Meanwhile, the California Coastal Commission notified Sable Offshore that it intends to issue a cease and desist order aimed at shutting down crude oil extraction in the Santa Barbara Channel.
Sable responds:“Sable Offshore Corp. (“Sable”) through its subsidiary, Pacific Pipeline Company (“PPC”), continues to lawfully operate through its existing coastal development permits which were issued in 1986.”
DOT and others shouldn’t make statements they can’t back up (see the X post below).
As a supporter of responsible offshore oil and gas operations, I find statements like this to be irresponsible and embarrassing. Sable Offshore is not using newer or safer drilling technology than is used in many other areas.
The Sable Offshore Project is using new technology to drill oil that is more safe and environmentally friendly than anywhere in the WORLD@PHMSA_DOT is proud to be a part of this and making America ENERGY DOMINANT 💪 https://t.co/q3ztD1G0R4
— U.S. Department of Transportation (@USDOT) June 10, 2026
Those who have been following the Santa Ynez Unit saga should take a look at Sable’s informative PowerPoint update (attached). The presentation includes reserve data, well operation plans, production forecasts, financial and legal updates, and regional energy supply information.
Also, Sable CEO Jim Flores has announced that Energy Secretary Wright and Interior Secretary Burgum will be visiting the project this week. Transportation Secretary Duffy was also expected, but he will not be attending.
Judge Stephen V. Wilson, US District Court for the Central District of California ruled that Sable’s pipeline doesn’t imminently harm Gaviota Park. Judge Wilson said the state “is grasping at straws,” for evidence of real environmental harm, and the federal consent decree governing the terms of the system’s restart is controlled by the California Office of the State Fire Marshall, not the parks department.
The judge didn’t rule on the larger question of whether the Defense Production Act order to restart the Las Flores pipeline system was lawful.
The CBD had challenged an April 2025 BOEM decision concludingthat Sable was not required to revise its development and production plan for the SYU. They sought a court order requiring a revised plan. This suit seemed to be a stretch, so its dismissal is not a surprise.
Per the Dept. of Justice, the court dismissed the lawsuit because the plaintiffs’ asserted procedural injury had no basis in the statute, was not traceable to any action by BOEM, and could not be redressed by an order of the court.(Other than that, it was just fine. 😉)
Among other problems the court identified with the plaintiffs’ case, they invoked a provision of the statute that governs “approval of a development and production plan,” not revision of an already-existing plan. It will be interesting to see the full decision so that we can better understand the context for that statement. Distinguishing revised plans in that manner could have significant policy implications.
For a full update on Sable litigation, see the section of their Quarterly Report beginning on p. 12.
California Attorney General Bonta asks the Court to stay Energy Secretary Wright’s Order directing Sable, under the Defense Production Act to restart production and preliminarily enjoin Defendants, and all those acting in concert with Defendants (i.e. Sable), from enforcing or relying on it. See the attached Federal Court filing.
The AG’s irreparable harm and public interest arguments seem particularly weak, and this may not be the best time to attempt to halt a 20+% increase in California oil production.
An apology letter from the California Coastal Commission (CCC) to SpaceX was part of a lawsuit settlement. SpaceX alleged political bias in the commission’s 2024 decision to deny increased Falcon 9 launches at Vandenberg Space Force Base, based on comments about Elon Musk’s political views and SpaceX’s labor practices.
Excerpt:
“In 2024, the Commission reviewed consistency determinations by the U.S. Space Force for SpaceX’s Falcon 9 launch program at Vandenberg Space Force Base. During that review, some Commissioners made negative comments about SpaceX’s labor practices and its Chief Executive Officer’s political views. The Commission acknowledges that these political comments were irrelevant to the Commission’s consistency review and were improper, and the Commissioners apologize for those comments.”
AI confirms my suspicions that formal CCC apologies are highly unusual 😉
Update: Another EIA revision to Gulf of America oil production for Dec. 2025 (1.994 to 1.985 million bopd) means that 2019 retains the production record by the narrowest of margins – 1.898 to 1.897 million bopd. Stay tuned because this may not be the final word 😉.
Per EIA, Feb. 2026 production dipped a bit to 1.931 million bopd (chart below).
Meanwhile, California OCS oil production for FEB continued at about 10,000 bopd. This number may increase a bit for March, and more for April data when the first Sable sales are included. A big increase, by as much as 500%, should be apparent in the June report barring a court ordered shutdown.
Sable’s updated PowerPoint presentation is attached.
Also, the 2025 compensation package for Sable CEO Jim Flores is attracting attention. Flores received $76 million in total compensation. The bulk of his pay came from more than $69 million in stock awards, alongside a $1.3 million salary and a $3.9 million bonus.