REEDSPORT WAVE ENERGY PROJECT

November 29, 2006

Port of Umpqua Building

Attending Members:

Keith Tymchuk, Co-Convener

Dave Van’t Hof, Governor’s office

Robin Hartmann, OPAC

Scott McMullen, OPAC and OFCC

Jeff Griffin, Governor’s ERT

Rick Hohnbaum, City of Reedsport

Jeff Kroft, Oregon DSL

JR Herbst, Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians

Cathy Tortorici, NOAA Fisheries

Callum Stevenson, Oregon State Parks

Laurel Hillman, Oregon State Parks

Peter Stauffer, Surfrider Foundation

Greg, McMurray, Oregon DLCD

Sheri Aasen, Lower Umpqua Economic Development Forum

Justin Klure, Oregon DOE

Ron Kreskey, Congressman Peter DeFazio

Steve Kopf, Ocean Power Technologies

Jim Hastreiter, FERC

Cristen Don, ODFW

Juine Chada, Senator Ron Wyden

Terri Moffett, Senator Gordon Smith

John Dixon, U.S. Coast Guard

David Chapman, U.S. Coast Guard

Ken Homolka, ODFW




Attending Public:

Tom Tymchuk, Central Lincoln PUD

Sallie Schullinger-Krause, Oregon Environmental Council



Members not present:

Marilyn Kittleman, Douglas County

Teena Monical, U.S. Corps of Engineers

Kathy Roberts, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Gail Achterman, Oregon State University

Hugh Link and Al Pazar, Oregon Dungeness Crab Commission

Scott Hartzell, Commercial Crabbing



Welcome, Purpose, Introductions

Convener Keith Tymchuk opened the meeting and expressed his confidence in this effort and how pleased he was with the progress to date. Keith specifically asked that the group to think about how to achieve consensus on any issues around single buoy installation by the next meeting. Senator Joanne Verger was unable to attend due to a schedule conflict.



Dave Van’t Hof reiterated the strong support of the Governor’s office for the development of the wave energy industry in Oregon. He further emphasized the interest for this Oregon Solutions process to serve as a model for other projects on the coastline.





Project Summary

Steve Kopf from Ocean Power Technology gave a brief overview of the proposed wave energy park. The company currently has test buoys operational off the coasts of Hawaii and New Jersey.



The company has the following desired project development schedule:

¨ Summer of 2007: 150 kW single buoy anchored in place for testing and evaluation.

¨ Summer of 2008: Additional twelve buoys (total of 13 buoys and 2 MW) in place as an array under FERC license and under study.

¨ Future development: Total of 200 buoys and 50 MW occupying a radius of up to ½ mile by 3 mile



Declaration of Cooperation and Process Map

Therese Hampton reviewed the process map that was developed after the first meeting. The map outlines the project schedule, the regulatory process, and the role of the Oregon Solutions effort. The Oregon Solutions process will culminate with a Declaration of Cooperation targeted for May 2007. The Declaration of Cooperation is to be signed by all parties to indicate their specific form of support to the project. The Declaration of Cooperation will include:

A coordinated regulatory approach to support the project.
Specific approach to achieve single buoy installation by summer 2007.
Project scoping and study recommendation for FERC process for initial array placement.
Define the role of the group in the post-application phase.


Therese asked each of the organizations present to begin to think about their role in the Declaration of Cooperation. In addition, Therese discussed the nature of the regulatory process and the need for parallel path efforts to achieve a 404 permit for the single buoy installation while also developing the scoping and study work to support the FERC license of the array.



Key Updates

County Permit—Steve Kopf provided an update on preliminary permit applications. FERC has not responded to OPT’s preliminary permit application and has indicated they will not respond until after the December 6 workshop. Douglas County has developed and submitted an amendment to their preliminary permit application to exclude the specific area under request by Ocean Power Technology.

Crabbing/Fishing Interests—Steve Kopf and Therese Hampton met with local crabbing and fishing interests on Tuesday, November 28th. There were 8 people present at the meeting. They expressed concern regarding lost productivity, lost gear, and safety. It was agreed that there would be additional meetings to further understand issues and discuss potential remedies.

Statewide Forum on Wave Power Development—Dave Van’t Hof shared that the governor’s office understands the need and is trying to find a forum to address statewide issues. The OPAC Wave Group is being considered as an option. In addition, a non-profit recommended by the Oregon Inc. process is also being considered. In the meantime, issues can be directed to the Governor’s office.

Regulatory Issues—Meetings were held with each of the regulatory agencies to understand their regulatory role and authorities for the project. It was determined that establishing workgroups on the COE 404 permit process and on the FERC process would be most productive. Meetings of each of those groups are scheduled for Thursday, November 30.



Other Issues

A list of issues developed at the last meeting combined with issues developed by Oregon Department of Energy’s POWER group was shared with the group. The group was asked to identify any additional items that had not yet been identified.

Increased communication to the local community—there are lots of questions about the project, when it might begin, what kind of jobs might be created, if there is impact from or to other development in the area
Security Threat—Does this wave park pose any kind of terrorism/security threat that needs to be considered?
Project Safety, Emergency Response, and Recovery—Will the project have limitations on access? How will that be established? In the event of an incident, who will respond?


Next Steps

Crabbing/Fishing Interests—continue meeting with crabbing and fishing interests to further explore issues and remedies.
COE 404 Permit Team—group of regulatory agencies identified in this project meet to develop a project plan, coordinate to ensure all relevant information is provided, and assure timely achievement of 404 permit.
FERC Process Team—group of all necessary regulatory agencies to define approach to achieving scoping and study plan agreement.
Public Information Group—newly formed group to address public information needs.


Key Outcomes by Next Meeting

The following key outcomes are targeted for completion prior to the next meeting. It is estimated the next meeting will be in early February.

Workplan for securing COE 404 permit for single buoy installation
Support from crabbing/fishing interests for single and array installation.
Public information plan to share project plan and information.
Approach for how to address existing scientific information to support the FERC process
 

Dear Mr. Stauffer,
Thank you for taking the lead on representing environmental and recreational interests on this renewable energy project. By way of introduction, I am an Associated Editor with Lewis and Clark's Environmental Law review, a third year law student, and for approximately ten years an avid Oregon surfer. Further, I hold a Masters Degree in Mechanical Engineering, where much of my formal training centered on power systems engineering from the perspective of heat transfer and fluid mechanics.

Now, to the point - I write to express a concern heretofore overlooked in all analyses, and dismissed out of hand on the few occasions I've brought it up informally among environmental colleagues.

What effect will electrical generators that convert wave energy to electrical energy have on local surf conditions and marine biology - with particular selfishness, what will happen to the waves we ride?

At first blush my concern may seem overblown and without merit, but the first law of thermodynamics - the conservation of energy - tells us that energy cannot be created or destroyed, but only converted. Further, because no conversion process is perfect, energy is lost to the environment during conversion processes. Thus, more than a watt of wave power will be removed for every watt of electrical power generated. The difference will likely be dissipated as heat and rejected either to the water or air.

While a single buoy will not make much impact (perhaps even an immeasurable impact) to local water temperature or breaking wave size, I cannot imagine the same can be said for an array of buoys capable of generating dozens or hundreds of kilowatts.

Consequently, I respectfully urge you and the rest of the committee to consider effects of wave power generation on breaking wave size and local water temperature. Increased local water temperature will surely have an impact on marine eco-systems, particularly cold water ecosystems such as those that support crabs and other sealife important to local economies. Further, removing energy from waves will result in smaller breaking waves. Perhaps smaller waves will negatively affect local tourism. Those who travel to the coast to watch storms may be less likely to do so when spectacular waves crashing against the rocks no longer appear. Those who travel to the coast to surf will also be less likely to do so if the wave power generators diminish wave size.

If you would like to discuss these concerns, please feel free to drop me an email at Lloyd@LloydPollard.com and we can set up a telephone call.

All the best to you, and thank you again for representing environmental and recreational interests on this committee.

Lloyd Pollard