The evaluations of Chevron’s technical analysis titled, “Materials Selection for Repair of Damaged Process Piping in High-Temperature Sulfidation Service in the No. 4 Crude Unit” have been completed by Jim McLaughlin, the City’s metallurgical consultant and David Hendrix, the City’s peer reviewer.  View the Letters from City’s Consulting Materials Engineers regarding Chevron Report.
Staff is conducting a public meeting tonight to provide information on the factors leading to a decision concerning pipe material before permits are granted for damaged process piping in high-temperature sulfidation service.  The meeting is scheduled as follows:
Date:            Wednesday, December 19, 2012
Time:            6:30 PM
Location:       Richmond City Council Chambers
440 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, California 94804

Staff will continue to provide material as it becomes available to us.  Please also check the City’s website at www.ci.richmond.ca.us/chevronrefineryfire2012
Decisions regarding this permit are solely the authority of City staff -- the building official and the fire marshal. The City Council has no role in this issue other than to advocate for transparency.
One note about the two reviews: Both reviewers went to great lengths to stress that the selected pipe material is in accordance with building code and fire code requirements. As an architect practicing for over 40 years, I know that the buildings codes are minimum requirements. They are not exhaustive, and they do not necessarily constitute best practices. Neither are they necessarily up to date.
Similarly, industry standards are not necessarily best practices. They also tend to lag current knowledge by a year or sometimes several years. Industry standards are promulgated by the industry based on their own motivations, which do not necessarily include public safety. They are also consensus standards, which means they sometimes represent the lowest common denominator rather than best practices.
I’m not criticizing the pipe material selection, but I am disappointed that there was not more discussion of best practices to supplement the exhaustive defense of code compliance and industry standards. The conclusions may have been the same, but they would have more public validation.

Chevron’s pipe repair review consistent with industry standard, city expert says
By Stephen HobbsPosted December 18, 2012 10:21 pm
The city’s metallurgical consultant wrote in a report submitted to City Manager Bill Lindsay Tuesday afternoon that Chevron’s choice of piping to replace the No. 4 crude unit at the Richmond refinery is “consistent with industry standards.”
Chevron submitted plans detailing recommendations for repairing the piping in the refinery to Lindsay on Dec. 12. The company’s analysis argued that making the new pipes of 300-series stainless steel, as the U.S. Chemical Safety Board has suggested, would introduce “a new damage mechanism” that would create a problem even more difficult to monitor and inspect than the sulfidation corrosion blamed for the Aug. 6 refinery fire.
James McLaughlin, a consulting engineer for the city, said in his letter Tuesday that Chevron’s preferred material, 9-chrome alloy, follows industry practices. He concluded that Chevron’s report was “sufficiently complete” to comply with the California Fire Code.
The city’s peer reviewer also had findings consistent with McLaughlin’s. “Based on the information contained in Chevron’s technical report, it is my opinion that Chevron’s logic and procedures used in their materials selection process is consistent with industry practice,” David E. Hendrix wrote in a letter sent to the city Tuesday.
Hendrix is president of the Hendrix Group, Inc., a material engineering consulting group, based in Houston, TX.
The technical analysis from Chevron and the city consultant’s response come before a council-ordered public meeting on Wednesday night meant to provide “transparency in the permitting process.”
Lindsay emphasized that building permits will not be issued for the repair of the damaged piping in the crude unit until after Wednesday’s meeting.
Congressman George Miller also weighed in on the piping issue Tuesday, saying he believed that Chevron had made a decision on the what piping material to use “even before the damaged piping had been removed for testing,” Miller wrote in a letter to the Richmond City Council.
Miller also criticized Chevron’s call for “timely action” on the permit process while they have been slow to share details with the public and respond to the CSB.
“Expediency should not be allowed to override transparency of the decision making process or concern for worker and public health and safety,” Miller wrote.
According to his resume, James McLaughlin, a material engineer at Becht Engineering Co., Inc., has more than 30 years of experience in the petroleum industry, specifically with issues of corrosion prevention, failure analysis and “fitness-for-service assessments in the entire range of equipment in refineries, petrochemical units and upstream facilities.”
Although his report said he found Chevron’s review complete, McLaughlin did not endorse the use of 9-chrome. “These opinions,” he wrote, “do not constitute a professional opinion that Chevron should install 9Cr in its repair project.
Wednesday night’s public meeting on the permitting process will take place at 6:30 p.m. at the City Council chambers.