New York Assembly Bill A03959

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/30/25
• Refer: 1/30/25
• Refer: 1/7/26

Caption

Requires a mitigation ratio of one acre for every acre of occupied grassland bird breeding habitat and three acres of mitigation for every acre of grassland bird wintering habitat included in a major electric transmission facility siting permit.

Summary

This bill amends the Public Service Law to change how major electric transmission facility siting permits must address impacts to grassland bird habitat in designated Department of Environmental Conservation grassland bird conservation centers. If a proposed transmission project would affect occupied grassland bird breeding habitat or grassland bird wintering habitat, the Office of Renewable Energy Siting and Electric Transmission (ORES) would be required to impose a mitigation ratio of one acre of mitigation for every acre of breeding habitat taken, and one acre of mitigation for every acre of wintering habitat taken. The bill also specifies that these mitigation requirements cannot be reduced by applying a habitat-succession formula or any other additional calculation that would divide the impact over multiple life cycles. In effect, the measure is designed to ensure a direct, acre-for-acre conservation offset for habitat losses associated with transmission projects in these sensitive areas, and it applies to pending permit applications that have not yet received final net conservation benefit plan approval.

Impact

The bill would amend section 139 of the Public Service Law by adding a new subdivision governing mitigation for major electric transmission facility siting permits in grassland bird conservation centers. It would impose mandatory habitat mitigation standards on ORES and affect applicants for transmission projects that disturb designated breeding or wintering habitat, likely increasing project costs, siting constraints, and environmental review obligations. The bill applies immediately to pending permits without an approved final net conservation benefit plan, but it is tied to the eventual repeal of the underlying section.

Sentiment

No committee transcript or vote record was provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or recorded support/opposition. Based on the bill text and caption, the measure appears environmentally protective and aimed at strengthening conservation requirements for grassland bird habitat. The absence of recorded votes or discussion prevents a more specific assessment of legislative sentiment.

Contention

The main point of contention is likely the strictness of the mitigation standard. Environmental advocates and bird conservation interests would likely support the bill’s fixed acre-for-acre mitigation requirement and its rejection of formulas that reduce mitigation obligations over time. By contrast, electric transmission developers, utilities, and possibly clean-energy siting stakeholders may object that the bill could make projects more expensive or harder to site by limiting flexibility in how habitat impacts are offset. The bill’s application to pending applications may also be contested by affected applicants.