PORTSMOUTH — In a 6-1 vote Monday night, the Town Council recommended that the R.I. Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB) reject SouthCoast Wind Energy’s request for a noise variance during work to install underground transmission lines through sections of Portsmouth.

It remains to be seen whether the vote, which came after more than a dozen residents spoke on the variance request during a public hearing at Portsmouth Middle School, will have any teeth with the EFSB. The three-person state panel is ultimately the judge and jury over whether the entire project is approved, and its authority supersedes the council’s, Council President Keith Hamilton pointed out.

“We can give an advisory opinion, but we can’t (decide on) the variance,” he said, adding the EFSB can overrule any opinion it receives.

Michael Mineau, an attorney who represented SouthCoast Monday night, said the EFSB’s own hearing on a noise ordinance has not been scheduled yet. The deadline for various advisory opinions from municipalities and local and state agencies on the project is Feb. 7, 2025, after which time a public hearing will be scheduled. Kelsey Perry, the external affairs manager at SouthCoast Wind, said the town will be notified of the date of that hearing, during which members of the public are welcome to comment.

SouthCoast Wind proposes to construct an offshore wind energy-generating facility in federal waters approximately 30 miles south of Martha’s Vineyard and 23 miles south of Nantucket within a federal lease area. The plan calls for connecting that facility via export cables through federal and state waters and eventually to an electrical substation at Brayton Point in Somerset in order to connect to the regional electric grid. 

To do that, the developers say they need to utilize horizontal directional drilling (HDD) technology to install approximately two miles of underground transmission cables beneath mostly state and town roadways in Portsmouth. HDD is a trench-less construction method allowing a deep underground installation, the developers say. 

The cables would make landfall in the vicinity of Boyds Lane/Park Avenue, travel beneath Boyds Lane to the intersection with Anthony Road, then beneath Anthony Road to the northeast, and exit Portsmouth at Montaup Country Club, with a backup location near the Roger Williams University parking lot off Boyds Lane. 

“This is a temporary construction project with no permanent above-ground apparatus that will be making noise,” said Mineau.

Some nighttime work

The majority of construction activities will occur during the hours of 7 a.m. and 9 p.m., during which construction activities are exempt from the noise ordinance limits, Mineau told the council. SouthCoast, he said, was seeking a favorable advisory opinion from the council that any necessary construction activities that take place at night also be exempt from the ordinance. 

“There are select cases where we’re looking for longer work hours,” added Kelly Smith, the onshore package manager at SouthCoast Wind. She explained that the job of splicing segments of cable together cannot be stopped once it’s begun, and that generators and de-watering pumps may need to run overnight.

She said the HDD drilling, the primary source of construction noise, would take place over about four months at the beach in the vicinity of Boyds Lane and Park Avenue, and at Montaup, using standard 12-hour work shifts. There would be about “four overnights” at the beach and at the country club, she said.

According to documents provided by SouthCoast, the equipment used for the possible nighttime activities would produce sound levels ranging from 70 to 84 dBA at a distance of 50 feet, and 81 to 95 dB at a distance of 15 feet.

The noise ordinance, however, focuses on the maximum sound level allowed at residential property lines, which is 55 dBA after 9 p.m.

According to Erich Thalheimer, an acoustics expert testifying for SouthCoast, the Boyds Lane site is about 560 from the nearest residential property on Park Avenue, and the Montaup site is about 845 feet from the nearest residential abutter on Attleboro Attleboro. 

“Noise levels on conservative assumptions are expected to be about 61 decibels on Park Avenue and 58 decibels at … Attleboro Avenue,” said Thalheimer. Those levels, according to a report submitted by SouthCoast, approximate the noise levels of conversational speech or a typical business office. 

Public speaks out

Sarah Dunn, of Valhalla Drive, spoke out against any variance to the noise ordinance, saying she was concerned about about the impact nighttime construction noise would have on her child.

“My son is 5 and though he may not always want to, he needs sleep at night in order to grow and focus at school,” she said. “Extending noise into nighttime hours is unacceptable.”

Carol Mello of Massasoit Avenue agreed. “When the wind moves in a certain way, the noise is definitely going to be loud,” Mello said, adding the council should also be concerned about the adverse impact overnight noise has on pets, whose hearing is far more sensitive than that of humans.

Peter Roberts of Ormerod Avenue, a disabled war veteran, said he already hears the traffic on Route 24 and struggles to sleep. “The last thing I need is more noise keeping me awake,” he said. 

Ken Mulder, of Perrault Street, said the noise levels during construction should be monitored on a daily basis. “If you’ve ever been around directional boring, it’s deafening,” said Mulder, adding that SouthCoast’s estimated noise levels don’t seem realistic.

Christine Carceller, of Lepes Road, said the request before the council was too vague, and that a decibel limit should be included in any decision on a noise variance. “I just don’t buy these numbers. It’s got to be more than that,” she said. 

‘No impacts’

One of the few residents to speak in favor of the noise exemption was Emily Skeehan of Cutler Court. Her family has a home in Long Island, N.Y., where she said SouthCoast Wind has already completed cable installation that she witnessed herself. 

“There were no impacts and it was in a residential area,” said Skeehan, adding the occasional nighttime work would be short-term. “The benefits will be longterm.”

Tom Forconi, business manager for Michels Trenchless, Inc., said he has managed similar projects in nearly every state, plus in the Middle East and South America. He spoke in favor of the HDD method, saying it allowed for deep and stable burial of transmission cables while doing little impact to the environment. 

“These installations are typically very deep, so any change of becoming uncovered due to erosion are very slim,” he said. “There will not be any effect to the beach. The only minor disruption will be maybe a day’s time for each location.”

After Council Vice President David Gleason moved to recommend an advisory opinion against the sound variance, the council agreed in a 6-1 vote, with Juan Carlos Payero dissenting. “I believe the work can be done during the normal hours and the variance should not be allowed,” Hamilton said in explaining his vote.

The council also added a caveat: In the event the EFSB approves the variance anyway, it sets a noise limit at 70 dBA at both residential locations previously mentioned.