More Texaco Files Seized in Spill Inquiry : Ventura: Investigators seek information that could show company knew of the leak long before reporting it.

State investigators served a second search warrant on Texaco’s north Ventura offices Friday, seizing more maps, production records and maintenance reports for their investigation into a 370,000-gallon spill of a toxic petroleum byproduct that seeped into the area’s ground water.

More than a dozen state Department of Fish and Game investigators searched three buildings at the Texaco facility late into the evening Friday, said Capt. Roger Reese, who heads Fish and Game’s Ventura office.

Reese said investigators were seeking documents that would show the amount of gas condensate lost in recent years from the facility and that could show the company knew about the spill long before reporting it.

Texaco reported the spill in January, 1993, saying it was contained in a 4-by-4-foot area.

But state investigators later found that so much of the toxic liquid had leaked that an underground water basin beneath the spill bore a slick many feet thick. Officials estimate it will take years to pump all of the toxic liquid out of the ground and clean up the site. Texaco has repeatedly denied both responsibility for the spill and the state’s allegations that it knew about the spill before it was reported to authorities.

Reese said Friday that Texaco’s denials were not believable. The company could not have lost so much of the valuable gasoline-like fuel without noticing it, he said.

“They lost 370,000 gallons of a product that’s worth a lot of money,” he said. “Oil companies keep track of their products and generally keep very good records. . . .It’s not plausible that they would not know they lost that much material.”

Reese’s statement was the strongest yet about the state’s reasons for pursuing a criminal investigation against Texaco.

The Department of Fish and Game alleges that the material may have been leaking for months or even years before it was reported to authorities.

“It’s really not a matter of delay in reporting the (large) spill,” Reese said. “It was never reported.”

Despite several detailed allegations by investigators, Texaco officials declined to respond, except to generally deny any wrongdoing.

“The property borders Shell Oil and several other companies,” said Texaco spokeswoman Faye Cox. “There are several different pipelines that cross the canyon owned by several different companies. We still haven’t been able to determine the source of the spill.”

Investigators continue to be unsure about the size of the spill, relying on an estimate provided by a consulting firm that works for Texaco. In addition, investigators are unable to determine how much of the toxic liquid flowed down School Canyon Creek, past a housing development and into the Ventura River.

Investigators say it has taken them months to determine that the massive spill of the toxic liquid came from one of Texaco’s pipelines and had seeped through the soil and settled into the canyon’s ground water.

When Fish and Game investigators asked Texaco about the suspected leaky pipeline--which had been repaired in recent years--they were told by Texaco that it never carried the material, despite the fact that “Gas Condensate” was written on the pipeline, Reese said.

Investigators said that several boxes of documents were seized during their four-day search of Texaco’s Ventura facilities but that it was still too soon to tell if criminal charges are warranted against the company.

“We don’t know what we found so I can’t say the search strengthened our case any,” Reese said. “It’s going to take some very careful and complicated analysis before we know what we have.”

Times staff writer Daryl Kelley contributed to this story.