752 



26 



such an approach was crucial to successful provision of needed energy 

 supplies for the Nation in an environmentally sound manner. For 

 example, Robert M. White, Administrator of the National Oceanic and 

 Atmospheric Administration, testified : 



[The coastal States] feel that while the benefits of OCS 

 production are enjoyed by all citizens in all parts of the coun- 

 try, the disadvantages are localized and therefore their elimi- 

 nation is the responsibility of all. 



Broad support for the committee's approach was offered by Gov. 

 Thomas Salmon of Vermont, who chairs the National Governors' 

 Conference's Natural Resources and Environmental Management 

 Committee : 



I sense that what the States want, the States think they 

 deserve, are payments or reimbursements, particularly on the 

 coast, to the extent of those amounts required in public ex- 

 penditures to provide for the onsite component of Outer Con- 

 tinental Shelf development. . . . We are not talking about gen- 

 eral revenue sharing in that context. We are talking about 

 reasonable indemnification for actual cost as measured 

 against a formula that this Congress is perfectly capable of 

 approving. . . . 



The concept of financial aid to the States also received supi^ort from 

 the oil and gas industry and related industries such as offshore drill- 

 ing firms. Alden J. Laborde, chairman of the board of Ocean Drilling 

 & Exploration Co., said the following about assisting the States : 



I think basically it is only fair. There is no doubt the 

 States have to make an accommodation for our activities. I 

 think it is only fair they should enjoy some of the proceeds 

 from this thing. 



3. Interstate Coordination 



A serious omission from the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 

 was the lack of any incentive or mechanism for States to take regional 

 or interstate approaches to coastal management. Yet it becomes in- 

 creasingly clear that one State's program may in itself affect other 

 States. For example. New Jersey appears to be the recipient of several 

 proposals for heavy industry on its coast as a result of its neighbor 

 State of Delaware's outright prohibition against such industries in its 

 own coastal zone. Furthermore, many coastal regions share common 

 management challenges and could benefit from a coordinated approach. 

 Such an approach to recreational development along the eastern 

 shore of Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia could, for example, pro- 

 vide the best management program for the entire region. 



S. 586 offers the needed financial incentives for States to "give high 

 priority (1) to coordinating State coastal zone planning, policies, and 

 programs in contiguous interstate areas, and (2) to studying, plan- 

 ning, and/or implementing unified coastal zone policies in such areas." 

 (Section 309(a).) The bill gives the constitutionally required consent 

 of the Congress for States to enter into interstate compacts or agree- 

 ments for these purposes, and also provides for 90 percent annual 



