Company fines $ 18 million to define state -owned oil pipelines

From Alejandro LazoCalmness

This story was originally published by CalmattersS Register about their ballots.

The California Coastal Committee today fines a $ 18 million oil company to repeatedly define orders to stop working on a corrosion pipeline in Santa Barbara County, which caused a large oil spill nearly a decade ago.

The vote laid the basis for a potential test for high bets on the state of the state for the development of police oil along the coast. The main pipeline in the gaviota throw more than 100,000 gallons of crude oil on the coastal land and ocean waters, exclusion of fishing, closing beaches and damage to marine life and coastal habitats in 2015.

Sable Offshore Corp., a company based in Houston, buy the pipeline From previous owners, Exxon Mobil, last year, and seeks to restart the oil operation in Santa Ines.

The coastal committee said Sybell has done something that no presumer has done so far: ignoring the agency’s repeated orders and continuing his work.

“Our orders were valid and legally issued, and Cybel’s refusal to comply with a refusal to comply with the law,” said Commissioner Megan Harmon, who is also a member of the Santa Barbara Municipal Council. “Their refusal, in a very real sense, is a subjugation of the will of the people in California.”

“I never accepted how special this area was for granted. As a child, I was injured by a spill of oil ’69, and in 2015 I had to watch how their own children go through the same trauma.”

Carol Millar, resident of Santa Barbara County

The company claims it can continue using the original permission of the pipeline district issued in the 1980s. In February, Sersiber brought a case against the coastal committee sAing that the state illegally stops the work on the repair and maintenance of the company.

At a 5-hour public hearing in Santa Barbara today, over 100 speakers have been arranged, many of them called on the committee to sanction Sybell and stop his work. Some referred to the memories of a spill of oil Refugio for 2015, as well as the large -scale spill of oil Santa Barbara since 1969, caused by the blowing of the Union oil platform. The public outrage of this spill has helped to form the ecological movement, led to the first day of the earth and contributed to the entry into force of many national environmental laws.

“I have never accepted how special this area is for granted,” said Santa Barbara County Resident Carol Milar. “As a child, I was injured by the oil spill ’69, and in 2015 I had to watch their own children go through the same trauma.”

Steve Rush, Vice President of Sybell for Environment and Government, said the committee was overdone due to a spill caused by previous owners.

“We are proud of our well -paid, qualified jobs that the project brought us to the region,” he told the commissioners. “This is not about the oil Refugio oil for 2015. It’s not about restarting the pipeline … It’s not about the future of oil production or fossil fuels in California.”

“We are proud of our well -intentioned, qualified jobs that the project brought to the region. It’s not about the 2015 Refugio oil spill.”

Steve Rush, Sable Offshore Corp.

By repairing the first, corrosive pipelines, the company seeks to restart the production of the Santa Ynez Oil Operation, that includes three offshore platformsaccording to an an A presentation of investors from the companyS Operations stopped after spilling in 2015.

Cyol was excavated around the former pipelines and placed cement bags on the sea floor under the oil and water pipelines.

The fine of the coastal committee imposed against Sybiber is the highest imposed against a company, according to a spokesman for the committee. The Commission voted to reduce the $ 18 million fine to a potentially just under $ 15 million if Sable complies with the state orders and runs for a permit to develop the coast.

At the beginning of last year, the committee staff accused the company with numerous violations of coastal laws, including unpaid construction and excavations on the oil pipeline of 14 miles on the shores of the Gavity, including the areas of the coast.

The Commission Implementation Department said Sybiber has undertaken a major job in many places without providing the necessary permits for the development of the coast.

The company dug large pits, clean vegetation, classified roads, put concrete offshore among other works, according to a staff presentation today. In their presentation, the commission staff said these actions exceed routine maintenance and were a complete restoration of the pipeline.

Coastal committee officials have stressed that work is serious environmental risks, including wetlands and other sensitive habitats, potential damage to protected species, including the turtles of the Western pond and the steel head.

“The time of realized development is particularly problematic, since much of this development is during the breeding season, as well as for the breeding season of frogs with redheads and the season of migrating steel throwing,” says Stephanie Cook, a committee lawyer. “This work has a high potential to adversely affect these habitat areas.”

The staff said he spent months in an attempt to acquire Sable for cooperation, but the company provides incomplete or misleading information.

“Time … is especially problematic, because much of this development was during the bird breeding season, as well as the growing season of frogs with red legs and the migrating season of migrating steel throwing.”

Stephanie Cook, Coastal Committee lawyer

In a statement issued after the hearing, Rush said the company was conducting routine repairs and maintenance of pipelines and stated that the actions were authorized under old permits issued by Santa Barbara County. The work is carried out in areas already affected by previous construction and use, and the company says that the state cannot cancel the interpretation of the county of its permits.

“Sable is dedicated to restarting project operations in a safe and effective way,” Rush says in the statement. “No business in California should be forced to go through a lengthy and arbitrary permit process when there are already valid permits for the work done.”

However, the validity of the permit of the pipeline for the pipeline is controversial. The Council of Supervisory Bodies of Santa Barbara County at the February VOT did not approve of the transfer of the Sable county permit, the new owner. The vote was 2-2, with one member refraining because the pipeline passes through its property. District officials are I’m still trying to decide Their next step.

One of the concerns of district officers is whether Sable has the financial capacity and adequate insurance to deal with a major oil spill.

Pipeline dispute comes as a Trump administration Moves to increase the production of oil and gas at the same time eliminating efforts to develop wind and solar energy.

Several workers who said they were related to the company spoke in support of others who said the company would strengthen the local economy.

Evelyn Lynn, director of Oxnard’s Aspen Helicopters operations, said she supported Sable’s efforts because it would give her company impetus.
“If they are not allowed to start their efforts again, it will have huge secured damage to all our local companies, as well as our company in particular, and all our local people who live here,” Lynn said. “All our employees are required to live in California. They are all local and all affected.”

The coastal committee’s permits are not the only step that the company has to take to manage the pipeline. Numerous government agencies are regulating the pipelines, including the California Department of Pisces and Wildlife of the Petroleum Departure and the Prevention Response and the State Fire Marshal service.

Environmental groups called for a full inspection of the pipeline environment according to the California Environmental Law.

National environmental organizations such as the Center for Biodiversity Weighed, along with local defenders, to support the coastal committee. A group born of the original spill of oil Santa Barbara – the center of defense of the environment – opposes the project and efforts to restart the well. The Surfrider Foundation is also launching the “Do not Activate Sable” campaign, and several beaches spoke against the project.

This article was Originally Published on CalMatters and was reissued under Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Noderivatives License.