Digital Extra

Investigators for the safety board yesterday also offered the first official theory for the cause of the fire on the tug Scandia that led to the spill. They said that during the heavy sea conditions caused by the storm a container of a greaselike substance probably spilled onto a fiery-hot exhaust manifold that was left exposed because of sloppy maintenance.

The five-person safety board unanimously endorsed its investigators' conclusions that the underlying cause of the fire and the spill of 828,000 gallons of heating oil was inadequate oversight of maintenance and operations by Eklof.

Investigators said they found a long list of maintenance problems ranging from a fire pump so rusted it was pockmarked with holes the size of quarters, to a broken turbocharger that frequently filled the Scandia's engine room with smoke and made the crew sick. They said they could find no records of any efforts to fix the problems.

But board members also said they were disturbed and frustrated that the Coast Guard's safety rules are so lax that the service rarely inspects tugs towing barges filled with millions of gallons of oil and gasoline.

They questioned why the Coast Guard didn't respond more aggressively with emergency safety rules right after the disaster, rather than propose watered-down rules last winter. And they chided the American Bureau of Shipping, a nonprofit group that inspects tugs for insurance purposes, for failing to find any problems with the Scandia despite repeated inspections.

Safety board investigators said surveyors for the ABS had inspected the Scandia every year before the fire and always reported that it was in satisfactory condition even though two escape hatches were sealed shut, fire hoses had incompatible couplings and the fire pump was riddled with holes.

"It is a mystery to me as to how this could have happened," said Ash Chatterjee, the safety board's chief investigator.

Turning to the Coast Guard's role in supervising the industry, one board member, John G. Goglia, said, "I don't know the right word to describe the attitude of the Coast Guard on safety issues. Who is the customer of the Coast Guard? Are they the protectors of the environment and our coastlines, or are they the protectors of the commercial shipping industry?"

Board chairman James Hall said, "It appears there was a better plan in place to recover the spilled oil than to prevent the spill in the first place."

THE ONLY disagreement among board members arose over staff conclusions that the Coast Guard rescue team made errors in its rescue efforts by starting out with a boat that couldn't cope with the heavy seas; having a rescue swimmer outfitted improperly; taking two tug crewmen back to try to save the barge and -- as a result -- involving a Coast Guard helicopter rescue in a situation where initially only property was at risk.

"The staff believes [taking the two crewmen back to the barge] was an ill-conceived decision that needlessly endangered the lives of the crew, the boat crew and the helicopter crew," said Don Tyrrell, an investigator. With 25-foot seas, the return trip was a highly dangerous operation and there should have been better guidance, he said.

Robert T. Francis II, the board's vice chairman, said he was very reluctant to embrace "20-20 hindsight" when such heroic efforts were being undertaken by the Coast Guard crew.

"I don't think these young Coasties thought they were putting their lives in danger when they were trying to prevent a large oil spill," Francis said. "I hate to put a damper on people who have that kind of charge."

Goglia said the Coast Guard's culture supports taking risks to save others. "I remember hearing them say, You have to go out, but you don't have to come back."

Tyrrell argued that the coxswain of the rescue boat was a veteran who acted courageously and skillfully. But he erred by not checking on the worsening weather conditions before setting out. He lost 20 minutes when he had to return to port for a sturdier boat. He also erred, Tyrrell said, by putting the two crewmen back in danger by taking them back to the barge.

THE SAFETY BOARD is charged with investigating major accidents involving airplanes, ships and trains. Officials said their investigation of the North Cape spill was delayed by the criminal investigation launched by former U.S. Attorney Sheldon Whitehouse and the Providence office of the FBI.

Last fall Whitehouse charged Eklof and several key employees with criminal negligence for allowing the maintenance and safety flaws that led to the disaster. They pleaded guilty and paid a record $9.5 million in fines and costs.

The spill occurred Jan. 19, 1996, after Capt. Gregory R. Aitken left Bayonne, N.J., despite forecasts of a fierce winter storm. Early in the afternoon in Block Island Sound, the Scandia caught fire. The crew was forced to abandon ship and a Coast Guard rescue team from Newport plucked them from the water. The Coast Guard rescue swimmer suffered from hypothermia, so the rescuers took him and the Scandia crew back to port. Later the Coast Guard took two crewmen back out to the barge so they could try to free its anchor.

But heavy seas were washing over the barge and the crewmen had to be rescued by a Coast Guard helicopter dispatched from Cape Cod.

The FBI later determined there was no windlass on the barge to lower the anchor, the anchor was shackled to the deck and the crew had little equipment for fighting the fire when it broke out on the Scandia.

Investigators for the safety board said some of the crewmen misled them in their initial investigation. But after the criminal case was over investigators interviewed crew members again and got a different story, one that described widespread safety and maintenance problems.

Yesterday the investigators presented their findings and recommendations to the safety board for approval. After a few hours of discussion, the board approved its investigators' determination of a probable cause, and a list of 20 recommendations for safety and maintenance improvements that it wants Eklof, the Coast Guard and the tug and barge industry to implement. The safety board's detailed report on the incident won't be available for several weeks.

Douglas Eklof, president of Eklof, watched the proceedings with his attorney, Thomas J. Kelly Jr. Afterward, Eklof said he felt bad that the Coast Guard was being criticized and he said he's already implemented many safety improvements at his own company. Also, he said he is working with the American Waterway Operators, an industry group, to make the entire industry safer.

"The whole incident has made other companies review their practices," he said.

THE SAFETY BOARD voted to recommend that the Coast Guard develop new safety rules for the tug and barge industry that equal those already imposed on tankers; that it require company managers to communicate with tug captains during emergencies; that it develop new standards for dealing with bad weather and equipment problems and that it require remote anchor release devices, self-contained breathing apparatus and fire suits, and fixed firefighting systems in engine rooms.

It also recommended that search and rescue personnel conduct mandatory briefings before missions to assess weather and sea conditions and that rescue swimmers be required to wear thermal protective clothing.

It recommended that Eklof develop an effective maintenance program, implement new procedures to communicate with its captains and develop measures to guide captains on weather risks and the adequacy of their vessel's equipment.