Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
563877929
label
Outer Continental Shelf
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
563877929
contentType
document
title
Outer Continental Shelf
citationUrl
identifierLocal
04014-017a
collections
Records of the White House Office of the Chief of Staff to the President (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Ed Rogers' Subject Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
563877929
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
47c823e2750dfd91
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
2025-0647-S
2025-0647-S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin: Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Series:
Rogers, Ed, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
OA/ID Number:
04014
Folder ID Number:
04014-017a
Folder Title:
Outer Continental Shelf
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
15
23
1
ROBERT J. LAGOMARSINO
COMMITTEE ON
19TH DISTRICT, CALIFORNIA
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
SUBCOMMITTEES
2332 RAYBURN BUILDING
WESTERN HEMISPHERE AFFAIRS
WASHINGTON, DC 20515
202-225-3601
Congress of the United States
VICE CHAIRMAN
ASIAN AND PACIFIC AFFAIRS
CONGRESSIONAL OBSERVER
house of Representatives
COMMITTEE ON
GENEVA ARMS CONTROL TALKS
ER
INTERIOR AND INSULAR
POW/MIA TASK FORCE
Mashington, DC 20515
AFFAIRS
CHAIRMAN
SUBCOMMITTEES
August 1, 1990
INSULAR AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
fy
VICE CHAIRMAN
NATIONAL PARKS AND PUBLIC LANDS
VICE CHAIRMAN-PARKS
Governor John H. Sununu
Chief of Staff
Executive Office of the President
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Governor Sununu:
Following up on John our /conversation this morning, I am writing
to ask for your assistance in working out a reasonable solution
to the problems created by the Administration's recent decision
on leasing portions of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).
As we discussed, I am not opposed to off-shore drilling, as
long as it is done in an environmentally safe and sound manner.
However, the Administration's OCS leasing proposal forces one
area of the country to bear the entire national burden for
additional off-shore leasing activity. Much of that area lies
off the coast of my Congressional District.
I am especially concerned about the proposed leases in the
environmentally sensitive areas in the Santa Barbara Channel.
Some of the proposed tracts come right up against the Federal
Ecological Preserve and Buffer Zone as well as the National
Marine Sanctuary surrounding the Channel Islands. Additionally,
several tracts block either the northbound or southbound shipping
lanes that cut through the channel. It is these areas that I was
trying to protect when I testified before the President's OCS
Task Force last year. In fact, I understand that the tracts
within the Santa Barbara Channel were not included in the OCS
Task Force recommendations to the President, but were added
later.
Of the 87 tracts to be considered for leasing after January
1, 1996 under the President's proposal, I would like to see the
following tracts, all in the Santa Barbara Channel, included in
the ten-year moratorium that the President has announced for the
rest of the California coast. Taken from OCS Leasing Maps 6A and
6B, the tract numbers are:
SUITE 101
314 EAST CARRILLO
104 E. BOONE ST. #E
5740 RALSTON
SANTA BARBARA, 93101
SANTA MARIA, 93454
VENTURA, 93003
(805) 963-1708
(805) 922-2131
(805) 642-2200/656-4344
THIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE OF RECYCLED FIBERS
Governor John H. Sununu
August 1, 1990
Page 2
From OCS Leasing Map 6A: 5588, 5586, 5382, 5281, 5172, 5173,
5174, 5073, 5074, 5079, 5080, 5081, 5082, 5083, 4973, 4975, 4976,
4977, 4978, 4979, 4980, 4981, 4982, 4983, 4984, 4873, 4874, 4875,
4876, 4877, 4772, 4773, 4774, 4777. (35 blocks)
From OCS Leasing Map 6B: 5162, 5163, 5171, 5062, 5070, 5071,
4961. (7 blocks)
After including these 42 tracts in the ten-year moratorium
enjoyed by the rest of the California coast, there would still be
45 additional tracts available for leasing after January 1, 1996.
Realistically, the local governments in the on-shore areas near
the tracts listed above will not issue the permits needed for a
company to commence drilling activity before the year 2000.
If this proposal is not feasible to the Administration,
then, at the very least, the proposed tracts contiguous to the
environmentally sensitive Channel Islands National Marine
Sanctuary and the Buffer Zone, as well as those blocking the
shipping lanes should be included in the ten-year moratorium.
Taken from OCS Leasing Maps 6A and 6B, the tracts included in the
moratorium under this compromise are:
From OCS Leasing Map 6A: 5588, 5382, 5281, 5079, 4976, 4975,
4973, 5074, 5073, 4973, 4873, 4872, 4984, 4983, 4982, 4981, 4980,
4979, 4978, 4877, 4777, 4774, 4773, 4772. (24 blocks)
From OCS Leasing Map 6B: 5070. (1 block)
After including these 25 tracts in the ten-year moratorium, 62
tracts remain available for leasing in five years. The inclusion
of these tracts also addresses the President's stated concerns
regarding environmentally sensitive areas and the danger of
off-shore oilspills
especially from tanker traffic.
Further addressing the President's concerns about oilspills
from tankers, I have been trying to get a vessel traffic system
installed in the channel in an effort to reduce the safety
hazards created by the existing obstacles to free navigation. I
would certainly like to see the consideration of this system
progress. Also, I would like to see the President reaffirm his
commitment to the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary and
the Federal Ecological Preserve and Buffer Zone through permanent
protection for these areas from any oil and gas development.
Governor John H. Sununu
August 1, 1990
Page 3
As I mentioned before, I believe that oil and gas
development can proceed on the Outer Continental Shelf in an
environmentally sound manner. I also agree with the President's
decision that air quality controls for oil and gas development
off-shore California should be the same as those applied
on-shore. However, it is unfair to load the entire national
burden for off-shore development on a small, environmentally
sensitive area such as the Santa Barbara Channel, and considering
the chances of any development actually proceeding there, the
harm done by the decision appears to be needless.
Thank you for your consideration of these requests. I look
forward to hearing from you shortly.
With best wishes,
Rob
LAGOMARSINO
Member of Congress
RJL:tj
FINAL EDITION
The Miami Herald
WEDNESDAY, MAY 30, 1990
CONTENTS COPYRIGHT © 1990 THE MIAMI HERALD
25 CENTS
R
Bush likely to extend
Keys oil ban
By
PAUL ANDERSON
1Nto (stimit)
Another key issue - the cost of
Herald Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON - President
12-year moratorium is less than state had sought
canceling 73 leases for exploratory
wells sold in the early 1980s for
Bush is ready to extend through
nearly $110 million - will be left to
2002 a moratorium on oil drilling in
negotiations between the U.S.
the Gulf of Mexico off the Florida
Department of Interior and state
Keys, with an announcement possi-
"It sounds like it's a step forward,
recommendations of a National
ment's next two cycles of offshore
into the Gulf it will extend.
officials, sources at the Interior
ble as soon as today, administration
but it's not resolving the issue," said
Academy of Sciences study and an
leasing, 1992-1997 and 1997-2002.
Environmentalists fear that an oil
Department said.
officials said Tuesday.
Ann Whitfield of the Florida Public
interagency federal task force,
The moratorium will cover an
spill in the Florida Keys would per-
Those leases, each covering à
The moratorium falls short of the
Interest Research Group, a leader
which concluded that the long-term
area south of 26 degrees north lati-
manently damage the last living
tract three miles by three miles, are
permanent drilling ban sought by
in the coalition fighting for a ban.
ecological impact of offshore drilling
tude, which cuts across the state at
coral reef in the continental United
held by nine different oil companies.
environmentalists and others,
But the administration officials,
needs further research.
Naples, to at least the Dry Tortu-
States and the fragile mangrove
They'v been suspended by con-
including Gov. Bob Martinez and
who didn't want to be identified by
The extended moratorium will
gas, one source said. It could not be
fringe of the Everglades along the
Florida's congressional delegation.
name, said the plan is in line with the
reach through the federal govern-
immediately determined how far out
Southwest Florida coast.
PLEASE SEE OIL. 12A
Bush will extend
SOUTH FLORIDA DRILLING DELAYED
oil moratorium,
U.S. officials say
eveleb blool
Tampa
with what they are expecting, based
Presidential Task
OIL, FROM 1A
on Bush's previous comments.
Force Study Area.
will be protected
sidmuly
"We've got nothing official, but
until at least 2002
gressional drilling bans.
those are the signals we've been
Additional details of the presi-
getting," said Brian Ballard, the
dent's forthcoming announcement
Republican governor's top aide.
Int
Naples
were sketchy late Tuesday.
Ballard said the governor won't
26'N Latitude
Miami
While the policy for South Florida
mind having to negotiate over the
ib "locked down," a senior White
current leases, which now have an
House official said, the president is
estimated cost of more than $140
LEGEND
still weighing a proposal to allow
million. "We want that as a separate
Sites already
drilling in portions of two sensitive
000.000
deal, with every avenue open," he
leased
dreas off the coast of California.
Little
said.
If a decision isn't announced
Late last year, Martinez offered
Dry Tortuga
West
today, it will be delayed by the sum-
to put up $10 million from a state
mit with Soviet leader Mikhail Gor-
oil-spill trust fund toward buying
BERT GARCIA/Miami Herald Staff
Bachev, the official said.
back the leases, but Interior Secre-
Aides to Martinez, Sens. Bob Gra-
tary Manuel Lujan said the state
ham and Connie Mack and other
would have to bear a greater share
canceled leases claim credits
will be "the crucial issue' in Bush's
Florida officials said late Tuesday
- if not all - of the cost.
against royalties and other fees due
decision.
they had not been informed of a final
Since then, members of Con-
the government for drilling else-
"If he doesn't get those oil compa-
decision affecting South Florida. But
gress, led by Rep. Larry Smith,
where.
nies out of there
it's just fluff,"
they said the policy outlined by the
D-Hollywood, have proposed a plan
Environmentalist Whitfield said
she said. "He can't then claim this
administration sources was in line
to let the oil companies holding the
cancellation of the existing leases
as an environmental decision."
05/08/90
14:18
202 343 3231
DOI PUB AFFAIRS
005
Platt's OILGRAM NEWS
Wednesday, May 2, 1990
FLA. GOVERNOR BIDS. LUJAN
CANCEL OCS LEASE SALE 137
Washington 5/1--Florida Gov. Martinez has urged the
Interior Dept. to cancel a proposed offshore lease sale
along the state's Gulf Coast while issues such as environ-
mental risk, oil spill containment and cleanup and a revised
5-year OCS plan are addressed.
The proposed sale, No. 137, is scheduled for November
1991, off the northwest coast of Florida.
"We are on the threshold of d new era in understanding
the need to balance our nation's energy needs with those
of our environment, but until we fully understand the rami-
fications of offshore exploration, we must come down on
the side of environmental caution," Martinez wrote Interior
Secretary Luian.
Martinez cited statements made by Lujan and discus-
sions at the staff level that suggest the new 5-year OCS
program "will include a thorough re-evaluation and refocus-
ing of oil and gas leasing, which could bring about major
changes to the leasing approach off Florida. Because of
the potential benefits these changes may hold for Florida,
canceled" it is essential to the state that the proposed sale be
14
SEALTH THE STATE
STATE OF FLORIDA
OF
GREAT
FLORIDA
Office of the Covernor
FL Elections-
THE CAPITOL
Gov's. Race
& COD TRUST
TALLAHASSEE. FLORIDA 32399-0001
BOB MARTINEZ
GOVERNOR
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Jon Peck, Press
April 30, 1990
Secretary 488-5394
GOVERNOR URGES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO CANCEL SALE
OF OIL AND GAS LEASES OFF PANHANDLE AND GULF COAST
Governor Bob Martinez today urged the federal government
to cancel the proposed sale of offshore oil and gas leases
along Florida's Gulf coast, saying environmental concerns
should take priority and final decisions should wait for
development of a new national energy program.
In a letter to U.S. Interior Secretary Manuel Lujan Jr.,
the Governor said the federal government should cancel plans
to offer additional leases while such issues as environmental
risk, oil spill containment and cleanup, and a revised
five-year program are addressed.
"We are on the threshold of a new era in understanding the
need to balance our nation's energy needs with those of our
environment, but until we fully understand the ramifications
of offshore exploration we must come down on the side of
environmental caution," Governor Martinez wrote. "To allow
this lease sale to go forward without the benefit of that new
understanding could be to the detriment of the program and the
environment, as well as to the people of Florida."
(MORE)
2
The Interior Department is considering Proposed Sale 137,
which would make 47.5 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico
subject to oil and gas exploration. The Florida portion of
the area runs approximately from Naples north to Pensacola.
The department has scheduled public hearings on the proposed
lease sale in three Florida cities this week.
Governor Martinez has been working constantly with the
federal government to ban future drilling activity south of
Naples. The Governor has spoken repeatedly with Secretary
Lujan and President Bush about the areas off Southwest
Florida, including the Florida Keys, and is awaiting a
decision from the President.
In his letter to Lujan, the Governor noted that there are
already more than 200 active leases off the Florida Panhandle
that are not being used. He said additional leases are not
necessary until the oil and gas industry have evaluated the
status of the existing leases.
The Governor noted that Interior is developing a new
five-year program that will provide a comprehensive approach
to oil and gas leasing, and the new program could benefit
Florida. As a result, he said, further lease sales should be
stopped until the new program is completed.
"There is no compelling reason to hold Proposed Sale 137,
but there are significant reasons -- for both the State of
Florida and the entire nation -- to stop any further action,"
Governor Martinez wrote. "It is imperative that we refrain
from further leasing activity while we work to ensure that our
irreplaceable environmental resources are safeguarded."
A copy of the Governor's letter to Lujan is attached.
# # #
OF
THE
STATE
&
GREAT
HORIDA
4 GOD TRUET
STATE OF FLORIDA
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
BOB MARTINEZ
April 30, 1990
The Honorable Manuel Lujan, Jr.
Secretary of the Interior
18th and C Streets, Northwest
Washington, b.c. 20240
Dear Mr Secretary:
I am writing to provide my recommendations on the alternatives
proposed for Eastern Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf
(OCS) oil and gas lease sale 137, scheduled for November 1991,
as they appear in the draft Environmental Impact Statement for
the sale.
There is no compelling reason to hold Proposed Sale 137, but
there are significant reasons -- for both the State of Florida
and the entire nation -- to stop any further action.
Therefore, I strongly urge you to adopt Alternative F, which
cancels the proposed sale.
Recent statements made by you and discussions at the staff
level suggest that the new 5-Year OCS program for the nation
will include a thorough re-evaluation and refocusing of oil
and gas leasing, which could bring about major changes to the
leasing approach off Florida. Because of the potential
benefits these changes may hold for Florida, it is essential
to the State that the proposed sale be canceled.
It is evident that more time is needed to develop a national
energy program, as well as the research and development into
oil spill containment and cleanup activities to support that
program. We are on the threshold of a new era in
understanding the need to balance our nation's energy needs
with those of our environment, but until we fully understand
the ramifications of offshore exploration we must come down on
the side of environmental caution. To allow this lease sale
to go forward without the benefit of that new understanding
could be to the detriment of the program and the environment,
as well as to the people of Florida.
The Honorable Manuel Lujan, Jr.
April 30, 1990
Page Two
There already are more than 200 active or pending leases off
Florida's Gulf coast, especially in the Panhandle area off
northwest Florida. Those active leases have received only
limited exploratory drilling, and there is no need to offer
additional leases in the Eastern Gulf until the industry has
better evaluated these existing leases for the potential for
natural gas. More than 130 leased blocks were relinquished
with no drilling ever taking place.
Both a national energy program and adequate technology for oil
spill prevention and cleanup are critical in developing a new
5-Year Program. Should we be able to develop a mutually
satisfactory program with all of the needed elements to ensure
that Florida's natural resources are protected, limited
leasing in certain areas of the Eastern Gulf may be
acceptable. Until then, however, it is imperative that we
refrain from further leasing activity while we work to ensure
that our irreplaceable environmental resources are safeguarded.
For these reasons, I recommend cancelling this sale until
details of the new program can be worked out with the State.
I appreciate the opportunity to comment on sale 137 and look
forward to working with you on the new 5-Year Leasing
Program. Detailed technical comments on the draft
Environmental Impact Statement for Sale 137 and comments
received by my office are being forwarded to your New Orleans
office by my staff.
Sincerely,
Bob
Governor
BM/vjp
05/08/90
14:16
202 343 3231
DOI PUB AFFAIRS
002
ocs.
oes
TUESDAY, MAY 1, 1990 USA TODAY
FLORIDA
TALLAHASSEE - Federal
government should cancel plans
to seil oil natural gas drilling
OCS sulf of
leases for most of Gulf of Mexico
in '91, Gov. Bob Martinez said.
met
Public hearings on proposal are to-
day here. in Tampa: Wednesday in
Pensacola
Martinez: Cancel oil and gas lease sale
By MICHAEL MOLINE
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (UPI) Gov. Bob Martinez called upon the federal
government Monday to cancel sales of offshore oil and gas exploration
leases from Naples to Pensacola pending more study of the environmental
dangers. President Bush is already considering a ban on energy exploration
in the portion of the Gulf of Mexico south of Naples, including the
Florida Keys. Martinez referred Monday to the remaining 47-million acres
from Naples northeast to the Alabama border.
In a letter to Interior Secretary Manuel Lujan, Martinez said the
lease sales should be delayed pending completion of a federal study into
the effects of oil and gas drilling on the environment.
The federal agency is currently working on a new five-year program
to balance the nation's energy needs against environmental
considerations, Martinez said in a news conference.
"We are on the threshhold of a new era in understanding the need
to balance our nation's energy needs with those of our environment, but
until we fully understand the ramifications of offshore exploration we
must come down on the side of environmental caution," Martinez wrote to
Lujan.
"To allow this lease sale to go forward without the benefit of
that new understanding could be to the detriment of the program and the
environment, as well as to the people of Florida."
He noted that Florida's tourism and fishing industries depend on
the conditions of the state's beaches, shores and waters.
The Interior Department is conducting public hearings on the
Proposed Lease Sale 137 this week. Martinez said there are already more
than 200 active leases off the Panhandle that have never been drilled.
A 30-mile buffer zone where drilling is banned already extends
offshore from the Bay-Gulf county line to Naples. The off-limits zone
proposed by Martinez extends further into the Gulf.
Florida officials have been trying to prevent drilling at existing
leases in the southern Gulf for several years. Bush has hinted his
decision about those leases, expected within a few weeks, will please
environmentalists.
Martinez said cancelling the lease sales in the other sections of
the Gulf would prevent political battles with energy interests such as
the state has been fighting in the southern Gulf.
"We just don't need another one of those (political struggles),"
he said.
upi 04-30-90 02:50 ped
Document No.
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
DATE:
6/26/90
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
---
FACT SHEET AND PRESIDENTIAL STATEMENT ON OCS
SUBJECT:
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MCCLURE
SUNUNU
NEWMAN
SCOWCROFT
PORTER
DARMAN
ROGICH
CARD
UNTERMEYER
CICCONI
ROGERS
DEMAREST
ANDERSON
FITZWATER
WINSTON
GRAY
CARNEY
HAGIN
BOSKIN
HOLIDAY
DELAND
BROMLEY
REMARKS:
RESPONSE:
James W. Cicconi
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Ext. 2702
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Tuesday, June 26, 1990
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT
I have often stated my belief that development of oil and gas
on the outer continental shelf (OCS) should occur in an
environmentally sound manner.
I have received the report of the interagency OCS Task Force
on Leasing and Development off the coasts of Florida and
California, and have accepted its recommendation that further
steps to protect the environment are needed.
Today, I am announcing my support for a moratorium on oil and
gas leasing and development in Sale Area 116, Part II, off
the coast of Florida, Sale Area 91 off the coast of northern
California, Sale Area 119 off the coast of central
California, and the vast majority of Sale Area 95 off the
coast of southern California, until after the year 2000.
The combined effect of these decisions is that the coast of
southwest Florida and more than 99 percent of the California
coast will be off limits to oil and gas leasing and
development until after the year 2000.
Only those areas which are in close proximity to existing oil
and gas development in Federal and state waters, comprising
less than 1% of the tracts off the California coast, may be
available before then. These areas, concentrated in the
Santa Maria Basin and the Santa Barbara Channel, will not be
available for leasing in any event until 1996 -- and then
only if the further studies for which I am calling in
response to the report of the National Academy of Sciences
satisfactorily address concerns related to these tracts.
I am also approving a proposal that would establish a
National Marine Sanctuary in California's Monterey Bay and
provide for a permanent ban on oil and gas development in the
sanctuary, and I am asking the Secretary of the Interior to
begin a process that may lead to the buyback and cancellation
of existing leases in Sale Area 116, Part II, off southwest
Florida.
In addition, I am directing the Secretary of the Interior to
delay leasing and development in several other areas where
questions have been raised about the resource potential and
the environmental implications of development. For Sale Area
132 off the coasts of Washington and Oregon, I am accepting
the recommendation of the Secretary that further leasing and
development activity be deferred until a series of
environmental studies are completed, and directing that no
-2-
such activity take place until after the year 2000. I am
also cancelling Lease Sale 96, in the Georges Bank area of
the North Atlantic, and directing that no leasing and
development activity take place in this area until after the
year 2000. This will allow time for additional studies to
determine the resource potential of the area and address the
environmental and scientific concerns which have been raised.
Finally, I am today directing the Secretary to take several
steps to improve the OCS program and respond to several of
the concerns expressed by the Task Force. My goal is to
create a much more carefully targeted OCS program -- one that
is responsive to local concerns, to environmental concerns,
and to the need to develop prudently our nation's domestic
energy resources. Although I have today taken these strong
steps to protect our environment, I continue to believe that
there are significant offshore areas where we can and must go
forward with resource development.
While I believe that a leaner OCS program will ultimately be
more effective, Americans must recognize that the OCS program
is a vital source of fuel for our growing economy. My desire
is to achieve a balance between the need to provide energy
for the American people and the need to protect unique and
sensitive coastal and marine environments.
#
#
#
#
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
June 26, 1990
FACT SHEET
PRESIDENTIAL DECISIONS CONCERNING OIL AND GAS DEVELOPMENT
ON THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF
The President today announced a series of decisions related to
oil and gas development on the outer continental shelf (OCS).
The President believes that these decisions strike a needed
balance between development of the Nation's important domestic
energy resources and protection of the environment in sensitive
areas.
Decisions by the President on Three Pending Sales
Decision for California Sales
O
Cancel all sales scheduled for 1990, 1991 and 1992
offshore California, including Sale 91 off the coast of
northern California and Sale 95 off the coast of
southern California.
Conduct additional oceanographic and socioeconomic
studies as recommended by the National Academy of
Sciences in a review conducted for the interagency Task
Force on Leasing and Development of the OCS (the Task
Force). These studies should take 3 to 4 years.
Exclude more than 99 percent of the tracts (including
all of the Sale 91 area and all of the Sale 95 area
south of the Santa Barbara Channel) off California from
consideration for any lease sale until after the year
2000. The Interior Department has identified 87 tracts
off the coast of southern California within the Sale 95
area that have high resource potential. These tracts
are located in the Santa Maria Basin and Santa Barbara
Channel, where oil and gas production is currently
underway. They comprise approximately 0.7 percent of
all of the tracts off California, or 0.67 percent of
the 74 million total acres off California that could be
leased and 1.63 percent of the 30.5 million acres in
the Southern California Planning Area. These tracts
will not be available for leasing consideration until
after January 1, 1996 and completion of the additional
studies. They will then be available only if
2
development appears viable based on the guiding
principles outlined below and the results of the
studies.
Decision for Florida
Cancel Sale 116, Part II, and exclude the area from
consideration for any lease sale until after the year
2000. Any development after the year 2000 would be
pursued only if it appears viable based on the guiding
principles outlined below and the results of additional
studies.
Conduct additional oceanographic, ecological and
socioeconomic studies as recommended by the National
Academy of Sciences in its review. These studies
should be completed within 5 to 6 years.
Begin cancellation of existing leases off Florida and
initiate discussions with the State of Florida for its
participation leases. in a joint federal-state buy-back of the
Guiding Principles
The President's decisions were based on the following principles:
(1) Adequate Information and Analysis -- Adequate
scientific and technical information regarding the resource
potential of each area considered for leasing and the
environmental, social and economic effects of oil and gas
activity must be available and subjected to rigorous
scrutiny before decisions are made. No new leasing should
take place without such information and analysis.
(2) Environmental Sensitivity -- Certain areas off our
coasts represent unique natural resources. In those areas
even the small risks posed by oil and gas development may be
too great. In other areas where science and experience and
new recovery technologies show development may be safe,
development will be considered.
(3) Resource Potential -- Priority for development should
be given to those areas with the greatest resource
potential. Given the inexact nature of resource estimation,
particularly offshore, priority should be given to those
areas where earlier development has proven the existence of
economically recoverable reserves.
(4) Energy Requirements -- The requirements of our
nation's economy for energy and the overall costs and
3
benefits of various sources of energy must be considered in
deciding whether to develop oil and gas offshore. The level
of petroleum imports, which has been steadily increasing, is
a critical factor in this assessment.
(5) National Security Requirements -- External events,
such as supply disruptions, might require a reevaluation of
the OCS program. All decisions regarding OCS development
are subject to a national security exemption. If the
President determines that national security requires
development in the areas of these three lease sales or in
other areas, he has the ability to direct the Interior
Department to open the areas for development.
The need to develop adequate information, particularly needed to
meet the inadequacies identified by the National Academy of
Sciences, is an essential factor in calling for further studies
and cancellation of the pending sales. The Sale 116 area off
southwest Florida, which contains our nation's only mangrove-
coral reef ecosystem and is a gateway for the precious
Everglades, deserves special protection. The presence of
successful drilling operations and known resources off certain
areas of southern California merits allowing continued
development, assuming scientific and environmental uncertainties
can be resolved.
Other Actions by the President
The President has also directed certain other actions affecting
offshore oil and gas development.
Sale 119 and Monterey Bay Sanctuary
The Task Force consideration of development off northern and
southern California has been accompanied by strong concern
about the prospect of development off central California and
Sale 119. Sale 119, originally scheduled for March 1991,
covers an area stretching from San Francisco southward to
the northern tip of Monterey Bay. This area includes unique
coastal and marine resources and a portion of the area of
the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary proposed by the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (the
proposed sanctuary would cover approximately 2,200 square
miles). NOAA has also proposed regulations to prohibit all
oil and gas exploration and development activities within
the sanctuary. This area contains nationally significant,
environmentally sensitive resources, including the largest
breeding ground for marine mammals in the lower 48 states.
4
The President has directed Interior Secretary Manuel Lujan
and NOAA Administrator John Knauss to take the following
actions:
Cancel Sale 119 and adopt the sanctuary proposed by
NOAA.
Permanently prohibit all oil and gas exploration and
development within the sanctuary.
Allow no development in the Sale 119 area outside the
sanctuary until after the year 2000. At that time the
guiding principles outlined above will be applied to
determine the viability of development in the area.
Sale 96 in North Atlantic
Sale 96 has been proposed for the Georges Bank area of the
North Atlantic Planning Area, which stretches northward from
Rhode Island to Canada. The President has directed Interior
Secretary Lujan to:
Cancel Sale 96 and exclude it from the 1992-1997 five-
year plan.
Conduct additional studies, including studies designed
to determine the resource potential of the North
Atlantic area and to assess the environmental,
scientific and technical considerations of development
in the area.
Consult with the governors of the states whose
residents would be affected by future development of
oil and gas in the North Atlantic.
These actions ensure that no sale will be considered in the
North Atlantic Planning Area until after the year 2000, and
then only if studies show that development is warranted
because of resource potential and is environmentally safe.
OCS Development off Washington and Oregon
The President has accepted the recommendation of Interior
Secretary Lujan to conduct a series of additional
environmental studies of the effects of oil and gas
development off Washington and Oregon, including the Sale
132 area, before any environmental impact statement would be
completed. These studies are expected to take 5 to 7 years.
No sale will be considered off Washington and Oregon until
after the year 2000 and then only if studies show that
development can be pursued in an environmentally safe
manner.
5
General OCS Decisions
The President also decided that:
Air quality controls for oil and gas development
offshore California should be substantially the same as
those applied onshore.
Immediate steps should be taken to improve the ability
of industry and the federal government to respond to
oil spills offshore, regardless of their source.
Federal agencies should develop a plan to reduce the
possibility of oil spills offshore from whatever
source, including and especially from tanker traffic.
This plan should include moving tanker routes further
away from sensitive areas near the Florida Keys and the
Everglades.
Restructuring the OCS Program
The President determined that providing the necessary
balance between developing domestic energy resources and
protecting the environment requires certain revisions to the
OCS program. The program must be:
targeted more carefully toward areas with truly
promising resource potential;
buttressed by information adequate to ensure that
oil and gas development proceeds in an
environmentally sound manner; and
sensitive to the concerns and needs of local areas
affected by offshore development.
Accordingly, the President directed Interior Secretary Lujan
to take three actions to improve the overall OCS program:
Improve the information needed to make decisions on OCS
development by conducting the studies identified by the
National Academy of Sciences and studies to explore new
technologies for alleviating the risks of oil spills
from OCS platforms and new oil and gas drilling
technologies, such as subsea completion technology.
Target proposed sale areas in future OCS five-year
plans to give highest priority to areas with high
resource potential and low environmental risk. This
will result in offering much smaller and more carefully
selected blocks of tracts.
6
Prepare a legislative initiative that will provide
coastal communities directly affected by OCS
development with a greater share of the financial
benefits of new development and with a larger voice in
decision-making. Currently, states receive 100 percent
of revenues from leases within three miles of shore.
Revenues from leases between three and six miles of
shore are divided 73 percent to the federal government
and 27 percent to the states. Revenues from leases six
miles or further offshore go 100 percent to the federal
government. Coastal communities directly affected by
development are not presently guaranteed any of these
revenues.
Background on Sales
Sale 91
The Sale 91 area contains approximately 1.1 million acres
and lies offshore Mendocino and Humboldt Counties in
northern California, primarily in two areas off Eureka and
from south of Cape Mendocino to south of Point Arena. It is
within the Northern California Planning Area, which
stretches from the California/Oregon border to the
Sonoma/Mendocino County lines. There is currently no oil
and gas production within this planning area. The Minerals
Management Service (which is responsible for the OCS program
within the Interior Department) estimates that there are
between 210 million and 1.54 billion barrels of crude oil
and approximately 2.5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in
the Northern California Planning Area and between 20 million
and 820 million barrels of oil and approximately 1.0
trillion cubic feet of natural gas in the Sale 91 area.
Congress imposed a moratorium prohibiting leasing in the
Northern California Planning Area as part of the Interior
Department's FY 1990 appropriations bill.
Sale 95
The Sale 95 area contains approximately 6.7 million acres
and lies offshore southern California from the northern
border of San Luis Obispo County to the United States/Mexico
border. It is within the Southern California Planning Area,
which extends from the northern border of San Luis Obispo
County to the United States/Mexico border. Oil and gas
production is currently taking place in the Southern
California Planning Area in the Santa Maria Basin, the Santa
Barbara Channel and offshore Long Beach. There are 135
active federal leases in the area, producing approximately
90,000 barrels of crude oil and 95 million cubic feet of
natural gas daily from 17 producing platforms in federal
7
waters. One platform in federal waters is used exclusively
for processing and four other platforms are under
construction or completed but not yet producing. In
addition, there are 10 platforms and four artificial islands
in the area supporting production facilities within state
waters, which extend three miles from the shore. The
Minerals Management Service estimates that there are between
610 million and 2.23 billion barrels of crude oil and
approximately 3.01 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in the
Southern California Planning Area and between 200 million
and 960 million barrels of oil and approximately 1.1
trillion cubic feet of natural gas in the Sale 95 area.
Sale 116, Part II
The area of Sale 116, Part II contains approximately 14
million acres, lying south of 26 degrees north latitude off
the southwest Florida coast off Collier, Monroe and Dade
Counties. This area is within the southeastern portion of
the Eastern Gulf of Mexico Planning Area. (In 1988 the
Eastern Gulf of Mexico was divided for leasing purposes into
two parts along the 26 degrees north latitude line.) There
is no oil and gas production within the sale area, although
73 active leases are held within the area by ten oil and gas
companies. The Minerals Management Service estimates that
there are between 440 million and 1.72 billion barrels of
crude oil and approximately 1.68 trillion cubic feet of
natural gas in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico Planning Area and
between 279 million and 1.06 billion barrels of oil and
approximately 110 billion cubic feet of natural gas in the
Sale 116, Part II area.
Background on the OCS Task Force
In his February 9, 1989 budget message to Congress, the President
indefinitely postponed three OCS lease sales scheduled for FY
1990 -- Sale 91 off the coast of northern California, Sale 95 off
the coast of southern California and Sale 116, Part II off the
coast of southwestern Florida -- pending a study of the sales by
a Cabinet-level task force charged with reviewing and resolving
environmental concerns over adverse impacts of the sales.
The Task Force was named on March 21, 1989. It consisted of
Interior Secretary Manuel Lujan as Chairman, Energy Secretary
James Watkins, Administrator John Knauss of the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Administrator William
Reilly of the Environmental Protection Agency, and Director of
the Office of Management and Budget Richard Darman. The Task
Force conducted nine public workshops in Florida and California,
heard from over 1,000 witnesses, took ten field trips to sites in
the two states, received briefings from various federal agencies,
8
met twice with Members of Congress, and solicited and received
over 11,000 written public comments.
The Task Force also commissioned a technical review from the
National Academy of Sciences regarding the environmental and
other information available on which decisions could be made.
The National Academy of Sciences determined that adequate
ecological, oceanographic or socioeconomic information was not
available to some extent for each of the three sale areas.
The Task Force found that:
The southwest Florida shelf comprises subtidal and
nearshore habitats that are unique within the U.S.
continental margin and provide refuge to a number of
rare and endangered species;
The incremental risks of an oil spill associated with
the Sale 91 area off northern California are greater
than those associated with the other two sales.
Information concerning the onshore socioeconomic
effects of oil and gas development is particularly
lacking for Sale 116, Part II off Florida and Sale 91.
Additional studies in response to the report of the
National Academy of Sciences are needed before the
Secretary of the Interior makes leasing decisions in
any of the three areas.
Background on the OCS Program
Management of oil and gas found in federal waters offshore (which
generally begin three miles from a state's coast and can extend
out 200 to 300 miles) is vested in the Department of the Interior
under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act of 1953, as amended.
The Act directs the Interior Department to:
make OCS resources available to meet the nation's
energy needs;
protect human, marine and coastal environments;
ensure that states and local governments have
timely access to information and opportunities to
participate in OCS program planning and decision-
making; and
obtain for the federal government a fair and
equitable return on resources while preserving and
maintaining free enterprise competition.
9
These responsibilities within the Interior Department are
administered by the Minerals Management Service (MMS), created in
1982 to oversee the orderly development of offshore energy and
mineral resources while safeguarding the environment. The
current director of the MMS is Barry Williamson.
The MMS makes resources available by leasing federal acreage
offshore to private companies, which explore for and can develop
and produce commercial deposits, subject to continuing review and
permitting procedures. Environmental standards are established
by the MMS in regulations and lease stipulations and enforced
through review of companies' exploration, development and
production plans (including drilling permits that must be
obtained) before operations can begin on leases, and an offshore
facility inspection program, under which inspectors review
safety, operational and environmental activities on offshore
platforms. Inspectors currently oversee 3,800 platforms in the
Gulf of Mexico and 22 platforms off California.
Oil and gas lease sales are conducted in a competitive sealed bid
process. Sales are scheduled in five-year planning cycles (the
first of which was in 1978) developed by the Secretary of the
Interior with public review and comment on the draft plan.
Efforts are made to address concerns raised during this review
process, which normally takes two years. After the adoption of a
plan, extensive pre-lease activities are conducted before any
sales occur. These activities include the preparation of an
environmental impact statement for each sale, with opportunities
for public review and comment, and submission of sale proposals
to the governors of the affected states before final decisions
are made. These steps generally take an additional two or more
years.
The total OCS area covers 1.4 billion acres, and is composed of
over 260,000 tracts. Since 1954 over 118,000 (or approximately
45 percent) of the tracts have been offered for lease; 10,115
(3.9 percent) have been leased; 4,111 (1.6 percent) have been
drilled; and slightly more than 1,250 (approximately .05 percent)
are occupied by platforms. Production from the OCS program since
1954 totals over 8.5 billion barrels of crude oil and condensate
and 88 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. Since its creation,
the Minerals Management Service has been responsible for
overseeing the production of more than two billion barrels of
crude oil and condensate and over 25.6 trillion cubic feet of
natural gas and for generating over $90 billion in revenues from
lease sales and lease rental payments for the United States
Treasury.
The OCS accounts for a significant portion of existing United
States oil and gas resources. Table 1 shows: the quantities of
proven oil and gas reserves that have been discovered and are
economically recoverable within the United States as a whole and
10
the OCS separately (Column A); and the quantities of undiscovered
oil and gas resources estimated to be economically recoverable
using existing technologies within the United States as a whole
and the OCS separately (Column B).
TABLE I
OIL AND GAS RESERVES IN THE UNITED STATES
AND THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF (OCS)
Column A
Column B
Proven Oil and
Estimated Oil and
Gas Reserves
Gas Reserves
All U.S. OCS Only
All U.S. OCS Only
Oil
(billion barrels)
26.8
2.6
34.8
8.2
Natural Gas
Liquids (billion
barrels)
8.2
.6
6.3
.8
Natural Gas
(trillion cubic
feet)
168.0 32.3
262.7 74.0
Note: Column A shows the quantities of proven oil and gas
reserves that have been discovered and are economically
recoverable within the United States as a whole and the OCS
separately; Column B shows the quantities of undiscovered oil and
gas resources estimated to be economically recoverable using
existing technologies within the United States as a whole and the
OCS separately.
# # #
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Tuesday, June 26, 1990
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT
I have often stated my belief that development of oil and gas
on the outer continental shelf (OCS) should occur in an
environmentally sound manner.
I have received the report of the interagency OCS Task Force
on Leasing and Development off the coasts of Florida and
California, and have accepted its recommendation that further
steps to protect the environment are needed.
Today, I am announcing my support for a moratorium on oil and
gas leasing and development in Sale Area 116, Part II, off
the coast of Florida, Sale Area 91 off the coast of northern
California, Sale Area 119 off the coast of central
California, and the vast majority of Sale Area 95 off the
coast of southern California, until after the year 2000.
The combined effect of these decisions is that the coast of
southwest Florida and more than 99 percent of the California
coast will be off limits to oil and gas leasing and
development until after the year 2000.
Only those areas which are in close proximity to existing oil
and gas development in Federal and state waters, comprising
less than 1% of the tracts off the California coast, may be
available before then. These areas, concentrated in the
Santa Maria Basin and the Santa Barbara Channel, will not be
available for leasing in any event until 1996 -- and then
only if the further studies for which I am calling in
response to the report of the National Academy of Sciences
satisfactorily address concerns related to these tracts.
I am also approving a proposal that would establish a
National Marine Sanctuary in California's Monterey Bay and
provide for a permanent ban on oil and gas development in the
sanctuary, and I am asking the Secretary of the Interior to
begin a process that may lead to the buyback and cancellation
of existing leases in Sale Area 116, Part II, off southwest
Florida.
In addition, I am directing the Secretary of the Interior to
delay leasing and development in several other areas where
questions have been raised about the resource potential and
the environmental implications of development. For Sale Area
132 off the coasts of Washington and Oregon, I am accepting
the recommendation of the Secretary that further leasing and
development activity be deferred until a series of
environmental studies are completed, and directing that no
-2-
such activity take place until after the year 2000. I am
also cancelling Lease Sale 96, in the Georges Bank area of
the North Atlantic, and directing that no leasing and
development activity take place in this area until after the
year 2000. This will allow time for additional studies to
determine the resource potential of the area and address the
environmental and scientific concerns which have been raised.
Finally, I am today directing the Secretary to take several
steps to improve the OCS program and respond to several of
the concerns expressed by the Task Force. My goal is to
create a much more carefully targeted OCS program -- one that
is responsive to local concerns, to environmental concerns,
and to the need to develop prudently our nation's domestic
energy resources. Although I have today taken these strong
steps to protect our environment, I continue to believe that
there are significant offshore areas where we can and must go
forward with resource development.
While I believe that a leaner OCS program will ultimately be
more effective, Americans must recognize that the OCS program
is a vital source of fuel for our growing economy. My desire
is to achieve a balance between the need to provide energy
for the American people and the need to protect unique and
sensitive coastal and marine environments.
#
#
#
#
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
June 26, 1990
FACT SHEET
PRESIDENTIAL DECISIONS CONCERNING OIL AND GAS DEVELOPMENT
ON THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF
The President today announced a series of decisions related to
oil and gas development on the outer continental shelf (OCS).
The President believes that these decisions strike a needed
balance between development of the Nation's important domestic
energy resources and protection of the environment in sensitive
areas.
Decisions by the President on Three Pending Sales
Decision for California Sales
O
Cancel all sales scheduled for 1990, 1991 and 1992
offshore California, including Sale 91 off the coast of
northern California and Sale 95 off the coast of
southern California.
Conduct additional oceanographic and socioeconomic
studies as recommended by the National Academy of
Sciences in a review conducted for the interagency Task
Force on Leasing and Development of the OCS (the Task
Force). These studies should take 3 to 4 years.
Exclude more than 99 percent of the tracts (including
all of the Sale 91 area and all of the Sale 95 area
south of the Santa Barbara Channel) off California from
consideration for any lease sale until after the year
2000. The Interior Department has identified 87 tracts
off the coast of southern California within the Sale 95
area that have high resource potential. These tracts
are located in the Santa Maria Basin and Santa Barbara
Channel, where oil and gas production is currently
underway. They comprise approximately 0.7 percent of
all of the tracts off California, or 0.67 percent of
the 74 million total acres off California that could be
leased and 1.63 percent of the 30.5 million acres in
the Southern California Planning Area. These tracts
will not be available for leasing consideration until
after January 1, 1996 and completion of the additional
studies. They will then be available only if
2
development appears viable based on the guiding
principles outlined below and the results of the
studies.
Decision for Florida
O
Cancel Sale 116, Part II, and exclude the area from
consideration for any lease sale until after the year
2000. Any development after the year 2000 would be
pursued only if it appears viable based on the guiding
principles outlined below and the results of additional
studies.
Conduct additional oceanographic, ecological and
socioeconomic studies as recommended by the National
Academy of Sciences in its review. These studies
should be completed within 5 to 6 years.
Begin cancellation of existing leases off Florida and
initiate discussions with the State of Florida for its
participation in a joint federal-state buy-back of the
leases.
Guiding Principles
The President's decisions were based on the following principles:
(1) Adequate Information and Analysis -- Adequate
scientific and technical information regarding the resource
potential of each area considered for leasing and the
environmental, social and economic effects of oil and gas
activity must be available and subjected to rigorous
scrutiny before decisions are made. No new leasing should
take place without such information and analysis.
(2) Environmental Sensitivity -- Certain areas off our
coasts represent unique natural resources. In those areas
even the small risks posed by oil and gas development may be
too great. In other areas where science and experience and
new recovery technologies show development may be safe,
development will be considered.
(3) Resource Potential -- Priority for development should
be given to those areas with the greatest resource
potential. Given the inexact nature of resource estimation,
particularly offshore, priority should be given to those
areas where earlier development has proven the existence of
economically recoverable reserves.
(4) Energy Requirements -- The requirements of our
nation's economy for energy and the overall costs and
3
benefits of various sources of energy must be considered in
deciding whether to develop oil and gas offshore. The level
of petroleum imports, which has been steadily increasing, is
a critical factor in this assessment.
(5) National Security Requirements -- External events,
such as supply disruptions, might require a reevaluation of
the OCS program. All decisions regarding OCS development
are subject to a national security exemption. If the
President determines that national security requires
development in the areas of these three lease sales or in
other areas, he has the ability to direct the Interior
Department to open the areas for development.
The need to develop adequate information, particularly needed to
meet the inadequacies identified by the National Academy of
Sciences, is an essential factor in calling for further studies
and cancellation of the pending sales. The Sale 116 area off
southwest Florida, which contains our nation's only mangrove-
coral reef ecosystem and is a gateway for the precious
Everglades, deserves special protection. The presence of
successful drilling operations and known resources off certain
areas of southern California merits allowing continued
development, assuming scientific and environmental uncertainties
can be resolved.
Other Actions by the President
The President has also directed certain other actions affecting
offshore oil and gas development.
Sale 119 and Monterey Bay Sanctuary
The Task Force consideration of development off northern and
southern California has been accompanied by strong concern
about the prospect of development off central California and
Sale 119. Sale 119, originally scheduled for March 1991,
covers an area stretching from San Francisco southward to
the northern tip of Monterey Bay. This area includes unique
coastal and marine resources and a portion of the area of
the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary proposed by the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (the
proposed sanctuary would cover approximately 2,200 square
miles). NOAA has also proposed regulations to prohibit all
oil and gas exploration and development activities within
the sanctuary. This area contains nationally significant,
environmentally sensitive resources, including the largest
breeding ground for marine mammals in the lower 48 states.
4
The President has directed Interior Secretary Manuel Lujan
and NOAA Administrator John Knauss to take the following
actions:
Cancel Sale 119 and adopt the sanctuary proposed by
NOAA.
Permanently prohibit all oil and gas exploration and
development within the sanctuary.
Allow no development in the Sale 119 area outside the
sanctuary until after the year 2000. At that time the
guiding principles outlined above will be applied to
determine the viability of development in the area.
Sale 96 in North Atlantic
Sale 96 has been proposed for the Georges Bank area of the
North Atlantic Planning Area, which stretches northward from
Rhode Island to Canada. The President has directed Interior
Secretary Lujan to:
Cancel Sale 96 and exclude it from the 1992-1997 five-
year plan.
Conduct additional studies, including studies designed
to determine the resource potential of the North
Atlantic area and to assess the environmental,
scientific and technical considerations of development
in the area.
Consult with the governors of the states whose
residents would be affected by future development of
oil and gas in the North Atlantic.
These actions ensure that no sale will be considered in the
North Atlantic Planning Area until after the year 2000, and
then only if studies show that development is warranted
because of resource potential and is environmentally safe.
OCS Development off Washington and Oregon
The President has accepted the recommendation of Interior
Secretary Lujan to conduct a series of additional
environmental studies of the effects of oil and gas
development off Washington and Oregon, including the Sale
132 area, before any environmental impact statement would be
completed. These studies are expected to take 5 to 7 years.
No sale will be considered off Washington and Oregon until
after the year 2000 and then only if studies show that
development can be pursued in an environmentally safe
manner.
5
General OCS Decisions
The President also decided that:
Air quality controls for oil and gas development
offshore California should be substantially the same as
those applied onshore.
Immediate steps should be taken to improve the ability
of industry and the federal government to respond to
oil spills offshore, regardless of their source.
Federal agencies should develop a plan to reduce the
possibility of oil spills offshore from whatever
source, including and especially from tanker traffic.
This plan should include moving tanker routes further
away from sensitive areas near the Florida Keys and the
Everglades.
Restructuring the OCS Program
The President determined that providing the necessary
balance between developing domestic energy resources and
protecting the environment requires certain revisions to the
OCS program. The program must be:
targeted more carefully toward areas with truly
promising resource potential;
buttressed by information adequate to ensure that
oil and gas development proceeds in an
environmentally sound manner; and
sensitive to the concerns and needs of local areas
affected by offshore development.
Accordingly, the President directed Interior Secretary Lujan
to take three actions to improve the overall OCS program:
Improve the information needed to make decisions on OCS
development by conducting the studies identified by the
National Academy of Sciences and studies to explore new
technologies for alleviating the risks of oil spills
from OCS platforms and new oil and gas drilling
technologies, such as subsea completion technology.
Target proposed sale areas in future OCS five-year
plans to give highest priority to areas with high
resource potential and low environmental risk. This
will result in offering much smaller and more carefully
selected blocks of tracts.
6
O
Prepare a legislative initiative that will provide
coastal communities directly affected by OCS
development with a greater share of the financial
benefits of new development and with a larger voice in
decision-making. Currently, states receive 100 percent
of revenues from leases within three miles of shore.
Revenues from leases between three and six miles of
shore are divided 73 percent to the federal government
and 27 percent to the states. Revenues from leases six
miles or further offshore go 100 percent to the federal
government. Coastal communities directly affected by
development are not presently guaranteed any of these
revenues.
Background on Sales
Sale 91
The Sale 91 area contains approximately 1.1 million acres
and lies offshore Mendocino and Humboldt Counties in
northern California, primarily in two areas off Eureka and
from south of Cape Mendocino to south of Point Arena. It is
within the Northern California Planning Area, which
stretches from the California/Oregon border to the
Sonoma/Mendocino County lines. There is currently no oil
and gas production within this planning area. The Minerals
Management Service (which is responsible for the OCS program
within the Interior Department) estimates that there are
between 210 million and 1.54 billion barrels of crude oil
and approximately 2.5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in
the Northern California Planning Area and between 20 million
and 820 million barrels of oil and approximately 1.0
trillion cubic feet of natural gas in the Sale 91 area.
Congress imposed a moratorium prohibiting leasing in the
Northern California Planning Area as part of the Interior
Department's FY 1990 appropriations bill.
Sale 95
The Sale 95 area contains approximately 6.7 million acres
and lies offshore southern California from the northern
border of San Luis Obispo County to the United States/Mexico
border. It is within the Southern California Planning Area,
which extends from the northern border of San Luis Obispo
County to the United States/Mexico border. Oil and gas
production is currently taking place in the Southern
California Planning Area in the Santa Maria Basin, the Santa
Barbara Channel and offshore Long Beach. There are 135
active federal leases in the area, producing approximately
90,000 barrels of crude oil and 95 million cubic feet of
natural gas daily from 17 producing platforms in federal
7
waters. One platform in federal waters is used exclusively
for processing and four other platforms are under
construction or completed but not yet producing. In
addition, there are 10 platforms and four artificial islands
in the area supporting production facilities within state
waters, which extend three miles from the shore. The
Minerals Management Service estimates that there are between
610 million and 2.23 billion barrels of crude oil and
approximately 3.01 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in the
Southern California Planning Area and between 200 million
and 960 million barrels of oil and approximately 1.1
trillion cubic feet of natural gas in the Sale 95 area.
Sale 116, Part II
The area of Sale 116, Part II contains approximately 14
million acres, lying south of 26 degrees north latitude off
the southwest Florida coast off Collier, Monroe and Dade
Counties. This area is within the southeastern portion of
the Eastern Gulf of Mexico Planning Area. (In 1988 the
Eastern Gulf of Mexico was divided for leasing purposes into
two parts along the 26 degrees north latitude line.) There
is no oil and gas production within the sale area, although
73 active leases are held within the area by ten oil and gas
companies. The Minerals Management Service estimates that
there are between 440 million and 1.72 billion barrels of
crude oil and approximately 1.68 trillion cubic feet of
natural gas in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico Planning Area and
between 279 million and 1.06 billion barrels of oil and
approximately 110 billion cubic feet of natural gas in the
Sale 116, Part II area.
Background on the OCS Task Force
In his February 9, 1989 budget message to Congress, the President
indefinitely postponed three OCS lease sales scheduled for FY
1990 -- Sale 91 off the coast of northern California, Sale 95 off
the coast of southern California and Sale 116, Part II off the
coast of southwestern Florida -- pending a study of the sales by
a Cabinet-level task force charged with reviewing and resolving
environmental concerns over adverse impacts of the sales.
The Task Force was named on March 21, 1989. It consisted of
Interior Secretary Manuel Lujan as Chairman, Energy Secretary
James Watkins, Administrator John Knauss of the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Administrator William
Reilly of the Environmental Protection Agency, and Director of
the Office of Management and Budget Richard Darman. The Task
Force conducted nine public workshops in Florida and California,
heard from over 1,000 witnesses, took ten field trips to sites in
the two states, received briefings from various federal agencies,
8
met twice with Members of Congress, and solicited and received
over 11,000 written public comments.
The Task Force also commissioned a technical review from the
National Academy of Sciences regarding the environmental and
other information available on which decisions could be made.
The National Academy of Sciences determined that adequate
ecological, oceanographic or socioeconomic information was not
available to some extent for each of the three sale areas.
The Task Force found that:
The southwest Florida shelf comprises subtidal and
nearshore habitats that are unique within the U.S.
continental margin and provide refuge to a number of
rare and endangered species;
The incremental risks of an oil spill associated with
the Sale 91 area off northern California are greater
than those associated with the other two sales.
Information concerning the onshore socioeconomic
effects of oil and gas development is particularly
lacking for Sale 116, Part II off Florida and Sale 91.
Additional studies in response to the report of the
National Academy of Sciences are needed before the
Secretary of the Interior makes leasing decisions in
any of the three areas.
Background on the OCS Program
Management of oil and gas found in federal waters offshore (which
generally begin three miles from a state's coast and can extend
out 200 to 300 miles) is vested in the Department of the Interior
under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act of 1953, as amended.
The Act directs the Interior Department to:
make OCS resources available to meet the nation's
energy needs;
protect human, marine and coastal environments;
ensure that states and local governments have
timely access to information and opportunities to
participate in OCS program planning and decision-
making; and
obtain for the federal government a fair and
equitable return on resources while preserving and
maintaining free enterprise competition.
9
These responsibilities within the Interior Department are
administered by the Minerals Management Service (MMS), created in
1982 to oversee the orderly development of offshore energy and
mineral resources while safeguarding the environment. The
current director of the MMS is Barry Williamson.
The MMS makes resources available by leasing federal acreage
offshore to private companies, which explore for and can develop
and produce commercial deposits, subject to continuing review and
permitting procedures. Environmental standards are established
by the MMS in regulations and lease stipulations and enforced
through review of companies' exploration, development and
production plans (including drilling permits that must be
obtained) before operations can begin on leases, and an offshore
facility inspection program, under which inspectors review
safety, operational and environmental activities on offshore
platforms. Inspectors currently oversee 3,800 platforms in the
Gulf of Mexico and 22 platforms off California.
Oil and gas lease sales are conducted in a competitive sealed bid
process. Sales are scheduled in five-year planning cycles (the
first of which was in 1978) developed by the Secretary of the
Interior with public review and comment on the draft plan.
Efforts are made to address concerns raised during this review
process, which normally takes two years. After the adoption of a
plan, extensive pre-lease activities are conducted before any
sales occur. These activities include the preparation of an
environmental impact statement for each sale, with opportunities
for public review and comment, and submission of sale proposals
to the governors of the affected states before final decisions
are made. These steps generally take an additional two or more
years.
The total OCS area covers 1.4 billion acres, and is composed of
over 260,000 tracts. Since 1954 over 118,000 (or approximately
45 percent) of the tracts have been offered for lease; 10,115
(3.9 percent) have been leased; 4,111 (1.6 percent) have been
drilled; and slightly more than 1,250 (approximately .05 percent)
are occupied by platforms. Production from the OCS program since
1954 totals over 8.5 billion barrels of crude oil and condensate
and 88 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. Since its creation,
the Minerals Management Service has been responsible for
overseeing the production of more than two billion barrels of
crude oil and condensate and over 25.6 trillion cubic feet of
natural gas and for generating over $90 billion in revenues from
lease sales and lease rental payments for the United States
Treasury.
The OCS accounts for a significant portion of existing United
States oil and gas resources. Table 1 shows: the quantities of
proven oil and gas reserves that have been discovered and are
economically recoverable within the United States as a whole and
10
the OCS separately (Column A); and the quantities of undiscovered
oil and gas resources estimated to be economically recoverable
using existing technologies within the United States as a whole
and the OCS separately (Column B).
TABLE I
OIL AND GAS RESERVES IN THE UNITED STATES
AND THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF (OCS)
Column A
Column B
Proven Oil and
Estimated Oil and
Gas Reserves
Gas Reserves
All U.S. OCS Only
All U.S. OCS Only
Oil
(billion barrels)
26.8
2.6
34.8
8.2
Natural Gas
Liquids (billion
barrels)
8.2
.6
6.3
.8
Natural Gas
(trillion cubic
feet)
168.0 32.3
262.7 74.0
Note: Column A shows the quantities of proven oil and gas
reserves that have been discovered and are economically
recoverable within the United States as a whole and the OCS
separately; Column B shows the quantities of undiscovered oil and
gas resources estimated to be economically recoverable using
existing technologies within the United States as a whole and the
OCS separately.
# # #
SENT BY:NIELSEN, MERKSAMER ; 2-15-90 ; 2:31PM ; SACRAMENTO OFFICE+
2024562397;# 1
LAW OFFICES OF
NIELSEN, MERKSAMER,
HODGSON, PARRINELLO & MUELLER
SAN FRANCISCO
A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS
770 L STREET. SUITE 800
650 CALIFORNIA STREET. SUITE 2630
SAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORNIA 94108
SACRAMENTO. CALIFORNIA 95814
TELEPHONE (415) 989-6800
TELEPHONE (916) 446-6752
FILE NUMBER
TELECOPY TRANSMISSION
TO: Chief of Staff John Sununu
Ed Rogers
FROM: Steve Merksamer
COMMENTS:
FYI
NUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING THIS COVER) :
R
.
If you do not receive all pages, please call (916)446-6752
Sacramento Telecopier Number: Kerox 7021, Automatie (916)446-6106
San Francisco Telecopier Number: Xerox 7021, Automatic (415)362-2701
Operator's Name Elsie
Date Transmitted
2/15/90
Time Transmitted
SENT BY:NIELSEN, MERKSAMER
; 2-15-90 ; 2:31PM ;
SACRAMENTO OFFICE-
2024562397;# 2
THE SACRAMENTO BEE
Thursday, Feb. 15, 1990
Duke rips
offshore
oil critics
Calls views of Wilson,
others shortsighted
served as attorney general, said he believes it is "contrary
to law" for Van de Kamp to withdraw from cases he previ-
ously had accepted. He also questioned Van de Kamp's
logic, noting that the attorney general continues to han
die capital punishment cases despite his personal
tion to the death penalty.
"On the other hand, when it comes to trees; he says
the middle of representing an agency that he's not going
to continue to represent the state because he doesn'
want those trees to be cut down," he said.
"I'm finding it a little hard to figure out whether people
are more important to him than trees or are trees more
important to him than people."
A spokesman for Van de Kamp said be disagrees with
the governor's interpretation of the laws governing the at-
By Amy Chance
Bee Capitol Bureau
torney general's role.
Gov. Deukmejian leaped to the defense of offshore oil
drilling Wednesday in the wake of last week's Southern
California oil spill, saying U.S. Sen. Pete Wilson and oth-
ers who want to ban drilling are shortsightedly ignoring
the country's overall energy needs.
The Republican governor said the latest spill, which OC-
curred when a tanker ruptured its hull off Huntington
Beach, should not fuel efforts to halt drilling. Rather, he
said, it points up the need to lessen California's depen-
dence on tanker-shipped imported oil.
Wilson, who is the sole Republican bidding to replace
Deukmejian as governor, has long differed with promi-
nent members of his
own party on the ques-
tion of offshore oil drill-
ing. Deukmejian did
not try to downplay his
I think that
disagreement with the
senator's call for a ban
they're not
didn't believe offshore oil drilling could be done in an en-
vironmentally safe way, while 38 percent said it could.
Deukmejian also was critical of Wilson's call for cre-
ation of a California Environmental Protection Agency,
saying he is not convinced a new department is neces-
sary. "I don't support making a change just to make a
The governor had even harsher words, bowever, for
one of the Democratic gubernatorial candidates, state At-
torney General John Van de Kamp.
Van de Kamp announced last week that be would no
longer defend state actions allowing the logging of old-
growth timber, saying that his legal role conflicted with
his gubernatorial campaign and his belief that the prac-
tice ought to be outlawed.
Deukmejian, who also declined to take cases when be
on further develop-
ment.
looking at the
"I have said of those
people who hold the
bigger picture
view of wanting to con-
change," be said.
tinue a ban on any fur-
and what
ther offshore
development, that I
the needs are at
think it's a very short-
sighted view," Deuk-
the present.
mejian said at a Capitol
press conference.
- Gov. Deukmejian
"I think that they're
not looking at the big-
ger picture of the inter-
ests of our country and what the needs are at the present
time."
Deukmejian said Californians use twice as much crude
oil as is produced in the state.
"I don't hear them calling on residents of this state to
cut the consumption of the amount of gasoline that they
use in half," he said.
Wilson spokesman Bill Livingstone said the senator is
pushing now for increased development of alternative fu-
els. In the meantime, he said, Wilson does not believe the
benefits of increased oil development are worth the envi-
Offshore
Continued from page Al
can proceed with the exception of certain "environmen-
tally sensitive" areas.
"I don't know what his final decisions are going to be
but 1 tend to feel that it will be along those lines," be
said. "I don't think there will be much difference between
their position and the position that we have held since the
beginning of our administration."
That position is at odds with the one taken by most Cal-
ifornians, according to an August California Poll. Three-
fourths of those surveyed said they were opposed to more
drilling for oil and natural gas along California's coast, by
far the highest level of opposition ever expressed in a
In addition, 57 percent of those questioned said they
ronmental risks.
"The question is, should we sacrifice our coastline in
order to have a marginal decrease in our foreign depen-
dence on oil? Wilson says no," Livingstone said.
state poll.
President Bush, who is due to announce a national en-
ergy strategy soon, has also said the Southern California
oil spill should not lead to a complete shutdown of off-
A2
***
San Francisco Apronisic
SENT BY:NIELSEN, MERKSAMER
Deukmejian, Wilson at Odds
On Oil Drilling and Pesticides
seas yesterday that forced a flotilla
son over his opposition to offshore
By Robert B. Gunnison
of oil skimming boats to seek refuge
drilling and stricter regulations of
Chronicle Sacramento Bureau
in port.
agricultural chemicals.
Sacramento
Sources say Deukmefian has
THURSDAY, FEB. 15, 1990
In response to questions, the
Reflecting a sim mering de
governor said opponents of off-
grown testy about Wilson's cam-
bate in the Republican ranks,
shore drilling have "a: very short-
THE SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE
2-15-90 2:32PM
paign speeches in which the impli-
Governor Deukmejlan yester-
sighted view: They're not looking at
cation is clear that be would be B
day distanced himself from the
the big pieture of what's needed for
different kind of governor from
environmental views of GOP
our country."
Deukmejian.
gubernatorial candidate Pete
President Bush is deciding
Yesterday, Deukmejian also
Wilson.
whether to allow drilling off the
differed with Wilson over pesticide
Deukmejian opened a Capitol
California coast. Deukmejlan has
regulations
press conference with a report on
backed the continued drilling, say:
ASSOGATED
the Huntington Beach oil spill and a
ing California must reduce its de-
The governor was asked to
defénse of offshore drilling, which
pendence on imported oil. But Wil-
comment on a Senate report that
GOVERNOR DEUKMEJIAN
Wilson has long opposed.
son Insists that environmental con-
state regulators had ignored their
He praised state's oil deapup
cerns outweigh the need for the
own scientists and approved chemi-
SACRAMENTO OFFICE+
Deukmejlan praised the state's
fuel.
cal products with incomplete health
state version of the federal Environe
cleanup and said only 20 percent of
studies The report said the state
mental Protection Agency. that
the oil remained from the 400,000
"There's no question. that he
Department of Food and Agricul-
would oversee state regulation of
gallons that gushed from a tanker
has a different view than I do on
ture at least 20 times had approved
pesticides. Environmentalists have
last week in California worst spill in
this subject," Deukmejian said of
pesticides and other substances
long criticized the Department of
two decades.
Wilson, who has à lock on the GOP
against the advice of its own health
Food and Agriculture as being too
nomination for governor in the
experts.
A storm packing gale-force
lenient in pesticide enforcement.
June primary.
winds on Tuesday Light pushed
"In general, I'm very satisfied
much of the floating oll onto nearly
The opposing views reflect a
with the way our Department of
"1 don't support making
a
25 miles of the region's popular
split among Republicans. Tradition-
Food and Agriculture has monitor-
change just to make a change,
surfing and sunbathing beaches -
al business and agricultural inter-
ed this program." he said.
Deukmejian said. "At present, I
from Anaheim Bay to Newport
ests, who have a sympathetic ear in
don't think there is sufficient rea-
Beach. The storm generated rough
Deukmetian, are at odds with Wil-
Wilson, has proposed creating a
son to make that kind of change."
2024562397; 3
SENT BY:NIELSEN, MERKSAMER
; 2-15-90 ; 2:33PM ;
SACRAMENTO OFFICE-
2024562397;: 4
THE LOS ANGELES TIMES
THURSDAY, FEB. 15, 1990
Governor
Criticizes
Wilson on
Oil Drilling
Politics: Deukmejian
calls opposition to
offshore production
'shortsighted.' The GOP
candidate for governor
pledges to create a state
EPA-type agency.
By GEORGE SKELTON
TIMES SACRAMENTO BUREAU CHIBF
SACRAMENTO-Punctuating
major differences between himself
and his would-be Republican suc-
cessor, Gov. George Deukmejian on
Wednesday criticized Sen. Pete
Wilson's opposition to offshore oil
development as "shortsighted" and
not in the nation's interest.
The GOP governor also objected
to Wilson's campaign pledge to
create a state environmental pro-
tection agency, implying that the
proposal merely was a political
ploy and insisting that the new
entity is not needed.
Wilson's campaign aides have
been saying for some time that the
senator would be a different kind of
governor than Deukmejian, and a
press conference. held Wednesday
by the lame duck incumbent aptly
illustrated the point.
A Wilson spokesman, Bill Liv-
ingston, said afterward that al-
though the senator "has great
admiration" for Deukmejian, the
two "invariably disagree" on some
issues. "Sen. Wilson is not a clone,"
he spokesman said.
Besides disagreeing with Deuk-
mejian on offshore oil drilling, Wil-
son generally has been more pro-
environment than the governor,
advocating managed growth rather
than laissez faire economic devel-
opment. The two Republicans also
have taken opposing positions on
other issues, such as abortion,
Deukmejian supports restrictions,
Wilson is "pro-choice."
Illustrating the depth of their
differences in style and ideology,
one anonymous Wilson strategist
recently commented to a reporter.
# "The Duke' has been asleep at the
switch for the last couple of years."
SENT BY:NIELSEN, MERKSAMER
; 2-15-90 ; 2:34PM
SACRAMENTO OFFICE-
2024562397;# 5
A36
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1990
GOVERNOR: Differences With Sen. Wilson
Continued from A3
"I don't hear, for example, the
ing and support for the California
the thugs up."
people who are calling for a [drill-
Coastal Commission, which he
Deukmejian's main goal on
ing] ban calling on residents of this
would give more money. The sena-
Wednesday was to assure people
state to cut the consumption of the
tor also said he would have unhesi-
residing along Orange County's
amount of gasoline that they use in
tantly fully funded family planning
beaches and trying to make a
half."
clinics, which Deukmejian relue-
living there that everything possi-
At another point, Deukmejian
tantly did only after having been
ble is being done to clean up the oil
was asked about Wilson's pledge to
pressured by fellow Republicans.
spill. But he also said that "we
establish a new state environmen-
At his press conference, Deuk-
should not fool ourselves. As long
tal agency-Cal-EPA-to oversee
mejian also jabbed at state Atty.
as California remains thoroughly
regulation of pesticides, hazardous
Gen. John K. Van de Kamp, a
dependent on imported oil
we
waste, air and water pollution,
candidate for the Democratic gu-
are going to run the risk of having
garbage and recycling. One of the
bernatorial nomination. The gov-
oil tanker accidents.
purposes is to take pesticide regu-
ernor noted that Van de Kamp
"The fundamental lessons of this
lation away from the farmer-ori-
personally opposes capital punish-
most recent oil spill [are] that the
ented state agriculture depart-
ment, but still defends the state in
best thing we can do for Califor-
ment. The governor dismissed the
death penalty cases. So he ques-
nie's environment and economy is
idea as lacking merit.
tioned the attorney general's re-
to strike out hard against our
"I don't support making a change
cent decision to withdraw as the
dependency on imported oil and
just to make a change," Deukmeji-
state's lawyer in cases involving
produce more California energy of
an said. "I would support making
the logging of old-growth red-
all types right here at home."
changes if it is necessary
if
woods, just because Van de Kamp
And this, the governor said,
there's some reason. At the present
personally opposes the cutting.
includes offshore oil development
time, I don't believe there is suffi-
"I'm finding it a little hard to
"done in an environmentally safe
cient reason to make that kind of
figure out-whether people are
manner."
change. The expertise in this area
more important to him than trees,
When a reporter pointed out that
is in the Department of Food and
or are trees more important to him
Wilson-who is virtually certain to
Agriculture."
than people," Deukmejian said. "I
be the GOP gubernatorial nomi-
Wilson talked about his differ-
can't figure out his logic in all this."
nee-advocates banning any new
ences with Deukmejian on Tuesday
A spokesman for Van de Kamp,
offshore development, the gover-
in Santa Barbara while touring the
Duane Peterson, said the logic is
nor responded:
state to officially announce his
that Van de Kamp has not made a
"There is no question that he has
gubernatorial candidacy. Standing
campaign issue out of capital pun-
a different view than I do on this
on an oceanside cliff with oil plat-
ishment, but is pushing to elimi-
subject. And I have said of these
forms in the far background, the
nate logging of old growth red-
people who hold the view of want-
senator praised Deukmejian for be-
woods. The attorney general does
ing to continue a ban on any
ing "perhaps the most pro-law
not want to be accused of providing
further offshore oil development, I
enforcement governor in our histo-
poor legal representation for politi-
think it's a very shortsighted view.
ry" and said they share "concern
cal purposes so is telling the state
And I think they're not looking at
for the hard-earned tax dollars of
to get another lawyer, the spokes-
the bigger picture of the interest of
Californians."
man said.
our country and what the needs
"But we do have differences,"
Times political writer Keith Love In
are.
Wilson added, citing offshore drill-
Los Angeles contributed to this story.
JAN-09-'90 16:50 ID:API WASH DC
TEL NO: 202-682-8030
#363 P02
OFFSHORE PETROLEUM DEVELOPMENT: STILL NEEDED
The recent oil tanker spill in Alaska was an extremely serious accident and U.S.
oil companies are acting to reduce the risk of another accident, and to put in place any
improvements needed in oil spill prevention and response.
This accident does not reduce the need for orderly offshore petroleum development.
Keeping the federal outer continental shelf (OCS) off-limits to such activities will harm
the nation's future energy security but will not reduce the risk of another tanker
accident.
o Nation Depends on OCS Petroleum. We depend on oil for 43 percent of our energy.
Since 1954, federal OCS operations have produced 7.9 billion barrels of oil and
79.2 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. According to the U.S. Department of the
Interior, the federal OCS could contain another 35.1 billion barrels of oil --
enough to fuel all the registered automobiles in the United States for 6.5 years.
Domestic Production Declining. U.S. oil production is at a 25-year low, and still
declining. Discovery of additional petroleum resources, such as those believed to
lie beneath the federal OCS. will be essential to fuel the U.S. economy into the
21st century.
Developing Federal OCS Critical to U.S. Energy Security. The nation already
imports 45 percent of the oil it uses, and we are using more oil while producing
less. To avoid pushing our foreign oil dependence higher in the future, we must
develop new supplies here at home, and the federal OCS is one of our best pros-
pects for finding them.
Only a Fraction of OCS Developed. Drilling has occurred on only a tiny portion of
the 1.4 billion-acre federal OCS. Off California's coast, for example, less than
one-half of 1 percent of the federal OCS that has been considered for leasing
since 1954 has been developed.
Moratoria Block OCS Development. Congress continues to ban leasing on much of the
federal OCS. Currently, 25.7 million acres have been put off-limits by legis-
lative moratoria.
Leasing Program Works Well. Federal law requires the Interior Department to follow
a 5-year OCS lease sale schedule. This involves detailed data collection and
analysis, exhaustive environmental studies, and extensive input from state and
local officials and the public.
Keeping OCS Off-Limits Won't Stop Tanker Traffic. In reviewing the Alaska spill's
impact, EPA Administrator William K. Reilly pointed out that much of the world's
and the nation's oil will continue to be supplied by ocean tankers. No matter
what the nation decides about petroleum development on the federal OCS. half of
its domestic oil and at least 75 percent of its imported oil will continue to
travel by ocean tanker. As an industry and as a nation, we need to learn the
JAN-09-'90 16:51 ID:API WASH DC
TEL NO: 202-682-8030
#363 P03
-2-
right lessons from the tanker spill. If, however, we draw the wrong conclusions
and ban development of federal OCS resources, we could increase U.S. reliance on
foreign oil to dangerous levels.
o Modern Technology, Transportation Prevent Mishaps. U.S. oil companies use
state-of-the-art offshore exploration and production equipment. Such modern
technology. developed over more than three decades of OCS operations, helps ensure
that the coastal and marine environments are protected. And virtually all the oil
produced from federal OCS wells is transported to shore via pipeline, rather than
tanker.
o U.S. Economy Benefits. Lease bonuses, rents and royalties from federal OCS
production poured $86 billion into the federal treasury between 1954 and 1987.
For every 10 jobs created offshore, 37 jobs are added in onshore industries.
4/25/89
JAN-09-'90 16:52 ID:API WASH DC
TEL NO: 202-682-8030
#363 P04
THE FEDERAL OCS AND THE ENVIRONMENT: A GOOD RECORD
The petroleum industry's record of more than 30 years of operations on the federal
outer continental shelf (OCS) provides overwhelming evidence that these operations can
take place without harming the environment. Offshore oil production and environmental
protection are not mutually exclusive.
Oil Spills Rare. No major oil spill has occurred on the federal OCS in 20 years.
In 1986, 351 million barrels of oil were produced, but only 610 barrels spilled
-- less than 0.0002 percent. Natural oil seeps that year in the Santa Barbara
Channel off California added about 150,000 barrels of oil to the marine
environment.
Leasing Process Protects Environment. The Interior Department's 5-year OCS
leasing program involves exhaustive environmental studies, detailed data
collection and analysis, and extensive input from state and local officials and
the public.
OCS Protected by Stringent Regulation. Oil companies must obtain 17 federal
permits and comply with 74 sets of federal regulations to operate on the federal
OCS. Operations also must be consistent with state coastal management programs.
Modern Technology Prevents Mishaps. U.S. oil companies use state-of-the-art
offshore exploration and production equipment. Such modern technology, de-
veloped over more than three decades of OCS operations, helps ensure that the
coastal and marine environments will be fully protected.
Fish Catches Have Increased Around Offshore Rigs. The fish catch has increased
in the Gulf of Mexico, where oil companies have operated for decades. Catches
have increased especially near platforms, which act as artificial reefs. Plat-
forms in the central and western Gulf constitute 28 percent of the reef habitat.
Few Drilling Platforms Needed. Drilling platforms on the federal OCS are placed
only where oil is found. Modern technology prevents the need for multiple plat-
forms at a site. Because of the sheer cost of these platforms -- often tens of
millions of dollars -- few will be built. All production facilities must get
government approval before installation.
2/23/89
JAN-09-'90 16:52 ID:API WASH DC
TEL NO: 202-682-8030
#363 P05
2
INDUSTRY INTEREST RANKINGS, RESOURCE ESTIMATES, AND VALUE ESTIMATES
FOR THE 26 OCS PLANNING AREAS
INDUSTRY
RESOURCE
INTEREST 7/89
ESTIMATES
PLANNING AREA
[RANK (RANGE) 1
[BBOE]
C. Gulf of Mexico
1 (1-2)
7.38
OCS MORATORIA LEGISLATION
W. Gulf of Mexico
2 (2-3)
5.20
AND PRES. TASK FORCE
* S. California
3 (1-9)
1.36
Focus ON 6 OUT OF TOP 10
Chukchi Sea
4 (1-9)
0.59
AREAS OF INTEREST
* C. California
5 (4-8)
0.58
Beaufort Sea
6 (3-10)
0.12
* N. California
7 (4-9)
0.52
* E. Gulf of Mexico
8 (4-9)
0.30
* N. Aleutian Basin
9 (4-14)
0.01
* Washington/Oregon
10 (8-21)
0.14
Mid-Atlantic
11 (5-20)
0.43
North Atlantic
12 (8-15)
0.22
South Atlantic
13 (9-14)
0.23
Cook Inlet
14 (5-20)
****
Gulf of Alaska
15 (6-23)
0.04
Straits of Florida
16 (10-23)
0.08
St. George Basin
17 (12-19)
0.01
Navarin Basin
18 (11-20)
0.03
Hope Basin
19 (12-21)
****
Norton Basin
20 (13-21)
****
Kodiak
21 (16-22)
0.01
Shumagin
22 (14-26)
****
Saint Matthew-Hall
23 (13-23)
****
Aleutian Arc
24 (20-26)
****
Bowers Basin
25 (22-26)
****
Aleutian Basin
26 (23-26)
****
**** Negligible
Minerals Management Service
Department of the Interior
JAN-09-'90 16:53 ID:API WASH DC
TEL NO: 202-682-8030
#363 P06
1987 Estimates of Total Scores for Relative Marine Productivity
and Environmental Sensitivity for Whole Planning Areas
Planning Areas
Whole Planning Area
Score
Rank
Hope Basin
338
1
North Aleutian Basin
326
2
St. George Basin
287
3
Norton Basin
262
4
Kodiak
262
5
Cook Inlet
261
6
Shumagin
260
7
Beaufort Sea
257
8
Washington/Oregon
256
9
Central Gulf of Mexico
254
10
Straits of Florida
238
11
Central California
236
12
Gulf of Alaska
231
13
South Atlantic
230
14
Northern California
222
15
Southern California
219
16
North Atlantic
209
17
Chuckchi Sea
200
18
Eastern Gulf of Mexico
198
19
Mid-Atlantic
198
20
Western Gulf of Mexico
180
21
Navarin Basin
141
22
Minerals Management Service
Department of the Interior
JAN-09-'90 16:53 ID:API WASH DC
TEL NO: 202-682-8030
#363 P07
A decision to cancel the existing lease sales and not include
them in the next five-year plan (1992-97) will provide the
President with a very limited pro-environmental story and
substantial risks.
After the recent events in Panama, the President is not
susceptible to charges of being indecisive. With the State of
the Union address and budget message and continued reductions
in world wide tensions, an OCS story will get limited play.
There are immediate political pluses for Senator Wilson and
Governor Martinez but as their respective gubernatorial races
heat up in September and October haven't you taken a
politically charged issue away from them.
For the first time the opponents of domestic production will
have a Presidential seal of approval that environmental risks
exist from the OCS activities. Rather than the President
gaining control of the program from Congress, these opponents
will seek additional wins as they try to shut down future
leasing, buy back leases, establish offshore wilderness areas
with no drilling allowed.
Proponents of OCS activities in the Gulf states of Texas,
Louisiania, Alabama, and Mississippi will come under attack
and annual lease sales scheduled for the Central and Western
Gulf areas could be delayed or cancelled (revenue losses of
$500-$750 million annually for bonus money).
More crude oil will be imported in foreign tankers (this is a
greater environmental risk).
Declining domestic production has substantial economic and
geopolitical risks.
So long as the framework for OCS leasing exists, the nation
JAN-09-'90 16:54 ID:API WASH DC
TEL NO: 202-682-8030
#363 P08
can respond quickly when the public support for increased
domestic production improves. If the fundamental framework
for leasing decisions is not in place, administrative burdens
will hamper the nation's ability to respond.
A conference committee is reconciling the differences in the House and
Senate passed versions of oil-spill liability legislation. One issue
is of particulent concern if private clean-up cooperatives are to be
effective in responding to future spills -- preempting state liability
laws for "good samaritans."
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 9, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
DAVID Q. BATES
wrde
SUBJECT:
Final Report of Outer Continental Shelf Leasing
and Development Task Force
Accompanying this memorandum you will find a copy of the final
report of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Leasing and
Development Task Force (the Task Force), which was delivered to
the White House by the Task Force last Friday, January 5.
In your budget address to Congress last February, you announced
the establishment of this Cabinet-level Task Force, comprised of
Secretaries Lujan (who served as Chairman) and Watkins,
Administrators Reilly and Knauss and Director Darman. Its charge
was to resolve environmental concerns about the potential adverse
impacts of three pending OCS oil and gas lease sales scheduled
for Fiscal Year 1990: Sale 116, Part II, off the southwestern
coast of Florida; Sale 91, off northern California; and Sale 95,
off southern California. The Task Force conducted numerous
meetings over the past year and requested that the National
Academy of Sciences (NAS) evaluate the adequacy of the scientific
and technical information available for making leasing decisions
in the three areas. The NAS report identified varying
deficiencies in the oceanographic, ecological and socioeconomic
information available for all three areas.
The Task Force has presented options for each sale, but within
those options has made no recommendations. In addition to the
specific options, the Task Force has also identified additional
measures that should be taken to protect the environmental
resources in these and other OCS areas in which existing leases
are being developed.
The Task Force has presented three options for the Florida sale,
all of which encompass cancellation of the pending sale.
Alternatives are presented for the timing of any subsequent sale,
ranging from (1) its consideration in the 1992-97 five-year
program, to (2) consideration in the 1997-2002 five-year program,
to (3) consideration only after the 1997-2002 program, if ever.
Within all of these options steps to obtain the additional
oceanographic, ecological and socioeconomic data identified by
the NAS are recommended, as are steps to revise oil spill
contingency plans to protect the Everglades and Florida Keys from
the adverse impact of an oil spill. The Task Force also
addresses the future of existing leases within the area and
presents options ranging from (a) considering their future
development under normal procedures to (b) beginning discussions
with the state regarding its purchase of the leases to (c)
initiating actions that could lead to cancellation of the leases.
The Task Force has presented four options for the northern and
southern California sales, ranging from (1) continued
preparations for the sales to (2) cancellation of the pending
sales to (3) deferral of the sales until the next 1992-97 five-
year leasing program, with leasing to be allowed only in some of
the available areas to (4) cancellation of the sales and
exclusion of the entire areas from the 1992-97 five-year program.
Each option would be accompanied by collection of the additional
oceanographic and/or socioeconomic data identified by the NAS,
revision of the air quality controls applicable to offshore
drilling to make them more consistent with the controls for
onshore activities, revision of oil spill contingency plans and,
with respect to the northern California sale, evaluation of the
effects of leasing on commercial fishing.
A working group within the White House is currently reviewing the
report in order to prepare a decision memorandum for your
consideration. Governor Sununu and I are discussing plans for
you to meet with the members of the Task Force and possibly with
interested members of Congress before you make your decision.
CC: Governor Sununu
OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF
GREAT 3 THE UNITED THE
LEASING & DEVELOPMENT
OF
TASK FORCE
A Report to the President
On Lease Sales 91, 95, and 116, Part II
January 2, 1990
MANUEL LUJAN, JR., Chairman
Secretary of the Interior
JAMES WATKINS
Secretary of Energy
WILLIAM REILLY
Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency
OF INTERIOR
JOHN KNAUSS
Administrator of the
March 1849
National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration
TRIMENT OF ENERGY.
RICHARD DARMAN
Director of the Office of
OF STATES UNITED FAMERICA
Management and Budget
UNITED PROTECTION STATES. AGENCY
NATIONAL OFFANIC & is S OF PARTMENT AND NOAA ATMOSPHERIC COMMUNITY RIC
OF THE OFFICE The $ MANAGEMENT AND PUDGET
Of
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Outer Continental Shelf Leasing
and Development Task Force
Working Group Agency Representatives
DOI
Tom Weimer
NOAA
David Cottingham
Tim Glidden
Ben Mieremet
DOE
David Doane
OMB
Robert Grady
Gary Reisner
EPA
Brooks Bowen
Task Force Staff
Robert E. Kallman, Executive Director
Richard Glynn, Deputy Executive Director
H. Theodore Heintz, Jr., Staff Director
Richard J. Ramsey, Policy Analyst
Paul D. Kranhold, Public Affairs Officer
Vicki Agnew, Administrative Officer
Carole Borton, Management Analyst
Ranieri Cavaceppi, Research Assistant
Christopher M. Dube, Research Assistant
James E. Sykes, Jr., Research Assistant
Agency Liaison
DOI
Jim Hughes
Poe Leggette
DOE
Linda Stuntz
Allan Fitzsimmons
EPA
Terry Davies
Craig Hooks
Alison Bird
Robert Wayland
NOAA
Kent Burton
US Coast Guard
LCDR Wayne Hollingsworth
FWS
Columbus Brown
NPS
Kheryn Klubniken
MMS
Hugh Hilliard
Ellen Aronson
US Geological Survey
Mike Fields
National Academy of Sciences
David Policansky
Table of Contents - 1
January 2, 1990
Final Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
CHAPTER 1: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND OPTIONS
Introduction
I-1
Environmental Concerns Expressed to the Task Force
I-1
General Findings
I-2
Summary of Findings on Specific Environmental Concerns
I-4
Air Quality
I-4
Oil Spill Risk
I-4
Effects on Protected Lands
I-5
Effects on Protected Species and Other Wildlife
I-5
Effects on Commercial Fishing
I-5
Effects on Water Quality
I-6
Changes in Onshore Infrastructure and Land Use
I-6
Effects on Tourism and Recreation
I-6
Summary of Options Developed By The Task Force
I-6
Sale 116, Part II - Off Southwestern Florida
I-7
Option A
I-7
Option B
I-7
Option C
I-8
Protecting the Everglades and Keys from Oil Spills
I-9
Sale 95- Off Southern California
I-9
Option A
I-9
Option B
I-10
Option C
I-11
OCS Air Quality Regulations, Tanker Route Study, and Oil Spill Response
I-11
Sale 91- Off Northern California
I-12
Option A
I-12
Option B
I-12
Option C
I-13
Additional Environmental Control and Mitigation Measures
I-14
CHAPTER II: INTRODUCTION
The President's Charge to the Task Force
II-1
The Workings of the Task Force
II-2
Agency Briefings
II-2
Public Workshops
II-4
Congressional Meetings
II-4
Field Trips
1I-4
Federal Register Notice
II-5
CHAPTER III: A FRAMEWORK FOR CONSIDERING ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Determining What is Environmentally Sound
III-1
Using Scientific Information To Resolve Concerns
III-1
Using Existing Standards
III-3
The Balancing Approach
III-4
The Consensus Building Approach
III-5
A Jurisdictional Perspective
III-5
Conclusions
III-7
Table of Contents - 2
January 2, 1990
Final Report
CHAPTER IV: CONCERNS ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Introduction
IV-1
Impacts on Air Quality
IV-2
Summary of Concerns
IV-2
Sale Specific Concerns
IV-4
Sale 116, Part II - Off Southwestern Florida
IV-4
Sale 95 - Off Southern California
IV-4
Sale 91 - Off Northern California
IV-6
Oil Spills
IV-7
Summary of Concerns
IV-7
Sale Specific Concerns
IV-13
Sale 116, Part II - Off Southwestern Florida
IV-13
Sale 95 - Off Southern California
IV-14
Sale 91 - Off Northern California
IV-14
Commercial Fisheries Concerns
IV-15
Summary of Concerns
IV-15
Sale Specific Concerns
IV-19
Sale 116, Part II - Off Southwestern Florida
IV-19
Sale 95 - Off Southern California
IV-19
Sale 91 - Off Northern California
IV-20
Effects on Protected Species
IV-21
Summary of Concerns
IV-21
Sale Specific Concerns
IV-22
Sale 116, Part II - Off Southwestern Florida
IV-22
Sale 95 - Off Southern California
IV-23
Sale 91 - Off Northern California
IV-24
Impacts on Protected Lands
IV-25
Summary of Concerns
IV-25
Sale Specific Concerns
IV-25
Sale 116, Part II - Off Southwestern Florida
IV-26
Sale 95 - Off Southern California
IV-26
Sale 91 - Off Northern California
IV-26
Social and Economic Impacts
IV-26
Summary of Concerns
IV-26
Sale Specific Concerns
IV-29
Impacts on Water Quality
IV-30
Summary of Concerns
IV-30
Sale Specific Concerns
IV-31
Sale 116, Part II - Off Southwestern Florida
IV-31
Sale 95 - Off Southern California
IV-31
Sale 91 - Off Northern California
IV-32
CHAPTER V: BENEFITS OF OCS OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION
Public Comments About OCS Benefits and Energy Policy
V-1
Benefits of OCS Oil and Gas Production
V-1
Energy Security Benefits
V-2
U.S. Vulnerability to Oil Supply Disruptions
V-3
Economic Benefits
V-3
Table of Contents - 3
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Potential Benefits From the Three Sale Areas
V-3
Overview of the Current Situation: Declining Production and Rising Imports
V-4
Impact of Price on U.S. Production and Consumption
V-4
Oil Supply and Demand Outlook for the Future
V-5
Potential Contribution of OCS Resources to U.S. Oil Reserves
V-6
Concerns About the Estimated Amounts of Oil and Gas
V-7
Contribution of OCS Oil and Gas to the Economy
V-9
Energy Policy and Conservation
V-10
The Potential for Increased Oil Conservation
V-11
Potential Additional Oil Conservation Beyond Expected Savings
V-13
Summary of Oil Conservation Potential
V-14
CHAPTER VI: ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
MEASURES
Summary of Options Developed by the Task Force
VI-1
Sale 116, Part II - Off Southwestern Florida
VI-2
Location of Sale Area and Estimated Hydrocarbon Resources
VI-2
Option A
VI-3
Option B
VI-4
Option C
VI-5
Protecting the Everglades and Keys from Oil Spills
VI-6
Sale 95- Off Southern California
VI-7
Location of the Sale Area and Estimated Hydrocarbon Resources
VI-7
Option A
VI-8
Option B
VI-9
Option C
VI-10
OCS Air Quality Regulations and Tanker Route Study
VI-11
Sale 91- Off Northern California
VI-12
Location of the Sale Area and Estimated Hydrocarbon Resources
VI-12
Option A
VI-13
Option B
VI-14
Option C
VI-15
Additional Environmental Protection and Mitigation Measures
VI-16
Require Transport of OCS Oil in Pipelines Where Feasible and Environmentally
Preferable
VI-16
Improve OCS Oil Spill Risk Assessment, Contingency Planning, and Response
Capability
VI-16
Encourage Consolidation of Onshore Facilities to Reduce Demand on Existing
Onshore Public Services, Infrastructure, and Land Use Changes
VI-19
Establish Processes to Assist Local Communities to Address Onshore Impacts
Associated with OCS Development
VI-19
Require No Discharge of Drilling Muds/Fluids in Sensitive Areas
VI-19
Establish Joint Oil Industry/Fishing Industry Coordinating Committees in Areas
Where OCS Activities are Likely to Conflict with Commercial Fishing
VI-20
Strengthen Policies to Protect Environmentally Sensitive Areas
VI-20
APPENDIX
"The Adequacy of Environmental Information for Outer Continenal Shelf Oil and Gas
Decisions: Florida and California," NAS/NRC, Executive Summary, 1989
Table of Contents - 4
January 2, 1990
Final Report
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table I-1
Chances of An Oil Spill Over 30 Years Greater Than
10,000 Barrels
I-4
Table IV-1
Characterization of Air Quality Concerns
IV-2 +
Table IV-2
Air Pollutants from OCS Activities
IV-2
Table IV-3
Type and Quantities of Typical Emissions from OCS
Activities and Platforms
IV-3
Table IV-4
Typical Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from California OCS Activities
IV-5
Table IV-5
OCS Oil Platform Spills/OCS Oil Pipeline Spills
IV-8
Table IV-6
Oil Spills by Source
IV-9
Table IV-7
OCS vs. Non-OCS Oil in the Sale Areas
IV-11
Table IV-8
Probability of One or More Oil Spills Greater That
10,000 Barrels
IV-13
Table IV-9
Commercial Fisheries Harvest and Value
IV-16
Table IV-10
Characterization of Protected Species Concerns
IV-21 +
Table IV-11
Characterization of Social and Economic Concerns
IV-26 +
Table of Contents - 5
January 2, 1990
Final Report
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure II-1
Lower 48 Planning Areas/Task Force Study Areas
II-1 +
Figure II-2
Lease Sale 116, Part II, Eastern Gulf of Mexico
II-1 +
Figure II-3
Lease Sale 95, Southern California
II-1 +
Figure II-4
Lease Sale 91, Northern California
II-1 +
Figure IV-1
Frequency of NAAQS Expected Exceedences: 1986-1988
IV-4 +
Figure IV-2
Oil in the Sea
IV-7 +
Figure IV-3
Cumulative Spill Risk - Southwestern Florida
IV-12 +
Figure IV-4
Cumulative Spill Risk - Southern California
IV-12 +
Figure IV-5
Cumulative Spill Risk - Northern California
IV-12 +
Figure V-1
World Oil Reserves
V-2 +
Figure V-2
U.S. Oil Consumption and Production
V-4 +
Figure V-3
U.S. Petroleum Net Imports: 1980-1989
V-4 +
Figure V-4
U.S. Oil Consumption, Production, and Imports: 1920-2000
V-5 +
Figure V-5
Comparison on Estimates of Undiscovered Economically
Recoverable Oil and Gas
V-7 +
Figure V-6
U.S. Oil Use Intensity
V-11 +
Figure V-7
Oil Conservation Potential to the Year 2000
V-12 +
Figure V-8
Current U.S. Oil Use
V-13 +
Figure VI-1
Major Oil Bearing Regions in the Southern California
Planning Area
VI-7 +
Figure VI-2
Possible Sale Configuration for Northern California (Option B)
VI-14 +
Table of Contents - 6
January 2, 1990
Final Report
I. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND OPTIONS
INTRODUCTION
For many years, substantial controversy has surrounded the Federal Government's
program to lease oil and gas resources on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) for
exploration and development by the oil and gas industry. Concerns about the
environmental effects of offshore oil and gas activities have given rise to strong opposition
among the coastal residents of California and Florida. Where opposition has been strong,
leasing, exploration, and development of oil and gas have been delayed by local permitting
controversies, State coastal zone management actions, litigation, and congressional
moratoria. It has become clear that past attempts to gain a consensus on the means of
controlling environmental effects and the importance of developing offshore oil and gas
resources have been unsuccessful in many cases in these areas.
In his message on the Fiscal Year 1990 budget, President Bush announced that he would
establish a Cabinet level task force to "review and resolve environmental concerns" about
three OCS oil and gas lease sales off Florida and California that had been scheduled for
FY 1990. The three sales, shown in Figure II-1, are:
1. Lease Sale 116, Part II south of 26 degrees north latitude off the
southwestern coast of Florida,
2. Lease Sale 95 off the southern coast of California, and
3. Lease Sale 91 off the northern coast of California.
The President ordered that the Minerals Management Service (MMS), the Agency in the
Department of the Interior (DOI) responsible for OCS leasing, delay preparations for the
three sales until concerns about environmental effects could be resolved.
This report presents the findings of the OCS Leasing and Development Task Force (Task
Force) to the President and options for deciding whether and how to proceed with leasing
in the three areas.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS EXPRESSED TO THE TASK FORCE
In its nine public workshops, the Task Force heard a wide variety of concerns expressed
about undesirable environmental effects that people believe could result from OCS oil and
gas activities in the three sale areas. In part because of the oil spill from the Exxon Valdez,
the risks of oil spills from offshore oil development were a foremost concern. Other
concerns included air quality, conflicts with fishing, effects on tourism and recreation,
changes in onshore land use and "lifestyles," and effects on sensitive environmental areas
and ecosystems.
Many people told the Task Force that the potential benefits of OCS oil and gas development
in the three areas were small and that a national energy policy that placed emphasis on oil
conservation and alternative energy sources, particularly alternative transportation fuels,
could reduce or eliminate the need for development of these resources.
In general, people who expressed opposition to leasing felt very strongly that the potential
I- 1
January 2, 1990
Final Report
environmental effects were unacceptable.
Those supporting oil and gas exploration and development in the three areas stated their
belief that these activities could be conducted in a way that protects environmental resources
in a responsible manner. Those in favor of going ahead with leasing also emphasized the
importance of domestic oil production, noting that the current trend of declining production
and growing oil imports would increase the likelihood of future energy security and
economic problems.
GENERAL FINDINGS
The Task Force reviewed a wide range of information about environmental effects that
could occur if OCS oil and gas leasing proceeds in the three areas. Sources of information
included MMS studies, Environmental Impact Statements (EIS's), briefings from various
Federal Agencies, public workshops, and meetings with interested Members of Congress.
The Task Force also asked the National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council
(NAS/NRC) to evaluate the adequacy of the scientific and technical information base for
making leasing decisions in the three areas.
The NAS/NRC had already been engaged by MMS to review the environmental studies
program and oil and gas resource evaluation methods which MMS uses in its preparations
for leasing decisions. The Secretary of the Interior's leasing decisions determine what
tracts are offered for lease and what conditions are imposed upon the lessees. The
Secretary makes these leasing decisions after a 2-year process of analysis, public comment,
and consultation with the Governors of affected States.
The NAS/NRC Report concluded that some types of information in some of the areas are
adequate for the Secretary's leasing decisions, while other types of information are not.
The NAS/NRC found the oceanographic information adequate for northern California and
the ecological information adequate for both northern and southern California. The
NAS/NRC found the socioeconomic information inadequate for leasing decisions in
southwestern Florida and northern California and doubted that it was adequate for southern
California. It found the physical oceanographic information inadequate for southern
California and marginal for southwestern Florida and the ecological information inadequate
for southwestern Florida. The NAS/NRC did not assess potential environmental effects or
draw conclusions about whether leasing should proceed.
The MMS has spent over $41 million on environmental studies specifically for these areas
during the past 15 years. Nevertheless, the Task Force finds that some
additional studies, in response to the NAS/NRC Report, are needed before
the Secretary of the Interior makes leasing decisions in the three areas.
The Task Force also found that MMS should revise its process for writing
EIS's to improve the environmental assessment information available for
leasing decisions.
The Task Force carefully considered the information that it collected in briefings and
workshops in order to determine what actions should be taken to resolve the environmental
concerns about offshore oil and gas activities in the three areas. In some cases, the
Task Force found that environmental effects could be greater than the Task
Force deems acceptable at this time. In these cases, additional controls or
mitigation measures are needed. In other cases, the Task Force found that
I-2
January 2, 1990
Final Report
the actual effects of OCS activity are being controlled in an acceptable way.
The Task Force has also concluded that although many of the environmental
effects of oil and gas activities, taken individually, are acceptable,
collectively they could result in unacceptable changes to the local
environments in or near the three sale areas unless new measures are taken
to control or mitigate such effects.
The Task Force also reviewed information on the role of OCS oil and gas production from
the three areas to our Nation's energy supplies as well as the relationship between leasing
decisions and the development of a national energy policy. The MMS resource assessment
shows that if oil and gas are found in these three areas, economically recoverable resources
could range from 0.8 to 2.1 billion barrels of oil (equivalent to as much as 8% of current
U.S. oil reserves) and 1.1 to 3.2 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. The NAS/NRC
concluded that MMS resource estimates are based on an adequate data base and that the
procedures used in estimation are generally appropriate.
Additional oil and gas production in such amounts would replace as much as $40 billion
worth of imported oil over 30 years. Such production would provide economic benefits in
the form of Federal leasing revenues and net corporate income which together could reach
as high as $7.8 billion. The southern California OCS is currently producing over 30
million barrels of oil per year.
The Task Force has concluded that substantial economic and energy
security benefits would be provided by the oil and gas production in future
decades that could result from leasing in the three areas. Furthermore, it
concluded that while additional oil conservation can substantially reduce
U.S. oil consumption, it would not reduce or eliminate the economic and
energy security benefits from additional OCS oil production. Both
conservation and production projects and policies should be considered on
their own merits, as they will be in formulating the National Energy
Strategy currently in preparation by the Department of Energy.
The Task Force recognizes the substantial conflict that often exists between the goals of
protecting coastal and marine environments and maintaining the quality of life in coastal
areas, on the one hand, and the goals of promoting energy security and economic growth,
on the other. The Task Force found no easy way to resolve this conflict. Based on its
review of available information, the Task Force concluded that additional
time and effort are needed before environmental concerns can be resolved
in a manner that provides an acceptable balance between these often
conflicting goals.
Although the OCS oil and gas program has generally had a good environmental record over
the last decade, many people do not feel confident that oil and gas activities can be
conducted off their coasts without causing damage to valuable environmental resources. In
some instances, collection of more information about these effects will help to resolve these
concerns. In other cases, additional environmental protection measures need to be
developed, perhaps even tested, before leasing decisions proceed. New working
relationships and institutional arrangements may be needed so that affected local
communities have more influence on leasing, exploration, and development decisions.
The Task Force has developed a series of options that allow different periods of time for
I- 3
January 2, 1990
Final Report
studies. It has also suggested a number of additional environmental controls which should
be considered in future leasing decisions. Some of these measures should be undertaken
now to better control existing threats to the environment. The next section summarizes
findings on specific environmental concerns. This is followed by a summary of the
options and additional environmental protection measures.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ON SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS
The Task Force's findings about specific environmental concerns and its recommendations
for additional studies and specific environmental control measures are summarized below.
Air Quality
The effects of emissions from offshore oil and gas operations on the generally poor air
quality in southern California is a primary concern. Outer Continental Shelf emissions may
not make a substantial contribution to onshore air pollution in all coastal areas of California.
The emission controls which the MMS currently imposes offshore are less stringent than
required for similar activities onshore.
The Task Force has concluded that air emissions from OCS oil and gas
facilities off the California coast should be subject to more stringent
controls that are substantially equivalent to controls applicable to similar
onshore facilities. The MMS now has efforts underway to develop a new proposed
rulemaking to achieve this objective.
Oil Spill Risks
The MMS analysis of oil spill risk shows that development of oil and gas in each of the
three lease sales would cause a small increase in the risk of an oil spill greater than 10,000
barrels during the next 30 years in their area. Table I-1 shows the MMS's estimates of the
chances of an oil spill greater than 10,000 barrels both without additional leasing and with
the proposed lease sale.
Table I-1: Chances of An Oil Spill Over 30 Years
Greater Than 10,000 Barrels
Chance
Chance
Without
With
Lease Sale
Leasing
Leasing
Sale 116, Part II
96%
97%
Sale 95
93%
94%
Sale 91
77%
85%
I-4
January 2, 1990
Final Report
The Task Force has concluded that:
the risk that an oil spill of significant size will occur due to
OCS-related activities in the three proposed lease sale areas is small
compared to the risk of a significant spill from other existing
sources, notably non-OCS tanker and barge traffic;
although the risk of occurrence of a major OCS oil spill is relatively
small, the environmental effect of such a spill could be significant;
coastal and marine resources deserve greater protection from oil
spills from all sources than is now available; and
governments and the oil and shipping industries should act now to
achieve significantly better protection against oil spills for coastal
and marine resources, regardless of whether OCS leasing and
development proceeds in the three proposed lease sale areas.
Effects on Protected Lands
There are numerous protected areas such as parks, marine sanctuaries, and wildlife refuges
near the three sale areas that could be affected by oil and gas activities including existing
tanker transportation. These include the Everglades National Park, Looe Key National
Marine Sanctuary, Key Largo National Marine Sanctuary, Channel Islands National Park,
Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary, Farallon Islands National Marine Sanctuary,
and Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuary.
The Task Force has concluded that the sensitive and highly valuable
resources in protected areas such as National Parks deserve additional
consideration and management to ensure that they are not seriously
damaged by oil and gas activities.
Effects on Protected Species and Other Wildlife
A wide variety of endangered or threatened species inhabit areas in or near the sale areas.
The effects of offshore oil and gas activities on these species is reviewed through the
consultation procedures required by the Endangered Species Act. While most species are
not jeopardized by oil and gas activities, concern has been expressed about potential harm
to individuals and the cumulative effects of many different oil and gas developments.
The Task Force concluded that effects on protected species and wildlife are
important enough to warrant additional management attention but are not,
by themselves, sufficient to justify a delay in leasing.
Effects on Commercial Fishing
The Task Force concluded that there are conflicts between commercial
fishing activity and offshore oil and gas activities, many of which can be
resolved or significantly mitigated.
I- 5
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Effects on Water Quality
The Task Force concluded that environmental impacts from drilling muds,
cuttings, and produced fluids can be adequately addressed under the
existing National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System regulatory
program.
Changes in Onshore Infrastructure and Land Use
The Task Force has concluded that development of offshore oil and gas
resources may create onshore land use conflicts and demands on
infrastructure that need to be better addressed. Conflict could be reduced if
better consultative relationships were established among the oil industry,
Federal, State, and local governments and other affected parties for
planning and coordinating the onshore activities of OCS lessees.
Effects on Tourism and Recreation
The Task Force concluded that OCS impacts on tourism and recreation are a
major concern for which further information is needed to determine the
magnitude of impacts. However, tourism losses alone are not likely to be
sufficient to provide a basis for canceling or delaying lease sales. They
should be addressed as a part of other efforts or new efforts to control and
mitigate onshore impacts.
SUMMARY OF OPTIONS DEVELOPED BY THE TASK FORCE
The Task Force developed three options for each of the three lease sales. In doing so, it
recognized that OCS lease sales must be scheduled in a 5-year leasing program approved
by the Secretary of the Interior. The three lease sales addressed by the Task Force, as well
as follow on sales in the same OCS areas, are scheduled in the 1987-1992 5-Year Leasing
Program. Additional sales could be scheduled in a new 5-year leasing program. The
Secretary is tentatively planning to release a proposal for a new 5-year program for
comment in March 1990. If gaps and overlaps between 5-year programs are avoided, the
new program will cover the 1992-1997 period. It would be followed by a 1997-2002
program. The options for the three sale areas reflect the structure imposed by the 5-year
program requirement.
In addition to the options for lease sales in the three areas, the Task Force also developed a
list of additional environmental control or mitigation measures that can be used to further
reduce undesirable effects of OCS oil and gas activities. The options and additional
measures are summarized below.
I-6
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Sale 116, Part II - Off Southwestern Florida
All three of the following options developed for Sale 116, Part II include recommendations
to develop a program to better protect the Everglades and Florida Keys environmental
resources from oil spills and to consider moving oil tanker routes to reduce the risk of
damage from oil spills to these resources.
Option A:
Cancel Sale 116, Part II, and defer subsequent leasing decisions until
additional oceanographic, ecological, and socioeconomic data in response
to the NAS/NRC Report have been collected.
Revise requirements for OCS oil spill contingency plans to improve their
effectiveness, and develop improved means of assessing the risk of oil spill
damage.
Canceling the sale would exclude the Part II area from any additional OCS leasing for the
remainder of the 1987-1992 5-Year Program. Leasing in the Part II area could occur in the
1992-1997 5-Year Program only after additional oceanographic, ecological, and
socioeconomic data in response to the NAS/NRC Report have been collected and after the
ability to protect the Everglades from oil spills has been demonstrated.
The NAS/NRC Report identified gaps in the information record for the area off
southwestern Florida and concluded that those gaps should be addressed prior to any
decision regarding the leasing of tracts in the area. Consequently, the MMS would acquire
and analyze additional information for leasing decisions.
The timing of future leasing decisions should be determined after analysis of the time
required to complete the studies. Upon their completion, the Secretary of the Interior will
decide whether or not to offer tracts for lease. If a decision to lease is made, the new
information would be used in determining which tracts to offer and what environmental
controls to apply to the leases in order to resolve environmental concerns.
Existing Leases: Proceed with decisions about exploration and development
on existing leases under normal OCS Lands Act and Coastal Zone Management Act
(CZMA) procedures.
This option would allow exploration and development on the 73 existing leases in the
Part II area, subject to the OCS Lands Act and the CZMA. Decisions on two exploration
plans are currently before the Secretary of Commerce under the CZMA. Any subsequent
development on these leases should be conditioned on the demonstration of the ability to
better protect Everglades and Keys ecosystem from oil spills and completion of additional
ecological and socioeconomic studies in response to the NAS/NRC Report.
Option B:
Cancel Sale 116, Part II.
Exclude the Part II area from consideration in formulating the new
1992-1997 5-Year Program.
I-7
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Canceling the sale and excluding the area from the 1992-1997 program would delay leasing
until late 1997 at the earliest. If a sale in the Part II area is scheduled in the 1997-2002
5-Year Program, additional oceanographic, ecological, and socioeconomic studies will be
conducted prior to leasing decisions. Leasing will proceed only after the ability to better
protect the Everglades from oil spills has been demonstrated.
Existing Leases: Proceed with decisions about exploration and development
on existing leases under normal OCS Lands Act and CZMA procedures.
The DOI should undertake discussions with Florida and existing lessees to
facilitate purchase of existing leases by the State, if the State so desires.
This option would proceed with decisions regarding exploration and development on the
73 existing leases in the Part II area using the normal procedures under OCS Lands Act and
the CZMA. Decisions on two exploration plans are currently before the Secretary of
Commerce under the CZMA. Any subsequent development on these leases would be
conditioned on the demonstration of the ability to better protect Everglades and Keys
ecosystem from oil spills.
The State of Florida has been considering ways of compensating lessees in order to prevent
drilling on existing leases. State purchase of some of the existing leases is one mechanism
for achieving this objective.
Option C:
Cancel Sale 116, Part II.
Exclude the Part II area from consideration in formulating the new
1992-1997 5-Year Program and the 1997-2002 5-Year Program.
This option would not allow leasing before 2002, if ever. Future decisions on leasing
would be based on additional information on environmental effects and energy benefits
available by that time. Although there would be no drilling, the MMS would continue to
refine its assessment of the oil and gas resources in the area to provide a basis for these
future decisions.
Existing Leases: The DOI should undertake discussions with Florida and
existing lessees to facilitate State purchase of existing leases. The
Secretary should initiate procedures that could lead to cancellation of the
existing leases pursuant to section 5 of the OCS Lands Act. If these leases are
canceled, it would prevent drilling on existing leases. Selection of this option would reflect
the view that the existing oil spill threat to environmental resources in this region is too
great and that additional risk from any source, including OCS exploration and
development, is not justified at this time.
The Secretary of the Interior should begin the lease cancellation process immediately. This
process requires that, prior to cancellation, the leases be suspended for 5 years based on a
determination by the Secretary that there is a threat of serious harm or damage to the
environment from continued operations on the lease. In order to make this determination,
the Secretary would need to review the information on the environmental effects of
operations on existing leases. Leases cannot be drilled while under suspension. The State
I- 8
January 2, 1990
Final Report
of Florida may wish to purchase existing leases in order to reach a final resolution on
drilling of existing leases at an earlier time than under the section 5 process.
Protecting the Everglades and Keys from Oil Spills
A key feature of all three options is the establishment of a program to provide greater
protection from oil spills to the environmental resources of the Everglades and Keys
ecosystem. The Task Force has found that even without OCS activity, the use, value, and
unique environmental sensitivity of the Everglades and Keys resources are great enough to
warrant increased protection from oil spills from existing sources including tanker
transport. The Task Force suggests that the program develop a system for oil spill
protection for the Everglades National Park and Florida Keys resources.
These efforts to improve protection of the Everglades and Keys should involve the DOI,
the Department of Commerce, the U.S. Coast Guard, the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), and representatives from the shipping and petroleum industries. In addition, the
U.S. Coast Guard should study the feasibility of moving oil tanker routes further from the
environmental resources in the Keys and Everglades.
Sale 95 Off Southern California
Option A:
A-1: Proceed with preparations for a lease sale but defer final leasing
decisions until after additional oceanographic and socioeconomic data in
response to the NAS/NRC report have been collected.
A-2: Cancel Sale 95, and defer subsequent leasing decisions until
additional oceanographic and socioeconomic data in response to the
NAS/NRC report have been collected.
Establish air quality controls for the California OCS that are substantially
equivalent to those applied onshore.
Revise requirements for OCS oil spill contingency plans to improve their
effectiveness, and develop improved means of assessing the risk of oil spill
damage.
Option A-1 would give the Secretary of the Interior the discretion to proceed with
preparations for a lease sale when he determines that it is appropriate in light of the.
progress in collecting additional data. Option A-2 directs the Secretary to cancel Sale 95.
Both would allow future leasing decisions for the southern California OCS to be based on
more extensive data about the oceanographic and socioeconomic effects of oil and gas
activities. The NAS/NRC Report identified gaps in the information record for the southern
California area and concluded that those gaps should be addressed prior to any decision
regarding the leasing of tracts in the area. Consequently, the MMS would acquire and
analyze additional information for leasing decisions.
Upon completion of the additional studies, the Secretary of the Interior would decide which
tracts to offer, if any, and what environmental controls to apply to the leases in order to
resolve environmental concerns.
I-9
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Option B:
Defer leasing decisions until the 1992-1997 5-Year Leasing Program.
Offer tracts only in Santa Maria Basin and San Diego Outer Basin in the
next sale off southern California.
Conduct additional oceanographic and socioeconomic studies prior to
making leasing decisions for any future sale.
Establish air quality controls for the California OCS that are substantially
equivalent to those applied onshore.
Revise requirements for OCS oil spill contingency plans to improve their
effectiveness, and develop improved means of assessing the risk of oil spill
damage.
This option would allow a lease sale to be scheduled in the 1992-1997 5-Year Leasing
Program. A sale could occur in the middle of this period, following completion of the
additional studies. Leasing decisions by the Secretary of the Interior will draw on this
information to determine the tracts to be offered and the environmental control measures to
be applied in order to resolve environmental concerns.
The option for proceeding with leasing in the Santa Maria Basin needs to be considered in
light of the likelihood that related onshore facilities would probably be located in Santa
Barbara County, which has already experienced substantial development. Because there
has been little drilling of the larger prospects in this area, there may be a greater chance for
large discoveries than in the Channel. The generally deeper water, however, may make
such resources less beneficial economically.
Leasing in the San Diego Outer Basin may be more acceptable environmentally than leasing
closer to shore, because the greater distance from shore reduces visual impacts and reduces
the chance that an oil spill from operations on a lease would contact the coast. Because
there are a number of large prospects that have not been drilled, there is a fair chance for
large discoveries. However, as the geology and economics are less favorable in this area,
the chance of finding commercial quantities of oil and gas is considerably lower than in the
Inner Basin.
This option would defer leasing in the Santa Barbara Channel in light of the intensity of
current and planned oil and gas development on existing leases off Santa Barbara County.
These developments have been slowed by concerns about the onshore impacts. Once such
problems have been worked out, however, additional leasing and development should be
possible without substantial increases in onshore facilities, if activities are appropriately
phased. Additional leasing in the Santa Barbara Channel holds a lower probability of
discovering new large oil fields, because most of the larger prospects there have already
been drilled.
This option also defers leasing in the Inner Basin in light of its proximity to highly valued,
intensively used coastal resources in San Diego County, Orange County, and Los Angeles
County. However, because the larger prospects in this area have not been drilled,
deferring leasing would forgo a good chance for large discoveries.
I - 10
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Option C:
Cancel Sales 95 and 138.
Exclude the southern California area from consideration in formulating the
new 1992-1997 5-Year Program.
Conduct additional oceanographic and socioeconomic studies prior to
making leasing decisions for the next sale.
Establish air quality controls for the California OCS that are substantially
equivalent to those applied onshore.
Revise requirements for OCS oil spill contingency plans to improve their
effectiveness, and develop improved means of assessing the risk of oil spill
damage.
Under this option, leasing would not be allowed until late 1997, at the earliest. A sale
could be scheduled in the 1997-2002 5-Year Program. Leasing would proceed only if new
OCS air quality controls have proven substantially equivalent with standards onshore and
after collection of additional oceanographic and socioeconomic data in response to the
NAS/NRC Report. The decision to proceed would be based on the treatment of additional
OCS oil and gas production in the National Energy Strategy. Although there would be no
drilling on new leases, exploration and development could continue on existing leases. The
MMS would continue to refine its assessment of the oil and gas resources in the area to
provide a basis for these future decisions.
OCS Air Quality Regulations, Tanker Route Study, and Oil Spill Response
A component of all three of the options above is the recommendation that MMS issue a rule
making the standards for regulating air quality on the OCS substantially equivalent to
regulatory standards onshore. Less stringent controls for OCS facilities would be allowed
only if justified by safety and technical considerations applicable to OCS facilities. The
MMS is already drafting a new proposed rulemaking intended to achieve this goal.
Also included in all three options is the recommendation that the U.S. Coast Guard conduct
a study of the possibility of moving tanker routes out of the Santa Barbara Channel. This
study should also include consideration of a vessel traffic system for this area and traffic
separation zones for the area near the Channel Islands National Park and National Marine
Sanctuary.
Oil spill concerns in the southern California area are substantial. The Task Force has
concluded that they could be addressed more effectively by focusing more effort on the
prevention and containment of oil spills from all sources of risk including tankers. It is
possible that improvements in oil spill response capabilities in the area could reduce the
potential damage to valuable coastal resources by more than the increased risk due to
additional OCS oil production. Increased capabilities would also reduce the risk of damage
from an OCS oil spill.
I - 11
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Sale 91 - Off Northern California
Option A:
A-1: Proceed with preparations for a lease sale but defer final leasing
decisions until after additional socioeconomic data in response to the
NAS/NRC report have been collected.
A-2: Cancel Sale 91, and defer subsequent leasing decisions until
additional socioeconomic data in response to the NAS/NRC report have
been collected.
Establish air quality controls for the California OCS that are substantially
equivalent to those applied onshore.
Revise requirements for OCS oil spill contingency plans to improve their.
effectiveness, and develop improved means of assessing the risk of oil spill
Reevaluate the effects on fisheries and institute measures to reduce
conflicts with commercial fishing.
Option A-1 would give the Secretary of the Interior the discretion to proceed with
preparations for a lease sale when he determines that it is appropriate in light of the
progress in collecting additional data. Option A-2 directs the Secretary to cancel Sale 91.
Both options would allow future leasing decisions for the northern California OCS to be
based on more extensive data about the socioeconomic effects of oil and gas activities. The
NAS/NRC Report identified gaps in the information record for the northern California area
and concluded that those gaps should be addressed prior to any decision regarding the
leasing of tracts in the area. Consequently, the MMS would acquire and analyze additional
information for leasing decisions.
Upon completion of the additional studies, the Secretary of the Interior would decide which
tracts to offer, if any, and what environmental controls to apply to the leases in order to
resolve environmental concerns.
Option B:
Defer leasing decisions until the 1992-1997 5-Year Leasing Program.
Offer tracts only in the Eel River Basin in the next sale off
northern California.
Conduct additional socioeconomic studies prior to leasing decisions for the
next sale.
Establish air quality controls for the California OCS that are substantially
equivalent to those applied onshore.
Reevaluate the effects on fisheries and institute measures to reduce
conflicts with commercial fishing.
I - 12
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Revise requirements for OCS oil spill contingency plans to improve their
effectiveness, and develop improved means of assessing the risk of oil spill
damage.
Under this option a lease sale could be scheduled for late 1992, at the earliest. This option
would allow leases to be offered in the gas-prone Eel River Basin only, thus reducing the
probability of finding oil in the sale area and causing much less risk of an oil spill. Leasing
in the Point Arena Basin would be deferred, forgoing the best chances of major oil
discoveries in the northern California area.
Option C:
Cancel Sale 91 and Sale 128.
Exclude the Northern California Planning Area from consideration in
formulating the new 1992-1997 5-Year Program.
This option would not allow leasing in this area until late 1997, at the earliest. Leasing
decisions would be made only after collection of additional socioeconomic data in response
to the NAS/NRC Report. The decision to proceed would be based on the treatment of
additional OCS oil and gas production in the National Energy Strategy. Although there
would be no drilling, the MMS would continue to refine its assessment of the oil and gas
resources in the area to provide a basis for these future decisions.
I - 13
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Additional Environmental Control and Mitigation Measures
The Task Force identified a number of additional measures which should be developed for
consideration when future leasing decisions are made in the three areas. It also suggests
that some of these measures be taken in the near future in order to reduce the environmental
effects of exploration and development on existing leases or to protect environmental
resources in one or more of the three areas from damages that could result from other
existing activities. Because some of these measures could be instituted only at considerable
cost to lessees, taken together they could substantially reduce the benefits of developing oil
and gas and could discourage the industry from bidding for the right to OCS resources.
The MMS, in consultation with other affected Agencies, should develop criteria for
determining where and when they should be applied. The MMS should also develop
regulations, lease stipulations, and other measures requiring such controls.
The additional measures are as follows:
Require transport of OCS oil in pipelines where feasible and environmentally
preferable.
Improve OCS oil spill risk assessment, contingency planning and response capability.
Encourage consolidation of onshore facilities to reduce demand on existing onshore
public services infrastructure and land use changes.
Establish processes to assist local communities to address onshore impacts associated
with OCS development.
Require no discharge of drilling muds/fluids in sensitive areas.
Establish joint oil industry/fishing industry coordinating committees in areas where
OCS activities are likely to conflict with commercial fishing.
Strengthen policies to protect environmentally sensitive areas.
A more detailed description of these measures is provided in Chapter VI.
I - 14
January 2, 1990
Final Report
II. INTRODUCTION
THE PRESIDENT'S CHARGE TO THE TASK FORCE
In his February 9, 1989, budget address to Congress, President Bush announced the
establishment of a Cabinet level Task Force to review and resolve environmental concerns
about adverse impacts in three OCS oil and gas lease sales that were scheduled for Fiscal
Year 1990: Sale 91, Northern California; Sale 95, Southern California; and Sale 116,
Part II, Eastern Gulf of Mexico south of 26 degrees north latitude. The general locations of
these three lease sales are shown in Figure II-1.
The President stated that he is committed to continued OCS oil and gas development in an
environmentally sound manner. Nonetheless, he recognized that there are legitimate
differences of opinion concerning the environmental effects of OCS leasing in these three
areas. The President ordered that, until the Task Force resolves such concerns:
leasing in the Sale 116, Part II area would be indefinitely postponed;
leasing in the Sale 95 area would be delayed; and
leasing in the Sale 91 area would be indefinitely postponed.
The three lease sales under review are shown in more detail in Figures II-2, II-3, and II-4.
Sale 116, Part II, Eastern Gulf of Mexico (Figure II-2) consists of approximately
14 million acres located between 26 degrees and 24 degrees north latitude offshore
southwestern Florida (from Naples to the southern limits of the Eastern Gulf of Mexico
Planning Area). The area is about 25 miles from the Dry Tortugas at its closest point to
land.
Sale 95, Southern California (Figure II-3) includes approximately 6.7 million acres located
offshore southern California from the northern border of San Luis Obispo County to the
U.S. / Mexico provisional boundary.
Sale 91, Northern California (Figure II-4) consists of approximately 1.1 million acres
located offshore portions of Mendocino and Humboldt Counties in the Northern California
Planning Area. The proposal is in two segments: centering off Eureka in the north and
from south of Cape Mendocino to south of Point Arena.
On March 21, 1989, the White House announced the structure of the President's OCS
Leasing and Development Task Force. The members of the Task Force include: the
Secretary of the Interior, who serves as Chairman; the Secretary of Energy; the
Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); the
Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB); and the Administrator of the
EPA. The National Academy of Sciences was asked to provide a technical review of the
information about environmental concerns and petroleum resources to the Task Force.
II 1
Lower 48 Planning Areas
Task Force Study Areas
WASHINGTON
OREGON
NORTHERN
CALIIFORNIA
NORTH ATLANTIC
CENTRAL
CALIFORNIA
SOUTHEAN
MID-ATLANTIC
CALIFORNIA
SOUTH
ATLANTIC
EASTERN
WESTERN
CENTRAL
GULF OF
STRAITS OF FLORIDA
GULF OF
GULF OF
MEXICO
MEXICO
MEXICO
Figure II-1
Tallahassee
Sale 116, Part II
Eastern Gulf of Mexico
S'
Available Acreage #
ampa
FLORIDA
Miami
#
Area under study at the time the
presale process was put on hold.
Figure II-2
8an Luis Obispo
.Santa Maria
Proposed Sale 95
CALIFORNIA CALIF ORNIA
Banta Barbara
Southern California
Los Angeles
Available Acreage #
Long Beach
Oceanside
SanDiego
# Area under study at the time the presale process was put on hold.
Figure II-3
OREGON
CALIFORNIA
Crescent City
Proposed Sale 91
Northern California
Trinidad Head
Available Acreage #
Euroka
Cape Mendocino
CALIFORNIA
N. CALIFORNIA PLANNING AREA
Fort
Bragg
Mendocino
SEE DETAIL MAP
Pt.
Arena
Area under study at the time presale process was put on hold.
Figure II-4
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Based on the President's direction, the Task Force decided to pursue the following six
objectives:
1. Review concerns about adverse environmental impacts in each of the three sale
areas.
2. Identify and investigate environmental concerns.
3. Explore leasing proposals, including no leasing, for the three sale areas that
might resolve environmental concerns.
4. Review the Administration's energy goals, environmental goals, and ocean
management goals as they relate to OCS leasing.
5. Review the question of leasing and operations in the three sale areas, and make
recommendations to the President.
6. Review and monitor information available about the Exxon Valdez oil spill and
cleanup effort which may aid the Task Force in accomplishing the five
previous objectives.
Based on guidance from the White House Staff, the Task Force limited the options and
recommendations presented in this report to those which: (1) could be implemented
within the President's and the Administration's current legal authorities; and (2) could
apply specifically to the three lease sales which the President asked the Task Force to
review.
THE WORKINGS OF THE TASK FORCE
As part of its review and analysis of the environmental effects of the three proposed lease
sales, the Task Force obtained information from a wide range of sources and settings
including Federal Government Agency briefings, public workshops in communities
adjacent to the proposed sales, field trips, and meetings with Members of Congress. In
addition, the Task Force accepted written comments from the public.
Agency Briefings
Federal Government Agencies whose responsibilities relate to the conduct of the OCS
leasing program presented briefings to the Task Force on general environmental and
resource issues as well as sale specific concerns. The Federal Agencies presenting
materials to the Task Force are listed below:
Department of the Interior
Minerals Management Service
National Park Service
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Geological Survey
Environmental Protection Agency
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
U.S. Coast Guard
Department of Energy
II - 2
January 2, 1990
Final Report
The general briefings presented by these Agencies covered the following subjects:
Oil Spills
sources of oil in the marine environment
oil spill history from OCS and non-OCS sources
effects of oil spills
oil spill prevention
oil spill modeling
oil spill contingency planning
oil spill clean up and containment capabilities
overview of the Exxon Valdez oil spill and response
analysis of possible legislative changes to oil spill
planning and response statutes
General Environmental Effects
OCS Environmental Studies Program
Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act
Coastal Zone Management Act
National Marine Sanctuary Program
Oil Production and Conservation
preparation of the National Energy Strategy
oil production and conservation history
world oil supply and outlook
potential for new sources of domestic production and conservation
The topics covered at briefings on each of the proposed lease sales included:
status and 5-year program rankings of the proposed sale
geology, leasing history, and resource estimates in the area
existing OCS activity in the area
location of the proposed sale in relation to environmental and
recreation resources
potential for effects on protected lands and protected species
oceanography, fisheries, and live bottom resources
oil spill probability and trajectory analyses
oil spill response time
issues of particular significance to the specific sale
history of coastal consistency determinations for OCS oil and
gas activities
II 3
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Public Workshops
In order to obtain specific information about the effects of OCS activity on local communities and
environmental resources, the Task Force held nine public workshops in Florida and California,
organized by the Governor's Office in Florida and the county governments in California. The
workshops were held in the following communities:
California
Florida
Carlsbad
Tallahassee
Los Angeles
Fort Myers
Eureka/Arcata
Miami
Santa Barbara
Key West
Sacramento
These workshops gave the Task Force the opportunity to discuss the proposed sales with
State and local officials, scientists, business leaders, and interested groups. In addition to
the panel discussions involving the Task Force, local officials, experts, and the general
public were invited to express their concerns.
Congressional Meetings
The Task Force twice met with Members of Congress in Washington, D.C. The first
meeting, with the delegations from Florida and California, was held prior to the Task Force
workshops in the proposed sale areas. The second meeting, which followed the
completion of the workshops, involved Members of Congress from States other than
California and Florida.
Field Trips
An important component of the Task Force's information collection process was the direct
examination of resources and facilities associated with OCS activity. Field trips were
arranged for the Task Force in association with its workshops in the proposed sale areas.
These field trips are listed below.
Southern California Coast
Aloha Research Vessel to Platform Gilda, CA
10,000 Islands / Everglades National Park, FL
Shark Valley / Everglades National Park, FL
Snorkeling / Viewing Coral in the Florida Keys
Northern California Coast and Avenue of the Giants
Platform Hondo and the Offshore Storage and Treatment Facility, offshore
Santa Barbara, CA
Los Flores Canyon Facility, CA
Gaviota Oil and Gas Plant, CA
Channel Islands National Park, CA
II 4
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Federal Register Notice
At the conclusion of the workshops and field trips, the Task Force published a "Staff
Summary of Environmental Concerns and Options" in the Federal Register (54 FR
33150-33165). The Notice summarized the environmental concerns about OCS leasing
and potential options for resolution of those concerns which the Task Force heard in its
workshops, briefings, meetings, and field trips.
As a part of the Federal Register Notice, the Task Force solicited public comment on
concerns and options not included in the publication.
II 5
January 2, 1990
Final Report
III. A FRAMEWORK FOR CONSIDERING
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
DETERMINING WHAT IS ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND
The fundamental problem with the development of oil and gas resources on the OCS is the
potential for undesirable effects on the nearby environment and its many uses. The Task
Force has heard first hand that many of these effects and risks are widely regarded by
residents near the three sale areas as being substantial and very costly. Coastal residents
and visitors value the environmental resources in those areas highly and do not want them
degraded. While they would feel the losses resulting from such effects, they believe that,
as individuals, they stand to benefit little from the development of oil and gas resources. In
fact, most of the economic benefits are captured in the form of Federal leasing revenues
which seldom have a direct noticeable effect on the lives of individual citizens.
The environmental effects and risks in and near the three sale areas that can result from
OCS exploration and development, followed by the production and transportation of oil
and gas, are real and concrete. Air and water can be polluted; plants, fish, and marine
mammals can be hurt; beaches can be fouled; and ocean vistas can be marred by industrial
facilities. Socioeconomic effects can also result in the form of damage to or displacement
of existing economic activities, the construction and operation of onshore support facilities,
and the demand for new public services and facilities to serve additional population and
industrial activity. Although these changes can be offset by increases in jobs and local tax
revenues, concerns have also been raised about changes in lifestyle and culture. To
determine the extent of such effects and risks and to judge whether allowing them to occur
would be environmentally sound, the Task Force addressed the following questions:
1.
Given current environmental control policies, how could the oil and gas activities
that would result from the three planned lease sales affect the environmental
resources nearby?
2.
To what extent would such effects damage other uses of environmental
resources?
3.
What options for configuring the three lease sales and controlling or mitigating
environmental effects might reduce such damages?
4.
Would the remaining effects and risks be regarded as environmentally sound?
The Task Force has been briefed by Federal Agencies regarding a wide variety of potential
environmental effects of oil and gas activities in the three lease sale areas. In its
workshops, it received further information both from experts and from the general public.
The Task Force recognizes that there are several different approaches that can be used in
determining whether the effects of oil and gas activities are environmentally sound and
resolving issues about leasing. Various approaches are discussed in the next sections.
Using Scientific Information to Resolve Concerns
A scientific and technological approach can be used to determine how and to what extent
various environmental resources could be affected by offshore oil and gas activities in the
III - 1
January 2, 1990
Final Report
three sale areas. The Task Force has learned that there are numerous conflicting claims
about potential effects and risks of oil and gas activities on the OCS. Environmental
concerns about the proposed lease sales may be at least partially resolved if scientific
studies can show that the effects will not be as damaging as feared. They may also be
resolved if regulatory or technological means can be employed to prevent undesirable
effects. Nevertheless, many people lack trust in the technology that is designed to prevent
mishaps.
The Task Force asked the NAS/NRC to review the existing information on the potential oil
and gas resources in the three sale areas and the environmental effects of the OCS activities
that could result from leasing. The NAS/NRC was asked to judge the adequacy of the
information for leasing decisions, but not to assess the environmental effects that could
occur. The results of this work were provided to the Task Force in a report on
November 3, 1989, so that they could be incorporated into this report to the President. The
results are discussed in Chapter IV, the discussion of environmental concerns. The
Executive Summary of the NAS/NRC Report is included in the Appendix to this report.
The NAS/NRC Report is available in full from the Board on Environmental Studies and
Toxicology, 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, D.C. 20418.
The NAS/NRC Report concluded that in a number of cases, the available information is not
scientifically adequate for the assessment of environmental effects needed for leasing
decisions. Unfortunately, lack of complete scientific knowledge, combined with inherent
uncertainty about the location and extent of undiscovered oil and gas resources, limits the
capability to resolve concerns through science alone, particularly at the leasing stage.
The NAS/NRC Report also raises the issue of the relationship of leasing decisions to
subsequent decisions about whether and how to develop oil and gas that is found. This
relationship has a strong effect upon the information needed for leasing decisions. The
NAS/NRC Report observes that many people doubt that the Secretary of the Interior will
decide not to allow a lessee to proceed with development once a new oil and gas field has
been discovered on a lease. In the NAS/NRC view, this burdens the environmental
assessments performed for leasing decisions with the difficult task of analyzing specific
effects from facilities and reserves whose size and location cannot be determined until after
successful exploratory drilling. The NAS/NRC suggests that this problem would be eased
by providing for a more distinct separation of leasing and development decisions to allow
"distinctly different phases of scientific data-gathering and analysis."
The Task Force examined the question of whether different criteria for information
adequacy should be used at different phases in the lengthy decision process that governs
OCS leasing and development for the three sale areas. The Task Force found that it is not
feasible to complete a detailed, scientifically rigorous assessment of the environmental
effects of the specific reserves and facilities that might ultimately result from a leasing
decision before that decision is made. The difficulty is substantially due to the lack of
information on the size and location of the oil and gas, if any, that will be found.
Environmental impact statements for leasing decisions currently use hypothetical scenarios
of oil and gas development to assess a range of potential environmental impacts. Means for
obtaining definitive information about oil and gas resources before leasing are beyond the
Task Force's scope.
The NAS/NRC suggested that a more comprehensive EIS be written at the development
stage. This would allow the information used in leasing decisions to be more general,
while that used in later development decisions would be more specific. In this approach,
III 2
January 2, 1990
Final Report
one purpose of the information used in leasing decisions is to identify potential effects
which are so substantial that, if they occurred, they would make subsequent developments
impossible to undertake in an environmentally sound manner. Leasing decisions, in this
approach, need to be based on information that is adequate to detect environmental
problems which would be insurmountable at the exploration and development stage. This
is not to say that environmental concerns would not emerge at the development stage or that
they could necessarily be resolved without controversy, delay, and substantial cost.
The Task Force examined the procedures established by the OCS Lands Act in light of this
approach. The Task Force found that these procedures allow for additional information to
be used in decisions at the exploration and, particularly, the development stage. In fact,
before development can proceed on any oil and gas discovered in the three sale areas, the
MMS will require a new EIS to be completed which assesses the effects of the proposed
development plans. The Secretary has clear authority to require development plans to be
modified if the specific information available at that point shows that the plan does not
provide adequate "protection of the human, marine, or coastal environment." In the past,
development plans for leases off southern California have been modified significantly after
discussion with Federal Agencies and State and local governments.
The Secretary also has the authority to suspend and, after 5 years, cancel a lease if there is a
threat of serious harm or damage that cannot be reduced. The NAS/NRC observed that no
lease has ever been canceled and implied that this was due to the sizable investments which
lessees have typically made by that point. The Task Force notes that the NAS/NRC
Report provides no evidence to support this implication. Nevertheless, the Task
Force finds that strengthened data collection and environmental assessment
coupled with more careful scrutiny of development plans for any leases
issued in the three areas might yield greater public confidence that the
environment will be protected.
In addition, States with Federally approved coastal zone management programs have the
authority to block the issuance of necessary Federal permits if they find activities affecting
their coastal zone are not consistent with their coastal zone management programs. Thus,
States can use additional information that becomes available at the exploration plan and
development plan stages to force modifications or stop those activities. This has occurred
on numerous exploration and development plans.
From this examination, the Task Force concluded that reliance on scientific
information is useful to resolve environmental concerns in the three sale
areas. The Task Force found that it is not feasible to produce the specific
information necessary to estimate all of the effects of exploration and
development prior to leasing decisions. The Task Force also concluded
that it is not necessary that information for leasing decisions fully and
precisely describe all of the effects of development, because there is, in
fact, opportunity to collect more specific scientific information for
subsequent development decisions.
Using Existing Standards
Another approach for resolving environmental concerns about the three lease sales is to
examine Federal, State, and local laws and regulations to identify environmental standards
that have been established. Existing standards would provide a reference that is, at least in
part, determined outside the decision processes used to manage the OCS leasing program.
III 3
January 2, 1990
Final Report
While using existing environmental policies to define "environmentally sound" has its
advantages, it also has drawbacks. For many types of environmental effects, oil and gas
activities, both onshore and offshore, are already legally required to comply with these
policies. It is clear, however, that compliance with existing policies reduces but does not
entirely eliminate environmental effects. Some routine emissions, discharges, changes in
land and water use, and accidents will still occur. These effects may be acceptable under
existing law or they may result in fines for violations and payments for damages. The level
of controversy about OCS leasing suggests that many people do not regard the effects and
risks that occur under existing standards as acceptable.
Furthermore, disagreements sometimes arise about whether the existing environmental
standards are sufficiently protective. Amending existing policies to address such problems
would require a determination of what is environmentally acceptable, undercutting the
reliance on such standards for determining what is environmentally sound. The Task
Force decided to review existing environmental standards as they are
applied to OCS oil and gas activities in the three sale areas to determine
whether they yield results that are environmentally acceptable.
THE BALANCING APPROACH
The Task Force recognizes that the primary approach used to make decisions under the
OCS Lands Act is a "balancing" of the benefits from oil and gas production and the
environmental costs. When such costs and benefits are considered at the national level, if
the benefits are greater than the costs, including all environmental costs, the country as a
whole will be better off if the decision is made to implement the activity. The cost/benefit
approach has the advantage of providing a generally consistent, systematic treatment of
similar effects for all of the OCS areas included in the leasing program.
The Task Force has learned that there has been substantial controversy over the way in
which environmental costs have been treated and decisions made using the balancing
approach, particularly in decisions about previous lease sales off southern California.
Many of the participants in the Task Force workshops advocated use of the balancing
approach but stated their belief that the environmental costs and risks far outweighed the
benefits of offshore oil and gas development in one or more of the three sale areas.
Although it could not review the socioeconomic information for southern California, the
NAS/NRC was particularly critical of the socioeconomic analysis MMS conducted for the
other two lease sales. This supports the view that a cost/benefit analysis that deals more
carefully with local and regional costs and benefits is needed as a part of the balancing
approach.
The "balancing" decisions made in the past for the three sale areas have generally favored
leasing and development with some acreage restrictions and environmental controls as
opposed to forgoing oil and gas production. The Task Force found that the reasons for this
are evident in the analyses performed by the MMS. The estimated benefits of oil and gas
development have been much larger than the estimated environmental costs. This is
particularly evident, for example, in the analysis provided in MMS' 5-Year Leasing
Program Mid-1987 to Mid-1992 ( April 1987). It was this analysis that supported
inclusion of the three lease sales in the 1987-1992 5-Year Program.
The MMS's estimates of the benefits from oil and gas development in the three areas are
large because they reflect the substantial amounts of oil and gas that may be found and the
III 4
January 2, 1990
Final Report
high value which oil and gas bring in the U.S. economy. People in the United States value
the goods and services produced from oil and gas so highly that we continue to use them
widely, even when oil prices are high. Thus, the environmental costs must be large for a
decision based on balancing benefits and costs to go against leasing and development. The
MMS' estimates of environmental costs in the three areas have been small in comparison
with the estimated benefits.
The Task Force identified several features of the balancing approach that can account for
the difference between the apparently dominant benefits at the national level and the strong
and enduring opposition to offshore oil development among residents of California and
Florida. First, while the environmental costs occur primarily at the local level, the
economic benefits are captured primarily by the Federal Government or are experienced by
Americans collectively. Thus, a cost/benefit test applied, say, to a California county, could
possibly show that the local costs outweigh the local benefits even if the benefits outweigh
the costs for the Nation as a whole. Moreover, the rapid population growth in southern
California and southwestern Florida in the last decade suggests that people there value
living in such environments more highly than they did in earlier times. During the same
period, the potential economic benefits from oil and gas development have declined. These
trends suggest the need for greater efforts to measure local costs.
A second problem with the balancing approach is the possibility that the methods MMS
uses for the quantitative valuation of environmental costs are not capable of measuring the
full range of environmental effects, particularly the high value which residents living near
the three sale areas attach to their environment. The NAS/NRC concluded that more
socioeconomic data, perhaps even survey data, is needed in all three areas to measure the
costs reflected by the intense local opposition to leasing.
A further difficulty in using the balancing approach arises from the chance nature of the
most catastrophic effects, oil spills. While the basic methods for analysis of such risks are
well developed, they yield results which are difficult for most people to understand.
Incorporating such analysis into the cost/benefit framework gives results that would yield
the greatest economic benefit, but are often not acceptable to the people most directly
exposed to the risks. The Task Force found in its workshops that people seem to be
particularly averse to risks over which they have little of no control. Many expressed the
view that with certain coastal and marine resources, no additional risk is acceptable.
However, many people seem to be unaware or the existing risks to the same resources,
even though they are sometimes greater than the risks from additional OCS leasing.
The Task Force concluded that the balancing approach is an appropriate
basis for the leasing decisions made by the Secretary of the Interior, but
that additional information about the environmental effects in the three sale
areas needs to be considered in order to more fully reflect the high value
that coastal residents and visitors in California and Florida place upon the
environmental resources that may be affected by OCS activities.
THE CONSENSUS BUILDING APPROACH
Another approach to determining what is environmentally sound is to negotiate additional
leasing restrictions, environmental controls, or mitigation measures for each proposed sale
in a manner that reduces opposition and increases consensus. This approach has been used
with limited success in some previous California lease sales, such as Sale 80 in 1984, and
in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico. The procedures established by the OCS Lands Act for
III 5
January 2, 1990
Final Report
formulating 5-year OCS leasing programs and making decisions on individual lease sales
provide opportunities for comments and recommendations by the Governors of affected
States as well as other governmental officials. These procedures can be used by the
Secretary of the Interior to build a broader consensus on future leasing decisions.
A JURISDICTIONAL PERSPECTIVE
The Task Force has learned that, to an extent, controversies about OCS leasing and
development arise from the way in which the benefits and costs are distributed among the
various jurisdictions involved. Because most solutions to controversies raised by the three
proposed lease sales would alter the distribution of benefits and costs, it is useful to
understand how that distribution affects the various jurisdictions.
The Task Force recognizes that the Federal Government acts as a steward for the general
public in managing the resources on public lands such as the OCS lands. As owner of the
oil and gas resources of the OCS, the Federal Government tries to promote the realization
of the economic benefits that can be result from developing those resources. These benefits
are captured primarily in the form of leasing revenues which reduce the need for the public
to pay higher Federal taxes.
The Federal Government is also the jurisdiction most sensitive to the benefits of improved
energy security because of its national security and national economic responsibilities.
Development of domestic oil and gas resources is clearly an important means of improving
energy security. Furthermore, development of the oil and gas resources in the three areas
is the only way of achieving the economic benefits inherent in those resources. The
Federal Government's efforts to bring about economical and safe development of OCS oil
and gas is thus an appropriate response to the national benefits it would yield for the
general public.
The Federal Government is also responsible for maintaining the quality of many
environmental resources including air and water, fish and wildlife, National Parks, marine
sanctuaries, wildlife refuges, and other areas of national significance. These resources are
so unique and valuable that they have been made a part of national systems so that they are
preserved for the use of all the people of the United States. Protecting the resources of
these areas is an important goal which Federal Agencies must consider in making decisions
about OCS leasing.
The State and local governments of California and Florida, in contrast to the Federal
Government, properly respond to the benefits and costs that would be experienced by their
constituents rather than the Nation as a whole. The environmental costs and risks that
might result from oil and gas activities on leases in the three areas would be borne primarily
by residents and visitors in the coastal areas of California and Florida. On the other hand,
these people often perceive little of the benefit because it is captured primarily at the Federal
level. State and local jurisdictions benefit from the portion of the Federal leasing revenues
that is paid to the States, 27% of the revenues from leases in the first 3 miles of the OCS.
Current law does not specify, however, that the OCS revenues the States receive be
transferred to local jurisdictions affected by OCS leasing and development. Local
governments may not see enough benefit from the States' share of OCS revenues to
outweigh the costs they experience. Furthermore, while States and localities may benefit
from the economic growth that results from oil industry employment and investment, such
benefits often go unnoticed.
III 6
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Most of the solutions proposed to resolve OCS controversies would change the distribution
of benefits and costs among the various affected jurisdictions. For example, some
measures would impose stricter environmental controls in order to reduce the risk of
damages and risks borne by coastal residents and visitors in California and Florida. The
costs incurred to implement such controls would reduce the overall economic benefits
shared by U.S. taxpayers in order to provide the benefits of greater environmental quality
to coastal residents. Most measures that would compensate those affected for the
environmental damages they sustain or that would increase the share of the Federal leasing
revenues would similarly reduce the total costs borne by coastal residents while reducing
the benefits to Federal taxpayers. However, changes in the allocation of OCS revenues
within coastal States, could offset local costs without affecting Federal finances.
The Task Force has learned that resolving OCS controversies is difficult because of the
issues of fairness and equity raised by the distributional consequences of leasing and
development. From one perspective, it could be argued, residents and visitors in California
and Florida who bear environmental risks in order that the general public may benefit
should be compensated. From another perspective, if the general public gives up
substantial benefits from developing the oil and gas resources it owns so that the residents
and visitors in California and Florida can enjoy their coastal resources unaffected by oil and
gas development, it could be argued that residents of these States should compensate the
general public in some fashion. The Task Force recognizes that there is clearly
no easy solution to such an equity conflict. The President should give
careful consideration to the effects of decisions about the three lease sales
on both the Nation as a whole and State and local jurisdictions.
CONCLUSIONS
The Task Force recognizes the complexity of the issues that arise from the environmental
concerns about OCS oil and gas activities. Clearly, no single approach can easily resolve
the conflicting views about the environmental effects that will occur, the extent to which
effects can and should be controlled, and the proper balance between the benefits that may
be achieved and the environmental costs and risks that must be borne. The strategic and
economic importance of domestic oil and gas production, on the one hand, and the
substantial public concern about degradation of environmental resources, on the other,
make OCS leasing issues difficult to resolve in a manner that meets the objectives of all
interested parties. The Task Force has concluded that, over the long run,
careful attention to each of the approaches outlined above will yield
balanced OCS leasing decisions for the three sale areas.
III - 7
January 2, 1990
Final Report
IV. CONCERNS ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
INTRODUCTION
Offshore oil and gas exploration and development can cause a wide range of environmental
effects which create concerns among the residents of nearby coastal areas. The
environmental effects that can result from OCS oil and gas activities include changes in the
physical and biological elements of the environment as well as changes in local economies,
land use, and population. Taken together, such effects are often regarded as a threat to the
character of coastal communities and the environmental amenities which attract people to
these areas.
Over the past 20 years, the Department of the Interior, other Federal Agencies, State and
local governments, and the oil and gas industry have developed a variety of measures to
protect the environment from impacts associated with OCS activity. The Federal
Government has enacted many environmental protection laws. These have been
supplemented in many cases by State and local actions. Technologies for controlling
environmental effects have been developed by the oil industry. Although these measures
do not completely prevent adverse effects, they have limited the nature and extent of the
damages that actually occur. The Task Force has undertaken the job of reviewing the
potential effects that are of concern to coastal residents and examining the existing
environmental protection measures. Its objective was to determine whether the effects that
would or could occur warrant actions that have been proposed such as banning or delaying
leasing and imposing more stringent environmental protection measures.
This chapter describes potential impacts to resources and communities in the following
categories:
Air Quality
Oil Spills
Commercial Fishing
Protected Species
Protected Lands
Social and Economic Impacts (including onshore infrastructure
changes and tourism losses)
Water Quality
The discussion for each section contains a description of existing conditions and potential
impacts posed by oil and gas leasing, exploration, development, and production in each of
the three lease areas. In most cases, the Task Force relied on MMS estimates of
hydrocarbon resources, scenarios describing anticipated development (both offshore and
onshore), and oil spill trajectory models. Generally, these are the most comprehensive data
available on these subjects. For information on environmental impacts, the Task Force
reviewed MMS information in light of the findings of the NAS/NRC Report, the
presentations and submissions from its public workshops, and additional information from
Agencies represented on the Task Force.
IV - 1
January 2, 1990
Final Report
IMPACTS ON AIR QUALITY
Summary of Concerns
The human health effects of air pollution make it a strong concern in areas where
substantial emissions and meteorological conditions cause poor air quality. Southern
California in particular has a combination of factors that cause poor air quality, create the
need for stringent controls of emissions, and heighten concerns about the effects of
additional emissions from offshore oil and gas activities. Ozone, which is formed by a
photochemical reaction among pollutants in the atmosphere, is a primary concern in
southern California. Reduced visibility is the concern in other areas that have excellent air
quality. Table IV-1 summarizes the air quality concerns for the three sale areas.
Offshore oil and gas operations emit air pollutants from several sources including: (1)
engine driven generators used to power platform and drilling equipment; (2) flaring of
natural gas associated with oil production; (3) fugitive hydrocarbon emissions; and (4)
emissions from support ships and helicopters. The types and quantities of air emissions
typically associated with offshore oil and gas activities are shown in Tables IV-2 and IV-3.
Meteorological conditions play an important role in the transport and dispersion of
emissions and, thus, have a strong effect on ambient air quality. The conditions that can
result in higher onshore concentrations from long-range transport of offshore emissions are
(1) a plume traveling in a stable air layer over the water, (2) winds blowing persistently
toward shore, and (3) meteorological conditions which cause the polluted air mass to
"slosh" back and forth over the coastal areas. On days when such conditions exist, OCS
emissions can contribute to onshore air pollution problems. Under different conditions,
offshore emissions can occur without adding measurably to onshore pollution loads.
The build-up of ozone from reactions involving nitrogen oxides and volatile organic
compounds is promoted by atmospheric temperature inversions which can trap pollutants
over a wide area. When an inversion occurs onshore, emissions of nitrogen oxides and
volatile organic compounds from OCS activities can contribute to ozone build-up.
Table IV-2 : Air Pollutants from OCS Activities
Nitrogen oxides (NOx) are an important factor in causing ozone pollution.
Sulfur oxides (SOx)
Total suspended particulates (TSP) refers to all particle emissions, both reactive
and nonreactive
Carbon monoxide (CO)
Volatile organic compounds (VOC) include all hydrocarbon compounds, except
those that are nonreactive.
Ozone (O3) is not released from OCS sources but is formed as a result of
photochemical reactions in the atmosphere involving VOC and NOx.
Particulate matter.
IV - 2
Table IV-1: Characterization of Air Quality Concerns
Closest Existing/
Potential OCS
General
Non-Attainment
Class I PSD
Development to
Description
Categories
Areas
Class I Area
Off Southwest
Good to
none
Everglades National Park
>30 Miles
Florida
Excellent
Ft. Jefferson National
Monument
Off Southern
Poor
Ozone,
Channel Islands National Park 6 Miles
California
NO2,
TSP,
PM10
CO
Off Northern
Good to
none
Redwoods National Park
15 Miles
California
Excellent
Emission Sources: Platform power generation
Crew and supply boats
Gas flaring
Helicopter flights
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Table IV-3: Type and Quantities of Typical Emissions
from OCS Activities and Platforms
Source
Emissions In Tons
NOx
VOC
SOx
CO
TSP
Exploration: 1
Drilling Vessel 2
25-80
3-10
2-5
8-17
3-5
Boats In-transit 3
1-3
2-6
<1-2
<1-2
<1-2
Development and
Production: 4
Platform 5
65-160
20-45
1-10 6
45-70
3-6
Boats In-transit and at
platform 3
10-100
3-60
1-3
3-10
1-3
Notes:
1.
Emissions in tons/operation
2.
Range for drilling depends upon exploration vessel engines used, target
depth, and duration of operation
3. Boat emissions vary with distance
4. Emissions in tons/year
5. Assumes power generated on the platform; (Electrified platforms can
have all pollutant emissions in single digits.) Range for development and
production depends upon the size of the platform, production
throughput, and whether production is processed on the platform.
6. SOx emissions can vary depending on the operation of sulfur content of
the production. The number listed here does not include SOx emissions
from the OS&T, which, depending on the operation of sulfur recovery
equipment, can have emissions 10 times higher.
Air emissions from activities onshore are controlled under the Federal Clean Air Act,
administered by the EPA, and related State and local laws. Under the Clean Air Act,
States develop implementation plans to control emissions sufficiently to meet National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). In addition, certain areas are designated as
Class I because of their high air quality. In Class I areas, the EPA applies regulations
designed for the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD). New emission sources
which exceed emission increments prescribed by the EPA are not allowed to locate in Class
I areas.
The Clean Air Act does not apply to activities conducted on the OCS, which are outside
State jurisdiction. Instead, OCS air emissions from drilling vessels and production
platforms are regulated by the MMS under Section 5 (a)(8) of the OCS Lands Act. This
provision requires compliance with NAAQS to the extent that OCS activities significantly
affect the air quality of a State. Because of the different requirement of the OCS Lands Act,
the existing MMS air quality regulations (30 FR 250.45 and 250.46) do not apply
emission controls that are as stringent as those in effect in some adjacent onshore areas.
Many of the participants in the Task Force workshops in California expressed the view that
IV 3
January 2, 1990
Final Report
it was inequitable to impose stringent controls on emissions from onshore activities while
allowing less controlled emissions offshore. The MMS has been considering a rulemaking
that would address this issue.
Support vessel and helicopter emissions are not currently regulated by either EPA under the
Clean Air Act or MMS under the OCS Lands Act. They can account for as much as 50%
of air pollutant emissions from OCS activities. The MMS is now considering regulating
emissions from crew and supply vessels.
Sale Specific Concerns
Sale 116, Part II- Off Southwestern Florida
Air quality in most of the Eastern Gulf of Mexico Planning Area is generally considered
very good. Air quality impacts of OCS-related development have not been a major issue in
southwest Florida. Former Secretary of the Interior Hodel created a substantial coastal
buffer area prohibiting leasing within 30 miles of the mainland and western Keys and 25
miles from the Dry Tortugas; this buffer removes concern for air pollutants except ozone.
Meteorological and topographical conditions with the potential to cause inversions which
promote ozone build-up are rare in the coastal region of southwest Florida. Likewise, there
are no large sources of emissions of volatile organic compounds. Thus, based on the
relatively low level of existing emissions, infrequent inversions, onshore ambient air
quality, and distance of possible OCS activities from shore, there is little potential for ozone
impacts from the Sale 116, Part II area.
The MMS conducts air pollution monitoring studies in other parts of the Gulf of Mexico,
notably the Offshore Coastal Dispersion study of inert pollutants. Such studies are
designed to detect any emerging air quality problems from OCS activities.
Everglades National Park is the only Class I PSD area near the proposed sale area. The
30-mile buffer should prevent any violations of PSD standards in Everglades National
Park.
Any new processing facilities which may be constructed in Florida as a result of OCS
development could have an impact on local air quality. The impact would depend on the
location of the facilities and the controls and mitigation requirements imposed by regulatory
officials with jurisdiction over onshore facilities. The MMS analysis does not project such
facilities in the area.
Emissions from OCS activities in the Sale 116, Part II area are unlikely to cause air quality
problems in adjacent onshore areas.
Sale 95 - Off Southern California
Parts of southern California, particularly the Los Angeles metropolitan area, suffer from the
worst air quality in the Nation due to a combination of meteorology, topography, extensive
urbanization, and rapid population growth. The majority of the onshore area adjoining Sale
95 is designated as nonattainment for the ozone standard set by EPA. Ozone levels in the
South Coast Air Quality Management District exceed the health-based NAAQS as often as
150 days each year. Figure IV-1 illustrates the magnitude of the southern California ozone
exceedences compared with the rest of the Nation. In the Ventura/Santa Barbara areas, the
IV 4
160
140
120
100
80
60
United States
40
Exceedance Davs/Year
Air Quality
20
OZONE
Frequency of NAAQS
Expected Exceedances
1986-88
Figure IV-1
January 2, 1990
Final Report
NAAQS for ozone is exceeded 10-15 days each year. The major source of emissions
contributing to ozone and smog is motor vehicles. Other large sources include
manufacturing, electric power generation, and petrochemical plants.
Table IV-4 shows the emissions of nitrogen oxide, a precursor to ozone, that are typical of
OCS operations off California. Newer platforms with emission controls produce
substantially lower emission levels.
Table IV-4: Typical Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from
California OCS Activities
Annual Average Emissions (Tons/Year/Platform)
Source
Uncontrolled
Controlled
Electrified Platform
15.21
5.42
Non-electrified Platform
159.93
62.34
Crew & Supply Vessels⁵
10-100
8-80
Notes: 1. Average for 12 existing electrified platforms
2. Average for 3 proposed electrified platforms
3. Average for existing 5 production and 3 processing
non-electrified platforms
4. Average for 3 existing and 2 future production and processing
non-electrified platforms
5. Depends on distance from port to platform
The NAS/NRC found that "the relationship between OCS development and onshore air
quality in the South Central Coast of California is as well understood as any such
relationship in the U.S." According to MMS, air quality models suggest that offshore
emissions do not play a significant role in causing NAAQS to be exceeded in southern
California. However, because of the inherent uncertainties, results from other models
make such conclusions about the contribution of OCS emissions to exceedences of
NAAQS onshore debatable. For example, EPA models estimate that as a worst case,
offshore air emissions can contribute up to 10% of the ambient ozone level, although the
modeled cases showed that OCS emissions did not contribute to ozone violations. The
EPA believes the models lack the sophistication to make adequately reliable findings about
the contribution of OCS emissions to exceedence of ozone standards.
Onshore areas already implement stringent emission control standards and are in the
process of adopting measures which would cause dramatic lifestyle changes for southern
California residents. Proposed changes include massive carpooling programs and,
eventually, elimination of gasoline powered vehicles. In addition, new regulations would
greatly restrict use of charcoal lighter fluid and propane barbecue grills, gas lawn mowers,
personal care sprays, and household fireplaces. Increasing emissions from OCS
IV 5
January 2, 1990
Final Report
development would exacerbate the air quality problem. In the face of increased offshore
emissions, onshore sources would have to reduce emissions even further in order to
comply with the NAAQS.
In January 1989, the MMS proposed regulations applicable offshore the State of
California. The Task Force has been advised that MMS is in the process of drafting a more
stringent rule which would establish a regulatory regime which controls OCS-related
emissions off California in a manner which is substantially equivalent to the controls
applicable to similar onshore facilities. This is consistent with the findings of the Task
Force below.
It has also been suggested that the authority to regulate OCS emissions be transferred from
the MMS to the EPA. The Task Force found that such a change in statutory jurisdiction is
not necessary if MMS revises its OCS air quality regulations to make them substantially
equivalent to the controls applicable to similar onshore facilities.
OCS development in the Sale 95 area could lead to increased levels of air pollutants in
nonattainment areas of southern California at a time when those levels need to be reduced to
meet NAAQS and California State standards. This issue can only be resolved by more
stringent air emission control and mitigation requirements for OCS development.
Sale 91 - Off Northern California
Air quality in most of northern California is generally very good. The primary existing
sources of air pollution in northern California are lumbering activities, agricultural
operations, paper mills, and geothermal energy development. The most common air
pollution problems are associated with particulates generated by lumbering and agricultural
operations, odors associated with sulfur compound emissions from pulp mills, and
hydrogen sulfide emissions from power generators in the Geysers geothermal area of
Sonoma County. However, progress has been achieved over the last 2 decades in reducing
these problems. Particulate emissions have been reduced by modifying wood waste
burning practices and by replacing orchard heaters with wind machines and water spray
systems. As a result, there has been a decrease in ambient levels of particulates at many
locations over the last decade.
There are two Class I PSD areas in the North Coast Air Basin: the Redwoods National
Park in Humboldt County and the Yolla-Bolly Middle Eel Wilderness Area in Trinity
County. At the public workshops in Arcata, the Task Force heard concerns that air
emissions from OCS development could degrade the air quality in Redwoods National
Park.
The two important pollutants of major concern for air quality in this Class I area are
particulate matter and sulfur dioxide. Generally, OCS activities emit small quantities of
particulates [see Table IV-4.] Sulfur dioxide emissions from OCS activities depend upon
the sulfur content of fuels used or the produced hydrocarbons. In the analysis done to
date, summarized in the draft EIS for Sale 91, MMS found that the sulfur dioxide standards
would not be violated for Redwoods National Park. Mitigation of particulate emissions is
not addressed in the draft EIS; however, no leasing is proposed within 15 miles of the
Park. The EPA commented that mitigation requirements for leases in the area should be at
least as great as reductions that were required under Sale 73, with the possibility of greater
future reduction requirements.
IV 6
January 2, 1990
Final Report
The air quality requirements that should apply to the Sale 91 area would require mitigation,
by either controls or offsets, of any emissions that exceed the PSD increment for an
onshore area. Thus, OCS-related facilities would not be expected to have a measurable
impact on the Park, barring unusual siting or other considerations which are not apparent at
this time.
The Task Force found that ozone pollution is not an issue in the Sale 91 area. Compliance
with PSD requirements, particularly for the Class I National Park areas, is a major concern,
but could be adequately addressed if revised MMS OCS air quality regulations require
controls or mitigation that comply with the PSD requirements.
OIL SPILLS
Summary of Concerns
Oil spilled into marine and coastal environments can have severe adverse effects. These
effects include the killing of animals and plants contacted by the oil, disruption of food
chains and ecosystems, and spoiled recreational use and enjoyment of land and water
resources.
Birds, corals, fish, and marine mammals can die from the ailments caused by coming in
contact with oil. Similarly, plants, such sea grasses, kelp, and mangroves, can also die
from the effects of oiling. The relatively short-term loss of plants and animals, which are
links in the food chain, can cause ecosystem disruption lasting longer than the physical
presence of spilled oil.
Oil enters the marine environment from a number of sources, both natural and caused by
man. The largest source is transportation (See Figure IV-2) and derives primarily from
accidental spills from tankers and intentional dumping of oiled bilge and ballast water.
Oil spills differ widely in size and effect. Public perceptions about oil spills are generally
dominated by the pictures of large spills such as the spill of 260,000 barrels of crude oil
from the Exxon Valdez, the largest U.S. oil spill. Most oil spills are much smaller and far
less damaging. The effects of an oil spill depend on the resources contacted by the oil.
Even a very large spill, exceeding 10,000 barrels, for example, could have very little or no
detectable, long-term effect if spilled in the open ocean under conditions where the oil
dispersed and weathered rapidly. On the other hand, a relatively small spill, such as a few
hundred barrels, contacting resources very sensitive to oiling, could kill thousands of
plants and animals and disrupt the affected ecosystem for a long period. Clearly, if a spill
occurs within reach of land, the larger the size of the spill, the greater the chances that
sensitive resources will be affected. Large spills can spread to greater areas and are less
likely to be effectively contained and cleaned up.
Of all sources of oil in the marine environment, the contribution from OCS related activity
is small. OCS spills tend to be small and infrequent. Table IV-5 shows the OCS-related
spills exceeding 1,000 barrels during the last 25 years from the OCS. The MMS requires
reporting of all spills but does not project statistics for spills less than 1,000 barrels in its
environmental impact statements.
IV 7
Figure IV-2: Oil in the Sea
Offshore Production (2%)
Natural Sources (8%)
Atmosphere (9%)
Transportation (45%)
Wastes and Runoff (36%)
Source: NAS, 1985,
Oil In the Sea: Inputs. Fates. and Effects
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Table IV-5: OCS Oil Platform Spills*
Platform Spills of 1,000 Barrels or More, 1964 to 1988
Year
Location
Barrels
Cause
1964
Eugene Island
2,559
Collision / Fire
1964
Ship Shoal / Eugene Island
11,869
Storm / Blowout
1965
Ship Shoal
1,688
Blowout
1969
Santa Barbara
77,000
Blowout
1969
Ship Shoal
2,500
Collision / Blowout
1970
Main Pass
30,000
Fire
1970-1
South Timbalier
53,000
Blowout / Fire
1973
West Delta
9,935
Tank Rupture
1973
South Pelto
7,000
Barge Leak
1979
Main Pass
1,500
Collision
1980
High Island
1,456
Tank Overflow
*Note: All spills occurred in the Gulf of Mexico except the one off Santa Barbara, California
OCS Oil Pipeline Spills
Pipeline Spills of 1,000 Barrels or More, 1964 to 1988
Year
Location
Barrels
Cause
1967
West Delta
160,638
Anchor Dragging
1968
South Timbalier
6,000
Anchor Dragging
1969
Main Pass
7,532
Cause Unknown
1973
West Delta
5,000
Corrosion
1974
Eugene Island
19,833
Anchor Dragging
1974
Main Pass
3,500
Hurricane
1976
Eugene Island
4,000
Trawler Dragging
1981
South Pass
5,100
Anchor Dragging
1988
Galveston
15,000
Anchor Dragging
Since 1964, five of the eleven major OCS platform oil spills, those greater than 1,000
barrels, have been from loss of well control. The amount of oil that could enter the water,
if a well remained uncontrolled, would depend primarily on the natural flow rate of the
well. The oil will enter the environment at the rate determined by the natural pressures and
other characteristics of the reservoir. The 1969 Santa Barbara Channel oil spill is the most
well-known example of loss of well control.
Oil spills from pipelines occur primarily when a pipeline is damaged (by anchors, typically)
or breaks. Since 1964, only one of the nine OCS pipeline spills greater than 1,000 barrels
was from corrosion (See Table IV-5). Theoretically, the volume of an oil spill is limited to
the volume of oil in the pipeline between the shut-off valves after the leak has been
identified and the pipeline shut down.
IV 8
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Most small platform spills occur from oil in discharges, diesel fuel spillage, or during
transfer of production. Outer Continental Shelf oil spills are generally smaller in size and
less frequent than tanker spills (See Table IV-6). The Task Force learned that, in general,
conditions prevalent in OCS oil and gas fields make very large spills less likely to occur
from OCS platforms than from major tanker accidents.
Table IV-6: Oil Spills by Source
1,000 Barrels or Greater
Average
Median
Barrels Spilled
Number
Spill Size
Spill Size
Per Billion
Source
of Spills
(Barrels)
(Barrels)
Barrels Handled
United States¹
OCS Platforms
20
21,000
6,500
.05
and Pipelines
TAPS Tankers2
6
51,000
14,000
.05
Worldwide Tankers3 140
106,000
15,000
.14
Notes: 1. Data for 1964-1988
2. TAPS (Trans Alaska Pipeline System) tankers carry Alaskan
crude oil from Valdez, Alaska to Long Beach, California and other
U.S. ports.
3. Data for 1974-1985
Source: MMS, 1989
The MMS has primary responsibility for prevention of OCS oil spills and ensuring
appropriate containment and cleanup response should a spill occur. The MMS is also
responsible for the assessment of oil spill risk and the identification of resources that could
be damaged by OCS oil spills.
The blowout of Union Oil's Platform A in the Santa Barbara Channel in 1969 awakened
many people to the kind of environmental damage that could result from offshore oil and
gas exploration and development. The Santa Barbara spill was the largest U.S. OCS
platform oil spill on record, spilling, by some estimates, as much as 77,000 barrels of oil in
the first 10 days and seeping an additional 28,000 barrels through 1988. The Santa
Barbara spill resulted in new legislation and spurred the development of new technologies
and safety requirements that greatly increased the ability to protect the environment from
adverse effects of OCS activities.
The primary means of preventing oil spills from loss of well control is the mandatory
installation of blowout preventers at the well head and casing in the well. These measures
automatically seal the well should it begin to get out of control. Lessees are also required to
IV - 9
January 2, 1990
Final Report
take measures to prevent spillage of fuel oil and produced oil during transfers between
vessels and platforms.
The MMS requires an Oil Spill Contingency Plan for oil and gas operations in the Federal
OCS for both exploration and development phases. These contingency plans are required
to ensure that lessees can effectively respond to an oil spill. Outer Continental Shelf
contingency plans identify what equipment is located onsite and what equipment is
available from specific contractors and how the equipment will be deployed in the event of
a spill. The availability of containment and cleanup equipment both at OCS platforms and
in nearby harbors increases the effectiveness of OCS spill response and reduces the
likelihood of damage from OCS oil spills.
However, OCS contingency plans do not include assessments of how much oil can be
contained or recovered under various conditions. They also do not specifically describe a
credible worst case scenario or provide a plan to effectively respond to a credible worst
case scenario. The MMS has recently completed a review of the maximum likely OCS
spills. This review concluded that the maximum credible oil spill from any OCS platform
would be 1000 to 6000 barrels per day. In the area off southern California where such
flow rates are possible, the existing skimmers are capable of removing 13,000 barrels of oil
per day. Thus, if conditions were to allow a spill of this size to be contained, it could be
handled successfully by existing equipment.
If damage occurs due to an oil spill from an OCS platform, pipeline, or "shuttle tanker,"
responsibility for compensating damaged parties lies first with the owner and operator of
the facility or vessel involved. In addition, the U.S. Coast Guard manages the Offshore
Oil Pollution Compensation Fund, established by Title III of the OCS Lands Act
Amendments of 1978, which is available to pay claims which exceed a responsible party's
legal limit of liability, or if the responsible party cannot pay the claim. The Secretary of
Transportation's last annual report on the fund reported that no claims had been presented
to the fund during the 10 years since it was established; the fund has reached nearly $128
million.
The Task Force also received briefings from the U.S. Coast Guard on the Exxon Valdez
spill and subsequent cleanup efforts and the review of regional oil spill contingency plans
being performed by the National Response Team. The Task Force concluded that
there are serious limitations in the capability to contain and clean up very
large oil spills, especially in heavy seas and high winds. These limitations
apply to the equipment and techniques used to respond to OCS oil spills as well as to spills
from tankers.
The Regional Contingency Plans required by the U.S. Coast Guard are now being
reviewed by the National Response Team to determine whether they are adequate for
maximum likely oil spills. While these contingency plans identify sensitive coastal areas
for priority in containment and cleanup efforts, in most cases Agencies like the National
Park Service which are responsible for managing such resources do not have the direct
capability to take actions to protect these resources from being oiled by a nearby spill.
For each lease sale, the MMS assesses the oil spill risk associated with the oil and gas
development that could occur. The MMS first estimates the amount of oil that could be
found, developed, and produced. This volume is compared to historical spill rates to
estimate the risk of a spill occurring during the life of the operation. The MMS estimates
IV 10
January 2, 1990
Final Report
the oil spill risk associated with new development only (base case risk) and associated with
all potential sources in the planning area (cumulative risk).
The MMS based its analyses of oil spill risk from the three sales on the historic spill record.
Despite the generally good record, these analyses show that if oil is produced in the
amounts estimated, the chance of a spill greater than 10,000 barrels ranges from 10% to
36% over the 30 year life of the oil fields that might be discovered.
The MMS calculates oil spill risk based on the spills greater than 1,000 and greater than
10,000 barrels per billion barrels produced, transported via pipeline, or transported via
tanker throughout the OCS. As Table IV-6 shows, the risks of a spill from tankers, as
compared to an OCS platform or pipeline, are much greater in both frequency of occurrence
and the amount of oil spilled. The MMS and States require pipelines when appropriate and
when permits can be obtained in order to take advantage of their superior safety. The
statistics in Table IV-5 cover spills reported from 1964 to 1988.
The Task Force learned that the coastal areas near each of the three proposed OCS lease
sales were subject to the risk of oil spills from existing tanker traffic and, in the case of
southern California, existing State and Federal offshore production. Compared to the risk
of spills from these existing sources, the additional risk from the development resulting
from the three sales is small.
Current oil spill risk assessments identify tanker traffic as the most significant threat of an
oil spill in each of the three areas. Table IV-7 compares the annual peak production
projection for Sale 116, Part II, Sale 95 and Sale 91 with the non-OCS crude oil and
petroleum product transported through the sale areas by tanker. The Task Force learned
that the Florida and California State governments have recently proposed or enacted
legislation authorizing funds to respond to an oil spill, but these efforts have not yet
resulted in specific improvements in spill prevention or response technology. The Task
Force found that, in general, tankers pose a much greater risk of a catastrophic oil spill than
offshore production.
Table IV-7: OCS vs. Non-OCS Oil in the Sale Areas
Millions of Barrels of Oil Per Year
Non-OCS
Peak OCS
Tankered Crude
Production From
Lease Sale
and Product*
Lease Sale
Sale 116, Part II
960
5
Sale 95
430
28
Sale 91
210
38
*
Data for domestic traffic is from 1986; 1985 for imports and exports.
IV 11
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Figures IV- 3, 4 and 5 show the cumulative risk of oil spills in each of the sale areas from
all sources. These statistics cover the projected 30 year production horizon, if the sales
were conducted and commercial hydrocarbons discovered.
The assessment of the potential damages from oil spills involves estimating the trajectories
that spilled oil might follow. Potential trajectories are derived from studies of physical
oceanographic and meteorologic data using computer simulations. Trajectory analyses can
show were oil is likely to go if spilled in various locations under various conditions. This
information can be helpful in planning oil spill responses to protect nearby environmental
resources. Currently, however, trajectory analyses are essentially projections of water
movement which account for neither natural nor human effects on spilled oil. Thus, they
tend to overstate the extent of contact an oil spill would have with coastal resources.
The NAS/NRC Report identified weaknesses in the information available for the analysis
of oil spill trajectories and the effects of oil spills on specific environments and ecosystems.
The NAS/NRC found that generally, there is a need for more field studies to accumulate
enough information to estimate oil spill trajectories. For example, more information is
needed regarding coastal circulation off southern California. Specifically, a unified
description of the Southern California Bight should be developed. In Sale 116, Part II, the
NAS/NRC judged the data on the Loop Current circulation during the summer months
inadequate and also recommended drifter studies to support conjecture about water flow
south of the Florida Keys onto the continental shelf. The NAS/NRC also found that a
general lack of understanding about the transport and the fate of spilled oil mixed vertically
in the water column.
With respect to ecology, the NAS/NRC found that "existing information on sensitivity and
recovery of critical habitats (e.g., coral reefs, mangroves, and sea grasses) is inadequate to
predict the impact of OCS-related activities." The lack of information concerning the
sensitivity and recovery of habitats and species would be a major concern in all three sale
areas if new oil fields were discovered and produced.
The Task Force has concluded:
The risk that an oil spill greater than 1,000 barrels will occur due to
OCS-related activities in the three proposed lease sale areas is small
compared to the risk of a significant spill from other existing sources,
notably non-OCS tanker and barge traffic;
Although the risk of occurrence of a significant-sized OCS oil spill is
small, the environmental effect of such a spill could be significant;
Coastal and marine resources deserve greater protection from oil spills,
from all sources, than is now available; and
Government and the oil and shipping industries should act now to achieve
significantly better protection from oil spills for coastal and marine
resources, regardless of whether OCS leasing and development proceeds in
the three proposed lease sale areas.
IV 12
Figure IV-3: Cumulative Spill Risk - Off Southwestern Florida
Contribution to Overall Risk of a Spill From Each Source
10,000 Barrels or More Over 30 Years
Existing Leases (4%)
Sale 116, Part II (3%)
Tankers with Imported Oil (90%)
Overall Risk From All Sources: 97%
Figure IV-4: Cumulative Spill Risk - Off Southern California
Contribution to Overall Risk of a Spill From Each Source
10,000 Barrels or More Over 30 Years
Existing
State OCS (8%)
Tankers with
Imported Oil (8%)
Sale 95 Base Case (4%)
Tankers with
Alaskan Oil (47%)
Existing
Federal OCS (22%)
Lightering (5%)
Overall Risk From All Sources: 94%
Figure IV-5: Cumulative Spill Risk - Off Northern California
Contribution to Overall Risk of a Spill From Each Source
10,000 Barrels or More Over 30 Years
Sale 91 Base Case (20%)
Lightering (4%)
Tankers with Alaskan Oil (61%)
Overall Risk From All Sources: 85%
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Sale Specific Concerns
Table IV-8 summarizes oil spill probabilities that are discussed in the following sections for
each lease sale.
Table IV-8: Probability of One or More Oil Spills*
Greater Than 10,000 Barrels
Lease Sale
116 (II)
95
91
Sale
10%
11%
36%
Tankers
96%
82%1
77%
Overall Probability (All Sources)
97%
86%1
85%
94%2
Notes: * See Figures IV-3, 4 and 5 for spill sources not itemized in this table
The above probabilities are not additive, as they are derived from a
non-linear distribution.
1. Excludes all Federal OCS production
2. Includes all Federal OCS production
Percent of Overall Probability Attributable to:
Sale
3%
4%
20%
Tankers
90%
60%
65%
Sale 116, Part II- Off Southwestern Florida
The Task force reviewed MMS estimates of the oil spill risk and trajectory analyses for Sale
116, Part II. These studies show that the estimated OCS oil production from the sale
would create a 10% chance of an oil spill greater than 10,000 barrels which, if
uncontained, could contact sensitive resources in the Everglades and the Keys. The
importance of the environmental resources in these areas makes it imperative to develop
measures to protect them from oil spills before production begins.
Petroleum geologists believe that if oil is found in this area, it will most likely resemble oil
found onshore in the Sunniland Formation. This oil is highly viscous and must be pumped
to the surface. For this reason, the likelihood of a blowout during exploration or
production drilling is extremely low.
IV 13
January 2, 1990
Final Report
The Southwest Florida Shelf, Dry Tortugas, and Florida Keys currently face threats of oil
spills from the merchant transport fleet, particularly tankers and freighters, which transit the
area. The MMS estimated that there is a 96% chance of an oil spill greater than 10,000
barrels occurring from maritime transport in this area over the next 30 years, even without
OCS oil and gas activity. Nearly 1 billion barrels of crude oil and petroleum products are
shipped through the Straits of Florida each year.
The simulations of spilled oil done by the Oil Spill Risk Assessment Task Force were from
four sites located northwest of the Keys. Models results showed that many oil trajectories
were entrained in the Loop Current and moved out of the area through the Straits of
Florida. The earliest contact of oil to the Keys was 33 hours, while the earliest contact to
the Florida mainland was 90 hours. However, less than 1% of the simulations contacted
land in this timeframe. Over 30 days, the maximum length of the model simulations, 25%
of the simulations contacted the Keys, and 11% contacted the mainland.
Sale 95 - Off Southern California
The MMS has estimated the probability of oil spill occurrence associated with an assumed
production of 230 million barrels of oil in the Sale 95 area over a 31-year period. The
estimated probability of a spill over 1,000 barrels is 27%. For a spill exceeding 10,000
barrels, the probability is 11%.
As in the Sale 116, Part II area, there is substantial risk of oil spills from tanker traffic.
Assuming no OCS development in this region over the next 31 years, the risk from
Alaskan and local tankers of oil spills greater than 1,000 and 10,000 barrels is 95% and
83%, respectively. With OCS oil production in the estimated amounts from Sale 95, the
risk of oil spills increases to 96% and 85%, respectively.
There is additional risk in this area from existing Federal and State leases. The risk of oil
spills exceeding 1,000 and 10,000 barrels, respectively, is 85% and 47% for existing
Federal leases; and 56% and 23% from existing State leases. This increased the overall
chance of an oil spill larger than 1,000 barrels from all sources (OCS and tanker activity) to
greater than 99.5%; and to 94% for a spill larger than 10,000 barrels.
Sale 91 - Off Northern California
Here, too, the risk of oil spills from tanker traffic overshadows the risk of spills from OCS
development. Assuming no OCS development in this region over the next 30 years, the
risks of oil spills exceeding 1,000 and 10,000 barrels, respectively, from Alaskan and local
tankers are estimated to be 89% and 77%. With the estimated OCS oil production from
Sale 91, the risk of an oil spill greater than 1,000 barrels increases from 89% to 96%.
The MMS has estimated the probability of oil spill occurrence associated with an assumed
production of 400 million barrels of oil in the Sale 91 area over a 30 year period. The
estimated probability of an OCS spill greater than 1,000 barrels is 57%. For an OCS spill
greater than 10,000 barrels the probability is 36%.
Within the proposed sale area, the probability of a spill is much higher in the Point Arena
Basin than in the Eel River Basin. This is because the likelihood of spill occurrence is
directly related to the estimated volume of oil production. A large majority of the
IV 14
January 2, 1990
Final Report
anticipated oil production would occur in the Point Arena Basin.
An oil spill in this region from any source would mainly affect commercial fishing, marine
mammals, and seabirds. If a spill were not contained at sea and came ashore along the
rocky and inaccessible coast of northern California, it could cause contamination that only
natural processes could clean up.
Given prevailing winds and currents, the areas having the highest probability of contact
from a spill include the shore along Mendocino County, the Gulf of Farallones and Cordell
Bank National Marine Sanctuaries, and the Point Reyes National Seashore just north of
San Francisco.
If severe weather and sea state conditions prevailed after a major oil spill in this area,
effective containment and cleanup would be very difficult. Containment equipment cannot
operate efficiently in high waves or swells. Average wave heights exceed 6 feet, the
practical limit of existing equipment, over 50% of the time off Point Arena.
COMMERCIAL FISHERIES CONCERNS
Summary of Concerns
Three major concerns were voiced by commercial and recreational fishermen about the
potential impacts of oil and gas development in the three areas: (1) the potential effects of
space and scheduling conflicts, (2) the loss or destruction of habitat from OCS oil and gas
operations, and (3) the loss of livelihood from an oil spill that could affect the fish or
fishing in the areas. The value and harvest of the fisheries of major concern are
summarized in Table IV- 9.
Competition for OCS space is the major source of conflict between the fishing and the oil
and gas industries. Geophysical surveys and drilling operations in prime fishing areas
could displace fishing efforts for a short, but possibly critical, period of time. Oil
development and production structures could interfere with some fishing efforts for many
years. The more mobile fisheries, such as trawling for bottom fish or shrimp, are the most
likely to be susceptible to space-use conflicts from offshore structures. The stationary
fisheries, such as lobster and crab potting, are more likely to be affected by oil and gas
support operations (vessel traffic) than by stationary structures.
The area excluded by offshore structures varies depending on the type of structure and
water depth. Floating exploration drilling rigs use an extensive array of anchors to hold the
position of the drilling rig. Approximately 3 square miles may be excluded from fishing
activities by such structures. Jackup rigs that rest on the bottom preempt a much smaller
area, generally less than 1 square mile. Generally, fishing exclusions from exploration
activities will last for a maximum of 120 days.
Each production and development platform results in less than 1 square mile of area lost to
the fishing industry. Unlike the short-term nature of the exclusion from exploration,
production and development structures would exclude most mobile fisheries in the
immediate area for 20-30 years.
IV 15
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Table IV-9: Commercial Fisheries Harvest and Value
1988 Annual
1988 Ex-Vessel
Fisheries of
Harvest
Value
Major Concern
(million pounds)
($ millions)
Off Southwest
Pink Shrimp
5.9
15.3
Florida *
Spiny Lobster
6.1
16.9
Snapper
2.1
3.3
Groupers
8.1
12.3
Off Southern
Shrimp
0.7
1.0
California
Flatfish
5.2
3.6
Rockfish
6.6
2.6
Shellfish
2.1
5.6
Shark
1.5
1.7
Urchin
19.0
7.0
Off Northern
Shrimp
10.2
4.2
California
Salmon
5.2
14.6
Urchin
19.0
7.0
Dungeness Crab
7.7
10.2
Rockfish
17.4
6.5
Sole
13.5
4.6
Major Concerns: Space-use conflicts, habitat loss, oil spills
* Lee, Collier, Monroe and Dade Counties
Two factors can increase the amount of OCS area that is lost to fisheries, both associated
with specific methods of fishing. Free-drifting fishing gear (drift gill nets and long lines),
typically set at night, move with the prevailing currents and are under minimal, if any,
control of the fishermen. These fishermen, therefore, must allow for a much larger safety
buffer upcurrent from OCS structures. Trawl fisheries may be excluded from a large area
if a number of structures are located proximate to each other; here, the exclusion is
increased due to the difficulty in setting and retrieving the gear in confined areas. The
stationary fisheries, such as potting, set nets, and hook and line, are less affected by
offshore structures.
Natural factors can reduce the overall effects of space loss on most commercial fisheries.
Most of the important fish species are mobile to some extent, and although physical space
may be lost to fishermen, the fish can be available to harvest when outside of the preempted
area. Of course, even the most mobile fish will have some portion of the stock in
preempted areas at any given time. As additional area is lost to fishermen, fishing effort
and costs increase to maintain the same quantity of landings.
IV 16
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Additional concerns have been raised on the potential for residual effects after seismic
operations in certain areas. Although the fishermen are physically able to fish the area after
seismic operations have concluded, claims have been made that the fish disperse and cannot
be caught by the fishermen. In addition, gear damage could occur as a result of offshore
oil and gas activity. This damage would affect the harvest of individual fishermen and
cause lost time and wages.
Potential competition for coastal facilities, such as docking areas and repair and storage
facilities, also contributes to the concerns of the fishing industry. All fisheries may be
affected by loss of onshore facilities. Onshore conflicts may occur if industrial
development preempts fishing industry uses.
Also of concern to the fishing community is the potential destruction or modification of fish
habitat because of coastal development, oil and gas structure placement, or operational
discharges from drilling activities. Concerns were raised that the discharge of drill muds
and cuttings could bury bottom organisms, alter live-bottom communities, and affect fish
habitat. In addition, the placement of structures or operational discharges that occur in
discrete spawning areas could affect the viability of future generations. Construction of
onshore facilities and expansion of port facilities could result in destruction of habitat.
The chemical component of drilling fluids can be toxic to fish species if high enough
concentrations occur. In addition, chronic, low-level inputs of hydrocarbons associated
with drilling discharges may have sublethal effects on organisms living on the bottom
nearby. These organisms are a part of the food chain on which commercial fisheries
depend.
Offshore oil and gas accidents may have adverse impacts on fish, shellfish, invertebrate
prey species, vegetation, and habitat. A large oil spill can cause significant impacts on
marine and estuarine ecosystems. One spill can affect a portion of a year class of fish if it
hits an estuary or nursery area. Extensive mortality of eggs and larvae that float or swim
near the water surface or are in shallow water and which contact the spill can occur. These
life stages are the most sensitive to toxic effects from spilled petroleum hydrocarbons. If a
spill occurs in or contacts a sheltered or partially enclosed coastal area, remnants of the spill
may persist for a number of years and affect subsequent year classes, probably with
decreasing overall effects over time. The effects of egg and larval mortality on fisheries
harvest cannot be realistically estimated because of highly complex environmental and
ecological processes affecting recruitment of young fish to the harvested population.
However, the overall effects will be influenced by the portion of the year class which is
affected.
Adult fish, for the most part, are able to avoid spilled oil which is floating on the surface.
Fish and shellfish eggs and larvae are much more susceptible to exposure to spilled oil in
open-water environments.
Oil in the water can damage fishing gear. In the event of a severe spill, public concerns
over fish tainting can temporarily disrupt a local market for fish.
There are currently a variety of measures in place to manage the potential adverse
environmental effects that oil and gas activities could have on the fisheries and fish
resources. To minimize the area lost to fishing from offshore exploratory structures,
operators in some areas have been required to use jackup drilling rigs in water depths of
IV 17
January 2, 1990
Final Report
175 feet or less. The MMS also requires training for oil industry personnel on how to
recognize and avoid interfering with fishing activities.
For the Santa Barbara Channel, a joint oil/fishing industry liaison committee has been
formed to provide information to each industry and to assure that oil and gas industry
activities are scheduled in a manner that minimizes conflicts with commercial fishermen.
The joint committee is also working towards establishing voluntary vessel traffic lanes to
concentrate OCS vessel traffic away from fishing areas.
Fishermen who suffer damage to or loss of fishing gear from OCS oil and gas-related
tools, equipment, etc., may file a claim with the Fishermen's Contingency Fund,
established by Title IV of the OCS Lands Act Amendments of 1978, which is funded by
assessments on offshore leases and permits. The Fund compensates for damaged gear and
some resulting economic loss (i.e., 50% of the gross income lost because of the damage to
fishing gear). The Fund currently contains approximately $2 million. In the Santa Barbara
Channel, the joint committee established a program to cover damage claims while they are
being processed.
The existing permitting process for offshore activities seeks to minimize potential
environmental effects on nearby live-bottom areas or other unique habitats. Stipulations on
existing leases in southern California, for example, require that offshore structures be sited
in a manner that avoids direct impacts on unique biological areas. The control of oil spills
has been discussed above; the control of water discharges is discussed in a later section of
this chapter.
There are limitations in current knowledge of these effects on fisheries. For example, there
is currently insufficient data to clearly separate spatial exclusion effects from natural harvest
variability. This is due, in part, to a lack of adequate information on the distribution and
abundance of various species, as noted by the NAS/NRC Report.
With regard to the potential effects of seismic surveys on fish harvests, preliminary studies
funded by MMS indicate that seismic sound sources can cause a response in rockfish that
affects the catch of these important commercial species. However, data are not available to
make an assessment of the duration or spatial extent of these effects under normal operating
conditions.
Overall, there is little information specific to these areas that can be used to evaluate the
long-term environmental effects of OCS activities on the habitat. However, habitat effects
are most likely to result from the physical effects of structure placement, anchoring, and
drilling discharges. Existing laboratory and field studies indicate a low accumulation of
heavy metals in organisms from drilling fluids, primarily because the metals are discharged
in a relatively insoluble form. The NAS /NRC Report indicates a need for more
site-specific monitoring and analysis in some areas. Additionally, the MMS lacks the data
needed for long-term assessment of the effectiveness of decisions on siting, permit actions,
and mitigation techniques.
The actual effects on fish populations from an open-water oil spill are unknown and
probably cannot be known. The overall effects would be determined by a multitude of
confounding factors including: size of the spill, season, species, location, weather, type of
oil, and ocean currents. In addition, it is currently impossible to project the resultant effect
of egg and larval losses on subsequent recruitment to the population. It is certain that
IV 18
January 2, 1990
Final Report
detrimental effects on individual eggs, larvae, and fish would occur as a result of an OCS
oil spill. However, because of their mobility and the broad distribution of most fish
species, it is unlikely that these effects would result in measurable changes in the overall
fish population.
Oil spills that contact land are of more immediate concern because they cause losses in
habitat or nursery areas. Still, the overall effect on fish population levels and commercial
fisheries from such losses is unknown. However, it is probable that such losses would
have persistent effects. Overall, there is a fairly large base of information on the lethal and
sublethal effects of petroleum hydrocarbons on individual specimens of various fish
species. What is lacking is an understanding of the linkage between the temporary or
permanent loss of habitat, the loss of eggs, or the death of larvae and the resulting effects
on harvestable fish populations.
The Task Force finds that while coordination and management of OCS
activities can minimize space use conflicts at sea, competition for port
space will be a concern in this planning area.
In addition, the Task Force found that additional mitigation concerning
management of onshore facilities; controls in biologically sensitive areas;
enforcement and improvements in oil spill prevention, containment, and
cleanup should be implemented, when necessary, to better protect the
commercial and recreational fishing industries.
Sale Specific Concerns
Sale 116, Part II - Off Southwestern Florida
Commercial fisheries in southwest Florida include high-value species such as shrimp,
spiny lobster, and stone crab. The potential effects of spatial exclusion in these fisheries is
not the primary issue in southwest Florida. The major concern centers around possible oil
spills and the potential loss or degradation of habitat that supports fish populations.
Seagrass beds, coastal wetlands, and mangrove forests are examples of the habitats that
would be at risk from an oil spill.
The southwest Florida area is an important recreational fishing area; concerns center on the
effects of an oil spill on the tourist industry and loss of aesthetic appeal for vacationers.
Recreational fishing in the Florida Keys and Everglades brings millions of dollars into the
local economy.
The Tortugas Shrimp Sanctuary is an important nursery area for pink shrimp and is within
the Sale 116, Part II area. The potential effects of an oil spill contacting the sanctuary are
of major concern.
The Task Force finds that habitats which are important to commercial fish stocks and
recreational fishing would be at risk if an oil spill occurred from tanker operations or OCS
activities.
Sale 95 - Off Southern California
The marine environment offshore southern California is rich in fish life. In 1988, the
IV 19
January 2, 1990
Final Report
landings in southern California contributed approximately 300 million pounds to the total
U.S. fisheries harvest.
Space-use conflicts are the dominant concerns off the California coast and are exacerbated
here because of the relatively narrow continental shelf. The level of conflict has been
mitigated with the advent of the joint oil/fisheries committee. If offshore oil and gas
operations increase, the potential for onshore conflicts over docking, repair, and storage
facilities will increase.
Loss of offshore fish habitat for the rocky reef fisheries and the effects of seismic activities
on rockfish harvest are major concerns of the fishermen of southern California. The loss
of fishing gear from obstructions or from oil and gas vessel activity and just compensation
for gear losses continue to be a general concern of fishermen. The potential effects of oil
spills on fishing, fishing gear, and fish populations remains a concern.
The Task Force finds that effects on commercial fishing cannot be fully mitigated but can
be substantially reduced by careful management and coordination of OCS activities to avoid
conflicts with fishermen.
Sale 91 - Off Northern California
The Sale 91 area is located within productive commercial fishing grounds. Annual landings
in the area are approximately 100 million pounds. Commercial fishing is among the top
three industries in the area.
Because of the relatively narrow shelf off northern California (less than 10 miles in some
areas), space-use concerns are one of the major issues; trawl fisheries for shrimp, soles,
and other groundfish would be the most affected fisheries. Competition for harbor space in
this area is a primary concern for the fishing community in this area.
Another uncertainty that has been raised has been the potential effects of offshore oil and
gas activities on potential biological areas of particular importance such as discrete
spawning or nursery areas. Furthermore, the general effects of drilling discharges on fish
habitat has been identified as a potential problem.
Based upon the review of information presented at briefings, public workshops, in
response to the Federal Register Notice on concerns in the study areas, the NAS Report,
and other scientific and technical information, the Task Force concluded that conflicts
between commercial fishing and offshore oil and gas industries have occurred in other
areas and are likely to occur in the Sale 91 area. However, it is apparent that many of the
conflicts can be resolved or significantly mitigated. The Task Force bases its conclusion
that potential impacts on commercial fishing can be mitigated appreciably on the success of
the Santa Barbara area Joint Oil/Fishing Committee.
IV 20
January 2, 1990
Final Report
EFFECTS ON PROTECTED SPECIES
Summary of Concerns
Each of the three sale areas is inhabited by a number of species that have been placed under
the protection of Federal statutes. These species include a variety of marine mammals as
well as birds, fish, and reptiles that are endangered or threatened. The protections provided
by the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA)
reflect the high value which the people of the United States place upon the maintenance of
wildlife.
Protected species can be affected by offshore oil and gas activities in a number of ways. A
summary of these effects is presented in Table IV-10. Onshore and nearshore habitat loss
and degradation are caused mainly by increases in industrial and other development in the
coastal zone, by discharges of pollutants, and by operation of commercial and recreational
vessel traffic.
Oil can cause physiological effects on individuals of protected species that become coated
with oil or ingest it either directly or by eating contaminated prey. Populations of protected
species can also be affected if an oil spill reduces the availability of their food resources.
The effects of oil on marine mammals and sea birds can be particularly severe.
Noise from oil and gas support vessels and aircraft can disturb and disrupt essential
activities of protected species. These activities include feeding, mating, calving (or
nesting), migrating, socializing, and hauling out. Such effects on marine mammals and
birds are generally short term, nonlethal, and localized. However, repeated overflights can
cause birds to abandon nests and seals to stampede, killing young. Collisions between oil
and gas support vessels and sea animals such as manatees, marine turtles, and whales can
damage the individuals involved, sometimes fatally.
The ESA and the MMPA provide the authorities for designating species to be protected.
The ESA authorizes the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to list species as
endangered and threatened. It mandates that no federally conducted, funded, or authorized
activity may jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or adversely affect their
critical habitats. The MMPA provides comparable protection for marine mammals. It is
administered by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and FWS.
These acts require that Federal Agencies consult with NMFS and FWS to identify ways to
avoid jeopardizing listed species and to minimize incidental "takings." The MMS follows
these consultation procedures. The FWS and NMFS provide biological opinions stating
whether the proposed lease sale would jeopardize any protected species and identifying
concerns which need to be addressed as subsequent activity evolves.
If an incidental taking of an individual of a protected species is likely, NMFS and FWS
also process requests for special incidental take regulations for those who would conduct
the activity. To ensure compliance with the ESA and MMPA, the MMS develops and
enforces appropriate protective measures to be taken by lessees. These measures are
specified in lease stipulations and Notices to Lessees and Operators which regulate
activities on the OCS. The MMS also regularly informs lessees of their obligations under
these laws.
IV 21
Table IV-10: Characterization of Protected Species Concerns
Effects of Chronic Activities
Effects of Oil Spills
Mammals
Noise: disturbs, migration, feeding,
Physiological: impairs feeding ability/
mating, haul out
digestion; respiration; thermal
Traffic: collisions
protection
Onshore development: habitat
Ecological: prey contamination
destruction, pollutant load
Birds
Noise: disturbs nesting, roosting,
Physiological: impairs feeding ability/
feeding, mating
digestion; respiration
Traffic: overflights disturb nesting
Ecological: prey contamination; habitat
Onshore development: habitat
destruction
destruction, pollutant load
Reptiles
Traffic: collisions
Physiological: impairs digestion;
Onshore development: habitat
respiration
destruction, pollutant load
Ecological: prey contamination; toxin
bioaccumulation
January 2, 1990
Final Report
The MMS takes a number a measures to prevent disturbance of protected species. For
example, biologically sensitive areas may be deleted from a lease offering or the disturbing
activities may be restricted to times when the protected species are not present. Conditions
can be imposed on leases and permits to eliminate or minimize disturbance. In the past, the
MMS has instructed operators to use procedures designed to mitigate the adverse effects of
noise, to limit boat speeds, and to take precautions to avoid collisions with protected
species. The oil spill prevention and containment measures that have been discussed in a
previous section of this chapter help to protect species from the dangers of contact with oil.
Onshore and nearshore habitat loss and degradation are controlled mainly by State and local
governments and such Federal Agencies as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, EPA, and
U.S. Coast Guard. Although it has no direct jurisdiction over these onshore areas, MMS
frequently works with the Federal Agencies that do, and with oil and gas operators, to
ensure that species are suitably protected.
To some extent, the knowledge needed to determine effects on protected species is limited.
Of particular concern is the lack of full understanding of the long-term habitat degradation
that might result from many years of discharging environmental contaminants into the
essential habitats of aquatic protected species.
Some physical effects of oiling on whales, dolphins, sea birds, sea otters, and marine
turtles are known from experimental studies. These include temporary fouling of whales'
baleen plates, temporary skin damage on dolphins and turtles, and sea bird and sea otter
mortality. Less is known about other effects such as the long-term effects of contaminant
buildup in organs and tissues and of chronic oiling on species' natality, reproduction rates,
and timing of sexual maturity.
Many behavioral responses of whales, dolphins, sea otters, seals and sea lions, and birds
to noise have been studied and are known. These responses appear to be temporary and
localized. However, the extent to which these and other protected species adapt to noise
remains poorly understood. Such habituation probably varies widely among species and
may be critical to determining long-term effects. The threshold at which the cumulative
effects of noise or other disturbances surpass the ability of a species to continue activities
essential to its survival is not generally known.
The Task Force concluded that effects on protected species and wildlife are
important enough to warrant additional management attention but are not,
by themselves, sufficient to justify a delay in leasing.
Sale Specific Concerns
Sale 116, Part II - Off Southwestern Florida
Protected species of special concern in this area include manatees, nesting marine turtles,
American crocodiles, sooty terns, brown noodies, whales, dolphins, and marine turtles
nearshore and offshore.
Continuing habitat loss and degradation caused by a rapidly expanding population and
associated development in southwestern Florida threaten many of these species. For
example, the manatees experience increased injury and mortality from collisions with
recreational boats whose numbers increase as the population grows. Outer Continental
IV 22
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Shelf oil and gas activities involve minimal additional development of onshore support
facilities and slightly increased likelihood of support vessel collisions with manatees. The
primary risk from OCS activities is from oil spill contamination of protected species habitat
nearshore and onshore. High-productivity mangrove swamps, seagrass beds on which
manatees feed, green sea turtle nesting beaches, and habitat of the American crocodile are
particularly vulnerable.
The FWS' biological opinion for Sale 116 concluded that there was potential jeopardy to
manatees if support vessels were not limited to operations from specified support bases.
The NMFS' opinion concluded that no jeopardy to marine mammal and sea turtle species
would arise, but noted concerns that available information on the distribution and
abundance of whales, dolphins, and marine turtles are inadequate and need to be
augmented.
To protect manatees, MMS limits support vessel traffic to and from a few onshore support
bases and restricts boat speeds and maneuvering in manatee areas. If development and
production are to proceed, additional environmental review will be necessary, and the
MMS and the wildlife Agencies will develop and implement appropriate constraints to
protect manatees and other protected species.
The NAS/NRC Report concluded that information on marine turtles and marine mammals
is inadequate or not sufficiently reliable for leasing decisions in this area and that still more
information would be needed for development and production decisions.
The Task Force finds that existing mitigating measures and safeguards appear to be
adequate and effective for protection of manatees. However, there are persistent risks to all
protected species from potential oil spills. Additionally, the information on the distribution
and abundance of whales, dolphins, and marine turtles offshore would be useful for
enhanced assessment of environmental effects, particularly of oil spills.
Sale 95 - Off Southern California
Protected species of special concern in and near this area include gray and other "great"
whales, dolphins, marine turtles, seals and sea lions, California sea otters, brown pelicans,
least terns, light-footed clapper rails, and pelagic sea birds (including the world's only
breeding colony of Zantu's murrelet).
Because southern California is highly developed, additional habitat loss or degradation due
specifically to OCS activities is unlikely. Offshore oil and gas production and wildlife
populations coexist in many parts of the area, particularly in the Santa Barbara Channel
where California sea lions frequently bask on oil platforms and associated equipment.
Humpback whales and sea lions are frequently observed in the Channel without apparent
reaction to drilling and support vessels working nearby. The numerous natural oil seeps in
the area cause occasional bird oiling but have little adverse effect on protected species such
as migrating whales. Still, the threat of large oil spills contacting protected species habitat,
particularly in bays and estuaries, requires protective measures.
There are no recent FWS or NMFS biological opinions for leasing and exploration in the
area, but opinions for a recent development plan in the Santa Barbara Channel concluded
that no jeopardy to protected species would occur. These opinions expressed concerns
about potential oiling and noise effects on least tern habitat and on seal and sea lion
IV 23
January 2, 1990
Final Report
rookeries. These concerns have been addressed through aerial overflight restrictions and
through operating restrictions on oil and gas support vessels. The NMFS also expressed
concern about potential cumulative effects of oil and gas and other activities on Guadalupe
fur seals and gray whale migration routes.
The NAS/NRC Report concluded that available biological information is adequate for
leasing decisions in this area, but more information is needed about birds along the Pacific
coast of Baja California (Mexico). The report also concluded that more information would
be needed for development and production decisions.
The Task Force concluded that existing information on protected species is adequate for
leasing decisions. The Task Force also concluded that continued attention to mitigating
measures and safeguards for protecting species of concern in the area is needed.
Sale 91 - Off Northern California
This area includes the same species of special concern noted for the Sale 95 area, except
that marine turtles and Zantu's murrelets are rarer here. If oil from this area were
transported into San Francisco Bay, species there (light- footed clapper rails, salt-marsh
harvest mice, and California least terns) and farther south (sea otters) might also be affected
severely by OCS oil spilled during shipping or unloading operations. This risk would be
offset by reductions the amounts of Alaskan and other crude oil that would be brought into
San Francisco from Long Beach.
Unlike southern California, northern California is relatively undeveloped. Outer
Continental Shelf exploration would cause minimal habitat loss and degradation because
existing support facilities would be used. The threat of large oil spills contacting protected
species habitat, especially near the Farallon Islands and the numerous rookeries and haulout
areas of Stellar and California sea lions and harbor seals, is a major concern.
The FWS and NMFS biological opinions for leasing and exploration in this area concluded
that no jeopardy to protected species would occur. However, both Agencies expressed
concerns similar to those noted for the Sale 95 area.
The major risk to protected species in this planning area is from possible oil spills. Oil spill
prevention and adequate response capability are essential for managing risk to protected
species in this area.
The NAS/NRC Report concluded that available biological information is adequate for a
leasing decision in this area, but that more information would be needed for development
and production decisions.
To further reduce potential adverse effects to protected species, the collection of additional
information and the adoption of appropriate protections would be helpful. Such protections
range from improved oil spill contingency planning to the adoption of buffers in the vicinity
of nearshore areas important to the protected species.
The protective measures currently employed by MMS should be augmented by additional
requirements as they are identified. Key questions that must be answered to assess the
need for additional requirements are: (1) What are the cumulative effects of oil and gas and
other activities on protected species? (2) What is the threshold at which the cumulative
IV 24
January 2, 1990
Final Report
effects or noise or other disturbance surpass species' abilities to continue essential
activities? (3) Do protected species habituate to noise and, if so, for how long and to what
extent?
The Task Force suggests that the Department of the Interior and oil and gas operators,
service companies, and transportation companies cooperatively seek answers to these
questions to determine areas that should be deleted or deferred from leasing and ways to
optimize protection of biologically sensitive resources.
IMPACTS ON PROTECTED LANDS
Summary of Concerns
Nationally and internationally recognized, ecologically sensitive coastal areas are located
near each of the three proposed sale areas. National and state parks, wildlife refuges,
seashores and sanctuaries, and other public recreation areas provide unparalleled wildlife
habitat as well as opportunities for public enjoyment. Everglades National Park, Channel
Islands National Park, Cordell Bank, and Farallones National Marine Sanctuaries are prime
examples of protected lands near the three sale areas. In addition to the areas protected by
Federal statutes, there are many State and local parks, beaches, and wildlife areas in the
coastal areas near the three sales.
The main environmental concern for protected lands is from the threat of a possible oil
spill. The threat of damage arises from two sources; either a tanker spill from a vessel in
transit, or a spill due to OCS operations. As noted earlier in this chapter, the probability of
a large spill (over 10,000 barrels) from a tanker accident is greater than from OCS
operations. In fact, the additional risk of a spill from OCS operations that could damage
protected lands near the three sale areas is very small.
Nevertheless, the Task Force has concluded that the exceptional value of these sensitive
resources justifies a high standard of protection from oil spill risk and damage, regardless
of the source of risk.
The Task Force found that the current level of protection afforded protected
lands in the event of a spill is the same as provided to all environmental
resources under Federal oil spill contingency plans. The Task Force
recognizes that these contingency plans represent a general defense against
damage, but are probably not sufficient to assure that harm to especially
sensitive resources would be minimized in the event of a major spill. The
Task Force therefore recommends that Federal managers of protected lands
should begin to prepare their own oil spill contingency response plans
which includes coordination with the U.S. Coast Guard, the MMS, the oil
and gas industry, and state and local governments.
Sale Specific Concerns
The resources which could be affected by a spill from tanker transport or OCS activity and
which therefore need to be addressed by oil spill contingency plans differ in each of the
three sale areas.
IV 25
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Sale 116, Part II - Off Southwestern Florida
In the Sale 116 Part II area, a large oil spill could severely affect the fragile ecosystem of
southwestern Florida. This area contains a number of significant wildlife refuges, marine
sanctuaries and parks, including Everglades National Park and Fort Jefferson National
Monument (Dry Tortugas), which have been designated International Biosphere Reserves;
and Looe Key and Key Largo National Marine Sanctuaries. The Keys-Everglades complex
is the only mangrove-coral reef ecosystem in the coterminous United States. Although the
entire ecosystem of the region is considered sensitive, the resources which require
particular attention in specific oil spill contingency plans are coral reefs, mangroves, and
sea grass beds. These provide important habitat for many species, and could be seriously
harmed and slow to recover from the effects of a spill.
Sale 95 - Off Southern California
The Sale 95 area also contains national parks and sanctuaries which deserve additional
protection. The Channel Islands National Park and the Channel Islands National Marine
Sanctuary are located near active leases in the Santa Barbara Channel. Oil spill contingency
planning for sensitive resources in this region would need to address specific protection for
marine mammals, sea birds, and offshore park lands, such as the Channel Islands.
Sale 91 - Off Northern California
An oil spill would threaten similar resources in the Sale 91 area. Marine mammals and sea
birds could be adversely affected and oil spill contingency plans for the Cordell Bank and
Gulf of the Farallones Marine Sanctuaries are needed to minimize the impact of an oil spill
on the resources and habitat of these areas.
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Summary of Concerns
In all three areas, people attending workshops vehemently expressed the concern that the
character of their communities would be changed by oil and gas operations offshore and by
onshore support facilities. The changes would result from: 1)increased population
resulting from the creation of new jobs; 2) demand for onshore support and processing
facilities.; and 3) reduction in tourism due to oil spills on beaches or the sight of offshore
platforms from shore. People in northern California and southwestern Florida fear that
offshore development will bring the boom-bust development patterns found in coastal areas
of the central and western Gulf of Mexico. In densely populated southern California,
where residents value their beaches and scenic coastline highly, the opposition to offshore
development focuses on air quality degradation, land-use changes, and the fear of a major
accident like the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill.
The Task Force learned that these effects may differ over time, depending upon the phase
of offshore activity. These phases are summarized in Table IV-11. For example,
exploration activities generally have different population, employment, public service and
land use impacts than either the development or production phases of the OCS life cycle.
Moreover, the Task Force found that the terms "socioeconomic effects" or "socioeconomic
IV 26
Table IV-11: Characterization of Social and Economic Concerns
1986
Population
Change in
in Adjacent
Population
Employment
Regional
Major
Counties
1981-86
Bases
Setting
Concerns
Off Southwest
2.2 million
13.2 %
Tourism,
Rural, resort
1. Land use changes
Florida
services,
development,
2. Visual impacts
fishing
protected areas
3. Loss of Tourism
along coast
Off Southern
13.8 million
12.7 %
Heavy
Urban with
1. Land use changes in
California
industry,
heavy industry
rural areas
services,
to rural
2. Cumulative impacts
tourism
agriculture
3. Visual impacts
4. Loss of Tourism
Off Northern 189 thousand
7.4%
Forestry,
Rural, extensive
1. Land use changes
California
fishing,
federal and
2. Chronic pollution
agriculture,
state land
3. Visual impacts
tourism
4. Inadequate
infrastructure
January 2, 1990
Final Report
impacts" are used to describe a wide variety of discrete onshore consequences which can
range from waste water treatment to aesthetic perceptions.
These concerns manifest themselves in slightly different ways in each of the sale areas due
to differences in population size, existing economic structure, and major land uses. For
example, similar levels of offshore activity are accurately perceived to have very different
infrastructure impacts in the small communities of northern California as compared with
Los Angeles.
The Task Force found that thinking about onshore effects could be clarified by identifying
and examining several classes or sources of impacts. For purposes of analysis, the Task
Force has found it helpful to distinguish at least three types of onshore impacts which can
result from offshore development: (1) direct project impacts, (2) population and
employment impacts and (3) attitudes and emotions.
The first category of impacts include those which are directly caused by specific offshore
activities and projects, such as dock space for supply boats, warehousing space, and
construction staging areas. Direct effects also include land use changes and public service
requirements associated with onshore oil and gas processing: water and sewer services,
transportation, fire protection, and pollution control. Direct project impacts can occur
during oil and gas exploration, development, or production. These effects tend to be
physical and economic in nature because they affect the local community's infrastructure,
land use, and ability to finance public services needed by the industry. Local planning to
accommodate and mitigate project impacts can only be successful when industry plans are
made clear, and thus can be facilitated by industry cooperation. Chapter VI discusses
onshore facility consolidation and voluntary joint local government/industry committees as
means for addressing project impacts.
The second class of effects includes those which are caused generally by changes in local
population and employment. Examples of such effects are the impacts of growth or decline
on housing demand and prices, personal income, welfare costs, school attendance and
capacities, police protection, sewage treatment, solid waste disposal, and other general
demands on community facilities. These effects of offshore activity on a community may
be evident in varying degree for a significant period of time, and can have social as well as
physical and economic dimensions. These broader community effects are often not as easy
to measure and plan for as direct project impacts, but they are nonetheless real and in large
degree can be anticipated, analyzed and dealt with by local plans and policies. A key
element in dealing successfully with general, community-wide impacts of offshore activity
is the availability of sound information and analysis upon which to base local planning
decisions. Development of improved socioeconomic data and some analysis of the onshore
effects of alternative offshore development scenarios during the prelease process should be
useful for anticipating community effects.
The third class of impacts is not readily measured, and in fact may be impossible to resolve
satisfactorily. These are the attitudes and feelings which people develop from knowing
that the oil and gas industry might conduct operations nearby. Many view the industry as
an intrusion on the landscape which will change the "character" of the community and
thereby diminish both their enjoyment of it as well as the desire of others to visit. Perhaps
the most specific concerns in this category are aesthetic objections to platforms and the fear
that an oil spill will damage beaches and affect recreation and tourism. Some people who
have worked hard and sacrificed in order to be able to live in an area with high quality
IV 27
January 2, 1990
Final Report
coastal resources are particularly upset by the possibility that those resources could be
affected by oil and gas activities.
Tourism and recreation are multi-billion dollar industries in California and Florida,
producing significant revenues to State and local governments. Tourism has surpassed
manufacturing and agriculture to become the largest industry in California ($36 billion
revenues annually) and Florida ($22 billion revenues annually). As the economic
significance of tourism has increased, so have communities' interests in protecting the
coastal and marine resources which attract visitors.
Many individuals, organizations, and government agencies believe that oil and gas
development is not compatible with recreation and tourism and will result in significant
economic losses at local and State levels. The Task Force found that there are few studies
that establish the strength of the cause and effect relationship between offshore oil and gas
activities and diminished tourism and recreation. As the NAS/NRC Report noted, the
results of these studies are conflicting and inconclusive.
The Task Force recognizes the validity of community concern about such changes, but also
recognizes that the nature and extent of possible effects is difficult to predict accurately at
the time a lease sale is being contemplated. The difficulty in prediction of onshore effects
arises because the strength and scope of community, physical, social and economic impacts
depends upon the timing, duration, size, and technology of specific offshore operations.
However, the character of offshore activities cannot be predicted prior to a lease sale
because the number of tracts that may actually be bid upon and leased is unknown.
Moreover, the location and size of the oil and gas fields, if any, that will be found, is
difficult to predict. Thus, the assessment of social and economic effects prior to a lease
sale must be based on scenarios that describe the offshore and onshore activities that are
typical of those expected to occur rather than on predictions of what will occur, when, and
where.
More accurate assessment of some social and economic effects becomes possible when
lessees file exploration plans, because these indicate the location, timing, and extent of
offshore exploratory drilling. This information can be used to assess the effects of the
planned exploration on local population, primary and secondary employment, demand for
public services and housing, and warehousing and dock space. It can also be used to
revise scenarios about possible oil and gas development activities that could follow if
exploration is successful.
Similarly, if exploration yields commercial oil and gas discoveries, production and
development plans submitted by lessees will provide additional information for more
detailed assessments of the effects on nearby communities. At this stage the need for
onshore support facilities may intensify land use conflicts and increase physical
infrastructure demands, while employment and population effects may diminish.
The NAS/NRC report found that the available socioeconomic information was inadequate
for all three areas. It suggested that the MMS collect additional data and perform analyses
of socioeconomic effects similar to those done for other major Federal projects. Despite the
recognized difficulty of evaluating specific socioeconomic effects due to the uncertainties
inherent in offshore leasing and exploration, the Task Force has concluded that planning
and coordination could be improved by conducting more analysis at the prelease stage, and
by distinguishing the several types or classes of onshore effects, each of which may call for
IV 28
January 2, 1990
Final Report
a different kind of assessment, planning, and local government response. Assessments
need to be revised at the exploration and development stages to provide more specific and
accurate projections of the effects that need to be considered in local planning.
The Task Force concludes that prelease information and analysis could be improved by
collecting more socioeconomic data and using it to estimate the onshore impacts of several
offshore exploration, development and production scenarios. These scenarios, and the
community impact profiles derived from them, could be presented in the EIS for each
proposed lease sale. The factual basis for constructing these impact profiles would be
community baseline studies conducted by the MMS. These baseline studies would collect
and analyze information on demography, economic structure, tax base, and expenditures,
public service capacities, public and private infrastructure including utilities, land use,
housing stock, and measures of social and economic status.
Many local governments near the three sale areas are faced with ongoing economic
development pressures which are addressed by policies and controls embodied in a variety
of land use plans and coastal zone management programs. Onshore facilities needed to
support OCS oil and gas activities must comply with the procedural and regulatory
provisions of these policies. Local permitting processes can ensure that acceptable sites are
chosen and that adverse impacts are mitigated. Controversies often arise, however, when
oil and gas support facilities are proposed.
In order to reduce such conflicts, the impact assessment information needs to be used in a
consultative process that begins early in the preparations for a lease sale and continues
through the exploration and development phases. Local governments, oil companies, the
MMS and other Federal and State Agencies need to participate in these discussions to
identify and resolve conflicts raised by onshore support facilities. The Task Force has
concluded that development of offshore oil and gas resources may create
onshore land use conflicts and demands on infrastructure that need to be
better addressed. Conflict could be reduced if better consultative
relationships were established among the oil industry, Federal, State, and
local governments and other affected parties for planning and coordinating
the onshore activities of OCS lessees.
The Task Force also concluded that OCS impacts on tourism and recreation
are a major concern for which further information is needed to determine
the magnitude of impacts. However, tourism losses alone are not likely to
be sufficient to provide a basis for canceling or delaying lease sales. They
should be addressed as a part of other efforts or new efforts to control and
mitigate onshore impacts.
Sale Specific Concerns
Although public concerns about socioeconomic effect are generally similar in all three of the
sale areas, there are some differences in the emphasis placed on specific effects from one
area to another, and sometimes between communities within the same area. In
southwestern Florida, concerns about the potential impacts of offshore development on
recreation and tourism and population growth receive priority attention. In southern
California, effects on tourism are also a concern, but especially so for communities south
of Los Angeles and the San Diego area. For communities north of Los Angeles, onshore
land use conflict and growing demands on infrastructure seem particularly important.
IV 29
January 2, 1990
Final Report
Communities in the Sale 91 area cite population growth and infrastructure problems which
could change the character of the area and adversely affect the tourism industry.
IMPACTS ON WATER QUALITY
Summary of Concerns
Degradation of water quality near exploratory drilling rigs and production platforms may be
caused by acute discharges, such as oil spills, and routine, chronic discharges of drilling
muds, drill cuttings, produced waters, sanitary wastes, and oil. The scientific literature
contains many studies documenting impacts of oil spills on water quality and other
components of the marine environment. However, the NAS/NRC Report raised concern
about the lack of information regarding impacts of long-term, chronic discharges,
particularly their effects on sensitive ecosystems such as mangroves, sea grasses, and
corals in Florida. The NAS/NRC Report was critical of MMS for not thoroughly
monitoring conditions at existing platforms to determine the extent of chronic, long-term
impacts.
The OCS discharges that cause the primary water quality concerns are drilling muds, drill
cuttings and produced water. Drilling muds are fluids that lubricate the drill bit and help to
control pressure in the well. Drill cuttings are fragments of the geological formations
penetrated by the drill bit. They are carried to the surface with the drilling fluids. Produced
water is the water brought up from subsurface formations along with the oil and gas that is
extracted.
The potential for environmental harm from drilling fluids and cuttings arises from toxicity,
oxygen demand and suspended sediments. Added oil (historically diesel fuel) and biocides
are the primary sources of toxicity. Water based drilling muds, which have come into
widespread use, have much lower toxicity than oil based muds. Oxygen demand from
muds and cuttings can be high, creating low oxygen levels in the discharge area.
Suspended sediments can increase turbidity in the area around the discharge and can bury
organisms living on the ocean bottom nearby. The effects of discharging muds and
cuttings thus depend on the nature of the ecology on the nearby bottom and the specific
content of the muds and cuttings. Depending on currents and water depth, discharged drill
cuttings can smother an area within 500 meters of the discharge and increase sedimentation
and turbidity. Discharged drilling fluids can create a turbidity plume which can extend up
to 4 km from the discharge. Sedimentation is likely to increase out to 1 km from the
discharge. At present, the most common mitigation for the discharge of drill muds and
cuttings is shunting of the discharge to a water depth that helps assure that the drill cuttings
settle to the bottom near the well site. This minimizes the area of the seabed that may be
buried.
Produced water may contain a variety of hydrocarbons, trace metals and chemicals used in
well maintenance. It is highly saline and low in dissolved oxygen. In some situations,
produced water may contain radionuclides. The plume of a produced water discharge tends
to sink because of its salinity, carrying the hydrocarbons and other chemicals it contains to
the bottom. Generally, such discharges do not create substantial environmental harm when
they occur in the open marine environment.
All discharges are regulated by EPA under the authority of the Clean Water Act through the
IV 30
January 2, 1990
Final Report
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. NPDES permits
issued by EPA specify the treatment required and the limits on discharges. The NPDES
permit may require "no discharge" if warranted.
The Task Force concluded that the known water quality-related
environmental impacts of OCS activities can be adequately evaluated and
regulated under the EPA's NPDES program. The Task Force also found a
lack of information on the long-term effects of chronic discharges.
Sale Specific Concerns
Sale 116, Part II - Off Southwestern Florida
Much of the concern about the effects of OCS activities on water quality off southwestern
Florida focuses on possible degradation of the currently excellent water quality in this area.
The waters off Florida have high clarity and good light penetration with little, if any,
turbidity except in shallow areas after storms. Excellent water quality off southwestern
Florida is a primary factor in the attractiveness of the area, particularly for recreational
diving and fishing.
Florida has designated the State waters adjacent to State and National Parks as
"Outstanding Florida Waters" and prohibits discharges that reduce water quality, including
those that increase turbidity.
Former Secretary of the Interior Hodel and Florida Governor Martinez appointed a joint
task force to assess the potential environmental impacts from OCS oil and gas activities in
the Sale 116, Part II area. The Joint DOI/Florida Task Force members agreed that
discharges from exploration platforms would occur frequently but cause water quality
effects of low severity. They also agreed that site specific analyses of drill rig locations
would be needed to determine the effects at a particular site. Decisions about the discharge
of drilling muds and cuttings need to be based upon detailed knowledge of the organisms
living on the seabed near the drilling site.
During exploration, produced waters should not present an environmental risk. However,
some produced waters during the development and production phase may not meet the
water quality standards for some metals. Produced waters in some parts of the Gulf of
Mexico contain elevated levels of barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, iron,
lead, nickel, silver, and zinc. Such pollutants may need to be treated before produced
waters are discharged. If development and production occur in the Sale 116, Part II area,
measures need to be taken to ensure that discharges of produced waters do not degrade
water quality near sensitive resources. Such controls are achievable within the NPDES
permit process.
Sale 95 - Off Southern California
The waters off southern California are among the most heavily used in the country for both
recreation and for disposal of municipal and industrial waste water. Concerns about the
water quality effects of OCS activities reflect local residents' desires to avoid further
degradation.
IV 31
January 2, 1990
Final Report
The existing discharges into the Southern California Bight are substantial. Twenty-eight
municipal and industrial sources discharge over one billion gallons of effluent per day into
coastal waters. Some publicly owned treatment works are discharging in violation of legal
requirements, notably Hyperion (Los Angeles) and San Diego. Waste water discharged
from municipal outfalls contains a number of potentially toxic chemicals. Non-point
surface runoff contains a variety of hydrocarbon and toxic pollutants and is the second
largest source of water pollutants, amounting to 67 billion gallons per year.
Southern California waters are also affected by natural oil seeps. Most documented natural
oil seeps in the Southern California Planning Area are in the Santa Barbara Channel and on
the Santa Monica and San Pedro shelves. Estimates of oil entering the water from seeps in
the Santa Barbara Channel range from 40 to 670 barrels per day. More than 900 seeps
have also been identified off Point Conception. One oil company has established a system
for capturing oil and gas from natural seeps.
Water discharges from both existing OCS activities and those that could occur on new
leases are controlled under the EPA's NPDES permits. The existing permits limit the
discharge of both toxics and conventional pollutants (including oil, suspended solids and
biological oxygen demand) into Federal waters off California. The NPDES system is
adequate to prevent degradation of the waters off California by OCS activities.
Sale 91 - Off Northern California
Water quality in the Sale 91 area is generally excellent. Concerns about the water quality
effects of OCS activities focus on the degradation of the otherwise pure waters off northern
California. The excellent water quality in the area is of particular importance to the quality
of fish caught in offshore fisheries, especially abalone.
During the winter and spring runoff, turbidity may increase within the river plumes. The
increased turbidity is accompanied by an increase in organic and trace metal levels. These
seasonal events are natural phenomena which create natural variations in water quality.
Humboldt Bay is the only region of relatively light industrial activity in the northern
California. Activities in and around the bay which could contribute to oceanic water quality
degradation include agriculture, industry, and sewage treatment. Two pulp mills operate on
the north spit of the bay, and both have short ocean outfalls which discharge an effluent
that consists of solid organic wastes and dissolved chemicals. There is much agricultural
activity, including both dairy and farming operations, surrounding Humboldt Bay; this is
probably the greatest source of non-point pollution in the region.
Discharges from activities on any leases issued in the northern California area need to be
carefully managed to avoid degradation of water quality. The NPDES program provides
the basis for appropriate assessment and control.
IV 32