EN12 - Description of significant impacts of activities, products, and services on biodiversity in protected areas and areas of high biodiversity value outside protected areas

Impacts of Power Plant Construction
Construction of pollution control equipment and associated landfills has resulted in the loss of wetland and riparian areas near several power plant sites.  However, these losses have been permitted under the Corps of Engineers’ 404 program and are mitigated by the company, often on a two to one, three to one, or higher basis.  Construction activity at the Amos and Mountaineer Plants has required such mitigations and future work at the Kyger Creek and Muskingum River Plants will require similar mitigations to replace lost wetland and stream habitats. 

Hydroelectric Generation
AEP operates hydroelectric projects in Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Virginia, and West Virginia.  Of these, the Berrien Springs, Buchanan, Leesville, Niagara and Smith Mountain projects operate on waters considered to be of high biodiversity or ecological value (Table 4).  This is due to the presence of stocked salmonids, such as chinook salmon or steelhead trout, and the federally endangered Roanoke Logperch.

Major impacts associated with hydroelectric project operation include alteration of stream and wetland areas by inundation, fluctuation of river flows and reservoir levels, blockage of upstream and downstream fish movement, and changing reservoir water quality.  The alteration of river and stream flow regimes as a result of dam operation can make otherwise suitable riverine habitat unfit for aquatic invertebrates, fish, amphibians, and other riparian-dependent species.  Fluctuating stream flows and water levels can also reduce the area suitable for fish spawning and can subject fish eggs to dehydration. 

The blockage of both upstream and downstream fish movement by dams, diversion structures, turbines, spillways, and waterways can affect fish populations.  Organisms passing over dam spillways or through hydroelectric turbines can be injured by strikes or impacts with solid objects, rapid pressure changes, abrasion with rough structures and the shearing effects of turbulent water.  In addition, fish that pass through trash racks and into turbines become susceptible to turbine-induced mortality.

Migrating fish may be prevented from moving upstream if their passage is blocked by the dams.  This could have a significant effect on anadramous fish populations, such as chinook salmon or steelhead trout, which are stocked by the Indiana Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) in the St. Joseph River, downstream of the AEP Twin Branch hydroelectric facility.  Below this facility, AEP operates the Berrien Springs, and Buchanan hydroelectric projects, through which the anadromous fish must pass.  AEP also operates the Leesville, Niagara, and Smith Mountain hydroelectric projects on the Roanoke River, which contains the Roanoke Logperch, a federally endangered fish species.  The dams restrict the movements of these fish, potentially isolating the populations and preventing genetic mixing. 

Impacts of Wind Generation
Avian collision problems occurred at first-generation California wind farms built during the 1970s.  Collisions of most concern were large raptors, especially golden eagles and smaller birds during migration in large flocks.  Today, bats have come to the wind industry’s attention and studies to grasp the dimension of the issue are underway.  AEP operates such a facility at the Trent Mesa wind farm in Texas, however, no bird collisions have been documented. 

Impacts of Transmission Facilities
Avian interactions with transmission lines and structures are species and site specific.  AEP has traditionally responded to animal-related incidences at its transmission and distribution facilities when they became evident.  For example, the company was made aware of a line that crossed a breeding colony of black skimmers in coastal Texas.  Fledglings from the colony were being lost for a number of reasons, one of which was collisions with this line.  As a deterrent, spiral marking devices were applied to the line, and according to the Audubon Society members that monitor the colony, the collision rate diminished and collision incidence was reduced to be the least of the colony’s threats.  In 2008, this line has again been associated with bird collisions.  Though the black skimmers have moved their colony away from the line, other species are intermittently, but consistently, colliding with this line.  Plans are being made to mark the entire mile of line, however, AEP is looking at the possibility of doing a study of the collision incidence and species involved first, then using a variety of available marking devices to determine the most effective for the species involved.  Following this study, the most effective markers will be installed.  The information gained from this study will guide future mitigation in coastal areas.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has also required AEP to install marking devices on some spans of newly constructed transmission lines to prevent collisions.  A line in the migratory flyway of the whooping crane was marked with aviation balls along approximately 40 miles of its length for this purpose, as was 6 miles of another line in the Attwater’s prairie chicken historic habitat.  Both bird species are endangered.  Spiral markers have been installed on newly built transmission line spans that cross bays, estuaries, wetlands or other water bodies, at the request of the permitting authorities who thought the new lines could pose a collision potential to birds in general.

Bird electrocutions occur on utility poles and towers as birds use these structures for perching, roosting and nesting.  AEP applies protective devices to structures when outages have been caused by bird electrocutions.

Transmission line rights-of-way often require tree removal for construction and maintenance.  This loss of trees is also a loss of habitat for woodland and forest fauna.

Climate Change
AEP’s minimizes the impacts of its operations on biodiversity, however, the company also recognizes where such impacts may arise.  Of particular note, and in a much larger and more general sense, is the company’s impact on global climate change, and its associated environmental and biodiversity impacts, due to its prominence as a greenhouse gas emitter in the United States.