Long Island Offshore Wind Park Scoping Report

							Long Island Offshore Wind Park
        Scoping Report



        Scoping Period
   June 19 – August 21, 2006
            Proposed Project
• 40 wind turbines
• 3.6 miles southwest of Jones Beach
• 400+ feet high
• Produce 140 megawatts of electricity
• Come onshore via submarine transmission line
  at West Amityville
• Purpose: To provide a utility-scale renewable
  energy facility for the Long Island electrical grid
Project Location
                    NEPA
• MMS determined an Environmental Impact
  Statement (EIS) required under NEPA
• Scoping is a required first step
  – announced for 60 days: 6/19-8/21
  – identifies significant issues, alternatives, or
    mitigations
  – includes public participation in addition to
    inputs by the lead and cooperating agencies
   Purpose of Scoping Report
• Collect concerns and information from individuals,
  federal and state agencies, and organizations regarding
  scope of EIS
• Trace comments to origin
   – necessary step to credibly show people their comments are
     considered
• Summarize and report concerns by themes
• Show what we received by objective evidence
• Does NOT include recommendations or conclusions
  about the EIS
• Organized in 2 volumes
   – Volume 1 is main report & cross-referencing appendices
   – Volume 2 contains scanned images of all sources
             Scoping Comments
• 2,877 sources submitted 6,075 comments
• Letters (1,988)
   – 1,949 received before August 21
   – 39 received after Aug 21 were included
   – Many multiple signatories per letter or letters per address
• Testimony at two public meetings (156 speakers)
   – July 10 (West Babylon, NY)
   – July 11 (Massapequa, NY)
   – Included various submittals on site
• OCS Public Connect website (208 entries)
• FOIA package from Save Jones Beach Association;
  COE comment records, correspondence, and miscellany
   – materials in this package that informed our evaluation were
     included in our scoping
            Scoping Comments
            General Impressions

• Support w/ or w/o conditions – 3,786
• Support w/ full environmental review: Natural Resources
  Defense Council – 8,054 letters
• Oppose w/ or w/o conditions or prefer “no action” - 714
• Support fair & full evaluation – 1,574
• Signatures on petitions supporting LIOWP from Citizens
  Campaign for the Environment (~12,000)
   – petitions do not help inform the scope of our environmental
     review and will be made part of the EIS administrative record
  Report Organization – Vol. I
• Introduction
• The Scoping Process
• Summary Of Scoping Comments
  –   Conceptual Concerns
  –   Potential Impacts or Issues of Concern
  –   Alternatives
  –   Mitigation Measures
  –   General Comments
• Summary Of People Offering Comments
• Next Steps
Report Organization – Vol. I (cont.)
Appendix A   Individual Source Numbers for Each Comment Code

Appendix B   Comment Codes and File Names in Volume II (Adobe PDF)
             for Each Person Offering a Comment

Appendix C   Comment Codes (with no file names) for Each Person
             Offering a Comment

Appendix D   Comment Codes and File Names for Each Agency and
             Organization

Appendix E   Comment Codes for Each Scoping Meeting Testifier

Appendix F   Comment Codes for Each Person Offering a Comment
             through OCS Public Connect

Appendix G   List of Supplementary Materials Included with Comments
  Report Organization – Vol. II
• Adobe PDF files referenced in Appendices B - G
Comment Coding - Traceability
• By person or group that commented:
  –   L1:    first letter (L2 = second letter, etc)
  –   SW1:   first speaker at West Babylon
  –   SM1:   first speaker at Massapequa
  –   P1:    first OCS Public Connect comment

• By comment:
  –   C1:    first conceptual comment
  –   I1:    first issue/impact of concern
  –   A1:    first alternative
  –   M:     mitigation
  –   G:     general comments
                Conceptual
          Comments that were general
       and broad; for or against the project

Examples
• C1: Support project
• C1A: Support project for environmental reasons
• C2: Oppose project
• C2B: Oppose project for political reasons
• C3: Support a “fair, full evaluation”
           Issues of Concern
Comments that demonstrated concern about impacts to the
  biological, physical and socioeconomic environment

Examples
• I1: Benthic and shellfish resources
• I2: Protected marine species
• I16B: Discuss the impacts of cable construction on
      neighbors, nearby schools, and other sensitive
      receptors
• I16E: Discuss the impacts of cable operation on
      neighbors, nearby schools, and other sensitive
      receptors
               Alternatives
           Comments that provided
       alternatives to the proposed project

Examples
• A1: Consider alternative renewable energy
      resources
• A2: Consider alternatives within current
      proposal
• A3: Update existing facilities
• A4: Expand the current plan
                 Mitigation
   Comments that provided mitigation ideas for
     various portions of the proposed project

Examples
• M2: Establish a long-term monitoring program
• M5: Paint turbines a different color to lessen
      impacts
                   General
        Comments about the EIS process;
            unbiased general comments
Examples
• G4: Perform a regulatory review; comply     with
      all state and Federal laws
• G6: Thoroughly justify project costs, need, and
      methods; perform a cost-benefit analysis;
      compensate for “takings”
Main Report (Conceptual Impacts)
Main Report (Specific Impacts)
                                                                                          NUMBER of
CODE                                    ISSUE or CONCERN
                                                                                          COMMENTS

                                     Impacts to the biological environment
 I1    Benthic and Shellfish Resources                                                       22

I1A    Define and characterize sediments along the proposed transmission route                4

I1B    Assess the benefits and impacts of artificial reef creation                            8
I1C    Assess the impacts of submarine construction                                           8
 I2    Protected Marine Species                                                              90
I2A    Use the best available science as a baseline of fish stocks                            4

I2B    Discuss the potential impacts on Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)                          7

I2C    Discuss the impacts of monopile lights on resident species                             1
I2D    Discuss the impacts of monopile lights on migrating species                            2
 I2E   Discuss the impacts of WTGs on resident marine species                                 6

 I2F   Assess impact of wind park on tuna migrations, whales, turtles and other species       9

I2G    Assess impact of leaks and spills from stored oils, diesel, etc.                       8
I2H    Discuss changes in species composition                                                 3
 I2I   Discuss impacts of increased vessel traffic                                            1
 I2J   Discuss impacts of potential thermal emissions                                         1
I2K    Discuss impacts of artificial reef addition                                            3
              Appendix A (sample)
C1: Support project (96 comments)
L1035, L1130, L1164, L123, L1359, L1488, L1674, L1695, L1767, L1768,
L1878, L192, L193, L1930, L1931, L2006, L2063, L2079, L2151, L2212, L2268,
L2314, L2315, L249, L377, L389, L390, L426, L479, L623, L647, L683, L689,
L691, L692, L693, L764, L781, L817, L827, L871, L872, L984, L985, L1063,
L1184, L1185, L1373, L1412, L1516, L2170, L2192, L706, L808, L2416, SM42,
SM70, SW55, SM38, SM61, SM32, SM78, SM69, P208 P3, P14, P19, P25, P31,
P37, P38, P50, P51, P52, P79, P84, P88, P114, P115, P116, P117, P120, P127,
P131, P145, P146, P148, P160, P162, P166, P171, P172, P182, P81, P144, P159

C1A: Support project for environmental reasons (i.e. human health, children,
safety, the “environment” in general, etc.) (2123)
L10, L1001, L1005, L1006, L101, L1011, L1012, L1013, L1017, L102, L1024,
L1027, L1028, L1029, L1030, L1031, L1032, L1033, L1034, L1037, L1039,
L1040, L1041, L1046, L1048, L1049, L1052, L1053, L1055, L1057, L1058,
L1059, L106, L1061, L1064, L1065, L1068, L1069, L1070, L1071, L1072,
L1073, L1074, L1075, L1077, L107, L1079, L1080, L1082, L1083, L1086,…
Appendix B (sample)
                          Next Steps
•   Scoping Report, public meeting transcripts, and all submitted materials and
    letters are available on the MMS website at
    http://www.mms.gov/offshore/RenewableEnergy/LIOWP.htm


                                       • Draft EIS planned for release in
                                         April 2007

                                       • 60-day public review and comment
                                         period on DEIS after release

                                       • MMS is required under NEPA to
                                         consider comments made on DEIS
                                         and incorporate them into the Final
                                         EIS