196 



Advisory Commission on Marine and Coastal Resources regarding oil pollution 

 and offshore drilling in the Santa Barbara Channel. 



This problem at present may be peculiar to Southern California with due 

 regard to the highly urbanized nature of its coastline and the press of interest 

 for diverse offshore uses. It is quite likely, however, that the same type of bound- 

 ary situation will be established in other areas, such as Alaska, Louisiana 

 and the Atlantic Coast states, where titles have not now been stabilized to the 

 extent that they have with respect to California, which could give rise to the 

 same problem in these other areas. 



All of the bills examined in effect reserve to the Federal Government the 

 right to review and approve or disapprove the State's management program for 

 its coastal zone. Further, to include in a State's coastal zone lands over which 

 the Federal Government has jurisdiction and control need not require the trans- 

 fer or release of any right reserved to the Federal Government under the 

 Submerged Lands Act or any right to dispose of an interest in natural resources 

 under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act of 1953. H.R. 14731 defines coastal 

 zone to include : "the land, waters and lands beneath the waters in close prox- 

 imity to the coastline (including the Great Lakes) and strongly influenced by 

 each other, including the estuary and its transitional areas. Transitional areas 

 include areas influenced or affected by water from an estuary such as, but not 

 limited to, salt marshes, coastal and intertidal areas, sounds, embayments, har- 

 bors, lagoons, inshore waters, and channels." (Section 302(b) ). Sections 306 (2) 

 and (3) of H.R. 14730 contain a similar definition. 



It would be quite reasonable to include in both of such proposed statutes 

 provisions establishing the right of the Federal Government to approve the in- 

 clusion of additional areas under Federal jurisdiction in a State's coastal zone 

 where it is determined that there is an interrelationship between the areas in 

 question which would justify this action. For this purpose, a sentence reading 

 in substance as follows might be added to the end of existing Section 302(b) 

 of H.R. 14731 : "The coastal zone will normally include only those areas within 

 the boundaries of coastal States, but the Secretary may approve the inclusion 

 of other areas under Federal jurisdiction and control where he determines 

 them to have a special functional interrelationship with lands within the bound- 

 aries of the coastal State or States affected which would justify this action in 

 light of the purposes set forth in Section 303 hereof. The inclusion of any such 

 Federal lands within the coastal zone of a State or States shall not convey or 

 diminish any rights reserved or possessed by the Federal Government under the 

 Submerged Lands Act of 1953 or the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act of 1953." 

 Note in this regard the similarity between this concept and that set forth in 

 accompanying Resolution R-V-2 of the California Advisory Commission on 

 Marine and Coastal Resources regarding California's inventory of coastal 

 lands for the preparation of its General Ocean Area Plan. Note also 

 that no change of substance would seem to be required in H.R. 14731 in 

 view of existing provisions requiring that the interests of the Federal Gov- 

 ernment be considered in any management plan developed by a State for its 

 coastal zone. Subsection (3) (b) of Section 305(b) requires the coastal State 

 to adopt "a management plan for its coastal zone * * * containing * * * [pro- 

 visions for] identification and recognition of the National, State, and local inter- 

 ests in the preservation, use, and development of the coastal zone." Subsection 

 (3) (g) of the same Section requires that the coastal State make "[p]rovision for 

 due i-ecognition of the rights and interests of other States and the Federal Gov- 

 ernment.^' The above recommended amendment would also appear appropriate 

 for inclusion in Section 306 of H.R. 14730 with some chances in terminology. 



Both of the bills which you and Mr. Mosher have introduced on the subject 

 reveal a commendable awareness of the need for taking into account the politi- 

 cal framework established by the Submerged Lands Act between the Federal 

 Government and that of the various coastal States and appear to give appro- 

 priate recognition to the interests of the State within that framework. To do 

 otherwise would not appear justified as I indicated during the debate at the 

 October 28 session of your very worthwhile Conference. 



I greatly appreciated the opportunity to participate with you and your col- 

 leagues and the representatives of other States in the exchange of ideas upon 

 the very important subject of coastal zone management. We in the coastal 

 States are grateful to your Subcommittee and Committee for taking the initia- 

 tive to hold this very well planned Congressional Conference on this subject. 

 Respectfully submitted, 



Robert B. Krueger. 



