RI Coastal Resources Management Council
...to preserve, protect, develop, and restore coastal resources for all Rhode Islanders
...to preserve, protect, develop, and restore coastal resources for all Rhode Islanders
In accordance with notice to members of the Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council, a meeting was held on Tuesday, March 11, 2008 at 6:00 PM at the Narragansett Bay Commission Boardroom – One Service Road, Providence, RI.
MEMBERS
Mike Tikoian, Chair
Paul Lemont, Vice Chair
Ray Coia
Don Gomez
Dave Abedon
Neill Gray
Michael Sullivan
MEMBERS ABSENT
Bruce Dawson
Jerry Shekarchi
Jerry Zarrella
Tom Ricci
STAFF PRESENT
Grover Fugate, CRMC Executive Director
Jeff Willis, CRMC Deputy Director
Jim Boyd, CRMC Coastal Policy
Brian Goldman, CRMC Legal Counsel
1. Chair Tikoian called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
2. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING:
Mr. Gray requested that page 9 – line 20 add the work “land” before survey; page 8 three lines up from the bottom change the word “two” to “four” boats; and page 8 six lines up from the bottom delete the words “two rocks” and add “the dock and rock #1”. Mr. Coia, seconded by Vice Chair Lemont moved approval of the minutes of the February 26, 2008 meeting as amended. The motion was carried on a unanimous voice vote.
3. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS
There were no subcommittee reports.
4. STAFF REPORTS
There were no staff reports
5. Presentation: Clean Marinas – Chair Tikoian stated that this presentation would be postponed to the next meeting.
6. Chair Tikoian said tonight they would learn more about the staff recommendation for a moratorium and the details of the Ocean Special Area Management Plan. Chair Tikoian stated Mr. Fugate, CRMC Executive Director and Brian Goldman, Legal Counsel have worked tirelessly with URI and Dr. Malcolm Spaulding to devise a plan of action for the Ocean SAMP and thanked them for their efforts. Chair Tikoian stated that the CRMC is authorized under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (CZMA) to develop and implement these SAMPs to address specific regional issues. Chair Tikoian said that CRMC has developed five of these management plans to date and is working on a sixth on Aquidneck Island and hopes this Ocean SAMP will be the seventh. Chair Tikoian said CRMC’s SAMPs are nationally regarded as models for special area management plans. Chair Tikoian said pursuant to RIGL 46-23-10, CRMC’s enabling legislation and CZMA, CRMC is legislatively tasked to partner with other state and municipal entities, NGOs, universities and other groups to develop and implement SAMPs. Chair Tikoian stated that CRMC is the lead agency on this and takes its responsibility very seriously. Chair Tikoian said this is an exciting time, RI and CRMC are stepping into the 21st century with exploration into new technology, new science and new approaches to environmental and coastal management. Chair Tikoian said there is no more prudent time than now with rising energy costs and clear signs that our non-renewable resources are running out to examine this issue. Chair Tikoian noted that this is an emotionally charged issue and important to the Governor, General Assembly and CRMC and they are all in agreement that renewable energy is a must. Chair Tikoian said there is no controversy here, despite how the matter has been portrayed in the media. Chair Tikoian said CRMC plans to work with both the executive and legislative branches of government to make this happen and hopes that information provided to the public will reflect that sense of cooperation. Chair Tikoian noted that just last week the Senate introduced a host of bills to examine alternate energy sources. Chair Tikoian said the CRMC wants to assure the public that it will work as quickly as possible to keep the process moving and needed their help to accomplish this ambitious goal. Chair Tikoian invited URI, DEM, Save the Bay and others to lend their expertise and help expedite this process.
7. Public Hearing on Changes to Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Program / Procedures:
Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Program
The Council will place a moratorium on all renewable energy proposals in the state’s territorial waters for a 12 month period pending the development of an ocean special area management plan. The moratorium may be extended in the future pending the schedule of the special area management plan adoption.
The purpose of this proposed change is to place a moratorium on all renewable energy proposals in the states territorial waters pending the development of an ocean special area management plan.
Chair Tikoian stated that Mr. Fugate (CRMC) and Dr. Malcolm Spalding, Professor, Ocean Engineering URI would give the council and public a presentation on renewable resources. Mr. Fugate stated that a proposal for a moratorium on Ocean SAMP is before the council and that he would give a background on the SAMP and Dr. Spalding would address the sources of renewable energy in Rhode Island and the Ocean SAMP Offshore Renewable Energy. Mr. Fugate noted that they had looked at this several years ago and there was interest in renewable energy. Mr. Fugate stated that a formal proposal was sent to the Governor’s Energy Office in December. Dr. Spaulding gave a presentation on Sources of Renewable Ocean Energy in Rhode Island. Dr. Spaulding said the sources of offshore renewable energy are ocean thermal energy conversation (OTEC), offshore winds, waves and ocean currents – in stream and head (impoundment) based tidal and mean current (e.g. Gulf Stream and river flow). Dr. Spaulding said the key issues with renewable are: low energy density, many power units distributed over large areas; intermittent power production (1/3 time for wind and waves); connection grid; resource use conflicts; and environmental impacts. Dr. Spaulding showed the council a map of the ATM (2007) Offshore Wind Sites. Dr. Spaulding gave a summary on RI power production potential. Dr. Spaulding said offshore energy production potential in (MW)
Dr. Spaulding said the cost of power production per MW hr for winds was $96 to $137 and waves was $630. Dr. Spaulding said waves only power generator capital costs and estimated 2.5 times if all project capitals costs. Dr. Spaudling explained ocean thermal energy conversion (OTEC) and said this requires deep water, source of cold (deep) water and warm water surface. Dr. Spaulding stated that no deep water sites exist in RI or the southern New England shelf. Dr. Spaulding said there was no potential for Rhode Island. Dr. Spaulding explained the equipment used to generate wind currents and showed a picture of the different systems. Dr. Spaulding said there are no strong mean currents in RI or adjacent waters, the tidal range in RI waters is modest (1m) so there was no possibility for impoundments and in stream tidal currents typically require current speeds greater than 1.5 to 2 m/sec to 4 kt to generate power (turbine curt in speeds – 0.5 m/sec or 1 kt). Dr. Spaulding explained the in stream tidal currents and said two potential sites in RI are the Sakonnet River Bridge and Warren River (Rte 114 Bridge). Dr. Spaulding showed maps of the Warren River Bridge Site, the nearby sites for in-stream tidal current power, different types of wave energy facilities and a worldwide wave energy map. Dr. Spalding explained the RI Wave Energy setting and said it’s a low energy density with short fetch distances and wind blows primarily from the west. Dr. Spaulding said the largest (most) waves are from south and southwest. Dr. Spaulding stated Rhode Island and Block Island Sound waves at mean wave period is 4.5 sec and at mean amplitude are 1.04 m. Dr. Spaulding showed a map of the annual wave energy flux and near shore wave energy development index. Dr. Spaulding explained the Rhode Island wave energy estimate. Dr. Spaulding said the estimate of power production annual average wave power per m of wave in front of Block Island is 5.7kW/m and the annual average wave power for waves greater than 5 sec, 0.5 m height from southern sector (max wave exposure – produce power) is 3.4. kW/m. Dr. Spaulding said the wave power estimate in RI is 1.36 kW/m annual average waver power after adjustment for operational efficiency (40%); 40.8 kW for typical unit (30 m ; 100 ft.) wide; 357 MWhr per year per unit – (52 households at 6909 kWhr per household). Dr. Spaulding stated it operates only 37% of the time similar to wind turbines. Dr. Spaulding explained the wave power estimate in RI and costs. Dr. Spaulding showed maps of a offshore wind sites, potential energy estimates and cost summary. Dr. Spaulding said the wind energy summary for:
Mr. Fugate gave a presentation on the wind energy issue and permitting process. Mr. Fugate defined CRMC and SAMPs as “… priority consideration … given to coastal dependent uses and orderly processes for siting major facilities related to national defense, energy, fisheries development, recreation, ports and transportation, and the location, to the maximum extent practicable, of new commercial and industrial developments in or adjacent to areas where such developments already exists…” Mr. Fugate said the term “Special Area Management Plan” means a comprehensive plan providing for natural resource protection and reasonable coastal dependent economic growth containing a detailed and comprehensive statement of policies; standards and criteria to guide public and private uses of lands and waters; and mechanisms for timely implementation in specific geographic areas within the coastal zone. Mr. Fugate said CRMC is recognized as a national leader in SAMPs. Mr. Fugate said the first SAMP was adopted in 1893 and the latest SAMP was adopted in 2005. He said they are working on the Metro Bay SAMP and Aquidneck Island SAMP. Mr. Fugate said the MRDP required them to blanket coastal zone with SAMPs to best manage coastal resources. Mr. Fugate explained the federal (CZMA) and statement planning authorities for SAMPs. Mr. Fugate explained the Ocean SAMP and said there is a surge of interest in offshore environment. Mr. Fugate said CRMC organized the CZMA managers of New York/ New England to discuss issues of common interest. Mr. Fugate said the most pressing issues were energy needs – liquid natural gas and renewable energy sources. Mr. Fugate said the discussions centered around a regional form of ocean governance, planning and zoning for ocean uses and control of projects in the offshore environment. Mr. Fugate said the planning process includes a mapping exercise of existing uses and critical resources / transportation zones, site selection screening criteria and conflict analysis. Mr. Fugate said they need to develop for public review an ocean zoning map, regulatory program for project development and regulatory program for resource protection. Mr. Fugate said the results of this would be pre-selected sites, environmental accountability, public and government support and permitting predictability. Mr. Fugate noted that there was a similar success model in the UK Crown Estate for renewable energy. Mr. Fugate said they wanted to be consistent with the proposed legislation to amend the CZMA for renewable energy. Mr. Fugate explained a table on coastal zone management: SAMP vs EIS. Mr. Fugate said the Army Corps of Engineers under a regulatory guidance letter 92-03 and 89-10 allows for simplified permitting if they participate in the SAMP development (copy of letter passed out to council members). Mr. Fugate said the process has been designed to be consistent with MMS’s process. In addition MMS has indicated they would like to participate in the SAMP process as this is similar to a process they would like to develop. Mr. Fugate said this would be “buy in” at the federal level simplifying and coordinating permitting between state and federal partners. Mr. Fugate said studies are necessary to answer questions and meet federal standards. Mr. Fugate said the Cape Wind tried economizing on the bird studies and it resulted in them having to do the bird studies again and it cost an additional $4 million. Mr. Fugate said it has cost the Cape Wind $10 million and it is still not completed. Mr. Fugate said “Why a Moratorium?” it protects state interest until regulations are in place, allows CRMC and URI to focus solely on the plan without being distracted by applications, avoids conflict and contradiction if applications were active, levels playing field for all players and prevents undesirable applications.
Dr. Spaulding gave a presentation the Ocean SAMP Offshore Renewable Energy. Dr. Spaulding explained maps of ATM (2007) potential wind farm sites, winds and power density, MMS use summary and major fishing areas identified by URI and EDC. Dr. Spaulding showed a map with initial concerns with some sites such as viable sites with resource use conflict; extreme waves close to breakwater, extreme waves which may limit seaward extent and extreme waves with costly structure. Dr. Spaulding showed a map of the Ocean SAMP study area and said the study area selection would include all state and contiguous federal waters, include sites for alternative tradeoff analysis required for permitting process and consistent with Army Corp dredged material disposal assessment. Dr. Spaulding said this was a two phased study – Phase I is the Ocean SAM and associated supporting studies and Phase II is the detailed investigations (meteorological and oceanographic observations, high resolution bottom, subbottom, archeological, and fish habitat mapping). Dr. Spaulding said for the study design they would:
Dr. Spaulding explained that the study schedule:
Dr. Spaulding said the metrological observations typically required 2-3 years. Dr. Spaulding said Phase I would be the development of Plan and stakeholders involvement – legal analysis, commercial and recreational fisheries (biological oceanography), visualization, technical and advisory council, and outreach and communications. Dr. Spaulding explained the major supporting studies of Phase I would be refinement of site selection – wind, wave and surge analysis, marine transportation (AIS), wind farm technology assessment, geology (surficial and sub-bottom), sea bed mapping and physical oceanography. Dr. Spaulding showed maps of the US Army Corp Wave Information Study Hindcast Locations, Windsurf in RI observations, Extreme Wave Heights and Periods (1/100yr), NOAA ENC Bathymetry – Wave Prediction 1/100yr, AIS Tracks Oct. 31 to Nov. 26, 2007 (ASA). Dr. Spaulding said Phase I supporting studies include: meteorology and air quality; noise and electromagnetic; sea and shore birds, marine mammals and turtles; and cultural and archeological resources. Dr. Spaulding said Phase II is the detailed investigations – high resolution bottom and sub-bottom mapping and ocean observations: winds, currents and waves. Dr. Spaulding said the meteorological and ocean observation tower must – meet immediate need for wind farm siting and the long term plan operated by URI as part of the federal initiative on Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) and leverage re-location of GoMOOS buoy in coordination with NOAA surveying vessel. Dr. Spaulding showed maps of northeastern regional coastal ocean observation system, GoMOOS Buoy to be relocated to RI and diagram of buoy, the Ocean and Meteorological Observation Tower (tentative site – primary site (Charlestown) and secondary site). Dr. Spaulding talked about the availability of supporting environmental data in Rhode Island. Dr. Spaulding said there are no winds, waves and currents in RI coastal waters He said the geological parameters are limited because the sampling is too course. He said birds data was only coastal observation and there were none offshore and that marine mammals data is limited and needs to be synthesized. Dr. Spaulding said there are few observations on marine archeological sites. Dr. Spaulding showed maps of NOAA Offshore Observation Buoys, USGS Sediment Sample and Side scan Survey Locations, USGS Sub-Bottom Survey Locations and Woods Hole Science Center Core and Sample Locations. Dr. Spaulding gave a breakdown of cost summary for Phase I & II:
Phase I Major Study Elements:
Total Cost - $4 million.
Phase II Detailed Investigations:
Total Cost - $2.6 million
Mr. Fugate suggested that they hold off consideration on the moratorium so they could digest all the information provided and hear public comment.
Chair Tikoian stated that a lot of work has gone into the Ocean SAMP and recommended that the council hold off on the moratorium to digest the information presented and answer any questions.
Chair Tikoian called for a recess at 7:30 p.m. Chair Tikoian called the meeting back to order at 7:40 p.m.
Mr. Fugate stated that a general description of the Ocean SAMP and table of contents for EIS (30 pages) which is an outline of the SAMP and cost estimates for studies, individual studies, scope of studies and costs had been passed out to council members. Mr. Gomez said this was an excellent presentation. Mr. Gomez felt they should contact the Navy on the bottom profiling as they have collected data on this and felt this was a resource they may want to contact. Dr. Spaulding agreed and said they have been in contact with the Navy. Mr. Gomez was worried about community involvement and felt it was important to have community involvement in the development of the SAMP. Mr. Fugate replied communities are involved in the development of the SAMP. Mr. Gomez noted that he attended a forum in Little Compton on renewable energy and said there was a lot of interest in this and the forum was standing room only. Mr. Gomez asked how the costs of this compare with national grid and gas sources, what the federal subsidies were and the maintenance costs. Dr. Spaulding said they could not answer that now until the studies are done. Mr. Gomez asked if they were looking at the economic trade off. Mr. Abedon stated that if the SAMP works it will give a better outline than the EIS. Mr. Fugate replied yes. Mr. Abedon agreed with getting the data to use to defend the SAMP and make a decision on it. Mr. Abedon noted that there are a lot of people working on this. Mr. Gray had a question on the 12 month moratorium and stated in the presentation they are looking at completion in 24 months. Mr. Fugate replied that this was a floating zone concept to get enough regulations in place to deal with the applications at 12 months and define the sites. Mr. Fugate felt in 12 months they would be in a good position to deal with this. Mr. Gray said in 12 months they would have regulations in place to review applications. Mr. Fugate replied yes. Mr. Gray asked if they could get copies of the slide presentations. Mr. Fugate replied yes. Director Sullivan said there was no doubt in his mind that a SAMP was needed on long term activities. Director Sullivan asked about the 12 month moratorium and wanted a timeline of specific things that would happen in one year before he makes a decision. Director Sullivan requested more detail from staff on the timeline of the SAMP. Mr. Abedon asked where the funding sources are coming from and how soon will they have them. Mr. Fugate replied the federal funding sources are in Congress and that DOE funding is available now. Mr. Fugate did not have a definite time on the funding. Mr. Fugate said the moratorium was contingent on the funding. Chair Tikoian had a question on the EIS used for the Providence River Dredge project and asked if this data could be used to supplement this SAMP and did they include this in the 12 month aggressive timeframe. Mr. Fugate replied yes. Chair Tikoian stated that it was important for the SAMP to be developed and defended so they can use this as a defense on new applications. Chair Tikoian said this would put a met tower in sooner than later. Mr. Fugate said they would have to find a good location and get correct data. Chair Tikoian said the met town would be just to draw data and to execute. Dr. Spaulding replied if people saw the met tower they would think that. Mr. Fugate said a private owner would determine where the tower goes and the wind farms go. Vice Chair Lemont believed strongly there is a great market place for this and using different energy resources. Vice Chair Lemont felt if gas prices are up and people will use their cars and boats less. Vice Chair Lemont also felt if energy prices go up people will use less energy. Vice Chair Lemont was concerned at what point whether this was economically doable or not doable. Vice Chair Lemont wanted to know if they were going to pay more for this and asked if this was taken into consideration and wanted to have this information. Mr. Fugate replied that they were not the proper agency to look at this and they have not looked at prices. Mr. Fugate said they are only looking at if these can be put in. Mr. Fugate said the PUC, legislature and administration are setting policy on this. Director Sullivan asked if this was public funds or private funds. Director Sullivan said people are going excited when they see buoy going up.
Public Comment:
Andrew Dzykewicz, Commissioner, Office of Energy Resources wanted to make two points. Mr. Dzykewicz said they are not saying they do not want a moratorium. Mr. Dzykewicz explained there was a website that stated RI considers ban on wind power. He said he did not want to set this as an example. Mr. Dzykewicz said capital investment drives up the cost for uses. Mr. Dzykewicz recommended they do permitting correctly and expediously. Mr. Dzykewicz stated that they have companies that want to put in wave action machines in Rhode Island and did not want the council to dismiss this out of hand. Mr. Gray said the comment about Rhode Island headline concerns him and felt this should be cleared up. Ames Colt, Chair of the Bays, Rivers and Watersheds Coordination Team, said he reviewed the SAMP and had a better understanding on this. Mr. Colt wanted the time period laid out. Mr. Colt said there is a strong interest in federal renewable energy and there long term values. Chair Tikoian replied the council is already working on this. Cynthia Giles, Conservation Law Foundation, said she supports renewable energy in Rhode Island and supports having an Ocean SAMP plan. Ms. Giles said they need to do their homework on the plan. She said when the plan is done right they will have better results. Ms. Giles said it would make the process better. Ms. Giles addressed the moratorium issue and said they don't know how the plan will work because there is not enough information to make a decision. Ms. Giles supported the executive director's recommendation to hold off on the moratorium and open this up for public comment and questions. Ms. Giles felt the public needed to see a plan in detail. Ms. Giles felt they were promoting not delaying and said they need to schedule hearings on this. Lee Ann Farrell, a Roger Williams University student asked for clarification on the federal requirements for an EIS in an ocean environment vs a SAMP. Ms. Farrell wanted to make sure the federal requirements were met. Mr. Fugate explained Section 10 permit and Section 401 Clean Water Act requirements. Mr. Fugate explained the difference between the SAMP and EIS process. Mr. Gray asked if they go through the EIS process as it is today how it will affect their SAMP program. Mr. Fugate explained that the EIS is site specific and the SAMP is not. Ms. Farrell asked what happens if there is no moratorium and they do not do the SAMP will they do an EIS. Mr. Fugate replied yes. Eric Stevens of Blue Water Wind felt the zoning concept was the right one and also wanted what is best for Rhode Island. Mr. Stevens felt the moratorium decision was the right one because of all the information presented. Mr. Stevens felt this needed more attention. Mr. Stevens said he is willing to meet and work with staff to create a plan and answer the remaining questions. Bill Fischer, Allco Renewable Energy Group asked Dr. Spaulding to consider the developers when they do the SAMP. Mr. Fischer felt a properly implemented SAMP was better than a full-blown EIS. Mr. Fischer asked them not to make the developers decision on the costs. Mr. Fischer felt a met tower in Charlestown to gather general data would be good. Mr. Fischer said a site was needed to get a site-specific location. Mr. Fischer said they wanted to put in a met tower. Mr. Fischer said from the developer's perspective they are looking for rules. Mr. Fischer said they need this from a lender's perspective. Chair Tikoian asked if the funding needs had to be site specific. Mr. Fischer replied yes from the lender's perspective. Director Sullivan said their original media report was to install a met tower to get testing done and gather information. Mr. Fischer replied yes. There was no additional public comment. Chair Tikoian concluded the hearing and thanked council members and staff present. Vice Chair Lemont, seconded by Mr. Coia moved to continue the matter for further study, get further costs data from the executive director on the $6 million and the timeline of the SAMP, the federal funding money and where any additional funding would be coming from. The motion was carried on a unanimous voice vote.
8. Category “A” List
There were none held.
There being no further business to discuss. The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Grover Fugate, Executive Director
Reported by Lori A. Field
Stedman Government Center
Suite 116, 4808 Tower Hill Road, Wakefield, RI 02879-1900
Voice 401-783-3370 • Fax 401-783-2069 • E-Mail cstaff1@crmc.ri.gov
An Official Rhode Island State Website