Of the Advocate
In response to this newspaper”s Freedom of Information Act request, the federal Minerals Management Service, or MMS, has released Pacific Gas and Electric Company”s nominations for an exclusive wave energy study off Fort Bragg.
The release shows that MMS is considering entering into a five-year, often secret process. MMS has made Fort Bragg and Eureka its two national test sites for the novel idea of wave energy leasing.
PG&E has expanded slightly on the area it has already been granted for study of wave energy by a different federal agency, the nominations show.
The utility is now working under a three-year preliminary permit issued in January by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, to study wave energy in a 68-square-mile area off Fort Bragg and a larger area off Eureka.
PG&E filed separate applications in January with the MMS for the federal area more than three miles offshore, which MMS claims jurisdiction over. Both federal agencies claim wave energy regulatory rights for areas past the three-mile limit of state waters.
Jana Morris, of PG&E”s news department, explained that Minerals Management Service lease blocks don”t match up exactly with the FERC area.
“Our MMS nominations intended to mimic as closely as possible the same area as originally identified in our FERC preliminary permit application for geography outside the three nautical mile limit. MMS requires nominations of entire lease blocks for alternative energy, which is why the MMS nominated areas extend beyond the area contained in the FERC preliminary permit,” she said.
The total area off Fort Bragg that extends beyond the three-mile state-federal boundary is comprised of 53,716 ocean acres, the nomination states. The Minerals Management Service study area, and FERC permit area, is about twice that big off Eureka.
“As the Humboldt WaveConnect preliminary permit granted by FERC extends out to 10 miles it overlaps with more of the alternative energy lease blocks, as opposed to the Mendocino WaveConnect site which only extends to four to six miles offshore,” Morris said.
The MMS nominations are similar to FERC”s preliminary permits in that, once granted, they function similar to a mining claim, holding that land for study by PG&E only.
They are different in that the MMS process is competitive while FERC seeks to give its permits to the first in line.
In the Freedom of Information Act response, the MMS gave a full answer to the newspaper”s questions on that process:
“The MMS does not have a description of how the competitive leasing process works,” said MMS Offshore FOIA Officer Celeste Mullally. “This is an interim policy in the absence of regulations that are under development.”
When the MMS is finished with its “rulemaking” process, there will be such procedures.
But for now, the federal agency is still puzzling over whether to grant requests already on the board like that of PG&E or just make developers wait.
The Mineral Management Service has chosen Fort Bragg and Eureka as its two national test sites for wave energy, with locations on the East Coast being chosen to test wind and tidal energy.
“Whatever way we decide to go, we will be proceeding under an interim policy in the absence of regulations and will need to outline a process at that point. We would do this by announcing relevant decisions and plans in the Federal Register,” Mullally said.
FISH asks for delay
Elizabeth Mitchell of Fort Bragg has filed a request that MMS wait rather than try to accommodate the developer. Her request was made on behalf of FISH (Fishermen Interested in Safe Hydrokinetics).
Rulemaking would detail how federal laws and federal agencies can work together on the new wave energy process, how the public can give input and to establish a groundwork for legal actions.
The FISH committee”s filing contains 11 criticisms of the MMS nominations such as that it does not deal with navigation safety issues, even though it is located in shipping areas. The application claims conflicts with recreational and commercial fishing need to be dealt with first.
“Numerous fisheries take place in the geographical areas of the PG&E leases. We hereby request that the areas of those fisheries be mapped and that wave energy technology testing be excluded from those areas. The FISH Committee will provide the information necessary for mapping,” the FISH application states.
The FISH filing says that the applicant should remove equipment from the ocean immediately, not in the one year described in the lease forms the federal agency uses.
It also says MMS-proposed rental price of the waters is too low.
“Rentals will require annual rental payments of $3 per acre. It has been pointed out that total rental payments under this provision will probably be less than the cost of a one-bedroom apartment in Manhattan. This is far too little for use of our valuable public water resources,” Mitchell wrote.
PG&E”s original FERC application asked to study a 5-megawatt test plant in the first three years followed by a full license application for a 40-megawatt power plant. The MMS application asks for permission to study and generate power in stages, not saying anything about in-water tests or generating capacity over the 5 year period.
The utility is now interpreting the permit issued by FERC as precluding testing in the water. FERC spokeswoman Celeste Miller said the only activity precluded by the FERC preliminary permits is actually plugging into the grid. However FERC emphasizes that local and state laws must be abided by.
The California Lands Commission has stepped into the local process to demand a full California Environmental Quality Act process.
“According to our FERC permit we cannot initiate any construction. We can only do environmental studies, which will help us decide which FERC license to apply for in two to three years … PG&E continues to propose an incremental and comprehensive approach as the most responsible course to site this emerging renewable energy technology,” Morris said.
PG&E was at first reluctant to release the lease nominations themselves to the newspaper, telling Mitchell they were commercially sensitive.
The Mineral Management Service said PG&E”s submission was voluntary and the company could have withheld any information deemed sensitive from public release.
“They agreed to release their information which we sent to you in full. If there had been any redactions (withholdings), you would have been given an exemption number for the redaction(s) and appeal rights,” said Mullally.
The MMS lease process is often confidential, the standard lease form shows. Mitchell hopes to push MMS into a more public leasing process for alternative energy than the more secretive process employed by oil companies engaged in offshore drilling for oil and natural gas.
“Secrecy is bad public policy: The affected public is intensely interested in wave energy projects,” the FISH filing states.
“We believe that the public is entitled to routine disclosure of not only the lease nominations themselves, but also the “studies, surveys, and test reports” that will be developed under the MMS leases. Access to information is simply essential to stakeholder understanding and participation in wave energy development,” the FISH filing states.
