President Bush left incoming President Barack Obama an auspicious gift — a brand new plan for more offshore drilling.
An investigation by this newspaper into the process used to produce this plan shows the Bush administration itself, against the desires even of oil companies, specifically targeted Mendocino County for new drilling.
Critics of the Minerals Management Service”s new five-year plan have characterized it as a last minute gift for oil companies.
“As the door closes on the Bush administration, I”m not surprised that they are pulling one more political stunt,” Congressman Mike Thompson said last week, in a press release. “Drilling off our coast would do nothing to end our dependence on foreign oil and would have no impact on gas prices at the pump.”
John Romero of MMS points out the plan needs approval from the Obama administration for anything to happen.
“Initiating the process for a new five-year program provides the new administration with the maximum decision-making flexibility as it defines a comprehensive energy policy for the nation. It will be up to the current administration to decide whether to continue planning for a 2010-2015 five-year program at this time and, if so, what areas to include in the program,” Romero said.
An investigation of the new five-year plan shows the process was rushed. It also shows contradictory reasons given by MMS about the need for the plan. And MMS may not have read and considered the 150,000-plus comments submitted.
This reporter reviewed more than 500 comments from the public, government and the oil industry. None of those asked that Mendocino County be selected for possible leasing.
The new plan would open up 44 million acres of federal waters more than three miles off Humboldt and Mendocino counties as early as 2014.
A 60-day public comment period opened yesterday, Jan. 21. Hearings will be scheduled in Fort Bragg and Ukiah this spring, the MMS has promised. The entire process of deciding whether or not to drill off the Mendocino Coast could be completed by early July, if the Obama administration follows the Bush administration”s schedule. Environmental processes are mandated, and congressional debate is possible after that.
But why the Mendocino Coast?
Why this coast?
Not one of the five major oil companies specifically targeted Northern California, the investigation showed. Chevron, Exxon Mobil, Shell, ConocoPhillips and BP did ask that all drilling bans be lifted and all areas opened up.
But when each firm targeted the areas they wanted first, Alaska, the Gulf of Mexico and areas of the East Coast topped their lists.
Northern California was at the bottom of priority lists, with none of the five providing any detail about a need for Northern California to be opened to drilling.
Those five companies control more than half the world”s oil. This reporter scanned about half the 204 oil industry comments without finding anyone aiming at Northern California.
Chevron”s priority list shows all the offshore areas it wants to lease through the year 2030. The company didn”t see a need to drill offshore in Northern California waters anytime during the next 22 years.
Nor was Northern California included in an extensive discussion of the issue by the California-based company. Chevron actually proposed a more environmentally-friendly drilling plan than did MMS itself.
Past promises
By setting into motion this five-year plan, the Bush administration went beyond what the oil companies wanted and contradicted two of its own promises, the investigation by this reporter further shows.
First, Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne and MMS Director Randall Luthi said last summer that an emergency new five-year plan was needed because of the spike in gas prices.
Everything Kempthorne and Luthi proposed was predicated on an emergency created by the rising price of oil.
But with just days left in the Bush administration and gas prices down, the plan was formally put on the table for Obama to deal with.
Secondly, the outgoing Luthi pleaded with the Obama team not to discard the plan because it is based on the comments of 150,000 people.
The evidence shows that isn”t entirely so, especially in terms of Northern California.
MMS can”t say how many comments were submitted, or how many were pro and con. This reporter has asked for specific numbers since public comments on the plan closed in November.
Romero responds
Romero, the public affairs officer, for the new program provided some answers late Tuesday night.
“More than 150,000 comments were received in response to the Request for Information. The Draft Proposed Program has been prepared using input from those comments. All comments were read by MMS staff,” Romero said. “Comments were analyzed and addressed in the (Draft Plan). The majority of the comments were for … increasing domestic offshore oil and gas development.”
When it requests public comments, the MMS is required to read and consider all comments submitted.
So why not an exact number, if they were actually read and counted? If public comment is driving the process, why is MMS not offering at least a percentage of how many commentors were for and against drilling in new areas?
The answer from Romero about why Northern California ended up on the list was also surprising. Putting Mendocino County on the drilling list was at least partly idea of the Minerals Management Service itself.
“MMS added to the information received from industry our assessment of hydrocarbon potential, focusing on the areas of highest potential in the Pacific Region,” said Romero. “The result is the Pt. Arena Basin in Northern California Planning Area you see in the Draft Proposed Program. This area may or may not be included in the Proposed or Final 5-Year Program. It is important to note that this is the beginning of a lengthy public review process,” he added.
Congressman Thompson doesn”t think those resources are worth the damage from drilling and possible spills.
“Studies show there is about two billion barrels off the Mendocino Coast, which would satisfy U.S. demand for oil for less than 100 days. There is simply not enough oil off the coast to justify the risk that drilling poses,” Thompson said.
History of five-year plan
President Bush removed an executive ban on offshore oil drilling last summer — one that had been put in place by his father. The Bush administration then proposed overwriting its own five-year offshore energy development plan. Doing so would allow new areas to be opened up two years faster than if the current plan was allowed to run its course, MMS said.
Next, congressional Democrats allowed the last ban on offshore oil and gas development to expire in October.
Then came economic collapse and falling fuel prices.
The five-year plan was entirely ignored by the media until its surprise release last week, with less than a week left in Bush”s term.
The new plan would allow oil and gas drilling not only in Northern and Southern California but also in Alaska”s Bristol Bay, one of the nation”s most plentiful sources of fish. These are among six new areas opened for drilling.
Washington, Oregon and protected parts of Florida were excluded along with waters off San Francisco Bay that lie within national marine sanctuaries.
While no major oil company mentioned Northern California or ranked the West Coast high in priority, BP and ConocoPhillips asked that MMS push communication with western states and get environmental studies into motion so drilling could happen. Shell asked that MMS open one new area to drilling in every closed area, including the western seaboard.
The governors of all three Pacific seaboard states oppose new offshore oil drilling.
Last week, Congressman Thompson introduced legislation that would permanently prohibit oil and gas drilling off the coasts of Mendocino, Humboldt and Del Norte counties. President Obama has said he would consider some new offshore oil drilling as part of an energy plan.
Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., Obama”s pick for Interior secretary, has said Obama will likely ban drilling in some areas.
Where to learn more and comment
The MMS”s John Romero also provided information about where the public can read more about the sources of information that MMS used to identify Northern California as a prime area for oil production.
Information on the Point Arena Basin can be found in National Assessment reports, prepared by the Interior Department”s U.S. Geological Survey and Minerals Management Service. The National Assessment is a mandated inventory of the nation”s known oil and gas resources.
The 2006 National Assessment can be found at: http://www.mms.gov/revaldiv/RedNatAssessment.htm
Romero said additional information on Point Arena Basin can be found in the Central Province section of the 1995 National Assessment at http://www.mms.gov/omm/pacific/offshore/na/pdfs/c-calif.pdf.
After Jan. 21, the public may submit comments during the next 60 days by using the online commenting system, http://www.regulations.gov or by mail to:
Minerals Management Service
Attention: Leasing Division (LD)
381 Elden Street, MS-4024
Herndon, VA 20170-4817
