634 



standinir on one of tlie more intriginno: problems that confront ns all, 

 and that is, coping with onshore'energy developments which affects 

 the coastal zone. He has been a real leader in the coastal zone man- 

 agement concept and more specifically as it affects where one half the 

 oil and gas is remaining in this country, the shores of his native State 

 of Alaska. 



Mr. Stevens. Mr. President, I am a cosponsor of S. 586, a bill 

 amending the Coastal Zone ISIanagement Act of 1972 and assisting 

 the coastal States to study, plan for. manage, and control the impact 

 of enersry resource development and production which affects their 

 coastal zones. The bill provides tripartite aid in the form of a coastal 

 energy facility impact fund. Federal guarantiees of State and local 

 bonds, and aiitomatic grants to qualifying States. Each of the three 

 forms of assistance is designed to help States cope with the present and 

 future impact upon their coastal zone resulting from either the explo- 

 ration, development, or production of oil or natui-al gas on adjacent 

 OutoT- Continental Shelf lands, or the landing of such oil or natural 

 gas directly from the Outer Continental Shelf lands of another State. 



Let me emphasize that tliis is not a revenue-sharing bill. We have 

 no provisions in here pertaining to revenue sharing. 



The Coastal Energ;^'^ Facility Impact Fimd autliorizes $250 million 

 for 3 fiscal years and the 1976 transitional quarter to be spent upon 

 grants and/or loans to the States. Such grants and/or loans must be 

 snent on efforts to reduce, ameliorate, or compensate for the net ad- 

 verse impact resulting from Outer Continental Shelf energy resource 

 development or other related activities. Up to 20 percent of this 

 fund may be spent on planning and the balance, up to 100 percent 

 of the fund, on direct impact aid. States which have experienced net 

 adverse impact prior to the enactment of this legislation may receive 

 compensating grants and/or loans from the Coastal Energy Facility 

 Impact Fund up to 5 years after the approval of this bill. Any State 

 wishing to receive funds from the Coastal Energy Facility Impact 

 Fimd must participate in a coastal zone management program under 

 either section 805 or 306 of the Coastal Zone IManagement Act or under 

 a State plan approved by the Secretary of Commerce as being consist- 

 ent with this act. 



The remaining two provisions, the automatic grant and the bond 

 guarantee, which I proposed, integrally connect to provide nonreve- 

 nue sliaring. front-end money to States and municipalities so that they 

 may build the necessary schools, roads, sewers, and other related facili- 

 ties needed to cope with the impact of Outer Continental Slielf oil and 

 natural gas production. 



These are tlie sections which the amendment of the Senator from 

 Louisiana addresses and which I have joined him in presenting. It is 

 an amendment to muko. certain that S. 586 and S. 521 meet the same 

 objectives with regard to the financing of those acti^dties necessary 

 to meet the impacts of OCS development. It is the concept of front- 

 end money which I wish to emphasize. A train, I emphasize that these 

 are not revenue sharing proposals. They are designed only to amelio- 

 rate coastal zone impacts. 



The need for front-end money should be obvious. Modern Outer 

 Continental Shelf drilling projects are mammoth undertakings, po- 



