COUNCIL VOTES TO CHALLENGE PIPELINE OK : L.A. PLANS LAWSUIT IF STATE WON'T RETHINK OIL PROJECT THROUGH VALLEY.

Byline: Steven J. Gorman Daily News Staff Writer

The Los Angeles City Council voted Tuesday to ask state regulators to reconsider their approval of the proposed Pacific Pipeline and to authorize a legal challenge to the project if the city's request is denied, officials said.

The closed-session action, disclosed by Councilman Mike Hernandez, followed a boisterous public hearing in which scores of private citizens and workers who favor the planned oil pipeline packed the council chamber to show their support.

The vote was 12-0, according to Hernandez aide Morrie Goldman.

He said the council instructed the City Attorney's Office to file an administrative appeal with the California Public Utilities Commission, seeking a rehearing of its decision April 10 to approve the pipeline and environmental studies for the project.

If the commission denies the city's request, or upholds its earlier decision, the city attorney would then file suit before the state Supreme Court and in federal court challenging the adequacy of the studies, Goldman said.

As currently proposed, the Pacific Pipeline would carry up to 130,000 barrels of crude oil daily from Kern County to refineries in Wilmington, El Segundo and Carson.

About 12 miles of the pipeline would pass through the Valley along a Southern Pacific railroad right of way in Sylmar, San Fernando, Pacoima and Sun Valley before crossing into Burbank and Glendale on its way south.

Foes of the project argue that the environmental studies failed to thoroughly consider at least two alternatives that might avoid some of the biggest risks associated with the Pacific Pipeline plan. Those alternatives would involve expansion and modification of existing pipelines - one operated by Atlantic Richfield Co., another by Edison Pipeline & Terminal Co., a subsidiary of Southern California Edison.

In particular, the city Department of Environmental Affairs has said state regulators largely overlooked the risk for potential contamination of the city's water supply in the event of a major rupture of the proposed Pacific Pipeline.

``There was no question in the council's mind that there are alternatives to the Pacific Pipeline project,'' Hernandez said in a statement. ``As a council, we decided this was the right thing to do. It is our job to represent people. It is our job to represent neighborhoods.'

Pacific Pipeline project manager Chuck McLean expressed confidence that the consortium of oil companies seeking to build the pipeline - Chevron, Texaco and Unocal - will prevail. And he disputed suggestions that the environmental impact report had fallen short.

``This is the most comprehensive EIR ever done on any project in the city of L.A.,'' he said. ``It's certainly not inadequate by any means.''

Pacific Pipeline officials have said the project would entail the most sophisticated construction and leak-detection technology known to the oil industry and would actually reduce environmental hazards by replacing trucks, trains and oil tankers, which they say pose a greater risk of accidents and spills.