U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines - U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines
Cover Photo: Wind Turbine. Photo by Stefanie Stavrakas, USFWS
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines
OMB Control No, 1018-0148
Expiration Date: 12/31/2014
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines
March 23, 2012
i
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines
Acknowledgements
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) would like to recognize and thank the Wind Turbine Guidelines
Advisory Committee for its dedication and preparation of its Recommendations. The Recommendations have served
as the basis from which the Service’s team worked to develop the Service’s Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines.
The Service also recognizes the tireless efforts of the Headquarters, Regional and Field Office staff that helped to
review and update these Guidelines.
Paperwork Reduction Act Statement: The Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines contain reporting and recordkeeping
requirements that require Office of Management and Budget approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995. Your response is voluntary. We collect this information in order to provide technical assistance related
to addressing wildlife conservation concerns at all stages of land-based wind energy development. For each
response, we estimate the time necessary to provide the information as follows:
Tier 1 – 83 hours
Tier 2 – 375 hours
Tier 3 – 2,880 hours
Tier 4 – 2,550 hours
Tier 5 – 2,400 hours
The above estimates include time for reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining data, and preparing and
transmitting reports. Send comments regarding these estimates or any other aspect of the requirements to the
Service Information Collection Clearance Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 2042-
PDM, Arlington, VA 22203.
We may not conduct and you are not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number.
ii
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines
Table of Contents
Executive Summary……………………………………………………………………………………………… vi
Chapter 1 - General Overview…………………………………………………………………………………… 1
Statutory Authorities……………………………………………………………………………………… 1
Migratory Bird Treaty Act……………………………………………………………………… 2
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act………………………………………………………… 2
Endangered Species Act……………………………………………………………………………3
Implementation of the Guidelines………………………………………………………………………… 4
Consideration of the Guidelines in MBTA and BGEPA Enforcement……………………… 6
Scope and Project Scale of the Guidelines……………………………………………………… 6
Service Review Period…………………………………………………………………………… 7
Introduction to the Decision Framework Using a Tiered Approach…………………………………… 7
Considering Risk in the Tiered Approach………………………………………………………………… 10
Cumulative Impacts of 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
Tier 2 Decision Points……………………………………………………………………………………… 18
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……………………………………………………………………………… 24
Assessing Site Use/Behavior…………………………………………………………………… 24
Duration/Intensity of Studies…………………………………………………………………… 25
Assessing Risk to Species of Concern…………………………………………………………… 25
Tier 3 Technical Resources………………………………………………………………………………… 26
Tier 3, Question 1………………………………………………………………………………… 26
Tier 3, Question 2………………………………………………………………………………… 27
iii
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines
Tier 3, Question 3………………………………………………………………………………… 28
Tier 3 Decision Points……………………………………………………………………………………… 33
Chapter 5: Tier 4 – Post-construction Studies to Estimate Impacts…………………………………………… 34
Tier 4a – Fatality Studies………………………………………………………………………………… 34
Tier 4a Questions………………………………………………………………………………… 35
Tier 4a Protocol Design Considerations……………………………………………………… 35
Tier 4a Study Objectives…………………………………………………………………………………… 37
Tier 4b – Assessing direct and indirect impacts of habitat loss, degradation, and fragmentation…… 40
Tier 4b Protocol Design Considerations………………………………………………………… 41
Tier 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………………………………………………………………………………… 44
Tier 5 Studies and Research…………………………………………………………………… 46
Chapter 7: Best Management Practices………………………………………………………………………… 49
Site Construction and Operation………………………………………………………………………… 49
Retrofitting, Repowering, and Decommissioning……………………………………………………… 51
Retrofitting……………………………………………………………………………………… 51
Repowering……………………………………………………………………………………… 51
Decommissioning………………………………………………………………………………… 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
Conflict Resolution………………………………………………………………………………………… 55
Bird and Bat Conservation Strategies (BBCS)………………………………………………………… 55
Project Interconnection Lines…………………………………………………………………………… 55
Confidentiality of Site Evaluation Process as Appropriate…………………………………………… 56
Collaborative Research…………………………………………………………………………………… 56
Service - State Coordination and Cooperation………………………………………………………… 56
iv
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines
Service Tribal Consultation and Coordination………………………………………………………… 57
Tribal Wind Energy Development on Reservation Lands…………………………………… 57
Tribal Wind Energy Development on Lands that are not held in Trust……………………… 57
Non-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 of Tiered Approach……………………………………………………… 9
Table 2. Decision Framework for Tier 4a Fatality Monitoring of Species of Concern.……………… 39
Table 3. Decision Framework to Guide Studies for Minimizing Impacts to Habitat and Species of
Habitat Fragmentation (HF) Concern.…………………………………………………………………… 42
v
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines
Executive Summary
As the Nation shifts to renewable golden eagles and other birds of • Tier 2 – Site characterization
energy production to supplant the prey; prairie and sage grouse; (broad characterization of one
need for carbon-based fuel, wind and listed, proposed, or candidate or more potential project sites)
energy will be an important source endangered and threatened
of power. As wind energy production species. Wind energy development • Tier 3 – Field studies to
increases, both developers and in some areas may be precluded document site wildlife and
wildlife agencies have recognized by federal law; other areas may habitat and predict project
the need for a system to evaluate be inappropriate for development impacts
and address the potential negative because they have been recognized
impacts of wind energy projects on as having high wildlife value based • Tier 4 – Post-construction
species of concern. These voluntary on their ecological rarity and studies to estimate impacts1
Guidelines provide a structured, intactness.
scientific process for addressing • Tier 5 – Other post-
wildlife conservation concerns at all The Guidelines use a “tiered construction studies and
stages of land-based wind energy approach” for assessing potential research
development. They also promote adverse effects to species of concern
effective communication among wind and their habitats. The tiered The tiered approach provides the
energy developers and federal, state, approach is an iterative decision- opportunity for evaluation and
and local conservation agencies and making process for collecting decision-making at each stage,
tribes. When used in concert with information in increasing detail; enabling a developer to abandon or
appropriate regulatory tools, the quantifying the possible risks of proceed with project development,
Guidelines form the best practical proposed wind energy projects or to collect additional information
approach for conserving species to species of concern and their if required. This approach does
of concern. The Guidelines have habitats; and evaluating those risks not require that every tier, or
been developed by the Interior to make siting, construction, and every element within each tier, be
Department’s U.S. Fish and Wildlife operation decisions. During the implemented for every project.
Service (Service) working with the pre-construction tiers (Tiers 1, 2, The Service anticipates that many
Wind Turbine Guidelines Advisory and 3), developers are working to distributed or community facilities
Committee. They replace interim identify, avoid and minimize risks to will not need to follow the Guidelines
voluntary guidance published by the species of concern. During post- beyond Tiers 1 and 2. Instead, the
Service in 2003. construction tiers (Tiers 4 and 5), tiered approach allows efficient use
developers are assessing whether of developer and wildlife agency
The Guidelines discuss various actions taken in earlier tiers to resources with increasing levels of
risks to “species of concern” from avoid and minimize impacts are effort.
wind energy projects, including successfully achieving the goals and,
collisions with wind turbines and when necessary, taking additional If sufficient data are available
associated infrastructure; loss steps to compensate for impacts. at a particular tier, the following
and degradation of habitat from Subsequent tiers refine and build outcomes are possible:
turbines and infrastructure; upon issues raised and efforts
fragmentation of large habitat undertaken in previous tiers. Each 1. The project proceeds to the
blocks into smaller segments that tier offers a set of questions to help next tier in the development
may not support sensitive species; the developer evaluate the potential process without additional
displacement and behavioral risk associated with developing a data collection.
changes; and indirect effects such project at the given location.
as increased predator populations 2. The project proceeds to the
or introduction of invasive plants. Briefly, the tiers address: next tier in the development
The Guidelines assist developers process with additional data
in identifying species of concern • Tier 1 – Preliminary site collection.
that may potentially be affected by evaluation (landscape-scale
their proposed project, including screening of possible project 3. An action or combination
migratory birds; bats; bald and sites) of actions, such as project
1
The Service anticipates these studies will include fatality monitoring as well as studies to evaluate habitat impacts.
vi
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines
modification, mitigation, avoiding areas where development provides guidance to both developers
or specific post-construction is precluded or where wildlife and Service personnel regarding
monitoring, is indicated. impacts are likely to be high appropriate communication and
and difficult or costly to remedy documentation.
4. The project site is abandoned or mitigate at a later stage. By
because the risk is considered consulting early, project developers The Guidelines also provide
unacceptable. can also incorporate appropriate Best Management Practices for
wildlife conservation measures and site development, construction,
If data are deemed insufficient monitoring into their decisions about retrofitting, repowering, and
at a tier, more intensive study is project siting, design, and operation. decommissioning. For additional
conducted in the subsequent tier reference, a glossary of terms and
until sufficient data are available Adherence to the Guidelines is list of literature cited are included in
to make a decision to modify the voluntary and does not relieve any the appendices.
project, proceed with the project, or individual, company, or agency of
abandon the project. the responsibility to comply with
laws and regulations. However, if
The most important thing a a violation occurs the Service will
developer can do is to consult with consider a developer’s documented
the Service as early as possible in efforts to communicate with
the development of a wind energy the Service and adhere to the
project. Early consultation offers Guidelines. The Guidelines include
the greatest opportunity for a Communications Protocol which
Wind Resource Map. Credit: NREL
vii
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines viii
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines
Chapter 1 - General Overview
The mission of the U.S. Fish and (3) Produce potentially reducing adverse effects to fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) is working comparable data across the wildlife resources from wind energy
with others to conserve, protect and Nation; projects for public comment in July
enhance fish, wildlife, plants and 2003. After the Service reviewed the
their habitats for the continuing (4) Mitigate, including avoid, public comments, the Secretary of
benefit of the American people. As minimize, and compensate the Interior (Secretary) established
part of this, the Service implements for potential adverse effects a Federal Advisory Committee2 to
statutes including the Endangered on species of concern and provide recommendations to revise
Species Act, Migratory Bird Treaty their habitats; and, the guidelines related to land-
Act, and Bald and Golden Eagle based wind energy facilities. In
Protection Act. These statutes (5) Improve the ability to March 2007, the U.S. Department
prohibit taking of federally listed predict and resolve effects of the Interior established the
species, migratory birds, and eagles locally, regionally, and Wind Turbine Guidelines Advisory
unless otherwise authorized. nationally. Committee (the Committee).
The Committee submitted its
Recent studies have documented As the United States moves to final Recommended Guidelines
that wind energy facilities can kill expand wind energy production, (Recommendations) to the Secretary
birds and bats. Mortality rates it also must maintain and protect on March 4, 2010. The Service used
in fatalities per nameplate MW the Nation’s wildlife and their the Recommendations to develop
per year vary among facilities and habitats, which wind energy its Land-Based Wind Energy
regions. Studies have indicated that production can negatively affect. Guidelines.
relatively low raptor (e.g., hawks, As with all responsible energy
eagles) fatality rates exist at most development, wind energy projects The Service encourages project
modern wind energy developments should adhere to high standards proponents to use the process
with the exception of some facilities for environmental protection. With described in these voluntary Land-
in California and Wyoming. Turbine- proper diligence paid to siting, based Wind Energy Guidelines
related bat deaths have been operations, and management of (Guidelines) to address risks to
reported at each wind facility to projects, it is possible to mitigate species of concern. The Service
date. Generally, studies in the West for adverse effects to wildlife, intends that these Guidelines, when
have reported lower rates of bat and their habitats. This is best used in concert with the appropriate
fatalities than facilities in the East. accomplished when the wind energy regulatory tools, will form the best
There is still much uncertainty project developer communicates as practical approach for conservation
regarding geographic distribution early as possible with the Service of species of concern.
and causes of bat fatalities (NWCC and other stakeholders. Such
2010). early communication allows for the Statutory Authorities
greatest range of development and
These Guidelines are intended to: mitigation options. The following These Guidelines are not intended
website contains contact information nor shall they be construed to
(1) Promote compliance for the Service Regional and Field limit or preclude the Service from
with relevant wildlife laws offices as well as State wildlife exercising its authority under any
and regulations; agencies: http://www.fws.gov/offices/ law, statute, or regulation, or from
statelinks.html. conducting enforcement action
(2) Encourage scientifically against any individual, company,
rigorous survey, monitoring, In response to increasing wind or agency. They are not meant to
assessment, and research energy development in the United relieve any individual, company, or
designs proportionate to the States, the Service released a set agency of its obligations to comply
risk to species of concern; of voluntary, interim guidelines for with any applicable federal, state,
2
Committee membership, from 2008 to 2011, has included: Taber Allison, Massachusetts Audubon; Dick Anderson, California Energy
Commission; Ed Arnett, Bat Conservation International; Michael Azeka, AES Wind Generation; Thomas Bancroft, National Audubon; Kathy
Boydston, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department; René Braud, EDP Renewables; Scott Darling, Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department; Michael
Daulton, National Audubon; Aimee Delach, Defenders of Wildlife; Karen Douglas, California Energy Commission; Sam Enfield, MAP Royalty;
Greg Hueckel, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife; Jeri Lawrence, Blackfeet Nation; Steve Lindenberg, U.S. Department of Energy;
Andy Linehan, Iberdrola Renewables; Rob Manes, The Nature Conservancy, Kansas; Winifred Perkins, NextEra Energy Resources; Steven
Quarles, Crowell & Moring; Rich Rayhill, Ridgeline Energy; Robert Robel, Kansas State University; Keith Sexson, Association of Fish and
Wildlife Agencies; Mark Sinclair, Clean Energy States Alliance; David Stout, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Patrick Traylor, Hogan Lovells.
1U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines
tribal, or local laws, statutes, or hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, either a decrease in productivity or
regulations. The Guidelines do not capture, or collect, or attempt to nest abandonment by substantially
prevent the Service from referring pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, interfering with normal breeding,
violations of law for enforcement capture, or collect.” 50 CFR 10.12. feeding, or sheltering behavior. 50
when a company has not followed the CFR 22.3. BGEPA authorizes the
Guidelines. The MBTA provides criminal Service to permit the take of eagles
penalties for persons who commit for certain purposes and under
Ultimately it is the responsibility any of the acts prohibited by the certain circumstances, including
of those involved with the planning, statute in section 703 on any of the scientific or exhibition purposes,
design, construction, operation, species protected by the statute. religious purposes of Indian tribes,
maintenance, and decommissioning See 16 U.S.C. 707. The Service and the protection of wildlife,
of wind projects to conduct relevant maintains a list of all species agricultural, or other interests, so
wildlife and habitat evaluation and protected by the MBTA at 50 CFR long as that take is compatible with
determine, which, if any, species 10.13. This list includes over one the preservation of eagles. 16 U.S.C.
may be affected. The results of thousand species of migratory birds, 668a.
these analyses will inform all efforts including eagles and other raptors,
to achieve compliance with the waterfowl, shorebirds, seabirds, In 2009, the Service promulgated
appropriate jurisdictional statutes. wading birds, and passerines. The a final rule on two new permit
Project proponents are responsible MBTA does not protect introduced regulations that, for the first
for complying with applicable state species such as the house (English) time, specifically authorize the
and local laws. sparrow, European starling, rock incidental take of eagles and eagle
dove (pigeon), Eurasian collared- nests in certain situations under
Migratory Bird Treaty Act dove, and non-migratory upland BGEPA. See 50 CFR 22.26 &
game birds. The Service maintains 22.27. The permits authorize
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act a list of introduced species not limited, non-purposeful (incidental)
(MBTA) is the cornerstone of protected by the Act. See 70 Fed. take of bald and golden eagles;
migratory bird conservation and Reg. 12,710 (Mar. 15, 2005). authorizing individuals, companies,
protection in the United States. The government agencies (including
MBTA implements four treaties that Bald and Golden Eagle Protection tribal governments), and other
provide for international protection Act organizations to disturb or
of migratory birds. It is a strict otherwise take eagles in the course
liability statute, meaning that proof Under authority of the Bald and of conducting lawful activities such
of intent, knowledge, or negligence Golden Eagle Protection Act as operating utilities and airports.
is not an element of an MBTA (BGEPA), 16 U.S.C.
violation. The statute’s language 668–668d, bald eagles and
is clear that actions resulting in a golden eagles are afforded
“taking” or possession (permanent additional legal protection.
or temporary) of a protected species, BGEPA prohibits the take,
in the absence of a Service permit sale, purchase, barter,
or regulatory authorization, are a offer of sale, purchase, or
violation of the MBTA. barter, transport, export
or import, at any time or
The MBTA states, “Unless and in any manner of any bald
except as permitted by regulations or golden eagle, alive or
… it shall be unlawful at any time, dead, or any part, nest, or
by any means, or in any manner egg thereof. 16 U.S.C. 668.
to pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill BGEPA also defines take
… possess, offer for sale, sell … to include “pursue, shoot,
purchase … ship, export, import … shoot at, poison, wound,
transport or cause to be transported kill, capture, trap, collect,
… any migratory bird, any part, molest, or disturb,” 16
nest, or eggs of any such bird …. U.S.C. 668c, and includes
[The Act] prohibits the taking, criminal and civil penalties
killing, possession, transportation, for violating the statute.
import and export of migratory See 16 U.S.C. 668. The
birds, their eggs, parts, and nests, Service further defined the
except when specifically authorized term “disturb” as agitating
by the Department of the Interior.” or bothering an eagle to a
16 U.S.C. 703. The word “take” is degree that causes, or is
defined by regulation as “to pursue, likely to cause, injury, or Bald Eagle, Credit: USFWS
2U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines
Removal of active eagle nests would
usually be allowed only when it is
necessary to protect human safety or
the eagles. Removal of inactive nests
can be authorized when necessary
to ensure public health and safety,
when a nest is built on a human-
engineered structure rendering it
inoperable, and when removal is
necessary to protect an interest
in a particular locality, but only if
the take or mitigation for the take
will provide a clear and substantial
benefit to eagles.
To facilitate issuance of permits
under these new regulations,
the Service has drafted Eagle
Conservation Plan (ECP) Guidance.
The ECP Guidance is compatible
with these Land-Based Wind
Energy Guidelines. The Guidelines
guide developers through the
process of project development and
operation. If eagles are identified
as a potential risk at a project site,
developers are strongly encouraged
to refer to the ECP Guidance. The Indiana bat. Credit: USFWS
ECP Guidance describes specific are not likely to jeopardize the actions on their lands to benefit both
actions that are recommended continued existence of these species listed and non-listed species.
to comply with the regulatory or destroy or adversely modify their
requirements in BGEPA for an eagle critical habitat. Federal agencies Section 9 of the ESA makes it
take permit, as described in 50 CFR are encouraged to do the same with unlawful for a person to “take” a
22.26 and 22.27. The ECP Guidance respect to “candidate” species that listed species. Take is defined as “...
provides a national framework for may be listed in the near future. The to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot,
assessing and mitigating risk specific law is administered by the Service wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect
to eagles through development of and the Commerce Department’s or attempt to engage in any such
ECPs and issuance of programmatic National Marine Fisheries Service conduct.” 16 U.S.C. 1532(19). The
incidental takes of eagles at wind (NMFS). For information regarding terms harass and harm are further
turbine facilities. The Service species protected under the ESA, defined in our regulations. See 50
will make its final ECP Guidance see: http://www.fws.gov/endangered/. CFR 17.3. However, the Service
available to the public through its may authorize “incidental take”
website. The Service has primary (take that occurs as a result of an
responsibility for terrestrial and otherwise legal activity) in two ways.
Endangered Species Act freshwater species, while NMFS
generally has responsibility Take of federally listed species
The Endangered Species Act (16 for marine species. These two incidental to a lawful activity may
U.S.C. 1531–1544; ESA) was enacted agencies work with other agencies be authorized through formal
by Congress in 1973 in recognition to plan or modify federal projects consultation under section 7(a)(2) of
that many of our Nation’s native so that they will have minimal the ESA, whenever a federal agency,
plants and animals were in danger of impact on listed species and their federal funding, or a federal permit
becoming extinct. The ESA directs habitats. Protection of species is is involved. Otherwise, a person may
the Service to identify and protect also achieved through partnerships seek an incidental take permit under
these endangered and threatened with the states, through federal section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA upon
species and their critical habitat, and financial assistance and a system of completion of a satisfactory habitat
to provide a means to conserve their incentives available to encourage conservation plan (HCP) for listed
ecosystems. To this end, federal state participation. The Service species. Developers not receiving
agencies are directed to utilize also works with private landowners, federal funding or authorization
their authorities to conserve listed providing financial and technical should contact the Service to obtain
species, and ensure that their actions assistance for management an incidental take permit if a wind
3U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines
information with the Service and should contemporaneously document
considered its advice. with reasoned justification why they
did so. Although the Guidelines
• For projects initiated prior to leave decisions up to the developer,
publication, the developer should the Service retains authority to
consider where they are in the evaluate whether developer efforts
planning process relative to the to mitigate impacts are sufficient,
appropriate tier and inform the to determine significance, and to
Service of what actions they will refer for prosecution any unlawful
take to apply the Guidelines. take that it believes to be reasonably
related to lack of incorporation
• For projects operating at the of Service recommendations or
time of publication, the developer insufficient adherence with the
should confer with the Service Guidelines.
regarding the appropriate period
of fatality monitoring consistent
with Tier 4, communicate and
share information with the
Service on monitoring results,
and consider Tier 5 studies
and mitigation options where
appropriate.
Utility-Scale Wind turbine with an anemometer
tower in the background. Credit: University of
Minnesota College of Science and Engineering
Projects that are already under
development or are in operation
energy project is likely to result are not expected to start over or
in take of listed threatened or return to the beginning of a specific
endangered wildlife species. For tier. Instead, these projects should
more information regarding formal implement those portions of the
consultation and the requirements Guidelines relevant to the current
of obtaining HCPs, please see the phases of the project per the bullets
Endangered Species Consultation above.
Handbook at http://www.fws.gov/
endangered/esa-library/index. The Service is aware that it will
html#consultations and the take time for Service staff and
Service’s HCP website, http://www. other personnel, including wind
fws.gov/endangered/what-we-do/ energy developers and their
hcp-overview.html. biologists, to develop expertise
in the implementation of these
Implementation of the Guidelines Guidelines. Service staff and many
staff associated with the wind
Because these Guidelines are energy industry have been involved
voluntary, the Service encourages with developing these Guidelines.
developers to use them as soon Therefore, they have a working
as possible after publication. To knowledge of the Guidelines. To
receive the considerations discussed further refine their training, the
on page 6 regarding enforcement Service will make every effort to
priorities, a wind energy project offer an in-depth course within 6
would fall into one of three general months of the final Guidelines being
categories relative to timing and published.
implementation:
The Communications Protocol on
• For projects initiated after page 5 provides guidance to Service
publication, the developer has staff and developers in the exchange
applied the Guidelines, including of information and recommendations
the tiered approach, through site at each tier in the process. Although
selection, design, construction, the advice of the Service is not
operation and post-operation binding, a developer should review
phases of the project, and has such advice, and either accept or
communicated and shared reject it. If they reject it, they
4U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines
Table 1. Suggested Communications Protocol
This table provides examples of potential communication opportunities between a wind energy project developer and
the Service. Not all projects will follow all steps indicated below.
TIER Project Developer/Operator Role Service Role
Tier 1: • Landscape level assessment of habitat for • Provide lists of data sources and references,
Preliminary site species of concern if requested
evaluation • Request data sources for existing information
and literature
Tier 2: Site • Assess potential presence of species of • Provide species lists, for species of concern,
characterization concern, including species of habitat including species of habitat fragmentation
fragmentation concern, likely to be on site concern, for general area, if available
• Assess potential presence of plant • Provide information regarding plant
communities present on site that may provide communities of concern, if available
habitat for species of concern • Respond to information provided about
• Assess potential presence of critical findings of biologist from site visit
congregation areas for species of concern • Identify initial concerns about site(s) based
• One or more reconnaissance level site visit by on available information
biologist • Inform lead federal agencies of
• Communicate results of site visits and other communications with wind project
assessments with the Service developers
• Provide general information about the size
and location of the project to the Service
Tier 3: Field • Discuss extent and design of field studies to • Respond to requests to discuss field studies
studies and impact conduct with the Service • Advise project proponent about studies to
prediction • Conduct biological studies conduct and methods for conducting them
• Communicate results of all studies to Service • Communicate with project proponent(s)
field office in a timely manner about results of field studies and risk
• Evaluate risk to species of concern from assessments
project construction and operation • Communicate with project proponents(s)
• Identify ways to mitigate potential direct and ways to mitigate potential impacts of
indirect impacts of building and operating the building and operating the project
project • Inform lead federal agencies of
communications with wind project
developers
Tier 4: Post • Discuss extent and design of post-construction • Advise project operator on study design,
construction studies to conduct with the Service including duration of studies to collect
studies to estimate • Conduct post-construction studies to assess adequate information
impacts fatalities and habitat-related impacts • Communicate with project operator about
• Communicate results of all studies to Service results of studies
field office in a timely manner • Advise project operator of potential
• If necessary, discuss potential mitigation mitigation strategies, when appropriate
strategies with Service
• Maintain appropriate records of data collected
from studies
Tier 5: Other • Communicate with the Service about the need • Advise project proponents as to need for
post-construction for and design of other studies and research to Tier 5 studies to address specific topics,
studies and conduct with the Service, when appropriate, including cumulative impacts, based on
research particularly when impacts exceed predicted information collected in Tiers 3 and 4
levels • Advise project proponents of methods and
• Communicate with the Service about ways metrics to use in Tier 5 studies
to evaluate cumulative impacts on species • Communicate with project operator and
of concern, particularly species of habitat consultants about results of Tier 5 studies
fragmentation concern • Advise project operator of potential
• Conduct appropriate studies as needed mitigation strategies, when appropriate,
• Communicate results of studies with the based on Tier 5 studies
Service
• Identify potential mitigation strategies to
reduce impacts and discuss them with the
Service
5U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines
Consideration of the Guidelines in
MBTA and BGEPA Enforcement
The Service urges voluntary
adherence to the Guidelines and
communication with the Service
when planning and operating a
facility. While it is not possible to
absolve individuals or companies
from MBTA or BGEPA liability, the
Office of Law Enforcement focuses
its resources on investigating
and prosecuting those who take
migratory birds without identifying
and implementing reasonable and
effective measures to avoid the
take. The Service will regard a
developer’s or operator’s adherence
to these Guidelines, including
communication with the Service, as
appropriate means of identifying Communication with Christy Johnson-Hughes. Credit: Rachel London, USFWS
and implementing reasonable and
effective measures to avoid the energy projects to reduce potential The tiered approach is designed
take of species protected under the impacts to species of concern, to lead to the appropriate amount
MBTA and BGEPA.3 The Chief of regardless of whether they are of evaluation in proportion to
Law Enforcement or more senior proposed for private or public the anticipated level of risk that
official of the Service will make lands. A developer of a distributed a project may pose to species
any decision whether to refer for or community scale wind project of concern and their habitats.
prosecution any alleged take of such may find it useful to consider the Study plans and the duration and
species, and will take such adherence general principles of the tiered intensity of study efforts should
and communication fully into account approach to assess and reduce be tailored specifically to the
when exercising discretion with potential impacts to species of unique characteristics of each site
respect to such potential referral. concern, including answering Tier and the corresponding potential
Each developer or operator will be 1 questions using publicly available for significant adverse impacts
responsible for maintaining internal information. In the vast majority on species of concern and their
records sufficient to demonstrate of situations, appropriately sited habitats as determined through
adherence to the Guidelines and small wind projects are not likely to the tiered approach. This is why
response to communications from pose significant risks to species of the tiered approach begins with
the Service. Examples of these concern. Answering Tier 1 questions an examination of the potential
records could include: studies will assist a developer of distributed location of the project, not the size
performed in the implementation of or community wind projects, as well of the project. In all cases, study
the tiered approach; an internal or as landowners, in assessing the need plans and selection of appropriate
external review or audit process; a to further communicate with the study methods and techniques may
bird and bat conservation strategy; Service, and precluding, in many be tailored to the relative scale,
or a wildlife management plan. cases, the need for full detailed location, and potential for significant
pre-construction assessments or adverse impacts of the proposed site.
If a developer and operator are not monitoring surveys typically called
the same entity, the Service expects for in Tiers 2 and 3. If landowners The Service considers a “project”
the operator to maintain sufficient or community/distributed wind to include all phases of wind
records to demonstrate adherence to developers encounter problems energy development, including,
the Guidelines. locating information about specific but not limited to, prospecting, site
sites they can contact the Service assessment, construction, operation,
Scope and Project Scale of the and/or state wildlife agencies to and decommissioning, as well as
Guidelines determine potential risks to species all associated infrastructure and
of concern for their particular interconnecting electrical lines.
The Guidelines are designed for project. A “project site” is the land and
“utility-scale” land-based wind airspace where development occurs
3
With regard to eagles, this paragraph will only apply when a project is not likely to result in take. If Tiers 1, 2, and/or 3 identify a potential to
take eagles, developers should consider developing an ECP and, if necessary, apply for a take permit
6You can also read
