Humboldt Bay harbor staff pushes heavy‑lift terminal draft EIR to late 2026; technical briefing outlines large cranes, barges and tugs

Humboldt Bay Harbor Recreation and Conservation District staff told the board the timeline for the proposed heavy‑lift marine terminal has been pushed back, and a visiting port planner described the sizable equipment and vessel fleet the yard will need.

“CEQA draft environmental impact report won’t come to you until the end of the calendar year of ’26,” staff told the board, citing delayed California Energy Commission grant funds, slower-than-expected Phase 1 site assessment work and cascading special-study scheduling as primary reasons for the change.

The schedule shift was announced before a technical presentation by Thomas Hickey, a port planner with Moffett & Nichol, who described how floating foundations are assembled and moved, and the specialized equipment a heavy‑lift terminal will require. Hickey said foundations for deep-water floating turbines are typically assembled in an upland yard, then launched using semi‑submersible barges or other launch systems and towed to the staging/integration site for final outfitting.

Hickey outlined two general assembly approaches—production-line assembly and spot‑production assembly—and described common foundation types (semi‑submersible and tension‑leg/TLP designs). He said some foundation‑launch methods remain novel and that large semi‑submersible launching barges may need to be custom-built in the United States to meet the Jones Act.

On equipment, Hickey listed self‑propelled modular transporters (SPMTs) for moving heavy components onshore; crawler cranes for unloading and in‑yard assembly; and ring cranes for erecting the newest, largest turbines. “The ring cranes are the only cranes capable, at the moment, of assembling these new 20‑to‑25 megawatt WTGs,” he said, and described ring cranes as electrically powered and plugged into terminal power during lifts. He also described two delivery vessel types: ro‑ro/gear hybrid ships that can roll components on and off, and open‑deck heavy‑lift carriers that often require shoreside cranes.

Board members asked about noise and electrification. Hickey said most modern cranes planned for these terminals are electric and that ring cranes and crawler cranes are being designed to run on battery or shore power; he cautioned that anchor‑handling tug supply vessels (AHTS) and other large towing vessels currently have limited electric availability and that hybrid or diesel‑electric solutions are more common today.

Commissioners also asked whether U.S. shipyards could build the required vessels. Hickey said U.S. yards are capable but that build times depend on design and yard capacity; he estimated roughly one to two‑and‑a‑half years for a turn‑key build once a design and yard are committed.

Staff closed by reminding the board that grant and procurement rules—specifically the Jones Act and Build America Buy America provisions—may limit access to foreign‑built electric vessels and equipment and could affect equipment choices should grants require domestic manufacture.

Next steps: staff said a detailed “green terminal” technical report (covering electrical systems, solar, utilities and traffic) will be presented next month and that community and tribal engagement items are scheduled for October, pending grant funding.