We appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed regulatory action concerning mitigation for forest core impacts within the Small Renewable Energy Projects (Solar) Permit by Rule (9VAC15-60). As stakeholders in the renewable energy development process, we respectfully submit the following considerations for DEQ’s review:

Technical Concerns with State-Wide Modeling Assumptions

• We encourage transparency on how previously proposed mitigation ratios have been derived in the absence of finalized mapping tools or agreed-upon definitions of high-integrity forest cores.
• A primary concern surrounding the reliance on DCR’s Ecological Cores was that the dataset’s foundational algorithms created an output that is heavily dependent upon state-wide model assumptions. The maps represent criteria that are given varied importance in space based on proximity to other features, resulting not only in an unverifiable field circumstance, but also in a description of land which is unreliable when measuring actual impact caused by land disturbance. DCR's Ecological Cores output is suggestive in nature and does not provide, or seek to provide, a measure of need for mitigation that is dependable for regulation. This having been decided by previous RAP sessions, what methods will DEQ employ to justly develop a dataset that solves this disconnect?
• In the event that impact to forest cores requires mitigation, the mitigation ratio should be 1:1. Justification for higher ratios than are actuated by impact should be demonstrated by literature and case studies.

Environmental, Landowner, and Economic Development Concerns

• The previously proposed mitigation ratios for forest cores may introduce new costs and constraints for landowners and project developers. It may be helpful to assess whether such requirements could disproportionately affect rural landowners whose forested land will become economically impracticable for an otherwise viable land lease.
• To what extent is the proposed regulatory action consistent with the Commonwealth’s public interest in expanding renewable energy under the Virginia Clean Economy Act? While HB 206 directs consideration of impacts to forest and agricultural lands, it does not specifically reference forest cores. Clarifying how this continued regulatory action aligns with legislative intent and broader energy policy goals would strengthen the rationale for its implementation.

We appreciate DEQ’s commitment to stakeholder engagement and look forward to continued dialogue as this regulatory action advances.