Efforts by an oil company to restart a Gaviota Coast pipeline and three offshore oil platforms have hit a snag.
Santa Barbara County Supervisors are moving to reject a controversial request to transfer ownership permits for the pipeline and other facilities to Sable Offshore Corporation. Sable wants to restart the operation, which has been offline since a significant oil spill on the coast a decade ago.
Nearly 100 people attended a hearing held by the County Supervisors to comment on the transfer issue.
Plains All-American Pipeline owned the system at the time of the 2015 140,000-gallon pipeline rupture. It considered replacing the pipeline, but instead decided to sell it to ExxonMobil. The pipeline was critical for the company because it moved oil from the three oil platforms off the Santa Barbara County coast.
ExxonMobil explored options to reactivate the wells, including using tanker trucks until the pipeline was back in operation. Santa Barbara County rejected the truck idea, citing safety concerns about the large number of tankers that would be on the road.
The company eventually sold the infrastructure to Sable, which now owns and manages the oil facilities. The issue was the transfer of the county-issued permits necessary to operate the onshore facilities.
Sable planned to fast-track a return to service by repairing the pipeline, rather than replacing it.
That created opposition in the environmental community, with concern that the decades-old system would cause another spill. A coalition of environmental groups led efforts to block the permit transfer, raising questions about Sable’s ability to operate the facilities safely. They pointed out that the company is facing several legal challenges over how it conducted repairs to the system.
Santa Barbara County planning staff recommended approval of the permit transfers, as did the Santa Barbara County Planning Commission. Earlier this year, Supervisors deadlocked 2 to 2 on the issue, with County Supervisor Joan Hartmann recusing herself because part of the project was near her property.
Sable sued, seeking a court order to allow the transfer. A judge instead ordered Supervisors to revisit the issue. After a review, it was decided that there was no conflict of interest for Hartmann, and she could participate in the second hearing.
Dozens of opponents at the hearing called for the county to reject the transfer.
"A criminal complaint with 21 charges, including five felonies. An Attorney General complaint. Numerous violations of the state water code and the state fish and game code. This company is just racking them (legal challenges) up," said Linda Krop, Chief Counsel for the Santa Barbara-based Environmental Defense Center. The EDC led a coalition of environmental groups fighting the proposed transfer.
"They've had a consistent disregard for following due process in their attempts to restart the pipeline," said Lelia Werlind, who opposes the project. "As a community member, I'm extremely worried about the environmental consequences of transferring the permits."
However, supporters were also out in force at the meeting.
"Those requirements are objective and based on operational capability, financial responsibility, and compliance with regulatory obligations," said Sable employee Jose Crespo. "Sable has met those requirements. County staff confirmed it. The Planning Commission confirmed it. Federal regulators overseeing the system have also confirmed compliance. By every legal and technical measure, the criteria are satisfied."
"We're here to support the Sable owner/operator change transition," said Kristin Miller, President of the Santa Barbara South Coast Chamber of Commerce. "An equitable and fair process should mean that our government does not favor or disfavor specific industries based on political preferences. Businesses are already struggling with meeting the conflicting federal, state, and local regulations."
The operation of the pipeline is regulated by the state fire marshal’s office, which hasn’t signed off on the restart efforts. Sable contended the repairs were not only covered but also required by the state permits.
Some attendees who testified talked about the issue of restarting the facilities, but that wasn’t the issue under consideration; instead, it was the transfer of the permits.
"I feel bad for the public and my colleagues. The public has been led to believe the denial today will somehow stop the restart," said Santa Barbara County Supervisor Bob Nelson. "I believe it will not."
County supervisors ultimately voted 4 to 1, with Nelson the lone dissenting vote, to direct staff to draw up the paperwork to deny the permit transfers. They’ll formally vote on it next month. But, exactly how the decision will impact Sable’s efforts to restart operations is unclear.
