Robinson Cole LLP
High Contrast Mode

Coastal + Offshore Resources

Coastal + Offshore Resources

From ports to marinas, from manufacturing facilities to private residences, the coastal zone is home to thousands of shoreline and water-dependent uses, all governed by a web of federal, state, and local laws and regulations.  Robinson+Cole’s Coastal and Offshore Resources Practice Group is committed to representing the legal interests of our shoreline clients across a broad range of coastal permitting; environmental, real estate, litigation, construction, transactional, and data privacy matters. With a national practice and offices spanning the East Coast from Massachusetts to Florida, Robinson+Cole is ideally positioned to advise our coastal clients on the host of complex legal issues they may confront, both on land and off-shore.

Our Services

Our extensive Coastal and Offshore Resources experience and capabilities include the following:

Coastal Management, Development, + Permitting

We advise clients with waterfront and water-dependent facilities on all aspects of coastal management, development, and federal, state, and local permitting, including coastal resiliency and sea level rise adaptation, flood plain management, tidal and freshwater wetlands regulations, and zoning and subdivision applications. Our lawyers have represented property owners and developers before regulatory agencies at the federal, state, and local levels, and have litigated land use cases in state and federal trial and appellate courts. We also counsel clients regarding climate change-driven issues impacting coastal development as well as environmental compliance and risk.

Environmental

Our group of environmental lawyers, one of the largest in the Northeast, provides sophisticated, practical and cost-effective advice tailored to port, terminal and other water-dependent clients facing a broad array of environmental, health, and safety (EH+S) challenges and needs. We have litigated issues on behalf of those clients under a full range of environmental laws, including the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, a/k/a Superfund); the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); the Clean Water Act (CWA); the Clean Air Act (CAA); the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA); and others, including their state equivalents. Our toxic tort experience includes mold, lead paint, and asbestos litigation. We have also represented clients in environmental and remediation projects, including contaminated sediment cleanups, and assisted clients with crisis planning and management, including matters related to vessel casualties, oil spills, and incidents unique to marine and waterfront operations. Our compliance and permitting services position us as integral counselors and representatives in state and federal permit application and related proceedings.

Business Litigation

Our litigators have represented shoreline interests in a host of business disputes, encompassing claims of contract breach, business torts, unfair and deceptive trade practices, securities and antitrust violations, and intellectual property claims, as well as defending civil and criminal enforcement matters. Members of the business litigation section often team with our environmental lawyers to respond to claims involving a variety of environmental matters and manage emergency response and fire and explosion investigations. We work with our clients to minimize litigation risks, reduce dispute resolution costs, and preserve important business relationships.

Construction

From acquisition and compliance to renovation and construction as well as operation and maintenance, our construction lawyers are experienced in the unique pressures faced by ports, terminals, and other water-dependent clients when they undertake capital improvements, including funding, timetables, and community outreach. Our breadth of experience also includes managing the legal aspects of coastal construction projects, including projects to plan for and promote coastal resiliency.

Real Estate Leasing

We represent landlords and tenants in complex leasing transactions involving shorefront commercial and residential space nationwide. Our leasing experience encompasses industrial and warehouse facilities in a variety of arrangements, including ground leases, subleases, multi-tiered arrangements, umbrella leases, and equity and cash flow participation leases. We also handle structuring and implementing of commercial leasing programs for building owners and are well-versed in green building leasing issues and provisions.

Data Privacy + Security

Clients benefit from our broad-based knowledge of data privacy and security laws and regulations as well as data breach preparedness, response, notification, remediation, coordination, and litigation, including investigations by federal and state authorities. Our lawyers are experienced in data mapping and development of enterprise-wide privacy and security plans, compliance with various privacy and security requirements, and industry-specific regulations.

Experience


Counsel to the O.W. Bunker USA Inc. Liquidating Trust

Counsel to the O.W. Bunker USA Inc. Liquidating Trust in its post-confirmation litigation, including appeals to the Second Circuit and Fifth Circuit, related to attachment proceedings under Rule B and vessel arrests under Rule C of the Supplemental Rules for Admiralty or Maritime Claims and Asset Forfeiture Actions, litigation regarding the status of maritime liens under the Commercial Instruments and Maritime Liens Act, discovery issued in aid of litigation to courts in the United Kingdom, Denmark, and Greece pursuant to the Hague Convention, and claims allowance and collection actions under the Bankruptcy Code.

Read More

Executory Contract-Related Issues

Representation of a marine fuel broker in connection with certain executory contract-related issues in In re Aegean Marine Petroleum Network Inc.

Greek Shipping Company Representation

Representation of a Greek shipping company and its U.S. based agent in connection with preference litigation brought in two distinct chapter 7 liquidations.



Publications


May 8, 2025

States Sue Trump Administration Over Blocked Wind Developments

Environmental Law+ Blog

On Monday, May 4, 2025, a coalition of 17 states and the District of Columbia filed suit in Massachusetts District Court over the Trump administration’s efforts to block federal permits for all offshore wind development. The administration’s policy was announced in a January 20, 2025 executive order placing federal permitting of wind projects on hold while the Interior Department reviews applications for offshore leases. The lawsuit asks the court to declare the executive order unlawful and to prevent federal agencies from taking any measures to block or delay wind projects, claiming the it is baseless and unjustified. Several offshore wind projects are under development, having advanced through the long list of environmental reviews required by federal law, while others are in the regulatory pipeline. The plaintiffs note that the executive order contradicts the administration’s simultaneous declaration of a “national energy emergency,” and undermines efforts by the affected plaintiffs to comply with their renewable energy requirements. Notwithstanding the executive order, the offshore wind industry has faced economic headwinds in recent years that have resulted in delays, additional costs, and, in some cases, project cancelations. As a result of economic uncertainty and political hostility, the status of offshore wind projects varies widely – Atlantic Shores (1.5GW) off the coast of New Jersey recently had its air pollution permit invalidated by the EPA; Empire Wind (810MW) off the coast of New York is under a stop order issued by the Interior Department; Beacon Wind (2.5GW) off the coast of New York withdrew a key permit application, citing the need to reevaluate the project design; Vineyard Wind 1 (800MW) off the coast of Massachusetts is on track to complete construction in 2025; New England Wind 1 and 2 (2.6GW) off the coast of Massachusetts is fending off lawsuits to reopen its Clean Air Act permits; Southcoast Wind (2.4GW) off the coast of Massachusetts has announced a construction delay; and Revolution Wind (704MW) off the coast of Rhode Island is progressing. The jurisdictions involved in the lawsuit are Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Washington. Visit our Environmental Law+ blog. 

June 25, 2024

How Justices’ Chevron Ruling May Influence Wind Projects

Law360

The article covers recent challenges to offshore wind projects, and how an anticipated ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court may upend long-standing principles of deference to federal agency decision making. “The court’s decision could influence the agencies’ rulemaking process, how agencies interpret their statutory authority, and the deference that courts apply to those interpretations,” they write. “While the statutes and regulations governing the approval process for offshore wind projects will remain constant, at least for the time being, the federal courts’ framework for reviewing agencies’ decision making based on those rules could be subject to upheaval.” Read the article.

Legal Update: First Circuit Rejects Challenges to Federal Permits for Vineyard Wind 1 teaser
May 21, 2024

Legal Update: First Circuit Rejects Challenges to Federal Permits for Vineyard Wind 1

May 8, 2025

States Sue Trump Administration Over Blocked Wind Developments

Environmental Law+ Blog

On Monday, May 4, 2025, a coalition of 17 states and the District of Columbia filed suit in Massachusetts District Court over the Trump administration’s efforts to block federal permits for all offshore wind development. The administration’s policy was announced in a January 20, 2025 executive order placing federal permitting of wind projects on hold while the Interior Department reviews applications for offshore leases. The lawsuit asks the court to declare the executive order unlawful and to prevent federal agencies from taking any measures to block or delay wind projects, claiming the it is baseless and unjustified. Several offshore wind projects are under development, having advanced through the long list of environmental reviews required by federal law, while others are in the regulatory pipeline. The plaintiffs note that the executive order contradicts the administration’s simultaneous declaration of a “national energy emergency,” and undermines efforts by the affected plaintiffs to comply with their renewable energy requirements. Notwithstanding the executive order, the offshore wind industry has faced economic headwinds in recent years that have resulted in delays, additional costs, and, in some cases, project cancelations. As a result of economic uncertainty and political hostility, the status of offshore wind projects varies widely – Atlantic Shores (1.5GW) off the coast of New Jersey recently had its air pollution permit invalidated by the EPA; Empire Wind (810MW) off the coast of New York is under a stop order issued by the Interior Department; Beacon Wind (2.5GW) off the coast of New York withdrew a key permit application, citing the need to reevaluate the project design; Vineyard Wind 1 (800MW) off the coast of Massachusetts is on track to complete construction in 2025; New England Wind 1 and 2 (2.6GW) off the coast of Massachusetts is fending off lawsuits to reopen its Clean Air Act permits; Southcoast Wind (2.4GW) off the coast of Massachusetts has announced a construction delay; and Revolution Wind (704MW) off the coast of Rhode Island is progressing. The jurisdictions involved in the lawsuit are Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Washington. Visit our Environmental Law+ blog. 

June 25, 2024

How Justices’ Chevron Ruling May Influence Wind Projects

Law360

The article covers recent challenges to offshore wind projects, and how an anticipated ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court may upend long-standing principles of deference to federal agency decision making. “The court’s decision could influence the agencies’ rulemaking process, how agencies interpret their statutory authority, and the deference that courts apply to those interpretations,” they write. “While the statutes and regulations governing the approval process for offshore wind projects will remain constant, at least for the time being, the federal courts’ framework for reviewing agencies’ decision making based on those rules could be subject to upheaval.” Read the article.

Legal Update: First Circuit Rejects Challenges to Federal Permits for Vineyard Wind 1 teaser
May 21, 2024

Legal Update: First Circuit Rejects Challenges to Federal Permits for Vineyard Wind 1

Summer 2016, Aug. 31, 2016

U.S. Bankruptcy Court Relies on International Comity to Invalidate Rule B Attachments

MMWR Maritime and Transportation Alert

 

Summer 2016, Aug. 31, 2016

U.S. Bankruptcy Court Finds Performance Under Maritime Service Contract Excused Where Carrier Discontinues Voyages

MMWR Maritime and Transportation Alert

 



Summer 2016, Aug. 31, 2016

U.S. Bankruptcy Court Relies on International Comity to Invalidate Rule B Attachments

MMWR Maritime and Transportation Alert

 

Summer 2016, Aug. 31, 2016

U.S. Bankruptcy Court Finds Performance Under Maritime Service Contract Excused Where Carrier Discontinues Voyages

MMWR Maritime and Transportation Alert

 

News


February 11, 2025

Peter Knight Quoted in Hartford Business Journal Article on Jones Act’s Impact on New England’s Energy Costs

Coastal + Offshore Resources co-chair Peter Knight was recently quoted in the Hartford Business Journal article titled “CT officials seek exemption from archaic federal law to help lower energy prices, support manufacturing growth” published on February 10, 2025. As the New England region faces some of the highest energy rates in the country, some state officials have taken aim at the Jones Act, which was originally enacted in 1920 to protect the U.S. shipping industry, as a substantial contributor to the state’s energy woes. “Whether you’re talking about bananas or coal, or oil and gas, if you’re transporting cargo from one U.S. port to another U.S. port, like from New Haven to New York, that ship has to be built in the U.S.,” said Peter on the archaic issues posed by the Jones Act. “It has to be a U.S. crew. It has to be owned by a U.S. entity, and it has to be registered under the U.S. flag.” Peter elaborated more on the Jones Act, noting that the cost to ship LNG domestically far exceeds the cost to import from overseas and citing the fact that there currently are no LNG tankers that meet the Act’s requirements. As a result, importing domestic LNG on oceangoing vessels has not been economically feasible and has further exacerbated energy pricing in the region. To read the article, click here.

Hartford Business Journal
June 26, 2024

Peter Knight, John Casey, and Eden Yerby Co-Author Law360 Article on How SCOTUS Rulings May Impact Wind Projects

Law360
December 20, 2023

Peter Knight, Jess Bardi, and Eden Yerby Author Article on “Tidal Changes in U.S. Offshore Wind Development” in The Maritime Executive

The Maritime Executive
February 11, 2025

Peter Knight Quoted in Hartford Business Journal Article on Jones Act’s Impact on New England’s Energy Costs

Coastal + Offshore Resources co-chair Peter Knight was recently quoted in the Hartford Business Journal article titled “CT officials seek exemption from archaic federal law to help lower energy prices, support manufacturing growth” published on February 10, 2025. As the New England region faces some of the highest energy rates in the country, some state officials have taken aim at the Jones Act, which was originally enacted in 1920 to protect the U.S. shipping industry, as a substantial contributor to the state’s energy woes. “Whether you’re talking about bananas or coal, or oil and gas, if you’re transporting cargo from one U.S. port to another U.S. port, like from New Haven to New York, that ship has to be built in the U.S.,” said Peter on the archaic issues posed by the Jones Act. “It has to be a U.S. crew. It has to be owned by a U.S. entity, and it has to be registered under the U.S. flag.” Peter elaborated more on the Jones Act, noting that the cost to ship LNG domestically far exceeds the cost to import from overseas and citing the fact that there currently are no LNG tankers that meet the Act’s requirements. As a result, importing domestic LNG on oceangoing vessels has not been economically feasible and has further exacerbated energy pricing in the region. To read the article, click here.

Hartford Business Journal
June 26, 2024

Peter Knight, John Casey, and Eden Yerby Co-Author Law360 Article on How SCOTUS Rulings May Impact Wind Projects

Law360
December 20, 2023

Peter Knight, Jess Bardi, and Eden Yerby Author Article on “Tidal Changes in U.S. Offshore Wind Development” in The Maritime Executive

The Maritime Executive
August 4, 2023

Jess Bardi Presented with 2023 EBC Ascending Leader Award

July 14, 2023

John Casey Selected to EBC Ocean and Coastal Resources Committee Leadership Team

April 4, 2023

John Casey Receives Person of the Year Award at CT Marine Trades Association 2023 Industry Day Conference & Annual Meeting

July 1, 2020

Peter Knight Quoted in ABA Journal Article on COVID-19 Small Business Virtual Legal Clinic

ABA Journal

August 4, 2023

Jess Bardi Presented with 2023 EBC Ascending Leader Award

July 14, 2023

John Casey Selected to EBC Ocean and Coastal Resources Committee Leadership Team

April 4, 2023

John Casey Receives Person of the Year Award at CT Marine Trades Association 2023 Industry Day Conference & Annual Meeting

July 1, 2020

Peter Knight Quoted in ABA Journal Article on COVID-19 Small Business Virtual Legal Clinic

ABA Journal

Events


Past

EBC 5th Annual Ocean and Coastal Resources Regional Agency Update

Mar 5 2025
Virtual via Zoom
Past

EBC 5th Annual Connecticut Offshore Wind Conference

Sep 20 2024
Eversource Energy
Past

EBC 5th Annual Ocean and Coastal Resources Regional Agency Update

Mar 5 2025
Virtual via Zoom
Past

EBC 5th Annual Connecticut Offshore Wind Conference

Sep 20 2024
Eversource Energy
Past

Legal Basics 101: An Introduction to Chapter 91 – An EBC “Lunch & Learn” Webinar

Sep 18 2024
Environmental Business Council of New England (EBC)
Past

EBC 4th Annual Ocean and Coastal Resources Regional Agency Update

Feb 8 2024
Environmental Business Council of New England (EBC)
Past

3rd Annual Connecticut Offshore Wind Conference

Sep 23 2022
Environmental Business Council of New England (EBC) Connecticut
Past

Experiences and Best Practices: Inspections, Enforcement & Permitting

Oct 22 2020
Past

Legal Basics 101: An Introduction to Chapter 91 – An EBC “Lunch & Learn” Webinar

Sep 18 2024
Environmental Business Council of New England (EBC)
Past

EBC 4th Annual Ocean and Coastal Resources Regional Agency Update

Feb 8 2024
Environmental Business Council of New England (EBC)
Past

3rd Annual Connecticut Offshore Wind Conference

Sep 23 2022
Environmental Business Council of New England (EBC) Connecticut
Past

Experiences and Best Practices: Inspections, Enforcement & Permitting

Oct 22 2020