August 12, 2019 — The following is an excerpt from a story originally published by Undercurrent News:
Before the US president Donald Trump administration ordered a delay of the country’s first offshore wind farm late last week, it was the belief of at least some of its officials that making the changes requested by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) would be disastrous and NMFS approval was not needed to move ahead anyhow, Undercurrent News has learned.
Interior secretary David Bernhardt on Friday told Bloomberg that he has ordered an additional study by his department of the Vineyard Wind project, a plan to build more than 80 giant wind turbines on a 118-mile stretch of ocean some 15 miles from the coast of Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts, before going ahead with a final environmental impact statement (EIS).
The decision puts in jeopardy the $2.8 billion project, which had promised to supply a combined 800 megawatts of power to at least 400,000 New England homes and businesses but had worried the commercial fishing industry. It was scheduled to begin construction this year and be operational by early 2022.
Bernhardt reportedly told the news service that it’s important the impact of the project be thoroughly studied. “For offshore wind to thrive on the outer continental shelf, the federal government has to dot their I’s and cross their T’s,” he said.
A Vineyard Wind spokesman called the Interior Department’s decision “a surprise and disappointment” and said his company urged the federal government to “complete the review as quickly as possible”.
As reported last week by Undercurrent News, the US Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) has seemingly dragged its feet on Vineyard Wind’s final EIS since receiving at least two letters from Michael Pentony, the regional administrator for NMFS’ greater Atlantic office.
One 44-page letter, sent in March to James Bennett, head of BOEM’s Office of Renewable Programs, provided a detailed critique of a half dozen alternative approaches for the wind farm under consideration. Another short three-page letter sent by Pentony on April 16, restated some of the same concerns, including NMFS’ request for more space between the turbines and an overall different directional orientation.
“We reviewed your preferred alternative and associated rationale provided in your letter dated April 3, 2019, and are writing to inform you that [NMFS] does not concur with your choice of a preferred alternative,” the second letter states.