The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s (BOEM) new plan for addressing fishing industry fears over offshore wind projects drew a skeptical reception last week at a public hearing on six projects planned for the New York Bight.

Under the proposed “engagement” plan, an offshore wind developer would have to meet with stakeholders — including fishermen, Native Americans, disadvantaged communities and other ocean users — document issues raised and provide BOEM a report showing adjustments the developer made to address the concerns. If BOEM is not convinced that the developer has done enough, the agency could determine that the lease is not in “good standing” and stop the project until the concerns are resolved.

The hearing came a week after the Biden administration announced the auction of six lease areas in the New York Bight on Feb. 23 that would generate at least 5.6 GW. (See BOEM to Auction Six New Lease Areas in NY Bight.)

The proposed lease areas and the planned engagement process were shaped in part by opinions voiced in the four earlier meetings with the fishing industry, BOEM Director Amanda Lefton told the 130 people attending the online forum.

“Based on your feedback from the proposed sale notice, we’ve built a strong foundation for enhancing engagement,” she said. “This foundation is designed to embed transparency, accountability and communication into the process.”

Mitigation or Compensation

That approach involves a four-step process that BOEM believes will air stakeholder concerns and, through transparency and public pressure, push developers to address them.

BOEM officials said they will require leaseholders to identify the stakeholders affected by the projects and create a plan to communicate with them. The leaseholder must file a report with BOEM every six months detailing the engagement between the stakeholders and the lessee, said Zachary Jylkka, a renewable energy program specialist for BOEM.

“This report is not just a list of meetings that have occurred,” he said. “There’s a requirement that the lessee must document how, if at all, the design or implementation of the project has been informed by, or altered, to address the potential effects of the project.”

BOEM will then review the reports, “ensure that comments from the previous reporting period were addressed,” and post them on the agency website so that the public can comment on them, he said. The lessee is then “required to adequately address those comments,” he added.

If the lessee does not address issues, “BOEM reserves the right to require specific mitigation, including but not limited to requiring third party verification or mediation at the lessee’s expense, increased recording frequency or designation that the lease is not in good standing,” he said.

“If a lease is designated as not in good standing, BOEM will withhold approval of any pending plans from that lessee (such as the site assessment plan or construction and operations plan) until the identified issue is resolved,” said BOEM spokesperson Olivia Woods in an email.

Problems that cannot be mitigated could result in the lessee paying compensation to the injured stakeholder, BOEM officials said.

Industry Skeptical

Yet several fishing industry representatives said they were not convinced the new rules would make the government and wind industry more responsive to their concerns.

“I don’t think any of this has any teeth,” said Scot Mackey, a lobbyist for Garden State Seafood Association, a 1,200-member industry group that represents fishers of scallop, clam and other fish, in an interview after the hearing. “They’re making recommendations to developers. But there’s … nothing behind it. As far as I can see, if developers choose to [ignore complaints] they can.”

Ronald Smolowitz, a technical adviser to the Fisheries Survival Fund, which represents scallop fishermen, said the key issues facing the projects are “compensation, research and mitigation.” He said the NY Bight projects would “probably impact $15 million worth of [fish] landings a year.” How much revenue could be lost is unclear, he said.

The industry’s experience with the Vineyard Wind project in Massachusetts, the East Coast project that is closest to fruition, has not been good, he said. “The fishing industry has been totally left out of the conversation,” he told the hearing. After the hearing, Smolowitz said in an interview that he does not expect BOEM’s new engagement proposals to result in much of a change in the fishing sector’s treatment by wind developers.

Without an “overpowering authority” to make developers “do something — and BOEM doesn’t have the authority to make them do something — then these companies will just do what they want to do, regardless of what the fishing industry says,” he said.

Biggest Single Auction

The six NY Bight leases are the most ever offered in a single auction, totaling 480,000 acres. BOEM had solicited commercial interest for 1.7 million acres in the Bight but excluded 72% of the area to reduce environmental impacts and avoid conflicts with the commercial fishing industry and other ocean users.

The Biden administration has set a goal of 30 GW of offshore wind by 2030, with states on the East Coast already committed to a pipeline of 39 GW by 2040.

New Jersey, with a target of generating 7,500 MW of wind power by 2035, has set three wind projects in motion in two phases. Offshore wind farms would generate 23% of the state’s energy under Gov. Phil Murphy’s effort to reach 100% clean energy by 2050.

The state Board of Public Utilities in 2019 approved the 1,100-MW Ocean Wind 1 project, developed by Danish developer Ørsted and on June 30 approved Ørsted’s 1,148-MW Ocean Wind 2 and the 1,510-MW Atlantic Shores project, a joint venture between EDF Renewables North America and Shell New Energies US. The BPU is planning to hold three more solicitations over the next five years. (See NJ Awards Two Offshore Wind Projects.)

Parts of the fishing industry oppose these projects, as do some property owners and representatives of the tourism sector, who fear that turbines could mar coastal views and reduce the number of visitors.

Fishermen fear the projects will damage habitats, perhaps scaring fish away from long-time fishing areas, and that it will be dangerous to fish around the turbines. Fishing representatives say the combination of the weight of the fishing nets and the impact of the waves, wind and tides passing through rows of turbines can make it difficult and dangerous to maneuver a fishing vessel. Some in the industry have asked for more space between the turbines, to avoid problems. (See Fishermen Fear the Impact of NJ Wind Farms.)

Lefton told the fishermen at the hearing that BOEM reduced the number of prospective offshore wind development areas from eight originally planned to six, in large part because of feedback from them and other ocean users. The mission of the hearing was, in part, to “discuss how we can ensure that there is a seat at the table for ocean users like the commercial fishing industry moving forward.”

“I realize that you’ve all heard some version of this before,” she said. “I know you’ve been frustrated by a perceived lack of communication and transparency from us, that you take time to provide feedback and you don’t know where the information goes or what changes result from it.

“I want to note that we hear you,” she said. “We’re approaching things differently beyond the NY Bight thanks to your feedback.”

Parts of the process sound like a “step in the right direction” said Annie Hawkins, executive director of the Responsible Offshore Development Alliance, which works to ensure that coast development does not harm the fishing sector. In the past, she said, developers had to file engagement reports, but it was often too late in the process to have much impact.

Still, she said, she has concerns about some elements of the engagement proposal and whether it would “perpetuate the status quo or actually change engagement.”

“By the time six months go by, you know, they’ve put plans in place and procurements, materials and that kind of stuff,” she said. “How do we know that that’s going to be seen and responded to? And it’s not like six months is going to go by and then we’re going to hear ‘Oh, it’s kind of too late to address that.’”