Deepwater Wind Secures
State Property Easements
 |
| Burnside Ave. at Scarborough State Beach, Deepwater Wind’s Alternative Landing Site. (photo Tracey C. O’Neill) |
Providence - Deepwater Wind (DWW) on Wednesday surmounted the
latest hurdle in its quest to bring its Block Island Wind Farm energy
transmission cable to the mainland.
Despite an upsurge in opposition to the project, after several
hours testimony and commentary concerning DWW’s alternative landing site at Scarborough State Beach,
the State Properties Committee in a 2-0 vote with one abstention, granted the
offshore wind corporation easements for passage and construction at two
state-owned property sites.
“It’s a good day,” said Jeff Grybowski, CEO of Deepwater Wind.
Committee goes out of
the box
Taking public concern and the lengthy and sometimes tumultuous
regulatory process under consideration, the committee agreed to hear public
comment for and against the proposed easements after formal presentations by
state agencies and questioning by committee members.
“Unlike most state property meetings, we really don’t take
public comment. For this one I am,” said Ronald Renaud, Chair. “I know
this is a passionate issue for some, probably all, pro or con.”
Representatives for the Rhode Island Departments of
Transportation (RIDOT) and Environmental Management (DEM) presented Easement and Assumption Agreements to the committee for
consideration on one RIDOT parcel located at Dillon’s corner and two DEM
parcels located on theScarborough State Beach Complex,
all within the Town of Narragansett.
Two state property sites
designated for use by DWW
The Dillon’s Corner property, currently used by RIDOT as a salt
and storage facility, resides at the convergence of Routes 108 and 1. The
easement granted to Deepwater Wind Block Island Transmission, LLC, as shown in
documents filed with State Properties, allowed for a one-year temporary
construction easement for resurrection of an electrical substation and
perpetual use thereafter. Collateral to the easements is the assignment and
assumption of rights in the easement to Narragansett Electric Company (NEC),
the entity responsible for erecting and maintaining the substation.
 |
| Paul Carcieri RIDOT, Annete Jacques RIDOT, Mary Kay DEM, Larry Mouradjian DEM (l to r) |
Presented by Paul Carcieri, Chief Real Estate Specialist at
RIDOT, the combined Dillon’s Corner easements generate income to the state in
amount of $205,000.
Easements at the Scarborough Beach Complex allow for the
installation and operation of subterranean electric cable on two separate
parcels. The mainland landing site for the Block Island transmission has the
cable scheduled to come ashore north of the beach operation in an area occupied
by a storm water drainage system.
“This landfall location is adjacent to a storm water discharge
area that runs north of our designated beach property at Scarborough and into
public open space at Black Point Beach,” said Larry Mouradjian, Assistant
Director at DEM.
According to Mouradjian, historical studies of the Scarborough
beachfront from 1939 to 2004, accredited to Dr. Jon Boothroyd of the University
of Rhode Island’s College of Environment and Life Sciences,
showed that the beachfront was not particularly susceptible to
radical changes in its profile over that period of time.
The subterranean cable buried in a location that already holds a
utility easement, will occupy a PVC conduit and insulators buried a minimum of
10 ft. under the sand at landing.
“We should not see or even know that this utility is there,”
said Mouradjian, emphasizing that the proposed (utility) easements were
standard in nature. “We are accustomed to utility easements in state parks. We
have many throughout the system.”
Scarborough Beach
Complex garners a facelift
 |
| Scarborough Alternative Landing Site |
In consideration for the easements, DEM will receive
compensation from Narragansett Electric Company and Deepwater Wind.
Legal counsel for DEM provided the breakdown of monetary
compensation to be paid for the Scarborough Beach Complex easements.
The easement appraisal for both the temporary and permanent
easements vetted the state an initial cash payment in amount of $169,750 as
reported by Mary Kay, DEM legal counsel. The second payment paid by
Narragansett Electric Company upon assumption is slated for renovations,
landscape and paving improvements to the Scarborough Beach facility in amount
of $350,000.
“The Scarborough Beach facility has not had significant
improvements done since early 1980’s when there was a big construction project
on the pavilion and parking lot, ” said Kay. “This will be a much needed
improvement to the entire beach facility which is the most highest use beach
facility in the State of Rhode Island.”
DEM also found “no significant environmental or public use
concerns” with the easement on the second lot at Scarborough, the
auxiliary parking lot that fronts Ocean Road with access on Burnside Avenue.
Upon completion of work by Narragansett Electric Company, the parking lot will
see addition of one manhole cover above ground.
The final payment with a $1 million bottom line, guaranteed by
Deepwater Wind will be made in ten equal annual installments of $100,000 for
improvements to state parks and recreation areas.
“For the public benefit, we will receive the generosity of a
renovation to Scarborough Beach and also a commitment to assist in hosting
improvements to our state park facilities in the future, “said Mouradjian. “We
feel that this is a reasonable request and find no reason to oppose it on the
grounds of operation.”
AG’s office voices
concern over the project
After voicing several concerns on behalf of the State Attorney
General Peter Kilmartin, Richard B. Woolley abstained from the vote.
 |
| Dr. Robert Griffith, Richard Woolley, Ronald Renaud of the RI State Properties Committee (l to r) |
Setting forth the AG’s support for wind energy, Woolley
described concerns particular to the Deepwater Wind Demonstration Project.
“He (Kilmartin) feels that these two easements should not be
considered piece-meal and have to be considered in context of the entire
project,” said Woolley.
Questioning RIDOT representatives, Woolley put forth an argument
that Deepwater Wind, being a for-profit corporation should pay some form of
additional compensation to the State of Rhode Island for its utility permit
requests to place utility cables under Scarborough and State highways.
In a back and forth exchange, Wooley and RIDOT representatives
debated whether there were differences between DWW’s utility permit requests,
(applications not yet submitted) and any other standard utility permit request.
“In the context of the big picture of this thing,” said Woolley.
“If and when Narragansett Electric or Deepwater comes to DOT and says ‘we want
to have utility permit access to put these transmission cables from Scarborough
under Ocean Road, up Burnside Avenue and then from Burnside Avenue down 108 to
the switching station,’ I think that the State Properties Committee should have
their hand in it.”
“In just this particular matter or in all matters,” asked
Annette Jacques, RIDOT legal counsel.
Woolley emphasized his belief that the Deepwater Wind project
and utility permit request were somehow different from other similar requests
from for-profit entities.
“This is a unique circumstance,” said Woolley. “This is not a
regular public utility. This is a special project for a for-profit entity. Even
if it’s shifted over to Narragansett Electric, it runs directly to the
Deepwater Wind Project, not anybody else.”
“We do have very similar permits for other for-profit entities
as well, though” said Jacques. “Just to be clear, we are moving forward on a
basis that the department has directed as to how the State Properties Committee
wants to interpret that enabling legislation. If it’s in this particular
project moving forward or if it’s in projects that affect the highways, [not]
the freeways that might be a conversation – that’s certainly not before the
committee today.”
“Just because it’s been a matter of policy by a department for a
period of time, doesn’t necessarily make it appropriate,” said Woolley.
Renaud called for a conversation between the Directors for all
departments involved.
“I think what we can do with this is – Director Lewis, Director
Coit, Director Licht, the Attorney General can make that determination,” said
Renaud. “We can bring this concern to them and have that for discussion other
than today.”
General Treasurer,
Raimondo supports renewable energy
Christopher Feisthamel, represented the General Treasurer’s
office in an ex-officio capacity.
“I want to go on the record and say that the General Treasurer
wholly supports renewable energy. I appreciate and applaud the efforts of the
chairman to create a process that’s truly transparent,” said Feisthamel.
Representing the Department of Administration, Robert Griffith
narrowed the scope of the vote to the easements before the committee in
opposition to several suggestions that the big picture or project in its
entirety be considered. A former member of the Energy Facility Siting Board, Griffith spoke to the
difficulties involved in each process.
“The easement is not something that the broader issue is going
to turn on. The easement is a starting point for this to travel through the
CRMC process and I’m quite certain through the Energy Facilities Siting board
process,” said Griffith. “The specific point for landfall of the cable is the
beginning point for both of those processes. [I] myself am compelled to look at
this on the narrow point of the easements.”
Griffith also provided insight into the state’s movement towards
renewable energy streams.
“However, it has been the policy of the state since 2004 to move
towards a 16 percent renewable energy reliance,” said Griffith.
Easements granted
Griffith and Renaud voted in the affirmative, with Woolley
abstaining.