Transport Commission Postpones Decision on Proposed Oil Pipeline

Faced with objections from government officials and continuing public opposition, the Los Angeles Transportation Commission on Thursday postponed a decision on a proposed oil pipeline that would run under streets from Santa Clarita to Torrance.

Los Angeles transportation engineers had recommended that Mobil Oil be allowed to replace its existing pipeline, saying that traffic jams and detours during the 18-month construction period are the price that must be paid to avoid continued oil spills from the aged, leaky line.

The new pipeline would run 92 miles from Kern County’s oil fields to Mobil’s Torrance refinery, passing in the South Bay through Inglewood, Hawthorne and north Torrance. It would generally follow the route of the existing line, which has ruptured eight times in the last five years, several times covering streets with crude oil.

The most recent break, which occurred Feb. 1 in Santa Clarita, spilled more than 63,000 gallons of heated crude oil into the Santa Clara River.

Opposition to the new pipeline was expressed to the commission in letters by Los Angeles Councilman Hal Bernson, state Assemblyman Richard Katz (D-Sylmar), the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy and the Los Angeles Environmental Affairs Commission.

At a meeting in Van Nuys that drew about 50 people, the commission approved the final environmental impact report on the project. However, it postponed for 30 days a decision on whether to allow construction of the pipeline so it can review the objections and gather more public comment.

“I would venture the opinion that most people seem to agree that something has to be done to replace that pipeline,” Commissioner Nathan L. Chroman said Friday. “But details concerning the route and other problems have to be looked into.”

Chroman said he plans to drive along several of the proposed routes “so I have a better idea of what people are saying.”

The board’s approval of the environmental impact report Thursday paves the way for other cities along the 92-mile route to submit comments on the project. In addition to Los Angeles, other jurisdictions through which the pipeline would pass, such as the cities of Inglewood and Torrance and the U.S. Forest Service, also must approve the project before it can proceed.

Katz urged the commission to reject the final report, saying it did not sufficiently consider noise and traffic problems.

Construction noise “would be like standing next to a very large motorboat gunning its engine without a muffler at full speed,” Katz wrote. “We cannot allow Mobil’s procrastination and desperation about their pipeline and their profits to disrupt our businesses, drive us out of our homes or gridlock our streets.”

Residents objected to the increased capacity of the pipeline and to noise and traffic tie-ups at major intersections that would occur while the pipeline is being built. Although the new pipeline could carry about 30,000 more barrels of oil a day, Mobil has maintained that the company will not increase production at its Torrance refinery.

“The refining capacity will not change at that refinery,” Mobil spokesman Jim Carbonetti said Friday. “The product that comes through that pipeline will displace supplies we take through tankers in the port, tank trucks and local pipelines.”

But Barbara A. Fine, vice president of the Federation of Hillside and Canyon Assns., which represents 58 homeowner groups in the Santa Monica Mountains, said she is skeptical of the company’s plans.

The environmental impact report concedes that during the construction phase there would be bumper-to-bumper traffic or gridlock at some major intersections along the route for up to three weeks, along with noise and reduced access to cross streets.

“It’s not just the dust and the dirt and the noise and the traffic we’re worried about--it’s safety in case of spills or explosions,” said Sonni Maccarone, who lives on Woodley Avenue on the proposed route through Sepulveda.

Lori Parcells, Inglewood’s acting planning manager, said the project is unlikely to have a crippling effect on traffic flow in the South Bay, although it will involve construction along major roads including Inglewood, Rosecrans and Prairie avenues.

“There will be some temporary impacts during construction, but they (Mobil officials) don’t expect to have to close the streets for any length of time,” Parcells said.

Kenneth Cude, an engineer for the Los Angeles Transportation Department, said the probability of additional breaks in the existing pipeline should take precedence over any temporary traffic problems. An analysis of alternatives in the environmental report said there is a 99.8% chance that the existing pipeline will rupture in the next five years and cause another spill, compared with a 10.5% chance over a five-year period with the new pipeline.

“The choice is to continue to put up with it breaking and causing a mess on city streets or replacing it with a state of the art, modern pipeline that would be much safer,” Cude said.

Times staff writer George Hatch contributed to this story.