ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Response to FERC Environmental Information Request
Resource Report 3-Fish, Wildlife, and Vegetation
VOLUME IIA
APPENDIX 3C
Revised Draft Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
July 2015
MIGRATORY BIRD CONSERVATION PLAN
Rover Pipeline Project
Prepared for:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
DRAFT - July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................................... 1 1.1 1.2 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose and Need.................................................................................................................. 2 2.0 REGULATORY BACKGROUND AND FEDERAL CONSULTATIONS ............................. 4 3.0 SPECIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN............................................................................ 4 4.0 EFFECTS ON FOREST, WETLAND, AND OPEN LAND HABITATS AND BIRD
SPECIES ......................................................................................................................................... 8 4.1 4.2 4.3 5.0 Forest, Wetland, and Open Land Habitats in the Project Area ............................................. 8 Project Effects on Forest, Wetland, and Open Land Habitats and Bird Species ................. 11 Potentially Affected Birds of Conservation Concern.......................................................... 14 AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION, AND MITIGATION STRATEGIES .............................. 16 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 Routing ................................................................................................................................ 16 Construction Schedule ........................................................................................................ 17 Construction and Maintenance Procedures ......................................................................... 17 Wetland and Upland Effects and Mitigation ....................................................................... 19 6.0 CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................................................... 19 7.0 REFERENCES............................................................................................................................. 20 LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1. USFWS Regions 3 and 5 - Birds of Conservation Concern that Potentially Breed in the Vicinity
of the Project Area ........................................................................................................................................ 6 TABLE 2. Acres of Vegetation Affected................................................................................................. 12 LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1: General Location Map ........................................................................................................ 22 Attachment 2: Birds of Conservation Concern for USFWS Regions 3 and 5 ........................................... 24 i
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
1.0
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1.1
Introduction
Rover Pipeline LLC (Rover) is seeking authorization from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC) pursuant to Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) to construct, own, and operate the proposed
Rover Pipeline Project (Project). The Project is a new natural gas pipeline system that will consist of
approximately 712.9 miles of Supply Laterals and Mainlines, 10 compressor stations, and associated meter
stations and other aboveground facilities that will be located in parts of West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio,
and Michigan. The Project will include approximately 510.7 miles of proposed right-of-way, extending
from the vicinity of New Milton, Doddridge County, West Virginia to the vicinity of Howell, Livingston
County, Michigan, and will include approximately 202.2 miles of dual pipelines.
The Project will consist of the following components and facilities (see Attachment 1):

Supply Laterals:
o eight supply laterals consisting of approximately 201.2 miles of 24-, 30-, 36-, and 42-inchdiameter pipeline in West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Ohio,
o two parallel supply laterals, each consisting of approximately 18.6 miles (for a total of
approximately 37.2 miles) of 42-inch-diameter pipeline (Supply Connector Lateral Line A
and Line B) in Ohio,
o approximately 72,645 horsepower (hp) at six new compressor stations to be located in
Doddridge and Marshall counties, West Virginia; Washington County, Pennsylvania; and
Noble, Monroe, and Harrison counties, Ohio, and
o two new delivery, 11 new receipt, and two bidirectional meter stations on the Supply
Laterals.

Mainlines A and B:
o approximately 190.9 miles of 42-inch-diameter pipeline (Mainline A) in Ohio,
o approximately 183.6 miles of parallel 42-inch-diameter pipeline (Mainline B) in Ohio,
o approximately 114,945 hp at three new compressor stations to be located in Carroll,
Wayne, and Crawford counties, Ohio, and
o two new delivery meter stations in Defiance County, Ohio.

Market Segment:
o approximately 100.0 miles of 42-inch diameter pipeline in Ohio and Michigan,
o approximately 25,830 hp at one new compressor station to be located in Defiance County,
Ohio, and
o two new delivery meter stations in Washtenaw and Livingston counties, Michigan.
On June 26, 2014, in compliance with the requirements of 18 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §
157.21(b), Rover requested that the FERC begin its review of the Project using the FERC’s Pre-Filing
Review Process (Pre-filing Process). On June 27, 2014, the FERC approved Rover’s request and assigned
Docket No. PF14-14-000 to the Project. As part of the Pre-Filing Process, the FERC, with input from
federal and state agencies and other stakeholders, analyzed environmental impacts, alternatives, and
1
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
mitigation measures as a prelude to submittal of Rover’s certificate application and the development of the
FERC’s Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Project. This allowed the FERC, and other federal
and state resource management agencies, to identify and resolve environmental issues associated with the
design and routing of the Project. Agencies participated in the Pre-Filing Process by providing assistance
in the identification and resolution of concerns, and by participating in agency and public information
meetings. The Pre-Filing Process concluded with Rover’s filing of its certificate application under Section
7(c) of the NGA in February 2015 under Docket No. CP15-93-000.
1.2
Purpose and Need
The United States (U.S.) Energy Information Administration’s Annual Energy Outlook 2013 Early Release
projects U.S. natural gas production to increase from 23.0 trillion cubic feet in 2011 to 33.1 trillion cubic
feet in 2040, a 44 percent increase. Almost all of this increase in domestic natural gas production is due to
projected growth in shale gas production, which grew from 7.8 trillion cubic feet in 2011 to 16.7 trillion
cubic feet in 2014. The availability of increased quantities of shale gas is predicted to continue for the next
100 plus years, allowing U.S. consumers to rely upon and plan for low cost supplies of natural gas.
According to the most current and relevant government and industry supply/consumption indexes
(including the U.S. Department of Energy), the supply will continue to outpace domestic consumption for
many years
The Rover Pipeline Project originated as a result of discussions with producers who have active production
and processing capacity as well as significant volumes of stranded gas in the Marcellus and Utica Shale
areas of West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, and who desire to move their production to markets in the
Gulf Coast, Midwest, Northeast, and into Canada for redelivery to both Canadian and U.S. markets. Thus,
the Project has been designed to enable the flow of natural gas from producer processing plants and
interconnections in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Ohio to interconnections with Energy Transfer
Partners, L.P.’s existing Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line and other Midwest pipeline interconnects near
Defiance, Ohio, as well as a direct connection with Vector Pipeline L.P. (Vector) near Howell, Michigan.
Vector provides interconnections to the local Michigan market through local distributors, storage facilities,
and power plants, and provides further transportation into the Midwest, Eastern Canada, and Northeastern
U.S. markets, including a connection with the gas trading hub located near Dawn, Canada.
The Project is a producer-driven pipeline project in which Marcellus and Utica producers have made longterm commitments for transportation capacity to move significant volumes of natural gas production to
connections with interstate natural gas pipelines and storage facilities, as well as to major gas consuming
markets in the Gulf Coast, Midwest and Canadian regions. The hub facilities connected to the Project at
Defiance and the Vector interconnect will facilitate the delivery of natural gas to high-demand centers in
the U.S. and Canada, thus increasing the diversity of supply, and helping to moderate gas prices by replacing
declining supplies from the Gulf Coast. Furthermore, the Project will benefit local Midwest gas consumers
by providing access to a readily available, stable, and competitively-priced gas supply for local distribution
companies connected to the Project.
The Project will have the capacity to transport 3.25 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) of natural gas. Rover
held an open season that concluded on July 25, 2014 and executed binding precedent agreements with
shippers representing 3.25 Bcf/d, which represents the total capacity of the new pipeline system. However,
when the Project was revised in January 2015 to terminate at a connection with Vector in Livingston,
County, Michigan in order to maximize use of existing infrastructure and minimize impacts to the
environment and landowners, 0.15 Bcf/d of capacity became available on the proposed system. It is
anticipated that this available capacity will be subscribed before construction begins.
2
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
As a result of these precedent agreements, the Project has been designed to accumulate natural gas supplies
at receipt points that are accessible to the producers’ processing plants, and to deliver these volumes to
connections with interstate natural gas pipelines and storage facilities at the hubs at Defiance, as well as
interconnects with Michigan natural gas utilities. The receipt points are defined by the compressor stations
and receipt meters located at or near the beginning of each of the Supply Laterals. The delivery points are
defined by the interconnecting pipeline systems located near Defiance and the Vector interconnect near
Howell, Michigan. The new infrastructure will give shippers the option of storage, selling gas in the local
Canadian market, selling gas back into Michigan market, or selling gas to U.S. Northeast markets via the
TransCanada pipeline interconnections at Niagara Falls, Grand Island, Waddington, or other interconnects
to the east. In addition, Rover will have bidirectional meter stations at the proposed Clarington Station, and
delivery meters at the Rockies Express Pipeline (REX) and Columbia Gas Transmission (CGT)
interconnects. These interconnects will allow access to the East Coast, Gulf Coast, and Chicago markets.
Approximately 78 percent of the natural gas moved through the Project will be delivered to customers on
the U.S. segments of the pipeline, including multiple take-off points in Michigan and Ohio, or other
interstate pipelines, including local distribution company gas systems serving customers throughout the
states (see Attachment 1). As described above, the Project will connect stranded Marcellus and Utica Shale
gas to all markets in the U.S.
The new source will offset the reduction in available gas supply from traditional supply areas (the Rocky
Mountain Region, Texas Panhandle, Oklahoma, Kansas, and the Gulf of Mexico) that historically have
served Ohio and Michigan as well as other regions of the U.S. Historic supplies from the Gulf of Mexico
alone are down approximately 46 percent over the last five years. Ohio is the 8th largest consumer and
Michigan is the 9th largest consumer of natural gas in the U.S.; whereas, Ohio is the 19th largest producer
and Michigan is the 17th largest producer, making both states net importers of natural gas to meet their
supply needs for commercial and residential consumption.
In summary, the Project will provide:

new take-away infrastructure for stranded Marcellus/Utica shale gas;

new infrastructure for Midwest markets to provide a reliable and nearby source of competitively
priced natural gas supplies to replace declining supplies from the Gulf Coast and other historic
production regions of the U.S.;

new infrastructure to move natural gas to local utilities and storage in Ohio and Michigan, to the
Midwest Hub for Midwest and Gulf Coast markets, to the Dawn Hub for Canadian and U.S.
Northeast markets, as well as the East Coast and other markets listed above from the bidirectional
and delivery meters in the Supply Laterals;

new infrastructure to the Dawn Hub that will provide shippers with the option of storage, or selling
gas in the local Canadian market, selling gas back into Michigan market, or selling gas to U.S.
Northeast markets;

long and short term economic benefits within the Project area via increased consumption of goods
and services resulting from construction and operation of the Project;

short-term job creation via construction jobs and service jobs to support the construction workforce;
3
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
2.0

long-term job creation via permanent jobs to operate the new pipeline system; and

long-term tax benefit to communities and state via ad valorem taxes.
REGULATORY BACKGROUND AND FEDERAL CONSULTATIONS
Migratory birds are species that nest in the U.S. and Canada during the summer, and then migrate south to
the tropical regions of Mexico, Central and South America, and the Caribbean for the non-breeding season.
Migratory birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S. Code 703-711; [MBTA]),
which prohibits the taking of any migratory bird, or a part, nest, or eggs of any such bird, except under the
terms of a valid permit issued pursuant to federal regulations. The MBTA also protects resident, nonmigratory bird species in the U.S. and its territories.
In addition, while the U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) delisted the bald
eagle in 2007, bald and golden eagles continue to be protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection
Act (16 U.S. Code 668-668d). Further, Executive Order 13186 ([EO] 13186) (66 Federal Register 3853)
directs federal agencies to identify where unintentional take is likely to have a measurable negative effect
on migratory bird populations and to avoid or minimize adverse effects on migratory birds through
enhanced collaboration with the USFWS. EO 13186 states that emphasis should be placed on species of
concern, priority habitats, and key risk factors, and that particular focus should be given to addressing
population-level impacts.
On March 30, 2011, the USFWS and the FERC entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that
focuses on avoiding or minimizing adverse effects on migratory birds and strengthening migratory bird
conservation through enhanced collaboration between the two agencies. This voluntary MOU does not
waive legal requirements under the MBTA, Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, Endangered Species
Act (ESA), Federal Power Act, NGA, or any other statutes and does not authorize the take of migratory
birds.
To protect migratory bird species, as required under the MBTA, Rover developed this Migratory Bird
Conservation (MBC) Plan with consideration of project-related effects on forest, wetland, and open land
habitats and migratory bird species. This MBC Plan focuses on Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and
Important Bird Areas (IBAs) in the Project area. Section 3.0 discusses both migratory and resident bird
species of conservation concern in the vicinity of the Project. Section 4.0 discusses potential effects on
habitats for these species and Section 5.0 includes measures to minimize or mitigate for adverse impacts to
bird resources within the Project area to the greatest extent practicable.
3.0
SPECIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN
During the initial planning and environmental review of the Project, Rover conducted consultations with
federal and state resource agencies to identify wildlife species that could potentially be affected by Project
construction activities. Surveys and habitat assessments for specific federal and state listed species (under
the ESA and respective state statutes and regulations) with potential to occur in the Project area are being
conducted and effects to threatened and endangered bird species will be assessed and mitigated, as
necessary, under separate consultation with the USFWS, West Virginia Department of Natural Resources
(WVDNR), Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (PDCNR), Pennsylvania
Game Commission (PGC), Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission (PFBC), Ohio Department of Natural
Resources (ODNR), and the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR).
4
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
BCC are a subset of a larger Birds of Management Concern (BMC) list, which is, in turn, a subset of all
species protected by the MBTA (USFWS 2008). The BMC species are of concern because of documented
or apparent population declines, small or restricted populations, dependence on restricted or vulnerable
habitats, or overabundant to the point of causing ecological and economic damage (USFWS 2012). To
qualify for the BMC list, the bird species must be a high priority game bird, on the Birds of Conservation
Concern 2008 list, a federal threatened or endangered species, or overly abundant leading to management
conflicts (USFWS 2011).
The USFWS’ Birds of Conservation Concern 2008 includes three geographic scales: (1) the National level,
(2) the North American Bird Conservation Initiative (NABCI) - Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs), and
(3) USFWS Regions. The USFWS Region lists include species from the Birds of Conservation Concern
2008 BCR lists if the species has a Relative Density >1 or a manageable population in 50 percent or more
of the BCRs in which it occurs within a USFWS Region. Because the Project is located in USFWS Regions
3 and 5, the USFWS Region 3 and 5 (Great Lakes, Big Rivers Region and Northeast Region, respectively)
lists from the Birds of Conservation Concern 2008 were used as the primary method to determine which
species of BCC potentially breed in the vicinity of the Project.
In addition, this MBC Plan considers whether the Project pipeline facilities would cross IBAs, which are
discrete sites that provide essential habitat for one or more bird species and include habitat for breeding,
wintering, and/or migrating birds (Audubon 2014). In Ohio, the Project crosses four state IBAs: the Wayne
National Forest – Marietta, Killbuck Valley, Funk Bottoms, and the Sandusky River IBAs. In Michigan,
the Project crosses one state IBA, the Pinckney Recreation Area IBA. These areas are discussed in Section
4.3 of this MBC Plan. No IBAs were identified as being crossed in Pennsylvania or West Virginia.
Numerous bird species, including colonial species, utilize the Project area and therefore may be affected by
construction of the Project. In particular, this includes those species characterized by the USFWS as BCC
that utilize forest, wetland, and open land habitats, particularly for nesting. As discussed in Sections 4.0
and 5.0 below, the majority of the Project pipeline facilities will be located in agricultural or open lands.
However, some loss and fragmentation of forest and wetland habitats caused by the Project may have direct
or indirect consequences to nesting species, as discussed in Section 4.0. Based on the avoidance and
minimization strategies implemented by the Project Team and discussed in Section 5.0, species that utilize
forest edge, scrub-shrub, and open habitat types will incur only minor direct effects as a result of
construction activities. These species may actually benefit from the increased amount of these types of
habitat created by construction of the Project.
The species listed as BCC, released most-recently in 2008, identifies bird species of concern including those
protected under the MBTA that represent the USFWS’ highest conservation priorities (USFWS 2008).
Table 1 includes species of BCC within USFWS Regions 3 and 5 that potentially breed in the vicinity of
the Project, a description of each species’ preferred breeding habitat and breeding/nesting season, and
occurrence of preferred breeding habitat in the Project work areas. The list of BCC species for USFWS
Regions 3 and 5 are included as Attachment 2. Possible and probable breeding locations by state for each
species of BCC were confirmed within USFWS Region 3 in the breeding bird atlases for Ohio and Michigan
and within USFWS Region 5 in the breeding bird atlases for Pennsylvania and West Virginia.
5
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
TABLE 1. USFWS Regions 3 and 5 - Birds of Conservation Concern that Potentially Breed in the Vicinity of
the Project Area
Common
Name
Least Bittern
Potential Breeding In the
Project Vicinity1
Scientific Name
Ixobrychus exilis
Region 3
Region 5
Preferred Breeding Habitat and
Breeding/Nesting Season
Occurrence of
Preferred Breeding
Habitat in the Project
Work Areas
PA2
WV3
OH4
MI5
N/A
N/A
No
Po
Freshwater or brackish marshes with
tall emergent vegetation. Reed nesters.
Breed/Nest from April to August.
Breeding/nesting habitat
present in Project work
areas.
Breeding/nesting habitat
present in Project work
areas.
Worm-eating
Warbler
Helmitheros
vermivorus
No
Pr
Pr
Pr
Well-drained upland deciduous forests
with understory patches of mountain
laurel or other shrubs, drier portions of
stream swamps with an understory of
mountain laurel, deciduous woods near
streams; almost always associated with
hillsides. Breed/Nest from May to July.
Prairie
Warbler
Setophaga
discolor
Pr
Pr
Co
Pr
Disturbed situations reverting to
woodland with young trees and brush;
shrubby woodland edges. Breed/Nest
from April to August.
Breeding/nesting habitat
present in Project work
areas.
Wood Thrush
Hylocichla
mustelina
Co
Co
Co
Pr
Heavy deciduous or mixed forested
areas, including riparian or wetlands.
Breed/Nest from April to August.
Breeding/nesting habitat
present in Project work
areas.
Blue-winged
Warbler
Vermivora
cyanoptera
Co
Pr
Co
Co
Breeds at forest/field edges, often
Breeding/nesting habitat
shaded by large trees. Breed/Nest from present in Project work
April to July.
areas.
Kentucky
Warbler
Geothlypis
formosa
Pr
Pr
Co
No
Ground nest in moist, deciduous
woodland thickets, sometimes along
streams. Breed/Nest from May to July.
Breeding/nesting habitat
present in Project work
areas.
Breeding/nesting habitat
present in Project work
areas.
Pr
Partial to tall deciduous trees, this
species tends to be found contrastingly
nesting along river bottom-lands, or in
hilly or mountainous areas with steep
ridges. Extensive tracts of mature
broadleaf forest are required for
breeding habitat. Breed/Nest from April
to July.
Po
Most commonly occupied habitats
Breeding/nesting habitat
contain cliffs for nesting and open areas present in Project work
for foraging. Ideal locations for nesting areas.
include undisturbed areas with a wide
view, near water, and close to plentiful
prey. Breed/Nest from March to May.
No
Breeding occurs primarily in extensive, Breeding/nesting habitat
open tracts of short grassland habitat.
present in Project work
Nesting occurs in open areas such as
areas.
native prairie, dry meadows, pastures,
domestic hayfields, and along highway
rights-of-way and on airfields.
Breed/Nest from mid-April 15 to July 31.
Cerulean
Warbler
Peregrine
Falcon
Upland
Sandpiper
Setophaga
pelagica
Falco peregrinus
Bartramia
longicauda
Pr
N/A
N/A
Pr
N/A
N/A
Pr
Po
Pr
Black-billed
Cuckoo
Coccyzus
erythropthalmus
N/A
N/A
Co
Pr
Prefer more densely wooded areas and Breeding/nesting habitat
are frequently found within coniferous
present in Project work
vegetation. Nests in groves of trees,
areas.
forest edges, moist thickets, overgrown
pastures; in deciduous or evergreen
tree or shrub. Is a low or ground nesting
species. Breed/Nest from May to July.
Henslow's
Sparrow
Ammodramus
henslowii
Pr
No
Co
Co
Typically breeds in ephemeral grass
habitats with tall, dense vegetation, tall
standing residual vegetation, and a
dense litter layer. Especially in damp or
6
Breeding/nesting habitat
present in Project work
areas.
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
TABLE 1. USFWS Regions 3 and 5 - Birds of Conservation Concern that Potentially Breed in the Vicinity of
the Project Area
Common
Name
Potential Breeding In the
Project Vicinity1
Scientific Name
Region 3
PA2
WV3
Region 5
OH4
Preferred Breeding Habitat and
Breeding/Nesting Season
MI5
Occurrence of
Preferred Breeding
Habitat in the Project
Work Areas
low-lying areas, adjacent to salt marsh
in some areas. Breed/Nest from May to
August.
Dickcissel
Pied-billed
Grebe
Canada
Warbler
America
Bittern
Black Tern
Spiza americana
Podilymbus
podiceps
Cardellina
canadensis
Botaurus
lentiginosus
Chlidonias niger
N/A
Co
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
No
N/A
N/A
N/A
Po
Po
Po
No
No
Po
Preferred breeding habitat consists of
Breeding/nesting habitat
grasslands with a strong forb
present in Project work
component, medium litter layer, areas
areas.
of patchy bare ground, and moderate
amount of residual standing dead
vegetation. Breed/Nest from late May to
July.
Breeding/nesting habitat
present in Project work
areas.
Co
Breeding primarily occurs in fresh to
moderately brackish waterbodies,
marked by dense stands of emergent
vegetation and ample stretches of open
water. Nests are typically built in
shallow water surrounded by dense
vegetation. Breed/Nest from April to
August.
Breeding/nesting habitat
present in Project work
areas.
No
Breeding occurs in a variety of forest
types. Is most abundant in cool, moist
forests with a mix of coniferous and
deciduous trees preferring wet
shrubland, generally characterized by
alder and bordering wetlands of various
types. Breed/Nest from May to June.
Pr
Typically breeds within wetlands
dominated by tall, emergent vegetation,
and within these habitats frequents
vegetation fringes and shorelines.
Breed/Nest from May to July.
Breeding/nesting habitat
present in Project work
areas.
Po
Nests among marshes, along sloughs,
Breeding/nesting habitat
rivers, lakeshores, and impoundments, present in Project work
or in wet meadows, typically in sites
areas.
with mixture of emergent vegetation and
open water. Breed/Nest from May to
July.
Breeding/nesting habitat
present in Project work
areas.
Whip-poor-will
Caprimulgus
vociferus
Pr
No
No
Pr
Inhabit dry, semi-shaded forests with
moderate to scant understories and
nearby openings. Such woodlands may
be deciduous or coniferous. Forest
edges seem to be particularly suitable.
Breed/Nest from May to June.
Bald Eagle
Haliaeetus
leucocephalus
N/A
N/A
Co
Pr
Breeds in forested areas near large
bodies of water. Breed/Nest from
October 1 to May 15.
Breeding/nesting habitat
present in Project work
areas.
Red-headed
Woodpecker
Melanerpes
erythrocephalus
Po
No
Co
Co
Old trees in open areas. Breed/Nest
from February to September.
Breeding/nesting habitat
present in Project work
areas.
1
Co = Confirmed. Po = Possible. Pr = Probable. N/A = Species is not known within the area. No = Species does not breed in the
area.
2
Based on Second Atlas of Breeding Birds in Pennsylvania 2004-2009 (Second Atlas of Breeding Birds 2004-2009 in Pennsylvania
Species Maps (online resource). 2015. Pennsylvania State University. http://www.pabirdatlas.psu.edu/)
7
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
TABLE 1. USFWS Regions 3 and 5 - Birds of Conservation Concern that Potentially Breed in the Vicinity of
the Project Area
Common
Name
Potential Breeding In the
Project Vicinity1
Scientific Name
Region 3
PA2
WV3
Region 5
OH4
Preferred Breeding Habitat and
Breeding/Nesting Season
MI5
Occurrence of
Preferred Breeding
Habitat in the Project
Work Areas
3
Based on West Virginia Breeding Bird Atlas II 2009-2014 (WV Breeding Bird Atlas II 2009-2014. 2015. WVDNR Breeding Bird Atlas
2009. http://martes.dnr.state.wv.us/BreedingBirdsAtlas/default.aspx) amd (West Virginia Breeding Bird Atlas II 2009-2014 (online
resource). 2015. Cornell Lan of Ornithology. http://bird.atlasing.org/Atlas/WV/)
4
Based on the Ohio Breeding Bird Atlas II 2006-2011 (Ohio Breeding Bird Atlas 2006-2011. 2015. The Ohio State University.
http://www.ohiobirds.org/obba2/) and (Ohio Breeding Bird Atlas II (online resource). 2015. Cornel Lab of Ornithology.
http://bird.atlasing.org/Atlas/OH/)
5
Based on Michigan Breeding Bird Atlas II 2002-2008 (Michigan Breeding Bird Atlas II 2002-2008. 2015. Kalamazoo Nature Center.
http://www.mibirdatlas.org/)
Other references: The Birds of North America (The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.), Ithaca: Cornell Laboratory of
Ornithology; Retrieved from The Birds of North America Online database:
http://bna.birds.cornell.edu.bnaproxy.birds.cornell.edu/BNA/; AUG 2005); Cornell Lab of Ornithology (2014a; 2014b); NatureServe
(2014); USFWS (2008).
4.0
EFFECTS ON FOREST, WETLAND, AND OPEN LAND HABITATS AND BIRD
SPECIES
The Project facilities are located in or traverse several vegetative communities, which include upland
forests, open uplands, and palustrine forested, scrub-shrub and emergent wetlands. The local vegetative
communities identified within the Project facilities are consistent with those endemic to the local area and
represent the dominant plant species identified during the biological surveys conducted in summer 2014
and through May 2015, as described below.
4.1
Forest, Wetland, and Open Land Habitats in the Project Area
The vegetation cover types within the Project area are consistent with typical plant communities found in
Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio, and Michigan. Plant community types along the Project pipeline route
and at aboveground facility sites were determined based on a review of aerial photography, existing land
use classifications, and field surveys.
Upland Forest
Upland forest is present throughout the Project area in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio, and Michigan.
Upland forest communities have been identified within the construction corridor and in additional
temporary workspaces (ATWS) for the pipeline route. Clearing in these areas will be required for the
Project and will be conducted during the bird nesting season. Upland mixed woodland forests are welldeveloped with a partially closed canopy. These woodlands typically occur on loamy soils.
Typical upland forest plants identified during environmental surveys for West Virginia included: American
beech (Fagus grandifolia), sugar maple (Acer saccharum), slippery elm (Ulmus rubra), red maple (Acer
rubrum), black walnut (Juglans nigra), white ash (Fraxinus americana), spicebush (Linderia benzoin),
Allegheny blackberry (Rubus allegheniensis), Japanese stilt grass (Microstegium vimineum) and white
snakeroot (Ageratina altissima). Common upland forest plants identified in Pennsylvania included:
American elm (Ulmus americana), Osage orange (Maclura pomifera), black cherry (Prunus serotina)
twinsisters (Lonicera tatarica), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), black walnut (Juglans nigra), wingstem
8
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
(Verbesina alternifolia), and Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis). Common upland forest plants in Ohio
included American beech (Fagus grandifolia), black cherry (Prunus serotina), red maple (Acer rubrum),
sugar maple (Acer saccharum), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), tulip polpar (Liriodendron tulipifera),
white oak (Quercus alba), American elm (Ulmus americana), tulip tree (Liriodendron tulipifera), shagbark
hickory (Carya ovata), American basswood (Tilia americana), American hazlenut (Corylus americana),
flowering dogwood (Cornus florida) and northern red oak (Quercus rubra). Common upland forest plants
in Michigan included: American beech (Fagus grandifolia), black cherry (Prunus serotina), chokeberry
(Prunus virginiana), sugar maple (Acer saccharum), common buckthorn (Rhamnus carthartica), American
hophornbeam (Ostrya virginiana), white oak (Quercus alba), serviceberry (Amelarichier arborea),
common prickly-ash (Zanthoxylum americanum), Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia),
shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), American basswood (Tilia americana), poison ivy (Toxicodendron
radicans), Solomon’s seal (Polygonatum biflorum), frost grape (Vitis riparia), smooth crabgrass (Digitaria
ischaemum), and red clover (Trifolium pratense).
A variety of songbirds, including migrants and resident species, utilize the upland forest habitat. Many
migrants feed on the numerous insects occurring within the forest canopy. Breeding birds use a range of
different nest sites, with some species nesting on the forest floor, some in the understory vegetation, and
some in the tree canopy. Characteristic resident bird species in upland forests include red-bellied
woodpecker (Melanerpes carolinus) and wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo). Typical migratory species
might include the great crested flycatcher (Myiarcus crinatus) and the wood thrush (Hylocichla mustellia).
USFWS Region 3 - BCC species in the vicinity of the Project that utilize upland forests include wormeating warbler, red-headed woodpecker, Kentucky warbler, bald eagle, whip-poor-will, cerulean warbler,
black-billed cuckoo, and wood thrush (see Table 1). USFWS Region 5 - BCC species in the vicinity of
the Project that utilize upland forests include worm-eating warbler, red-headed woodpecker, Kentucky
warbler, whip-poor-will, cerulean warbler, and wood thrush (see Table 1).
Forested Wetland
Forested wetlands in the Project area are generally characterized as deciduous, which are common
throughout much of the region in depressions, on floodplains, on flats on glacial lake plains, and along lake
shores. Floodplain forests occupy lowlands adjacent to the larger rivers in the region. Wet flatwoods occur
on broad, glacial lake plains, such as those along Lake Ontario. These wetlands are dominated by typical
swamp species, but are not flooded as long as most swamps. Instead, they have seasonally high or perched
water tables that may persist from winter to early summer. Typical forested wetland tree species within the
Project area include silver maple (Acer saccharinum) and red maple; American elm, green ash and black
ash (Fraxinus nigra); shellbark hickory (Carya laciniosa), black willow, pin oak (Quercus palustris) and
swamp white oak (Quercus bicolor); and Eastern cottonwood. The understory within the delineated
forested wetlands was typically dominated by Northern spicebush (Lindera benzoin), American elm,
common buttonbush, American hornbeam (Carpinus caroliniana), green ash, red maple, arrowwood
(Viburnum sp.), and dogwood species (Cornus sp.). Dominant herbaceous vegetation within the forested
wetlands include Japanese stilt grass, Canadian clearweed (Pilea pumila), aster species, spotted touch-menot, rice cutgrass, various sedge species, sensitive fern, and goldenrod species.
Forested wetlands have a diverse assemblage of plant species and provide important food, shelter, migratory
and overwintering areas, and breeding areas for birds including wood duck (Aix sponsa), great blue heron
(Ardea herodias), prothonotary warbler (Protonotaria citrea), and swamp sparrow (Melospiza georgiana).
USFWS Region 3 - BCC species in the vicinity of the Project that may utilize forested wetlands include
wood thrush and Canada warbler (see Table 1). One USFWS Region 5 - BCC species, the wood thrush,
may utilize forested wetlands in the vicinity of the Project (see Table 1).
9
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
Scrub-shrub Wetland
Scrub-shrub wetland habitats are typically not as structurally diverse as forested wetlands. They contain
vegetation that is characteristically low and compact. Under normal conditions the vegetative structure is
usually caused by surface water inundation for extended periods of time. Scrub-shrub wetlands can also be
maintained by periodic maintenance (such as along existing rights-of-way) that removes larger trees.
Common dominant shrub species identified in delineated wetlands include willow species such as black
willow (Salix nigra), sandbar willow (Salix interior), and Bebb’s or gray willow (Salix bebbiana); dogwood
species such as silky dogwood (Cornus amomum), gray dogwood (Cornus racemosa), stiff dogwood
(Cornus foemina), alternate-leaf dogwood (Cornus alternifolia), and red-osier dogwood (Cornus alba);
smooth arrowwood (Viburnum recognitum) and southern arrowwood (Viburnum dentatum); Morrow’s
honeysuckle (Lonicera morrowii) and twinsisters (Lonicera tatarica); and common buttonbush
(Cephalanthus occidentalis), and white meadowsweet (Spiraea alba), as well as young trees such as
slippery elm and American elm, eastern cottonwood (Populus deltoides), and green ash (Fraxinus
pennsylvanica). Typical dominant herbaceous species identified in scrub-shrub wetlands include reed
canarygrass, goldenrod species (Solidago sp.), aster species (Symphyotrichum sp.), spotted touch-me-not,
beggarticks (Bidens sp.), rice cutgrass, sensitive fern, stinging nettle (Urtica dioica), arrow-leaf tearthumb,
and sedges (Carex sp.).
The plant species that make up scrub-shrub wetlands can offer excellent nesting sites for birds.
Representative species found in scrub-shrub wetlands include red-winged blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus),
swamp sparrow (Melospiza georgiana), and great egret (Ardea alba). USFWS Region 3 - BCC species in
the vicinity of the Project that utilize scrub-shrub wetlands include Henslow’s sparrow and Canada warbler
(see Table 1). One USFWS Region 5 - BCC species, Henslow’s warbler, utilizes scrub-shrub wetlands in
the vicinity of the Project(see Table 1).
Emergent Wetland
Emergent wetlands and depression marshes are shallow with herbaceous vegetation and sandy soils. The
emergent wetlands identified along the Project rights-of-way include wet pastures and emergent marshes
that contain a submergent, emergent and other rooted herbaceous species, including cattails, sedges, rushes,
and grasses. Typical vegetation recorded during environmental surveys varied within the delineated
wetlands, depending on position in the landscape, duration and type of hydrology, and anthropogenic
disturbances. Common dominant herbaceous species identified in delineated wetlands include reed
canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), lamp rush (Juncus effusus), rice cutgrass (Leersia oryzoides), cattail
species (Typha sp.), sensitive fern (Onoclea sensibilis), spotted touch-me-not (Impatiens capensis), late
goldenrod (Solidago gigantea), spotted trumpetweed (Eutrochium maculatum), common boneset
(Eupatorium perfoliatum), black bent (Agrostis gigantea), cottongrass bulrush or woolgrass (Scirpus
cyperinus), dark-green bulrush (Scirpus atrovirens), large barnyard grass (Echinochloa crus-galli), skunk
cabbage (Symplocarpus foetidus), arrow-leaf tearthumb (Persicaria sagittata), swamp smartweed
(Persicaria hydropiperoides), and various sedges, including hop sedge (Carex lupulina), lakebank sedge
(Carex lacustris), uptight sedge (Carex stricta), shallow sedge (Carex lurida), and fox sedge (Carex
vulpinoidea).
Freshwater emergent wetlands provide breeding habitat for birds including red-winged blackbird, great blue
heron, great egret and mallard (Anas platyrhnchos). USFWS Region 3 - BCC species in the vicinity of the
Project that utilize emergent wetlands include least bittern, American bittern, pied-billed grebe, and black
tern (see Table 1). One USFWS Region 5 - BCC species, the pied-billed grebe, utilizes emergent wetlands
in the vicinity of the Project (see Table 1).
10
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
Open Land
Open land generally consists of early successional habitat types such as successional scrub-shrub areas,
fallow agricultural fields, and disturbed and/or maintained areas such as existing utility rights-of-way or
other open space areas. Open uplands occur throughout the Project area. Typical open land vegetation
recorded during environmental surveys included Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), meadow fescue
(Festuca pratensis), reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundicra), broomsedge bluestem (Andropogon
virginicus), orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata), white clover (Trifolium repens), ragweed (Ambrosia
artemisiifolia), corn (Zea mays), Queen Anne’s lace (Daucus carota), smooth brome (Bromus inermis),
beeblam (Monarda fistulosa), quackgrass (Elymus repens), and goldenrod (Solidago spp.).
Early successional and grassland habitats are utilized by many wildlife species and offer habitat for groundnesting birds. Edge habitats adjacent to open space areas can create another type of habitat that is used by
a distinct group of species of birds such as eastern meadowlark (Sturnella magna), killdeer (Charadrius
vociferus), and song sparrow (Melospiza melodia). USFWS Region 3 - BCC species in the vicinity of the
Project that utilize open land include prairie warbler, blue-winged warbler, upland sandpiper, red-headed
woodpecker, Henslow’s sparrow, dickcissel, and peregrine falcon (see Table 1). USFWS Region 5 - BCC
species in the vicinity of the Project that utilize open land include prairie warbler, blue-winged warbler,
red-headed woodpecker, and Henslow’s sparrow (see Table 1).
4.2
Project Effects on Forest, Wetland, and Open Land Habitats and Bird Species
Table 2 provides acreage of vegetation affected by construction and operation of the Project by state and
county. In total, Project construction will affect approximately 3,031.62 acres of upland and wetland forest,
open land not used for agriculture, and scrub-shrub and emergent wetlands. Approximately 24 percent
(121.0 miles) of the Project pipeline facilities will be located adjacent to existing pipeline or electric
transmission rights-of-way. Where feasible and permitted by the agreements with the adjacent utility
companies, some part of the existing, adjacent easements will be used for temporary spoil storage during
construction. Rover is also discussing the possibility of collocating (e.g., placing the pipeline within an
existing utility easement) with various electric transmission entities. Where collocation is not possible, the
permanent easements for the Rover pipelines will abut the adjacent existing easements where feasible.
The effect of the Project on bird species and their habitats will vary depending on the requirements of each
species and the existing habitat present along the Project pipeline route. Direct effects from construction
include the displacement of birds along the right-of-way and possible direct mortality of some individuals.
However, it is expected that most bird species would leave the construction work areas as construction
activities approach. Depending on the season, construction could disrupt bird courting or nesting, and
foraging and breeding behaviors, on and adjacent to the right-of-way.
11
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
Acres of Vegetation Affected
Contractor Yards Access Roads Sub‐Total Ohio Pipeline Right‐of‐Way Aboveground Facilities Contractor Yards Access Roads Sub‐Total 6.69 9.98 0 910.46 310.45 17.5 8.12 39.45 19.17 1201.67 430.71 0.02 0.02 0 0 1.02 1.02 11.95 11.95 0 0 0.01 0.01 13 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.38 0.38 0 0 0.5 0.51 0.63 0.63 0 0 0.01 0 1.52 1.52 Operation 10.15 Operation 86.28 Operation Construction 214.13 Operation Operation Aboveground Facilities Construction Total Emergent Wetlands Operation Pipeline Right‐of‐Way Scrub/Shrub Wetlands Agriculture Construction Michigan Open Upland Operation Type of Facility Construction State Wetland Construction Upland Open and Scrub‐Shrub Land Construction Forest Construction TABLE 2.
214.53 86.68 10.15 6.69 11.5 1.53 923.04 323.03 17.5 8.12 39.47 19.18 1216.19 445.23 1802.61 716.41 29.78 20.14 278.59 108.49 4078.68 1572.47 8.99 3.9 54.3 26.85 6252.95 2448.26 54.72 26.3 0 0 12.69 6.75 150.36 82.3 0 0 2 0.52 219.77 115.87 0 0 0 0 369.11 0 0 0 0.53 0 15.33 0 384.97 0 1.51 0.29 0 0 6.14 2.85 3.1 2.08 0 0 0 0 10.75 5.22 1858.84 743 29.78 20.14 666.53 118.09 4232.14 1656.85 9.52 3.9 71.63 27.37 6868.44 2569.35 Pennsylvania Pipeline Right‐of‐Way 127.3 49.88 0.14 0.09 9.59 3.23 20.56 7.07 0.17 0.02 0.63 0.33 158.39 60.62 Aboveground Facilities 15.28 4.24 0 0 3.78 0.9 0 0 0 0 0.05 0 19.11 5.14 Contractor Yards 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Access Roads 0 0 0 0 0.1 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.1 0.1 142.58 54.12 0.14 0.09 13.47 4.23 20.56 7.07 0.17 0.02 0.68 0.33 177.6 65.86 Sub‐Total West Virginia Pipeline Right‐of‐Way 734.67 292.74 0.09 0.04 38.59 15.32 113.3 42.95 0 0 1.34 0.68 887.99 351.73 Aboveground Facilities 37.92 18.25 0.04 0 10.68 7.95 5.99 1.41 0 0 0 0 54.63 27.61 Contractor Yards Access Roads 0 0 0 0 17.92 0 0 0 0 0 0.03 0 17.95 0 2.88 0.41 0 0 1.56 0.37 0.29 0.09 0 0 0 0 4.73 0.87 Sub‐Total 775.47 311.4 0.13 0.04 68.75 23.64 119.58 44.45 0 0 1.37 0.68 965.3 380.21 Total 2991.42 1195.2 40.2 26.96 760.25 147.49 5295.32 2031.4 27.19 12.04 113.15 47.56 9227.53 3460.65 Source: National Land Cover Database (http://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd2011.php), 12
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
Many of these bird species would relocate into similar, nearby habitats. If there were a lack of adequate
habitat, some individuals could utilize suboptimal habitats, which could increase inter- and intra-specific
competition and lower reproductive success and survival. The influx and increased density of birds in some
undisturbed areas caused by these dislocations could also reduce the reproductive success of bird species
that are not displaced by construction.
The cutting, clearing, and/or removal of existing vegetation could also affect bird species by reducing the
amount of available habitat. During construction, vegetation clearing may be conducted during the bird
nesting season. The degree of effect would depend on the type of habitat affected and the rate at which
vegetation regenerates after construction. The effect on forest-dwelling species would be greater because
forest habitat would take a comparatively longer time to regenerate and would be prevented from
reestablishing on the permanent right-of-way during pipeline operation. Habitat fragmentation is a concern
when clearing rights-of-way for construction as it could result in an altered community since those species
more adaptable to edge habitats would establish themselves, while those bird species that require interior
forest habitat are subject to more negative effects. The effects on open land and shrub-dwelling species
would be less than that of forest-dwelling species because those areas would revegetate and return to
preconstruction conditions relatively quickly. The effect on species that commonly inhabit agricultural
lands would be relatively minor and temporary because these areas are regularly disturbed and would be
replanted during the next growing season following installation of the pipeline.
Upland Forest
The Project will require clearing of approximately 2,991.42 acres of upland forest. Where the Project
pipelines will be located adjacent to existing rights-of-way, effects to forested habitat have been minimized.
These areas already exist as edge habitat, not interior forested habitat. Therefore, although some conversion
of forested vegetation will occur, effects on habitat for forest-dwelling birds will be minimal. Conversion
of forested habitats has the potential to reduce the area of habitat available for woodland bird species;
however, this effect is expected to be minimal, given the narrow, linear nature of pipeline projects and the
relatively small amount of forested vegetation that will be affected.
Approximately 1,195.2 acres of upland forest will remain cleared for maintenance of the permanent rightof-way, which will vary from 50 to 60 feet wide. As such, the maintained permanent rights-of-way will be
subjected to mowing in accordance with the Rover Upland Erosion Control, Revegetation, and Maintenance
Plan (Rover Plan) and the Rover Wetland and Waterbody Construction and Mitigation Procedures (Rover
Procedures).1 This maintenance will result in permanent conversion of these areas of existing upland
forested vegetation to herbaceous or scrub-shrub vegetation.
Wetlands
Since disturbed wetlands will be returned to pre-construction conditions, there will be no permanent loss
of wetlands along the Project pipeline facilities. The only permanent wetland effects associated with the
Project pipeline facilities will be a conversion of forested wetlands to emergent or scrub-shrub wetlands as
a result of vegetation maintenance of the permanent cleared right-of-way and maintenance of cleared area
surrounding above-ground facilities (see Table 2). Routine vegetation management within wetland areas
1
The Rover Plan and Procedures incorporate the FERC’s Upland Erosion Control, Revegetation, and Maintenance
Plan and Wetland and Waterbody Construction and Mitigation Procedures (May 2013), which are a set of
construction and mitigation measures that were developed in collaboration with other federal and state agencies
and the natural gas pipeline industry to minimize the potential environmental effects of the construction of pipeline
projects in general.
13
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
will not be conducted over the full width of the permanent right-of-way. A 10-foot wide corridor centered
on the pipeline will be maintained in an herbaceous state and any trees located within 15 feet of the pipeline
that have roots that could compromise the integrity of the pipeline coating will be cut, in accordance with
the Rover Procedures.
Temporary effects on wetlands may include soil disturbance, temporary alteration of hydrology, and loss
of vegetation. These changes could affect the reinstatement of natural re-growth of wetland vegetation if
not restored properly. No permanent filling of wetlands is proposed or anticipated for the Project). Of the
180.54 acres of wetlands that will be affected during construction, approximately 86.56 acres of wetlands
will be permanently affected by routine vegetation maintenance during operation of the Project facilities.
Of this amount, approximately 26.96 acres of forested wetlands will be permanently converted to emergent
or scrub-shrub cover types.
Open Land
The Project will include approximately 760.25 acres of open uplands not used for agriculture. Impacts on
the open land cover type will be temporary and short-term. After restoration and reseeding of the right-ofway and other disturbed open lands (pipe yards, contractor yards, and areas surrounding aboveground
facilities), non-agricultural open land vegetation communities typically will regenerate quickly.
4.3
Potentially Affected Birds of Conservation Concern
After identifying BCC species with a potential to breed within the USFWS Region 3 and 5 areas, and in the
vicinity of the Project, (see Section 3), nine species were identified that may be susceptible to the direct and
indirect effects of forest, wetland, and open land clearing as they are common breeders. Common breeders
in USFWS Region 3 include wood thrush, blue-winged warbler, pied-billed grebe, prairie warbler,
Kentucky warbler, black-billed cuckoo, Henslow’s sparrow, bald eagle, and red-headed woodpecker (see
Table 1). Common breeders in USFWS Region 5 include wood thrush, blue-winged warbler, and piedbilled grebe (see Table 1).
The remaining ten species are either probable or possible breeders in the vicinity of the Project and may be
less susceptible to the direct and indirect effects of forest, wetland, and open land clearing than common
breeders and include least bittern, worm-eating warbler, cerulean warbler, peregrine falcon, upland
sandpiper, dickcissel, Canada warbler, American bittern, black tern, and whip-poor-will (see Table 1).
Four common breeders within the USFWS Region 3 – BCC that thrive in open land and scrub-shrub
habitats, forests with nearby gaps, and early successional landscapes will likely benefit from the habitat
conversion identified in Section 4.2, as this will provide additional habitat for breeding and/or foraging.
These species that will likely indirectly benefit from construction of the Project include the prairie warbler,
blue-winged warbler, red-headed woodpecker, and Henslow’s sparrow (see Table 1). One common breeder
within the USFWS Region 5 – BCC thrives in the same types of habitat. The species that will likely
indirectly benefit from construction of the Project is the blue-winged warbler (see Table 1).
The Project pipeline facilities would cross the boundaries of four state IBAs2 in Ohio: the Wayne National
Forest - Marietta IBA (Sherwood Lateral, between approximate MPs 35.8 and 46.2, and Berne Lateral
between MPs 0.00 and 1.8), Killbuck Valley IBA (Mainlines A and B between approximate MPs 67.5 and
68.6), Funk Bottoms IBA (Mainlines A and B between approximate MPs 77.4 and 79.3 and MPs 84.0 and
2
Audubon Important Bird Areas at http://netapp.audubon.org/iba.
14
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
84.8), and the Sandusky River IBA (Mainlines A and B between approximate MPs 138.8 and 142.9). The
Project pipeline facilities would cross the boundary of one state IBA in Michigan, the Pinckney
Recreational Area IBA (Market Segment between approximate MPs 82.5 and 83.8).
The Wayne National Forest is located in southeastern Ohio in the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains
and is comprised of approximately 239,000 acres, divided into three noncontiguous units (Athens, Marietta,
and Ironton Units). The Wayne National Forest is made up of a variety of habitats - forest, wetland,
grassland (reclaimed surface-mine), and shrubby fallow field areas. The most common habitat is deciduous
hardwood. The Wayne National Forest – Marietta IBA is a 64,623-acre tract of land located in Monroe,
Washington, and Noble counties, Ohio and includes land managed by the U.S. Forest Service as part of the
Wayne National Forest, as well as land within the Wayne National Forest proclamation boundary. It lies
adjacent to the Ohio River and is comprised of flora that is thicker and wilder than within the other units of
the Wayne National Forest, and the forest has the character of a river setting (Audubon 2014). According
to data from the eBird online checklist program created by the Cornell Lab of Ornithology and National
Audubon Society (2002), blue-winged warbler, cerulean warbler, Kentucky warbler, prairie warbler, wood
thrush, and worm-eating warbler have been observed with this IBA during the 2009-2014 breeding seasons.
The Sherwood and Berne Laterals will be within the Wayne National Forest – Marietta IBA in forested
areas for approximately 12.2 miles in Monroe and Noble counties, Ohio. Although the Project crosses the
Proclamation Boundary of the Wayne National Forest, Rover pipelines are not located on land owned by
the U.S. Forest Service.
The Killbuck Valley IBA is a 5,501-acre tract of land that extends along Killbuck Creek south of Wooster
in Wayne County southward to Holmesville in Holmes County. It encompasses the largest wetland complex
in Ohio south of Lake Erie. Much of the area of the IBA is in Wayne County and consists of the riparian
zone plus the associated marshland of Killbuck Marsh State Wildlife Area and private conservation
easement land (Audubon 2014). According to data from the eBird online checklist program created by the
Cornell Lab of Ornithology and National Audubon Society (2002), pied-billed grebe, least bittern, bald
eagle, solitary sandpiper, red-headed woodpecker, and wood thrush have been observed within this IBA
during the 2009-2014 breeding seasons. Mainlines A and B will be within the Killbuck Valley IBA in a
mix of open and forested areas for approximately 1.1 miles in Wayne County, Ohio. Killbuck Creek and
associated riparian areas will be crossed using a horizontal directional drill (HDD).
The Funk Bottoms IBA is a 1,999-acre tract of land located in Wayne and Ashland counties, Ohio and
consists of floodplain bottoms: intermittent wetlands and mostly scrub/shrub fields, with some permanent
restored wetlands. The Funk Bottoms Wildlife Area is the main source of habitat. The adjacent areas are
largely agricultural and include a peat farm. The area has an observation tower. The region undergoes
extensive bottomland flooding in March and April (Audubon 2014). According to data from the eBird
online checklist program created by the Cornell Lab of Ornithology and National Audubon Society (2002),
bald eagle, solitary sandpiper, short-billed dowitcher, black-billed cuckoo, red-headed woodpecker, wood
thrush, and dickcissel have been observed with this IBA during the 2009-2014 breeding seasons. Mainlines
A and B will be within the Funk Bottoms IBA in open and agricultural areas for approximately 1.7 miles
in Wayne County, Ohio, and in forested wetland areas associated with Jerome Creek for approximately 0.8
mile in Ashland County, Ohio. Mainline Compressor Station 2 will be within the edge of this IBA in open
agricultural land.
The Sandusky River IBA is an 83,672-acre tract of land located in Seneca, Sandusky, and Wyandot
counties, Ohio and extends along the Sandusky River riparian corridor from Upper Sandusky north to
Fremont, the entire river flowing 130 miles from its source in Crawford County to the Muddy Creek and
Sandusky Bay. It is designated a State Scenic River and is the largest, cleanest riverine system in Northwest
15
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
Ohio, with many scenic exposed dolomite and limestone outcroppings. The southern two-thirds is relatively
flat, characterized by broken ridges (glacial end moraines) ranging from 10 to 50 feet in height. The northern
one-third is flat to gently rolling, comprising remnants of the shorelines of ancient glacial lakes (Audubon
2014). According to data from the eBird online checklist program created by the Cornell Lab of Ornithology
and National Audubon Society (2002), bald eagle, black-billed cuckoo, red-headed woodpecker, wood
thrush, and dickcissel have been observed with this IBA during the 2009-2014 breeding seasons. Mainlines
A and B will be within the Sandusky River IBA in open agricultural areas for approximately 4.1 miles in
Seneca County, Ohio. The Sandusky River and associated riparian areas will be crossed using an HDD.
The Pinckney Recreation Area IBA is a 10,702-acre tract of land located in Livingston County, Michigan
and is comprised of a large property geared primarily to recreational activities such as hiking, fishing, and
other outdoor activities. The site is primarily comprised of upland deciduous forest, with smaller pockets
of grassland (Audubon 2014). According to data from the eBird online checklist program created by the
Cornell Lab of Ornithology and National Audubon Society (2002), black-billed cuckoo, red-headed
woodpecker, blue-winged warbler, cerulean warbler, wood thrush, prairie warbler, and worm-eating
warbler have been observed with this IBA during the 2009-2014 breeding seasons. The Market Segment
will be within the Pinckney Recreation Area IBA in primarily forested areas for approximately 1.3 miles
in Washtenaw County, Michigan. The pipeline will be located adjacent to an existing electric transmission
line through this IBA.
Rover will implement the same avoidance, minimization, and mitigation strategies within IBAs as it would
for the remaining pipeline facilities. These strategies are discussed in Section 5.0 of this MBC Plan.
5.0
AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION, AND MITIGATION STRATEGIES
Rover has considered the construction and operational effects to bird species throughout the development
of the Project and has taken steps to avoid or minimize such effects. The following sections discuss these
avoidance and minimization strategies, and the proposed mitigation for unavoidable effects to Project area
habitats.
5.1
Routing
Rover began the Project by first identifying the locations of required gas receipt and delivery points for its
customers. The proposed pipeline route was then drafted based upon multiple factors including: minimizing
environmental effects and sensitive environmental areas, avoiding cultural sites, minimizing crossings of
residential areas, minimizing the number of land owners affected, following existing utility corridors,
avoiding infrastructure effects, safety, and constructability. Rover then began civil surveys and biological
and cultural surveys. These surveys helped to further define the route, and environmentally sensitive areas
were avoided to the extent feasible. Many of these areas provide habitat for bird species, and include
wetlands and waterbodies, forested areas, unique habitat types, and areas of wildlife importance.
After selecting the preliminary routes for the pipeline segments, more extensive environmental review and
analysis was conducted to identify other environmentally sensitive areas. This included consultations with
federal and state agencies to identify known occurrences of federal and state bird species of concern
(including threatened or endangered species, raptors, and bird rookeries) as well as biological surveys of
the areas that will be affected by Project construction and operation. During subsequent design iterations,
many areas of environmental concern were avoided by implementing route modifications or by utilizing
the HDD method to construct a crossing. To the extent feasible, effects to large, contiguous forested tracts
were minimized by placing the Project pipeline facilities within or adjacent to existing pipeline and electric
16
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
transmission rights-of-way, and by routing through previously disturbed areas such as agricultural and open
lands, and previously disturbed, fragmented, or managed forested areas.
The proposed pipeline route for the Project was selected to maximize opportunities for paralleling existing
linear rights-of-way. Paralleling existing rights-of-way reduces the potential effects to bird species,
particularly forest interior species, because new habitat fragmentation and effects to those species
occupying the forest interior are minimized. By locating the pipeline facilities along existing linear rightsof-way, effects to environmental resources are minimized because these areas have already been affected
by the existing utility.
Construction of the Project facilities adjacent to existing rights-of-way will limit effects to vegetation by
reducing land use change associated with the construction of the pipelines. Currently, the Project does not
include any areas where the pipelines will lie within any existing easements (i.e. collocate), but Rover is
discussing this possibility with various utility operators. Where collocation is not possible, the permanent
easements for the Rover pipelines will abut the adjacent existing easements following construction where
feasible.
5.2
Construction Schedule
Rover plans to commence construction activities in January 2016, pending receipt of all applicable permits
and clearances. The Supply Laterals and Mainlines A and B are scheduled to be in-service in December
2016. The Market Segment is scheduled to be in-service no later than June 2017.
Although Rover intends to begin clearing in the first quarter of 2016, construction activities may occur
during the bird nesting season (generally April 15 to August 1 in the Project area) and could result in direct
and indirect effects on bird species.
5.3
Construction and Maintenance Procedures
The Project may have a short-term effect on bird species that may nest in or near the construction areas.
However, Rover has designed the Project in a manner so as to minimize potential effects to bird species
and will take other measures during Project construction and operation to limit Project effects. These
measures include:

routing Project facilities to avoid sensitive resources where possible;

maximizing locations where the pipeline will parallel existing rights-of-way;

limiting the construction and operation right-of-way widths to the minimum necessary;

conducting mitigation for effects to sensitive resources (e.g., wetlands) through agency permit
conditions;

avoiding forested areas, especially contiguous forests, to the extent possible;

adherence to the measures outlined in the Rover Plan and Procedures during construction of the
Project facilities; and

limiting routine right-of-way maintenance mowing during the bird nesting season (generally April
15 to August 1 in the Project area).
17
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
To further protect and minimize potential adverse effects on wetlands, Rover will:

Expedite Construction In and Around Wetlands – Expediting construction in and around wetlands
will reduce the amount of time wetland soils are exposed, minimizing the opportunity for soil loss
and reducing the amount of time during which wetland functions and values are affected.

Minimize Vegetation Clearing within Wetlands – The construction right-of-way in forested
wetlands will be limited to 75 feet for a single pipeline and 95 feet for dual pipelines. During
operation of the Project, wetlands will be maintained in accordance with the Rover Procedures.

Use of Equipment Mats – Equipment mats will be used to cross wetlands where rutting could be
an issue. Decompaction will be performed if necessary.

Segregate Topsoil – Effects on wetlands will be minimized by segregating up to the top 12 inches
of topsoil from the area disturbed by trenching activities, except in saturated areas. The topsoil will
be restored to its original location immediately after backfilling is complete to preserve the existing
seedbank and promote the revegetation of the disturbed area.

Install and Maintain Erosion Controls – Erosion controls, including but not limited to silt fence and
other best management practices, will be put in place to protect wetlands from sediment resulting
from disturbance in adjacent uplands during construction.

Stabilize and Restore Wetlands – Wetlands will be restored to their original configurations and
contours following construction to assist in maintaining preconstruction hydrology, thereby
minimizing effects on wetlands. Disturbed upland areas adjacent to wetlands will be promptly
stabilized to minimize sediment transport into wetlands, thus protecting wetlands from sediment
transport and maintaining wetland functions and values. After construction, disturbed wetlands
and adjacent uplands will be monitored to ensure long-term stabilization in accordance with the
Rover Plan and Procedures. Regular inspection and maintenance of erosion control measures will
expedite successful restoration of the wetland.

Implement Invasive Species Monitoring and Control – Rover will conduct post-construction
maintenance and monitoring of the right-of-way in affected wetlands to assess the success of
restoration and revegetation. Monitoring efforts will include documenting occurrences of exotic
invasive species in wetlands to compare to pre-construction conditions.
Routine vegetative maintenance of the full permanent right-of-way in upland areas will be limited to once
every three years. To facilitate periodic corrosion surveys, a 10-foot wide strip centered on the pipeline
can be mowed annually in upland and wetland areas to maintain herbaceous growth to facilitate periodic
corrosion/leak surveys. Routine vegetative maintenance will not occur between April 15 to August 1 of
any year to avoid or minimize the potential for project-related disturbance of bird nesting periods.
In scrub-shrub and open land habitats, the temporary right-of-way will more quickly revegetate to
preconstruction conditions, and significant long-term conversion of habitat will not occur in these areas. In
forested areas, there will be conversion to early successional habitats within the 10-foot annuallymaintained strip centered over the pipeline; however, adjacent areas will likely become established with
scrub-shrub and woody vegetation in a matter of years. Numerous BCC species that thrive in open land
and scrub-shrub habitats will likely benefit from this habitat conversion, as discussed in Section 4.3.
Rover is continuing consultations with the USFWS, and federal and state agencies in West Virginia,
Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan to ensure consistency with federal and state endangered and threatened
18
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
species laws. Potential Project effects on other federally or state listed bird species, not included in this
MBC Plan, will be addressed in these separate consultations.
5.4
Wetland and Upland Effects and Mitigation
To mitigate project-related effects, Rover will adhere to its Plan and Procedures, and other proposed
mitigation plans, during construction and operation of the Project facilities. These guidelines and plans
provide measures that will be implemented to minimize and mitigate upland and wetland disturbance during
construction. Examples of these measures include:

use of Environmental Inspectors during construction to ensure compliance with the requirements
of the Rover Plan and Procedures, environmental conditions of the FERC’s Order, mitigation
measures proposed by Rover, all other environmental permits and approvals, and environmental
requirements in landowner easement agreements;

funding of a third-party environmental compliance monitoring program that will be managed by
FERC to assess environmental compliance during construction;

implementation of preconstruction planning to identify all construction work areas that will be
needed for safe construction, and the methods and locations for regular collection, containment,
and disposal of excess construction materials and debris;

implementation of best management practices (and the Agricultural Mitigation Plans in Ohio and
Michigan) for topsoil segregation, protection of drain tiles and irrigation systems, and soil
compaction mitigation in agricultural areas;

installation and maintenance of temporary and permanent erosion control measures during
construction and restoration of the Project facilities;

implementation of best management practices for prompt restoration and revegetation of areas
disturbed by construction; and

adherence to monitoring, maintenance, and project reporting guidelines.
Federal authorizations from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under Section 10 of the Rivers
and Harbors Act (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.) will be required for the construction of the Project pipeline facilities
in or under any navigable waters of the U.S. crossed by the Project. Clean Water Act Section 404
authorization will be required for dredge and fill activities associated with construction in wetlands and
designated Waters of the U.S. Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification will also be
required for waterbody and wetland crossings. In Michigan, authorization for waterbody and wetland
crossings will be obtained from the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality.
In compliance with federal and state regulatory permitting framework relative to wetland protection, Rover
will develop a project-specific wetland mitigation plan through approved programs in each USACE District
or state, such as in-lieu fee programs or the purchase of mitigation credits from established wetland banks,
prior to construction. The mitigation plans will provide measures to avoid, minimize, and compensate for
temporary and permanent wetland impacts. Rover will consult with the applicable federal and state
regulatory agencies for guidance during development of the proposed mitigation measures and plans.
6.0
CONCLUSIONS
19
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
Wherever possible, Rover has placed the Project pipeline adjacent to existing pipeline and electric
transmission rights-of-way to minimize impacts on environmental resources, including migratory bird
habitat. Rover will further minimize construction-related effects on bird species and their habitats by
limiting the construction and operation right-of-way widths to the minimum necessary, conducting
mitigation for effects to sensitive resources (e.g., wetlands) through agency permit conditions, adhering to
the measures outlined in the Rover Plan and Procedures, and prohibiting maintenance mowing during the
bird nesting season (generally April 15 to August 1 in the Project area). Given the limited amount of
disturbance and the predominance of open areas associated with construction of the Project facilities and
the availability of adjacent undisturbed habitat, it is unlikely that construction would have significant
adverse or long-term effects on bird species.
Rover will continue its consultation with the USFWS to protect bird species protected under the MBTA
and address project-related effects on those species should they arise.
7.0
REFERENCES
Audubon. 2014. Important Bird Areas Program. Online: http://web4.audubon.org/bird/IBA/. Site visited
02-Mar-2015.
Cornell Lab of Ornithology. 2014a. All About Birds Website. Online: http://www.allaboutbirds.org
/Page.aspx?pid=1189#_ga=1.126949380.823021758.1425483898. Site visited 03-Mar-15.
Cornell Lab of Ornithology. 2014b. The Birds of North America Online. Online: http://bna.birds.cor
nell.edu/bna/species. Site visited 03-Mar-15.
Cornell Lab of Ornithology and National Audubon Society. 2002. eBird online checklist program:
http://ebird.org/ebird/GuideMe?cmd=changeLocation. Site visited 03-Mar-2015.
NatureServe. 2014.
A Network Connecting Science
http://www.natureserve.org/. Site visited 03-Mar-15.
with
Conservation.
Online:
The Birds of North America (The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.), Ithaca: Cornell
Laboratory of Ornithology; Retrieved from The Birds of North America Online database:
http://bna.birds.cornell.edu.bnaproxy.birds.cornell.edu/BNA/; AUG 2005). Site visited 03-Mar-15.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Birds of Conservation Concern 2008. U.S. Department of Interior,
Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Arlington, Virginia. 85 pp.
[Online version available at http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/]. Site visited 02-Mar-2015.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011. Birds of Management Concern and Focal Species, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Migratory Bird Program. Online: http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/
currentbirdissues/management/BMC%20Focal%20Species%20November%202011. Site
visited 03-Mar-15.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2012. Migratory Bird Program - Birds of Management Concern. Online:
http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/currentbirdissues/management/BMC.html Site visited 03Mar-15.
20
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
.
21
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
Attachment 1:
General Location Map
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
Rover Pipeline Project General Location Map
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
Attachment 2:
Birds of Conservation Concern for USFWS Regions 3 and 5
(USFWS 2008)
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
July 2015
ROVER PIPELINE PROJECT
Migratory Bird Conservation Plan
July 2015