
The attached Memorandum of Understanding between Vineyard Wind (VW) and the Town of Nantucket is long on bureaucratic procedures and short on risk mitigation and penalties.
The agreement details requirements for monthly reports, liaisons, written correspondence, plan reviews, and participation on incident management teams, but excludes any monetary penalties for past or future incidents. (With regard to penalties, should BSEE have assessed civil penalties for the 2024 turbine incident in accordance with 30 CFR § 285.400 (f)? This was a major pollution event.)
This MOU provision gives the impression that the Town is subordinate to VW:
“The Town will provide Vineyard Wind 1 up to 4 business days, if required, to identify and correct errors in the Town’s intended public communications about the Project.”
The responsible party should not be exercising oversight over the communications of an affected local government. Can you imagine Santa Barbara County reaching such an agreement with Sable Offshore?
Finally, the MOU further establishes the Town as a de facto partner in the project. VW, not the Town, is the responsible party and must be held fully accountable for project performance.












Interesting case: Delaware litigation on approval of the Coastal Construction Permit for the Maryland Offshore Wind Project
Posted in decommissioning, energy policy, Offshore Wind, Regulation, tagged Coastal Construction Plan, court filing, decommissioning, Delaware litigation, Maryland Offshore Wind, public comment, US Wind on October 29, 2025| Leave a Comment »
The Dept. of the Interior is currently reconsidering approval of the Construction and Operations Plan for the Maryland Offshore Wind Project (US Wind).
Attached is a court filing challenging Delaware’s approval of the Coastal Construction Plan for that project. Some interesting points from the filing:
Read Full Post »