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
702452
label
Outer Continental Shelf (1990) [1]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
702452
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Outer Continental Shelf (1990) [1]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
29163-008
collections
Records of the White House Office of the Chief of Staff to the President (George H. W. Bush Administration)
John Sununu Issues Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
702452
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
24ea3b9dfea5be9d
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
1998-0004-F[1]
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:
Sununu, John, Files
Subseries:
Issues Files
OA/ID Number:
29163
Folder ID Number:
29163-008
Folder Title:
Outer Continental Shelf (1990) [1]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
15
25
3
1
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.
#
#
#
#
DRAFT
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 14, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR JIM CICCONI
FROM:
BARRY MCBEE BRN
SUBJECT:
OCS Fact Sheet
Attached is a draft of a fact sheet that could be used in
connection with the announcement of the President's decisions on
the OCS Task Force and the future of the OCS program. It
reflects Bob Grady's comments.
One issue that must be decided is whether all of the actions
embodied in the decision memo prepared for the President should
be announced by the President or whether some should be left to
Secretary Lujan. Specifically, the two most significant items
are Sale 96 off New England (the George's Bank area) and the
proposed sale off Washington and Oregon that has been studied by
an Interior Department/Washington/Oregon task force. Grady feels
that all of the announcements should be made from the White
House, while I think there are valid arguments to give some of
the announcements to Lujan.
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
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 decisions are intended both to respond to the report of his
interagency Task Force on Leasing and Development of the OCS and
to provide a general direction for the OCS program in the future.
The President believes that the nation needs to find a balance
between development of 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 its review of the information available for
decision-making, as requested by the Task Force, which
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. The tracts
confined
to
which are shown on the attached map are located in the
Santa Maria Basin and Santa Barbara Channel, where oil
and gas development is currently underway, and comprise
approximatel 0.7 percent of all of the tracts off
California. These tracts, constituting approximately
498,000 acres, represent .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. They will not be available
for possible leasing until after January 1, 1996 and
after completion of the additional studies and then
only if 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, which 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 for the President's Decision
In arriving at his decisions, and as a template for decisions on
future OCS development, the President considered the following
principles:
(1) Adequacy of 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 development
must be available and subjected to rigorous scrutiny before
decisions are made. Obtaining that data is the highest
priority. No activity should take place in any area without
such information and analysis.
(2) Environmental Sensitivity -- It must be recognized
that there are certain areas off our coasts that represent
irreplaceable 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 must
be given to those areas which have 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. There may also be other
undeveloped areas where the likelihood of significant
resources, as demonstrated by the interest of the oil and
gas industry, can justify possible development.
(4) Energy Requirements -- The requirements of our
nation's economy for energy and the overall costs and
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. At the same time,
greater availability of alternative energy sources and
savings from increased energy conservation and efficiency
may reduce our demand for traditional energy supplies.
(5) National Security Requirements -- The changing nature
of circumstances may alter conclusions on what is the
prudent course. The completion of the National Energy
Strategy and our experience with its implementation may lead
to a different approach to future sales. External events,
such as another oil embargo, might also lead to a
reevaluation of the entire OCS program. Because of this all
decisions regarding OCS development must be subject to a
national security exemption -- in the event the President
determines that national security requires development in
these areas, he will have the ability to direct the Interior
Department to open the areas for development.
The need to develop adequate information, particularly that
needed to meet the inadequacies identified by the NAS, is an
essential factor in calling for further studies and cancellation
of the pending sales. The unique character of 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
and deserves special protection, tilts the balance toward longer-
term protection. The presence of successful drilling operations
and known resources off certain areas of southern California
weighs toward allowing continued development at an earlier time,
assuming scientific and environmental uncertainties can be
resolved.
Other Actions by the President
The President has also directed that certain other actions be
taken with respect to pending decisions that would affect the
Outer Continental Shelf and offshore oil and gas development.
Sale 119 and Monterey Bay Sanctuary
The Task Force consideration of development off northern and
southern California was accompanied by strong concern about
the prospect of development off central California and the
fate of 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 the Monterey Bay
National Marine Sanctuary, which has been proposed by the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in
response to a 1988 Congressional mandate; 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, which was not required by Congress. Like the
area off southwest Florida, this area contains nationally
significant, environmentally sensitive resources, including
the largest breeding ground for marine mammals in the lower
48 states.
The President is directing Secretary Lujan and Administrator
Knauss to take the following actions:
Cancel Sale 119 and adopt the sanctuary proposed by the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Permanently prohibit all oil and gas activities 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 of the area.
General Recommendations of Task Force
As a result of its deliberations, the Task Force also made
three general recommendations for actions related to OCS
development and overall environmental protection. The
President today adopted all of those recommendations:
Air quality controls should be adopted for oil and gas
development offshore California that are substantially
the same as those applied onshore. This is consistent
with the position taken by the Administration in Clean
Air Act negotiations with the Senate.
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, as previously proposed.
Restructuring of OCS Program
The President believes that in order to strike the necessary
balance between development of domestic energy resources and
protection of our precious environment, certain revisions to
the OCS program will be required. The program must be:
targeted much 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.
These requirements are consistent with the guiding
principles outlined above on which the President relied in
making his decisions today.
Accordingly, the President today directed the Secretary of
the Interior to take the following three actions that will
improve the overall OCS program:
Immediately undertake a program to improve the
information needed to make decisions on OCS
development. This program will include conducting the
studies identified by the National Academy of Sciences
and studies to explore new technologies to alleviate
the risks of oil spills from OCS platforms and new oil
and gas drilling technologies, such as submersible
drilling rigs.
Target proposed sale areas in future OCS five-year
plans to ensure that only areas with the greatest
resource potential and the least environmental risk are
offered for sale. This will result in much smaller and
more carefully selected blocks of tracts being offered.
Develop within [ ] a legislative initiative [for
amendments to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act]
that will provide coastal communities directly affected
by OCS development with a greater share of the
financial benefits of new development and with more
voice in decision-making. In its administration of the
OCS program, the Interior Department has long heard
concerns raised by coastal communities about the risks
to their shorelines and the limited role they play in
making decisions about OCS development. The Interior
Department has also noted the inequity present in the
current scheme of revenue allocation from OCS
development -- states receive 100 percent of revenues
from leases within three miles of shore, revenues from
leases between three and twelve miles of shore are
divided 73 percent to the federal government and 27
percent to the states, and revenues from leases twelve
miles or further offshore go 100 percent to the federal
government, but the coastal communities most directly
affected by development are not guaranteed any of the
state 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 [ ] and
[ ] barrels of oil and approximately [ ] 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 from the northern border of San Luis
Obispo County to the U.S./Mexico border. It is within the
Southern California Planning Area, which extends from the
northern border of San Luis Obispo County to the U.S./Mexico
border. Oil and gas production is currently taking place in
the Southern California Planning Area in the Santa Maria
Basin and Santa Barbara Channel. 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 22 platforms. In addition, there are 10
platforms and four artificial islands in the area that
support production facilities within state waters, which
extend from the shore out three miles. 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 [ ] and [ ]
barrels of oil and approximately [ ] 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 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
279 million and 1.06 billion barrels of crude oil and
approximately 110 billion cubic feet of natural gas in the
area and between [ ] and [ ] barrels of oil and
approximately [ ] cubic feet of gas in the Sale 116, Part
II area.
Background on Task Force
In his February 9, 1989 budget message to Congress, the President
imposed a moratorium on 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 review of the
environmental effects of the sales by a Cabinet-level task force.
(The three lease sale areas are shown in the attachments.)
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,
hearing from over 1,000 witnesses, took ten field trips to sites
in the two states, received briefings from various federal
agencies, 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 (NAS) regarding the environmental
and other information available on which decisions could be made.
The NAS determined that adequate ecological, oceanographic or
socioeconomic information was not available to some extent for
each of the three sale areas.
The Task Force delivered its report to the President on January
3, 1990. The President met with the members of the Task Force on
January 18 and May 16.
One of the key findings of the Task Force based on its year of
study, analysis and consultation was that "additional time and
effort are needed before environmental concerns can be resolved
in a manner that provides an acceptable balance" between the
goals of domestic energy development and environmental
protection.
Specifically, 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 far
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 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.
These responsibilities within the Interior Department are under
the purview of the Minerals Management Service, created in 1982
to oversee the orderly development of offshore energy and mineral
resources while safeguarding the environment. The current
director of the Service is Barry Williamson.
The Service makes resources available by leasing federal acreage
offshore to private companies, which explore for resources and
can develop and produce commercial deposits they find, subject to
continuing review and permitting procedures. Environmental
standards are established by the Service in regulations and lease
stipulations and enforced through review and approval of
companies' exploration, development and production plans,
including drilling permits, before operations can begin on a
lease, 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 involve 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. A completed plan is submitted to the
President and the Congress. 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 [
] barrels of crude oil and more than
[
] 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
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 Treasury.
The OCS accounts for a significant portion of existing U.S. oil
and gas resources. The following chart shows the quantities of
undiscovered oil and gas resources estimated to be economically
recoverable using existing technologies (Column A) and the
quantities of proven reserves that have been discovered and are
economically recoverable (Column B) within the U.S. as a whole
and the OCS separately:
COLUMN A
COLUMN B
Oil and Gas Resources
Oil and Gas Reserves
U.S.
OCS
U.S.
OCS
Oil (billion
barrels)
34.8
8.2
26.8
2.6
Natural Gas
Liquids (billion
barrels)
6.3
.8
8.2
.6
Natural Gas (trillion
cubic feet)
262.7
74.0
168.0 32.3
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
00 JUN I P5: 07
June 1, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
DAVID Q. BATES
ESR
SUBJECT:
President's Task Force on Outer Continental Shelf
Leasing and Development
I. BACKGROUND
In your 1989 budget message to Congress, honoring a pledge made
during the campaign, you imposed a moratorium on three
controversial Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) lease sales scheduled
for fiscal year 1990 -- sale 91 off the coast of northern
California, sale 95 off the coast of southern California and sale
116 in the Gulf of Mexico off the southwestern coast of
Florida -- pending a review of the environmental effects of the
sales by a Cabinet-level task force. The Task Force, comprised
of Secretaries Lujan (who served as chairman) and Watkins,
Director Darman and Administrators Reilly and Knauss, conducted
briefings and public workshops in Florida and California, met
with Members of Congress from those two states and solicited
written comments. It also commissioned and received a study from
the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) addressing the adequacy of
the scientific and technical data available on which decisions on
the three lease sales could be made. The NAS concluded there was
inadequate ecological, oceanographic and socioeconomic data for
all three sales and recommended further studies be conducted.
The Task Force delivered its report to you on January 5. The
report identified multiple consensus options for each of the
California and Florida sales, but made no recommendations. Since
delivery of the report, additional options have been identified
by White House staff and by the Departments of the Interior and
Energy. A summary of the options for the California and Florida
sales is found at Tab A.
The Interior Department options for the three delayed sales were
part of a more comprehensive proposal that also addresses
additional proposed sales off the West and East Coasts that were
not studied by the Task Force. One of those sales is sale 119
off the central California coast, in an area stretching from San
Francisco southward to the northern tip of Monterey Bay. At the
same time, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA), responding to a 1988 Congressional mandate, has proposed
the designation of a national marine sanctuary in the Monterey
Bay area. NOAA has also proposed regulations to prohibit all oil
and gas exploration and development activities within the
sanctuary. A summary of the options identified by White House
staff for sale 119 and the sanctuary is found at Tab B.
Other proposed sales addressed by the Interior Department include
sale 96 in the George's Bank area of the North Atlantic Planning
Area, which stretches northward from Rhode Island to Canada, and
a sale off the coast of Washington and Oregon. The proposed
activities offshore Washington and Oregon have been the subject
of a state-Interior Department task force. The task force has
recommended that an environmental impact statement for the
proposed sale be deferred until additional environmental studies
are conducted.
II. OPTION FOR DISCUSSION
The following option is presented as a potential resolution of
the Task Force deliberations on the sales off California and
Florida and the broader issue of OCS development.
Guiding Principles
In arriving at the specific decisions that comprise the option
discussed below, and as a template for decisions on future OCS
development, consideration must be given to the following
principles:
(1) Adequacy of Information and Analysis -- Adequate
scientific and technical information regarding the resource
potential of each area and the environmental, social and
economic effects of development must be available and
subjected to rigorous scrutiny before decisions are made.
Obtaining that data is the highest priority. No activity
should take place in any area without such information and
analysis.
(2) Environmental Sensitivity -- It must be recognized
that there are certain areas off our coasts that represent
irreplaceable 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 must
be given to those areas which have 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. There may also be other
undeveloped areas where the likelihood of significant
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
01a. Memo
From David Bates to POTUS
6/1/90
P-5
Re: President's Task Force on Outer Continental Shelf
Leasing and Development
Options section redacted (1 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Open on Expiration of PRA
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
(Document Follows)
Subseries:
Issues Files
By (NLGB) on 12/12/07
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Outer Continental Shelf (1990) [1]
Date Closed:
12/10/2004
OA/ID Number:
29163-008
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM Removed as a personal record misfile.
resources, as demonstrated by the interest of the oil and
gas industry, can justify possible development.
(4) Energy Requirements -- The requirements of our
nation's economy for energy and the overall costs and
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. At the same time,
greater availability of alternative energy sources and
savings from increased energy conservation and efficiency
may reduce our demand for traditional energy supplies. The
National Energy Strategy, due in December, will provide a
critical blueprint in this regard.
The relative weight of the above principles was considered in
developing the options presented for each sale, leading to
different conclusions for each area. For example, the NAS
conclusion that adequate data are not available in all three
areas is an essential factor in calling for cancellation of the
pending sales and further studies. The unique character of the
Monterey Bay area, which serves as a vital breeding ground for
mammals, and of the area involved in sale 116 off southwestern
Florida, containing our only living coral reef, tilts the balance
toward permanent or long-term protection. The presence of
successful drilling operations and known resources off certain
areas of southern California weighs toward allowing continued
development at an earlier time, assuming scientific and
environmental uncertainties can be resolved.
At the same time, the changing nature of circumstances may also
change conclusions on what is the prudent course. The completion
of the National Energy Strategy and our experience with its
implementation may lead to a different approach to future sales.
External events, such as another oil embargo, might also lead to
a reevaluation of the entire OCS program, as is noted in the
national security exemption presented below.
California and Florida Sales
Option for California
O
Cancel all sales scheduled for 1990, 1991 and 1992
offshore California, including sales 91 and 95.
Conduct the additional oceanographic and socioeconomic
studies identified by the NAS, which should take 3 to 4
years.
O
Exclude more than 99 percent of the tracts off
California from consideration for any lease sale until
after the year 2000. The Interior Department has
identified approximately 90 tracts off the coast of
southern California that have high resource potential.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
01b. Memo
From David Bates to POTUS
6/1/90
P/5
Re: President's Task Force on Outer Continental Shelf
Leasing and Development (11 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Open on Expiration of PRA
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
(Document Follows)
Subseries:
Issues Files
By
If
(NLGB) on 12/12/07
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Outer Continental Shelf (1990) [1]
Date Closed:
12/10/2004
OA/ID Number:
29163-008
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6). of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
The tracts, which are shown on the map at Tab C, are
located in the Santa Maria Basin and Santa Barbara
Channel and comprise approximately .7 percent of all of
the tracts off California. These tracts would be
available for possible leasing after January 1, 1996
and after completion of the studies identified by the
NAS.
Discussion of California Option
This option would enable you to frame your decision on the
California lease sales in a manner that is sensitive to
environmental concerns. The Administration could then state
that:
permanent protection would be provided for the
sensitive marine sanctuary in Monterey Bay;
no drilling would be allowed off 99 percent of the
California coast until after the year 2000; and
no new drilling would be allowed anywhere off the coast
until 1996, and then only in the most promising areas
of the Santa Barbara Channel and the Santa Maria Basin
and only after completion of studies by the NAS.
This option is built on two premises: first, that a
scientific distinction can be made between lease sales off
these areas of southern California and the sales off
northern California and Florida; and, second, that the
decision is responsive to the concerns expressed by the
California Congressional delegation in your meeting with
them and in their proposals to the Interior Department in
1986 and 1987.
With respect to the first premise, the NAS report to the
Task Force clearly stated that "the southwest Florida shelf
(the area associated with Sale #116) comprises subtidal and
nearshore habitats that are unique (emphasis added) within
the U.S. continental margin and provide refuge to a number
of rare and endangered species." The NAS report also found
that the incremental risks of an oil spill associated with
the northern California sale (sale 91) were eight times
greater than the incremental risks of a spill associated
with either sale 116 or sale 95. In addition, the NAS found
that information concerning onshore socioeconomic impacts
related to sale 91 was particularly lacking. Unlike in
southern California, there is little onshore industrial
infra-structure now in place in the affected areas of
northern California and the onshore effects of offshore
development would be great.
The point is that distinctions can be made between sale 95
off southern California and the other two sales. The area
encompassed by sale 95 is not home to unique coral reefs or
endangered species. In addition, because there is existing
offshore development in state and federal waters near the
areas proposed. for earlier development, the incremental risk
of an oil spill and the effects on onshore infrastructure
are lower. Thus development in the recommended portions of
sale area 95 is different in terms of environmental impact
and scientific merit from development in sale area 91 or
sale area 116.
With respect to the second premise, you may recall that
during your meeting with the California delegation
Congressman Panetta mentioned several compromises he had
offered to Secretary Hodel in 1986. The central feature of
his proposal was the creation of a buffer zone along most of
the California coast, stretching from six to thirty miles
offshore, in which no drilling would take place. The only
two areas of the coast for which Congressman Panetta did not
propose a buffer zone were the Santa Maria Basin and the
Santa Barbara Channel. Thus, this option is consistent with
his earlier recommendations. A map displaying Congressman
Panetta's proposal is attached at Tab D.
In sum, then, this option is responsive to both the
scientific and environmental concerns identified by the NAS
and the concerns identified by the California delegation in
your meeting with them.
Option for Florida
o
Cancel sale 116 and exclude the area from consideration
for any lease sale until after the year 2000.
Conduct the additional oceanographic, ecological and
socioeconomic studies identified by the NAS, which
should be completed within 5 to 6 years.
Begin cancellation under federal law 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 under existing authorities
contained in the OCS Lands Act. Your budget already
contains $200 million in FY 1995 for purchasing these
leases.
National Security Exemption
o
Dictate that in the event the President determines that
national security requires development in these areas,
he would have the ability to direct the Interior
Department to open the areas for development.
Advantages of Options
Still allow relatively early drilling on promising
southern California tracts. (The resource estimates
for the five basins in the Southern California Planning
Area and an overview of resource estimates involved in
this OCS decision are found at Tab E.)
Development is underway in the areas where earlier
drilling would be permitted. These areas were not
proposed for a buffer zone out 30 miles in the 1986
proposal made by Congressman Panetta.
Could alleviate pressures in Congress for the creation
of ocean sanctuaries or permanent bans on leasing up
and down the length of both the Atlantic and Pacific
Coasts (as in the Boxer/Levine bill). This decision
could thus remove most of the sizable California and
Florida delegations from the national coalition that
threatens to jeopardize the entire OCS program.
Recognize the political reality that no drilling is
likely to occur on California and Florida leases in the
foreseeable future, given the clear disposition of the
Congress on this matter.
Have no adverse budgetary impact, as OMB has already
eliminated any projections of revenues from the sales
from its budget receipt projections.
Respond to NAS criticism that leasing always leads to
future development without any subsequent analysis of
environmental impacts.
Disadvantages of Options
O
Will likely be strongly criticized by the oil and gas
industry.
Drilling in even selected areas off California may
still be strongly criticized by environmentalists and
California political leaders.
May be impossible to reverse decisions or adopt a less
aggressive posture in the future even if energy
security concerns arise.
Could encourage future efforts to ban development in
areas not now the subject of controversy, such as the
Gulf of Mexico.
Sale 119 and Monterey Bay Sanctuary
Option
Cancel sale 119 and adopt sanctuary proposed by NOAA.
Permanently prohibit all oil and gas activities within
the sanctuary.
Allow no development in the sale 119 area outside the
sanctuary until after the year 2000.
Advantages of Option
Recognizes that this area is a nationally significant
and environmentally sensitive resource (e.g., it
includes the largest breeding ground for marine mammals
in the lower 48 states).
Acknowledges the strength of public opposition to
development off this portion of central California and
the fact that a more restrictive legislative ban on oil
and gas activities will likely be enacted (as with the
Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuary off San
Francisco last year) if regulatory prohibitions are not
imposed.
Disadvantages of Option
Could be questioned because it ignores the precedential
value of acting without an extensive analysis of the
available scientific data.
Could bolster arguments for a permanent ban on oil and
gas activities off California and even Washington and
Oregon.
Washington and Oregon -- Sale 132
Exclude the area off the two states from consideration
for the 1992-1997 and 1997-2002 five-year programs. A
state-Interior task force has recommended cancellation
of the sale through 1997 pending further studies.
North Atlantic (George's Bank) -- Sale 96
Cancel sale 96. (Note that the Boston Globe reported
recently that Interior was planning to cancel this
sale.)
Conduct additional studies, including studies designed
to determine the area's true resource potential.
Recommendations for OCS Program
Develop a legislative initiative to provide coastal
communities directly affected by OCS development with a
greater share of the financial benefits of new
development and with more voice in decision-making.
Charge the Interior Department with undertaking a
program to improve the information needed to make
decisions on OCS development. This program will
include conducting the studies identified by the NAS
and studies to explore new technologies to alleviate
the risks of oil spills and new oil and gas drilling
technologies, such as submersible drilling rigs.
Direct the Interior Department to ensure that future
OCS five-year plans provide for better targeting of
proposed sale areas to ensure that only areas with the
greatest resource potential are offered for sale.
Summary
The option presented here will go far toward addressing the
environmental concerns expressed about offshore drilling.
It would put most of the California coast and the sensitive
area off the Florida Everglades off limits to oil and gas
development until after the year 2000. It would provide
permanent protection for the sanctuary at Monterery Bay. It
would suggest long delays for controversial sales off of
Washington and Oregon and in George's Bank. Finally, it
would respond to the concerns expressed by the National
Academy of Sciences regarding the need for better
information before offshore development occurs. Moreover,
the option provides needed reforms in the conduct of the OCS
program: better targeting of future sales and greater
assistance to the most heavily impacted coastal communities.
This option should clear away an array of pending
environmental concerns and allow a more carefully targeted
and scientifically sound offshore development program to go
forward with renewed confidence and less resistance.
III. NEXT STEP
In your meetings with the California Congressional delegation,
some of the members hinted at the possibility of further
consultations prior to the announcement of your decision, and
this should be considered. Governors Martinez and Deukmej ian
have also been intensely interested in this decision, and some
type of personal consultations or discussions with them should
also be considered. The chairmen and ranking members of relevant
Senate and House committees could also be consulted.
IV. DECISION
Approve
Disapprove
Other
INDEX TO ATTACHMENTS
Tab A
Summary of Options for California and Florida
Sales
Tab B
Summary of Options for Sale 119 and Monterey
Bay Sanctuary
Tab C
Map Showing Leases in Santa Maria Basin and
Santa Barbara Channel off Southern
California Considered for Earlier
Development
Tab D
Map Showing Proposal by Congressman Panetta
for Buffer Zone off Southern California
Tab E
Resource Estimates for Basins in Southern
California Planning Area and Overview of
Resource Estimates
A
OCS TASK FORCE OPTIONS SUMMARY
CALIFORNIA
FLORIDA
19"
Northern California
86°
85°
84°
83°
82°
81°
60°
Planning Area
SALE AREAS
20°
LEVEN
SALE 91
FLORIDA
27
West Pain
Beach
ATLANTIC OCEAN
27*
Sale 116
-
Conta
26°
26°
Central California
Planning Area
25
may Large
25°
PACIFIC OCEAN
SALE 119
Mate
Dry
Terhages
Key was
Eastern
24
Team Late Chips
Gulf of Mexico
24°
Planning Area
-
Borters
LOS ANGELES
so
100
Haveng
23°
STATUTE MILES
23°
Continues
SALE 95
Ocean
-
W
CUBA
86°
85°
84°
83°
82°
81°
60°
SAN-
DIEGO
SCALE 16,000.000
Southern California
Planning Area
Earliest
Generic Options Identified by the Task Force.
Possible
Staff, and Affected Agencies:
Drill Date
1.) Defer Presidential decision until after
publication of National Energy Strategy.
1992
2.) Cancel sale at this time and defer decision
until studies identified by NAS completed.
1993
3.) Defer sale until 1992-1997 five-year plan and
offer only selected tracts off California.
1993-95
4.) Defer sale until 1997-2002 five-year plan.
1997
5.) Defer sale until after next two five-year plans.
2002
6.) Cancel sale and impose permanent ban except
for national security requirements.
Unknown
Option Offered for Discussion:
Sale 91: Defer any sale until after 2000
2000
Sale 95: Defer sale in majority of area until after 2000.
2000 for most;
Offer most promising areas in Santa Barbara Channel
1996 for
and Santa Maria basin (91 tracts) only upon completion
selected
of NAS-recommended environmental studies in 1995.
areas
(The California coast has 13,000 tracts; thus more than
99% of this coast would be protected until after 2000)
Sale 116: Defer any sale until after 2000. Proceed with
buyback of existing leases. Begin discussions with
2000
state of Florida about participating in lease buyback.
Delays proposed for all 3 sales would be subject to national security exemption.
B
Sale 119: Central California
Background:
A related issue to the three sales considered by the Task Force is the
disposition of lease sale 119 off central California. This area is subject to a
Congressional moratorium on pre-leasing activities in the current fiscal year.
The sale area, shown on the map below, stretches from north of San Francisco
past Monterey Bay to Big Sur. In 1988, Congress mandated the creation of a
National Marine Sanctuary in Monterey Bay. NOAA has proposed to designate
an area for the sanctuary covering about 2,200 square miles -- including
significant portions of the sale area. The proposed NOAA rule would prohibit
oil and gas exploration and development activities within the sanctuary. Such
a ban is not mandatory within a marine sanctuary. Sanctuaries in several
other parts of the country are not subject to such a ban, although others off
the California coast are.
There are two issues now pending related to sale 119. First is whether to
publish the NOAA rule adopting the sanctuary boundaries and banning oil and
gas activities in the sanctuary. The second is whether to cancel the sale, and
for how long. Many members of Congress and the public are expecting a
decision on sale 119 to be announced concurrently with a decision on the
other California lease sales.
126°
124°
122°
CENTRAL CALIFORNIA
PLANNING AREA
SALE 119
BODEGA BAY
Monterey Bay
Proposed Marine Sanctuary
38°
SAN CALIFORNIA FRANCISCO
38°
OAKLAND
SAN JOSE
SANTA CRUZ
MONTEREY
BIG SUR
o
50
100
36°
MILES
36°
126°
124°
122°
Options:
Adopt NOAA sanctuary boundaries but allow oil and gas development
Adopt oil and gas ban in sanctuary but proceed with sale outside sanctuary
boundaries.
Adopt NOAA proposal and cancel sale 119 until 1997¹
Adopt NOAA proposal and cancel sale 119 until 2000¹
1
With national security exemption as proposed for sales 91, 95, and 116.
C
124°
123°
122°
121°
120°
119°
118°
117°
San Simeon Pt
Most Prospective Tracts
Pt. Estero
3% of Total
Morro Bay
Santa Maria and
San Luis Obispo
Santa Barbara Areas
Santa Maria
Santa
35
NI 10-2
NI 10-3
Barbara
35
Santa Maria
Pt. Sal
Channel
Purisma Pt
Southern California
CALIFORNIA
Lompoc
Pt. Conception
Santa
Planning Area
Gaviota
Barbara
Pitas Pt.
le
Ventura
1:00PM
LOS ANGELES
Pt. Dume
34
NI 10-6
Santa Monica
34
THE
sand
Senta
Long Beach
sana
Pt. Fermin
Santal
Laguna Beach
Dana Pt.
BB
Bantal
2
Oceanside
BA
seal
33
NI 10-9
33
La Jolla
San Diego
BD
Prospective Blocks
BC
Sale 95 Area Boundary
BE
N
Mexico
BASIN
NUMBER OF PROSPECTIVE BLOCKS
32
NH11-10
32
Santa Maria
45
Santa Barbara
42
TOTAL
87
0
50
100
31
NH 11-
STATUTE MILES
31
NH11-4
124°
123°
122°
121°
120°
119°
118°
117°
MMS/06/90
D
124°
123°
122°
121°
120°
119°
118°
117°
San Simson Pt.
Pt. Estero
Most Prospective Tracts
Morro Bay
3% of Total Southern California
San Luis Obispo
Planning Area Tracts
Santa Maria
Santa
35
NI 10-2
NI 10-3
35
Barbara
Santa Maria
Sel
Channel
Purisma Pt.
Southern California
CALIFORNIA
Lompoc
Pt. Conception
Santa
Planning Area
Gaviota
Barbara
Los Angeles
Pitas Pt
TOTAL NUMBER OF BLOCKS
6
Ventura
Wilmington
LOS ANGELES
Southern California Planning Area = 5661
Pt. Dume
34
NI 10-6
Santa Monica
34
Sale 95 Area = 1317
Long Beach
min
PANETTA'S PROPOSAL
DEFER UNTIL THE YEAR 2000
Laguna Beach
Dana Pt.
San Diego
DEFER FROM 5 YEAR PROGRAM
Oceanside
SUBJECT TO LEASING RESTRICTIONS
33
NI 10-9
33
La Jolla
San Diego
BD
Prospective Blocks
Sale 95 Area Boundary
N
Mexico
BASIN
NUMBER OF PROSPECTIVE BLOCKS
32°
NH11-10
32
Santa Maria
38
Santa Barbara
40
Los Angeles
30
Wilmington
35
San Diego
26
o
50
100
31'
TOTAL
169
NH 11-
STATUTE MILES
3,1
NH11-4
124°
123°
MM8/05/90
122°
121°
120°
119°
118°
117°
E
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PLANNING AREA
RESOURCE POTENTIAL
Oil
%
Gas
*
(billion of
trillion
of
barrels) Total
cubic ft)
Total
Santa Maria Basin
.62
40.5
.57
23.2
Santa Barbara Basin
.32
20.9
.90
36.6
Wilmington Basin
.06
3.9
.09
3.7
Los Angeles Basin
.06
3.9
.08
3.2
San Diego Basin
.47
30.8
.82
33.3
OVERVIEW OF U.S.
RESOURCE POTENTIAL
Oil
*
Gas
%
(billion of
trillion
of
barrels) Total
cubic ft)
Total
Total U.S. Resources
34.80
263.00
Entire OCS
8.20
23.6
74.00
28.1
ANWR
3.20
9.2
6.90 (1)
2.6
Existing Fla. Leases
.14
.4
.30
.1
Existing S. Cal. Leases (2)
.34
1.0
.80
.3
Sale 116
.11
.3
---
Sale 95
.23
.7
.46
.2
Sale 91
.20
.6
.41
.2
Sale 119
.16
.5
.26
.1
DRAFT
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 5, 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. In my address to the Congress
in February of 1989, I stated my support for a moratorium on
oil and gas leasing activity in areas off the coasts of
southwestern Florida and northern and southern California
where particular concerns about the environment had been
expressed. At that time, I appointed an interagency Task
Force to investigate further these concerns.
I have received the report of the Task Force and have
concluded 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 off the coast of
Florida, Sale Area 91 off the coast of northern California,
and the majority of Sale Area 95 off the coast of southern
California, until after the year 2000. I am directing the
Secretary of the Interior to initiate discussions with the
State of Florida and with lessees concerning a possible
buyback of existing leases in Sale Area 116, and to initiate
procedures that could lead to their cancellation under the
terms of the OCS Lands Act.
In addition, I believe that no oil and gas leasing and
development activity should occur anywhere in these three
areas until after completion of the further studies
recommended by the National Academy of Sciences in its report
to the Task Force. Thus, I support a moratorium on further
leasing activity in the Santa Maria Basin and Santa Barbara
Channel areas of Sale Area 95 until January 1, 1996. These
areas would be available for sale after that date only if the
concerns expressed by the Academy can be addre sed
satisfactorily.
In addition to those areas studied by the Task Force, concern
has been expressed about several other areas on the OCS
currently scheduled to be available for oil and gas leasing.
I am further recommending several actions to address these
concerns.
With respect to Sale Area 119, off the coast of Central
California, I recommend a moratorium on oil and gas leasing
DRAFT
-2-
and development until after the year 2000. In addition, I
have approved a proposal by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to establish a national
Marine Sanctuary in Monterey Bay, and to prohibit oil and gas
development permanently within this sanctuary.
With respect to Sale Area 132, off the coasts of Washington
and Oregon, I am accepting the recommendations of a task
force established by the Secretary of the Interior to exclude
this area for oil and gas leasing and development until after
the year 2000, pending completion of further studies.
With respect to Sale Area 96, on Georges Bank off the coast
of New England, I am recommending a moratorium on oil and gas
leasing and development until after the year 2000, pending
further studies to determine the true resource potential of
the area.
The combined effect of these decisions is that the coasts of
Florida, Washington, Oregon, New England, and 99 percent of
the California coast will be off limits to oil and gas
leasing 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. And these areas will not be available for leasing in
any event until 1996.
Some areas are so unique and valuable that they deserve
permanent protection -- Monterey Bay is one of these.
Finally, I am today directing the Secretary of the Interior
to take several steps to improve the OCS program and respond
to several of the concerns expressed by the Task Force. The
steps include:
O
targeting more carefully future OCS five-year plans
to ensure that only those areas with the greatest resource
potential and the least environmental risk are offered for
sale;
O
developing a proposal to allow those local areas
most directly affected by OCS development to receive a
greater share of the financial benefits of new development;
O
improving the quality of the information gathered
prior to making leasing and development decisions to address
the inadequacies highlighted by the National Academy of
Sciences in its report to the Task Force;
DRAFT
-3-
O
proceeding with steps to ensure that air quality
standards for California OCS activities are similar to those
which apply onshore;
O
developing and implementing an interagency plan to
reduce the probability of oil spills from any source,
including tanker traffic; and
O
implementing immediately plans to upgrade the
nation's ability to respond to oil spills from any source.
The OCS program which will result from implementation of
these steps will be a leaner, more carefully targeted, and
ultimately more effective program. It will reflect my desire
to achieve a balance between the need to develop our domestic
energy resources and the need to protect unique and sensitive
coastal and marine environments.
My intent in announcing these decisions is to respond to the
environmental concerns which have been expressed with respect
to these sales, to put the controversy surrounding the OCS
program to rest, and to allow the effort to develop promising
domestic energy resources on the OCS to go forward on a more
carefully targeted and environmentally sensitive basis.
#
#
#
#
1
DRAFT
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release:
June 5, 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 decisions are intended both to respond to the
report of the interagency OCS Leasing and Development Task
Force and to provide more general direction for the future of
the OCS program.
The President believes that the nation needs to find a
balance between development of important domestic energy
resources and protection of the environment in sensitive
areas.
Oil and Gas Leasing and Development Off the Coasts of
Southwest Florida and California:
The Task Force has devoted a year of study, analysis and
public consultation to the question of oil and gas leasing
and development in Sale Area 116 off the coast of Southwest
Florida and Sale Areas 91 and 95 off the California coast.
One of the key findings of the Task Force was that
"additional time and effort are needed before environmental
concerns can be resolved in a manner that provides an
acceptable balance" between the goals of domestic energy
development and environmental protection.
Specifically, the Task Force found that:
0
the southwest Florida shelf comprises subtitle 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 risk of oil spill associated with the
northern California sale (Sale Area 91) was far greater
than that associated with the other two sales;
information concerning the onshore socioeconomic effects
of oil and gas development was particularly lacking for
2
DRAFT
the Florida sale (Sale Area 116) and the northern
California sale (Sale Area 91);
O
some 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.
The President today recommended that:
0
No oil and gas development take place in Sale Area 116
off the coast of southwest Florida until after the year 2000;
O
The Department of the Interior initiate discussions with
the State of Florida and with lessees to facilitate purchase
of existing leases in this area, and the Secretary of the
Interior initiate procedures that could lead to cancellation
of the existing leases pursuant to section 5 of the OCS Lands
Act.
O
No oil and gas development take place in Sale Area 91
off the coast of northern California until after the year
2000;
O
No oil and gas development take place in Sale Area 95
south of the Santa Barbara Channel until after the year 2000;
O
Development in the Santa Barbara Channel and Santa Maria
basin, areas which are close proximity to existing oil and
gas development in Federal and State waters, be delayed at
least until after January 1. 1996 -- which will allow for the
additional studies recommended by the National Academy of
Sciences to be conducted. Development could then go forward
if deemed prudent in light of the results of the studies;
0
No oil and gas development take place in any of the
areas considered by the Task Force until the concerns
identified by the National Academy of Sciences have been
satisfactorily addressed and the studies recommended by the
Academy have been conducted.
The task force also put forward several general
recommendations which the President today adopted:
O
Air quality controls should be adopted for the
California OCS which are substantially the same as those
applied on shore. This is consistent with the position taken
by the Administration in Clean Air Act negotiations with the
Senate.
o
Steps should be taken immediately to improve the ability
of industry and the Federal government to respond to oil
spills from any source.
3
DRAFT
0
Federal agencies should develop a plan to reduce the
probability of oil spills from all sources, including and
especially those from tanker traffic. This plan should
include moving oil tanker routes further away from sensitive
areas in the Florida Keys and the Everglades, as previously
proposed.
Sale Area 119: Central California
Consideration of leasing and development off the northern and
southern California coasts by the Task Force has been
accompanied by strong concern about the prospect of oil and
gas leasing and development in Sale Area 119, off the coast
of central California. The area includes several unique
marine and coastal resources in the proposed Monterey Bay
National Marine Sanctuary.
The President today recommended that no oil and gas
development take place in Sale Area 119 before the year 2000.
In addition, the President today approved a proposal by the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to
provide permanent protection to the Monterey Bay National
Marine Sanctuary. The proposal includes a permanent ban on
oil and gas development within the sanctuary.
In combination with my decisions on areas studied by the task
force, adoption of these recommendations will mean that:
No oil and gas development will occur off 99 percent of
the California coast until after the year 2000.
Permanent protection will be provided in one of the
most sensitive coastal areas.
In the remaining one percent, no oil and gas development
will occur until 1996, if at all, and will occur only
upon completion of further environmental studies and
steps taken to address environmental concerns.
Other Controversial Sale Areas: Oregon, Washington, and
Georges Bank
The Department of the Interior has also convened a task force
to address environmental concerns related to leasing and
development in Sale Area 132, off the coast of Oregon and
Washington. The task force has recommended cancellation of
these sales pending further study. Today, the President
recommended that any oil and gas development in this area be
delayed until after the year 2000, pending completion of the
further studies recommended by the task force.
4
DRAFT
A similar controversy has arisen over oil and gas development
in Sale Area 96, the Georges Bank area off the coast of New
England. The President today recommended that any
development in this area be delayed until after the year
2000, pending further study to determine the true resource
potential of the area.
General OCS Program Recommendations:
The President believes that if the balance between
development of our domestic energy resources and protection
of unique and sensitive coastal and marine environments is to
be struck, the OCS program in the future will need to be
targeted much more carefully toward areas with truly
promising resource potential; sensitive to the concerns and
needs of local areas affected by OCS development; and
buttressed by information adequate to ensure that oil and gas
development can go forward in an environmentally sound
manner.
Therefore, the President today directed the Department of the
Interior to take three broad steps in order to improve the
OCS program:
O
The Department should target all future OCS five-
year plans to ensure that only those areas with the greatest
resource potential and the least environmental risk are
offered for sale. This will necessarily result in much
smaller and more carefully selected blocks being offered in
the future.
O
The Department should develop a legislative
proposal to allow coastal communities directly affected by
OCS development to receive a greater share of financial
benefits of new development and to have a stronger voice in
OCS decision-making.
The Department should begin immediately to develop
a program to improve the adequacy of the information needed
to make OCS decisions. This should include the information
identified in the report of the National Academy of Sciences
to the Task Force, as well as studies to explore new
technologies to alleviate the risks oil spills.
Conclusion:
Taken together, these decisions represent a dramatic response
to the concerns which have been expressed about oil and gas
development on the outer continental shelf. They will
provide significant protection for areas which have aroused
5
DRAFT
great controversy off the coasts of Florida, California,
Washington, Oregon, and New England.
The OCS program which will result from the approach outlined
by the President will be leaner, more effective, and more
focused on producing the greatest results with the least
environmental disruption.
The President has long been committed to offshore oil and gas
development where it can be accomplished in an
environmentally sound manner. The President's intention is
that this set of decisions will allow the OCS program now to
move forward with less controversy, fewer threats posed to
the environment, and sound footing from which to develop
America's most promising energy resources.
# # # #
DRAFT
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 5, 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. In my address to the Congress
in February of 1989, I stated my support for a moratorium on
oil and gas leasing activity in areas off the coasts of
southwestern Florida and northern and southern California
where particular concerns about the environment had been
expressed. At that time, I appointed an interagency Task
Force to investigate further these concerns.
I have received the report of the Task Force and have
concluded 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 off the coast of
Florida, Sale Area 91 off the coast of northern California,
and the majority of Sale Area 95 off the coast of southern
California, until after the year 2000. I am directing the
Secretary of the Interior to initiate discussions with the
State of Florida and with lessees concerning a possible
buyback of existing leases in Sale Area 116, and to initiate
procedures that could lead to their cancellation under the
terms of the OCS Lands Act.
In addition, I believe that no oil and gas leasing and
development activity should occur anywhere in these three
areas until after completion of the further studies
recommended by the National Academy of Sciences in its report
to the Task Force. Thus, I support a moratorium on further
leasing activity in the Santa Maria Basin and Santa Barbara
Channel areas of Sale Area 95 until January 1, 1996. These
areas would be available for sale after that date only if the
concerns expressed by the Academy can be addressed
satisfactorily.
In addition to those areas studied by the Task Force, concern
has been expressed about several other areas on the OCS
currently scheduled to be available for oil and gas leasing.
I am further recommending several actions to address these
concerns.
With respect to Sale Area 119, off the coast of Central
California, I recommend a moratorium on oil and gas leasing
DRAFT
-2-
11:
and development until after the year 2000. In addition, I
have approved a proposal by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to establish a national
Marine Sanctuary in Monterey Bay, and to prohibit oil and gas
development permanently within this sanctuary.
With respect to Sale Area 132, off the coasts of Washington
and Oregon, I am accepting the recommendations of a task
force established by the Secretary of the Interior to exclude
this area for oil and gas leasing and development until after
the year 2000, pending completion of further studies.
With respect to Sale Area 96, on Georges Bank off the coast
of New England, I am recommending a moratorium on oil and gas
leasing and development until after the year 2000, pending
further studies to determine the true resource potential of
the area.
The combined effect of these decisions is that the coasts of
Florida, Washington, Oregon, New England, and 99 percent of
the California coast will be off limits to oil and gas
leasing 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. And these areas will not be available for leasing in
any event until 1996.
Some areas are so unique and valuable that they deserve
permanent protection -- Monterey Bay is one of these.
Finally, I am today directing the Secretary of the Interior
to take several steps to improve the OCS program and respond
to several of the concerns expressed by the Task Force. The
steps include:
o
targeting more carefully future OCS five-year plans
to ensure that only those areas with the greatest resource
potential and the least environmental risk are offered for
sale;
O
developing a proposal to allow those local areas
most directly affected by OCS development to receive a
greater share of the financial benefits of new development;
O
improving the quality of the information gathered
prior to making leasing and development decisions to address
the inadequacies highlighted by the National Academy of
Sciences in its report to the Task Force;
DRAFT
-3-
O
proceeding with steps to ensure that air quality
standards for California OCS activities are similar to those
which apply onshore;
O
developing and implementing an interagency plan to
reduce the probability of oil spills from any source,
including tanker traffic; and
O
implementing immediately plans to upgrade the
nation's ability to respond to oil spills from any source.
The OCS program which will result from implementation of
these steps will be a leaner, more carefully targeted, and
ultimately more effective program. It will reflect my desire
to achieve a balance between the need to develop our domestic
energy resources and the need to protect unique and sensitive
coastal and marine environments.
My intent in announcing these decisions is to respond to the
environmental concerns which have been expressed with respect
to these sales, to put the controversy surrounding the OCS
program to rest, and to allow the effort to develop promising
domestic energy resources on the OCS to go forward on a more
carefully targeted and environmentally sensitive basis.
#
#
#
#
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
00 JUN I P5: 07
June 1, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR THE
FROM:
DAVID PRESIDENT Q. BATES DrR
SUBJECT:
President's Task Force on Outer Continental Shelf
Leasing and Development
I. BACKGROUND
In your 1989 budget message to Congress, honoring a pledge made
during the campaign, you imposed a moratorium on three
controversial Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) lease sales scheduled
for fiscal year 1990 -- sale 91 off the coast of northern
California, sale 95 off the coast of southern California and sale
116 in the Gulf of Mexico off the southwestern coast of
Florida -- pending a review of the environmental effects of the
sales by a Cabinet-level task force. The Task Force, comprised
of Secretaries Lujan (who served as chairman) and Watkins,
Director Darman and Administrators Reilly and Knauss, conducted
briefings and public workshops in Florida and California, met
with Members of Congress from those two states and solicited
written comments. It also commissioned and received a study from
the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) addressing the adequacy of
the scientific and technical data available on which decisions on
the three lease sales could be made. The NAS concluded there was
inadequate ecological, oceanographic and socioeconomic data for
all three sales and recommended further studies be conducted.
The Task Force delivered its report to you on January 5. The
report identified multiple consensus options for each of the
California and Florida sales, but made no recommendations. Since
delivery of the report, additional options have been identified
by White House staff and by the Departments of the Interior and
Energy. A summary of the options for the California and Florida
sales is found at Tab A.
The Interior Department options for the three delayed sales were
part of a more comprehensive proposal that also addresses
additional proposed sales off the West and East Coasts that were
not studied by the Task Force. One of those sales is sale 119
off the central California coast, in an area stretching from San
Francisco southward to the northern tip of Monterey Bay. At the
same time, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA), responding to a 1988 Congressional mandate, has proposed
the designation of a national marine sanctuary in the Monterey
Bay area. NOAA has also proposed regulations to prohibit all oil
and gas exploration and development activities within the
sanctuary. A summary of the options identified by White House
staff for sale 119 and the sanctuary is found at Tab B.
Other proposed sales addressed by the Interior Department include
sale 96 in the George's Bank area of the North Atlantic Planning
Area, which stretches northward from Rhode Island to Canada, and
a sale off the coast of Washington and Oregon. The proposed
activities offshore Washington and Oregon have been the subject
of a state-Interior Department task force. The task force has
recommended that an environmental impact statement for the
proposed sale be deferred until additional environmental studies
are conducted.
II. OPTION FOR DISCUSSION
The following option is presented as a potential resolution of
the Task Force deliberations on the sales off California and
Florida and the broader issue of OCS development.
Guiding Principles
In arriving at the specific decisions that comprise the option
discussed below, and as a template for decisions on future OCS
development, consideration must be given to the following
principles:
(1) Adequacy of Information and Analysis -- Adequate
scientific and technical information regarding the resource
potential of each area and the environmental, social and
economic effects of development must be available and
subjected to rigorous scrutiny before decisions are made.
Obtaining that data is the highest priority. No activity
should take place in any area without such information and
analysis.
(2) Environmental Sensitivity -- It must be recognized
that there are certain areas off our coasts that represent
irreplaceable 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 must
be given to those areas which have 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. There may also be other
undeveloped areas where the likelihood of significant
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
02a. Memo
From David Bates to POTUS
6/1/90
5
Re: President's Task Force on Outer Continental Shelf
Leasing and Development [same as doc 01a]
Options section redacted (1 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Open on Expiration of PRA
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
(Document Follows)
Subseries:
Issues Files
WHORM Cat.:
By IP (NLGB) on 12/12/07
File Location:
Outer Continental Shelf (1990) [1]
Date Closed:
12/10/2004
OA/ID Number:
29163-008
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
resources, as demonstrated by the interest of the oil and
gas industry, can justify possible development.
(4) Energy Requirements -- The requirements of our
nation's economy for energy and the overall costs and
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. At the same time,
greater availability of alternative energy sources and
savings from increased energy conservation and efficiency
may reduce our demand for traditional energy supplies. The
National Energy Strategy, due in December, will provide a
critical blueprint in this regard.
The relative weight of the above principles was considered in
developing the options presented for each sale, leading to
different conclusions for each area. For example, the NAS
conclusion that adequate data are not available in all three
areas is an essential factor in calling for cancellation of the
pending sales and further studies. The unique character of the
Monterey Bay area, which serves as a vital breeding ground for
mammals, and of the area involved in sale 116 off southwestern
Florida, containing our only living coral reef, tilts the balance
toward permanent or long-term protection. The presence of
successful drilling operations and known resources off certain
areas of southern California weighs toward allowing continued
development at an earlier time, assuming scientific and
environmental uncertainties can be resolved.
At the same time, the changing nature of circumstances may also
change conclusions on what is the prudent course. The completion
of the National Energy Strategy and our experience with its
implementation may lead to a different approach to future sales.
External events, such as another oil embargo, might also lead to
a reevaluation of the entire OCS program, as is noted in the
national security exemption presented below.
California and Florida Sales
Option for California
o
Cancel all sales scheduled for 1990, 1991 and 1992
offshore California, including sales 91 and 95.
O
Conduct the additional oceanographic and socioeconomic
studies identified by the NAS, which should take 3 to 4
years.
o
Exclude more than 99 percent of the tracts off
California from consideration for any lease sale until
after the year 2000. The Interior Department has
identified approximately 90 tracts off the coast of
southern California that have high resource potential.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
02b. Memo
From David Bates to POTUS
6/1/90
P-5
Re: President's Task Force on Outer Continental Shelf
Leasing and Development
[same as doc 01b] (11 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Open on Expiration of PRA
(Document Follows)
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
By
If
(NLGB)
on
12/12/07
Subseries:
Issues Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Outer Continental Shelf (1990) [1]
Date Closed:
12/10/2004
OA/ID Number:
29163-008
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
The tracts, which are shown on the map at Tab C, are
located in the Santa Maria Basin and Santa Barbara
Channel and comprise approximately .7 percent of all of
the tracts off California. These tracts would be
available for possible leasing after January 1, 1996
and after completion of the studies identified by the
NAS.
Discussion of California Option
This option would enable you to frame your decision on the
California lease sales in a manner that is sensitive to
environmental concerns. The Administration could then state
that:
permanent protection would be provided for the
sensitive marine sanctuary in Monterey Bay;
no drilling would be allowed off 99 percent of the
California coast until after the year 2000; and
no new drilling would be allowed anywhere off the coast
until 1996, and then only in the most promising areas
of the Santa Barbara Channel and the Santa Maria Basin
and only after completion of studies by the NAS.
This option is built on two premises: first, that a
scientific distinction can be made between lease sales off
these areas of southern California and the sales off
northern California and Florida; and, second, that the
decision is responsive to the concerns expressed by the
California Congressional delegation in your meeting with
them and in their proposals to the Interior Department in
1986 and 1987.
With respect to the first premise, the NAS report to the
Task Force clearly stated that "the southwest Florida shelf
(the area associated with Sale #116) comprises subtidal and
nearshore habitats that are unique (emphasis added) within
the U.S. continental margin and provide refuge to a number
of rare and endangered species. The NAS report also found
that the incremental risks of an oil spill associated with
the northern California sale (sale 91) were eight times
greater than the incremental risks of a spill associated
with either sale 116 or sale 95. In addition, the NAS found
that information concerning onshore socioeconomic impacts
related to sale 91 was particularly lacking. Unlike in
southern California, there is little onshore industrial
infra-structure now in place in the affected areas of
northern California and the onshore effects of offshore
development would be great.
The point is that distinctions can be made between sale 95
off southern California and the other two sales. The area
encompassed by sale 95 is not home to unique coral reefs or
endangered species. In addition, because there is existing
offshore development in state and federal waters near the
areas proposed for earlier development, the incremental risk
of an oil spill and the effects on onshore infrastructure
are lower. Thus development in the recommended portions of
sale area 95 is different in terms of environmental impact
and scientific merit from development in sale area 91 or
sale area 116.
With respect to the second premise, you may recall that
during your meeting with the California delegation
Congressman Panetta mentioned several compromises he had
offered to Secretary Hodel in 1986. The central feature of
his proposal was the creation of a buffer zone along most of
the California coast, stretching from six to thirty miles
offshore, in which no drilling would take place. The only
two areas of the coast for which Congressman Panetta did not
propose a buffer zone were the Santa Maria Basin and the
Santa Barbara Channel. Thus, this option is consistent with
his earlier recommendations. A map displaying Congressman
Panetta's proposal is attached at Tab D.
In sum, then, this option is responsive to both the
scientific and environmental concerns identified by the NAS
and the concerns identified by the California delegation in
your meeting with them.
Option for Florida
O
Cancel sale 116 and exclude the area from consideration
for any lease sale until after the year 2000.
Conduct the additional oceanographic, ecological and
socioeconomic studies identified by the NAS, which
should be completed within 5 to 6 years.
O
Begin cancellation under federal law 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 under existing authorities
contained in the OCS Lands Act. Your budget already
contains $200 million in FY 1995 for purchasing these
leases.
National Security Exemption
O
Dictate that in the event the President determines that
national security requires development in these areas,
he would have the ability to direct the Interior
Department to open the areas for development.
Advantages of Options
Still allow relatively early drilling on promising
southern California tracts. (The resource estimates
for the five basins in the Southern California Planning
Area and an overview of resource estimates involved in
this OCS decision are found at Tab E.)
Development is underway in the areas where earlier
drilling would be permitted. These areas were not
proposed for a buffer zone out 30 miles in the 1986
proposal made by Congressman Panetta.
Could alleviate pressures in Congress for the creation
of ocean sanctuaries or permanent bans on leasing up
and down the length of both the Atlantic and Pacific
Coasts (as in the Boxer/Levine bill). This decision
could thus remove most of the sizable California and
Florida delegations from the national coalition that
threatens to jeopardize the entire OCS program.
Recognize the political reality that no drilling is
likely to occur on California and Florida leases in the
foreseeable future, given the clear disposition of the
Congress on this matter.
Have no adverse budgetary impact, as OMB has already
eliminated any projections of revenues from the sales
from its budget receipt projections.
Respond to NAS criticism that leasing always leads to
future development without any subsequent analysis of
environmental impacts.
Disadvantages of Options
O
Will likely be strongly criticized by the oil and gas
industry.
O
Drilling in even selected areas off California may
still be strongly criticized by environmentalists and
California political leaders.
May be impossible to reverse decisions or adopt a less
aggressive posture in the future even if energy
security concerns arise.
Could encourage future efforts to ban development in
areas not now the subject of controversy, such as the
Gulf of Mexico.
Sale 119 and Monterey Bay Sanctuary
Option
Cancel sale 119 and adopt sanctuary proposed by NOAA.
Permanently prohibit all oil and gas activities within
the sanctuary.
Allow no development in the sale 119 area outside the
sanctuary until after the year 2000.
Advantages of Option
Recognizes that this area is a nationally significant
and environmentally sensitive resource (e.g., it
includes the largest breeding ground for marine mammals
in the lower 48 states).
Acknowledges the strength of public opposition to
development off this portion of central California and
the fact that a more restrictive legislative ban on oil
and gas activities will likely be enacted (as with the
Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuary off San
Francisco last year) if regulatory prohibitions are not
imposed.
Disadvantages of Option
Could be questioned because it ignores the precedential
value of acting without an extensive analysis of the
available scientific data.
Could bolster arguments for a permanent ban on oil and
gas activities off California and even Washington and
Oregon.
Washington and Oregon -- Sale 132
Exclude the area off the two states from consideration
for the 1992-1997 and 1997-2002 five-year programs. A
state-Interior task force has recommended cancellation
of the sale through 1997 pending further studies.
North Atlantic (George's Bank) -- Sale 96
O
Cancel sale 96. (Note that the Boston Globe reported
recently that Interior was planning to cancel this
sale.)
O
Conduct additional studies, including studies designed
to determine the area's true resource potential.
Recommendations for OCS Program
Develop a legislative initiative to provide coastal
communities directly affected by OCS development with a
greater share of the financial benefits of new
development and with more voice in decision-making.
Charge the Interior Department with undertaking a
program to improve the information needed to make
decisions on OCS development. This program will
include conducting the studies identified by the NAS
and studies to explore new technologies to alleviate
the risks of oil spills and new oil and gas drilling
technologies, such as submersible drilling rigs.
Direct the Interior Department to ensure that future
OCS five-year plans provide for better targeting of
proposed sale areas to ensure that only areas with the
greatest resource potential are offered for sale.
Summary
The option presented here will go far toward addressing the
environmental concerns expressed about offshore drilling.
It would put most of the California coast and the sensitive
area off the Florida Everglades off limits to oil and gas
development until after the year 2000. It would provide
permanent protection for the sanctuary at Monterery Bay. It
would suggest long delays for controversial sales off of
Washington and Oregon and in George's Bank. Finally, it
would respond to the concerns expressed by the National
Academy of Sciences regarding the need for better
information before offshore development occurs. Moreover,
the option provides needed reforms in the conduct of the OCS
program: better targeting of future sales and greater
assistance to the most heavily impacted coastal communities.
This option should clear away an array of pending
environmental concerns and allow a more carefully targeted
and scientifically sound offshore development program to go
forward with renewed confidence and less resistance.
PHOTOCOPY
GB HANDWRITING
III. NEXT STEP
In your meetings with the California Congressional delegation,
some of the members hinted at the possibility of further
consultations prior to the announcement of your decision, and
this should be considered. Governors Martinez and Deukmejian
have also been intensely interested in this decision, and some
type of personal consultations or discussions with them should
also be considered. The chairmen and ranking members of relevant
Senate and House committees could also be consulted.
IV. DECISION
Approve
18-18-90
Disapprove
Other
INDEX TO ATTACHMENTS
Tab A
Summary of Options for California and Florida
Sales
Tab B
Summary of Options for Sale 119 and Monterey
Bay Sanctuary
Tab C
Map Showing Leases in Santa Maria Basin and
Santa Barbara Channel off Southern
California Considered for Earlier
Development
Tab D
Map Showing Proposal by Congressman Panetta
for Buffer Zone off Southern California
Tab E
Resource Estimates for Basins in Southern
California Planning Area and Overview of
Resource Estimates
OCS TASK FORCE OPTIONS SUMMARY
CALIFORNIA
FLORIDA
18"
Northern California
86°
85°
84°
83°
82°
81°
80°
Planning Area
SALE AREAS
28°
26°
SALE 91
FLORIDA
27
West Pain
Beach
ATLANTIC OCEAN
-27°
Sale 116 Motor
26*
26*
Miami
SAN
Central California
FRANCISCO
SALE
The
Planning Area
25
Key Largo
25°
PACIFIC OCEAN
SALE 119
Dry
Tertuges
Key West
Eastern
24
Gulf of Mexico
24"
San Late Chiese
Planning Area
Senta
Berbers
LOS ANGELES
o
60
100
Haveng
23
STATUTE MILES
23*
Continue
SALE 95
Coass
, mide
5
CUBA
86°
85°
84°
83°
82°
81°
80°
SAN-
DIEGO
SCALE 1,8,000,000
Southern California
Planning Area
14"
Earliest
Generic Options Identified by the Task Force.
Possible
Staff, and Affected Agencies:
Drill Date
1.) Defer Presidential decision until after
publication of National Energy Strategy.
1992
2.) Cancel sale at this time and defer decision
until studies identified by NAS completed.
1993
3.) Defer sale until 1992-1997 five-year plan and
offer only selected tracts off California.
1993-95
4.) Defer sale until 1997-2002 five-year plan.
1997
5.) Defer sale until after next two five-year plans.
2002
6.) Cancel sale and impose permanent ban except
for national security requirements.
Unknown
Option Offered for Discussion:
Sale 91: Defer any sale until after 2000
2000
Sale 95: Defer sale in majority of area until after 2000.
2000 for most;
Offer most promising areas in Santa Barbara Channel
1996 for
and Santa Maria basin (91 tracts) only upon completion
selected
of NAS-recommended environmental studies in 1995.
areas
(The California coast has 13,000 tracts; thus more than
99% of this coast would be protected until after 2000)
Sale 116: Defer any sale until after 2000. Proceed with
buyback of existing leases. Begin discussions with
2000
state of Florida about participating in lease buyback.
Delays proposed for all 3 sales would be subject to national security exemption.
Sale 119: Central California
Background:
A related issue to the three sales considered by the Task Force is the
disposition of lease sale 119 off central California. This area is subject to a
Congressional moratorium on pre-leasing activities in the current fiscal year.
The sale area, shown on the map below, stretches from north of San Francisco
past Monterey Bay to Big Sur. In 1988, Congress mandated the creation of a
National Marine Sanctuary in Monterey Bay. NOAA has proposed to designate
an area for the sanctuary covering about 2,200 square miles -- including
significant portions of the sale area. The proposed NOAA rule would prohibit
oil and gas exploration and development activities within the sanctuary. Such
a ban is not mandatory within a marine sanctuary. Sanctuaries in several
other parts of the country are not subject to such a ban, although others off
the California coast are.
There are two issues now pending related to sale 119. First is whether to
publish the NOAA rule adopting the sanctuary boundaries and banning oil and
gas activities in the sanctuary. The second is whether to cancel the sale, and
for how long. Many members of Congress and the public are expecting a
decision on sale 119 to be announced concurrently with a decision on the
other California lease sales.
126°
124°
122°
CENTRAL CALIFORNIA
PLANNING AREA
BODEGA BAY
SALE 119
Monterey Bay
Proposed Marine Sanctuary
38°
SAN CALIFORNIA FRANCISCO
38°
OAKLAND
SAN JOSE
SANTA CRUZ
MONTEREY
BIG SUR
0
50
100
36°
MILES
36°
126°
124°
122°
Options:
Adopt NOAA sanctuary boundaries but allow oil and gas development
Adopt oil and gas ban in sanctuary but proceed with sale outside sanctuary
boundaries.
Adopt NOAA proposal and cancel sale 119 until 19971
Adopt NOAA proposal and cancel sale 119 until 2000¹
1
With national security exemption as proposed for sales 91, 95, and 116.
124°
123°
122°
121°
120°
119°
118°
117°
San Simeon Pt
Most Prospective Tracts
3% of Total
Pt. Estero
Morro Bay
Santa Maria and
San Luis Obispo
Santa Barbara Areas
Santa Maria
Santa
35
NI 10-2
NI 10-3
Barbara
35
Santa Maria
Pt Sa/
Channel
Purisma Pt
CALIFORNIA
Southern California
Lompoc
Pt. Conception
Santa
Planning Area
Gaviota
Barbara
Pitas Pt
6
Ventura
THIC hards
LOS ANGELES
:
Pt. Dume
34
NI 10-6
Ruck
Santa Monica
34
San
Miguell
Santa
Long Beach
Santa
Cruz
Pt. Fermin
Rese le:
Santa
Barbara to
Laguna Beach
Dana Pt
8B
Bock
Santa
atalina S
Oceanside
BA
San
33
Nieclas
NI 10-9
San
La Jolla
33
Clemerte]s
San Diego
8D
BO
Prospective Blocks
Sale 95 Area Boundary
BE
N
Mexico
32
BASIN
NUMBER OF PROSPECTIVE BLOCKS
NH 1 10
32
Santa Maria
45
Santa Barbara
42
TOTAL
87
O
50
100
31
NH 11-
STATUTE MILES
31
NH11-4
124°
123°
122°
121°
120°
119°
118°
117°
MMS/06/90
124°
123°
122°
121°
120°
119°
118°
117°
San Simeon Pt.
Pt. Estero
Most Prospective Tracts
Morro Bay
3% of Total Southern California
San Luis Obispo
Planning Area Tracts
Santa Maria
Santa
35
NI 10-2
NI 10-3
35
Barbara
Santa Maria
Pt. Sal
Channel
Southern California
Purisma Pt
CALIFORNIA
Lompoc
Pt. Conception
Planning Area
Santa
Gaviota
Barbara
Los Angeles
Pitas Pt.
TOTAL NUMBER OF BLOCKS
6
Ventura
Wilmington
LOS ANGELES
Southern California Planning Area = 5661
Pt. Dume
34
NI 10-6
Santa Monica
34
Sale 95 Area = 1317
Long Beach
Pt. Fermin
PROPRIETARY
Laguna Beach
Dana Pt.
6B
San Diego
Oceanside
BA
33
NI 10-9
33
La Jolla
San Diego
6D
Prospective Blocks
BO
Sale 95 Area Boundary
6E
N
Mexico
BASIN
NUMBER OF PROSPECTIVE BLOCKS
32°
NH 11-10
32
Santa Maria
38
Santa Barbara
40
Los Angeles
30
Wilmington
35
San Diego
26
0
50
100
31
TOTAL
169
NH 11-
STATUTE MILES
31
NH11-4
124°
123°
MMS/05/90
122°
121°
120°
119°
118°
117°
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PLANNING AREA
RESOURCE POTENTIAL
Oil
%
Gas
%
(billion of
trillion
of
barrels) Total
cubic ft)
Total
Santa Maria Basin
.62
40.5
.57
23.2
Santa Barbara Basin
.32
20.9
.90
36.6
Wilmington Basin
.06
3.9
.09
3.7
Los Angeles Basin
.06
3.9
.08
3.2
San Diego Basin
.47
30.8
.82
33.3
OVERVIEW OF U.S.
RESOURCE POTENTIAL
Oil
%
Gas
%
(billion of
trillion
of
barrels) Total
cubic ft)
Total
Total U.S. Resources
34.80
263.00
Entire OCS
8.20
23.6
74.00
28.1
ANWR
3.20
9.2
6.90 (1)
2.6
Existing Fla. Leases
.14
.4
.30
.1
Existing S. Cal. Leases (2)
.34
1.0
.80
.3
Sale 116
.11
.3
Sale 95
.23
.7
.46
.2
Sale 91
.20
.6
.41
.2
Sale 119
.16
.5
.26
.1
PHOTOCOPY
GB HANDWRITING
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 5, 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, and manner. have accepted this recommention
I have received the report of the interagency Task Force on
Leasing and Development off the coasts of Florida and
California, and have concluded 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 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.
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, environmental concerns, and
to the need to develop prudently our nation's domestic energy
resources.
-2-
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.
#
#
#
#
1
DRAFT
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release:
June 5, 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 decisions are intended both to respond to the
report of the interagency OCS Leasing and Development Task
Force and to provide more general direction for the future of
the OCS program.
The President believes that the nation needs to find a
balance between development of important domestic energy
resources and protection of the environment in sensitive
areas.
Oil and Gas Leasing and Development Off the Coasts of
Southwest Florida and California:
The Task Force has devoted a year of study, analysis and
public consultation to the question of oil and gas leasing
and development in Sale Area 116 off the coast of Southwest
Florida and Sale Areas 91 and 95 off the California coast.
One of the key findings of the Task Force was that
"additional time and effort are needed before environmental
concerns can be resolved in a manner that provides an
acceptable balance" between the goals of domestic energy
development and environmental protection.
Specifically, the Task Force found that:
the southwest Florida shelf comprises subtitle 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 risk of oil spill associated with the
northern California sale (Sale Area 91) was far greater
than that associated with the other two sales;
information concerning the onshore socioeconomic effects
of oil and gas development was particularly lacking for
2
DRAFT
the Florida sale (Sale Area 116) and the northern
California sale (Sale Area 91);
0
some 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.
The President today recommended that:
O
No oil and gas development take place in Sale Area 116
off the coast of southwest Florida until after the year 2000;
O
The Department of the Interior initiate discussions with
the State of Florida and with lessees to facilitate purchase
of existing leases in this area, and the Secretary of the
Interior initiate procedures that could lead to cancellation
of the existing leases pursuant to section 5 of the OCS Lands
Act.
O
No oil and gas development take place in Sale Area 91
off the coast of northern California until after the year
2000;
O
No oil and gas development take place in Sale Area 95
south of the Santa Barbara Channel until after the year 2000;
O
Development in the Santa Barbara Channel and Santa Maria
basin, areas which are close proximity to existing oil and
gas development in Federal and State waters, be delayed at
least until after January 1, 1996 -- which will allow for the
additional studies recommended by the National Academy of
Sciences to be conducted. Development could then go forward
if deemed prudent in light of the results of the studies;
0
No oil and gas development take place in any of the
areas considered by the Task Force until the concerns
identified by the National Academy of Sciences have been
satisfactorily addressed and the studies recommended by the
Academy have been conducted.
The task force also put forward several general
recommendations which the President today adopted:
O
Air quality controls should be adopted for the
California OCS which are substantially the same as those
applied on shore. This is consistent with the position taken
by the Administration in Clean Air Act negotiations with the
Senate.
o
Steps should be taken immediately to improve the ability
of industry and the Federal government to respond to oil
spills from any source.
3
DRAFT
O
Federal agencies should develop a plan to reduce the
probability of oil spills from all sources, including and
especially those from tanker traffic. This plan should
include moving oil tanker routes further away from sensitive
areas in the Florida Keys and the Everglades, as previously
proposed.
Sale Area 119: Central California
Consideration of leasing and development off the northern and
southern California coasts by the Task Force has been
accompanied by strong concern about the prospect of oil and
gas leasing and development in Sale Area 119, off the coast
of central California. The area includes several unique
marine and coastal resources in the proposed Monterey Bay
National Marine Sanctuary.
The President today recommended that no oil and gas
development take place in Sale Area 119 before the year 2000.
In addition, the President today approved a proposal by the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to
provide permanent protection to the Monterey Bay National
Marine Sanctuary. The proposal includes a permanent ban on
oil and gas development within the sanctuary.
In combination with my decisions on areas studied by the task
force, adoption of these recommendations will mean that:
O
No oil and gas development will occur off 99 percent of
the California coast until after the year 2000.
Permanent protection will be provided in one of the
most sensitive coastal areas.
In the remaining one percent, no oil and gas development
will occur until 1996, if at all, and will occur only
upon completion of further environmental studies and
steps taken to address environmental concerns.
Other Controversial Sale Areas: Oregon, Washington, and
Georges Bank
The Department of the Interior has also convened a task force
to address environmental concerns related to leasing and
development in Sale Area 132, off the coast of Oregon and
Washington. The task force has recommended cancellation of
these sales pending further study. Today, the President
recommended that any oil and gas development in this area be
delayed until after the year 2000, pending completion of the
further studies recommended by the task force.
4
DRAFT
A similar controversy has arisen over oil and gas development
in Sale Area 96, the Georges Bank area off the coast of New
England. The President today recommended that any
development in this area be delayed until after the year
2000, pending further study to determine the true resource
potential of the area.
General OCS Program Recommendations:
The President believes that if the balance between
development of our domestic energy resources and protection
of unique and sensitive coastal and marine environments is to
be struck, the OCS program in the future will need to be
targeted much more carefully toward areas with truly
promising resource potential; sensitive to the concerns and
needs of local areas affected by OCS development; and
buttressed by information adequate to ensure that oil and gas
development can go forward in an environmentally sound
manner.
Therefore, the President today directed the Department of the
Interior to take three broad steps in order to improve the
OCS program:
O
The Department should target all future OCS five-
year plans to ensure that only those areas with the greatest
resource potential and the least environmental risk are
offered for sale. This will necessarily result in much
smaller and more carefully selected blocks being offered in
the future.
O
The Department should develop a legislative
proposal to allow coastal communities directly affected by
OCS development to receive a greater share of financial
benefits of new development and to have a stronger voice in
OCS decision-making.
The Department should begin immediately to develop
a program to improve the adequacy of the information needed
to make OCS decisions. This should include the information
identified in the report of the National Academy of Sciences
to the Task Force, as well as studies to explore new
technologies to alleviate the risks oil spills.
Conclusion:
Taken together, these decisions represent a dramatic response
to the concerns which have been expressed about oil and gas
development on the outer continental shelf. They will
provide significant protection for areas which have aroused
5
DRAFT
great controversy off the coasts of Florida, California,
Washington, Oregon, and New England.
The OCS program which will result from the approach outlined
by the President will be leaner, more effective, and more
focused on producing the greatest results with the least
environmental disruption.
The President has long been committed to offshore oil and gas
development where it can be accomplished in an
environmentally sound manner. The President's intention is
that this set of decisions will allow the OCS program now to
move forward with less controversy, fewer threats posed to
the environment, and sound footing from which to develop
America's most promising energy resources.
# # # #
OCS
SUMMARY
The final report of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Leasing and
Development Task Force was delivered to the White House on
January 5. The report is the work of the Cabinet-level Task
Force, comprised of Secretaries Lujan (who served as chairman)
and Watkins, Administrators Reilly and Knauss and Director
Darman, announced by you in your budget message to Congress in
February 1989. In that budget message you charged the Task Force
to study and resolve environmental concerns regarding the
potential adverse effects of three OCS lease sales scheduled for
FY 1990 that were delayed: Sale 116 off the southwestern coast
of Florida; Sale 95 off southern California; and Sale 91 off
northern California.
In developing options for your consideration, the Task Force
examined the issues of air quality, the risks of oil spills,
changes in onshore infrastructure and land use due to these lease
sales, and the impacts of these sales on protected lands and
species and other wildlife, commercial fishing, water quality,
and tourism and recreation. The Task Force commissioned an
analysis of the adequacy of scientific and technical information
available for making leasing decisions in the three areas from
the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). The NAS report concluded
that there was a lack of some oceanographic, ecological or
socioeconomic data for each area, although the study is subject
to some criticism for calling for an unreasonable level of data.
In its eight-month process the Task Force solicited extensive
input from the public and members of Congress. The public and
most elected officials in the two states are generally opposed to
the sales. The Task Force also uncovered wide dissatisfaction
with the OCS program, as local residents who are most affected by
OCS activities often do not receive commensurate financial
benefits and feel they have little opportunity for participation
in decision-making.
The Task Force presented specific options for decisions on each
sale (four options for the Florida sale and three for each
California sale). The Task Force made no recommendations among
the various options. Additional options have been developed by
White House staff and members of the Task Force independently.
The Task Force also presented, and staff has developed, general
options to be addressed in connection with these three sales and
the overall OCS program.
Decisions are also currently pending on Sale 119 in the San
Francisco-Monterey area of central California and the creation of
a national marine sanctuary in Monterey Bay, which as proposed by
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) would
cover the most valuable part of the Sale 119 area; NOAA's
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
03a. Report
From Outer Continental Shelf Leasing and Development Task
n.d.
5
Force
Options section redacted (1 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Open on Expiration of PRA
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
(Document Follows)
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
By
IP
(NLGB)
on
5/12/05
Subseries:
Issues Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Outer Continental Shelf (1990) [1]
Date Closed:
12/10/2004
OA/ID Number:
29163-008
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly-unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile
proposal would also ban all oil and gas activities within the
sanctuary. Given the proximity of these areas to the two delayed
California sales and the commonality of the issues, it is
appropriate to make these decisions at the same time as decisions
on the lease sales are made. Four options have been developed by
White House staff calling for combined actions on Sale 119 and
the Monterey Bay sanctuary.
Set forth below are summaries of the options developed by the
Task Force and the White House staff. A full presentation of
those options, and supporting discussion of the respective pros
and cons, is found in the accompanying decision memorandum. The
decision memorandum also provides more extensive information
regarding the Task Force deliberations.
Task Force Options for Sales
Option A
Florida -- Cancel sale and defer leasing decision until
additional oceanographic, ecological and socioeconomic data
identified by NAS have been collected.
As for existing leases in same area, proceed with exploration and
development decisions under normal procedures.
California
A-1 -- Proceed with preparations for lease sales but defer
leasing decisions until the additional oceanographic (southern
California) and socioeconomic (southern and northern California)
data identified by NAS have been collected.
A-2 -- Cancel sales and defer subsequent leasing decisions
until additional oceanographic (southern California) and
socioeconomic data (southern and northern California) identified
by NAS have been collected.
Option B
Florida -- Cancel sale and exclude area from consideration for
the 1992-1997 OCS five-year leasing program.
As for existing leases, begin discussions with Florida and
existing lessees to facilitate state purchase of leases.
California -- Defer leasing decisions on both sales until 1992-
1997 five-year program and, if sales go forward, offer tracts
only in limited geographic areas (Santa Maria and Outer San Diego
Basins off southern California and Eel River Basin off northern
California).
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
03b. Report
From Outer Continental Shelf Leasing and Development Task
n.d.
P/5
Force (2 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Open on Expiration of PRA
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
(Document Follows)
Subseries:
Issues Files
By W (NLGB) on 5/12/05
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Outer Continental Shelf (1990) [1]
Date Closed:
12/10/2004
OA/ID Number:
29163-008
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
Option C
Florida -- Cancel sale and exclude area from consideration for
both 1992-1997 and 1997-2002 five-year programs.
As for existing leases, begin discussions with Florida regarding
its purchase of leases and initiate procedures that could lead to
cancellation of existing leases under OCS Lands Act.
California -- Cancel sales and exclude areas from consideration
for 1992-1997 five-year program.
Options for Sales Not Identified by Task Force
A. Proceed with sales in Florida and California under existing
OCS Lands Act process.
B. Cancel sales in Florida and California and exclude from
consideration for 1992-1997 program at this time; if additional
studies to obtain data identified by NAS show leasing possible in
environmentally sensitive manner, add tracts to 1992-1997
program.
C. Delay decisions until final National Energy Strategy
submitted in December.
D. Cancel sales and impose permanent ban on lease sales in
three areas.
Other Actions Recommended by Task Force (to Address Environmental
Concerns in Areas of Sales)
A. In southern and northern California, establish air quality
controls for OCS activities that are substantially equivalent to
those applied onshore. The Minerals Management Service already
has efforts underway to develop a new proposed rulemaking to
achieve this objective.
B. In northern California, evaluate the effects of OCS
activities on commercial fisheries and institute measures to
reduce conflicts.
C. In both Florida and California, revise requirements for OCS
oil spill contingency plans to improve their effectiveness and
develop improved means of assessing the risk of damage from oil
spills
D. Institute a Coast Guard study of the feasibility of moving
tanker routes away from sensitive areas.
E.
Direct the Secretary of the Interior to study restructuring
of revenue-sharing and decision-making provisions of OCS Lands
Act and OCS program.
Options for Sale 119 and Monterey Bay Marine Sanctuary
A. Cancel Sale 119 and adopt NOAA proposal for sanctuary,
including prohibition on oil and gas activities.
B. Adopt NOAA proposal for sanctuary and proceed with Sale 119
only in areas outside sanctuary.
C. Limit sanctuary to smaller size, prohibiting oil and gas
activities within it, and proceed with Sale 119.
D. Adopt NOAA proposal for size of sanctuary, but allow oil and
gas activities within it subject to regulation, and proceed with
Sale 119.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
04. Report
Issue report on Outer Continental Shelf Leasing and
4/9/90
P/S
Development (21 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Open on Expiration of PRA
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
(Document Follows)
Subseries:
Issues Files
By H (NLGB) on 5/12/05
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Outer Continental Shelf (1990) [1]
Date Closed:
12/10/2004
OA/ID Number:
29163-008
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile
April 9, 1990
I. ISSUE
A decision on the options presented by the Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS) Leasing and Development Task
Force is needed.
II. BACKGROUND
In your February 9, 1989 budget message to Congress,
honoring a pledge made during the campaign, you imposed a
moratorium on three controversial OCS lease sales
scheduled for fiscal year 1990 -- Sale 116 in the Gulf of
Mexico off the southwestern coast of Florida, Sale 95 off
the coast of southern California, and Sale 91 off the
coast of northern California -- pending a review of the
environmental effects of the sales by a Cabinet-level
task force. The California sales had been subject to
Congressionally-imposed moratoria in 1987, 1988 and 1989
and the Florida sale became subject to a Congressionally-
imposed moratorium last year.
The Secretary of the
Interior, the Secretary of Energy, the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget, the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency and the Administrator of
the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) were named as members of the Task Force and
charged with making recommendations on the future of the
lease sales within one year.
In fulfilling its charge, the Task Force conducted
briefings and public workshops in Florida and California,
hearing from over 1,000 witnesses, met with Members of
Congress from those two states and other parts of the
country, and received over 11,000 written comments. It
also commissioned and received a study from the National
Academy of Sciences (NAS) addressing the adequacy of the
scientific and technical data available on which
decisions on the three lease sales could be made.
The Task Force delivered its report to the White House on
January 5.
III. DISCUSSION
A. POLICY GOALS
The OCS leasing program is governed by the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act and overseen by the Minerals
Management Service (MMS) within the Interior Department.
(A description of the program is found at Appendix A.)
The program has been the focus of controversy in recent
years over the environmental effects of offshore oil and
2
gas exploration and development. The controversy has
resulted in yearly Congressional moratoria on certain
lease sales, pre-lease planning activities, and even some
post-lease exploration. The policy goal of the decisions
on these three lease sales, which will inevitably affect
the entire OCS program, must be to reconcile the need for
adequate domestic energy supplies through robust
exploration and development on the OCS and the need for
long-term protection of sensitive environments and
ecosystems. An additional goal must be to regain
Executive branch control of the OCS program by addressing
Congressional and local concerns and removing their
stranglehold on the program.
B. RESOURCE POTENTIAL
The decisions with respect to these three lease sales
must take into account their relationship to the total
oil and gas resources of the U.S. The MMS has developed
mean estimates for the undiscovered economically
recoverable (using existing technology) oil and gas
resources derivable from (1) the U.S. as a whole,
including the OCS, (2) the entire OCS, (3) the Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska (ANWR), (4) the
existing leases in the three planning areas in which
these sales are located and (5) the leases involved in
the sales. Appendix B is a table setting forth the
relative oil and gas resources available from all of
these areas. As you can see, the three sales represent
about 1.6 percent of all U.S. oil resources and about 0.4
percent of all U.S. gas resources, equivalent to about
one-sixth of the resources available from ANWR.
It should be noted that the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has already eliminated any projected
revenues from these three sales from its budget
projections. The decisions on the sales therefore have
no immediate impact on, and should not be considered as
an issue relevant to, the budget.
C. RELATIONSHIP OF STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO OCS
PROGRAM
The relationship of state and local governments and their
constituents to the OCS program is also a relevant issue.
The federal government's perspective on the OCS program
is premised on its role in the nation's overall energy
strategy, with its national security and economic
implications. In administering the OCS program the
federal government also exercises its national
stewardship functions to manage and protect scarce and
valuable environmental resources on public lands.
3
State and local governments, on the other hand, represent
more parochial interests of the people who will
experience the direct impact of OCS development. Most of
the financial benefit of OCS leasing and development
accrues to the federal government (states receive 100
percent of revenues from OCS leases within the first
three miles of shore, 27 percent of revenues from OCS
leases three to twelve miles from shore, and nothing from
leases further than twelve miles offshore). Further, the
residents of the localities most directly affected by OCS
activity may or may not benefit proportionately from the
revenues received by the state if those revenues are
spent elsewhere. Despite the opportunities granted for
participation in the OCS process, persons affected by
federal OCS decisions often feel that their interests
have not been represented; this likely accounts for the
contentious nature of many recent OCS decisions.
Although not a subject directly addressed by the Task
Force, the concept of restructuring the OCS program to
give states a greater share of the revenues arose during
your January meeting with the members of the Task Force.
Many members of the Administration believe, however, that
this type of local revenue-sharing will not be enough to,
engender support by Atlantic and Pacific coastal states
and localities for the OCS program.
D. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES (NAS) STUDY
The Task Force asked the NAS to study the adequacy of the
scientific and technical data available on which
decisions for the three lease sales could be made. The
NAS report concluded that generally there are not
adequate oceanographic, ecological and socioeconomic data
on which to base a lease/no lease decision, but that the
adequacy varies by lease sale. The NAS conclusions are
as follows:
Sale
Oceanographic Ecological
Socioeconomic
Florida
marginal
inadequate
inadequate
N. Cal.
adequate
adequate
inadequate
S. Cal.
inadequate
adequate
doubtful
The NAS recommended that no decision be made on
proceeding with the lease sales until further studies are
conducted, although it did not specifically identify
those studies that must be conducted in order to have a
complete data base. There is no clear consensus as to
the length of time needed to conduct adequate studies.
Staff of the Task Force estimates that it could take as
long as five to six years in Florida and as little as two
to three years in northern California.
4
Questions regarding the value of the NAS study and the
weight it should be accorded have been raised. Some
allege that the strictest academic "peer review" standard
was used to assess the available data, which would be far
greater than the standard generally used in making
governmental decisions. Such a standard could be seen as
unreasonable in a real world context, imposing a burden
that could rarely if ever be sustained, particularly when
weighed against the costs necessary to meet such a
standard and the benefits of the OCS program.
The NAS was also requested to study the adequacy of
resource estimate methodology used by the MMS. The NAS
report concluded that the MMS methodology for developing
resource estimates is adequate and sound.
E. LOCAL CONSIDERATIONS
As noted in Section II above, in preparing the report the
Task Force conducted local meetings in Florida and
California. These were designed to give the Task Force
the opportunity to discuss the proposed sales with state
and local officials, scientists, business leaders and
other interested groups and with members of the general
public. Demonstrations in opposition to leasing were
held at each of the nine public workshops. In addition,
the vast majority of persons who spoke at the meetings
were adamant in their opposition to new leasing. Local
opposition to leasing does not appear to have lessened,
and in fact may have strengthened. An August California
Poll found that 75 percent of those surveyed opposed more
drilling off the coast, the highest level of opposition
yet expressed in a statewide poll.
State and local officials are also generally unanimously
opposed to the sales. In Florida, the entire
Congressional delegation, Governor Martinez and all local
elected officials oppose new leasing, and in fact also
oppose exploration on existing leases off southwestern
Florida. Both California Senators oppose new leasing, as
do virtually all local elected officials. The California
Congressional delegation is split on the issue, although
almost all affected coastal representatives oppose new
leasing. Governor Deukmajian is generally supportive of
further offshore development.
F. ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS
In analyzing the three lease sales, the Task Force
identified and addressed six specific environmental
concerns: (1) air quality; (2) the risks of oil spills;
(3) the impact of OCS activity on commercial fishing;
5
(4) the effects of OCS activity on protected lands and
species; (5) water quality; and (6) socioeconomic
impacts. The general findings of the Task Force with
respect to these six areas and the cumulative effects are
found at Appendix C.
G.
RELATIONSHIP OF DECISIONS ON SALES TO SALE 119 IN
CENTRAL CALIFORNIA AND CREATION OF MONTEREY BAY SANCTUARY
Closely related to your decision on these three lease
sales are decisions on the future of Sale 119 off central
California and the creation of a national marine
sanctuary in the area around Monterey Bay.
The area to be covered by Sale 119, which is still in its
pre-leasing stages, stretches from San Francisco
southward to the northern tip of Monterey Bay. This
incorporates sensitive areas off the coast of Big Sur,
Carmel and Monterey, resulting in public opposition to
this sale that is at least as strong as that to Sales 95
and 91 and perhaps even stronger. The sale was
originally scheduled for March 1991, but due to the
imposition of a moratorium by Congress and delays in the
pre-sale process, a sale probably could not occur until
the middle of the 1992 fiscal year at the earliest. In
addition, pre-sale analysis would likely reduce the area
to be covered by the sale. OMB has already eliminated
projected revenues from this sale from its FY 1991 budget
projections and has also eliminated revenues from a FY
1994 lease sale in central California. Appendix B shows
the oil and gas resources available from Sale 119. As
you can see, such oil and gas resources are less than
those available from Sales 95 and 91 and slightly more
than those available from Sale 116.
The creation of a national marine sanctuary in the
Monterey Bay area was mandated by Congress in 1988.
Fulfilling its responsibility under the legislation, NOAA
has proposed designating an area for the sanctuary
covering approximately 2,200 square miles, about a third
of which is within the area to be covered by Sale 119,
including more than two-thirds of the most promising
tracts. NOAA has also proposed regulations that prohibit
all oil, gas and mineral exploration and development
activities within the proposed sanctuary. Other
activities are limited but not proscribed. A ban on oil
and gas activities is not mandatory within a marine
sanctuary; in fact, sanctuaries in other parts of the
country are not subject to this prohibition, although
because of the sensitivity of the issue in California
other sanctuaries off its shores do bear such bans
6
(including one ban that was Congressionally imposed in
1989).
IV. OPTIONS
A. Decisions on Lease Sales
The Task Force presented eleven separate options for the
lease sales, three for the Florida sale and four for each
California sale. White House staff and the individual
departments represented on the Task Force have also
identified other options, including those at the extreme
ends of the spectrum. All of the options for the lease
sales are set forth below (Task Force options first,
followed by options developed by staff) and accompanied
by supporting discussion of their pros and cons. It
should be noted that the members of the Task Force agreed
only to include within their final report options that
all members could agree would be acceptable, so some of
the new options that have been developed may have been
considered by the Task Force and may be supported by
individual members.
Task Force Options for Sales
Option A
Sale 116 (Florida)
Cancel the sale and defer subsequent decision until the
additional oceanographic, ecological and socioeconomic
data identified by the NAS have been collected.
As for existing leases, proceed with exploration and
development decisions under normal procedures.
Sales 95 (Southern California) and 91 (Northern
California)
The same language is included for Option A for both
California sales. A separate decision is needed for each
sale, however.
A-1 -- Proceed with preparations for the lease sales
but defer final decisions until the additional
oceanographic (southern California) and socioeconomic
(southern and northern California) data identified by the
NAS have been collected.
A-2 -- Cancel the sales and defer subsequent decisions
until the additional oceanographic (southern California)
7
and socioeconomic data (southern and northern California)
identified by the NAS have been collected.
Discussion -- Under these options, leasing in both
Florida and California could occur as part of the 1992-
1997 five-year plan, which was to be proposed by
Secretary Lujan in March but which is being delayed
pending your decision on these sales. These are pro-
petroleum industry options that signal the
Administration's continued commitment to OCS development
and affirm to the greatest extent the Interior
Secretary's discretion over OCS decisions, consistent
with current law. They recognize that the OCS is a
national resource the development of which will not be
unduly subject to local citizens' views. They will
likely meet with strong criticism, however, particularly
on the ground that a decision to cancel the sales of the
leases, followed almost immediately by the inclusion of
the same leases in the next five-year program, smacks of
hypocrisy. This criticism can be partially rebutted by
responding to the environmental concerns identified by
the NAS and imposing additional environmental
restrictions on new leases.
Allowing exploration and development to proceed on the
Florida leases using normal procedures avoids any
interference with current lessees and any "takings"
problems that could arise.
Option B
Sale 116 (Florida)
Cancel the sale and exclude the area from consideration
for the 1992-1997 five-year program.
As for existing leases, proceed with exploration and
development decisions under normal procedures but begin
discussions with the state and existing lessees regarding
the state's purchase of the leases.
Sales 95 (Southern California) and 91 (Northern
California)
In southern California (Sale 95), defer a decision on the
sale until the 1992-1997 five-year program, conducting
additional oceanographic and socioeconomic studies; if
the sale goes forward, offer tracts only in the Santa
Maria and San Diego Outer Basins.
In northern California, also defer a decision until the
1992-97 five-year program, conducting additional
8
socioeconomic studies; if the sale goes forward, offer
tracts only in the Eel River Basin.
Discussion -- These are compromise options. Leasing
could occur off California after 1992 (which, given
current Congressional moratoria and the time required to
complete the studies arising from the NAS report, may be
as soon as leasing could occur in any event), but would
be restricted to areas where development would be less
intrusive and to smaller areas so that environmentally-
sensitive features such as the Channel Islands National
Park and Marine Sanctuary could be protected. Leasing
off Florida would be delayed for at least seven years
until 1997. The petroleum industry should find this an
acceptable option, as it does not preclude development.
There is less certainty that the environmental community
will accept it as a reasonable compromise. The delays
should, however, allow the Interior Department to
complete the studies identified by the NAS, and this can
be used to rebut environmental concerns.
Beginning discussions with Florida regarding its purchase
of the existing leases imposes some burden on it to
protect its tourist industry and natural resources, which
is reasonable given that the state has also allowed
development in this area. This could open the door to
moves by the environmental community to cancel the
leases, however.
Option C
Sale 116 (Florida)
Cancel the sale and exclude the area from consideration
for both the 1992-1997 and 1997-2002 five-year programs.
As for existing leases, begin discussions with the state
and existing lessees regarding the state's purchase of
the leases and have Interior initiate procedures that
could lead to cancellation of the existing leases (which
would suspend further exploration or development).
Sales 95 (Southern California) and 91 (Northern
California)
Similar language is included for Option C for both
California sales. A separate decision is needed for each
sale, however.
Cancel the sales (and the next scheduled sales in both
areas) and exclude the areas from consideration for the
1992-1997 five-year program.
9
Discussion -- These are the most pro-environmental
options identified by the Task Force, precluding lease
sales off Florida until at least 2002 and off California
until at least 1997. They do not constitute the
permanent ban on leasing in the three areas that
environmentalists and most local residents seek, however.
These options could alleviate pressures in Congress for
the creation of ocean sanctuaries or permanent bans on
leasing.
The move to cancel the existing leases off Florida would
be particularly welcomed by environmentalists and would
respond to one of the criticisms of the NAS, namely that
leasing always leads to future development without any
subsequent analysis of environmental impacts. There are
questions about the ability of the Interior Department to
cancel the leases under current law, however, which
requires a finding of existing environmental harm.
These options are also the ones on which the FY 1991
budget is based, including provision in the budget for
repurchase in FY 1995 of the existing leases off Florida,
valued at the lesser of the fair market value of the
leases or the amount of lease bonuses paid plus
investment to date (approximately $200 million), so no
adverse budgetary impact would result if this course were
chosen.
Options Not Identified by Task Force
A. Proceed with lease sales under existing OCS Lands Act
process. Pre-lease activities would be reactivated at
the point at which they were stopped by the Presidential
moratorium.
Discussion -- This is one of the two extreme options.
It would essentially reject both the NAS study and the
report of the Task Force and proceed with "business as
usual.' It could be perceived as a complete sell-out to
the petroleum industry and would likely be severely
criticized by the environmental community and probably by
the general public, particularly in the two affected
states.
B. Cancel the sales, excluding them at this time from
the 1992-1997 five-year program, and directing that
future decisions on lease sales in these areas will be
made only after the data identified as deficient by the
NAS have been identified and collected; if the studies
subsequently show that leasing can be done in an
environmentally acceptable manner, add the tracts to the
1992-1997 five-year program.
10
Discussion -- This is a new option proposed by the
Energy Department. It allows decisive action on the
sales and the OCS program as a whole; it also
acknowledges that a more objective and scientific basis
is needed for decision-making. It avoids an arbitrary
decision to defer leasing or delete tracts from
consideration for leasing by holding the door open for
later inclusion of the leases in the 1992-1997 five-year
program; as such, it could thwart the efforts of those
who would use a cancellation decision as the precedent
for seeking further arbitrary bans on OCS activities
elsewhere. It would require an amendment to the 1992-97
five-year program at some point, which could focus
Congressional and environmental opposition to leasing.
C. Delay any decision on the sales until the National
Energy Strategy (NES) is finalized and submitted in
December 1990; concurrently with the announcement of that
course of action, make the OCS Task Force report public.
Discussion -- This option alleviates the difficulties
posed by making these decisions in the vacuum created
without knowing how they and the future of the OCS
program relate to the NES. It also sends a signal that
the President intends to balance environmental concerns
with energy security and economic requirements. The
petroleum industry may be disconcerted by the perceived
signal that further development is being significantly
slowed, although the strong link to the NES should offset
industry uneasiness. Delaying the sales also adversely
affects the time before which these resources can be
tapped (assuming that some development goes forward).
This option also delays any guidance to the Interior
Department and the MMS for their development of the next
five-year plan and other pending decisions regarding the
OCS. The release of the report will remove some of the
mystery surrounding the decisions, allow the public to
engage in the dialogue and focus attention on the
necessity for further scientific (by collection of the
data identified by the NAS) and economic (by the NES)
analysis of the decisions and the overall domestic energy
situation. The delay in the decision and release of the
report would likely be opposed by the California and
Florida Congressional delegations (especially Senator
Wilson), who want a decision to be made soon.
D. Cancel the sales and impose a permanent ban on lease
sales in the three areas.
Discussion -- This option recognizes the political
reality that no drilling is likely to occur on these
leases in the foreseeable future, given the clear
11
disposition of the Congress on this matter. OMB has
already eliminated any projections of revenue from these
sales from its budget receipt projections. Implementing
this option could remove the sizeable California and
Florida Congressional delegations from the nationwide
coalition that threatens to jeopardize the entire OCS
program or at least block some future activities. It
could, however, also be used as "evidence" by those
seeking permanent bans on all offshore drilling
activities, even on existing leases, that no OCS
activities are environmentally prudent.
B. Decisions on Other Actions Recommended to Address
Environmental Concerns in Areas of Sales and Deficiencies
in OCS Program.
The Task Force also developed recommended options for
addressing various environmental concerns that arise in
the three sale areas (and to a lesser extent throughout
the entire OCS). These options relate to (1) air quality
standards offshore California, (2) conflicts with
commercial fishing, particularly in northern California,
(3) oil spill contingency planning and response
capabilities, (4) tanker traffic, (5) safeguards for
protected lands and species, (6) protection of water
quality, and (7) steps to alleviate adverse socioeconomic
effects of OCS activities. In addition, your staff
developed an option for study of increased state and
local participation in the OCS program. This concept,
including the notion of increased sharing of revenues
from the OCS with local communities impacted by OCS
activities, has been discussed publicly by Secretary
Lujan and other Interior officials publicly in recent
days. All of these options are set forth in Appendix D.
C. Decisions on Sale 119 and Monterey Bay Sanctuary
Because of the reasonable proximity of the Sale 119 area,
including the Monterey Bay area, to the Sale 95 and 91
areas, and because of the common issues surrounding oil
and gas activities in all three areas, decisions on the
future of Sale 119 and the size and scope of activities
within the new Monterey Bay Sanctuary should also be made
at this time.
A. Cancel Sale 119 and proceed with the pending NOAA
proposal establishing the size of, and the prohibitions
on oil and gas activities within, the sanctuary.
Discussion -- NOAA asserts that the entire proposed
sanctuary area is nationally significant and
environmentally sensitive. For example, excluding any of
12
the proposed lease sale area would exclude the largest
breeding ground for marine mammals in the lower 48
states, a biologically irreplaceable resource.
Cancelling the sale would also acknowledge the strength
of the public opposition to oil and gas activities off
this portion of central California. NOAA further argues
that, if prohibitions on oil and gas activities are not
imposed through regulations, a more restrictive
legislative ban will likely be enacted, as occurred last
spring with the Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuary
off San Francisco. The impact of such a decision where
there has not been the extensive analysis of available
scientific data that accompanied the Task Force report
must be assessed, however, as must the possibility that
this could bolster arguments for a permanent ban on oil
and gas activities off California and even Washington and
Oregon.
B. Proceed with the NOAA proposal for the sanctuary,
including the prohibitions on oil and gas activities, and
proceed with Sale 119 only in areas outside the
sanctuary.
Discussion -- The proposed sanctuary boundaries were
drawn to provide a buffer to protect the area's sensitive
resources. Therefore, oil and gas activities could
proceed outside the sanctuary without causing, from
NOAA's viewpoint, any undue risk. This option
acknowledges that selected coastal areas are unique and
therefore require that special measures be implemented to
proetect them. At the same time it recognizes that oil
and gas activities can proceed in an environmentally safe
manner near sensitive areas.
C.
Limit the sanctuary to a smaller size recommended by
the Department of the Interior, prohibiting oil and gas
activity in this reduced area, and proceed with Sale 119.
Discussion -- The Interior Department proposal for the
sanctuary is approximately 60 percent smaller than the
NOAA proposal and preserves the tracts with the greatest
resource potential. Interior argues that it adequately
protects valuable marine resources without unduly
hindering development, but recognizes that certain areas
are so unique that no oil and gas activity within them is
appropriate. NOAA argues that it would exclude some of
the most biologically significant areas and expose the
Administration to charges that the sanctuary boundaries
were gerrymandered to permit oil and gas activities.
D. Proceed with Sale 119 and the NOAA proposal for the
size of the sanctuary; do not prohibit oil and gas
13
activity within the sanctuary but only subject it to
regulation like other activities.
Discussion -- This position provides protections to the
entire area NOAA has identified as sensitive, but
emphasizes the view that oil and gas activity can occur
coincident with sound environmental protection. It is
likely to result, however, in a legislative ban on oil
and gas activities. If not, the current debate on oil
and gas drilling would be taken up again during NOAA's
rulemaking process to implement allowable oil and gas
activities in the sanctuary.
APPENDIX A
DESCRIPTION OF OCS PROGRAM
The OCS leasing program is governed by the Outer Continental
Shelf Lands Act and overseen by the Minerals Management
Service (MMS) within the Interior Department. The sale and
development of leases under the Act is accomplished in five-
year programs, which begin with thorough analyses to assess
the potential reserves derivable from leases and any problems
that would accompany their development. That process starts
more than two years before the beginning date of a five-year
program. The MMS undertakes twelve separate steps as part of
this evaluative process, preparing two drafts of the program
and an environmental impact statement (EIS). The public is
given opportunity to comment at three points in the process
and Congress is also formally notified before a program is
finally approved.
Following final approval of a five-year program, typically
another 24 to 26 months are required before any lease sale can
take place. During this period another EIS specific to the
lease sale area is prepared and additional opportunities for
public comment are provided, along with an opportunity for
comment by the governor of the state offshore which the sale
is to occur. Once a sale occurs, exploration of the leases
can take anywhere from 1 to 10 years and development and
production can occur over several decades.
The three lease sales studied by the Task Force are all part
of the 1987-1992 five-year program. The sales were at
different stages when the moratoria were imposed, and could
have been held within five to sixteen months. The initial
steps for the 1992-1997 five-year program were scheduled to
commence in March with Secretary Lujan's release of a proposal
for comment, but that has been delayed pending decisions on
these three lease sales. The program development process is
expected to take until the summer of 1992, with the first sale
tentatively scheduled for September 1992. That schedule is
not mandated by statute or administrative rule or regulation,
however, and could be delayed. A delay of up to six months
would not significantly affect the timing of the program and
the early sales, as only one to two months would be lost.
APPENDIX B
RESOURCE POTENTIAL
Oil
%
Gas
%
(billion of
trillion
of
barrels) Total
cubic ft)
Total
Total U.S. Resources
34.80
263.00
Entire OCS
8.20
23.6
74.00
28.1
ANWR
3.20
9.2
6.90 (1)
2.6
Existing Fla. Leases
.14
.4
.30
.1
Existing S. Cal. Leases (2)
.34
1.0
.80
.3
Sale 116
.11
.3
---
---
Sale 95
.23
.7
.46
.2
Sale 91
.20
.6
.41
.2
Sale 116
.16
.5
.26
.1
(1) Although ANWR is estimated to contain 6.9 trillion cubic
feet of gas, the production of natural gas from ANWR is
considered by some to be uneconomical.
(2) None of the area off northern California has yet been
leased.
APPENDIX C
FINDINGS ON ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS
Air Quality. Offshore oil and gas drilling activities produce
the same types of emissions as onshore activities, with the
notable addition of emissions from support vessels and
helicopters. Meteorological conditions may also exist that
consistently drive offshore emissions toward land,
particularly off California. Despite this, the Task Force
found that emissions controls currently imposed by the MMS on
offshore drilling are less stringent than those imposed on
similar activities onshore. The effects of offshore emissions
are of greatest concern in southern California due to the
generally already poor air quality; there are more limited
concerns with respect to northern California also. All of the
Task Force options for California include strengthening
emissions standards. The Senate version of the Clean Air Act
amendments currently contains Administration-supported
language requiring such stricter OCS emissions standards.
Oil Spill Risks. The Task Force found that the risks posed to
coastal and marine resources by oil spills are significant and
that the environmental impact of a major OCS spill would be
severe. It concluded, however, that the increased chances of
a major oil spill caused by OCS drilling activities in the
three areas are small (in the case of Florida and southern
California, only a 1 percent greater risk, and in the case of
northern California an 8 percent greater risk) compared to the
risk of a spill caused by existing activity, such as non-OCS
tanker and barge traffic. The Task Force found that coastal
and marine resources warrant greater protection from possible
oil spills, whatever their source, than is currently provided.
Commercial Fishing. Commercial fishing is a vital economic
activity in all three areas, especially off southern and
northern California. OCS activities pose a variety of
conflicts between the petroleum and fishing industries,
including competition for available space at sea and for port
space onshore. There are also concerns about the loss or
destruction of habitat due to the effects of OCS activities
and the significant risks posed by oil spills. The Task Force
concluded that many of these conflicts can be resolved or
largely mitigated through the recommended use of joint
committees comprised of representatives of the petroleum and
fishing industries in areas where OCS activities are planned.
Protected Lands. Each of these three areas has unique
protected lands, most notably the mangrove-coral reef system
in the Everglades and Florida Keys. The Task Force found that
these sensitive and highly valuable areas now receive only the
same level of protection as that in ordinary areas but that
they warrant additional consideration and heightened
management.
Protected Species. Each of these three areas is inhabited by
species that have been placed under the protection of federal
statutes, most notably the endangered manatees off Florida.
The Task Force concluded that existing protections are
sufficient to protect these species so that a delay in leasing
cannot be justified on this basis alone.
Water Quality. OCS activities can have various impacts on the
water quality near rigs and platforms. Such activity is
currently regulated by EPA under the Clean Water Act through
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. The Task
Force found that this regulation is adequate in the three
areas. It noted, however (as did the NAS), that information
on the long-term effects of chronic discharges is lacking.
Socioeconomic Impacts. OCS activities, though offshore, have
significant socioeconomic impacts onshore. The Task Force
found that these include the possibility of increased
conflicts over land use and greater demands on infrastructure
that could force changes in the character of an area. Tourism
and recreation can also be adversely affected, although the
Task Force found that this does not appear to be a sufficient
basis for delaying the lease sales. The Task Force concluded
that in these three areas such conflicts can be substantially
reduced through better consultative relationships among the
petroleum industry, government (especially state and local
governments) and other affected parties in planning and
coordinating the onshore activities of OCS lessees.
Cumulative Effects. The Task Force concluded that, although
many of the environmental effects of OCS 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 recognized the substantial conflict that often
exists between the goals protecting the 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 conflicting goals.
APPENDIX D
OPTIONS FOR OTHER ACTIONS TO ADDRESS ENVIRONMENTAL
CONCERNS AND DEFICIENCY IN OCS PROGRAM
A.
Air Quality. Establish air quality controls for the OCS
areas offshore California that are substantially
equivalent to those applied onshore.
Discussion -- Although the real impact of any emissions
from offshore drilling or production platforms and the
vessels and helicopters that serve them may be
negligible, it is perceived as a substantial problem.
The perception is exacerbated by the fact that air
pollution is the single most dramatic environmental
problem in southern California and that the standards for
offshore activities are not subject to EPA control but to
MMS oversight and have not always been consistent. The
MMS has efforts underway to develop a new proposed
rulemaking to achieve this objective.
B.
Commercial Fishing. In Northern California, reevaluate
the effects of OCS activities on the commercial fishing
industry and institute measures to reduce conflicts
between the petroleum and fishing industries.
Discussion -- The potential conflicts posed to the
commercial fishing industry in northern California were
repeatedly cited. This is a particular problem in that
region because of the heavy reliance of local economies
on fishing, the limited existing infrastructure for which
the commercial fishing and petroleum industries would
compete, and the relatively small population base that
could be severely affected by employment dislocations
resulting from changes in commercial activity.
C.
Oil Spill Contingency Planning and Response Capabilities.
Steps should be taken to protect coastal and marine
resources more adequately through the following:
1.
Develop improved means of assessing the risks of oil
spills;
2.
Revise requirements for OCS oil spill contingency
response plans to improve effectiveness
(particularly for the Everglades and Keys
ecosystems), including requiring more analysis of
response effectiveness as part of the pre-lease
evaluative process and setting mandatory response
times and minimum standards for equipment and
technology to respond to spills;
3.
Prepare special oil spill contingency response plans
for protected lands, ensuring full coordination
among the MMS, the Coast Guard, the petroleum
industry, and state and local governments;
4.
Revise regional guidelines for oil spill responses
and increase the frequency of oil spill response
drills, involving both government and industry; and
5.
Where feasible and environmentally preferable,
require that oil produced on the OCS be transported
by pipeline rather than ship.
Discussion -- The unique aspects of the Everglades and
the Florida Keys, including the only tropical coral reef
in the continental U.S., justify revisions in planning
and response capabilities for that area. Additional
attention should also be given to northern California due
to its extremely narrow continental shelf and normal
high-sea conditions, which would make oil spills
difficult to contain with currently available technology
and likely to reach environmentally-sensitive areas to
the south, such as Redwoods National Park or Point Reyes.
D.
Tanker Traffic. Direct Coast Guard to study feasibility
of moving tanker routes away from sensitive areas.
Discussion -- The recent California oil spill shows the
need to study tanker routes to see if travel further
offshore and away from sensitive areas is feasible. The
Coast Guard has been at work on a proposal that would
provide for International Maritime Organization action to
move tanker and other major vessel traffic further away
from the coral reefs off Florida.
E.
Protected Lands and Species. Defer particularly
sensitive protected lands from development or establish
requirements to ensure the maximum practicable protection
and mitigation of impacts. In addition, provide greater
management attention to avoiding conflicts between OCS
activities and protected species.
Discussion -- Given that certain lands have already been
considered so unique as to warrant protection by the
federal government (including national parks and marine
sanctuaries), consideration of setting aside those lands
from development is not a radical additional step. At
the very least, special requirements to preserve those
lands or mitigate any possible impacts from OCS
activities is consistent with the assessment of their
protected character. Similarly, preserving rare or
endangered species through special attention from the
managers of the OCS program appears reasonable and not
unduly burdensome.
F.
Water Quality. The MMS should initiate research into the
long-term effects of OCS activity on the marine
environment and water quality, particularly such
practices as the chronic discharge of drilling fluids.
In sensitive environments, special mitigation programs to
reduce potential adverse effects should be considered.
Discussion -- Given the scarcity of data on the long-
term effects of OCS activities, further study is
justified. Because the potential effects of such
practices as chronic discharges of drilling fluids are
currently unknown, special protection of those marine
environments that are identifiable as sensitive through
mitigation measures is reasonable until better data
become available.
G.
Adverse Socioeconomic Effects. The MMS should note local
concerns and ordinances relating to the siting of onshore
facilities stemming from OCS activities in stipulating
the conditions for lease development, such as considering
a requirement for the consolidation of onshore
facilities. In addition, the MMS and NOAA should play a
greater mediative role between industry and local
governments to mitigate the adverse effects of this
increased onshore development.
Discussion -- The significant impact of OCS activities
on onshore development and the economic and social lives
of local residents should not be underestimated. This is
exacerbated by the general feeling of local residents
that they have little voice in the decision-making
process. Greater sensitivity to local concerns and
existing priorities for development and its control could
be accomplished at very little cost to the federal
government through increased attention to such matters by
the MMS. Such actions as requiring consolidated onshore
facilities could have positive effects on land use
conflicts and infrastructure demands. At the very least,
federal agencies should play the role of "broker" to
mediate between the competing interests of industry and
local communities.
H.
Restructuring of OCS Program. Direct the
Secretary of the Interior to begin a study that would
lead to proposals for amendments to the OCS Lands Act in
order to restructure the revenue-sharing and decision-
making provisions of the legislation so that state and
local governments will have a greater voice in the OCS
program.
Discussion -- The lack of financial benefits to the
people most affected by OCS activities and the limited
participatory role in the actual decision-making process
for OCS development have been noted as at least partial
sources of the controversies currently surrounding these
sales and the entire program. Tasking Secretary Lujan to
study these issues with a goal of amending the underlying
legislation could have a positive impact on these sales,
lessening some of the furor. It would more conceivably
be a method to address concerns expressed by Congressmen
and others from areas in which OCS development is
favorably viewed on the whole but where additional
incentives may be needed to avoid repetitions of current
problems. It also is the logical and fair approach to
balancing more equitably federal and local interests.
The nature and extent of authority given to state and
local governments will need to be carefully considered,
however, with the goal being to maintain the OCS program
as a federal authority. Interior Department officials,
including Secretary Lujan, have alluded to increased
federal revenue-sharing with local communities in recent
public remarks. The responses to such overtures have not
been particularly positive, with reaction from some
quarters that such action will not be sufficient to
overcome opposition to OCS activities on other grounds.
The result might be a reduction in federal revenues
without a significant reduction in opposition.