COVER STORY : Trouble Underfoot : Environment: Angered by a glut of factories, landfills and auto repair shops, opponents of a proposed oil pipeline say it’s just another example of ‘environmental racism.’ The project’s backers say it will mean jobs.

The corner of San Fernando Road and Pepper Avenue in Cypress Park is a checkerboard of bungalow-style homes, playgrounds and industry, where children and residents routinely inhale dust and noxious fumes from adjacent bus and train maintenance yards.

Art Pulido has lived here all his life and knows of environmental problems beyond the wafting smells of exhaust and fuel. There’s lead in the ground near the railway yard. And petroleum pipelines crisscross beneath the train tracks.

Now a consortium of 11 oil companies wants to build a crude-oil pipeline to run near the tracks, across the street from the neighborhood park.

“We’re right in the middle of a lot of toxic waste,” said Pulido, 40, owner of a messenger service. “And they want to dump more down our throats.”

Pulido is among dozens of residents and activists from the Eastside to South-Central who are joining forces to battle the Pacific Pipeline, a proposed 171-mile conduit that would carry crude oil from Santa Barbara County to refineries in El Segundo and Wilmington.

The first public hearing on the project, before the state Public Utilities Commission, is scheduled for Monday in Downtown Los Angeles.

In Central Los Angeles, the Pacific Pipeline is to travel 20 miles along railroad right-of-way property through Cypress Park, East Los Angeles and Watts, and along the borders of Walnut Park and the Southeast cities of Huntington Park, South Gate, Lynwood, Compton and Carson.

Angered by decades of living with a glut of factories, landfills and auto repair shops, critics say the pipeline--like other projects in these communities--is an example of “environmental racism,” a pattern in which the nation’s most environmentally hazardous industries are placed in poor and minority areas.

Residents have other fears about the pipeline: ruptures from earthquakes or train derailments, toxic fumes from spills, air pollution from construction, and possible fires and explosions.

Proponents say such concerns are unwarranted, pointing out the project is a state-of-the-art pipeline with safety valves that exceed federal safety requirements for guarding against oil spills. And in the midst of a tough job market, the $215-million pipeline is expected to provide 400 union-scale jobs to Los Angeles County residents. The project calls for creation of a job-training center for inner-city youths.

“We’re looking at what we can do to participate in every city we’re going through,” said Norman Rooney, president of Pacific Pipeline Systems Inc. of Ventura, which is proposing the pipeline on behalf of the oil companies.

The oil companies--led by Chevron, Texaco, Shell and Arco--must find a pipeline route by 1996 to replace the tankers, which each carry about 269,000 barrels to the refineries. The state Coastal Commission has ordered oil companies to phase out the use of tankers, which have a greater risk of spills and air pollution problems than pipelines.

After this week’s hearings throughout the affected regions, the state Public Utilities Commission is to decide in July whether the pipeline is environmentally sound. If it gets the go-ahead from the commission, the proposal must then be approved by each city and county it traverses. With no problems, construction would begin in spring, 1994, and the pipeline could be completed the following year.

But trouble may be on the horizon for the project.

Last month, the Los Angeles City Council and the Los Angeles Board of Education approved separate resolutions opposing it.

“The lower-income communities have been dumped on for years. Now we’re saying: ‘We’ve paid our share and we don’t want any more,’ ” said Los Angeles City Councilman Mike Hernandez, a leading opponent of the project. “The fact that (companies) continue to try and put things here is racist, because they believe the people will offer the least resistance.”

Last year, the federal Environmental Protection Agency released a report that racial and ethnic minorities nationwide suffer disproportionate exposure to dust, soot, carbon monoxide, lead and emissions from hazardous-waste dumps.

A 1987 study by the United Church of Christ’s Commission on Racial Justice found that three out of every five blacks and Latinos in the country lived near toxic-waste sites. More Latinos in Los Angeles live in communities near toxic-waste sites than in any other city in the United States, the report noted. Six years later, little has changed.

“What you’re saying, in a sense, is that a big segment of the community is considered garbage, a throw-away community,” said Robert Bullard, a sociology professor at UC Riverside and an expert on environmental racism. “That is the most blatant form of racism that we can see.”

Pipeline proponents argue that there was no racist intent behind the decision to run the project through the Eastside and South Los Angeles. They said the route is the most logical and financially feasible since nearly 80% of it falls along the Southern Pacific Railroad right of way.

Pipeline opponents are drumming up unwarranted fears in residents without hearing both sides of the story, they say.

“Sometimes we feel this is being blown out of context. . . . We picked this area because it was least disturbing to the people, not because it’s poor,” Rooney said.

Although he said he understands that safety is an issue to residents, he insisted the project poses little danger and claimed it is no different than a sewer line, which is more likely to be the source of an explosion because of the amount of methane gas running through it.

An environmental-impact report on the Pacific Pipeline, prepared by Aspen Environmental Group of Agoura Hills and funded by the Public Utilities Commission, said construction would not present a major safety hazard. And once buried five feet, oil spills or ruptures would be minimal, the report said.

There is greater risk associated with existing crude-oil pipelines that crisscross the county, according to the report and pipeline proponents. Those pipelines are longer and potentially more hazardous because of their age and the extra distance the oil travels before getting to refineries.

Residents, though, fear the worst, recounting incidents like a 1989 train derailment that triggered a gasoline pipeline explosion in San Bernardino County that killed six people, injured dozens and destroyed 22 houses in a predominantly minority area.

In another instance, a pin-sized hole caused a pipeline rupture in Central Los Angeles in January, spilling as much as 126 gallons of oil into a storm drain near the Los Angeles River.

“They can tell you it’s safe, but they cannot guarantee that an explosion will not happen,” said Juana Guiterrez of Mothers of East L.A.-Santa Isabel chapter.

On a recent afternoon, as a breeze blew through Guiterrez’s living room, there were no signs of pollution problems. But when there is no breeze, Guiterrez said, “you get a lot of the pollution and the smell from all the factories around here and in Vernon and from the freeways.”

Crude oil smells like rotten eggs, and environmentalists warn that the stench from a spill could last for days. Given all the other industry in areas along the proposed route, opponents call for moving the pipeline elsewhere.

Frank Villalobos, a community activist and president of Barrio Planners, an East L.A.-based design firm, said the pipeline should run along Pacific Coast Highway, the shortest route from Santa Barbara County to the refineries. Better yet, he said, the oil companies should build a refinery in Santa Barbara where the oil is drilled.

But Thomas Gwyn, chairman of the state Coastal Commission, said endangering the coastline with another refinery when there are existing sites in the Los Angeles Basin makes no sense.

“I’m aware that this is a controversial issue anywhere you put this (pipeline),” Gwyn said. “But the coastline is not growing and the open space of the coastline needs to be preserved.”

Each day, tankers bring 500,000 barrels of crude oil to Los Angeles. The proposed pipeline would reduce that amount by 25%. The remaining 375,000 barrels, from various parts of the world, would still be shipped on tankers to refineries in the Los Angeles Basin.

Much of the opposition to the project comes from Coalition Against the Pipeline, a six-year-old group of senior citizens, housewives, community activists and longtime residents who defeated the 1987 Angeles Pipeline proposal. That pipeline was to run from Kern County to the refineries in Wilmington, traveling down Western Avenue. The proposal was dropped in 1990.

In its new fight, the coalition has been putting up posters in supermarkets, handing out flyers and holding strategy meetings and rallies. The group said it will sue to stop the project if necessary.

The opposition is strong in the Eastside, where the project would threaten year-old plans to develop discount department stores and recreation areas on 118 acres of Taylor Yard property near Cypress Park, Hernandez said.

But in South Los Angeles, few residents are familiar with the project. People can’t fight against something they don’t know about,” said Robin Cannon, president of Concerned Citizens of South-Central.

At a pipeline workshop sponsored by the utilities commission last month at USC, only a few people from the area showed up, and none were Latino or African-American.

Pacific Pipeline Systems mailed 12,000 letters explaining the project to those who own property within 300 feet of the pipeline. Most of the residents living within a few blocks of the pipeline route are renters and did not receive the letters.

Pipeline officials also have spent about $75,000 to hire two public relations firms--Rose & Kindel and Winner/Wagner & Associates--to promote the pipeline to businesses, elected officials and residents.

The lobbying efforts have won allies among union officials and others who stress the importance of creating jobs in a slow economy.

Ron Kennedy, president of the Los Angeles and Orange counties’ Building Trade Council, said the pipeline would help reduce the 35% unemployment rate among its 6,000 employees.

Gene Hale, president of the African-American Chamber of Commerce, also applauded the project if it means a guarantee of jobs for inner-city youths. “I’m not saying environmentally this is the best thing,” Hale said. “I’m just saying because the economy is so bad and there are no jobs out there, this is something that could work if there are guarantees before construction begins.”

But for Pulido of Cypress Park, the prospect of a few hundred jobs is not worth putting his neighborhood at risk.

“We’re talking about our lives, our safety, our health,” Pulido said. “That is more important than this pipeline.”

Pipeline Hearings

The state Public Utilities Commission has scheduled three public hearings this week on the pipeline project.

* DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES: 7 p.m. Monday, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, A-level Auditorium, 111 N. Hope St.

* CARSON: 7 p.m. Tuesday, Carson Community Center, 8 Civic Plaza Drive.

* BURBANK: 7 p.m. Wednesday, Burbank City Hall, City Council chambers, 275 E. Olive Ave.

Copies of the Draft Environmental Impact Report can be viewed at the Public Utilities Commission office, 107 S. Broadway, Room 5109. The commission can be reached at (213) 897-2973.

For general information: Donna Silvestre, California Public Utilities Commission consumer outreach officer, (310) 412-6349.

Building the Pipeline

1. Ditching: A backhoe will dig a trench 7 feet deep and 36 inches wide along the Alameda corridor on the east side of the railroad tracks.

2. Soil Transfer: Soil dug from the ditch will be loaded into a truck and movd to the far end of the construction site to be used in refilling the trench.

3. Lowering-In And Line-Up: The 20-inch pipes will be lowered into the trench, lined up end-to-end and clamped together.

4. Welding: The pipes will be welded together at the joints.

5. X-Ray Inspection: Each weld will be X-rayed for flaws.

6. Joint Coating: The pipeline will be coated with a special material to prevent corrosion.

7. Backfilling: The same soil dug up will be used to refill the trench.

8. Backfill Compacting: A steamroller will pack the dirt over the trench. The area will then be tarred and paved.

*

Construction: 14 months, beginning in the spring of 1994 and completed by spring of 1995.

Disturbance from construction: In Central Los Angeles, pipeline would shut down one side of two-lane roadways during 10-hour construction days. Construction area would be a width of 20 to 50 feet. About 300-500 feet of pipeline will be laid a day, disrupting traffic and property 2-3 days a week.

Fires: Fires along the pipeline route are considered to be very unlikely because the oil is so viscous it would require being lit by a blowtorch to burn. If fires did occur, they would not present a significant risk to the public.

Capacity: 130,000 barrels of crude oil a day, or 10,000 gallons of oil per minute.

*

Depth: 5 feet underground

Material: steel with welded joints

Length: 171 miles from Gaviota to oil refineries in El Segundo and Wilmington

Cost: $215 million for design and construction

Jobs: 600 yearlong union jobs, 400 of which will be filled by residents of Los Angeles County.

Pollutants: Would generate considerable pollutant emissions during construction, mainly dust and fumes. Proponents have submitted emissions control measures to reduce amounts of dust and fumes given off by machines.

Hazards: Pipeline builders project it will have tow leaks and one rupture over its 20-year operating lifetime.

Precautions: Special valves to reduce the flow of oil and prevent oil from flowing downhill. The valves would also shut down the pipeline immediately if a leak were detected.

Recent Oil Pipeline Spills

1. Ft. Tejon, April 1993: 100,000 gallons of crude oil

2. Central Los Angeles, January 1993: 120 gallons of crude oil

3. Valencia, February 1991: 75,000 gallons of crude oil

4. Granada Hills, June 1990: 67,000 gallons oil-tainted water

5. Valencia, July 1988: 300 gallons of crude oil

6. Encino, Sept. 1988: 132,000 gallons crude oil

7. Sherman Oaks, Sept. 1988: 125,000 gallons oil-tainted water

8. Lebec, June 1987: 105,000 gallons crude oil

9. Torrance, June 1986: 6,300 gallons crude oil

10. Granada Hills, April 1986: 29,000 gallons crude oil

Route

More than 80% is within existing railroad, highway or pipeline transportation corridors. In Central Los Angeles, it will run 20 miles along the Alameda corridor. A proposed alternate route will cut in along Santa Fe Street from Downtown to 25th Street, where it will follow the railroad right-of-way.