SANTA BARBARA COUNTY, Calif. (KEYT) – A state agency has filed a civil suit against Sable Offshore alleging that the Houston-based company's use of a four-mile segment of pipeline inside of Gaviota State Park, currently being used to transport crude oil without the proper paperwork, is technically trespassing.
"This is a civil action brought by State Parks to enjoin Defendants Sable Offshore Corp. and Pacific Pipeline Company from trespassing at Gaviota State Park," opened Wednesday's civil filing in Santa Barbara County Superior Court. "State Parks previously granted an easement to Sable's predecessor-in-interest to place and operate the pipeline through the Park. That easement, however, expired in 2016, and neither Sable nor its predecessors-in-interest have acquired a new easement. Thus, Sable is not currently authorized to transport oil through the segment of the pipeline that runs through the Park. Sable is also not authorized to leave its pipeline in the Park. Despite this lack of authorization, on or about March 16, 2026, Sable began transporting oil through the pipeline, and is therefore trespassing on State Parks' property."
"State Parks seeks an injunction directing Sable to cease the flow of oil through the Park and to remove the pipeline according to the expired easement," requested the state agency in its filing.
On March 13, the Trump Administration stated that it had compelled the private energy company to restart oil production, including the use of onshore pipelines shuttered since a massive oil spill from a ruptured pipeline in 2015.
The shut down in 2015 included both offshore and onshore oil-producing infrastructure collectively known as the Santa Ynez Unit.
"Ever since a catastrophic oil spill at Refugio Beach in 2015 led to a court-ordered consent decree, CAL FIRE - Office of the State Fire Marshal has been responsible for overseeing the repair of the lines that caused the spill, which are now operated by Sable Offshore Corp in Santa Barbara County," shared Daniel Villaseñor with the California Natural Resources Agency.
The ruptured pipeline, formerly known as Line 901 and now referred to as Line CA-324, impacted 150 miles of California coastline and destroyed thousands of acres of shoreline habitats. Its sister pipeline which was also shut down at the same time, Line 325, which runs from the Gaviota Coast to Pentland Station in Kern County was also restarted after the order from the Trump Administration.
Transportation of oil through onshore pipelines through Santa Barbara County, a small section of San Luis Obispo County, and eventually to Kern County are necessary to sell crude oil from offshore platforms and the first sales from the Santa Ynez Unit are expected to hit the market on April 1, 2026, shared Sable Offshore.
"Since 2016, State Parks has issued annual Right of Entry ("ROE") permits to Sable’s predecessors-in-interest or companies affiliated with Sable that have allowed them to access Gaviota State Park in order to physically access the Pipeline and perform minimal maintenance on the Pipeline," detailed the California Department of Parks and Recreation in Wednesday's filing. "Those permits are necessary because...Sable does not have an easement that would otherwise allow it to access the Park."
During pipeline safety checks and repairs conducted last year, 18 pipeline anomalies were detected along a four-mile-long section of pipeline within the borders of Gaviota State Park.
The image below shows the part of the small section of pipelines that pass through Gaviota State Park on the lower left-hand side and the detected pipeline anomalies are identified as the blue circles with the pipeline in question, Line 325a, shown as the green line.
"On May 8, 2025, State Parks issued a separate ROE permit to PPC that allowed it to perform eighteen (18) "anomaly" digs along the segment of the Pipeline that runs through Gaviota State Park," stated Wednesday's filing by the state agency. "The purpose of these digs was to expose the Pipeline in certain locations to allow a physical inspection of it and to determine if repairs of the Pipeline were needed."
"The permit expired on August 8, 2025," noted the California Department of Parks and Recreation. "As a consequence of the failed rehabilitation and lack of reseeding, the dig areas at issue are currently overgrown with invasive mustard, which is the environmental impact that the ROE permit condition aimed to prevent."
According to State Parks, Sable was informed of the steps necessary to secure an easement needed to restart the flow of oil through the pipeline subject to its jurisdiction.
"Rather than pursuing an easement as State Parks had recommended, Sable initially pursued an ROE permit to perform the anomaly digs discussed above," shared the state agency before concluding, "Sable does not currently have any easement rights or other property rights that would allow it to transport oil through Gaviota State Park (or to leave its Pipeline in the Park)."
The day after the executive order directing a restart, the California Department of Parks and Recreation officially declined Sable Offshore's easement request regarding the four-mile pipeline segment 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."
On Monday, March 16, the California Department of State Parks and Recreation shared that, "Sable has shown that it does not intend to comply with State Parks' demand and we will be taking further action."
Some of that repair work completed last year is also subject to civil charges brought by the California Attorney General and criminal charges brought by the Santa Barbara County District Attorney's Office.
Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Justice issued a slip opinion, arguing that the President, or a designated person, can issue an order under the Defense Production Act of 1950 (DPA) to Sable Offshore, and the Justice Department opinion concluded the action authorizing a restart, even if it was found unlawful or removed, shielded Sable Offshore from legal liability regarding the forced restart.
"[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 earlier this month. "[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 Sable Offshore for compliance with the federal order 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."
Talia Nimmer with the Climate Law Institute and the Center for Biological Diversity, a plaintiff in a lawsuit heard by Jude Geck earlier this week, posited that the liability shield the Justice Department found in the Defense Production Act of 1950 only extends to contract damages by complying with the federal order and not all legal claims in perpetuity.
Sable Offshore shared with investors that it has resumed production of hydrocarbons from Platform Harmony and will ramp up to full production from platforms Harmony and Heritage by the end of March. Platform Hondo is expected to join its sister platforms at full production by June of this year.
"This is a revolting power grab by an extremist president. Trump is misusing this Cold War-era law just to help a Texas oil company skirt vital state laws that protect our coastline, and Californians will pay the price," shared Talia Nimmer, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, one of multiple plaintiffs seeking legal action against Sable's restart. "Mandating a restart of these defective oil pipelines won't curb high gas prices, but it will put coastal wildlife at huge risk of another oil spill. Overriding state law to let an oil company restart pipelines sets a radically dangerous precedent. It's clear that no state is safe from Trump."
Sable Offshore and the Trump Administration have stated the forced restart circumventing federal, state, and local laws is justified by a national security energy emergency, but getting oil from the Santa Ynez Unit to market has an added benefit for the company.
"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 in the oil restart announcement on March 13, 2026.
Approximately 20 million barrels of oil transited the Strait of Hormuz each day before the war in Iran started in late February.
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.
"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," explained 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."
Court documents detail that Sable secured a $622,000,000 loan from ExxonMobil to fund the purchase of the local oil production infrastructure which includes a deadline where ownership would revert back to ExxonMobil unless oil from the Santa Ynez Unit under Sable's management enters the market.
A spokesperson on behalf of ExxonMobil declined to comment on the change in ownership indirectly facilitated by the Trump Administration when reached for clarification Monday.
"Directing a private oil company to push its project through without safety checks and adherence to California laws that keep our coast safe is appalling and illegal," added Nimmer.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who signed the civil suit filed on Wednesday, asked the court to order an injunction preventing the continued transportation of oil through the pipeline within the state park as well as an order requiring the removal of the pipeline segment entirely.
Your News Channel reached out to Sable Offshore and its representatives for comment and more information and its response will be added to this article when they are received.
State agency files lawsuit against Sable’s use of oil pipeline in Gaviota State Park News Channel 3-12.
Hence then, the article about state agency files lawsuit against sable s use of oil pipeline in gaviota state park 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 ( State agency files lawsuit against Sable’s use of oil pipeline in Gaviota State Park )
Also on site :
- A Dead Character's Live Text, Justin Trudeau, and a Pity Party: Inside the 'Firefly' Announcement Panel
- Lea Michele Shares Why Recording ‘Nobody’s Side’ From Broadway’s ‘Chess’ Was ‘One of The Most Incredible Moments’ Of Her Career
- Ubisoft are ending game development at long-time Tom Clancy studio Red Storm with 105 staff laid off, according to reports