Induced effects are a major consideration. Communities concerned 

 with industrial development options tend to view new plant payrolls and 

 property taxes as an added economic benefit, and local commercial 

 interests sense the potential for increased profits. But the commitment 

 of coastal lands for heavy industry sites may engender a wide variety of 

 impacts that extend considerably beyond the direct, localized, impacts 

 of the plant. Certainly, new residents employed by a new OCS facility 

 will generate a demand that may require expansion in the public sector 

 for utilities and services such as sewage treatment and water supply, 

 and may induce housing projects, shopping centers and other community 

 development in the private sector. And the facility may attract more 

 industry. All this development has a potential for impact on living re- 

 sources. In addition, costs to the community for more streets, police and 

 fire protection, schools and other essential services, may be greater than 

 the direct costs of the plant itself, requiring that planning decisions 

 relating to industrial siting must include the development they will 

 induce. 



2,1.2 Effects on Living Resources 



Resource conservation and environmental impacts may be severe for 

 onshore facilities. Those concerns relating to fish and wildlife and 

 their habitats are most significant for large, heavy impact OCS 

 projects, i.e., exploration and production drilling, platform fabrication 

 yards, pipelines, oil refineries, and petrochemical industries. Effects 

 on living resources may arise from decisions made in each of four distinct 

 phases of OCS projects: location, design, construction, and operation 

 (including maintenance). The following considers only those factors 

 having a major influence on fish and wildlife and excludes marginal 

 factors of importance to them even though they may be important otherwise 

 (e.g. , air pollution). 



Location : Waterfront locations of facilities may require dredge 

 and spoil disposal which can lead to adverse ecologic effects, such as: 

 (1) turbidity; (2) eutrophication; (3) toxification; (4) basin shoaling 

 and oxygen depletion; (5) wetlands loss; and (6) benthic habitat 

 degradation. Other major consequences of the waterfront location include: 

 (1) shoreline alteration from bulkheading; (2) preemption of land for 

 filling; (3) disruption and degradation of wetlands and other vital 

 areas. Solutions can be effected through taking special care to reduce 

 effects on terrestrial wildlife, endangered species habitats, and aquatic 

 ecosystems. Where waterfront locations are not required for the facilities 

 the use of upland areas will preclude many of these problems and will 

 retain waterfront sites for uses which require that type of access. 



Design : The high potential for adverse aquatic impacts of the 

 waterfront location requires that maximum care be taken in design of the 

 facility. Solutions include provisions for: (1) maintaining the natural 

 shoreline; (2) minimizing dredging; (3) arranging proper disposal of 



45 



