660 



This is as it should be if a proper balancing of the interests of industry 

 and the public can be achieved. But the parties to this contract must 

 have equal bargaining power. S. 586 is intended to bolster local efforts 

 to rationally plan for energy facilities in an independent and expert 

 fashion. 



Of primary importance to the States at the outset is planning assist- 

 ance. It is most difficult to plumb the reaches of impact associated with 

 energy/ facilities. Without adequate staff and resources, a State must 

 rely on the information provided by industry. This bill will give the 

 States a jump on the problem and allow them to deal with the com- 

 plex problems of coastal energy development on an informed basis, 

 aliead of time. 



It is important to underscore the fact that S. 586 continues the basic 

 philosophy of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972. Using the 

 carrot approach. States are encouraged to establish a statewide plan- 

 ning process and statewide plan for the balanced development and 

 protection of coastal areas. The planning decisions are left to the 

 States themselves. With an approved process comes Federal financial 

 assistance. This initial phase, program development, has attracted 

 nearly every coastal State. 



Recently, my own State of Washington was informed by the Office 

 of Coastal Zone Management that it was the first to receive preliminary 

 approval of the management program itself. As a State with one of 

 the Nation's longest coastlines, Washington State knows well the need 

 to protect our coastal areas. In this regard, there has been a long, 

 and sometimes difficult, debate over the siting of deep draft oil tanker 

 terminals in the State. Continually, the effort to establish a State 

 energy plan was frustrated by a lack of knowledge about industry 

 ])lans and an unwillingness on the part of oil companies to work closely 

 with local government. In fact, announcements of company plans to 

 build tanker terminals came as bombshells in the newspapers, rather 

 than as part of some orderly process. The legislature, understandably 

 miffed, simply outlawed large tankers from imier Puget Sound. 



Mr. President, the Coastal Zone Management Act was designed to 

 bring order to the planning process at the local level. But it can only 

 be as as successful as the capability of any State will allow. S. 586 

 enables the States to develop the adequate capability. 



The impact assistance in the bill is a vital part of the proposal. 

 Through the efforts of the national ocean policy study, the burdens as- 

 sociated with energy facilities became clear. A quick buildup of onshore 

 staging areas for OCS development, pipelines, support facilities, 

 tanker terminals, and the like can sorely strain a local government's 

 ability to provide schools for the workers' children, fire, and police 

 protection, water, sewage, and other public services. S. 586 provides 

 impact assistance to the States without busting the budget by giving 

 sucli assistance only where overall adverse impact is shown. 



In summary, Mr. President, S. 586 is a balanced bill to meet a very 

 real coastal State need. I urge my colleagues to pass the bill. 



I hope we will not stall this measure. I do not mean to say that any- 

 one wants to stall it; everyone wants to discuss it. But it is long over- 

 due, and all these things are piling up on us in the coastal zone. 



I guess all 50 States have environmental acts now, and they will 

 require an impact statement, but they have had no comprehensive 



