Mobil Oil’s Pipeline

The article by Laura Lake on Mobil Oil’s M-70 replacement pipeline (Commentary, April 28) gives the impression that citizens can do nothing more to control the activities concerning construction of this line. This is simply not true.

The Los Angeles Transportation Commission, in a knee-jerk reaction, did certify the environmental impact report and approve the project, but a new procedure initiated by homeowners could allow for further public input. For the Board of Public Works must observe state environmental law by requiring a public hearing before allowing that department’s bureau of engineering to issue a discretionary permit for pipeline construction under city streets.

In her article, Lake has failed to realize one major difference between the M-70 project and the defunct Angeles Pipeline. While opposition to the Angeles Pipeline was unanimous, many homeowner associations most impacted by the M-70 recognize the unsafe condition of the existing line and are not opposing construction of a replacement pipe because they fear more spills like those which have already occurred.

What most homeowners associations do question is why the city has allowed Mobil Oil to increase the carrying capacity of the new line from an average of 63,500 barrels per day of heavy, thick crude oil from the San Joaquin Valley to 95,000 barrels--an increase of 50%.

Residents along the pipeline route are not buying assurances from Mobil Oil that the M-70 line is going to be the safest yet. Even though the Department of Transportation has required an extensive mitigation and monitoring program, a close look reveals many of the conditions to be fairly standard federal and state requirements. The DOT has maintained that these agencies prevail.

That is why homeowner associations asked the city’s new Department of Environmental Affairs and its Environmental Affairs Commission to review the environmental documents. The city attorney’s office has ruled this can be done for projects that have large environmental components. As a result, the DEA will be working with the Department of Transportation in requiring additional mitigation. Mobil Oil has agreed to pay the costs associated with this review.

The environmental report indicated that the detection system for the existing pipeline allows spills of less than 10.5 gallons per minute to go undetected for long periods. With a leaky detection system, Mobil will have a major task to inspect and clean up its act. It has accepted responsibility for the problem, but no timetable has been put forward.

Until the new environmental review procedures are fully in place, however, there is need to press for a public hearing on the M-70 pipeline prior to granting the construction permit.

BARBARA FINE, Vice President

Federation of Hillside and Canyon Assns.

Beverly Hills