Jurris.COM
Section 6601 Of Article 1. General Provisions From California Fish And Game Code >> Division 6. >> Part 1. >> Chapter 5.5. >> Article 1.
6601
. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a) California's extraordinary marine biological diversity is a vital asset to the state and nation. The diversity of species and ecosystems found in the ocean waters off the state is important to public health and well-being, ecological health, and ocean-dependent economic activities.
(b) Although the state maintains various programs to protect, restore, and enhance California's marine resources, the effect of these programs is limited by inadequate and unstable funding.
(c) There is an existing permitting process for decommissioning and fully removing offshore oil platforms or production facilities. Owners and operators are currently responsible for the full cost of decommissioning and remediating those facilities.
(d) According to the United States Department of the Interior, the 23 oil and gas platforms in federal waters off the California coast are expected to reach the end of their useful production lifetimes and be decommissioned between 2015 and 2030.
(e) The California Ocean Science Trust in its June 2010 study, titled "Evaluating Alternatives for Decommissioning California's Offshore Oil and Gas Platforms: A Technical Analysis to Inform State Policy," analyzed a number of decommissioning alternatives to full rig removal and determined that the most likely alternative is to remove the upper portion of the rig and leave the remainder of the structure in place.
(f) The California Ocean Science Trust report and other studies indicate that the partial removal option can result in a net benefit to the marine environment and substantial cost savings compared to full removal of an oil platform or production facility.
(g) Provided that partial removal of an oil rig would result in a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal, it is in the interest of the state that a portion of the cost savings that result from partial removal should be shared with the citizens of this state to protect and enhance the state's marine resources.
(h) It is also in the interest of the state that any program to allow partial removal of oil platforms meet all of the following criteria:
(1) Partial removal shall result in a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal.
(2) The determination of whether partial removal would result in a net benefit to the marine environment should be made only after scientific study and evaluation.
(3) Because the location and depth of an oil platform, as well as other ecological factors, create a unique environment, each oil platform shall be subject to scientific study and evaluation before partial removal is allowed.
(4) The costs of the scientific study and evaluation should be borne by the applicant.
(a) California's extraordinary marine biological diversity is a vital asset to the state and nation. The diversity of species and ecosystems found in the ocean waters off the state is important to public health and well-being, ecological health, and ocean-dependent economic activities.
(b) Although the state maintains various programs to protect, restore, and enhance California's marine resources, the effect of these programs is limited by inadequate and unstable funding.
(c) There is an existing permitting process for decommissioning and fully removing offshore oil platforms or production facilities. Owners and operators are currently responsible for the full cost of decommissioning and remediating those facilities.
(d) According to the United States Department of the Interior, the 23 oil and gas platforms in federal waters off the California coast are expected to reach the end of their useful production lifetimes and be decommissioned between 2015 and 2030.
(e) The California Ocean Science Trust in its June 2010 study, titled "Evaluating Alternatives for Decommissioning California's Offshore Oil and Gas Platforms: A Technical Analysis to Inform State Policy," analyzed a number of decommissioning alternatives to full rig removal and determined that the most likely alternative is to remove the upper portion of the rig and leave the remainder of the structure in place.
(f) The California Ocean Science Trust report and other studies indicate that the partial removal option can result in a net benefit to the marine environment and substantial cost savings compared to full removal of an oil platform or production facility.
(g) Provided that partial removal of an oil rig would result in a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal, it is in the interest of the state that a portion of the cost savings that result from partial removal should be shared with the citizens of this state to protect and enhance the state's marine resources.
(h) It is also in the interest of the state that any program to allow partial removal of oil platforms meet all of the following criteria:
(1) Partial removal shall result in a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal.
(2) The determination of whether partial removal would result in a net benefit to the marine environment should be made only after scientific study and evaluation.
(3) Because the location and depth of an oil platform, as well as other ecological factors, create a unique environment, each oil platform shall be subject to scientific study and evaluation before partial removal is allowed.
(4) The costs of the scientific study and evaluation should be borne by the applicant.
