Take Action

Make Your Voice Heard

Submit a Comment to NOAA to Support Sable Offshore

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is currently evaluating California’s Coastal Management Program, including the California Coastal Commission — and this is an important opportunity to make your voice heard.

As part of its review, NOAA is accepting public comments on how California is administering its coastal management responsibilities and coordinating with federal agencies.

We’re asking Sable Offshore supporters, local businesses, workers, contractors and community members to take a few minutes to submit a comment to NOAA.

The deadline for submissions is August 22 at 11:59 p.m. PT.

We’ve made the process simple. Visit the link below and select the comment letter that best reflects your perspective. Options are available for business owners, energy industry representatives, Sable employees, safety and engineering professionals, local residents, contractors and workers.

Please take a few minutes today to submit your comment and encourage your colleagues, friends and others who care about these issues to do the same.

Every comment helps ensure NOAA hears directly from the workers, businesses and communities affected by California’s coastal management decisions.

Thank you for your continued support.

Sable Offshore

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Simply input your information below and click submit.

Your name will be auto populated into the letter, so you do not need to incorporate it.

Role(Required)

Name(Required)

Email(Required)

Phone

Address(Required)

Company(Required)

Share one or two sentences describing your company’s work with Sable Offshore and the Santa Ynez Unit/Santa Ynez Pipeline System.(Required)

Please note all custom messages will be reviewed before being sent.

Share one or two sentences describing the work you personally do on the Santa Ynez Unit and Santa Ynez Pipeline System.(Required)

Please note all custom messages will be reviewed before being sent.

California Residents Only, No PO Boxes - Your message will be sent to the following officials:

Disclosure(Required)

Dear NOAA Office for Coastal Management:

I am a business leader in [Company] in [Location] and appreciate the opportunity to comment on NOAA's evaluation of California's Coastal Management Program.

My concern is not simply one disagreement between a company and a regulator. It is a pattern where the state has attempted to expand its own authority beyond what the law allows and what past permits have long established. The Santa Ynez Pipeline System operated for decades in Santa Barbara County under permits issued by local, state, and federal agencies more than thirty years ago. Those are not informal understandings; they are formal approvals that businesses and workers in this region have relied on.

Beginning in 2024, the California Coastal Commission asserted new permitting authority over routine repair work already covered by those longstanding permits, rejecting the conclusions of both Santa Barbara County and federal regulators. The Commission then issued a cease-and-desist order and a penalty of more than $18 million, the largest in its history, for that already authorized work. California's Legislature has since enacted a new law aimed at pipelines idle for five years or more, and even though the Santa Ynez Pipeline System does not meet that description by the law's own terms, the Commission is attempting to apply the law to this pipeline anyway.

When a state commission claims that routine maintenance work that has been performed under existing permits for decades suddenly requires new authorization, it does not just affect one company. It signals to every business operating under a state or federal permit that the ground can shift under them at any time. That kind of unpredictability makes it harder to invest, harder to plan, and harder to keep good jobs in this region.
I am asking NOAA to look closely at whether California's coastal management program is maintaining, or undermining, the kind of stable and coordinated permitting environment the Coastal Zone Management Act was designed to protect, and to recommend the improvements needed to restore that stability.

Thank you for considering this input.

[Your Name]

Messages to the NOAA Office for Coastal Management will be sent at the optimal moment for the campaign.

Disclosure: By submitting this form, you are authorizing us to send a message to your federal leaders on your behalf regarding government actions impacting Sable Offshore Corp. While the sample messages provided reflect the key concerns and themes that will be communicated, such as energy reliability, environmental standards, and job creation, the final version of the message sent may be edited for clarity, accuracy, or strategic effectiveness. Any such changes will not alter the core substance or intent of your advocacy.

Disclosure(Required)

Dear NOAA Office for Coastal Management:

I am an energy sector worker with [Company] in [Location] and appreciate the opportunity to comment on NOAA's evaluation of California's Coastal Management Program.

The dispute over the Santa Ynez Pipeline System, and offshore energy production more broadly, is not just about permits and paperwork. It touches directly on national security, and I do not think that should be taken lightly. In March 2026, the U.S. Secretary of Energy issued an order under the federal Defense Production Act directing Sable to prioritize and allocate pipeline transportation services for the Santa Ynez Pipeline System. That order rested on a national emergency declaration finding that insufficient domestic energy production, transportation, refining, and generation poses an unusual and extraordinary threat to our nation's economy, national security, and foreign policy.

The Defense Production Act is not invoked for routine matters. Sable complied with that order the very next day, resuming petroleum transportation through the Santa Ynez Pipeline System’s onshore pipeline segments in direct response to a federal national security directive.

Despite that, the California Coastal Commission has continued to obstruct activity that the federal government has formally identified as a national security priority, by claiming that Sable’s compliance with the Defense Production Act order violates a new state law that clearly does not apply. I believe NOAA should weigh heavily the fact that a company followed a direct federal order tied to national security, only to face continued resistance and threats of legal action from the state.

I am asking NOAA to take that imbalance into account in its evaluation and to ensure that California coordinates with federal agencies in support of federal energy and security priorities as the Coastal Zone Management Act requires.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

[Your Name]

Disclosure(Required)

Dear NOAA Office for Coastal Management:

I am an employee of Sable Offshore and appreciate the opportunity to comment on NOAA's evaluation of California's Coastal Management Program.
I keep hearing that the Santa Ynez Pipeline System is somehow unsafe to operate. The federal government has said otherwise, and I believe that matters for anyone weighing in on this review. Sable carried out repair and maintenance work on the System’s onshore pipelines, consistent with federal regulations, in 2024 and 2025. Santa Barbara County confirmed that this onshore work was authorized by the pipeline's existing permits, and federal agencies confirmed that the related offshore repair work in federal waters was authorized as well.  The California Coastal Commission reached the opposite conclusion, issuing a cease-and-desist order and a penalty of more than $18 million, the largest in its history, for that same repair work.

Once that repair work was complete, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration inspected the System’s onshore pipelines, approved a restart plan, and issued the special permits needed to resume safe operation. All of these actions confirm that the onshore pipelines are safe and comply with applicable federal regulatory standards.  And despite all of that, the Coastal Commission has attempted to stop the Pipeline System from operating.

I’ve experienced what it’s like when the people on the ground and the federal safety experts agree that something is authorized and safe, only to have another agency try to undermine those determinations based on its own new interpretation of its own authority.

I am asking NOAA to weigh that imbalance seriously in its evaluation, and to consider whether California's coastal management program is giving the determinations of federal agencies the weight the Coastal Zone Management Act requires.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

[Your Name]

Disclosure(Required)

Dear NOAA Office for Coastal Management:

I am a safety professional with experience at [Company] and appreciate the opportunity to comment on NOAA's evaluation of California's Coastal Management Program.

I want to focus on what federal safety regulators actually found regarding the Santa Ynez Pipeline System, because I think that record gets lost in the back-and-forth. In December 2025, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, the federal agency with safety authority over interstate pipelines, confirmed that the Santa Ynez Pipeline System is an active interstate pipeline subject to federal jurisdiction. After in-person inspections and multiple rounds of technical review, PHMSA approved Sable's restart plan for the onshore segments and issued first an emergency special permit, then a standard special permit, for the pipeline's operation.
These are not opinions from Sable or from me. They are formal determinations from the federal agency responsible for evaluating pipeline safety, made after direct inspection and technical review. When federal safety regulators reach that kind of determination, it should carry real weight in any subsequent regulatory action.

Instead, the California Coastal Commission required Sable to seek new approvals to operate the same pipeline that already has Coastal Act authorization, and imposed a penalty of more than $18 million, the largest in its history, for repair work that federal regulators and Santa Barbara County had already reviewed and approved. From a technical and safety standpoint, that outcome is difficult to square with the inspection record.
I am asking NOAA to consider, as part of its evaluation, whether the Commission's actions are consistent with the CZMA's requirement that states give appropriate weight to federal agency safety determinations, and to recommend a process that respects those findings going forward.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide this comment.

[Your Name]

Disclosure(Required)

Dear NOAA Office for Coastal Management: 

I am a resident of [Location] and appreciate the opportunity to comment on NOAA's evaluation of California's Coastal Management Program.

National conversations about energy and coastal policy can feel distant, but for those of us who live in Santa Barbara County, the dispute over the Santa Ynez Pipeline System, operated by Sable Offshore, is not abstract. Domestic energy production and transportation support jobs, local businesses, and tax revenue right here in our community, and this pipeline has been part of that picture for decades. 

What troubles me is the confusion over who actually has authority to make decisions about this pipeline, and what that confusion has cost. Santa Barbara County, the original permitting authority for the pipeline's onshore segments, confirmed that Sable's repair work was authorized under permits it had already issued. The California Coastal Commission tried to override that conclusion anyway, issuing a cease-and-desist order and imposing a penalty of more than $18 million, the largest in its history. 

Since then, the dispute has only grown. The State of California has gone so far as to sue federal agencies, including the U.S. Department of Transportation and the U.S. Secretary of Energy, over their own determinations about this pipeline. When a state sues the federal government over decisions the Coastal Zone Management Act asks it to coordinate on, that is not the kind of partnership Congress intended.

I am asking NOAA to weigh this record seriously in its evaluation and to hold California's coastal management program to the standard Congress set: one where the state works with federal agencies, not around them, and where decisions affecting our jobs and our community are made in a stable, predictable way. 

Thank you for the opportunity to be heard.

[Your Name]

Disclosure(Required)

Dear NOAA Office for Coastal Management:

My name is [Your Name], and I am with [Company]. I appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on NOAA's evaluation of California's Coastal Management Program. 

[Share one or two sentences describing your company’s work with Sable Offshore and the Santa Ynez Unit/Santa Ynez Pipeline System.]

We are proud of our work with Sable Offshore, and we are especially proud that our men and women are part of the team working to make sure that this pipeline meets stringent safety requirements. The people doing this work take that responsibility seriously, and we are committed to ensuring the pipeline operates safely and responsibly.

Safely operating the Santa Ynez Unit and Santa Ynez Pipeline System provides real benefits to our local economy, including approximately 300 new jobs with family-sustaining wages and approximately $5 million in annual tax revenue for Santa Barbara County.

There are broader benefits to producing energy resources right here in California and under strict federal environmental and safety standards, too.  Otherwise, we would need to increase our reliance on oil produced overseas and transported here by tanker, resulting in far more greenhouse gas emissions than transporting domestically-produced oil by pipeline.  Also, oil transported by tanker poses far greater risks to the ocean than an onshore pipeline that is being maintained consistent with applicable federal safety standards.

I respectfully ask NOAA to consider the impact California’s actions are having on local workers, businesses and our economy as part of its evaluation, and to also ensure that California’s coastal management program appropriately respects and coordinates with federal agencies on our national priorities as required by law.
Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
[Your Name]

Disclosure(Required)

Dear NOAA Office for Coastal Management:

My name is [Your Name], and I am a contractor with [Company] that supports Sable Offshore's work on the Santa Ynez Unit and Santa Ynez Pipeline System. I appreciate the opportunity to comment on NOAA's evaluation of California's Coastal Management Program.

[Share one or two sentences describing the work you personally do on the Santa Ynez Unit and Santa Ynez Pipeline System.]

I'm proud of the work I do, and proud to contribute to the safe operation of a critical energy system that makes life more affordable for people like me. My work has allowed me and my family the stability and financial opportunity needed to create a life for ourselves in California – the same state my colleagues and I work hard to keep safe day in and day out. The people doing this work take that responsibility seriously, myself included.

The Santa Ynez Unit and Santa Ynez Pipeline System mean real jobs, not just numbers on a page. We’re talking about family-sustaining wages, jobs like mine, that let people buy homes, raise families, and put down roots in California’s Central Coast region – a region we are proud to protect.

I respectfully ask NOAA to consider the impact California's actions are having on workers like me, and on the local economy, as part of its evaluation, and to also ensure that California's coastal management program appropriately respects and coordinates with federal agencies to meet our shared goals.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Respectfully,
[Your Name]