The California Coastal Commission voted Thursday to fine Sable Offshore Corp. $18 million after a months-long conflict over work on the pipeline that caused the 2015 Refugio oil spill.
The commission voted to approve $18,022,500 in administrative penalties against Sable for work it has done to the pipeline that runs through Santa Barbara County, saying that the company did not receive permission to begin construction on the line.
One of the commissioners, Santa Barbara City Councilwoman Meagan Harmon, called the situation “profoundly disappointing.”
“We have not gotten a foothold with Sable, and we’ve not gotten a foothold with Santa Barbara County either. So, we are where we are, and because of this absolute failure of communication and Sable’s, to be frank, absolute failure to follow the law, this hearing has become necessary,” Harmon said.
Harmon said she believed that commission staff had tried to work with Sable but that the company made no effort to work with them.
The commission chose to issue the fine to Sable in an 9-2 vote, and sent another cease-and-desist letter to Sable for construction on the pipeline, an order for Sable to restore the area, and the fine.
Staff had recommended a $14.9 million fine, but the commission approved a higher fine amount with a discount if Sable applies for a permit.
During Thursday’s meeting held in Santa Barbara, commission enforcement staff reported that Sable has ignored the commission’s authority by doing unpermitted work on the pipeline, and it has failed to stop when the state issued cease-and-desist orders.
The pipeline in question, CA-324, is the same line that ruptured in 2015 and caused the Refugio spill that dumped 123,000 gallons of oil onto the coast and into the ocean. Sable is the new owner of the pipeline and the Santa Ynez Unit oil platforms and processing facilities. The company wants to restart production, which has been shut down since the spill almost a decade ago.
In September 2024, Sable began construction to repair parts of the pipeline. The California Coastal Commission was alerted to the work and has issued multiple cease-and-desist orders.
“There is no precedent for this kind of direct disregard for legal orders, and it is highly problematic for the entity to flatly refuse to comply with a legal validly issued order,” said Lisa Haage, the chief of enforcement for the commission.
Sable representatives claim that the commission did not have the authority to order the company to stop construction.
The company claimed that it had the right to conduct repairs and construction in the area under contracts it acquired from ExxonMobil. The pipeline was owned by Plains All-American Pipeline at the time of the spill and since then changed hands to ExxonMobil and then Sable in 2022.
Original pipeline construction permits issued by Santa Barbara County in the 1980s include repairs and other work on the pipeline, Sable representatives said.
“Accordingly, the (environmental impact report) confirmed that the pipeline operational corridor would remain permanently impacted by ongoing work,” said DJ Moore, an attorney for Sable.
Construction crews have conducted excavation with heavy equipment, widened roads, installed metal plates, installed shutoff valves, and removed, replaced and reinforced parts of the pipeline, according to the commission staff report.
The commission staff claimed that the work done on the area around the pipeline had a negative effect on the area, including land erosion and disrupting protected wildlife species such as the southwestern pond turtle and the Southern California steelhead.
During deliberations, the commissioners expressed frustration that Santa Barbara County had not done more in terms of enforcement. Other commissioners also said they did not understand why no one from the county had attended the meeting to address the commission.
In previous letters to the commission, the county said it did not act because it believes the work done by Sable falls under the scope of existing permits.
Justin Cummings, the commission chair, agreed with the staff recommendations. However, he made a motion to increase the amount of the administrative penalties, which most other commissioners supported.
“We have been saying over and over again, if you … work with us in collaboration, we get through the process much more quickly, but if you want to go out and try to supersede the people, the state of California, we’re going to stand up for ourselves,” Cummings said.
As part of the decision, Sable will be able to lower the fine if it goes through the process to obtain a coastal development permit.
After the meeting was over, Sable responded to the vote by saying it was based on a fundamental disagreement between the company and the commission.
“The Sable Offshore team has decades of experience in successfully collaborating with government agencies. Despite having worked with Coastal Commission staff for many months, the commission and Sable disagree regarding whether Coastal Act authorization exists for the work and whether the commission has the authority to order our maintenance and repair work to stop. That’s a fundamental disagreement that the parties have not been able to resolve,” said Steve Rusch, Sable’s vice president of environmental and governmental affairs.
“Sable is dedicated to restarting project operations in a safe and efficient manner. No California business should be forced to go through a protracted and arbitrary permitting process when it already has valid permits for the work it performed.”
Public Comment
The meeting brought out scores of people on both sides, with 116 people signing up to speak during public comment.
Hannah-Beth Jackson, a former state senator, told the commission that Sable can’t put “lipstick on a pig” and that the commission had a responsibility.
“I think the fact that we have a company that has chosen just to ignore those responsibilities is a level of arrogance we cannot accept. Nobody is above the law,” she said.
Trent Fontenot, a Sable supporter, called the commission’s actions an example of overreach and said the decision lies with the local government.
“How much of our taxpayer dollars are going to continue to be wasted by the commission staff fighting the very local agencies that they delegated jurisdiction to?” Fontenot said.
Opponents of the pipeline declared the commission’s vote a victory for the South Coast.
“The Coastal Commission is doing an amazing job of standing strong and holding Sable accountable for the damage this Texas company has done to California’s coast and wildlife,” Brady Bradshaw of the Center for Biological Diversity said.
“The fragile coastal ecosystem can’t handle much disruption before it suffers lasting harm, and another major oil spill would be disastrous. The commission is the only agency solely focused on protecting California’s world-famous coastline, and we really appreciate the integrity it’s showing in upholding this critical mission.”
