The Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors voted to deny the appeal of the Pacific Coast Energy Company’s Orcutt Hill project on Tuesday, after hours of public comment and discussion.
With supervisors Peter Adam and Steve Lavagnino dissenting, the board voted 3-2 to deny the project, which was appealed after the Planning Commission voted against the project in July.
PCEC submitted its application to double the number of oil wells at its 1555 Orcutt Hill Road facility, which has 96 wells now.
“This is another sad day for Santa Barbara County. This applicant went above and beyond what was needed,” Lavagnino said.
“I find (Orcutt Hill) to be an acceptable project. The site has been in constant oil production for over 100 years. That environment in that area has been disturbed for over 100 years. If you are not going to allow drilling on Orcutt Hill, it’s not going to happen anywhere.”
More than 40 people commented on the proposal Tuesday, with the majority opposed.
“Almost all of the emails I got on the negative side had a Santa Barbara address associated with them,” said Adam, who represents the Fourth District. “I didn’t get any — that I’m aware of — from my district.”
The company had made changes to its original proposal, adding options such as excluding drilling in the Careaga formation and to mitigate greenhouse gas impacts to zero.
The applicant’s additions to the project included a labor agreement with the State Building and Construction Trades, and the elimination four pods, which would have reduced production by about 40 percent, according to PCEC representatives.
PCEC representatives also proposed a conservation plan with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to establish a California tiger salamander habitat and the idea of funding research projects on how to enhance the proliferation of Lompoc yerba santa.
Supervisor Janet Wolf said the information provided wasn’t enough to prompt her to vote yes.
“I was the ‘no’ vote when this first came, which was to extend the evaluation period of this project,” Wolf said. “I was confident at that time, and even more confident at this time. I can’t find a significant or overriding financial benefit for this.”
Findings for denial were noted at the Oct. 11 hearing.
The project identifies significant and unavoidable impacts to biological resources and water resources due to expected oil seeps and potential oil spills or leaks, according to the staff findings.
Supervisor Doreen Farr outlined the history of oil leaks, which resulted in nearly 100 crude oil seeps since the company began production.
The frequency of oil seeps occurring at the site increased once the applicant started their steam injection program in 2005, but has fallen due to the implementation of revised field practices developed with the Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources, according to a staff report.
“When we met the first time, PCEC had certainly changed their position dramatically,” Farr said. “Sometimes the seeps are active flowing oil down a gully and difficult to contain. It’s not a good history and story. I have voted for a lot of oil related projects and development. I’ve never seen one with a history like this, and I was willing to give the applicant the benefit of the doubt.”
The county has addressed the permitting of the existing seep cans through the emergency permit process.
While tax revenues produced by current PCEC range from $2.7 million to $4.7 million annually between 2012 and 2015, this “uncertain benefit does not outweigh the significant environmental impacts the project will cause,” according to a staff report.
The property tax revenue generated by the project would have been allocated to the county general fund, schools, fire protection, the Santa Maria Public Airport District, water agencies, the Orcutt Union School District and the Santa Maria juvenile hall.
“I acknowledge the oil company is part of our local economy, and we continue to use oil in our daily lives,” supervisor Salud Carbajal said. “However, with risks in oil development, we need to ensure any new development is done safely to minimize environmental, health and safety impacts.”
— Noozhawk staff writer Brooke Holland can be reached at bholland@noozhawk.com. Follow Noozhawk on Twitter: @noozhawk, @NoozhawkNews and @NoozhawkBiz. Connect with Noozhawk on Facebook.
