Judge Picks Mobil Nominee as Safety Firm for Refinery : Torrance: Proposal by Westinghouse is ruled ‘clearly superior.’ City officials who backed another firm are dismayed.

A retired Superior Court judge, siding with the Mobil Oil Corp., Thursday selected Westinghouse Electric Corp. to oversee safety operations at Mobil’s Torrance refinery.

The appointment of Westinghouse as safety adviser by Judge Harry V. Peetris upset officials in the city of Torrance, which had favored a Northern California consulting firm for the crucial post.

The safety adviser is considered the key element in last fall’s consent decree between the city and Mobil, which was the result of a public-nuisance lawsuit filed in 1989 by Torrance against the company.

In his 12-page decision, Peetris called Westinghouse’s proposal “clearly superior,” noting that its project team members are well versed in the fields of risk management, environmental and geological services, earthquake engineering assessment, environmental programs and chemical technology.

Under the consent decree, Peetris had the responsibility to name the adviser if the two litigants could not agree. Mobil had nominated Westinghouse, and the city had championed SRI International of Menlo Park.

Torrance city officials, who have spent $1.4 million on their lawsuit against Mobil and talked optimistically about the course of the consent decree, expressed disappointment.

“Now I have to accept the fox watching the chicken coop, and I don’t like it at all,” said Councilman Dan Walker. “I think, unfortunately, that Mobil has an ally (in Westinghouse) rather than an entity that is going to supervise it.”

Under the consent decree, the adviser will analyze safety procedures at the refinery, make recommendations on how to improve those measures and oversee the modification or seven-year phase-out of highly toxic hydrofluoric acid at the plant.

Peetris, who has been considering his decision since the conclusion of a two-day hearing on April 11, set a $1-million spending limit for Westinghouse, which had estimated that the entire job would cost about $350,000.

Peetris said his order is contingent on Mobil’s accepting two changes in the consent decree. One would allow either side to seek a higher spending limit in the event of an emergency; the other would allow Peetris to hire experts, at Mobil’s expense, to help him arbitrate any future technical disagreements.

Mobil officials, who have 20 days to agree to the changes, said they had not had a chance to review the judge’s decision, which was issued at about 3:30 p.m. City and Mobil officials apparently had no warning that the ruling would be issued Thursday.

During debate over the adviser’s selection, attorneys for Torrance questioned whether Westinghouse had sufficient experience in the petrochemical industry and raised doubts about whether it could remain objective in its dealings with Mobil.

One conflict could stem from Westinghouse’s operation of nuclear power plants, whose work force is represented by the same labor union--the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers--that represents Mobil’s employees. Torrance attorneys argued that Westinghouse might avoid making recommendations that would anger workers or the union with which it also negotiates. Westinghouse also holds other contracts with Mobil for services and supplies.

“Obviously, we’re very much disappointed,” Torrance Mayor Katy Geissert said. “We really thought SRI had a much better grasp of the consent decree.”

But in his decision, Peetris--who did not discuss SRI--called Westinghouse’s previous interactions with Mobil “significantly small.”

“While these objections are not deemed to be of such a nature as to disqualify Westinghouse . . . it may still appear to some (to be) a non-objective selection,” Peetris acknowledged. “These objections should be dispelled, especially when considering that . . . the circle from which to choose is so small that all of the companies have had some business dealings with Mobil.”

B. Griffith Holmes, who will serve as Westinghouse’s project director for the safety contract, said objectivity will not be a problem.

“I fully intend to be objective. We approach all of our projects in that manner,” Holmes said. “We have no commitments to Mobil Oil Corp.”

SRI International, a nonprofit research firm, has had minimal contact with Mobil. Two of SRI’s proposed team members previously worked for Mobil; however, neither had worked at the Torrance refinery, city officials said.

During an April hearing on the selection, however, Mobil rapped the company for inexperience in the petrochemical field.

“SRI is an extremely competent firm. They just don’t have the expertise and technical know-how in this particular area,” refinery manager Joel Maness said Thursday evening.

“We didn’t suggest Westinghouse because we felt that they would be a yes man or a pro-refinery sort of contractor,” he said. “We selected Westinghouse because we felt they had the expertise and the talent to do the job.”