Eilat Ashkelon Pipeline Company

The present Europe Asia Pipeline Company Ltd. was established under a 2017 law after the historic company’s 49-year concession expired. The earlier company’s operations and employees transferred to the successor in 2019, and the successor is fully owned by the State of Israel.[2][4]

Its activities include crude-oil and refined-products transport and storage, LPG services, port operations, and services for the natural-gas sector. The company operates energy ports at Eilat and Ashkelon, three crude-oil pipelines, and a separate petroleum-products pipeline.[2][7] Public discussion often uses EAPC or its Hebrew acronym, Katsa’a, for both the historic concessionaire and the current operator, but the two are legally distinct.

The network developed from Israel’s effort to secure an overland route between the Red Sea and its Mediterranean refineries. In 1957, three tanks were built at Eilat and an eight-inch pipeline was laid to Beersheba, from which crude oil continued by train to Haifa. A 16-inch Eilat–Haifa pipeline entered service in 1959.[4] The route was strategically important because Egypt barred Israeli ships, and ships that had called in Israel, from the Suez Canal, leaving the Haifa and Ashdod refineries dependent on more distant sources.[1]

In 1968, Israel and Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi’s Iran formed the Eilat Ashkelon Pipeline Company as a joint venture. It was intended to serve as a land bridge for oil arriving at Eilat from Persian Gulf sources, moving it to Ashkelon for shipment across the Mediterranean toward Europe. The system also connected with the refineries at Ashdod and Haifa.[1][8] The project included a 42-inch Eilat–Ashkelon pipeline and a crude-oil terminal and port at Ashkelon.[4] Oil reached Haifa overland from Eilat on August 2, 1968.[1]

A 1970 State of Israel Bonds manual described the 42-inch line as under construction and projected completion that year, with an annual capacity of 60 million tons. It presented the line as a means of transshipping oil from the Red Sea toward Mediterranean and European destinations. These were contemporary plans and projections rather than verified operating figures.[9] A 1970–1971 University Study Mission document separately described Eilat as the terminal of Israel’s oil pipeline and as an outlet for trade with East Africa and Asia, without identifying the company or giving route and capacity details.[10]

Iranian shipments under the partnership stopped shortly before the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Iran’s National Iranian Oil Company reportedly did not formally dissolve the partnership and was subsequently described as an inactive partner.[11] Israel took control of the company after the Shah’s fall, while later reporting describes Iran’s active participation as ending as relations deteriorated.[1][8]

The former Iranian partner initiated proceedings in 1981 seeking half of EAPC’s assets and $350 million for oil supplied before the Shah’s overthrow. A later account said international arbitration continued and cited an estimate of roughly $7 billion at issue. These remain reported claims and estimates in an intergovernmental dispute, not a settled determination of liability.[11]

The system was adapted in 2003 to pump crude from Ashkelon to Eilat as well as in its original direction. The work included expansion of storage facilities, and the first very large crude carrier called at Eilat for loading that year.[4][12] A contemporary report placed capacity at 1.2 million barrels per day after the reversal work; that was a 2003 capacity figure, not a measure of current throughput.[12]

The historic company received a government concession to transport oil between the Red Sea and Mediterranean and to establish and operate facilities along the route. The concession expired in 2017 after 49 years. The Oil Transport and Storage Infrastructure Law created a successor, Europe Asia Pipeline Company Ltd., wholly owned by the state; activities and employees transferred in 2019.[2][4] As of March 2020, it was classified as a government company, with the Minister of Finance responsible for company-related matters.[2]

The succession process produced differing dates in later reporting. The State Comptroller records establishment of the successor in 2017 and transfer of operations in 2019. Calcalist Tech says the Europe Asia Pipeline Company name was adopted in 2017, while a Ynet report describes the new operating entity’s registration following the March 2017 legislation.[13][14] These accounts concern separate legal and operational stages rather than a continuation of the former Iranian shareholding.

The successor framework provided for land-use or lease rights over property needed for the infrastructure. A 2022 agreement with the Israel Land Authority returned 240 dunams in Eilat to the state and regulated the company’s continuing rights in Eilat and Ashkelon.[15] The former concession had covered extensive land, pipeline construction and operation, fuel transport, and oil-related commercial activities.[14][8]

A broad secrecy order has continued to restrict public access to information about the company. The historic order covered investment in and operation of the pipeline, work on the line, fuel sources and uses, and sales to outside parties.[8] In 2026, Calcalist reported that the order had most recently been extended in May 2025 through the end of 2026. In a separate dispute over executive bonuses and grants, EAPC declined disclosure requests, and the requesting association later dismissed its petition without obtaining the information.[6]

EAPC combines pipelines, ports, terminals, storage farms, and services for several energy products. Its five principal sectors are crude-oil services; refined-products services; LPG unloading, storage, distribution, and cylinder filling; port services; and natural-gas-sector services.[2] The company also offers long-term crude storage and blending and operates a natural-gas receiving terminal.[16]

The main Eilat–Ashkelon crude line is 254 kilometers long and 42 inches in diameter. EAPC states a maximum annual capacity of 60 million tons toward Ashkelon and 30 million tons toward Eilat. A 197-kilometer line links Ashkelon with the Haifa refinery and has a stated annual throughput capacity of 5.8 million tons; a 36-kilometer line to the Ashdod refinery has a stated maximum of seven million tons. A 260-kilometer, 16-inch line carries products including gasoline, jet fuel, and gasoil between Ashkelon and Eilat.[7]

The State Comptroller reports tank-farm capacity of 3.7 million cubic meters and a total pipeline length of 747 kilometers.[2] EAPC’s own webpages differ slightly: one gives storage capacity as 3.6 million cubic meters, while another gives 3.7 million.[16][17] Recent reporting also gives a rounded pipeline-network figure of about 750 kilometers.[13]

Reverse-flow capability allows crude unloaded on the Mediterranean coast to be pumped to Eilat and transferred to larger tankers for Asian destinations. The route can avoid the longer voyage around Africa and, depending on tanker size and market conditions, may offer an alternative to Suez transit.[4][12] A 2002 account described reversal for Caspian oil as a proposal; completion was reported the following year.[18][12]

A 2023 account described crude arriving from Ceyhan, Turkey, with some supplies processed in Haifa and Ashdod and others pumped from south of Ashkelon to Eilat for shipment to refiners in China and Taiwan. It cited an estimate of 194,000 barrels per day of Kurdish crude imports in January and reports of a 70,000-barrel-per-day average during 2022, while stressing that reporting restrictions prevented a definitive tally.[19]

During late November 2023, crude-import activity at EAPC’s Ashkelon port was reported as somewhat limited, with other terminals used to accommodate supplies for Israeli refineries. Foreign-media accounts cited in the same analysis said tankers carrying Mediterranean crude, including Azerbaijani oil, were passing through Suez and unloading at Eilat instead.[20] Other analysis describes the corridor as moving or storing Russian, Azerbaijani, and Kazakh oil from Ashkelon toward Eilat.[3]

The pipeline’s strategic value derives from the connection between Israel’s Red Sea and Mediterranean coasts. Its original configuration moved Iranian oil toward Europe; its later bidirectional configuration allowed Mediterranean cargoes to reach Eilat and Asian markets.[1][4] A 2003 account described the route as 158 miles long and emphasized its ability to spare tankers the longer journey around Africa at a time when Suez could accommodate only comparatively small tankers.[12]

The corridor has been discussed for Caspian, Russian, and other supplies. A 2002 report described plans to move Caspian oil from Ashkelon to Eilat, while later analysis described Russian, Azerbaijani, and Kazakh oil using the route.[18][3] A 2004 commentary reported that some Arab producers sought to deter the trade by excluding tankers that had called at Eilat or Ashkelon from Arab ports, which the author said appeared to slow traffic.[21]

Regional energy discussions following the Abraham Accords included possible movement of crude oil and other products through the Eilat–Ashkelon system. A U.S. Department of State briefing identified the UAE, Bahrain, and Israel as participants and noted that Israeli Energy Minister Yuval Steinitz joined remotely.[22]

EAPC and MED-RED Land Bridge signed a non-binding memorandum of understanding in October 2020. A ten-year commercial agreement followed in December, and the parties later signed an updated annex reducing permitted volumes in line with Environmental Protection Ministry restrictions.[2] The proposed use of the corridor was presented as having diplomatic as well as commercial value, although most Emirati oil moved toward Asia and competing routes included Suez and Egypt’s higher-capacity Sumed pipeline.[5]

Policy debate has therefore weighed possible energy-security and emergency-continuity benefits against environmental risk. An inter-ministerial team identified benefits from maintaining or expanding Eilat operations, while the Environmental Protection Ministry adopted a policy against increases that would create additional risk.[2]

Environmental risk is a persistent concern because the network crosses sensitive landscapes and has experienced significant leaks. The State Comptroller reported exposed pipeline sections, delays in completing risk-reduction assessments, and pipeline routes through areas classified as highly or very highly environmentally sensitive, including nature reserves and national parks.[2]

On December 4, 2014, a pipeline failed during work connected with its diversion and lowering for the Ramon Airport project. About five million liters of crude oil escaped into and around the Evrona Nature Reserve.[23][24] The Environmental Protection Ministry’s economic assessment placed the damage at approximately NIS 281 million. A separate civil settlement later required about NIS 100 million for compensation and rehabilitation; the figures represent different proceedings rather than competing estimates of one payment.[23][25]

A suspicion notice summarized in later reporting alleged inadequate engineering and safety planning, failure to calculate pressure loads, and the use of connectors that failed under pressure. EAPC responded that it had acted responsibly and quickly and was financing restoration.[23] Another account said the spill affected about five square miles, contaminated waterways and part of the reserve, flooded Route 90, and led to more than 80 hospitalizations. It was contained before reaching the Jordanian border.[24]

Reported cleanup figures differ slightly. Ynet said approximately 54,000 tons of contaminated soil were removed, while EAPC’s rehabilitation account gives more than 55,000 tons from inside and outside the reserve. The company says cleanup began on the day of the incident and that the reserve reopened four months later.[23][26]

The Environmental Protection Ministry sued EAPC in May 2015 for $28.8 million, with most of the requested funds intended for ecosystem repair if the action succeeded.[24] In 2024, the Be’er Sheva Magistrate’s Court convicted EAPC under a plea agreement. Calcalist reported a NIS 1.562 million fine and an equal undertaking to avoid further offenses for three years. This criminal penalty was separate from the civil settlement.[25]

Earlier incidents included the 2008 shutdown of a deteriorated jet-fuel line and a December 2010 leak near the Shizafon military base after contractor equipment damaged an old pipeline. EAPC’s report put that spill at 243,000 liters, and about 100 tons of contaminated soil were removed.[27]

EAPC and several former senior employees were also convicted over two 2011 pollution incidents in the Zin Stream. In 2022, the Beersheba Magistrate’s Court fined the company NIS 1.6 million after finding failures in compliance with work specifications and preparedness for a leak.[28]

Another leak occurred near Ashkelon on August 29, 2021. Authorities replaced a 40-foot pipe section and removed 800 tons of contaminated earth. The Environmental Protection Ministry subsequently announced a criminal investigation into the cause.[29]

Proposals to increase oil movement through Eilat have drawn objections because the terminal lies between tourist beaches and coral-reef reserves. In 2021, the Environmental Protection Ministry delayed implementation of the proposed UAE arrangement after finding EAPC’s risk assessment inadequate, describing the action as an interim measure pending a government decision.[5]

Potential concerns include damage to Eilat Bay’s marine life and tourism following a spill, as well as greater exposure to maritime-security threats. A 2023 analysis described the UAE-related arrangement as mostly dormant and presented these outcomes as risks rather than confirmed incidents.[3] They have been weighed against energy-security and emergency-supply benefits identified by an inter-ministerial team.[2]

Secrecy rules form a separate controversy. Critics have argued that the restrictions hinder public oversight, while the company and Finance Ministry have relied on the statutory order when withholding commercial and management information.[8][6] The restrictions also make it difficult to establish comprehensive public figures for transactions, cargoes, and throughput.[19]

Corporate terminology can add confusion. The 1968 company was an Israeli-Iranian venture, whereas Europe Asia Pipeline Company Ltd. is a wholly state-owned successor created under the 2017 framework. Establishment, naming, and operational transfer occurred at different stages, explaining references to both 2017 and 2019.[2][13]

The infrastructure has also figured in proposals for other energy uses. A 2013 commentary discussed possible liquefied-natural-gas export terminals associated with the EAPC corridor: one at Ashkelon facing Europe and another at Ramat Yotam near Eilat facing Asia. The proposal depended on the scale of gas discoveries in the Levant Basin and was not described as a completed project.[30]

Regional discussions and the MED-RED arrangement illustrate continuing interest in adapting the route for cooperation beyond its original Iranian-oil purpose. The available sources describe possible movements of crude and other products but do not provide a complete record of shipments under the arrangement.[2][22]

The corridor’s enduring significance lies in its adaptability. Infrastructure originally designed for oil moving from Eilat toward Europe can now operate toward Asian markets while supporting storage, port, petroleum-product, LPG, and natural-gas-related services.[4][2]