Proposals by Firms Vying for Mobil Job Vary Widely : Torrance: Disparate cost estimates are among many differences in the documents submitted by two companies hoping to oversee safety at the refinery.

The two firms that are competing to oversee safety at the Mobil Oil Corp. refinery in Torrance have submitted proposals that show distinctly different approaches to the job.

Westinghouse Electric Corp., the firm nominated by Mobil, expects to complete much of its safety review in 12 to 18 months at a cost of $185,000, according to a proposal released by the city this week. Westinghouse tentatively estimates a total bill of $350,000 for the job.

But SRI International, nominated by the city of Torrance, appears to be contemplating a more expensive four-phase operation. Its proposal projects that the first phase alone could cost from $325,000 to more than $1 million. SRI said the total cost of the job cannot be estimated at this time.

The position of safety adviser was created last fall in a consent decree between Mobil and the city. The pretrial agreement settled a public nuisance lawsuit Torrance had filed against Mobil in 1989 after a series of explosions and other accidents at the plant.

The proposals are now being reviewed by Mobil and city officials. If the two parties cannot agree on a firm, the choice will be made by the judge overseeing the consent decree.

City Atty. Kenneth L. Nelson, who released the proposals this week, said city and Mobil representatives already have interviewed representives of the two firms in person, and the city should know shortly if it is deadlocked in its discussions with Mobil.

The Westinghouse budget estimate “seems a bit low,” Nelson said. The wide gap between the two estimates will probably prompt considerable discussion in coming days, he said.

“There’s no question that those numbers will need to be explained, reconciled,” he said.

City Manager LeRoy J. Jackson said that both firms offer good resources but that “our feeling about SRI is that they have a background in the type of specific areas we feel are appropriate.”

A Mobil spokesman, James A. Carbonetti, said he had not seen either proposal.

A spokesman at Westinghouse headquarters in Pittsburgh, Michael Stock, declined to comment on any aspect of the Westinghouse proposal and would not confirm whether the $350,000 figure is his firm’s estimate for the total project. “We don’t discuss the details in the media,” he said.

However, Stock said Westinghouse believes “we are well-qualified for this work and we have experience in this area.”

The selection of a safety adviser is considered the key ingredient in implementing the October, 1990, consent decree between Mobil and the city.

As part of the settlement, Mobil agreed to phase out its use of a highly toxic chemical, hydrofluoric acid, by Dec. 31, 1997, unless a satisfactory modified catalyst can be found by the end of 1994. Whoever is chosen as safety adviser will be responsible for deciding whether any modified catalyst would be safe enough to allow the continued use of hydrofluoric acid.

The settlement also calls for Mobil to pay the full cost of the safety adviser. The court will set the maximum amount the adviser will be paid and will oversee the firm’s budget.

Following the settlement guidelines, Mobil and the city each have named nominees.

Mobil nominated Westinghouse’s Energy Systems Business Unit. The Westinghouse proposal describes a “project team” representing five different groups: Westinghouse Risk Management, Westinghouse Environmental and Geotechnical Services, Westinghouse Environmental Programs and Chemical Technology Group, Fauske & Associates, and EQE Engineering.

In its proposal, Westinghouse outlines 13 different steps to satisfy the consent decree, ranging from “detection/monitoring” to perimeter improvements, emergency response programs, and environmental and safety practices.

Most of the work involved in meeting those 13 steps can be completed in 12 to 18 months at a cost of $185,000, the proposal says. It also outlines two reports that would be made in 1992 at a cost of $15,000; it was unclear what those reports would address. Another $150,000 would cover reports made in 1993 through 1997, it states.

The city’s nominee, SRI International, is a nonprofit research firm based in Menlo Park.

The SRI proposal lacks any estimate for the total cost of the project.

It does project that the first phase--in which major issues would be identified and plans developed for meeting the consent decree--would cost $250,000 to $750,000. That does not include project-related charges such as travel and office expenses, which would average 30% to 40% of the overall professional charges, the SRI proposal states.

“Estimates for Phases II, III and IV are not possible at this time because of the high uncertainty regarding the issues to be studied and the project management procedures to be used,” the proposal states.

Nor does the proposal estimate how long the first phase would last.

SRI representatives are reluctant at this point to provide more definite time or cost projections, said Dennis D. Maxwell, SRI vice president for corporate marketing and communications.

The Westinghouse and SRI proposals are done in different formats, making direct comparison difficult.

The SRI proposal, for instance, states that it plans to open two Torrance offices, including one at the refinery that would have equipment for three staff people. The Westinghouse proposal does not mention any offices, and Nelson said he did not know whether one is planned.

SRI also discusses making monthly reports during the first two years, followed by quarterly reports for the remaining years. Quarterly reports are required by the consent decree.

Westinghouse says it sees the project starting with a meeting among Westinghouse, the city and Mobil to clarify the goals of the consent decree and to discuss the overall schedule, budget and other matters.

After that meeting, Westinghouse would prepare a final project plan, the proposal states.

SRI says that it would meet first with retired Superior Court Judge Harry V. Peetris to discuss the consent decree, working arrangements between SRI and the court, communications with the press and other parties, control of documents and other matters. It would then hold a series of meetings with Mobil and the city, the proposal says. Both proposals include the resumes of the people who would be involved in the safety adviser job.

Two of the nine people on the SRI project team have previously worked for Mobil, the proposal shows. One was a process engineering supervisor at a Mobil refinery in Illinois; the other worked for Mobil in research and development.

Nelson said he does not believe that it would be a problem having former Mobil employees involved in monitoring the refinery. Neither person worked at the Torrance refinery, he said.