Council officials have taken action against the operator and owner of a West Sussex dormant oil site over clean-up delays.

There has been no planning permission for the Broadford Bridge pad, near Billingshurst, for more than a year.

The operator, a subsidiary of UK Oil & Gas plc (UKOG), was ordered to plug and abandon the well and restore the site to farmland “as a matter of urgency”.

But it failed to meet its own deadline of November 2024.

DrillOrDrop has learned that both the operator, UKOG (234) Ltd, and the landowner have been served with planning contravention notices. This is a notice issued by a planning authority to investigate a potential breach of rules, before formal enforcement action is taken.

A West Sussex County Council spokesperson told us:

“West Sussex County Council is in ongoing discussions with the operator of the Broadford Bridge oil site regarding timeframes and progress towards restoration, following the expiration of planning permission over a year ago.

“Planning Contravention Notices were served on both the site operator and the landowner on 7 January 2025.

“The council will continue to monitor the situation closely and, if necessary, will take appropriate enforcement action to ensure the site is restored.

“We are committed to securing restoration and will act where needed to ensure this is achieved within a reasonable timeframe.”

Last month (March 2025), UKOG announced it had suspended trading because its annual accounts would not be published on time.

We asked UKOG what progress it had made in decommissioning the Broadford Bridge well and restoring the site. The company did not respond.

Broadford Bridge is the second site which UKOG has been ordered to clear. The Supreme Court quashed planning permission for the company’s Horse Hill site in Surrey in June 2024. There is still no final date when Horse Hill will be cleared.

“Fears confirmed”

The Weald Action Group, which campaigns against onshore oil and gas in southern England, said in a statement today:

“The long delay in the restoration of Broadford Bridge confirms many of our fears.

“Campaign groups have frequently asked that planning permission should include a condition for a restoration bond to ensure that oil and gas sites will be safely restored.

“Planning officers have regularly dismissed any such suggestion.

“In the light of UKOG’s financial difficulties, as highlighted by the suspension of their shares last month, such dismissals would seem to be a serious mistake.”

The group added:

“We note that the council did issue Planning Contravention Notices in January, but now, almost three months later, nothing more seems to have happened. This saga seriously undermines any faith people can have in the planning system.”

Broadford Bridge has been mothballed since 2018.

Planning permission expired in March 2024 when West Sussex’s planning committee refused to extend the life of the site for a fifth time. Permissions had previously been extended in 2017, 2018, 2020 and 2022.

At the March 2024 planning meeting, Weald Action Group said “in our opinion, UKOG’s application to extend permission yet again was a tactic to avoid the costs of restoration”.

Restoring Broadford Bridge could cost about £1m. If UKOG cannot pay, the responsibility would fall next on the landowner.

Weald Action Group said today:

“We cannot help but wonder whether the landowner would have the funds for this. In which case presumably West Sussex County Council, and therefore council tax payers, would have to pay the bill.

“Ongoing matter” with industry regulator

The industry regulator, the North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA, allows wells to be suspended for several years. But its guidance states that suspension would “generally not exceed five years”.

The Broadford Bridge well has now been dormant for seven years.

DrillOrDrop asked NSTA whether it had ordered the decommissioning of the Broadford Bridge well by issuing a plug and abandonment notice.

The NSTA replied:

“This matter is ongoing between the NSTA and the licensee and therefore the NSTA cannot comment at this time”

We asked about what the timescale might be for decommissioning the well and, if no notice had been issued, why was this.

The NSTA replied to both questions: 

“This matter is ongoing between the NSTA and the licensee and therefore the NSTA cannot comment at this time”

We also asked how long would the well need to be suspended before the NSTA took enforcement action for plugging and abandonment?

NSTA replied:

“Site restoration is a planning permission requirement and is overseen by the Mineral Planning Authority”.

In response, Weald Action Group said this confirmed its suspicion that onshore oil and gas was “barely an afterthought for the NSTA”:

“The bland comment that “the matter is ongoing…..and NSTA cannot comment at this time” does leave us wondering if they have even engaged with the problem.

“Other questions were dismissed as not being their responsibility.

“The NSTA is clearly not going to be any help in ensuring that this site will be restored.”

Licence area

The Broadford Bridge well is in licence area PEDL234, which also includes UKOG’s proposed Loxley gas exploration site near Dunsfold in Surrey.

Just over a year ago, UKOG announced the NSTA had given it more time to complete the work programme for the licence.

Under the extension, the company was required to begin drilling the Loxley well by 30 June 2025. So far, no work has been carried out on the Loxley site access, well pad construction or on drilling the well.

At the time of writing, the drilling deadline is 11 weeks away and UKOG has not revealed that it has received another extension.

Given that UKOG estimated that site construction would take 14 weeks, it looks unlikely that the company will meet the time limit.

We asked NSTA what action, if any, it would take to remove or transfer licence PEDL234.

NSTA replied:

“Licensees are required to comply with the work programme on their licence and to plug and abandon a well at the end of its useful life.”

DrillOrDrop has closed the comments section on this and future articles. We are doing this because of the risk of liability for copyright infringement in comments. We still want to hear about your reaction to DrillOrDrop articles. You can contact us by clicking here.