CAPE WIND AS PROPOSED FOR NANTUCKET SOUND
POSES A THREAT TO PUBLIC SAFETY
Zoning is Police Power intended to create order by law to prevent chaos that results in public safety hazards.
As of September 19, 2009; Nantucket Sound is not zoned to prohibit alternative use that conflicts with present and/ or existing use such as navigation, marine and heritage trades, and recreational use.
To address this policy deficiency, President Obama is initiating policy to exclude and direct alternative development of the Ocean.
The Christian Science Monitor
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Obama's ocean task force releases report
Sweeping changes could affect the United States'
management of oceans, including offshore energy
development.
By Mark Clayton
Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
"In June, President Obama set up the commission to
develop: "a national policy that ensures the protection,
maintenance, and restoration of the health of ocean,
coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems and resources,
enhances the sustainability of ocean and coastal
economies."
It must also, he wrote, "preserve our maritime heritage,
provides for adaptive management to enhance our
understanding of and capacity to respond to climate
change, and is coordinated with our national security
and foreign policy interests."
http://features.csmonitor.com/environment/2009/09/17/obamas-ocean-task-force-releases-report/
Nantucket Sound has not yet been zoned, yet Cape Wind is under consideration by federal Minerals Management Service of the Department of the Interior for a lease for the area of Nantucket Sound under conflicting types of use that should preclude Nantucket Sound as a site for Cape Wind. Chaotic development leads to public safety hazards.
The most important public policy consideration is the assurance of public safety addressed by zoning. The National Environmental Policy Act assures the public of our safety also protected under the Energy Policy Act of 2005 as well as other laws.
Compelling evidence demonstrates that Cape Wind would imperil air travelers, and the navigators traversing Nantucket Sound. There are approximately 400,000 annual flights in this airspace. Approximately 3 million ferry passengers travel in 22,000 annual trips cross this triangular body of water that exists between Cape Cod, Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket Island.
The Minerals Management Service as lead federal permit reviewing agency produced the Cape Wind Final Environmental Impact Statement required under National Environmental Policy Act review. This FEIS anticipates vessel collisions by Cape Wind proposed action structures, excerpt from Page 65 of 322, of Section 5, of the Cape Wind MMS FEIS:
"The analysis shows that the highest possibility of an oil spill occurring in the area in and around Nantucket Sound is related to vessels transiting the area, regardless of the presence of the proposed action structures and related work vessels. Over the course of 30 years, transiting vessels alone may result in 21 spills from vessels colliding with one of the proposed action structures. When the presence of the proposed action components are combined with transiting vessels, the possibility for a spill over the 30-year period increases slightly to 22.443 spills. The oil spill probability analysis shows that only 7 percent of all spills expected in Nantucket Sound during a 30 year period could be attributed to the addition of the proposed facility. It is possible that 2 spills attributable to the proposed action itself could occur during the same 30 year period. Of these spills, there is a 90 percent chance that they would involve 50 gallons (189 liters) or less, and a 1 percent chance they would involve volumes of 10,000 gallons (37,854 lite= rs). The probability of a spill in the same 30 year period involving the entire 68,000 gallons (207,408 liters) of oil contained within the 130 WTGs and the ESP is less than one in a million. (Report No. 3.3.5-1.)"
The MMS FEIS anticipates 1.43 vessel strikes by introduction of Cape Wind per year.
Calculated as [30 yrs. divided by "21 spills from vessels colliding with one of the proposed action structures"]
Cape Wind Electrical Service Platform and appurtenant structures that include wind turbines, would introduce 65, 000 gallons of oil in various Cape Wind project containments. While all structures will not likely simultaneously combust, (MMS FEIS "less than one in a million"), the Cape Wind project may alone result in 1.43 vessel strikes per year. Will one these predicted vessel strikes involve loss(es) of life, an oil tanker spill, a passenger ferry collision, and/or a fishing boat collision?
The United States Passenger Vessel Association is the U.S. Coast Guard Commandant Admiral Thad W. Allen defined "face of the port" of the private sector.
"Admiral Thad W. Allen assumed the duties of the 23rd Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard on May 25th, 2006. As such, he leads the largest component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), comprised of about 42,000 men and women on Active Duty, 7,000 civilians, 8,000 Reservists and 34,000 volunteer Auxiliarists."
http://www.uscg.mil/FLAG/cg00.asp
March 3, 2009
Dear Commandant Allen:
I have read your expression of the importance of the of the Coast Guard partnership with the private sector, "face of the port", the Passenger Vessel Association, (copied below), 'Passenger Vessel Association Meeting 10 Jan 2009'.
I ask you to please deeply consider that one month following your meeting with PVA leadership in San Francisco, the PVA BOD approved their revised resolution in opposition to the Cape Wind project, "because of its hazardous impact on navigation and safety of passengers on ferry vessels".
Most Respectfully,
Barbara Durkin
Northboro, MA 01532
"The Board of Directors of the Passenger Vessel Association – the national trade association representing owners and operators of U.S.-flagged passenger vessels of all types – continues to oppose the construction of a proposed offshore wind energy facility in Nantucket Sound, Massachusetts, because of its hazardous impact on navigation and safety of passengers on ferry vessels.
The location of 130 wind towers in close proximity to existing ferry routes to the island of Nantucket and Martha's Vineyard poses unacceptable safety risks, including possible collision, allision with the wind towers, and interference with navigational radar generated by the wind energy facility.
PVA members, including the Woods Hole, Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket Steamship Authority and Hy-Line Cruises, provide essential year-round transportation services to Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket, and the safety of their vessels, passengers, and crew is paramount.
Existing navigational uses of and traditional ferry routes in Nantucket Sound must be protected and should take precedence over proposed new usages that jeopardize navigational safety.
The Final Environmental Impact Statement of January 2009 is flawed with regard to navigational safety and demonstrates insufficient concern about and attention to this issue, especially with regard to high-speed passenger vessels and operations in reduced visibility or adverse sea conditions. The U.S. Minerals Management Service should refrain from issuing a permit for construction of the Nantucket Sound wind energy project. (approved February 17, 2009)
The Board of Directors of the Passenger Vessel Association – the national trade association representing owners and operators of U.S.-flagged passenger vessels of all types – continues to oppose the construction of a proposed offshore wind energy facility in Nantucket Sound, Massachusetts, because of its hazardous impact on navigation and safety of passengers on ferry vessels.
The location of 130 wind towers in close proximity to existing ferry routes to the island of Nantucket and Martha's Vineyard poses unacceptable safety risks, including possible collision, allision with the wind towers, and interference with navigational radar generated by the wind energy facility.
PVA members, including the Woods Hole, Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket Steamship Authority and Hy-Line Cruises, provide essential year-round transportation services to Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket, and the safety of their vessels, passengers, and crew is paramount.
Existing navigational uses of and traditional ferry routes in Nantucket Sound must be protected and should take precedence over proposed new usages that jeopardize navigational safety.
The Final Environmental Impact Statement of January 2009 is flawed with regard to navigational safety and demonstrates insufficient concern about and attention to this issue, especially with regard to high-speed passenger vessels and operations in reduced visibility or adverse sea conditions. The U.S. Minerals Management Service should refrain from issuing a permit for construction of the Nantucket Sound wind energy project. (approved February 17, 2009) (Original resolution approved April 25, 2006; additions to the original resolution are underlined)."
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
U.S. Coast Guard Commandant Admiral Thad W. Allen
Passenger Vessel Association Meeting 10 Jan 2009
Shipmates,
I recently met in San Francisco with the Passenger Vessel Association. PVA represents the "non-foreign cruise ship" passenger vessel industry. I previously met with PVA in 2007 at their meeting in Charleston, SC. This is a very important partnership for the Coast Guard. Many PVA members are small businesses that represent the maritime culture of their operating areas including dinner cruises, water taxis, charter cruises, and ferries. In many ways they are the private sector "face of the port" in much the same way that our coastal stations are the face of the Coast Guard.
I met with the executive leadership of PVA and then addressed their general membership, taking questions in both fora. The topics addressed included the transition to the Transportation Worker Identification Card (TWIC), biometrics, licensing, proposed changes to water discharge permits (overboard discharges), potential changes in weight standards for passengers in assessing capacity and stability of vessels carrying passengers for hire, automated identification systems (AIS), wind farms, and ballast water management (invasive species).
If I were to summarize the most significant theme from our discussions it would their desire for the federal government to be able to assess the collective impact of regulations on small passenger vessel operations. In fact, they raised a good point. We tend to look at a particular rule (regulation) in a stovepipe related to the cause for action or statutory mandate. I have asked our marine safety folks to take a look at this.
We appreciated the hospitality and the honest, open feedback as we continue to implement improvements in our Marine Safety program.
ADM A
http://www.uscg.mil/comdt/blog/archive/2009_01_01_archive.asp
The FAA has issued Cape Wind a ** NOTICE OF PRESUMED HAZARD ** current this date September 18, 2009.
Federal Aviation Administration
Air Traffic Airspace Branch, ASW-520
2601 Meacham Blvd.
Fort Worth, TX 76137-0520
Aeronautical Study No.
2009-WTE-332-OE
Prior Study No.
2006-ANE-1078-OE
Page 1 of 4
Issued Date: 02/13/2009
Len Fagan
Cape Wind Associates, LLC.
75 Arlington Street, Suite 704
Boston, MA 02116
** NOTICE OF PRESUMED HAZARD **
The Federal Aviation Administration has conducted an aeronautical study under the provisions of 49 U.S.C.,
Section 44718 and if applicable Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 77, concerning:
Structure: Wind Turbine 4A-HSS
Location: Cotuit, MA
Latitude: 41-30-55.77N NAD 83
Longitude: 70-23-48.35W
Heights: 440 feet above ground level (AGL)
440 feet above mean sea level (AMSL)
Initial findings of this study indicate that the structure as described exceeds obstruction standards and/or would
have an adverse physical or electromagnetic interference effect upon navigable airspace or air navigation
facilities. Pending resolution of the issues described below, the structure is presumed to be a hazard to air
navigation.
See Attachment for Additional information.
Further study has been initiated by the FAA.
NOTE: PENDING RESOLUTION OF THE ISSUE(S) DESCRIBED ABOVE, THE STRUCTURE IS
PRESUMED TO BE A HAZARD TO AIR NAVIGATION. THIS LETTER DOES NOT AUTHORIZE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE STRUCTURE EVEN AT A REDUCED HEIGHT. ANY RESOLUTION OF THE
ISSUE(S) DESCRIBED ABOVE MUST BE COMMUNICATED TO THE FAA SO THAT A FAVORABLE
DETERMINATION CAN SUBSEQUENTLY BE ISSUED.
IF MORE THAN 60 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS LETTER HAS ELAPSED WITHOUT
ATTEMPTED RESOLUTION, IT WILL BE NECESSARY FOR YOU TO REACTIVATE THE STUDY BY
FILING A NEW FAA FORM 7460-1, NOTICE OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OR ALTERATION.
If we can be of further assistance, please contact our office at (816) 329-2525. On any future correspondence
concerning this matter, please refer to Aeronautical Study Number 2009-WTE-332-OE.
Page 2 of 4
Signature Control No: 107807735-108228745 ( NPH -WT )
Donna O'Neill
Specialist
Attachment(s)
Additional Information
Page 3 of 4
Additional information for ASN 2009-WTE-332-OE
The proposed construction consists of 130 wind turbines that would be located in Nantucket Sound,
Massachusetts, within the area bounded by the following latitude/longitude coordinates:
North Boundary Line 41-32-36.55N
East Boundary Line 70-14-24.92W
South Boundary Line 41-27-37.39N
West Boundary Line 70-23-48.35W
Each wind turbine was studied separately under Aeronautical Study Numbers 2009-WTE-332 through 461-OE.
Each of the 130 wind turbines is identified as an obstruction and/or as having an adverse effect on the use of air
navigation facilities or navigable airspace under the standards of 14 CFR, Part 77, as follows:
There are three FAA radar sites that provide detection of aircraft for Air Traffic Control within the Nantucket
Sound area. These radar facilities are North Truro Cape (QEA), Nantucket (ACK), and Otis Air Force
Base (FMH). QEA is an ARSR-4 (digital/long range search radar) with ATCBI-6. ACK is an ASR-9
(digital/terminal search radar) with Mode-S (digital secondary surveillance radar), and FHM is an ASR-8
(analog/terminal search radar) with an ATCBI-5 (analog secondary surveillance radar).
Wind turbines can present problems for primary (search) and secondary (beacon) radar coverage. Wind turbine
towers may provide line-of-sight (LOS) shielding issues and beam distortion. Rotating wind turbines that are
within line of sight of a search radar system provide unwanted target returns or "clutter". Detection of small
aircraft within a clutter environment may not be possible, especially for analog search radar systems.
Another effect is that if a target is directly over the wind farm while its blades are in motion, detection will be
unreliable, resulting in a reduction of the probability of detection (PD). The result will be primary misses and
non-reinforced beacon. Targets without transponders will be displayed as uncorrelated video over the wind
farm.
Secondary Surveillance Radar (Beacon)
The proposed wind farm is not likely to affect detection of aircraft with an operational transponder. Although
unlikely, detection of transponder equipped aircraft flying within 2nm behind the wind farm (as viewed from
the radar site) and at an altitude of 600', or lower, may be a problem due to line-of-sight shielding. At 11
nautical miles (NM) it is highly unlikely that there will be any false targets due to reflections. Beam distortion
caused by the wind turbines is also not likely.
Primary Surveillance Radar (Search)
Line-of-sight shielding is not an issue as the wind turbine towers are at a minimum of 9 nm from the nearest
radar, and separated at a distance of 0.25 NM. Only targets below 800' and within 3 NM of the wind farm may
potentially be affected by shadowing. However, at maximum range for either of the primary radars, the other
radar will provide better coverage for areas impacted by the wind turbines.
FMH
Page 4 of 4
The search radar located at FMH will be impacted by the cumulative effect of the wind turbines associated with
this project. The cumulative effect of rotational blades associated with this project is expected to reduce search
radar detection for aircraft at all altitudes above the wind farm area. The unwanted clutter will be excessive for
the ASR-8 over the wind farm and the ability to track aircraft without transponders over the wind farm will be
impeded. In its current configuration, the FMH ASR-8 has no effective means of mitigating clutter created by
wind farms.
ACK
Pending wind patterns, the probability of detection (PD) over the wind farm will decrease as a result of wind
turbine clutter, and due to raised thresholds that are a product of the dynamic geocensor map function. The
combination of these two factors will reduce the probability of detection over the wind farm. This could
result in a decrease in the beacon reinforcement rate over the wind farm, or primary misses of aircraft without
transponders. There could also be a minimal amount of clutter displayed. All ASR-9 sites have been upgraded
with a 9PAC-II. Included in this upgrade is the dynamic geocensor which is very adept at suppressing clutter.
The radar system most vulnerable to the effects of the proposed wind turbine project is the FMH ASR-8. The
analog ASR-8 located at FMH has limited capabilities to resolve the effects of clutter caused by multiple wind
turbines within a confined area. Although changes made within the ASR-8 can reduce clutter, these changes
also adversely impact detection of aircraft. ASR-8 performance can potentially be improved by adding a
TDX-2000 external digitizer although its performance over a wind turbine farm is unknown at this time.
Installation and optimization of a TDX-2000 with the FMH ASR-8 can provide many post processing tools and
features that are designed for operating in a high clutter environment. Constraints can be applied to the specific
area of high clutter, such as the wind farm, to eliminate target detection for short run length, unwanted targets.
Installation and optimization of TDX-2000 with an ASR-8 has an estimated cost of approximately $1.5 million.
Power upgrades, necessary for installation should be approximately $200,000.
If it is found that the addition of the TDX-2000 external digitizer does not mitigate the effects of the wind
turbine farm on the FMH ASR-8, then the only other viable option is to replace the FMH ASR-8 system with
an ASR-11 system. The ASR-11 is a digital search radar with post processing capabilities. The cost associated
with a new radar facility would be estimated at $12-15 million.
If further study finds that the construction of the Cape Wind project would produce a substantial adverse
effect on aviation due to radar interference/degradation, funding through a reimbursable agreement with the
proponent would be required for either mitigation option (external digitizer or replacement ASR-11). The
mitigation resolution would need to be implemented and operational prior to construction of the Cape Wind
project. The proponent would need to agree to immobilize all wind turbines and, as a part of the reimbursable
agreement, to fund the replacement of the ASR-8 with an ASR-11 system if the external digitizer is installed
and it is found that its performance is not acceptable to Air Traffic Control.
[End] This FAA document may be viewed at www.windstop.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sent by Massachusetts Fishermen's Partnership as an organization of commercial fishermen's associations from all gear and geographic sectors of the Massachusetts fishing industry:
January 12, 2009
Senator Daniel K. Inouye
Chairman
Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation
508 Dirkson Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-6125
To the Honorable Chairman Inouye:
The U.S. Coast Guard Sector Southeast New England has contracted an independent study "on how the wind turbine generators may impact marine radar systems and navigation on vessels operating in the area" of Nantucket Sound.
I am thankful for the invitation to participate in the Coast Guard Cape Wind Radar Workshop. I am a commercial fisherman who fishes Nantucket Sound as owner and operator of the fishing vessel SIRIUS. I am the President of the Massachusetts Fishermen's Partnership (MFP), an organization of commercial fishermen's associations from all gear and geographic sectors of the Massachusetts fishing industry. Established in 1995, the partnership works to provide solutions to problems common to all fishermen.
At the stakeholder briefing of December 5, 2008, I requested a copy of the completed Radar Study from Sector Southeast New England Captain Perry. I have not been provided with that by the U.S. Coast Guard. However; I respectfully submit my comments for your consideration regarding currently available information, and applicable law.
Representations made by Captain Perry on December 5th provided herein, confirm that Cape Wind would interfere with reasonable uses of the exclusive economic zone, the high seas, and the territorial seas.
APPENDIX A SECTION 388 OF THE ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2005, PUBLIC LAW 109-58; provision (I) prevents the interference with reasonable uses of the exclusive economic zone, the high seas, and territorial seas.
[1.] The MMS Cape Wind Project Plan Filing (page 16) "NONCOMPETIVE LEASE, EASEMENT AND RIGHT-OF-WAY (THIRTY YEARS)" states:
"…Rights granted are subject to applicable laws, the terms, conditions, and attached stipulations of this lease, easement or right-of-way, the Secretary of the Interior's regulations and formal orders in effect as of issuance, and to regulations and formal order hereafter promulgated when not inconsistent with rights granted or specific provisions of this lease, easement or right-of-way."
Applicable law:
Alternative Energy Programmatic EIS A-3 October 2007 APPENDIX A SECTION 388 OF THE ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2005, PUBLIC LAW 109-58
(4) REQUIREMENTS- The Secretary shall ensure that any activity under this subsection
is carried out in a manner that provides for--
(A) safety;
(B) protection of the environment;
Alternative Energy Programmatic EIS A-5 October 2007
(C) prevention of waste;
(D) conservation of the natural resources of the outer Continental Shelf
(E) coordination with relevant Federal agencies;
(F) protection of national security interests of the United States;
(G) protection of correlative rights in the outer Continental Shelf;
(H) a fair return to the United States for any lease, easement, or right-of-way
under this subsection;
(I) prevention of interference with reasonable uses (as determined by the
Secretary) of the exclusive economic zone, the high seas, and the territorial seas;
(J) consideration of--
(i) the location of, and any schedule relating to, a lease, easement, or right-of-
way for an area of the outer Continental Shelf; and
(ii) any other use of the sea or seabed, including use for a fishery, a
sealane, a potential site of a deepwater port, or navigation;
Sector Southeast New England Captain Perry's representations to stakeholders, during the December 5th conference call, confirm the "activity" proposed as Cape Wind cannot be carried out in a manner that provides for safety as required by Section 388 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005.
Given the fact that 1/3 mile spacing between the WTGs will be unsafe for us as mobile gear fishermen, in this designated Essential Fish Habitat and spawning ground, Cape Wind represents the termination of our rights assured under Section 388 that include, "use for a fishery".
The Cape Wind present proposal represents a closure of this 24 square mile economic zone to mobile gear fishermen based on safety risks identified during the December 5th conference call by Captain Perry who stated:
"The other scenario is vessels operating in the scenario, within in wind farm and trying to do collision avoidance operations in there. That to me was problematic. When we looked at what came out of that. Ah, we found it very difficult for one vessel to see another vessel. And, although if you were concentrating on the radar, you could argue, you could say yep, I could find that vessel and we could see it and I could track it and I could avoid it. But it was very difficult. Ah, so that kind of comes, where the human element comes into play. An individual or a crew would really have to concentrate on that and ah I think it's well above and beyond what we should expect the mariner to do."
"It's a tough situation you I think that ya know I'm very sympathetic to the fishermen having been a commercial fisherman myself and I certainly understand that hey ya know this is tough because, am I, and we don't know this, I mean, we're come up with, if you can't fish in here because it's unsafe then you don't fish in there. That's outside the Coast Guard realm. OK? You can fish someplace else. But it's another thing if he's a boater that can only operate in this area. You can't operate anyplace else. He can only do his right in there. Then I can kind of come in and weigh in on the freedom of navigation. In fact I can say ya know, the waterways for everybody. The freedom??? From the US promotes and stands by and if we're gonna restrict somebody from using in there then maybe I might say no my recommendation is that this project doesn't go forward for that. You can fish someplace else it may stink but it may be costly to him but unfortunately that's outside of my authority the Coast Guard's authority to do that."
[1.] MMS Cape Wind Project Plan Filing (page 1, paragraph 2):
"The Project has been designed with sufficient spacing between WTGs (a minimum of 0.34 nautical mile (629 meters) x 0.56 nautical mile (1,000 meters) grid) so that the construction and operation of the proposed Project will not preclude or prohibit traditional uses of the water-sheet area within or around the Wind Park turbine array. Use of the water sheet area within the turbine array would include the continuation of general commercial and recreational navigation, commercial and recreational navigation, commercial and recreational aviation, commercial and recreational fishing, and other traditional water-based activities that promote the use and enjoyment of this area of Nantucket Sound."
Refuting MMS Project Plan Filing assertions are the Division of Marine Fisheries comments on the Cape Wind ACOE-DEIS/R by letter [2.] to MMS dated July 14, 2006 that state:
"Fishermen are concerned that the safe and effective use of mobile gear would be impossible in a field of WTGs for the following reasons":
1. "The otter-trawl gear typically extends from about 775' to 1400' behind the boat depending on the size of the trawler and species being targeted. The trawl doors spread the gear to between 300-400 feet apart. The targeted species tend to be aggregated in schools not evenly distributed over the area. Therefore, it will it would be very difficult for fishermen to fish with this gear in between a row of WTGs."
2. "Fishermen concentrate their efforts where they have located the schools and need to be able to turn on the fish. A trawler cannot make sharp turns with its net in the water. It requires a large turning radius of 1/2 to 1 mile to prevent gear collapsing. This is more than the distance between WTGs."
3. "Fishing is dynamic activity with boats going along every possible compass heading. Having to take account of the winds and tidal currents, locations of fish, and locations and courses of other boats in the area requires considerable skill on the part of the captains to safety ply their trade. The presence of WTGs throughout the fishing area would make safe maneuvering extremely difficult and pose an ever present danger of collision. The probability of accidental collision with the structures or other vessels whose presence may be visually obstructed by the towers would be enhanced under conditions of foul weather or visibility for which the area is noted."
Whereas MMS is clear in their expressed intent [1] MMS Cape Wind Project Plan Filing (page 1, paragraph 2) to: "not preclude or prohibit traditional uses of the water-sheet area within or around the Wind Park turbine array." And "the turbine array would include the continuation of general commercial and recreational navigation, commercial and recreational navigation, commercial and recreational aviation, commercial and recreational fishing"
Whereas MMS representation of the dynamic activity of mobile gear fishing conflicts with my 30 years of fishing experience that mobile gear fishing will not be able to take place within an industrial development where WTG are spaced at 1/3 mile apart.
Whereas the Division of Marine Fisheries comments on the Cape Wind ACOE-DEIS/R by letter [2.] to MMS dated July 14, 2006 provides further evidence that mobile gear fishing will not be able to take place within an industrial development where WTG are spaced at 1/3 mile apart.
Whereas U.S. Coast Guard Captain Perry stated during the December 5th conference call: "You can fish someplace else." And, "An individual or a crew would really have to concentrate on that and ah I think it's well above and beyond what we should expect the mariner to do."
Whereas U.S. Coast Guard Captain Perry confirms that Cape Wind represents interference with reasonable uses (as determined by the Secretary) of the exclusive economic zone, the high seas, and the territorial seas;
I respectfully request that alternate project sites to Nantucket Sound be pursued. The spacing between WTG's is increased as per DMF 07/14/06 comments to MMS. Or, appropriate economic mitigation to fishermen displaced by Cape Wind is mandated.
Most Respectfully,
Edward Barrett
President of Massachusetts Fishermen's Partnership
http://www.fishermenspartnership.org/
[1.] The MMS Cape Wind Project Plan Filing
See page 1, paragraph 2; and page 16 "NONCOMPETIVE LEASE, EASEMENT AND RIGHT-OF-WAY (THIRTY YEARS)"
http://www.mms.gov/offshore/PDFs/CapeWindProjectPlanFiling2.pdf
[2.] Copy of DMF comments on the Cape Wind project available upon request
Cc: Senator Edward M. Kennedy
Senator John F. Kerry
Congressman William Delahunt
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison
Randal Luthi, Director MMS
Rodney Cluck Cape Wind Project Manager
[End]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The British Chamber of Shipping:
"has confirmed that there may be an impact on air and marine radar within 1.5 nautical miles of turbines" and "advocates the adoption of a precautionary separation zone of at least two nautical miles from recognized shipping lanes."
The McGowan Group, in its February, 2006 assessment report: Impact of UK Offshore Renewable Energy Guidelines, concluded that under UK standards and guidelines, the [Cape Wind] project lacks a detailed navigation risk assessment:
"The impacts of this project to marine transportation, the marine environment and public safety are significant in a region plagued with challenging weather and currents for its varied waterway traffic." [the Cape Wind project is], "incompatible with the needs of marine transportation" in Nantucket Sound and poses unacceptable and unnecessary risk to cruise ships and ferry vessels, oil transport, fishing, and recreational users due to its proximity to active shipping channels."
Wayne Lampson, General Manager of the Woods Hole, Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket Steamship Authority SSA that operates 56 transits per day between Wood's Hole and Martha's Vineyard; and twenty eight between Hyannis and Nantucket commented to the lead agency, Minerals Management Service MMS, in response to the Cape Wind draft EIS:
"The Steamship Authority continues to have serious concerns about the potential hazards and impacts of the proposed Cape Wind project to the safe navigation and operation of our vessels in Nantucket Sound."
Wood's Hole, Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket Steamship Authority SSA Cape Wind MMS Scoping comment to MMS:
"My name is Captain Charles Gifford, I am the Port Captain for the Wood's Hole, Martha's Vineyard, Nantucket Steamship Authority. I'm a U.S. Coast Guard licensed Master Mariner and an approved instructor at the Massachusetts Maritime Academy."
"The Steamship Authority annually makes 22,000 trips transporting close to three million passengers and over 600,000 cars and trucks to the Islands of Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket. It is our opinion that the 130 wind turbines planned for Horseshoe Shoals and Nantucket Sound has a potential for creating a significant hazard to safe navigation for our vessels and other users of the waterways."
The Wood's Hole, Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket Steamship Authority on April 16, 2008 stated to MMS in the comments regarding the Cape Wind DEIS proposed wind energy facility in Nantucket Sound:
"The Steamship Authority continues to have a number of other serious concerns regarding navigational safety. These concerns include the potential interference of wind turbines with radar systems, the close proximity of the proposed wind farm to existing ferry routes and the probable interruption of slowing of normal ice flow within Nantucket Sound that could hinder navigation and disrupt ferry service to and from the islands."
Reuters Press Release
National Organizations Call Upon Feds to Halt Review of Cape Wind
Sat Apr 11, 2009 7:27am EDT
"HYANNIS, Mass., April 10 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Local stakeholders have
long opposed the Cape Wind project for the unacceptable threats it poses to
local Tribes and public safety -- and now several national organizations have
requested a halt to any further action on the costly proposal.
In support of the Aquinnah and Mashpee Wampanoag Tribes, the United South and
Eastern Tribes (USET), a coalition of 25 federally recognized Tribes, has
objected to the proposed Cape Wind location due to unavoidable cultural,
religious, and archaeological impacts. In a February 12, 2009, resolution,
USET called upon the Department of Interior (DOI) to halt any further action
on Cape Wind stating that the project "will forever change the physical
integrity of the Sacred Site." The Aquinnah and Mashpee Wampanoag Tribes have
long stated the project would desecrate their religious freedoms as a
sovereign nation spiritually connected to Nantucket Sound.
The Passenger Vessel Association (PVA), the national trade group representing
U.S.-flagged passenger vessels, recently issued a resolution calling upon
DOI's Minerals Management Service (MMS) to refrain from issuing a permit for
Cape Wind. In its February 17, 2009, resolution, PVA restated its enduring
opposition to Cape Wind because of the project's "hazardous impact on
navigation and safety of passengers on ferry vessels." The Steamship Authority
and Hy-Line Cruises, the local ferry operators that transport 3 million
passengers a year between Cape Cod and the islands of Martha's Vineyard and
Nantucket, have opposed Cape Wind because of its close proximity to ferry
routes and interference to navigational radar.
Echoing the concerns of local airports, the Aircraft Owners and Pilots
Association (AOPA), which represents two thirds of all pilots in the U.S.,
urged the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to issue a final determination
of hazard for Cape Wind because of radar interference and impacts to visual
flight rule (VFR) flights. In a March 20, 2009, letter to FAA, AOPA wrote
that they oppose the project "due to the negative impact on both VFR
operations as well as the impacts on air traffic radar systems that serve
flight operations into Barnstable Municipal, Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket
Memorial Airport." In February 2009, FAA issued a presumed hazard
determination for the Cape Wind project due to radar interference to the
400,000 flights that travel over Nantucket Sound annually.
The Alliance and a growing chorus of stakeholders -- including the Wampanoag
Tribes, Massachusetts Historical Commission, and local towns -- have called
for MMS to consider a deepwater alternative location for the Cape Wind
project, which would protect public safety, preserve Tribal interests, and
enable our nation to pursue responsible, affordable offshore renewable energy.
Visit www.SaveOurSound.org to view USET, PVA, and AOPA documents."
http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS34646+11-Apr-2009+PRN20090411
'The Proposal is Reckless'
Boston Globe
April 23, 2006
Co-written by; John T. Griffin, vice chairman of the Barnstable Airport Commission, and Edward Barrett, president of the Massachusetts Fishermen's Partnership:
"More than 3 million people cross the sound every year on commercial ferries within close proximity to the planned turbine field. There are more than 400,000 flights through that airspace every year with hundreds of small aircraft barely flying above the 426 foot height of these turbine blades. Anyone who knows Nantucket Sound knows that a clear day can quickly turn into pea soup fog with nearly zero visibility, leaving even experienced mariners bewildered about who -- and what -- is out there in their path. Not to mention the commercial fishermen who rely on Nantucket Sound for half their catch and know full well that safety concerns will result in restrictions or outright prohibition on fishing in the Cape Wind grid."
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is an environmental lawyer and professor at Pace University Law School:
"Nantucket Sound is among the most densely traveled boating corridors in the Atlantic. The turbines will be perilously close to the main navigation channels for cargo ships, ferries and fishing boats. The risk of collisions with the towers would increase during the fogs and storms for which the area is famous. That is why the Steamship Authority and Hy-Line Cruises, which transport millions of passengers to and from the cape and islands every year, oppose the project. Thousands of small businesses, including marina owners, hotels, motels, whale watching tours and charter fishing operations will also be hurt. The Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University in Boston estimates a loss of up to 2,533 jobs because of the loss of tourism - and over a billion dollars to the local economy.
Nantucket Sound is a critical fishing ground for the commercial fishing families of Martha's Vineyard and Cape Cod. Hundreds of fishermen work Horseshoe Shoal, where the Cape Wind project would be built, and make half their annual income from the catch. The risks that their gear will become fouled in the spider web of cables between the 130 towers will largely preclude fishing in the area, destroying family-owned businesses that enrich the palate, economy and culture of Cape Cod."
Senator Ted Kennedy:
"The project is proposed directly adjacent to a major shipping lane and a major passenger ferry route in the midst of one of the most heavily trafficked maritime environments in the country. Each year, nearly 3 million people travel through the area by ferry or private vessel. The proposed site is too close to shipping channels to be safe: with only a 1,200-ft separation from established shipping channels and a 4,500-foot separation from established ferry routes, not enough time is available to respond to a structure or possibly to avoid another vessel.
Vessels traveling at just 6 nautical miles per hour will encounter a new 417-foot spinning turbine every 3 minutes; vessels traveling 20 nautical miles per hour will encounter a turbine approximately every 50 seconds. Factoring in that Nantucket Sound often experiences dense fog causing zero visibility conditions, John T. Griffin, Vice Chairman of the Barnstable Airport Commission, and Edward Barrett, of the Massachusetts Fishermen's Partnership, recently wrote that the Cape Wind proposal was "utter recklessness."
http://www.tedkennedy.com/content/860/concerns-with-the-cape-wind-proposal
Flying Cloud Captain Bruce Malenfant:
Said he is "horrified" at how close the proposed wind farm would be to his Barnstable-Nantucket route. He called this proposal "well within an area we operate in" and he referred to the displacement of boating traffic by Cape Wind saying, "That is a dangerous recipe."
William H. Rypka retired lieutenant commander in the U.S. Coast Guard:
"Accidents can and will happen, and the wind plant would increase both their frequency and the potential for loss of life and oil spills. There is an active commercial fishery in the Sound along with the many fishing boats, ferries and pleasure craft that transit the area. The 130 steel and concrete structures would be located adjacent to the main shipping channel and would be huge hazards to navigation; they could not possibly be viewed as navigation aids."
William H. Rypka, retired Coast Guard Lieutenant Commander:
"Had [the turbines] been in place there is no possible way that a safe search by helicopter could have been conducted, much less the person rescued."
Mass Fishermen's Partnership
"Cape Wind puts fishermen at risk"
"MFP is a Coalition of 18 Massachusetts commercial fishing organizations that call on Cape Wind to "stop making false claims" about their offshore wind project's impact on fishing. "Navigation of mobile fishing gear between the 130 wind towers would be hazardous or impossible"
David F. Scudder, Vice President of Hy-Line Cruises in his letter to Senate and House Conferees of February 26, 2006:
"On the basis of public safety concerns, we have consistently and adamantly been against the wind farm project in the Sound since its inception. Navigating Nantucket Sound in all kinds of weather and traffic conditions is challenging enough without the introduction of these structures to complicate and restrict our routes."
Federally Recognized Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe:
'Historically the Sound is of great importance to the tribe,' tribal spokesman Scott Fearson said. 'The tribe considers the Sound to be ancestral waters. There are a number of concerns about this project.' 'The Tribe's economic health and cultural heritage are virtually defined by our reliance on our coastal resources. 'The Cape Wind project would disrupt the fragile habitat of these aboriginal fishing grounds and pose new navigational hazards to our fleet. The consequences would be devastating, in terms of both economic development and public safety.'
Eric R. Dawicki, international maritime safety and security expert, and president of the Northeast Maritime Institute in Fairhaven:
"To the best of my knowledge these monstrosities will be a threat to environment, navigational safety and most importantly will be an impediment to security."
"The damage done to marine life, marine flora and fauna is undeterminable in an already abused environment. Navigational safety problems are imminent."
Air Traffic Controllers Union at Cape Approach: "could not think of a worse place to put these turbines."
The Department of Defense: "The results from those flight trials documented that state-of the art utility-class wind turbines can have a significant impact on the operational capabilities of military air defense radar systems."
Woods Hole, Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket Steamship Authority: Project has the "potential for creating as significant hazard to safe navigation for our vessels and other users of the waterways."
Flying Cloud Captain Bruce Malefant: stated to the USACE that he is "horrified" at the proposed wind plant's close proximity to his Barnstable Nantucket Route.
Barnstable Airport officials call this project: "Lethal."
The Department of Defense: "The results from those flight trials documented that state-of the art utility-class wind turbines can have a significant impact on the operational capabilities of military air defense radar systems."
Martha's Vineyard Gazette; October 6, 2006:
"Pentagon officials are calling for additional studies to determine whether the proposed wind farm in Nantucket Sound would impair a crucial missile detection radar system located on Cape Cod."
Submitted by,
Barbara Durkin