Attorney General argues safety requirements bypassed and federal law ignored by Trump Administration when forcing pipeline restart
WASHINGTON D.C. (KEYT) – California Attorney General Rob Bonta penned a letter stating that the Trump Administration's plans to issue a special permit to waive safety requirements regarding the use of pipelines to transport oil through three California counties ignores federal law and procedures.
"California urges PHMSA [U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration] to deny [pipeline operator] Sable's application for a special permit," stated the letter from California's Attorney General to Linda Daugherty, Acting Associate Administrator of Pipeline Safety for the U.S. Department of Transportation. "PHMSA had no authority to issue an emergency special permit for Lines CA-324/325 and has no authority to decide on the Application [for a special permit]."
Back in February of this year, the U.S. Department of Transportation's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration published a notice of a request to waive safety requirements to remediate corrosion on certain onshore pipelines within 180 days of discovery.
Over 25,000 comments were received regarding the waiver of safety requirements before closing.
The pipelines in question, formerly known as Line 901 and Line 903 and now known as Line CA-324 and CA-325, were shut down after Line 901 ruptured due to corrosion and spilled over 100,000 gallons of crude oil over 150 miles of California coastline in May 2015.
Since a federal court order in 2020, restart plans involving the pipelines has been subject to the authority of the California Office of State Fire Marshal alongside other state regulators.
"[I]n 2020, the United States and the State of California, through their respective agencies, including PHMSA [Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration] and the State Fire Marshal, entered into a Consent Decree with Plains and its parent company Plains All American Pipeline," noted the Attorney General's letter. "The Consent Decree conveyed "sole regulatory oversight" over the restart of Lines CA-324/325 to the State Fire Marshal and requires the owner of the pipelines to obtain state waivers providing conditions in lieu of modern safety regulations for cathodic protection. See Consent Decree, Appendices B and D. The Consent Decree also assigns the State Fire Marshal with exclusive authority to approve a restart plan after the pipelines' owner complies with the conditions set out in the Consent Decree, including obtaining state waivers through the State Fire Marshal for the limited effectiveness of cathodic protection...As part of its acquisition of Lines CA-324/325, Sable agreed to be bound by the Consent Decree."
Despite that federal court order requiring the state safety agency to manage restart plans, early last 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 the oil production infrastructure from ExxonMobil in February of 2024, to begin oil production immediately -skirting federal, state, and local regulatory authority- for national security purposes.
Those onshore pipelines are part of oil production infrastructure that include offshore pipelines and platforms as well as an oil processing plant at Las Flores Canyon collectively referred to as the Santa Ynez Unit.
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.
On March 13, 2026, the Trump Administration announced that it had ordered Sable Offshore to restart oil production, including the use of those shuttered onshore pipelines, regardless of any outstanding legal or safety claims.
The Trump Administration delegated the authority to invoke the Defense Production Act of 1950 to the Secretary of Energy through Executive Order 13603 "National Defense Resources Preparedness".
"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 the March 13 order from the Energy Secretary.
Sable Offshore shared it resumed oil production in compliance with the order from Secretary Wright the following day and then shared it had resumed sales of oil from the Santa Ynez Unit weeks later.
According to Sable, Platform Harmony is producing about about 22,000 gross barrels of oil per day and the energy company expects production restart at Platform Heritage by April 6, with an expected total rate of over 30,000 gross barrels of oil per day.
Platform Hondo is expected to resume production by the end of the second quarter of this year and produce over 10,000 barrels of oil per day added Sable Offshore.
Attorney General Bonta already filed a lawsuit in federal court in March challenging the restart order legality and stated purpose arguing, "Restarting the flow of oil through Lines CA-324/325 does not fix any of these purported problems. Defendants' national defense and national energy emergency justifications are patently unreasoned. To the contrary, the offshore platforms have a maximum expected gross oil rate of 50,000 barrels per day, contributing a fraction of a percent to the domestic energy market. Although international conflict has driven up oil prices globally by reducing oil exports from the Middle East, there is no actual shortage of crude oil in the United States; the incremental oil production the Wright Order directs would thus neither address a shortage (because there is none) nor lower the cost of crude oil in the United States (because this miniscule incremental production would not have an impact on the global price of oil). And even if there were any marginal benefit to the "national defense," it would be vastly outweighed by the environmental and safety risks, as well as the unlawful and unconstitutional displacement of the State's police powers and the intrusion upon the State's sovereign property rights."
Late last year, Sable was still complying with the procedures outlined by the federal consent decree.
The energy company submitted a Request for Approval of Restart Plans in September of last year to the California Office of State Fire Marshal, but the state safety regulator found that there were still outstanding steps required before approving restart.
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.
"PHMSA [Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration] may reject a certification and assert jurisdiction only if it decides that the State authority is not satisfactorily enforcing compliance with applicable safety standards," explained Attorney General Bonta in the letter to the Department of Transportation. "However, prior to rejecting any certification and assuming regulatory control, PHMSA must first provide the State authority with notice and an opportunity for a hearing before taking final action. Here, PHMSA has not rejected the State's certification and the State Fire Marshal and the State of California have and continue to dutifully enforce compliance with all applicable safety standards."
"PHMSA has no authority to unilaterally modify the Consent Decree," argued Attorney General Bonta. "To lawfully issue a special permit for Lines CA-324/325, PHMSA would need to first modify or terminate the Consent Decree through the proper process."
The Consent Decree details that the process to modify the court-approved deal requires, "a subsequent written agreement signed by the Parties" which would include federal regulators with the Department of Transportation, Sable Offshore, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, and state safety regulators.
The federal government filed a motion to change or entirely remove the consent decree on March 30, 2026, but that motion is set for hearing in federal court on June 1 of this year.
"As a government agency and party to the Consent Decree, PHMSA is bound by it and cannot unilaterally assert regulatory jurisdiction over Lines CA324/325 in contravention of the Consent Decree's express delegation of that authority to the State Fire Marshal," added Attorney General Bonta. "The fact that the United States filed a motion to terminate or modify the Consent Decree only supports that the United States understands that PHMSA is bound by the Consent Decree and has no authority to issue a special permit."
Sable indirectly confirmed in an 8K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission in early February that it had not made any of the requested safety actions from state regulators when it informed investors that it has not made any additional capitol investments into onshore facilities and pipelines and had only spent money on ongoing court proceedings.
"The pipeline operator [Sable Offshore] then relied on the [U.S. Secretary of Energy] Wright Order, and a contemporaneous opinion from the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel, to argue that any state laws or existing court orders standing in the way of restart could be ignored and set aside," detailed the Attorney General in a Mid-March lawsuit challenging the legality of the order forcing a restart. "The very next day, on March 14, 2026, the pipeline operator restarted pumping oil through pipelines despite an outstanding preliminary injunction in state court, despite not having necessary permits from either the state or the federal government for pipeline operation, despite still not having approval from several state agencies, and despite not having a current or valid easement to keep or utilize the segment of its pipeline crossing California state property."
The Houston-based company was already facing legal claims regarding some of its repair work completed last year including civil charges brought by the Attorney General's Office and criminal charges brought by the Santa Barbara County District Attorney's Office.
The Department of Transportation may have removed itself from overseeing the requested safety waiver as well by proactively promising Sable Offshore it wouldn't enforce the Pipeline Safety Act in a letter issued on January 12, 2026.
"PHMSA has made it clear that regulated parties "may rely on this notice as a temporary safeguard from PHMSA regulatory enforcement"," explained Attorney General Bonta. "If PHMSA is going to enact this [Limited Enforcement Discretion] policy , it should refrain from exercising jurisdiction over Sable's Application because it has already predetermined that it will not enforce its own regulations."
"We just want them to follow the law," argued Sable Offshore CEO Jim Flores during an interview on Fox News last month. "But that doesn't happen in California. You have to defend yourself. And the aspect is, the more of this going on is running so many people out of the state. And we're one of the few people investing in the state and trying to help it."
Attorney General Bonta noted that even if the federal pipeline safety regulator had the authority to approved Sable's application, it would still need to comply with federal environmental laws and Department of Transportation procedures.
"The National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA") requires the preparation of an environmental impact statement for "major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment"," stated California's Attorney General. "The Department of Transportation's own Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts (DOT Order 5610.D) indicate that major federal actions may include
"grants, construction, regulatory actions, certifications, licenses, permits, approval of policies and plans, adoption or implementation of programs, waivers, legislation proposed by DOT, and any renewals or approvals of the above"."
Multiple officials with the Trump Administration and Sable Offshore have stated that the forced restart is for national security purposes, but what, if any, conditions have been imposed that are not publicly available regarding the use of oil from the Santa Ynez Unit remain unanswered and likely inaccurate.
"The Trump Administration remains committed to putting all Americans and their energy security first," stated Secretary Wright on Friday, March 13, 2026. "Unfortunately, some state leaders have not adhered to those same principles, with potentially disastrous consequences not just for their residents, but also our national security. Today's order will strengthen America’s oil supply and restore a pipeline system vital to our national security and defense, ensuring that West Coast military installations have the reliable energy critical to military readiness."
The Trump Administration's order to restart did not explicitly direct crude oil from the Santa Ynez Unit for exclusive military uses nor limit its destination to the nation's strategic petroleum reserve.
Instead, the restart order required Secretary Wright to, "allocate materials, services, and facilities, as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense with respect to all forms of energy", but the same Administration is responsible for cutting billions in energy investments, potentially outside of its legal authority, rescinding over 3.5 million acres of offshore waters leased for energy generation, and even spending almost a billion dollars in one instance to halt plans to build offshore wind farms just last month.
Additionally, The Trump Administration's unilateral exemptions to federal laws on behalf of private oil and gas production under the umbrella of national security are both not new and ongoing.
"[Oil produced in California] is used by the 50 military bases in California, Nevada, and Arizona. And that's the reason why Trump invoked the Defense Production Act," claimed Sable Offshore's CEO Jim Flores during an interview with Fox News' Laura Ingraham following the forced restart. "He has to make sure those military bases and those sailors and airmen and so forth have fuel for their jets and their boats and so on."
Despite multiple requests from Your News Channel for more information about those claims, Sable Offshore has not responded.
"PHMSA provided scant reasoning for how the emergency special permit would address an actual or impending emergency," also noted California's Attorney General in his letter to the Department of Transportation. "PHMSA stated that the Emergency Special Permit is necessary because it "would enable and facilitate the special permit segments to meet regional energy demands, reduce refinery feedstock prices, mitigate the risks of fuel shortages on the West Coast, and reduce United States dependency on imported oil and the associated energy security risks of such imports"... However, PHMSA did not explain how the granting of the Emergency Special Permit will enable and facilitate, reduce, mitigate, or meet any of these purported needs. PHMSA gave no indication that it examined any data or considered any factors to conclude that the granting of an emergency special permit would indeed address the alleged energy "emergency"."
Back in February of last year, Professor Dr. Paasha Mahdavi with UC Santa Barbara's Department of Political Science found that the closure of the Santa Ynez Unit did not result in a direct increase in imported oil.
The chart below, courtesy of Dr. Mahdavi's research in Economic analysis of market impacts of resuming oil and gas production from the Santa Ynez Unit published in February of 2025, shows the impact of the Santa Ynez Unit's oil production compared to other sources.
"Aside from a peak in imports in 2017-2019, and the pandemic collapse in 2020, foreign import levels in 2023 were roughly the same as in 2014-2015 [see chart below]," explained Professor Mahdavi. "Looking at the period directly after the SYU went offline, there was no increase in foreign imports: imports actually fell to 316 million barrels in 2016 from 320 million barrels in 2014 and 318 million barrels in 2015."
"Purely from an operating cost and up-front capital cost perspective, the SYU is more cost-competitive than roughly 80% of California's onshore oil fields," noted Professor Mahdavi. "Yet even without accounting for retirement costs, SYU's barrels are not more cost competitive than existing foreign suppliers to California. Assuming operating costs of roughly $44/barrel for SYU, this would still exceed average per-barrel total costs— including capital expenditures, taxes, transport, and administrative costs—for California's top foreign suppliers of oil. This includes Saudi Arabia ($9/barrel), Iraq ($11/barrel), Colombia ($11/barrel), Ecuador ($7-$20/barrel), and Brazil ($21-28/barrel)."
"This suggests that restarting SYU production would not lead to a reduction in imports on a strictly economic basis," Dr. Mahdavi added.
The Secretary of Energy's March 13th order forcing a restart did not include any federal subsidies to reduce the cost of production which would ensure oil from the Santa Ynez Unit is cheaper than international sources.
"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," admitted the Secretary of Energy in the oil restart announcement on March 13, 2026.
An estimated 20 million barrels of oil transited the Strait of Hormuz each day before the military strikes in Iran, authorized by the Trump Administration, started in late February of this year.
"Oil trades at a worldwide price," explained a press release from California's Governor on the day of the announced restart. "American crude sells to the highest bidder, not at a discount for American consumers. Prices are surging because Trump's military strikes on Iran have disrupted shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, trapping an estimated 20% of the global oil supply in the Persian Gulf."
"Donald Trump started a war, admitted it would spike gas prices nationwide, and told Americans it was a small price to pay. Now he's using this crisis of his own making to attempt what he’s wanted to do for years: open California's coast for his oil industry friends so they can poison our beaches," added Governor Newsom. "His answer is a pipeline that would contribute just 0.05% to total global crude oil production, and that represents less than 0.3% of the petroleum products that are trapped in the Persian Gulf because of Trump's war. That is a drop in the bucket that will not solve the crisis he created."
Perhaps the strangest invocation of how restarting oil production at the Santa Ynez Unit qualifies as a national security issue was received by Your News Channel author on Wednesday, March 25, 2026, in an email directly from a Department of Energy spokesperson which asserted:
"Despite being home to more than 30 military installations, California has adopted policies that have left our forces—and $4.1 trillion of our Nation’s GDP—dependent on imported oil. This is an untenable threat to our national security, especially in a time of military conflict.
Instead of correcting these self-inflicted vulnerabilities, California leaders are attempting to block the Secretary’s efforts to restart critical infrastructure and strengthen domestic energy production. California leaders should stop prioritizing political agendas over America’s energy security."
The judge who oversaw the agreement in federal court regarding the onshore pipelines, the state of California, its elected leaders, nor its voters have been officially designated under federal law as a national security threat in any publicly available listing from any federal agency.
Multiple questions regarding the above statement from the U.S. Department of Energy designating tens of millions of Americans as a national security threat went unanswered and the statement is now subject to Freedom of Information Act requests with both the federal energy agency and the Department of Defense.
The Defense Department acknowledged the official request and asked for additional time to respond in accordance with federal disclosure laws.
The Department of Energy though, repeatedly feigned ignorance of the need to disclose information through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and even went so far as to request that Your News Channel author cite the law requiring disclosure.
Your News Channel author complied with the request and provided an exhaustive explanation of how the request complied with all thirteen subsections of 10 CFR 1004.
The Department of Energy's assigned FOIA Officer did not respond to the assistance and it appears as though the federal energy agency intends to wait out the 20-day response period detailed in the federal disclosure law.
An official denial is required before an appeal can be filed shared the Department of Energy's Office of Hearings and Appeals when contacted by Your News Channel author.
In late March, Sable Offshore's CEO Jim Flores confirmed that an unspecified amount of oil from the Santa Ynez Unit was being sold to Chevron.
"Sable is proud to announce oil sales through the Santa Ynez Pipeline System to Chevron," stated Sable Offshore's CEO in a press release. "In doing so, we are providing American oil from American soil through an American pipeline to an American refinery for American consumers and the United States military."
The fact that Chevron is buying oil from the Santa Ynez Unit has a substantial impact going forward.
Court documents showed that Sable Offshore initially secured a $622,000,000 loan from ExxonMobil to fund the purchase of the Santa Ynez Unit from the oil giant.
That line of credit had a very important condition.
Ownership of the Santa Ynez Unit would revert back to ExxonMobil unless oil from the Santa Ynez Unit under Sable's management entered the market.
That deadline and impact of sales were noted not just by Your News Channel author, but also by California's Attorney General Rob Bonta when the state filed a lawsuit regarding the forced restart in mid-March.
"Sable was and remains undercapitalized. As a condition of the acquisition, if Sable did not restart production by January 1, 2026, ExxonMobil had the right of reversion," stated the state's lawsuit challenging a restart. "[T]he Wright Order [directing a restart] does not say, and no public information indicates, that Sable holds a Title I government contract or that Sable is required to sell its crude to the government in a Title 1 contract. The Wright Order also fails to state where, or to whom, Sable will sell the crude oil it produces."
A spokesperson on behalf of ExxonMobil declined to comment on the change in ownership facilitated by the Trump Administration when reached for confirmation by Your News Channel and Sable Offshore has repeatedly ignored related questions on multiple occasions.
"Let's be clear: we do not have a 'National Energy Emergency'," stated Attorney General Bonta in a press release Monday. "President Trump is simply prioritizing the fossil fuel industry, ensuring that they can continue to line their own pockets by illegally restarting oil transportation through California’s pipelines at the expense of our public health and environment."
