Federal lawyers have asked a judge to return Revolution Wind’s construction and operations approval to the Interior Department for another review, CT Mirror and The Hill reported October 13. Their accounts describe an October 9 filing, not a new court decision canceling the offshore wind project.
The permit history is documented by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. The federal record of decision was signed August 21, 2023, and BOEM approved the construction and operations plan on November 17 that year. The approved design allows up to 65 turbines and two offshore substations, with a planned capacity of 704 megawatts, southeast of Point Judith, Rhode Island.
CT Mirror’s John Moritz reports that the motion concerns the agency’s compliance with the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act in litigation brought by Green Oceans in 2024. The outlet also reports that the judge had not ruled on the request when its October 13 article was updated. Eastern CT News has not independently obtained the October 9 motion or a subsequent court ruling.
Revolution Wind’s developer describes New London’s State Pier as a location for marshaling project components, establishing the direct Eastern Connecticut connection. The Rhode Island governor’s September 18 announcement separately confirms that all 65 turbines had been installed. Installation is a construction milestone; it does not establish that the project has reached full commercial operation.
In an October 13 report updated that evening, The Hill’s Rachel Frazin quoted Interior describing the filing as compliance with a court briefing schedule rather than a policy change. That is the department’s stated position, not a ruling by the judge. The Hill also reported that the request arrived during bipartisan negotiations over legislation to accelerate infrastructure permitting.
The developer’s construction page says power began reaching the grid in March 2026 and explains that the export cable comes ashore in North Kingstown, Rhode Island. It describes Connecticut power-purchase agreements with Eversource and United Illuminating approved by the state’s utility regulator. Those background details do not establish today’s output or any particular saving on a customer’s bill.
For Connecticut readers, the immediate issue is the status of a power project intended to supply the region, not a verified interruption to household electricity. Neither the official background record reviewed here nor the attributed reports establishes a new local outage, a changed customer rate, or a fresh stop-work order. The next material development would be the court’s response or a dated agency or developer notice explaining any operational effect.