State engineer accuses SouthCoast Wind of lying to RI agencies

SouthCoast Wind says it has been ‘forthright and transparent’

In a statement, SouthCoast Wind did not specifically address Ciochetto’s allegations.

“SouthCoast Wind has been forthright and transparent in its interactions with the RI EFSB and Coastal Resources Management Council – just as we have been in all our permitting and siting efforts – and this is demonstrated by agency records,” said Rebecca Ullman, the company’s director of external affairs.

The coastal council also offered only general comment on the email.

“CRMC is committed to continuing to work together with the Southcoast Wind Project team and will ensure that this working relationship moves forward in an atmosphere of cooperation, transparency and productivity,” Jeff Willis, executive director of the agency, said in a statement.

Ciochetto did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Permitting questions came up during Energy Facility Siting Board proceedings

SouthCoast Wind went before the siting board after doubts arose about the economic viability of power-purchase contracts that the company signed with electric utilities in Massachusetts. Inflation and increases in supply-chain costs caused in part by the war in Ukraine had raised the cost of construction of the wind farm and would make it difficult for investors to reach their profit targets, the company said last fall.

The doubts were confirmed a month ago when SouthCoast Wind, in written testimony to the siting board, said that it planned to terminate the contracts and bid again in an upcoming solicitation for offshore wind in Massachusetts.

The contract problems in the Bay State are an issue in Rhode Island because SouthCoast Wind wants to bring a power cable from the wind farm up the Sakonnet River and across Common Fence Point in Portsmouth to reach a substation at the site of the former Brayton Point Power Station in Somerset. The transmission cable is essential for the project to deliver power to the regional electric grid.

Because the cable would pass through Rhode Island waters and land, it requires permission from both the coastal council and the siting board. But the wind farm can’t move forward without power purchase contracts in place, so the siting board is considering suspending its proceedings on SouthCoast Wind until the contract questions are settled.

The show-cause hearing on June 12 was scheduled to allow the company to argue its case for moving forward and for other interested parties to comment. The board has yet to make a decision on whether to suspend the application.

Email alleges false statements about coastal council permit proceedings

Ciochetto said in his email to Rodvien that it was not intended as public comment and that he had “a fever of 103” at the time of writing. The siting board notified the coastal council and parties involved in the proceedings of the email and asked the council to comment on some of the issues it raised.

“Because the email communication goes beyond procedural matters by addressing issues that relate to the application, and shares information which relates to testimony that was given by the applicant during the show-cause proceedings, the email needs to be disclosed to the parties involved in our proceeding,” board chairman Ronald Gerwatowski wrote.

In his email, Ciochetto says that SouthCoast Wind made false statements in documents filed before the hearing that summarize the state of other permits the company must secure before it can build the wind farm it says would power more than a million homes.

In written testimony, SouthCoast Wind CEO Francis Slingsby said the company “has been moving forward” with other applications, including those submitted to the coastal council. A chart filed with the siting board also lists the coastal council applications, which include one for the cable that the company says it submitted this spring and expects to win approval for early next year.

But Ciochetto said staff with the coastal council advised SouthCoast Wind that the application for what’s known as a Category B assent was incomplete.

“… we spoke with them multiple times to try to get them to make it complete, however they were unable to bring the application to a point where we can accept it,” he said. “so [sic] as to this date there is no application being reviewed by the CRMC for the state waters portion.”

While a page on the CRMC website that lists documents filed so far by SouthCoast Wind includes other materials, there is nothing on the Category B assent.

Slingsby also said in writing that his company “has continued to engage in discussions” with the Fisherman’s Advisory Board. Ciochetto said that’s not true. Marisa Desautel, a lawyer for the fisherman’s board, told The Providence Journal that her office has not had any meetings with the board and SouthCoast Wind.

Ciochetto also said in the email that council staff repeatedly urged SouthCoast Wind to look at an overland route for the cable to avoid the Sakonnet River, which is classified as essential fish habitat by the New England Fishery Management Council. He said the company has ignored the request.

Ciochetto said he supports the responsible development of offshore wind, but raised concerns that some projects are being rushed.

“At CRMC, we are mostly worried about the uncertainty that the future brings,” he wrote. “There are serious impacts that may be realized.”