Proposed bill would make offshore wind developers create compensation fund

Feb. 21—A long-sought bill with bipartisan support that would require offshore wind developers to establish a compensation fund will get a hearing Wednesday before the legislature's Energy and Technology Committee.

The fund would provide compensation if construction or operation of a facility damages fisheries or the marine environment, and if the developer creates fewer jobs than promised in an agreement.

The hearing was scheduled for Tuesday but postponed to 11 a.m. Wednesday due to an internet outage at the state Capitol.

Sen. Heather Somers, R-Groton, co-introduced House Bill 5223 with four Democratic state representatives, while three Republicans and two Democrats are co-sponsors. Local co-sponsors include Rep. Greg Howard, R-Stonington, and Rep. Devin Carney, R-Old Lyme.

"This is new territory," Somers said. "It's an industrialization underneath the ocean that we have not seen before, and we do not have the data."

The legislature in 2019 passed a bill that authorized the procurement of energy from offshore wind. It also required the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection to establish a commission on environmental standards "to provide input on best practices for avoiding, minimizing and mitigating any impacts to wildlife, natural resources, ecosystems and traditional or existing water-dependent uses."

Somers said she and other members of that commission "overwhelmingly" agreed there should be a mitigation fund for unforeseen circumstances from wind farms.

In a 2019 report, the Commission on Environmental Standards said the fund shouldn't be used in lieu of avoiding or minimizing impacts, that developers should avoid impacts, minimize those that are unavoidable, and only then consider compensation "for any residual losses."

The Environment Committee in 2020 raised a bill establishing a fund to compensate commercial fishermen negatively impacted by offshore wind facilities, but a public hearing never happened because it was initially scheduled for March 16 — just as the world shut down due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Somers' district has the last commercial fishing fleet in the state, in Stonington, and she said "if the impact is such that they can no longer fish or their career is not viable, it was important for us on the committee to not prioritize one industry over another."

Some other members of the commission submitted written testimony supporting the bill: Rep. David Michel, D-Stamford; Rep. Anne Hughes, D-Easton; and Nathan Frohling, director of external affairs for The Nature Conservancy in Connecticut.

In written testimony supporting the bill, Michel asked that it also incorporate another bill he co-introduced, which would establish a maximum noise level for offshore wind facilities, and require the DEEP to consider environmental degradation and jobs created when grading bids for offshore wind energy. Hughes and others requested this inclusion as well.

Michel said countries such as Scotland, Netherlands, Sweden and Germany have standards for environmental standards and labor creation. He said some might feel standards would scare away developers, but he asserted developers won't turn away from projects worth billions of dollars.

Nature and environmental groups support creation of fund

Most of the 13 pieces of written testimony submitted support the intent of the bill, though in some cases with caveats.

Robert LaFrance, director of policy for Audubon Connecticut, wrote in his testimony, "Birds have been negatively impacted by wind turbines on land and the potential for impacts from offshore wind also exists."

LaFrance believes something akin to an "in lieu fee" program, which allows developers to pay a fee in lieu of taking on mitigation themselves, could be used to address mitigation for impacts to wildlife.

"We need the wind power sort of now, but by the same token, most times when you do a project, you know what the environmental impacts are going to be," LaFrance told The Day, citing wetlands projects as a more known entity.

His recommendations are that the CES meet quarterly, and that it study the issue and come back with recommendations next year.

LaFrance also pointed to a letter Gov. Ned Lamont signed with eight other New England and mid-Atlantic governors that, in part, urges the federal government to provide leadership on "mitigation frameworks for demonstrated negative impacts on marine resources, fisheries, and local cultures" from offshore wind development.

Lyndsey Pyrke-Fairchild, who works for Empire Fisheries in Stonington and is a member of the town's Climate Change Task Force, wrote in her testimony, "H.B. 5223 is crucial to mitigate impacts to our fragile ocean ecosystems, Connecticut's economy, labor force, and sustainable food supply chains. There is no such thing as free or perfect energy production. Any new technology will come with its own impacts."

Frohling, of the Nature Conservancy, said his organization supports the goals of the bill but that depends on how a fund is set up. He said Connecticut isn't ready to implement a fund now, and legislation should instead call for a study that specifies how a fund is set up and calls for the state to coordinate with other efforts in the region.

Other supporters of the bill include representatives of CT Roundtable on Climate and Jobs, North Atlantic States Regional Carpenter Labor-Management Program, and Seatower, which designs foundations for offshore wind.

Representing the Ørsted-Eversource joint venture Revolution Wind, Nicole M. Verdi and Raymond V. Collins said the partnership has and will continue to work with the commercial fishing industry, and they raised several concerns about the bill.

"The bill mentions a mitigation fund, but it does not put forth any details about its structure and administration, criteria, and performance standards," they wrote. "It is difficult to know the impact of this requirement without a defined plan with very specific language."

They said they also believe the issue of less-than-expected employment numbers is separate from environmental matters "and should be governed by any contractual agreements rather than legislation."