In accordance with notice to member of the Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council, a meeting was held on Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 6:00 p.m. located at the Administration Building, Conference Room A, One Capitol Hill, Providence, RI.

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

Staff Present
Jeffrey Willis, Executive Director
Laura Miguel, Deputy Director
Kevin Sloan, Coastal Policy Analyst
Justin Skenyon, Ocean Engineer
David Ciochetto, Ocean Engineer
Anthony DeSisto, Legal Counsel
Mark Hartman, Asst Legal Counsel
Lisa Turner, Office Manager, Recording Secretary
Cindy Tangney, Court Reporter

1. CALL TO ORDER

Chair Coia called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. Thank you to everyone for coming this evening.

2. Subcommittee Reports

Rights of Way Subcommittee Meeting was held at 5:00 p.m. today (Tuesday, April 25, 2023). There are eight to ten ROWs for the Subcommittee to review. Spring Avenue was discussed and it was determined that for Subcommittee review to proceed an Agreed Statement of Facts would be due in May prior to the next ROW Subcommittee meeting on May 23, 2023 where hearing dates would be set.

3. Staff Reports

No Staff Report

4. Discussion and action on federal consistency decision for CRMC File 2021-06-029 Revolution Wind, LLC Coastal Zone Management Act consistency certification; offshore wind energy facility in federal waters.

Chair Coia began by explaining the meeting process that would be followed.

Mr. Willis introduced and explained the concept of a Federal Consistency review which is essentially reviewing a matter that is under the consistency provisions of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act and by which NOAA gives a state the authority to review a project that is beyond its state jurisdiction if the activities are shown to have an impact on the State’s coastal resources.

Mr. Sloan began by stating that the staff recommendation is not an approval of the project. The final approval rests with the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM). Mr. Sloan gave a brief overview of the project stating that the Revolution Wind farm occupies BOEM’s lease area OCS-A 0486 on the outer continental shelf which is over 83,000 acres. Mr. Sloan stated that the Project Design Envelope (PDE) and the Construction and Operation Plan (COP) is based on an operating capacity between 704 and 880 megawatts, utilizing wind turbine generators (WTG) in the 8 to 12 megawatt range in up to 100 WTG positions connecting to two offshore substations with associated inter-array cables and export cables. Mr. Sloan stated that there are three Purchase and Power agreements totaling 704 megawatts with 400 megawatts being delivered to Rhode Island. Mr. Sloan explained that there would be a total of 67 turbine positions utilizing a Siemens Gamesa 11-megawater WTG. Mr. Sloan then went through the procedural history of the CRMC CZMA review further explaining the federal consistency review regulations as well.

Mr. Sloan concluded his staff presentation by explaining that CRMC staff recommendation is a Concurrence with conditions and that the conditions were included in the staff recommendation portion of the CRMC staff report.

Mr. Gomez asked Mr. Sloan about wind-wake effect and its impact on search and rescue. Mr. Sloan stated that the wind-wake effect is the effect of having all the turbines turning at once and how it impacts the water body within the farm and downwind of the farm. Mr. Sloan stated that understanding the impacts are still being researched and knowledge is growing.

No further questions for staff.

Chair Coia introduced Attorney Marisa Desautel, representing the Fishermen’s Advisory Board. Ms. Desautel introduced co-counsel Attorney Karen Browning, also of Desautel Law.

Ms. Desautel began by explaining that the Fishermen’s Advisory Board (FAB) is meant to be advisory to CRMC through the Ocean Special Area Management Plan (OSAMP) which relies heavily on the expertise of the FAB members to inform the Council.

Ms. Desautel asked that an incident be addressed by the Council which occurred in Orsted’s Southfork lease area in the previous week on Thursday and Friday caused by an Orsted vessel named the Fleet King. Ms. Desautel explained the 500 yd exclusion zone which applied to cable laying operations. The Fleet King was instructing fishermen to adhere to a 1.5-mile exclusion zone on both sides of the cable being dropped. Fishers were excluded from a 3-mile fishing area. Ms. Desautel expressed extreme concern regarding the lack of communication between all parties as well as the lack of credibility in the developer for not complying with the agreement of 500-yard exclusion zone.

Ms. Desautel requested a continuation of the hearing to gather information and decide how to move forward. Ms. Desautel stated that the fishers had no recourse in regard to the developer usurping the agreed upon terms.

Mr. Willis stated that the agreement is a BOEM requirement that goes in the COP and that the recourse is through BOEM/BSEE and not CRMC. Ms. Desautel explained that there is no recourse in that option.
Ms. Desautel stated that Orsted was also tasked with conducting a gillnet study which had not been done and there is no recourse for this.

Ms. Desautel stated that the FAB would like to figure out what happened and have it addressed appropriately. Ms. Desautel stated that witnesses were available.

Mr. DeSisto asked if they could hear from Orsted.

Attorney Robin Main, representing Orsted, addressed the Council and stated that it was an Orsted issue and that Kellin Ingalls would explain on behalf on Orsted. Ms. Main stated that it was not a Revolution Wind issue and that the hearing must go forward this evening.

Ms. Main stated that there was an incident with the Fleet King issuing notifications over Channel 16 that was incorrect information as far as spacing but there was not cable being laid but the fishing vessel was guarding certain portions of the cable that was already on the seabed floor. Ms. Main stated that the Fleet King requested that fishing and other activities not go on in a certain area. Ms. Main stated that Orsted cannot institute their own exclusion zones. Ms. Main stated that the issue was immediately corrected, and it is done.

Chair Coia stated that the Council was satisfied with Ms. Main’s representation at this point.
Ms. Desautel presented her witness Robert Jonathan Dougherty, who was sworn in, the commercial fisherman who received the communication from the Fleet King to turn around to avoid the area. Mr. Dougherty stated that a lot of time was taken up to get to a fishing spot. Mr. Dougherty stated that he had heard other communications over the radio telling other fishermen to stay out of the area.
There were no questions of the witness from Council or Attorney Main.

Ms. Main objected to having witnesses at a consistency proceeding.

Ms. Desautel presented a second witness, Chris Brown who was sworn in. Mr. Brown testified that he had provided an affidavit that had heard the communication between Mr. Dougherty and the Fleet King captain. Mr. Brown stated that he spoke with Mr. Dougherty and then called the Coast Guard who stated that they did not issue any orders for the Port of Providence or other local ports. Mr. Brown expressed his concern in regard to the usurpation of authority by the Fleet King.

There were no questions for Mr. Brown from the Council or from Ms. Main.

Mr. Gomez motioned to deny the request for continuance made by Ms. Desautel. Ms. McGovern seconded the motion.

Mr. Gagnon agreed that with a deadline approaching for the completion of the CRMC review of the Federal Consistency, the Council needed to move forward on a decision for the Rev Wind matter.
Chair Coia stated he would support the motion as the reason for the request for continuance was not pertinent to the matter before the Council.

Ms. Hall stated for the record that the communication issues being relayed to the Council is relative, that it was addressed in the staff report as well as responded to by the applicant and was useful for future reviews but that she supported the motion for the hearing to move forward.

Mr. Gomez stated for the record that he supported commercial fisherman but agreed with Ms. Hall that the communication issue should be treated separately.

Chair Coia polled the Council on Motion to deny request for continuance:

Mr. Izzi Yes
Ms. Hall Yes
Mr. Gagnon Yes
Ms. McGovern Yes
Mr. Gomez Yes
Chair Coia Yes

Motion to deny request for continuance approved.

Ms. Desautel continued with her presentation for the Fishermen’s Advisory Board.

Ms. Desautel explained that after review of all documents, countless meetings with the developer, and based on the FAB’s expert, it is believed by the FAB that the CRMC Council does not have enough information to make a decision this evening based on the lack of information on fisheries impact, and lack of mitigation of fisheries impacts. Ms. Desautel stated that Orsted cannot demonstrate consistency with the Ocean SAMP enforceable policies.

Ms. Desautel stated that the developer’s COP indicated that there would be at least three years’ worth of impact expected and that additional mitigation measures were submitted in the FAB’s supplemental memorandum that was filed with CRMC on Monday, April 24, 2023. Ms. Desautel stated that there are too many uncertainties and that a significant disruption to existing coastal uses is expected. Ms. Desautel stated that BOEM also indicated that there would be major adverse impacts to commercial fisheries and that substantial modifications to fishing gear and operations would be required. Ms. Desautel stated, based on habitat disruption, uncertainty of cumulative effects of multiple offshore wind projects abutting on another, and the disruption to the spawning grounds of Cox Ledge, the FAB requests additional conditions be made part of the Council’s decision in order to provide mitigation to the fisheries.

FAB’s Witnesses

Rich Hittinger was sworn in and identified himself for the record. Mr. Hittinger testified that he is a retired recreational fisherman, Vice President of the RI Saltwater Angler’s Association, as well as a member of the Fishermen’s Advisory Board. Mr. Hittinger confirmed he was familiar with the Revolution Wind project by reviewing many of their documents. Mr. Hittinger confirmed he had submitted an affidavit for tonight’s hearing. Mr. Hittinger testified to the level of activity within the Cox Ledge area of the Revolution Wind project area stating that it is the most important fishing area for all of Rhode Island and Southern Massachusetts; the specific species within the area that are crucial to the fishermen; and how the construction will impact the species. Mr. Hittinger stated that the impacts would come from the monopile driving, sound energy, secondary coverage of the cables and the moving of boulders that would disturb fish habitat. Mr. Hittinger also stated that the aesthetic value of the area would potentially change the number of clients looking for recreational fishing in this area. Mr. Hittinger expressed concern that recreational fishing was included in the mitigation package.

Richard Bellavance, who was testifying via telephone, was sworn in and identified himself for the record. Mr. Bellevance testified that he was a member of the Fishermen’s Advisory Board, the owner and operator of Priority Fishing Charters out of Point Judith, the RI representative on the New England Fishery Management Council, and the president of the Rhode Island Party and Charter Boat Association (RIPCBA) consisting of 60 small businessowners. Mr. Bellevance confirmed that he had executed an affidavit for this meeting. Mr. Bellevance stated he was familiar with the Revolution Wind project and had reviewed all of the documentation relative to the project as well as taken part in many meeting as a member of the FAB. Mr. Bellevance testified regarding the charterboat industry and the number of trips in federal waters over the last few years, the fisheries species he felt would be affected, the impact of construction delays on the party and charter fishing industry in this area, the secondary coverage of the cables impacting charter fishing and moving of boulders that would disturb fish habitat. Mr. Bellevance also talked about the impact to big game fishing in this area and the impact of the project on highly migratory species such as tuna fish and sharks.

Chris Brown, who was still under oath, identified himself as a member of the Fishermen’s Advisory Board, a commercial fisherman for 46 years, and President of the Seafood Harvesters of America. Mr. Brown testified about the fish species he fishes, his knowledge of the Revolution Wind project, and his experience of fishing around the Block Island Wind Farm before it was electrified and after. Mr. Brown testified as to the level of fishing in the Cox Ledge area stating that there is not much trawling in this area due to glacial moraine, boulders and high ground; however, fish migration to and from the area is very important. Mr. Brown testified to the impact construction delay would have on the fisheries community both special and temporal. Mr. Brown also testified to the impacts of secondary coverage of cables stating that if you snag a net, your day ends early and a cost in incurred to fix the equipment. Mr. Brown also testified on the moving of boulders.

Ms. Hall asked Mr. Brown about the FAB’s supplemental mitigation measures of April 24, 2023 asking if all 19 mitigation measures would lessen his concerns regarding this project. Mr. Brown stated that the mitigation measures suggested by the FAB would help; however, the FAB does not think that there is any level of mitigation that could offset the effect on the systemic productivity of the Atlantic Ocean and eloquently explained why.

Mr. Gomez asked Mr. Brown about squid’s habitat. Mr. Brown stated that if we're having an impact on the smallest creatures in the food web and the largest (whales), how long before we discover that we're having an impact on everything else?

Todd Guilfoos was sworn in and identified himself for the record as an Associate Professor at the University of Rhode Island in Environmental and Natural Resource Economics. Mr. Guilfoos testified that he advises the FAB on economic valuation from this project. Mr. Guilfoos testified to the valuation of the effects of this project on the Rhode Island fisheries and how his valuation differs from that of Revolution Wind.

There were no questions for Mr. Guilfoos from Council

Conclusion of FAB presentation

Revolution Wind:

Present representing Revolution wind was Attorney Robin Main and partner Attorney Christine Dieter both of Hinckley Allen Law Firm.

Ms. Main thanked the Council and staff for their time and efforts in the review of the Revolution wind project and explained their presentation schedule.

Kellen Ingalls was sworn in and identified himself for the record. Mr. Ingalls explained, using a PowerPoint presentation, the project and the modifications that had been made throughout the review process stating that the number of turbines went from the original 100 number to an end number of 65 turbines. Mr. Ingalls presentation included the micrositing of the turbines as well as the array cables. Mr. Ingalls explained the construction schedule which would take place in 2024 with seabed preparation in January, foundation installation and turbine installation in May (as well as scour protection) and cable installation in July of 2024.

There were no questions for Mr. Ingalls from the Council.

Gareth Ellis was sworn in and identified himself for the record as the Electrical Package Manager for Revolution Wind, which encompasses all of the cable supply and installation and the horizontal directional drilling (HDD). Mr. Ellis spoke about the basics behind cable installation and trenching using some of the best tools and practices in the industry to ensure proper burial and reduction of the amount of secondary protection. Mr. Ellis explained the moving of the boulders and grouping locations.

Mr. Gomez asked if acoustic profiling would be used to help lay the cables. Mr. Ellis stated that sonars are on the front of the machines used. Mr. Ellis stated that seabed preparation will ensure that there’s nothing in the way of the cable.

Mr. Gomez asked if precise locations of secondary protection would be provided.

Mr. Ellis confirmed that the equipment that places the mattresses would provide an exact picture of the seabed where it is placed, and post survey will have accurate information.

Mr. Gagnon asked about the repositioning of the boulders. Mr. Ellis stated 10-15 meters from the center line for the safety of the equipment.

Ms. Hall asked how the applicant had responded to the FAB regarding the concerns of the boulder repositioning and the impact to fisheries habitat. Mr. Ellis stated that he could only speak to the repositioning and placing the boulders as close as possible, grouping, once they are off the center line. Mr. Ellis stated that the placement of the boulders would be charted during the as-built survey.

Ms. Hall asked about the construction schedule. Mr. Ellis stated that Revolution Wind had committed to staying within the particular schedule so as to not cause disturbance to the fisheries schedule.
Mr. Ingalls asked to answer the questions for Ms. Hall. Mr. Ingalls stated that with the boulder relocation, they had committed to grouping boulders wherever practicable. Mr. Ingalls stated that they had indicated what time of the year the seabed preparation would be done. Mr. Ingalls stated that Revolution will work with BOEM on the specific schedule for the installation of the wind farm.
Hauke Kite-Powell PhD was sworn in and identified himself for the record. Dr. Kite-Powell works at Woods Hole where they addressed the value of commercial and charter fishing from the lease area and the cable route as well as what is likely to change in that value as a result of the construction and operation of the wind farm. Dr. Kite-Powell stated that they based their analysis on data from NOAA, surveys from commercial fisheries landings and value, and charter fishing revenue from 2022 charter. Dr. Kite-Powell explained their methods of determining baseline economic values of commercial fisheries and charter fishing and then how construction of the wind farm would affect those economic values.

No questions from Council

Kellen Ingalls, still under oath, presented the Revolution Wind Mitigation Package. Mr. Ingalls confirmed receiving the mitigation measures that were sent by the FAB to CRMC and stated that some we can work with them on and some are on the federal level we are working on now. Mr. Ingalls went through the FAB’s mitigation measures agreeing to some and stating some were for federal consideration.

Mr. Ingalls then went on to the Revolution Wind proposed Compensatory Mitigation package stating that they have fully adopted the BOEM recommended guidance and added that the final mitigation offer sent on April 18th included $11.5 million for commercial fishing, $500,000 for charter fishing, and $300,000 for a community fund to help the fishing community, including private recreational fishing in the area. Mr. Ingalls stated that there was an additional $300,000 for an effect study. Mr. Ingalls stated that $333,333 was allocated for the regional navigation fund to provide training, acquisition of upgraded radar materials and equipment. Mr. Ingalls gave a total of $12,933,333.
Mr. Ingalls explained the effects study which was agreed upon by Woods Holes, Revolution Wind and the FAB. The purpose of this study should be to use reliable scientific methods and data to address concerns about uncertainty of operational impacts on commercial fishing. After Mr. Ingalls explained the what the study would include, he explained about the adjustment mechanism to either pay the difference to the trust or the trust would pay the difference back to Revolution Wind if the estimated losses are less than anticipated.

Mr. Ingalls concluded asking that the Council approve the mitigation package of $12,933,333 plus the project effects study.

Mr. Ingalls clarified for Mr. Gomez that the amounts were in “todays” dollars. Mr. Gomez expressed concern over the fishermen’s cost increase due to the inflation of the last few years and suggested an increase of 10%. Mr. Ingalls stated that the numbers are favoring the fishermen and that the discussion was more of an economist discussion.

Mr. Gomez asked how the trust was set up and by whom. Ms. Main stated that it will be done just like the state waters file was utilizing a trust with a claims process.

Ms. McGovern asked for more information on the decommissioning of the farm. Mr. Ingalls stated that through a condition of the lease agreement with BOEM, they will submit a decommissioning plan at a later date to make sure that all of the funding that is necessary, all of the means and methods are in place and approved by BOEM for that process. Decommissioning takes place later in the life of the wind farm so that they can use the most recent technology available. Mr. Ingalls stated that he is not sure of the specifics of the bond timing for the decommissioning process. Mr. Ingalls stated that there will be financial insurance for Revolution Wind, the same as there is for Southfork.

Mr. Sloan stated that BOEM and BSEE has mechanisms in place where if the decommissioning obligations for some reason cant be met, those funds would be forfeited and other enforcement mechanisms.

Mr. Gagnon asked how long the impact study would take. Mr. Ingalls stated that there are two phases of the study, the first would be early next year to gather a baseline and then the second phase will take place in 2030 or 2031 after five years. Mr. Ingalls confirmed that after the study is completed that is when the adjustment aspect would take place.

Ms. Hall asked Mr. Ingalls to address the difference between the FAB estimations and the Revolution Wind estimations. Mr. Ingalls explained that there is a 5 percent loss average across the life of the project and there is a professional difference of opinion on that 5% versus the 30% between the economists. Mr. Ingalls stated that the purpose of the effect study is to bridge the gap.

Dr. Kite Powell stated that the difference is that the ground around the towers which Rev Wind feels is lost to the fishermen may be adapted to by the fishermen getting the same landings as previously. There is also an assumption that the gentlemen’s agreement falling apart and not being replaced resulting in the loss of ground to the fixed gear fishery.

Mr. Gagnon asked if there will be someone that the fishing community can call if they have a question or an issue that may come up so that they can get a quick answer while they are out fishing. Mr. Ingalls said there would be. Mr. Ingalls clarified for Ms. Hall that in the case of the incident on the previous Thursday, the fisherman could have called the fisheries liaisons. Mr. Ingalls explained that there is a website dedicated to fisheries communications.

No further questions from the Council.

Ms. Main stated there were no more witnesses and made a brief statement asking that the Council issue a consistency concurrence with the conditions as laid out by the staff. Ms. Main also stated that the compensatory mitigation cannot be used against the developer but that Revolution Wind is committed to the mitigation package as put forth of $12.9 million which includes the draft BOEM guidance adaptation period, and the effect study.

Chair Coia opened the Public Comment portion of the meeting.

Amanda Barker of Providence, Policy Advocate for Green Energy Consumers Alliance as well as the RI state lead for the New England for Offshore Wind Coalition. Ms. Barker spoke in support of the project.

Tom Clemow addressed the Council stating that not have the knowledge of an outcome of a project is not a reason to say not to go forward with the project. Mr. Clemow’s second point is that schedules are important and the BOEM obligations are structured schedules that need to be adhered to.

Lisa Quattrocki Knight addressed the Council in opposition to the project based on navigational safety,

Stephen Knight addressed the Council in opposition of the project based on lack of transparency on the part of the developer as well as issues with climate change and carbon footprint.

Bill Thompson addressed the Council in opposition based on the significant long-term impacts that will occur as a result of the project to the commercial and recreational fishing industry.

Timmons Roberts addressed the Council in support of the project based on his many years of study as a professor most recently at Brown University.

Chair Coia and the Council discussed the date for another meeting to continue public comment and council deliberations for the Revolution Wind project. It was decided that the next regularly scheduled meeting, May 9, 2023, would be the best date and that the meeting would begin at 5:00 p.m.

Ms. McGovern motioned to continue the public hearing on this particular matter to May 9th. The motion was seconded by Mr. Gomez.

No discussion.

Chair Coia polled the Council:

Mr. Izzi Yes
Ms. Hall Yes
Mr. Gagnon Yes
Ms. McGovern Yes
Mr. Gomez Yes
Chair Coia Yes

Motion carried to continue the hearing to May 9th.

8. ADJOURN

Motion to adjourn
Motion: Mr. Gagnon
Second: Mr. Gomez

Motion to adjourn approved on a unanimous voice vote.

The meeting adjourned at 10:03 pm.

 

Minutes respectfully submitted,

Lisa A. Turner
Recording Secretary

*Meeting Transcript Available Upon Request

 

CALENDAR INDEX