For Immediate Release, October 2, 2017
Contacts: |
Linda Krop or Alicia Roessler, Environmental Defense Center, (805) 963-1622,
LKrop@EnvironmentalDefenseCenter.org; ARoessler@EnvironmentalDefenseCenter.org
Charles Varni, Surfrider Foundation-SLO Chapter, (805) 459-6698, charles@varni.org
Andrew Christie, Sierra Club-Santa Lucia Chapter, (805) 543-8717, sierraclub8@gmail.com
Clare Lakewood, Center for Biological Diversity, (510) 844-7121, clakewood@biologicaldiversity.org
Ross Hammond, Stand.earth, (415) 559-5082, ross@stand.earth
Shana Lazerow, Communities for a Better Environment, (510) 302-0430, slazerow@cbecal.org |
Phillips 66 Dismisses Lawsuit Challenging Denial of Rail Spur Project
Environmental Groups Celebrate Final Victory in Protecting the California
Coast From Dangerous Oil Trains
SAN LUIS OBISPO, Calif.— Environmental groups rejoiced as Phillips 66 agreed to dismiss its
lawsuit challenging the denial of its proposed Rail Spur Project by the San Luis Obispo County
Board of Supervisors. The dismissal means that the County’s denial stands, and Phillips will not
be able to import heavy tar sands crude by rail car to its refinery near Nipomo in southern San
Luis Obispo County. Phillips’ agreement to dismiss its lawsuit came as the company was facing a
motion to dismiss from a coalition of environmental groups, as well as the County of San Luis
Obispo, based on the fact that Phillips had failed to appeal the County’s denial to the California
Coastal Commission.
“The County’s denial of the Phillips oil train project will stand, and our coast and communities will
be spared the risks of dangerous explosions and horrific rail accidents,” proclaimed Linda Krop,
Chief Counsel for the Environmental Defense Center, which represented several of the groups
involved in the litigation. “This victory is important for several reasons - for stopping dangerous oil
trains, protecting coastal habitats, and upholding the integrity of the County’s extensive decisionmaking
process."
“This is a win for the citizens, environment, and economy of California,” said Andrew Christie,
Director of the Sierra Club’s Santa Lucia Chapter. “In addition to removing the threat of all the
well-documented hazards of this project, this decision thwarts the oil company's attempt to avoid
the legal protections for environmentally sensitive habitats, one of the central pillars of the
California Coastal Act.”
“California’s environmental justice communities are disproportionately at risk from derailment or
explosions of tank cars carrying explosive crude oil. The County’s rejection of this crude project
goes a long way to addressing that risk, and we see it as a victory and a shining example for
other decisionmakers who need to stand tall and say no to dangerous projects,” said Andres
Soto, organizer for Communities for a Better Environment.
The San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors denied the project on March 29, 2017. Phillips
then filed a lawsuit, alleging that the County had improperly determined that environmentally
sensitive habitat areas (“ESHA”) existed on the project site. Impacts to ESHA were cited by the
County as one of many reasons Phillips’ application was denied. Because the project is in the
coastal zone, however, Phillips was required to appeal the County’s action to the Coastal
Commission before resorting to court.
The County received comments and petitions from more than 25,000 Californians opposed to the
Phillips Rail Spur project, and letters from more than 45 cities, counties, and school boards urging
the County to deny the crude-by-rail proposal. If built, the Phillips 66 rail terminal would have
allowed more than 7 million gallons of crude oil to be shipped via rail to its local refinery each
week, and made it possible for Phillips 66 to refine volatile and carbon-intensive tar sands crude
from Canada. Tar sands crude, when prepared for transport, is thinned with an unstable blend of
chemicals that have been known to explode in derailment incidents, which have become
increasingly frequent in recent years.
Trains servicing the Phillips 66 project would have traveled from the north and south through
hundreds of major California cities and smaller communities, including Santa Barbara, Ventura,
Los Angeles, Sacramento, Davis, Berkeley, Oakland, and San Jose. These trains also would
have jeopardized numerous ecologically sensitive areas including the San Francisco Bay and
California's iconic central coast.
"This is a proud day for the thousands of Californians who stood up to Phillips 66 and said "NO" to its proposed crude oil train terminal in San Luis Obispo County," said Charles Varni, STOP
Climate Change Coordinator for San Luis Obispo Surfrider Foundation Chapter. He went on to
add, "Across the western states we see grassroots movements challenging the fossil
infrastructure and the last efforts of the fossil lobby to make more billions in profits regardless of
harm to our health and planet. This victory is a symbol of what science based environmental
impact analysis and enlightened citizen activism can accomplish."
“From California to Washington, citizens along the West Coast are standing up to Big Oil’s
reckless plans to endanger our communities with risky projects — and we’re winning,” said Ross
Hammond, U.S. Campaigns Director at Stand.earth. “As the impacts of climate change are
increasingly being felt locally, citizens are realizing that standing up to greedy fossil fuel
companies must start at the local level, too. This is a huge victory for San Luis Obispo and the
hundreds of communities along the rail line whose public health and safety would have been
severely threatened by this increase in explosive oil trains traveling next to their homes, schools,
and waterways.”
"Communities in San Luis Obispo and across California can rest easier knowing that Phillips 66
will not be allowed to put people and wildlife at risk from these dangerous oil trains," said Andres
Sheikh, Clean Energy Campaign Fellow at the Center for Biological Diversity. "This great
outcome is a testament to the power of people standing up for what’s right, and putting public
health and local communities ahead of pollution and profits.”
|