[ad_1]
The owner of the Inglewood oil field is suing California to override a state law that requires energy companies to halt production and plug all wells or pay steep fines.
Sentinel Peak, the oilfield’s sole owner and operator, claims in a lawsuit filed this week that Assembly Bill 2617 is an unconstitutional statute that imposes unreasonably high fines on the company and forces it to shut down operations. He claimed that there was.
The law, signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in September, requires all low-producing oil wells in the Inglewood oil field to be shut down by March 2027 and all wells to be plugged by the end of 2030. . Failure to meet these deadlines will result in a $10,000 monthly fine for each well in violation.
The legislation would effectively oversee the end of fossil fuel extraction in the Inglewood oil field, which has been drilled for a century. Located in Culver City, Los Angeles’ Baldwin Hills, and unincorporated Ladera Heights, this 1,000-acre oil field has approximately 820 unplugged wells, 420 of which are still pumping oil. are. Approximately 80% of these operating wells are considered low-producing, producing less than 15 barrels of oil or 60,000 cubic feet of gas per day.
Sentinel Peak’s lawyers said the law “represents an unlawful attempt to force individual companies to cease operating their legitimate businesses,” according to court documents. Specifically, it argues that mandatory fines violate federal and state laws prohibiting excessive monetary penalties.
“The fines imposed by AB 2716 are grossly disproportionate to the seriousness of the crime for which they are intended,” the complaint states. “The penalties imposed are fixed and mandatory with no clear cap. They have no relation to the actual damage caused by the neighboring use.”
The California Department of Conservation’s Geological Energy Management Division, the state’s oil and gas regulator, declined to comment on the lawsuit. But the law’s author, Rep. Isaac Bryan (D-Los Angeles), has vowed to defend it.
“Our community has stood up strong for decades to shut down this dangerous, low-producing oil field, and to protect the people who have long deserved the right to live a full and healthy life.” We will stand strong in court to protect our frontline communities,” Brian said. “The people of California have argued through Congress that they have no business with dangerous oil wells right next to their communities. It is the government’s right and privilege to protect its citizens.”
The lawsuit is the latest sparring match over the landmark bill. The original version of AB 2617 included a $10,000 per day penalty for all low-producing oil wells throughout the state. However, after negotiations with the California oil lobby, the bill was narrowed down to the Inglewood oil field.
Sentinel Peak, a Denver-based energy company, said the law “intentionally singles out and discriminates” against its operations in the Inglewood oil field.
“AB 2716 does not impose any requirements on other similarly located oil production operations, even if they operate near residential areas,” the complaint states. “The law applies to appellants as a ‘class of one.'”
Environmental groups argue that states have the right to enact regulations to protect public health. The law aims to prevent toxic gases from oil production from drifting into nearby communities.
Sentinel Peak previously agreed to plug all 38 wells in Culver City by 2030. However, this will cap most of the oil fields.
“States have the right to place limits on wells that have high environmental impacts and little economic benefit,” said Consumer Watchdog President Jamie Cote. “There is a compelling national interest in closing these wells to protect the community.”
Elected officials emphasized the health risks as Mr. Newsom signed the bill at the Kenneth Hahn Soccer Field, where children play soccer just steps away from oil field pumpjacks.
“They feel like they’re being targeted, but they run the largest urban oil field in the country,” Cote said. “We don’t get much oil and the environmental health impacts are well documented. We’re not taking their land, we’re operating within 450 feet of a football field because it’s dangerous. I’m just saying it can’t be done.”
[ad_2]Source link
