Click to Submit Public Comment on Federal Review of California’s Coastal Management Plan (due August 22, 2026)

Public Comment on Fed. Review of CA CMP Docket No. 260623-0150; RTID: 0648-XA006

The current state-federal partnership through CZMA has demonstrated a balance of economic development and coastal protection. Under California’s Coastal Management Plan, the state’s ocean economy has more than doubled since 2001, resulting in over $60 billion in economic output in 2024. California’s commercial ports collectively handle nearly one third of all export activity in the U.S., supporting over 3 million jobs nationwide (See California Association of Ports Authorities Study at https://californiaports.org/portsday23/). Over 50% of all goods shipped from Asia to the U.S. transit through the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach alone.

California has a strong record of permitting and regulating the sectors identified in this call for public comment. (I) Spaceport infrastructure: Over the past four to five decades, the California Coastal Commission (Coastal Commission) has reviewed over 135 projects related to space-launch activity under its federal consistency authority granted by the CZMA. Only two of these projects received a finding of non-concurrence by state agencies. (II) Desalination: The Coastal Commission has denied only one desalination project. This decision to deny this project in 2022, based on coastal safety concerns, is unrelated to the CZMA and would not have been impacted by the existence of California’s CMP. The only desalination project in California that has gone through the CZMA review process, a pilot project in federal waters, received streamlined concurrence from state agencies. (III) Undersea Cables: The Coastal Commission has reviewed 19 undersea fiber optic cable projects under the CMP over the past 30 years. It has concurred with each and every one of these projects. Safeguards against accidental entanglement of endangered marine life, such as whales and sea turtles is of paramount importance as this protects our connection to nature for future generations well beyond any technological dependency on petroleum or physical cables. (IV) Pipeline Maintenance. California has never objected to a pipeline repair and maintenance project under its CMP federal consistency authority. (V) Offshore oil production. The Coastal Commission has concurred with nearly 90% of the 243 offshore oil and gas projects it has reviewed over the past 48 years. California guidance is based on the local absorption of the oil spills in 1971, 1990, 1997, 2007 and 2015. California’s guidance must be central to any government action in this sector since any government action must be premised on the public’s welfare and local government best understands the nature of the severe localized public health negative externalities it must ultimately address.

California has met and continues to clearly meet the legal requirements under the CZMA for its Coastal Management Program. Congress passed CZMA to “encourage and assist the states to exercise effectively their responsibilities in the coastal zone through the development and implementation of management programs to achieve wise use of the land and water resources of the coastal zone, giving full consideration to ecological, cultural, historic, and aesthetic values as well as the needs for compatible economic development.” See 416 U.S.C. §1452.

Once NOAA determines that a program satisfies the requirements of the CZMA and grants final approval, it may no longer examine the content of the approved program, only the adequacy of its execution. See State of Cal. By & Through California Coastal Comm’n v. Mack, 693 F. Supp. 821, 825 (N.D. Cal. 1988). As both a court and NOAA have found, “NOAA may not use its power over funding to accomplish indirectly what it may not accomplish directly: enforce alteration of the approved program itself.” Ibid.; see 84 Fed. Reg. 38118, 38121 (Aug. 6, 2019). For more than three decades, California has earned excellent reviews for its coastal management program from NOAA. In fact, NOAA concluded in its 2025 draft report that “the State of California is successfully implementing and enforcing its federally approved coastal management program, adhering to the terms of the federal financial assistance awards, and addressing coastal management needs identified in… the Coastal Zone Management Act.” This report’s findings detail a rigorous review process and demonstrate California’s strong performance in managing its coast. Thus, NOAA has no legal basis to attempt to decertify California’s program based on unsupported assertions that it has failed to promote certain preferred industries of this current federal administration.

This federal review is taking place just one year after NOAA performed an exhaustive review of California’s coastal management program. This is without precedent. This review has been initiated as the federal Administration pursues unprecedented actions targeted at California including the expansion of new offshore oil drilling for the first time in four decades. Coastal states have concurred with approximately 95 percent of federal activities through consistency determinations over the last 50 years. In California, this concurrence rate is even higher, 96 percent of the more than 3,700 federal and federally regulated projects have received concurrences. The fact that the federal administration’s proposed expansion of offshore oil production in other states, including Florida, North Carolina and South Carolina, were stopped when those states’ leaders expressed concerns underscores the inconsistent treatment of California and the lack of a rational basis for this review of the coastal management plan.

The timing of this review is also inconsistent with established patterns and practices of CZMA management and raises concerns that this review is driven by specific federal priorities for California coast utilizing the threat of the federal government’s decertification or defunding of the coastal state’s management program. Because this review targets sectors for which the current plan has not failed to perform pursuant to the CZMA’s legislative intent, the timing of this review raises the alarming risk that the motive for this review is not the adequacy of the current plan but instead the federal administration’s favoritism for specific private actors. Because such favoritism clearly violates the congressional intent of the CZMA, decertification of California’s Coastal Management Plan would constitute an abuse of authority.

In summary, California has a clear and verifiable track record of effectively exercising its authority under the CZMA to enable balanced coastal development. There is no legal basis to decertify California’s CMP. It is improper for NOAA to perform a federal review of a state’s coastal management program based on preferred projects of this federal Administration.

In light of the foregoing, this attempt to decertify California’s coastal management program proves anti-democratic, as it would mute the voices of local communities impacted by federal coastal activities and ignore the input of local experts that know the coast best. Because the federal government has not produced sufficient data to rationally justify this review, decertification would be contrary to the rule of law.

I urge the Administration to refocus on needed state and federal cooperation to manage California’s coast that has been the hallmark of this law for nearly five decades. Demonstrate that this review is more than just a pretext for outright authoritarianism. Safeguard California’s coast and the democracy on which each and every one of us relies on for protection.

\"The point is that we all love our beautiful saltwaters. These are sacred waters, and it’s up to us to be the voice. It’s up to us to cause no more human harm. We’ve done enough.” – Tina Calderon, Gabrielino Tongva and Chumash culture bearer

Public Comment on Fed. Review of CA CMP Docket No. 260623-0150; RTID: 0648-XA006

The current state-federal partnership through CZMA has demonstrated a balance of economic development and coastal protection. Under California’s Coastal Management Plan, the state’s ocean economy has more than doubled since 2001, resulting in over $60 billion in economic output in 2024. California’s commercial ports collectively handle nearly one third of all export activity in the U.S., supporting over 3 million jobs nationwide (See California Association of Ports Authorities Study at https://californiaports.org/portsday23/). Over 50% of all goods shipped from Asia to the U.S. transit through the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach alone.

California has a strong record of permitting and regulating the sectors identified in this call for public comment. (I) Spaceport infrastructure: Over the past four to five decades, the California Coastal Commission (Coastal Commission) has reviewed over 135 projects related to space-launch activity under its federal consistency authority granted by the CZMA. Only two of these projects received a finding of non-concurrence by state agencies. (II) Desalination: The Coastal Commission has denied only one desalination project. This decision to deny this project in 2022, based on coastal safety concerns, is unrelated to the CZMA and would not have been impacted by the existence of California’s CMP. The only desalination project in California that has gone through the CZMA review process, a pilot project in federal waters, received streamlined concurrence from state agencies. (III) Undersea Cables: The Coastal Commission has reviewed 19 undersea fiber optic cable projects under the CMP over the past 30 years. It has concurred with each and every one of these projects. Safeguards against accidental entanglement of endangered marine life, such as whales and sea turtles is of paramount importance as this protects our connection to nature for future generations well beyond any technological dependency on petroleum or physical cables. (IV) Pipeline Maintenance. California has never objected to a pipeline repair and maintenance project under its CMP federal consistency authority. (V) Offshore oil production. The Coastal Commission has concurred with nearly 90% of the 243 offshore oil and gas projects it has reviewed over the past 48 years. California guidance is based on the local absorption of the oil spills in 1971, 1990, 1997, 2007 and 2015. California’s guidance must be central to any government action in this sector since any government action must be premised on the public’s welfare and local government best understands the nature of the severe localized public health negative externalities it must ultimately address.

California has met and continues to clearly meet the legal requirements under the CZMA for its Coastal Management Program. Congress passed CZMA to “encourage and assist the states to exercise effectively their responsibilities in the coastal zone through the development and implementation of management programs to achieve wise use of the land and water resources of the coastal zone, giving full consideration to ecological, cultural, historic, and aesthetic values as well as the needs for compatible economic development.” See 416 U.S.C. §1452.

Once NOAA determines that a program satisfies the requirements of the CZMA and grants final approval, it may no longer examine the content of the approved program, only the adequacy of its execution. See State of Cal. By & Through California Coastal Comm’n v. Mack, 693 F. Supp. 821, 825 (N.D. Cal. 1988). As both a court and NOAA have found, “NOAA may not use its power over funding to accomplish indirectly what it may not accomplish directly: enforce alteration of the approved program itself.” Ibid.; see 84 Fed. Reg. 38118, 38121 (Aug. 6, 2019). For more than three decades, California has earned excellent reviews for its coastal management program from NOAA. In fact, NOAA concluded in its 2025 draft report that “the State of California is successfully implementing and enforcing its federally approved coastal management program, adhering to the terms of the federal financial assistance awards, and addressing coastal management needs identified in… the Coastal Zone Management Act.” This report’s findings detail a rigorous review process and demonstrate California’s strong performance in managing its coast. Thus, NOAA has no legal basis to attempt to decertify California’s program based on unsupported assertions that it has failed to promote certain preferred industries of this current federal administration.

This federal review is taking place just one year after NOAA performed an exhaustive review of California’s coastal management program. This is without precedent. This review has been initiated as the federal Administration pursues unprecedented actions targeted at California including the expansion of new offshore oil drilling for the first time in four decades. Coastal states have concurred with approximately 95 percent of federal activities through consistency determinations over the last 50 years. In California, this concurrence rate is even higher, 96 percent of the more than 3,700 federal and federally regulated projects have received concurrences. The fact that the federal administration’s proposed expansion of offshore oil production in other states, including Florida, North Carolina and South Carolina, were stopped when those states’ leaders expressed concerns underscores the inconsistent treatment of California and the lack of a rational basis for this review of the coastal management plan.

The timing of this review is also inconsistent with established patterns and practices of CZMA management and raises concerns that this review is driven by specific federal priorities for California coast utilizing the threat of the federal government’s decertification or defunding of the coastal state’s management program. Because this review targets sectors for which the current plan has not failed to perform pursuant to the CZMA’s legislative intent, the timing of this review raises the alarming risk that the motive for this review is not the adequacy of the current plan but instead the federal administration’s favoritism for specific private actors. Because such favoritism clearly violates the congressional intent of the CZMA, decertification of California’s Coastal Management Plan would constitute an abuse of authority.

In summary, California has a clear and verifiable track record of effectively exercising its authority under the CZMA to enable balanced coastal development. There is no legal basis to decertify California’s CMP. It is improper for NOAA to perform a federal review of a state’s coastal management program based on preferred projects of this federal Administration.

In light of the foregoing, this attempt to decertify California’s coastal management program proves anti-democratic, as it would mute the voices of local communities impacted by federal coastal activities and ignore the input of local experts that know the coast best. Because the federal government has not produced sufficient data to rationally justify this review, decertification would be contrary to the rule of law.

I urge the Administration to refocus on needed state and federal cooperation to manage California’s coast that has been the hallmark of this law for nearly five decades. Demonstrate that this review is more than just a pretext for outright authoritarianism. Safeguard California’s coast and the democracy on which each and every one of us relies on for protection.

\"The point is that we all love our beautiful saltwaters. These are sacred waters, and it’s up to us to be the voice. It’s up to us to cause no more human harm. We’ve done enough.” – Tina Calderon, Gabrielino Tongva and Chumash culture bearer