Martinez News and Views

Martinez News and Views

Share this post

Martinez News and Views
Martinez News and Views
State Law Governing Refinery Contract Workers Dominates Meeting on Investigation into February Fire

State Law Governing Refinery Contract Workers Dominates Meeting on Investigation into February Fire

Requirement that workers come from local union halls generates significant discussion at MRC Oversight meeting; also, City Council restores funding for annual fireworks show in 2025-26 budget

Craig Lazzeretti's avatar
Craig Lazzeretti
Jun 11, 2025
∙ Paid
2

Share this post

Martinez News and Views
Martinez News and Views
State Law Governing Refinery Contract Workers Dominates Meeting on Investigation into February Fire
1
1
Share

A previous version of this article misidentified two members of the Martinez Refining Co. Oversight Committee. The article has been updated with the correct identifications.

The following article by freelance writer Tom Lochner is made possible through the financial support of paid subscribers and other financial donors to the newsletter. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber, for $5 a month or $50 annually, if not already to support more local coverage of Martinez.

By Tom Lochner

A Martinez Refining Co. Oversight Committee meeting on June 3 focused largely on SB 54, a 2014 law ostensibly designed to promote the use of skilled and trained workers on refinery projects — and whether, as some people say, it actually accomplishes the opposite by impeding rather than boosting safety at the refinery, site of a massive fire on Feb. 1.

SB 54 requires that contract workers for certain refinery construction and maintenance operations be enrolled in or have graduated from an apprenticeship program approved by the California Department of Apprenticeship Standards. But a consultant hired by Contra Costa Health's Hazmat Program, JEM Advisors, noted that the vast majority of the programs are controlled by the California State Building Construction and Trades Council (SBCTC). The SBCTC is a powerful trades union lobbying group in Sacramento that donates heavily to Democratic Party politicians and whose affiliates have spent heavily on local elections. Thus, such contractors with local refineries must have an affiliation with the SBCTC.

"This excludes many highly experienced turnaround professionals who have worked on California turnarounds prior to 2014,” the consultant report reads.

A “turnaround” is refinery parlance for shutting down specific process units to conduct major maintenance, repairs and upgrades. The turnaround that was underway at MRC at the time of the fire was billed by refinery manager Daniel Ingram in a presentation to the City Council last year as "one of the largest, if not the largest, turnaround … under PBF for sure, maybe the history of the site, in terms of total scope, manpower and activities that will be going on."

The scarcity of available turnaround personnel at crucial moments can lead to all kinds of improvisational problem-solving, some of which can lead to mistakes, the investigation concluded.

The two authors of the Independent Incident Investigation/Root Cause Analysis, the final draft of which was the subject of the June 3 meeting, are Tom Hanson and Rex Kenyon, both former Chevron officials with more than 90 years of experience between them in multiple sectors of the refining industry. The report received intense pushback, along with some intense criticism of its authors, from an experienced steamfitter during the public comment period following the report's presentation.

The investigation identified the root cause of the Feb. 1 fire at the PBF Energy refinery as: "Operations Monitoring and Control of Work was inadequate for current Maintenance Contractor Organizational Capability." Four contributing causes were identified as well.

The incident started, the consultants found, when two contract workers trying to install an isolation blind in preparation for maintenance work on a process unit, mistakenly opened a wrong flange, allowing hydrocarbon material to leak, culminating in the massive fire.

Contributing Cause #1, according to JEM, was "Regulatory Restrictions due to California Senate Bill 54 along with Co-Employment rules," with the result that "past resources that included 'professional shutdown execution' personnel from other locations are no longer available for PBF to use on turnarounds." The consultant said that no options to deal directly with this causal item were identified.

Contributing Cause #2 involves "Work Processes and Procedures;" some of the identified shortcomings are as mundane as "Permits to Work" that are hard to read because of their small font size and that lack important information; other perceived shortcomings include various kinds of corner-cutting.

Contributing Cause #3 is inadequate contractor training, resulting in a higher likelihood for human errors entering into maintenance works.

Contributing Cause #4 is inadequate or missing contractor supervision.

A summary of recommended actions are in Appendix 4 on the last page of the Draft Final Report by clicking this link.

Committee member Heidi Taylor urged looking at the "big picture" rather than at isolated incidents. "I want to make sure that this stuff doesn't happen. And the only way to do that, I believe, is to look to address this kind of globally and still… focus on what they can do specifically to keep us safe, and the workers safe."

Contra Costa Health Hazmat Program Director Nicole Heath responded that a "global look" will occur at an upcoming full facility audit of MRC.

Committee member Kent Hull emphasized that the co-employment issue needs to be addressed, saying it's "more of a legal issue than it is a process issue."

"MRC is not allowed to train the contractors, which means that they don't really have control over the contractors' knowledge and ability," Hull said. "And so that seems like it's sort of a perfect storm, a convenient way of avoiding responsibility."

Committee member Tony Semenza asked whether any of the people involved in the mishap were administered a drug test. Hanson and Ken Axe, MRC’s representative on the committee, responded that no such tests were done. Said Axe, "When somebody's transported for observation at a hospital, you know, they've left our care." A drug test, he said, "was not a requirement that we placed on the individuals when they went to the emergency room."

According to the JEM report, six workers were evaluated by medical personnel; none were hospitalized.

Committee member Juan Banales questioned whether the competence and expertise of the contract workforce that SB 54 is supposed to guarantee is in fact occurring, when a duo led by a 10- or 12-year journeyman, with some experience at MRC, opens the wrong flange as they attempt to install an isolation blind.

"This is …. a very simple isolation system," Hanson said, in his response. "It's about as simple as you can get, and to get on the wrong flange in this case is — I need more imagination to figure out how that could have happened."

Kenyon said that based on JEM's interview with the journeyman, he finds it hard to believe that the journeyman really has 10 years of experience, and that altogether the journeyman exhibited "very poor capabilities."

Kenyon added, "When you're in a turnaround environment and you're bringing in 1,000, 2,000 individuals, that's when the big impact of SB 54 is felt, when you have to bring them all through a small portal for the local union hall, whereas if you're doing routine maintenance where you have probably less than 100 contractors working, it's not a big impact. But when you're trying to (bring) 4,000 to 2,000 people in here, and it's coming through a local union hall, you're really going to be severely restricted on the quality of the individuals you'll be getting."

The JEM report did not sit well with Mark Mulliner, who described himself during the public comment period that followed the presentation as a steamfitter of 33 years with the California State Building trades who "cut my teeth" in the refineries of the Bay Area. Addressing Hanson and Kenyon, Mulliner said: "You guys made a lot of personal observations about unions and about SB 54 legislation."

Mulliner then asked Hanson and Kenyon if they had any safety data. "Do you have anything that you can produce at the next public hearing meeting showing how, since 2014, these refineries aren't safer and more productive? Because we have data that shows the refineries are way more safer than they ever have been before. And I can personally tell you I was there when people were dying at Tosco, and they were dying because of the operation procedures."

The reference was to the former Tosco Avon refinery in Martinez, where in February 1999, a fire killed four workers and severely injured another. An explosion at the same refinery in January 1997 killed one worker and injured 46.

"You guys are making a lot of generalized statements about your personal opinions, and I'm willing to bet that your whole life, you've worked merit, nonunion, mechanical companies," Mulliner continued. "And I feel like you're very biased in the overall general statements, because you don't have any data, you're just making comments."

He added, "I have never in my life … heard two men make so many generalized statements without data."

The next steps in the process are projected as follows:

  • Hanson and Kenyon will provide more detailed recommendations regarding SB 54 and its impact on contractor qualifications and safety, and include data supporting their observations about SB 54's impact on refinery safety in the revised report.

  • Contra Costa Health will incorporate all oversight committee comments and responses into an appendix of the revised report.

  • CC Health will open the 45-day public comment period for the incident investigation report on June 10, and hold a public meeting on June 17 for presentation and comments on both the incident investigation report and a toxicologist report.

  • Axe will submit MRC's root cause analysis report by the end of June.

  • CC Health will post the finalized safety inspection report online.

  • A full facility audit, to be performed by a third-party consultant, is tentatively slated for completion late this summer or early fall.

    Share

The following item by freelance writer Tom Lochner on the city’s budget is being made available to paid subscribers only. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber if not already to support more local coverage of Martinez.

City Council makes more tweaks to 2025-26 budget

Keep reading with a 7-day free trial

Subscribe to Martinez News and Views to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.

Already a paid subscriber? Sign in
© 2025 Precision Communications and Consulting
Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice
Start writingGet the app
Substack is the home for great culture

Share