CALIFORNIA MAY TIGHTEN ENVIRONMENTAL RULES

Feb. 5, 1990
A new California environmental initiative planned for the 1990 elections would impose still more costly and stringent rules and programs on the petroleum industry if implemented. Backed by California Atty. Gen. John Van de Kamp, who is running for governor, the initiative is seen as a "political grab bag of issues which attempts to bypass the legislative process," said Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA). The Environmental Protection Initiative (EPI) would hit the oil and gas

A new California environmental initiative planned for the 1990 elections would impose still more costly and stringent rules and programs on the petroleum industry if implemented.

Backed by California Atty. Gen. John Van de Kamp, who is running for governor, the initiative is seen as a "political grab bag of issues which attempts to bypass the legislative process," said Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA).

The Environmental Protection Initiative (EPI) would hit the oil and gas industry in California directly and indirectly in addition to elements aimed at pesticide use and public sewage treatment.

The initiative is as sweeping and precedent-setting as the recently implemented water quality initiative Proposition 65 and the yet to be implemented South Coast Air Quality Management District (Scaqmd) plan to bring the Los Angeles basin into compliance with state and federal air quality standards by the turn of the century. Some elements of EPI reflect the other two measures.

One key element could lead to even more litigation ensnaring the petroleum industry over environmental issues in California.

Beginning in 1992, EPI provides for election of an environmental advocate who will conduct investigations and studies and bring legal action to ensure compliance with the state's environmental laws, recommend policies to ensure environmental protection, and administer a grant program to develop alternatives to pesticides and chemicals phased out by the initiative.

GLOBAL WARMING, OZONE

EPI calls for California to lead the way in reducing the causes of global warming and depletion of the earth's ozone layer.

The initiative would require carbon dioxide emissions to be cut 20% by 2000 and 40% by 2010 as part of an effort to reduce emissions of a gas linked to postulated global warming from the greenhouse effect.

EPI does not specify how this would be accomplished but probably relies on the Scaqmd air quality plan (OGJ, Jan. 23, 1989, p. 16). Scaqmd's plan could cost the petroleum industry more than $330 million the first year alone.

It also would phase out by 1997 use of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), linked to destruction of the ozone layer, unless needed for medical purposes.

The California Air Resources Board would be authorized to grant limited CFC use extensions of as much as 2 years.

CFCs are used as blowing agents in manufacture of a number of petrochemical products.

Also dealing with global warming is the initiative's reforestation program. It calls for a $300 million bond program to acquire redwood forests and for urban and rural reforestation.

In addition, the program would ban clearcutting of old growth redwoods and require developers to plant one tree for every 500 sq ft of new development in the state.

OIL SPILL CONCERNS

Much of EPI focuses on an oil spill prevention and cleanup plan that largely resembles one that was developed by two members of the California Coastal Commission and introduced in the state legislature (OGJ, Sept. 18, p. 35).

The new wrinkle in the initiative's oil spill prevention plan is that it would permit more drilling on leases in state waters only in the event of a national energy emergency.

EPI also would:

  • Direct the State Lands Commission (SLC) to develop an oil spill prevention plan including use of tug escorts for tankers, emergency stations for disabled tankers, and onsite inspections of potential oil spill sources.
  • Establish a $500 million oil spill prevention and cleanup fund to finance immediate cleanup of a spill, offer loans to victims of a major spill, and restore land soiled by a spill. SLC may reduce the fund if it determines that federal or state law has established an adequate replacement.
  • Finance the oil spill fund through a fee of not more than 25/bbl of oil paid by companies transporting oil "through California's oceans."
  • Require all oil companies transporting oil "through California's oceans" to have an oil spill cleanup plan using the best available containment and cleanup technology.
  • Create an office of oil spill response in the state Department of Fish and Game to direct all spill cleanup efforts.
  • Set a variety of water quality standards and a statewide monitoring program to assess water and sediment quality.
  • Revise existing marine pollution discharge fees to reflect the volume and toxicity of a substance being discharged into state waters.
  • Require industries that discharge into state waters to conduct pollution prevention audits to identify routinely discharged pollutants and establish methods to cut those discharges.

WSPA RESPONDS

WSPA criticized the initiative as being redundant and unnecessary, particularly in regard to the oil spill programs.

It said, "The petroleum industry has taken steps to ensure that the public and the environment are protected as evidenced by industry introduction of the Petroleum Industry Response Organization and its $250 million oil spill response program.

"The proposal is duplicative of industry efforts and also of Congress' attempts to provide residents with a comprehensive oil spill response program.

"Industry supports consistent, comprehensive programs and believes this is nothing more than a political grab bag designed to improve image ratings and fund raising capabilities."

Copyright 1990 Oil & Gas Journal. All Rights Reserved.