913 



27 



regions will feel impacts from the introduction of this activity when 

 it occurs in relatively undeveloped areas. LNG or deepwater port im- 

 pacts, on the other hand, are likely to be localized in nature. 



Because most of this country's offshore experience has so far been 

 concentrated off one state — Louisiana — and drilling has taken place 

 only off two other states — Texas and California — one of the difficulties 

 the states and the Committee face is in knowing what new resources 

 actually lie offshore and where. While much evidence of promising new 

 areas has been collected by private oil firms and the U.S. Geological 

 Survey, the existence of commercially productive fields can only be 

 determined by drilling. Oil firms feel fairly confident that major 

 reserves lie off the coast of Alaska, and in fact have placed that area 

 at the top of its list of preferred new lease areas despite the major 

 environmental risks. Yet it is also true that the same firms felt confi- 

 dent that oil and gas would be fomid off the coast of Florida to the 

 extent that they bid $1.5 billion in 1973 and have yet to find any recov- 

 erable material. 



AVhile, therefore, it is not possible to detail specifically the exact 

 extent and location of the offshore impacts which an expanded OCS 

 leasing program will bring, there is enough evidence to convince the 

 states and the Committee that major help is needed. 



Major confirmation of this viewpoint came the day after the Com- 

 mittee approved H.R. 3981 by a vote of 35 to 0. On February 4, the Sec- 

 retary of the Interior, the Honorable Thomas Kleppe, submitted legis- 

 lation which he described in part as follows : 



The purpose of the bill is to establish the Federal Energy 

 Development Impstct Assistance Fund from which planning 

 grants, loans and loan guarantees can be made to assist 

 affected states and local governments in providing public 

 facilities. 



This represents a recognition on the part of the Administration, 

 after more than a year's delay, that federal support is warranted to 

 state and local communities which must bear the costs of providing 

 services and facilities made necessary by federally-approved energy 

 projects conducted in the broad, national interest. This principle lies 

 at the heart of the forms of assistance proposed in H.R. 3981. There 

 are significant differences in the approaches contained in the legisla- 

 tion produced by the Committee after its five hearings and several 

 days of mark-up sessions this year and the measure put forth at the 

 last minute by the Department of the Interior. 



The most glaring omission, in the opinion of the Chairman of the 

 Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee and the Oceanography 

 Subcommittee and the ranking minority members of each body (and 

 the preponderance of the membership of each) is that the Interior 

 Department bill totally ignores the existence of the coastal zone man- 

 agement effort. For reasons which are detailed below, the Committee 

 feels strongly that H.R. 3981 is a far superior approach to the problem 

 of how to deal with onshore impacts from major energy activities in 

 the coasts, is more equitable to the regions involved and will be more 

 likely to encourage an early and orderly expansion of needed energy 

 sources. 



