Quiero saber acerca de...

jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 103 / Tuesday, June 1, 2021 / Proposed Rules nationally for fastest growing States for wind generation in the past year AWEA
2020, p. 33. There is substantial information Southwest Power Pool 2020 indicating interest by the wind industry in developing wind energy within the range of the lesser prairiechicken, especially if additional transmission line capacity is constructed. As of May 2020, approximately 1,792 wind turbines were located within the lesser prairie-chicken analysis area Hoen et al. 2020. Not all areas within the analysis area are habitat for the lesser prairie-chicken, so not all turbines located within the analysis area affect the lesser prairie-chicken and its habitat.
The average size of installed wind turbines and all other size aspects of wind energy development continues to increase Department of Energy DOE
2015, p. 63; AWEA 2020, p. 8788;
AWEA 2014, entire; AWEA 2015, entire;
AWEA 2016, entire; AWEA 2017, entire;
AWEA 2018, entire; AWEA 2019, entire;
AWEA 2020, entire. Wind energy developments range from 20 to 400
towers, each supporting a single turbine.
The individual permanent footprint of a single turbine unit, about 0.751 ac 0.30.4 ha, is relatively small in comparison with the overall footprint of the entire array DOE 2008, pp. 110
111. Roads are necessary to access the turbine sites for installation and maintenance. Depending on the size of the wind energy development, one or more electrical substations, where the generated electricity is collected and transmitted on to the power grid, may also be built. Considering the initial capital investment and that the service life of a single turbine is at least 20 years DOE 2008, p. 16, we expect most wind energy developments to be in place for at least 30 years. Repower of existing wind energy developments at the end of their service life is increasingly common, with 2,803 MW of operating projects partially repowering in 2019
AWEA 2020, p. 2.
Please see the SSA report for a detailed review of the best available scientific information regarding the potential effects of wind energy development on habitat use by the lesser prairie-chicken Service 2021, pp.
3133.
Noise effects to prairie-chickens have been recently explored as a way to evaluate potential negative effects of wind energy development. For a site in Nebraska, wind turbine noise frequencies were documented at less than or equal to 0.73 kHz Raynor et al.
2017, p. 493, and reported to overlap the range of lek-advertisement vocalization frequencies of lesser
VerDate Sep<11>2014

20:04 May 28, 2021

Jkt 253001

prairie-chicken, 0.501.0 kHz. Female greater prairie-chickens avoided wooded areas and row crops but showed no response in space use based on wind turbine noise Raynor et al.
2019, entire. Additionally, differences in background noise and signal-to-noise ratio of boom chorus of leks in relation to distance to turbine have been documented, but the underlying cause and response needs to be further investigated, especially since the study of wind energy development noise on grouse is almost unprecedented Whalen et al. 2019, entire.
The effects of wind energy development on the lesser prairiechicken must also take into consideration the influence of the transmission lines critical to distribution of the energy generated by wind turbines. Transmission lines can traverse long distances across the landscape and can be both above ground and underground, although the vast majority of transmission lines are erected above ground. Most of the impacts to lesser prairie-chicken associated with transmission lines are with the above ground systems. Support structures vary in height depending on the size of the line. Most high-voltage power line towers are 98 to 125 ft 30
to 38 m high but can be higher if the need arises. Local distribution lines, if erected above ground, are usually much shorter in height but still contribute to fragmentation of the landscape.
The effect of the transmission line infrastructure is typically much larger than the physical footprint of transmission line installation.
Transmission lines can indirectly lead to alterations in lesser prairie-chicken behavior and space use avoidance, decreased lek attendance, and increased predation on lesser prairie-chicken.
Transmission lines, particularly due to their length, can be a significant barrier to dispersal of prairie grouse, disrupting movements to feeding, breeding, and roosting areas. Both lesser and greater prairie-chickens avoided otherwise usable habitat near transmission lines and crossed these power lines much less often than nearby roads, suggesting that power lines are a particularly strong barrier to movement Pruett et al. 2009, pp. 12551257. Because lesser prairiechicken avoid tall vertical structures like transmission lines and because transmission lines can increase predation rates, leks located in the vicinity of these structures may see reduced attendance by new males to the lek, as has been reported for sage-grouse Braun et al. 2002, pp. 1113.
Decreased probabilities of use by lesser prairie-chicken were shown with the
PO 00000

Frm 00017

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

29447

occurrence of more than 0.09 mi 0.15
km of major roads, or transmission lines within a 1.2-mi 2-km radius Sullins et al. 2019, unpaged.
Additionally, a recent study corroborated numerous authors Pitman et al. 2005; Pruett et al. 2009; Hagen et al. 2011; Grisham et al. 2014; Hovick et al. 2014a findings of negative effects of power lines on prairie grouse and reported a minimum avoidance distance of 1,925.8 ft 587 m, which is similar to other studies of lesser prairiechickens Plumb et al. 2019, entire.
As part of our geospatial analysis, we calculated the amount of otherwise usable land cover for the lesser prairiechicken that has been impacted both direct and indirect impacts by wind energy development in the current analysis area of the lesser prairiechicken. We used an impact radii of 5,906 ft 1,800 m for indirect effects of wind turbines and 2,297 ft 700 m for indirect effects of transmission lines.
Within our analysis area, the following acreages have been identified as impacted due to wind energy development: About 2 percent of the total area in the Short-Grass/CRP, Mixed-Grass, and Shinnery Oak Ecoregions; and no impacts of wind energy development documented currently within the Sand Sagebrush Ecoregion. Rangewide, we estimate about 428,000 ac 173,000 ha of grassland have been impacted by wind energy development, representing about 2 percent of the total analysis area Service 2021, Appendix E, Figure E.3.
These percentages do not account for overlap that may exist with other features that may have already impacted the landscape.
Additionally, according to our geospatial analysis, the following acreages within the analysis area have been directly or indirectly impacted due to the construction of transmission lines: About 7 percent of the total area in the Short-Grass/CRP Ecoregion; 5
percent of the total area in the Sand Sagebrush Ecoregion; 7 percent of the total area in the Mixed-Grass Ecoregion;
and 10 percent of the total area in the Shinnery Oak Ecoregion. Rangewide, we estimate about 1,553,000 ac 629,000 ha of grassland have been impacted by transmission lines representing about 7
percent of the total analysis area Service 2021, Appendix E, Figure E.4.
Wind energy development and transmission lines remove habitat that supports lesser prairie-chicken. The effects of the development extend past the immediate site of the turbines and their associated infrastructure, further impacting habitat and altering behavior of lesser prairie-chicken throughout
E:FRFM01JNP3.SGM

01JNP3