Free tier, this brief uses 1 of 2 remaining for the month.Resets May 1
¶BOEM is preparing an Environmental Impact Statement for a proposed hydraulic fracturing well stimulation treatment at Platform Gilda in the Santa Barbara Channel off Ventura County, California, following a Ninth Circuit directive in Environmental Defense Center v. BOEM (2022). The 41 comments are overwhelmingly in opposition, submitted by a mix of environmental advocacy organizations, local and state government entities, and individual members of the public. The dominant concerns are toxic chemical exposure to marine wildlife and human health, increased oil spill risk from aging platform infrastructure, greenhouse gas emissions from expanded production, and BOEM's use of expedited NEPA procedures that commenters argue skip a meaningful draft EIS stage. A multi-part joint filing from Center for Biological Diversity and Environmental Defense Center (14 parts) constitutes the most voluminous submission, alongside comments from the California Attorney General, Los Angeles County, Defenders of Wildlife, and several coastal advocacy groups.🔒1🔒2🔒3
07Document timeline
1 source documents
2026-03-18
NOI
Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement on Platform Gilda Well Stimulation Treatment
BOEM is preparing an EIS under an expedited 28-day timeline, authorized by DOI alternative arrangements during the declared national energy emergency, to evaluate DCOR, L.L.C.'s proposal to conduct well stimulation treatments (WST), including hydraulic fracturing, on up to 16 existing wells at Platform Gilda, located approximately nine miles southwest of Ventura, California in the Santa Barbara Channel. Two alternatives are analyzed: approving the supplemental Development and Production Plan (Alternative A, the preferred alternative) and No Action (Alternative B). Potential impacts include air and water quality, benthic habitats, marine mammals, sea turtles, and seismicity. Written scoping comments were due by March 30, 2026.
Comments cite specific health hazards of fracking chemicals, including reproductive harm, neurotoxicity, and cancer, and reference a scientific review finding at least 10 chemicals harmful to sea otters, fish, and benthic invertebrates.
"According to a scientific review of chemicals used for fracking off California (before it was prohibited), at least 10 could kill or harm a broad variety of marine species, including sea otters, fish and benthic invertebrates."
Representative quote, cluster 01
Commenters argue that hydraulic fracturing subjects aging wells, casings, and platform infrastructure to additional pressure and chemical stress, increasing the probability of a catastrophic spill in a sensitive marine region.
"Offshore fracking increases the likelihood of an oil spill by subjecting wells, casings, and aging platform infrastructure to additional pressure, chemical exposure, and mechanical stress."
Representative quote, cluster 02
Multiple commenters, including a legal commenter and advocacy organizations, argue that BOEM is misusing emergency or expedited NEPA procedures, skipping the draft EIS stage, abbreviating the public comment period, and failing to provide meaningful stakeholder engagement.
"BOEM appears to be skipping over the draft-stage completely. BOEM should proceed using the regular NEPA process."
Representative quote, cluster 03
Commenters argue that approving offshore fracking expands oil and gas production, generating avoidable carbon pollution from extraction, transport, and combustion that deepens the climate crisis and contradicts California's clean energy transition.
"The extraction, transport, and combustion of additional offshore oil will also produce substantial carbon pollution, deepening our climate crisis—emissions that are entirely avoidable."
Representative quote, cluster 04
Comments note that fracking operations release hazardous air pollutants through venting and chemical evaporation, posing health risks to coastal communities and those living near oil processing and refining facilities.
"Many chemicals emitted during fracking are designated as hazardous air pollutants, which can enter the air during the venting of gases during fracking or the evaporation of chemicals from fracking, leading to dangerous human exposures."
Representative quote, cluster 05
Commenters contend that a spill or chronic contamination would devastate commercial fisheries and coastal tourism economies that depend on clean water and healthy marine habitat.
"This poses risks to blue whales, sea otters, commercial fisheries, and coastal tourism."
Representative quote, cluster 06
Local and state government bodies, including the California Attorney General, Los Angeles County's Chief Sustainability Office, and a Santa Barbara County Supervisor, formally oppose the project and raise legal and environmental concerns.
"Rob Bonta, Attorney General of the State of California, hereby submits the attached comment and accompanying attachments."
Representative quote, cluster 07
The Center for Biological Diversity, Environmental Defense Center, Wishtoyo Foundation, and Santa Barbara Channelkeeper submitted a 14-part joint comment with references that constitutes the most detailed technical record in the docket.