SB 233: Marine resources and preservation.
- Session Year: 2015-2016
- House: Senate
- Latest Version Date: 2015-07-16
(1)The California Marine Resources Legacy Act establishes a program, administered by the Department of Fish and Wildlife, to allow partial removal of offshore oil structures. The act authorizes the department to approve the partial removal of offshore oil structures, if specified criteria are satisfied. The act requires the first person to file an application to partially remove an offshore oil structure to pay, in addition to other specified costs, the startup costs incurred by the department or the State Lands Commission to implement the act, including the costs to develop and adopt regulations, and requires the payment of startup costs to be reimbursed by the department, as specified. The act requires an applicant, upon conditional approval for removal, to apportion a percentage of the cost-savings funds in accordance with a prescribed schedule to specified entities and funds. The act defines cost savings to mean the difference between the estimated cost to the applicant of complete removal of an oil platform, as required by state and federal leases, and the estimated costs to the applicant of partial removal of the oil platform pursuant to the act.
Before the first application to partially remove an offshore oil structure is filed, this bill would authorize a prospective applicant to pay a portion of the startup costs in an amount determined by the department to be necessary for staff and other costs in anticipation of receipt of the first application. The bill would require an applicant, upon conditional approval for partial removal of an offshore oil structure, to apportion and transmit a portion of the cost savings to the department, instead of to the specified entities and funds. The bill would require the department to apportion those cost-savings funds received from the applicant in accordance with the prescribed schedule to the specified entities if certain criteria are satisfied. The bill would require the department to apportion the cost-savings funds received from the applicant who elects to pay a portion of the startup costs before the first application is filed and who files the first application in accordance with the prescribed schedule based on when the application was submitted rather than when the cost savings are transmitted. The bill would authorize the applicant to withdraw the application at any time before final approval and would require the department to return specified funds, including startup costs, submitted to process the application that have not been expended as of the date of receipt of the notification of withdrawal. The bill would require the department to promptly return the cost savings to the applicant if the partial removal of the offshore oil structure is not permitted by a court or governmental agency and the applicant is required to carry out full removal of the structure.
(2)Existing law requires the Natural Resources Agency to serve as the lead agency for the environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of a proposed project to partially remove an offshore oil structure pursuant to the California Marine Resources Legacy Act. Upon certification of environmental documents pursuant to CEQA, the California Marine Resources Legacy Act requires the State Lands Commission to determine the cost savings of partial removal compared to full removal of the structure and requires the Ocean Protection Council to determine whether partial removal provides a net environmental benefit to the marine environment compared to the full removal of the structure.
This bill would instead require the commission to serve as the lead agency for the environmental review under CEQA.
The bill would require the council, in determining whether partial removal of the structure would provide a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal of the structure, to take certain adverse impacts to air quality and greenhouse gas emissions into account and to consult with the State Air Resources Board, among other entities. In making that determination, the bill would require the council to determine the appropriate weight to be assigned to adverse impacts to air quality and greenhouse gas emissions as compared to adverse impacts to biological resources and water quality.
(1)The California Marine Resources Legacy Act establishes a program, administered by the Department of Fish and Wildlife, to allow partial removal of offshore oil structures. The act authorizes the department to approve the partial removal of offshore oil structures, if specified criteria are satisfied. The act requires the first person to file an application to partially remove an offshore oil structure to pay, in addition to other specified costs, the startup costs incurred by the department or the State Lands Commission to implement the act, including the costs to develop and adopt regulations, and requires the payment of startup costs to be reimbursed by the department, as specified. The act requires an applicant, upon conditional approval for removal, to apportion a percentage of the cost-savings funds in accordance with a prescribed schedule to specified entities and funds. The act defines cost savings to mean the difference between the estimated cost to the applicant of complete removal of an oil platform, as required by state and federal leases, and the estimated costs to the applicant of partial removal of the oil platform pursuant to the act.
Before the first application to partially remove an offshore oil structure is filed, this bill would authorize a prospective applicant to pay a portion of the startup costs in an amount determined by the department to be necessary for staff and other costs in anticipation of receipt of the first application. The bill would require an applicant, upon conditional approval for partial removal of an offshore oil structure, to apportion and transmit a portion of the cost savings to the department, instead of to the specified entities and funds. The bill would require the department to apportion those cost-savings funds received from the applicant in accordance with the prescribed schedule. schedule to the specified entities if certain criteria are satisfied. The bill would require the department to apportion the cost-savings funds received from the first application in accordance with the prescribed schedule based on when the application was submitted rather than when the cost savings are transmitted. The bill would authorize the applicant to withdraw the application at any time before final approval and would require the department to return specified funds, including startup costs, submitted to process the application that have not been expended as of the date of receipt of the notification of withdrawal. The bill would require the department to promptly return the cost savings to the applicant if the partial removal of the offshore oil structure is not permitted by a court or governmental agency and the applicant is required to carry out full removal of the structure.
(2)Existing law requires the Natural Resources Agency to serve as the lead agency for the environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of a proposed project to partially remove an offshore oil structure pursuant to the California Marine Resources Legacy Act. Upon certification of environmental documents pursuant to CEQA, the California Marine Resources Legacy Act requires the State Lands Commission to determine the cost savings of partial removal compared to full removal of the structure and requires the Ocean Protection Council to determine whether partial removal provides a net environmental benefit to the marine environment compared to the full removal of the structure.
This bill would instead require the commission to serve as the lead agency for the environmental review under CEQA.
The bill would require the council, in determining whether partial removal of the structure would provide a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal of the structure, to take certain adverse impacts to air quality and greenhouse gas emissions into account and to consult with the State Air Resources Board, among other entities. In making that determination, the bill would require the council to determine the appropriate weight to be assigned to adverse impacts to air quality and greenhouse gas emissions as compared to adverse impacts to biological resources and water quality.
(1)The California Marine Resources Legacy Act establishes a program, administered by the Department of Fish and Wildlife, to allow partial removal of offshore oil structures. The act authorizes the department to approve the partial removal of offshore oil structures, if specified criteria are satisfied. The act requires the first person to file an application to partially remove an offshore oil structure to pay, in addition to other specified costs, the startup costs incurred by the department or the State Lands Commission to implement the act, including the costs to develop and adopt regulations, and requires the payment of startup costs to be reimbursed by the department, as specified. The act requires an applicant, upon conditional approval for removal, to apportion a percentage of the cost-savings funds in accordance with a prescribed schedule to specified entities and funds. The act defines cost savings to mean the difference between the estimated cost to the applicant of complete removal of an oil platform, as required by state and federal leases, and the estimated costs to the applicant of partial removal of the oil platform pursuant to the act.
The
Before the first application to partially remove an offshore oil structure is filed, this bill would authorize a prospective applicant to pay a portion of the startup costs in an amount determined by the department to be necessary for staff and other costs in anticipation of receipt of the first application. The bill would require an applicant, upon conditional approval for partial removal of an offshore oil structure, to apportion and transmit a portion of the cost savings to the department, instead of to the specified entities and funds. The bill would require the department to apportion those cost-savings funds received from the applicant in accordance with a the prescribed schedule. The bill would authorize the applicant to withdraw the application at any time before final approval and would require the department to return specified funds funds, including startup costs, submitted to process the application that have not been expended as of the date of receipt of the notification of withdrawal.
(2)Existing law requires the Natural Resources Agency to serve as the lead agency for the environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of a proposed project to partially remove an offshore oil structure pursuant to the California Marine Resources Legacy Act. Upon certification of environmental documents pursuant to CEQA, the California Marine Resources Legacy Act requires the State Lands Commission to determine the cost savings of partial removal compared to full removal of the structure and requires the Ocean Protection Council to determine whether partial removal provides a net environmental benefit to the marine environment compared to the full removal of the structure.
This bill would instead require the commission to serve as the lead agency for the environmental review under CEQA.
The bill would require the council, in determining whether partial removal of the structure would provide a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal of the structure, to take certain adverse impacts to air quality and greenhouse gas emissions into account and to consult with the State Air Resources Board, among other entities. In making that determination, the bill would require the council to determine the appropriate weight to be assigned to adverse impacts to air quality and greenhouse gas emissions as compared to adverse impacts to biological resources and water quality.
(1)The California Marine Resources Legacy Act establishes a program, administered by the Department of Fish and Wildlife, to allow partial removal of offshore oil structures. The act authorizes the department to approve the partial removal of offshore oil structures, if specified criteria are satisfied. The act requires an applicant, upon conditional approval for removal, to apportion a percentage of the cost-savings funds in accordance with a prescribed schedule to specified entities and funds. The act defines cost savings to mean the difference between the estimated cost to the applicant of complete removal of an oil platform, as required by state and federal leases, and the estimated costs to the applicant of partial removal of the oil platform pursuant to the act, and specifically provides for the inclusion of certain costs in cost savings. act.
The bill would require an applicant, upon conditional approval for partial removal of an offshore oil structure, to apportion and transmit a portion of the cost savings to the department, instead of to the specified entities and funds. The bill would require the department to apportion those cost-savings funds received from the applicant in accordance with a prescribed schedule based on the date the application was submitted to the department. schedule. The bill would authorize the applicant to withdraw the application at any time before final approval and would require the department to return specified funds submitted to process the application that have not been expended as of the date of receipt of the notification of withdrawal.
(2)Existing law requires the Natural Resources Agency to serve as the lead agency for the environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of a proposed project to partially remove an offshore oil structure pursuant to the California Marine Resources Legacy Act. Upon certification of environmental documents pursuant to CEQA, the California Marine Resources Legacy Act requires the State Lands Commission to determine the cost savings of partial removal compared to full removal of the structure and requires the Ocean Protection Council to determine whether partial removal provides a net environmental benefit to the marine environment compared to the full removal of the structure.
This bill would instead require the department commission to serve as the lead agency for the environmental review under CEQA, to determine the cost savings of partial removal compared to full removal of the structure, and to determine whether partial removal provides a net environmental benefit to the marine environment compared to the full removal of the structure. CEQA.
The bill would require the department, council, in determining whether partial removal of the structure would provide a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal of the structure, to take certain adverse impacts to air quality and greenhouse gas emissions into account and to consult with the State Air Resources Board and the Ocean Protection Council, Board, among other entities. In making that determination, the bill would require the council to determine the appropriate weight to be assigned to adverse impacts to air quality and greenhouse gas emissions as compared to adverse impacts to biological resources and water quality.
(1)The California Marine Resources Legacy Act establishes a program, administered by the Department of Fish and Wildlife, to allow partial removal of offshore oil structures. The act authorizes the department to approve the partial removal of offshore oil structures, if specified criteria are satisfied. The act requires an applicant, upon conditional approval for removal, to apportion a percentage of the cost-savings funds in accordance with a prescribed schedule to specified entities and funds. The act defines cost savings to mean the difference between the estimated cost to the applicant of complete removal of an oil platform, as required by state and federal leases, and the estimated costs to the applicant of partial removal of the oil platform pursuant to the act, and specifically provides for the inclusion of certain costs in cost savings.
The bill would require an applicant, upon conditional approval for partial removal of an offshore oil structure, to transmit a portion of the cost savings to the department, instead of to the specified entities and funds. The bill would require the department to apportion those cost-savings funds received from the applicant in accordance with a prescribed schedule based on the date the application was submitted to the department. The bill would authorize the applicant to withdraw the application at any time before final approval and would require the department to return specified funds submitted to process the application that have not been expended as of the date of receipt of the notification of withdrawal.
(2)Existing law requires the Natural Resources Agency to serve as the lead agency for the environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of a proposed project to partially remove an offshore oil structure pursuant to the California Marine Resources Legacy Act. Upon certification of environmental documents pursuant to CEQA, the California Marine Resources Legacy Act requires the State Lands Commission to determine the cost savings of partial removal compared to full removal of the structure and requires the Ocean Protection Council to determine whether partial removal provides a net environmental benefit to the marine environment compared to the full removal of the structure.
This bill would instead require the department to serve as the lead agency for the environmental review under CEQA, to determine the cost savings of partial removal compared to full removal of the structure, and to determine whether partial removal provides a net environmental benefit to the marine environment compared to the full removal of the structure.
The bill would require the department, in determining whether partial removal of the structure would provide a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal of the structure, to take certain adverse impacts to air quality and greenhouse gas emissions into account and to consult with the State Air Resources Board and the Ocean Protection Council, among other entities.
Existing law regulates the construction and installation of any screen installed on conduits used in producing, generating, transmitting, delivering, or furnishing electricity for light, heat, or power and conduits with a maximum flow capacity over 250 cubic feet per second of water to prevent fish from passing through the conduit. Existing law requires, before the installation of any screen, the Department of Fish and Wildlife and the owner to enter into an agreement that defines the method of determining the cost of maintenance, repairs, operation, and keeping the screen free of debris.
This bill would additionally require the agreement to define the method of determining the cost of monitoring the screens performance.
Existing law regulates the construction and installation of any screen installed on conduits used in producing, generating, transmitting, delivering, or furnishing electricity for light, heat, or power and conduits with a maximum flow capacity over 250 cubic feet per second of water to prevent fish from passing through the conduit. Existing law requires, before the installation of any screen, the Department of Fish and Wildlife and the owner to enter into an agreement that defines the method of determining the cost of maintenance, repairs, operation, and keeping the screen free of debris.
This bill would additionally require the agreement to define the method of determining the cost of monitoring the screens performance.
(a)A proposed project to partially remove an offshore oil structure pursuant to this chapter is a project as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 21065 of the Public Resources Code and is therefore subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code) and shall be reviewed pursuant to the time limits established in Section 21100.2 of the Public Resources Code.
(b)The commission shall serve as the lead agency for the environmental review of any project proposed pursuant to this chapter.
SEC. 2.Section 6612 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6612.(a)Upon receipt of an application to partially remove an offshore oil structure pursuant to this chapter, the department shall determine whether the application is complete and includes all information needed by the department.
(b)(1)Upon a determination that the application is complete, the applicant shall provide surety bonds executed by an admitted surety insurer, irrevocable letters of credit, trust funds, or other forms of financial assurances, determined by the department to be available and adequate, to ensure that the applicant will provide sufficient funds to the department, council, commission, and conservancy to carry out all required activities pursuant to this article, including all of the following:
(A)Environmental review of the proposed project pursuant to Section 6604.
(B)A determination of net environmental benefit pursuant to Section 6613.
(C)A determination of cost savings pursuant to Section 6614.
(D)Preparation of a management plan for the structure pursuant to Section 6615.
(E)Implementation of the management plan and ongoing maintenance of the structure after the department takes title pursuant to Section 6620.
(F)Development of an advisory spending plan pursuant to Section 6621.
(G)Other activities undertaken to meet the requirements of this article, including the costs of reviewing applications for completeness, and reviewing, approving, and permitting the proposed project, which includes the costs of determining whether the project meets the requirements of all applicable laws and regulations and the costs of environmental assessment and review.
(2)The department shall consult with the council, commission, and conservancy in determining appropriate funding for activities to be carried out by those agencies.
(3)The funds provided pursuant to paragraph (1) shall not be considered in the calculation of cost savings pursuant to Section 6614 or the apportionment of cost savings pursuant to Section 6618.
(c)The first person to file an application on and after January 1, 2011, to partially remove an offshore oil structure pursuant to this chapter, shall pay, in addition to all costs identified under subdivision (b), the startup costs incurred by the department or the commission to implement this chapter, including the costs to develop and adopt regulations pursuant to this chapter. Before the first application is filed, a prospective applicant may elect to pay, and the department may accept payment of, a portion of the startup costs, in an amount determined by the department to be necessary for staff and other costs in anticipation of receipt of the first application. The payment of startup costs shall be reimbursed by the department as provided in paragraph (3) of subdivision (e) of Section 6618.
(d)As soon as feasible after the applicant provides financial assurances pursuant to subdivision (b), the lead agency shall begin the environmental review of the proposed project as required pursuant to Section 6604.
(e)The applicant may withdraw the application at any time before final approval. Upon notification that the applicant has withdrawn the application, the department shall return to the applicant any funds provided by the applicant under subdivisions (b) and (c) that have not been expended as of the date of receipt of notification of withdrawal.
SEC. 3.Section 6613 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6613.(a)The council shall determine whether the partial removal of an offshore oil structure pursuant to this chapter provides a net benefit to the marine environment compared to the full removal of the structure.
(b)As a necessary prerequisite to determining net environmental benefit as required in subdivision (a), the council shall, upon receipt of its initial application from the department pursuant to Section 6610, establish appropriate criteria, based on the best available credible science, for evaluating the net environmental benefit of full removal and partial removal of offshore oil structures.
(1)The criteria shall include, but are not limited to, the depth of the partially removed structure in relation to its value as habitat and the location of the structure, including its proximity to other reefs, both natural and artificial.
(2)The criteria shall not include any consideration of the funds to be generated by the partial removal of the structure.
(3)In determining the criteria, the council shall consult with appropriate entities, including, but not limited to, the department, the commission, the State Air Resources Board, the California Coastal Commission, and the California Ocean Science Trust.
(4)The council shall establish the criteria in time to use them in making its initial determination of net environmental benefit pursuant to this section.
(c)Upon certification of environmental documents pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, the council shall, based on the criteria developed pursuant to subdivision (b) and other relevant information, determine whether partial removal of the structure would provide a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal of the structure. In making the determination, the council shall, at a minimum, take into account the following:
(1)The contribution of the proposed structure to protection and productivity of fish and other marine life.
(2)Any adverse impacts to biological resources or water quality, air quality or greenhouse gas emissions, or any other marine environmental impacts, from the full removal of the facility that would be avoided by partial removal as proposed in the application.
(3)Any adverse impacts to biological resources or water quality, air quality or greenhouse gas emissions, or any other marine environmental impacts, from partial removal of the structure as proposed in the application.
(4)Any benefits to the marine environment that would result from the full removal of the structure or from partial removal as proposed in the application.
(5)Any identified management requirements and restrictions of the partially removed structure, including, but not limited to, restrictions on fishing or other activities at the site.
(d)In making the determination pursuant to subdivision (c), the council shall determine the appropriate weight, based on the best available credible science, to be assigned to adverse impacts to air quality or greenhouse gas emissions as compared to adverse impacts to biological resources or water quality.
(e)Benefits resulting from the contribution of cost savings to the endowment shall not be considered in the determination of net environmental benefit.
(f)The council may contract or enter into a memorandum of understanding with any other appropriate governmental or nongovernmental entity to assist in its determination of net environmental benefit.
(g)The determination made pursuant to this section and submitted to the department by the council shall constitute the final determination and shall not be revised except by the council.
(h)The council shall take all feasible steps to complete its determination in a timely manner that accommodates the departments schedule for consideration of the application.
SEC. 4.Section 6614 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6614.(a)Upon certification of the appropriate environmental documents, the commission shall determine, or cause to be determined, the cost savings that will result from the partial removal of an offshore oil structure as proposed in the application compared to full removal of the structure.
(b)The commission shall ensure that any cost savings are accurately and reasonably calculated. The commission may contract or enter into a memorandum of understanding with any other appropriate governmental agency or other party, including an independent expert, to ensure that cost savings are accurately and reasonably calculated.
(c)The commission shall consider any estimates of cost savings made by any governmental agency, including, but not limited to, the Internal Revenue Service, the Franchise Tax Board, and the United States Department of the Interior. The commission shall include in its determination a written explanation, which shall be available to the public, of the differences, and the reasons for the differences, between the commissions determination of cost savings and any other estimates of cost savings the commission considered.
(d)The applicant shall provide all necessary documentation, as determined by the commission, to allow the commission to calculate the amount of cost savings. Failure to provide information requested by the commission in a timely manner may result in rejection of the application.
(e)The determination made pursuant to this section and submitted to the department by the commission shall constitute the final determination and shall not be revised except by the commission.
(f)The commission shall take all feasible steps to complete its determination in a timely manner that accommodates the departments schedule for consideration of the application.
SEC. 5.Section 6615 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6615.Prior to granting conditional approval of an application for partial removal of an offshore oil structure, the department shall do all of the following:
(a)Prepare a plan to manage the offshore oil structure after its partial removal. The plan shall include measures to manage fishery and marine life resources at and around the structure in a manner that will ensure that the net benefits to the marine environment identified pursuant to Section 6613 are maintained or enhanced. Consistent with state and federal law, management measures may include a buffer zone in which fishing or removal of marine life is restricted or prohibited.
(b)Provide an opportunity for public comment on the application and environmental document pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.
(c)Hold public hearings for comment on the application and environmental document pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act in the county nearest to the location of the offshore oil structure that is the subject of the application.
SEC. 6.Section 6616 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6616.The department may grant conditional approval of an application for partial removal of an offshore oil structure only if all of the following criteria are satisfied:
(a)The partial removal of the offshore oil structure and the planning, development, maintenance, and operation of the structure would be consistent with all applicable state, federal, and international laws, including, but not limited to, all of the following:
(1)The federal Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1801 et seq.).
(2)The federal National Fishing Enhancement Act of 1984 (33 U.S.C. Sec. 2101 et seq.).
(3)The federal Coastal Zone Management Act (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1451 et seq.).
(4)The California Coastal Management Program.
(5)The Marine Life Management Act (Part 1.7 (commencing with Section 7050)).
(6)The Marine Life Protection Act (Chapter 10.5 (commencing with Section 2850) of Division 3).
(7)State and federal water quality laws.
(8)Navigational safety laws.
(b)The partial removal of the offshore oil structure provides a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal of the structure, as determined pursuant to Section 6613.
(c)The cost savings that would result from the conversion of the offshore oil platform or production facility have been determined pursuant to Section 6614.
(d)The applicant has provided sufficient funds consistent with subdivision (b) of Section 6612.
(e)The department and the applicant have entered into a contractual agreement whereby the applicant will provide sufficient funds for overall management of the structure by the department, including, but not limited to, ongoing management, operations, maintenance, monitoring, and enforcement as these relate to the structure.
(f)The department has entered into an indemnification agreement with the applicant that indemnifies the state and the department, to the extent permitted by law, against any and all liability that may result, including, but not limited to, active negligence, and including defending the state and the department against any claims against the state for any actions the state undertakes pursuant to this article. The agreement may be in the form of an insurance policy, cash settlement, or other mechanism as determined by the department. In adopting indemnification requirements for the agreement, the department shall ensure that the state can defend itself against any liability claims against the state for any actions the state undertakes pursuant to this article and pay any resulting judgments. The department shall consult with and, as necessary, use the resources of the office of the Attorney General in preparing and entering into the indemnification agreement.
(g)The applicant has applied for and received all required permits, leases, and approvals issued by any governmental agency, including, but not limited to, a lease issued by the commission if the proposed project involves state tidelands and submerged lands. For structures located in federal waters, all of the following requirements shall be met:
(1)The department and the owner or operator of the structure reach an agreement providing for the department to take title to the platform or facility as provided in Section 6620.
(2)The department acquires the permit issued by the United States Army Corps of Engineers.
(3)The partial removal of the structure is approved by the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement of the United States Department of the Interior.
SEC. 7.Section 6618 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6618.(a)The cost savings from the partial removal of an offshore oil structure, as determined pursuant to Section 6614, shall be apportioned and transmitted as described in this section.
(b)Except as provided in subdivision (c), upon receipt of conditional approval pursuant to Section 6617, the applicant shall apportion and directly transmit a portion of the total amount of the cost savings to the department as follows:
(1)Fifty-five percent, if transmitted by the applicant to the department before January 1, 2017.
(2)Sixty-five percent, if transmitted by the applicant to the department on or after January 1, 2017, and before January 1, 2023.
(3)Eighty percent, if transmitted by the applicant to the department on or after January 1, 2023.
(c)Upon receipt of conditional approval pursuant to Section 6617, the applicant who elects to pay a portion of the startup costs pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 6612 before the first application is filed and who files the first application to partially remove an offshore oil structure shall apportion and directly transmit a portion of the total amount of the cost savings resulting from the first application to the department as follows:
(1)Fifty-five percent, if the application was submitted before January 1, 2017.
(2)Sixty-five percent, if the application was submitted on or after January 1, 2017, and before January 1, 2023.
(3)Eighty percent, if the application was submitted on or after January 1, 2023.
(d)If the departments final approval pursuant to Section 6619 or any other federal, state, or local permit or approval required for the partial removal of the offshore oil structure is permanently enjoined, vacated, invalidated, rejected, or rescinded by a court or governmental agency as the result of litigation challenging the permit or approval, and the applicant is required to carry out full removal of the structure, the department shall promptly return the cost savings to the applicant.
(e)Upon final, nonappealable judicial decisions upholding the departments final approval pursuant to Section 6619 and all permits and approvals required for the partial removal of the offshore oil structure or the running of the statutes of limitations applicable to all the permits and approvals, whichever is later, the department shall directly transmit the following amounts from the total amount of the cost savings transmitted pursuant to subdivision (b) or (c) to the following entities:
(1)Eighty-five percent shall be deposited into the California Endowment for Marine Preservation established pursuant to Division 37 (commencing with Section 71500) of the Public Resources Code.
(2)Ten percent shall be deposited into the General Fund.
(3)Two percent shall be deposited into the Fish and Game Preservation Fund for expenditure, upon appropriation by the Legislature, by the department to pay any costs imposed by this chapter that are not otherwise provided for pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 6612 and subdivision (e) of Section 6616. Any moneys remaining in the Fish and Game Preservation Fund, after providing for these costs, shall be used, upon appropriation by the Legislature, first to reimburse the payment of the startup costs described in subdivision (c) of Section 6612, and thereafter to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance the coastal and marine resources of the state consistent with the mission of the department.
(4)Two percent shall be deposited into the Coastal Act Services Fund, established pursuant to Section 30620.1 of the Public Resources Code, and shall be allocated to support state agency work involving research, planning, and regulatory review associated with the application and enforcement of coastal management policies in state and federal waters pursuant to state and federal quasi-judicial authority over offshore oil and gas development.
(5)One percent shall be deposited with the board of supervisors of the county immediately adjacent to the location of the facility prior to its decommissioning. The amount paid to the county shall be managed pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 6817 of the Public Resources Code.
(a)A proposed project to partially remove an offshore oil structure pursuant to this chapter is a project as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 21065 of the Public Resources Code and is therefore subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code) and shall be reviewed pursuant to the time limits established in Section 21100.2 of the Public Resources Code.
(b)The commission shall serve as the lead agency for the environmental review of any project proposed pursuant to this chapter.
SEC. 2.Section 6612 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6612.(a)Upon receipt of an application to partially remove an offshore oil structure pursuant to this chapter, the department shall determine whether the application is complete and includes all information needed by the department.
(b)(1)Upon a determination that the application is complete, the applicant shall provide surety bonds executed by an admitted surety insurer, irrevocable letters of credit, trust funds, or other forms of financial assurances, determined by the department to be available and adequate, to ensure that the applicant will provide sufficient funds to the department, council, commission, and conservancy to carry out all required activities pursuant to this article, including all of the following:
(A)Environmental review of the proposed project pursuant to Section 6604.
(B)A determination of net environmental benefit pursuant to Section 6613.
(C)A determination of cost savings pursuant to Section 6614.
(D)Preparation of a management plan for the structure pursuant to Section 6615.
(E)Implementation of the management plan and ongoing maintenance of the structure after the department takes title pursuant to Section 6620.
(F)Development of an advisory spending plan pursuant to Section 6621.
(G)Other activities undertaken to meet the requirements of this article, including the costs of reviewing applications for completeness, and reviewing, approving, and permitting the proposed project, which includes the costs of determining whether the project meets the requirements of all applicable laws and regulations and the costs of environmental assessment and review.
(2)The department shall consult with the council, commission, and conservancy in determining appropriate funding for activities to be carried out by those agencies.
(3)The funds provided pursuant to paragraph (1) shall not be considered in the calculation of cost savings pursuant to Section 6614 or the apportionment of cost savings pursuant to Section 6618.
(c)The first person to file an application on and after January 1, 2011, to partially remove an offshore oil structure pursuant to this chapter, shall pay, in addition to all costs identified under subdivision (b), the startup costs incurred by the department or the commission to implement this chapter, including the costs to develop and adopt regulations pursuant to this chapter. Before the first application is filed, a prospective applicant may elect to pay, and the department may accept payment of, a portion of the startup costs, in an amount determined by the department to be necessary for staff and other costs in anticipation of receipt of the first application. The payment of startup costs shall be reimbursed by the department as provided in paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) (e) of Section 6618.
(d)As soon as feasible after the applicant provides financial assurances pursuant to subdivision (b), the lead agency shall begin the environmental review of the proposed project as required pursuant to Section 6604.
(e)The applicant may withdraw the application at any time before final approval. Upon notification that the applicant has withdrawn the application, the department shall return to the applicant any funds provided by the applicant under subdivisions (b) and (c) that have not been expended as of the date of receipt of notification of withdrawal.
SEC. 3.Section 6613 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6613.(a)The council shall determine whether the partial removal of an offshore oil structure pursuant to this chapter provides a net benefit to the marine environment compared to the full removal of the structure.
(b)As a necessary prerequisite to determining net environmental benefit as required in subdivision (a), the council shall, upon receipt of its initial application from the department pursuant to Section 6610, establish appropriate criteria, based on credible the best available science, for evaluating the net environmental benefit of full removal and partial removal of offshore oil structures.
(1)The criteria shall include, but are not limited to, the depth of the partially removed structure in relation to its value as habitat and the location of the structure, including its proximity to other reefs, both natural and artificial.
(2)The criteria shall not include any consideration of the funds to be generated by the partial removal of the structure.
(3)In determining the criteria, the council shall consult with appropriate entities, including, but not limited to, the department, the commission, the State Air Resources Board, the California Coastal Commission, and the California Ocean Science Trust.
(4)The council shall establish the criteria in time to use them in making its initial determination of net environmental benefit pursuant to this section.
(c)Upon certification of environmental documents pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, the council shall, based on the criteria developed pursuant to subdivision (b) and other relevant information, determine whether partial removal of the structure would provide a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal of the structure. In making the determination, the council shall, at a minimum, take into account the following:
(1)The contribution of the proposed structure to protection and productivity of fish and other marine life.
(2)Any adverse impacts to biological resources or water quality, air quality or greenhouse gas emissions, or any other marine environmental impacts, from the full removal of the facility that would be avoided by partial removal as proposed in the application.
(3)Any adverse impacts to biological resources or water quality, air quality or greenhouse gas emissions, or any other marine environmental impacts, from partial removal of the structure as proposed in the application.
(4)Any benefits to the marine environment that would result from the full removal of the structure or from partial removal as proposed in the application.
(5)Any identified management requirements and restrictions of the partially removed structure, including, but not limited to, restrictions on fishing or other activities at the site.
(d)In making the determination pursuant to subdivision (c), the council shall determine the appropriate weight weight, based on the best available science, to be assigned to adverse impacts to air quality or greenhouse gas emissions as compared to adverse impacts to biological resources or water quality.
(e)Benefits resulting from the contribution of cost savings to the endowment shall not be considered in the determination of net environmental benefit.
(f)The council may contract or enter into a memorandum of understanding with any other appropriate governmental or nongovernmental entity to assist in its determination of net environmental benefit.
(g)The determination made pursuant to this section and submitted to the department by the council shall constitute the final determination and shall not be revised except by the council.
(h)The council shall take all feasible steps to complete its determination in a timely manner that accommodates the departments schedule for consideration of the application.
SEC. 4.Section 6614 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6614.(a)Upon certification of the appropriate environmental documents, the commission shall determine, or cause to be determined, the cost savings that will result from the partial removal of an offshore oil structure as proposed in the application compared to full removal of the structure.
(b)The commission shall ensure that any cost savings are accurately and reasonably calculated. The commission may contract or enter into a memorandum of understanding with any other appropriate governmental agency or other party, including an independent expert, to ensure that cost savings are accurately and reasonably calculated.
(c)The commission shall consider any estimates of cost savings made by any governmental agency, including, but not limited to, the Internal Revenue Service, the Franchise Tax Board, and the United States Department of the Interior. The commission shall include in its determination a written explanation, which shall be available to the public, of the differences, and the reasons for the differences, between the commissions determination of cost savings and any other estimates of cost savings the commission considered.
(d)The applicant shall provide all necessary documentation, as determined by the commission, to allow the commission to calculate the amount of cost savings. Failure to provide information requested by the commission in a timely manner may result in rejection of the application.
(e)The determination made pursuant to this section and submitted to the department by the commission shall constitute the final determination and shall not be revised except by the commission.
(f)The commission shall take all feasible steps to complete its determination in a timely manner that accommodates the departments schedule for consideration of the application.
SEC. 5.Section 6615 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6615.Prior to granting conditional approval of an application for partial removal of an offshore oil structure, the department shall do all of the following:
(a)Prepare a plan to manage the offshore oil structure after its partial removal. The plan shall include measures to manage fishery and marine life resources at and around the structure in a manner that will ensure that the net benefits to the marine environment identified pursuant to Section 6613 are maintained or enhanced. Consistent with state and federal law, management measures may include a buffer zone in which fishing or removal of marine life is restricted or prohibited.
(b)Provide an opportunity for public comment on the application and environmental document pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.
(c)Hold public hearings for comment on the application and environmental document pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act in the county nearest to the location of the offshore oil structure that is the subject of the application.
SEC. 6.Section 6616 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6616.The department may grant conditional approval of an application for partial removal of an offshore oil structure only if all of the following criteria are satisfied:
(a)The partial removal of the offshore oil structure and the planning, development, maintenance, and operation of the structure would be consistent with all applicable state, federal, and international laws, including, but not limited to, all of the following:
(1)The federal Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1801 et seq.).
(2)The federal National Fishing Enhancement Act of 1984 (33 U.S.C. Sec. 2101 et seq.).
(3)The federal Coastal Zone Management Act (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1451 et seq.).
(4)The California Coastal Management Program.
(5)The Marine Life Management Act (Part 1.7 (commencing with Section 7050)).
(6)The Marine Life Protection Act (Chapter 10.5 (commencing with Section 2850) of Division 3).
(7)State and federal water quality laws.
(8)Navigational safety laws.
(b)The partial removal of the offshore oil structure provides a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal of the structure, as determined pursuant to Section 6613.
(c)The cost savings that would result from the conversion of the offshore oil platform or production facility have been determined pursuant to Section 6614.
(d)The applicant has provided sufficient funds consistent with subdivision (b) of Section 6612.
(e)The department and the applicant have entered into a contractual agreement whereby the applicant will provide sufficient funds for overall management of the structure by the department, including, but not limited to, ongoing management, operations, maintenance, monitoring, and enforcement as these relate to the structure.
(f)The department has entered into an indemnification agreement with the applicant that indemnifies the state and the department, to the extent permitted by law, against any and all liability that may result, including, but not limited to, active negligence, and including defending the state and the department against any claims against the state for any actions the state undertakes pursuant to this article. The agreement may be in the form of an insurance policy, cash settlement, or other mechanism as determined by the department. In adopting indemnification requirements for the agreement, the department shall ensure that the state can defend itself against any liability claims against the state for any actions the state undertakes pursuant to this article and pay any resulting judgments. The department shall consult with and, as necessary, use the resources of the office of the Attorney General in preparing and entering into the indemnification agreement.
(g)The applicant has applied for and received all required permits, leases, and approvals issued by any governmental agency, including, but not limited to, a lease issued by the commission if the proposed project involves state tidelands and submerged lands. For structures located in federal waters, all of the following requirements shall be met:
(1)The department and the owner or operator of the structure reach an agreement providing for the department to take title to the platform or facility as provided in Section 6620.
(2)The department acquires the permit issued by the United States Army Corps of Engineers.
(3)The partial removal of the structure is approved by the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement of the United States Department of the Interior.
SEC. 7.Section 6618 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6618.(a)The cost savings from the partial removal of an offshore oil structure, as determined pursuant to Section 6614, shall be apportioned and transmitted as described in this section.
(b)Upon Except as provided in subdivision (c), upon receipt of conditional approval pursuant to Section 6617, the applicant shall apportion and directly transmit a portion of the total amount of the cost savings to the department as follows:
(1)Fifty-five percent, if transmitted by the applicant to the department before January 1, 2017.
(2)Sixty-five percent, if transmitted by the applicant to the department on or after January 1, 2017, and before January 1, 2023.
(3)Eighty percent, if transmitted by the applicant to the department on or after January 1, 2023.
(c)Of the total amount of the cost savings to be transmitted pursuant to subdivision (b),
(c)Upon receipt of conditional approval pursuant to Section 6617, the applicant who files the first application to partially remove an offshore oil structure shall apportion and directly transmit a portion of the total amount of the cost savings resulting from the first application to the department as follows:
(1)Fifty-five percent, if the application was submitted before January 1, 2017.
(2)Sixty-five percent, if the application was submitted on or after January 1, 2017, and before January 1, 2023.
(3)Eighty percent, if the application was submitted on or after January 1, 2023.
(d)If the departments final approval pursuant to Section 6619 or any other federal, state, or local permit or approval required for the partial removal of the offshore oil structure is permanently enjoined, vacated, invalidated, rejected, or rescinded by a court or governmental agency as the result of litigation challenging the permit or approval, and the applicant is required to carry out full removal of the structure, the department shall promptly return the cost savings to the applicant.
(e)Upon final, nonappealable judicial decisions upholding the departments final approval pursuant to Section 6619 and all permits and approvals required for the partial removal of the offshore oil structure or the running of the statutes of limitations applicable to all the permits and approvals, whichever is later, the department shall directly transmit the following amounts from the total amount of the cost savings transmitted pursuant to subdivision (b) or (c) to the following entities:
(1)Eighty-five percent shall be deposited into the California Endowment for Marine Preservation established pursuant to Division 37 (commencing with Section 71500) of the Public Resources Code.
(2)Ten percent shall be deposited into the General Fund.
(3)Two percent shall be deposited into the Fish and Game Preservation Fund for expenditure, upon appropriation by the Legislature, by the department to pay any costs imposed by this chapter that are not otherwise provided for pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 6612 and subdivision (e) of Section 6616. Any moneys remaining in the Fish and Game Preservation Fund, after providing for these costs, shall be used, upon appropriation by the Legislature, first to reimburse the payment of the startup costs described in subdivision (c) of Section 6612, and thereafter to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance the coastal and marine resources of the state consistent with the mission of the department.
(4)Two percent shall be deposited into the Coastal Act Services Fund, established pursuant to Section 30620.1 of the Public Resources Code, and shall be allocated to support state agency work involving research, planning, and regulatory review associated with the application and enforcement of coastal management policies in state and federal waters pursuant to state and federal quasi-judicial authority over offshore oil and gas development.
(5)One percent shall be deposited with the board of supervisors of the county immediately adjacent to the location of the facility prior to its decommissioning. The amount paid to the county shall be managed pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 6817 of the Public Resources Code.
(a)A proposed project to partially remove an offshore oil structure pursuant to this chapter is a project as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 21065 of the Public Resources Code and is therefore subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code) and shall be reviewed pursuant to the time limits established in Section 21100.2 of the Public Resources Code.
(b)The commission shall serve as the lead agency for the environmental review of any project proposed pursuant to this chapter.
SEC. 2.Section 6612 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6612.(a)Upon receipt of an application to partially remove an offshore oil structure pursuant to this chapter, the department shall determine whether the application is complete and includes all information needed by the department.
(b)(1)Upon a determination that the application is complete, the applicant shall provide surety bonds executed by an admitted surety insurer, irrevocable letters of credit, trust funds, or other forms of financial assurances, determined by the department to be available and adequate, to ensure that the applicant will provide sufficient funds to the department, council, commission, and conservancy to carry out all required activities pursuant to this article, including all of the following:
(A)Environmental review of the proposed project pursuant to Section 6604.
(B)A determination of net environmental benefit pursuant to Section 6613.
(C)A determination of cost savings pursuant to Section 6614.
(D)Preparation of a management plan for the structure pursuant to Section 6615.
(E)Implementation of the management plan and ongoing maintenance of the structure after the department takes title pursuant to Section 6620.
(F)Development of an advisory spending plan pursuant to Section 6621.
(G)Other activities undertaken to meet the requirements of this article, including the costs of reviewing applications for completeness, and reviewing, approving, and permitting the proposed project, which includes the costs of determining whether the project meets the requirements of all applicable laws and regulations and the costs of environmental assessment and review.
(2)The department shall consult with the council, commission, and conservancy in determining appropriate funding for activities to be carried out by those agencies.
(3)The funds provided pursuant to paragraph (1) shall not be considered in the calculation of cost savings pursuant to Section 6614 or the apportionment of cost savings pursuant to Section 6618.
(c)The first person to file an application on and after January 1, 2011, to partially remove an offshore oil structure pursuant to this chapter, shall pay, in addition to all costs identified under subdivision (b), the startup costs incurred by the department or the commission to implement this chapter, including the costs to develop and adopt regulations pursuant to this chapter. This Before the first application is filed, a prospective applicant may elect to pay, and the department may accept payment of, a portion of the startup costs, in an amount determined by the department to be necessary for staff and other costs in anticipation of receipt of the first application. The payment of startup costs shall be reimbursed by the department as provided in paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 6618.
(d)As soon as feasible after the applicant provides financial assurances pursuant to subdivision (b), the lead agency shall begin the environmental review of the proposed project as required pursuant to Section 6604.
(e)The applicant may withdraw the application at any time before final approval. Upon notification that the applicant has withdrawn the application, the department shall return to the applicant any funds provided by the applicant under subdivisions (b) and (c) that have not been expended as of the date of receipt of notification of withdrawal.
SEC. 3.Section 6613 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6613.(a)The council shall determine whether the partial removal of an offshore oil structure pursuant to this chapter provides a net benefit to the marine environment compared to the full removal of the structure.
(b)As a necessary prerequisite to determining net environmental benefit as required in subdivision (a), the council shall, upon receipt of its initial application from the department pursuant to Section 6610, establish appropriate criteria, based on credible science, for evaluating the net environmental benefit of full removal and partial removal of offshore oil structures.
(1)The criteria shall include, but are not limited to, the depth of the partially removed structure in relation to its value as habitat and the location of the structure, including its proximity to other reefs, both natural and artificial.
(2)The criteria shall not include any consideration of the funds to be generated by the partial removal of the structure.
(3)In determining the criteria, the council shall consult with appropriate entities, including, but not limited to, the department, the commission, the State Air Resources Board, the California Coastal Commission, and the California Ocean Science Trust.
(4)The council shall establish the criteria in time to use them in making its initial determination of net environmental benefit pursuant to this section.
(c)Upon certification of environmental documents pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, the council shall, based on the criteria developed pursuant to subdivision (b) and other relevant information, determine whether partial removal of the structure would provide a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal of the structure. In making the determination, the council shall, at a minimum, take into account the following:
(1)The contribution of the proposed structure to protection and productivity of fish and other marine life.
(2)Any adverse impacts to biological resources or water quality, air quality or greenhouse gas emissions, or any other marine environmental impacts, from the full removal of the facility that would be avoided by partial removal as proposed in the application.
(3)Any adverse impacts to biological resources or water quality, air quality or greenhouse gas emissions, or any other marine environmental impacts, from partial removal of the structure as proposed in the application.
(4)Any benefits to the marine environment that would result from the full removal of the structure or from partial removal as proposed in the application.
(5)Any identified management requirements and restrictions of the partially removed structure, including, but not limited to, restrictions on fishing or other activities at the site.
(d)In making the determination pursuant to subdivision (c), the council shall determine the appropriate weight to be assigned to adverse impacts to air quality or greenhouse gas emissions as compared to adverse impacts to biological resources or water quality.
(e)Benefits resulting from the contribution of cost savings to the endowment shall not be considered in the determination of net environmental benefit.
(f)The council may contract or enter into a memorandum of understanding with any other appropriate governmental or nongovernmental entity to assist in its determination of net environmental benefit.
(g)The determination made pursuant to this section and submitted to the department by the council shall constitute the final determination and shall not be revised except by the council.
(h)The council shall take all feasible steps to complete its determination in a timely manner that accommodates the departments schedule for consideration of the application.
SEC. 4.Section 6614 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6614.(a)Upon certification of the appropriate environmental documents, the commission shall determine, or cause to be determined, the cost savings that will result from the partial removal of an offshore oil structure as proposed in the application compared to full removal of the structure.
(b)The commission shall ensure that any cost savings are accurately and reasonably calculated. The commission may contract or enter into a memorandum of understanding with any other appropriate governmental agency or other party, including an independent expert, to ensure that cost savings are accurately and reasonably calculated.
(c)The commission shall consider any estimates of cost savings made by any governmental agency, including, but not limited to, the Internal Revenue Service, the Franchise Tax Board, and the United States Department of the Interior. The commission shall include in its determination a written explanation, which shall be available to the public, of the differences, and the reasons for the differences, between the commissions determination of cost savings and any other estimates of cost savings the commission considered.
(d)The applicant shall provide all necessary documentation, as determined by the commission, to allow the commission to calculate the amount of cost savings. Failure to provide information requested by the commission in a timely manner may result in rejection of the application.
(e)The determination made pursuant to this section and submitted to the department by the commission shall constitute the final determination and shall not be revised except by the commission.
(f)The commission shall take all feasible steps to complete its determination in a timely manner that accommodates the departments schedule for consideration of the application.
SEC. 5.Section 6615 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6615.Prior to granting conditional approval of an application for partial removal of an offshore oil structure, the department shall do all of the following:
(a)Prepare a plan to manage the offshore oil structure after its partial removal. The plan shall include measures to manage fishery and marine life resources at and around the structure in a manner that will ensure that the net benefits to the marine environment identified pursuant to Section 6613 are maintained or enhanced. Consistent with state and federal law, management measures may include a buffer zone in which fishing or removal of marine life is restricted or prohibited.
(b)Provide an opportunity for public comment on the application and environmental document pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.
(c)Hold public hearings for comment on the application and environmental document pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act in the county nearest to the location of the offshore oil structure that is the subject of the application.
SEC. 6.Section 6616 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6616.The department may grant conditional approval of an application for partial removal of an offshore oil structure only if all of the following criteria are satisfied:
(a)The partial removal of the offshore oil structure and the planning, development, maintenance, and operation of the structure would be consistent with all applicable state, federal, and international laws, including, but not limited to, all of the following:
(1)The federal Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1801 et seq.).
(2)The federal National Fishing Enhancement Act of 1984 (33 U.S.C. Sec. 2101 et seq.).
(3)The federal Coastal Zone Management Act (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1451 et seq.).
(4)The California Coastal Management Program.
(5)The Marine Life Management Act (Part 1.7 (commencing with Section 7050)).
(6)The Marine Life Protection Act (Chapter 10.5 (commencing with Section 2850) of Division 3).
(7)State and federal water quality laws.
(8)Navigational safety laws.
(b)The partial removal of the offshore oil structure provides a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal of the structure, as determined pursuant to Section 6613.
(c)The cost savings that would result from the conversion of the offshore oil platform or production facility have been determined pursuant to Section 6614.
(d)The applicant has provided sufficient funds consistent with subdivision (b) of Section 6612.
(e)The department and the applicant have entered into a contractual agreement whereby the applicant will provide sufficient funds for overall management of the structure by the department, including, but not limited to, ongoing management, operations, maintenance, monitoring, and enforcement as these relate to the structure.
(f)The department has entered into an indemnification agreement with the applicant that indemnifies the state and the department, to the extent permitted by law, against any and all liability that may result, including, but not limited to, active negligence, and including defending the state and the department against any claims against the state for any actions the state undertakes pursuant to this article. The agreement may be in the form of an insurance policy, cash settlement, or other mechanism as determined by the department. In adopting indemnification requirements for the agreement, the department shall ensure that the state can defend itself against any liability claims against the state for any actions the state undertakes pursuant to this article and pay any resulting judgments. The department shall consult with and, as necessary, use the resources of the office of the Attorney General in preparing and entering into the indemnification agreement.
(g)The applicant has applied for and received all required permits, leases, and approvals issued by any governmental agency, including, but not limited to, a lease issued by the commission if the proposed project involves state tidelands and submerged lands. For structures located in federal waters, all of the following requirements shall be met:
(1)The department and the owner or operator of the structure reach an agreement providing for the department to take title to the platform or facility as provided in Section 6620.
(2)The department acquires the permit issued by the United States Army Corps of Engineers.
(3)The partial removal of the structure is approved by the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement of the United States Department of the Interior.
SEC. 7.Section 6618 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6618.(a)The cost savings from the partial removal of an offshore oil structure, as determined pursuant to Section 6614, shall be apportioned and transmitted as described in this section.
(b)Upon receipt of conditional approval pursuant to Section 6617, the applicant shall apportion and directly transmit a portion of the total amount of the cost savings to the department as follows:
(1)Fifty-five percent, if transmitted before January 1, ____. 2017.
(2)Sixty-five percent, if transmitted on or after January 1, ____, 2017, and before January 1, ____. 2023.
(3)Eighty percent, if transmitted on or after January 1, ____. 2023.
(c)Of the total amount of the cost savings to be transmitted pursuant to subdivision (b), the department shall directly transmit the following amounts to the following entities:
(1)Eighty-five percent shall be deposited into the California Endowment for Marine Preservation established pursuant to Division 37 (commencing with Section 71500) of the Public Resources Code.
(2)Ten percent shall be deposited into the General Fund.
(3)Two percent shall be deposited into the Fish and Game Preservation Fund for expenditure, upon appropriation by the Legislature, by the department to pay any costs imposed by this chapter that are not otherwise provided for pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 6612 and subdivision (e) of Section 6616. Any moneys remaining in the Fish and Game Preservation Fund, after providing for these costs, shall be used, upon appropriation by the Legislature, first to reimburse the payment of the startup costs described in subdivision (c) of Section 6612, and thereafter to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance the coastal and marine resources of the state consistent with the mission of the department.
(4)Two percent shall be deposited into the Coastal Act Services Fund, established pursuant to Section 30620.1 of the Public Resources Code, and shall be allocated to support state agency work involving research, planning, and regulatory review associated with the application and enforcement of coastal management policies in state and federal waters pursuant to state and federal quasi-judicial authority over offshore oil and gas development.
(5)One percent shall be deposited with the board of supervisors of the county immediately adjacent to the location of the facility prior to its decommissioning. The amount paid to the county shall be managed pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 6817 of the Public Resources Code.
(a)This chapter establishes a program through which an applicant may voluntarily apply to the department to carry out partial removal of the structure.
(b)The program established pursuant to this chapter shall be deemed consistent with, and part of, the California Artificial Reef Program pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with Section 6420) of Chapter 5 for purposes of compliance with federal law including the National Fishing Enhancement Act of 1984.
(c)The department shall serve as the primary authority for carrying out the program, including review and approval of applications to partially remove an offshore oil structure in state or federal waters and management and operation of decommissioned offshore oil structures in state or federal waters approved pursuant to this chapter.
(d)Final approval of an application shall not be granted until the applicant complies with all requirements of the chapter, including the payment of all costs to the state to review and approve the proposed project as required by subdivision (b) of Section 6612 and the transmittal of the required portion of cost savings to the endowment and other parties as required by Section 6618.
(e)The department may obtain funds for the planning, development, maintenance, and operation of an offshore oil structure transferred to the department pursuant to this chapter and may accept gifts, subventions, grants, rebates, reimbursements, and subsidies from any lawful source.
(f)The department may adopt regulations to implement this chapter.
SEC. 2.SECTION 1.Section 6604 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6604.(a)A proposed project to partially remove an offshore oil structure pursuant to this chapter is a project as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 21065 of the Public Resources Code and is therefore subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code) and shall be reviewed pursuant to the time limits established in Section 21100.2 of the Public Resources Code.
(b)The department commission shall serve as the lead agency for the environmental review of any project proposed pursuant to this chapter.
SEC. 3.Section 6610 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6610.(a)An owner or operator, or other party responsible for decommissioning, of an offshore oil structure may apply to the department for approval to partially remove the structure pursuant to the requirements of this chapter.
(b)The department shall design and make available to potential applicants an application process that will facilitate review of the application by the department in a timely manner, consistent with Section 6604.
(c)Upon receipt of an application pursuant to this section, the department shall transmit a copy of the application to the endowment.
SEC. 4.Section 6611 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6611.(a)The application for partial removal shall include, at a minimum, all of the following:
(1)The applicants plan and schedule for partial removal of the offshore oil structure, including removal of any portion of the structure as appropriate to maintain navigational safety.
(2)A determination of the estimated cost of partial removal and the estimated cost of full removal.
(3)A determination of the environmental impacts and benefits to the marine environment from partial removal and full removal of the structure.
(4)Identification of all permits, leases, and approvals required by any governmental agency, including a permit issued by the United States Army Corps of Engineers if required for offshore oil structures, and a lease issued by the commission if the proposed project involves state tidelands and submerged lands, and a proposed schedule for the applicant or the state to receive those permits, leases, and approvals.
(b)The department may require the applicant to submit a management plan for the structure following partial removal, including maintenance in a manner consistent with navigational safety, enforcement, and monitoring.
(c)The information submitted pursuant to subdivisions (a) and (b) shall be used by the department for advisory purposes only. Final determinations regarding the partial removal and management of the offshore oil structure, net benefit to the marine environment from partial removal, and cost savings from partial removal shall be made solely by the department, as specified in this chapter, based on its independent review and judgment.
SEC. 5.SEC. 2.Section 6612 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6612.(a)Upon receipt of an application to partially remove an offshore oil structure pursuant to this chapter, the department shall determine whether the application is complete and includes all information needed by the department.
(b)(1)Upon a determination that the application is complete, the applicant shall provide surety bonds executed by an admitted surety insurer, irrevocable letters of credit, trust funds, or other forms of financial assurances, determined by the department to be available and adequate, to ensure that the applicant will provide sufficient funds to the department department, council, commission, and conservancy to carry out all required activities pursuant to this article, including all of the following:
(A)Environmental review of the proposed project pursuant to Section 6604.
(B)A determination of net environmental benefit pursuant to Section 6613.
(C)A determination of cost savings pursuant to Section 6614.
(D)Preparation of a management plan for the structure pursuant to Section 6615.
(E)Implementation of the management plan and ongoing maintenance of the structure after the department takes title pursuant to Section 6620.
(F)Development of an advisory spending plan pursuant to Section 6621.
(G)Other activities undertaken to meet the requirements of this article, including the costs of reviewing applications for completeness, and reviewing, approving, and permitting the proposed project, which includes the costs of determining whether the project meets the requirements of all applicable laws and regulations and the costs of environmental assessment and review.
(2)The department shall consult with the council, commission, and conservancy in determining appropriate funding for activities to be carried out by the conservancy. those agencies.
(3)The funds provided pursuant to paragraph (1) shall not be considered in the calculation of cost savings pursuant to Section 6614 or the apportionment of cost savings pursuant to Section 6618.
(c)The first person to file an application on and after January 1, 2011, to partially remove an offshore oil structure pursuant to this chapter, shall pay, in addition to all costs identified under subdivision (b), the startup costs incurred by the department or the commission to implement this chapter, including the costs to develop and adopt regulations pursuant to this chapter. This payment of startup costs shall be reimbursed by the department as provided in paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 6618.
(d)As soon as feasible after the applicant provides financial assurances pursuant to subdivision (b), the department lead agency shall begin the environmental review of the proposed project as required pursuant to Section 6604.
(e)The applicant may withdraw the application at any time before final approval. Upon notification that the applicant has withdrawn the application, the department shall return to the applicant any funds provided under subdivisions (b) and (c) that have not been expended as of the date of receipt of notification of withdrawal.
SEC. 6.SEC. 3.Section 6613 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6613.(a)The department council shall determine whether the partial removal of an offshore oil structure pursuant to this chapter provides a net benefit to the marine environment compared to the full removal of the structure.
(b)As a necessary prerequisite to determining net environmental benefit as required in subdivision (a), the department council shall, upon receipt of its initial application from the department pursuant to Section 6610, establish appropriate criteria criteria, based on credible science, for evaluating the net environmental benefit of full removal and partial removal of offshore oil structures.
(1)The criteria shall include, but are not limited to, the depth of the partially removed structure in relation to its value as habitat and the location of the structure, including its proximity to other reefs, both natural and artificial.
(2)The criteria shall not include any consideration of the funds to be generated by the partial removal of the structure.
(3)In determining the criteria, the department council shall consult with appropriate entities, including, but not limited to, the council, department, the commission, the State Air Resources Board, the California Coastal Commission, and the California Ocean Science Trust.
(4)The department council shall establish the criteria in time to use them in making its initial determination of net environmental benefit pursuant to this section.
(c)Upon certification of environmental documents pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, the department council shall, based on the criteria developed pursuant to subdivision (b) and other relevant information, determine whether partial removal of the structure would provide a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal of the structure. In making the determination, the department council shall, at a minimum, take into account the following:
(1)The contribution of the proposed structure to protection and productivity of fish and other marine life.
(2)Any adverse impacts to biological resources or water quality, air quality or greenhouse gas emissions, or any other marine environmental impacts, from the full removal of the facility that would be avoided by partial removal as proposed in the application.
(3)Any adverse impacts to biological resources or water quality, air quality or greenhouse gas emissions, or any other marine environmental impacts, from partial removal of the structure as proposed in the application.
(4)Any benefits to the marine environment that would result from the full removal of the structure or from partial removal as proposed in the application.
(5)Any identified management requirements and restrictions of the partially removed structure, including, but not limited to, restrictions on fishing or other activities at the site.
(d)In making the determination pursuant to subdivision (c), the council shall determine the appropriate weight to be assigned to adverse impacts to air quality or greenhouse gas emissions as compared to adverse impacts to biological resources or water quality.
(d)
(e)Benefits resulting from the contribution of cost savings to the endowment shall not be considered in the determination of net environmental benefit.
(e)
(f)The department council may contract or enter into a memorandum of understanding with any other appropriate governmental or nongovernmental entity to assist in its determination of net environmental benefit.
(f)
(g)The determination made pursuant to this section and submitted to the department by the council shall constitute the final determination and shall not be revised except by the department. council.
(h)The council shall take all feasible steps to complete its determination in a timely manner that accommodates the departments schedule for consideration of the application.
SEC. 7.SEC. 4.Section 6614 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6614.(a)Upon certification of the appropriate environmental documents, the department commission shall determine, or cause to be determined, the cost savings that will result from the partial removal of an offshore oil structure as proposed in the application compared to full removal of the structure.
(b)The department commission shall ensure that any cost savings are accurately and reasonably calculated. The department commission may contract or enter into a memorandum of understanding with any other appropriate governmental agency or other party, including an independent expert, to ensure that cost savings are accurately and reasonably calculated.
(c)The department commission shall consider any estimates of cost savings made by any governmental agency, including, but not limited to, the Internal Revenue Service, the Franchise Tax Board, and the United States Department of the Interior. The department commission shall include in its determination a written explanation, which shall be available to the public, of the differences, and the reasons for the differences, between the departments commissions determination of cost savings and any other estimates of cost savings the department commission considered.
(d)The applicant shall provide all necessary documentation, as determined by the department, commission, to allow the department commission to calculate the amount of cost savings. Failure to provide information requested by the department commission in a timely manner may result in rejection of the application.
(e)The determination made pursuant to this section and submitted to the department by the commission shall constitute the final determination and shall not be revised except by the department. commission.
(f)The commission shall take all feasible steps to complete its determination in a timely manner that accommodates the departments schedule for consideration of the application.
SEC. 8.SEC. 5.Section 6615 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6615.Prior to granting conditional approval of an application for partial removal of an offshore oil structure, the department shall do all of the following:
(a)Prepare a plan to manage the offshore oil structure after its partial removal. The plan shall include measures to manage fishery and marine life resources at and around the structure in a manner that will ensure that the net benefits to the marine environment identified pursuant to Section 6613 are maintained or enhanced. Consistent with state and federal law, management measures may include a buffer zone in which fishing or removal of marine life is restricted or prohibited.
(b)Provide an opportunity for public comment on the application and environmental document pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.
(c)Hold a public hearing hearings for comment on the application and environmental document pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act in the county nearest to the location of the offshore oil structure that is the subject of the application.
SEC. 9.SEC. 6.Section 6616 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6616.The department may grant conditional approval of an application for partial removal of an offshore oil structure only if all of the following criteria are satisfied:
(a)The partial removal of the offshore oil structure and the planning, development, maintenance, and operation of the structure would be consistent with all applicable state, federal, and international laws, including, but not limited to, all of the following:
(1)The federal Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1801 et seq.).
(2)The federal National Fishing Enhancement Act of 1984 (33 U.S.C. Sec. 2101 et seq.).
(3)The federal Coastal Zone Management Act (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1451 et seq.).
(4)The California Coastal Management Program.
(5)The Marine Life Management Act (Part 1.7 (commencing with Section 7050)).
(6)The Marine Life Protection Act (Chapter 10.5 (commencing with Section 2850) of Division 3).
(7)State and federal water quality laws.
(8)Navigational safety laws.
(b)The partial removal of the offshore oil structure provides a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal of the structure, as determined pursuant to Section 6613.
(c)The cost savings that would result from the conversion of the offshore oil platform or production facility have been determined pursuant to Section 6614.
(d)The applicant has provided sufficient funds consistent with subdivision (b) of Section 6612.
(e)The department and the applicant have entered into a contractual agreement whereby the applicant will provide sufficient funds for overall management of the structure by the department, including, but not limited to, ongoing management, operations, maintenance, monitoring, and enforcement as these relate to the structure.
(f)The department has entered into an indemnification agreement with the applicant that indemnifies the state and the department, to the extent permitted by law, against any and all liability that may result, including, but not limited to, active negligence, and including defending the state and the department against any claims against the state for any actions the state undertakes pursuant to this article. The agreement may be in the form of an insurance policy, cash settlement, or other mechanism as determined by the department. In adopting indemnification requirements for the agreement, the department shall ensure that the state can defend itself against any liability claims against the state for any actions the state undertakes pursuant to this article and pay any resulting judgments. The department shall consult with and, as necessary, use the resources of the office of the Attorney General in preparing and entering into the indemnification agreement.
(g)The applicant has applied for and received all required permits, leases, and approvals issued by any governmental agency, including, but not limited to, a lease issued by the commission if the proposed project involves state tidelands and submerged lands. For structures located in federal waters, all of the following requirements shall be met:
(1)The department and the owner or operator of the structure reach an agreement providing for the department to take title to the platform or facility as provided in Section 6620.
(2)The department acquires the permit issued by the United States Army Corps of Engineers.
(3)The partial removal of the structure is approved by the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement of the United States Department of the Interior.
SEC. 10.SEC. 7.Section 6618 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6618.(a)The cost savings from the partial removal of an offshore oil structure, as determined pursuant to Section 6614, shall be apportioned and transmitted as described in this section.
(b)Upon receipt of conditional approval pursuant to Section 6617, the applicant shall apportion and directly transmit a portion of the total amount of the cost savings to the department as follows:
(1)Fifty-five percent, if the application was submitted transmitted before January 1, 2023. ____.
(2)Sixty-five percent, if the application was submitted transmitted on or after January 1, 2023, ____, and before January 1, 2028. ____.
(3)Eighty percent, if the application was submitted transmitted on or after January 1, 2028. ____.
(c)Of the total amount of the cost savings to be transmitted pursuant to subdivision (b), the department shall directly transmit the following amounts to the following entities:
(1)Eighty-five percent shall be deposited into the California Endowment for Marine Preservation established pursuant to Division 37 (commencing with Section 71500) of the Public Resources Code.
(2)Ten percent shall be deposited into the General Fund.
(3)Two percent shall be deposited into the Fish and Game Preservation Fund for expenditure, upon appropriation by the Legislature, by the department to pay any costs imposed by this chapter that are not otherwise provided for pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 6612 and subdivision (e) of Section 6616. Any moneys remaining in the Fish and Game Preservation Fund, after providing for these costs, shall be used, upon appropriation by the Legislature, first to reimburse the payment of the startup costs described in subdivision (c) of Section 6612, and thereafter to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance the coastal and marine resources of the state consistent with the mission of the department.
(4)Two percent shall be deposited into the Coastal Act Services Fund, established pursuant to Section 30620.1 of the Public Resources Code, and shall be allocated to support state agency work involving research, planning, and regulatory review associated with the application and enforcement of coastal management policies in state and federal waters pursuant to state and federal quasi-judicial authority over offshore oil and gas development.
(5)One percent shall be deposited with the board of supervisors of the county immediately adjacent to the location of the facility prior to its decommissioning. The amount paid to the county shall be managed pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 6817 of the Public Resources Code.
(a)This chapter establishes a program through which an applicant may voluntarily apply to the department to carry out partial removal of the structure.
(b)The program established pursuant to this chapter shall be deemed consistent with, and part of, the California Artificial Reef Program pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with Section 6420) of Chapter 5 for purposes of compliance with federal law including the National Fishing Enhancement Act of 1984.
(c)Except as specified in Section 6604, the The department shall serve as the primary authority for carrying out the program, including review and approval of applications to partially remove an offshore oil structure in state or federal waters and management and operation of decommissioned offshore oil structures in state or federal waters approved pursuant to this chapter.
(d)Final approval of an application shall not be granted until the applicant complies with all requirements of the chapter, including the payment of all costs to the state to review and approve the proposed project as required by subdivision (b) of Section 6612 and the transmittal of the required portion of cost savings to the endowment and other parties as required by Section 6618.
(e)The department may obtain funds for the planning, development, maintenance, and operation of an offshore oil structure transferred to the department pursuant to this chapter and may accept gifts, subventions, grants, rebates, reimbursements, and subsidies from any lawful source.
(f)The department may adopt regulations to implement this chapter.
SEC. 2.Section 6604 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6604.(a)A proposed project to partially remove an offshore oil structure pursuant to this chapter is a project as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 21065 of the Public Resources Code and is therefore subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code) and shall be reviewed pursuant to the time limits established in Section 21100.2 of the Public Resources Code.
(b)The Natural Resources Agency department shall serve as the lead agency for the environmental review of any project proposed pursuant to this chapter.
SEC. 3.Section 6610 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6610.(a)An owner or operator, or other party responsible for decommissioning, of an offshore oil structure may apply to the department for approval to partially remove the structure pursuant to the requirements of this chapter.
(b)The department shall design and make available to potential applicants an application process that will facilitate review of the application by the department in a timely manner, consistent with Section 6604.
(c)Upon receipt of an application pursuant to this section, the department shall transmit a copy of the application to the council, the commission, and the endowment, which shall constitute notice to these agencies. endowment.
SEC. 4.Section 6611 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6611.(a)The application for partial removal shall include, at a minimum, all of the following:
(1)The applicants plan and schedule for partial removal of the offshore oil structure, including removal of any portion of the structure as appropriate to maintain navigational safety.
(2)A determination of the estimated cost of partial removal and the estimated cost of full removal.
(3)A determination of the environmental impacts and benefits to the marine environment from partial removal and full removal of the structure.
(4)Identification of all permits, leases, and approvals required by any governmental agency, including a permit issued by the United States Army Corps of Engineers if required for offshore oil structures, and a lease issued by the commission if the proposed project involves state tidelands and submerged lands, and a proposed schedule for the applicant or the state to receive those permits, leases, and approvals.
(b)The department may require the applicant to submit a management plan for the structure following partial removal, including maintenance in a manner consistent with navigational safety, enforcement, and monitoring.
(c)The information submitted pursuant to subdivisions (a) and (b) shall be used by the department for advisory purposes only. Final determinations regarding the partial removal and management of the offshore oil structure, net benefit to the marine environment from partial removal, and cost savings from partial removal shall be made solely by the department, council, and commission, as specified in this chapter, based on their its independent review and judgment.
SEC. 5.Section 6612 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6612.(a)Upon receipt of an application to partially remove an offshore oil structure pursuant to this chapter, the department shall determine whether the application is complete and includes all information needed by the department.
(b)(1)Upon a determination that the application is complete, the applicant shall provide surety bonds executed by an admitted surety insurer, irrevocable letters of credit, trust funds, or other forms of financial assurances, determined by the department to be available and adequate, to ensure that the applicant will provide sufficient funds to the department, council, commission, department and conservancy to carry out all required activities pursuant to this article, including all of the following:
(A)Environmental review of the proposed project pursuant to Section 6604.
(B)A determination of net environmental benefit pursuant to Section 6613.
(C)A determination of cost savings pursuant to Section 6614.
(D)Preparation of a management plan for the structure pursuant to Section 6615.
(E)Implementation of the management plan and ongoing maintenance of the structure after the department takes title pursuant to Section 6620.
(F)Development of an advisory spending plan pursuant to Section 6621.
(G)Other activities undertaken to meet the requirements of this article, including the costs of reviewing applications for completeness, and reviewing, approving, and permitting the proposed project, which includes the costs of determining whether the project meets the requirements of all applicable laws and regulations and the costs of environmental assessment and review.
(2)The department shall consult with the council, commission, and conservancy in determining appropriate funding for activities to be carried out by those agencies. the conservancy.
(3)The funds provided pursuant to paragraph (1) shall not be considered in the calculation of cost savings pursuant to Section 6614 or the apportionment of cost savings pursuant to Section 6618.
(c)The first person to file an application on and after January 1, 2011, to partially remove an offshore oil structure pursuant to this chapter, shall pay, in addition to all costs identified under subdivision (b), the startup costs incurred by the department or the commission to implement this chapter, including the costs to develop and adopt regulations pursuant to this chapter. This payment of startup costs shall be reimbursed by the department as provided in paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 6618.
(d)As soon as feasible after reaching the agreement the applicant provides financial assurances pursuant to subdivision (b), the lead agency department shall begin the environmental review of the proposed project as required pursuant to Section 6604.
(e)The applicant may withdraw the application at any time before final approval. Upon notification that the applicant has withdrawn the application, the department shall return to the applicant any funds provided under subdivisions (b) and (c) that have not been expended as of the date of receipt of notification of withdrawal.
SEC. 6.Section 6613 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6613.(a)The council department shall determine whether the partial removal of an offshore oil structure pursuant to this chapter provides a net benefit to the marine environment compared to the full removal of the structure.
(b)As a necessary prerequisite to determining net environmental benefit as required in subdivision (a), the council department shall, upon receipt of its initial application from the department pursuant to Section 6610, establish appropriate criteria for evaluating the net environmental benefit of full removal and partial removal of offshore oil structures.
(1)The criteria shall include, but are not limited to, the depth of the partially removed structure in relation to its value as habitat and the location of the structure, including its proximity to other reefs, both natural and artificial.
(2)The criteria shall not include any consideration of the funds to be generated by the partial removal of the structure.
(3)In determining the criteria, the council department shall consult with appropriate entities, including, but not limited to, the department, council, the commission, the State Air Resources Board, the California Coastal Commission, and the California Ocean Science Trust.
(4)The council department shall establish the criteria in time to use them in making its initial determination of net environmental benefit pursuant to this section.
(c)Upon certification of environmental documents pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, the council department shall, based on the criteria developed pursuant to subdivision (b) and other relevant information, determine whether partial removal of the structure would provide a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal of the structure. In making the determination, the council department shall, at a minimum, take into account the following:
(1)The contribution of the proposed structure to protection and productivity of fish and other marine life.
(2)Any adverse impacts to biological resources or water quality, air quality or greenhouse gas emissions, or any other marine environmental impacts, from the full removal of the facility that would be avoided by partial removal as proposed in the application.
(3)Any adverse impacts to biological resources or water quality, air quality or greenhouse gas emissions, or any other marine environmental impacts, from partial removal of the structure as proposed in the application.
(4)Any benefits to the marine environment that would result from the full removal of the structure or from partial removal as proposed in the application.
(5)Any identified management requirements and restrictions of the partially removed structure, including, but not limited to, restrictions on fishing or other activities at the site.
(d)Benefits resulting from the contribution of cost savings to the endowment shall not be considered in the determination of net environmental benefit.
(e)The council department may contract or enter into a memorandum of understanding with any other appropriate governmental or nongovernmental entity to assist in its determination of net environmental benefit.
(f)The determination made pursuant to this section and submitted to the department by the council shall constitute the final determination and shall not be revised except by the council. department.
(g)The council shall take all feasible steps to complete its determination in a timely manner that accommodates the departments schedule for consideration of the application.
SEC. 7.Section 6614 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6614.(a)Upon certification of the appropriate environmental documents by the lead agency, the commission documents, the department shall determine, or cause to be determined, the cost savings that will result from the partial removal of an offshore oil structure as proposed in the application compared to full removal of the structure.
(b)The commission department shall ensure that any cost savings are accurately and reasonably calculated. The commission department may contract or enter into a memorandum of understanding with any other appropriate governmental agency or other party, including an independent expert, to ensure that cost savings are accurately and reasonably calculated.
(c)The commission department shall consider any estimates of cost savings made by any governmental agency, including, but not limited to, the Internal Revenue Service, the Franchise Tax Board, and the United States Department of the Interior. The commission department shall include in its determination a written explanation, which shall be available to the public, of the differences, and the reasons for the differences, between the commissions departments determination of cost savings and any other estimates of cost savings the commission department considered.
(d)The applicant shall provide all necessary documentation, as determined by the commission, department, to allow the commission department to calculate the amount of cost savings. Failure to provide information requested by the commission department in a timely manner may result in rejection of the application.
(e)The determination made pursuant to this section and submitted to the department by the commission shall constitute the final determination and shall not be revised except by the commission. department.
(f)The commission shall take all feasible steps to complete its determination in a timely manner that accommodates the departments schedule for consideration of the application.
SEC. 8.Section 6615 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6615.Prior to granting conditional approval of an application for partial removal of an offshore oil structure, the department shall do all of the following:
(a)Prepare a plan to manage the offshore oil structure after its partial removal. The plan shall include measures to manage fishery and marine life resources at and around the structure in a manner that will ensure that the net benefits to the marine environment identified pursuant to Section 6613 are maintained or enhanced. Consistent with state and federal law, management measures may include a buffer zone in which fishing or removal of marine life is restricted or prohibited.
(b)Provide an opportunity for public comment on the application environmental document pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.
(c)Hold a public hearing for comment on the environmental document pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act in the county nearest to the location of the offshore oil structure that is the subject of the application.
SEC. 9.Section 6616 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6616.The department may grant conditional approval of an application for partial removal of an offshore oil structure only if all of the following criteria are satisfied:
(a)The partial removal of the offshore oil structure and the planning, development, maintenance, and operation of the structure would be consistent with all applicable state, federal, and international laws, including, but not limited to, all of the following:
(1)The federal Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1801 et seq.).
(2)The federal National Fishing Enhancement Act of 1984 (33 U.S.C. Sec. 2101 et seq.).
(3)The federal Coastal Zone Management Act (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1451 et seq.).
(4)The California Coastal Management Program.
(5)The Marine Life Management Act (Part 1.7 (commencing with Section 7050)).
(6)The Marine Life Protection Act (Chapter 10.5 (commencing with Section 2850) of Division 3).
(7)State and federal water quality laws.
(8)Navigational safety laws.
(b)The partial removal of the offshore oil structure provides a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal of the structure, as determined pursuant to Section 6613.
(c)The cost savings that would result from the conversion of the offshore oil platform or production facility have been determined pursuant to Section 6614.
(d)The applicant has provided sufficient funds consistent with subdivision (b) of Section 6612.
(e)The department and the applicant have entered into a contractual agreement whereby the applicant will provide sufficient funds for overall management of the structure by the department, including, but not limited to, ongoing management, operations, maintenance, monitoring, and enforcement as these relate to the structure.
(f)The department has entered into an indemnification agreement with the applicant that indemnifies the state and the department, to the extent permitted by law, against any and all liability that may result, including, but not limited to, active negligence, and including defending the state and the department against any claims against the state for any actions the state undertakes pursuant to this article. The agreement may be in the form of an insurance policy, cash settlement, or other mechanism as determined by the department. In adopting indemnification requirements for the agreement, the department shall ensure that the state can defend itself against any liability claims against the state for any actions the state undertakes pursuant to this article and pay any resulting judgments. The department shall consult with and, as necessary, use the resources of the office of the Attorney General in preparing and entering into the indemnification agreement.
(g)The applicant has applied for and received all required permits, leases, and approvals issued by any governmental agency, including, but not limited to, a lease issued by the commission if the proposed project involves state tidelands and submerged lands. For structures located in federal waters, all of the following requirements shall be met:
(1)The department and the owner or operator of the structure reach an agreement providing for the department to take title to the platform or facility as provided in Section 6620.
(2)The department acquires the permit issued by the United States Army Corps of Engineers.
(3)The partial removal of the structure is approved by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Safety and Environmental Enforcement of the United States Department of the Interior.
SEC. 10.Section 6618 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:6618.(a)The cost savings from the partial removal of an offshore oil structure, as determined pursuant to Section 6614, shall be apportioned and transmitted as described in this section.
(b)Upon receipt of conditional approval pursuant to Section 6617, the owner or operator of the structure applicant shall apportion and directly transmit a portion of the total amount of the cost savings to the entities in subdivision (c) department as follows:
(1)Fifty-five percent, if transmitted the application was submitted before January 1, 2017. 2023.
(2)Sixty-five percent, if transmitted the application was submitted on or after January 1, 2017, 2023, and before January 1, 2023. 2028.
(3)Eighty percent, if transmitted the application was submitted on or after January 1, 2023. 2028.
(c)Of the total amount of the cost savings to be transmitted pursuant to subdivision (b), the applicant department shall directly transmit the following amounts to the following entities:
(1)Eighty-five percent shall be deposited into the California Endowment for Marine Preservation established pursuant to Division 37 (commencing with Section 71500) of the Public Resources Code.
(2)Ten percent shall be deposited into the General Fund.
(3)Two percent shall be deposited into the Fish and Game Preservation Fund for expenditure, upon appropriation by the Legislature, by the department to pay any costs imposed by this chapter that are not otherwise provided for pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 6612 and subdivision (e) of Section 6616. Any moneys remaining in the Fish and Game Preservation Fund, after providing for these costs, shall be used, upon appropriation by the Legislature, first to reimburse the payment of the startup costs described in subdivision (c) of Section 6612, and thereafter to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance the coastal and marine resources of the state consistent with the mission of the department.
(4)Two percent shall be deposited into the Coastal Act Services Fund, established pursuant to Section 30620.1 of the Public Resources Code, and shall be allocated to support state agency work involving research, planning, and regulatory review associated with the application and enforcement of coastal management policies in state and federal waters pursuant to state and federal quasi-judicial authority over offshore oil and gas development.
(5)One percent shall be deposited with the board of supervisors of the county immediately adjacent to the location of the facility prior to its decommissioning. The amount paid to the county shall be managed pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 6817 of the Public Resources Code.
SECTION 1.Section 5993 of the Fish and Game Code is amended to read:5993.Before the installation of any screen under the provisions of this article, the department and the owner shall enter into an agreement defining the method of determining the cost of monitoring screen performance, maintenance, repairs, operation, and keeping the screen free of debris, which agreement shall provide that, in the event either the department or the owner objects to the cost, the matter shall be referred to the Director of General Services for his or her final and conclusive decision.
Before the installation of any screen under the provisions of this article, the department and the owner shall enter into an agreement defining the method of determining the cost of monitoring screen performance, maintenance, repairs, operation, and keeping the screen free of debris, which agreement shall provide that, in the event either the department or the owner objects to such the cost, the matter shall be referred to the Director of General Services for his or her final and conclusive decision.
|
Date
|
Status
|
|---|---|
| Jun 1, 2015 | From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 1149.) (May 28). |
| Aug 11, 2016 | August 11 hearing. Held in committee and under submission. |
| Aug 27, 2015 | Joint Rule 62(a) suspended. |
| Aug 27, 2015 | August 27 set for first hearing canceled at the request of author. |
| Aug 26, 2015 | August 26 set for first hearing. Placed on APPR. suspense file. |
| Aug 19, 2015 | August 19 hearing postponed by committee. |
| Jul 16, 2015 | Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| Jul 15, 2015 | From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 12. Noes 0.) (July 14). |
| Jul 7, 2015 | From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on W., P., & W. |
| Jun 23, 2015 | June 30 hearing postponed by committee. |
| Jun 15, 2015 | Referred to Com. on W., P., & W. |
| Jun 4, 2015 | In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk. |
| Jun 3, 2015 | Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 37. Noes 2.) Ordered to the Assembly. |
| Jun 3, 2015 | Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 37. Noes 2. Page 1300.) Ordered to the Assembly. |
| Jun 2, 2015 | Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading. |
| Jun 1, 2015 | From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (May 28). |
| Feb 13, 2015 | Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print. |
| May 23, 2015 | Set for hearing May 28. |
| May 11, 2015 | May 11 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file. |
| May 1, 2015 | Set for hearing May 11. |
| Apr 29, 2015 | From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 1.) (April 28). Re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| Apr 29, 2015 | From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 1. Page 820.) (April 28). Re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| Apr 21, 2015 | From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on N.R. & W. |
| Apr 16, 2015 | Set for hearing April 28. |
| Apr 14, 2015 | April 14 set for first hearing canceled at the request of author. |
| Mar 19, 2015 | Set for hearing April 14. |
| Mar 19, 2015 | From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on N.R. & W. |
| Mar 18, 2015 | March 24 hearing postponed by committee. |
| Mar 17, 2015 | Set for hearing March 24. |
| Feb 26, 2015 | Referred to Com. on N.R. & W. |
| Feb 17, 2015 | From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 19. |
|
Date
|
Description
|
Location
|
Votes
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 14, 2015 | Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] | Assembly Standing Committee on Water, Parks, and Wildlife |
Passed |
|
| Jun 3, 2015 | Senate 3rd Reading SB233 Hertzberg | Senate Floor |
Passed |
|
| May 28, 2015 | Do pass as amended | Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations |
Passed |
|
| May 11, 2015 | Placed on suspense file | Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations |
Passed |
|
| Apr 28, 2015 | Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] | Senate Standing Committee on Natural Resources and Water |
Passed |
This list shows positions taken on this bill by organizations on the date displayed, which is linked to the original source.
Positions by individuals are not included.
|
Organization
|
Position
|
Date
|
|---|---|---|
| 22nd Street Landing Sportfishing | ** Support | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Amigos Del Air Libre | ** Support | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Big Fish Bait and Tackle | ** Support | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Citizens Planning Association of Santa Barbara County | ** Against | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Coalition For Enhanced Marine Resources | ** Support | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Community Environmental Council | ** Against | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Deep Blue Scuba and Swim Center | ** Support | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Environment California | ** Against | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Environmental Action Committee of West Marin | ** Against | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Environmental Defense Center | ** Against | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Food and Water Watch | ** Against | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Friends of the Sea Otter | ** Against | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Get Oil Out! | ** Against | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Get Wet Scuba | ** Support | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Harbor Breeze Corporation | ** Support | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Hubbs-Sea World Research Institute | ** Support | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Inland Empire Waterkeeper | ** Support | Jun 3, 2015 |
| International Marine Mammal Project of Earth Island Institute | ** Against | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Ocean Conservation Research | ** Against | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Ocean Foundation | * Indeterminate | Apr 28, 2015 |
| Orange County Coastkeeper | ** Support | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Association | ** Against | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Pierpoint Landing | ** Support | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Professional Association of Diving Instructors | ** Support | Jun 3, 2015 |
| San Diego County Wildlife Federation | ** Support | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Santa Barbara Channelkeeper | ** Against | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Sierra Club - Los Padres Chapter | ** Against | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Sierra Club California | ** Against | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Sport Fishing Conservancy | ** Support | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Sportfishing Conservancy; The | * Indeterminate | Apr 28, 2015 |
| The Ocean Conservancy | ** Against | Jun 3, 2015 |
| United Anglers | ** Support | Jun 3, 2015 |
| VALLEY INDUSTRY AND COMMERCE ASSOCIATION | ** Support | Jun 3, 2015 |
| Western Alliance for Nature | ** Against | Apr 28, 2015 |
| Wholly H2O | ** Against | Apr 28, 2015 |
Date of Hearing: August 26, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Jimmy Gomez, Chair
SB 233
(Hertzberg) – As Amended July 16, 2015
Policy Committee: |
Water, Parks and Wildlife |
Vote: |
12 - 0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY:
This bill modifies the California Marine Resources Legacy Act regarding applications to allow the partial removal of an offshore oil structure. Specifically, this bill:
Designates the State Lands Commission (SLC), instead of the Natural Resources Agency, as the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Requires SLC to begin CEQA review after the applicant provides specified financial assurances.
Allows a prospective applicant, before the first application for partial removal of an offshore oil structure is filed, to pay a portion of the startup costs rather than all startup cost as currently required. The portion of the startup costs must be in an amount the Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) determines necessary for staff and other costs in anticipation of receipt of the first application.
Authorizes an applicant to withdraw an application at any time before final approval and requires DFW to return any unexpended funds to the applicant upon notification of withdrawal.
Requires the criteria developed by the Ocean Protection Council (OPC) for evaluating the net environmental benefit of full removal versus partial removal to be based on credible science.
Requires OPC to consult with the Air Resources Board (ARB) to determine the criteria for evaluating net environmental benefit, including air quality impacts. When making the determination if partial removal produces a net benefit, requires OPC to determine how to weigh adverse impacts to air quality or GHG emissions as compared to adverse impacts to biological resources or water quality.
Clarifies the purpose of the opportunity for public comment and public hearings that the DFW is required to provide and hold are to receive public comment on the application and environmental document pursuant to CEQA.
Modifies the timelines that trigger the percentage of the cost savings that an applicant is required to share with the state for the first applicant to partially remove an offshore oil structure only. Provides that the applicant who files the first application to partially remove an offshore oil structure is required to apportion and directly transmit a portion of the total amount of cost savings resulting from the first application to DFW as follows:
a) Applicant must transmit 55% of the total cost savings to the
state and other specified
entities if the application is
submitted before January 1, 2017.
b) Applicant must transmit 65% if application is submitted after
January 1, 2017 but before
January 1, 2023.
c) Applicant must transmit 80% if application is submitted after January 1, 2023
Requires DFW to return the cost savings paid by the first applicant to the applicant if any approvals required for partial removal are permanently enjoined, vacated, invalidated, rejected, or rescinded as a result of litigation, and the applicant is required to carry out full removal.
Provides that the total percentage of the cost savings required to be shared must be transmitted by the applicant to DFW.
Requires DFW, upon final, non-appealable judicial decisions upholding DFW's final approval and all permits and approvals required for partial removal, or the running of the statute of limitations, whichever is later, to transmit the specified percentages of the total to the California Endowment for Marine Preservation, the General Fund, and Fish and Game Preservation Fund, the Coastal Act Services Fund, and the County adjacent to the facility, as specified.
FISCAL EFFECT:
Potential unknown costs for OPC to develop criteria to evaluate the net environmental benefits and compare potential adverse impacts to air quality and GHG with adverse impacts to water quality and biological resources, likely in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Potential increased costs for the ARB to provide assistance to the OPC to determine the net environmental benefit of each proposed project, likely in the $100,000 to $150,000 range.
Increased, reimbursable costs for SLC to prepare an Environmental Impact Report and calculate cost savings.
All costs may be offset by any proceeds the state receives from completed partial removal applications.
COMMENTS:
Purpose. According to the author, no operators of offshore oil platforms have applied for a permit for partial removal of rigs under the California Marine Resources Legacy Act because it is so cumbersome and opaque. This bill seeks to improve the permitting process to convert an oil rig into an artificial reef.
Background. AB 2503 (J. Perez, Chapter 687, Statutes of 2010) enacted the California Marine Life Legacy Act. The act establishes a program under which an offshore oil platform owner is allowed to partially remove a platform, leaving behind some of the underwater structure for marine habitat. The owner may voluntarily apply to DFG to partially remove such a structure if certain conditions including the determination by OPC of net environmental benefit are met.
Offshore oil structure owners might realize savings in the tens-to-hundreds of millions of dollars by partially removing decommissioned oil structures, as opposed to fully removing them. The act requires any cost savings, as defined by the act, be shared with the state in a percentage dependent on the timing of the application for partial removal: 55% of cost savings for applications submitted before 2017, 65% for applications submitted between 2017 and 2023, and 80% for those submitted after 2023.
It is anticipated that one or more offshore oil structures may be scheduled for decommissioning in the next few years.
State Agency Capacity. From a state agency perspective, it is unclear if this bill addresses the lack of state capacity, at the DFW and other entities, to ramp-up by hiring the expert staff necessary to implement this bill. It is also unclear how state agencies can reimburse start-up costs for withdrawn applications once staffing is in place.
Additionally, this bill places the OPC in the position of evaluating air quality and GHG impacts which is not their typical jurisdiction.
The author may wish to work with the Administration on modifications necessary to ensure state agencies will be able to meet the requirements of this bill should an application be submitted.
Prior Legislation. AB 207 (Rendon) of 2013 proposed amendments to the Act substantially similar to this bill. AB 207 was held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee. AB 2267 (Hall) of the 2012 Session also proposed similar amendments to the Act and was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee. Some versions of these prior bills, and earlier versions of this bill, also proposed to alter the time frames and percentages of the cost savings that the applicant is required to share with the state, and provisions relating to liability and indemnity.
Analysis Prepared by: Jennifer Galehouse / APPR. / (916) 319-2081
Date of Hearing: August 19, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Jimmy Gomez, Chair
SB 233
(Hertzberg) – As Amended July 16, 2015
Policy Committee: |
Water, Parks and Wildlife |
Vote: |
12 - 0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY:
This bill modifies the California Marine Resources Legacy Act regarding applications to allow the partial removal of an offshore oil structure. Specifically, this bill:
Designates the State Lands Commission (SLC), instead of the Natural Resources Agency, as the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Requires SLC to begin CEQA review after the applicant provides specified financial assurances.
Allows a prospective applicant, before the first application for partial removal of an offshore oil structure is filed, to pay a portion of the startup costs rather than all startup cost as currently required. The portion of the startup costs must be in an amount the Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) determines necessary for staff and other costs in anticipation of receipt of the first application.
Authorizes an applicant to withdraw an application at any time before final approval and requires DFW to return any unexpended funds to the applicant upon notification of withdrawal.
Requires the criteria developed by the Ocean Protection Council (OPC) for evaluating the net environmental benefit of full removal versus partial removal to be based on credible science.
Requires OPC to consult with the Air Resources Board (ARB) to determine the criteria for evaluating net environmental benefit, including air quality impacts. When making the determination if partial removal produces a net benefit, requires OPC to determine how to weigh adverse impacts to air quality or GHG emissions as compared to adverse impacts to biological resources or water quality.
Clarifies the purpose of the opportunity for public comment and public hearings that the DFW is required to provide and hold are to receive public comment on the application and environmental document pursuant to CEQA.
Modifies the timelines that trigger the percentage of the cost savings that an applicant is required to share with the state for the first applicant to partially remove an offshore oil structure only. Provides that the applicant who files the first application to partially remove an offshore oil structure is required to apportion and directly transmit a portion of the total amount of cost savings resulting from the first application to DFW as follows:
a) Applicant must transmit 55% of the total cost savings to the
state and other specified
entities if the application is
submitted before January 1, 2017.
b) Applicant must transmit 65% if application is submitted after
January 1, 2017 but before
January 1, 2023.
c) Applicant must transmit 80% if application is submitted after January 1, 2023
Requires DFW to return the cost savings paid by the first applicant to the applicant if any approvals required for partial removal are permanently enjoined, vacated, invalidated, rejected, or rescinded as a result of litigation, and the applicant is required to carry out full removal.
Provides that the total percentage of the cost savings required to be shared must be transmitted by the applicant to DFW.
Requires DFW, upon final, non-appealable judicial decisions upholding DFW's final approval and all permits and approvals required for partial removal, or the running of the statute of limitations, whichever is later, to transmit the specified percentages of the total to the California Endowment for Marine Preservation, the General Fund, and Fish and Game Preservation Fund, the Coastal Act Services Fund, and the County adjacent to the facility, as specified.
FISCAL EFFECT:
Potential unknown costs for OPC to develop criteria to evaluate the net environmental benefits and compare potential adverse impacts to air quality and GHG with adverse impacts to water quality and biological resources, likely in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Potential increased costs for the ARB to provide assistance to the OPC to determine the net environmental benefit of each proposed project, likely in the $100,000 to $150,000 range.
Increased, reimbursable costs for SLC to prepare an Environmental Impact Report and calculate cost savings.
All costs may be offset by any proceeds the state receives from completed partial removal applications.
COMMENTS:
Purpose. According to the author, no operators of offshore oil platforms have applied for a permit for partial removal of rigs under the California Marine Resources Legacy Act because it is so cumbersome and opaque. This bill seeks to improve the permitting process to convert an oil rig into an artificial reef.
Background. AB 2503 (J. Perez, Chapter 687, Statutes of 2010) enacted the California Marine Life Legacy Act. The act establishes a program under which an offshore oil platform owner is allowed to partially remove a platform, leaving behind some of the underwater structure for marine habitat. The owner may voluntarily apply to DFG to partially remove such a structure if certain conditions including the determination by OPC of net environmental benefit are met.
Offshore oil structure owners might realize savings in the tens-to-hundreds of millions of dollars by partially removing decommissioned oil structures, as opposed to fully removing them. The act requires any cost savings, as defined by the act, be shared with the state in a percentage dependent on the timing of the application for partial removal: 55% of cost savings for applications submitted before 2017, 65% for applications submitted between 2017 and 2023, and 80% for those submitted after 2023.
It is anticipated that one or more offshore oil structures may be scheduled for decommissioning in the next few years.
State Agency Capacity. From a state agency perspective, it is unclear if this bill addresses the lack of state capacity, at the DFW and other entities, to ramp-up by hiring the expert staff necessary to implement this bill. It is also unclear how state agencies can reimburse start-up costs for withdrawn applications once staffing is in place.
Additionally, this bill places the OPC in the position of evaluating air quality and GHG impacts which is not their typical jurisdiction.
The author may wish to work with the Administration on modifications necessary to ensure state agencies will be able to meet the requirements of this bill should an application be submitted.
Prior Legislation. AB 207 (Rendon) of 2013 proposed amendments to the Act substantially similar to this bill. AB 207 was held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee. AB 2267 (Hall) of the 2012 Session also proposed similar amendments to the Act and was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee. Some versions of these prior bills, and earlier versions of this bill, also proposed to alter the time frames and percentages of the cost savings that the applicant is required to share with the state, and provisions relating to liability and indemnity.
Analysis Prepared by: Jennifer Galehouse / APPR. / (916) 319-2081
SB 233
Page 8
|
Office of Senate Floor Analyses (916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) 327-4478 |
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 233
Amended: 6/2/15
SENATE NATURAL RES. & WATER COMMITTEE: 6-1, 4/28/15
AYES: Stone, Allen, Hertzberg, Hueso, Monning, Wolk
NOES: Jackson
NO VOTE RECORDED: Pavley, Vidak
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 5/28/15
AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza, Nielsen
SUBJECT: Marine resources and preservation
SOURCE: Coalition for Enhanced Marine Resources
Sport Fishing Conservancy
DIGEST: This bill modifies the rigs-to-reefs program by requiring that the decision to allow partial decommissioning consider air quality or greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs), designating the State Lands Commission (commission) as the lead agency for the purposes of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and makes other clarifying and technical changes.
ANALYSIS: Existing federal law requires that “decommissioned” oil and gas platforms be removed at the end of production, and the surrounding marine environment be cleaned up and restored to a natural condition. Existing state and federal offshore oil leases generally require the removal of decommissioned oil platforms after the lease ends. Both federal regulations and provisions in state and federal leases allow the federal government to consider and approve alternative decommissioning methods other than complete removal. “Rigs-to-reefs” programs are widely used in the Gulf of Mexico, and Louisiana, Texas and Mississippi.
Existing state law:
Establishes the California Marine Resources Legacy Act (Fish and Game Code §§ 6600 et seq.) which established state policy to allow, on a case-by-case basis, the partial decommissioning of offshore oil and gas platforms. Partial decommissioning means removing the top part of the platform while leaving the lower portion behind to act as a subsurface “reef.” Not all platforms may qualify for partial decommissioning, however, as certain conditions must be met. These include, among others, that there be a net environmental benefit from the “reef” and that a portion of the cost savings to the platform owner from partial, as opposed to full, decommissioning be shared with the state and deposited in an endowment whose moneys would be used to the benefit of coastal marine resources. This “rigs-to-reefs” program is voluntary and platforms in both state and federal waters are eligible to participate. The legislative findings for the bill that established the “rigs-to-reefs” program (AB 2503, Perez, Chapter 687, Statutes of 2010) included that the costs of the program should be borne by the applicants.
Recognizes the multi-jurisdictional nature of platform decommissioning and the need for a viable rigs-to-reefs program to utilize the established expertise and authority of different state entities. AB 2503 split up program responsibilities between different regulators as follows:
The Department of Fish and Wildlife (department) has the primary authority, as specified, for carrying out the program,
The Natural Resources Agency serves as lead agency under CEQA,
The Ocean Protection Council (council) determines whether a net benefit to the marine environment from partial decommissioning exists,
The State Lands Commission (commission) determines the cost savings, and
The authority of the California Coastal Commission is acknowledged and information sharing, coordination and communication between the different entities is emphasized.
Provides that a rigs-to-reef application is complete when the applicant provides certain financial assurances that ensures that sufficient funds are available to pay for the cost of processing the application. The first AB 2503 applicant will also be required to pay the program’s set-up costs, although those are reimbursable.
Provides that conditional approval of a rigs-to-reef application may be provided when certain criteria, as specified, are met. When conditional approval is received, the owner or operator of the structure must transmit a portion of the total cost savings to the state on the following schedule: 55% by January 1, 2017, 65% between January 1, 2017 – January 1, 2023 and 80% after January 1, 2023.
This bill modifies the existing rigs-to-reefs program. Specifically, this bill:
Replaces the Natural Resources Agency as CEQA lead with the commission;
Allow the applicant to withdraw its rigs-to-reef application at any time and clarifies payment for start-up costs and reimbursement procedures, if applicable, for applicants;
Adds consultation with the Air Resources Board, as specified, in the calculation of net benefits to the marine environment;
Adds air quality or GHGs to the determination of the net benefit to the marine environment;
Adds a public meeting to review the environmental documents to the one already required on the application, as specified; and
Makes additional technical and clarifying changes.
Background
There are 27 oil and gas platforms offshore California. Four of these platforms are in state waters at relatively shallow depths (approximately 200 feet or less). The remaining 23 platforms are over three miles from shore at depths reaching nearly 1,200 feet. Additionally, there are five more offshore “islands” (which are also platforms) in state waters. The platforms are located off the coasts of Los Angeles, Ventura and Santa Barbara counties. At least five offshore platforms, including one island, off the coast of California have been “decommissioned” and removed.
Rigs-to-reefs programs allow the oil industry to avoid the costs of full decommissioning, although full decommissioning was an agreed-upon lease condition. Estimates of the cost savings associated with partial decommissioning vary from tens of millions to hundreds of millions of dollars per platform. AB 2503 provided a financial incentive to the oil industry to submit partial decommissioning applications by providing that a smaller fraction of the cost savings would be shared with the state in the early years of the program (55%) compared to later (80%).
Despite repeated assertions over at least the last 15 years that applications for partial decommissioning were imminent, no applications under AB 2503 have been filed with the state. (It is a fair point that no application has been developed pursuant to AB 2503, which this bill seeks to address.) The economic viability of any offshore platform and its oil and gas wells is a function of many factors. High prices for crude oil the last five years – prices of benchmark crudes often exceeded $100/barrel – compared to approximately $50/barrel in last several months with muted expectations of a substantial price rise in the short term are likely to have affected the outlook for the offshore California platforms.
Comments
The commission has experience as a CEQA lead agency for platform decommissioning. Even in the event of an application for a rigs-to-reefs conversion in federal waters, it is likely that substantial elements of the decommissioning would be under the commission’s jurisdiction.
Air quality and the net environmental benefit. The consideration of air quality, including GHGs, in decommissioning is a required element of the CEQA environmental analysis. The focus on biological resources and water quality – in other words on the proposed reef and its immediate subsurface environment – in the existing calculation of the net environmental benefit to the marine environment seeks to ensure the reef provides lasting benefits. It is highly likely that there will be a significant difference in total air emissions between partial and full decommissioning to the advantage of partial decommissioning. That said, the direct and indirect impacts from air emissions to the proposed reef and their duration are unclear, and the council will have to determine how to appropriately weigh these impacts in its calculations.
The rigs-to-reef program is voluntary. Circumstances may arise, such as advances in offshore oil production, where the platform owner may wish to keep the platform in operation despite having applied for partial decommissioning. Existing law is clear that the rigs-to-reefs program is voluntary, and the bill makes explicit that the platform owner may withdraw the program application.
AB 2503’s division of regulatory effort is appropriate given existing jurisdiction and expertise. Offshore oil platforms operate under the jurisdiction of multiple regulators, as will their eventual partial or full decommissioning. There is substantial existing expertise and experience relevant to decommissioning already extant in state government. Coordination and communication are critical between the relevant entities as they utilize their existing expertise and exercise their independent judgment in processing a rigs-to-reef application. AB 2503 specifically provides for formal agreements to be used to ensure coordination and communication between entities and timely application processing. These have proven successful in many other circumstances.
Recent platform decommissioning. According to the commission, Belmont Island off the coast of Los Angeles County was decommissioned in the early 2000s and was the last offshore oil facility to be removed from California’s waters. The commission found that complete removal of the island was the environmentally preferred option because there was no evidence that the island provided unique habitat in the area. Additionally, the Coast Guard determined, given the shallow depth, that leaving the base of the island behind would create a navigational hazard.
Prior to the Belmont Island decommissioning, the Chevron 4-H platforms off the coast of Carpenteria and Summerland were decommissioned in 1996. The commission acted as CEQA lead. During the platforms’ operation, “shell mounds” built up under each one. The mounds are composed of materials from the periodic cleaning of the platform legs of marine life as well as other marine organisms. Additionally drilling fluids and drill cuttings were deposited on the sea floor underneath the platforms prior to this practice being banned. The drilling materials contain contaminants such as PCBs, hydrocarbons and metals. All of these materials are now bonded together in the mounds which were left in place when the platforms were decommissioned. The mounds are 25 – 28 feet high, and 200 – 250 feet in diameter. Decommissioning requirements included the full removal of the shell mounds and all site debris, and that a “trawl test” with standard equipment be performed. According to reports, the site is untrawlable. A decision has been made to leave the mounds in place, but it is unclear if all the necessary permits have been issued.
Most of the offshore platforms are in federal waters and will need federal permits. While close coordination and communication may be able to facilitate the necessary state permits for partial decommissioning, the state cannot compel the relevant federal entities to issue the applicable federal permits in a timely manner.
Do rigs-to-reefs automatically mean there will be more fishing opportunities? Not necessarily. The department is authorized to limit fishing in the vicinity of the reef, if warranted (FGC §6613(c)).
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, this bill has one-time costs in the low to mid tens of thousands of dollars, reimbursable by the project applicant, to the department and the Air Resources Board for new responsibilities in considering a partial decommissioning application
Coalition for Enhanced Marine Resources (co-source)
Sport Fishing Conservancy (co-source)
Amigos Del Air Libre
Big Fish Bait and Tackle
Deep Blue Scuba and Swim Center
Get Wet Scuba
Harbor Breeze Corporation
Hubbs-Sea World Research Institute
Inland Empire Waterkeeper
Orange County Coastkeeper
Pierpoint Landing
Professional Association of Diving Instructors
San Diego County Wildlife Federation
22nd Street Landing Sportfishing
United Anglers
Valley Industry and Commerce Association
Citizens Planning Association of Santa Barbara County
Community Environmental Council
Environment California
Environmental Action Committee of West Marin
Environmental Defense Center
Food and Water Watch
Friends of the Sea Otter
Get Oil Out!
International Marine Mammal Project of Earth Island Institute
Ocean Conservancy
Ocean Conservation Research
Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Association
Santa Barbara Channelkeeper
Sierra Club – Los Padres Chapter
Sierra Club California
The Ocean Foundation
Western Alliance for Nature
Wholly H2O
Two individuals
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author, “in 2010, the Legislature passed AB 2503 by former Speaker John Perez, which enacted California’s rigs-to-reefs program. We are now nearing the point where the first of California’s offshore oil rigs will be ready for decommissioning in the next few years. It has become apparent through discussions with the Administration, that the permitting process is unworkable, both for practical reasons involving a lack of expertise and fiscal reasons as well. Senate Bill 233 is intended to make the current rigs-to-reefs permitting process more pragmatic without sacrificing any level of environmental review. As the bill moves along, we intend to work closely with a multi-agency group to review the rigs-to-reefs approval process and make recommendations for changes, the chairs of the policy committees, and stakeholders to make sure that we have a consensus approach to the decommissioning process [that] is both workable and protective of the environment.”
The author continues, “[t]he bill adds the impact of greenhouse gas emissions [which] should be considered in weighing the removal options for offshore oil rigs” in the calculation of the net environmental benefit and “has left open for negotiation moving back the various cut-off dates which encourage early retirement of oil rigs to accommodate the five years since the passage of AB 2503.”
“Overall, SB 233 seeks to take a critical look at the rigs-to-reefs program and to work to make the process better. Ultimately, if oil rigs are approved for conversion, a productive marine ecosystem will be saved from destruction and potentially hundreds of millions of dollars will be made available in perpetuity for funding ocean oriented environmental programs.”
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: In a joint opposition letter, the Environmental Defense Center and others note that this bill “is unnecessary, premature, and would undermine the provisions in existing law that require a balanced, thorough analysis of proposal to leave offshore oil platforms at sea. The bill is unnecessary because the legislature already passed AB 2503 in 2010. That bill followed many years of state-wide debate and was fashioned to include relevant agencies and stakeholders in a process that would address the many issues that will be raised if oil platforms are not removed from the ocean environment. These issues include legacy pollution resulting from residual toxins and contaminated debris left in the ocean, introduction of invasive species, attraction of fish away from productive natural reefs, safety and navigational risks, and increased liability to the state.”
The joint letter continues that this bill is premature because “no platforms are ready for decommissioning. […] Clearly, there is no need to hasten to amend existing law.” While acknowledging that many of the letter signers did not support AB 2503 because “we believe the oil industry should comply with its original commitments to remove oil platforms at the end of their productive life and to restore the marine environment to a natural condition,” they note that “[e]xisting law is adequate to address the issues raised by proposals to avoid full decommissioning of offshore oil platforms.”
The Environmental Action Committee of West Marin identifies several issues in its letter, including, among others, concerns about the length of time considered in the net environmental benefit analysis, and the lack of public participation in the development of net environmental benefit criteria.
Prepared by: Katharine Moore / N.R. & W. / (916) 651-4116
6/2/15 20:10:46
**** END ****
SB 233 (Hertzberg) Page 3 of 3
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular Session
SB 233 (Hertzberg) - Marine resources and preservation
|
|
Version: April 21, 2015 |
Policy Vote: N.R. & W. 6 - 1 |
Urgency: No |
Mandate: No |
Hearing Date: May 28, 2015 |
Consultant: Marie Liu |
SUSPENSE FILE. AS AMENDED.
Bill Summary:
SB 233 would modify the rigs-to-reefs program by changing the financial incentives for early decommissioning, require that the decision to allow partial decommissioning consider air quality or greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs), and designate the State Lands Commission (SLC) as the lead agency for the purposes of CEQA.
Fiscal Impact (as approved on May 28, 2015):
One-time costs in the low to mid tens of thousands of dollars, reimbursable by the project applicant, to the Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Air Resources Board for new responsibilities in considering a partial decommissioning application.
Background:
In 2010, the Legislature passed AB 2503 (Perez) Chapter 687, Statutes of 2010, which establishes a process whereby the state may allow the partial decommissioning of offshore oil and gas platforms on a case-by-case basis. Partial decommissioning means removing the top part of the platform while leaving the lower portion behind as an artificial reef.
In order to qualify for partial decommissioning, certain conditions must be met including, among other things, that the partial decommissioning results in a net environmental benefit. The criteria to determine the net environmental benefit is to be developed by the Ocean Protection Council (OPC) and is required to consider any impacts to biological resources or water quality, the impacts on fish protection and productivity, and any management requirements of a partially removed structure. In determining the net environmental benefit criteria, OPC is required to consult with the Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW), the SLC, the California Coastal Commission, and the California Ocean Science Trust.
DFW is required to develop a management plan for the partially removed structure and to provide an opportunity for public comment on the partial decommissioning plan.
Any cost savings to the platform owner by avoiding full decommissioning must be shared with the state. The platform owner/state cost savings split would start at 45/55 for decommissioning applications received before January 1, 2017 and would decrease in five-year increments. Cost shares for decommissionings whose applications were received after 2023 would be 20/80. This declining cost-savings ratio was intended to encourage early decommissionings.
The state’s portion of the savings is to be divided as follows:
85% to the California Endowment for Marine Preservation to be used to benefit coastal marine resources,
10% to the General Fund,
2% to the Fish and Game Preservation Fund to cover any of DFW’s costs under the program,
2% to the Coastal Act Services Fund to support state agency work involving coastal management policies regarding oil and gas development, and
1% to the county immediately adjacent to the location of the decommissioned facility.
AB 2503 specified that the Resources Agency should be the lead agency for the purposes of CEQA in a rigs-to-reef project.
Proposed Law:
This bill would make various changes to the existing rigs-to-reef program. Specifically, this bill would:
Change the cost sharing schedule to unspecified date.
Require that air quality or GHG emissions be considered in the net benefits evaluation. In development of the net benefit criteria, OPC would be required to also consult with the California Air Resources Board (ARB). The OPC would be authorized to weigh of adverse impacts on air quality and GHG emissions compared to the adverse impacts on biological resources or water quality.
Replace the Resources Agency with the SLC as the lead agency for the purposes of CEQA.
Require that DFW provide an opportunity for public comment on CEQA environmental documents.
Specify that an applicant may withdraw its application at any time before final approval and require the DFW return any funds that were provided by the applicant for administrative costs but were not expended.
Specify that the environmental review of the proposed project can begin once the applicant provides financial assurances to DFW.
Staff Comments:
The largest cost, or potential cost, of this bill would be a result of extending the schedule by which cost savings ratios are to decline. Currently the bill has replaced the timing for the owner/state ratio with blanks. Under the current schedule, the first cost ratio decreases in 2017. Given that no entity has provided the upfront funding to start the program (as required by existing law) and that no operator has expressed interest in applying for decommissioning in the short-term, it is highly unlikely that an application will come in time to qualify for the largest owner/state cost savings ratio. Should this bill extend the timeline for the highest owner/state cost savings ratio by replacing the blanks in the bill with dates that are further out than existing law, the bill would effectively be reducing the cost savings that the state would have received without the bill. Cost savings from partial decommissioning are likely to be in the tens of millions of dollars, translating to potential state losses in the millions to the General Fund and several special funds.
Under this bill, the ARB would have new responsibilities to consult with the OPC regarding net benefit criteria. ARB would also have costs to the air quality and GHG emissions of a proposed project. The ARB estimates that one PY would be needed if there were 5-6 projects in a year. However, given that there are only 27 platforms to begin with, it seems unlikely at there would be more than one or two applications for decommissioning in any one year. Staff estimates that likely costs to ARB will be approximately $35,000 per application. These costs would be paid for by the project applicant.
Replacing the Natural Resources Agency with the SLC as the lead agency under CEQA should not change CEQA costs only who will incur them. The CEQA costs would be paid for by the project applicant.
DFW is likely to incur some additional costs to hold the public meetings required by this bill. These costs are currently unknown, but staff estimates that they would likely be in the thousands of dollars. These costs should also be borne by the project applicant. DFW notes that it has significant costs associated with AB 2503 that have yet to be funded. No programmatic activities have begun under AB 2503 because no platform owners have shown interest in decommissioning.
Author amendments (as adopted on May 28, 2015): Amend per author to explicitly allow a prospective applicant to provide upfront funding for the startup costs, as determined by DFW.
Committee amendments (as adopted on May 28, 2015): Restore current law in respect to the owner/state cost savings schedule.
-- END --
SB 233 (Hertzberg) Page 3 of 3
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular Session
SB 233 (Hertzberg) - Marine resources and preservation
|
|
Version: April 21, 2015 |
Policy Vote: N.R. & W. 6 - 1 |
Urgency: No |
Mandate: No |
Hearing Date: May 11, 2015 |
Consultant: Marie Liu |
This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.
Bill Summary:
SB 233 would modify the rigs-to-reefs program by changing the financial incentives for early decommissioning, require that the decision to allow partial decommissioning consider air quality or greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs), and designate the State Lands Commission (SLC) as the lead agency for the purposes of CEQA.
Fiscal Impact:
Unknown potential revenue losses, likely to be at least in the millions of dollars, to the General Fund and various special funds if the dates for the cost share requirements are extended.
One-time costs in the low to mid tens of thousands of dollars, reimbursable by the project applicant, to the Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Air Resources Board for new responsibilities in considering a partial decommissioning application.
Background:
In 2010, the Legislature passed AB 2503 (Perez) Chapter 687, Statutes of 2010, which establishes a process whereby the state may allow the partial decommissioning of offshore oil and gas platforms on a case-by-case basis. Partial decommissioning means removing the top part of the platform while leaving the lower portion behind as an artificial reef.
In order to qualify for partial decommissioning, certain conditions must be met including, among other things, that the partial decommissioning results in a net environmental benefit. The criteria to determine the net environmental benefit is to be developed by the Ocean Protection Council (OPC) and is required to consider any impacts to biological resources or water quality, the impacts on fish protection and productivity, and any management requirements of a partially removed structure. In determining the net environmental benefit criteria, OPC is required to consult with the Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW), the SLC, the California Coastal Commission, and the California Ocean Science Trust.
DFW is required to develop a management plan for the partially removed structure and to provide an opportunity for public comment on the partial decommissioning plan.
Any cost savings to the platform owner by avoiding full decommissioning must be shared with the state. The platform owner/state cost savings split would start at 45/55 for decommissioning applications received before January 1, 2017 and would decrease in five-year increments. Cost shares for decommissionings whose applications were received after 2023 would be 20/80. This declining cost-savings ratio was intended to encourage early decommissionings.
The state’s portion of the savings is to be divided as follows:
85% to the California Endowment for Marine Preservation to be used to benefit coastal marine resources,
10% to the General Fund,
2% to the Fish and Game Preservation Fund to cover any of DFW’s costs under the program,
2% to the Coastal Act Services Fund to support state agency work involving coastal management policies regarding oil and gas development, and
1% to the county immediately adjacent to the location of the decommissioned facility.
AB 2503 specified that the Resources Agency should be the lead agency for the purposes of CEQA in a rigs-to-reef project.
Proposed Law:
This bill would make various changes to the existing rigs-to-reef program. Specifically, this bill would:
Change the cost sharing schedule to unspecified date.
Require that air quality or GHG emissions be considered in the net benefits evaluation. In development of the net benefit criteria, OPC would be required to also consult with the California Air Resources Board (ARB). The OPC would be authorized to weigh of adverse impacts on air quality and GHG emissions compared to the adverse impacts on biological resources or water quality.
Replace the Resources Agency with the SLC as the lead agency for the purposes of CEQA.
Require that DFW provide an opportunity for public comment on CEQA environmental documents.
Specify that an applicant may withdraw its application at any time before final approval and require the DFW return any funds that were provided by the applicant for administrative costs but were not expended.
Specify that the environmental review of the proposed project can begin once the applicant provides financial assurances to DFW.
Staff Comments:
The largest cost, or potential cost, of this bill would be a result of extending the schedule by which cost savings ratios are to decline. Currently the bill has replaced the timing for the owner/state ratio with blanks. Under the current schedule, the first cost ratio decreases in 2017. Given that no entity has provided the upfront funding to start the program (as required by existing law) and that no operator has expressed interest in applying for decommissioning in the short-term, it is highly unlikely that an application will come in time to qualify for the largest owner/state cost savings ratio. Should this bill extend the timeline for the highest owner/state cost savings ratio by replacing the blanks in the bill with dates that are further out than existing law, the bill would effectively be reducing the cost savings that the state would have received without the bill. Cost savings from partial decommissioning are likely to be in the tens of millions of dollars, translating to potential state losses in the millions to the General Fund and several special funds.
Under this bill, the ARB would have new responsibilities to consult with the OPC regarding net benefit criteria. ARB would also have costs to the air quality and GHG emissions of a proposed project. The ARB estimates that one PY would be needed if there were 5-6 projects in a year. However, given that there are only 27 platforms to begin with, it seems unlikely at there would be more than one or two applications for decommissioning in any one year. Staff estimates that likely costs to ARB will be approximately $35,000 per application. These costs would be paid for by the project applicant.
Replacing the Natural Resources Agency with the SLC as the lead agency under CEQA should not change CEQA costs only who will incur them. The CEQA costs would be paid for by the project applicant.
DFW is likely to incur some additional costs to hold the public meetings required by this bill. These costs are currently unknown, but staff estimates that they would likely be in the thousands of dollars. These costs should also be borne by the project applicant. DFW notes that it has significant costs associated with AB 2503 that have yet to be funded. No programmatic activities have begun under AB 2503 because no platform owners have shown interest in decommissioning.
-- END --
SB 233 (Hertzberg) Page 8 of 8
SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER
Senator Fran Pavley, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: SB 233 Hearing Date: April 28, 2015
Author: |
Hertzberg |
|
|
Version: |
April 21, 2015 |
||
Urgency: |
No |
Fiscal: |
Yes |
Consultant: |
Katharine Moore |
||
Subject: Marine resources and preservation
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
There are 27 oil and gas platforms offshore California. Four of these platforms are in state waters at relatively shallow depths (approximately 200 feet or less). The remaining 23 platforms are over 3 miles from shore at depths reaching nearly 1200 feet. Additionally, there are five more offshore “islands” (which are also platforms) in state waters. The platforms are located off the coasts of Los Angeles, Ventura and Santa Barbara counties. At least five offshore platforms, including one island, off the coast of California have been “decommissioned” and removed.
AB 2503 (Perez, c. 687, Statutes of 2010) established state policy to allow, on a case-by-case basis, the partial decommissioning of offshore oil and gas platforms. Partial decommissioning means removing the top part of the platform while leaving the lower portion behind to act as a subsurface “reef.” Not all platforms may qualify for partial decommissioning, however, as certain conditions must be met. These include, among others, that there be a net environmental benefit from the “reef” and that a portion of the cost savings to the platform owner from partial, as opposed to full, decommissioning be shared with the state and deposited in an endowment whose moneys would be used to the benefit of coastal marine resources. AB 2503’s “rigs-to-reefs” program is voluntary and platforms in both state and federal waters are eligible to participate. AB 2503’s legislative findings included that the costs of the program should be borne by the applicants.
There were at least two unsuccessful attempts prior to AB 2503 to establish a rigs-to-reefs program (SB 241, Alpert, 2000, and SB 1, Alpert, 2001). Additionally, since AB 2503 became law, there have been two unsuccessful attempts to alter its extensively negotiated terms to the benefit of the platform owners (AB 2267, Hall, 2012, and AB 207, Rendon, 2013).
Rigs-to-reefs programs allow the oil industry to avoid the costs of full decommissioning, although full decommissioning was an agreed-upon lease condition. Estimates of the cost savings associated with partial decommissioning vary from tens of millions to hundreds of millions of dollars per platform. AB 2503 provided a financial incentive to the oil industry to submit partial decommissioning applications by providing that a smaller fraction of the cost savings would be shared with the state in the early years of the program (55%) compared to later (80%).
Despite repeated assertions over at least the last 15 years that applications for partial decommissioning were imminent, no applications under AB 2503 have been filed with the state. It is a fair point that no application has been developed pursuant to AB 2503 (which this bill seeks to address), but it is also staff’s understanding that no serious inquiries to the relevant agencies have occurred.
The economic viability of any offshore platform and its oil and gas wells is a function of many factors. High prices for crude oil the last five years – prices of benchmark crudes often exceeded $100/barrel – compared to approximately $50/barrel in last several months with muted expectations of a substantial price rise in the short term are likely to have affected the outlook for the offshore California platforms.
Existing federal law requires that “decommissioned” oil and gas platforms be removed at the end of production, and the surrounding marine environment be cleaned up and restored to a natural condition. Existing state and federal offshore oil leases generally require the removal of decommissioned oil platforms after the lease ends. Both federal regulations and provisions in state and federal leases allow the federal government to consider and approve alternative decommissioning methods other than complete removal. “Rigs-to-reefs” programs are widely used in the Gulf of Mexico, and Louisiana, Texas and Mississippi.
That said, as a recent commentary in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences pointed out, circumstances are unique to each particular platform depending on the location, water depth, platform size and other factors. Simple generalizations about rigs-to-reef “working” in some locations with the implication that partial decommissioning will necessarily provide net environmental benefits and cost savings in other locations are inappropriate.
AB 2503 recognized the multi-jurisdictional nature of platform decommissioning and the need for a viable rigs-to-reefs program to utilize the established expertise and authority of different state entities. AB 2503 purposefully split up program responsibilities between different regulators.
AB 2503’s rigs-to-reefs program uses the expertise of the following state entities:
The Department of Fish and Wildlife (department) has the primary authority, as specified, for carrying out the program, including:
the development of application materials,
the determination of whether an application was complete,
the preparation of a plan to manage the reef,
providing an opportunity for public comment on the application,
holding a public hearing in the county nearest to the proposed reef,
the review and conditional and final approval of an application, and
the management and operation of approved artificial reefs.
The Natural Resources Agency serves as lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The Ocean Protection Council (council) determines whether a net benefit to the marine environment from partial decommissioning exists. This includes establishing appropriate criteria to make this evaluation.
The State Lands Commission (commission) determines the cost savings.
The State Coastal Conservancy (conservancy) creates an advisory spending plan for the cost savings deposited in the endowment.
In addition, the authority of the California Coastal Commission in the coastal zone as well as the authority of local and federal regulatory entities within their respective jurisdictions were explicitly acknowledged and protected.
AB 2503 requires information sharing among different state entities including the department, the council, the commission and the endowment. It repeatedly allows for formal agreements to be developed, as needed, to support the coordination and consultation required between entities.
Focusing on the application, AB 2503 establishes minimum standards for the required materials, including:
a plan and schedule for partial decommissioning,
a determination of the estimated costs of partial and full decommissioning,
a determination of the environmental impacts and benefits to the marine environment from partial and full decommissioning,
identification of all necessary permits, leases and approvals needed and a schedule to obtain them, and
in some instances, a management plan for the reef following partial decommissioning.
An AB 2503 application is complete when the applicant provides certain financial assurances that ensures that sufficient funds are available to pay for the cost of processing the application. The first AB 2503 applicant will also be required to pay the program’s set-up costs, although those are reimbursable.
AB 2503 provides specific criteria for the department to issue a conditional approval for a partial decommissioning project. These include:
all applicable laws are followed,
there is a net benefit to the marine environment,
there are cost savings,
there is funding to do the evaluation that is provided by the applicant,
an agreement has been reached between the applicant and the department to support the overall management of the reef,
the applicant and the department have entered into an indemnification agreement to protect the state from liability, as specified,
the applicant has obtained all necessary permits, leases and approvals, and
the department and owner of the platform have reached an agreement for the department to take title to the reef.
AB 2503 requires the owner or operator of an oil structure, upon receipt of conditional approval for partial removal, to transmit a portion of the total cost savings as follows:
55% by January 1, 2017
65% between January 1, 2017 – January 1, 2023
80% after January 1, 2023
The department shall not grant final approval until the full amount of applicable cost savings has been transmitted.
PROPOSED LAW
This bill would modify the AB 2503 rigs-to-reefs program. It would:
replace the Natural Resources Agency as CEQA lead with the commission;
allow the applicant to withdraw its rigs-to-reef application at any time;
re-set or potentially re-set the financial incentives by replacing the years in the dates with blanks;
add consultation with the Air Resources Board, as specified, in the calculation of net benefits to the marine environment;
add air quality or greenhouse gas emissions to the determination of the net benefit to the marine environment;
add a public meeting to review the environmental documents to the one already required on the application, as specified; and
make additional technical and clarifying changes.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
According to the author, “in 2010, the Legislature passed AB 2503 by former Speaker John Perez, which enacted California’s rigs-to-reefs program. We are now nearing the point where the first of California’s offshore oil rigs will be ready for decommissioning in the next few years. It has become apparent through discussions with the Administration, that the permitting process is unworkable, both for practical reasons involving a lack of expertise and fiscal reasons as well. Senate Bill 233 is intended to make the current rigs-to-reefs permitting process more pragmatic without sacrificing any level of environmental review. As the bill moves along, we intend to work closely with a multi-agency group to review the rigs-to-reefs approval process and make recommendations for changes, the chairs of the policy committees, and stakeholders to make sure that we have a consensus approach to the decommissioning process [that] is both workable and protective of the environment.”
The author continues, “[t]he bill adds the impact of greenhouse gas emissions [which] should be considered in weighing the removal options for offshore oil rigs” in the calculation of the net environmental benefit and “has left open for negotiation moving back the various cut-off dates which encourage early retirement of oil rigs to accommodate the five years since the passage of AB 2503.”
“Overall, SB 233 seeks to take a critical look at the rigs-to-reefs program and to work to make the process better. Ultimately, if oil rigs are approved for conversion, a productive marine ecosystem will be saved from destruction and potentially hundreds of millions of dollars will be made available in perpetuity for funding ocean oriented environmental programs.”
Get Wet Scuba notes that “our group frequently dives at oil rigs that are off the coast of Long Beach. It is a vibrant ecosystem and supports enormous amount[s] of marine life. It is one of the most beautiful dives in Southern California.”
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
The letters opposing this bill were all received prior to the most recent amendments. Those amendments addressed or appear to have addressed some of the specific objections raised against the bill.
In a joint opposition letter, the Environmental Defense Center and others note that the bill “is unnecessary, premature, and would undermine the provisions in existing law that require a balanced, thorough analysis of proposal to leave offshore oil platforms at sea. The bill is unnecessary because the legislature already passed AB 2503 in 2010. That bill followed many years of state-wide debate and was fashioned to include relevant agencies and stakeholders in a process that would address the many issues that will be raised if oil platforms are not removed from the ocean environment. These issues include legacy pollution resulting from residual toxins and contaminated debris left in the ocean, introduction of invasive species, attraction of fish away from productive natural reefs, safety and navigational risks, and increased liability to the state.”
The joint letter continues that the bill is premature because “no platforms are ready for decommissioning. […] Clearly, there is no need to hasten to amend existing law.” While acknowledging that many of the letter signers did not support AB 2503 because “we believe the oil industry should comply with its original commitments to remove oil platforms at the end of their productive life and to restore the marine environment to a natural condition,” they note that “[e]xisting law is adequate to address the issues raised by proposals to avoid full decommissioning of offshore oil platforms.”
The West Marin Environmental Action Committee identifies several issues in its letter, including, among others, concerns about the length of time considered in the net environmental benefit analysis, the lack of public participation in the development of net environmental benefit criteria, and the proposed reset of the cost saving criteria.
Many of the bill’s opponents express an interest in engaging with the author and other stakeholders on the issue. For example, the Ocean Conservancy writes, “we urge more time to engage and reach a level of mutual understanding and commitment by designated responsible agencies, stakeholders and the affected public to achieve an effective and thorough process to guide the disposition of oil platforms offshore California. We would be pleased to participate in a dialogue with interested parties to that end.”
COMMENTS
This bill is a work-in-progress. Committee staff understand that discussions are active among the author’s office and stakeholders to facilitate implementation of the rigs-to-reefs program. These discussions include providing the upfront resources necessary for implementation. It is likely that further amendments may be proposed by the author at a later date to incorporate the results of these negotiations. The committee may wish to re-hear the bill in that event.
The commission has experience as a CEQA lead agency for platform decommissioning. Even in the event of an application for a rigs-to-reefs conversion in federal waters, it is likely that substantial elements of the decommissioning would be under the commission’s jurisdiction.
Cost sharing and incentives. AB 2503 established state policy to provide financial incentives to platform owners for rigs-to-reef conversions with the proviso that the state share in the cost savings. The incentives to platform owners were front-loaded. The applicants had 6 years from the date AB 2503 became law to obtain the required conditional approval of the rigs-to-reefs conversion in order to qualify for the most cost savings. The AB 2503 incentive structure has been established law for over 4 years, and no platform operators have provided resources to fund AB 2503 implementation or come forward to apply for partial decommissioning. However, under current law, it would be effectively impossible for an applicant to qualify for the maximum savings level now.
Air quality and the net environmental benefit. The consideration of air quality, including greenhouse gas emissions, in decommissioning is a required element of the CEQA environmental analysis. The focus on biological resources and water quality – in other words on the proposed reef and its immediate subsurface environment – in the existing calculation of the net environmental benefit to the marine environment seeks to ensure the reef provides lasting benefits. It is highly likely that there will be a significant difference in total air emissions between partial and full decommissioning to the advantage of partial decommissioning. That said, the direct and indirect impacts from air emissions to the proposed reef and their duration are unclear, and the council will have to determine how to appropriately weigh these impacts in its calculations.
Public participation. The bill adds a public hearing to review the environmental documents to the public hearing on the application held near the proposed reef location. While the CEQA process, as well as the various permitting requirements for a rigs-to-reefs proposal, provide for public participation, this bill provides additional opportunity for public comment to those likely to be most affected by the proposal.
The rigs-to-reef program is voluntary. Circumstances may arise, such as advances in offshore oil production, where the platform owner may wish to keep the platform in operation despite having applied for partial decommissioning. Existing law is clear that the rigs-to-reefs program is voluntary, and the bill makes explicit that the platform owner may withdraw the program application.
AB 2503’s division of regulatory effort is appropriate given existing jurisdiction and expertise. Offshore oil platforms operate under the jurisdiction of multiple regulators, as will their eventual partial or full decommissioning. There is substantial existing expertise and experience relevant to decommissioning already extant in state government. Coordination and communication are critical between the relevant entities as they utilize their existing expertise and exercise their independent judgment in processing a rigs-to-reef application. AB 2503 specifically provides for formal agreements to be used to ensure coordination and communication between entities and timely application processing. These have proven successful in many other circumstances.
Recent platform decommissioning. According to the commission, Belmont Island off the coast of Los Angeles County was decommissioned in the early 2000s and was the last offshore oil facility to be removed from California’s waters. The commission found that complete removal of the island was the environmentally preferred option because there was no evidence that the island provided unique habitat in the area. Additionally, the Coast Guard determined, given the shallow depth, that leaving the base of the island behind would create a navigational hazard.
Prior to the Belmont Island decommissioning, the Chevron 4-H platforms off the coast of Carpenteria and Summerland were decommissioned in 1996. The commission acted as CEQA lead. During the platforms’ operation, “shell mounds” built up under each one. The mounds are composed of materials from the periodic cleaning of the platform legs of marine life as well as other marine organisms. Additionally drilling fluids and drill cuttings were deposited on the sea floor underneath the platforms prior to this practice being banned. The drilling materials contain contaminants such as PCBs, hydrocarbons and metals. All of these materials are now bonded together in the mounds which were left in place when the platforms were decommissioned. The mounds are 25 – 28 feet high, and 200 – 250 feet in diameter. Decommissioning requirements included the full removal of the shell mounds and all site debris, and that a “trawl test” with standard equipment be performed. According to reports, the site is untrawlable. A decision has been made to leave the mounds in place, but it is unclear if all the necessary permits have been issued.
Most of the offshore platforms are in federal waters and will need federal permits. While close coordination and communication may be able to facilitate the necessary state permits for partial decommissioning, the state cannot compel the relevant federal entities to issue the applicable federal permits in a timely manner.
Do rigs-to-reefs automatically mean there will be more fishing opportunities? Not necessarily. The department is authorized to limit fishing in the vicinity of the reef, if warranted (FGC §6613(c)).
SUPPORT
Coalition for Enhanced Marine Resources (Co-Sponsor)
Sport Fishing Conservancy (Co-Sponsor)
Get Wet Scuba
Hubbs-Sea World Research Institute
Inland Empire Waterkeeper
Orange County Coastkeeper
Professional Association of Diving Instructors
United Anglers
Valley Industry and Commerce Association
OPPOSITION
Citizens Planning Association of Santa Barbara County
Community Environmental Council
Environment California
Environmental Action Committee of West Marin (unless amended)
Environmental Defense Center
Food and Water Watch
Friends of the Sea Otter
Get Oil Out!
International Marine Mammal Project of Earth Island Institute
Ocean Conservancy
Ocean Conservation Research
Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Association
Santa Barbara Channelkeeper
Sierra Club – Los Padres Chapter
Sierra Club California
The Ocean Foundation
Western Alliance for Nature
Wholly H2O
Two individuals
-- END --
Discussed in Hearing
Senate Floor
Senate Standing Committee on Natural Resources and Water
Bill Author
Bill Co-Author(s):