General Wildlife Guidance for Authorization of Meteorological Tower (MET) Right-of-Way Applications and Wildlife Monitoring Protocols for Wind Energy Development
In Reply Refer To:
6513/2801/2920 (NV930) P
United States Department of the Interior
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
Nevada State Office
P.O. Box 12000 (1340 Financial Blvd.)
Reno, Nevada 89520-0006
http://www.blm.gov/nv/st/en.html
March 18, 2010
EMS TRANSMISSION 03/19/2010
Instruction Memorandum No. NV-2010-024
Expires September 30, 2011
To: District Managers, Nevada
From: State Director, Nevada
Subject: General Wildlife Guidance for Authorization of Meteorological Tower (MET) Right-of-Way Applications and Wildlife Monitoring Protocols for Wind Energy Development
Program Area: Realty (Right-of-Way Management) and Wildlife
Purpose: This Instruction Memorandum (IM) provides guidance and direction to the authorization of wind energy site testing and monitoring meteorological tower (MET tower) activities in or near sage-grouse habitat on public lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management – Nevada (BLM Nevada).
Policy/Action: The following direction is provided to ensure consistency in processing right-of-way applications for wind energy site testing and monitoring activities in or near sage-grouse habitat on public lands administered by BLM Nevada. This IM also provides guidance for wildlife monitoring protocols for wind energy development.
This guidance supplements and is consistent with that provided by WO IM 2009-043 issued on December 19, 2008 for processing right-of-way applications for wind energy projects on public lands and associated best management practices; WO IM 2010-022 addressing managing structures for the safety of sage-grouse; BLM Idaho IM 2009-006 and Oregon BLM IM 2008-014 which address MET towers in or near sage-grouse habitat, and the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies Guidelines to Manage Sage-grouse Populations and Their Habitats (Connelly et al. 2000).
A. Authorization of MET Towers in Sage-grouse Habitats
Active Sage-grouse Lek Areas
Nevada BLM’s first priority for the placement of MET towers is outside a 2-mile circumference area from an active lek. An active lek is defined as a lek that had two or more birds present during at least one of the three or more visitations in a given breeding season. For a strutting ground to attain this status it must also have had two or more birds observed at the location at least two years in a five-year period (Connelly et al. 2003).
If placement of a MET tower outside a circumference area of 2 miles from an active lek is unavoidable, the next priority should be placement of the tower behind a visual obstruction which eliminates the visibility of the tower in such a manner that sage-grouse reproductive activities are not adversely impacted.
If placement of the MET tower cannot be placed behind a visual obstruction, it should not be authorized.
Known Seasonal Concentration Areas
Placement of MET towers in other known seasonal concentration areas such as brood rearing and winter habitats should be avoided, whenever possible.
If avoidance is not possible, placement within the known concentration area is permissible but not encouraged, and must be fully analyzed through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process (refer to further guidance Other Guidance – Item 4 below).
Other Guidance
1) MET towers shall be designed to discourage use as perches or nesting substrates by birds. The use of lattice MET towers in key sage-grouse habitat and important sage-grouse habitat restoration areas should be avoided to reduce the likelihood of avian predator perching/nesting.
2) Use of guy wires is discouraged. If guy wires are necessary, all wires shall have permanent markers attached for their entire length to increase visibility. For currently installed MET towers that are authorized under an existing right-of-way, field offices will work with the right-of-way holder to explore options for reducing collision risk if collisions have been documented.
3) In addition to the Best Management Practices (BMPs) outlined in Section 1.3.1 – Site Monitoring and Testing of Appendix A-6 of the Record of Decision (ROD) for the Implementation of a Wind Energy Development Program and Associated Land Use Plan Amendments approved in December 2005, additional BMPs/conservation measures may be required to mitigate negative effects of installing MET towers in or near sage-grouse habitats, depending on local conditions. Applicants/project proponents will also be required to provide for monitoring of sage-grouse leks and seasonal habitats affected by MET towers, as determined by BLM. BMPs for protection of wildlife and other natural resources are listed in Attachment A.
4) In light of BLM’s classification of the Greater sage-grouse as a BLM sensitive species, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s March 5, 2010 “warranted but precluded” determination for sage-grouse range-wide and the BMP requiring MET towers not be located in sensitive habitats or in areas where ecological resources known to be sensitive to human activities are present, it is important that the NEPA analyses clearly document the impacts of actions on the management of Greater sage-grouse and/or its habitat. Therefore, in general, MET tower proposals within brood rearing habitat, winter habitats, etc., should be analyzed and documented through an environmental assessment (EA). However, the use of Categorical Exclusions (CX) is permissible if it can be clearly documented that potential adverse impacts to sage-grouse are not significant, and no other extraordinary circumstances exist (see 2008 NEPA Handbook H-1790-1; Appendix 5).
Regardless of the type of NEPA analysis used, all supporting documentation (biological clearances, biological evaluations) identifying what BMPs or other stipulations (avoidance measures, timing limitations, mitigation, etc.) that were applied to minimize impacts to sage-grouse shall be attached to the NEPA document.
5) When considering proposals for the installation of new MET towers, project proponents should be reminded that any subsequent approval of such towers is for the purposes of wind data collection only, and does not imply agreement or consent by BLM as to the appropriateness of the site for subsequent wind energy development proposals.
6) When considering MET tower proposals, the local BLM Office is responsible for early coordination and consultation in the project planning and NEPA process should occur with the appropriate local Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW) office(s). Documentation of consultation efforts should be maintained as part of the project record.
B. Pre-Construction Botanical and Wildlife Monitoring and Surveys
The applicant should be encouraged to use the time during wind monitoring and potential full field development project(s) to collect key information (listed below) on species that could be impacted by potential wind energy development project(s). Detailed pre-construction surveys and monitoring would identify and/or verify documented botanical, wildlife, and special status species use of the project area along with the surrounding area of an appropriate radius. Such information would provide up-to-date information for any subsequent NEPA analysis associated with potential full field wind energy development project(s).
Local differences in wildlife populations and movement patterns, habitats present, area topography, weather, and facility design, result in each proposed full field development site being unique and requiring detailed individual evaluation. Data on wildlife use and mortality at one wind energy facility are not necessarily applicable to others. The following protocol is intended to suggest a minimal level of monitoring. Each site would be evaluated by BLM field biologists in coordination with their NDOW counterpart(s) to determine if additional surveys may be needed, or if some surveys may be omitted.
1. The project proponent should contact the BLM District or Field Office biologist to identify important aquatic, fish, and wildlife habitat (e.g. crucial winter ranges), special status plant and animal species (e.g. sage-grouse) in the proposed project area.
2. Review of the literature, including wildlife, special status species, and botanical databases, would be useful to determine potential wildlife and/or botanical resource concerns. It is suggested the review be completed for the project area including at least a 1-mile buffer surrounding the project site (defined as furthest extent of all ground disturbing activities). The buffer size can be larger depending on the specific species habitat requirements that may be impacted by the project.
3. Maps and aerial photos would be useful to determine any significant landscape features that may act as an attractant for wildlife and identify fragmentation issues.
4. Field investigations would be worthwhile to determine the presence and extent of different botanical and priority wildlife habitats (e.g. aspen stands, riparian areas).
5. Pre-construction botanical, wildlife, and special status species surveys within the project area (including the 1-mile buffer) would be valuable. The number of survey points should be based on size/extent of project, topography of project site, and different habitat types present. Surveys should be completed by qualified biologists/consultants approved by the BLM.
It is recommended the surveys be conducted at least one year prior to construction. Scientific Collection Permits from NDOW or USFWS, as appropriate, may be necessary if any survey would involve capturing or handling of animals. At a minimum, surveys for birds and bats should include:
a) Spring (March thru May) and fall (September thru November) migration surveys for migratory birds with a focus on birds of conservation concern. These surveys should be performed at dawn and dusk, three times each season to identify early, mid and late migrants.
b) Spring and fall migration surveys for raptors conducted to established Hawk Watch protocols.
c) Breeding bird surveys for birds of conservation concern, BLM sensitive species using Great Basin Bird Observatory protocol. This information would be used to identify habitat that may potentially be impacted. During the surveys, additional data may be collected on general species presence, behavior, and habitat use.
d) The focus on bird monitoring should be to identify species of management concerns (NV Species of Conservation Concern). Migratory birds on these lists and their habitats should be the focus of evaluation for impact from wind energy. The objective is to determine the extent of habitat use by migratory birds and identification of concentrations or important breeding areas.
e) Raptor nest ground and/or aerial surveys to identify nest sites would be necessary if their habitat exists within the project area (including the 1-mile buffer).
f) Bat surveys of caverniculous roosting habitat (i.e., mines and caves) would be necessary to identify maternity use and/or hibernacula use.
g) Bat capture surveys (i.e., mist nets) at water sources and roosting habitats within/adjacent to the project area would be necessary to supplement long-term acoustic monitoring stations to determine species richness and diversity of the area, as well as insight into seasonal use activity patterns.
It is recommended that data collected are summarized in a technical report(s), and submitted to the BLM Office prior to preparation of the NEPA document for the full field wind energy development project. The proponent will provide BLM with the raw data collected in accordance with Nevada BLM data standards. Species occurrence data should be collected and submitted in accordance with data sharing agreement with Nevada Department of Wildlife and Nevada Natural Heritage Program.
Background: As part of the overall strategy to develop a diverse portfolio of domestic energy supplies for the Nation’s future, the National Energy Policy of 2001 and the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-58, August 8, 2005) encourage the development of renewable energy resources, including wind energy.
The United States has significant potential for wind energy development, especially on Federal lands in the West. The Federal wind energy production tax credit, State level tax credits and other incentives, included renewable energy portfolio standards in several states have generated a strong interest in commercial wind energy project on BLM-administered land in Nevada. Project proposals on public land will create a workload that demands a commitment of resources and a priority to the timely and consistent processing of right-of-way applications for wind energy site testing and monitoring activities.
Timeframe: Effectively immediately upon receipt.
Budget Impact: Minimal
Contact: Any questions concerning the content of this IM should be directed to BLM Nevada State Office, Division of Natural Resources, Lands and Planning. Points of contact include Jackie Gratton at (775) 861-6532 or Sandra Brewer at (775) 861-6626.
Signed By:
Ron Wenker
State Director, Nevada
Authenticated By:
Ellyn Darrah
Administrative Assistant
Attachment
1- Wildlife Best Management Practices (3 pp)