If convicted, the business may face up to five years on probation and penalties in the millions of dollars.Prosecutors accused the Corporation of being irresponsible in their reaction to the October leak, which was thought to have been triggered in part by the anchor of a cargo ship impacting the pipeline months before. According to some estimates, the leak polluted 34 square miles of seawater along California’s coast, killing animals, forcing fisheries to close, and harming sensitive wetland habitats.
Prosecutors said in a statement that “in the afternoon of October 1, the pipeline, which was used to transport crude oil from multiple offshore locations to a processing plant in Long Beach, began leaking”. “However, until the next morning, the defendants reportedly continued to use the damaged pipeline, on and off.”
They went on to say that despite eight sirens blaring to warn the Corporation about the leak, operators kept restarting the pipeline.Prosecutors went on to say that pipeline personnel had not received appropriate training to comprehend the leak detection technology, and that the operational team was “understaffed and exhausted.”Amplify has claimed that its detection technology was not working properly and was displaying a potential leak from a platform where there was no breach. According to the business, the real leak was located miles distant from where the system showed.
The October spill rekindled a discussion about the placement of oil platforms within a few miles from the heavily populated southern California beach, the source of which took days to discover.Shortly after, a petition was sent to the US Department of the Interior, urging the government to rescind oil and gas leases in the region.