About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

9 Environs 1 (1985)

handle is hein.journals/environs9 and id is 1 raw text is: UCD School of Law Vol. 9 No. 1 Environmental Law Society March 1985 Environmental Review of Outer Continental Shelf Development: the Fint Ridge Legacy by Fern Shepard Norton Sound, Alaska When Prudhoe Bay on Alaska's North Slope was confirmed in 1968 to hold oil reserves of up to 10 billion barrels, a new record was established for the largest petroleum deposit in the United States. The discovery's magnitude seized the attention of the domestic oil industry. Alaska's outer continental shelf (OCS) has been abuzz with activity ever since, as dozens of oil companies search for comparable reserves. Norton Sound, on Alaska's western coast, opens into the Bering and Chukchi Seas. Native towns and villages dot its circumference, with Seward Peninsula to the north and the mouth of Alaska's principal river, the Yukon, to the south. Icebound during the long winters, during the summer Norton Sound is an estuary for numerous bird species; a home for porpoises, walrus, and seals; and part of the migratory pathway for bowhead, sperm, and beluga whales. Norton Sound soon may be home for offshore oil drilling platforms. The central portion has been leased by the U.S. Department of the Interior to companies seeking exploitable reserves. But as the companies gear up to explore their tracts, the human residents fear that the region's wildlife, its delicate ecology, and their traditional cultures are in jeopardy. Before any exploration begins, they urge assessment of the possible adverse ef- fects and the precautions necessary to avert their occurrence. This article sketches one of the hurdles that the Norton Sound community and others concerned about the impacts of OCS development now face. Although a primary goal of the National Environ- mental Policy Act was to provide ad- ditional consideration of environmetnal impacts in such situations, the means to do so could be precluded by a technical reading of the U.S. Supreme Court's Flint Ridge decision. Statutory Framework for OCS Development Petroleum and natural gas reserves on the OCS of the United States represent an enormous potential for energy in- dependence. Divorced from the whims of OPEC and international politics, domes- tic OCS supplies have attracted the attention of the federal government and the energy industry. Engineering ad- vances have provided an indispensible foundation for expanded OCS opera- tions by permitting safer and more ef- ficient development at greater depths and distances from shore. However, the highly publicized Santa Barbara and North Sea blowouts, coupled with mas- sive oil spills in the Delaware Riverand off the Massachusetts coast, have engen- dered potent opposition to OCS devel- opment without stringent environmental safeguards. The federal government regulates de- velopment activity on the OCS under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), 43 U.S.C. §1331 et. seq. Since the 1978 amendment of OCSLA, four distinct stages in development of an offshore oil well have been defined under the Act: (1) specification of a five year leasing plan by the Department of the Interior; (2) lease sales of tracts on the OCS; (3) exploration for oil and gas by the lessees; and (4) development and production. Each stage is subject to separate and independent governmental regulation. OCSLA itself defines its pur- pose as providing for expeditious and orderly develpment, subject to environ- mental safequards. 43 USC §1332(3). The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. §4321 et. seq., expresses a federal policy to address environmental impacts, and generally applies to all federal actions regardless of their underlying source of authorization. NEPA requires the preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS) for all majorfederal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human en- vironment. 42 U.S.C. §4332(2) (C). Given the definite federal involvement in OCS resource development under OCSLA, there is little question whether NEPA applies. The issue is when: with four distinct stages, when is an EIS required? The issue raised at Norton Sound is whether a site-specific EIS is required at Stage 3, when leaseholders begin ex- ploring their OCS tracts for recoverable resources. EIS's are not currently re- quired until Stage 4, when development and production occur. However, there are two critical characteristics of Stage 3. First, significant physical activities com- mence at this stage with platform in- stallation, sonic testing, and initiation of drilling. For the first time in the process,

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most