Recent legal actions have hindered oil and gas company Sable Offshore’s plan to restart the Las Flores Pipeline and begin oil sales in July. A campus environmental coalition, UCSB Stop Sable, has continued to oppose the pipeline and urged California Governor Gavin Newsom to stop the plan from restarting.
Members of UCSB Stop Sable observed whether the injunction had been upheld on May 29 at the Gaviota State Park Campground. Anusha Singh / Daily Nexus
On June 3, a Santa Barbara judge issued an emergency temporary restraining order to the Office of the State Fire Marshal (OSFM) to process Sable’s application to restart the pipeline until July 18. The order will be followed by a hearing on whether the OSFM complied with state and federal environmental laws when it waived certain cathodic protection regulations for the pipeline last December. Cathodic protection prevents pipeline corrosion that occurs through oxidation and eventual breakdown. Sable asserts that its operations comply with a consent decree given to the previous pipeline operator, Plains All American.
On May 28, the Santa Barbara County Superior Court approved a preliminary injunction from the California Coastal Commission for maintenance and repair work on the Las Flores Pipeline. Sable said that as of that morning, it had already completed its work on the pipeline.
“We look forward to overturning today’s decision, though it has no bearing on Sable’s plans to recommence oil sales by July,” Sable Vice President of Environmental & Governmental Affairs Steve Rusch said in a statement. “Sable will continue to aggressively defend our vested rights to pursue low carbon California oil and natural gas sorely needed to stabilize supply and lower consumer gasoline prices.”
Members of UCSB Stop Sable observed whether the injunction had been upheld on May 29 at the Gaviota State Park Campground. Sable had been conducting repair work in the Gaviota State Park prior to that day. The group observed from the publicly accessible Las Cruces Trail that pipeline work had in fact ceased.
“I’ve been to four other legal meetings,” second-year environmental studies major Jared Umphress said. “We’ve tried to work through the system and with the system and with our set laws … I feel like we’ve exhausted the system, and thus we have to work around it.”
The group of around 15 people chanted, “What do we want? Enforcement. When do we want it? Now,” and, “The pipeline will break, our future is at stake.” Anusha Singh / Daily Nexus
The group also highlighted that Governor Newsom has not spoken about the pipeline. In December of last year, 120 environmental organizations, such as the Environmental Defense Center and the Associated Students Environmental Affairs Board, co-signed a letter to Newsom urging him to ensure that state agencies comply with environmental laws and deny permission to restart the pipeline.
“Newsom right now is using his state agencies as a shield. He’s claiming that he’s the leader of climate progress in California, but he’s well aware of what’s happening here and he just isn’t doing anything because he thinks that he has a chance at running in [the 2028 presidential campaign] and that’s just cowardly,” fourth-year environmental studies major Izzi Sistek said.
Earlier this week, Newsom told The Wall Street Journal he is not “thinking about running [for president], but it’s a path that [he] could see unfold.”
Previously, Newsom had taken a stance against oil, signing legislation to restrict new oil wells and accusing oil companies of concealing research that indicated petroleum use was a major cause of climate change. In recent months, Newsom has advocated for refiners in the state.
“I write to direct you to redouble the State’s efforts to work closely with refiners on short- and long-term planning, including through high-level, immediate engagement, to help ensure that Californians continue to have access to a safe, affordable, and reliable supply of transportation fuels, and that refiners continue to see the value in serving the California market, even as demand for fossil fuels continues its gradual decline over the coming decades,” an April letter to the California Energy Commission read.
After observing that there was no ongoing repair work, the coalition rallied along a freeway exit ramp leading into the campground at around 8 a.m. The group of around 15 people chanted, “What do we want? Enforcement. When do we want it? Now,” and, “The pipeline will break, our future is at stake,” for an hour and were met with occasional honks and cheers from passing vehicles.
“’It’s inspiring [to see] everybody who came out because it showed that we’d wake up early and we’d physically be here, which is a statement in and of itself,” Umphress said. “Having our signs and having cars pass by people will notice this, they’ll see that people took the time out of day to be here, so they’ll bring attention.”
After observing that there was no ongoing repair work, the coalition rallied along a freeway exit ramp leading into the campground. Anusha Singh / Daily Nexus
Student advocates were joined by members of the Society of Fearless Grandmothers Santa Barbara, a local climate action group. Group members Irene Cooke and Michal Lynch recalled the 2015 Refugio Oil spill, which shut down the pipeline.
“What I remember was hearing from people that they couldn’t breath, especially people up here, further off the coast, all sorts of people were reporting illnesses of various kinds, either respiratory or worse, where they just couldn’t function,” Lynch said. “And for months and months, it wasn’t just ‘whoops and it’s gone’ — it gets into your system.”
Cooke reiterated that the coalition hopes that Newsom speaks out against the pipeline.
“On the one hand, [Newsom] wants to be a climate champion, and on the other hand, he’s sitting idly by, letting state parks give a waiver for work in this park, letting the Fire Marshal give a waiver for safety measures, totally abandoning the people of Santa Barbara County,” Cooke said.
The California State Lands Commission (CSLC) has also voiced its opposition to the restart. The CSLC sent Sable a letter on May 23, stating concerns about Sable’s May 19 restart announcement. The commission stated that the oil that has flowed from the Santa Ynez Unit (SYU) — the offshore platforms that the Las Flores Pipeline System serves — was from well-testing procedures and not a full-fledged restart.
“Characterizing testing activities as a restart of operations is not only misleading but also highly inappropriate — particularly given that Sable has not obtained the necessary regulatory approvals to fully resume operations at SYU,” the letter read.
The most recent action occurred on June 12, when several Sable investors initiated an investigation regarding potential violations of federal securities laws that aim to protect investors. Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, a shareholder rights law firm, is investigating the matter on the investors’ behalf.
