HOUSE BILL REPORT

ESHB 1190

BYHouse Committee on Natural Resources & Parks (originally sponsored by Representatives Sayan, R. King, S. Wilson, Basich, Jacobsen, P. King, Valle, Haugen, Heavey and Ebersole; by request of Joint Select Committee on Marine and Ocean Resources)

Enacting the ocean natural resources management act.

House Committe on Natural Resources & Parks

Majority Report:  The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass.  (11)

      Signed by Representatives Belcher, Chair;K. Wilson, Vice Chair; Beck, Brumsickle, Dellwo, Ferguson, Fisher, Fuhrman, Hargrove, Raiter and Sayan.

House Staff:Jean Kelley McElroy (786-7196)

Rereferred House Committee on Appropriations

Majority Report:  The substitute bill by Committee on Natural Resources & Parks as amended by Committee on Appropriations be substituted therefor and the substitute bill as amended do pass.  (26)

      Signed by Representatives Locke, Chair; Grant, Vice Chair; H. Sommers, Vice Chair; Silver, Ranking Republican Member; Youngsman, Assistant Ranking Republican Member; Appelwick, Belcher, Bowman, Braddock, Brekke, Dorn, Doty, Ebersole, Ferguson, Hine, May, Nealey, Padden, Peery, Rust, Sayan, Spanel Sprenkle, Valle, Wang and Wineberry.

Minority Report:  Do not pass.  (2)

      Signed by Representatives Holland and McLean.

House Staff:      Randy Acker (786-7136)

AS PASSED HOUSE MARCH 9, 1989

BACKGROUND:

The ocean sea floor and resources off Washington's coast are owned by the state from extreme low tide seaward three miles, and the federal government seaward from three to two hundred miles.  There are at present few statewide regulations, guidelines, or policies for the use or development of Washington's coastal resources.  While the laws could potentially be used to regulate coastal resources, local coastal governments have done little to address coastal resource management through their shoreline management programs or under those other laws.

The federally owned waters off Washington's coast are governed by many federal laws and agencies.  Of immediate concern to the State of Washington is the Mineral Management Service (MMS), which is responsible for the development of mineral and other resources within federally owned ocean waters.  The MMS is authorized to lease ocean areas for purposes of exploration, development, and extraction of mineral resources.  For oil and gas leases, MMS is required under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) to do this by developing five year lease plans.

The MMS' current five year lease plan provides for a lease sale of ocean areas off the coasts of Washington and Oregon in April of 1992.  As preliminary steps to the sale itself, MMS will request statements of interest from the oil industry in 1989 and will identify the sale area in 1990.

Under the OCSLA, the Secretary of the Interior must consider recommendations from an adjacent state's governor concerning the size, location, and timing of a proposed lease sale.  The federal Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) and current case law do not provide for any state input in deciding when or whether a lease sale should be held, nor in deciding what areas will be included in the lease sale.  The CZMA does, however, provide for some state input after the lease sale.  The CZMA directs that federal agencies conduct and support activities directly affecting the coastal zone in a manner which is, to the maximum extent practicable, consistent with approved state management programs.  It also provides that any applicant for a federal license to conduct an activity affecting land or water uses in the coastal zone of a state must provide a state approved certification of consistency with that state's management program.  This requirement of certification also applies to any plans for exploration or development of, or production from, any area which has been leased under the OCSLA.

The approved state management program consists of the adjacent state's "coastal authorities" laws and regulations that have been approved by the Secretary of Commerce.  At present, the approved coastal authorities for Washington include the SMA and county and city master programs, certain environmental laws, and the Energy Facilities Site Locations Act.

Because of this system, any exploration, development, or production activities conducted or permitted by MMS must be consistent with the above sections of Washington law.  There is, however, dispute as to what is meant by "consistent" and as to the extent to which actions must be consistent.

In 1987, due to concern over the upcoming lease sale, the legislature and Governor Gardner took several actions.  The governor wrote to the Department of the Interior suggesting that the lease sale may need to be delayed, and stating that he does not support leasing north of the forty-seventh parallel or within twelve miles of Gray's Harbor, Willapa Bay, and Columbia River estuaries.  Further, several committees were formed and/or asked to conduct studies on aspects of the proposed lease sale.  These groups include the Joint Select Committee on Marine and Ocean Resources, the University of Washington Sea Grant program, and several task forces.

Finally, if the 1992 lease sale is held, oil is found, and production takes place, the oil could be shipped from the production platforms to locations within the state by pipeline.  Under Washington's current system, pipelines of different diameters and lengths would be regulated under different statutes and by different agencies.

The original bill was developed by the Joint Select Committee on Marine and Ocean Resources.

SUMMARY:

Legislative policies regarding coastal waters off Washington are adopted.  These policies will guide the decision-making process for the management, conservation, use, and development of natural resources in Washington's coastal waters. Among these policies are the following:  (1) No leasing of state-owned tidal or submerged lands along the Washington coast from Cape Flattery south to Cape Disappointment, nor in Grays Harbor, Willapa Bay, and the Columbia river downstream from the Longview bridge, for purposes of oil or gas exploration, development, or production.  This policy will end on July 1, 1995, unless the legislature extends it before then.  The decision on whether to extend this policy shall be based on the information available at that time, including several reports and studies which are to be prepared and presented to the legislature no later than September 1, 1994. (2)  If conflicts arise, priority shall be given to resource uses and activities that will not adversely impact renewable resources over uses which are likely to have an adverse impact on renewable resources.  (3)  The state shall actively encourage the conservation of liquid fossil fuels and explore available methods of encouraging such conservation.  (4) Generally, fishing and currently existing commercial uses are excluded from having to meet the planning and project review criteria.  (5) The state shall participate to the maximum extent possible in federal ocean and marine resource decisions.

Planning and project review criteria are established.  These set the minimum standards which must be met before the state may support any activities that are likely to have an adverse impact on marine life, fishing, aquaculture, recreation, navigation, air or water quality, or other existing ocean or coastal uses.  The criteria include a demonstrated significant need for the activity; no reasonable alternative to the activity; no likely long-term significant adverse impacts to coastal or marine resources or uses; minimization of adverse environmental and social impacts; compensation for adverse impacts; plans and sufficient performance bonding to ensure site rehabilitation; and compliance with all applicable laws.

The Departments of Natural Resources and Ecology shall complete an analysis of the potential positive and negative impacts of leasing state coastal waters for oil and gas development.  This analysis shall be done at the direction of the Joint Select Committee on Marine and Ocean Resources, and it shall be presented to the legislature no later than September 1, 1994.  One hundred thousand dollars is appropriated from the general fund to the Joint Select Committee to use in contracting with these departments for this analysis.

Local governments are directed to review and amend their shoreline master programs to ensure that they conform with the policies and intent of this bill.  One hundred eighty thousand dollars is appropriated from the general fund to the Department of Ecology for this process, with $120,000 of that to go to the local governments.

The University of Washington Sea Grant program is directed to develop and implement a public education program on ocean and marine resources and on proposed uses for those resources.  The program is also directed to explore new and beneficial uses of the coastal and marine resources.

The Washington State Energy Office is directed to prepare a report on liquid fossil fuel supply and demand, on strategies for conserving those fuels, and on ways of implementing those strategies.

The Shoreline Management Act is amended to direct the Department of Ecology to consult with affected state agencies, local governments, Indian tribes, and the public prior to responding to federal coastal zone management consistency certifications.

The Joint Select Committee on Marine and Ocean Resources is extended until June 30, 1994, and it is assigned additional tasks.

Fiscal Note:      Available.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    (Natural Resources & Parks) Craig Partridge, Department of Natural Resources; Rod Mack, Department of Ecology; Elizabeth Tabbutt, Washington Environmental Council.

(Appropriations) Rod Mack, Department of Ecology; Taylor Martinson, Department of Fisheries; Craig Partridge, Department of Natural Resources.

House Committee - Testified Against:      (Natural Resources & Parks) Vernon Lindskog, Western States Petroleum Association.

(Appropriations) None Presented.

House Committee - Testimony For:    (Natural Resources & Parks) A clear statewide policy for the management of Washington's ocean and marine resources is needed immediately, in part because of the planned federal oil and gas lease sale scheduled for 1992. Additional information is necessary to allow the legislature and the state to decide what Washington's policy should be in the future.  Washington needs to begin looking seriously at developing an energy conservation plan.

(Appropriations) A very strong process led to the development of the bill.  It strikes a good balance between resource protection and development.  The moratorium is appropriate since it provides time for needed studies.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      (Natural Resources & Parks) The original version of the bill was more balanced.  There should be no moratorium on oil and gas leasing.  Some sections of the bill should be changed to allow oil and gas development, which could include running a pipeline through Washington's coastal waters, and to ensure that only activities with a significant adverse impact will be subject to the planning and project review criteria.

(Appropriations) None Presented.