Proposed Project - Geer RD Solar Project, LLC.

Landscape Architects, Architects,
Engineers, and Planners, P.C.

NEW YORK CITY > SARATOGA SPRINGS > SYRACUSE
HANWHA HANWHA
390W 390W
52-MOD 52-MOD
HANWHA
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD HANWHA HANWHA
390W
HANWHA 390W 390W
52-MOD
390W 52-MOD 52-MOD
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
52-MOD
HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA
390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W
52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD
HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA

390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W
52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD
HANWHA
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
52-MOD
HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA

390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W
52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD
221 GEER ROAD, KINGSBURY, WASHINGTON COUNTY , NY

HANWHA
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
52-MOD
HANWHA
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
52-MOD
MATRIX DEVELOPMENT, LLC

HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA
390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W
52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD
KINGSBURY SOLAR
HANWHA HANWHA
390W 390W
52-MOD 52-MOD
HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA

390W 390W 390W 390W
52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD
HANWHA HANWHA
390W 390W
52-MOD 52-MOD

390W 390W 390W 390W
HANWHA HANWHA
390W 390W
52-MOD 52-MOD
HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA
390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W
52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD
HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA
390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W
52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD
SEEDING SPECIFICATIONS
LOCATION NAME/SPECIES SUPPLIER SEEDING
REBEL TALL FESCUE,

CHEWINGS FESCUE OR SEEDLAND.COM
BETWEEN AND HARD FESCUE
A/B UNDER SOLAR 5#/1,000 SF
PANELS
ERNX 129-CONSERVATION
ERNST
SHADE MIX
BUTTERFLY AND
C OUTSIDE OF FENCE HUMMINGBIRD ERNMX-179 30#/ACRE
GARDEN MIX
1. BETWEEN DECEMBER 1ST AND APRIL 1ST EACH TYPE OF SEED SHALL HAVE AN ADDITIONAL 1#/1,000 SF OF
WINTER RYEGRASS OR GRAIN RYE GRASS SEED INCLUDED.
2. IT SHALL BE THE SUB-CONTRACTORS RESPONSIBILITY TO ENSURE THAT THE PROJECT LIMIT OF WORK IS
STABILIZED (IN ACCORDANCE WITH LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS/REQUIREMENTS/PERMITS
LANDSCAPING PLAN
APPROVALS) DURING THE LENGTH OF THE PROJECT.
ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE RESTORED WITH 4" MIN, TOPSOIL AND SEED PER SEEDING SPECIFICATIONS
GROUNDCOVERS 2500' 1250' 0 2500'
1/2
HANWHA
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
52-MOD
HANWHA
Landscape Architects, Architects,
390W
Engineers, and Planners, P.C.

HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
390W
HANWHA
52-MOD
NEW YORK CITY > SARATOGA SPRINGS > SYRACUSE

390W
52-MOD
HANWHA HANWHA
390W 390W
52-MOD 52-MOD

390W 390W 390W 390W
221 GEER ROAD, KINGSBURY, WASHINGTON COUNTY , NY

HANWHA HANWHA
390W 390W
52-MOD 52-MOD
MATRIX DEVELOPMENT, LLC

KINGSBURY SOLAR
390W 390W 390W 390W
HANWHA HANWHA
390W 390W
52-MOD 52-MOD
HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA
390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W 390W
52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD
HANWHA
390W
HANWHA
390W
HANWHA
390W
HANWHA
390W
HANWHA
390W
HANWHA
390W
HANWHA
390W
HANWHA
390W
HANWHA
390W
HANWHA
390W
PLANT LIST
52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD 52-MOD
QT. SYM SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SPACING SIZE
13 CD CEDRUS DEODARA 'AUREA' GOLDEN WEEPING DEODAR CEDAR H=25/40'; W=15/30 2 1/2"-3" CAL.
17 CJ CRYPTOMERIA JAPONICA JAPANESE CEDAR H=60'; W=20 2 1/2"-3" CAL.
HANWHA
390W
52-MOD
HANWHA
390W
52-MOD
HANWHA
390W
52-MOD
HANWHA
390W
52-MOD
HANWHA
390W
52-MOD
HANWHA
390W
52-MOD
HANWHA
390W
52-MOD
HANWHA
390W
52-MOD
HANWHA
390W
52-MOD
HANWHA
390W
52-MOD
HANWHA
390W
52-MOD
HANWHA
390W
52-MOD
HANWHA
390W
52-MOD
HANWHA
390W
52-MOD
HANWHA
390W
52-MOD
HANWHA
390W
52-MOD
13 CL CUPRESSUS X LEYLANDI LEYLAND CYPRESS H=30/50'; W=20 2 1/2"-3" CAL.

16 JV JUNIPERUS VIRGINIANA EASTERN RED CEDAR H=30/40'; W=12/20 2 1/2"-3" CAL.
28 PG PICEA GLAUCA 'DENSATA' WHITE SPRUCE H=20'/40'; W=10'/15' 2 1/2"-3" CAL.
26 PP PICEA PUNGENS COLORADO SPRUCE H=10'; W=18' 2 1/2"-3" CAL.
46 TB TAXUS BACCATA 'FASTIGIATA' COLUMNAR ENGLISH YEW H=10'/20'; W=6' 2 1/2"-3" CAL.
40 AC AMELANCHIER CANADIENSIS SHADBLOW SERRVICEBERRY H=6/15; W=5/8 3/5 GAL.

19 CR CORNUS RACEMOSA GREY DOGWOOD H=10/15; W=10/15 3/5 GAL.
88 IO ILEX OPACA AMERICAN HOLLY H=10; W=5 3/5 GAL.
24 IV ILEX VERTICILLATA WINTERBERRY H=6/8; W=6/8 3/5 GAL.
8 LB LINDERA BENZOIN SPICEBUSH H=6/10; W=6/10 3/5 GAL.
LANDSCAPING PLAN
TREES 2500' 1250' 0 2500'
2/2
Michael Doud 8/21/2019, revised 3/20/2020
Director of Development
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE
OF DECOMMISSIONING COSTS
Geer Road Solar
Town of Kingsbury, New York
Langan Project No.190050702
February 24, 2020
DESCRIPTION OF ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST
I. DISASSEMBLY & DISPOSAL

1.0 PV Modules (390 W) 63,232 EA. $ 5.33 $ 337,026.56
2.0 Inverter(s) (2 MVA) 8 EA. $ 271.00 $ 2,168.00
3.0 Transformer(s) (1 MVA) 8 EA. $ 271.00 $ 2,168.00
4.0 Racking Frame (Tracker) 875 EA. $ 26.00 $ 22,750.00
5.0 Racking Posts 13,230 EA. $ 20.00 $ 264,600.00
6.0 LV Wiring 13,590 LF $ 0.76 $ 10,328.40
7.0 MV Wiring 890 LF $ 0.41 $ 364.90
8.0 Fiber Optic Cable 300 LF $ 0.66 $ 198.00
9.0 Fence 22,560 LF $ 2.50 $ 56,400.00
10.0 Concrete 80 CY $ 100.00 $ 8,000.00
11.0 Gravel 3,220 CY $ 40.00 $ 128,800.00
12.0 General Conditions 20 MW $ 3,822.00 $ 76,440.00
SUBTOTAL $ 909,243.86
II. SITE RESTORATION

13.0 Re-Seeding (drives & fenced area) 90 AC $ 3,924.00 $ 353,990.00
14.0 Re-Grading (drives only) 80 CY $ 11.00 $ 880.00
SUBTOTAL $ 354,870.00
III. SALVAGE
15.0 Racking Frame 240,240 LBS. $ 0.09 $ 21,620.00
16.0 Racking Posts 230,340 LBS. $ 0.09 $ 20,730.60
SUBTOTAL $ 42,350.60
SUBTOTAL DISASSEMBLY, DISPOSAL AND SITE RESTORATION $ 1,264,113.86

TOTAL SALVAGE VALUE $ 42,350.60
NET DECOMMISSIONG COST $ 1,221,763.26
10% CONTINGENCY $ 122,176.33

TOTAL DECOMMISSIONING COSTS $ 1,386,290.19
DECOMMISSIONING ESTIMATE $ 1,386,290.19

20 YEAR INFLATION AT 2.5% PER YEAR $ 885,307.70
NET DECOMMISSIONING ESTIMATE $ 2,272,000.00
NOTES:
1. This Engineer's estimate is based on a set of plans titled "Geer Road Solar, Town of Kingsbury, Washington County, New York", prepared by Langan,
dated 02/24/2020.
2. This Engineer’s estimate represents an opinion of the probable costs of construction, within a reasonable degree of certainty. It is based on our
experience and qualifications as an engineer and shall be deemed to represent our opinion and judgment. This estimate does not guarantee the cost of
labor, material, or equipment, nor the means, methods and procedures of the Contractor's work as determined by the Contractor and/or Owner, nor the
competitive bidding submissions. This estimate cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual costs will be the same as or within any
specific percentage of this estimate of probable construction cost.
3. It is a violation of the NYS Education Law Article 145 for any person, unless he is acting under the direction of a licensed Professional Engineer, to
alter this item in any way.
ASSUMPTIONS/EXCLUSIONS:
1. This estimate does not include permit/application fees or potential environmental remediation costs.
2. Quantities for Line Items #6.0, 7.0, and 8.0 are estimates. The electrical wiring design has not been completed.
3. Line item #9.0 includes removal of fence and all appurtenances, including but not limited to footings, posts and barbed wire.
4. Line item #13.0 includes re-seeding of the driveway area (after stone removal), concrete pads and reseeding within the fenced area as a result of
decommissioning.
5. Line item #14.0 includes filling of the roadbed (after road stone removal).
Page 1 of 1
DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
for
Geer Road Solar

221 Geer Road
Prepared For:
Geer RD Solar 1, LLC

153 Mercer Street, #4
New York, NY 10012
Prepared By:
Langan Engineering, Environmental, Surveying,

Landscape Architecture and Geology, D.P.C.
One North Broadway, Suite 910
White Plains, New York 10601
October 18, 2019
Project No.: 190050702

Geer Road Solar Page i
221 Geer Road October 18, 2019
Table of Contents
1 Executive Summary ........................................................................... 2
2 Decommissioning .............................................................................. 2
2.1 Dismantling PV Modules, Racks and Supports ..................................................... 2
2.2 Dismantling Electrical Equipment and Foundations .............................................. 3
2.3 Dismantling Driveways ........................................................................................ 3
2.4 Other Components .............................................................................................. 3
2.5 Department of Agriculture and Markets ............................................................... 3
3 Erosion and Sediment Control Plan.................................................... 4

3.1 Erosion and Sediment Control Measures ............................................................. 4
3.2 Pollution Prevention Controls ............................................................................... 4
3.3 Inspections and Maintenance .............................................................................. 5
3.3.1 Trained Contractor Requirements ............................................................. 5
3.3.2 Qualified Inspector Requirements ............................................................ 5
4 Waste Disposal .................................................................................. 6
5 Restoration of Land ........................................................................... 6

5.1 General ................................................................................................................ 6
5.2 Department of Agriculture and Markets ............................................................... 6
6 Emergency Response and Communications Plans ............................ 7
7 Permit and Approvals ......................................................................... 7

Geer Road Solar Page 2
1 Executive Summary
Decommissioning will occur as a result of any of the following conditions:
• The land lease expires or is terminated; or

• The solar energy system (SES) does not produce power for a period of 12 consecutive
months.
The site activity impacts will be similar to the construction phase, but in reverse sequence.
Decommissioning of electrical devices, equipment and wiring/cabling will be conducted in
accordance with local, municipal, state, and federal standards and guidelines. Electrical
decommissioning will include obtaining the required permits and following procedures before de-
energizing, isolating, and disconnecting electrical devices, equipment and wiring/cabling.
The procedures will include the following:
• The creation of temporary work areas. In order to provide sufficient area for the laydown
of the disassembled panels and racking and loading onto trucks, gravel will be placed on
a clear, level area that is accessible.
• Equipment will include, at a minimum:
o The use of cranes to remove the panels, racking, inverters, and transformers.
o The use of trucks for removal of panels, racking, inverters, and transformers.
• Driveways will be removed unless the property owners want them left in place. The
gravel will be removed and replaced with clean soil for reuse by the landowner for
agricultural or other purposes.
Erosion and sediment control measures, similar to those used during construction will be
implemented and maintained by the trained contractor.
2 Decommissioning
2.1 Dismantling PV Modules, Racks and Supports
Modules will be disconnected, removed from the racks, packaged and transported to a
designated location for resale, recycling or disposal. If the modules are not to be reused in a
different location, the glass and silicon will be reclaimed and the aluminum frames will be
recycled. Any disposal or recycling will be done in accordance with local by-laws and
requirements. The connecting underground cables and the junction boxes will be de-energized,
disconnected and removed.
The steel lattice racks supporting the modules will be unbolted and disassembled using standard
hand tools, possibly assisted by a small portable crane. The vertical steel posts supporting the
racks and steel support posts (driven or screwed) will be completely removed by mechanical
equipment and transported off-site for salvage (driven piles) or reuse (screw piles).
Any demolition debris that is not salvageable will be transported by truck to an approved offsite
disposal area. Other salvageable equipment and/or material will be removed from the site for
resale, scrap value or disposal depending on market conditions.
2.2 Dismantling Electrical Equipment and Foundations

Decommissioning of electrical devices, equipment, and wiring/cabling will be in accordance with
local, municipal, provincial and federal agency standards and guidelines. Electrical
decommissioning will include obtaining the required permits, and following before de-energizing,
and disconnecting electrical devices, equipment and wiring/cabling.
Decommissioning will require dismantling and removal of the electrical equipment, including
inverters, transformers, underground cables and overhead lines, the prefabricated inverter
enclosures and substation electrical building. The equipment will be disconnected and
transported off-site by truck. The concrete foundations and support pads may be broken up by
mechanical equipment (backhoe-hydraulic hammer/shovel, jackhammer), loaded onto dump
trucks and removed from the site, at the request of the property owners; and smaller pre-cast
concrete support pads may be removed intact by cranes and loaded onto trucks for reuse or be
broken up and hauled away by dump trucks.
Prior to removal of the transformers, the oil will be pumped into a separate industry approved
disposal container and sealed to prevent any spill during storage and/or transportation.
Equipment and material may be salvaged for resale or scrap value depending on the market
conditions.
2.3 Dismantling Driveways

The gravel may be removed or left in place at the property owner’s request. If removed, the
gravel will be placed in dump trucks to haul the aggregate to a recycling facility or approved
disposal facility. The underlying subsoil, if exhibiting significant compaction will then be aerated
using a tractor with disk attachment to restore the soil structure and aerate the soil. Clean topsoil
would be replaced over this area, from where it may have been temporarily stored elsewhere on-
site by dump truck, to match the surrounding grade. Depending upon the time of year and the
planned use of the land, the area will be returned to its pre-construction condition.
2.4 Other Components

Unless retained for other purposes, and at the request of the property owners, removal of other
facility components from the site will be completed, including but not limited to surface drains,
culverts, and fencing. Anything deemed usable shall be recovered and reused. Other remaining
components will be considered as waste and managed according to federal, provincial and
municipal requirements. For safety and security, the security fence will be the final component
dismantled and removed from the site.
2.5 Department of Agriculture and Markets

The NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets requires that above ground structures be
removed if the use of the solar arrays is discontinued. Areas previously used for agricultural
production, according to recommendations by the landowner, the Soil and Water Conservation
District, and the Department of Agriculture and Markets be restored.
Concrete piers, footers or other supports must be removed to a depth of 48-inches below the
soil surface. Underground electric lines must be abandoned in place. Access roads in agricultural
areas must be removed, unless otherwise specified by the landowner.
3 Erosion and Sediment Control Plan

3.1 Erosion and Sediment Control Measures
Temporary erosion and sediment control measures to be used during decommissioning
construction generally include the following:
• Stabilized construction access.

• Dust control.
• Temporary soil stockpiles.
• Silt fencing.
• Temporary seeding.
Once decommissioning is completed, disturbed areas shall be final seeded within 14 days after
completion of the land disturbing activities. Final site stabilization is achieved when soil-
disturbing activities have been completed and a uniform, perennial vegetative cover with a
density of 80 percent has been established or equivalent stabilization measures (such as the use
of mulches or geotextiles) have been employed on the disturbed unpaved areas and areas not
covered by permanent structures.
3.2 Pollution Prevention Controls

Good housekeeping practices are designed to maintain a clean and orderly work environment.
Good housekeeping measures shall be maintained throughout the construction process by those
parties involved with the direct care and development of the site. The following measures shall
be implemented to control the possible exposure of harmful substances and materials to
stormwater runoff:
1. Soil stockpile locations shall be located away from storm drainage, water bodies or
watercourses and surrounded with adequate erosion and sediment control measures.
Soil stockpile locations shall be exposed no longer than 14 days before seeding.
2. Equipment maintenance areas shall be protected from stormwater flows and shall be
supplied with appropriate waste receptacles for spent chemicals, solvents, oils, greases,
gasoline, and any pollutants that might contaminate the surrounding habitat or water
supply. Equipment wash-down zones shall be within areas draining to sediment control
devices.
3. The use of detergents for large-scale (e.g., vehicles, buildings, pavement surfaces)
washing is prohibited.
4. Material storage locations and facilities (e.g., covered storage areas, storage sheds) shall
be on-site and shall be stored according to the manufacturer’s standards in a dedicated
staging area. Chemicals, paints, solvents, fertilizers, and other toxic material shall be
stored in waterproof containers. Runoff containing such materials shall be collected,

removed from the site, treated and disposed of at an approved solid waste or chemical
disposal facility.
5. Hazardous spills shall be immediately contained to prevent pollutants from entering the
surrounding habitat or water supply. Spill Kits shall be provided on site and shall be
displayed in a prominent location for ease of access and use. Spills greater than 5 gallons
shall be reported to the NYSDEC Response Unit at 1-800-457-7362. In addition, a record
of the incidents or notifications shall be documented and attached to the SWPPP.
6. Portable sanitary waste facilities shall be provided on site for workers and shall be properly
maintained.
7. Dumpsters or debris containers shall be on site and shall be of adequate size to manage
respective materials. Regular collection and disposal of wastes must occur as required.
8. Non-stormwater components of site discharge shall be clean water. Water used for
construction, which discharges from the site, must originate from a public water supply
or approved private well. Water used for construction that does not originate from an
approved public supply must not discharge from the site.
9. Discharges from dewatering activities, including discharges from dewatering trenches

and excavations, shall be managed by appropriate control measures.
3.3 Inspections and Maintenance
3.3.1 Trained Contractor Requirements

The trained contractor must inspect the erosion and sediment control practices and pollution-
prevention measures to verify that they are being maintained in effective operating condition.
The inspections will be performed daily in the active work area. If deficiencies are identified, the
contractor will begin implementing corrective actions within one business day and must
complete the corrective actions by the end of the day.
3.3.2 Qualified Inspector Requirements

The owner/operator must have a Qualified Inspector conduct site inspections to verify the
stability and effectiveness of protective measures and practices employed during construction.
The site inspections will be conducted at least once every seven days.
Inspection reports must identify and document the maintenance of the erosion and sediment
control measures. If deficiencies are identified, the contractor will begin implementing corrective
actions within one business day and must complete the corrective actions by the end of the day.
4 Waste Disposal
As discussed above, the waste generated by the installation, operation and decommissioning of
The Project is minimal, and there are no toxic residues. Any wastes generated will be disposed
of according to standards of the day with the emphasis of recycling materials whenever possible.
5 Restoration of Land
5.1 General
The agricultural use of the areas will be restored by:
• Site cleanup.
• Any excavation and/or trenching caused by the removal of building or equipment
foundations, rack supports and underground electrical cables will be backfilled with the
appropriate material and leveled to match the ground surface.
• Driveways will be removed completely, filled with suitable sub-grade material and leveled.
Topsoil will be placed on these areas to restore agricultural capability.
• Any compacted ground will be tilled, mixed with suitable sub-grade materials and leveled.
5.2 Department of Agriculture and Markets

The NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets has the following restoration requirements:
• All agricultural areas temporarily disturbed by construction must be decompacted to a

depth of 18 inches with a deep ripper or heavy-duty chisel plow. Soil compaction results
must be no more than 250 pounds per square inch (PSI) as measured with a soil
penetrometer. In areas where the topsoil was stripped, soil decompaction must be
conducted prior to topsoil replacement. Following decompaction, remove all rocks 4
inches and larger in size, from the surface of the subsoil prior to replacement of the
topsoil. Replace the topsoil to original depth and reestablish original contours where
possible.
• Remove all rocks 4 inches and larger from the surface of the topsoil. Subsoil
decompaction and topsoil replacement must be avoided after October 1. All parties
involved must be cognizant that areas restored after October 1st may not obtain sufficient
growth to prevent erosion over the winter months. If areas are to be restored after
October 1st, necessary provision must be made to restore and/or reseed any eroded or
poorly germinated areas in the springtime, to establish proper growth.
• Regrade all access roads to allow for farm equipment crossing and to restore original
surface drainage patterns, or other drainage pattern incorporated into the design.
• Seed all restored agricultural areas with the seed mix specified by the landowner, in order
to maintain consistency with the surrounding areas.
• Repair all surface or subsurface drainage structures damaged during construction as close
to preconstruction conditions as possible, unless said structures are to be removed as
part of the project design. Correct any surface or subsurface drainage problems resulting
from construction of the solar energy project with the appropriate mitigation as
determined by the Environmental Monitor, Soil and Water Conservation District and the
Landowner.
• On affected farmland, postpone any restoration practices until favorable (workable,

relatively dry) topsoil/subsoil conditions exist. Restoration must not be conducted while
soils are in a wet or plastic state of consistency. Stockpiled topsoil must not be regraded
and subsoil must not be decompacted until plasticity, as determined by the Atterberg field
test, is adequately reduced. No project restoration activities shall occur in agricultural
fields between the months of October through May unless favorable soil moisture
conditions exist.
• Following restoration, remove all construction debris from the site.
6 Emergency Response and Communications Plans

Prior to initiating any decommissioning activities, Geer Road Solar will notify the local authorities,
the public, and relevant government agencies of their intent to decommission The Project.
Copies of a detailed emergency response plan, developed in conjunction with the local
emergency services, will be distributed to the local municipality prior to the commencement of
operations. A plan specific to The Project will be developed during the construction phase of this
project and will be applicable to both the operations and decommissioning phases of The Project.
During decommissioning, Geer Road Solar will coordinate with the local authority, the public and
others as required to provide them with information about the ongoing activities. Besides regular
direct/indirect communication, a sign will be posted at the gate of the facility which will include
Geer Road Solar’s contact information (telephone number, e-mail and mailing address) should
the public have any questions, inquiries or complaints. Inquiries will be directed to Geer Road
Solar’s primary contact person who will respond to the inquiry accordingly. Inquiries will be
logged electronically with the following information: date of question, inquiry or complaint, name,
phone number, email address of the individual, response, date of response, and any follow-up
issues.
7 Permit and Approvals

Decommissioning activities are expected to disturb more than one or more acres of land.
Therefore, coverage under the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
(NYSDEC) State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) General Permit for Stormwater
Discharges from Construction Activity (General Permit) latest revision will be required prior to
commencement of decommissioning. Erosion and sediment control inspections will be
It is anticipated that the decommissioning will require a Building or Demolition permit obtained
from Town of Kingsbury.
\\langan.com\data\WPW\data7\190050701\Project Data\_Discipline\Site Civil\Reports\Decommissioning\2019-09-25\2019-09-25 Decommissioning Plan.docx
Photograph Information
Date: September 30, 2019
Time: 1:17pm
Focal Length: 24mm
Camera: Canon EOS 6D MarkII
Photo 43° 21’ 09.8796” N

Location: 73° 33’ 54.3429” W
To appear at the correct scale this page is intended to be viewed approximately 11“ from the reader’s eye when printed on 11”x17” paper.
Figure 1a
Simulated Condition - Viewpoint 1
PROJECT VISUALIZATION
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Kingsbury, Washington County, NY
Figure 1b
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Time: 12:25
Focal Length: 24mm
Photo 43° 21’ 10.6622” N

Location: 73° 33’ 47.3642” W
Figure 2a
Existing Condition - Viewpoint 2
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Figure 2b
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Figure 2c
Simulated Condition - Viewpoint 2 with Landscape Mitigation (Yr. 1 growth)
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Figure 2d
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Time: 12:34pm
Focal Length: 24mm
Photo 43° 21’ 12.9769” N

Location: 73° 33’ 44.5899” W
Figure 3a
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Figure 3b
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Time: 12:47pm
Focal Length: 24mm
Photo 43° 21’ 17.9095” N

Location: 73° 33’ 42.0927” W
Figure 4a
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Figure 4b
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Figure 4c
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Figure 4d
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Time: 12:43pm
Focal Length: 24mm
Photo 43° 21’ 23.1795” N

Location: 73° 33’ 40.0180” W
Figure 5a
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Figure 5b
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Figure 5c
Simulated Condition - Viewpoint 5 (Yr. 1 growth)
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Figure 5d
Simulated Condition - Viewpoint 5 (Yr. 5 growth)
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Time: 12:55pm
Focal Length: 24mm
Photo 43° 21’ 27.5328” N

Location: 73° 33’ 37.3752” W
Figure 6a
Existing Condition - Viewpoint 6a
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Figure 6b
Simulated Condition - Viewpoint 6a
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Time: 12:55pm
Focal Length: 24mm
Photo 43° 21’ 27.5328” N

Location: 73° 33’ 37.3752” W
Figure 7a
Existing Condition - Viewpoint 6b
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Location of project behind trees
Figure 7b
Simulated Condition - Viewpoint 6b
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Time: 12:58pm
Focal Length: 24mm
Photo 43° 21’ 32.0688” N

Location: 73° 33’ 36.7704” W
Figure 8a
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Figure 8b
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Time: 12:59pm
Focal Length: 24mm
Photo 43° 21’ 32.5908” N

Location: 73° 33’ 36.5616” W
Figure 9a
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Location of project behind house
Figure 9b
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Time: 1:00pm
Focal Length: 24mm
Photo 43° 21’ 33.7104” N

Location: 73° 33’ 36.0756” W
Figure 10a
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Figure 10b
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Time: 1:00pm
Focal Length: 24mm
Photo 43° 21’ 36.2988” N

Location: 73° 33’ 35.5536” W
Figure 11a
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Figure 11b
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Time: 1:06pm
Focal Length: 24mm
Photo 43° 21’ 37.0404” N

Location: 73° 33’ 35.4384” W
Figure 12a
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Location of project behind trees and barns
Figure 12b
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Date: November 24, 2019
Time: 11:55am
Focal Length: 50mm
Camera: Canon EOS 6D
MarkII
Photo 43° 21’ 27.6120” N

Location: 73° 34’ 20.0160” W
Figure 13a
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Figure 13b
Kingsbury Solar,
221 Geer Road
Barrett Energy Resources Group
PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
www.barrettenergygroup.com
Technical Memorandum
To: Michael Doud, Matrix Development, LLC

From: Stephen Barrett
RE: Glare Study, Solar Photovoltaic Project, Geer Road WEST, Hudson Falls, New York
Executive Summary
Matrix Development, LLC (Matrix) is developing a nominal 18.6 MWdc solar photovoltaic (PV)
project northwest of the intersection of Geer and Underwood Roads in Hudson Falls, NY
referred to as Geer Road WEST. Another project proposed by Matrix located on the opposite
side of Geer Road, which is not the subject of this memorandum, is referred to as Geer Road
EAST.
The Geer Road WEST Project is comprised of three single axis tracking arrays: #1 (6.65 MWdc),
#2 (6.65 MWdc), and #4 (5.28 MWdc). Matrix has engaged Barrett Energy Resources Group
(BERG) to analyze potential impacts of glare from the project on aviation receptors at Floyd
Bennett Memorial Airport (GFL) located in Queensbury approximately 2 miles west of the
project, and receptors close to the project such as motorists and residences.
To complete this work, BERG has utilized the Solar Glare Hazard Analysis Tool (SGHAT) which
was developed by the US Department of Energy for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
to protect aviation sensitive receptors from unintended glare from solar projects. For this
project, SGHAT has been used along with the FAA’s Solar Policy and ocular hazard standard to
evaluate glare on aircraft on final approach to four runway ends at GFL. SGHAT has also been
used to assess potential glare impacts on motorist receptors traveling on Geer and Underwood
Roads and on representative residential receptors in the vicinity of the project.
The modeling reports, which are included as Attachment A for the aviation receptors and
Attachment B for the non-aviation receptors, show no potential glare impacts on any of the
receptors analyzed. This is primarily due to the use of the single axis tracking system which
limits the potential for glare on receptors relatively close to the ground including pilots landing
at the airport runway ends. For aviation receptors, the results demonstrate that the project as
designed meets the FAA’s Solar Policy and ocular hazard standard. This Technical
Memorandum describes the project, methodology, and results.
11/30/2019 1
PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
Project Description
The Geer Road-West Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Project is located on about 100 acres of
undeveloped farmland northwest of the intersection of Geer and Underwood Roads in Hudson
Falls, NY as shown on Figure 1. The project is designed as a single axis tracking array and has a
nameplate capacity of 18.6 MWdc. It is adjacent to another project proposed by Matrix referred
to as Geer Road East.
Figure 1. Geer Road West Solar Project Locus
FAA Solar Policy

In 2013, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) published “Interim Policy, FAA Review of
Solar Energy System Projects on Federally-Obligated Airport,” which sets forth methods for
assessing glare and the standards for determining impact for projects proposed on airport
property. It also requires the use of modeling to assess glare and directs project proposers to
the Solar Glare Hazard Analysis Tool (SGHAT) which was developed by the US Department of
Energy at the request of the FAA. The US Department of Defense (DOD) has also adopted
SGHAT and the associated requirements to analyze glare under Instruction (DODI) 4165.57. In
addition to providing a clear method for assessing potential impacts of glare on aviation
11/30/2019 2
PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
receptors, the model also produces a highly credible result for evaluating other glare sensitive
receptors such as motor vehicles and residences.
Glare Methodology and Standard of Impact

Determination of glare occurrence from a solar PV project requires knowledge of the sun
position, observer location, and the characteristics of the solar panels (e.g. tilt, orientation,
location, extent, etc.). Vector algebra is then used to determine if glare is visible from the
prescribed observation points. Figure 2 provides a simple representation of how the sun can
produce glare on an air traffic control tower for a specific time and location. The angle of the
light source from the sun must be equal to the angle of the reflection on a receptor. Therefore,
when receptors are close to the ground (like a landing aircraft or a car), the reflection is only
possible when the sun is also close to the ground (i.e., near sunrise or sunset). As the sun
moves, the incidence of glare ends.
Figure 2. Geometric Representation of Potential Glare Impacts from the Sun
The FAA’s Solar Policy specifies the glare methodology and ocular hazard standard required for
solar PV projects located at airports. For this analysis, BERG used SGHAT version 3 released in
the spring of 2016 under the brand “GlareGauge.” For consistency with the FAA Policy, the
model is referred to herein as SGHAT.
11/30/2019 3
PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
If glare is recorded by the SGHAT model, the predicted intensity of the glare is reported in a
color-coded system at three levels:
• green, a low potential for an after-image1;
• yellow, a potential for an after-image; and
• red, a potential for retinal burn.
The Policy includes an ocular hazard standard which sets forth the intensity of glare using the
color-coded system that is deemed significant and thereby determined to produce a potential
hazard to air navigation. The standard prohibits any glare from impacting the air traffic control
tower (ATCT) (i.e. results with green, yellow or red represent a significant impact), but allows
for a low potential for an after image (green) for pilots on approach to the airport with yellow
and red results representing a significant impact. Table 1 presents the airport sensitive
receptors that must be evaluated for glare using the SGHAT model, the potential results
reported by the model, and whether the result complies with the FAA’s Solar Policy.
Table 1. SGHAT Model Levels of Glare and Compliance with FAA Policy
Airport Sensitive Level of Glare Glare Color Does Result
Receptor Result Comply with FAA
Policy?
ATCT No glare None Yes
Low Potential for After-Image Green
Potential for After-Image Yellow

No
Potential for Permanent Eye Red
Damage
Aircraft on No glare None

approach Yes
Potential for Permanent Eye Red No

Damage
1An after-image occurs when you look directly into a bright light, then look away. It typically takes several seconds for your vision to
readjust and return to normal. It is also referred to as a temporary visual disability or flash blindness.
11/30/2019 4
PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
The FAA Policy and ocular hazard standard apply to the assessment of aviation receptors and
are not specifically relevant for the evaluation of glare impacts on other receptors. For non-
aviation receptors, the results are simply used to determine if glare is predicted (any color) or
not (no color).
SGHAT Model Setup for Proposed Project

Regardless of the receptor to be analyzed, the model set-up entails locating the solar project,
inputting its design characteristics, and identifying sensitive receptors for analysis. The position
and movement of the sun throughout the year is built into the SGHAT model.
For the Geer Road West Solar Project, BERG used the PV project polygon tool to draw the
footprint of the solar arrays on SGHAT’s interactive Google map. The specific attributes of the
solar arrays were then input into the model. As the project proposes a single axis tracking array,
SGHAT includes relevant fields for those elements including for this project design: tilt angle of
0°, azimuth orientation of 0°, beginning and ending panel rotational angle of 60°, average
height of 6 feet above ground level (agl), and a panel surface with no anti-reflective coating as a
baseline. Figure 3 is a simple schematic showing how the solar panels track the sun’s position
throughout the day.
Figure 3. Schematic of Solar Tracking System Through a One-Day Cycle

This study has evaluated both aviation and non-aviation receptors. For the aviation receptors,
the FAA’s solar policy requires assessment of the control tower and pilots on final approach.
11/30/2019 5
PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
Floyd Bennett Airport does not have an air traffic control tower (ATCT); therefore, the only
receptors requiring analysis are the approach pathways associated with the four runway ends.
To analyze the aviation sensitive receptors, BERG activated the flight path tool and selected the
threshold (or end) of the first runway and selected a second point away from the threshold to
represent a straight-on approach pathway, and the model automatically draws the flightpath
from the threshold out to two miles for analysis. This step was repeated for the other three
approach pathways. The model assumes a 3-degree glide path for each runway approach,
which was confirmed for three of the four approach pathways; however, arrivals to Runway 12
are designed for a 3.85-degree glide slope which was used. Figure 4 shows the location of the
solar project, and the two-mile flight paths (in light purple) analyzed in accordance with FAA
methodology.
Figure 4. Airport Sensitive Receptors at Floyd Bennett Airport
For the non-aviation analysis, BERG identified representative motor vehicle receptors
associated with the roadways near the project as well as nearby residential receptors. The
11/30/2019 6
PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
model’s observation point tool was used to select individual points located on the Google map.
Four motorist and eight residential locations were analyzed as shown on Figure 5. For the
motorist receptors, the driver’s height above the roadway was set at 5 feet. For the residential
receptors, the viewpoint was set at 5 feet above ground level to represent the view of a person
standing on the property.
Figure 5. Motorist and Residential Receptors Analyzed for Glare
For each model run, the glare analysis button was activated, and the model evaluated glare
from various sun angles at 1-minute intervals throughout the year to predict if glare could be
observed by the sensitive receptors.
Glare Model Results

The SGHAT-generated report for aviation receptors is included in Attachment A and for non-
aviation receptors as Attachment B. No glare was predicted for any of the receptors, aviation
and non-aviation, analyzed.
11/30/2019 7
PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
The single axis tracking system is effective in eliminating potential glare from receptors close to
the ground. This is due first to the design and operational elements where the face of the panel
is always perpendicular to the sun as the sun moves across the sky during the day. The effect is
that the sun’s rays contact the panel and the portion that is reflected returns back toward the
sun and not toward any receptor on the ground. This concept is illustrated in Figure 6.
Figure 6. Tracking System Mitigates Glare for Low-to-Ground Receptors
The second project element of the tracking system that mitigates glare is the starting and
stopping angle of the panels, which for this project is set at 60° (compared to 90° if the panel
continued tracking to the horizon). Because the panels do not extract much energy from the
sun when it is low on the horizon, the tracking system does not remain perpendicular to the sun
at the beginning and end of each day. If it did, the sun may contact the panel surface and reflect
back toward the sun at a low angle and close to the ground. Instead, the panel is already angled
such that any reflection from the rising or setting sun is cast upward and away from the ground.
Once the sun rises to a position in the sky where it is perpendicular to the panel “resting” angle,
the tracking commences. At the end of the day, the panel reaches the same angle where it
started the day, stops tracking, and, as the sun continues to set, any reflection off the panel is
cast upward. This concept is also shown in Figure 6.
Conclusions
Barrett Energy Resources Group (BERG) has utilized the SGHAT modeling tool developed by
the US Department of Energy to assess the potential effects of glare from a solar photovoltaic
(PV) project on both aviation and non-aviation receptors near Matrix Development’s proposed
11/30/2019 8
PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
solar project at Geer and Underwood Roads in Hudson Falls, NY. There are two solar projects
adjacent to each other and the project addressed in this study is referred to as Geer Road West.
Attachment B for the non-aviation receptors, show that the project has no potential to produce
glare on aviation and non-aviation receptors. Impacts are fundamentally mitigated by the
single axis tracking system design which directs any reflections back skyward. For aviation
receptors, the results demonstrated that the project as designed meets the FAA’s Solar Policy
and ocular hazard standard.
11/30/2019 9
PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
Attachment A
Glare Modeling Results
Floyd Bennett Airport Receptors
11/30/2019 10
FORGESOLAR GLARE ANALYSIS
Project: Matrix Geer Road West

A ground-mounted single axis tracking facility comprised of arrays 1 (6.65 MWdc), 2 (6.65 MWdc), and 4 (5.28 MWdc) .
Site configuration: Preferred Design - Airport

Analysis conducted by Stephen Barrett (steve@barrettenergygroup.com) at 17:53 on 30 Nov, 2019.
U.S. FAA 2013 Policy Adherence

The following table summarizes the policy adherence of the glare analysis based on the 2013 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration
Interim Policy 78 FR 63276. This policy requires the following criteria be met for solar energy systems on airport property:
• No "yellow" glare (potential for after-image) for any flight path from threshold to 2 miles
• No glare of any kind for Air Traffic Control Tower(s) ("ATCT") at cab height.
• Default analysis and observer characteristics (see list below)
ForgeSolar does not represent or speak officially for the FAA and cannot approve or deny projects. Results are informational only.
COMPONENT STATUS DESCRIPTION
Analysis parameters PASS Analysis time interval and eye characteristics used are acceptable
Flight path(s) PASS Flight path receptor(s) do not receive yellow glare
ATCT(s) N/A No ATCT receptors designated
Default glare analysis parameters and observer eye characteristics (for reference only):
• Analysis time interval: 1 minute

• Ocular transmission coefficient: 0.5
• Pupil diameter: 0.002 meters
• Eye focal length: 0.017 meters
• Sun subtended angle: 9.3 milliradians
FAA Policy 78 FR 63276 can be read at https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2013-24729

SITE CONFIGURATION
Analysis Parameters
DNI: peaks at 1,000.0 W/m^2

Time interval: 1 min
Ocular transmission
coefficient: 0.5
Pupil diameter: 0.002 m
Eye focal length: 0.017 m
Sun subtended angle: 9.3
mrad
Site Config ID: 33811.6210
PV Array(s)
Name: Array 2
Axis tracking: Single-axis rotation
Tracking axis orientation: 180.0°
Tracking axis tilt: 0.0°
Tracking axis panel offset: 0.0°
Max tracking angle: 60.0°
Resting angle: 60.0°
Rated power: -
Panel material: Smooth glass without AR coating
Reflectivity: Vary with sun
Slope error: correlate with material
Vertex Latitude (°) Longitude (°) Ground elevation (ft) Height above ground (ft) Total elevation (ft)
1 43.361096 -73.562376 291.01 6.00 297.01

2 43.360440 -73.568041 293.40 6.00 299.40
3 43.358880 -73.567526 288.33 6.00 294.33
4 43.358880 -73.566625 288.36 6.00 294.36
5 43.359036 -73.565251 286.19 6.00 292.19
6 43.359910 -73.565423 288.47 6.00 294.47
7 43.359972 -73.564178 288.97 6.00 294.97
8 43.357851 -73.564135 286.99 6.00 292.99
9 43.357632 -73.563191 310.36 6.00 316.36
10 43.358818 -73.562548 311.54 6.00 317.54
11 43.360159 -73.562633 291.86 6.00 297.86
Name: PV array 2
Rated power: -
1 43.358506 -73.567182 287.73 6.00 293.73

2 43.357382 -73.567140 289.98 6.00 295.98
3 43.353451 -73.565895 277.65 6.00 283.65
4 43.353388 -73.565080 275.40 6.00 281.40
5 43.354761 -73.565165 279.67 6.00 285.67
6 43.354824 -73.564393 280.69 6.00 286.69
7 43.353888 -73.564307 270.59 6.00 276.59
8 43.353888 -73.563621 266.94 6.00 272.94
9 43.356509 -73.564221 276.03 6.00 282.03
10 43.358568 -73.565251 284.42 6.00 290.42
Name: PV array 3
Rated power: -
1 43.359945 -73.562052 303.34 6.00 309.34

2 43.357355 -73.562953 312.84 6.00 318.84
3 43.355935 -73.563210 295.35 6.00 301.35
4 43.354250 -73.563339 283.31 6.00 289.31
5 43.354313 -73.562374 285.28 6.00 291.28
6 43.355873 -73.561880 310.78 6.00 316.78
7 43.355920 -73.561515 306.32 6.00 312.32
8 43.356840 -73.561258 315.07 6.00 321.07
9 43.356903 -73.560914 312.29 6.00 318.29
10 43.358135 -73.560678 321.57 6.00 327.57
11 43.358244 -73.561129 326.39 6.00 332.39
12 43.358931 -73.560936 324.64 6.00 330.64
13 43.358931 -73.560464 325.47 6.00 331.47
14 43.360117 -73.560249 323.10 6.00 329.10
Flight Path Receptor(s)
Name: Rwy 1
Description:
Threshold height: 50 ft
Direction: 358.0°
Glide slope: 3.0°
Pilot view restricted? Yes
Vertical view: 30.0°
Azimuthal view: 50.0°
Point Latitude (°) Longitude (°) Ground elevation (ft) Height above ground (ft) Total elevation (ft)
Threshold 43.335754 -73.608705 320.63 50.00 370.63

Two-mile 43.306859 -73.607309 209.98 714.11 924.09
Name: Rwy 12
Description:
Direction: 110.0°
Glide slope: 3.85°
Threshold 43.341473 -73.619004 326.44 50.00 376.45

Two-mile 43.351362 -73.656405 326.91 760.22 1087.14
Name: Rwy 19
Description:
Direction: 178.0°
Glide slope: 3.0°
Threshold 43.349345 -73.609209 323.71 50.00 373.72

Two-mile 43.378240 -73.610598 298.61 628.56 927.17
Name: Rwy 30
Description:
Direction: 290.0°
Glide slope: 3.0°
Threshold 43.337696 -73.605079 322.51 50.00 372.52

Two-mile 43.327807 -73.567680 268.28 657.69 925.97
GLARE ANALYSIS RESULTS
Summary of Glare
PV Array Name Tilt Orient "Green" Glare "Yellow" Glare Energy
(°) (°) min min kWh

Array 2 SA SA 0 0 -
tracking tracking
PV array 2 SA SA 0 0 -
tracking tracking
PV array 3 SA SA 0 0 -
tracking tracking
Total annual glare received by each receptor
Receptor Annual Green Glare (min) Annual Yellow Glare (min)
Rwy 1 0 0
Rwy 12 0 0
Rwy 19 0 0
Rwy 30 0 0
Results for: Array 2
Receptor Green Glare (min) Yellow Glare (min)
Rwy 1 0 0
Rwy 12 0 0
Rwy 19 0 0
Rwy 30 0 0
Flight Path: Rwy 1

0 minutes of yellow glare
0 minutes of green glare
Flight Path: Rwy 12

Flight Path: Rwy 19
Flight Path: Rwy 30

Results for: PV array 2
Rwy 1 0 0
Rwy 12 0 0
Rwy 19 0 0
Rwy 30 0 0
Flight Path: Rwy 1

Flight Path: Rwy 12

Flight Path: Rwy 19

Flight Path: Rwy 30

Results for: PV array 3
Rwy 1 0 0
Rwy 12 0 0
Rwy 19 0 0
Rwy 30 0 0
Flight Path: Rwy 1

Flight Path: Rwy 12

Flight Path: Rwy 19

Flight Path: Rwy 30

Assumptions
"Green" glare is glare with low potential to cause an after-image (flash blindness) when observed prior to a typical blink response time.
"Yellow" glare is glare with potential to cause an after-image (flash blindness) when observed prior to a typical blink response time.
Times associated with glare are denoted in Standard time. For Daylight Savings, add one hour.
Glare analyses do not account for physical obstructions between reflectors and receptors. This includes buildings, tree cover and
geographic obstructions.
Several calculations utilize the PV array centroid, rather than the actual glare spot location, due to algorithm limitations. This may affect
results for large PV footprints. Additional analyses of array sub-sections can provide additional information on expected glare.
The subtended source angle (glare spot size) is constrained by the PV array footprint size. Partitioning large arrays into smaller sections
will reduce the maximum potential subtended angle, potentially impacting results if actual glare spots are larger than the sub-array size.
Additional analyses of the combined area of adjacent sub-arrays can provide more information on potential glare hazards. (See previous
point on related limitations.)
Glare locations displayed on receptor plots are approximate. Actual glare-spot locations may differ.
Glare vector plots are simplified representations of analysis data. Actual glare emanations and results may differ.
The glare hazard determination relies on several approximations including observer eye characteristics, angle of view, and typical blink
response time. Actual results and glare occurrence may differ.
Hazard zone boundaries shown in the Glare Hazard plot are an approximation and visual aid based on aggregated research data. Actual
ocular impact outcomes encompass a continuous, not discrete, spectrum.
2016-2019 © Sims Industries d/b/a ForgeSolar, All Rights Reserved.

PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
Attachment B
Motor Vehicle and Residential Receptors
11/30/2019 11
11/30/2019 Preferred Design Site Config | ForgeSolar
GlareGauge Glare Analysis Results
Site Con guration: Preferred Design

Project site configuration Created Nov. 30, 2019 11:24 a.m.
details and results. Updated Nov. 30, 2019 12:04
p.m.
DNI varies and peaks at 1,000.0
W/m^2
Analyze every 1 minute(s)
0.5 ocular transmission coefficient
0.002 m pupil diameter
0.017 m eye focal length
9.3 mrad sun subtended angle
Timezone UTC-5
Site Configuration ID: 33810.6210
Summary of Results No glare predicted!

PV name Tilt Orientation "Green" Glare "Yellow" Glare Energy Produced
deg deg min min kWh
Array 2 SA tracking SA tracking 0 0 -

PV array 2 SA tracking SA tracking 0 0 -
PV array 3 SA tracking SA tracking 0 0 -
Component Data
PV Array(s)
https://www.forgesolar.com/projects/6210/configs/33810/ 1/6
Name: Array 2
Axis tracking: Single-axis rotation Ground Height above Total
Vertex Latitude Longitude elevation ground elevation
Tracking axis orientation: 180.0 deg
Tracking axis tilt: 0.0 deg
Tracking axis panel offset: 0.0 deg deg deg ft ft ft
Maximum tracking angle: 60.0 deg
1 43.361096 -73.562376 291.01 6.00 297.01
Resting angle: 60.0 deg
2 43.360440 -73.568041 293.40 6.00 299.40
Rated power: -
Panel material: Smooth glass without 3 43.358880 -73.567526 288.33 6.00 294.33
AR coating 4 43.358880 -73.566625 288.36 6.00 294.36
Vary reflectivity with sun position? 5 43.359036 -73.565251 286.19 6.00 292.19
Yes 6 43.359910 -73.565423 288.47 6.00 294.47
Correlate slope error with surface
7 43.359972 -73.564178 288.97 6.00 294.97
type? Yes
8 43.357851 -73.564135 286.99 6.00 292.99
Slope error: 6.55 mrad
9 43.357632 -73.563191 310.36 6.00 316.36
10 43.358818 -73.562548 311.54 6.00 317.54
11 43.360159 -73.562633 291.86 6.00 297.86
Name: PV array 2
1 43.358506 -73.567182 287.73 6.00 293.73
2 43.357382 -73.567140 289.98 6.00 295.98
Rated power: -
AR coating 4 43.353388 -73.565080 275.40 6.00 281.40
Yes 6 43.354824 -73.564393 280.69 6.00 286.69
7 43.353888 -73.564307 270.59 6.00 276.59
type? Yes
8 43.353888 -73.563621 266.94 6.00 272.94
9 43.356509 -73.564221 276.03 6.00 282.03
10 43.358568 -73.565251 284.42 6.00 290.42
Name: PV array 3
1 43.359945 -73.562052 303.34 6.00 309.34
2 43.357355 -73.562953 312.84 6.00 318.84
Rated power: -
AR coating 4 43.354250 -73.563339 283.31 6.00 289.31
Yes 6 43.355873 -73.561880 310.78 6.00 316.78
7 43.355920 -73.561515 306.32 6.00 312.32
type? Yes
8 43.356840 -73.561258 315.07 6.00 321.07
9 43.356903 -73.560914 312.29 6.00 318.29
10 43.358135 -73.560678 321.57 6.00 327.57
11 43.358244 -73.561129 326.39 6.00 332.39
12 43.358931 -73.560936 324.64 6.00 330.64
13 43.358931 -73.560464 325.47 6.00 331.47
14 43.360117 -73.560249 323.10 6.00 329.10
Discrete Observation Receptors

Number Latitude Longitude Ground elevation Height above ground Total Elevation
deg deg ft ft ft
OP 1 43.360918 -73.559842 316.52 5.00 321.52

OP 2 43.360039 -73.559348 318.87 5.00 323.87
OP 3 43.359181 -73.559648 319.01 5.00 324.01
OP 4 43.358884 -73.560078 323.98 5.00 328.98
OP 5 43.358229 -73.559820 309.95 5.00 314.95
OP 6 43.357854 -73.559949 307.58 5.00 312.58
OP 7 43.356597 -73.560764 304.06 5.00 309.06
OP 8 43.355725 -73.561525 303.08 5.00 308.08
OP 9 43.355148 -73.561718 294.86 5.00 299.86
OP 10 43.352971 -73.562030 282.97 5.00 287.97
OP 11 43.352347 -73.561773 279.14 5.00 284.15
OP 12 43.352784 -73.566622 279.00 5.00 284.00
PV Array Results
Array 2
Component Green glare (min) Yellow glare (min)
OP: OP 1 0 0
OP: OP 2 0 0
OP: OP 3 0 0
OP: OP 4 0 0
OP: OP 5 0 0
OP: OP 6 0 0
OP: OP 7 0 0
OP: OP 8 0 0
OP: OP 9 0 0
OP: OP 10 0 0
OP: OP 11 0 0
OP: OP 12 0 0
PV array 2
OP: OP 1 0 0
OP: OP 2 0 0
OP: OP 3 0 0
OP: OP 4 0 0
OP: OP 5 0 0
OP: OP 6 0 0
OP: OP 7 0 0
OP: OP 8 0 0
OP: OP 9 0 0
OP: OP 10 0 0
OP: OP 11 0 0
OP: OP 12 0 0
PV array 3
OP: OP 1 0 0
OP: OP 2 0 0
OP: OP 3 0 0
OP: OP 4 0 0
OP: OP 5 0 0
OP: OP 6 0 0
OP: OP 7 0 0
OP: OP 8 0 0
OP: OP 9 0 0
OP: OP 10 0 0
OP: OP 11 0 0
OP: OP 12 0 0
Assumptions
Glare analyses do not account for physical obstructions between reflectors and receptors. This includes buildings,
tree cover and geographic obstructions.
Detailed system geometry is not rigorously simulated.
The glare hazard determination relies on several approximations including observer eye characteristics, angle of
view, and typical blink response time. Actual values and results may vary.
Several calculations utilize the PV array centroid, rather than the actual glare spot location, due to algorithm
limitations. This may affect results for large PV footprints. Additional analyses of array sub-sections can provide
additional information on expected glare.
The subtended source angle (glare spot size) is constrained by the PV array footprint size. Partitioning large arrays
into smaller sections will reduce the maximum potential subtended angle, potentially impacting results if actual glare
spots are larger than the sub-array size. Additional analyses of the combined area of adjacent sub-arrays can
provide more information on potential glare hazards. (See previous point on related limitations.)
Hazard zone boundaries shown in the Glare Hazard plot are an approximation and visual aid. Actual ocular impact
outcomes encompass a continuous, not discrete, spectrum.
Glare locations displayed on receptor plots are approximate. Actual glare-spot locations may differ.
Glare vector plots are simplified representations of analysis data. Actual glare emanations and results may differ.
Refer to the Help page for assumptions and limitations not listed here.
PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
Technical Memorandum
To: Michael Doud, Matrix Development

From: Stephen Barrett
RE: Glare Study, Solar Photovoltaic Project, Geer Road EAST, Hudson Falls, New York
Executive Summary
Matrix Development, LLC (Matrix) is developing a nominal 6.7 MWdc solar photovoltaic (PV)
project northeast of the intersection of Geer and Underwood Roads in Hudson Falls, NY
referred to as Geer Road EAST. Another project proposed by Matrix located on the opposite
side of Geer Road, which is not the subject of this memorandum, is referred to as Geer Road
WEST.
The Geer Road EAST Project is comprised of two single axis tracking arrays: #3A (2.95 MWdc)
and #3B (3.76 MWdc). Matrix has engaged Barrett Energy Resources Group (BERG) to analyze
potential impacts of glare from the project on aviation receptors at Floyd Bennett Memorial
Airport (GFL) located in Queensbury approximately 2 miles west of the project, and receptors
close to the project such as motorists and residences.
To complete this work, BERG has utilized the Solar Glare Hazard Analysis Tool (SGHAT) which
was developed by the US Department of Energy for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
to protect aviation sensitive receptors from unintended glare from solar projects. For this
project, SGHAT has been used along with the FAA’s Solar Policy and ocular hazard standard to
evaluate glare on aircraft on final approach to four runway ends at GFL. SGHAT has also been
used to assess potential glare impacts on motorist receptors traveling on Geer and Underwood
Roads and on representative residential receptors in the vicinity of the project.
Attachment B for the non-aviation receptors, show no potential glare impacts on any of the
receptors analyzed. This is primarily due to the use of the single axis tracking system which
limits the potential for glare on receptors relatively close to the ground including pilots landing
at the airport runway ends. For aviation receptors, the results demonstrate that the project as
designed meets the FAA’s Solar Policy and ocular hazard standard. This Technical
Memorandum describes the project, methodology, and results.
11/30/2019 1
PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
Project Description
The Geer Road-East Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Project is located on about 40 acres of
undeveloped farmland northeast of the intersection of Geer and Underwood Roads in Hudson
Falls, NY as shown on Figure 1. The project is designed as a single axis tracking array and has a
nameplate capacity of 6.7 MWdc. It is adjacent to another project proposed by Matrix referred
to as Geer Road West.
Figure 1. Geer Road East Solar Project Locus
FAA Solar Policy

In 2013, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) published “Interim Policy, FAA Review of
Solar Energy System Projects on Federally-Obligated Airport,” which sets forth methods for
assessing glare and the standards for determining impact for projects proposed on airport
property. It also requires the use of modeling to assess glare and directs project proposers to
the Solar Glare Hazard Analysis Tool (SGHAT) which was developed by the US Department of
Energy at the request of the FAA. The US Department of Defense (DOD) has also adopted
SGHAT and the associated requirements to analyze glare under Instruction (DODI) 4165.57. In
11/30/2019 2
PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
addition to providing a clear method for assessing potential impacts of glare on aviation
receptors, the model also produces a highly credible result for evaluating other glare sensitive
receptors such as motor vehicles and residences.
Glare Methodology and Standard of Impact

Determination of glare occurrence from a solar PV project requires knowledge of the sun
position, observer location, and the characteristics of the solar panels (e.g. tilt, orientation,
location, extent, etc.). Vector algebra is then used to determine if glare is visible from the
prescribed observation points. Figure 2 provides a simple representation of how the sun can
produce glare on an air traffic control tower for a specific time and location. The angle of the
light source from the sun must be equal to the angle of the reflection on a receptor. Therefore,
when receptors are close to the ground (like a landing aircraft or a car), the reflection is only
possible when the sun is also close to the ground (i.e., near sunrise or sunset). As the sun
moves, the incidence of glare ends.
Figure 2. Geometric Representation of Potential Glare Impacts from the Sun
The FAA’s Solar Policy specifies the glare methodology and ocular hazard standard required for
solar PV projects located at airports. For this analysis, BERG used SGHAT version 3 released in
the spring of 2016 under the brand “GlareGauge.” For consistency with the FAA Policy, the
model is referred to herein as SGHAT.
11/30/2019 3
PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
If glare is recorded by the SGHAT model, the predicted intensity of the glare is reported in a
color-coded system at three levels:
• green, a low potential for an after-image1;
• yellow, a potential for an after-image; and
• red, a potential for retinal burn.
The Policy includes an ocular hazard standard which sets forth the intensity of glare using the
color-coded system that is deemed significant and thereby determined to produce a potential
hazard to air navigation. The standard prohibits any glare from impacting the air traffic control
tower (ATCT) (i.e. results with green, yellow or red represent a significant impact), but allows
for a low potential for an after image (green) for pilots on approach to the airport with yellow
and red results representing a significant impact. Table 1 presents the airport sensitive
receptors that must be evaluated for glare using the SGHAT model, the potential results
reported by the model, and whether the result complies with the FAA’s Solar Policy.
Table 1. SGHAT Model Levels of Glare and Compliance with FAA Policy
Airport Sensitive Level of Glare Glare Color Does Result
Receptor Result Comply with FAA
Policy?
ATCT No glare None Yes

No
Potential for Permanent Eye Red
Damage
Aircraft on No glare None

approach Yes
Potential for Permanent Eye Red No

Damage
1An after-image occurs when you look directly into a bright light, then look away. It typically takes several seconds for your vision to
readjust and return to normal. It is also referred to as a temporary visual disability or flash blindness.
11/30/2019 4
PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
The FAA Policy and ocular hazard standard apply to the assessment of aviation receptors and
are not specifically relevant for the evaluation of glare impacts on other receptors. For non-
aviation receptors, the results are simply used to determine if glare is predicted (any color) or
not (no color).
SGHAT Model Setup for Proposed Project

Regardless of the receptor to be analyzed, the model set-up entails locating the solar project,
inputting its design characteristics, and identifying sensitive receptors for analysis. The position
and movement of the sun throughout the year is built into the SGHAT model.
For the Geer Road East Solar Project, BERG used the PV project polygon tool to draw the
footprint of the solar arrays on SGHAT’s interactive Google map. The specific attributes of the
solar arrays were then input into the model. As the project proposes a single axis tracking array,
SGHAT includes relevant fields for those elements including for this project design: tilt angle of
0°, azimuth orientation of 0°, beginning and ending panel rotational angle of 60°, height of 6
feet above ground level (agl), and a panel surface with no anti-reflective coating as a baseline.
Figure 3 is a simple schematic showing how the solar panels track the sun’s position throughout
the day.
Figure 3. Schematic of Solar Tracking System Through a One-Day Cycle

This study has evaluated both aviation and non-aviation receptors. For the aviation receptors,
the FAA’s solar policy requires assessment of the control tower and pilots on final approach.
11/30/2019 5
PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
Floyd Bennett Airport does not have an air traffic control tower (ATCT); therefore, the only
receptors requiring analysis are the approach pathways associated with the four runway ends.
To analyze the sensitive receptors, BERG activated the flight path tool and selected the
threshold (or end) of the first runway and selected a second point away from the threshold to
represent a straight-on approach pathway, and the model automatically draws the flightpath
from the threshold out to two miles for analysis. This step was repeated for the other three
approach pathways. The model assumes a 3-degree glide path for each runway approach,
which was confirmed for three of the four approach pathways; however, arrivals to Runway 12
are designed for a 3.85-degree glide slope which was used. Figure 4 shows the location of the
solar project, and the two-mile flight paths (in light purple) analyzed in accordance with FAA
methodology.
Figure 4. Airport Sensitive Receptors at Floyd Bennett Airport
For the non-aviation analysis, BERG identified representative motor vehicle receptors
associated with the roadways near the project as well as nearby residential receptors. The
model’s observation point tool was used to select individual points located on the Google map.
Four motorist and eight residential locations were analyzed as shown on Figure 5. For the
motorist receptors, the driver’s height above the roadway was set at 5 feet. For the residential
11/30/2019 6
PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
receptors, the viewpoint was set at 5 feet above ground level to represent the view of a person
standing on the property.
Figure 5. Motorist and Residential Receptors Analyzed for Glare
For each model run, the glare analysis button was activated, and the model evaluated glare
from various sun angles at 1-minute intervals throughout the year to predict if glare could be
observed by the sensitive receptors.
Glare Model Results

The SGHAT-generated report for aviation receptors is included in Attachment A and for non-
aviation receptors as Attachment B. No glare was predicted for any of the receptors, aviation
and non-aviation, analyzed.
The single axis tracking system is effective in eliminating potential glare from receptors close to
the ground. This is due first to the design and operational elements where the face of the panel
is always perpendicular to the sun as the sun moves across the sky during the day. The effect is
that the sun’s rays contact the panel and the portion that is reflected returns back toward the
sun and not toward any receptor on the ground. This concept is illustrated in Figure 6.
11/30/2019 7
PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
Figure 6. Tracking System Mitigates Glare for Low-to-Ground Receptors
The second project element of the tracking system that mitigates glare is the starting and
stopping angle of the panels, which for this project is set at 60° (compared to 90° if the panel
continued tracking to the horizon). Because the panels do not extract much energy from the
sun when it is low on the horizon, the tracking system does not remain perpendicular to the sun
at the beginning and end of each day. If it did, the sun may contact the panel surface and reflect
back toward the sun at a low angle and close to the ground. Instead, the panel is already angled
such that any reflection from the rising or setting sun is cast upward and away from the ground.
Once the sun rises to a position in the sky where it is perpendicular to the panel “resting” angle,
the tracking commences. At the end of the day, the panel reaches the same angle where it
started the day, stops tracking, and, as the sun continues to set, any reflection off the panel is
cast upward. This concept is also shown in Figure 6.
Conclusions
Barrett Energy Resources Group (BERG) has utilized the SGHAT modeling tool developed by
the US Department of Energy to assess the potential effects of glare from a solar photovoltaic
(PV) project on both aviation and non-aviation receptors near Matrix Development’s proposed
solar project at Geer and Underwood Roads in Hudson Falls, NY. There are two solar projects
adjacent to each other and the project addressed in this study is referred to as Geer Road East.
The modeling reports, which are included as Attachment A for the aviation analysis and
Attachment B for the non-aviation analysis, show that the project has no potential to produce
11/30/2019 8
PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
glare on aviation and non-aviation receptors. Impacts are fundamentally mitigated by the
single axis tracking system design which directs any reflections back skyward. For aviation
receptors, the results demonstrated that the project as designed meets the FAA’s Solar Policy
and ocular hazard standard.
11/30/2019 9
PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
Attachment A
Floyd Bennett Airport Receptors
11/30/2019 10
FORGESOLAR GLARE ANALYSIS
Project: Matrix Geer Road East

A ground-mounted single axis tracking facility comprised of two arrays: 3A (2.95 MWdc) and 3B (3.76 MWdc).
Site configuration: Preferred Design - Airport

Analysis conducted by Stephen Barrett (steve@barrettenergygroup.com) at 18:57 on 30 Nov, 2019.
U.S. FAA 2013 Policy Adherence

The following table summarizes the policy adherence of the glare analysis based on the 2013 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration
Interim Policy 78 FR 63276. This policy requires the following criteria be met for solar energy systems on airport property:
• No "yellow" glare (potential for after-image) for any flight path from threshold to 2 miles
• No glare of any kind for Air Traffic Control Tower(s) ("ATCT") at cab height.
• Default analysis and observer characteristics (see list below)
ForgeSolar does not represent or speak officially for the FAA and cannot approve or deny projects. Results are informational only.
COMPONENT STATUS DESCRIPTION
Analysis parameters PASS Analysis time interval and eye characteristics used are acceptable
Flight path(s) PASS Flight path receptor(s) do not receive yellow glare
ATCT(s) N/A No ATCT receptors designated
Default glare analysis parameters and observer eye characteristics (for reference only):
• Analysis time interval: 1 minute

• Ocular transmission coefficient: 0.5
• Pupil diameter: 0.002 meters
• Eye focal length: 0.017 meters
• Sun subtended angle: 9.3 milliradians
FAA Policy 78 FR 63276 can be read at https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2013-24729

SITE CONFIGURATION
Analysis Parameters
DNI: peaks at 1,000.0 W/m^2

Time interval: 1 min
Ocular transmission
coefficient: 0.5
Pupil diameter: 0.002 m
Eye focal length: 0.017 m
Sun subtended angle: 9.3
mrad
Site Config ID: 33812.6209
PV Array(s)
Name: Array 3A
Rated power: -
1 43.361529 -73.557705 284.04 6.00 290.04

2 43.360032 -73.557684 282.46 6.00 288.46
3 43.359985 -73.558027 289.27 6.00 295.27
4 43.358877 -73.557963 280.06 6.00 286.06
5 43.358909 -73.557018 278.67 6.00 284.67
6 43.359158 -73.557061 278.06 6.00 284.06
7 43.359189 -73.556546 276.59 6.00 282.59
8 43.359969 -73.556632 277.34 6.00 283.35
9 43.360001 -73.556182 275.62 6.00 281.62
10 43.360313 -73.556182 276.97 6.00 282.97
11 43.360344 -73.555431 274.18 6.00 280.18
12 43.360593 -73.555152 273.67 6.00 279.67
13 43.361295 -73.555259 272.79 6.00 278.79
14 43.361280 -73.555602 273.43 6.00 279.43
15 43.361670 -73.555624 274.47 6.00 280.47
Name: Array 3B
Rated power: -
1 43.357164 -73.560187 299.66 6.00 305.66

2 43.354028 -73.561539 280.52 6.00 286.52
3 43.353498 -73.561539 279.38 6.00 285.38
4 43.353482 -73.560208 277.72 6.00 283.72
5 43.354060 -73.559522 276.74 6.00 282.74
6 43.354824 -73.559522 280.36 6.00 286.36
7 43.355136 -73.559672 281.80 6.00 287.80
8 43.355401 -73.559243 281.64 6.00 287.64
9 43.355713 -73.559264 282.50 6.00 288.50
10 43.355963 -73.558556 279.50 6.00 285.50
11 43.355885 -73.558191 277.47 6.00 283.47
12 43.356291 -73.557912 279.38 6.00 285.38
13 43.357305 -73.557912 279.16 6.00 285.16
Flight Path Receptor(s)
Name: Rwy 1
Description:
Direction: 358.0°
Glide slope: 3.0°
Threshold 43.335753 -73.608693 320.63 50.00 370.63

Two-mile 43.306858 -73.607304 209.98 714.10 924.09
Name: Rwy 12
Description:
Direction: 110.0°
Glide slope: 3.85°
Threshold 43.341475 -73.618997 326.41 50.00 376.41

Two-mile 43.351364 -73.656398 326.91 760.19 1087.10
Name: Rwy 19
Description:
Direction: 178.0°
Glide slope: 3.0°
Threshold 43.349349 -73.609205 323.71 50.00 373.71

Two-mile 43.378245 -73.610594 298.34 628.83 927.16
Name: Rwy 30
Description:
Direction: 290.0°
Glide slope: 3.0°
Threshold 43.337691 -73.605056 322.39 50.00 372.39

Two-mile 43.327802 -73.567657 268.87 656.98 925.84
GLARE ANALYSIS RESULTS
Summary of Glare
PV Array Name Tilt Orient "Green" Glare "Yellow" Glare Energy
(°) (°) min min kWh

Array 3A SA SA 0 0 -
tracking tracking
Array 3B SA SA 0 0 -
tracking tracking
Total annual glare received by each receptor
Receptor Annual Green Glare (min) Annual Yellow Glare (min)
Rwy 1 0 0
Rwy 12 0 0
Rwy 19 0 0
Rwy 30 0 0
Results for: Array 3A
Rwy 1 0 0
Rwy 12 0 0
Rwy 19 0 0
Rwy 30 0 0
Flight Path: Rwy 1

Flight Path: Rwy 12

Flight Path: Rwy 19
Flight Path: Rwy 30

Results for: Array 3B
Rwy 1 0 0
Rwy 12 0 0
Rwy 19 0 0
Rwy 30 0 0
Flight Path: Rwy 1

Flight Path: Rwy 12

Flight Path: Rwy 19

Flight Path: Rwy 30

Assumptions
"Green" glare is glare with low potential to cause an after-image (flash blindness) when observed prior to a typical blink response time.
"Yellow" glare is glare with potential to cause an after-image (flash blindness) when observed prior to a typical blink response time.
Glare analyses do not account for physical obstructions between reflectors and receptors. This includes buildings, tree cover and
geographic obstructions.
Several calculations utilize the PV array centroid, rather than the actual glare spot location, due to algorithm limitations. This may affect
results for large PV footprints. Additional analyses of array sub-sections can provide additional information on expected glare.
The subtended source angle (glare spot size) is constrained by the PV array footprint size. Partitioning large arrays into smaller sections
will reduce the maximum potential subtended angle, potentially impacting results if actual glare spots are larger than the sub-array size.
Additional analyses of the combined area of adjacent sub-arrays can provide more information on potential glare hazards. (See previous
point on related limitations.)
Glare locations displayed on receptor plots are approximate. Actual glare-spot locations may differ.
Glare vector plots are simplified representations of analysis data. Actual glare emanations and results may differ.
The glare hazard determination relies on several approximations including observer eye characteristics, angle of view, and typical blink
response time. Actual results and glare occurrence may differ.
Hazard zone boundaries shown in the Glare Hazard plot are an approximation and visual aid based on aggregated research data. Actual
ocular impact outcomes encompass a continuous, not discrete, spectrum.
2016-2019 © Sims Industries d/b/a ForgeSolar, All Rights Reserved.

PO Box 1004 | Concord, MA 01742 | 339-234-2696
Attachment B
Motor Vehicle and Residential Receptors
11/30/2019 11
GlareGauge Glare Analysis Results
Site Con guration: Preferred Design

Project site configuration Created Nov. 29, 2019 10:42 a.m.
details and results. Updated Nov. 29, 2019 8:14 p.m.
DNI varies and peaks at 1,000.0
W/m^2
Analyze every 1 minute(s)
0.5 ocular transmission coefficient
0.002 m pupil diameter
0.017 m eye focal length
9.3 mrad sun subtended angle
Timezone UTC-5
Site Configuration ID: 33800.6209
Summary of Results No glare predicted!

PV name Tilt Orientation "Green" Glare "Yellow" Glare Energy Produced
deg deg min min kWh
Array 3A SA tracking SA tracking 0 0 -

Array 3B SA tracking SA tracking 0 0 -
Component Data
PV Array(s)
Name: Array 3A
1 43.361529 -73.557705 284.04 6.00 290.04
2 43.360032 -73.557684 282.46 6.00 288.46
Rated power: -
AR coating 4 43.358877 -73.557963 280.06 6.00 286.06
Yes 6 43.359158 -73.557061 278.06 6.00 284.06
7 43.359189 -73.556546 276.59 6.00 282.59
type? Yes
8 43.359969 -73.556632 277.34 6.00 283.35
9 43.360001 -73.556182 275.62 6.00 281.62
10 43.360313 -73.556182 276.97 6.00 282.97
11 43.360344 -73.555431 274.18 6.00 280.18
12 43.360593 -73.555152 273.67 6.00 279.67
13 43.361295 -73.555259 272.79 6.00 278.79
14 43.361280 -73.555602 273.43 6.00 279.43
15 43.361670 -73.555624 274.47 6.00 280.47
Name: Array 3B
1 43.357164 -73.560187 299.66 6.00 305.66
2 43.354028 -73.561539 280.52 6.00 286.52
Rated power: -
AR coating 4 43.353482 -73.560208 277.72 6.00 283.72
Yes 6 43.354824 -73.559522 280.36 6.00 286.36
7 43.355136 -73.559672 281.80 6.00 287.80
type? Yes
8 43.355401 -73.559243 281.64 6.00 287.64
9 43.355713 -73.559264 282.50 6.00 288.50
10 43.355963 -73.558556 279.50 6.00 285.50
11 43.355885 -73.558191 277.47 6.00 283.47
12 43.356291 -73.557912 279.38 6.00 285.38
13 43.357305 -73.557912 279.16 6.00 285.16
Discrete Observation Receptors

Number Latitude Longitude Ground elevation Height above ground Total Elevation
deg deg ft ft ft
OP 1 43.360716 -73.559886 320.42 5.00 325.42

OP 2 43.359998 -73.559328 318.30 5.00 323.30
OP 3 43.359062 -73.559715 318.27 5.00 323.27
OP 4 43.358719 -73.560122 324.82 5.00 329.82
OP 5 43.358141 -73.559886 309.99 5.00 314.99
OP 6 43.357814 -73.560015 308.35 5.00 313.35
OP 7 43.356669 -73.560788 306.79 5.00 311.79
OP 8 43.355713 -73.561496 302.51 5.00 307.51
OP 9 43.355146 -73.561732 294.87 5.00 299.87
OP 10 43.353008 -73.561839 281.85 5.00 286.85
OP 11 43.353086 -73.563427 281.00 5.00 286.00
OP 12 43.352400 -73.561796 279.35 5.00 284.35
PV Array Results
Array 3A
OP: OP 1 0 0
OP: OP 2 0 0
OP: OP 3 0 0
OP: OP 4 0 0
OP: OP 5 0 0
OP: OP 6 0 0
OP: OP 7 0 0
OP: OP 8 0 0
OP: OP 9 0 0
OP: OP 10 0 0
OP: OP 11 0 0
OP: OP 12 0 0
Array 3B
OP: OP 1 0 0
OP: OP 2 0 0
OP: OP 3 0 0
OP: OP 4 0 0
OP: OP 5 0 0
OP: OP 6 0 0
OP: OP 7 0 0
OP: OP 8 0 0
OP: OP 9 0 0
OP: OP 10 0 0
OP: OP 11 0 0
OP: OP 12 0 0
Assumptions
Glare analyses do not account for physical obstructions between reflectors and receptors. This includes buildings,
tree cover and geographic obstructions.
Detailed system geometry is not rigorously simulated.
The glare hazard determination relies on several approximations including observer eye characteristics, angle of
view, and typical blink response time. Actual values and results may vary.
Several calculations utilize the PV array centroid, rather than the actual glare spot location, due to algorithm
limitations. This may affect results for large PV footprints. Additional analyses of array sub-sections can provide
additional information on expected glare.
The subtended source angle (glare spot size) is constrained by the PV array footprint size. Partitioning large arrays
into smaller sections will reduce the maximum potential subtended angle, potentially impacting results if actual glare
spots are larger than the sub-array size. Additional analyses of the combined area of adjacent sub-arrays can
provide more information on potential glare hazards. (See previous point on related limitations.)
Hazard zone boundaries shown in the Glare Hazard plot are an approximation and visual aid. Actual ocular impact
outcomes encompass a continuous, not discrete, spectrum.
Glare locations displayed on receptor plots are approximate. Actual glare-spot locations may differ.
Glare vector plots are simplified representations of analysis data. Actual glare emanations and results may differ.
Refer to the Help page for assumptions and limitations not listed here.
SITE PLAN APPROVAL DOCUMENTS
GEER ROAD SOLAR
TOWN OF KINGSBURY
WASHINGTON COUNTY, NEW YORK
SCALE 1" = 2000'

SITE DATA
MUNICIPALITY: TOWN OF KINGSBURY
TAX PARCEL #: 128.-1-26
PROPERTY ACREAGE: 195.7 ACRES
SITE ADDRESS: 221 GEER ROAD
PROPERTY OWNER: PECKHAM MATERIALS CORP.
ZONING DISTRICT: RA-1A
PROPOSED USE: SOLAR FARM
DISTURBED AREA: (1) 72.4 ACRES
IMPERVIOUS AREA: (2) 1.3 ACRES
NOTES:
(1) THE DISTURBED AREA IS THE TOTAL DISTURBED AREA FOR PROJECT.
(2) IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE IS FOR THE INVERTER PADS, ANY EXISTING
STRUCTURES TO REMAIN, AND EXISTING ROADWAYS.
DRAWING LIST
DRAWING NO. DRAWING TITLE
CS001 TITLE SHEET
VB101 SUBDIVISION PLAN
CD101 EXISTING CONDITIONS & SITE REMOVAL PLAN
CD102 TREE REMOVAL PLAN
CS101 SITE PLAN
CG101 GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN
CG201 DRIVEWAY PROFILES (1 OF 2) 03/23/2020
CG202 DRIVEWAY PROFILES (2 OF 2)

CE101 EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN
CS501 DETAILS
WN101 USACE WETLAND DISTURBANCE PLAN Langan Engineering, Environmental, Surveying,
White Plains, NY 10601
T: 914.323.7400 F: 914.323.7401 www.langan.com
WARNING:
IT IS A VIOLATION OF THE NYS EDUCATION LAW ARTICLE
145 FOR ANY PERSON, UNLESS HE IS ACTING UNDER THE
DIRECTION OF A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER, TO
ALTER THIS ITEM IN ANY WAY.
© 2019 Langan
Filename: \\langan.com\data\WPW\data7\190050701\Project Data\CAD\01\SheetFiles\SPA\190050701-CS001-0101.dwg Date: 3/20/2020 Time: 17:29 User: czolezi Style Table: Langan.stb Layout: CS001 Title Sheet
LEGEND
EXISTING CONDITIONS PROPOSED CONDITIONS
PROPERTY LINES PROPERTY LINE
WETLAND BOUNDARY LINE
ELECTRICAL (OVERHEAD)
ADJACENT AREA LINE
TREE LINE
WETLAND LIMITS
STREAM
03/23/2020

T: 914.323.7400 F: 914.323.7401 www.langan.com
WARNING:
© 2019 Langan
Filename: \\langan.com\data\WPW\data7\190050701\Project Data\CAD\01\SheetFiles\SPA\190050701-VB101-0101.dwg Date: 3/17/2020 Time: 18:13 User: czolezi Style Table: Langan.stb Layout: VB101 Subdivision Plan
LEGEND
PROPERTY LINES LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE
WETLAND BOUNDARY LINE WETLAND DISTURBANCE
ELECTRICAL (OVERHEAD) TREES/VEGETATION TO BE

REMOVED
ADJACENT AREA LINE
TREES/VEGETATION TO BE
TREE LINE REMOVED (NO STUMPING)
WETLAND LIMITS BUILDING TO BE REMOVED
STREAM TREE TO BE REMOVED
MAJOR CONTOUR 320 SNOWMOBILE TRAIL

SECTION TO BE RELOCATED
MINOR CONTOUR
03/23/2020

T: 914.323.7400 F: 914.323.7401 www.langan.com
WARNING:
© 2019 Langan
Filename: \\langan.com\data\WPW\data7\190050701\Project Data\CAD\01\SheetFiles\SPA\190050701-CD101-0101.dwg Date: 3/20/2020 Time: 18:21 User: lmcmahon Style Table: Langan.stb Layout: CD101 Existing Conditions & Removal
LEGEND
WETLAND BOUNDARY LINE TREES/VEGETATION TO BE

REMOVED
ADJACENT AREA LINE TREE TO BE REMOVED
TREE LINE TREE/VEGETATION TO BE

REMOVED (NO STUMPING )
EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN
WETLAND LIMITS
STREAM
MAJOR CONTOUR 320
MINOR CONTOUR
03/23/2020

T: 914.323.7400 F: 914.323.7401 www.langan.com
WARNING:
© 2019 Langan
Filename: \\langan.com\data\WPW\data7\190050701\Project Data\CAD\01\SheetFiles\SPA\190050701-CD101-0102.dwg Date: 3/20/2020 Time: 18:22 User: lmcmahon Style Table: Langan.stb Layout: CD102 Tree Removal Plan
LEGEND
WETLAND BOUNDARY LINE BUILDING SETBACK
ELECTRICAL (OVERHEAD) SECURITY FENCE
ADJACENT AREA LINE SITE ACCESS
TREE LINE TREE LINE
WETLAND LIMITS ELECTRICAL (UNDERGROUND)
STREAM
03/23/2020

T: 914.323.7400 F: 914.323.7401 www.langan.com
ZONING COMPLIANCE TABLE

TAX PARCEL: 128.-1-26 PROPERTY ACREAGE: 195.7 ACRES
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 221 GEER ROAD ZONING DISTRICT: RA-1A
SITE USE: SOLAR FARM
REQUIRED/
ITEM LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3
PERMITTED
MIN. LOT SIZE 1 ACRE 58.0 ACRES 48.3 ACRES 89.4 ACRES
MIN. LOT FRONTAGE 200 FT 2,118.1 FT 690.5 FT 1578.1 FT
MIN. FRONT YARD SETBACK 100 FT 299.3 FT 739.1 FT 170.3 FT WARNING:
MIN. SIDE YARD SETBACK 50 FT 89.0 FT 68.0 FT 90.2 FT IT IS A VIOLATION OF THE NYS EDUCATION LAW ARTICLE
MIN. REAR YARD SETBACK 50 FT 52.4 FT 56.8 FT 65.3 FT DIRECTION OF A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER, TO
MAX. HEIGHT 20 FT 12 FT 12 FT 12 FT ALTER THIS ITEM IN ANY WAY.
MAX. SOLAR COVERAGE (%) 40% 11.2% (1) 13.4% (1) 8.6% (1)
MAX. IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE (%) -- 1.03% (2) 0.66% (2) 0.45% (2)
NOTES:
(1) CALCULATED BASED ON JUST THE AREA OF THE SOLAR PANELS.
© 2019 Langan
(2) IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE IS FOR THE INVERTER PADS, ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES TO REMAIN, AND EXISTING
ROADWAYS.
Filename: \\langan.com\data\WPW\data7\190050701\Project Data\CAD\01\SheetFiles\SPA\190050701-CS101-0101.dwg Date: 3/17/2020 Time: 18:16 User: czolezi Style Table: Langan.stb Layout: CS101 Site Plan
LEGEND
WETLAND BOUNDARY LINE SECURITY FENCE
ELECTRICAL (OVERHEAD) TREE LINE
ADJACENT AREA LINE MAJOR CONTOUR 320
TREE LINE MINOR CONTOUR
WETLAND LIMITS LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE
STREAM ELECTRICAL (UNDERGROUND)
MAJOR CONTOUR 320
MINOR CONTOUR
·
·
·
03/23/2020

T: 914.323.7400 F: 914.323.7401 www.langan.com
WARNING:
© 2019 Langan
Filename: \\langan.com\data\WPW\data7\190050701\Project Data\CAD\01\SheetFiles\SPA\190050701-CG101-0101.dwg Date: 3/17/2020 Time: 18:18 User: czolezi Style Table: Langan.stb Layout: CG101 Grading & Drainage Plan
03/23/2020

T: 914.323.7400 F: 914.323.7401 www.langan.com
WARNING:
© 2019 Langan
Filename: \\langan.com\data\WPW\data7\190050701\Project Data\CAD\01\SheetFiles\SPA\190050701-CG201-0101.dwg Date: 3/17/2020 Time: 18:20 User: czolezi Style Table: Langan.stb Layout: CG201 Driveway Profile (1 Of 2)
03/23/2020

T: 914.323.7400 F: 914.323.7401 www.langan.com
WARNING:
© 2019 Langan
Filename: \\langan.com\data\WPW\data7\190050701\Project Data\CAD\01\SheetFiles\SPA\190050701-CG201-0101.dwg Date: 3/17/2020 Time: 18:20 User: czolezi Style Table: Langan.stb Layout: CG202 Driveway Profile (2 Of 2)
LEGEND
WETLAND BOUNDARY LINE SECURITY FENCE
ELECTRICAL (OVERHEAD) SITE ACCESS
ADJACENT AREA LINE TREE LINE
TREE LINE MAJOR CONTOUR 320
WETLAND LIMITS MINOR CONTOUR
STREAM LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE
MAJOR CONTOUR 320 SILT FENCE
MINOR CONTOUR
03/23/2020

T: 914.323.7400 F: 914.323.7401 www.langan.com
WARNING:
© 2019 Langan
Filename: \\langan.com\data\WPW\data7\190050701\Project Data\CAD\01\SheetFiles\SPA\190050701-CE101-0101.dwg Date: 3/17/2020 Time: 18:21 User: czolezi Style Table: Langan.stb Layout: CE101 Erosion Control
3/8" ROUND ROD
GATE FRAME (TYP)
04/13/2020

T: 914.323.7400 F: 914.323.7401 www.langan.com
WARNING:
© 2019 Langan
Filename: \\langan.com\data\WPW\data7\190050701\Project Data\CAD\01\SheetFiles\SPA\190050701-CS501-0101.dwg Date: 4/13/2020 Time: 09:23 User: czolezi Style Table: Langan.stb Layout: CS501 Details
LEGEND
WETLAND BOUNDARY LINE WETLAND DISTURBANCE
ADJACENT AREA LINE
TREE LINE
WETLAND LIMITS
STREAM
MAJOR CONTOUR 320
MINOR CONTOUR
03/23/2020

T: 914.323.7400 F: 914.323.7401 www.langan.com
WARNING:
© 2019 Langan
Filename: \\langan.com\data\WPW\data7\190050701\Project Data\CAD\01\SheetFiles\SPA\190050701-WN101-0101.dwg Date: 3/17/2020 Time: 18:24 User: czolezi Style Table: Langan.stb Layout: WN101 USACE Wetland Disturbance Plan
92 1/2
60°
84 3/4
(20 1/2)
14 1/2
(MIN)
19 3/4
28 1/2
FRONT EDGE
FRONT VIEW CLEARANCE
DRAWN BY CHECKED BY
DESIGN CRITERIA: TCorson - 9/18/2019 -
WIND SPEED -
SNOW LOAD - ENG. APPROVED BY PROJ. ENG. APPROVED BY
EXPOSURE CATEGORY - XX - 9/18/2019
TILT ANGLE - ~
RACK SIZE - MFG. APPROVED BY PROJECT NAME SHEET SIZE
MODULE ORIENTATION - PORTRAIT XX - 9/18/2019 PROJECT D
TERRASMART, LLC PROJECT NUMBER CLIENT MODULE REV SHEET NUMBER
MA 9530 MARKETPLACE RD. 16-XXXX CLIENT GENERIC 0 3 OF 11

SUITE 203, FORT MYERS, FL 33912
PE# 13178 P 239.362.0211 | F 239.676.1900 PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL. THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING IS THE SOLE PROPERTY OF TERRASMART.
WWW.TERRASMART.COM ANY REPRODUCTION IN PART OR AS A WHOLE WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION OF TERRASMART IS PROHIBITED.

Proposed Project - Geer RD Solar Project, LLC.

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Proposed Project - Geer RD Solar Project, LLC.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Landscape Architects, Architects,

Engineers, and Planners, P.C.

HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA

HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA

221 GEER ROAD, KINGSBURY, WASHINGTON COUNTY , NY

MATRIX DEVELOPMENT, LLC

HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA

HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA

REBEL TALL FESCUE,

GROUNDCOVERS 2500' 1250' 0 2500'

Engineers, and Planners, P.C.

NEW YORK CITY > SARATOGA SPRINGS > SYRACUSE

HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA HANWHA

221 GEER ROAD, KINGSBURY, WASHINGTON COUNTY , NY

MATRIX DEVELOPMENT, LLC

QT. SYM SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SPACING SIZE

13 CL CUPRESSUS X LEYLANDI LEYLAND CYPRESS H=30/50'; W=20 2 1/2"-3" CAL.

40 AC AMELANCHIER CANADIENSIS SHADBLOW SERRVICEBERRY H=6/15; W=5/8 3/5 GAL.

DESCRIPTION OF ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST

I. DISASSEMBLY & DISPOSAL

II. SITE RESTORATION

SUBTOTAL DISASSEMBLY, DISPOSAL AND SITE RESTORATION $ 1,264,113.86

10% CONTINGENCY $ 122,176.33

DECOMMISSIONING ESTIMATE $ 1,386,290.19

Geer Road Solar

Geer RD Solar 1, LLC

Langan Engineering, Environmental, Surveying,

October 18, 2019

Project No.: 190050702

1 Executive Summary ........................................................................... 2

3 Erosion and Sediment Control Plan.................................................... 4

4 Waste Disposal .................................................................................. 6

5 Restoration of Land ........................................................................... 6

6 Emergency Response and Communications Plans ............................ 7

7 Permit and Approvals ......................................................................... 7

• The land lease expires or is terminated; or

The procedures will include the following:

2.2 Dismantling Electrical Equipment and Foundations

2.3 Dismantling Driveways

2.4 Other Components

2.5 Department of Agriculture and Markets

3 Erosion and Sediment Control Plan

• Stabilized construction access.

3.2 Pollution Prevention Controls

stored in waterproof containers. Runoff containing such materials shall be collected,

9. Discharges from dewatering activities, including discharges from dewatering trenches

3.3 Inspections and Maintenance

3.3.1 Trained Contractor Requirements

3.3.2 Qualified Inspector Requirements

5.2 Department of Agriculture and Markets

• All agricultural areas temporarily disturbed by construction must be decompacted to a

• On affected farmland, postpone any restoration practices until favorable (workable,

• Following restoration, remove all construction debris from the site.

6 Emergency Response and Communications Plans

7 Permit and Approvals

Photo 43° 21’ 09.8796” N

Photo 43° 21’ 10.6622” N

Photo 43° 21’ 12.9769” N

Photo 43° 21’ 17.9095” N

Photo 43° 21’ 23.1795” N

Photo 43° 21’ 27.5328” N

Photo 43° 21’ 27.5328” N

Photo 43° 21’ 32.0688” N