707 



subcommittee, tog-ether with the National Ocean Policy Study, held 

 field hearings in Boston to solicit the views of concerned New Eng- 

 landers on what legislative and administrative actions were necessary 

 to assure full protection of the public interest, both in the procedures 

 leading up to a final decision on whether offshore leasing should go 

 forward and in insuring adequate protection of the interests of New 

 England if exploration and development is undertaken on the Georges 

 Bank. 



Those hearings made clear the deep concern wliich exists in all sec- 

 tors of the New England economy over the adequacy of petroleum sup- 

 plies and the price we are paying for oil. New England has led tlie 

 Nation in conservation. Our State officials have been in the forefront 

 of efforts to bring about lower prices and to remove the burden which 

 results from our dependence on high-priced foreign oil imports. 



Nevertheless, those hearings also made clear just how pervasive 

 the concern is — among business and industry, among fishing interests, 

 among tourist and recreation interests and among citizens groups — 

 that tliey have not been brought into the formulation of Federal 

 energy policy. A suspicious and distrustful attitude had developed be- 

 tween our regional, State and local groups and the Federal Govern- 

 ment. It threatened to stand in the way of the necessary cooperative 

 effort we must make to develop national energy policies which are fair 

 and equitable to all regions. 



One critical portion of the Federal energy policy is the decision- 

 malving process involving our offshore oil and gas reserves. If offshore 

 oil and gas will help reduce energy costs, if it can be developed without 

 jeopardizing our environment, if it can be brouglit in without destroy- 

 ing our tourist and fishing industries, if it can be carried out witliout 

 distorting our future coastal development I believe we will be able 

 to win the support of the people of New England for a well-planned 

 offshore leasing program. 



At present, however, there is little incentive for coastal States like 

 New England to offer their support to such a program. The oil that 

 hecomes available will sell at premium prices, not subject to price 

 controls. In Massachusetts, where many of our communities are operat- 

 ing on a marginal tax base, we cannot afford the schools, hospitals and 

 other faciliites which will be required during an intensive effort to 

 bring offshore areas into production. And with an unemployment rate 

 now over 10 percent in Massachusetts, we cannot afford a cycle of 

 boom, and bust economies, where communities may gain jobs for a 

 short period, only to be plunged back into high unemployment once 

 the rigs are in place and the demand for labor returns to i^redevelop- 

 mont levels. 



We know that large amounts of land will be needed if we are to 

 •construct refineries, petro-chemical plants and other related facili- 

 ties — but lacking infonnation on the extent of deposits on Georges 

 Bank we cannot make even the roughest estimate of the extent of our 

 potential need for such facilities. The possibility exists of having 17 

 j)ercent of the prime industrial land in Rhode Island and eastern 

 Massachusetts utilized in the full development of offshore oil and gas. 

 A commitment of this amount of land, with its consequent environ- 

 mental impacts, will have significant ramifications for the area and 

 should not be undertaken without sufficient study and policy con- 



