Federal Agencies to Conduct Environmental Assessment of Sable Offshore’s Plans to Restart Oil Production in Santa Barbara Channel

Move Comes Ahead of Thursday’s Public Meeting on State Oversight of Oil Pipeline Proposal

Platform Heritage is one of the three offshore platforms contained in the federal leases now owned and operated by Sable Offshore. | Credit: JC Kinghorn

Two federal agencies have undertaken the task of conducting an environmental assessment of Sable Offshore’s plans to restart oil production in the Santa Barbara Channel — plans set to be discussed this Thursday when the public has its first chance to ask questions to state regulatory agencies. The Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) agreed to work with the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) on the assessment on March 7 in the hopes of resolving a federal lawsuit filed against BSEE by the Center for Biological Diversity with the Wishtoyo Chumash Foundation last year.

The original June 2024 complaint alleges that BSEE — along with its Pacific Regional Director Bruce Hesson and then-Secretary of the Interior Debra Haaland — did not comply with several federal regulations when they authorized extensions of ExxonMobil’s 16 offshore oil and gas leases off the Gaviota Coast. The three offshore oil platforms contained in the federal leases are now owned and operated by Sable Offshore, who intervened as a defendant in October.

BSEE granted the most recent lease extensions in November 2023. They determined that doing so was “in the national interest” and “categorically excluded” from needing an environmental assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) because the oil facilities have been stagnant since the 2015 Refugio Oil Spill.

“[BSEE] based its categorical exclusion review under NEPA on operations being shut down while basing its national interest determination only on the purported benefits of restarting production and without considering any of the harms,” Kristen Monsell, an attorney for the plaintiffs, told the Independent.

Months after the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) first filed suit, BSEE granted Sable two additional permits to dig two new oil wells. As a result, federal Judge Michelle Williams Court is allowing the plaintiffs to amend their complaint to include the new permits in their allegations. Amended arguments were expected in the coming weeks.

Now, BSEE is hoping that conducting an environmental assessment will render the plaintiffs’ allegations moot, whether or not they are amended.

Regardless, an environmental assessment is not as rigorous or comprehensive as an environmental impact statement (EIS), the most recent of which was prepared and certified in the 1980s when the oil pipelines were first constructed. Under NEPA, the results of BSEE’s new environmental assessment may necessitate an EIS if the agency finds significant potential impacts to be possible. According to a declaration to the court from defendant Hesson, “the [environmental assessment] will be completed in the next few months.”

Meanwhile, BSEE has not indicated that it will rescind the lease extensions pending the environmental assessment results, according to CBD attorney Monsell. In other words, this lawsuit is not currently affecting Sable Offshore’s ability to restart oil operations in Santa Barbara.

“This agency has the authority to pause any restart while they’re doing a thorough review of the project,” Monsell added, “and it’s clear they should use that power here after we’ve already had a disastrous spill.”

Monique Limon and Gregg Hart at a 2024 rally protesting Sable | Credit: Courtesy

BSEE’s attorney with the U.S. Department of Justice, Daniel Luecke, declined to comment on the pending litigation. Sable’s spokespeople did not respond to requests for comment.

U.S. Senator Adam Schiff, Congressmember Salud Carbajal, and 21 other members of Congress weighed in on the Sable matter ahead of BSEE’s decision in a March 3 letter to Governor Gavin Newsom, voicing their concerns over bringing crude back to the Central Coast. They asked the governor to require the state Fire Marshal — who has the final say over a restart — to “reconsider” a waiver granted to Sable in December allowing them to operate their oil pipelines without industry-standard corrosion protection. The letter also demanded that the Fire Marshal and California State Parks each hold a public hearing and conduct environmental reviews of Sable’s project. State Parks is negotiating a new easement with Sable for a four-mile stretch of pipeline that runs through the Gaviota State Park.

While a formal public hearing has not yet surfaced, Senator Monique Limón and Assemblymember Gregg Hart will be hosting an informational public meeting at 4 p.m. on Thursday, March 13, at the La Cumbre Junior High Auditorium (2255 Modoc Rd.). Representatives of various state agencies will be present to answer questions about Sable’s restart plans, and California Natural Resources Secretary Wade Crowfoot will moderate the discussion. Attendees are asked to RSVP.

Correction: The results of BSEE’s new environmental assessment may necessitate a federal environmental impact statement (EIS) rather than a state environmental impact report (EIR) as previously reported.