In accordance with notice to members of the Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council, a meeting was held on Tuesday, December 12, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. in the Cafeteria, Administration Building, One Capitol Hill, Providence, RI.

Members Present
Jennifer Cervenka, Chair
Raymond Coia
Don Gomez
Ron Gagnon, DEM Rep
Mike Hudner
Jerry Sahagian
Trish Reynolds
Michelle Collie

Members Excused
Joy Montanaro
Lisette Gomes

Staff Present
Grover Fugate, Executive Director
Jeff Willis, Deputy Director
James Boyd, Coastal Policy Analyst
David Reis, Spv Environmental Scientist
Danni Goulet, Marine Infrastructure Coordinator
Anthony DeSisto, Legal Counsel
John Longo, Legal Counsel

1. CALL TO ORDER

Chair Cervenka called the meeting to order at 5:10 p.m. and gave directions on exits, restrooms and interpreter services for language and hearing. Meeting will run til 9:00 tonight. Cart Services available two sign language interpreters as well.

An audience member came forward at this point and presented the Chair with a petition for her resignation. Chair Cervenka moved on.

2. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING

Chair Cervenka stated that there were a few changes to the November 28th, 2017 minutes – a
fragmented sentence on the second page and grammatical changes on the third page, first paragraph.

Council Member Coia motioned for approval with changes, seconded by Council Member Hudner. The motion to approve revised minutes carried on a unanimous voice vote.

3. STAFF REPORTS

Director Fugate reported on the following:

• An all-day science conference was held at URI on Monday, December 4th, 2017, based on the resiliency work that CRMC has been doing over the past year.
• Along with the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, the CRMC co-sponsored a conference that was held at URI on Monday December 11th and Tuesday, December 12th, 2017 (today) regarding offshore wind energy science. The conference was very well attended and Council member Don Gomez was in attendance representing the Council.

4. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS

None were heard.

5. FEDERAL CONSISTENCY FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE COUNCIL:

2016-10-099 NATIONAL GRID LNG, LLC (NGLNG): Construct and maintain a new natural gas liquefaction facility ancillary to the existing liquefied natural gas (LNG) tank and associated vaporization plant and truck station located at 121 Terminal Road, Providence, RI. The proposed natural gas liquefaction facility (Project) will be constructed on a portion of the 42 acre property owned by Narragansett Electric Company (TNEC) d/b/a National Grid, and leased to NGLNG. The Project will be constructed adjacent to National Grid’s existing LNG storage tank and vaporization plant. Nine to eleven (9-11) feet of clean fill will be placed on the Project site to elevate the proposed liquefaction facility to an elevation 21 feet (NAVD88) to avert inundation during a 100-year storm event. The fill slope constructed to support the Project will be protected by a riprap slope armoring (revetment). The natural gas supply for the Project will be provided by an existing natural gas pipeline, which runs beneath the Providence River to the site. Liquefied natural gas will be stored in the existing LNG tank that is connected to existing tank fill lines as part of the existing LNG truck station. Stormwater runoff from the Project will be directed to a sand filter for treatment before discharge to the Providence River. A variance is required from CRMP Section 140.B.1 for construction of the proposed revetment protected slope and placement of clean fill material within the 50-foot coastal feature setback.

National Grid LNG, LLC is seeking a federal license, permit or authorization from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) pursuant to Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (U.S. Code 15 § 717). Federal actions, including the issuance of federal licenses, permits or authorizations that are reasonably likely to affect any land or water use or natural resources of a coastal zone must be consistent with the enforceable policies and standards of the federally approved state coastal management plan. While FERC’s jurisdiction in this matter preempts state law, it does not impact the CRMC’s federal consistency authority and jurisdiction of the Project pursuant to the federal Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), 16 USC §§ 1451-1464, and the CZMA’s implementing regulations at 15 C.F.R. Part 930 Subpart D – Consistency for Activities Requiring a Federal License or Permit.

Therefore, the Council will not be issuing an Assent for this Project; rather the CRMC will be issuing a determination as to whether the Project is consistent with the enforceable policies and standards of the Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Program (CRMP) in accordance with the applicable federal regulations of 15 C.F.R. Part 930 Subpart D.

Located at Port of Providence, 121 Terminal Avenue, Providence, RI.

Chair Cervenka stated that at the last meeting the Public Comment period was closed. Attorney Paul
Ryan had asked to address two matters.

Attorney Ryan spoke about an APRA request that was submitted to the CRMC and the response that was received from CRMC stating that the CRMC was exempt under State public record laws. Attorney Ryan stated that he had resubmitted the request with a copy going to the Open Meetings Department of the Attorney General’s office. Attorney Ryan stated that their request was for information on what NOAA told the Council in writing vis-à-vis the process and the vote.

Attorney Ryan then stated that documents and requests were filed against the Chair asking her to recuse herself alleging a conflict of interest between the Chair Cervenka and Chamber of Commerce in Northern Rhode Island who spoke in favor of the project.

Chair Cervenka stated that she had reviewed and considered the documents sent to Governor Raimondo and to the Ethics Commission and that there are a number of false statements and a number of statements that are not false. Chair Cervenka went on to say that the statements that are not false do not rise to the level of conflict and that she is prepared to move forward certain that she can render a fair and impartial decision. Chair Cervenka confirmed that she will defend herself to the Ethics Commission and clear her name. Chair Cervenka deferred to Attorney DeSisto to answer the APRA request questions.

Attorney DeSisto stated that he communicated with the two people that requested the documents and that under 38-2-2, Subsection K, the information requested is not considered a public document under APRA. Attorney DeSisto stated that he will discuss the issues with the Attorney General’s office.
Attorney Robin Main gave a short rebuttal calling Tony LaRusso to answer the question of the facilities lifespan. (Tony LaRusso acknowledged being under oath).

Tony LaRusso explained that the 25-year lifespan considers the depreciation and the 30-year lifespan is the design basis; meaning, that it was designed to exceed the 25 years needed to pay-off the project. Tony LaRusso stated that NGLNG is willing to provide the Council an update report that would consider, at that time, the status of the need for the project, a condition report of the facility, update on a sea level rise to the extent available at the time; and all would be done within regulations and laws of the day. Tony LaRusso confirmed that if the facility is up and running for 2020, the timeframe for update report would be 2049-2050. Tony LaRusso explained the need of supply diversity and their long distance on-going relationship with Everett terminal where National Grid has purchased LNG from them for many years but needs to acknowledge that more than a one source supply is needed during this timeframe to meet the customer’s peak gas needs in the winter.

Tony LaRusso discussed how the project would blend into the environment.

Council Member Gomez asked for clarification on decommissioning of the project. Tony LaRusso explained that they would remove the unused facility from the site but that there is a FERC process to abandon a facility. Chair Cervenka asked if the facility will be decommissioned. Tony LaRusso answered that the facility will be decommissioned after its useful life. Tony LaRusso again confirmed that there was a FERC process for decommissioning and there would be an environmental assessment performed.

Director Fugate asked for clarification on the term “useful life” and that staff understood the decommissioning would happen within 30 years. Tony LaRusso stated that they would provide an analysis as the timeframe is difficult to determine. Tony LaRusso stated that, in his experience with this type of equipment, the design life is 30 years and that extra time could be addressed once approaching the 30 year timeframe by providing a report and discussion with the agency.

Attorney Main made her closing statements thanking the Council for their time and consideration and reiterating what Director Fugate and CRMC staff had described as the project being consistent with the enforceable policies of the RICRMP. Attorney Main stated that the project was designed to blend into the surrounding area and that the plant is designed to help fulfill the need for diverse supply of natural gas in this area on peak winter days. Attorney Main reaffirmed that the plant is a throughput system and not a storage facility and would not increase the amount of LNG that is currently stored at the existing terminal. Attorney Main outlined the next steps for the project stating the need for further State permits and that they anticipate FERC’s environmental decision by the end of March.

Chair Cervenka thanked Attorney Main for her closing statement and stated that the Council would deliberate and asked Attorney DeSisto to present for the Councilmembers the legal standards by which they would be rendering their decision.

Attorney DeSisto outlined the project and the review guidelines for the CRMC Federal Consistency process explaining that the consistency review does not give a permit. Attorney DeSisto stated that two issues from the staff report needed to be addressed -- the physical life of the plant and the scenic and visual impacts of the project; and, that FERC would review for siting, construction, operation of the facility, and review of public health and safety issues as well as social issues that have been raised. Attorney DeSisto explained that the vote is whether or not the project is consistent with CRMC regulations or an objection to the consistency.

Council Member Sahagian asked CRMC Counsel for the proper terminology to stipulate a timeframe for the physical life of the plant. Attorney DeSisto stated the timeframe could start upon receiving the Certificate of Occupancy (CO).

Council Member Sahagian stated that based on the findings of fact in the staff report, he submitted that the application is consistent with the enforceable policies of the Coastal Resources Management Plan, and add a stipulation that the permit would be for a period of 30 years subsequent to the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy (CO) on the building. Council Member Sahagian also made it part of his motion that the Executive Director would have the authority to file any appropriate or necessary paperwork to move the application forward. Council Member Sahagian clarified that he proposed a 30- year limitation on the use of the facility and that the 30-years would begin upon issuance of CO.

Council Member Gomez seconded the motion as set forth by Council Member Sahagian.

Attorney Main asked to address the Council on the stipulation of 30 years and they feel it would be a disservice to the rate payers as the plant will depreciate after 25 years so every moment beyond the 25 years it will be less expensive to fill the tank and the difference in expense would potentially be passed on to rate payers. Attorney Main stated that dialogue at 29 to 30 years would be an appropriate way to handle the lifespan issue.

Director Fugate responded by stating that the document that staff reviewed throughout the report indicated that there is a design life of 25 years and that is what the staff based their report on. Director Fugate acknowledged the motion with a 30-year time limit granting a little leeway but expressed the need to decommission the facility based on staff’s review.

Chair Cervenka asked CRMC staff to clarify the 30 year design of the facility.

James Boyd, CRMC Coastal Policy Analyst, stated that the staff did their analysis of the project based on the applicant’s documentation stating that the project would reach the end of its design life at approximately 2050 with a sea level rise of 16.9 feet during a 100 year storm. James Boyd stated that beyond the 25 years staff looked at additional sea level rise reports and all conditions were under the 21’ of the platform during the approximate timeframe of 25-30 years.

Council Member Hudner expressed his concern that the application before them was a very complicated matter, acknowledging that many of the complications were outside of CRMC purview. Council Member Hudner recognized the Council and staff for the intensity of review and the commitment that the Council brings to dealing with these matters.

Council Member Gomez stated that the stipulation has to remain but would be better at 25 years. Council Member Sahagian asked that the motion remain stipulated for 30 year lifespan.

Attorney DeSisto clarified that the motion was to concur with the National Grid Consistency Certification subject to the condition of a 30-year lifespan.

All ayes for concurrence.

The motion was carried on a unanimous voice vote.

9. ADJOURN

Council Member Sahagian motioned, seconded by Council Member Coia, to adjourn. Motion carried on unanimous voice vote. Meeting adjourned at 5:50 p.m.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Lisa A. Turner
Recording Secretary

CALENDAR INDEX