California”s top environmental official has told the two federal agencies that are contending to regulate wave energy they need to slow down and get their acts together.
Mike Chrisman, Secretary of Resources in Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger”s administration, sent a letter to the heads of the Minerals Management Service, or MMS, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, that emphasizes how important alternative energy is.
That is followed in the letter by a very big “But.”
“Nevertheless, the process for permitting and licensing ocean energy development has raised significant concerns … As the state agencies responsible for overseeing these projects we are particularly concerned by conflicting federal authorizations, the lack of a clear process to involve local governments and stakeholders and the potential that the process may not address all potential project impacts,” Chrisman wrote on May 14.
Chrisman informed FERC and MMS he had consulted with State Lands, Fish and Game, Ocean Protection Council, Coastal Commission, Public Utilities Commission and the California Energy Commission before drafting the letter of concern.
Eight developers proposed preliminary permits to FERC off California in the past year. The only one denied so far was the county of Sonoma.
FERC has refused to allow Mendocino County and the city of Fort Bragg to participate officially in the preliminary process for the PG&E-proposed project off Fort Bragg, which is one of the three California projects granted preliminary permits by FERC in 2008. PG&E has applied to both FERC and MMS for its Fort Bragg and Eureka projects, as both federal agencies claim to regulate wave energy from three miles offshore and out. FERC also claims rights to regulate nearshore wave energy.
Chrisman told the two federal agencies that the state of California is committed to working with them to improve the process. He offers four “suggestions” to the federal agencies to improve the process:
– “Develop an agreement between FERC and MMS to clarify how the permits can be issued in a coordinated and consistent manner.” Chrisman points out the two processes are different and sometimes contradictory.
– “Formally incorporate federal consistency provisions into the Coastal Zone Management Act and other state regulatory requirements into the federal license processes.”
– “Recognize state marine management goals and address those goals during the licensing process.” Chrisman recommends early dialogue with the general public and local and state agencies. Fellow federal agencies have criticized FERC”s process for lacking in communication with them and for a process that misunderstands ocean regulation.
– “Limit permits to pilot-scale projects until baseline information is gathered and cumulative impacts are adequately addressed.”
Chrisman repeats several times the importance of creating a functional process and the state and federal government working together and creating an intelligible process.
“California has a goal of producing 33 percent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2020 … California is interested in ocean energy as a potential new source of electricity that will contribute to the economic development of our coastal communities,” he wrote.
Chrisman sent his letter on May 15 to Randall B. Luthi, director of MMS, and Joseph Kelliher, chairman of FERC.
The newspaper obtained the information too late to get comment from the federal agencies.
