted a vernal pool survey within the Facility Area. New York does not specifically recognize vernal pools from a regulatory standpoint. In most cases, a vernal pool would be regulated only if it provided habitat for one or more threatened or endangered species AND had been added, through a public hearing process, to the official to the official map of state-regulated wetlands. In Ecological Communities of New York State Second Edition, Edinger et. al. (2014) describes the vernal pool community as: “An aquatic community of small, shallow depressions that are intermittently to ephemerally flooded. These small depressions typically occur within an upland forest, but may be surrounded by a narrow fringe of red maple-hardwood swamp that quickly transitions to upland forest. The pools generally lack trees, but are classified here as forested wetlands because of their position in the forested landscape. Vernal pools are typically flooded in spring or after a heavy rainfall, but usually dry during summer. Many vernal pools are filled again in autumn.” Edinger et. al (2014) goes on to list five obligate vernal pool species (species that depend upon vernal pool habitat for reproduction) and numerous facultative vernal pool species/groups (species that are often found in vernal pools, but are not dependent on them and can successfully reproduce elsewhere) that occur in these communities. Table 1 includes the five obligate vernal pool species that occur within vernal pool communities in New York State.
Table 1. Obligate Vernal Pool Species of New York State. Common Name Scientific Name Spotted salamander Ambystoma maculatum Blue-spotted salamander Ambystoma laterale Jefferson’s salamander Ambystoma jeffersonianum Marbled salamander Ambystoma opacum Wood frog Lithobates (Rana) sylvaticus
2 Greene County Solar Facility Vernal Pool Survey Report
METHODS
Most the Facility Area was surveyed by Tetra Tech for the presence of potential vernal pools April 9-10, 2019. Each potential vernal pool was surveyed for the presence of vernal pool indicator species during the April 9-10 survey, and revisited two additional times in the spring of 2019, on April 16 and May 1. One small forested section that was evaluated in November 2019 did not contain any potential pools, nor did it have topography suitable for vernal pools. Timing of vernal pool surveys was tailored to local climatic conditions (i.e., temperature and precipitation) and further calibrated by observations at a reference site (i.e., known vernal pools on NYSDEC lands in the vicinity of the Facility) (NYSDEC 2019a) and updates on the regional amphibian migrations listserve (NYSDEC 2019b). Postings on the listserve included details on regional mass amphibian migration movement, also known as “big night”, and the subsequent timing of amphibian chorusing. The second survey in mid-April was conducted approximately two weeks following reports of full wood frog choruses to target wood frog egg mass identification and enumeration. The third and final survey was conducted approximately two weeks following the mid-April to target salamander egg mass identification. A Tetra Tech ecologist surveyed and documented each feature according to the guidelines outlined in the Maine Association of Wetland Scientists Vernal Pool Technical Committee Vernal Pool Survey Protocol (Maine Association of Wetland Scientists 2014). The high water line of each vernal pool depression was mapped using a handheld global positioning system unit (GPS) or a combination of GPS and desktop digitization. Recorded information includes general site conditions, the identification and abundance of species observed in each feature, with particular attention focused on the obligate species and their egg masses. A minimum of two net sweeps were conducted in each feature to determine presence of fairy shrimp (Eubranchipus spp.), amphibian larvae, and or invertebrates. Additionally, visual surveys and cover object searches were conducted out to 50 feet from the depressional high water line in the adjacent critical terrestrial habitat.
3 Greene County Solar Facility Vernal Pool Survey Report
RESULTS
Two features were surveyed in 2019; one pool (VP-01) contained evidence of breeding activity by obligate vernal pool species (Table 2). The second features (PVP-01) was deemed not to be a vernal pool because no evidence of use by obligate or facultative vernal pool species was observed.
Table 2. Summary of Vernal Pool Surveys at Greene County Solar Facility, Greene County, New York.
Blue- Pool Survey Survey Survey Wood Frogs Spotted Jeff’s Marbled spotted ID Date 1 Date 2 Date 3 Sal. Sal. Sal. 4/10 4/16 5/1 Sal. VP-01 4/10/19 4/16/19 5/1/19 1A,3B 3B >750C 0 0 0 0 PVP- 4/10/19 4/16/19 5/1/19 0 0 0 0 0 01 A Adult B Egg masses C Tadpoles
Pool VP-01 Pool VP-01 is a small pool located in a floodplain at the confluence of two perennial streams (S20 and S21), in the west-central part of the Facility Area. The observed maximum water depth within the pool was 12 inches and it has a mucky substrate with fine sediment. The pool does not have a permanent inlet or outlet but likely receives periodic hydrologic input from S21. Based on small size and shallow water, it likely dries completely in most years. It is unclear if the pool is entirely manmade, but it has been affected by human disturbance within the past 50 years (or more), at minimum. There is an old utility outbuilding nearby, buried utility line, and a nondescript metal valve located on the edge of the pool. Three wood frog (Lithobates sylvatiscus) egg masses and numerous wood frog tadpoles were observed during multiple site visits to the pool. Furthermore, one adult wood frog was observed calling in the vicinity, and two spring peepers (Pseudacris crucifer) were observed in amplexus (mating position) in the pool during the early April survey event. PVP-01 An area of pooled water approximately 30 feet long by 10 feet wide was observed during the early April survey event. This pool was located on within a wetland (wetland W-1) on a transition between forested wetland and emergent wetland in the northeast portion of the Facility Area. While the pool contained approximately 18 inches of water, no vernal pool indicator species were observed in the pool, nor were any heard calling. Based on the presence of dense meadow grass species that were present throughout the pool, it is unlikely that the area remains inundated for a significant length of time. The location of the two vernal pools are provided in Figure 1. The supporting Maine State Vernal Pool Assessment Form and photographic documentation of the survey, including photographs of the two pools, are provided in Appendices A and B, respectively.
4 Greene County Solar Facility Vernal Pool Survey Report
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The Facility Area was surveyed for the presence of potential vernal pools in early April 2019. The subsequent vernal pool surveys were timed to target obligate wood frog and salamander breeding activity. Of the two potential vernal pool features surveyed within the Facility Area, one (VP-01) contained evidence of breeding by obligate vernal pool amphibians. In Best development practices: Conserving pool-breeding amphibians in residential and commercial developments in the northeastern United States, Calhoun and Klemens (2002) describe the habitat immediately surrounding the breeding pool (area within 100 feet of the pool’s boundary) as the vernal pool envelope (VPE) and the area 100- 750 feet from the boundary of the pool as the critical terrestrial habitat (CTH). The VPE provides important habitat for adult salamanders and wood frogs during breeding, and for juveniles during emergence from the pool. Furthermore, this zone functions to protect water quality within the pool and provides nutrient inputs. Outside of the breeding season, amphibians may inhabit the CTH for foraging, dispersing, and hibernating. During the breeding season, adults migrate to and from the vernal pool in this zone. A well-functioning and intact VPE and CTH combined is important for maintaining populations of breeding amphibians for any given vernal pool. Currently, most of the VPE for VP-01 is vegetated, primarily with young forest immediately to the north and east, and shrubby riparian area to the west and south (Figure 1). A wetland dominated by common reed (Phragmites australis) is present to the southeast and an active agricultural field is located to the north, beyond the forested area. The CTH comprises primarily active agricultural field or early successional shrub while open wetlands and developed area (i.e., residential area and roads) to the south and east, make up smaller components. The proposed limit of disturbance in this section of the Facility is approximately 200 feet to the northwest of the pool within an agricultural field. No tree clearing will occur within the VPE. A swath of forest approximately 30 feet wide and 400 feet long, located along the west side of the CTH and approximately 500 feet west of VP-01, will be cleared to facilitate construction and maintenance of an overhead transmission line. Other than this clearing, there will be no other change in cover type within 750 feet of the pool after construction of the proposed Facility is complete.
5 Greene County Solar Facility Vernal Pool Survey Report
REFERENCES
Calhoun, A. J. K. and M. W. Klemens. 2002. Best development practices: conserving pool-breeding amphibians in residential and commercial developments in the northeastern United States. MCA Technical Paper No. 5, Metropolitan Conservation Alliance, Wildlife Conservation Society, Bronx, New York. Edinger, G.J., D.J. Evans, S. Gebauer, T.G. Howard, D M. Hunt, and A.M. Olivero (editors). 2014. Ecological Communities of New York State. Second Edition: A Revised and Expanded Edition of Carol Reschke’s Ecological Communities of New York State (1990). New York Natural Heritage Program, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, NY. Maine Association of Wetland Scientists. 2014. Maine Association of Wetland Scientists Vernal Pool Technical Committee Vernal Pool Survey Protocol – April 2014. Available online at: http://mainewetlands.org/s/Complete-MAWS-2014-VP-Survey-Protocol_v3_05142014-6zs7.pdf. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC). 2019a. Five Rivers Environmental Education Center, Environmental Education Centers and Programs. Available online at: https://www.dec.ny.gov/education/1835.html. NYSDEC. 2019b. Amphibian Migrations and Road Crossings, Hudson River Estuary Program. Available online at: http://www.dec.ny.gov/lands/51925.html.
6 PVP-01 !(
Legend Vernal Pool Locations Figure 1 Greene County Solar Facility Greene County, New York
Prepared By: Date:
11/2019
!( ¯ Greene County Solar Facility Vernal Pool Survey Report
APPENDIX A PHOTOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION
PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Hecate Energy Greene 1 LLC, Hecate Energy Greene Company: 2 LLC, and Hecate Energy Greene County 3 LLC Project: Greene County Solar Facility
Photographer: L. Quillen Date: 4/ /2019 Photo No.: 1 Direction: N
Comments: Pool VP-01 is located in a floodplain near the confluence of streams S20 and S21.
Photographer: L. Quillen Date: 4/16/2019 Photo No.: 2 Direction: NW
Comments: Pool PVP-01 is located in W1 at a transition point from forested wetland to emergent wetland. No vernal pool indicators were observed in this pool during 2019 survey efforts. PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Hecate Energy Greene 1 LLC, Hecate Energy Greene 2 Company: LLC, and Hecate Energy Greene County 3 LLC Project: Greene County Solar Facility
Photographer: L. Quillen Date: 4/ 19 Photo No.: 3 Direction: n/a
Comments: View of one of three wood frog (Lithobates sylvaticus) egg masses observed in VP-01. A single adult wood frog was heard calling at this pool during early-April survey.
Photographer: L. Quillen Date: 4/ /2019 Photo No.: 4 Direction: n/a
Comments: View of spring peepers (Pseudacris crucifer) in amplexus, observed during mid-April survey. PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Hecate Energy Greene 1 LLC, Hecate Energy Greene Company: 2 LLC, and Hecate Energy Greene County 3 LLC Project: Greene County Solar Facility
Photographer: L. Quillen Date: 4/16/2019 Photo No.: 5 Direction: n/a
Comments: View of one of three wood frog egg masses with hatching tadpoles.
Photographer: L. Quillen Date: 5/1/2019 Photo No.: 6 Direction: n/a
Comments: View of wood frog tadpole observed in VP- 01 during early May survey. Greene County Solar Facility Vernal Pool Survey Report
APPENDIX B VERNAL POOL DATA FORM