A Santa Barbara County Superior Court judge ruled this week that Sable Offshore Corp. conducted work on its oil and gas pipelines without proper permits.
Judge Thomas Anderle issued a decision on Wednesday that found that Sable began construction on segments of its Santa Barbara County pipelines that was not covered by permits that the company already held.
In its decision, the court stated that the California Coastal Commission did not abuse its authority when it issued a cease-and-desist order to Sable, concluding that the company was conducting unauthorized work on the pipeline. Sable and the Pacific Pipeline Co. had sued the commission over the cease-and-desist orders.
“The Court agrees with the (Coastal) Commission’s characterization of such work as beyond the scope of the 1986 (coastal development permits),” the ruling stated.
The decision also cited the disturbance of the area’s natural habitat and disturbance to the access roads as work that exceeded the original permit’s limits.
Sable plans to restart oil production for the Santa Ynez Unit, which includes offshore platforms, a Gaviota Coast processing facility and transportation pipelines. One of the pipelines, CA-324, is the pipeline that ruptured in 2015 and caused the Refugio oil spill. It has been shut down since then.
The company came under fire after it began working on the pipelines in 2024, including the installation of safety valves and replacing and reconstructing faulty segments.
Sable was issued a cease-and-desist order by the California Coastal Commission in November 2024 after the commission was informed of work done to the pipeline and surrounding areas and determined it was unpermitted.
The company continued its construction and stated that the previous Coastal Development Permits that Sable obtained when it purchased the pipeline facilities from ExxonMobil granted it the right to perform repairs and maintenance on the system.
However, the commission argued that those permits did not cover the most recent construction work by Sable.
Sable claimed that it excavated 3.7 acres across its worksites and an estimated 72,000 cubic yards of soil in the coastal zone, according to court documents.
The commission issued an $18 million fine against Sable in April after the company reportedly ignored the cease-and-desist orders and continued its work. Sable later sued the commission over the orders.
In a statement after the court’s ruling this week, the commission stated that the decision upholds its authority to protect California’s shorelines.
“We are pleased the court upheld the commission’s authority to protect the beautiful coast of California,” said Lisa Haage, chief of enforcement for the California Coastal Commission. “We are disappointed that Sable has so far declined to follow state law but hope that will change in light of the court’s ruling.”
Julie Teel Simmonds, senior counsel at the Center for Biological Diversity, called the ruling a victory for the environment.
“The judge thankfully recognized that this post-spill work on the idled pipelines was no ordinary repair and maintenance and that the Coastal Commission acted squarely within its authority by ordering Sable to stop,” Simmonds said. “This is a victory for California’s precious coastal resources and the rule of law.”
In the aftermath of the ruling, Sable called the decision “disappointing” and said that it is suing the commission for its erroneous cease-and-desist orders.
The company stated that the construction work was done as part of its anomaly repair program on the Las Flores Pipeline System and claims it was completed in accordance with federal rulings.
Jim Flores, chairman and CEO of Sable, said the decision will not impact its goal of restarting the pipeline and transferring oil through it.
“Sable is very concerned about the state’s crumbling energy complex,” Flores said. “California’s economy will face dire consequences if refineries continue to close due to the lack of domestic production, which should be a major concern for the bondholders of the State of California.”
