LEXIS-NEXIS® Congressional Universe-Document

Search Terms: "Conservation and Reinvestment Act", House or Senate or Joint

Document 47 of 92.

View Related Topics

APRIL 20, 1999, TUESDAY

SECTION: IN THE NEWS

LENGTH: 1019 words

HEADLINE: PREPARED STATEMENT OF
CHAIRMAN FRANK MURKOWSKI
BEFORE THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY & NATURAL RESOURCES
SUBJECT - S. 25 -- CONSERVATION AND REINVESTMENT ACT
S. 446 -- RESOURCES 2000 ACT
S. 532 -- PUBLIC LAND AND RECREATION INVESTMENT ACT
LANDS LEGACY INITIATIVE

BODY:

Welcome to the first of three hearings on legislative proposals to spend revenues earned from oil and gas development on the Outer Continental Shelf or OCS. During these hearings, we will receive testimony on S. 25 -- the Conservation and Reinvestment Act introduced by Senator Landrieu and I; S. 446 -- the Resources 2000 Act introduced by Senator Boxer; and S. 532-- the Public Land and Recreation Investment Act introduced by Senator Feinstein. We also will hear about the Administration's Lands Legacy Initiative.
Federal OCS production is authorized only off the coast of 6 states: Texas, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, a part of California and parts of Alaska. In all other areas, a Federal moratoria prohibits any OCS exploration or development until 2012. For those states which support OCS activity, their residents know, first-hand, the mixed blessings of federal OCS energy programs. If oil and gas are discovered on Federal lands in Wyoming, the revenues from that discovery are split 50-50 with Wyoming. Those rules do not apply if the oil and gas are discovered on Federal submerged lands on the Outer Continental Shelf. In Fiscal Year 1998, the Federal OCS leasing program generated $4.522 billion in rents and royalties. Of this total, only $116 million, or approximately 2.5%, was paid to States for development that occurred in a narrow band off their coasts. All of the rest of the money went to the Federal treasury.
As we heard at an earlier Committee hearing in January, coastal States which support OCS activities have unavoidable impacts from such development. These States deserve some financial assistance from the Federal government to minimize these impacts. The current situation is not fair.
This inequity is even more clear when one examines the role of Federal OCS production in meeting this country's energy demands. America imports more than 56 percent of our domestic petroleum requirements. DOE predicts that, in the next 10 years, America will be at least 64 percent dependent on foreign oil. OCS development will play an important role in offsetting even greater dependence on foreign energy. The OCS accounts for 27% of our domestic natural gas production and 20% of our domestic oil production.
Unlike foreign oil on foreign tankers, this energy is home-grown and contributes directly to our national wealth. It also produces good jobs in these industries and contributes to the balance of payments. Technological advancements have and will continue to result in new OCS production having an unparalleled record of excellence on environmental and safety issues.
S. 25, a bipartisan proposal, seeks to remedy the current inequity in the distribution of Federal OCS royalties by redistributing 50% of the OCS revenues for three programs: coastal impact assistance; state and local park and recreation programs; and state wildlife programs. The other 50% would remain in the Federal treasury.
S. 25 allocates 27% of the OCS revenues to coastal states and communities that shoulder the responsibility of offshore oil and gas development off their coastlines. Funds will be used for a variety of coastal, environmental and infrastructure purposes. Our bill acknowledges that all coastal states have unique needs and provides coastal impact assistance to 30 coastal states and 5 territories -- even those states which prohibit oil and gas activity off their coasts.
The bill also takes a portion of the revenues and invests them in conservation and wildlife programs in all 50 states: 16% of the revenues would go to fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund including state, local and urban park and recreation facilities; while 7% of the revenues would be used for state fish and wildlife programs. These programs recognize that a portion of the revenues earned from the depletion of a nonrenewable resource should be reinvested in renewable resources -- the park, recreation and conservation systems which all Americans enjoy. Today, our first panel will share with us the importance of local park and recreation.
Importantly, the expenditure of this money throughout the bill rests with local communities not with the Federal government. Local communities will figure out what renewable resources need to be conserved and enhanced for the benefit of their residents - not the Federal government.
One provision of concern in S. 25 is the funds that would be provided for Federal land acquisition- approximately 8318 million based on 1998 OCS revenues. Throughout the western states in Federal conservation units, there are private property holders being held in limbo -- wanting to sell their land because their land use and access is curtailed by Federal regulations but no Federal money has been provided to make these owners whole. At the same time, there are other inholders who do not want to sell.
The bill tries to reach a balance between these competing interests: Only Federal purchases would be those within land management units authorized by an Act of Congress; none of the funds could be used to condemn property; 2/3rds of the money would have to be spent east of the 100th meridian which runs from Texas north through the Great Plains; and acquisitions greater than 85 million would require House and Senate authorizing and appropriating committees. This provision of S. 25, and the money provided for Federal land acquisition in the other proposals, will be thoroughly discussed by our second panel of witnesses.
This is an exciting time for those of us who have worked years, in some cases decades, to enact coastal impact assistance legislation. There is a landmark opportunity to remedy the existing inequity in the distribution of OCS revenues and provide secure and meaningful funding for the state-side Land and Water Conservation Fund program
Bills before the Committee are not perfect but they do provide a starting point. I Look forward to working with the members of this Committee, along with the sponsors of the other proposals, to enact meaningful OCS revenue sharing legislation which will benefit all Americans.
END

LOAD-DATE: April 21, 1999

Document 47 of 92.


Search Terms: "Conservation and Reinvestment Act", House or Senate or Joint
To narrow your search, please enter a word or phrase: