Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Maryland Offshore Wind’

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:

  • Maryland local governments declined to allow the transmission lines from the Maryland Offshore Wind Project to come ashore in their jurisdictions.
  • The Governor of Delaware agreed to allow the transmission lines to make landfall at the Delaware Seashore State Park.
  • The transmission pipelines would then traverse the adjacent Delaware Bays, to an inland substation, from which the power would be sent to Maryland.
  • US Wind applied for a number of permits from the Delaware Department of Natural Resources (DNREC) specific to horizontal directional drilling, laying cable pipelines, and other coastal construction activity.
  • The approval process, including provisions for public input, was not consistent with State regulations.
  • The Secretary’s decision to issue the beach construction permit is supported virtually exclusively by documents which were submitted by US Wind after the close of public comment.
  • Decommissioning and financial assurance information, a favorite BOE topic for both wind and oil/gas, was submitted after the close of the public record.

Read Full Post »

As promised, Ocean City, Maryland, neighboring towns, counties, fishing groups, the Save Right Whales Coalition, and a long list of commercial entities have sued BOEM for approving the Construction and Operations Plan (COP) for the Maryland Offshore Wind project. The complete filing is attached.

The plaintiffs’ discussion of BOEM’s failure to consider true alternatives (begins on p. 43) is particularly interesting. They contend that “BOEM rejected out-of-hand all true alternatives, and selected alternatives with only minor differences in number of turbines and the route for the power cables from the proposed action.

The plaintiffs also assert (p. 44) that “BOEM flatly rejected the option of not authorizing the Maryland Offshore Wind Project—as though approval were foreordained, with only the details to be determined.

The plaintiffs’ argue further (p. 46) that BOEM failed to analyze the 3 phases of the project, particularly the third phase which is open-ended at this time.

Blade failure concerns are discussed beginning on p. 49. Excerpt:

Missing from BOEM’s Final EIS is any discussion or analysis of the environmental impacts in the event of blade and turbine failure and the degradation of Project components, which are known and foreseeable possibilities that should have been reviewed and analyzed by BOEM. Risks of blade and turbine failure and component degradation are not hypothetical. Rather, they pose real dangers to the water quality of the ocean, fish and essential fish habitats, marine mammals, benthic resources, and recreational and commercial boaters.”

As previously recommended, wind leasing and plan approvals should be paused until BSEE’s investigation of the Vineyard Wind blade failure and the associated environmental damage study have been completed.

There is much more in this filing for those who want to take a closer look.

Read Full Post »