Problem on the United States Continental Shelf — Measuring the Environmental Effectiveness of the Outer Continental Shelf Act (OCSA)

The purpose of this article is twofold: 1. To set forth briefly the history of the continental shelf doctrine in the United States together with the methods by which oil and gas are regulated thereon; and 2. To discuss the environmental standards set forth in the United States domestic legislation and the reasons why the standards are inefficient or are incapable of an efficient environmental measurement. The theme the author develops is that of state/federal jurisdictional conflict, which was supposedly settled years ago, but has been going on in part for years. States want the right to regulate the oil and gas development on the continental shelf for purposes of protecting their respective environments. The federal government is interested in the financial outcome derived from leasing oil and gas sites on the continental shelf. The receipt of this income and potential income, in terms of future deficit reduction, allows for environmental concerns to be minimized. The question of how to measure the effectiveness of the domestic shelf legislation remains.This article reviews the interplay of environmental standards with oil and gas leasing on the Outer Continental Shelf (OSC) in order to determine if the marine environment is really protected by the interplay of domestic legislation. The 1982 LOS treaty leaves environmental protection to State (domestic) regulation. There is no customary law regarding this type of domestic shelf regulation. The main problem is measuring the "effectiveness" of our domestic shelf legislation. For example, do we simply review effectiveness in terms of controlling operational damage or in terms of environmental injury caused by catastrophic accidents?