Ørsted vs. Trump Administration: Revolution Wind JV Initiates Legal Action Against Stop-Work Order

Revolution Wind, a joint venture (JV) between Ørsted and a consortium led by Skyborn Renewables, filed a complaint in the US District Court for the District of Columbia on 4 September, challenging the stop-work order issued by the US Department of the Interior’s (DOI) Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM). The states of Connecticut and Rhode Island also initiated legal action against the stop-work order the same day.

The developer’s complaint will be followed by a request for a preliminary injunction, according to a press release from Revolution Wind LLC, which states that “the project is facing substantial harm from the continuation of the stop-work order” and therefore litigation was “a necessary step”.

In the filing, the Ørsted-led joint venture is seeking to vacate the order and secure preliminary and permanent injunctive relief. The developer said the order immediately stopped offshore construction works that are already about 80 per cent complete.

According to the document, more than USD 5 billion (approximately EUR 4.3 billion) has already been spent or committed, with potential cancellation liabilities exceeding USD 1 billion (approx. EUR 856 million) if the project remains frozen.

Ørsted argues that the stop-work order exceeds BOEM’s authority under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), and says the order must be set aside under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

As reported when the DOI announced the halt of Revolution Wind offshore construction, BOEM said the pause would allow time for the agency “to address concerns that have arisen during the review that the Department is undertaking“, and that the review was particularly focused on addressing “concerns related to the protection of national security interests“ and “prevention of interference with reasonable uses of the exclusive economic zone, the high seas, and the territorial seas”, as described in the OCSLA.

“The Stop Work Order was issued without statutory authority, lacks any evidentiary basis, and is unlawful. Although the Order invokes 43 U.S.C § 1337(p)(4) and 30 C.F.R. § 585.102(a), those provisions do not authorize BOEM to halt ongoing activities—rather, those provisions instruct BOEM on the factors to evaluate in the course of making a decision, which the agency evaluated in great detail in approving the Project and issuing a Record of Decision”, Revolution Wind states in the complaint.

The developer also pointed out that the Revolution Wind project went through “more than nine years of exhaustive federal and state review” and that the stop-work order did not explain the basis for its decision, “particularly in light of previous agency findings supporting approval of the Project that specifically addressed national security and other uses of the Outer Continental Shelf”.

Filed the same day in the District of Rhode Island, the states of Rhode Island and Connecticut, together with Connecticut Energy Commissioner Katie Dykes, submitted their own complaint against the Interior Department and BOEM. Their suit seeks declaratory and injunctive relief and calls for the stop-work order to be vacated.

The two states argue that the order represents “an existential threat to Revolution Wind” and is jeopardising its viability, subsequently threatening the states’ energy planning, statutory clean energy goals, and billions of US dollars of investments.

The state-filed complaint emphasises that the longer the order remains in place, the less likely it is that Revolution Wind will be fully built and come to fruition, providing electricity to Connecticut and Rhode Island.

“Because the Stop Work Order jeopardizes a project that is critical to the States’ economic vitality, energy mix, and climate goals, the States ask this Court to declare the Stop Work Order unlawful and enjoin Agency Defendants from halting Revolution Wind’s development”, the joint complaint from the two states reads.  

Connecticut and Rhode Island also say that BOEM exceeded its authority under the OCSLA and that the order was unlawful under the Administrative Procedure Act.

“An agency may not take any action that exceeds the scope of its statutory authority”, the states said.

In its press release on 4 September, Revolution Wind highlighted that it would continue to engage with the federal government, but said immediate judicial intervention is necessary to protect the nearly completed project.

Offshore construction on Revolution Wind started last year, following the final federal approval from BOEM. Currently, the project has all offshore wind turbine foundations and 45 out of 65 wind turbines installed. Next up to be installed, along with the remainder of the turbines, is the wind farm’s offshore substation.

The 704 MW offshore wind farm has 20-year power purchase agreements (PPAs) to deliver 400 MW of electricity to Rhode Island and 304 MW to Connecticut.

Reach the offshore wind industry in one go!

offshoreWIND.biz is read by thousands of offshore wind professionals every day.

—

Increase your visibility with banners, tell your story with a branded article, and showcase your expertise with a full-page company profile in our offshore wind business directory.

CONTACT

Follow offshoreWIND.biz on: