BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER
Senator Fran Pavley, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: SB 900 Hearing Date: March 29,
2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Jackson | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Version: |March 9, 2016 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant:|William Craven |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: State lands: coastal hazard removal and remediation
program
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
The State Lands Commission (SLC), established pursuant to Public
Resources Code section 6101 et seq., is an independent
commission comprised of the Lieutenant Governor, the State
Controller, and the Director of Finance. Established in 1938,
the Commission manages the state's 4 million acres of tidelands
and submerged lands and the beds of navigable rivers, streams,
lakes, bays, estuaries, inlets, and straits. In the marine
context, the SLC has broad authority over sovereign lands
including rivers and sloughs, lakes, tidelands, and submerged
lands. It also manages energy and mineral resource development
through leases, has an oil spill prevention program at marine
oil terminals and offshore platforms, and has an invasive
species prevention program from large ocean-going vessels.
PROPOSED LAW
The bill contains findings and declarations intended to
demonstrate the historic and present concerns with remnants of
abandoned structures along the coast including oil and gas
wells, piers, pilings, jetties, and seawalls. Early oil and gas
wells that were abandoned decades ago prior to the development
of modern standards may still be seeping oil into the surf zone
that adversely affects human recreation and other environmental
issues.
SB 900 (Jackson) Page 2
of ?
The findings also note the absence of a statewide inventory of
coastal hazards, and the lack of funding not only for the
inventory, but also for assessments for removing the hazards, as
well as implementation of actual removal projects.
The bill would require, upon appropriation of funding by the
Legislature, that the SLC administer a coastal hazard removal
and remediation program that does all of the following:
1. Conduct an inventory of the legacy oil and gas wells and
other coastal hazards along the coast.
2. Survey and monitor oil seepage in state waters and
request studies to determine and address oil seepage
locations, rates, environmental impacts, and possible
mitigation measures.
3. Begin removal of coastal hazards from lands within SLC
jurisdiction. In addition to legacy oil and gas wells, the
bill defines "coastal hazards" to include piers, jetties,
groins, seawalls, and facilities associated with oil
extraction or other commercial operations that may include
wood or steel piles, sheet metal pilings, H piles and H
beams, well casings, well caissons, railroad irons, cables,
angle bars, pipes, pipelines, rip rap, and wood beams and
structures.
4. In co-operation with the Division of Oil, Gas, and
Geothermal Resources, the SLC may seek to abandon legacy
oil and gas wells that present a hazard to public health
and safety and the environment. Legacy oil and gas wells
are defined as those with little or no information on how
the well was originally abandoned, and where there is not
viable company with the responsibility to undertake
abandonment procedures that complies with modern standards.
5. The SLC may seek private or philanthropic funding to
assist with its coastal hazard removal and remediation
program.
6. Funding is proposed pursuant to Section 6217 of the
Public Resources Code (tidelands oil revenues) which
generally provides that funds paid to the SLC shall be
SB 900 (Jackson) Page 3
of ?
deposited in the General Fund. For fiscal year 2017-18, the
sum of $2 million would be transferred to the Land Bank
Fund for the purpose of implementing the SLC coastal hazard
removal and remediation program.
7. In subsequent fiscal years, an amount sufficient to
bring the unencumbered balance to $2 million would be
required. In other words, the bill seeks to establish an
annual $2 million program for coastal hazard removal.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
California State Controller Betty Yee is the sponsor of the
bill. Along with the other supporters, she is quite concerned by
the fact that the SLC estimates that there are approximately 200
"legacy" oil wells in California, the majority of which are in
Santa Barbara County near Summerland and Ellwood beaches and
along the Central Coast. Controller Yee is joined by in support
by the State Lands Commission, the County of Santa Barbara, and
Supervisor Salud Carbajal.
The State Lands Commission, Controller Yee, and many of the
other supporters are also actively in support of the in-depth
study of coastal hazards, the removal of other coastal hazards
unrelated to oil and gas production, and the monitoring of
"natural seepage."
The SLC pointed out that drilling activity on tidelands occurred
before the process was regulated and that there was little if
any oversight of abandoned activities. Also, early coastal
protective structures, such as seawalls and groins, have
deteriorated and are now public safety hazards. In both cases,
because there are no identifiable responsible parties, the State
of California is responsible for removing and remediating these
hazards.
The SLC argues that it has a good track record of removing and
remediating coastal hazards when funding is provided.
Sierra Club California states that while the visual
infrastructure of old oil operations has been removed, many of
these wells were not properly capped, causing fresh oil to foul
the ocean and beaches on a regular basis. Additionally, it notes
that the Refugio oil spill in 2015 highlighted the state's lack
of reliable data on the amount of natural oil seepage in state
SB 900 (Jackson) Page 4
of ?
waters which underscores the importance of the study and
monitoring provision regarding natural seepage that is in the
bill.
Many of these same points are also made by the other nonprofit
conservation groups that are in support, including Heal the
Ocean, the Environmental Defense Center, Get Oil Out, and the
Santa Barbara Channelkeeper.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
None received.
COMMENTS
1. Although not recommended as a committee amendment,
assuming the bill moves forward, the author may want to
consider deadlines, priorities, or phases for the
implementation of proposed section 6212 (a), including the
inventory of legacy oil and gas wells, the oil seepage
survey (but not ongoing monitoring), and the studies on oil
seepage locations, rates, and possible mitigation measures.
2. Although not within the jurisdiction of this committee,
the fiscal question of whether the ongoing funding should
or should not be derived from what is essentially General
Fund dollars should be noted. That question will be
determined in discussions with the Appropriations Committee
and presumably the Department of Finance.
SUPPORT
County of Santa Barbara
Environmental Defense Center
Heal the Ocean
Get Oil Out
Santa Barbara Channelkeeper
State Lands Commission
Sierra Club California
State of California Controller Betty Yee (sponsor)
OPPOSITION
None Received
SB 900 (Jackson) Page 5
of ?
-- END --