State Files Suit to Block Valdez From Coastline

The state attorney general’s office late Friday filed suit against Exxon Co., asking that the beleaguered Exxon Valdez be prevented from entering state waters for repairs until certain agencies are satisfied that it won’t do any harm.

The Valdez, holding a position about 50 miles west of Point Loma, continued on Friday to “burp” small discharges of a blue-brown substance from its stern, but the discharges were intermittent and dissipated quickly, Coast Guard officials reported.

Late Friday, the Coast Guard said test results showed both oil and organic matter in samples taken from a Wednesday discharge from the tanker. Exxon officials maintain that the substance contains natural organisms, or algae, and has no oil content.

The complaint in San Diego Superior Court seeks an injunction to temporarily block the tanker’s expected passage into state waters, where the ship must find a protected area to remove five huge steel pieces jutting downward from its hull.

“Today we’re taking action to protect California’s coastline from Exxon’s negligence and broken promises. As trustees for California’s coastal waters and beaches, we cannot afford to take any chances with Exxon or the Valdez,” said Gray Davis, state controller and a member of the state Lands Commission.

Joined by Other Agencies

That commission joined Atty. Gen. John Van de Kamp and the Regional Water Quality Control Board in San Diego in requesting the injunction. The latter agency handles pollution concerns in San Diego Bay.

Exxon Shipping Co. officials, informed of the state’s legal action late Friday, said it was too early to offer an official response. But a spokeswoman said President Frank Iarossi on Thursday had assured state officials that the firm would abide by earlier demands and “stay put” until given permission to enter state waters, which extend 3 miles from the coast.

“Yesterday, Mr. Iarossi reaffirmed our commitment that we would not bring it into state waters as long as the state agencies and the Coast Guard were not comfortable and had any concerns,” Exxon Shipping Co. spokeswoman Jan Cool said. “I don’t know why the state feels like they need to file an injunction.”

The Valdez, which was towed from Alaska after hitting a reef and dumping 11 million gallons of oil along the Alaskan shore, was scheduled Tuesday to enter San Diego Bay for a $25-million, nine-month repair job at the National Steel & Shipbuilding Co., which built the vessel in 1986.

But the discovery Monday of the jutting steel pieces, peeled back during the 2,200-mile transit from Prince William Sound, and mysterious slicks and discharges believed to be coming from the Valdez, have delayed its entry.

Officials say the discharge must be stopped before the ship can be taken to shallower, calmer waters to remove the plates, which prevent the Valdez from clearing the harbor bottom. The removal site most likely will be Pirate Cove off San Clemente Island, Long Beach Harbor or off Coronado.

The legal complaint filed Friday is based on state public nuisance codes and prohibitions against depositing oil into the ocean or allowing it to pass into state waters, state officials said.

Lt. Gov. Leo McCarthy, also a member of the state Lands Commission, said Exxon failed to agree in writing to demands issued Wednesday by the state that the oil company would have to meet before it could move the Valdez into state waters. The commission’s demands are similar to those set earlier by other state agencies, and Exxon Shipping Co. has repeatedly agreed verbally to the earlier requests.

Several Demands Made

The conditions by the state agencies demand that the Valdez discharge no oil during a 24-hour waiting period or when it enters state waters; that it leak no pollution while the steel plates are being removed; that Exxon provide a contingency plan for possible spills, and that the oil company reimburse the state for damages and costs.

Exxon has “had those requests for 36 hours or longer. And what we got is a nice, warm answer from their public relations staff,” said McCarthy, who acknowledged that Exxon had verbally agreed to the state demands. “If we didn’t have the history of Exxon promises up in Alaska, we very likely wouldn’t be going through all this.”

McCarthy said a written agreement by Exxon in the future would be acknowledged and filed with the court. He said Exxon, the Coast Guard, the state Department of Fish and Game and other state agencies are holding “constructive debate” about the Valdez.

Coast Guard officials late Friday said test results received in the afternoon showed the presence of “very weathered and degraded Alaskan crude oil” and a “very active organic substance” in samples of a discharge from the tanker on July 12.

The Valdez had Alaskan crude oil in its tanks when it ran aground in Prince William Sound.

The oil-content findings came from a Coast Guard lab in Connecticut, which on Thursday had reported that samples from Monday’s 18-mile slick did not contain oil, said Lt. Larry Solberg.

Amtech, an independent, San Diego lab chosen by Exxon, Coast Guard and state officials, also confirmed the presence of organic matter, but the company had not yet done oil surveys on the samples, Solberg said.

Solberg said more tests would be taken to confirm the findings, particularly because earlier tests had conflicted.

“We’re going to confirm that over and over again, probably,” he said.

Earlier, a scientist at Amtech warned against “preliminary conclusions” from test results.

“I would caution anybody involved with it or even remotely interested to hold back as far as drawing any concrete conclusions,” said Mark King, Amtech lab’s director. “We haven’t even been able to complete the sampling yet.”

Discussing Conflicting Results

Meanwhile, a team of state, federal and Exxon scientists met throughout Friday at Coast Guard headquarters in San Diego to discuss conflicting test results on the discharges, and a local radio station said it is sponsoring a demonstration on Monday to protest the Valdez’s presence off the San Diego coast.

Amtech’s King said samples were being collected from the tanks of the vessel, and Solberg said chemical analyses and toxicity tests of such samples would start Sunday and be completed within two to three days.

The scientific team, led by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration expert Gary Patrae, was assembled Thursday after Coast Guard test results of the 18-mile slick conflicted with earlier state test results, which showed oil in the samples.

“Basically, what we are expecting to come out of the scientific meeting is a consensus on what tests need to be done, how they’re going to do it, and when they’re going to do it,” Solberg said.

The team late Friday issued plans for a biological survey to be performed while the plates are removed, he said. The biological survey will include placing several colonies of plankton and other organisms at the removal site before the tanker arrives, and the recovery and analysis of them for harmful effects after the repair is completed, Solberg said.

In another development, Alaska state officials have confirmed that a 15-mile slick that trailed the crippled tanker as it left Prince William Sound June 23 contained crude oil, and said they believe it came from the Valdez.

Bob Flint, regional program manager for the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation in Anchorage, said the slick contained 200 to 400 gallons of oil. But he added that scientists, like those in San Diego, are having difficulty with the tests, and there remains some uncertainty about the source.

However, state officials are considering it an “illegal discharge” by the tanker, and are pursuing legal action, Flint said.

Exxon officials in San Diego said they were told the substance was merely “organic material,” and would not comment further.

OFFICIALS DISPUTE: A state water quality official offered to go to Alaska to inspect the ship but was denied permission. Part II.