Delay Voted on Offshore Lease Sales : Action Would Ban Opening of Tracts Till Reagan Leaves

Foes of oil and gas drilling off the California coast won a major victory Thursday as a House panel approved a plan to delay federal lease sales of offshore tracts until after President Reagan leaves office.

On a voice vote, the Democratic-run Appropriations Committee added language to an Interior Department spending bill that would bar the agency from selling any leases off the California coast before February, 1989.

The move represents a significant turnaround in a protracted struggle between the Reagan Administration and environmentalists over attempts to expand energy exploration efforts in the Pacific. Only seven months ago, the committee had rejected a request from state lawmakers to renew a drilling moratorium, prompting Interior officials to ready plans for lease sales as early as 1988.

Called a Cease-Fire

“This is not the end of the war over offshore drilling, but it’s a hell of a cease-fire,” California Rep. Leon E. Panetta (D-Monterey) declared.

Thursday’s action is likely to be ratified by the full House and stands a good chance of passage in the Senate, where it is supported by both California members, Republican Pete Wilson and Democrat Alan Cranston.

Technically, the plan would put off the first round of lease sales for only one year, but supporters said that such a reprieve could increase pressure on the Administration to limit the scope of any drilling plan by pushing the matter into the center of the 1988 presidential campaign in California.

Furthermore, backers argued, Reagan’s successor might be more sympathetic to the concerns of environmentalists and undo any expansive drilling program devised by Donald P. Hodel, the current secretary of the Interior, before it went into effect.

Setback for Hodel

The developments were a clear setback for Hodel, who had gone to Capitol Hill on Wednesday to personally lobby Appropriations Committee members against reimposing a drilling moratorium.

Striving to make the best out of the turn of events, Hodel, noting that the panel stopped short of an all-out drilling ban, said his agency is “greatly relieved.”

“Maybe he’s taking some Rolaids,” quipped California Rep. Tom Lantos (D-San Mateo), a staunch drilling opponent, when told of Hodel’s comment.

Tom DeRocco, a spokesman for Interior’s Minerals Management Service, which oversees offshore drilling programs, acknowledged that the agency is “less than ecstatic” about the vote, while Steve Griles, the chief of the service, conceded that the congressional action might force the agency to adjust its entire California lease sale schedule.

In Los Angeles, Mayor Tom Bradley said: “Clearly, the war to protect the coast is not over by any means. But the Appropriations Committee has handed us a battlefield victory today which we can all celebrate.” “It’s just what we need,” added Bob Hattoy, a spokesman for the Sierra Club in Southern California. The vote, he said, “gives us a new chance for long-term protection for the California coast.”

Laguna Beach City Councilman Robert F. Gentry, who was in Washington to lobby for a moratorium, said: “It walks and talks like a moratorium, but it’s not a moratorium.”

At least one proponent of exploration proclaimed finding reason for cheer in Thursday’s vote. “I’m pleased to see that there is no moratorium . . . and that all of the activity preparatory to lease sales can go forward,” said Rep. William E. Dannemeyer (R-Fullerton).

“Sooner or later we’re going to have to face the reality of a vote on this issue,” he said.

Industry Reaction

The American Petroleum Institute, a major oil industry lobbying group, issued a statement that dismissed the delaying tactic as “the same old moratoria . . . under a new label.” It added: “The nation will be denied the benefits of potential oil and gas discoveries for many years to come.”

Michael P. Fergus, public affairs representative for the Western Oil and Gas Assn. in Los Angeles, added: “It ignores once again the long lead times required to bring offshore discoveries on line, and additionally it ignores the role of great importance that offshore California will play in our nation’s energy future.”

The arrangement agreed to by the committee represents a compromise between drilling opponents and Rep. Ralph Regula (R-Ohio), a panel member who has been the watchdog for the Administration and the petroleum industry on the offshore question. Both sides agreed to the deal after realizing that a planned vote on a new moratorium would be so close that no one could predict its outcome.

Years of Delay

California lawmakers had blocked Administration drilling plans for several years by persuading colleagues to go along with a moratorium. Last year, however, they reached agreement with Hodel on a plan to open the coastal waters to limited energy exploration. Hodel later reneged on the deal and the Appropriations Committee rejected by one vote a subsequent attempt by drilling foes to revive the moratorium.

However, an Appropriations subcommittee last week voted to back a new moratorium after hearing complaints from a congressional task force that Hodel had refused to bargain with it in good faith to come up with a new drilling scheme.

During those negotiations, the task force had proposed opening up about 170 offshore tracts to development--all at least nine miles from the coastline. Hodel, on the other hand, had pushed to open 673 tracts, many of them hugging the dividing line between state and federally controlled waters three miles from shore.

Secretary’s Proposal

Under Hodel’s proposal, sales of tracts off Northern California would have begun in 1988, with tracts off the southern part of the state going on the block a year later. The proposal approved by the committee would forbid him from formally announcing the northern lease sales before Jan. 1, 1989. Federal guidelines for such sales then would effectively delay them for at least one month.

“They (the Reagan Administration) get a chance to propose their deal, and the new administration gets a chance to reject it,” said Pat Fulton, an aide to Rep. Vic Fazio (D-Sacramento), who negotiated the compromise with Regula.

Griles suggested that delaying the planned sales of northern tracts until 1989 might lead the government to put off tract sales off Southern and Central California that were scheduled for 1989. He said that squeezing all of the sales into the same year would overtax the federal and state bureaucracies.

Also contributing to this story were Times staff writers Kristina Lindgren in Orange County and Janet Clayton in Los Angeles.