966 



80 



States on the basis of actual or anticipated effects, or both, and impacts 

 of offshore oil and ^as exploration, development, and production on 

 each such State, It also requires that in no case may the grrant in any 

 fiscal year be less than an amount equal to 10 perccntum of the revenues 

 derived during the immediately preceding year by the United States 

 from acreage leased and from oil and gas production of the OCS 

 adjacent to such State. 



H.R. 6090 also authorizes grants from the "Marine Resources Con- 

 servation and Development Fund" to noncoastal States to ameliorate 

 environmental, social, and economic impacts associated with the devel- 

 opment of Federal energy resources in or on the OCS. 



The bill expressly avoids limiting or modifying the risrht, claim, or 

 interest of any State to funds received before the bill is enacted or 

 altering or modifying the claim of any State to title or jurisdiction 

 over any submerged lands. 



Unlike H.R. 1776, H.R. 6090 does not contain a provision authoriz- 

 ing an interstate coordination grant program to coastal States. 



II. DISCUSSION 



Existing legislation provides a satisfactory framework for carry- 

 ing out the essential objectives of most of these bills, and we are mov- 

 ing toward accomplishing them. The existing Outer Continental Shelf 

 Lands Act and Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 permits sub- 

 stantial latitude for adjustment to changing circumstances and our 

 program for development of the OCS can be fully carried out under 

 the present law. Significant changes in these laws could seriously delay 

 achievement of the degree of national energy independence which we 

 believe is vital. 



Discussed more specifically below are some of the more important 

 aspects in which we believe provisions of these bills are either unnec- 

 essary or undesirable. 



Delay of OCS Oil arid Gas Development 



A principal effect of these bills would be the delay of Outer Conti- 

 nental Shelf oil and gas development imtil State coastal zone manage- 

 ment plans were approved, in full or in part, or until some specified 

 date. Three of the proposed bills, H.R. 3981, H.R. 3807, and H.R. 3637 

 would provide grants to States for the purpose of studies which could 

 expedite or improve their coastal zone management plan programs. 

 The object of all three of these proposed bills appears to be the delay- 

 ing of OCS activity until the coastal States have sufficiently advanced 

 their coastal zone management prosrrams to protect State and local 

 interests which may be adversely affected by either offshore or onshore 

 developments. 



Although some States may need both financial and technical assist- 

 ance in developing coastal zone management plans, such assistance can 

 largely be provided under existing programs without imposing delays 

 unrelated to management problems. 



Federal/ State Planning and Control 



The subject bills assume a present inadequacy in cooperative effort 

 for OCS planninq: and control. States and localities which are most 

 likely to be directly affected by the development of energy resources of 



