- Today
- Holidays
- Birthdays
- Reminders
- Cities
- Atlanta
- Austin
- Baltimore
- Berwyn
- Beverly Hills
- Birmingham
- Boston
- Brooklyn
- Buffalo
- Charlotte
- Chicago
- Cincinnati
- Cleveland
- Columbus
- Dallas
- Denver
- Detroit
- Fort Worth
- Houston
- Indianapolis
- Knoxville
- Las Vegas
- Los Angeles
- Louisville
- Madison
- Memphis
- Miami
- Milwaukee
- Minneapolis
- Nashville
- New Orleans
- New York
- Omaha
- Orlando
- Philadelphia
- Phoenix
- Pittsburgh
- Portland
- Raleigh
- Richmond
- Rutherford
- Sacramento
- Salt Lake City
- San Antonio
- San Diego
- San Francisco
- San Jose
- Seattle
- Tampa
- Tucson
- Washington
US Energy Secretary Orders Texas Oil Firm to Restore California Operations
Directive aims to address supply disruption risks, replace foreign crude imports
Mar. 15, 2026 at 7:48pm
Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›
U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright directed a Texas-based oil and gas company, Sable Offshore Corp., to restore operations in federal waters off the coast of southern California that were damaged by a 2015 oil spill. The move, invoking the Defense Production Act, aims to address supply disruption risks and replace nearly 1.5 million barrels of foreign crude each month.
Why it matters
This directive from the Trump administration is the latest move in an ongoing dispute between the federal government and California over offshore oil and gas development. California has sought to block the restart of Sable's pipeline system, citing environmental concerns and the company's pending criminal charges.
The details
Sable's Santa Ynez unit includes three rigs in federal waters, offshore and onshore pipelines, and the Las Flores Canyon Processing Facility, which can produce about 50,000 barrels of oil per day. The Energy Secretary said the order will 'strengthen America's oil supply and restore a pipeline system vital to our national security and defense'.
- In January 2026, California sued the federal government for approving Sable's plans to restart pipelines along the coast.
- On the first day of his second term in 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order to reverse former President Joe Biden's ban on future offshore oil drilling.
The players
Chris Wright
U.S. Energy Secretary under the Trump administration.
Sable Offshore Corp.
A Texas-based oil and gas company that operates offshore facilities and pipelines in federal waters off the coast of California.
Gavin Newsom
Governor of California, who condemned the federal government's move to restart Sable's pipeline operations.
Rob Bonta
California's Democratic state Attorney General, who sued the federal government in January 2026 over the approval of Sable's pipeline restart plans.
What they’re saying
“The Trump Administration remains committed to putting all Americans and their energy security first. 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.”
— Chris Wright, U.S. Energy Secretary
“This is an attempt to illegally restart a pipeline whose operators are facing criminal charges and prohibited by multiple court orders from restarting. California will not stand by while the Trump administration attempts to sacrifice our coastal communities, our environment, and our $51 billion coastal economy. The Trump administration and Sable are defying multiple court orders, and we will see them back in court.”
— Gavin Newsom, Governor of California
What’s next
The judge overseeing the criminal charges against Sable Offshore Corp. will determine whether the company can legally restart operations despite the pending legal issues.
The takeaway
This directive highlights the ongoing tension between the federal government and California over the balance between energy security, environmental protection, and state regulatory authority. The outcome of this dispute could have significant implications for the future of offshore oil and gas development along the California coast.


