HomeMy WebLinkAboutWinergy responses to TOS LWRP
-- -
-
-"
./:
.-'".
,
"
VIEW OF PROPOSED PRD..JECT FROM TIP OF ORIENT POINT COUNTY PARK
2.3 MILES TO THE NEAREST WINO TURBINE
WINERGY POWER LLC RESPONSES TO THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
LWRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM
Policy 1 Foster a pattern of development in the Town of Southold that enhances
community character, preserves open space, makes efficient use of
infrastructure, makes beneficial use of a coastal location, and minimizes adverse
effects of development.
The community character of Southold is defined by a pattern of open agricultural land
interspersed with development clustered around a number of historic hamlet centers and along the
many creeks and inlets found along the shoreline of the Peconic Estuary. Although Southold
remains on the edge of the rapid residential development that is moving eastward from central
Suffolk County, it has maintained the character of a rural community based on traditional uses
such as agriculture and maritime activity. Increasing development pressure has focused on the
Town's extensive agricultural areas and on the waterfront, threatening the rural character of the
community and its natural resources.
The longstanding planning goals of the Town of Southold "reflect the interest in preserving and
enhancing the natural and built environment and providing opportunities for a level of growth
and expansion of the economic base that is compatible with the existing scale of development,
availability afwater, existing sensitive environment afthe Town and its historic heritage" (Town
of Southold Planning Board, 1985, p3). The future pattern of land use proposed in the "Master
Plan Update" encouraged residential development to locate in and around existing hamlets "in
order to preserve and enhance the historic and cultural centers of the community, to support
existing commercial centers, to provide locations for moderately priced housing and to
encourage efficient and effective provision of community facilities and services" (Town of
Southold Planning Board, 1985, p6) and for commercial development to locate in hamlet centers.
The Town of Southold L WRP policies seeks to advance these longstanding planning goals as
well as to further the shared vision of the Town for itself. As expressed by the Southold Town
Stewardship Task Force:
"This vision is of a Southold that has found a way to preserve and cherish its unique
heritage, while sustaining a strong economic base. The special character of Southold, its
unique combination of hamlet centers in the midst of working farmland and open space,
all surrounded by clean and productive water, is central to this common vision"
(Southold Town Stewardship Task Force, 1994)
The policy is intended to foster a development pattern that provides for beneficial use of the
environmental, historical, and cultural coastal resources of the Town of Southold while
maintaining and building on its traditional economic base. The primary components of the desired
development pattern are: strengthening the hamlets as centers of activity, maintaining a clear
sense of separation between hamlet centers and the countryside, encouraging waterdependent
uses to concentrate in existing locations of maritime activity, enhancing stable residential areas,
and preserving agriculture, open space and environmentally sensitive coastal resources.
Development that does not reinforce the traditional land use pattern of the Town of Southold
would result in a loss of the community and landscape charact'tlr of SouthOld.. -:.." -.. ... , ,- ':;::;.::'~~-T
I 0'... . .
r=;~'-'---- "---RTI 1'\
I !F..'~ 'l ,\', - J r""'~ .,
, p."'. [[0 (I,] I II 'Ir' I-~'\ J. J
I I . I ,l I -, t 1 ~ ,~,
I ( .:1 "(,1
~ - , : d ;-, 1
, \
;
1
APR 1 3 2006
I
l.___
.J
.'
Winerev Power response: The Town of Southold has grown from a base of fishing and
farming. The proposal that we are putting forth is highly consistent with these
longstanding core activities.
We agree and embrace the intent of Policy I of the Southold LWRP, which mandates the
". . . beneficial use of a coastal location, and minimizes adverse effects of development."
From the Policy 1 discussion in the LWRP: "The longstanding planning goals of the
Town of South old "...reflect the interest in preserving and enhancing the natural and
built environment and providing opportunities for a level of growth and expansion of the
economic base that is compatible with the existing scale of development, availability of
water, existing sensitive environment of the Town and its historic heritage" (Town of
Southold Planning Board, 1985, p3)."
The Offshore Wind Park that Winergy Power is proposing will not conflict with the
Southold planning goals. Weare proposing a research, development and demonstration
(RD&D) project in an area that has been designated as an exclusive use zone in the
offshore environment. This project is temporary by design and will provide the Town of
Southold, the County, the State and Federal govemments a basis to evaluate the benefits
or detriments of the presence and operation of offshore wind turbines.
Marine activities have historically been a central focus of the population of Town of
Southold. The Town expanded based on its geographical location, seafood processing
enterprises, and natural deepwater ports. This important sector in the economic base has
been vital to the growth and prosperity of the Town for over three centuries.
In the last three decades, the economic base of the Town of Southold has been
transformed to more of an agricultural-based economy. This was caused by the
introduction of vineyards, which was developed through a joint partnership among the
Town of South old, the State of New York, and Cornell Cooperative Extension. The wines
are produced, marketed and sold locally, nationally and throughout the world. When this
industry was formed, it was an RD&D project. The successes that have followed have
greatly exceeded expectations.
The RD&D project that Winergy Power is proposing is in an exclusive use zone that is
leased through 2037. The site was chosen with the assistance of and approved by the
Town of Southold, commercial fisherman, recreational fisherman, the New York State
Office of General Services, the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, National Marine Fisheries and the Village
of Greenport.
The activity proposed for the site is temporary. The project being proposed advances the
longstanding planning goals of efficient use of the natural resources of the Town of
Southold. The open ocean site, already being re-developed as a commercial fishery, will
become even more productive with the presence of the proposed offshore wind park.
2
"This vision is of a Southold that has found a way to preserve and cherish its
unique heritage, while sustaining a strong economic base. The special character
of Southold, its unique combination of hamlet centers in the midst of working
farmland and open space, all surrounded by clean and productive water, is
central to this common vision" (Southold Town Stewardship Task Force, 1994)
The wind park will have no impact on onshore open space, yet will enhance the level of
marine activity with a new environmental benign cottage industry. The mariculture
activity at the site is, by its nature, waterdependent. The temporary placement of the three
offshore wind turbines within the confines of the leased zone is a water-enhanced activity
whose economics will be significantly improved by sharing facilities with this permitted
waterdependent use.
The fish farm extended and combined both the man lime heritage and agricultural
character of the Town of Southold to an offshore amalgam of both longstanding
activities. The temporary offshore wind park will further extend this pairing of historical
activities to the enterprise of offshore wind farming, which involves harvesting and
processing the abundant marine resource of the wind, much as vineyards and farms
convert sunlight into consumable and marketable goods. The offshore wind park will
further enhance the productivity of the already-leased open ocean column, temporarily
occupying part of the leased area to generate another useful product, electricity, in an area
that fish are being cultivated.
3
Policy 2
Preserve historic resources of the Town of Southold.
The rich and varied historic resources of the Town Southold are a significant if unrecognized
reminder of the community's colonial roots and its rich agricultural and nautical traditions.
Although the term "historic" is used, these resources may be archeological and/or cultural in
nature as well as historical. Further, these resources may be underwater as well as aboveground.
More than 1,500 locally significant aboveground structures and sites were identified in a Town-
wide inventory conducted by the Society for the Preservation of Long Island Antiquities in 1988.
Fifty-five of these structures have been designated as Town Landmarks.
It is worth highlighting the fact that the significance of Southold's resources has been recognized
by the listing of seven properties and two historic districts on the State and National Registers of
Historic Places. The two historic districts alone encompass more than 160 separate structures.
Further, nautical structures occupy a prominent place in this set of resources. There are seven
operating lighthouses within the Town, one of which, the Horton Point Lighthouse (Reach 2), is
on the National Register. Furthermore, given the Town's long maritime history, the exploration
and recovery of submerged resources from offshore waters could be considered as a potential
focus of heritage tourism in its various forms.
There also is considerable evidence of the earlier Native American occupation of the region.
Fishers Island in particular features extensive archaeological sites that have yielded a rich variety
of subsistence material, much of which has been catalogued at the Henry Fergusen Museum on
the island. The Indian Museum in Southold holds one of the largest and most significant
collection of aboriginal artifacts in the State of New York. Fort Corchaug in Cutchogue contains
the only known pre-historic fort of its type on Long Island. The New York State Archaeological
Sensitivity Map (OPRHP, March 1992) indicates that the Town of Southold exhibits multiple site
sensitivity over most of its area.
Archaeological sites, historic structures and submerged items from shipwrecks are tangible links
to the past development of Southold. They are important components in defining the community's
distinctive identity and heritage. The intent of this policy is to preserve these resources by
encouraging and promoting private efforts to restore, conserve and maintain them.
Winerl!v Power response: The proposed project site has the benefit of a completed
FEIS, which includes a complete review by the NY State Department of Parks,
Recreation and Historic Preservation. A letter attesting to this is provided in Attachment
3 to this L WRP compliance form. All matters pertinent to Policy 2, and addressed in the
Policy 2.x Standards, were reviewed prior to this issuance of the FEIS to Mariculture
Technologies.
4
Policy 3
Enhance visual quality and protect scenic resources throughout the Town of
Southold.
The Town of Southold contains a variety of unique aud beautiful scenic components. These
resources are defined by traditional patterns of development that were based on agriculture, the
strongest visual element in Southold, and maritime activities.
The visual quality of the landscape is a major contributor to the community character of the Town
of South old. The Town includes different landforms, a variety of upland and shoreline vegetation,
a complex laud and water interface, well-defined harbors, aud historic hamlets. In addition to the
many highly scenic natural resources found throughout the Sound, the variety of cultural elements
in the laudscape and the interplay of the built aud natural environments, especially along the
waterfront, are of particular importance to the visual quality of the Town.
The intent of this policy is to protect and enhauce the visual quality of the Town of Southold as
well as to improve the quality of deteriorated areas and other negative visual elements. The
preservation of the aesthetic, historic, aud scenic character of the Town is critical to the
continuance of its attraction and economic vitality as a year-round waterfront community.
Mauy of the importaut scenic components in the Town of Southold can be viewed from local
roads and from the public parks along the shoreline. NY Route 25 runs the length of Southold aud
is one of the Town's more aesthetic as well as heavily traveled roadways. Views from this road
are extensive and varied. It offers unfolding views of the hamlet centers and open agricultural
areas and views of Long Island Sound, Orient Harbor and the open countryside of Orient.
Similarly, Suffolk County Route 48 is another heavily traveled arterial that parallels State Route
25. It offers a contrast to SR 25's winding ambiance, particularly between Mattituck and
Southold, by offering wide open vistas of farm fields fringed by woodlauds.
The Town of Southold is promoting the protection of the scenic components associated with SR
25 and CR 48 through a Scenic Byway Corridor Management Plan (200 I).
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: Prior to addressing each of the Policy 3 Standards, we wish
to note that the three wind turbines that Winergy Power proposes to place in the waters
within the existing leased site on a temporary basis will not be visible from either of the
roadways considered in the Scenic Byway Corridor Management Plan (2001). The wind
turbines will not be located near any well-traveled road. They will be nestled in the
Northwest corner of Gardiners Bay where it abuts the southern side of Plum Island.
The wind turbines will be visible from Orient Point County Park, a seldom-visited open
area, and possibly from the road that leads from the mainland of Long Island to Orient
Beach State Park. The wind turbines will not be visible from the parking lot or the beach
at Orient Beach State Park.
Figure 3-1 below shows a simulated view of the wind park from Orient Point County
Park.
5
Figure 3-1
Simulated View of Proposed Wind Turbines from Orient Point County Park
6
Figure 3-2 below shows distances, in nautical miles, from land masses in the vicinity of
the proposed wind park.
Figure 3-2
Distanees of the Proposed Wind Park from Land in Statute Miles
Policv Standards
3.1 Enhance visual quality and protect scenic resources throughout the Town of Southold.
A. Alinimize introduction (~r structural design components {induding utility lines, lighting,
signage andfencing} which would be discordant with existing nalural scenic components
and character.
Winer!!, Power reSDonse: The installation of the wind park will not require the
installation of any new utility lines. The wind turbines themselves will be 2.1 miles
7
distant from the mainland and occupy, temporarily, only a small portion of the vistas that
are available to people from a limited number of vantage points on Long Island. In sum,
the wind turbines will only be visible from less than two of the least densely populated
and traveled miles of the approximately 160 miles of shoreline within the Town of
Southold.
As of the 2000 census, there were 709 people living in the hamlet of Orient. Based on an
analysis of the tax rolls of Suffolk County, almost all of the homes on Orient Point are
seasonal. The wind turbines will be visible to fewer than five residences on Orient Point.
Because there is no land left at Orient Point for further residential development, the
carefully chosen location of the RD&D wind power facility complies with Policy 3.1 A in
that it minimizes the intrusion of structures that may be interpreted as discordant with the
scenic components and character of the Town of Southold.
B. Restore deteriorated and remove degraded visual components.
Winerl!V Power response: This policy does not apply.
C. Screen components of development which detract from visual quality.
Winerl!v Power response: The remote location of the proposed offshore RD&D wind
park was selected specifically to avoid detracting from the visual quality of Southold's
pristine and historic coastline. Winergy Power perceives that the limited, temporary
nature of the RD&D wind park will make it a feature, rather than a detraction, of the
Southold coastline.
Any disruptions to views from the coastline will be temporary because the permit being
requested for the RD&D facility is for a limited period of time, after which the wind
turbines will be removed.
D. Use appropriate sltmg, scales, forms, and materials to ensure that structures are
compatible with and add interest to existing scenic components.
Winerl!V Power response: The uniqueness to North America of the structures being
proposed will add an element of interest to the vistas of an over-the-water view. The
project has national implications in opening an avenue for the United States to access the
enormous energy carried in the wind over the coastal waters, thus helping our country
achieve energy independence. The technologies to be tested in the Winergy Power
RD&D project will allow offshore wind energy project developers to build projects far
offshore, at a distance where visual impacts to shore-side populations will not be a matter
of concern.
There are many historic maritime towns in the United States, but none have offshore
wind turbines. As a matter of record, there is a small town in Massachusetts (Hull) that
8
has a wind turbine on its shoreline 50 feet from the mean high tide mark. Hull is a
traditional maritime village, similar to the hamlets within the Town of Southold. The
installation of the turbine has increased year-round tourism and has extended the tourist
season, thereby giving the restaurants, inns and local shops more predictable revenue
streams.
The town of Hull has just taken delivery of a second wind turbine to place atop its landfill
and has begun planning for placing three wind turbines in its near-shore waters.
According to a January 6, 2006 article in The Patriot Ledger, the experience with a wind
turbine in Hull has led 30 other shore-side communities in New England to begin
planning to install their own windpower facilities.
E. Preserve existing vegetation and establish new indigenous vegetation to enhance scenic
quality:
1. Preserve existing vegetation which contributes to the scenic quality of the landscape.
Winen!v Power response: The site of the proposed wind park is on a sea bed area that is
continually scoured by persistent currents and thus does not have any vegetation.
2. Allow for selective clearing of vegetation to provide public views without impairing
values associated with the affected vegetation.
Winen!v Power response: This policy section is not applicable.
3. Restore historic or important designed landscapes to preserve intended or designed
aesthetic values.
Winerl!v Power response: This policy section is not applicable.
4. Restore or add indigenous vegetative cover that presents a natural appearance.
Winerl!V Power response: This policy section is not applicable.
F. Improve the visual quality associated with hamlet areas.
Winerl!V Power response: The wind park will be visible only from an extremely small
area of land at the northeastern-most end of the Long Island. It will not be visible from
any of the more densely populated areas of Orient. The wind park will add a small,
interesting feature to an otherwise broad ocean view from small, seldomly visited areas,
thereby enhancing the visual quality of the vista.
9
G. Improve the visual quality of historic maritime areas.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: The wind park will add a small, interesting feature to an
otherwise broad ocean view from small, seldomly visited areas, thereby enhancing the
visual quality of the vista.
H. Protect the visual interest provided by active water-dependent uses.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: The wind park will be situated in an exclusive-use zone that
is undergoing re-development as an active mariculture enterprise, an intrinsically
waterdependent activity. The water enhanced activity of offshore wind energy conversion
will add a new, environmentally clean element to an activity that has already proven to be
a productive, environmentally benign enterprise. The wind park will increase the visual
level of activity occurring in the area reserved for environmentally benign commercial
activities.
I. Anticipate and prevent impairment of dynamic landscape elements that contribute to
ephemeral visual qualities.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: The site was specifically selected for its remoteness from
public view, yet accessibility for support ships, researchers and other interested parties
that would need or want to visit the site. The visual impacts of the presence of the wind
turbines will be small, temporary, and of limited extent because only three wind turbines
will be placed at the site and because the proposed project is to operate for a limited
period before removal.
As for storms, other weather and marine events, and for daily aesthetic events such as
sunrises, the temporary wind park will add an opportunity to explore new visual
experiences for the limited lifetime of the project.
J Protect visual quality associated with public lands, including public transportation
routes, public parks and public trust lands and waters.
1. Limit water surface coverage or intrusion to the minimum amount necessary.
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: The wind park is a water-enhanced activity that will operate
in concert with the waterdependent offshore fish farm. Two of the wind turbines will
each occupy a column of water 19 feet in diameter and be attached to monopile bases. A
third wind turbine will be mounted on a lift boat on three legs that are 12 feet in diameter
and sit on pads on the sea bed. The wind turbines and towers will, for the most part, be
the only components that will be visible from shore. The public trust water area occupied
by the wind turbine towers and lift boat legs will be temporary, lasting only for the
permitted lifetime of the RD&D project.
The small size of the wind park will ensure that only a minute region of the shoreline
vista will be impacted by the wind park, and then only from an extremely low population
10
density section of shoreline.
2. Limit alteration of shoreline elements which contribute to scenic quality.
Winer!!v Power response: The wind park will not impact any onshore visual elements.
K. Protect visual quality associated with agricultural land, open space and natural
resources.
A. Maintain or restore original landforms except where altered landforms provide useful
screening or contribute to scenic quality.
Winerl!V Power response: The wind park will not impact any onshore landforms.
B. Group or orient structures during site design to preserve open space and provide
visual organization.
Winerl!V Power response: The wind park will not occupy any onshore area. Offshore,
the three wind turbines will be spaced for maximum operational efficiency in the already-
leased area. They will be positioned to follow the southern contour of the Plum Island
shoreline.
c. Avoid structures or activities which introduce visual interruptions to natural
landscapes including:
a. introduction of intrusive artificial light sources
Winerl!v Power response: There will temporarily be two lights located at the top each of
the wind turbine towers in compliance with Federal Aviation Administration
requirements. There will be navigation lights at the base of each leg of the support
structures of the wind turbines, in compliance with U.S. Coast Guard regulations. This is
no different and no more intrusive than the lighting for water towers and cell towers. The
presence of the lights will be temporary in nature, lasting for the term of the project.
b. fragmentation of and structural intrusion into open space areas
Winerl!v Power response: The installation of the offshore wind park will not cause any
fragmentation of onshore areas. The RD&D project will be placed in an area that is
already a restricted use zone leased from the State of New York and thus does not remove
any new water column territory from public use.
The erection of the wind park will not require the installation of any new utility lines.
The project will be a temporary RD&D facility that will involve the installation of three
wind turbines and their support structures in an open ocean area that is visible from a
limited section of the shoreline. Because the project will only run for a defined period of
11
time, the impacts will be minimal and will disappear at the end of the lifetime of the
project.
c. changes to the continuity and configuration of natural shorelines and associated
vegetation
Winerl!V Power response: This policy section does not apply.
12
Policy 4
Minimize loss of life, structures, and natural resources from flooding and
erosion.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: This policy does not apply.
13
Policy 5
Protect and improve water quality and supply in the Towu of Southold.
Winerl!V Power response: This policy does not apply.
14
Policy 6
Protect and restore the quality and function of the Town of Southold
ecosystem.
The Town of Southold is a complex ecosystem consisting of physical (non-living) and biological
(living) components and their interactions. The physical components include the open waters and
embayments of Long Island Sound, the Peconic Bays, Shelter Island Sound, Gardiners Bay,
Fishers Island Sound and Block Island Sound, as well as coastal lowlands, headlands, bluffs,
adjacent upland areas, small offshore islands, and soils. These features continue to develop and
change through the action of tides and offshore currents, and through weathering by precipitation
and surface runoff. The biological components include the plants and animals that make up a
wide range of ecological communities in and around the Town of Southold.
Certain natural resources that are important for their contribution to the quality and biological
diversity of the Town's ecosystem have been specifically identified by the State of New York for
protection. These natural resources include regulated tidal and freshwater wetlands; designated
Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats; and rare, threatened, and endangered species. In
addition to specifically identified discrete natural resources, the quality of the Town's ecosystem
also depends on more common, broadly distributed natural resources, such as the extent of forest
cover, the population of overwintering songbirds, or benthic communities. These more common
natural resources collectively affect the quality and biological diversity of the Sound ecosystem.
The role of the Southold Town Board of Trustees in the protection and management of the
Town's ecosystem, particularly as it relates to surface waters is recognized by the Town. The
policy standards noted below recognize that federal and state legislation governing the protection,
management and restoration of the environment are not always sufficiently restrictive to protect
local resources. Where the Town and its Board of Trustees have implemented protective
measures that exceed that of federal and state regulations, local regulations and standards should
be complied with.
Policv Standards
6.1 Protect and restore ecological quality throughout the Town of Southold.
A. Avoid adverse changes to the Long Island Sound and the Peconic Bay ecosystems that
would result from impairment of ecological quality as indicated by:
1. Physical loss of ecological components
Physical loss is often the most obvious natural resource impairment to identify. It
usually results from discrete actions, such as filling or excavating a wetland or
clearing an upland forest community prior to development.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: The proposed Winergy Power RD&D wind park will involve
driving two rnonopiles into the seabed to support two wind turbines, plus jet plowing a
cable path to shore, directionally drilling an underground path for a transmission cable,
and covering of the cable. At the end of life of the project, the monopiles will be cut six
feet below the seabed and removed. The remaining length of monopile will be buried and
left underground. The cable will be disconnected and left in place, buried. The original
lease for a commercial fish farming operation at the site was granted because the seabed
at the leased area is so scoured by constant currents that no significant biological activity
occurs at the site. This conclusion was reached during site investigation through
15
interviews of commercial and recreational fishermen and was confirmed during the
performance and analyses of site sampling surveys that were carried out as part of the
requirements for completing an FEIS for the site in accordance with SEQR regulations.
2. Degradation of ecological components
Degradation occurs as an adverse change in ecological quality, either as a direct
loss originating within the resource area or as an indirect loss originating from
nearby activities. Degradation usually occurs over a more extended period of time
than physical loss and may be indicated by increased siltation, changes in
community composition, or evidence of pollution.
Winerl!v Power response: There will be no long-term ecological degradation from the
project because the project is temporary in nature and all equipment will be removed at
the expiration of the permit.
3. Functional/ass of ecological components
Functional loss can be indicated by a decrease in abundance of fish or wildlife,
often resulting from a behavioral or physiological avoidance response. Behavioral
avoidance can be due to disruptive uses that do not necessarily result in physical
changes, but may be related to introduction of recreational activities or predators.
Timing of activities can often be critical in determining whether a functional loss is
likely to occur. Functional loss can also be manifested in physical terms, such as
changes in hydrology.
Winerl!V Power response: There will be impacts throughout the lifetime of the project.
The impacts will be temporary because the project will be removed after the time interval
specified in the permit that is being requested.
The periods of impact will include:
. Construction
. Operation
. Decommissioning and removal
The impacts will be experienced in different realms:
. Marine - The noise and seabed disturbance associated with
processes of pile driving the monopiles and jet plowing the
transmission cable into the seabed will cause temporary
avoidance of the area by the various pelagic creatures.
These effects will be temporary, lasting no longer than 90
days. The high majority of bottom sediment disturbed by
the laying of the cable will re-settle into the groove that is
opened. Persistently strong currents in the area will quickly
bring sediments that fill
any remaining depression.
The pile driving process will be no different than occurs
during the installation of bridge stanchions.
16
.
According to the Department of Natural Resources, South
Carolina, "To enhance recreational fishing and sport diving
opportunities in coastal waters, and to increase the amount
of productive hard-bottom habitat available overall, man
can participate (with significant help from nature) in the
creation of additional man-made, or "artificial" reefs. This
is accomplished by placing suitable long-lived, stable and
environmentally safe materials (usually steel or concrete)
on a selected area of ocean bottom. Once the material is in
place it acts in the same way that naturally occurring rock
outcroppings do in providing hard substrate necessary in
the basic formation of a live-bottom reef community."
Since the monopiles and liftboat legs that will rise from the
seabed are steel structures, just such an artificial reef will
be provided for colonization, thus increasing the three-
dimensional habitat for all marine organisms.
After removal of the wind turbine structures at the end of
the RD&D period, we believe that the three-dimensional
environment will largely remain because of the presence
and ongoing operation of the permitted fish farm in the
same area.
Avian - The region surrounding the proposed project area
has been monitored for decades to assess the species,
populations and behavior of birds. Several species of birds
that are regarded as "at risk" live near the proposed project
area. These are the Piping Plover, Common Tern and Least
Tern, according to the book "Important Bird Areas of New
York, Second Edition" by Michael F. Burger and Jillian M.
Liner, Audubon New York. The Roseate Tern also belongs
on this list, as per discussions with the North fork Audubon
Society and Helen Hays of the American Museum of
Natural History, who has been monitoring the Great Gull
Island population for nearly 40 years.
An examination of NY Department of Environmental
Conservation records and discussions with Matthew Male,
field biologist who established a roseate tern colony on
Gardiners Island, and Helen Hays showed that there are
substantial natural annual variations in the sizes of the
populations of the various species.
The introduction into the area of the three wind turbine
towers will change the three-dimensional structure of the
environment through which the region's birds traverse as
part of their daily lives and through which migratory birds
pass and sometimes over-winter.
There are precedents for the introduction of offshore wind
turbines into areas that are traversed by birds, i.e., the
17
Nysted offshore wind farm in the Baltic Sea (72 wind
turbines) and the Horns Rev offshore wind farm in the
North Sea (80 wind turbines). According to the 2005
Report from E2, Nysted Wind Park Owner,
"A large number of the birds migrating through
Denmark fly over the area where the turbines stand.
This is why birds have been counted from: planes.
visual observations made and radar registration
performed, while an infrared camera has been attached
to a wind turbine for night observations close to the
turbine blades. The intention is to study bird behaviour
at and in the vicinity of the farm and to examine
whether they collide with the wind turbines or try to
steer clear of the farm.
The results obtained so far are certainly positive. No
instance of any birds colliding with the rotating turbine
blades has yet been seen. The vast majority of bird
flocks avoid the wind turbine farm. At day light. the
birds start flying round the farm three kilometres before
they reach Nysted Offshore Wind Farm. At night. the
birds seem to discover the wind turbines later and turn
off about one kilometre before the farm.
A few flocks migrate through the offshore wind farm.
and some birds even use the turbine bases for resting
their wings. So the 72 wind turbines pose no threat to
bird life. "
The New York DEC has identified the potential of bird
impacts with the proposed wind turbine structures as a
factor of special concern. Winergy Power intends to
establish a full bird monitoring program that will be
designed in concert with the DEC and operate the program
(as needed) for the life of the RD&D project. This study
will greatly expand on the bird monitoring program that
was carried out at the existing water column lease site by
National Marine Fisheries and the DEC in 1999-2000.
. Geologic ~ Two monopiles will be driven to depths ranging
from 90 to 120 feet into the seabed, depending on a
geotechnical survey. This type of activity has been
common for centuries. Once the installation process is
complete, marine life quickly repopulates the impacted
area.
18
B. Protect and restore ecological quality by adhering to the following measures.
1. Maintain values associated with natural ecological communities. Each natural
ecological community has associated values which contribute to the ecological
quality of the Town of Southold. These values should be assessed on a case-by-
case basis.
Winerl!v Power response: This is the purpose of the proposed RD&D project, i.e., to
place wind turbines in the coastal waters of the United States and examine all impacts, if
any, on the natural environment. The project will be in place for a limited time, long
enough to provide a baseline for the public, government regulators, politicians, NGOs,
universities, other educational institutions, power suppliers and utilities to assess the
value of installations such as this that are sited offshore and provide clean, renewable
energy for consumption on the mainland. We are in compliance with the ecological
values embraced by the Town of Southold.
2. Retain and add indigenous plants to maintain and restore values of natural
ecological communities.
a. Protect existing indigenous plants from loss or disturbance to the extent
practical.
Winerl!V Power response: This is not applicable.
b. Include use of suitable indigenous plants in the landscaping plans for new
development and in redevelopment projects where loss or disturbance of
existing indigenous plants could not be prevented during construction.
Winerl!V Power response: This is not applicable.
3. A void fragmentation of ecological communities and maintain corridors to facilitate
the free exchange of biological resources within and among communities.
a. Each individual resource area should be maintained as a complete contiguous
areas to protect the area's natural resource values. Specifically, actions that
would fragment the ecological community into separate ecological islands
should be avoided.
Winerl!v Power response: This is not applicable.
b. Where fragmentation of ecological commumlIes has already occurred, the
adverse effects of fragmentation can be mitigated by maintaining or providing
connecting corridors to allow exchange of biological resources.
Winerl!v Power response: This is not applicable.
4. Maintain ecological integrity of particular locales by maintaining structural and
functional attributes, including normal variability, to provide for self-sustaining
19
systems.
Winen!v Power response: The physical extent of the RD&D project will be so small
relative to the environment in which it operates that no significant impacts will be
experienced by any ofthe self-sustaining ecological systems in the area.
5. Avoid permanent adverse change to ecological processes.
Winerl!V Power response: This is the purpose of the proposed RD&D project, i.e., to
place wind turbines in the coastal waters of the United States and examine all impacts, if
any, on the natural environment. The project will be in place for a limited time to provide
a baseline for the public, government regulators, politicians, NGOs, universities, other
educational institutions, power suppliers and utilities to assess the value of installations
such as this that are sited offshore and provide clean, renewable energy for consumption
on the mainland. We are in compliance with the ecological values embraced by the Town
of Southold.
C. Reduce adverse impacts on ecological quality due to development.
I. Reduce adverse effects of existing development.
Winerl!v Power response: This is the purpose of the proposed RD&D project, i.e., to
provide a thorough baseline understanding for all stakeholders so that adverse impacts
can be avoided in all future offshore renewable energy projects sited in other locations.
2. Mitigate impacts of new development.
Winerl!v Power response: As stated immediately above, this is the purpose of the
proposed RD&D project, i.e., to provide a thorough baseline understanding for all
stakeholders so that adverse impacts can be avoided in all future offshore renewable
energy projects sited in other locations.
6.2 Protect and restore Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats.
The Town of Southold is rich in habitats that support diverse and often large wildlife
populations, many of which are of commercial or recreational value. The importance of
these habitats has been recognized through the state designation of nineteen Significant
Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats in Southold:
Reach 6
Mattituck Inlet Wetland
Orient Harbor
Long Beach Bay
Plum Gut
Great Gull Island
Hashamomuck Pond
Conkling Point
Reach 1
Reach 5
20
Reach 9
Reach 10
Port of Egypt Island
Jockey Creek Spoil Area
Cedar Beach Point
Corey Creek
Richmond Creek and Beach
Little Creek and Beach
Cutchogue Harbor Wetlands
Robins Island
Downs Creek
The Race
Fishers Island Beaches
Hungry Point Islands
Reach 7
Reach 8
These habitats cover the full range of habitats typical on the East End of Long Island and include
dunes, beaches, wetlands, islands and open water. The Town of Southold recognizes the
importance of protecting and enhancing these wetlands and habitats.
All of these habitats have experienced and continue to experience human disturbance. This
includes the effects of bulkheading, filling and dredging, removal of vegetation, adjacent land
uses, and recreational activities and facilities, such as fishing, hunting and boating and the
associated marina and boat launch facilities. These impacts do not have to destroy or impair the
natural resources of the habitats. In addition to avoiding incompatible use of the habitats and
adjacent land, many management measures can be taken to ensure that negative impacts do not
occur.
(Go to next page)
21
A. Protect Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat values from uses or activities
that would:
Winerl!V Power response: In this response, we address all the questions asked in this
subsection 6.2.A. 1., 2., and 3. This response is in large part taken from the FEIS that was
developed for the Mariculture Technologies operation. The information has recently been
updated to encompass the expected environmental interactions of the project that we are
proposmg.
The Town of Southold is rich self-sustaining biological systems that include many kinds
of organisms. This requires the preservation of the variety of life, i.e., biological
diversity, or biodiversity. Such efforts require inventory knowledge and an understanding
of natural and artificial changes in biodiversity. Our knowledge of biological diversity is
still very poor, with perhaps no more than a few percent of the world's species having
been identified (IBryant, 2002). Similarly, we are only now beginning to detect and
quantify changes to understand the nature, extent and ecological implications of changes
in biodiversity. This is why the baseline data presented here in response to all questions
raised by Southold LWRP Section 6.2 is important. It provides the Town with a base
upon which to build and model from for future generations.
Benthic monitoring is a relatively sensitive, effective and reliable technique that can
detect subtle changes that serve as an early indicator before more drastic environmental
changes occur. Most other monitoring methods (e.g., video monitoring for bacterial mats
and sediment parameters) generally detect the later, more drastic changes. It is the intent
of Winergy Power to establish with the various agencies a strict monitoring protocol that
is built upon the baseline that has been established.
It is Winergy Power's intent that within the RD&D project we are proposing that we can
work in conjunction with all involved to produce recommendations or guidelines for
sampling, sample processing and data analysis of marine benthos and to establish a
degree of uniformity in the procedures that will make data from different investigations
more readily comparable. At the same time, it is recognized that decisions on the
methodology, equipment and analysis will depend on the particular aims of all involved.
This is a major advantage of an RD&D project.
Species are recognized as the essential baseline for understanding diversity. Thus, the
sampling and identification methods and procedures required to obtain reliable measures
of species richness and diversity are emphasized here below.
I. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SURVEY
This permitted site has undergone an extensive series of above water and underwater
studies in order to establish the environmental status of the site and to establish a
database of baseline information.
22
DIVER SURVEY
A dive study was conducted on September 7th, 8th and 9th, 1994 within and beyond the
area designated for the proposed wind turbines. Atmospheric conditions during the
survey period were uniformly sunny days with a southwesterly wind at 10-15 mph.
The location of the transect ran from (720 II' 08" Longitude, 410 09' 56" Latitude) to a
position of (72009' 54" Longitude, and 410 II' 10" Latitude). The water depth averaged
approximately 35 feet. The total length of this transect (repeated several times) was 1.8
miles. The transect was located using a Magellan ™ Differential GPS System located
aboard EEA's 25 foot research vessel. The divers were equipped with a Sony ™ Model,
101 Video Camera enclosed in a Amphibico™ water tight housing unit. Videos were
taken both with and without a halogen light. To aid in the movement of divers along the
transect, each diver was equipped with an underwater scuba scooter powered by an
underwater battery.
Dives was conducted at all tidal stages. Unfortunately, visibility was poor during all
times of the dive and at all stages of the tidal cycle. In fact, visibility ranged from a
minimum of 6 inches to a maximum of 3 feet. The best visibility was encountered during
high slack water. The poor visibility was attributed to a cloud of suspended sediments
and other flocculants.
Nevertheless, direct observation revealed the bottom to be uniformly flat and sandy with
a fine sediment layer of approximately 2-10 centimeters thick suspended above the ocean
floor. Approximately 8-10 erratic boulders 3 to 6 feet in diameter were encountered in the
three days of diving activity. Additionally, areas of sand waves were encountered along
the transect. Attempts to collect core samples for the expressed purposes of determining
the discontinuity layer proved unsuccessful due to the highly unstable and loose sand
stratum observed throughout the transect. That is, the highly liquefied sediments could
not be contained within the coring apparatus.
The biota observed was minimal. The most prevalent organisms observed were the flat-
clawed hermit crab (Pagurus pollicaris) for which 20 to 30 individuals were positively
identified along this 1.8 mile transect. The most common finfish observed was the sea
robin (Prionotus sp.). All observed sea robins were identified to be juveniles ranging
from 3 to 4 inches TL. Due to their small size and the limited visibility of the site, the
observed sea robins could not be identified to the species level. In addition, the following
species were observed in numbers not exceeding two (total throughout the transect):
Channel Whelk
Knobbed Whelk
Little Skate
Winter Flounder
Windowpane Flounder
Busycon cana/iculatum
Busycon carica
Raja erinacea
Pleuronectes americanus
Scophthalmus aguosus
23
The erratic boulders were covered with encrusting organisms including barnacles,
hydroids and sponges. Additionally, the marine algae, Irish Moss (Chondrus crispus) and
common kelp (Laminaria agardhii) were observed attached to the erratic boulders. We
anticipate that similar colonization by marine organisms will occur on the underwater
bases and liftboat stanchions, thereby enhancing the three-dimensional terrain of the
seabed at the proposed project site.
HYDROGRAPHY
The current was measured at three depths: surface, 17 feet depth, and one meter (3 feet)
off the ocean floor. A 15 minute sample was collected at each of the three depths every
hour for a continuous period of 12 hours. This represents one tidal cycle. An average tide
was selected; spring and neap tides were avoided.
The current meter data consisting of the sampling of surface, mid-water and bottom
velocities and direction was originally collected on July 5th and 6th, 1994. A sampling
event included direct measurement of current velocity and direction at depths of 2, 5 and
10 meters below the surface.
The original current meter study conducted on July 5, and 6, 1994, consisted of the
deployment of three Aanderra RCM-5 recording current meters positioned at the
following coordinates: 410 10' 19" La!. x 72010' 39" Long. Maximum depth was 37 feet
at this location. The current speed at 14 feet ranged from 5.1 cm/sec (0.10 knots) to 56.9
cm/sec (1.10 knots). The current flowed in basically two directions: easterly (200_600)
during a ebb tide; and westerly (2500-3000) during a flood tide.
The entire sampling regime for current velocity and direction was repeated on October 4,
1994. This sampling event utilized a SACM-3 smart acoustic current meter manufactured
by EG&G Marine Instruments instead of the previously employed Aanderra RCM-5
recording current meters. The SACM-3 Smart Acoustic Current Meter recorded current
direction using magnetic north as its reference for all measurements. Meter accuracy and
precision for all parameters in the SACM-3 Smart Acoustic Current Meter are shown in
Table 1.
Table 1.
SACM-3 Current Meter Accuracy aud Precision
Parameter
Speed
Direction
T"C
Accuracy
'" 1.0 cmls
",2.0 degrees
",0.05"C
Resolution
0.1 emls
0.1 degrees
O.OI"C
Rauge
0-350 emls
0-360 deg.
-2"C-35"C
Response
0.2 see
0.2 see
1.0min
Sampling was conducted for a period of 12 hours in order to obtain data over one
complete tidal cycle. As previously stated, the project site experienced average tides
during the sampling period.
24
Consistent with the initial current readings, the current exhibited an east/west directional
flow. Variations in current direction and speed indicate that some eddying occurs due to
the large volumes of water having to pass through the constrictions at Plum Gut to the
west and the Sluiceway to the east, in addition to the large variations in depth in these
areas. Average current velocities ranged from 7.2 cm/sec (0.14 knots) to 69.6 cm/sec
(1.35 knots) at 2 meters on a flood tide. The average current velocity at 5 and 10 meters
was 32.5 cm/sec (0.63 knots) and 30.1 cm/sec (0.58 knots), respectively, for a flood tide
and 37.4 cm/sec (0.73 knots) and 16.4 cm/sec (0.32 knots) respectively, for an ebb tide.
Tidal Current Charts have been developed by the U.S. Department of Commerce,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). These charts depict the
horizontal flow and direction of the current. There are also hourly recorded current flows
from a previously placed current meter southeast of the proposed offshore wind park.
These charts are identified as SFB (Slack Flood Begins) plus the hours, SEB (Slack Ebb
Begins) plus the hours using The Race as the time and reference.
A comparison between the current flows of the project site as determined in the field and
those depicted in the NOAA current charts is summarized below:
Table 2. Comparisons Between Project Site Cnrrent Flows and
Tbose ofTbe Tidal Current Cbart from NOAA
Current Cbart Current
Time Reference K1HR K1HR De~rees Direction
0800 SFB +3 0.8 1.3 290 SAME
0900 SFB +4 0.5 1.0 291 SAME
1000 SFB +5 0.1 0.4 280 SIMILAR
1100 SEB 0.6 0.4 80 SAME
1200 SEB +1 0.5 1.0 80 SIMILAR
1300 SEB +2 0.4 1.9 80 OPPOSITE
1400 SEB +3 0.3 2.1 80 OPPOSITE
1500 SEB +4 0.4 1.9 80 OPPOSITE
1600 SEB +5 0.8 1.4 80 OPPOSITE
1700 SEB +6 1.2 0.6 70 OPPOSITE
1800 SFB 1.0 0.2 280 SIMILAR
1900 SFB +1 1.02 0.9 290 SIMILAR
NOTE: The opposite site currents from 1300 hours to 1700 hours are probably the result
of an eddy caused by high velocity currents flowing through "Plum Gut" and "The
Sluiceway" between Plum Island and Orient Point and between Plum Island and Fishers
Island, respectively. During these same periods the chart current recording direction is
approximately 90 degrees to that of these two high velocity channel currents.
25
Current velocity influences the sediment structure of a particular area (Day et. aI., 1989).
In areas with high current velocity, sedimentation rates are low as fine materials are
carried away and do not accumulate on the bottom. The sediments are well sorted and
have high percentages of sand. High current velocity also facilitates higher oxygen levels
in sediments and in the water column, which is important for fish habitat. In contrast, low
current velocity promotes high sedimentation rates causing higher percentages of silt and
lower oxygen levels in the sediments. Low sedimentation rates have also been
responsible for creating sparse benthic communities due to the lack of food available to
infaunal organisms (Hoffman et. aI., 1981).
During the periods of slack tide settling rates are maximized. Previous diver inspections
of the bottom of Plum Gut indicate that all fine materials have been removed from these
high current areas, leaving only large stones and boulders.
The base line site field survey bears out the expected sparse benthic communities.
WATER QUALITY
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (1986) has set forth
regulations regarding the quality of the surface and ground waters of New York State.
These regulations detail the water quality classifications and standards for every water
body within the state.
The water quality regulations delineate several parameters which apply to all New York
saline surface waters. These parameters and standards for which are as follows:
PARAMETER AND SPECIFICATION
I. Garbage, cinders, ashes - None in any waters of the oils, sludge, or other refuse.
Marine district as defined by Environmental Conservation Law 17-0 I 05
2. pH - The normal range shall not be extended by more than one-tenth (0.1) pH
unit.
3. Turbidity - No increase except from natural sources that will cause a substantial
visible contrast to natural conditions. In cases of naturally turbid waters, the
contrast will be due to increased turbidity.
4. Color - None from man-made sources that will be detrimental to anticipated best
usage of waters.
5. Suspended Solids - None from sewage, industrial solids, wastes or other wastes
which will cause deposition or be deleterious for any best usage determined for
specific waters which are assigned to each class.
26
6. Oil and floating substances - No residue attributable to sewage, industrial wastes
or \other wastes, nor visible oil film nor globules of grease.
7. Thermal discharges - All discharges shall assure the protection and propagation
of a balanced, indigenous population of fish, shellfish, and wildlife in and on the
body of water.
The waters of the proposed Wind Farm Site are classified as "SA" waters. This
classification represents water quality conditions of oceanic sea water. In addition to the
above standards, additional requirements upon this class of waters are as follows:
PARAMETER AND SPECIFICATION
I. Coli form - The median MPN value in any series of samples representative of
waters in the shellfish-growing area shall not be in excess of 70 per 100 m!.
2. Dissolved Oxygen - Shall not be less than 5.0 mg/L at any time.
3. Toxic Waste - None in amounts that will substantially interfere with use for
primary contact recreation or that will be injurious to edible fish or shellfish or the
culture or propagation there of, or which in any manner adversely affect the
flavor, color, odor, or sanitary condition thereof, or impair the waters for any
other best usage as determined for their specific waters which are assigned to this
class.
Samples for nitrogen analysis were collected on August 8, 1994 at the following
coordinates of the site: 41010.19' Lat., 72010.39' Long.(Station 1) and 41017.22' Lat.,
720 11.61' Long. (Station 2). Sea conditions were as follows: wave height less than I
foot, winds out of the northeast at 0-5 knots and skies were sunny. The samples at Station
#1 were collected between 6:15 AM and 7:30 AM during a low tide. Samples for
nitrogen were collected simultaneously with the previously discussed oxygen and salinity
samples. The samples at Station # 2 were collected between 8:05 AM and 9:15 AM.
Samples for total kjehldahl nitrogen (TKN), ammonia nitrogen (NH3-N), nitrite nitrogen
(NO,-N), and nitrate nitrogen (N03-N) were collected at depths of 1 meter below the
surface and 1 meter above the bottom. These samples were subsequently placed in 250
ml plastic bottles, stored in the dark and on ice and transported to the laboratory where
they were immediately analyzed.
All nitrogen analyses were performed using EP A approved methods by EcoTest
Laboratories, Inc, a licensed New York State laboratory situate North Babylon, NY.
The methods used for the analyses were as follows: TKN-digestion method, EPA Code #
351.2; NH3-N -ammonia selective electrode method, EPA Code # 351.3; NO,-N-
27
spectrophotometric method, EP A Code # 354.1; and N03-N- cadmium reduction method,
EPA Code # 353.2. Nitrogen results for Station # I are presented in Table 3.
Table 3. Nitrogen analyses for station # I collected on August 8, 1994
with respect to depth.
Depth TKN NH,-N NO,-N NO,-N Total N
(feet) Im"/Ll Iml'/Ll (ml'/L) (m"/L) (m"/L)
3 0.6 <0.05 <0.002 <0.05 0.6
32 0.4 <0.05 <0.002 <0.05 0.4
Nitrogen concentrations for Station # 2 are presented in Table 4.
Table 4. Nitrogen concentrations for Station # 2 collected on Augnst 8,1994
with respect to depth.
Depth TKN NH,-N NO,-N NO,-N Total N
(feet) ml'/L ml'/L (ml!/L) (ml!/L) (ml!/Ll
3 0.4 <0.05 <0.002 <0.05 0.4
18 0.8 <0.05 <0.05 0.8 <0.002
Analysis of nitrogen with respect to the sample locations and depth revealed generally
low ambient nitrogen concentrations in the water column.
Two detailed water quality assessments were performed at tbree sites in order to
determine dissolved oxygen concentrations, temperature, and salinity with respect to
depth, nutrient availability as reflected in ambient nitrogen concentrations, as well as
light penetration as determined by sechii depth measurements. Site #1 was chosen to
correspond with the location in which hydrographic data was collected. Ten sample
locations with respect to depth were determined by dividing the total depth by ten thereby
establishing equidistant sample locations throughout the water column. The coordinates
for Sample Location #1 is located in accordance with the following Loran Coordinates:
410 10' 19" Latitude, 720 10' 39" minutes Longitude. The initial water quality
assessment for Sample Location # I was performed on August 8, 1994 between the hours
of 6:15 A.M. through 7:30 A.M. during which the tides were at slack low. At that time,
skies were sunny, winds as measured were 0 to 5 knots out of the northeast and seas were
less than I foot.
Determination of depth was performed using a standard depthometer as verified by a
weighted line lowered to the sea floor and measured by means of standard tape
measurement. Maximum depth at Sample Location #1 was 35 feet and therefore,
temperature and dissolved oxygen concentrations were determined at 3.5 foot intervals.
28
Temperature and dissolved oxygen were determined using an YSI Temperature/Oxygen
Meter ™ calibrated for altitude and salinity. The YSI Temperature/Oxygen Meter ™ is
standard equipment used in evaluating dissolved oxygen with respect to temperature in a
wide variety of commercial aquaculture operations. Salinity was determined at each of
the ten sample locations using a standard hand held refractometer. Also, a standard I foot
diameter sechii disk was lowered into the water column in order to determine light
penetration. Sechii disk measurements at the various sampling locations during the
August 8, 1994 sampling event were 12 feet below the surface. In addition to oxygen
determination by YSI Temperature/Oxygen Meter TM, approximately one liter of seawater
was collected at each of the respective depths using a Van Dorn Bottle constructed out of
plexiglas. Samples collected by this means were carefully drained with a minimum of
agitation into 250 ml glass sample bottles, allowing for at least a three-fold overflow.
Upon collection of the samples by Van Dorn Bottle, samples were immediately fixed in
accordance with methods set forth in Standard Methods for the Winkler Titration (Azide
Modification). Samples were held on ice and in darkness and transported to a licensed
laboratory for dissolved oxygen concentration by the Winkler Method. The laboratory
results for dissolved oxygen, temperature and salinity are set forth in Table 5 below.
Table 5. Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, Salinity with respect to Depth determined
at Sample Location #1 on August 8, 1994.
Depth Temperature Salinity Dissolved Oxygen Dissolved Oxygen
(feet) (oC) (ppt) (m2/1- by probe) (m2/1- by Lab)
3.5 19.5 30 9.2 7.6
7.0 19.5 30 9.2 7.6
10.5 19.5 30 9.2 7.3
14 19.5 30 9.2 7.4
17.5 19.0 30 9.0 7.7
21 19.0 30 9.0 . 7.6
24.5 19.0 30 9.0 7.8
28 19.0 30 9.0 7.5
31.5 19.0 30 9.0 8.1
35 19.0 30 8.8 7.9
1. TEMPERATURE
Temperature analysis taken on August 8, 1994 and August 31, 1994 revealed no
stratification in the water column as is common in other areas during that time of the
year. The current velocities prevalent throughout the area thoroughly mix the water
column, preventing temperature stratification. On August 8, 1994, surface temperature
was found to be 19.50C, and bottom temperature was 19.00C at Station 1. Station 2 had a
water temperature of20.0oC throughout the water column. On August 31, Station I had a
surface and bottom temperature of 19.5 and 19.0oC respectively. Station 2a had surface
29
and bottom temperatures of 22 and 20oC, respectively. The differences between surface
and bottom temperatures are not considered significant and can be attributed to slight
warming of the surface waters as the light intensity increased throughout the morning.
Figures I and 2 show the temperature profiles for all locations on August 8 and August
311994.
Station 1 Station 2
Temperature (C) Temperature (C)
19 20 21 22 19 20 21 22
0 0
Depth 10 Depth 5
I (feet) 10 I
(feet) 20 15
30 20
40 25
Figure l. Temperature profiles for Stations 1 and 2 on August 8, 1994.
Station 1 Statiou 2a
Temperature (C) Temperature (C)
19 20 21 22 19 20 21 22
0 0
5 5 . .
10 10 I
Depth 15 Depth 15
(feet) 20 (feet) 20
25 25
30 30 .
35 35
Figure 2. Temperature profiles of Station 1 and 2 on August 31, 1994.
Data collected from Sample Location # I reveal relatively uniform temperature
throughout the water colunm. The difference in temperature between surface and bottom
samples was O.soC. Additionally, dissolved oxygen concentrations were relatively
uniform throughout the water colunm. These data reveal a complete mixing of the water
column. Additionally, dissolved oxygen was found in saturated concentrations
throughout the water column. Finally, salinity was determined at 30 ppt throughout the
water colunm. These analyses reveal excellent water quality at Sample Location # I.
In order to gain approval of the proposed project, monitoring of dissolved oxygen was a
standard operating procedure. Therefore, it was critical to Winergy Power's predecessor,
30
Mariculture, to obtain reliable information with respect to dissolved oxygen to assure that
the fish farm represented no impact. Accordingly, Sample Location #1 was re-evaluated
with respect to dissolved oxygen and temperature on August 31, 1994. All sampling
activities occurred between 9:30 A.M. and 10:30 A.M. during slack low tide. Cloud cover
ranged from partly cloudy to overcast. Winds were from the southwest at 0 to 5 knots and
seas were less than one foot. The sample location for the August 31, 1994 sampling event
was the same location for the August 8, 1994 sampling event as reflected in identical
Loran Coordinates. The summary results for temperature and dissolved oxygen for the
August 31, 1994 sampling event are set forth below in Table 6.
Table 6.
Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen with Respect to Depth determined at
Sample Location #1 on August 31,1994
Depth Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Dissolved Oxygen
(feet) oc mg/I- by probe) (m,,/I - bv Lab)
3.5 20 9.6 8.2
7.0 20 9.6 8.0
10.5 20 9.6 7.6
14 20 9.6 7.5
17.5 20 9.6 7.8
21 20 9.4 7.8
24.5 20 9.4 7.6
28 20 9.4 7.5
31.5 20 9.4 7.6
35 20 9.2 7.5
Both data sets in Table 6 disclose essentially uniform temperature throughout the water
column. Accordingly, this particular area of Gardiner's Bay does not undergo seasonal
stratification. The principle explanation accounting for uniform temperatures are
attributed to complete mixing of the water column achieved by high current velocity and
wind.
The slightly elevated water temperatures occurring on the surface at Sample Location # I
during the August 8, 1994 sampling event were attributed to an increased warming from
sun exposure. This slight elevation in temperature was not detected during the August 31,
1994 sampling event due to partly cloudy and overcast conditions occurring earlier in the
morning which prevented surface warming from the sun.
In comparing detection methods between the Winkler Method and Direct Method by
probe, it is clear that dissolved oxygen as measured by oxygen probe was significantly
higher than dissolved oxygen as measured by the Winkler Method. On the average,
dissolved oxygen measurements were 1.56 mg!1 higher as measured by oxygen probe
than as measured by the Winkler Method. Even so, dissolved oxygen concentrations
reflected saturated conditions throughout the water column as evidenced by both the
31
Winkler Method and direct measurement by probe. Saturated surface waters at Sample
Location #1 are attributed to complete mixing of the water column as well as algal
production which adds oxygen to the water column.
2. DISSOLVED OXYGEN
Oxygen profiles were taken simultaneously with temperature measurements on August 8
and 31, 1994. Oxygen concentrations also indicated that the water column was
unstratified. Oxygen concentrations measured via Winkler Titration ranged from 7.3
mg/L to 8.5 mglL and represent saturated oxygen concentrations. These uniform oxygen
concentrations with respect to depth are attributed to the complete mixing of the water
column. Slightly elevated oxygen concentrations at the surface at three of the sampling
locations are attributed to surface layer exchange with the atmosphere. The slightly
depressed surface oxygen concentrations at Station I on August 8, 1994 are normal for
the time at which the samples were taken (6:15 A.M.). These low levels in oxygen
concentration are the result of respiration and uptake of oxygen by phytoplankton during
the evening hours (Day et. aI., 1989). Figures 4 and 5 show the oxygen profiles for all
locations on August 8 and 31, 1994.
Station 1 Station 2
Oxygen (mglL) Oxygen (mglL)
7 8 7 8
0 0
5 : 5 ..
10 .. I.
Depth 15 Depth 10
(fee') 20 . (fee')
.. 15
25 .1
30 . 20
.
35 . 25
Station 1 Station 2
Oxygen (mglL) Oxygen (mgIL)
7 8 7 8
0 0
5 . 5 ,
10 .. . 10 .
Depth 15 Depth 15 ,"
(fee') 20 : (feet) 20
25 .. 25 ..
30 .. 30 .
35 35
Figure 3. Oxygen profiles for Stations 1 and 2 on August 8,1994.
32
Dissolved oxygen, Temperature and Salinity were determined at an alternate site
("Sample Location #2) on August 8, 1994 approximately one quarter mile southeast from
Sample Location #1 at the following Loran Coordinates: 410 17' 22" Latitude, 720 II'
61". Sample collection and analyses of dissolved oxygen and temperature took place
between 8:05 am and 9:15 am. Summary results are set forth below in Table 7.
Table 7.
Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen with respect to Depth
at Sample Location #2 on August 8, 1994.
Depth Temperature Salinity Dissolved Oxygen Dissolved Oxygen
(feet) (oC) (ppt) (ml:/1 - by probe) (ml:/I- by Lab)
2.1 19.5 30 9.4 8.2
4.2 ]9.5 30 9.2 8.4
6.3 19.5 30 9.0 7.8
8.4 19.5 31 8.8 7.8
10.5 19.0 32 8.8 7.8
12.6 19.0 32 8.8 7.8
14.7 19.0 32 8.4 7.9
16.8 19.0 33 8.6 8.0
18.9 19.0 32 8.6 8.0
21.0 19.0 32 8.6 7.9
Data as disclosed in Table 7 reveals a slight warming of the water column brought about
by increased sun exposure occurring later in the morning. Also, salinities in the lower
portion of the water column were slightly elevated over samples obtained at Sample
Location #1 on August 8, 1994. These slightly elevated salinities are attributed to the
onset of flood tide, during which there is an influx of oceanic bottom waters greater in
salinity and density. Furthermore, these higher salinity waters, because of their greater
density, will tend to flow along the bottom (Mann and Lazier, 1991).
Dissolved oxygen concentration detected in at Sample Location #2 during the August 8,
1994 sampling event were slightly elevated as compared to dissolved oxygen collected at
Sample Location #1 on August 8, W94. These differences however were not regarded as
significant, being attributed to increased algal production occurring later that same
morning. Increased algal production was attributed to greater sunlight intensity also
occurring later in the morning. Again, these data reveal saturated oxygen concentrations
throughout the water column.
Temperature and dissolved oxygen with respect to depth was analyzed at a alternate site
(Sample Location #2a) on August 31,1994, proximate to Sample Location #2. The Loran
Coordinates for Sample Location #2a are as follows: 410 17' 6" Latitude, 720 II' 42"
Longitude. Sample collection and analyses of temperature and dissolved oxygen took
place between 10:45 am and II :30 am. The summary results are set forth below in Table
8.
33
Table 8. Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen witb respect to Depth at Sample Location #2a
on August 31, 1994.
Depth Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Dissolved Oxygen
(feet) oc (mell - by probe) (me/I- by Lab)
3.2 22 8.6 8.5
6.4 21 8.8 8.5
9.6 20 8.8 7.9
12.8 20 8.8 8.4
14.0 20 8.8 8.5
17.2 20 8.8 8.2
20.4 20 8.8 8.2
23.6 20 8.8 8.1
26.8 20 8.8 8.0
32 20 8.4 7.8
Consistent with the data obtained for Sample Location #2 during the August 8, 1994
sampling event, the later time in which these samples were collected and analyzed
resulted in a slight warming of the upper portion of the water column attributed to greater
sunlight intensity; as with all other sample analyses conducted during the various
sampling events and locations, the data reveals dissolved oxygen concentrations at
saturation levels throughout the water colunm. The slightly depressed dissolved oxygen
concentrations detected at the bottom sample is not regarded as significant and may be
attributed to minor biological/chemical oxygen demand brought about by suspended
sediments. However, the slight depression of dissolved oxygen on the bottom is not a
cause for concern either to Winergy Power or, presumably, government agencies having
jurisdiction over this proposed project.
In summary, as reflected in all of the temperature measurements made in the various
sample locations, this particular area of Gardiner's Bay does not undergo seasonal
stratification. Furthermore, dissolved oxygen was detected in saturated concentrations
throughout the water column during each sampling event. Therefore, it is concluded that
water quality, as reflected in these databases, is excellent.
3. SALINITY
Salinity measurements were collected at Station 1 and 2 on August 8, 1994. Salinity at
the first location was consistently 30 ppt throughout the water colunm. The second site
had a slightly elevated bottom salinity of 32 ppt as the tide began to flood. The
consistency of the salinity regime is attributed to complete mixing of the water colunm
and the relative distance of the site to large freshwater sources. This is particularly
relevant during August when rainfall events and amounts are considerably less that at
34
other times of the year. Figure 4 shows the salinity profiles for both locations on August
8,1994.
Station 1
Salinity (ppt)
25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
Station 2
Salinity (ppt)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
o
I
-I
o
5
10
Depth 15
(feel) 20
25
30
35
5
Depth 10
(feet) 15
2<1
25
Figure 4. Salinity profiles for Stations 1 and 2 on August 8, 1994.
4. NITROGEN
Samples for nitrogen analysis were collected on August 8, 1994 at two stations
previously described herein. Samples were collected I meter below the surface and I
meter above the bottom. Analyses were performed to determine total kjehldahl nitrogen,
ammonia nitrogen, nitrite nitrogen, and nitrate nitrogen. Total kjehldahl nitrogen ranged
from 0.4 mg/L to 0.8 mg/L; ammonia and nitrate nitrogen concentrations were less than
0.05 mg/L; and, nitrite nitrogen concentrations were less than 0.002 mg/L. Nitrite
nitrogen and nitrate nitrogen concentrations are comparable to concentrations found in
sampling performed in August 1971 by the New York Ocean Science Laboratory
(NYOSL, 1976). Generally, the NYOSL (1976) data set reveals nitrogen concentrations
to be at a maximum during the colder months of the year. In contrast, nitrogen levels are
at a minimum during the warmer months. The observed fluctuations in nitrogen
concentration are attributed to the following:
(1.) Greater precipitation during the cold months of the year subsequently cause
higher nitrogen outputs from the Thames River and Connecticut River, the largest source
of freshwater to Long Island Sound, thereby increasing nitrogen concentrations near the
Winergy Power site (LISS, 1994).
(2.) Extended periods of high velocity wind events occurring during the winter
months result in re-suspension of sediments and related nutrients into the water column,
thereby increasing nitrogen concentrations near the Winergy Power site (Day et. aI.,
1989).
(3.) Lower nitrogen utilization by phytoplankton during colder months of the year
(Valiela, 1984) results in an increase in nitrogen concentration in the water column. The
lowered utilization capability of the phytoplankton is attributed to the lack of sufficient
light for optimum growth (Day, et. aI., 1989) and cooler water temperatures. As light
35
intensity increases in the spring months, phytoplankton begins utilizing the available
nutrients and nitrogen levels decrease. At some point in the spring or early summer, the
algae deplete the nitrogen and their rate of growth slows down (Valiela, 1984). The low
levels of nitrogen found in June and August of 1971 correspond with the previously
mentioned nitrogen depletion and are consistent with nitrogen data collected as part of
this FEIS.
a. SEASONAL VARIATIONS IN NITROGEN
In an effort to compare nitrogen levels currently existing at the project site with historical
nitrogen levels and seasonal variations, an analysis was performed on the data set
compiled by the New York Ocean Science Laboratory ("NYOSL") situated in Montauk,
New York. NYOSL conducted a comprehensive study on the physical and chemical
quality of the waters of Long Island Sound and Block Island Sound from 1970 to 1973.
In order to establish baseline historical nitrogen conditions, data collected by NYOSL at
the sample location closest to the proposed net pen area was used in this analysis. This
sample location is referred to as N3, situated in The Race at coordinates 410 13.24' Lat,
no 05.30' Long (NYOSL, 1976). The NYOSL data collected for one year from October
20, 1970 to October 6, 1971 is summarized by month in Table 9.
Table 9. Average nitrite nitrogen (NO,-N) and nitrate (NO,-N) concentrations with
corresponding range from samples collected at 41013,24' Lat and 72005.30' Long
(New York Ocean Science Laboratory, 1976).
NO, - mg/L
mean
Month/Year
Jun 1971
Oct 1970
Feb 1971
Mar 1971
Au 1971
Oct 1971
As previously stated, this data was collected in August 1994. The 20 year consistency in
nitrogen values indicates that the nitrogen regime of the proposed site is stable and not
likely to change.
36
TOPOGRAPHY
The topography of the bottom in the vicinity of the proposed project is gradual. The
general topography of the site is flat with an average depth of 35 feet. The placement of
wind turbines, monopiles and jackup barge will not affect the bottom in such a way so as
to promote erosion. Discernible navigation channels are not present in the vicinity of the
proposed project site. Most of the waters surrounding the site have depths greater than 20
feet and are navigable by most vessels frequenting the area. In addition, the gradual
changes in depth throughout the area remove cave-ins as a matter of concern.
CURRENT PATTERN, VELOCITY AND TURBIDITY
As previously stated herein, the proposed site experiences an east/west current flow with
velocities ranging from 7.2 cm/sec to 69.6 cm/sec (0.14 knots to 1.35 knots).
Considerable current eddying occurs at the net pen site due to the large volumes of water
passing through the constriction at Plum Gut during an ebb tide. Current flow patterns
discussed above in Hydrography. Despite large current flows, turbidity in the area is
minimal. Secchi depth measurements taken at various locations on August 8, 1994 were
12 feet below the surface.
II. BENTHIC ANALYSIS
Objective: To establish substrate reference data by which future detection of impacts to
the existing benthos can be measured.
Methods: The applicant must prepare a sediment sampling plan which includes the
number and location of sediment samples to be collected for grain size, chemical and
biological analysis. Single sediment cores must be collected in an array of samples
representative of bottom characteristics of the site. The precise design, number and
location are not specified here because of the variety of pen configurations and sizes for
which the original survey was performed. However, a systematic sampling design
(samples at equidistant intervals) which covers the entire area plus 60 meters in each tidal
direction (ebb and flow) is required.
Grain size analyses should be performed using the Wet Sieving methods described in the
Buchenan (1984; pp. 47-48Z) or similar procedure. The standard sieve sizes for gravel,
sand, silt and clay shall be used. Full analyses of the silt clay fractions may be calculated
as the difference in dry weight between the original sample and the sum of the sieve
fractions down to the 0.062 mm sieve (very fine sand). The fraction in each sieve shall be
reported in grams (dry weight) including the total dry weight of the initial sample. The
unconsolidated material and the top 2 cm of inorganic sediments shall be collected for the
analysis of TOe. The applicant must insure that a minimum of 30 grams are collected for
37
analysis. Multiple cores (which include the top 2 em of inorganic material) if warranted,
will be required.
Total organic carbon shall be analyzed using the methods described in the Puget Sound
Estuary Program.
Samples for sediment analyses and macrobenthic infauna were collected on July 5, 1994
using a 0.1 rn2 Smith-MacIntyre benthic grab. Grabs were collected at each of twenty
stations at the project site. Sub samples of each grab which constituted less than one
quarter of the total grab sample were collected for sediment grain and total organic
carbon (TOe) analyses, placed in glass jars and maintained at 40C until analyzed.
Analyses for TOC were performed according to methods outlined in the EP A manual
(1988) for sediment testing and were conducted by H2M Labs Inc. of Melville, NY.
Samples were collected placed in glass jars with teflon or aluminum foil and cooled to
40C until analysis. Each test sample was treated with acid and heated to 750C to remove
inorganic carbon. The sample was then pyrolyzed in the presence of oxygen to remove
organic carbon, which was analyzed using gas chromatography, infrared detection, or
thermal conductivity detection.
TOC averaged between 388 mg/kg at Station 2 to 2,230 mglkg at Station 10. Currently,
there are no established limits for TOC samples (Matthew Billerman, EEA- personal
communication).
Nevertheless, TOC is regarded as reflective of other estuarine environments on eastern
Long Island.
Sediment grain size analyses were performed in accordance with methods set forth by the
American Society for Testing and Materials (1993), and conducted by Soil Mechanics
Drilling Corp. of Seaford, N.Y.. The raw data can be found in Appendix N in the DEIS
for Mariculture Technologies, May 1995. samples from each aggregate were dried in the
laboratory to a constant mass at a temperature of II 0.50C. After mass determination, the
each sample was washed through a series of nested sieves of progressively smaller
openings to determine particle size distribution. After sufficient sieving, the mass of each
increment was determined. The masses of all increments were then added and compared
to the mass of the original dry sample. If the values differed more than 0.3% based on the
original dry sample weight, the results were discarded and the test repeated.
The sediments are dominantly characterized as very fine to medium sand with traces of
silt. Stations ranged between 88.4% sand at station 10 to 98.8 % sand at stations 8 and 20.
The remainder of the percentage was comprised of gray silt. These small percentages of
silt indicate that there is little sedimentation due to the occurrence of high velocity current
at the proposed site.
. Infauna
38
Objective: To establish reference data of existing benthic infauna. In this way future
changes to the infauna can be compared.
Methods: Infauna samples shall be sieved through a 0.5 mm sieve (collection techniques
are presented with metric measurements) and organisms identified as to species or to the
lowest practical taxonomic level. Single cores collected according to the proposed
sampling plan along the axis of the current. Cores must be inserted to resistance or IS cm,
whichever is less. Depth of the core shall be reported. Individual benthic infauna cores
collected by a diver shall have an area of at least 81cm2 ((a four-inch diameter PVC pipe
will suffice). Alternatively, cores may be collected from a grab or box type corer having
an area of at least 0.1 m2 (1000 cm2). If sub samples are taken from a grab box type
corer for the sediment analysis and the remaining sample used for infauna analysis, no
more than one quarter of each sample may be removed for the sediment analysis.
The remainder (3/4) of each of the previously mentioned 0.1 m2 Smith-MacIntyre grabs
collected on July 5, 1994 for the sediment and infaunal collection was washed through a
0.5 mm mesh sieve to remove fine particles. Invertebrates retained by the sieve were
transferred to jars and preserved with buffered 10% formalin. Rose Bengal solution was
added to aid in later sorting of the organisms. Invertebrates were then sorted and
identified to the lowest practical taxonomic level. Macrobenthic invertebrate densities for
all stations at the proposed site are shown in Appendix 0 in the DEIS for Mariculture
Technologies, May 1995.
The infauna is primarily dominated by polychaete worms in both number of species and
abundance of individual species. There are over 5,300 described species of polychaetes
(Barnes, 1987). Polychaetes are very common in the marine environment, often
comprising as much as 40 to 80 percent of the infauna in a particular area. Therefore, it is
not surprising to find them dominant at the proposed site. Polychaetes primarily are
dioecious and reproduce sexually. Gametes usually develop as projections or swellings
within the body cavity rather than in distinct organs. Developing eggs are either released
into the water column, brooded or laid in masses and attached to various objects. After
gestation, all species develop into a larval form known as a trochophore. These may be
pelagic, feeding on plankton; or bottom dwelling and lecithotrophic (yolky and
nonfeeding). After this stage, the larva metamorphoses into an adult form. It is through
these means that the observed polychaetes are believed to have colonized the project site.
Sediment structure, particularly grain size, is a determining factor in what organisms
choose to live there as many species are restricted to certain types of sediment (Gray,
1974). Deposit feeders are often found dominant in silt/clay areas while suspension
feeders are often found dominant in sandy areas.
Polychaetes fall into one of two classifications: errant (free moving) or sedentary. Of the
species found at the site, nearly one third were errant forms. Most errant polychaetes are
carnivorous. However, some errant forms are omnivorous and use their jaws to feed on
algae and detritus. Some errant polychaetes are active burrowers in sand and mud while
39
others crawl about on the bottom among rocks and shells. Errant polychaete species
found at the site were as follows:
Arabella iricolor
Drilonereis longa
Eumida sanguinea
Glycera americana
Glycera dibranchiata
Harmothoe imbricata
Lumbrineris fragilis
Nephtys incisa
Nephtys picta
Notocirrus spiniferus
Pholoe minuta
Polynoidae sp.
Sigalion arenicola
Nephtys picta was the most dominate errant polychaete found. It was present at all of the
stations, whereas all other errant polychaete worms were found at four or less stations
and in lower numbers among all stations. Ranging from Cape Cod to South Carolina,
Nephtys picta is known to be an active predator of other invertebrates. It is not surprising
to find it at the proposed site, as it is a common burrower in sand or mud.
The remaining two thirds of the polychaetes found at the site were sedentary forms.
These sedentary polychaetes generally construct tubes or burrows into the bottom. They
may be deposit feeding or filter feeding. Some sedentary polychaetes are equipped with
special feeding structures with which they collect detritus and plankton from the sediment
or surrounding water. Material adheres to mucus secretions on these feeding structures
and is subsequently carried toward the mouth along ciliated tracts or grooves. The
sedentary polychaetes select digestible organic material from the mixture, discarding
non-preferred materials such as sand. The sedentary polychaete species found at the site
were as follows:
Ampharete arctica
Aricidia catherinae
Caulleriella killariensis
Cirratulus grandis
Clymenella zonalis
Magelona papillicornis
Mediomastus ambiseta
Ophelia denticulata
Orbinia ornata
Owenia fUsiformis
Polydora ligni
40
Polydora socialis
Polydora sp.
Polygordius triestinus
Sabellaria vulgaris
Scolecolepides viridis
Scolelepis squamata
Spiophanes bombyx
Tharyx acutus
Travisia carnea
Mediomastus ambiseta was the most dominant sedentary polychaete, followed by
Aricidea catherinae, Spiophanes bombyx, and Polygordius triestinus. All of these species
were present at fifteen or more stations. All are infaunal burrowers and deposit feeders.
The remaining sedentary polychaetes species present at the site were observed in half of
the sample grabs or less and in lesser numbers.
Besides polychaete worms, other invertebrates common at the site include the bivalve
Tellina agilis, and the amphipod Haustorius canadensis. Both of these species are also
active burrowers.
The fact that all of the dominant species at the proposed site are infaunal burrowers is not
surprising. The current velocities prevalent at the site are such that small surface dwelling
organisms would be easily swept away. The ability to burrow into the sediment allows
these animals to remain out of the current flow. High current velocity also inhibits many
of the tube building species as the sediments tend to be unstable. Therefore, tube building
forms were not found to be prevalent at the proposed site.
5. Sedimentation Conditions
On July 5, 1994, sediment samples were collected using a 0.1 m2 Smith-Maclntyre™
Benthic Grab. Twenty stations within the perimeter of the proposed net pen site were
chosen for sampling. Sediment grain and total organic carbon ('TOC") analyses were
performed with regard to standard methods previously described herein.
Sediment grain analysis revealed that the sediment in the area of the proposed project site
consisted of high percentages (88.4% to 98.8%) of very fine to medium grain sand. The
remaining percentage (1.2% to 11.6%) of sediment consisted of gray silt. There was
virtually no gravel or clay present in the sediment. During the diver survey, the bottom
proved to be highly unconsolidated. Attempts to obtain sediment cores were unsuccessful
because the sediment would not remain in the hand corer. This prevented the
determination of the discontinuity layer. The entire length of the 30.5 centimeter hand
corer penetrated the bottom with no resistance, further indicating the unconsolidated
nature of the sediments. Observations during the survey found that the overlying organic
41
layer to be highly variable and in constant motion. This lack of sediment compaction is
attributable to the high velocity currents prevalent throughout the area.
The sediment characteristics were evenly distributed throughout the proposed project site.
There were no significant differences in the percentages of sand and silt among the
stations. The lowest percentage of sand and consequently the highest percentage of silt
were present at Station 10 (88.4% and 11.6%, respectively).The highest percentage of
sand and lowest percentage of silt was found at Station 8 (98.8% and 1.2%, respectively).
The highly unconsolidated nature of the sediment coupled with the high velocity currents
and high oxygen content of the water column previously described herein, indicates that
any disturbances during construction will quickly dissipate, much as has been observed
with fish feed and fish feces at the site during mariculture activities. Furthermore, the site
contains several sporadically placed boulders, which make the area unsuitable for
commercial trawlers. These factors are important indicators that the installation and
operation of any offshore wind energy project will not cause any environmental damage
nor interfere with commercial fishing operations in the area.
Replenishment rates of sediment are low due to the high current velocities prevalent
throughout the area. Investigations of Plum Gut by divers revealed nothing but large
rocks and boulders on the bottom due to the tremendous volumes of water passing
through the constriction. South and east of Plum Gut, a large gully cut into the bottom
further indicates the ability of the current to remove material. The unconsolidated nature
of the bottom at the net pen site indicates that these sediments are vulnerable to
movement by the current, resulting in low sediment accumulation.
6. Aquatic Ecology
VEGETATION - DESCRIBE PRESENCE AND AMOUNT EACH TYPE
The dive survey on September 7th, 8th, and 9th revealed two species of marine algae: Irish
Moss (Chondrus crispus) and the Common Kelp (Laminaria agardhii), occurring on and
near the grow out site. These algae were attached to the sparsely distributed boulders.
There were no algal species growing on the bottom sediments due to the scouring effect
of the current.
INVERTEBRATE SPECIES
The diver survey and the field survey indicated that several infaunal invertebrate species
inhabit the proposed demonstration project site. Besides these species, obviously there
are other more mobile species which could be present at any given time. The following is
a list of possible invertebrate species that could inhabit areas within and beyond the
proposed net pen site; species whose presences were confirmed through the Table 10. For
a descriptive narrative on each of the species, several sources are recommended: Kenneth
42
L. Gosner's Peterson Field Guides - Atlantic Seashore (1978), E.L. Bousfield's Shallow
Water Gammaridian Amohiooda of New Emdand, and Kristian Fauchald's The
Polychaete Worms, Definitions and Keys to the Orders. Families and Genera.
Table 10. Invertebrate Species Occurrence at the Gardiner's Bay Site
Known To Be Present - by Time of Year
Common name Scientific name Occurrence
Long finned squid Lolif(o pealei Aoril-November
Moon iellv Aurelia aurita sDrinll-summer
Blue Crab Callinectes sapidus summer
Lady Crab' Ovalipes ocellatus summer
Lion's mane Cyanea cap illata summer
Sea nettle Chrysaora quinquecirrha summer
Ampharetid Worms' Amvharete arctica year round
Amphipod' Ampelisca abdita year round
Ampelisca vadorum year round
Ampelisca verrilli year round
Byblis serrato year round
Uncio/a irrorata year round
Gammarus oceanicus year round
Haustoriidae sp. year round
Acanthohaustorius millsi year round
Haustorius canadensis year round
Monoculodes edwardsi year round
Leptocheirus pinguis year round
Paraphoxus epistomus year round
Arabellid Worms' Dri/onereis lonf(a year round
Arrow worm* Sal!itta SD. vear round
Bamboo Worm* Clymenella zona/is year round
Bamboo Worm' Owenia fusiformis vear round
Barnacles* Balanus amphitrite year round
Blood Worms' Glycera dibranchiata year round
Glycera americana year round
Burrowing Scale Worm* Ph%e minuta year round
Burrowing Scale Worm' SiJ!alion arenico/a year round
Black Clam' Arc/tea islandica year round
Blue mussel' Mvti/us edulis vear round
Channeled whelk' Busycon canaliculatum year round
Commensal Crabs' Pinnixa sp. year round
Pinnixa chaetopterana year round
Pinnixa sayana year round
Crescent Mitrella' Mitrella lunata year round
43
Common name Scientific name Occurrence
Cumacean '" Oxvurostvlis smithi year round
Flat Clawed Hermit Crab' Pa<>urus nol/iearis vear round
Flat worm' Phvlum Rhvnchoeoela vear round
F rin~ed Worm' Cirratulus ,,,andis vear round
Frin<>ed Worms' Tharvx acutu vear round
Horse shoe crab Limulus volvvhemus vear round
Frilled anemone Metridium senile vear round
Gastronod' Utricu/astra cana/iculata vear round
Glassv L vonsia' Lvonsia hvalina vear round
Green Crab Carcinus maenas vear round
Horse mussel Modiolus modiolus year round
Isopod' Cyathura polita year round
Ciro/ana concharum yea, round
Chiridotea coeca year round
Edotea montosa year round
Sphaeroma quadridentatum year round
Sa/amae cocina year round
Knobbed whelk' Busvcon carica vear round
Lacy Crust (bryozoa)' Callopora eraticula year round
Membranipora tenuis year round
Lobed moonshell Polin ices dinlicatus vear round
Lon~ Clawed Hermit Crab PO<lUrus lonrdearvus vear round
Lumbrinerid Worms' Lumbrineriifraf!ilis vear round
Mantis shrimn Souilla emnusa vear round
Mud Worms' Polvdora lif!ni vear round
Mud Worms' Polvdora socialis vear round
Mud Worms' Polvdora so. vea, round
Mud Worms' Scolecolevides viridis vear round
Mud Worms' Sviovhanes bombvx vear round
Near Nut Shell' Nucula vroxima vear round
New En~land Do~ Whelk' Nassarius trivittatus vear round
Northern lobster Homarus americanus vear round
Northern moonshell Lunatia heros vear round
Odostomes'" Odostomia SD. vear round
Ooal Worm' Arabella iricolor vear round
oml Worm' Notocirrus sDiniferus vear round
Onheliid Worms' Onhelia denticulata vear round
Onheliid Worms' Travisia carnea vear round
Orbiniid Worms' Aricidia catherina vear round
Orbiniid Worms' Orbinia ornata vear round
Ostracoda' Ostracoda sn. vear round
Paddle Worm' Eumida sanf'uinea vear round
RoS;;:- Ma;;elonas' Maf!elona vavillicornis vear round
Polvchaeta' Polvnoidae sn. vear round
Polvchaeta' Mediomastus ambiseta vear round
Polvchaeta' Polvf!ordius triestinus vear round
Polvchaeta' Scolelenis SQUamata vear round
44
Common name Scientific name Occurrence
Polvchaeta' Caulleriella killariensis vear round
Purple Sea Urchin Arbacia Dunctulata vear round
Pvramid Shell' Turbonil/a nivea/stricta vear round
Quahog Mercenaria mercenaria vear round
Razor clam * Ensis directus year round
Red Crust (bryozoa)' Schizoporella unicornis year round
Stephanosella sp. year round
Stomachetosell sinuosa year round
Red-Lined Worms' Nephtys pi year round
Nephtys incisa year round
Rock Crab Cancer irroratus year round
Round worm* Class Nematoda year round
Sand Builder Worm' Sabellaria vulgaris vear round
Sand Dollar' Echinarachnius parma year round
Scale Worm' Harmothoe imbricata vear round
Sea Star Asterias forbesii vear round
Slipper Shell' Crepidula Jornicata year round
Crepidula plana year round
Soider Crab Lihinia emandnata vear round
Springtail' Anurida maritima year round
Surf clam' SDisula solidissima vear round
Tellins' Tellina agilis vear round
As expected, the vast majority of invertebrate species found at the proposed project site
are present year round. A complete listing of invertebrate species found at the net pen site
via infaunal sampling is contained in Appendix 0 of the DEIS for Mariculture
Technologies, May 1995. Polychaete worms (Class Polychaeta). were the dominant
invertebrate form found at the site. Polychaetes often comprise as much as 40 to 80
percent of the infauna found in a particular area (Barnes, 1987). The second most
dominant group of invertebrates present at the site were of the Class Crustacea,
particularly the Gammeridian Amphipods (Order Amphipoda). The Amphipods most
prevalent were those species which burrow in the sediment.
The third and fourth most dominant group at the site was of the Phylum Mollusca. Of this
Phylum, members of the Class Bivalvia, particularly the species Tellina agilis, which
actively burrows in the sediments, were most abundant. Also, several species of the Class
Gastropoda were present at some of the stations. These included the channeled whelk
(Busycon canaliculatum) and knobbed whelk (Busycon carica).
The remaining benthic community consisted of Bryozoans (Phylum Bryozoa), Nemertean
Worms (Phylum Rhynchocoela); Round Worms (Phylum Aschelminthes, Class
Nematoda); Hydroids (Phylum Cnidaria, Class Hydrozoa); and Arrow Worms (Phylum
Chaetognatha). Many of these forms were present at only a few stations, and some only
45
one station. Their occurrences consisted of less than five individuals at anyone station. In
general, the benthic community was distributed sparsely throughout the site.
BENTHOS
a. Benthic Infauna
A benthic infaunal analysis was conducted by EEA, Inc., on July 5, 1994 at twenty
stations throughout the proposed wind farm/net pen site. Among the organisms identified,
74 were identified to the species level; eight were to the genus level; and three were to
some higher taxonomic level. The organisms identified by this analysis, the number of
stations each were present at and the total number of individuals is listed Table 11 below:
Table 11.
Benthic Fauna Identified and Counted at the Winergy Power Site
Number of Total Number
Common Name Scientific Name Stations Present of Animals
Flat worm Phvlam Rhvnchocoela I I
Round worm Class Nematoda 6 12
Arrow worm SUllitta so. I I
Red Crust (bryozoa) Schizoporella unicorn is 4 7
Stephanosella sp. 2 3
Stomachetosell sinuosa 2 3
Lacy Crust (bryozoa) Callopora craticala 1 1
Membranipora tenuis 4 IS
Slipper Shell Crepidalalornicata 4 14
Crepidala plana 4 20
Crepidala sp. 2 17
Crescent Mitrella Mitrella lanata 3 4
New En~land OM Whelk Nassarius trivittatus 9 21
Odostomes Odostomia sn. I 1
Pyramid Shell Turbonilla nivea/stricta 2 2
Gastronod Utricu/astra cana/icu/ata I I
Channeled whelk Busvcon cana/icu/atum 2 2
Knobbed whelk Busvcon carica 2 2
Glassv Lvonsia Lvonsia hva/ina I I
Black Clam Arc/iea is/andica I I
Near Nut Shell Nacala nroxima I 2
Tellins Tellina a~i/is 18 104
Surf clam Soisala so/idissima 5 6
Blue mussel Mvtitas eda/is I I
Razor clam Ensis directus 2
Red-Lined Worms Nephtys picta 20 ISO
Nephtys incisa 4 6
46
Number of Total Number
Common Name Scientific Name Stations Present of Animals
Polychaeta Palynaidae sp. I 5
Mediomastus ambiseta 19 242
Palygardius triestinus 19 66
Caulleriella killariensis 8 8
Scalelepis squamata 4 8
Opal Worms Arabella iricala I 3
Notocirrus spiniferus I I
Arabellid Worms Drilanereis lan"a 3 3
Scale Worm Harmothoe imbricata 1 I
Burrowing Scale Worm Phalae minuta I 3
Sigalion arenico/a 2 2
Lumbrinerid Worms Lumbrineris fra"i1is 1 1
Blood Worms Glycera dibranchiata I 1
Glycera americana I I
Paddle Worm Eumida san"uinea I I
Orbiniid Worms Aricidia catherinae 17 120
Orbinia ornata 4 4
Sand Builder Worm Sabellaria vul"aris 3 18
Mud Worms Spiaphanes bambyx 15 77
Scolecolepides viridis 5 24
Palydara sacialis 3 16
Palydara ligni I I
Palydara sp. I 2
Fringed Worms Tharyx acutus 10 22
Cirratu/us grandis I I
Opheliid Worms Travisia carnea 10 19
Ophelia denticulata I I
Amnharetid Worms Amnharete arctica 4 8
Rosv Mauelonas Ma"elana vavillicamis 6 8
Bamboo Worm Oweniafusifarmis 4 4
Clymenella zanalis 2 2
s;;TirWtail Anurida maritima 2 3
Ostracoda Ostracoda sn. 14 36
Barnacles Balanus amnhitrite 5 78
Cumacean Oxvurastvlis smithi I I
Isopod Cyathura palita 2 2
Ciro/ana concharum I I
Chiridotea caeca 9 18
Edolea rnontosa I I
Sphaeroma quadridentatum I I
Salamae cocina 2 4
47
Number of Total Number
Common Name Scieutific Name Stations Present of Animals
Amphipod Ampelisca abdita 4 10
Ampelisca vadorum 10 53
Ampelisca verrilli 3 90
Byblis serrata 1 1
Uncia/a irrorata 7 20
Gammarus oceanicus 2 2
Haustoriidae sp. 3 14
Acanthohaustorius millsi 2 3
Haustorius canadensis 14 152
Monoculodes edwardsi 1 2
Leptocheirus pinguis I 2
Paraphoxus epistomus 16 49
Flat Clawed Hermit Crab Pal!:urus pollicaris 20 20-30
Commensal Crabs Pinnixa sp. 3 5
Pinnixa chaetopterana 1 1
Pinnixa sayana 4 9
Ladv Crab Ovalives ocellatus 4 4
Sand Dollar Echinarachnius parma 3 6
As previously discussed herein, the benthic community is dominated by polychaete
worms. Of the polychaetes, the species Mediomastus ambiseta and Nephtys picta were
the most prevalent followed by Aricidia catherinae, Spiophanes bombyx, and
Polygordius triestinus. Other species found to be common include the bivalve Tellina
agilis and the amphipod Haustorius canadensis. All of these species were present at
fifteen or more stations.
As indicated above, all species were represented by less than 250 individuals with 20
stations. Only five species were represented by more than 100 individuals within twenty
stations. This demonstrates the sparseness of the community structure. Station #5 had the
highest density of 250 individuals present. Research of benthic fauna has revealed
densities greater than 1000 individuals per m3 in marine sublittoral communities (Day et.
aI., 1989).
All of the species found to be dominant at the wind farm site are infaunal burrowers. This
is not surprising as the current velocities prevalent throughout the area makes the area
unsuitable for other forms. None of the benthic infaunal species identified are listed as
protected or rare and endangered.
Predator - prey relationships are important in understanding the interactions between
different aspects of a community.
The relationships between the plankton, benthos and nekton (fishes) can be described in
terms of trophic levels through an analysis of the food web. An investigation was
48
performed of the food web existing in the area of the proposed wind farm site. The results
of this analysis are depicted in Figure 5 below.
Silall;
Ayian species
PrimaryEillh
Predators
Summer Flounder
~lriped Bass
Bluefish
Weakfish
Sea Robin
Secondar:y~~
~uid
Predators
Winter Flounder
Blackfish
Silverbacks
AnchoV)(
Skwl
~
Crustacea
L
.s.man
Invertebrates
L Zooplankton
~
Dogfish
Skates
Turtles
fhylQplankton
Fig 5. Representative Food Web in Gardiners Bay
49
The main linear food chain runs from the plankton to the small benthic macro
invertebrates which are eaten by the secondary fish predators, which in turn are eaten by
the major predatory fishes. The major predatory fish and secondary fish are subsequently
preyed upon by seals, osprey and gulls. This food web represents a model food web for
the geographic area around Gardiner's Bay.
FINFISH SPECIES
Finfish are more difficult to enumerate because of their greater mobility. In addition,
many species are seasonal, migrating from one geographical area to another. Table 12 is a
list of species expected to be present in the area of the proposed wind park site as well as
the time of the year which they would occur. Species that were confirmed as present at
the site during the diver survey are marked with an asterisk (*). Detailed descriptions of
each species are located in Peterson Field Guides Atlantic Coast Fishes (1986) by C.
Richard Robins, G. Carlton Ray and John Douglass. (See references for complete
publication information.)
Table 12.
Finfish Species Occurrence at the Gardiner's Bay Site
Common name Species name Occurrence
Atlantic Mackerel Scomber scombrus spring
Bluefish Pomatomus sa/latrix spring-fall
Sheepshead Archosargus vrobatocevhalus spring-fall
Striped Bass Marone saxatiUs spring-fall
Alewife Alosa vsuedoharenflUs spring-summer
American Shad Alosa savidisslma spring-summer
Atlantic Herring elupea harengus spring-summer
Atlantic Menhaden Brevoortia tvrannus spring-summer
Blueback Herring Alosa aestiva/is spring-summer
Clearnose Skate Raja eglanterla spring-summer
Weakfish Cynoscion re}!alis spring-summer
Windowpane ScolJlhalmus aauosus soring-summer
King Mackerel Scombermoruscavalla spring-voung
Atlantic Bonito Sarda sarda summer
Atlantic Needlefish StronJ[Vlura marina summer
Ballvhoo Hemiramphus brasiliensis summer
Butterfish Pevrilus trlacanthus summer
Gray Triggerfish Batistes capriscus summer
Haltbeak Hvvorhamvhus unlfasciatus summer
Little Skate' Raia erinacea summer
Little Tunny Euthvnnus alletteratus summer
Northern Puffer Svhoeroides maculatus summer
Northern Stargazer AstrocoJJus borealis summer
Sharksucker Echeneis naucrates summer
50
Common name Species name Occurrence
Strioed Mullet MUJ!i1 cevhalus swnmer
Summer Flounder Paralichthvs dentuta summer
African Pompano Aleelis ciliaris summer(voun~)
Atlantic Moonfish Selene setavinnis summer (voun~)
Atlantic Tomcod MicroJ!adus tomcod summer (young)
Banded Rudderfish Seriola zonata summer (young)
Bi~eve Priaeanthus arenatus summer(voun~)
Bluespotted Cometfish Fistularia tabacaria summer (young)
Cobia Raehyeentron eanadum summer (young)
Crevalle Jack Caranx hivvos summer (voun~)
Florida Pompano Traehinotus earolinus summer (young)
Flying Gumard Dactvlovterus volitans summer (voun~)
Foureve Butterflvfish Chaetodon cavistratus summer (young)
Greater Amberiack Seriola dumerili summer (young)
Grey Snaooer Lutianus rzriseus summer (voun~)
Leather Jacket OliJ!ovlites saurus summer (young)
Lookdown Selene vomer summer (young)
Northern Sennet Svhraena borealis summer (voun~)
Orange Fitefish Aluterus schoepfi summer (young)
Permit Trachinotus{alcatus summer (young)
Planehead Fitefish Monacanthus hisvidus summer (voung)
Pollock Pollachius virens summer (young)
Red Hake Urovhvcis chuss summer (voung)
Short Bigeve PristiJ!envs alta summer (young)
Silver Hake Merluecius bilinearis summer (voun~)
Silver Jennv Eucinostomus flUla summer (young)
Snowy Grouper Epinephelus niveatus summer (young)
Spotfin Butterflyfish Chaetodon ocellatus summer (voun~)
Sootted Hake Urovhvsis reJ!ia summer (voung)
Yellow Jack Caranx bartholomaei summer (young)
Smooth Do~fish Mustelis canis summer-fall
Barndoor Skate Raja laevis winter
Winter Skate Raja ocellata winter
American Eel Anquilla rostrata year round (young)
summer (adults)
American Sand Lance Ammodytes americanus year round
Atlantic Silverside Menidia menidia year round
Bay Anchovy Anchoa mitchilli year round
Black Sea Bass Centrovristis striata year round
Blackfish Tauto>!a onitis year round
Conger Eel Comler oeeanicus year round
Cunner Tautof!olabrus adspersus year round
Fourspot Flounder Paralichthvs oblonf!us year round
Goosefish Lovhius americanus year round
Grubby Sculpin Mvoxocevhalus aenaeus year round
Hog Choker Trinectes maculatus year round
Inshore Lizardfish Synodus foetens year round
Lumofish Cvclovterus lumvus year round
51
Common name
Northern Sea Robin
Oster Toadfish
Scu
Sea Raven
Sine Do fish
Stri ed Blenn
Stri ed Sea Robin'
White Perch
Winter Flounder
Atlantic Stur eon
Shortnose Slur eon
S ecies name
* Prionotus carolinus
o sanus tau
Stenotomus ch so s
Hemitri terus americanus
S ualus acanthias
Chasmodes bos uianus
Prionotus evolans
Morone americana
Pleuronectes americanus
Ad enser ox rh nchus
Ad enser brevirostrum
Many of the species listed are seasonal residents of the proposed wind farm site, staying
only a few months out of the year. Several will only pass through the area on their way to
and from their spawning grounds in the Peconic Estuary or in areas around Long Island
Sound. Many of the summer residents are juveniles of species normally found far to the
South. These juveniles are often carried by the northerly flow of the Gulf Steam, and
subsequently swept into the Gardiner's Bay on the incoming tide. If these organisms do
not become prey to larger fish, such as Fluke and Bluefish, they perish when water
temperatures drop below their tolerance during the colder months.
HABITAT
The habitat at the wind farm site consists of flat bottom with a few sporadically-placed
boulders. The sediments consist of large percentages of unconsolidated, fine, gray sand.
High currents throughout the area promote high oxygen concentrations in the sediment
and in the water column. The high current velocities restrict benthic populations to those
that have the ability to burrow into the sediments and avoid being swept away. In
addition, little sedimentation occurs because most particles are carried away with the
current. Consequently, the benthic community is sparse due to the lack of food and
unconsolidated nature of the sediments. Furthermore, aquatic vegetation is sparsely
distributed over the site.
The presence of wind turbine bases and moorings, there will be more surface area for
animals to colonize. None of the proposed bases will have a deleterious effect upon the
bottom, which will essentially remain in the same condition as currently exists.
Upon completion of the wind project, the environment will be transformed from
primarily a two-dimensional bottom to a three-dimensional habitat, much like an artificial
reef. The addition of three-dimensional structures introduces surfaces for encrusting and
adhering organisms to colonize. This in turn attracts small fishes to the area for food and
shelter from predators. In addition, the presence of these small fish attracts predators in
hopes of finding food themselves. As with the placement of artificial reefs, it is expected
52
that the placement wind turbine bases will increase the amount of habitat available to
various organisms. This was the case when the net pens were present within the area.
At the Middelgrunden wind farm in Copenhagen harbor, fishing boats set up nets not
more than a few hundred yards off the concrete bases of the turbines, finding that the fish
are actually drawn to the structure that the foundations provide. For another example, two
new fishing party boats are in regular service for anglers taking advantage of increased
fish populations amidst the Nysted Wind Farm in the Baltic Sea.
WILDLIFE
Sea Turtles
The most common sea turtles that strand in Long Island waters are the loggerhead
(Caretta caretta) and Kemp's Ridley (Lepidochelys kempii) turtles (Gaffney, 1993). The
distribution of the loggerhead includes the subtropical waters, continental shelves and
estuaries along the coasts of the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian Oceans.
In the western Atlantic, the loggerhead ranges from as far north as Newfoundland to as
far south as Argentina and Chile (NRC.,1990). In 1978, the Loggerhead was listed as
threatened throughout its range by the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973.
Adult and subadult loggerheads are primarily predators of benthic mollusks and
crustaceans. Coelenterates and cephalopod mollusks are a large part of the diet of turtles
in their pelagic stage. Additionally, posthatchling loggerheads ingest macroplankton
found along weed lines in the sargassum raft community. Finally, loggerheads have been
known to occasionally scavenge fish and fish parts.
The loggerhead's primary nesting sites are located on the Atlantic coast beaches of
Florida. Nesting also occurs in Georgia, the Carolinas and along the gulf coast of Florida.
Mating takes place in late March to early June before the nesting season which occurs
from May to July along the Southeastern U.S. coast. Females usually select steeply
sloped, high energy barrier beaches with a gradually sloped offshore approach. Nesting
occurs at night. Clutch size averages between 100-126 eggs. Females may nest one to
seven times per season. Incubation ranges from 54 to 63 days depending on temperature.
After hatching, the juveniles enter the sea and engage in a swimming frenzy which takes
them 22-28 km offshore, where they become associated with sargassum rafts. In this
pelagic stage, they may spend 3 to 5 years circumnavigating the Atlantic before they
migrate to near shore and estuarine habitats along the eastern U.S. and begin their sub
adult stage. It is during this latter stage that loggerhead turtles may enter the Peconic -
Gardiner's Bay Estuary system. There are no nesting sites for the loggerhead in New
York waters.
In the western Atlantic, Kemp's Ridley turtles are present as far north as Long Island,
New York and Vineyard Sound, Massachusetts. However, most are found in the Gulf of
53
Mexico (NRC, 1990). The northern extent of this range seems to be a result of hatchlings
becoming caught in the Gulf Stream current and taken northward. It is uncertain that
these turtles have the migratory capability of returning to the Gulf of Mexico. Even so,
adults are almost entirely found in the Gulf of Mexico. The Kemp's Ridley is listed as an
endangered species pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
Adult, sub adult and juvenile Kemp's Ridley turtles feed on crabs and other invertebrates.
Hatchling feeding behavior has not been observed in the wild, but it is presumed that they
feed on a variety of organisms found in the pelagic region of the Gulf of Mexico.
The beach at Rancho Nuevo in the Gulf of Mexico is the primary nesting area for Kemp's
Ridley turtles. Males and females congregate near the nesting site to mate several weeks
before the nesting season in April - June. The females emerge to lay the first clutch four
weeks after mating. Many females gather offshore of the beach and then come ashore
together to lay their eggs in a synchronized fashion over a period of several hours.
Nesting occurs during the day with females laying an average of 105 eggs per clutch.
Incubation time of Kemp's Ridley turtles averages 50-55 days. The growth rates of wild
hatchlings are unknown, but studies indicate that it may take 6 to 7 years for a turtle to
reach adult size. There are no breeding and nesting areas for the Kemp's Ridley turtle in
New York waters.
In Long Island waters, Sea turtles face various threats to their survival in Long Island
waters, including entanglement in lobster-pot lines or other floating lines and entrapment
in pound nets (NRC, 1990). Furthermore, necropsies on sea turtles have indicated that
ingestion of plastics and floatable debris is the cause of considerable mortality. Cold
stunning, particularly for Kemp's Ridleys, causes mortality as the ambient water
temperature drops during the fall months. The phenomenon of cold stunning may account
for the greatest degree of mortality in New York waters.
The potential impact to sea turtle populations resulting from this project as proposed is
regarded as insignificant as plastic or other floatable debris will not be released into the
water column, thereby eliminating this potential impact to the Kemp's Ridley.
7. Harbor Seals
A small colony of harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) was observed utilizing the rocky
shoreline of eastern Plum Island. The harbor seal is a circumpolar species associated with
in the northern cold and temperate waters. In the western North Atlantic, the harbor seal
ranges from the southern coasts of Greenland to the eastern shores of Baffin Island and
Hudson Bay to the New York Byte. Occasional stragglers are reported from Virginia and
North Carolina. Unlike other species, harbor seals are not found on ice flows, preferring
to remain in areas that are kept ice free by currents. Harbor seals, known to follow rivers
to fresh water, are usually found in fairly concentrated colonies on sand and mud banks in
river estuaries or as more dispersed populations along rocky shoreline.
54
Pups are born between mid-May and mid-June in Nova Scotia and late June to early July
in tbe more Arctic regions of the seal's range. Three or four weeks after birth, the pups
are weaned and begin to feed on small invertebrates until they learn to catch live fish,
which constitutes the preferred prey of the harbor seal. Mating commences after the pups
are weaned.
As with other species, harbor seals feed on whatever fish species that are most readily
found in the vicinity. Harbor seals will feed on both pelagic or bottom fishes, having no
preference for either, and will also feed upon invertebrates.
In New York waters, there are various threats to seal populations. Commercial fishermen
regard the seal as an important competitor for fish resources. Because of damage to the
fisheries, a bounty was place upon the seals from 1927 to 1976. Dwindling fishery stocks
also threaten seals as their food source disappears. Seals have been known to be caught in
gill and trammel nets in near shore waters off tbe California coast, but there is little
evidence of entrapment in New York waters. In Long Island waters, most seal stranding
are probably due to disease and ingestion of floatable debris.
There is evidence to support the notion that harbor seals have the ability to readily adapt
to human presence. For example, reports of harbor seals becoming accustomed to boat
traffic are well documented. Additionally, harbor seals have been known to frequent
coastal areas utilized for mariculture activities witbout consequence.
III. REFERENCES
]Biodiversity and Conservation.!Q 2002 Peter J. Bryant, Hypertext Book; University of California
- Irvine
55
The Southold LWRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM text continues from here:
6.2 Protect and restore Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats.
A. (continues)
I. Destroy habitat values associated with the designated habitat through:
a. direct physical alteration, disturbance, or pollution, or
b. indirect effects of actions, which would result in a loss ofhabital.
2. Significantly impair the viability of the designated habitat beyond the tolerance
range of important fish or wildlife species which rely on the habitat values found
within the designated area through:
a. degradation of existing habitat elements,
b. change in environmental conditions,
c. functional loss ofhabital values, or
d. adverse alteration of physical, biological, or chemical characteristics.
The habitat impairment test presented in this section must be met for any activity that is subject to
consistency review under federal and state laws. If the proposed action is subject to consistency
review, then the habitat protection policy applies, whether the proposed action is to occur within
or outside the designated area.
Definitions
Habitat destruction is defined as the loss of fish or wildlife use through direct physical alteration,
disturbance, or pollution of a designated area or through the indirect effects of these actions on a
designated area. Habitat destruction may be indicated by changes in vegetation, substrate, or
hydrology, or by increases in runoff, erosion, sedimentation or pollutants.
Significant impairment is defined as reduction in vital resources (e.g., food, shelter, living space)
or change in environmental conditions (e.g., temperature, substrate, salinity) beyond the tolerance
range of important species of fish or wildlife that rely on the habitat values found within the
designated area.
Indicators of a significantly impaired habitat focus on ecological alterations and may include, but
are not limited to, reduced carrying capacity, changes in community structure (e.g. food chain
relationships, species diversity, etc), reduced productivity andlor increased incidence of disease
and mortality.
The tolerance range of a species of fish or wildlife has been defined as the physiological range of
conditions beyond which a species will not survive at all. In this document, the term is used to
describe the ecological range of conditions that supports the specie's population or has the
potential to support a restored population, where practical. Two indicators that the tolerance range
of a species has been exceeded are the loss of individuals through an increase in emigration and
an increase in death rate. An abrupt increase in death rate may occur as an environmental factor
falls beyond a tolerance limit (a range has both upper and lower limits). Many enviromnental
factors, however, do not have a sharply defined tolerance limit, but produce increasing emigration
or death rates with increasing departure from conditions that are optimal for the species.
The range of parameters that should be considered in applying the habitat impairment test
include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. physical parameters, such as living space, circulation, flushing rates, tidal
56
amplitude, turbidity, water temperature, depth (including loss of littoral zone),
morphology, substrate type, vegetation, structure, erosion and sedimentation rates
2. biological parameters, such as community structure, food chain relationships,
species diversity, predator/prey relationships, population size, mortality rates,
reproductive rates, meristic features, behavioral patterns and migratory patterns,
and
3. chemical parameters, such as dissolved oxygen, carbon dioxide, acidity, dissolved
solids, nutrients, organics, salinity, and pollutants (heavy metals, toxics and
hazardous materials)
B. Where destruction or significant impairment of habitat values cannot be avoided,
minimize potential impacts of land use or development through appropriate
mitigation. Use mitigation measures that are likely to result in the least
environmentally damaging feasible alternative.
Mitigation includes:
I. Avoidance of potential adverse impacts, including:
a. avoiding ecologically sensitive areas,
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: The project site is not an ecologically senSltJve area, as
described in our response to Section 6.2.A. above. While all areas of ecological
sensitivity, the proposed project site was selected because of the barren topography and
the sparse habitat and the low permanent population of marine activity in the area.
b. scheduling activities to avoid vulnerable periods in life cycles or the creation of
unfavorable environmental conditions,
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: If and when the RD&D project is granted a permit, it will
take into consideration the results of analyses from all involved agencies, and they will
have defined the appropriate annual time periods in which construction and
decommissioning can proceed with minimal impact on the natural life cycles of the
various marine and avian species inhabiting and traversing the project site.
c. preventing fragmentation of intact habitat areas.
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: The design of the RD&D project is too small relative to the
size of the site - and of the open ocean expanse, to cause any fragmentation of
ecosystems in the area.
2. Minimization of unavoidable potential adverse impacts, including:
a. reducing scale or intensity of use or development,
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: The purpose of the RD&D project IS to provide all
stakeholders with baseline data that will be essential to determining impacts of the
presence of offshore wind turbines before future installations of much larger commercial-
scale wind farms at other locations can proceed.
57
b. designing projects to result in the least amount of potential adverse impact,
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: The purpose of the RD&D project is to utilize a minimally
economically feasible project and to demonstrate the use of a lift boat as a base to enable
returning a project site to its original natural environment at the end of the project
lifetime.
c. choosing alternative actions or methods that would lessen potential impact.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: This is the purpose of the RD&D project. It will function for
a limited amount of time. All impacts will be assessed and reported to all stakeholders.
The baseline data that the project will generate will give future developers and
stakeholders the ability to assess and address impacts that might occur in future offshore
wind farms.
3. Specific measures designed to protect habitat values from impacts that cannot be
sufficiently avoided or minimized to prevent habitat destruction or significant
habitat impairment, and
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: This is the purpose of the RD&D project. It will function for
a limited amount of time. The project will assess the impacts and mitigation of impacts
by a state of the art scour protection system at the base of the monopile towers and the
effectiveness of the lift boat for easy installation and removal of an offshore wind turbine.
4. Specific protective measures included in the narratives for each designated
Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat area.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: Although the RD&D project is not in the nearby protected
area, Plum Gut, it is close enough to note that the project is temporary by design. We do
not expect any adverse impacts to occur. We expect an increase in habitat for the fish that
transverse the area. The presence of the lift boat and monopile-base wind turbines will
provide protective habitat for the coastal fish, which would also increase the food supply
for avian and marine mammal species.
C. Wherever practical, restore Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats so as to
foster their continued existence as natural systems by:
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: As stated above in 6.2.B.4, and in response to questions I., 2.
And 3. below, although the RD&D project is not in the nearby protected area, Plum Gut,
it is close enough to note that the project is temporary by design. We do not expect any
adverse impacts to occur. We expect an increase in habitat for marine organisms that
transverse the area. The presence of the lift boat and monopile-base wind turbines will
58
provide protective habitat for the coastal fish, which would also increase the food supply
for avian and marine mammal species.
1. Reconstructing lost physical conditions to maximize habitat values,
2. Adjusting adversely altered chemical characteristics to emulate natural conditions,
and
3. Manipulating biological characteristics to emulate natural conditions through re-
introduction of indigenous flora and fauna.
6.3 Protect and restore tidal and freshwater wetlands.
Wetlands within the Town of Southold are critical natural resources that provide benefits
including; open space, habitat for fish and wildlife, water quality enhancement, flooding and
erosion protection, scenic value, and opportunities for environmental education. Over the years,
many wetland areas have been lost or impaired by degradation or functional loss. Wetlands and
their benefits are also dependent upon the condition of adjacent lands which provide buffers
between wetlands and surrounding uses. Large areas of adjacent lands that previously provided a
buffer for wetlands have been physically lost to development or functionally lost through changes
in land use, including inappropriate or incompatible landscaping. These losses and impairments to
the wetlands and their functions cumulatively have impacted the Town of South 0 ld's ecosystem.
Protecting and improving the remaining tidal and freshwater wetlands and restoring lost or
impaired wetlands are the most appropriate ways to achieve an increase in quality and quantity of
wetlands. Historical losses and alterations, which have occurred in many locations in Southold,
present numerous opportunities for restoration. In addition to protecting and improving the
Town's wetlands, adjacent lands that provide buffers to wetlands must be maintained and
enhanced, and where appropriate, reestablished.
These buffers are necessary to ensure the long term viability of the Town's wetlands. Where these
lands are in private ownership, educating residential owners as to the long-term benefits of
compatible land use and landscaping techniques will be essential to maintaining the ecological
health of some wetland areas.
The Town recognizes the value of wetlands to its ecosystem, its economy and its aesthetic
character. It also recognizes that federal and state regulations concerning wetlands do not fully
cover local conditions, and in some cases, are less restrictive than local regulations. The Town
Board of Trustees has local expertise in the management of the Town's wetlands and in this
capacity espouses a "no net loss" of wetlands policy, as espoused by the New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation.
The NYSDEC Habitat Protection staff has indicated that "the creation of new freshwater
wetlands as a compensatory mitigation measure would only be approved under the most unusual
of circumstances and only in response to a pressing social need.
They are unlikely to allow projects of this type in state regulated wetlands. Wetlands created
through mitigation projects are often of a lesser quality than the existing wetlands that are being
destroyed. Natural wetlands are created due to specific topographic geologic, and hydrogeologic
conditions that are very difficult to properly recreate." (Letter of December 15, 2003 from Sherri
Aicher, Environmental Aoalyst, Division of Environmental Permits, Region One, New York
59
State Department of Environmental Conservation, to Stephen Ridler, New York State Department
of State, Division of Coastal Resources.) The following policy standards recognize that local
expertise and judgement must be given priority.
A. Comply with statutory and regulatory requirements of the Southold Town Board of
Trustees laws and regulations for all Andros Patent and other lands under their
jurisdiction
. Comply with Trustee regulations and recommendations as set forth in Trustee
permit conditions.
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: Winergy Power will comply with all Trustee regulations and
recommendations as set forth in Trustee permit conditions.
B. Comply with statutory and regulatory requirements afthe State's wetland laws.
Winen!v Power reSDonse: The Stream Protection Act, the Freshwater Wetlands Act,
and the Tidal Wetlands Act were passed to ensure that freshwater resources are not
compromised. In response to questions 6.8.1., 2. and 3. below, almost all activities and
equipment associated with the activity that Winergy Power is proposing will take place in
the saline environment of the waters of New York State. The only portion of the activity
that we are proposing that encroaches on the landside where it is possible that a
negligible impact will occur is where the transmission cable makes landfall. Depending
on the outcome of the final permit, the cable will arrive on shore in one of two ways. It
will either follow the existing cable route from Plum Island to the utility substation on
Orient Point, an action that was given a FONSI in 1999, or, it will be directionally drilled
as presented in the permit application to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Application
Number: 2005-00367-L2). The proposed new cable route is depicted in Figure 6 below.
Neither of these cable route options will compromise the fresh waters of the Town of
Southold.
60
..
...
..
(A) To (BP,2OOf.et
(6) To (CP,COO feet
" (C) To (D): 4,200 feel
(D) To (E): '2,500 feel
(E) To(F): ',3oofe.1
..
..
Application Number: 2005-00367-l2
Revision t Jarua 9, 2006
Application by:
..l ~ Wlnergy Power, UC
e.I'- 640 Montauk Highway
Shirley NY. 11967
Type of C.ble & Installation
(AI To (C): Buried 3-a>ndoclor """,nod 34.5 kV
cable,lnstanedviajelplow.
(el To (E): Buried J...<:ondoctoI' armored 34.5 kV
cable, Instaned via jet plow.
(E) To (F) BuOed 34.5 kV Cable in to. HOPE
CondJit. installed via directional drilling
..
..
Scale:
4-- 1 Statute mile ---t>
""""
N
D
Figure 6-1. Proposed New Cable Route
I. Comply with regulatory requirements of the Stream Protection Act for the
excavation or placement of fill in all wetlands that arc adjacent to and contiguous at
any point to any of the navigable waters of the state, and that arc inundated at mean
high water level or tide.
2. Comply with the regulatory requirements of the Freshwater Wetlands Act for the
protection of mapped freshwater wetlands.
3. Comply with the regulatory requirements of the Tidal Wetlands Act for the
protection of mapped tidal wetlands including coastal fresh marsh; intertidal marsh;
coastal shoals, bars and flats; high marsh or salt meadow; littoral zones; and
formerly connected tidal wetlands.
D. Prevent the net loss of vegetated 'wetlands according to the following measures. Use
the measure resulting in the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative.
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: This does not apply.
I. Avoid placement of fill in or excavation of vegetated wetlands:
a. Choose alternative sites which would not result in adverse impacts on
wetlands.
61
-
b. Reduce scale or intensity of development to avoid excavation or fill.
c. Choose design alternatives which would avoid excavation or fill.
2. Minimize adverse impacts resulting from unavoidable fill, excavation, or other
activities by:
a. reducing scale or intensity of use in order to limit incursion into wetland areas
b. designing projects to result in the least degree of adverse wetland impacts
3. Provide compensatory mitigation for adverse impacts which may result from
unavoidable fill, excavation or other activities remaining after all appropriate and
practicable minimization has been accomplished.
a. Restore former wetlands or create new tidal wetlands according to the
following priorities:
(i) 'restore former wetlands or create new tidal wetlands in areas
adjacent or contiguous to the site
(ii) where restoration of former wetlands in areas adjacent or
contiguous to the site is not appropriate or practicable, restore
former wetlands in close physical proximity and in the same
watershed, to the extent possible
(iii) where restoration of former tidal wetlands is not appropriate or
practicable, create new tidal wetlands in suitable locations as
determined by sediment, exposure, shoreline characteristics, and
water regime; include consideration of loss of resource values
which may exist at the mitigation site
b. Creation of new non-tidal freshwater wetlands is generally not suitable for
compensatory mitigation for loss of natural wetland.
c. Where wetlands are restored or tidal wetlands created:
(i) Provide equivalent or greater area of mitigation wetland. Base the
actual area of wetland provided on the following factors:
characteristics of the mitigation site, proposed wetland creation or
restoration methods and designs, and quality of the wetland
restored or created relative to the wetland lost.
(ii) Provide equivalent or greater value or benefit to that of the wetland
area lost, as defined by class of freshwater wetland, as ranked in 6
NYCRR Part 664 or, tidal wetland zones, as described in 6
NYCRR Part 661.
(iii) A lesser area of mitigation wetland may be allowed in cases where
the mitigation wetland and its benefits would clearly be a greater
value than the wetland lost.
(iv) Guarantee success of the compensatory mitigation. Wetland
mitigation is considered successful if functional attributes of the
wetland have been reached and maintained, including a plant
density which approaches the design density.
(a) Carry out mitigation in accord with a compensatory plan
which details wetland creation or restoration measures.
Base compensatory plans on establishment of a natural,
self-regulating wetland.
(b) Monitor arid report on progress of the wetland mitigation
according to a prescribed plan.
(c) Provide a suitable performance bond or other surety
instrument guaranteed to an appropriate agency or
organization to assure successful completion of the
mitigation.
62
d. When a series of small, unavoidable wetland losses requires mItIgation,
combine mitigation projects to create larger contiguous wetland areas
whenever the resulting ecological value would be greater than that achieved
through pursuing discrete, separate efforts.
e. Protect wetland functions and associated benefits regardless of the
availability of compensatory mitigation.
(i) Do not fill, excavate, or dredge vegetated wetland areas which:
(a) support endangered or threatened species of plants or
animals
(b) have not been subjected to significant impairment, or
(c) are part of a natural resource management area,
including refuges, sanctuaries, reserves, or areas
designated as Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife
Habitats, based on wetland values.
(ii) Do not fill, excavate, or dredge vegetated wetland areas when the
wetland loss would result in significant impairment of the
remaining wetland area.
(iii) Retain functions and benefits associated with vegetated and non-
vegetated wetlands.
D. Provide adequate buffers between wetlands and adjacent or nearby uses and activities
in order to ensure protection a/the wetland's character, quality, values, andfunctions.
The adequacy of the buffer depends on the following factors:
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: This does not apply.
I. Potential for adverse
Uses such as those involving
mineral extraction have high
substantial buffer.
2. The nature and importance of
Substantial buffers may be necessary to
nearby uses based on the nature of the
affected wetland.
3. Direction and flow of surface water between a use and adjacent or nearby wetland.
Buffer widths may be reduced in areas where drainage patterns normally do not lead
directly to the wetland and where adverse affects on the wetland, other than those
due to runoff, are not likely.
4. Buffer width necessary to achieve a high particulate filtration efficiency of surface
runoff as determined by vegetative cover type, soil characteristics, and slope of land.
5. Other management measures or design alternatives to protect wetlands from adverse
effects where site constraints do not allow sufficient buffer width.
effects associated with the use.
hazardous materials, on-site sewage disposal, or
potential for adverse effects and may require
the wetland and its benefits.
avoid adverse effects from adjacent or
land use and the characteristics of the
E. Maintain buffers to ensure that adverse effects of adjacent or nearby development are
avoided:
I. Maintain buffers to achieve a high filtration efficiency of surface runoff.
2. Avoid permanent or unnecessary disturbance within buffer areas.
3. Maintain existing indigenous vegetation within buffer areas.
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: This does not apply.
63
F. Restore tidal wetlands and freshwater wetlands, wherever practical, to foster their
continued existence as natural systems by:
I, reconstructing lost physical conditions to maximize wetland values,
2, adjusting altered chemical characteristics to emulate natural conditions,
3. manipulating biological characteristics to emulate natural conditions through re-
introduction of indigenous flora and fauna, and
4, protecting lands adjacent to wetlands from alterations so as to maximize natural
buffers to wetlands.
Winerl!v Power response: This does not apply,
6.4 Protect vulnerable fish, wildlife, and plant species, and rare ecological
communities.
The Town of Southold hosts a rich array of ecologically important living resources. Although
many living resources provide important ecological values, this section specifically addresses
those ecologically important living resources whose loss would clearly result in permanent
adverse changes to the Town of Southold ecosystem. The ecologically important living resources
addressed here are: vulnerable fish and wildlife species, vulnerable plant species, and rare
ecological communities,
Certain human activities already have resulted in impairments to ecologically important
resources, causing permanent adverse changes to the Town's ecological complexes. Additional
impairments to these resources would result in further adverse changes to the Town's ecological
complexes, Protection of ecologically important living resources may include alteration of a
proposed activity or other measures to avoid adverse impacts on the potentially affected species,
This section establishes standards for the identification and protection of vulnerable fish and
wildlife species based on the State of New York's endangered animal species lists, and for
vulnerable plant species based on the endangered plant species lists. It also provides standards for
protection of rare ecological communities as defined under the Natural Heritage Program's
community types,
Winerl!v Power response: In this response, we address all criteria raised in the
subsection, i.e., 6A,A" 6A,B, and 6A,C, below, (Please see our comment in 6A.A. I
below, where we indicate that a typographic error is likely to have occurred in the final
form of these published criteria for the Southold LWRP,)
The site that has been chosen for this temporary RD&D project has the benefit of a
complete ESA Section 7 review, The site was deemed to be in compliance with the ESA
criteria prior to permitting for the mariculture net pens, We have advised that the
placement of stanchions within the water column would not have any significant
deleterious effect on the aquatic or avian ecology of the area. The site of the proposed
project is the only proposed offshore wind energy project site that we are aware of that
has undergone an ESA review and is definitely the only site in New York State offshore
waters that has undergone such a review. If requested, we will provide the Town of
64
Southold with the completed ESA review, which will be included in the final permit
request submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
A. Protect vulnerable fish and wildlife species.
I. Vulnerable fish and wildlife species are those listed in regulation 6 NYCRR Part
182.5 as Endangered Species, Threatened Species, and Special Concern Species.
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: We believe that this criterion actually refers to 6 NYCRR
Part 182.6, which refers to "Endangered species, threatened species and species of special
concern." The cited 6 NYCRR Part 182.5 refers to "Special rules: alligator, caiman and
crocodile (Order Crocodylia)," which obviously are not native to this climate and region.
2. Review existing species records and field survey proposed development sites, at
the appropriate times, for the presence of listed species or conditions that meet their
habitat requirements.
3. Protect habitat of listed species identified through field surveys or other methods
during all stages of their life cycles.
B. Protect vulnerable plant species.
1. Vulnerable species are those listed in regulation 6 NYCRR Part 193.3 as
Endangered Species, Threatened Species, Exploitable Vulnerable Species, and
Rare Species.
2. Review existing species records and field survey proposed development sites, at
the appropriate times, for the presence of listed species or conditions that meet their
habitat requirements.
3. Protect habitat identified by the occurrence of a listed species during all stages of
their life cycles.
C. Protect rare ecological communities.
1. Rare ecological communities to be protected include:
a. communities that quality for a Heritage State Rank of SI or S2; and
b. communities that quality for both a Heritage State Rank of 83, 84 or 85; and
an Element Occurrence Rank of A. (See The Natural Coast for an explanation
of Heritage State Ranks).
2. Review existing ecological community records and field survey sites potentially
affected by proposed development for the presence ofrare ecological communities.
3. Protect rare ecological communities. Use appropriate design and development of
land and water uses that will integrate or be compatible with the identified
ecological community.
4. Use the most up-to-date information available on the structure and the function of
rare ecological communities as a factor in determining open space requirements of
a project.
65
Policy 7
Protect and improve air quality in the Town of Southold.
This policy provides for protection of the Town of Southold from air pollution generated within
the coastal area or from outside the coastal area that adversely affects coastal air quality.
The air quality within the Town of Southold is considered to be within federal regulatory
standards. Since the Town does not have any heavy industry and only one small asphalt plant, air
pollution from stationery sources is not a current threat. Further, the Town's zoning code does not
permit the introduction of new heavy industries. The most likely short-term sources of air
pollution will come from the expansion of existing or the creation of new power generation plants
and from escalating levels of automobile use. Open air burning is not permitted. The town's solid
waste management facility is being operated in accordance with all applicable federal and state
regulations.
Policv Standards
7.1 Control or abate existing and prevent new air pollution.
Winerl!V Power response: The proposed offshore wind park is in complete compliance'
with the letter and spirit of Policy Standard 7.1. Wind turbines emit no pollutants into the
air and will offset the need to burn fossil fuels to produce electricity. It would require the
burning of approximately 68,000 barrels of oil in a power plant to produce the equivalent
amount of electricity annually produced by the three wind turbines to be installed in the
RD&D wind park. By converting the projected annual electricity output of the three wind
turbines proposed for the site to the air pollution offsets as defined by the American Wind
Energy Association and the U.S. DOE Energy Information Administration, one finds that
the wind turbines will offset the generation of nearly 32,000 tons of carbon dioxide
(C02), 168 tons of sulfur dioxide (SOx) and 102.9 tons of nitrogen oxides (NO,). These
abatements of atmospheric pollutants fully support the intent of Policy Standard 7.1.
A. Limit pollution resulting from new or existing stationary air contamination sources
consistent with:
I. attainment or maintenance of any applicable ambient air quality standard,
2. applicable New Source Performance Standards,
3. applicable control strategy ofthe State Implementation Plan, and
4. applicable Prevention of Significant Deterioration requirements.
B. Recycle or salvage air contaminants using best available air cleaning technologies.
A strategy to recycle certain of these contaminants has already been implemented at the
Town Recycling Center in Cutchogue, where all appliances containing refrigerants are
properly emptied and recycled by a trained, licensed technician.
C Limit pollution resulting from vehicle or vessel movement or operation, including
actions which directly or indirectly change transportation uses or operation resulting
in increased pollution.
The Town Planner and the Town's Transportation Commission have been working in
conjunction with regional, state and county agencies for the past several years to
encourage the use of alternative forms of transportation to the automobile. Greater use
66
of intermodal forms of transportation and bicycle trails are two of the alternatives that
have been extensively promoted within the Town. Further, the Town Board has
reduced strip zoning by changing its zoning pattern to result in more centralized
business zoning in traditional business centers where joint parking lots and pedestrian
corridors can reduce automobile traffic and encourage pedestrian access.
D. Restrict emissions or air contaminants to the outdoor atmosphere that are potentially
injurious or which unreasonably inteifere with enjoyment of life or property.
Open burning of leaves or trash is a potential source of such emissions. It is banned by
a combination of state and local laws. Since some open burning still is occurring, the
Town will promote public awareness of the hazards posed by such activity and will
continue to enforce its laws restricting andlor prohibiting the practice.
It should be noted here that the Plum Island Animal Disease Center is a federal agency
located on a federal reservation, hence exempt from this local ordinance. The burning
of brush for the purposes of security and emergency services access on Plum Island
takes place in accordance with State permits.
E. Limit new facility or stationary source emissions of acid deposition precursors
consistent with achieving final control target levels for wet sulfur deposition in
sensitive receptor areas, and meeting New Source Performance Standards for the
emissions of oxides afnitrogen.
Potential sources of oxides of nitrogen (NOX) pollutants include automobiles, trucks
and power plants. Such pollutants tend to contribute to the formation of ground level
smog, to which the many open fields throughout the Town may prove particularly
susceptible.
7.2 Limit discharges of atmospheric radioactive material to a level that is as low
as practicable.
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: This is not applicable.
Presently the Town is not aware of any discharges of atmospheric radioactive material
within the Town borders. However, the Town is greatly concerned about atmospheric
radiation that may be discharged from the nuclear power plant at Millstone, Connecticut
and blown into the Town by prevailing winds.
7.3 Limit sources of atmospheric deposition of pollutants to the Town of
Southold, particularly from nitrogen sources.
Steps taken to deal with NOX pollutants as described in Section 8.1 E. above, contribute to
attainment of this policy goal.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: As quantitatively described in our response to Policy
Standard 7.1 above, the proposed three wind turbine cluster will annually offset the
production of approximately 102.9 tons of nitrogen oxides (NO,) that would otherwise be
emitted from fossil-fueled power plants.
67
Policy 8
Minimize environmental degradation in Town of Sonthold from solid waste
and hazardous suhstances and wastes.
The intent of this policy is to protect people from sources of contamination and to protect the
coastal resources of the Town of Southold from degradation through proper control and
management of wastes and hazardous materials. Attention is also required to identify and address
sources of soil and water contamination resulting from landfill and hazardous waste sites and in-
place sediment contamination in the Town of Southold.
Winerl!v Power resnonse: The proposed project will not generate solid waste. This
Policy Standard does not apply.
It is, however, necessary to note that the lubricating oil that will be used for all
components will be replaced during regularly scheduled periodic maintenance. The
lubricants to be used will be mineral oil that poses no hazard to the environment.
68
PUBLIC COAST POLICIES
Policy 9
Provide for public access to, and recreational use of, coastal waters, public
lands, and public resources of the Town of Southold.
The Town of Southald has numerous access points to its shoreline and waterfront recreation
facilities. The maiu objective of the Town is to improve these facilities, providing increased
public access to the shoreline and waterfront recreation facilities for residents and visitors. In
addition to these improvements the Town has identified opportunities to increase public access to
the shoreline, and to waterfront recreation facilities, as well as to link existing and proposed
access and recreation sites within the Town. Southold will take the necessary steps to maximize
the appropriate use of the waterfront to ensure public access iu a manner that will not adversely
impact sensitive natural resources.
In some parts of Southold, physical and visual access by the public to coastal lauds and waters is
limited. Problems in accessing or viewiug the coast are further heightened by the limited degree
of access and of recreational opportunities that are available to local residents. In additiou, private
waterfront developmeut has made parts of the coast physically aud visually inaccessible. lu some
places, opportunities to provide additional public access have been diminished or lost altogether.
With the current trend toward redevelopment of waterfront lots with larger structures, there have
been cases of reduced visual accessibility due to the loss of vantage points or outright blockage of
views. In some places, access along public trust lands of the shore has beeu impeded by the
construction oflong docks, and groins betweeu private property and the public shore.
This aside, Southold's shoreline has the potential to offer a continuous right of access along the
shore. Given the iucrease in shoreline developmeut, the opportunity to walk the shoreline of the
Long Island Sound and the Peconic Estuary is a valuable public asset. It remains, however, an
unrealized asset because the right of continuous access is useless without the ability to get to the
shore and, ouce on the shore, to walk uufettered. As noted earlier, there are stretches of
Southold's shoreline where the public's rights in the foreshore have been constraiued, and
sometimes precluded, by the design and uature of private residential development. This is a major
public policy concern. The Towu of Southold will work to protect the community's Public Trust
Rights to the shoreline.
Many of the important scenic components in the Town of Southold can be viewed from local
roads, street ends and from the public parks along the shoreline. In particular, NY Route 25 runs
the length of Southold and is one of the Town's major aesthetic roadways, offering extensive and
varied views. The Town will promote the protection of the scenic components associated with
NY Route 25 through the preparation and implementation of a Scenic Byway Corridor
Management Plan. County Route 48 and New Suffolk Avenue also provide important visual
access. Policies have been developed for the protection of scenic resources in Policy 13.
This policy incorporates measures to provide public access throughout the Town of Southold. The
need to maintain and improve existing public access and facilities is among these measures, and
is necessary to ensure that use of existing access sites and facilities is optimized in order to
accommodate existing demand. Another measure is to capitalize on all available opportunities to
provide additional visual and physical public access along with appropriate opportunities for
recreation.
69
The Town of Southold will address these issues through the preparation of a comprehensive study
of public access and recreation in the Town. It will evaluate the quality and quantity of Park
District, Town, County and State facilities, and the ability of existing facilities to accommodate
residents and visitors. It will examine the opportunities to increase recreational opportunities for
Town residents within the existing park district structure and the fee structures at Town facilities
for residents and visitors. This study will provide information on where public access problems
and opportunities exist, where more access is needed or is lacking, and how to address these
issues. Without a thorough understanding of these important issues, the Town cannot effectively
accommodate current and future recreational needs.
Winer!!V Power reSDonse: The site of the proposed RD&D project is in an area that has
already been designated as an exclusive use zone and has the benefit of an FEIS. It is our
intention to make the site facilities available to all stakeholders for the purposes of
regulatory oversight, education, scientific research, tourism, and others. We will also
show that dual uses (mariculture and renewable energy) of a public trust resource in the
same area are possible.
Policv Standards
9.1 Promote appropriate and adequate physical public access and recreation to
coastal resources.
A. Provide a level o{public access and type of recreational use which takes into account
the following factors:
1. proximity to population centers,
Winerev Power reSDonse: The site was purposely chosen for its remoteness from
population centers
2. public demand for access and recreational use,
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: The area is already a restricted use zone. The maximum
number of daily transits as 52 boats in a single day, as counted during operation of the
fish farm over a three-year period, including the fish farm maintenance and operation
traffic. On average, fewer than 10 boats per day transited the area. Therefore, we
anticipate that there will be no adverse impact on recreational activities.
3. type and sensitivity of natural resources affected,
Winerev Power response: The site was selected because it has the benefit of an FEIS,
which reveals minimal natural marine life in the area because of the regular high currents.
The visual aspects of the proposed RD&D project will add an interesting visual
dimension to the area for the time that the project is in operation.
4. purpose of public institutions which may exist on the site,
70
Winerl!v Power response: No public institutions are present on the site at this time.
5. accessibility to the public access site or facility,
Winerl!V Power response: The project area will be available to transit by boat traffic.
6. the needs of special groups such as the elderly and persons with disabilities,
Winerl!v Power response: This project will not have any impact on the existing access
to the area by persons with special needs or the elderly.
7. the potential for adverse impacts on adjacent land uses,
Winerl!v Power response: We do not anticipate any adverse impacts on adjacent land
uses.
8. the potential for adverse impacts on the transportation network.
Winerl!v Power response: We do not anticipate any adverse impacts on the adjacent
transportation network.
B. Provide convenient. well-defined physical public access to and along the coast for
water-related recreation.
Winerl!V Power response: The proposed project will have no foreseeable impact on
existing public access along the coast.
C. Protect and maintain existing public access and water-related recreation facilities.
1. Prevent physical deterioration of facilities due to lack of maintenance or overuse.
Winerl!v Power response: This policy does not apply.
2. Prevent anyon-site or adjacent development project or activity from directly or
indirectly impairing physical public access and recreation or adversely affecting
its quality.
Winerl!V Power response: The proposed project is in a restricted, exclusive use zone.
Since the area is already removed from the public trust, this policy does not apply.
3. Protect and maintain established access and recreation facilities.
71
Winen!v Power reSDonse: The proposed project is in a restricted, exclusive use zone.
4. Protect and maintain the infrastructure supporting public access and recreational
facilities.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply.
E. Provide additional physical public access and recreation facilities at public sites
throughout the Town of Southold.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply.
I. Promote acquisition of additional public park lands to meet existing public access
and recreation needs.
2. Provide for public access and recreation facilities on non-park public waterfront
lands as a secondary use.
3. Provide for public access at streets terminating at the shoreline.
4. Provide access and recreation facilities to all members of the public whenever
access or recreation is directly or indirectly supported through federal or state
projects or funding.
5. Retain a public interest which will be adequate to preserve public access and
recreation opportunities in publicly owned lands immediately adjacent to the
shore in any transfer of public lands.
E. Provide physical access linkages throughout the Town of Southold among public
access sites, open space areas, public trust lands, and nearshore surface waters.
The Town of Southold Transportation Commission has identified the need to link
these individual sites through a network of hiking trails, bikeways and kayak trails.
This network, koown as the "The Seaview Trails of the North Fork", is a key element
in the Commission's lntermodal Transportation concept, which calls for a
comprehensive approach to transportation planning that utilizes all the available
transportation hubs and linkages in an effort to reduce the increasing traffic pressure
on the Town's road network.
The Town of Southold will implement "the Seaview Trails of the North Fork". The
network of access linkages is illustrated on Map Il-13. Wherever possible, the trail
will utilize public lands. Where this is not possible, trail links will be developed in
close cooperation with local landowners to develop trail easements.
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply.
F. Include physical public access to, and/or water-related recreation facilities on,
coastal lands and waters whenever development or activities are likely to affect the
public's use and enjoyment of public coastal lands and waters. Provide incentives to
private development projects which provide public access and/or water-related
recreation facil flies.
72
Winerev Power response: The proposed project is in a restricted, exclusive use zone.
Since the area is already removed from the public trust, this policy does not apply.
G. Restrict public access and recreation only where incompatible with public safety. and
the protection a/natural resources.
Winerev Power response: The proposed project is in a restricted, exclusive use zone.
Since the area is already removed from the public trust, this policy does not apply.
9.2 Protect and provide public visual access to coastal lands and waters from
public sites and transportation routes where physically practical.
A. Avoid loss of existing visual access.
I. Limit physical blockage of existing visual access by development or activities due
to the scale, design, location, or type structures.
Winerev Power response: This policy section does not apply.
2. Protect view corridors provided by streets and other public areas leading to the
coast.
Winerl!V Power resPonse: This policy section does not apply.
3. Protect visual access to open space areas associated with natural resources.
Winerl!V Power response: The proposed RD&D project will add a relatively small
interesting feature to an expansive vista that can be viewed only from a severely limited
stretch of coastline. Because the project will operate for only a limited amount of time,
the change in the current vista will be temporary. Therefore, we believe that we have
protected the visual access to open space areas.
4. Use Community Preservation Project Plan funds to obtain scenic easements to
protect key scenic vistas from transportation corridors and other public sites.
Winerev Power response: This policy section does not apply.
5. Include public visual access criteria in the Conservation Opportunities Process.
Winerev Power response: This policy section does not apply.
B. Minimize adverse impact on visual access.
\. Provide for view corridors to the coast in those locations where new structures
73
would block views of the coast from inland public vantage points.
Winen!v Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply.
2. Use structural design and building siting techniques to preserve or retain visual
access and minimize obstruction of views.
Winen!v Power reSDonse: The proposed RD&D project will add a relatively small
interesting feature to an expansive vista that can be viewed only from a severely limited
stretch of coastline. Because the project will operate for only a limited amount of time,
the change in the current vista will be temporary. Therefore, we believe that we have
protected the visual access to open space areas and, because the project is so small, we
have minimized the obstruction of views.
3. Visual access requirements may be reduced where site conditions, including
vegetative cover or natural protective features, block potential views.
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply.
4. Vegetative or structural screening of an industrial or commercial waterfront site
is allowed if the resulting overall visual quality outweighs the loss of visual
access.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply.
C. Mitigate/or loss a/visual access.
I. Provide public visual access from vantage points on the site where development
of the site blocks visual access from inland public vantage points.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply.
2. Provide for additional and comparable visual access at nearby locations if
physical access cannot be provided on-site.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply.
D. Increase visual access to the coast whenever practical.
I. Provide pulloffs along public roads at appropriate locations to enhance
opportunities for visual access to coastal lands and waters.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply.
2. Provide interpretative exhibits at appropriate locations for visual access to
74
enhance public understanding and enjoyment of views of coastal lands and
waters and its associated water-dependent uses.
Winer!!v Power response: If Winergy Power is granted a permit and the project goes
into operation, then Winergy Power will set up an information kiosk in either Orient
Point County Park or Orient Point State Park, if requested. We will also continue to
maintain informational content on our web site at www.winergyllc.com.
3. Provide visual access to areas of high visual quality including hamlet waterfronts,
water-dependent uses, agriculture, natural resources, and panoramas of the Long
Island Sound and the Peconic Estuary.
Winerl!V Power response: The two main areas for viewing the RD&D wind park are
Orient Point County Park and the privately-held Cross Sound Ferry property. This policy
section does not apply.
E. Protect visual access to the natural shoreline from the water.
1. Prevent loss of natural vegetation due to excessive land clearing and
inappropriate non-native landscaping.
Winerl!V Power response: This policy section does not apply.
9.3 Preserve the public interest in and use of lands and waters beld in public
trust by the state and the Town of Southold.
A. Limit grants, leases, easements. permits or lesser interest in lands underwater in
accordance with an assessment of potential adverse impacts of the proposed use.
structure, or facility on public interest in public lands under water. Use the
following factors in assessing potential adverse impact:
Winerl!V Power response: The proposed project site is already the beneficiary of a
completed FEIS, issued May 5, 1997. This site went through a thorough review through
the following agencies: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New York State Department of
Environmental Conservations, National Marine Fisheries Service, New York State
Department of State (for coastal consistency), New York State Office of General Services
(the landowner for the State of New York), New York State Office of Parks, Recreation
and Historical Preservation, U.S. Coast Guard, and various other agencies. This site was
also presented to the Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold and the application was
accepted on May 17, 1997. The value of the site having undergone such multiple
extensive reviews and its remoteness were major factors in the selection of the site for the
temporary RD&D project.
The water-dependent activity (mariculture) that will shortly resume at the site, coupled
with the water-enhanced activity of the placement and operation of three offshore wind
turbines for a limited amount of time, is consistent with Section 9.3.A. subsections 1
through 8 below.
75
The placement of the three wind turbines in the area will permit a sharing of operational
expenses and facilities with the mariculture enterprise, thus improving the economics of
both activities.
1. environmental impact,
2. values for natural resource management, public recreation, and commerce,
3. size, character, and effect of the transfer in relation to neighboring uses,
4. potential for interference with navigation, public uses of waterway, and riparian
rights,
5. effect of the transfer of interest on the natural resources associated with the lands,
6. water-dependent nature of use,
7. adverse economic impact on existing commercial enterprises,
8. consistency with the public interest for purposes of navigation and commerce,
fishing, bathing, and access to navigable waters and the need of the owners of
private property to safeguard development.
B. Limit the transfer of interest in public trust lands to the minimum necessary
conveyance of public interest.
1. Provide the minimum conveyance using the legal instrument that results in the
least reduction of public interest.
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: The proposed project area will not exceed the boundaries of
an area that has already been leased as an exclusive use zone. The original area leased for
the mariculture activity is sufficiently large to allow installation of a minimally
economically feasible cluster of offshore wind turbines, once consideration is given to a
sharing of facilities and operational resources between the mariculture enterprise and
offshore wind park. The placement of the wind turbines will not restrict the operations
and expansion of the mariculture enterprise in any sense during the limited lifetime of the
RD&D project.
2. Limit the physical extent of any conveyance to the minimum amount of land
necessary.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: The proposed project area will be within the boundaries of an
area that has already been leased as an exclusive use zone. No additional conveyance is
being requested.
C. Limit grants-In-fee of underwater lands to exceptional circumstances.
The only exceptional circumstances that appear to exist the Town of Southold may
be a grant for formerly underwater land where a grant is the only means available to
achieve clear, marketable title to adjacent upland.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: This policy principle does not apply.
76
D. Retain a public interest in the transfer of interest in underwater lands that will be
adequate to preserve public access, recreation opportunities, and other public trust
purposes.
Winerl!v Power response: The State of New York issued an exclusive use lease to the
project area and retains ownership of the site. This policy section does not apply.
E. Private uses, structures, or facilities on underwater lands are limited to those
circumstances where ownership of the underwater lands or riparian interest has
been legally validated either through proof of ownership of the underwater lands or
adjacent riparian parcel, or by assignment of riparian interest by the riparian
owner.
Winerl!v Power response: This policy section does not apply.
F. Avoid substantial loss of public interest in public trust lands by assessing the
cumulative impact of individual conveyances of grants, easements, and leases of
public trust lands.
Winerl!v Power response: The State of New York issued an exclusive use lease to the
project area on May 17, 1997 and retains ownership of the site. This policy section does
not apply.
G. Resume and re-establish public trust interests in existing grants which are no longer
being exercised according to terms of the grant, or where the use is not in
conformity with the public trust doctrine.
Winerl!V Power response: This policy section does not apply. All historic information in
reference to grants on the proposed project site are on record and available through the
New York Office of General Service, Division of Real Estate, Office of Submerged
Lands. Contact Alan Bauder, 518 473-1288.
9.4 Assure public access to public trust lands and navigable waters.
A. Provide free and substantially unobstructed passage along public trust shorelands.
Winerl!V Power response: This policy section does not apply.
B. Ensure that interference with passage along the shoreline is limited to the minimum
extent necessary to gain access from the upland to the water.
Winerl!v Power response: This policy section does not apply.
C. Where public access is substantially impeded, provide passage around interferences
77
on public trust lands through adjacent upland easements or provide other
mitigation.
Winerey Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply.
D. Require that all publicly owned land allow for perpendicular access to trust lands
whenever compatible with the principal use of the public land.
Winerey Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply.
E. Provide access 10, and reasonable recreational use of, navigable waters and public
trust lands under water.
I. Provide for free and unobstructed public use of all navigable waters below the
line of mean high water for navigation, recreation, and other public trust
purposes, including the incidental rights of public anchoring.
Winerey Power reSDonse: The proposed project site is leased from the State of New
York as an exclusive use zone for commercial mariculture activities.
2. Permit limited obstruction of public use, including navigation, m navigable
waters:
3. for water-dependent uses involving navigation and commerce which require
structures or activities in water as part of the use.
Winerey Power reSDonse: A fish farm, by its very nature, requires water as part of its
operation. The placement of net pens within the water column can be regarded as a
structure. These structures are in an exclusive use zone leased from the State of New
York through 2037. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers granted a permit for the
placement of these structures in the water column. When appropriate, the re-
establishment of the fish farm will be employing local fisherpeople whose skills have
been in practice for many generations. The operation of wind turbines within this
exclusive use area, whose chief activity has been deemed waterdependent (through its
coastal consistency analysis) will be a water-enhanced activity for the limited lifetime of
this RD&D project.
The waterdependent fish farming aclIvlty will improve the economics of the water-
enhanced RD&D wind park by means of a sharing of facilities and operational activities
such as the support boats and security.
b. for commercial recreational boating facilities, provided that the loss of
navigable waters and use of underwater lands is offset by sufficient public
benefits.
Winerey Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply.
78
c. in order to gain reasonable access to navigable waters from riparian lands.
Winerl!:V Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply.
3. Obstruction of navigable waters and underwater lands is limited:
a. to the extent that it interferes with commercial navigation. The right of
commercial navigation is superior to all other uses on navigable waters and
may not be obstructed.
Winerl!:V Power reSDonse: The proposed project site is within an area that has been
granted the status of an exclusive use zone. Therefore, this policy section does not apply.
b. to the minimum necessary for access to navigable waters. The minimum is
determined by evaluating the following factors:
(i) the extent of the use's dependence on access to navigable
waters,
Winerl!:v Power reSDonse: The site is in a restricted use zone that is reserved by lease
with the State of New York for private commercial maricultnre. Each proposed wind
tnrbine will be placed within the restricted use zone if permitted, and thus will not impede
present uses of the navigable waters of the area.
(ii) the range oftidal water level fluctuation,
Winerl!:V Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply.
(iii) the size and nature ofthe body of water,
Winerl!:V Power reSDonse: The proposed project site is already leased from the State of
New York as an exclusive use zone. This policy does not apply.
(iv) the nature of public use of the adjacent waters,
Winerl!:V Power reSDonse: The proposed activity will have no impact on waters beyond
the exclusive use zone in which the activity will occur.
(v) the traditional means of access used by surrounding similar
uses,
Winerl!:V Power reSDonse: There are no traditional means of access at Plum Island. It is
an area restricted for research on animal diseases.
79
(vi) whether or not alternative means to gain access are available.
Piers, docking facilities, and catwalks must not result in an
unnecessary interference with use of public trust lands.
Alternatives to long piers or docks include use of dinghies to
reach moored boats and mooring in nearby marinas.
Dredging solely to accommodate the draft of larger boats is
not a recommended alternative.
Winen!v Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply,
c. by extent and characteristics of the developable adjacent upland area and its
ability to support in-water development for the waterdependent use,
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply because the adjacent
upland area, Plum Island, is a restricted use area,
d. by potential adverse effects on natural resources and their uses, and
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: The site proposed for the RD&D wind project has the benefit
of an FEIS for an offshore fish farm. The FEIS deemed that the commercial activities
permitted for the site would have insignificant impacts on the natural resources in the
area, The temporary placement of wind turbines in this exclusive use zone will, if
permitted, also have insignificant - if any - adverse effects on the natural resources of the
area, It is anticipated that the presence of the wind turbine bases will create a three-
dimensional environment for various marine organisms to colonize, hide and hunt for
their food. This has the potential of increasing the natural organic bounty of the area.
e. by potential adverse effects on public safety.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: The proposed site area is already a restricted use zone
adjacent to a facility that is well-defined, well-maintained and properly staffed as an
animal disease control center that does not affect public safety, The proposed wind
turbines will be appropriately marked to warn of hazards to boat and air traffic, One of
the proposed wind turbines will offer safe harbor for mariners in distress. This is a logical
alternative for mariners in distress that otherwise would have to beach on Plum Island.
4. Structures extending beyond the minimum necessary for access to navigable
waters impair public trust interests and open space values associated with the
water's surface, Allow such structures only in the following circumstances:
a. when necessary for practical and convenient operation of waterdependent
industry or commerce, and provided that obstruction of commercial
navigation does not result.
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: The proposed wind turbines will be sited within an area
80
restricted for use by an established, permitted waterdependent activity. All wind turbines
will be located within the 200 acre exclusive use zone. There will be no obstruction of
commercial navigation.
b. for commercial recreational boating facilities provided that:
(i) the loss of navigable waters and use of underwater lands is
offset by sufficient public benefit, and
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: The proposed activity will cause no loss of navigable waters.
The use of the seabed for the waterenhanced activity of wind energy conversion will
provide electricity from a clean renewable resource. The proposed RD&D project will
provide regulators, educators, legislators, researchers and other stakeholders with a
facility that will allow them to define baseline requirements for eventual commercial
development of the offshore renewable energy resource at other locations far offshore.
(ii) obstruction of commercial navigation does not result.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: The proposed activity will cause no obstruction to
commercial navigation because the site is distant from commercial traffic lanes and the
wind turbines will be located with an exclusive use zone.
c. when the principal purpose of the structure is necessary:
(i) to provide public access for recreational uses
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply.
(ii) for improvements for navigation
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply.
(iii) for protection from coastal hazards, or
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply.
(iv) for essential public transportation and transmission facilities.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply.
d. Ensure that navigable waters and marine navigation, whether on land or sea,
are not obscured or rendered ineffective through poorly placed or directed
lighting.
81
Winen!v Power reSDonse: Lighting systems on the proposed wind turbines and bases
will conform to all U.S. Coast Guard and FAA regulations. As a result of following these
regulations, no obscuration or other interference with navigation and navigable waters
will occur.
9.5 Provide access and recreation that is compatible with natural resource
values.
A. Provide appropriate access and associated recreational activIty that will avoid
potential adverse impacts on natural resources. Use the following factors in
determining the potential for adverse environmental effects:
1. intensity of the associated recreational, scientific, or educational activity,
Winen!v Power reSDonse: Two core values of the proposed RD&D offshore wind park
are: I. scientific research to provide baseline data for assessing the impacts of offshore
wind development; and, 2. providing educational opportunities and experiences for
students at the secondary and university levels. The majority of the data will be collected
electronically and will be collated at the Winergy Power office in Hauppauge. The data
will be made freely available on the company web site, www. winerl[V/lc com. In addition,
Winergy Power will be working with the SUNY schools and the Cornell Co-operative
Extension to arrange facility tours. We do not expect that the frequency of tours will be
so high that any significant impact on the natural environment would occur. The
maximum extent of the impact we anticipate will be no more than a charter boat making a
few more trips monthly.
2. level of likely disturbance associated with the proposed activity. The following
types of access or associated activities are listed in decreasing order of potential
for disturbance:
a. motorized activities,
Winen!v Power reSDonse: As noted in 9.5.A.I above, the maximum impact (from tours
to the site) will be no more than one additional charter boat operating in the area.
b. active, non-motorized activities, including water-dependent and water-related
uses,
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: The wind turbines will function in a highly automated
fashion and will cause little, if any, disturbance to the natural resources of the area.
c. passive activities,
Winen!v Power resnonse: The wind turbines will function in a highly automated
fashion and will cause little, if any, disturbance to the natural resources of the area. As
noted above, data collection will be an ongoing passive activity with all data transmitted
to the Winergy Power office in Hauppauge, NY.
82
d. avoidance of the area.
Winerl!V Power response: The proposed temporary RD&D wind park will be sited in an
exclusive use zone next to a restricted use zone known as Plum Island. As a result, the
area is not a destination.
3. Sensitivity of the natural resources involved and the extent of the ecological
benefits associated with avoidance of the area.
Winerl!V Power response: The completed FEIS for the mariculture activities has shown
that little impact would be anticipated from the placement of solid objects (e.g., net pen
anchors, which underwent a thorough ESA review) on or in the seabed in the water
column. Although a number of endangered avian species live near and traverse the area,
over a decade of careful monitoring of the impacts of offshore wind turbines on
indigenous and migratory birds in Northern European waters has shown that birds either
habituate or avoid wind turbines in the water. No significant impact on wildlife is
anticipated for the project.
B. Limit public access and recreational activities where uncontrolled public use would
lead to impairment a/natural resources.
4. Establish appropriate seasonal limitations on access and recreation in order to
minimize adverse impacts on fish and wildlife species.
Winerl!V Power response: This policy section does not apply.
5. Provide stewardship that is capable of controlling anticipated adverse impacts
before providing public access.
Winerl!V Power response: This policy section does not apply.
6. Physically limit or avoid provision of public access to natural resource areas
whose principal values are based on the lack of human disturbance.
Winerl!v Power response: This policy section does not apply.
7. Provide educational, interpretive, research, and passive uses of natural resources
through appropriate design and control of public access and recreation.
Winerl!v Power response: It is our intent to engage researchers, regulators and
educational institutions in the monitoring and analysis of data gathered at the site for a
wide range of scientific, engineering, regulatory and aesthetic purposes. As discussed
83
previously, data that is electronically collected will be made freely available on the
Winergy Power web site, www.winer<!\.l/c.com. Site tours and visits will be possible
through prior arrangements with Winergy Power and will be conducted as a normal part
of public outreach. Winergy Power will seek assistance from the SUNY system of
institutions and the Cornell Cooperative Extension in conducting these tours.
C. Provide public access for fish and wildlife resource related activities, including
fishing and hunting, provided that the level of access would not result in a loss of
resources necessary to continue supporting these uses.
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: This policy section does not apply.
D. Provide access using methods and structures that maintain and protect open space
areas associated with natural resources. Determine the extent of visual and physical
impairment by structures extending through these open space areas based on:
I. the value of the open space as indicated by un-fragmented size or mass of the
wetland or other natural resources, distance to navigable water, and wetland
value.
Winen!v Power reSDonse: There will be three wind turbines, each a different distance
from the tip of Orient Point County Park. We choose to speak of this point of view
because it is the closest to the proposed facility and will have the clearest view.
The closest wind turbine will be 2.1 miles from the tip of Orient Point County Park. The
other two wind turbines will be farther away.
The largest dimension of the wind turbines will be their rotor diameter, which is 362 feet
(112 m). At a distance of 2.1 miles, a 362-foot diameter disk will subtend approximately
1.7" of the field of view, or a little under 0.95% of the field of view. Ifwe assume that all
rotor disks will appear equally large, then the three wind turbines will occupy no more
than about 2.8% of the field of view from that point.
If we further assume that the wind turbines are visible from a full mile of coastline in
Orient, and take into consideration that there are an estimated 165 miles of coastline in
the Town of Southold, then the wind turbines will occupy 0.02% of the available coastal
viewshed in the Town of Southold.
2. the size, length, and design of proposed structures.
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: Each wind turbine rotor will be 362 feet in diameter. The
total height of each wind turbine will be 444 feet. The lift boat base of one of the wind
turbines (Figure 9-1) will have three legs, each extending 200 feet from the center. Two
of the wind turbines will be mounted on monopile bases (Figure 9-2). The towers of the
wind turbines will be 19 feet in diameter, with a slight taper at the top, where the nacelle
holding the nacelle and rotor is attached. .
84
-
-
Figure 9-1
Lift BoatITower Schematic
Application Numbe< 2005-OO367-L2
Revision 1: January 9. 2006
Application by:
,,"----., lIIIInergy Power LLC
e,r- 150 Motor P.-1tway, Sun. 425
Hauppauge. NY 11788
444' MlW
.-
""""'~
364'
Aviation ,
Wam;ng "\
lights,
\ .
~'iim;",,',;..\~.'"
~- ':11 ,r
1,1 \
[.
Hub_
262' MlW
~
I
\
A,.
-'l.o
""~o(s... r~i 80' MLW
'''''"" 65' MLW
I I """"""'....., i 30' MLW
I " _, -, t
'/-~O'MLW
" I . 1
'I' )~S~'-'--sed 8", t -i!9:~O' MLW
___ _~.// Footing -;'!g~t MlW
'-igflll
......
.
....
~-
UllBost
, '''!~(O''1Iv.
--"---J!!~l.
E_ ~-~
- --
---
S~~-B~~---_____
Le;s'.120'Lonll,
JOmm walthiCkneu,
lO'llIamll8r
-NoI 10 lICile-
--
Figure 9-1
Schematic of Wind Turbine on a Lift Boat Base
85
0YeIaI Heigt: 444' (KW)
Alliation
........
l4U
\
I
I
I
I
I
~26Z("'WlI
HEIGHT
-,.
""".
-..-..
....
~np--8J(t4W1
- -60 ("'-WI
PLATFORM
.....""'"
vailJI20-4S'
.
SEABED
.
Upto14O'
Figure 9-2
MonopilelTower Schematic
Application Number 2005-00367-L2
Revision 1: January 9, 2006
Appllc8l:ion by:
,,---. \o\o\rletVY Power LLC
e",J'''''' 150 Motor Parkway, Suite 425
Hauppauge, NY 11788
/
I
,
ROTOR ~ ",,-
DIAMETER \.
3M IT \
\
\
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
/
/
,
I
/
lVtignon
......-- -"i""
CO"
Ml&1lDN WfJ..eIlelIel
Electric
"""'"
rRANSrnON PIf:CE
18 FT DIAMETER
Scour Protection Mats-..1' dE!pl:h
Cable to Tower
Cable from Tower
MQNOPILE
] K.7 FT DIAMETER
.
o
150FT
Figure 9-2
Schematic of Wind Turbine on a Monopile Base
86
WORKING COAST POLICIES
Policy 10
Protect Southold's water-dependent uses and promote siting of new
waterdependent uses in suitable locations.
Maritime activity in Southold traditionally has been concentrated in the harbors, inlets and creeks.
As noted earlier, Policy I promotes a continuatiou of this traditional pattern ofrnaritime activity,
supporting the economic base, maintaining the maritime character of the Town, and avoiding
disturbance of the remaining natural shoreline and water areas. It also recognized that Mattituck
Inlet and Creek, identified by the state as a regional Maritime Center, Mill Creek and the Village
of Greenport are the primary focus of maritime activity within the Town of South old.
The intent of this policy is to protect existing water-dependent commercial, industrial, and
recreational uses and to enhance the economic viability of water-dependent uses by ensuring
adequate provision of infrastructure for water-dependent uses and their efficient operation.
This is relevant to Southold because other important concentrations of water-dependent uses are
located at Orient Point, Orient hamlet, Gull Pond, Mill Creek/Budds Pond, Town/Jockey Creek,
New Suffolk, James Creek and West Harbor.
Commercial fishing and shellfishing are a prominent water-dependent use and these uses are
addressed separately in Policy 3.
Policv Standards
10.1 (a) Protect existing water-dependent uses.
The term Water-dependent use means a business or other activity which can only be
conducted in, on, over, or adjacent to a water body because such activity requires
direct access to that water body, and which involves, as an integral part of such
activity, the use of the water. Existing uses should be maintained and enhanced where
possible and appropriate.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: The site that has been proposed for the RD&D wind energy
project has already been deemed waterdependent for the permitted operation of a fish
farm. This existing use is in the process of being re-established. The RD&D project that
is being proposed will be a water-enhanced activity within the exclusive-use zone of the
fish farm. The economics of the RD&D wind park are marginal. The economics of both
activities will be enhanced by the presence of the RD&D wind facility through a sharing
of facilities and operations personnel, e.g., the crew boat and the security personnel.
10.1 (b) Improve the economic viability of water-dependent uses by allowing for non-
water dependent accessory and multiple uses, particularly water enhanced and
maritime support services where sufficient upland exists.
The term water-enhanced use means a use or activity which does not require a
location adjacent to coastal waters, but whose location on the waterfront adds to the
public use and enjoyment of the water's edge. Water-enhanced uses are primarily
recreational, cultural, retail, or entertainment in nature. These uses may be necessary
for the successful financial operation and viability of water-dependent uses.
87
Marine I and II zoning districts have been identified within the Town's harbors, inlets
and creeks. These locations are illustrated on Map 11-6. These specific areas are
where new water-dependent or water-enhanced uses will be accommodated or where
existing uses will be permitted to expand within limits.
Currently the Town's Zoning Code permits a range ofland uses within the Marine
districts. Most of the uses are commercial in nature, but some are residential,
recreational or institutional. While most of the uses are water-enhanced, only some
are water-dependent. The primary differences between the Marine I and II districts lie
with the types of uses permitted within each zone. (The complete listing of uses
permitted in Marine I and II is listed in Table I on the next two pages.)
Marine II is more intensive than Marine I. It permits more water-enhanced uses as
well as a greater intensity of water-dependent development. For this reason, most
Marine II sites are located directly on Peconic Bay or near the mouth of tidal creeks
where flushing action is strong and where supporting infrastructure is available. The
one exception to this rule is in Mattituck Creek on Long Island Sound (Reach I),
which contains Marine II zoning at the head ofthe Creek.
The Town's marine zoning will be examined to further define those uses that are
water-dependent and their appropriate location relative to the Bay and the Sound. It
has been suggested that the mix of permitted uses be reviewed to see if a more
supportive mix of accessory uses appropriate to water-dependent uses should be
added. Key factors in this review will be the capability of public infrastructure to
support the revised mix and desired intensity of development. This capability review
will include an analysis of transportation, water, sewage and other services to support
the water-dependent and enhanced mix.
Winerl!v Power response: According to the Marine I and Marine II definitions below,
the activity that we are proposing is appropriate under both zoning classifications. Marine
I Permitted Uses include Special Exception Uses, 2. Mariculture or aquaculture or
research and development. Marine II Permitted Uses include: 6. Mariculture or
aquaculture operations or research and development.
The site of the proposed activity is included in the Town of South old LWRP Reach 5
Inventory and Analysis:
"There is one aquaculture operation currently existent located off the
southwest coast of Plum Island. The operation consists of (four) pens
of various diameters (, the minimum being 50 feet) installed (a quarter
mile) offshore near the edge of Plum Gut. Operated by Mariculture
Technologies, Inc., (lease was assigned to Winergy LLC in June 2002),
these pens are used to grow summer flounder, which are shipped here
from hatcheries elsewhere in the Northeastern U.S. ...
This facility is the first open-water fish farm to be located within the
Town of South old, and in New York State. It began operation in 1997
with support by federal grants designed to encourage the development
88
of pilot fish farms. The Company's progress is being monitored by the
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
(NYSDEC). To date, they have received a permit for Phase I of six
projected phases. ..." (In parentheses, we have filled in the information
that was missing from the LWRP document excerpt.)
The proposed RD&D wind energy project will be located in the exclusive use zone that is
identified in the Southold L WRP Reach 5 Inventory and Analysis.
In June of 2002, the lease and permit for the asset was assigned to Winergy LLC, at
which time Winergy set about restoring, cleaning and taking over full maintenance of the
site. The company is now in the process of re-marking the site and making arrangements
for net pen structures and product to be placed in the water column for either the summer
of2006 or 2007. The first would be preferred, but some difficulties are being encountered
in re-establishing the physical infrastructure necessary to anchor the new net pens.
We have identified a number of opportunities to share facilities, operations and personnel
between the two enterprises. The fish farm, although able to function financially on its
own, will benefit greatly as a start up operation if it can share crew boats, security and
communication with the RD&D wind park. Thus, a water-enhanced activity, the wind
park, will improve the economic viability of the waterdependent fish farming activity.
Table 1
The following types of water-dependent and water-enhanced uses are permitted or permitted by
special exception in Marine Zones I and II:
Marine I
Permitted Uses:
1. One (I) One-family detached dwelling per single and separate lot of record in
existence as of the date of adoption of this local law.
2. Marinas for the docking, mooring and accommodation ofrecreational or commercial
boats, including the sale of fuel and oil primarily for the use of boats accommodated
in such marinas.
3. Boat docks, slips, piers or wharves for pleasure or fishing trips or for vessels engaged
in fishery or shellfishery.
4. Boat yard for building, storing, repairing, renting, selling or servicing boats which
may include the following as an accessory use: office for the sale of marine
equipment or products, dockside facilities for dispensing of fuel and where pumpout
stations are provided restroom and laundry facilities to serve overnight patrons.
5. Boat and marine engine repair and sales and display, yacht broker, marine insurance
broker.
6. Buildings, structures and uses owned or operated by the Town of Southold, School
Districts, Park Districts and Fire districts.
7. Retail sale or rental of fishing, diving, bathing supplies and equipment if accessory to
marina or boat yard of ships loft or chandlery.
89
Special Exception Uses:
I. Beach club, yacht club or boat club including uses accessory to them such as
swimming pools, tennis courts, and racquetball facilities.
2. Mariculture or aquaculture or research and development.
Marine II
Permitted Uses:
1. One (I) one-family detached dwelling per single and separate lot of record in
existence as of the date of adoption of this local law.
2. Marinas for the docking, mooring and accommodation of recreational or commercial
boats, including the sale of fuel and oil primarily for the use of boats accommodated
in such marina.
3. Boat docks, slips, piers or wharves for charter boats carrying passengers on
excursions, pleasure or fishing trips or for vessels engaged in fishery or shellfishery.
4. Beach club, yacht club or boat club including uses accessory to them such as
swimming pools, tennis courts, racquetball facilities.
5. Boat yard for building, storing, repairing, renting, selling or servicing boats which
may include the following as an accessory use: office for the sale of marine
equipment or products, dockside facilities for dispensing of fuel and where pumpout
stations are provided, restroom and laundry facilities to serve overnight patrons.
6. Mariculture or aquaculture operations or research and development.
7. Boat and marine engine repair and sales and display, yacht broker, marine insurance
broker.
8. Buildings, structures and uses owned or operated by the Town of Southold, School
Districts, Park Districts and Fire Districts.
9. Retail sale of rental of fishing, diving, bathing supplies and equipment if accessory to
marine or boat yard of ships loft or chandlery.
Special Exception Uses:
1. Restaurants excluding outdoor counter service, drive-ins or curb service
establishments. Such prohibition shall not prevent service at tables on a covered or
uncovered terrace or porch incidental to a restaurant.
2. Ferry Terminal
3. Transient hotels or motels subject to the following Conditions:
(a) The minimum area for such use shall be not less than three acres.
(b) The number of guest rooms permitted in the hotel or motel shall be determined
by: the proportion of the site utilized for such use, and the availability of public
water and sewer. The maximum number of guest units shall be one unit per
(4,000) square feet ofland with public water and sewer.
4. Fish processing plant.
A. Avoid actions which would displace. adversely impact, or interfere with existing
water-dependent uses.
Due to the limited amount of marine zoned property, the Town's policy is to promote
maximum and efficient use of those properties without creating undue negative
environmental impacts on the coastal environment.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: The proposed RD&D offshore wind park is a water-enhanced
activity that will add a new environmentally benign activity to an exclusive use zone
dedicated to the existing waterdependent fish fanning operation. The proposed wind park
90
will offer economic benefits to the fish farm operation and will not displace, adversely
impact or interfere with the fish farm operation. This complies with policy objectives to
make maximum and efficient use of a site with an existing waterdependent activity.
B. Encourage water-enhanced uses where they are compatible with surrounding
development and are designed to make beneficial use of their coastal location.
To ensure that water-enhanced uses make beneficial use of a coastal location, they
should be sited and designed to:
I. be compatible with surrounding development,
Winerey Power resnonse: Our exclusive use zone is adjacent to a restricted use zone,
Plum Island, which is not a destination open to the public. The RD&D wind project, a
water-enhanced activity located within the confines of an area assigned to a
waterdependent activity (fish farming), makes compatible and beneficial use of these two
unique coastal locations, i.e., an exclusive use water column and an island that is closed
to the public. The wind park will increase the usefulness of the fish farming area during
the period of operation granted by the requested permit.
The research and development aspect of the proposed wind park is in harmony with the
research activities that have been performed at the Plum Island facility for decades. The
research performed at Plum Island has improved our food stock through the development
of knowledge that has helped keep our food animals free from disease. The data,
operational experience and technologies developed at the RD&D offshore wind park will
provide a baseline understanding of the requirements of offshore wind farms that will in
the future be sited farther offshore in deeper ocean waters that are not visible from land.
Such deepwater offshore wind farms hold the potential of greatly alleviating our nation's
need to become energy independent.
The proposed offshore wind park is modeled after successful similar projects in various
countries of Northern Europe (Blyth, UK; Vindeby, Denmark; Utgrunden, Sweden;
Arklow, Ireland) that have now or are now expanding their offshore wind industries. The
Northern European offshore wind industry now has sufficient installed capacity to serve
the electricity needs of over a half million people. This growth followed the
implementation of RD&D offshore wind parks. The installed base of offshore wind
capacity worldwide, approximately 800 MW, now reduces the annual carbon dioxide
from power production by over two million tons (four billion pounds) per year. The
power produced is equivalent to the need to bum over 5 million barrels of oil per year in
power plants. In all instances, the nearshore pilot projects are being followed by larger
projects further offshore that now provide substantial amounts of clean renewable energy
to the onshore power grid.
2. reflect the unique qualities of a coastal location through appropriate design and
orientation,
Winerey Power reSDonse: The proposed RD&D offshore wind park is a water-enhanced
activity that will be sited in an exclusive use zone reserved for fish farming. The fish
91
farming operation, which has the benefit of completed FEIS, is already placed in an area
that was selected as appropriate for use of a public trust resource for commercial
activities in the open ocean. Similarly, the placement and operation of the RD&D
offshore wind farm will be in the same restricted area, yet will afford opportunitiesfor
stakeholders to examine the operations and impacts and for the public to view the wind
turbines should they wish to travel to a favorable point of view.
3. attract people to or near the waterfront and provide opportunities for public
access,
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: Anyone that wishes to see offshore wind turbines in
operation will be able to do so by traveling either by boat to the area or by standing near
the shoreline in Orient Point County Park.
4. provide public views to or from the water,
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: As stated above, anyone that wishes to see these remotely-
sited offshore wind turbines in operation will be able to do so by traveling either by boat
to the area or by standing near the shoreline in Orient Point County Park.
5. minimize consumption of waterfront land,
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: The proposed activity will not utilize any waterfront land.
6. not displace or interfere with the operation of water-dependent uses,
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: The purpose of the site selection was to place the wind
turbines beneficially in a restricted use area already permitted for a waterdependent
activity. It does not displace or interfere with the operations of the waterdependent
activity. It will be, in fact, complementary to the economics of the operation of the fish
farming operation.
7. not cause significant adverse impacts to community character, the transportation
network and surrounding land and water resources.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: The proposed offshore RD&D wind park will not cause
significant impacts on the community character, the transportation network, or the
surrounding land and water resources. It is in a remote location and will operate in a
highly automated mode once installed. Also, Plum Island is a restricted area and is not a
public destination point.
10.2 Promote Mattituck Inlet and Creek, Mill Creek and the Village of
Greenport as the most suitahle locations for water-dependent uses within
92
the Town of Southold.
Mattituck Inlet and Creek, identified by the state as a regional Maritime Center, and the
Village of Greenport are tbe primary focus of maritime activity within the Town of
Southold. Give water-dependent development precedence over other types of development
at suitably zoned waterfront sites within Mattituck Inlet and Creek and the Village of
Greenport.
A. Ensure that public actions enable Mattituck Inlet, Mill Creek and the Village of
Greenport to continue to function as centers of water-dependent uses.
Winerl!v Power resoonse: The policy section is not applicable.
B. Protect and enhance the economic, physical, cultural, and environmental attributes
which make up the character of Mattituck Inlet and Creek, Mill Creek and the Village
of Greenport.
Winerl!v Power resoonse: The policy section is not applicable.
10.3 Allow for continuation and development of water-dependent uses within the
existing concentration of maritime activity in harbors, inlets and creeks.
In addition to Mattituck Inlet and Creek and the Village of Greenport, important
concentrations of water-dependent uses are located at Orient Point, Orient hamlet, Gull
Pond, Mill Creek/Budds Pond, Town/Jockey Creek, New Suffolk, James Creek and West
Harbor. Individual marinas and other water-dependent uses are located outside of the
concentrations of maritime activity.
A. Ensure that public actions enable these harbors, inlets and creeks to continue to
function as concentrations of water-dependent uses.
Winerl!v Power resoonse: This policy section is not applicable.
B. Protect and enhance the economic, physical, cultural, and environmental attributes
which make up the character afthese harbors, inlets and creeks.
Winerl!v Power resoonse: This policy section is not applicable.
10.4 Minimize adverse impacts of new and expanding water-dependent uses and
provide for their safe operation.
Winerl!v Power resoonse: The water-enhanced activity represented by the proposed
offshore RD&D wind park would temporarily occupy an area permitted and occupied for
a waterdependent use, i.e., fish farming. This policy section (10.4 in its entirety) does not
apply because the proposed project is water-enhanced and not water dependent.
93
A. Limit the potential for adverse impacts associated with development of a new water-
dependent use by promoting the location of new development at appropriate sites.
Appropriate sites include:
I. sites which have been previously developed,
2. sites which require minimal physical alteration to accommodate development,
3. sites that already possess public infrastructure or locational characteristics that
would support a water-dependent use.
B. Avoid development of new water-dependent uses at sites that are located outside of
the traditional concentrations of water-dependent uses or at sites that exhibit
important natural resource values or where the proposed use will cause significant
adverse affects on community character, surrounding land and water uses, or scenic
quality.
C. Site marinas, yacht clubs, boat yards, and other boating facilities in suitable
locations.
The Town of Southold has identified the traditional concentrations of maritime
activity located in the harbors, creeks and inlets, as the most appropriate locations for
the development and expansion of marinas, yacht clubs, boat yards, and other boating
facilities. These sites are zoned for these uses: either Marine I or II. In general, the
necessary infrastructure and services to support these uses already exists in these
areas, and due to the general level of previous development of these areas, the
potential for significant adverse impact on the remaining natural resources is likely to
be less than in other locations. Siting maritime uses outside of MI and MIl zoning
districts increases the potential for adverse impacts on coastal resources.
Note: As used in this document, the term "boating facility" means a business or
accessory use that provides docking for six or more boats and encompasses 4,000
square feet or greater of surface waters, as measured by the outermost perimeter of
the dock.
1. a. seek to mInImIZe adverse impacts on coastal resources by SItIng new
marinas, yacht clubs, boat yards, and other boating facilities only in areas
identified as appropriate for waterdependent uses;
b, avoid siting new marinas, yacht clubs, boat yards, and other boating facilities
outside ofthe areas identified as appropriate for water-dependent uses.
2. Use the following standards in the siting of new and the expansion of existing
marinas, yacht clubs, boat yards, and other boating facilities:
a. upland space for parking, storage and support facilities is sufficient,
b. waterside and lands ide access is adequate,
c. nearshore depth is adequate,
d. wetlands, shellfish beds, or fish spawning grounds would not be adversely
affected,
e. water quality classifications are compatible,
f. in-water dredging and maintenance dredging is minimized,
g. basin morphometry or other means ensures adequate water circulation,
h. on-site stormwater retention and filtration is ensured, along with rinse water from
boat wash down pads.
3. Ensure that new or expanding marinas:
94
a. consider marine services and boat repair, when feasible, to meet a range of
boating needs,
b. do not displace or impair the operation of existing waterdependent transportation,
industry, or commerce,
c. do not encroach upon navigation channels, channel buffer areas, or public
mooring areas,
d. incorporate public access to the shore through provisions, such as including
access from the upland, boat ramps, and transient boat mooring,
e. limit discharge of sewage by providing pump out facilities unless the State's
Clean Vessel Act plan indicates that adequate pumpout facilities exist.
D. Maintain existingferry services to Fishers Is/and and to Orient Point.
Within certain parameters, the existing ferry services to Fishers Island and Orient
Point should be maintained. The ferry service to Fishers Island provides the only
access on and off the island other than by private boat. Maintenance of that service is
essential to the economic survival of Fishers Island and the health, safety and welfare
of its residents.
The service to Orient Point provides a needed outlet to the Northeast, without which
all auto and freight travel would be forced to go west through New York City or
through Port Jefferson Harbor to Bridgeport. However, that service provides
ridership to a wider geographic area than just Southold Town. Escalating levels of
service are resulting in negative impacts on the quality of life and the transportation
network within the Town. Use the following considerations in the evaluation of
proposals to expand existing ferry operations or the establishment of new ferry
services:
1. compatibility ofthe proposal with the surrounding community,
2. public demand for the intended route,
3. adequately sheltered terminal site location and ferry waiting area,
4. adequate waterside access and dock facilities,
5. adequate size and design of terminal and parking area to accommodate the
intended volume of passengers during peak use,
6. availability of public rest rooms,
7. adequate road access to handle the volume of vehicle traffic generated during
peak use,
8. mitigation of all adverse environmental impacts,
9. degree to which expansion will serve local demand (as opposed to pass through
demand for portions of Long Island lacking direct ferry service.
10.5 Provide sufficient infrastructure for water-dependent uses.
Winen!v Power reSDonse: This policy section (10.5) does not apply.
The Town of Southold has identified Mattituck Inlet and Creek, Mill Creek and the
Village of Greenport as the focus of its maritime activity. These will be the targets for
improvements to existing infrastructure, such as water and sewer lines, maintenance
dredging of navigation channels and anchorage basins, docks and piers, bulkheads, boat
ramps, and pump out stations. This infrastructure, which is often too expensive for many
water-dependent businesses to maintain or provide on their own, is necessary to sustain
water-dependent uses.
95
A.
Provide adequate navigation infrastructure.
Dredging is an essential activity but with costs and impacts that require it to be
undertaken only to the extent necessaty to meet the current and future needs of water-
dependent uses of the Town of Southold. The Town of Southold will work in
cooperation with New York State, Suffolk County, the Village of Greenport and
private owners of water-dependent uses to:
I. Protect and maintain existing public and private navigation lanes and channels
which provide access to the Town's water-dependent uses.
2. Maintain necessary public and private channels and basins at depths consistent
with the needs of water-dependent uses. Discontinue or modify navigation
channel or basin maintenance dredging where project depths exceed vessel needs
3. Limit in-water and overhead obstructions that impede commercial, industrial, and
recreational navigation.
4. Provide new or expanded navigation lanes, channels, and basins when necessary
to support new, or expansion of existing, water-dependent uses. Dredging may be
necessary to support a water-dependent use when;
a. an existing use, or a new use in a suitable location, would be generating
vessel traffic that requires the navigation infrastructure,
b. the amount of dredging, including the project depth, is consistent with
shipping needs, and
c. an alternative site with access to adequate water depth or less need for
dredging is not available.
5. Avoid placement of dredged material in Long Island Sound when upland
alternatives exist.
6. Put clean dredge material to beneficial use for either beach nourishment or dune
reconstruction.
7. Give priority to commercial or industrial navigation in determining rights to
navigable waters where commercial or industrial navigation activity exists.
8. Provide for services and facilities to facilitate commercial, industrial, and
recreational navigation.
B.
Provide and maintain efficient infrastructure/or water-dependent uses.
Maintain existing infrastructure and improve or provide new infrastructure,
particularly in Mattituck Inlet and Creek, Mill Creek and the Village of Greenport,
for commercial and recreational vessels and water-dependent uses. The Town of
Southold will work with the federal government, New York State, Suffolk County,
the Village of Greenport and private owners of water-dependent uses to;
1. Maintain existing sound infrastructure for continued or potential future use by
preventing loss through abandonment and neglect.
2. Demolish and remove alternative infrastructure which is likely to present hazards
to harbor operations.
3. Maintain existing, and, where necessary for water-dependent uses, construct new,
shoreline stabilization and engineering structures such as piers, wharves, jetties,
and bulkheads.
4. Maintain facilities to meet safety requirements associated with vessel operations.
5. Maintain and provide for upland structures such as warehouses, offioading yards,
necessary adjacent upland areas, or other storage facilities.
6. Maintain and, where necessary for existing water-dependent uses, improve
landside infrastructure such as sewer and water lines, sewage treatment facilities,
parking areas, and roads for harbor uses.
96
7. Promote the provIsIOn of appropriate vessel services for commercial and
recreational vessels, including berthing, repairs, information, and fueling
services.
8. Maintain stabilized inlets at Mattituck Inlet and Silver Eel Pond.
10.6 Promote efficient harbor operation.
Winerl!V Power response: The RD&D project will share support facilities such as a
service boat and security personnel with the existing permitted mariculture operation,
thereby avoiding any additional demand for harbor and berthing facilities. Thus, this
policy section does not apply.
Contlicts between water-dependent and non-water-dependent uses, and contlicts among
water-dependent uses within Southold's harbors, inlets and creeks have increased in recent
years. Increased demand has created competition for space on the foreshore, surface
waters, and underwater lands of the Town's harbors. These contlicts have the potential to
degrade the natural and cultural characteristics of harbors and their ability to support a
range of uses.
The harbor management issues along the Long Island Sound shoreline are concentrated
solely in Mattituck Inlet and Creek. The harbor management issues along the Peconic
Estuary shoreline are concentrated in the numerous creeks. The highest priority issues are
located in Stirling Basin, Gull Pond, and in the vicinity of Mill Creek/Budd's Pond, and
Brickyard Cove. The most significant harbor management issues on Fishers Island occur
in West Harbor and Silver Eel Pond.
Harbor management plans have been prepared for Mattituck and Fishers Island. A harbor
management plan addresses contlict, congestion and competition for space in the use of a
community's surface waters and underwater land. It provides consideration of and
guidance and regulation on the managing of boat traffic, general harbor use, optimum
location and number of boat support structures, such as docks, piers, moorings, pumpout
facilities, special anchorage areas, and identification of local and federal navigation
channels. It also provides the opportunity to identify various alternatives for optimum use
of the waterfront and adjacent water surface, while at the same time analyzing the
probable environmental effects of these alternatives.
A. Prepare harbor management plans as needed for key harbors. inlets and creeks.
The Town of Southold may prepare harbor management plans for Stirling Basin, Gull
Pond, the vicinity of Mill Creek/Budd's Pond, and Brickyard Cove at some point in
the future.
B. Promote efficient harbor operation in Mattituck Inlet and Creek
The harbor management plan for Mattituck Inlet is included within the Town of
Southold L WRP in Section IV. Following a review of the inventory and analysis and
an assessment of the key issues in Mattituck Inlet and Creek, the Town of Southold
has established the following guidelines for the harbor management of Mattituck Inlet
and Creek:
I. Protect and improve water-dependent uses and the working waterfront.
2. Promote reuse of underutilized, previously disturbed waterfront properties for
97
environmentally appropriate water-dependent uses.
3. Maintain navigation, including use of the Town's only federal harbor, including
the federal anchorage, maintenance dredging, and the protection of navigation
channels.
4. Expand access to the water for natural recreation, navigation and shellfishing.
5. Reduce conflicts between marine uses and the environment.
6. Improve water quality and reduce pollution sources.
7. Maintain natural resources within the inlet, such as significant fish and wildlife
habitats, wetlands, and shellfish beds.
8. Provide opportunities for shellfishing and aquaculture.
C. Promote efficient harbor operation in the waters off Fishers Island
In response to the increasing congestion and competition for the use of the waters and
harbors of Fishers Island, the Town of Southold appointed the Fishers Island Harbor
Committee. Established in May 1994, they were charged with preparing a harbor
management plan for all the Town waters and harbors surrounding Fishers Island. The
Fishers Island Harbor Management Plan is included in the L WRP in Section IV. On
the recommendation of the Committee, the Town of Southold has established the
following guidelines for the harbor management of the waters surrounding Fishers
Island:
1. Ensure balance among existing use of the Island's surrounding waters and
harbors.
2. Protect and maintain the shoreline character, heritage, and existing quality of life.
3. Promote and support access to the Island's surrounding waters and other
resources in the shoreline areas for all Island residents.
4. Provide for and regulate multiple uses of the Island's surrounding waters and
harbors in a manner that assures safe, orderly and optimum use of the water and
shorefront resources.
5. Maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the Island's
surrounding waters and harbors and their dependent habitats.
98
Policy 11
Promote sustainable use of living marine resources in Long Island Sound,
the Peconic Estuary and Town waters.
The living marine resources of the Town of Southold play an important role in the social and
economic well being of the community. Fishermen and baymen have been an integral, but
vanishing part of the local scene. Commercial and recreational harvesting of these living marine
resources also contributes significantly to the economy of the region and the state. The close
proximity of the Town to the New York metropolitan area means that the resource is heavily used
commercially and recreationally.
Continued use of the Town's living marine resources depends on maintaining the long-term health
and abundance of marine fisheries resources and their habitats. Ensuring that the resources are
sustained in usable abundance and diversity for future generations requires the active
management of marine fisheries, protection and conservation of habitat, restoration of habitats in
areas where they have been degraded, and maintenance of water quality at a level that will foster
occurrence and abundance ofliving marine resources.
Habitat protection and restoration must include an active program of protecting existing wetlands
and preventing further loss of wetlands (and other habitat) to inappropriate bulkheading or other
shoreline hardening structures. The quality of existing habitat needs to be protected from
intrusions due to poor siting of moorings and other boating activity. Finally, allocation and use of
the available resources must be consistent with the restoration and maintenance of healthy stocks
and habitat and must maximize the benefits of resource use so as to provide valuable recreational
experiences and viable business opportunities for commercial and recreational fisheries.
Management of these resources must take place not only with Town boundaries, but within the
Peconic Estuary and the Long Island Sound. The land use and resource management decisions of
other Towns also factor into the equation. This means that estuarine resource management must
include brokered agreements among the bordering Towns and Villages, as well as State and
County agencies, about how to protect and manage the resource within their boundaries. The
Town's Trustees support the creation of a task force to accomplish this. This also is one of the
goals of the Peconic Estuary Program. In Long Island Sound, resource management efforts must
include the cooperation of the State of Connecticut and its constituent counties and towns. Where
certain threatened or endangered species of national significance are concerned, the active
cooperation of the federal government will be necessary in order to provide adequate protection
of the fishery.
Winen!v Power reSDonse: We are answering this policy in its entirety at this point. The
waterdependent activity that is permitted at the site with the benefit of an FEIS has
addressed all of the Policy II concerns. The phasing-in of the expansion of this
mariculture activity is based upon nutrient loading to ensure that any of the side effects
normally associated with offshore fish farms do not occur. The expansion of the
mariculture facility cannot and will not occur if the nutrient loading levels are exceeded.
This ensures that impacts of a significant nature will never occur that would be
detrimental to the marine resources of the Town of Southold.
It is well-understood, based on the 350 years of maritime heritage that Southold has
experienced, that the most appropriate employees that would be hired will come from the
99
generations of fisherpeople in the Town of Southold.
The placement of the wind turbines in an RD&D project will not detract or impair the
fisheries and the fishery resources that Southold has depended on over the centuries. The
mariculture FEIS concluded that the addition of a three-dimensional environment in the
permitted area would enhance the food web of the area by providing structure for
essential activities of marine life. The introduction of more three-dimensional structures
in the form of the wind turbine bases will further enhance the habitat to make it more able
to support a greater variety of marine organisms.
The proposed wind energy park will enhance the economics of the already-permitted
mariculture operation through a sharing of facilities, i.e., work boat, security personnel
and telecommunications.
Policv Standards
11.1 Ensnre the long-term maintenance and health of living marine resources.
A. Ensure that commercial and recreational uses of living marine resources in the Town
of Southold are managed in a manner that:
I. places primary importance on maintaining the long-term health and abundance of
marine fisheries,
2. results in sustained useable abundance and diversity of the marine resource,
3. does not interfere with population and habitat maintenance and restoration
efforts,
4. uses best available scientific information in managing the resources
5. minimizes waste and reduces discard mortality of marine fishery resources,
6. restricts commercial and recreational activities, including the use of certain gear
types, gear sizes and practices that have negative impacts on marine habitats.
B. Protect and manage native stocks and restore sustainable populations of indigenous
fish and wildlife species and other marine living resources.
The protection of native stocks includes protecting the genetic integrity of
recognizable native populations that can be placed at risk by inappropriate stocking.
Native stocks also need to be protected from adverse impacts due to introduction of
non-indigenous species.
C. Foster the occurrence and abundance of the Town's marine resources through:
I. protection of spawning grounds, habitats, and water quality,
2. enhancement and restoration of fish and shellfish habitat,
3. the prevention of over-fishing.
1l.2 Provide for commercial and recreational use of the Town of Southold's
finfish, shellfish, crustaceans, and marine plants.
A. Maximize the benefits of marine resource use so as to provide:
I. a valuable recreational resource experience,
2. viable business opportunities for commercial and recreational fisheries.
100
B. Where fishery conservation and management plans require actions that would result
in resource allocation impacts, ensure equitable distribution of impacts among user
groups.
C. Protect the public health and the marketability of marine and fishery resources by:
1. restricting the harvest of shellfish when the sanitary condition of waters exceeds
public health standards,
2. restricting the harvest of fish and shellfish when they are contaminated with
toxics exceeding established public health thresholds,
3. limiting the availability of shellfish from uncertified waters by depleting
(transferring) shellfish stocks to levels which would discourage illegal harvest,
4. maintaining and improving water quality of fishery and marketable marine
resources to protect public health.
D. Promote the restoration and protection of over-fished resources through the
development of a region-wide management plan for fisheries.
11.3 Maintain and strengthen a stable commercial fishing fleet in the Town of
Southold
The commercial fishing industry is both historically and economically significant in
Southold. It is critical to maintain a stable commercial harvesting fleet and adequate levels
of support facilities and infrastructure to prevent the irreversible loss of an industry that
provides basic nourishment for the people of the Town, region and the state. However, it is
also clear that the health of the harvested fisheries will be a dominant factor in the size,
stability and viability of the commercial fleet. The Town is not advocating subsidy of a
fleet in excess of the capacity of the fishery resource to regenerate itself. Over-fishing or
harvesting of any resource should be avoided at all costs.
A. Protect and strengthen commercial fishing harvest operations andfacilities to support
a stable commercial fishing industry.
I. Promote the improvement of existing and support the expansion of fishing
operations and facilities for offshore commercial fishing in Mattituck Inlet and
Creek and the Village of Greenport.
2. Protect and maintain nearshore harvest throughout the Town by providing access,
berthing, and off-loading facilities suitable for nearshore operators.
B. Maintain existing commercial fishing infrastructure and promote the development of
new commercial fishing infrastructure to support a stable commercial fishing fleet by
promoting the provision of
I. commercial fishing support facilities, including docks and dock space; off-
loading areas; gear storage space; commercially-priced fuel and service yards; ice
and refrigeration; road access to commercial fishing docks; and affordable
housing for fishery industry personnel,
2. fish processing facilities,
3. appropriately scaled baymen's docks in suitable locations near areas of significant
harvest activity.
C. Protect commercial fishing support facilities from interference or displacement by
competing land and water uses.
101
11.4 Promote recreational use of marine resources.
Direct public use of marine resources provides recreational experiences and economic
benefits that are integral to the coastal identity of Southold. Recreational use of marine
resources includes fishing from the beach and clamming near the shoreline. Commercial
charter and party boats provide additional opportunities for recreational fishing in
Southold for those who don't own their own boats.
As with the commercial fishing industry, the recreational fishing industry is both
historically and economically significant in Southold. The recreational fishing industry has
the capacity to over-harvest in much the same way as the commercial industry. The Town
does not support increasing the recreational harvest or the size of the recreational fleet
(party/charter boats) in excess of the capacity of the fishery to regenerate itself. The
enforcement ofrecreational harvest quotas is within the purview of both the Town's Bay
Constables and the State Department of Environmental Conservation.
A. Provide opportunities for recreational use of marine resources throughout the Town,
and not just through marine- zoned properties.
B. Provide adequate infrastructure at existing public waterfront parks to meet
recreational needs including appropriate fishing piers, dockage, and parking.
C. Promote commercial charter and party boat businesses in Mattituck Inlet and the
Vii/age of Greenport.
D. Enforce harvest quotas.
11.5 Promote managed harvest of shellfish originating from uncertified waters.
Microbiological cleansing of shellfish from uncertified waters in depuration facilities, and
relaying of shellfish from uncertified to certified areas for cleansing and eventual harvest,
provide a means of marketing a valuable resource that would remain unused otherwise.
This activity takes place within the Town. Shellfish from uncertified waters outside the
Town also are transferred within for cleansing before harvest and sale. The Plock
Shell fisher Preserve and the Suffolk County Marine Environmental Learning Center at
Cedar Beach County Park, both in Reach 7, are land-based centers for the managed
cleansing of shellfish.
It should be noted here, however, that the use of mechanical andlor hydraulic gear to
harvest shellfish is an issue of concern because of its potential to damage shellfish habitat.
Improper or careless use of this type of gear also has the potential to injure juvenile finfish
habitat, eelgrass beds and other marine habitat within Peconic and Gardiner's bays.
A. Allow for harvest of shellfish from uncertified waters, provided protocols are adhered
to for protection of public health.
In order to ensure that there is minimal environmental disturbance of the harvest area,
harvesters will:
I. use the scale or method of shellfish harvesting operations that is most appropriate
to the resource and the physical characteristics of the harvest area,
2. allow sufficient shellfish spawning stock to remain in the harvest area to maintain
the resource while reducing the likelihood of illegal harvesting.
102
B. Promote harvesting stockfor depuration andfor relays by nearshore hand harvesters.
1l.6 Promote aquaculture.
Winerl!v Power response: Please refer to the response that we inserted at the beginning
of the Policy 11 discussion.
Aquaculture is a desired water-dependent use in Southold. Aquaculture of economically
important species can not only provide additional economic opportunities, it can relieve
pressure on and enhance wild stocks that may be adversely affected by pollution, loss of
habitat, over-fishing, or other factors. Aquaculture is encouraged for the purpose of
restoring native stock and reseeding the creeks and bays; with the primary objective of
providing for local economic opportunities, both commercial and recreational in nature.
but at a scale appropriate for the resource itself and the marine environment in which the
operation is located. The siting of aquaculture facilities within inland portions of creeks
should take into account and mitigate negative environmental impacts on the native
ecology. The placement of aquaculture facilities within open waters also should be sited so
that existing fishery resources are not negatively impacted. More specifically, the effect on
finfish of the loss of habitat resulting from aquaculture operations should be a major
consideration in any leasing program within the Peconic Bays. Finally, the Town supports
the continued activities of the Plock Shellfisher Preserve and the Suffolk County Marine
Environmental Learning Center at Cedar Beach County Park in the area of promoting
sustainable aquaculture.
A. Encourage and promote aquaculture of economically important species.
B. Protect native stocks from potential adverse biological impacts due to aquaculture.
Biological impacts to be addressed include direct displacement, competition,
introduction of disease, exposure to antibiotics, animal wastes, and potential loss of
genetic integrity as well as loss of habitat.
The Town of Southold may provide leases of Town-owned underwater lands for
aquaculture only in areas which are not naturally significant shellfish producing areas or
which are not supporting significant shellfish hand-harvesting. Similarly, leases of state-
owned underwater lands for aquaculture should only occur in areas that are not already
significant shellfish producing areas or which are not currently supporting significant
shellfish hand-harvesting.
103
I Policy 12 Protect agricultural lands in the Town of Southold.
Winerl!V Power response: This policy does not apply.
104
Policy 13
Promote appropriate use and development of energy and mineral resources.
It has been observed that the Long Island region faces more serious energy problems than any
other region in the State of New York. The Town, along with the rest of Long Island faces
recurring price hikes and the danger of energy shortages. The Sound region is heavily dependent
on oil for electric generation and home heating. (One exception to this is the Village of
Greenport, which taps into hydroelectric supplies brought in by underground cable from upstate
and Canada.) Natural gas has been available, but in limited quantities throughout the region,
including SouthoId Town. The situation has been aggravated by the region's strong reliance on
motor vehicle transportation. Further, the decommissioning of the Shoreham nuclear power plant
has resulted in what are considered the highest electricity prices in the continental United States.
In response, the first order of action should be to promote the conservation of energy. Energy
efficiency in transportation, site design, and energy generation are effective means of reducing
energy demands. Better use of solar design principles and the integrated harnessing of solar and
wind power in residential home design also may reduce the degree of dependence on the
traditional sources of oil, gas and electricity. The climate within the Town of Southold is well
suited towards use of solar and wind power in certain small-scale situations. Further, as land
continues to be preserved for farming and open space uses, the growth potential and future
demand for energy may slow down. Another option for individuals is lifestyle choices that result
in reduced energy consumption. In the long run, a lessened demand for energy will reduce the
need for construction of new facilities that may have adverse impacts on coastal resources.
During the national oil crises of the 1970s, oil and gas extraction, as well as storage and refining,
off the Northeast coastline (specifically the Georges Bank) was given serious consideration.
Should that scenario be revived, the potential impacts on the Town would have to be explored,
particularly with regard to the potentially adverse impacts on its sole source aquifer and its fragile
marine ecosystem.
Policv Standards
l3.1 Conserve energy resources.
Winerl!V Power response: Winergy Power is examining alternative fuels for service
boats for the mariculture and RD&D wind park. The facilities, both mariculture and wind
energy, will be employing photovoltaic modules to power various infrastructure elements
such as marine warning lights.
A. Promote energy efficient modes aftransportation:
I. Promote and maintain rail freight and intermodal facilities.
2. Promote and maintain appropriate waterborne cargo and passenger transportation
within the capacity of the land-based transportation network.
3. Promote and maintain mass transit.
4. Promote alternative forms of transportation, including the proVISIOn of safe
bicycle lanes in new highway construction and rehabilitation of existing
highways.
B. Plan and construct sites using energy efficient design.
105
I. Promote use of energy efficient design through local building codes and site plan
review.
C. Capture waste heat from industrial processes for heating and electric generation.
D. Promote energy generating efficiency through design upgrades 0/ existing/acilities.
13.2 Promote alternative energy sources that are self-sustaining, including solar
and wind powered energy generation.
In siting such facilities, avoid interference with coastal resources, including migratory
birds, wetland and woodland habitats, scenic resources and coastal processes.
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: The RD&D wind park will be a temporary facility that is
sited in an already-permitted exclusive-use area. Because the area is already demarcated
as an exclusive use zone, the wind park will not interfere with other coastal processes.
The small size of the wind park, comprising only three wind turbines, will pose no hazard
to migrating birds, as has been found at more than twenty offshore wind facilities in
northern European waters. The highest capacity offshore wind farm in the world, the
Nysted Offshore Wind Park in the Baltic Sea (72 wind turbines), is located on a major
migratory bird route. The facility uses a comprehensive array of devices, plus human
observers to monitor flocks, individual birds, and individual birds in flocks. No bird
collisions with wind turbines have been observed since operations began in 2004. The
consensus view that has emerged regarding the impact of offshore wind turbines on avian
species is that birds either avoid wind turbines or quickly habituate to their presence and
fly close to, under or through the large, slowly moving blades.
Instead of obscuring the scenic resources of the many views of open waters surrounding
the Town of Southold, the three wind turbines will add an interesting feature to the views
of the water from an extremely limited number of vantage points on shore.
13.3 Ensure maximum efficiency and minimum adverse environmental impact
when siting major energy generating facilities.
A. Major energy generating facilities may be located in a coastal location where a clear
public benefit is established using the/ollowing/actors:
I. There is a demonstrated need for the facility.
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: Although the capacity of the proposed RD&D wind park will
not be high enough to qualify it as a major energy facility (based on Public Service
Commission law), we feel that it is appropriate for us to comment on the way that this
project addresses the public need.
According to the Long Island Power Authority, the demand for electricity on Long Island
increases by around 100 MW per year. That power can be obtained by burning fossil
fuels in power plants on Long Island. As noted above in this LWRP, "The Sound region
is heavily dependent on oil for electric generation..." Winergy Power proposes to install
106
10.8 MW of wind power generation. Extrapolating from the wind data that was collected
for a year of monitoring by A WS Scientific on a tall tower on Plum Island, we estimate
that the output of the wind park will generate enough electricity to power about 4,000
homes annually. This will be a significant supplement to existing on-Island power
generation and will displace the need to burn more than 68,000 barrels of volatilely-
priced oil to produce that electricity. The price of the power from the wind is stable by
nature.
The proposed wind energy facility will not have any impact on the aquifer. In addition,
by offsetting the need to bum over 68,000 barrels of oil per year, the chance of oil spills
will also be reduced, thus further protecting the aquifer. Finally, there is no transportation
involved in bringing the energy from offshore wind to consumers on land.
2. The facility will satisfY additional electric capacity needs or electric system
needs.
Winerl!v Power response: The wind park will have a maximum generating capacity of
10.8 MW. Because of the variability of wind, power will be generated from 80% to 85%
of the year. On an annual basis, the total amount of electricity generated will be as if the
wind turbines had been operating at full capacity for 45% of the year. When the power is
available, that power is not needed from other sources, which, in the case of Long Island,
would mean fossil-fueled power plant.
3. Alternative available methods of power generation and alternative sources of
energy cannot reasonably meet the public need.
Winerl!v Power response: The utility grid dead-ends at Orient Point. During power
outages, this is usually the last area to be brought back on-line. The location of the wind
energy facility at this end of the Island will transmit electricity westward, which will
strengthen the grid on the North Fork, thus reducing the incidences of low voltage and
outages. In addition, the existing utility lines have a high enough capacity to carry the
power produced by the wind turbines. No additional utility transmission/distribution
capacity is needed to accommodate the power from the wind turbines. This RD&D
project was not designed to be a commercial project. The operation of this RD&D wind
facility will demonstrate the operational requirements and characteristics of an offshore
wind energy facility, thus providing the baseline experience and data necessary for
integrating offshore wind-derived electricity to serve the public need.
4. Upgrades of existing facilities cannot reasonably meet the public need.
Winefl!v Power response: The proposed project is not a major energy generating
facility. However, the wind park will deliver power to the grid, a benefit that may reduce
the need to upgrade existing facilities or build new major generating facilities.
107
5. The facility incorporates feasible public recreational uses.
Winen!v Power reSDonse: This policy section is not applicable because the proposed
wind park will be located in a remote area that is a restricted use zone.
6. The facility is designed to minimize environmental and visual impacts to the
Town's environmental, scenic, historic and cultural resources.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: This water-enhanced activity will be located in a zone
restricted for a waterdependent activity. The project site was specifically chosen to
minimize visual impacts while allowing public viewing to those that wish to travel to the
little-visited areas from which it is possible to see the wind turbines. An FEIS exists for
the project site that indicates that there will be few - if any - environmental impacts, only
an increase in three-dimensional area within the water colunm. The FEIS also addressed
historic and cultural resources in the area and indicated little or no impacts for those areas
of concern.
If approved, this offshore wind park will be the first offshore wind energy facility in the
United States. The Town of Southold is not unaccustomed to being first. In the late
1960s, the Town of Southold was the first town in the U.S. to ban the use of laundry
detergents that were in use. This action was quickly followed by Suffolk County, which
became the first county in the U.S. to ban the use of such detergents, which had been
found to be having a significant detrimental impact on groundwater and the surrounding
marine environment. Should the wind facility be permitted, the Town of Southold would
lead the way to a future of clean energy for itself, the County, the State of New York, and
the country. The Town would show that offshore wind energy is compatible with historic
maritime values, in a similar manner to what the Town of Hull, Massachusetts has done
with their wind turbine, located 75 feet from the mean high water mark.
B. Achieve maximum transmission efficiency by siting major energy generating/acilities
close to load centers.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: The proposed RD&D wind park is not a major energy
generating facility. This policy section does not apply.
C. Preclude the potential degradation of coastal resources by siting and constructing
new electric energy generating and transmission facilities so that they would not
adversely affect:
1. commercial navigation,
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: The proposed RD&D offshore wind park would be sited in
an area that is already permitted as an exclusive use zone and thus would have no impact
on commercial navigation.
108
2. commercial and recreational fishing,
Winerl!v Power response: The proposed RD&D offshore wind park would be sited in
an area that is already permitted as an exclusive use zone and thus would have no impact
on commercial and recreational fishing. The location of the area was selected after full
consultation with both commercial and recreational fisherpeople to identify an area that
had little or no value to either group.
3. agricultural lands,
Winerl!V Power response: This policy section does not apply.
4. designated Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats,
Winerl!V Power response: This policy section does not apply. The proposed project area
is not designated as a Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat area.
5. habitats critical to vulnerable fish and wildlife species, vulnerable plant species,
and rare ecological communities
Winerl!v Power response: The proposed project site has the benefit of a completed
FEIS, which shows that there are no vulnerable fish and wildlife species, vulnerable
plants species or rare ecological communities in or adjacent to the proposed area. Plus,
the proposed project area is not designated as a Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife
Habitat area.
6. wetlands,
Winerl!V Power response: This policy section does not apply.
7. historic resources,
Winerl!v Power response: The FEIS for the site included a complete historical review
and the site was found not to feature anything of significance from a historical
perspective. As stated in response to Policy 2, the completed FEIS for the site includes a
complete review by the NY State Department of Park, Recreation and Historic
Preservation. A letter attesting to this is provided as Attachment 3 to this L WRP
compliance form. All matters pertinent to Policy 13.C.7. were reviewed prior to this
issuance of the FEIS to Mariculture Technologies.
8. scenic resources.
Winerl!v Power response: The proposed project IS not a major energy generating
109
facility. However, it is appropriate to note that the site was selected specifically because
of its remoteness from populated areas or heavily visited scenic resource areas.
There will be three wind turbines, each a different distance from the tip of Orient Point
County Park. We choose to speak of this point of view because it is the closest to the
proposed facility and will have the clearest view.
The closest wind turbine will be 2.3 miles from the tip of Orient Point County Park. The
other two wind turbines will be farther away.
The largest dimension of the wind turbines will be their rotor diameter, which is 367 feet
(112 m). At a distance of 2.3 miles, a 367-foot diameter disk will subtend approximately
1.70 of the field of view, or a little under 0.95% of the field of view. If we assumed that
all rotor disks will appear equally large, then the three wind turbines will occupy no more
than about 2.8% of the field of view from that point.
If we further assume that the wind turbines are visible from a full mile of coastline in
Orient, and take into consideration that there are an estimated 165 miles of coastline in
the Town of Southold, then the wind turbines will occupy 0.02% of the available coastal
viewshed in the Town of Southold. This is an insignificant percentage of the total scenic
vistas offered by the Town of Southold.
13.4 Minimize adverse impacts from fuel storage facilities.
A. Regional petroleum reserve facilities are inappropriate in the coastal area of the
Town of South old.
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: This policy section is inapplicable.
B. The production, storage, or retention of petroleum products in earthen reservoirs is
prohibited.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: This policy section is inapplicable.
C. Liquefied Natural Gasfacllities must be safely sited. screened and operated.
Winerl!v Power reSDonse: This policy section is inapplicable.
D. Protect natural resources by preparing and complying with an approved oil spill
contingency plan.
Winerl!V Power reSDonse: We perceive that this policy section does not apply, but it is
worthwhile to note that lubricants are used in many parts of the offshore wind turbines.
110
All lubricants are enclosed in sealed systems. The transformer onboard each wind turbine
will also hold fluid, but this will be mineral oil, which is environmentally benign.
Nevertheless, a spill contingency plan is included in our application to be re-submitted to
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
13.5 Minimize adverse impacts associated with mineral extraction.
Winerl!v Power response: This policy section is inapplicable in its entirety.
A. Commercial sand and aggregate mining is generally presumed to be an
inappropriate use in the Town of Southold. Factors to be used in determining the
appropriateness of a commercial mining operation include:
1. compatibility with adjacent uses,
2. loss of use of the site for other potential uses,
3. alteration of coastal geological landforms,
4. impact on designated sole-source aquifers,
5. adverse impact on natural resources,
6. degradation of visual quality.
B. Preserve soils and overburden using appropriate site preparation techniques and
subsequent site reclamation in accordance with an approved plan/or the suitable use
of affected lands, including:
1. drainage and water control to reduce soil erosion,
2. proposed future use of the affected lands, and
3. specific activities, including:
a. revegetation,
b. disposal of refuse or spoil,
c. drainage and water control features,
d. grading and slope treatment,
e. proposals for the prevention of pollution and the protection of the
environment.
C. Limit subaqueous sand and gravel extraction to activities necessary/or navigation or
erosion control.
111
ATTACHMENT I
A full catalog of visualizations will be provided shortly
112
ATTACHMENT 2
COMMENTS ON THE PECONIC ESTUARY PROGRAM/CCMP
Although the Peconic Estuary Program was not specifically mentioned in any of the L WRP
questions, we are aware that a review is needed in concert with the LWRP. For this reason, we
include the following comments. Our understanding is that this review will be conducted by the
New York Department of State.
According to the Peconic Estuary Program, Federal Consistency Report, September 2000: "The
National Estuary Program (NEP) was established by the Water Quality Act of 1987, which
amended the Federal Clean Water Act. The purpose of the NEP is to identify, protect and restore
estuaries of national significance.
There is a Federal consistency review requirement for the NEP. This is distinct from the Federal
consistency requirement of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act, conducted as part of the
State's coastal zone management program."
The site chosen for the project was awarded a permit in 1997 after a thorough review of an EIS,
appropriate addenda and appendices. This granting of a permit was the culmination of an II-year
effort that involved many agencies, including but not limited to, NY State Office of General
Services, NY State Department of State, NY State Department of Environmental Conservation,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, National Marine Fisheries Services, NY State Parks, Recreation
and Historical Preservation, U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Commerce, to
name just a few.
What we are proposing will temporarily add another three-dimensional element to an area already
permitted for the addition of such three-dimensional element.
113
ATTACHMENT 3
LETTER FROM NY ST ATE OF P ARKS, RECREATION AND HISTORIC PRESERV A nON
SHOWING No IMPACT ON HISTORIC RESOURCES
......_:'\
(.;
~1IE.~5'''TIE;
Bel'llallett,C...!rO
CQmminlone,
New York State Office 0' Parka, Recr..tlon and Hiatorlc Pre..rvatlon
Historic Preservation Field Services Bureau
Peebles Island, PO Box 189, Waterford, New York 12188-0189
518-237-86-43
March 16, 2006
Mr. John Carstens
Sr. Environmental Analyst
Office of General Services
Empire State Plaza
Albany, NY 12242
Re: CORPSlQQS Maricuhure Tech Proposal
Southold, Suffolk County
96PROII03
Dear Mr. Carstens:
Thank you for your recent call concerning the history of our involvement with the
Mariculture project. As noted. the physical tile in question has now been sent to the State
Archives and Records Administration.
A review of our electronic data base shows that the project was received for review by
this office on May 14. 1996. After reviewing the information, the NYSHPO determined that the
project would have No Effect on historidcultural resources. A letter memorializing this
determination was sent on May 16, 1996.
Iff can be of any further assistance do not hesitate to contact me at (518) 237-8643, ext.
3263,
~SinCCreIY' / .
'L~P-I ~
John A. Bonafide
Historic Preservation Services
Coordinator
An EQual Opportunity/Affirmatille Action Agency
o pr;nI8" Cl/'l.ec)'Ol.o papa'
114
ATTACHMENT 4
SCOUR CONTROL INFORMATION
The planned method of preventing scouring at the bases of the piles is based on installation of
Seabed Scour Control Systems Limited's synthetic seaweed mattresses around the base of each
pile. Each mattress consists of buoyant synthetic fronds made of polypropylene attached to a
webbed mat of polyester which is in turn anchored to the sea bed, as depicted in Figure 5.1.
The principle behind utilizing fronds to limit scouring is that the fronds reduce the speed of water
passing over the seabed. As the sea water slows, waterborne particulates precipitate down into the
fronds and settle. Over a period of two to three weeks after installation, sediment builds up into
the fronds (to approximately 80% of their depth) and remains stationary for the duration of the
installation.
4.1'
, "\ ,", I, I- ,',
I' 'I""" I' i ' 11.'111
, 'I' j ,1,\ It I: I', ,_ '. I I ,< I, ,\' \ .' , I 'i\.l
111'1', ',,1 .' iI,', ., ,\ ':' ! I,:, 1\ I
Ili\'llll'J f'litt i ~lll'!'i I:~
Fronds
Webbed Mat
~ ~'.~.;;::li:i,~{fi~;'~:~~f~V,,"" .<;.~;
"""..,~'I!J ".'.,.. '. ,>",Sea Bed
:~:i;1,:~1'~:.:1~::Ft\~}:.~'.f.~~"~{~~.r~<. '!i:, .:'f,;l,:~-. ~
....:.;.,.,'.,.,..
'~~-':'-'-'j.~_.~:::" :.;
,il{! ";:;t.:j~:g;Sr)i!(;\
Anchors
Figure 5.1
Profile of Scour Control Mattress
Figure 5 details the layout of the mattresses around each pile. There will be 8 mattresses. each
8.2' x 16.4', covering an area of 1,076 square feet at the base of each pile. In total, between the
two monopile foundations and the three legs of the Jack-Up Barge, there will be 30 mattresses
installed. totaling 5,382 square feet.
115
c=:J~ WI"o Mm"E GENERATOR (WTC)
BG t1s~~ro~~~T~)
f- --- 1 aZxlM.achBMalstola~ngl,076squar.feel
c=:Jc=:J
~
~
Plan View
~s OF MAJOR
TiDAl fLOW
WIND TURBINE GENERATOR
WATER SURfACE
"""'0
Section View
Figure 5
Scour Can1rol System Details
Apliicalion Number: 2005-00367-L2
Revision 1: Janua 9, 2006
Apliication by:
.. Winergy Power, LLC
. 640 Montauk Highway
Shi~ NY, 11967
116
Installation
Each rolled up mattress is lowered to the sea bed as depicted in figure 5.2. Anchors along the
trailing edge are driven into the sea bed with a specially designed hydraulic hammer gun and, as
the mattress is rolled out by divers, additional anchors are set, totaling 16 per mat. Each anchor is
certified by Lloyds and ABS to hold one metric ton (2240 lbs).
Figure 5.2
Installation of Scour Control Mattress
//--
,
. /// ///
'//. ;'////'/://
////"':'l ////:/?//-
////,/// /' (//
Seabed /~/;:;~ ~5;;
/::~ /// /
, //~
117
(:l~'~")
~/
"Natural" PROTECTION against Seabed
Seoul' and Erosion - Combining the Forces
of Nature for a permanent solution
.
it''':':-l .:.:rildd!:1'l5 lh.ll ;:It~'e ~c.OiJr ex,~: ;Iw:ief\\'.>r~r the I" Cl'{"!li, ~'5.:'l(Jated \"l!h SJd' sco~r
'::1'1 rJ'1;I:l..:1 1111 .~LI::;~" l:!.;lI"r~ IInncJ:3ldy Ih~y .lf~ 1I'~l.lllt:(7 lhit In:p::t (,11\ Le(\J11~
S:--,i't: if t' h II": If 'I;>:he(~. S({),lI .~;lll b." rJi'>K.1U:-, u.Jrn;,,!:, Ii": J"d C.1I1 n1pl)~!' ol'~rl
Ilfl~w.;e:)ld!lli: r~~,,;:iflt~ COJlJ" ~II~ J~ ......di a 1l';lJ<~ ~ll...i; Oi'n~t:: llilll'. '~:'!I' m:ill:lI.
.
h.l!if)""ll'i: Illb ,)"~ PI":..t:J d .JIIIJ Ot:..dVj 'J-;Ill, $(;.:Jl~~ 5:-0.11 COllhJ S~)::::r~ Ltj (SSCSl Lrc",teJ J tll~:II'JJ
01 h~H" 'C:;'':)ltl,. I ;1111:: 1',: r1 11;1(::': <!ll et~(ll.Klf' r Cilt'l'lk:: ~'Ld ~It~' ~I ,'Ill 1':11,.' In :...0':11 {J 1(1 SSCS IIJ': l".'t:1t
pli~WI:I:}'.S()luh;.n;;.l" LI;~ pU'lt~nlr, .l'>!'.lJ{p'd \';111, ~llr IiI ihi: 'lh~ IIlft!" .(,1 ;.\" lll~i; ,Ity ~.ui,... ,Q...I
.
1he SSCS fL~lt--:,tll F ~lll' ')'flh:di:;ll S,~lll :j 1,.'VC.I:'t~llll:.t;d l:l p;lh:d ,J I,p,':. v! :'UU~t:,l ill:.:JH;ll,i:m:.. Ii: ai'
llf Il:c nll':\;~ 1:I'-t~r.l""J, i.t)jl1p.l1t:~~ '''IJl1:l~ Ih'~ oil it "I ,;,.; ~~_ ~j 111.';I;,I!~,1 IK1H'J [0 11l1.1lk- 1:l1ln,.:(,.t:--:
;>rrHcrllOIl fer IIC'W 1.1" Hies. ;'Ild b' pllS; lil~,:;i!lallnil "C(~UI In'~lnCiJfb.. W(lf,S 1~ ~') p,lriit.k: I;,n.'. h'WI
il!;I;,I:l:ll;lI11,.:e 11l',c ~},ult:di(llj
.
H~t TClls!ie S.'-~~ll" BLI:JY;Hl! Pol...;)("c;,~~er.. Ffind--.. se~ In pJf31e1hlles Cl"7jl~ VI5C.0l.~ [h,tg a IdS:H~(L;..;.t' Ih~
\..:k..'ll, o' !':': ;:U"L'III ;.IlK! Siot Enl~li 11;; Veh:ll)' RcJ\I.:hJlll-.:.x,) kl p';'lfti_t'S III '51J51'(.,t-IO'1 ~"Io:~ "
dclxl<"JI,,'(1 i'; ) ':1:' il()ud(~ll ;1,."1 t:l iillli;t I" ,m:rll'lIlll;llllla! ;111,1, ",I'.t: ",llIdl),!.. whk:h hi (I::;:);J -1"11;1
tl:ll/:m ior 'll:l,fk' 11t;~.
I. "",..ltJ'II<l!
tiW~~<".,..ir~
n,.. Mo' /If.,1 I:'~
i"". vll~f 11J".
.' ;),,"/:r
~~d'1iIC;' ·
,~~."J?/!I1'~
. JJi:~ .t{.
~., ..
J 14"tt.ftN
.~j,.n"..(wlt
l_t"'I~,)f"r'l'l
..,,\.,~.. "',.-l
!o:n"....,fi.II...!1
."i.'pl'~
J-
'I.,!..
.:-
I--.-....~. [t.,.I.~t~"Io"-II"l\l.tJ'
u~~ ,<"I '-'II ~.p::t:
~~l'~ 1::,~4::::~'1:~~1~
,,' . . . ',ip .~. (......11
.~: ."...r."tC.tlf"~
. I ~
,;if1.'.. ,... "~!
. T'~ SSCS ~Y"ri':r.1~ ~nr rhd~ .ipplir.iHloo.';, ha\'i': hccn .1pprovcrl by; ~ .~ .
.. .. _.;',~ '.~r~' ....- _ ~,~~
".... J"U1( MlfJi5try'Dfllgn";:lJ/llirc;l,'1r1fl~r"':riw:-" '1,"
.' ,.- , ... .~-:". _,.4 "~.,."_ -. ..'
l!."''' LJ~ptfitm(;I;1 ollr.,/l..;pc:;f (M~,iflc:.l};.c.',I'C1((:,'i \
'~..~,~!...., ,
-1::. '.-;:~~,~~~~~:qrps Of in{:.it.~ers; , .
'J~t .." . 11.'\ N.'1liR{!.E/!/il.,"'rs4.~I~m,\' (.'YJ,~' ~tl,.~ro.?melll.'\go'K')'~;" J
i ,:j "....::- ~ 87lJS,~at;o!,aUf~rlatJo~'1 otJ~w;m"n's 0:[;8:115.1(101!5: ',t .~...t,;.fJ
",f;~~,!~ 'nsttu~!'OfHyd('olnp:f1I!erm~:P""lst./l.~Jrk';'I'ofScr.rx'!'s::, ~lfJW'"
.t", 'z4..... ',- ...~ .~. ~-" .-.,..,. . 'J :",. . -.Jl ~~
.t-~,. ~:'.;-. &. H>'U1;NJ/~..!i.,#!::e]f1IJg !?JVl:,/{}/I, '?~'",~Wil!t.I'~l,Jili N.:!dt"/.d'lu~.' v (; ~
':'l... ~~~~!~i' ;!~~\ .~~~ .,,;: /t.;W. - ,
SSCS Ploilucts a(t: appr~ovcd dS lJeing an eO'tilrolilllefll.:tIl~' du.;eptdLII::-~olotioC1 tv ":)l:.our..i1f.' :i\~
....~~~ '.... t ~"' .,'" "' 'I J' 'ltr?:t". ~i""f lo..
. V1111~ UIt: aIJl.6...~~,).1 of LIft: ss~s fII;lK.fS}':Il~rll~ lid: !XQI d',JJI1,)wl!.:Jg7;J :ill irlllllC Vlr)ll~ltflIIJl"I',(J y'tll'.,.,
" . AIC" 0".. .dM1IY.;li g ,~..tJgII~:J 10' llld clh:.<i_y AlltI ~'I'';''':)' pIlJ.t:1I ~l~ "'1'11 SLIJ11I~111"-.: (\dJlcs l,!'Ju\\t:I.Alid
Tee~Jl:IiJl::JtI<.lm) 3f1d"3!so.Y,~ql OtfshOlt V.lnJ fJrms:.__ ,t.. '....... _:,"'~ ~ h"'..,/o- r, ~tt\. , .
,.t", . , ,tf,; "~p.', ,.',L' '''I'' { ,. ,'~ .:-.oI'! l;
:ri' ~.... ,_ ,J ..~~~~. ,.:-.
r~
.;/
~_ CoM: ).... .I~rl 1I!Il,1... ~ 'I
c..f,(<<lrtj,~,.
_~~Irf~,h""'"
l.er...!...4<.:o-'.....k
.~kr 1\ ,,:I ""..-.!'.
.....~"t. to~ ne 1.J'oI
"',;:~nl'-
,
i
.ij<-.... .~
.,).~"~ "
.
,~
"
"
118
~$C$ I
..:,.:...
TIME AND TIDE STOPS FOR NOTHING" BUT 55CS
SCOUR CONTROL SYSTEMS ARE FOREVER
II...: 11 '-' JH ~ V. U~ v~(:d"~,,
'y 0~)' r<" h~ ',_n~ IL :;l,(.;",t,tt'l rocr WI.'
rl' ;Y"IT' <:'1.1/1:1 r " tih I'~ II....
". ilJlIl.. J';l., I II' l.: ilL ~iI~\.
tnno( ~"Fl(;. po.)!" ;(( ..... Hln
"(, ~ JI~ lit:)
l" 1 . lr"
.t..; rcll:,l' -ft'
6 1011 I\. 1 -t
. SSCS 8w.....nl fl'.md linn - lu "I SSC'S _
d. Ii ,1 :1, ..1,1( L-.,- :i!, il. ,1
"'k. ."i~ '.-'t"II!; I' 'or1;'l! ...
SSLS frond ~1I
I, .1 I~ (II Jl1.
""I .J;
1':. ..; ~~ Cl
l'lil 'H~
," ...111 Ii
In ht'i~'
.h.
r:: 0'
Iii'
1\1;, t, . ill' !1: ~ I.
l'>~:.k
h);/' Jl1J,~_;
,Jlilj~Jc' _' .:14 '.)
1 :..01, ,ld 1),
:;l',:u;.;lh t...w'~
:t~ SC' }\..! ;lId
,,-..t:. I: IllTl\J1l I.SlS
,';; (:rJ 't:!:1I1k..ill 01
1~j.'C 1l. :Z.~lll .
~ ., 'illl l ~ tl
It I ld' . :'ljrl1
\,of ~;N{ ~"
. :';~l~ ffunded t.:ollCrtte M.Jtlrnnl - Itx. !:.::.c.:S II',JiIJ' Jle an .hcd I,) ,I '<lV'" b,JlC of
lnffCI(' l.:nt f' f1t't~('"... of rope
t!i.\"I ..., " " ~:n'. ,1,11'.111\1 1 St,1 I' I,
.e .~ Ij ;)0011,111, ,I
1. m. :~.r") df'/l~'I)' crtiom
'r~ ,"1" !r.' r'f'l' (17~., ..I:'lIl':1~
II!> 1 )' III .llt' lpt. \~I t""h" b~ '.'k!,
ll~ Ii .llt .h UI <,:' I.'It" ~I ,il"llll~llh
.
SSCS Ano:::Mn ... ':'hc~'aft;'."hit"('aSi~)v u$('d rcr S-C.1bcd rt'lcl1!!OfI pu~po5es r7Hl[;I\g frWl
.Uk:" ~llb J,llJ ,tc:Jflk::.. GRP gldllilg.s. ~SIV 1;"'_ ~Jges, l';;lr..",~& fJ,;WC1 .1;10 !t:lt~OJln'll5 cat>>~
t,; 11-(: ~e-at>eJ J'oj tG pfo'Vo-.:-t l"UV01~;V J,'~rl'"l' J..!ull1t5 fofw";~ed lli:..MaL~", WJrUiJI.J
arc 'Vo'ddy u:.ct.ll:y C Irn!s .:,r rrcj('~~ ""h:rt~"Id("watcr anchor1'lR and rctCflton tl.HlCIOf'5 ~;'C
rt"lt:ked. l~ ssa ancn 'lr d1.'l'n in r.,'Ot~ Crt'J'~'i it I ll:QA,,,. rA,BS ce11~C3~t.d. !'e',-,:"C lorr~
l..'r 1 tl.. ~nt:.
~ ,-'-'~~
Conluhl'ley - Scoer Protettlon _"Sloeu~nt 5- lIYOlJI DeJIg.n . iSC$ wIll exerutt 10( ~' ~ile
;, 'I elJ ""f'111 ,"'~ ,....<.:";<;, ,.'n! AIVI';:..'i('<;~ ~f'flllf r~-:"f1li~, ~"',"""'f1 "ref" 'pi"{.for "'"l(lMH'nl~1 (~al~'
.ll-.i.lm"p. I't'\~t',';.;ty pnd ';ll1.pt/il'f'l1l_ '.I f""l'~""" [1o"ln,Il""r11 '11'1d m:\illt~f1.'r)(I'fl~'
~,Ol ~.l)le 'l,n rk..l~' f,"J( lo~!;'lli ",lon. .
.
. ~fl~till" '1J-~ l-t'y ;,"rt"I'~ r ...;I.....'I1-nv, ;ll"\.~ r,"(\,~,"jOR I::lltfflf'1J7,d ~tnlctllff"C; ar.1 plN"lnf"c; w1:~ UCS :n'
~ " I'.~. t'Yt.:. r 'j ,ilr(/ II f""~' ~"11 (.I'''I'",W,. "(JIlt' O/t.- Ofl~" ("r1<:( ,1 P,'{fTlll'If', ,:,::;!,.lt~'!hs ";'1' '!;..If) to .<<;(1'1'"
,r;t~lp,;.I: St: }, ,/Ii/ll",.I; '~r,Jy I;' .il'I,III.lh. 1. 111.;1./ liP;; ll,t P~IIII~IIt"'lr:.- M.,~.. FJlJI~ iCI'iflll:!'Cf(Jjt,r::.wa/''', '\;;:
C......rOWI'lL -r.~/ly. A'''LCOlJb/~: (./:I.:dJVC III LJ(cp8'irJ..SndIJow Wa_tcr; ..lmpAd D.~,mItAe~y}-'rctccMa.i from
f-.~err:" A;r,nmJfl,~I\;r:(., i n:t.1 .-Jr..''''''';1p .c;.r,It'f'T,1r1 \'.iM':11 'nt:'liIln of froM.': r.tr"~'t':-<: .'i,lIVI Comp.''1inn. ! .. ..
.,. \ lHyJnuJirna.~, R~';';"t"t, ~~~"
. u~.....,. ;' r'
. SSCs SC!'YM:CI 8nd ~Ic8Hon.
. fJ.1~~ ;','rI"!~I,(II' .:'!( 5u/:lS(.f~.':"vh-t't5
. At'rii:T -', ct ._.]t.;C' %,r-./X'ifnc ~'l1S':'III~S,.o. .
"~vb~~',J (JK's ft'v..pr J/l\J.. 'r/.:f.ci,!Ef!2sJ S!~[..F:rv!-:..iJ"n
-:SCOur r'l""ornriJhot"Olfs1Jr' t- W'ilJd ,":nnf:
:~ $~e .(,SU$S~1it $ vne.n ~'''';';t .L
~.f;;X111l(j S~!o~r CO'rt'('~'o, JrKi PmT:;l:1Q.1,
\O~'tf8J.1 S";Ql.i/ P;~~:,C';I/(,I'I , - '.
Th ~
'I-",.n. .,.~.....
. ".I_o;.,:,~".J..: Ie' J
_. ',r(!y!!",_:f>>I','
III
,.1
'.' . ,~'1~'.(."''''"'
, ,....r'"..J1.~
,~'7; ~', ~~.(
c,V['n,.,.,..t4
~!..~I..~
l.
,. sits "speci.lo" -
lJc~WI_d il!.'4 bUilt dlt rcqutid.
IIJ
,
m~ ~;t.,
. "
~ :.
, .'
. ,
':~""'.""
. rr~ ,Strtied, SCOlir~ontrolsY.Ji!mii:Ltd
,~H!iir.y. .Ro.d. Hartrey.lnd"hlalr; \lrJ!l Ymllo~\h:m"'alikN~]l.'~ri.tm
r"t ,~.(0)H93 H3380 "'hi: ~4 (0)1493 "~3390
(maill inio@S'~~'Ctms.com~~ Wt.b~I~\t",..it.icDu~~ntftoleo.ok'
. .. -,' - - .
-
Ih'1Nrn"rtl!'! t:f1~~nd 'Vn U'I'iIM
119