Hodel Hits Bill Putting Oil-Gas Pact Into Effect

Interior Secretary Donald P. Hodel on Tuesday assailed a House bill that would implement an agreement he made last July with the California congressional delegation permitting limited oil and gas development off the state’s coast.

Hodel, who later reneged on the agreement under pressure from the oil industry, told a House Interior Committee hearing that the legislation is “terribly, terribly flawed.”

“It does not even come close to striking a balance or being in the national interest,” he said.

‘Reasonable Balance’

But California Rep. Leon E. Panetta (D-Monterey), chief sponsor of the measure, sharply disagreed, contending that it “provides for a reasonable balance between energy and environmental and economic concerns.”

The bill would permit oil and gas leasing in 150 offshore tracts encompassing 864,000 acres now covered by a congressional moratorium on such leasing. The remainder of the 36.5 million acres covered by the moratorium would remain exempt from leasing until the year 2000.

That was the agreement originally struck by Hodel and a majority of the California congressional delegation.

Backed by Cranston, Wilson

The legislation is backed by 33 of California’s 45 House members and by Sens. Alan Cranston (D-Calif.) and Pete Wilson (R-Calif.).

On Thursday, the House Appropriations Committee will decide whether to reimpose the moratorium, which has been approved by Congress each of the last four years.

Efforts will be made to attach the moratorium to a “continuing resolution” needed to finance most of the government through next Sept. 30. The moratorium would serve as a holding action until Congress moves on the legislation implementing the agreement that had been reached with Hodel.

At Tuesday’s hearing, Hodel clashed with California Rep. Mel Levine (D-Santa Monica) over the origin of the agreement.

Levine contended that the 150 tracts selected for leasing--which oil companies later said had low potential for oil and gas--were chosen from “information handed to us by your (Hodel’s) staff. We didn’t dream these tracts up.”

“These tracts were thrown at me at the 11th hour,” Hodel responded. He said that he had told the California House members at that time that he was not sure what the industry interest in them would be.

After industry representatives expressed unhappiness with the choices, Hodel pulled out of the agreement Sept. 10, proposing that the 150 tracts be swapped for others with a higher potential.

Tourism, Fishing Cited

Also appearing at the hearing were California city officials and representatives of business and fishermen’s groups, who said the bill is needed to protect California’s $16-billion tourism and $2-billion fishing industry.

Among those opposed to the measure were oil industry spokesmen and California Reps. Daniel E. Lungren (R-Long Beach) and William E. Dannemeyer (R-Fullerton).

Dannemeyer said the idea that California should be given more protection than Gulf Coast states--where 90% of the outer continental shelf has been explored--”smacks of elitism.”

Rep. Ralph Regula (R-Ohio) agreed, saying that the dispute boils down to aesthetics, which “shouldn’t be an issue.” But, he noted, “those who live on the California coast simply do not want an oil rig in their sunset.”