O.C. Congressmen at Odds Over Offshore Oil Drilling

WASHINGTON —  With President Bush’s decision on offshore oil drilling expected within days, Orange County’s five congressmen, who usually stand shoulder to shoulder in national debates, are deeply split over federal drilling policy off the Southern California coast.

Reps. C. Christopher Cox (R-Newport Beach) and Ron Packard (R-Carlsbad), who together represent the southern two-thirds of the Orange County coast, are adamant opponents of new drilling off Southern California.

At the other end of the spectrum is Rep. William E. Dannemeyer (R-Fullerton), a member of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and a strong supporter of the oil industry, whose inland district includes parts of Orange, Anaheim and Santa Ana.

In between are Reps. Robert K. Dornan (R-Garden Grove), formerly a staunch advocate of offshore drilling, and Dana Rohrabacher (R-Lomita), whose district includes coastal communities from the Palos Verdes Peninsula south to Huntington Beach.

Bush said last week that “within days” he would announce his long-awaited decision on whether, when and where to permit leasing of new, federally controlled ocean tracts to oil companies for exploration and drilling.

The decision has been awaited since February, 1989, when Bush suspended preparations for leasing three vast sections of the Outer Continental Shelf for oil drilling. One of the affected lease sale areas is southwest of the Florida Everglades. The other two--involving lease sales 91 and 95--cover about two-thirds of the waters off the California coast, including most of the Outer Continental Shelf between San Luis Obispo and San Diego.

Bush’s decision has attracted even more interest since Feb. 7, when the American Trader, an 811-foot tanker leased by British Petroleum Oil Shipping Co. USA, ran aground on its own anchor and spilled 394,000 gallons of crude oil at a mooring about a mile and a half off Huntington Beach.

The President suggested last month that he might bar new drilling off the Florida coast, while his aides have hinted that Bush might permit some new drilling off California.

“I think the President has already said . . . that he is willing to restrict offshore oil drilling in environmentally sensitive areas,” said Cox, “so therefore, the $64,000 question is ‘Are we or aren’t we?’ ”

His own view, Cox said, is that “we should have no (new) federal leasing off of our coast.”

Two of four large drilling platforms that are anchored a dozen miles off the Orange County coast have been producing oil since 1980. A third began pumping in 1983, while the fourth came on line a year later. Three of the platforms are owned by Shell Western Exploration Production Inc., while the other is owned by Unocal Corp. The last federal lease of drilling tracts off the Orange County coast took place in 1976.

In addition, three smaller platforms and an “oil island” sit about a mile off Seal Beach and Huntington Beach in state-owned areas.

“People live in California because of its natural resources, in large part,” Cox said. “Even people who live inland use the beach and like to have it attractive and not sullied with oil spills.” In addition, Cox argued that offshore platforms are a source of nearly constant air pollution, which technological advances have not controlled.

In the end, Cox said, he believes that Bush “will do the right thing” and ban drilling off the California coast.

Packard, whose district includes southern Orange County and northern San Diego County, said he favors “leaving all of Southern California alone” south of Long Beach. “It’s simply not appropriate, in my judgment, to put (more) oil wells there,” he said.

On the other side of the issue, Dannemeyer noted that drilling in federal waters south of San Luis Obispo has been proceeding for a quarter of a century.

“We have clearly proved that technology exists to explore the resource, develop it, and protect the environment, both offshore and onshore,” Dannemeyer said. “There’s no question the country is in need of domestically produced oil and natural gas.”

In the years since the 1969 blowout of an oil platform off Santa Barbara, Dannemeyer said, technology to protect the environment from platform accidents has greatly improved. The most serious threat to the environment, he argued, is posed by oil tankers, not offshore platforms.

Until recently, Dornan shared Dannemeyer’s pro-drilling position, and both have been supported heavily by the oil industry. A recent study by Common Cause, the self-styled citizens lobby, ranked Dannemeyer and Dornan sixth and eighth, respectively, among members of the California congressional delegation in receipt of contributions from energy-related political action committees from 1983 through 1988.

However, in recent months, Dornan said, he has changed his position because of the fragmentation of the Soviet empire and the general easing of world tensions.

“I think California and Oregon have a compelling case about how beautiful their coastline is, and I think (the President) is going to say that we’re going to respect the environmental concerns here,” Dornan said.

He added, however: “We will continue to have these areas (for leasing) identified so that in times of emergency, or if the world should get into another tense Cold War situation, we’ll have to look at this, because our dependency on Middle Eastern, Persian Gulf oil is greater than it ever has been.”

Rohrabacher, who, like Cox, is completing his first term in Congress, said he is convinced that there are both economic and environmental reasons to proceed with offshore drilling. Like Dannemeyer, Rohrabacher argued that more drilling platforms offshore would cut the volume of oil-tanker traffic to local refineries.

In addition, he argued that oil platforms represent a visual nuisance only during daylight hours. “In fact,” Rohrabacher said, “the oil rigs improve the nighttime view of the ocean. When nighttime comes and you’re along the ocean, you just have pitch black. In Long Beach, they have some oil rigs . . . that are very beautiful at night.”

But despite his personal views, Rohrabacher said: “I don’t think the President should approve any (oil) development off the California coast that’s visible from the shoreline unless the people who live in those cities and along the shore fundamentally agreed with the need . . . of having those . . . areas developed.

“But that doesn’t mean that I don’t think there isn’t a lot of room available to convince people that there is a . . . need.”

To help make the case, Rohrabacher argued that the federal government should share with local communities and county governments some of the millions of dollars in tax revenue generated by offshore oil production. That would encourage the communities to embrace offshore drilling, he said.

Rohrabacher said he has discussed the proposal with Interior Secretary Manuel Lujan Jr. and may propose legislation to implement it.

OIL SPILL REPORT--A state report on the Huntington Beach spill disputes estimates of oil recovered. B1