BILL ANALYSIS
AJR 3
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AJR 3 (Nava and Evans)
As Amended April 2, 2009
Majority vote
NATURAL RESOURCES 6-3
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Skinner, Brownley, | | |
| |Chesbro, | | |
| |De Leon, Hill, Huffman | | |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Gilmore, Knight, Logue | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Requests Congress to reinstate the federal offshore
oil and gas leasing moratorium and communicates the
Legislature's opposition to the proposed expansion of oil and
gas drilling off the Pacific Coast and any federal energy
policies and legislation that would weaken California's
legitimate role in energy siting decisions.
EXISTING LAW , pursuant to the California Coastal Sanctuary Act
of 1994, imposes a moratorium on any new lease for the
extraction of oil or gas in state waters unless the President of
the United States has found a severe energy supply interruption
and has ordered a release from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve,
or unless the Governor finds that new oil and gas production
will significantly contribute to the alleviation of that
interruption.
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS : According to the author's office, this resolution
responds to the continued threat of offshore oil and gas
drilling in federal waters and commemorates the 40th anniversary
of the 1969 offshore oil spill in Santa Barbara County.
Congress first enacted the moratorium on offshore oil and gas
development in 1982 (which originally applied only to northern
California) and it had been renewed in an appropriations bill
every year until last year. The moratorium prohibited oil and
gas leasing on most of the outer continental shelf (OCS), three
AJR 3
Page 2
miles to 200 miles offshore.
In 1990, President George H.W. Bush, Sr. issued an Executive
Order, pursuant to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act,
withdrawing certain OCS areas, including offshore California,
from leasing consideration until 2000. In 1998, President
Clinton, by Executive O rder, expanded and extended the
moratorium until 2012. In July 2008, President George W. Bush,
Jr. repealed the Executive Order imposed by his father. In
September 2008, Congress voted not to renew the moratorium,
officially opening up federal waters off the California coast to
drilling for the first time since 1982.
On the very last day of the President George W. Bush, Jr.
Administration, the Interior Department proposed a new five-year
plan for oil and gas leasing on the OSC. In 31 lease sales, the
plan proposes to lease as much as 300 million acres of the OCS
to drilling, including about six million acres off the coast of
Humboldt, Mendocino, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura,
Los Angeles, and San Diego Counties.
On February 10, 2009, Ken Salazar, the Secretary of Interior
announced a four-part strategy "for developing a new,
comprehensive approach to energy resources of the OCS." Among
other things, it extends the public comment period for the
proposed five-year oil and gas leasing program 180 days until
September 21, 2009, hosting four public meetings nationwide
April 2009 to solicit input on whether, where, and how the
federal government develops its conventional and renewable
energy resources of the OCS. Neither Secretary Salazar nor
President Obama have indicated whether they are opposed to
additional drilling off of the California coast.
There are 79 federal oil and gas leases offshore California, 36
of which are undeveloped. According to the United States
Department of the Interior's Minerals Management Service (MMS),
the 43 active leases produce approximately 70,000 barrels of oil
and 130 million cubic feet of gas, but roughly one billion
barrels of unproven recoverable oil reserves and 500 billion
cubic feet of gas reserves are estimated to underlie the
undeveloped leases. These leases have a term of five years,
though MMS has granted a series of extensions. In 1999, MMS
directed lessees, if they wish to maintain their leases, to
submit a request for extension, including any plans to develop
AJR 3
Page 3
the leases and a timetable. Some lessees have submitted this
information though action on further extensions has been delayed
pending the resolution of litigation. Several environmental
groups have challenged the adequacy of the environmental
documentation prepared for the extension requests and have
argued that MMS should have prepared more detailed assessments.
Analysis Prepared by : Dan Chia / NAT. RES. / (916) 319-2092
FN:
0000321