Republicans will hold many hearings on the Obama administration’s five-year offshore drilling plan, which they don’t like. Unfortunately for the GOP, such hearings are about all they can do about it.
That’s because the plan, which would run from 2017 through 2022, is under the purview of the administration under federal law.
Options to force the administration’s hand are non-existent or, at best, weak. The current GOP strategy is simply to present a track record of support for offshore drilling in the Atlantic Ocean and elsewhere in hopes that the next president changes the offshore drilling plan, which will just be getting underway.
“This administration only lasts another year-and-a-half anyway, so the momentum swings to us progressively in this situation,” Rep. John Fleming, R-La., told the Washington Examiner.
The House voted to replace the current five-year plan through legislation before it went into effect in 2012, but it never had a chance in the Senate. Congress appears poised to take another shot, but President Obama is unlikely to sign anything that challenges his plan. Both chambers are taking a look at legislation to expand a revenue-sharing plan for offshore Atlantic drilling.
The draft Interior Department plan proposed in January included a large plot for offshore drilling in the Atlantic, potentially allowing leases for the first time since 1983. Arctic drilling zones were preserved, though some were taken out of rotation. The Eastern Gulf of Mexico and the Pacific shelf remained off limits.
In a departure from most Obama administration energy plans, the energy industry so far is fairly satisfied with the proposal. Mark Shuster, executive vice president of the Americas upstream division for Shell, said at a Wednesday hearing that the company “appreciates and commends” the proposal, though it wanted the Eastern Gulf of Mexico opened for drilling as well.
The concern for drilling companies and their Republican allies is that the administration will winnow down the list. The draft plan is the most inclusive the administration can offer because it is forbidden from adding areas to the final version.
“This plan has the lowest number of lease sales ever at 14, and that’s being generous,” Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colo., said during a Wednesday House Natural Resources Committee subcommittee hearing.
The hearing comes one week after a report from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service said federal energy production has fallen 10 percent since 2010, much of which has come from a reduction in offshore drilling following a moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico — a response to the April 2010 BP oil spill.
Offshore drilling supporters are optimistic they will, at the very least, keep the shores of North Carolina and Virginia in the final version. South Carolina and Georgia, which are also in the plan, are less likely.
“It’s ‘yes, but,'” Andy Radford, senior offshore policy adviser with the American Petroleum Institute, told the Examiner of whether he thinks the North Carolina and Virginia areas will survive. “There’s two more rounds of cuts — it’s like trying to make the varsity high school basketball team.”
Environmental groups have been actively trying to drum up opposition to drilling in the Atlantic and believe the White House isn’t seriously invested in opening the Atlantic just as Obama heads out the door. They, along with some Mid-Atlantic and Northeast Democrats, are worried that an oil spill could damage tourism and fishing industries for coastal states.
“If we effectively organize in the four states in the draft, we think the final five-year plan will look dramatically different,” Athan Manuel, director of the lands program with the Sierra Club, told the Examiner in an email.
Republicans intend to tout the support offshore drilling has received from Virginia Democrats. The GOP remembers full well that the Obama administration stripped the Atlantic from the current offshore leasing plan and is keen to cast drilling there as a bipartisan effort.
“Obviously that uncertainty creates a lot of problems,” Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va., said during the hearing. “You’re not going to find the people to make the investment to do that exploration.”
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Director Abigail Ross Hopper said the agency was evaluating each state with several factors in mind, telling reporters, “The administration is fully behind following the statutory process and taking a very careful look at it.”
Interior said it included offshore energy zones if they had political support from state and local governments. Virginia fits the bill, as Democratic Sens. Tim Kaine and Mark Warner, with Gov. Terry McAuliffe, all have publicly advocated for offshore drilling.
Claire Douglass, campaign director with conservation group Oceana, said Virginia Democrats could change their tune. She said a forthcoming Defense Department study will indicate that offshore drilling would impede military operations in the state, which could force a recalculation.
“We have reason to believe Kaine and McAuliffe can be reasonable,” Douglass told the Examiner.
One industry source said Republican North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory’s meeting with Hopper ahead of the hearing was encouraging. That led the source to believe offshore drilling in North Carolina could make it into the final version, but other states might have a difficult time staying in the plan.
“I mean, no one is coming in to help out [South Carolina Republican Gov.] Nikki Haley,” the source said.
