SU0015801 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

4 Environmental Analysis 4.4 Biological Resources Construction and operation of the proposed Project may impede wildlife movement through the area to be developed. The proposed infrastructure, including the BESS, electrical substations, and perimeter fencing, as well as vehicle traffic and on-site personnel, could inhibit the movement of larger or more sensitive wildlife through the area to be developed. The area to be developed consists of a relatively small footprint and likely provides limited opportunities for habitat continuity or wildlife movement due to existing disturbances, such as grazing and cattle fencing enclosing the Project site. Wildlife that do move through the area to be developed are likely acclimated to low levels of human activity given the existing grazing and residential uses. In addition, the ability of wildlife to move through areas surrounding the area to be developed would not be affected. Potential direct impacts, such as injury or mortality, to raptor species and special-status migratory birds from Project O&M may occur through the collisions into and/or electrocution from transmission lines or structures to be installed.While collision/electrocution impacts are potentially significant, impacts would be reduced through the implementation of Mitigation Measure 13I0-2, which requires power lines to be installed per the most recent Avian Power Line Interaction Committee (APLIC)guidance (APLIC 2012)to reduce the potential for bird injury and mortality from collisions and electrocution. No native wildlife nursery sites are known to occur in the area to be developed or Project site. Therefore, the impact due to interference with movement of native fish or wildlife, established native wildlife corridors, or native wildlife nursery sites would be less than significant. IMPACT 4.4-5: Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated) The Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources because the Project would not impact trees or wetlands. No trees would be removed during construction or operations and maintenance of the Project. In addition, incorporation of Mitigation Measures 13I0-1, BIO-2, and BIO-3 would implement preconstruction surveys and minimization and avoidance measures. Therefore, the impact due to conflicts with local policies protecting biological resources would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. IMPACT 4.4-6: Would the Project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated) The area to be developed is within the covered area for the SJMSCP. The SJMSCP is an HCP, and participation ensures that potential impacts to covered species are mitigated to less than significant levels and satisfies the requirements of federal and state endangered species acts. The mitigation measures for SJMSCP-covered species that may occur on the area to be developed would be followed and are incorporated into the proposed Mitigation Measures BIO-1, 13I0-2, and BIO-3. These species include CTS, western spadefoot, CRLF, San Joaquin coachwhip, BUOW, Swainson's hawk and other nesting birds, SJKF, longhorn fairy shrimp, vernal pool fairy shrimp, and American badger. Therefore, the impact due to conflicts with the SJMSCP would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Griffith Energy Storage Project 4.4-38 Tetra Tech/SCH 2022120675 Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2023