SANTA BARBARA COUNTY, Calif. (KEYT) – In compliance with an executive order issued late last week, Sable Offshore has restarted oil production in Santa Barbara County.
On Friday, the Trump Administration shared publicly that it compelled the Houston-based energy company to restart oil production, including the use of onshore pipelines shuttered since a massive oil spill in 2015, in Santa Barbara County.
"Even in these unprecedented times, this abuse of executive power would be staggering," shared Environmental Defense Center's Chief Counsel Linda Krop regarding the Justice Department's memorandum defending Friday's order from the Trump Administration. "The federal administration is threatening to prop up a company that has flouted the law and failed to make necessary repairs identified by state regulators. Restarting this defective pipeline without following any state or federal safety laws would directly threaten our environment, our economic security, and the health and safety of Californians."
According to the Secretary of Energy Chris Wright, the federal government issued the order to restart production under the authority of the Defense Production Act of 1950 and delegated to the Energy Secretary by Executive Order 13603 "National Defense Resources Preparedness".
"By delegation [through Executive Order 13603], section 101(a) [of the Defense Production Act of 1950] authorizes the Secretary [of Energy] to require acceptance and priority performance of contracts or orders and to allocate materials, services, and facilities, as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense with respect to all forms of energy," stated a Defense Production Act Order signed by Secretary of Energy Wright on March 13, 2026.
Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Justice issued a slip opinion that argued the President, or a designated person, can order Sable Offshore, the company seeking to restart oil production since purchasing local oil production infrastructure collectively called the Santa Ynez Unit from ExxonMobil in February of 2024, to begin oil production immediately -skirting federal, state, and local regulatory authority- for national security purposes.
"Sable is directed to immediately commence performance under contracts or orders for services, including contracts or orders hereinafter entered into or sought, for hydrocarbon transportation capacity in the SYPS [Santa Ynes Pipeline System] from the point of production in the SYU through the SYPS, including transportation service activities at the onshore facilities in Las Flores Canyon, California, to the Pentland Station terminal in Pentland, California, at which point hydrocarbons move through the Plains All American Line 2000 for transport to refineries," instructed Friday's order from the Energy Secretary.
The resumption of oil production plays a crucial role in who will own the oil production infrastructure going forward.
Court documents show that Sable initially secured a $622,000,000 loan from ExxonMobil to fund the purchase of the Santa Ynez Unit from the oil giant.
The line of credit had a pivotal condition.
Ownership of the Santa Ynez Unit would revert back to ExxonMobil unless oil from the Santa Ynez Unit under Sable's management enters the market.
Sable stated in a press release after the ordered restart that it expects to make its first sales of oil on April 1 of this year at an expected gross oil rate of 50,000 barrels of oil per day and therefore, retain ownership of the Santa Ynez Unit going forward.
"Sable Offshore is putting California consumers first by increasing domestic supply of crude oil into the California market by approximately 17% and we look forward to continuing to execute as so ordered by the Defense Production Act executed on March 13, 2026," said Jim Flores, Sable Offshore's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. "We look forward to working closely with the Department of Energy in fully complying with the DPA and working with the Trump administration to take all necessary steps to deliver the energy necessary for the security and defense of the country."
Friday's order from the Trump Administration did not explicitly direct crude oil from the Santa Ynez Unit for exclusive military use nor limit its destination to the nation's strategic petroleum reserve.
Previously, oversight of any plans to restart onshore pipelines needed to transport oil from the Las Flores Canyon Facility on the Gaviota Coast -which receives and processes oil from offshore platforms- was assigned to the Office of California State Fire Marshal through a court order after one of the onshore pipelines ruptured.
The pipeline that suffered the rupture, formerly known as Line 901 and now known as Line CA-324, has remained dormant since the spill in May of 2015, which spilled at least 100,000 gallons of crude oil that spread across 150 miles of California coastline, destroying thousands of acres of shoreline habitats.
In September of last year, Sable Offshore submitted a Request for Approval of Restart Plans, which involved the onshore pipelines, to the California Office of State Fire Marshal in accordance with the consent decree agreed to by the previous owner of the pipelines.
The state safety regulator found that there were still outstanding steps required before approving restart the following month.
Instead of conducting the requested safety actions, Sable Offshore instead informed investors in December of last year that it had determined that pipelines connecting the onshore oil processing plant on the Gaviota Coast to Pentland Station in Kern County are technically interstate pipelines under the Pipeline Safety Act and requested that federal regulators take over its restart plans.
The Department of Transportation agreed with Sable Offshore's assessment and promptly asserted its authority over restart plans in mid-December.
The Department of Transportation's pipeline safety regulator argued that the restart plans were subject to emergency permitting based on a national energy emergency declared by President Trump last year which could bypass normal regulatory steps.
While that emergency permit expired, in mid-February of this year, the federal government announcemed a 30-day public comment period kickstarting a review process before a new special permit could be issued.
In an 8K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission in early February, Sable shared with investors that it has not made any additional capitol investments or improvements into onshore facilities and pipelines outside of ongoing court proceedings.
Days after the federal approval, environmental advocacy groups filed an emergency lawsuit seeking to block the approval, but the federal court declined to issue a stay on federal approval of restart plans.
"EDC [Environmental Defense Center] and its clients are deeply concerned with the potential of this pipeline being turned on while recent findings from the state Fire Marshal show that the pipeline still needs repairs before it can safely resume operations," noted Linda Krop with the Environmental Defense Center, one of the plaintiff's in the lawsuit challenging the emergency permitting filed on Dec. 24.
Despite the decision to not immediately halt the restart process, the court did grant that the lawsuit would receive expedited processing and, during court proceedings in early January, legal representatives of Sable Offshore admitted that oil production had not restarted at both offshore and onshore pipelines, opening the onshore pipelines up to a recently passed state law.
The new state law, SB 237, would require Sable Offshore to request a coastal development permit among other steps from the California Coastal Commission to conduct any, "Repair, reactivation, and maintenance of an oil and gas facility, including an oil pipeline, that has been idled, inactive, or out of service for five years or more".
Those specifications only apply to shuttered onshore pipelines in Santa Barbara and Kern counties.
During the flurry of approvals and litigation in late December of last year, the California Coastal Commission noted that it had not waived its right under the Coastal Zone Management Act to review the federal regulator's decision to reclassify pipelines and assume authority over restart plans.
The state regulator added that the federal government's expedited approval is also subject to review of compliance under Subpart E of the Coastal Zone Management Act, through the National Environmental Policy Act, as well as through Appendix D of the Consent Decree in U.S. et al v. Plains All American Pipeline, LP and Plains Pipeline, the same court decision agreed to after the 2015 Refugio Oil Spill and referenced in Tuesday's Justice Department opinion.
The day after the executive order directing a restart last week, the California Department of Parks and Recreation declined the energy company's easement request before demanding the immediate removal of pipelines from the state agency's jurisdiction.
"Section 8 of the temporary pipeline easement granted to Sable’s predecessor, Celeron Pipeline Company, which expired in 2016 ("Expired Easement"), attached hereto, authorizes State Parks to demand Sable to remove the pipeline and restore the property to its original condition after the end of the term," stated the California Department of Parks and Recreation in a letter to Sable Offshore on March 14, 2026. "This letter demands immediate removal of the pipeline on State Parks’ property pursuant to section 8 of the Expired Easement. State Parks has determined that due to Sable’s excessive drain on state resources and incompatibility of their project with the park unit, State Parks will not be granting Sable an easement to continue to use Gaviota State Park for its oil pipeline operations. Additionally, although, State Parks has discussed the possibility of an easement with Sable, all prior permissions and discussions have been premised on the requirement that Sable comply with all applicable state laws and obtain all applicable state approvals, and Sable has now indicated that it has begun or imminently intends to begin restarting operations without adhering to those requirements or obtaining permission to use the State of California’s land."
Of the 22 pipeline anomalies detected during pipeline condition testing last year, 18 were within the borders of Gaviota State Park, shown as the blue circles on the left side of the image below along Line 325a which is the green line.
"[I]f State Parks does not receive a plan for removal of the pipeline within 10 days of the date of this letter, or if Sable does not confirm in writing to State Parks no later than 12 PM Pacific Time on Monday, March 16, 2026, that it has not restarted Line 325 traveling through Gaviota State Park and that it will not restart that pipeline until and unless it obtains all required state approvals and a new easement from State Parks or obtains a final judicial decision (inclusive of appeals) that any state approvals or easements are not needed, State Parks will pursue legal action to defend the State's property rights, and State Parks reserves the right to take all appropriate legal action in the interim," concluded the state agency.
Your News Channel reached out to confirm if Sable Offshore responded in time to meet Monday's deadline and a spokesperson on behalf of the California Department of State Parks and Recreation declined to answer the question after the deadline stating, "We have nothing further to add at this time".
"It’s completely reasonable for State Parks to tell Sable to either comply with the law or get its pipeline out of Gaviota State Park, and this step will curb oil spill risk along our coast," argued Julie Teel Simmonds, an attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity's Oceans program on Monday. "This letter is a clear signal the state has had enough of the company’s illegal and destructive behavior. I’m relieved that state officials are drawing a line in the sand to protect California’s coast and wildlife from the risk of another devastating oil spill."
In addition to those remaining regulatory hurdles, Sable is also facing civil charges brought by the California Attorney General and criminal charges brought by the Santa Barbara County District Attorney's Office regarding its already completed pipeline repair work.
"I'm distressed and saddened that California’s coast now faces the threat of another oil disaster from this unsafe pipeline," shared Brady Bradshaw, senior oceans campaigner at the Center for Biological Diversity. "The cynical misuse of a national security law for the benefit an oil company that has repeatedly broken the law is a shocking development, even from this administration."
Further complicating Sable's restart plans was the decision by the County of Santa Barbara's Board of Supervisors to not transfer permits the day before the Department of Transportation publicly shared that it had taken over oversight of the restart process from state safety regulators.
"You have asked whether an order issued under the Defense Production Act of 1950 ("DPA" or "Act"), Pub. L. No. 81-774, 64 Stat. 798 (codified as amended at 50 U.S.C. § 4501 et seq.), to Sable by the President or his delegee would preempt the California laws currently impeding Sable from resuming production and operating the associated pipeline infrastructure," opened the Justice Department opinion issued March 3, 2026. "We conclude that it would."
The Justice Department went on to explain that Sable Offshore would be authorized to bypass federal, state and local regulations in order to restart oil production at the Santa Ynez Unit and operate without any risk of liability while complying with the federal order.
"[S]ection 4511 [of the Defense Production Act of 1950] authorizes the President to control the distribution of materials, services, and facilities, and to require entities to prioritize the performance of some contracts over others, as 'necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense' or 'to maximize domestic energy supplies'." noted the Justice Department opinion. "[T]he DPA makes explicit that orders issued pursuant to the Act displace state-law liability. It provides that "[n]o person shall be held liable for damages or penalties for any act or failure to act resulting directly or indirectly from compliance with a rule, regulation, or order issued pursuant to this chapter."
"Such immunity from liability exists even when the related DPA rule, regulation, or order is subsequently 'declared by judicial or other competent authority to be invalid'," added the opinion before further insulating a potential emergency order by the President stating that, "a finding of necessity is likely immune from judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act ("APA") and other statutes, even if the Secretary [of Energy] makes the determination by exercising delegated presidential power."
According to the order to restart announcement made on Friday of last week, "The action also prioritizes pipeline transportation capacity to ensure crude produced offshore California moves through the Las Flores Pipeline System to Pentland Station and into interstate pipelines, allowing American energy to reach domestic refineries more efficiently, while reducing California's reliance on foreign oil vulnerable to geopolitical disruption."
"Today, more than 60 percent of the oil refined in California comes from overseas, with a significant share traveling through the Strait of Hormuz—presenting serious national security threats," noted the Secretary of Energy.
Approximately 20 million barrels of oil transited the Strait of Hormuz each day before the war in Iran started in late February.
"President Trump is using the war in Iran as a pretext to override the will of Santa Barbara County residents and the state of California," argued Congressman Salud Carbajal Friday. "The reality is that restarting the Sable project would produce nowhere near enough oil to lower the skyrocketing gas prices families are facing. His reckless war is causing immense damage, and jamming the Sable project through is a hollow solution. Once again, the President is prioritizing Big Oil over the well-being of our community. I will continue to fight this federal overreach in Congress and stand with our local partners as they pursue legal challenges in court."
The Trump Administration requires Sable Offshore to provide a monthly report to the Department of Energy on the use of Friday's order to restart and, according to the Secretary of Energy, the order will remain in effect, "until such time as the conditions necessitating the issuance of this order abate or until Sable is directed otherwise."
Sable Offshore has restarted oil production after Trump Administration order last week News Channel 3-12.
Hence then, the article about sable offshore has restarted oil production after trump administration order last week was published today ( ) and is available on News channel ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Sable Offshore has restarted oil production after Trump Administration order last week )
Also on site :