Mobil, Torrance Face Task of Agreeing on Refinery Overseer

After reaching an unprecedented agreement that will permit an independent safety adviser to oversee operations of the Mobil Oil Refinery in Torrance, city and Mobil officials now face several difficult tasks, chief among them being finding an adviser who knows the oil industry, but is not beholden to it.

The choice of the safety adviser, seen as crucial to enforcing the settlement announced Thursday, is one of several major hurdles facing the city and Mobil as they try to end an 18-month legal struggle over safety conditions at the oil refinery, city officials, environmental groups and other observers said.

To settle the lawsuit Mobil agreed to phase out or greatly modify its use of hazardous hydrofluoric acid. However, some experts have questioned whether the technology exists--or will exist soon enough--to allow Mobil to commit to using a modified form of the toxic compound in time for the 1994 deadline set out in the agreement.

Some Torrance residents are skeptical that the agreement alone will guarantee safety at the refinery.

“We have to keep a watchdog attitude toward them. The more regulation, the better,” said Jim Beezhold, vice president of the Northwest Torrance Homeowners Assn., which represents neighbors of the refinery.

But both city and company officials agreed that the linchpin to making the settlement work is finding the right safety adviser.

The post, to be filled within two months, “is the heart of the agreement” between Mobil and Torrance, said City Atty. Kenneth L. Nelson.

The city and Mobil will attempt to pick a safety adviser together. If they cannot, one will be selected by retired Superior Court Judge Harry V. Peetris, who helped negotiate the settlement and will oversee the case.

Torrance filed suit filed in April, 1989, after a series of accidents, deaths and injuries at the refinery. No deaths were caused by hydrofluoric acid, but 10 people were injured in a 1987 accident attributed to an acid overflow.

Torrance’s dilemma now will be to find a scientist or engineer who understands refineries, but who is not too closely linked with the industry, city officials and environmentalists said.

“You run the risk of finding someone whose livelihood depends on acceptability within the industry,” said David Roe, a senior attorney with the Environmental Defense Fund. “There are not a lot of public-interest, hydrofluoric-acid process engineers.”

Mobil is looking at a number of candidates, said Joel H. Maness, manager of the refinery.

One of the safety adviser’s most important tasks, both sides agreed, will be to judge whether Mobil will modify or discontinue its use of hydrofluoric acid. The settlement calls for the company to stop using the compound by Dec. 31, 1997, unless it can find a safer form of the acid and agree to use a new process by December, 1994.

Hydrofluoric acid is used as a catalyst in a process called alkylation, which creates a high-octane gasoline component. Safety concerns about the acid have arisen because it vaporizes at room temperature when released, forming a potentially fatal ground-hugging cloud.

Less-volatile sulfuric acid can be used in alkylation units in place of hydrofluoric acid. But Mobil has opposed converting on grounds that hydrofluoric acid is more efficient and that switching would cost $100 million.

Maness said that his company hopes within four years to develop additives that could make hydrofluoric acid safe by inhibiting its ability to vaporize. Mobil is also researching alternative octane-boosting processes that would make the the acid’s use unnecessary, he said.

“We feel that within four years we can complete our research process,” Maness said. “If at the end of that period we haven’t identified any other processes that we think are viable and feasible, sulfuric acid alkylation will be our only other option.”

However, at least one expert questioned whether such systems could realistically be discovered and developed so soon.

“There’s nothing that I’m aware of that will do the job now,” said Ronald Koopman, an energy expert with the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory who conducted industry-sponsored safety studies of hydrofluoric acid in 1986. “It sounds like they’re going to have to work very hard to invent something.”

TERMS OF SETTLEMENT The settlement of Torrance’s lawsuit against Mobil Oil Corp. came 18 months after the city sued the oil giant in Superior Court asking that its Torrance refinery be declared a public nuisance and that the city be given the authority to regulate it. Under the settlement terms announced Thursday:

Mobil must halt use of hydrofluoric acid at the refinery by Dec. 31, 1997, unless it can develop a safer form of the highly toxic substance and commit to a modified process by Dec. 31, 1994. The chemical is used as a catalyst in the production of high-octane unleaded gasoline.

A safety adviser, probably an engineering consulting firm, will be selected by Mobil and the city. If they cannot agree, the judge overseeing the settlement would name a firm.

The safety adviser will review and make recommendations about refinery safety, including the emergency response program, employee training, seismic safety, procedures for handling hazardous materials and traffic control on nearby streets.

Decisions of the safety adviser would be binding on the parties unless they appealed within 30 days to the judge appointed to oversee the settlement, who would decide whether to enforce or modify the adviser’s recommendations.

The safety adviser must approve of any modified hydrofluoric acid process and the modified chemical must not form an aerosol or dense vapor cloud on release.

The safety adviser will report findings every three months through 1997. If the city decides any part of refinery operations poses an immediate threat, it can seek a court hearing to be held within 48 hours.

The safety adviser has the right to inspect the refinery, obtain documents and interview Mobil employees but a Mobil representative can be present.

The fees of the safety adviser and the judge overseeing the agreement will be paid by Mobil.

The agreement expires Dec. 31, 1997, but can be extended by the court.