
What’s next for Sable Offshore?
Posted in California, energy policy, Offshore Energy - General, Regulation, tagged passes easily, Sable Offshore, Santa Ynez Unit, SB 237 on September 14, 2025| Leave a Comment »
Posted in California, energy policy, Offshore Energy - General, pipelines, Regulation, tagged AB 1448, California, California Coastal Commission, production restart, Sable Offshore, Santa Ynez Unit on September 12, 2025| Leave a Comment »

John Smith has highlighted the attached bill that could, if passed, further derail Sable’s plans to restart Santa Ynez Unit (SYU) production.
This provision appears to target Sable:
Section 3(b)(2): Repair, reactivation, and maintenance of an oil and gas facility facility, including an oil pipeline, that has been idled, inactive, or out of service for five years or more shall be considered a new or expanded development requiring a new coastal development permit consistent with this section.
The legislation would be effective on 1/1/2026 so perhaps Sable will already be producing. Sable may also explore the jurisdictional and interstate commerce issues touched on in this post.
This LA Times update adds to the confusion as to the implications for Sable.
Posted in California, Offshore Energy - General, pipelines, Regulation, tagged California Fire Marshall, DOT, Gov. Newsom, PHMSA, pipeline, Sable Offshore, Santa Ynez Unit, State legislation on September 10, 2025| Leave a Comment »

Sables’ share price sank on Tuesday following reports from Bloomberg and others that Governor Newsom is proposing new restrictions on California’s offshore oil industry. With Sable Offshore as a primary target, stricter requirements for restarting inactive intrastate oil pipelines would be imposed. •
This could trigger yet another legal battle or increase the complexity of those that are ongoing. The onshore pipeline, now owned by Sable Offshore, was originally classified as an interstate pipeline under Federal jurisdiction. However, following the 2015 Refugio oil spill, it was reclassified as an intrastate pipeline via a 2016 letter of understanding signed by representatives of the Federal Office of Pipeline Safety (DOT-PHMSA) and the Office of the State Fire Marshal (pertinent text pasted below).

Given that the Sable pipeline will carry OCS production, it would seem to fundamentally be an interstate line (Federal jurisdiction), as it was when owned by Plains. Could DOT reverse the 2016 letter agreement? That is conjecture for the attorneys and courts to consider.
Meanwhile, below is an upbeat Sable video on the pipeline!
Posted in California, Offshore Energy - General, Regulation, tagged BSEE, class action, litigation, production restart, Sable Offshore, Santa Ynez Unit, securities fraud on August 12, 2025| Leave a Comment »

In addition to the Johnson filing, at least 7 other law firms (links below) have announced class action litigation alleging that Sable Offshore made false or misleading statements regarding the restart of Santa Ynez Unit production.
Perhaps working in Sable’s favor is the fact that the Federal government (BSEE) made a similar production restart announcement nearly 2 months after Sable, declaring victory and seemingly taking credit for the achievement:
“This is a significant achievement for the Interior Department and aligns with the Administration’s Energy Dominance initiative, as it successfully resumed production in just five months.“
Will the Dept. of Justice intervene on behalf of Sable?
Meanwhile, Sable’s share price rebounded in mid-July and is holding up surprisingly well (see below). Perhaps investors don’t see the class action suits as a significant incremental threat given the risks associated with decisions by 8 California agencies, Santa Barbara County, and various judges, and the persistent challenges by well-organized opponents of offshore production.

Posted in California, Offshore Energy - General, pipelines, Regulation, tagged BSEE, investors lawsuit, press release, production restart, Sable Offshore, Santa Ynez Unit on July 31, 2025| Leave a Comment »

On July 25, 2025, more than 2 months after Sable’s brief production restart and 7 weeks after a court decision halted further production, BSEE surprisingly announced the resumption of Santa Ynez Unit (SYU) production boasting:
“This is a significant achievement for the Interior Department and aligns with the Administration’s Energy Dominance initiative, as it successfully resumed production in just five months.“
Were the authors of the press release unaware that the SYU production, which was largely from well tests, was halted by court order shortly after it began? More philosophically, is such cheerleading appropriate for the principal safety regulator, particularly given that BSEE is engaged in litigation over its practices in facilitating SYU production?
Ironically, just 3 days after BSEE hailed the resumption of production, the attached lawsuit was filed on behalf of investors who purchased Sable Offshore securities between May 19, 2025 and June 3, 2025. BOE contributor John Smith shared the filing.
The plaintiffs allege misleading statements regarding the resumption of production. Some of the key points cited in the filing:
Posted in California, energy policy, pipelines, Regulation, tagged California Coastal Commission, halt to pipeline work, preliminary injunction, Sable Offshore, Santa Ynez Unit on May 28, 2025| Leave a Comment »
For the reasons set forth herein, the application of the California Coastal Commission for issuance of a preliminary injunction is granted. No bond is required. The Commission shall present a written order for entry by the court.
The roller coaster ride continues. Sable Offshore’s stock price plunged in response to the latest order.

Posted in California, Offshore Energy - General, tagged production restart, Sable Offshore, Santa Ynez Unit on May 20, 2025| 2 Comments »