Coast Guard announces submission of radar assessment for Nantucket Sound Wind Farm

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Coast Guard announced Thursday that it completed and delivered its recommendations for the offshore renewable energy installation proposed for Nantucket Sound to the Minerals Management Service of the U.S. Department of the Interior.

The Coast Guard is a cooperating agency providing input in its areas of expertise to the MMS, which is the lead permitting agency for the proposed installation and has approval authority for that project. The report, “U.S. Coast Guard Assessment of Potential Impacts to Marine Radar as it Relates to Marine Navigation Safety from the Nantucket Sound Wind Farm as Proposed by Cape Wind, LLC,” allows the Coast Guard to provide its recommendations regarding potential impacts the proposed wind farm may have on maritime navigation safety, security and environmental response and Coast Guard missions.

The Coast Guard’s recommendations will be made public as part of the final environmental impact statement released by that agency. The public may comment on the FEIS once it is published.

For information on the FEIS, contact Nicholas Pardi, Minerals Management Service, 202 208-3985.

If you have any problems viewing this article, please report it here.

Related Posts

One Comment

  1. Barbara Durkin says:

    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 Coast Guard Cape Wind Radar Workshop conference held with Stakeholders tape recorded, with permission granted by USCG Captain Perry, on December 5, 2008:

    Captain Perry stated to workshop panelists:

    “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.”

    USCG Terms and Conditions of 2007 require USCG and MMS to determine if Cape Wind would allow for
    an acceptable level of risk to navigational safety.

    WTG Radar interference that requires mariners to “concentrate on that and ah I think it’s well above and beyond what we should expect the mariner to do.”

    …does not constitute acceptable risk presented by Cape Wind to mariners.