In accordance with notice to member of the Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council, a meeting was held on Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 6:00 p.m. located at the Administration Building, Conference Room A, One Capitol Hill, Providence, RI.

Members Present
Raymond Coia, Chair
Jerry Sahagian
Donald Gomez
Ronald Gagnon
Lyndsay McGovern
Catherine Robinson Hall
Stephen Izzi

Members Excused:
Trish Reynolds

Staff Present
Jeffrey Willis, Executive Director
Justin Skenyon, Ocean Engineer
Kevin Sloan, Coastal Policy Analyst
David Ciochetto, Ocean Engineer
Anthony DeSisto, Legal Counsel
Mark Hartman, Asst Legal Council
Lisa Turner, Office Manager, Recording Secretary

1. CALL TO ORDER

Chair Coia called the meeting to order at 6:10 p.m.

2. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING

Chair Coia called for a motion regarding the minutes for the Tuesday, October 11, 2022 Semi-monthly
Meeting.

Motion: Mr. Sahagian
Second: Mr. Gagnon

Motion carried on a unanimous vote to approve the minutes from October 11, 2022 meeting. Chair Coia abstained from the vote as he was excused on October 11, 2022.

3. Subcommittee Reports

None to report

4. Staff Reports

None to report

5. Review and Action regarding Application requiring Public Hearing and Special Exception:

2021-07-005 REVOLUTION WIND -- Two submarine export transmission cables (275 kilovolt high voltage alternating current (AC)) have been proposed for the project. Each cable measures approximately 23 miles in length and has been proposed to be installed in CRMC Type 4 and 6 Waters in Rhode Island Sound and the West Passage of Narragansett Bay, making landfall at the Quonset Business Park, North Kingstown. The export cable will cross an Area of Particular Concern as identified by Ocean Special Area Management Plan § 11.10.2 and will require a Special Exception under Coastal Resources Management Program Section 1.1.8.

The cables will be installed at a target burial depth of 4-6 feet (or deeper) below the seabed, which will create a total estimated disturbance of approximately 730 acres within state waters. Secondary cable protection in the form of rock bags, concrete mattresses, and/or rock berms may be used where the target burial depth cannot be achieved.

The export cables will make landfall at the Quonset Business Park, the heavily Industrial waterfront via horizontal directional drilling, which will require the construction of two offshore exit pits.

After joining with the export cables, the Onshore Transmission Cable will follow Circuit Drive northwest to 135 Circuit Drive, where it will cross this property north of the existing driveway and cross the property in a north-northwest direction until reaching the property owned by Quonset Development Corporation. Here the cable will continue north until reaching 101 Circuit Drive. The cable will then continue north across 101 Circuit Drive and 75 Circuit Drive within the existing paved access road to the existing Davisville Substation. At the Davisville Substation, the cable continues west, parallel to the northern property boundary before reaching The Narragansett Electric Company's parcel. After crossing, the cable enters the Onshore Substation tying into the proposed access road. The total cable length is approximately one mile.

Mr. Willis gave a brief description regarding the logistics of the meeting explaining that the project being heard was for the export cables only which were located within State waters putting them within CRMC jurisdiction. Mr. Willis stated that the project would likely be heard over two meetings and that at this meeting the Council would hear from CRMC staff and Revolution Wind Team.

Mr. Willis explained that the CRMC Wind Team had spent a lot of time with the Revolution Wind Team at weekly meetings over the period of application review and the parties had several meetings common ground
Mr. Willis introduced the CRMC Wind team which included Justin Skenyon, Kevin Sloan, David Ciochetto, Laura Dwyer and himself.

Mr. Skenyon briefly explained the Revolution Wind Project stating that it included the Federal Consistency Review of the Wind Farm, the cable being set within the west bay passage to the substation, and then the transmission station which would be within the jurisdiction of RIDEM Freshwater Wetlands Division.

Mr. Skenyon explained that the two offshore cables
Critical importance:

• Two off shore cables running up the West Bay Passage in a corridor that was set aside for this purpose through specific changes to the Redbook;
• Insure proper cable burial depth which is between 4-6’ in depth to ensure minimization of potential negatives of a cable being exposed, damaged or impacts from EMF (electromagnetic fields);
• Technology to achieve the goal will be a mechanical plow or jet plow which will change dependent on the bottom habitat.

Mr. Skenyon explained that the applicant has researched the cable corridor by sediment analysis, sampling, and seismic scan sonars. This also allowed for the identification of boulders that would need to be moved during the seabed preparation process.

Mr. Skenyon explained that there would be seven cable crossing that will required secondary cable protection due to cable exposure. Mr. Skenyon also explained that surveys would be given to the fishing community with new maps and information so as to not damage the cable or fishing equipment. Mr. Skenyon explained that the secondary cable protection would be in the form of concrete linked mattresses laid over the cable for protection.

Mr. Skenyon explained that that the fishing community had concerns for the bottom dwelling species due to the electromagnetic fields (EMFs) that would be generated from cables of this size. The best protection from EMF is to bury the cable deep. The fishing community is concerned because the mattresses do not protect from EMF emissions.

Mr. Skenyon explained the cable installation process of the mechanical plow and jet plow stating that the plow will displace sediment causing a smothering effect in the adjacent area having some temporary impacts but area would return to normal within short time.

At near shore, Mr. Skenyon explained that CRMC requested that applicant switch to horizontal directional drilling obtaining a cable depth of between 10-18 feet. Revolution Wind agreed to this method and worked with Quonset to obtain permissions required to land cable in an industrial area.

Mr. Skenyon explained that once the cable was onshore, the cable would follow roads and then cut across the transmission facility to the new substation that will be constructed.

Mr. Skenyon indicated that all approvals and permissions were received from the Town of North Kingstown and the Energy Facilities Siting Board. The Energy Facilities Siting Board requested that the onshore cable route be altered so as to not impact a local neighborhood.

Mr. Skenyon explained that all the work would be done during the traditional dredge window which is October to early February over a two year timeframe. The timeframe is important so as to not impact any recreational activities.
Mr. Skenyon explained that a new substation would need to be built to handle the power which will be built on a capped landfill from the days when Quonset was a military base. The project is considered good use of this land. Mr. Skenyon stated that the work will encroach to a small degree on the buffer to a nearby wetland which will not directly impact the wetland but that stormwater will directly impact the wetland. Mr. Skenyon stated that the applicant, CRMC and DEM on stormwater analysis for this project and the applicant is still able to meet what is needed to obtain their Water Quality Certification.

Maintenance of the buried cable was reviewed and Mr. Skenyon explained that once buried the cable will remain buried during the 25 year lifetime of the project unless critical maintenance is required (which is not expected). Routine surveys of the cable will be required and reported to CRMC. Timeframe for surveys is every 5-10 years – more frequently dependent on storm events.

Mr. Skenyon informed the Council that decommissioning is theoretical at this point and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) is working on this aspect of this industry.

Mr. Skenyon talked about impacts to environment explaining that the closest Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) beds in the area are 850 and 1000 feet from project disturbance and the sediment from the project will not result in any significant burial. Mr. Skenyon explained that benthic species would be affected but would repopulate within a few years. As the sandy bottom is very far away from cable burial site, there would be little effect on the winter flounder that lay their eggs in sandy waters.

Mr. Skenyon talked about the two variance requirements and the special exception request. The variance requests is for monitoring pre-application requirements and the Special Exception is to CRMC’s Area of Particular Concern for recreational purposes.

Mr. Skenyon concluded his overview stating that he and the Ocean Team were available to answer questions.

Mr. Gomez asked about cable armoring. Mr. Skenyon stated that the armor, which is a thick shell, was around the entirety of the cable (three cables combines inside the armoring). If the cable is less than 4’ in e buried, it will be covered with concrete mattresses. There will be no sediment added to the top of the mattresses.

Mr. Gomez asked about EMF shielding. Mr. Skenyon explained that the applicant presented analysis to BOEM that indicated how the binding of the cable itself can help cancel out EMF emission. Mr. Skenyon confirmed that the burial will also cancel out the EMF emission.

Mr. Gomez asked if there would be any effect on ship or small craft electronics. Mr. Skenyon stated that they really were not expecting an issue.

Mr. Gomez asked if there would be independent observers to watch the process as we did with the Block Island Wind Farm. Mr. Skenyon explained that Certified Verification Agents (CVAs) would be on site for the entirety of the project and will be the same CVAs for the Federal Consistency part of the proposed project.

Mr. Gomez asked about the life expectancy of the project. Mr. Skenyon stated that the construction would take two years and would be fully operational for 25 years.

No further questions of staff from Council.

Applicant Presentation:

Robin Main, Esq and Christine Dieter, Esq, both from the law firm of Hinkley Allen were present to represent Revolution Wind.

Ms. Main stated that the presentation would include testimony through the presentation of several witnesses for the overview of the project, the construction scheduling, the installation of the cable, and, ending with Special Exception rebuttal and variance request.

Kellen Ingalls, Project Development Director for Revolution Wind/Orsted, was sworn in and identified himself for the record. Mr. Ingalls gave a brief background of his education and experience.

Mr. Ingalls gave an overview of the entirety of the Revolution Wind project stating that their application to BOEM was for 100 wind turbines in this lease area with cables leading to two offshore substations and then two export cables heading for landfall at Quonset Development Corporation property in the Quonset Business Park. Mr. Ingalls summarized for the cable project that the export cables would travel 23 miles in state waters buried at a depth of 3-4’ and with horizontal drilling once closer to shore. Mr. Ingalls went on to say that an onshore substation would be constructed with an interconnection facility where the power will connect to an existing substation in Davisville. Mr. Ingalls, explained that RI has very ambitious clean energy goals with a goal that by 2032, all power will be coming from renewable sources and Revolution Wind will help meet that goal. Mr. Ingalls stated that power purchase agreements has the wind farm operating in 2025. Mr. Ingalls testified to the construction timeframes of starting in the fall of 2023, seabed clearance activity in 2024 and operational in 2025, all taking into account the time of year restrictions. Mr. Ingalls stated that the rate payers of RI will not be paying for project cost and that there was no state money in this project nor federal money. Mr. Ingalls stated that, for this project, he is responsible overseeing permits, site investigating, commercial aspects of the wind farm, design of farm and cables. Mr. Ingalls stated that they have an amazing team and are also working with a consulting firm VHB as they bring a regional/local expertise. Mr. Ingalls testified that Revolution Wind will create 1000 direct construction jobs and that Orsted has established its co- headquarters in Providence. Mr. Ingalls testified that the project is committed to spending tens of millions of dollars on RI ports. Mr. Ingalls stated that Quonset will be a major part of operations for the entirety of the US portfolio. Blount Boats and Senesco are building crew transfer vessels to transport crew to wind farm from operation hub. Mr. Ingalls also testified to the job creations from indirect services of the project in the number to 3000 jobs.

Mr. Gagnon asked Mr. Kellan to confirm the cable burial depth which he testified to be 3-4’. Mr. Kellan corrected and confirmed that it would be a 4-6’ target cable burial depth.

Ms. Hall asked if there was outreach to indigenous communities along the coastline. Mr. Kellan stated that they maintain a relationship with tribes and bring them into discussions of both onshore and offshore activities. Revolution Wind has brought a tribal relations lead on board to help facilitate discussions.

Ms. Hall asked if any survey work had been done in relation to historical and cultural areas. Mr. Ingalls stated that the surveys had been done out in the ocean as well as the site of the substation onshore which input from the tribes – from the project’s starting location to finish location.

Mr. Gomez asked where the materials that are not built in RI will be manufactured. Mr. Ingalls stated that the cable is a US company and that they are working to bring all the manufacturing here to start a US industry.

Ms. McGovern asked where the wind turbines would be located to provide 400 megawatt hours for the State of Rhode Island. Mr. Ingalls stated that the wind turbines were located in federal waters. Mr. Ingalls stated that it is not a specific turbine but an allocation that is done at the metering point.

Megan Eakin, Permitting Manager for Revolution Wind/Orsted, was sworn in and identified herself for the record. Ms. Eakin gave a brief overview of her education and professional experience. Ms. Eakin stated that she was responsible for the overseeing the Revolution Wind permitting team as well as coordinating with othe Orsted internal teams, as well as oversight of consultants. Ms. Eakin also stated that she had helped to prepare the package for the Certified Verification Agent that was submitted to CRMC as well as BOEM. Ms. Eakin testified to her involvement in the Category B assent application that was submitted to CRMC, the Order that was received from the Energy Facility Siting Board in July and the Water Quality Certification and Dredging permit applied for through the RI Department of Environmental Management. Ms. Eakin testified that throughout the application review period, there had been weekly meetings between Rev Wind and CRMC staff keeping communication lines open. Ms. Eakin explained the Revolution Wind outreach program through their project website and also an Open House at the URI Bay Campus which had good attendance. Ms. Eakin, using a demonstrative, testified on the approximate construction schedule for the project, focusing on the installation of the cables in state waters, stating that all of the activities that encompass the cable installation will happen between September 1st and January 31st with the 23 miles of cable installation in state waters happening in the months of October and November.

No questions from the Council.

Gareth Ellis, the Senior Electrical Package Manager with Orsted was sworn in and identified himself for the record. Mr. Ellis gave a brief overview of his education and professional experience. Mr. Ellis testified that in his position with Orsted, he lead and managed a team that performed due diligence on all of the supply and installation of contracts and contractors encompassing the contract management and document control. Mr Ellis testified that Revolution Wind has contracted with Nexans for the installation of the cable and that after Revolution Winds rigorous procurement procedure Nexans was the leader. Mr. Ellis testified as to the route selection process for Revolution Wind’s export cables in RI waters explaining the seabed survey process which began in 2017 producing a ground model. Mr. Ellis explained that the ground model is used to procure and put forward to the contractors so they can develop their techniques and trenching machines. After final analysis, full methodology is developed which will be used to install the cable. Mr. Ellis testified to the preparation of the seabed for cable installation, such as the removal of boulders that are in the path which then leads to the pre-lay grapnel which is dragged through the seabed surface to clear any debris which may cause a problem to the plow or jetting tool. Mr. Ellis stated that a final survey of the seabed is performed by a remote operated vehicle (small submarine – I wonder if it is yellow) giving a clear image of the seabed. Mr. Ellis testified that there were no sand waves that needed to be dredged in state waters. Next Mr. Ellis explained the actual installation of the cable in state waters using horizontal directional drilling from shore side to marine side (approximately 400 meters of drill); then a near shore barge will start to lay the remaining cable using a jet plow to just south of Jamestown Bridge where another barge, the Aurora, will pick up the cable for the joining of the two cables, one in the water and one that is on the barge for the remainder of the cable lay – the joining of the two cables takes seven days. Mr. Ellis stated that a mechanical plow will be used from this point to lay the remainder of the cable. Mr. Ellis testified to the target cable burial depth which is 4-6’ with some areas slightly deeper specifically near the entrance to the Bay which will be approximately 8.2 feet due to heavier traffic. Mr. Ellis testified as to what happens if the cable is not buried to target of four feet explaining that first they do a risk assessment and if the risk low, then the cable stays as is. Mr. Ellis then explains if that a capjet will be used to try to bury the cable deeper if required, if this does not work then they would use secondary protection such as flexible concrete mattresses. Mr. Ellis testified to having seven cable crossings in state waters which would require secondary protection. Mr. Ellis testified that another 5% of the cable that would need secondary cable protection. Mr. Ellis described the cable itself stating that there is a fiber optic cable and three individual coils twisted together and then surrounded by an armoring of steel and polyethylene providing protection and extra stiffness for installation purposes. Mr. Ellis stated that the twisting of the interior cables can reduce EMF. Mr. Ellis testified that 2-3 nautical miles of cable would be laid per day with the process being 24 hours 7 days. Mr. Ellis stated that the 24 hours 7 days a week process is necessary to be the most effective and efficient especially if severe weather is predicted. Mr. Ellis discussed the operations and maintenance of the cable stating that they are confident that the cable will stay buried and not be exposed over its lifetime.

Mr. Gagnon asked about the cables. Mr. Ellis explained that there would be two cables requiring two trenches which will be buried at the same time near to shore barge will be simultaneous to the Jamestown Bridge and then the main lay vessel will do one cable at a time.

Mr. Izzi asked about the cable burial timeframe. Mr. Ellis stated it will take 4 days per cable and 28 days for the cables beyond the Jamestown Bridge. Mr. Ellis stated that there would be no anchoring of the cable but that the sediment overlay and weight of the cable would provide sufficient anchoring.

Mr. Izzi asked about the possibility of supply chain issues. Mr. Ellis stated they do not anticipate any supply chain issues.

Ms. Hall asked about the boulder relocation plan and where they would be laid relative to commercial and recreational fisheries. Mr. Ellis stated that the intention is to move the boulders far enough away from the cable route that it would impact the trenching machine which are 5-6 meters wide. Mr. Ellis stated that 50 meters of each route have been surveyed for fisheries.

Ms. Hall asked Mr. Ellis to define risk vs low risk. Mr. Ellis stated that they use the industry standard engineering report called the Cable Burial Risk Assessment (CBRA) which means they take the ship traffic data for entire area and the fishing activities and put them into a risk matrix and this will tell them risk for interaction of vessels and/or fishing gear with cable. Mr. Ellis explained that they bury the cable to three feet for EMF and only in small lengths of cable.

Mr. Gomez asked about cable connections and how many connections there were. Mr. Ellis stated there were two connections in state waters – one per cable both to the south of the Jamestown Bridge. Mr. Ellis stated that they have very sterile process and factory experts available for the connection.

Mr. Gomez asked about the EMF reduction. Mr. Ellis confirmed for Mr. Gomez that in every case, burial of the cable is best.

No further questions.

Council Member Sahagian had to be excused. Brief recess.

Christine Dieter questions Drew Carey

Drew Carey was sworn in and identified himself for the record stating that he was the CEO of Inspire Environmental Newport and he managed a team of scientists that collect data and study sea floor. Mr. Carey gave a brief accounting of his education and professional experience.

Mr. Carey testified that he started working with Revolution Wind in 2013 when they received the approval of their lease. Mr. Carey stated that he and his team began with site assessment work which had been incorporated into the application in reports on benthic assessment, technical report on essential fish habitats and commercial and recreational fishing. Mr. Carey testified to the recovery of fish resources in the vicinity of the export cable in which he said that recovery could take several years explaining the stages of recovery stating that a three year term for recovery is very conservative. Mr. Carey testified about recreational boating in terms of the Areas of Particular Concern stating that he was a participant in the Ocean Special Area Management Plan. Mr. Carey stated that during the research for the OSAMP, surveys were done regarding recreational boating and tourism such as buoy yachting races. Mr. Carey testified to where the APC for recreational boating is located and that it encompassed over 16,000 acres. Mr. Carey testified that a portion of the export cable would be going through only 10% of the recreational boating APC within the state waters.

Ms. Hall asked for clarification on the 10% relative to those activities involved in the OSAMP. Mr. Carey stated that the races occurred between June and September of each year and that the cable laying operation would be from October to November.

Ms. Hall asked about the phased recovery timeframe relative to the areas using secondary protection. Mr. Carey stated that it does have a different succession.

Adrien Ross Pearsall, Fisheries Relations Manager with Orsted North American, was sworn in and identified himself for the record. Mr. Pearsall gave a brief over of his education and professional experience.

Mr. Pearsall testified that he was familiar with boating in Narragansett Bay and Rhode Island Sound which ranges from sightseeing, day sailing, sail racing to pleasure cruising. Mr. Pearsall testified that the bulk of the activity is between Memorial Day to Labor Day with hard stop dates from May 1 to November 1.

Using Figure 3.2-3 in which the export cable is shown, Mr. Pearsall testified that he did not expect the export cable to any anything more than a minimal impact on recreational boating. Mr. Pearsall also explained about Orsted’s outreach to sailboat community through Shields Fleet 9 based in Newport. Mr. Pearsall testified that he believed that the export cable construction would have minimal impact on the buoy racing. Mr. Pearsall testified that the Volvo Ocean Race would not be affected by export cable construction as the race is making a stop over to Newport East Passage in May of 2023 and not in 2024. Mr. Pearsall testified that the bi-annual Annapolis to Newport race is occurring in 2023 and will not be affected by the export cable construction. Mr. Pearsall also testified that the Newport to Bermuda race would not be affected as it occurs in June.

No further questions.

Kyle Cassidy, Fisheries Environmental Specialist with Orsted, was sworn in and identified himself for the record. Mr. Cassidy gave a brief overview of his education and professional experience stating that he manages all the fisheries related science projects that Orsted has going across the project portfolio – all leases currently in development. Mr. Cassidy testified to the surveys and plans proposed for RI state waters such as the ventless trap survey along the cable corridor route which is a partnership between RIDEM and Revolution Wind. Mr. Cassidy explained that the species targeted by this survey is lobster with Jonah crab as a secondary cause species. Mr. Cassidy stated the RIDEM would run the survey for a period of seven years and sampling twice per month beginning early winter of 2023. Mr. Cassidy stated there would be a 1.5 year advance in the survey from construction timeframe. The survey would be to see if there would be a significant change in population over time as a result of the export cable installation. Mr. Cassidy testified that there were supply-chain delays that contributed to the delay in the start of the survey. Mr. Cassidy stated that RIDEM had been running a ventless trap survey consistently since 2006 and used similar survey protocols with the difference in surveys being that RIDEM samples in June, July and August whereas the Revolution Wind survey will run year-round. Mr. Cassidy testified that the RIDEM survey would provide a reasonable supplement of pre-construction data to what the Revolution Wind survey will capture and that the Revolution Wind survey will still accomplish its intended purpose.

Mr. Gomez asked if Mr. Cassidy could comment on the oysters, shellfish and scallops. Mr. Cassidy stated that at year one and post year there is a benthic habitat assessment looking at the population at time point zero and over time.

Ms. Hall asked about other surveys such as herring fishery and flounder fishery. Mr. Cassidy explained that the only proposed survey is the ventless trap survey.

No further questions. Witnesses concluded.

Ms. Main addressed the Council and stated that on November 22, 2002, there will be discussions and testimony put forth on mitigation, and a presentation on the Special Exception.

Chair Coia stated that hearing would commence on November 22, 2022.

Mr. Izzi asked if public comment would be on November 22, 2022.

Chair Coia confirmed public comment on November 22, 2022.

Mr. Gagnon motioned to continue to November 22, 2022, seconded by Mr. Gomez.

Motion carried on unanimous vote.

7. ADJOURN

Motion to adjourn

Motion: Ms. McGovern
Second: Mr. Gomez
Motion carried on unanimous voice vote.

Meeting adjourned at 9:06 p.m.

 

Minutes respectfully submitted,

Lisa A. Turner
Recording Secretary

 

CALENDAR INDEX