News

Jun 17, 2023

Santa Barbara County planners delay decision on oil pipeline valve replacement appeals

County Reporter/Associate Editor A decision on three appeals of a permit to install 16 new valves on two oil pipelines, one along the Gaviota Coast and the other from there into Los Padres National

County Reporter/Associate Editor

A decision on three appeals of a permit to install 16 new valves on two oil pipelines, one along the Gaviota Coast and the other from there into Los Padres National Forest en route to Kern County, was put off by a split vote of the Santa Barbara County Planning Commission last week.

The 3-2 decision directed the Planning and Development Department staff to figure out the extent of additional environmental analysis that might be needed to determine the impacts of the valve replacement work, restarting the flow of crude oil through the pipeline and potential pipe ruptures and spills.

Fourth District Commissioner Larry Ferini and 5th District Commissioner Victor Martinez cast the dissenting votes.

Staff was directed to bring the report to the commission at its April 26 meeting — 25 days after the deadline set by Assembly Bill 864 to install the “best available technology” to reduce the amount of oil released in a spill on existing pipelines in the Coastal Zone.

A map from a Santa Barbara County Planning and Development Department report shows the location of motor-operated valves, designated as MOVs, and independent check valves, designated as CHKs, on pipelines 901 along the coast and 903 heading inland. The valves are designed to halt the flow of oil in the event of a pipeline rupture and are intended to comply with state Assembly Bill 864, drafted in response to a 100,000-gallon spill from Line 901 in 2015.

AB 864 was drafted in response to the May 19, 2015, rupture in the Gaviota Coast pipeline, designated Line 901, near Highway 101 that released more than 100,000 gallons of crude oil. The pipelines have been shut down since the 2015 incident.

The oil flowed down a drainage culvert to the Pacific Ocean just west of Gaviota State Park, affecting 25 miles of coastline, according to a staff report.

To comply with AB 864, Plains Pipeline LP sought and received a permit to install 16 new valves at various points along Line 901 and Line 903 to halt a reverse oil flow.

That decision was appealed by the Tautrim family, Gaviota Coast Conservancy and GreyFox LLC.

“There is no more dangerous facility in the county of Santa Barbara than the oil facility we’re dealing with,” said Barry Cappello, representing the Tautrim family, who said he was Santa Barbara city attorney during the 1969 offshore oil spill.

He added that “the promises made by these operators are promises that in the past have been broken.”

First District Commissioner C. Michael Cooney, 2nd District Commissioner Laura Bridley and Chairman and 3rd District Commissioner John Parke were leaning toward approving the appeals and denying the project.

But before taking that action, they decided to see “what additional [environmental review] would look like.”

A crew of professional cleaners toss bags of contaminated beach sand into a Dumpster at Refugio State Beach following the May 2015 pipeline rupture that released more than 100,000 gallons of crude oil. A permit for Plains Pipeline to install 16 check valves in the lines to minimize spill impacts is being appealed.

Appellants raised a number of issues, each of which the staff refuted in its response, resulting in a recommendation to deny the appeals and approve the project.

One issue was a claim that once the valves are replaced, oil from offshore platforms and wells farther south can start flowing through the “old, corroded” pipelines.

“Exxon has a right to restart [oil production], so an OK of this project means the pipeline would become operational without further environmental review,” Parke asserted.

Appellants had raised California Environmental Quality Act requirements as an issue, in part, because the county and Plains Pipeline LP are relying on an environmental impact report that was finalized in 1985 for construction of the Celeron/All American Pipeline Project.

“This is unique in my experience that we rely on an EIR of that age,” Cooney commented.

Jessica Diaz, representing GrayFox, said the environmental impact report falls short of CEQA’s mandate and the project was an example of “piecemeal” approval.

“You have to analyze the whole of the project,” she said. “It can’t be broken up into bite-size pieces.”

Martinez said the appellants and members of the public brought up CEQA requirements as a way to stop the pipelines from restarting.

“That’s not why we’re here today,” he said, pointing out the permit being appealed was just for replacing the valves. “I, for one, am in support of staff’s recommendation and would deny the appeals.”

Ferini agreed: “I don’t think this is the place to stop the pipeline, which is what I think everyone wants.”

But the idea that conditions have changed considerably since the initial EIR was conducted was a concern for Cooney and Bridley, who respectively made and seconded the motion to delay the decision and get more information on additional environmental review.

“Given that we’re really dealing with history here, I think we need a fresh environmental review to either supplement or replace that old environmental impact report,” Cooney said.

County Reporter/Associate Editor