### 1 M EMORANDUM

DATE: March 24 , 2011

SUBJECT: Revised Regulatory Alternative Impacts for ExxonMobil Group I Polymers and Resins Facilities

FROM : Bradley Nelson , EC/R Incorporated Lesley Stobert, EC/R Incorporated

TO: Nick Parsons , EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/ RCG Paula Hirtz, EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/ RCG

The purpose of this memorandum is to present revised estimated impacts of regulator y alternatives identified to reduce hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions from two source categories that are subject to the Group I Polymers and Resins National Emission Standards for HAP (NESHAP)

– 40 CFR 63, subpart U. These source categories are But yl Rubber Production and Ethylene Propylene Rubber Production. The revisions are a result of comments received from ExxonMobil , which has facilities in both of these source categories, on the proposed changes to the NESHAP after the Risk and Technology Re view (RTR) evaluation under section 112(d)(2), 112(d)(6) and 112(f)(3) of the Clean Air Act (CAA)

. Section 1 provides background information, followed by an identification of the regulatory alternatives in Section 2. Section 3 summarizes the estimated co sts and HAP emission reductions of the alternatives, and Section 4 summarizes the secondary impacts.

1.0 BACKGROUND
EPA published a proposed rule and supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register On October 21, 2010 (75 FR 65068) t h at took into consideration the residual risk and technology review analyses for several NESHAP, including five of the nine source categories regulated by th e Group 1 Polymers and Resins NESHAP

– Butyl Rubber Production, Epichlorohydrin Production, Ethylen e Propylene Rubber Production, Neoprene Production, and Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production . Sources of HAP emissions from these processes include raw material storage vessels, front

- end process vents, back

- end process operations, wastewater operations, a nd equipment leaks. The process “front

- end” includes pre

- polymerization, reaction, stripping, and material recovery operations; and the process “back

- end” includes all operations after stripping (predominately drying and finishing). The emission sources regulated by the NESHAP for these source categories are storage tanks, front

- end process vents, equipment leaks, and wastewater operations.
For the propos ed rule , r egulatory alternatives were evaluated for the process “front

- end” for Butyl Rubber Produc tion, Halobutyl Rubber Production, and Ethylene Propylene Rubber Production to reduce hydrochloric acide (HCl) emissions. Two “front

- end” process regulatory alternatives were identified. The first alternative was to establish an emissions limit based on the

### 2 current level of HCl emissions. This option did not require the installation of any additional controls, only that HCl emissions be maintained at the current level. The second alternative was to require a 99 percent reduction of the HCl created from the combustion of chlorinated organic compounds. In each case, the HCl is generated by the combustion of chlorinated organic compounds in a flare. Since it is not technically feasible to install an add

- on device to reduce these HCl emissions following th e flare, the impacts we re based on the replacement of the flares currently in use with incinerators followed by scrubbers that w ould achieve 99 percent reduction of the HCl emissions.
Regulatory alternatives were also identified for the process “back

- end” for: Butyl Rubber Production, Epichlorohydrin Production, Halobutyl Rubber Production, Neoprene Production, and Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production. Two alternatives were considered for each source category/subcategory. The alternative was to establish an emission limit based on the current HAP emissions levels considering existing levels of HAP stripping and recovery plus any existing controls. This option did not require the installation of any additional controls, only that emissions be maintained a t the current level. The second regulatory alternative identified was to reduce the organic HAP emissions by requiring a 98 percent reduction in organic HAP emissions.
Information about emission points and emissions were provided by the industry in respo nse to a questionnaire distributed by the EPA using their authority under section 114 of the CAA. These data were used to evaluate the impacts of the proposed regulatory alternatives.
During the proposal comment period, ExxonMobil , which owns the only f acility in the Butyl Rubber subcategory (located in Baytown, Texas) and the only facility in the Halobutyl Rubber subcategory (located in Baton Rouge, Louisiana) , stated that both of these facilities now produce halobutyl rubber as the primary product, and the technical differences that distinguished the subcategories no longer exist. As a result of this comment, EPA is eliminating the subcategories in the Butyl Rubber source category (Butyl Rubber and Halobutyl Rubber)

. To address the two facilities toge ther in one revised Butyl Rubber source category, we have re

evaluated the emissions reductions, costs, and other impacts of controls for both the back

- end operations and the front

- end process vents for these two facilities

. For the butyl rubber processes at these two facilities, as well as the ethylene propylene rubber processes at its Baton Rouge facility, ExxonMobil also submitted information regarding the types of control equipment that would be feasible for use at the se facilities and data on design f low rates, more information about HCl and HAP emissions, a nd control equipment costs. Considering these data, EPA has re

evaluate d the regulatory alternatives for the revised Butyl Rubber source category and the Ethylene Propylene Rubber source category a nd revised the estimated costs and HAP emission reductions associated with the alternatives for these source categories.

2.0 REGULATORY ALTERNATIVES
Considering the information provided by ExxonMobil after the proposal, we have re

evaluated the propose d regulatory options. For the process “front

- end” for the revised Butyl Rubber Production source category and the Ethylene Propylene Rubber Production source category, we again evaluated the first alternative to establish an emissions limit based on the

### 3 c urrent level of HCl emissions to reduce hydrochloric acid (HCl) emissions and t he second alternative to require a 99 percent reduction of the HCl created from the combustion of chlorinated organic compounds. F or the process “back

- end” for the revised Buty l Rubber Production source category, we again evaluated the first alternative to establish an emission limit based on the current HAP emissions levels considering existing levels of HAP stripping and

reco very plus any existing controls and the second alter native to require a 98 percent reduction in organic HAP emissions.

3.0 RELEVANT EMISSION POINTS AND BASELINE EMISSIONS
After the proposal was published , ExxonMobil provided additional information for the emission points for their Baytown and Baton Rou ge facilities. The sections below summarize the new information and compare it to the emission point information used for the proposed rule.

3.1 Front

- End Emissions

ExxonMobil had two facilities that reported emissions of HCl from the flaring of chlor inated organic compounds present in front

- end process vent emissions, one producing b utyl

r ubber (Baytown , TX facility) and one producing butyl r ubber and e thylene propylene r ubber (Baton Rouge , LA facility)

. In the proposal, HCl control impacts were esti mated using the emissions and flow rates obtained from the section 114 letter. After the proposal was published, ExxonMobil clarified which front

- end process vent HCl emissions streams were generated at the flare . ExxonMobil also provided information on the design flow rate that would be required for the emissions control systems to control streams from the butyl rubber processes at the Baytown facility and the design flow rate for a shared control device to control both the butyl rubber and ethylene prop ylene rubber processes at the Baton Rouge facility

. An estimate of the flow rate required for the control systems for each source category at the Baton Rouge facility was made based on the emission rates of the different source categories. A summary of t he differences i n flow rate and HAP emissions from the flares between the proposal information and the revised information are presented in Table 1.

### 4 Table 1

. Comparison of the Proposal and Revised “Front

- End” Process Baseline Emissi ons

Facility and Source Category Pollutant Proposal Estimate Emissions (Tons/yr) Revised Estimate Emissions (Tons/yr) Proposal Flow Rate

(ft 3 

### / min ) Revised Flow Rate

(ft 3 

### / min )

Baytown Facility, B utyl R ubber Production Hydrochloric Acid 30.1 24.7

3,500 5,7 00 Methyl Chloride 0.779 0.779
Hexane 6.53 6.53 1,3 Butadiene 0.001 0.0 01 Xylenes 0.0002 0.0 002 Baton Rouge Facility, Butyl Rubber Production Hydrochloric Acid 76.8 76.9 3,500 2,040 Methyl Chloride 0.53 0.53
Hexane 0.06 0.06

Baton Rouge Facility, Ethylene Propylene Rubber Production Hydrochloric Acid 19.8 24.1

3,500 660 Hexane 0.188 0.188 Methyl Chloride 0.53 0.53
Hexane 0.06 0.06



### 3.2 Back

- End Process Emissions
At proposal we evaluated regulatory alternatives for t he process back

- end for the butyl rubber processes at the ExxonMobil facilities in Baytown, TX and Baton Rouge, LA. In the proposal, HAP control impacts were estimated using the emissions and flow rates obtained from the section 114 letter. After the pro posal was published, ExxonMobil clarified the amount of back

- end emissions that would be controlled, considering emissions capture inefficiency and emissions that would be bypassed to the atmosphere during control equipment maintenance procedures. ExxonMo bil also provided information on the design flow rate that would be required for the emissions control systems to control the currently uncontrolled back

- end streams from t he butyl rubber processes at both facilities. The design flow information ExxonMobi l provided for the Baytown facility included capacity for other processes that could be routed to the control equipment . For the purposes of the costs and impact analyses, only the capacity to control the butyl rubber processes at the facility were consid ered. A summary of the differences in flow rate and HAP emissions from the back

- end processes the proposal information and the revised information are presented in Table 2

.

### 5 Table 2. Comparison of the Proposal and Revised “Back

- End” Process Vent Basel ine Emissions

Facility and Source Category Pollutant Proposal Estimate Emissions (Tons/yr) Revised Estimate Emissions (Tons/yr) Proposal Flow Rate

(ft 3 

### / min ) Revised Flow Rate

(ft 3 

### / min ) Baytown Facility, Butyl Rubber Production Hexane 26.19 25.8 12,780 15 ,000
Baton Rouge Facility, Butyl Rubber Production Hexane 34.7 41.7 27,240 80,000



### 4.0 COSTS AND EMISSION REDUCTIONS OF REGULATORY ALTERNATIVES

4.1 Front

- End Process Vents

As noted in Section 2, two regulatory alternatives were identified to add ress HCl emissions from front

- end process vents from the Butyl Rubber and Ethylene Propylene Rubber Production source categories. The first alternative would ensure that the current levels of HCl emissions are maintained. The only impact of this alternat ive would be costs due to the labor associated with the calculations, records, and reports to demonstrate compliance. These costs have not changed, other than considering the two butyl rubber production facilities together in one revised source category a nd considering the revised baseline HCl emissions. These costs are summarized in Table 3.

Table 3. Revised Estimated Impacts for Front

- End Regulatory Alternative 1

Source Category Revised Baseline HCl Emissions (tpy) Emission Reduction (tpy) Capital C osts ($) Annual Costs ($/yr) Cost Effectiveness ($/ton) Butyl Rubber 101.6 0 $0 $ 2 ,000 N/A Ethylene Propylene Rubber 24.1 0 $0 $1,000 N/A



### The second alternative would require a 99 percent reduction of the HCl created from the combustion of chlorinate d organic compounds in the flares currently used as control devic es for organic HAP. For the proposed rule , we estimated the costs of obtaining this level of control assuming a direct

- flame incinerator would be used followed by an acid gas scrubber. Also , at proposal, data on the stream flow rates going to the flare were not available (only the flow rate of emissions exiting the flare was obtained by the ICR), and a flow rate of 3,500 standard cubic feet per minute ( scfm ) was assumed for both butyl rubber processes and the ethylene rubber processes , based on information submitted by these facilities during development of the MACT standards. For the proposed rule , w e estimated costs using this information and the standard

### 6 EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) algorithms for thermal incinerators and acid

- gas scrubbers.
Based on the information provided by ExxonMobil after the publication of the proposed rule
, we have performed a revised analysis of the costs and impacts of this proposed alternative. D ue to the characteristics of the emissions streams to be controlled, including the variable concentration of HAP in the stream and the required energy input needed to obtain the desired 98% thermal destruction of organic HAP
, we have revise d our analysis to assume a recuperative thermal oxidizer would be used. A recuperative thermal oxidizer can reclaim up to 70 percent of the heat produced during oxidation for use in pre

- heating the combustion air and process gas stream, reducing the amoun t of natural gas needed to heat the stream and reduce the quantity of NOx produced. Additionally, ExxonMobil provided information after the proposal indicating that additional auxiliary equipment not included in the impacts and cost estimates performed at proposal would be needed. We believe i t is reasonable to assume that equipment such as utility piping, piperack s , and piperack modifications would be needed to install additional control equipment at an existing facility. We have included the estimated costs submitted by ExxonMobil for piperacks and piperack modifications, utility piping, and a new motor control center at both the Baytown and Baton Rouge facilities plus a caustic loop at the Baytown facility in our revised analysis. In this revised anal ysis, we also included the revised flow rate s shown in Table 1, which are based on the design flow rates submitted by ExxonMobil during the comment period

. In the revised analysis we estimated costs using this information and the standard EPA OAQPS algor ithms for recuperative thermal oxidizers and acid

- gas scrubbers.
Table 4 presents the costs based on the revised analysis of the second regulatory alternative requiring 99 percent reduction in HCl emissions. The control costs for the Baytown and Baton Rouge b utyl r ubber sources are totaled to show the average cost of controlling HCl emissions from the revised B utyl R ubber Production source category

. Details of these costs estimates are provided in Attachment s 1 and 2

.

### 7 Table 4. Revised Estimated Imp acts for Front

- End Regulatory Alternative 2

Parameter Butyl Rubber Production Source Category Ethylene Propylene Rubber Source Category HCl Emissions at Baseline (tpy) 101.6 24.1

Incinerator Capital $708,069 $231,440

Annual $420,412 $116 ,645

Scrubber Capital $640,410 $55,327

Annual $294,939 $82,726 Auxiliary Equipment Capital 2 

### $3,1 44
, 111 $1,6 02
, 744

Annual 2 

### $5 08
, 412 $2 41
, 783

Total Capital $4, 492
, 590 $1, 889
, 511

Annual $1,2 23,765 $4 41
, 154

HCl Emi ssion Reduction (tpy) 100.5 23.8

HCl Cost Effectiveness $12, 173 $1 8
, 528 HCl after control (tpy) 1.0 0.2



### 4.2 Back

- End Process Operations
As noted in Section 2, there were two regulatory alternatives identified to address back

end emissions from the Butyl Rubber Production source categor y . The first alternative would ensure that the current levels of emissions are maintained. The only impact of this alternative would be costs due to the labor costs associated with the calculations, records, and repo rts to demonstrate compliance. These costs have not changed, other than considering the two butyl rubber production facilities together in one revised source category and considering the revised baseline HAP emissions. These costs are summarized in Table 5.

### 8 Table 5. Revised Estimated Impacts for Back

- End Regulatory Alternative 1

Source Category Revised Baseline Emissions (tpy) Emission Reduction (tpy) Capital Costs ($) Annual Costs ($/yr) Cost Effectivenes

s ($/ton)
Butyl Rubber 67.5 0 $0 $ 2,000 N/A



### The second alternative would require a 9 8 percent reduction in organic HAP emissions for currently uncontrolled back

- end streams. For the proposed rule , we estimated the costs of obtaining this level of control assuming a direct

- flame incinerator would be used at the Baytown facility
, a recuperative thermal oxidizer would be used at the Baton Rouge facility , and assuming the stream flow rates going to the incinerator were the flow rates of the uncontrolled streams. For the proposed rule, w e estimated co sts using this information and the standard EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards algorithms for thermal incinerators.
Based on the information provided by ExxonMobil after the publication of the proposed rule we have performed a revised anal ysis of the costs and impacts of this proposed alternative. Due to the characteristics of the emissions streams to be controlled, including the low HAP concentration, high flow rate rates, presence of sticky particulates, potential moisture saturation and the amount of energy needed to obtain the desired 98% thermal destruction of organic HAP, we have revised our analysis to assume a re generative thermal oxidizer would be used. A

re generative thermal oxidizer can reclaim up to 9 5% of the heat produced dur ing oxidation for use in pre

- heating the combustion air and process gas stream, reducing the amount of natural gas needed to heat the stream and reduce the quantity of NOx produced. For these processes at these facilities, a recuperative thermal oxidizer would require much more fuel combustion and generate more NOx than a regenerative thermal oxidizer. Additionally, ExxonMobil provided information after the proposal indicating that additional auxiliary equipment would be needed that was not included in th e impacts and cost estimates performed at proposal. We believe i t is reasonable to assume that some additional equipment or plant modifications would be needed to install additional control equipment at an existing facility. For the back

- end processes, w e have estimated costs associated with the length of ducting required at both the Baytown and Baton Rouge facilities in our revised analysis. In this revised analysis, we also included the revised flow rates shown in Table 2 , which are based on the design flow rates submitted by Exxon Mobil during the comment period

. In the revised analysis we estimated costs using this information and the standard EPA OAQPS algorithms for regenerative thermal oxidizers.
Table 6 presents the costs based on the revised a nalysis of the second regulatory alternative for back

- end processes for the revised Butyl Rubber source category requiring 98 percent reduction in organic HAP emissions. The control costs for the Baytown and Baton Rouge butyl rubber sources are totaled t o show the average cost of controlling HCl emissions from the revised Butyl Rubber Production source category. Details of these costs estimates are provided in Attachment s 1 and 2.

### 9 Table 6. Revised Estimated Cost and Emission Reductions for Back

- End Regulatory Alternative 2

Parameter Butyl Rubber Production Source Category HAP Emissions at Baseline (tpy) 67.5

Incinerator Capital $3,318,385

Annual $1,477,287 Auxiliary Equipment Capital $1 92
, 360

Annual $46
, 8 70

Total Capital $3, 510
, 745

Annual $1,5 24,1 57 HAP Emission Reduction (tpy) 66.2

HAP Cost Effectiveness $2 3
, 0 41 HAP after control (tpy) 1.3



### 5.0 SECONDARY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
While the primary impact of the regulatory alternatives is to address HCl emissions on the front

- end and organic HAP emissions on the back

- end, the application of the control technologies that would be required under the second regulatory alternatives can also have other environmental effects. These impacts can be positive, su ch as a reduction in non

- HAP volatile organic compound air emissions; or negative, such as the generation of additional wastewater or energy consumption. In this section the secondary impacts on air pollution, water pollution, and energy are discussed. T he methodologies used to calculate secondary impacts can be found in documentation for the MACT standard. 1

1 Mem orandum. Estimated Regulatory Alternative Impacts for Elastomer Production Facilities (Polymers and Resins I). Norwood, P., EC/R, to Evans, L., EPA/OAQPS/ESD/OCG. May 10, 1995. Contained in Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions from Process Units in the El astomer Manufacturing Industry

-- Supplementary Information Document for Proposed Standards. EPA

- 453/R

- 95

- 005a. May 1995.

### 10 Air Pollution

For the two ExxonMobil facilities for which we have performed a revised cost and impact analysis , the secondary air pollution im pacts are the increased criteria pollutant emissions caused by the on

- site combustion of organic HAPs and fuels. This combustion results in the emission of nitrogenous oxides (NO x 

### ), carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter (PM), and sulfur dioxide (SO 2 

### ). In addition to these five criteria pollutants, emissions of carbon dioxide (CO 2 

### ) are also expected. Table 7 presents the revised estimated secondary air impacts for regulatory alternative 2 for the front

- end process ve nts, and Table 8 presents the revise d estimates for back

- end process vents.

Table 7. Revised Secondary Air Impacts for Front

- End Regulatory Alternative 2

Source Category Emissions (tpy) PM SO 2 

### NO X 

### CO CO 2 

### Butyl Rubber 0.0 5 0.01 5.2 0. 53 1 ,823
Ethylene Propylene Rubber 0.0 03 0.00 1 0.4 0. 04 136



### Table 8. Revised Secondary Air Impacts for Back

- End Regulatory Alternative 2

Source Category Emissions (tpy) PM SO 2 

### NO X 

### CO CO 2 

### Butyl Rubber 0. 18 0.0 4 63 2 7,111



### Water Pollution
The only impact on water pollution for the second regulator y alternatives identified in Section 2.0 is associated with the incinerator/scrubber system for control of HCl from the front

end process vents. Control of organic HAP emissions using combustion only does not result in any significant increase in wastewat er discharge, since no water effluents are generated by a thermal or recuperative oxidizer

. In the scrubber control system, water is used to remove the acid gas contained in the thermal oxidizer outlet stream. The amount of wastewater generated is equ al to the amount of water needed by the scrubber to absorb the acid gas leaving the incinerator. It is estimated that about 10 0 million gallons of wastewater will be generated annually from acid scrubbers at Butyl Rubber and Ethylene Propylene Rubber Prod uction facilities. The same assumptions were used for this analysis as those used in the MACT. 2 

### Table 9 presents the water pollution impacts from front

- end regulatory alternative 2.

2 See footnote 1

### 11 Table 9. Revised Water Pollution Impacts from Front

- End Regulatory A lternative 2

Source Category Flow Rate to Scrubber

(scfm) Operating Hours (hr/yr) W astew ater Treatment Flow Rate (1000 gal/yr) Butyl Rubber 7,000 8, 76 0 89.8
Ethylene Propylene Rubber 955 8, 76 0 8.5



### Energy Impacts
The energy demands associated w ith the control technologies for the second regulatory alternatives include the need for additional electricity and natural gas. The total nationwide energy demands that would result from implementing regulatory alternative 2 for front

- end and back

- end pr ocess vents are presented in Tables 10 and 11, respectively. More details about the methodologies used can be found in the MACT documentation. 3



### Table 10. Revised Energy Requirements for Front

- End Regulatory Alternative 2

Source Category Incinerator S crubber Annual Electricity Cost ($/yr) Electricity ( Kw

- hr ) Natural Gas Cost

($

/yr) Natural Gas ( Mscf /yr) Annual Electricity Cost ($/yr) Electricity ( Kw

- hr ) Natural Gas Cost

($

/yr) Natural Gas ( Mscf /yr)
Butyl Rubber Production $1 8,207 265
, 796 $1 58,913 30 ,385 $ 3 7,758 551
, 212 0 0

Ethylene Propylene

Rubber Production $ 1
, 511 22,0 58 $11,8 20 2, 26 0 $ 1,302 19,007 0 0



### Table 11. Revised Energy Requirements for Back

- End Regulatory Alternative 2

Source Category Annual Electricity Cost ($/yr) Electricity ( Kw

hr ) Na tural Gas Cost ($ /yr) Natural Gas ( Mscf /yr)

Butyl Rubber Production $ 222, 853 3,33 6 ,0 85 $ 619,874 1 1 8
, 523

3 See footnote 1

### Attachment 1
Capital and Annual Cost Summary Sheets

### Proposal Estimate ($2009) Revised Estimate ($2009) HCl Emissions at Baseline (TPY) 30.1 24.7

Incinerator 1 

### Capital $172,921 $399,696 Operating $90,547 $202,152 Capital Recovery 2 

### $18,986 $43,885
Annual $109,533 $246,036
Scrubber 3 

### Capital $496,400 $529,852 Operating $71,277 $130,334 Capital Recovery 2 

### $54,502 $58,175
Annual $125,779 $188,508 Auxiliary 4 

### Capital $0 $1,541,367
Operating 5 

### $0 $97,395 Capital Recovery 2 

### $0 $169,234
Annual $0 $266,629
Total Costs 6 

### Capital $669,321 $2,470,915 Operating $161,824 $429,880 Capital Recovery 2 

### $73,488 $271,293
Total Annual $235,312 $701,174
Cost Effectiveness $7,896 $28,674 HCl Emission Reduction (TPY) 29.8 24.5 HCl Emissions After Control (TPY) 0.3 0.2

6 

### The revised cost estimate includes the costs for a recuperative thermal oxidizer, HCl scrubber, stainless steel piping from the emission source to the oxidizer, one 25 HP pumps, caustic loop, utility piping, and a new motor control center. 2 

### The capital recovery was calculated using a CRF of 0.10979 (15-year equipment life and 7% interest).
3 

### The proposal estimate was calculated using the EPA Control Cost Manual (4th edition) for a gas absorber. The revised estimate was calculated using the most recent cost methodologies in the EPA Control Cost Manual (6th edition) for a gas absorber.
4 

### The revised estimate includes auxiliary costs for stainless steel ducting to the control device, a caustic loop, utility piping, new motor control center, and one 25 HP pumps.
5 

### The operating cost includes taxes, insurance, and the electricity needed to move the gas through Baytown BR - Front End Cost Parameters Table 1. Capital and Annual Cost Comparisons for Baytown

Butyl Rubber - Front End

1 

### The proposal estimate was calculated using the EPA Control Cost Manual for a direct flame thermal incinerator and the assumed flow rate in the MACT proposal. The revised estimate was calculated using the EPA Control Cost Manual for a recuperative thermal oxidizer w/ 70% heat recovery and the estimated process flow rate and HAP emissions from the Exxon data.

### Proposal Estimate ($2009) Revised Estimate ($2009) HCl Emissions at Baseline (TPY) 76.8 76.9
Incinerator 1 

### Capital $404,703 $308,373 Operating $247,164 $140,519 Capital Recovery 2 

### $44,434 $33,858
Annual $291,598 $174,376
Scrubber 3 

### Capital $580,177 $110,558 Operating $90,182 $94,293 Capital Recovery 2 

### $63,700 $12,139
Annual $153,882 $106,431 Auxiliary 4 

### Capital $0 $1,602,744 Operating 5 

### $0 $65,811 Capital Recovery 2 

### $0 $175,973
Annual $0 $241,783
Total Costs 6 

### Capital $984,880 $2,021,675 Operating $337,346 $300,622 Capital Recovery 2 

### $108,134 $221,969
Total Annual $445,480 $522,591
Cost Effectiveness $5,859 $6,869 HCl Emission Reduction (TPY) 76.0 76.1 HCl Emissions After Control (TPY) 0.8 0.8

Table 2. Capital and Annual Cost Comparisons for Baton Rouge

Butyl Rubber - Front End

Cost Parameters Baton Rouge BR - Front End

1 

### The proposal estimate was calculated using the EPA Control Cost Manual for a direct flame thermal incinerator and the assumed flow rate in the MACT proposal. The revised estimate was calculated using the EPA Control Cost Manual for a recuperative thermal oxidizer with 70% heat recovery, 3/4 of the total HBR and EPR process flow rate, and the HAP emissions from Exxon.

3 

### The proposal estimate was calculated using the EPA Control Cost Manual (4th edition) for a gas absorber. The revised estimate was calculated using the most recent cost methodologies in the EPA Control Cost Manual (6th edition) for a gas absorber.
4 

### The revised estimate includes auxiliary costs for stainless steel ducting to the control device, piperacks and piperack modifications, auxiliary equipment and piping, utility piping, new motor control center, and one 25 HP pump.
5 

### The operating cost includes taxes, insurance, and the electricity needed to move the gas through the duct.
6 

### The revised cost estimate includes the costs for a recuperative thermal oxidizer, HCl scrubber, and the cost for stainless steel piping from the emission source to the oxidizer, one 25 HP pump, piperacks and piperack modifications, auxiliary equipment and piping, utility piping, and a new motor control
center. 2 

### The capital recovery was calculated using a CRF of 0.10979 (15-year equipment life and 7% interest).

### Proposal Estimate ($2009) 1 

### Revised Estimate ($2009) HCl Emissions at Baseline (TPY) 106.9 101.6 Total Costs Capital $1,654,201 $4,492,590 Operating $499,170 $730,502 Capital Recovery $181,622 $493,262
Total Annual $680,792 $1,223,765
Cost Effectiveness $6,433 $12,173 HCl Emission Reduction (TPY) 105.8 100.5 HCl Emissions After Control (TPY) 1.1 1.0

Table 3. Butyl Rubber Front End Process Vents Total Cost Effectiveness

Cost Parameters Butyl Rubber Front End Process Vents Baytown and Baton Rouge Facilities Baytown/Baton Rouge Facilities

1 

### These combined costs were not presented at proposal, however they were calculated to provide a comparison of the combined cost effectiveness of the butyl rubber processes with the revised estimate.

### Proposal Estimate ($2009) Revised Estimate ($2009) HCl Emissions at Baseline (TPY) 19.8 24.1
Incinerator 1 

### Capital $404,690 $231,440 Operating $245,267 $91,234 Capital Recovery 2 

### $44,433 $25,411
Annual $289,700 $116,645
Scrubber 3 

### Capital $580,194 $55,327 Operating $70,210 $76,651 Capital Recovery 2 

### $63,702 $6,075
Annual $133,912 $82,726 Auxiliary 4 

### Capital $0 $1,602,744 Operating 5 

### $0 $65,811 Capital Recovery 2 

### $0 $175,973
Annual $0 $241,783
Total Costs 6 

### Capital $984,884 $1,889,511 Operating $315,477 $233,695 Capital Recovery 2 

### $108,135 $207,458
Total Annual $423,612 $441,154
Cost Effectiveness $21,643 $18,528 HCl Emission Reduction (TPY) 19.6 23.8 HCl Emissions After Control (TPY) 0.2 0.2

Table 4. Capital and Annual Cost Comparisons for Baton Rouge

Ethylene Propylene Rubber - Front End

Cost Parameters Baton Rouge EPR - Front End

1 

### The proposal estimate was calculated using the EPA Control Cost Manual for a direct flame thermal incinerator and the assumed flow rate in the MACT proposal. The revised estimate was calculated using the EPA Control Cost Manual for a recuperative thermal oxidizer with 70% heat recovery, 1/2 of the total HBR and EPR process flow rate, and the EPR HAP emissions from the Exxon data.

3 

### The proposal estimate was calculated using the EPA Control Cost Manual (4th edition) for a gas absorber. The revised estimate was calculated using the most recent cost methodologies in the EPA
4 

### The revised estimate includes auxiliary costs for stainless steel ducting to the control device, piperacks and piperack modifications, auxiliary equipment and piping, utility piping, new motor control center, and one 25 HP pump.
5 

### The operating cost includes taxes, insurance, and the electricity needed to move the gas through the duct.
6 

### The revised cost estimate a thermal oxidizer, scrubber, and the cost for stainless steel piping from the emission source to the oxidizer, and one 25 HP pump. 2 

### The capital recovery was calculated using a CRF of 0.10979 (15-year equipment life and 7% interest).

### Proposal Estimate ($2009) Revised Estimate -

15,000 scfm ($2009) Hexane Emissions at Baseline (TPY) 26.2 25.8

Incinerator 1 

### Capital $234,589 $848,334 Operating $154,871 $232,415 Capital Recovery 2 

### $25,757 $93,142
Annual $180,628 $325,558 Auxiliary 3 

### Capital $0 $29,020
Operating 4 

### $0 $4,547 Capital Recovery 2 

### $0 $3,186
Annual $0 $7,733

Total Costs 5 

### Capital $234,589 $877,354 Operating $154,871 $236,962 Capital Recovery 2 

### $25,757 $96,329
Total Annual $180,628 $333,291
Cost Effectiveness $7,035 $13,182 Hexane Emission Reduction (TPY) 25.7 25.3 Hexane Emissions After Control (TPY) 0.524 0.5

5 

### The revised cost estimate includes the costs for a regenerative thermal oxidizer, and the cost for stainless steel piping from the emission source to the oxidizer. The Exxon capital and annual cost estimate includes costs for a regenerative thermal oxidizer, demolition of existing facilities, and ducting. 4 

### The operating cost includes taxes, insurance, and the electricity needed to move the gas through the duct. 2 

### The capital recovery was calculated using a CRF of 0.10979 (15-year equipment life and 7% interest).

3 

### The revised estimate includes auxiliary costs for stainless steel ducting to the control device.

Table 5. Capital and Annual Cost Comparisons for Baytown

Butyl Rubber - Back End

Cost Parameters Baytown BR - Back End

1 

### The proposal estimate was calculated using the EPA Control Cost Manual for a direct flame thermal incinerator and the assumed flow rate in the MACT proposal. The revised estimate was calculated using the EPA Control Cost Manual for a regenerative thermal oxidizer and the estimated process flow

### Proposal Estimate ($2009) Revised Estimate -

80,000 scfm ($2009)

Hexane Emissions at Baseline (TPY) 34.7 41.7
Incinerator 1 

### Capital $951,419 $2,470,051 Operating $1,502,118 $880,530 Capital Recovery 2 

### $104,461 $271,198
Annual $1,606,579 $1,151,729 Auxiliary 3 

### Capital $0 $163,340 Operating 4 

### $0 $21,204 Capital Recovery 2 

### $0 $17,934
Annual $0 $39,137
Total Costs 5 

### Capital $951,419 $2,633,391 Operating $1,502,118 $901,734 Capital Recovery 2 

### $104,461 $289,132
Total Annual $1,606,579 $1,190,866
Cost Effectiveness $47,285 $29,141 Hexane Emission Reduction (TPY) 34.0 40.9 Hexane Emissions After Control (TPY) 0.7 0.8

3 

### The revised estimate includes auxiliary costs for stainless steel ducting to the control device.

4 

### The operating cost includes taxes, insurance, and the electricity needed to move the gas through the duct.
5 

### The revised cost estimate includes the costs for a thermal oxidizer and stainless steel piping from the emission source to the oxidizer.

Table 6. Capital and Annual Cost Comparisons for Baton Rouge

Halobutyl Rubber - Back End

Cost Parameters Baton Rouge HBR - Back End

1 

### The proposal estimate was calculated using the EPA Control Cost Manual for a direct flame thermal incinerator and the assumed flow rate in the MACT proposal. The revised estimate was calculated using the EPA Control Cost Manual for a regenerative thermal oxidizer and the estimated process flow rate and HAP emissions from the Exxon data.

2 

### The capital recovery was calculated using a CRF of 0.10979 (15-year equipment life and 7% interest).

### Proposal Estimate ($2009) 1 

### Revised Estimate ($2009) Hexane Emissions at Baseline (TPY) 60.9 67.5 Total Costs Capital $1,186,008 $3,510,745 Operating $1,656,989 $1,138,696 Capital Recovery $130,218 $385,461
Total Annual $1,787,207 $1,524,157
Cost Effectiveness $29,960 $23,041 HCl Emission Reduction (TPY) 59.7 66.2 HCl Emissions After Control (TPY) 1.2 1.3

Table 7. Butyl Rubber Back End Process Vents Total Cost Effectiveness

Baytown/Baton Rouge Facilities

Cost Parameters Butyl Rubber Back End Process Vents Baytown and Baton Rouge Facilities

1 

### These combined costs were not presented at proposal, however they were calculated to provide a comparison of the combined cost effectiveness of the butyl rubber processes with the revised estimate.

### Attachment 2

Control Device Capital and Annual Cost S preadsheetsTOTAL ANNUAL COST SPREADSHEET PROGRAM--RECUPERATIVE THERMAL OXIDIZERS (RCO)

Baton Rouge Ethylene Propylene Rubber Front End

COST BASE DATE: CEPCI 1999 390.6 COST ESCALATION: CEPCI 2009 521.9

INPUT PARAMETERS ICR (M-07) -- Gas flowrate (scfm): 641 -- Reference temperature (oF): 77 -- Inlet gas temperature (oF): 203.5 -- Inlet gas density (lb/scf): 0.073901176 -- Primary heat recovery (fraction): 0.7 -- Waste gas heat content (BTU/scf): 4.669 -- Waste gas heat content (BTU/lb): 63.18 -- Gas heat capacity (BTU/lb-oF): 0.255 -- Combustion temperature (oF): 2000 -- Heat loss (fraction): 0.01 -- Exit temperature (oF): 742.45 -- Fuel heat of combustion (BTU/lb): 21502 -- Fuel density (lb/ft3): 0.0408

DESIGN PARAMETERS

Auxiliary Fuel Requirement (lb/min): 0.175938126 (scfm): 4.312208979 Total Gas Flowrate (scfm): 645.7915281

TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT ($) (Cost correlations range: 500 to 50,000 scfm, 70% Heat Recovery)

Total Capital Investment - Base $173,214 Total Capital Investment - Escalated $231,440

ANNUAL COST INPUTS

Operating factor (hr/yr): 8760 Operating labor rate ($/hr): 23.38 2009 Technical labor rate Maintenance labor rate ($/hr): 25.718 Operator labor rate*1.1 Operating labor factor (hr/sh): 0.5 Maintenance labor factor (hr/sh): 0.5 Electricity price ($/kwh): 0.0685 Natural gas price ($/mscf): 5.23 Annual interest rate (fraction): 0.07 Control system life (years): 15 Capital recovery factor: 0.109794625 Taxes, insurance, admin. factor: 0.04 Pressure drop (in. w.c.): 20

ANNUAL COSTS

Item Cost ($/yr)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Operating labor $12,800.55 Supervisory labor $1,920.08 Maintenance labor $14,080.61 Maintenance materials $14,080.61 Natural gas $11,853.78 Electricity $1,511.30 Overhead $25,729.11 Taxes, insurance, administrative $9,257.62 Capital recovery $25,410.91

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Annual Cost $116,645RCO Average Pollutant Heat Content Calculations

Baton Rouge Ethylene Propylene Rubber Front End

Component NEI Emissions

(lb/hr) Molecular

Weight (lb/lbmole) Volumetric

Flow Rate (scf/min) -ΔHc (KJ/mole) Heat of Combustion (Btu/lb) Heat of

Combustion (Btu/scf) Volume

Fraction of Component in Exhaust Gas Vent Heat

Content (Btu/scf) VOC 44.09 0.0 2220 21,665 2,479 0.00E+00 0 Methane 16.04 0.00 890.4 23,884 994 0.00E+00 0 Ethane 30.07 0.00 1559.9 22,321 1,742 0.00E+00 0 Other HAP 44.09 0.00 2220 21,665 2,479 0.00E+00 0 Hexanes 8.58 86.17 0.639 4194.8 20,946 4,684 9.97E-04 4.67 Methyl Chloride 50.49 0.00 841.8 7,174 940 0.00E+00 0 Air 641 0 0 0 9.99E-01 0

Total 8.58 641 1.00E+00 4.67

Data Source: ICR Emissions rates & estimated flow rate based on Exxon's comments.TOTAL ANNUAL COST SPREADSHEET PROGRAM--GAS ABSORBERS [1]

Baton Rouge Ethylene Propylene Rubber Front End

COST BASE DATE: CEPCI 1991 361.3 COST ESCALATION: CEPCI 2009 521.9

INPUT PARAMETERS:

Stream parameters:

Inlet waste gas flowrate (scfm): 955 -- Inlet waste gas temperature (oF): 200 Assume gas is cooled to 200 F after incinerator -- Inlet waste gas pressure (atm.): 1 -- Process operating hours, hr/yr 8760 -- Pollutant in waste gas: HCl HCl emissions, tpy 24.05 -- HCl emissions, lb/yr 48100 -- HCl concentration, ppmv 1010.774352 -- HCl molecular weight 36.5 -- Inlet gas poll. conc., yi (mole fraction): 0.001010774 -- Pollutant removal efficiency (fraction): 0.99 -- Absorbent: Aqueous caustic soda -- Inlet pollutant conc. in absorbent: 0 -- Waste gas molecular weight (lb/lb-mole): 28.85 -- Absorbent molecular weight (lb/lb-mole): 18 -- Inlet waste gas density (lb/ft3): 0.059879618 -- Absorbent density (lb/ft3): 62.4 -- Absorbent specific gravity: 1 -- Waste gas viscosity @ inlet temp. (lb/ft-hr): 0.044 -- Absorbent viscosity @ inlet temp. (lb/ft-hr): 2.16 -- Minimum wetting rate (ft2/hr): 1.3 -- Pollutant diffusivity in air (ft2/hr): 0.725 -- Pollutant diffusivity in absorbent (ft2/hr): 0.000102

Packing parameters:

-- Packing type: 2-in. ceramic Raschig rings -- Packing factor, Fp: 65 -- Packing constant, alpha: 3.82 -- Packing constant, beta: 0.41 -- Packing constant, gamma: 0.45 -- Packing constant, phi: 0.0125 -- Packing constant, b: 0.22 -- Packing constant, c: 0.24 -- Packing constant, j: 0.17 -- Surface area-to-volume ratio, a (ft2/ft3): 28 -- Packing cost ($/ft3): 20

DESIGN PARAMETERS:

-- Material of construction (see list below):[2] 1 -- Inlet pollutant concentration (free basis): 0.001011797 -- Outlet pollutant concentration (free basis): 1.0118E-05 -- Out. eq. poll. conc. in absorbent., Xo* (op. line): 0.16 -- Theoretical operating line slope (Ls/Gs,min.): 0.006260494 -- Ls/Gs adjustment factor: 1.5 -- Actual operating line slope (Ls/Gs, act.): 0.009390741 -- Gas flowrate, Gs (free basis, lb-moles/hr): 118.8088058 -- Absorbent flowrate, Ls (free basis, lb-mol/hr): 1.115702768 -- Gas flowrate, Gmol,i (lb-moles/hr): 118.9290162 -- Absorbent flowrate, Lmol,i (lb-moles/hr): 1.115702768 -- Outlet actual pollutant conc. in absorbent, Xo: 0.106666667 -- Gas poll. conc. in eq. w/Xo (Yo*): 0.0001 -- Outlet absorbent poll. conc. (mole fract. basis): 0.096385542 -- Gas poll. conc., Yo* (mole fract. basis): 9.999E-05 -- Outlet gas poll. conc., yo (mole fract.): 1.01179E-05 -- Slope of equilibrium line (m): 0.001037396 -- Absorption factor (AF): 9.052222119 -- ABSCISSA (column diameter calculation): 0.000181499 -- ORDINATE (column diameter calculation): 0.206062991 -- Superficial gas flowrate, Gsfr,i (lb/sec-ft2) 0.624401327-- Flooding factor, f: 0.7

-- Column cross-sectional area, A (ft2): 2.178362187 -- Superficial liquid flowrate (lb/hr-ft2): 9.219150952 -- Minimum liquid flowrate (lb/hr-ft2): 2271.36 -- Column diameter, D (ft2): 1.66540592 -- Number of transfer units, Ntu: 5.045754253 -- Gas film transfer coefficient, Hg (ft): 2.428660928 -- Liquid film transfer coefficient, Hl (ft): 1.06425965 -- Height of a transfer unit (ft): 2.546229811 -- Packing depth (ft): 12.8476499 -- Column total height (ft): 22.4954239 -- Column surface area (ft2): 122.0533897 -- Column gas pressure drop (in. w.c./ft packing): 0.980199783 -- Column liquid pressure drop (ft of H2O): 60 -- Packing volume (ft3): 27.98683473

CAPITAL COSTS:
Equipment costs ($): -- Gas absorber $14,036 -- Pump (assumes $16/gpm) $158 -- Packing $560 -- Auxiliaries (ductwork, etc.) $0

------------- -- Total (base) $14,754 ' (escalated) $21,312 Purchased Equipment Cost ($): $25,149 Total Capital Investment ($): $55,327

================================================================================== ===========================

ANNUAL COST INPUTS:

Operating factor (hr/yr): 8760 Operating labor rate ($/hr): 23.38 Maintenance labor rate ($/hr): 25.718 Operating labor factor (hr/sh): 0.5 Maintenance labor factor (hr/sh): 0.5 Electricity price ($/kWhr): 0.0685 Absorbent material (caustic) price ($/ton): 300 Absorbent carrier ( water) price ($/1000 gal): 0.2 Wastewater trtmt cost ($/1000 gal): 3.8 Overhead rate (fraction): 0.6 Annual interest rate (fraction): 0.07 Control system life (years): 15 Capital recovery factor (system): 0.109794625 Taxes, insurance, admin. factor: 0.04

ANNUAL COSTS: Item Cost ($/yr) Wt. Factor W.F.(cond.)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ Operating labor $12,801 0.150703105 ---- Supervisory labor $1,920 0.022605466 ---- Maintenance labor $14,081 0.165773416 ---- Maintenance materials $14,081 0.165773416 ---- Electricity $1,302 0.015326597 ---- Absorbent material (caustic) $6,443 0.075854103 ---- Absorbent carrier (water) $15 0.000173924 ---- Wastewater treatment $281 0.003304556 ---- Overhead $25,729 0.302913242 0.807768644 Taxes, insurance, administrative $2,213 0.02605492 ---- Capital recovery $6,075 0.071517255 0.097572175

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------

------------------------ Total Annual Cost $84,939 1 1

NOTES: [1] This program has been based on data and procedures in Section 5.2, Chapter 1 of the OAQPS CONTROL COST MANUAL (6th edition). [2] Enter one of the following: fiberglass-reinforced plastic (FRP)--'1'; 304 stainless steel--'1.4'; polypropylene--'0.95'; polyvinyl chloride (PVC)--'0.70'.TOTAL ANNUAL COST SPREADSHEET PROGRAM--STRAIGHT DUCTWORK [1]

Baton Rouge Ethylene Propylene Rubber Front End

ICR COST BASE DATE: CEPCI 1993 359.2 COST ESCALATION: CEPCI 2009 521.9

INPUT PARAMETERS

-- Inlet stream flowrate (acfm): 2650 -- Duct velocity (ft/min): [4] 2952 -- Duct length (ft): [5] 650 -- Material of construction: [6] 304 SS Sheet -- Insulation thickness (in.): (text input) [7] 0 -- Duct design: [8] Circ.-spiral -- Cost equation parameters: [9]

a: 1.56 b: 1 -- Cost equation form: [10] 1 -- Control system installation factor: [11] 1.5 (if no system, enter '0') -- Fan-motor combined efficiency (fraction): 0.6

DESIGN PARAMETERS

-- Duct diameter (in.): 12.82493303 -- Pressure drop (in. w.c.): [12] 5.735754385

CAPITAL COSTS

Equipment Cost ($)--base: $13,004 ' ' ' --escalated: $18,895 Purchased Equipment Cost ($): $20,406 Other Purchased Equipment Cost ($):[13] $1,570,000 Total Capital Investment ($): [14] $1,600,610

====================================================================

ANNUAL COST INPUTS

Operating factor (hours/year): 8760 Electricity price ($/kWhr): 0.0685 Annual interest rate (fractional): 0.07 Ductwork economic life (years): 15 Capital recovery factor (system): 0.109794625 Taxes, insurance, admin. factor: 0.04

ANNUAL COSTS

Item Cost ($/yr) Wt.Fact.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Electricity $1,786 0.007394566 Taxes, insurance, administrative $64,024 0.265057691 Capital recovery $175,738 0.727547743

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total Annual Cost $241,549 1

Notes: [1] Data used to develop this program were taken from 'OAQPS Control Cost Manual', 5th edition, Chapter 10. Prices are for CIRCULAR straight ductwork, only. [2] Base ductwork costs reflect this date. [3] PPI = Producer Price Index PCU 3444#1 ('Air-conditioning ducts and stove pipe') for year and quarter shown. Ductwork equipment cost has been escalated to this date via this PPI. [4] See 'Manual,' pp. 10-30 to 10-33. [5] Duct length is a site-specific parameter that can vary from < 10 to > 1000 ft. [6] Choices available are: carbon steel sheet (galv. CS sh.), stainless steel sheet (304 SS sh.), coated carbon steel plate (coat. CS pl.), 304 stainless steel plate (304 SS pl.), polyvinyl chloride (PVC), and fiber-reinforced plastic (FRP)

[13] Other purchased equipment cost includes caustic loop, utility piping, and a new motor control center [14] Product of installation factor and Purchased Equipment Cost. Costs are presented both in terms of 2nd quarter '93 and above escalation date. Latter costs are based on Producer Price Index PCU 3444#1 ('Air-conditioning ducts and stove pipe') [7] Choices are: 0, 1, and 3. [8] Choices are: circular spiral (circ.-spiral) and circular longitudinal (circ.-long.) [9] Equation type and parameters depend on duct material of construction. Parameters reflect 2nd quarter 1993 costs. See 'Manual,' pp. 10-44 to 10-49. [10] Choices are: power function (1) and exponential (2). [11] Installation factor depends on control device ductwork is supporting. This factor, when multiplied by Purchased Equipment Cost, yields Total Capital Investment (TCI). If ductwork is installed alone, factor is 1.25 to 1.50. (Default = 1.50.) See 'Manual'. [12] Pressure drop applies ONLY to circular, spiral-wound galvanized duct with 10 joints per 100 feet. For pressure drop data for other duct types, see 'Manual,' Chapter 10.PUMPS

Baton Rouge Ethylene Propylene Rubber Front End

The EPA Control Cost Manual does not have specific cost equations for pumps.

25-HP Pump $2,134 Total Cost $4,268 Annual interest rate (fraction): 0.07 Control system life (years): 15 Capital recovery factor: 0.109795 Capital recovery $234.30

Data Source: http://www.grainger.com/Grainger/CENTURY-CloseCoupled-Pump-Motor-1XKP3TOTAL ANNUAL COST SPREADSHEET PROGRAM--REGENERATIVE THERMAL OXIDIZERS (RTO)

Baton Rouge Halobutyl Rubber Back End

COST BASE DATE: CEPCI 1999 390.6 COST ESCALATION: CEPCI 2009 521.9

INPUT PARAMETERS ICR (V-127 & V-131 -- Gas flowrate (scfm): 80,001 -- Reference temperature (oF): 77 -- Inlet gas temperature (oF): 120 -- Inlet gas density (lb/scf): 0.073901176 -- Primary heat recovery (fraction): 0.95 -- Waste gas heat content (BTU/scf): 0.042 -- Waste gas heat content (BTU/lb): 0.56 -- Gas heat capacity (BTU/lb-oF): 0.255 -- Combustion temperature (oF): 2000 -- Heat loss (fraction): 0.01 -- Exit temperature (oF): 214 -- Fuel heat of combustion (BTU/lb): 21502 -- Fuel density (lb/ft3): 0.0408

DESIGN PARAMETERS

Auxiliary Fuel Requirement (lb/min): 7.79891727 (scfm): 191.1499331 Total Gas Flowrate (scfm): 80191.85944

TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT ($) (Cost correlations range: 10,000 to 100,000 scfm)

Total Capital Investment - Base $1,848,634 Total Capital Investment - Escalated $2,470,051

ANNUAL COST INPUTS

Operating factor (hr/yr): 8760 Operating labor rate ($/hr): 23.38 2009 Technical labor rate Maintenance labor rate ($/hr): 25.718 Operator labor rate*1.1 Operating labor factor (hr/sh): 0.5 Maintenance labor factor (hr/sh): 0.5 Electricity price ($/kwh): 0.0685 Natural gas price ($/mscf): 5.23 Annual interest rate (fraction): 0.07 Control system life (years): 15 Capital recovery factor: 0.109794625 Taxes, insurance, admin. factor: 0.04 Pressure drop (in. w.c.): 20

ANNUAL COSTS

Item Cost ($/yr)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Operating labor $12,800.55 Supervisory labor $1,920.08 Maintenance labor $14,080.61 Maintenance materials $14,080.61 Natural gas $525,449.76 Electricity $187,667.72 Overhead $25,729.11 Taxes, insurance, administrative $98,802.05 Capital recovery $271,198.35

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Annual Cost $1,151,729RTO Average Pollutant Heat Content Calculations

Baton Rouge Halobutyl Rubber Back End

Component NEI Emissions

(lb/hr) Molecular

Weight (lb/lbmole) Volumetric

Flow Rate (scf/min) -ΔHc (KJ/mole) Heat of Combustion (Btu/lb) Heat of

Combustion (Btu/scf) Volume

Fraction of Component in Exhaust Gas Vent Heat

Content (Btu/scf) VOC 44.09 0.0 2220 21,665 2,479 0.00E+00 0 Methane 16.04 0.00 890.4 23,884 994 0.00E+00 0 Ethane 30.07 0.00 1559.9 22,321 1,742 0.00E+00 0 Other HAP 44.09 0.00 2220 21,665 2,479 0.00E+00 0 Hexanes 9.52 86.17 0.710 4194.8 20,946 4,684 8.87E-06 0.04 Benzene 78.11 0.00 3301.5 18,187 3,687 0.00E+00 0 Toluene 92.13 0.00 3947.9 18,438 4,409 0.00E+00 0 Ethylbenzene 106.16 0.00 4607.1 18,673 5,145 0.00E+00 0 Xylenes 106.16 0.00 4595.2 18,625 5,132 0.00E+00 0 Air 80,000 0 0 0 1.00E+00 0

Total 9.52 80,001 1.00E+00 0.0415

Data Source: ICR AverageTOTAL ANNUAL COST SPREADSHEET PROGRAM--STRAIGHT DUCTWORK [1]

Baton Rouge Halobutyl Rubber Back End

ICR COST BASE DATE: CEPCI 1993 359.2 COST ESCALATION: CEPCI 2009 521.9

INPUT PARAMETERS

-- Inlet stream flowrate (acfm): 80000 -- Duct velocity (ft/min): [4] 3840 -- Duct length (ft): [5] 720 -- Material of construction: [6] 304 SS Sheet -- Insulation thickness (in.): (text input) [7] 0 -- Duct design: [8] Circ.-spiral -- Cost equation parameters: [9]

a: 1.56 b: 1 -- Cost equation form: [10] 1 -- Control system installation factor: [11] 1.5 (if no system, enter '0') -- Fan-motor combined efficiency (fraction): 0.6

DESIGN PARAMETERS

-- Duct diameter (in.): 61.78310449 -- Pressure drop (in. w.c.): [12] 1.595420621

CAPITAL COSTS
Equipment Cost ($)--base: $69,395 ' ' ' --escalated: $100,827 Purchased Equipment Cost ($): $108,893 Total Capital Investment ($): [13] $163,340

====================================================================

ANNUAL COST INPUTS

Operating factor (hours/year): 8760 Electricity price ($/kWhr): 0.067 Annual interest rate (fractional): 0.07 Ductwork economic life (years): 15 Capital recovery factor (system): 0.109794625 Taxes, insurance, admin. factor: 0.04

ANNUAL COSTS

Item Cost ($/yr) Wt.Fact.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Electricity $14,670 0.374832949 Taxes, insurance, administrative $6,534 0.166939782 Capital recovery $17,934 0.458227269

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total Annual Cost $39,137 1

Notes: [1] Data used to develop this program were taken from 'OAQPS Control Cost Manual', 5th edition, Chapter 10. Prices are for CIRCULAR straight ductwork, only. [2] Base ductwork costs reflect this date. [3] PPI = Producer Price Index PCU 3444#1 ('Air-conditioning ducts and stove pipe') for year and quarter shown. Ductwork equipment cost has been escalated to this date via this PPI. [4] See 'Manual,' pp. 10-30 to 10-33. [5] Duct length is a site-specific parameter that can vary from < 10 to > 1000 ft. [6] Choices available are: carbon steel sheet (galv. CS sh.), stainless steel sheet (304 SS sh.), coated carbon steel plate (coat. CS pl.), 304 stainless steel plate (304 SS pl.), polyvinyl chloride (PVC), and fiber-reinforced plastic (FRP)

[13] Product of installation factor and Purchased Equipment Cost. Costs are presented both in terms of 2nd quarter '93 and above escalation date. Latter costs are based on Producer Price Index PCU 3444#1 ('Air-conditioning ducts and stove pipe') [7] Choices are: 0, 1, and 3. [8] Choices are: circular spiral (circ.-spiral) and circular longitudinal (circ.-long.) [9] Equation type and parameters depend on duct material of construction. Parameters reflect 2nd quarter 1993 costs. See 'Manual,' pp. 10-44 to 10-49. [10] Choices are: power function (1) and exponential (2). [11] Installation factor depends on control device ductwork is supporting. This factor, when multiplied by Purchased Equipment Cost, yields Total Capital Investment (TCI). If ductwork is installed alone, factor is 1.25 to 1.50. (Default = 1.50.) See 'Manual'. [12] Pressure drop applies ONLY to circular, spiral-wound galvanized duct with 10 joints per 100 feet. For pressure drop data for other duct types, see 'Manual,' Chapter 10.TOTAL ANNUAL COST SPREADSHEET PROGRAM--RECUPERATIVE THERMAL OXIDIZERS (RCO)

Baton Rouge Halobutyl Rubber Front End

COST BASE DATE: CEPCI 1999 390.6 COST ESCALATION: CEPCI 2009 521.9

INPUT PARAMETERS ICR (M-07) -- Gas flowrate (scfm): 2,015 -- Reference temperature (oF): 77 -- Inlet gas temperature (oF): 203.5 -- Inlet gas density (lb/scf): 0.073901176 -- Primary heat recovery (fraction): 0.7 -- Waste gas heat content (BTU/scf): 1.910 -- Waste gas heat content (BTU/lb): 25.85 -- Gas heat capacity (BTU/lb-oF): 0.255 -- Combustion temperature (oF): 2000 -- Heat loss (fraction): 0.01 -- Exit temperature (oF): 742.45 -- Fuel heat of combustion (BTU/lb): 21502 -- Fuel density (lb/ft3): 0.0408

DESIGN PARAMETERS

Auxiliary Fuel Requirement (lb/min): 0.813503022 (scfm): 19.93879955 Total Gas Flowrate (scfm): 2035.368605

TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT ($) (Cost correlations range: 500 to 50,000 scfm, 70% Heat Recovery)

Total Capital Investment - Base $230,793 Total Capital Investment - Escalated $308,373

ANNUAL COST INPUTS

Operating factor (hr/yr): 8760 Operating labor rate ($/hr): 23.38 2009 Technical labor rate Maintenance labor rate ($/hr): 25.718 Operator labor rate*1.1 Operating labor factor (hr/sh): 0.5 Maintenance labor factor (hr/sh): 0.5 Electricity price ($/kwh): 0.0685 Natural gas price ($/mscf): 5.23 Annual interest rate (fraction): 0.07 Control system life (years): 15 Capital recovery factor: 0.109794625 Taxes, insurance, admin. factor: 0.04 Pressure drop (in. w.c.): 20

ANNUAL COSTS

Item Cost ($/yr)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Operating labor $12,800.55 Supervisory labor $1,920.08 Maintenance labor $14,080.61 Maintenance materials $14,080.61 Natural gas $54,809.53 Electricity $4,763.24 Overhead $25,729.11 Taxes, insurance, administrative $12,334.93 Capital recovery $33,857.73

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Annual Cost $174,376RCO Average Pollutant Heat Content Calculations

Baton Rouge Halobutyl Rubber Front End

Component NEI Emissions

(lb/hr) Molecular

Weight (lb/lbmole) Volumetric

Flow Rate (scf/min) -ΔHc (KJ/mole) Heat of Combustion (Btu/lb) Heat of

Combustion (Btu/scf) Volume

Fraction of Component in Exhaust Gas Vent Heat

Content (Btu/scf) VOC 44.09 0.0 2220 21,665 2,479 0.00E+00 0 Methane 16.04 0.00 890.4 23,884 994 0.00E+00 0 Ethane 30.07 0.00 1559.9 22,321 1,742 0.00E+00 0 Other HAP 44.09 0.00 2220 21,665 2,479 0.00E+00 0 Hexanes 2.74 86.17 0.204 4194.8 20,946 4,684 1.01E-04 0.47 Methyl Chloride 24.2 50.49 3.08 841.8 7,174 940 1.53E-03 1.44 Air 2,012 0 0 0 9.98E-01 0

Total 26.9 2,015 1.00E+00 1.91

Data Source: ICR Emissions rates & estimated flow rate based on Exxon's comments.TOTAL ANNUAL COST SPREADSHEET PROGRAM--GAS ABSORBERS [1]

Baton Rouge Halobutyl Rubber Front End

COST BASE DATE: CEPCI 1991 361.3 COST ESCALATION: CEPCI 2009 521.9

INPUT PARAMETERS:

Stream parameters:

Inlet waste gas flowrate (scfm): 3,045 -- Inlet waste gas temperature (oF): 200 Assume gas is cooled to 200 F after incinerator -- Inlet waste gas pressure (atm.): 1 -- Process operating hours, hr/yr 8760 -- Pollutant in waste gas: HCl HCl emissions, tpy 76.85 -- HCl emissions, lb/yr 153700 -- HCl concentration, ppmv 1012.975821 -- HCl molecular weight 36.5 -- Inlet gas poll. conc., yi (mole fraction): 0.001012976 -- Pollutant removal efficiency (fraction): 0.99 -- Absorbent: Aqueous caustic soda -- Inlet pollutant conc. in absorbent: 0 -- Waste gas molecular weight (lb/lb-mole): 28.85 -- Absorbent molecular weight (lb/lb-mole): 18 -- Inlet waste gas density (lb/ft3): 0.059879618 -- Absorbent density (lb/ft3): 62.4 -- Absorbent specific gravity: 1 -- Waste gas viscosity @ inlet temp. (lb/ft-hr): 0.044 -- Absorbent viscosity @ inlet temp. (lb/ft-hr): 2.16 -- Minimum wetting rate (ft2/hr): 1.3 -- Pollutant diffusivity in air (ft2/hr): 0.725 -- Pollutant diffusivity in absorbent (ft2/hr): 0.000102

Packing parameters:

-- Packing type: 2-in. ceramic Raschig rings -- Packing factor, Fp: 65 -- Packing constant, alpha: 3.82 -- Packing constant, beta: 0.41 -- Packing constant, gamma: 0.45 -- Packing constant, phi: 0.0125 -- Packing constant, b: 0.22 -- Packing constant, c: 0.24 -- Packing constant, j: 0.17 -- Surface area-to-volume ratio, a (ft2/ft3): 28 -- Packing cost ($/ft3): 20

DESIGN PARAMETERS:

-- Material of construction (see list below):[2] 1 -- Inlet pollutant concentration (free basis): 0.001014003 -- Outlet pollutant concentration (free basis): 1.014E-05 -- Out. eq. poll. conc. in absorbent., Xo* (op. line): 0.16 -- Theoretical operating line slope (Ls/Gs,min.): 0.006274143 -- Ls/Gs adjustment factor: 1.5 -- Actual operating line slope (Ls/Gs, act.): 0.009411215 -- Gas flowrate, Gs (free basis, lb-moles/hr): 378.8188653 -- Absorbent flowrate, Ls (free basis, lb-mol/hr): 3.565145852 -- Gas flowrate, Gmol,i (lb-moles/hr): 379.2029888 -- Absorbent flowrate, Lmol,i (lb-moles/hr): 3.565145852 -- Outlet actual pollutant conc. in absorbent, Xo: 0.106666667 -- Gas poll. conc. in eq. w/Xo (Yo*): 0.0001 -- Outlet absorbent poll. conc. (mole fract. basis): 0.096385542 -- Gas poll. conc., Yo* (mole fract. basis): 9.999E-05 -- Outlet gas poll. conc., yo (mole fract.): 1.01399E-05 -- Slope of equilibrium line (m): 0.001037396 -- Absorption factor (AF): 9.07195787 -- ABSCISSA (column diameter calculation): 0.000181895 -- ORDINATE (column diameter calculation): 0.206062991 -- Superficial gas flowrate, Gsfr,i (lb/sec-ft2) 0.624401327-- Flooding factor, f: 0.7

-- Column cross-sectional area, A (ft2): 6.945652608 -- Superficial liquid flowrate (lb/hr-ft2): 9.239250643 -- Minimum liquid flowrate (lb/hr-ft2): 2271.36 -- Column diameter, D (ft2): 2.973798844 -- Number of transfer units, Ntu: 5.044689149 -- Gas film transfer coefficient, Hg (ft): 2.428660928 -- Liquid film transfer coefficient, Hl (ft): 1.06425965 -- Height of a transfer unit (ft): 2.545974044 -- Packing depth (ft): 12.84364763 -- Column total height (ft): 23.82438151 -- Column surface area (ft2): 236.4697461 -- Column gas pressure drop (in. w.c./ft packing): 0.980199783 -- Column liquid pressure drop (ft of H2O): 60 -- Packing volume (ft3): 89.20751468

CAPITAL COSTS:
Equipment costs ($): -- Gas absorber $27,194 -- Pump (assumes $16/gpm) $504 -- Packing $1,784 -- Auxiliaries (ductwork, etc.) $0

------------- -- Total (base) $29,483 ' (escalated) $42,588 Purchased Equipment Cost ($): $50,254 Total Capital Investment ($): $110,558

================================================================================== ===========================

ANNUAL COST INPUTS:

Operating factor (hr/yr): 8760 Operating labor rate ($/hr): 23.38 2009 Technical labor rate Maintenance labor rate ($/hr): 25.718 Operator labor rate*1.1 Operating labor factor (hr/sh): 0.5 Maintenance labor factor (hr/sh): 0.5 Electricity price ($/kWhr): 0.0685 Absorbent material (caustic) price ($/ton): 300 Absorbent carrier ( water) price ($/1000 gal): 0.2 Wastewater trtmt cost ($/1000 gal): 3.8 Overhead rate (fraction): 0.6 Annual interest rate (fraction): 0.07 Control system life (years): 15 Capital recovery factor (system): 0.109794625 Taxes, insurance, admin. factor: 0.04

ANNUAL COSTS: Item Cost ($/yr) Wt. Factor W.F.(cond.)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ Operating labor $12,801 0.115472473 ---- Supervisory labor $1,920 0.017320871 ---- Maintenance labor $14,081 0.12701972 ---- Maintenance materials $14,081 0.12701972 ---- Electricity $4,150 0.037433505 ---- Absorbent material (caustic) $20,588 0.185722334 ---- Absorbent carrier (water) $47 0.000425838 ---- Wastewater treatment $897 0.008090925 ---- Overhead $25,729 0.23209967 0.618932454 Taxes, insurance, administrative $4,422 0.039893272 ---- Capital recovery $12,139 0.109501671 0.149394944

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------

------------------------ Total Annual Cost $110,854 1 1

NOTES: [1] This program has been based on data and procedures in Section 5.2, Chapter 1 of the OAQPS CONTROL COST MANUAL (6th edition). [2] Enter one of the following: fiberglass-reinforced plastic (FRP)--'1'; 304 stainless steel--'1.4'; polypropylene--'0.95'; polyvinyl chloride (PVC)--'0.70'.TOTAL ANNUAL COST SPREADSHEET PROGRAM--STRAIGHT DUCTWORK [1]

Baton Rouge Halobutyl Rubber Front End

ICR COST BASE DATE: CEPCI 1993 359.2 COST ESCALATION: CEPCI 2009 521.9

INPUT PARAMETERS

-- Inlet stream flowrate (acfm): 2650 -- Duct velocity (ft/min): [4] 2952 -- Duct length (ft): [5] 650 -- Material of construction: [6] 304 SS Sheet -- Insulation thickness (in.): (text input) [7] 0 -- Duct design: [8] Circ.-spiral -- Cost equation parameters: [9]

a: 1.56 b: 1 -- Cost equation form: [10] 1 -- Control system installation factor: [11] 1.5 (if no system, enter '0') -- Fan-motor combined efficiency (fraction): 0.6

DESIGN PARAMETERS

-- Duct diameter (in.): 12.82493303 -- Pressure drop (in. w.c.): [12] 5.735754385

CAPITAL COSTS

Equipment Cost ($)--base: $13,004 ' ' ' --escalated: $18,895 Purchased Equipment Cost ($): $20,406 Other Purchased Equipment Cost ($):[13] $1,570,000 Total Capital Investment ($): [14] $1,600,610

====================================================================

ANNUAL COST INPUTS

Operating factor (hours/year): 8760 Electricity price ($/kWhr): 0.0685 Annual interest rate (fractional): 0.07 Ductwork economic life (years): 15 Capital recovery factor (system): 0.109794625 Taxes, insurance, admin. factor: 0.04

ANNUAL COSTS

Item Cost ($/yr) Wt.Fact.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Electricity $1,786 0.007394566 Taxes, insurance, administrative $64,024 0.265057691 Capital recovery $175,738 0.727547743

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total Annual Cost $241,549 1

Notes: [1] Data used to develop this program were taken from 'OAQPS Control Cost Manual', 5th edition, Chapter 10. Prices are for CIRCULAR straight ductwork, only. [2] Base ductwork costs reflect this date. [3] PPI = Producer Price Index PCU 3444#1 ('Air-conditioning ducts and stove pipe') for year and quarter shown. Ductwork equipment cost has been escalated to this date via this PPI. [4] See 'Manual,' pp. 10-30 to 10-33. [5] Duct length is a site-specific parameter that can vary from < 10 to > 1000 ft. [6] Choices available are: carbon steel sheet (galv. CS sh.), stainless steel sheet (304 SS sh.), coated carbon steel plate (coat. CS pl.), 304 stainless steel plate (304 SS pl.), polyvinyl chloride (PVC), and fiber-reinforced plastic (FRP)

[13] Other purchased equipment cost includes caustic loop, utility piping, and a new motor control center [14] Product of installation factor and Purchased Equipment Cost. Costs are presented both in terms of 2nd quarter '93 and above escalation date. Latter costs are based on Producer Price Index PCU 3444#1 ('Air-conditioning ducts and stove pipe') [7] Choices are: 0, 1, and 3. [8] Choices are: circular spiral (circ.-spiral) and circular longitudinal (circ.-long.) [9] Equation type and parameters depend on duct material of construction. Parameters reflect 2nd quarter 1993 costs. See 'Manual,' pp. 10-44 to 10-49. [10] Choices are: power function (1) and exponential (2). [11] Installation factor depends on control device ductwork is supporting. This factor, when multiplied by Purchased Equipment Cost, yields Total Capital Investment (TCI). If ductwork is installed alone, factor is 1.25 to 1.50. (Default = 1.50.) See 'Manual'. [12] Pressure drop applies ONLY to circular, spiral-wound galvanized duct with 10 joints per 100 feet. For pressure drop data for other duct types, see 'Manual,' Chapter 10.PUMPS

Baton Rouge Halobutyl Rubber Front End

The EPA Control Cost Manual does not have specific cost equations for pumps.

25-HP Pump $2,134 Total Cost $4,268 Annual interest rate (fraction): 0.07 Control system life (years): 15 Capital recovery factor: 0.109795 Capital recovery $234.30

Data Source: http://www.grainger.com/Grainger/CENTURY-CloseCoupled-Pump-Motor-1XKP3TOTAL ANNUAL COST SPREADSHEET PROGRAM--REGENERATIVE THERMAL OXIDIZERS (RTO)

Baytown Butyl Rubber Back End

COST BASE DATE: CEPCI 1999 390.6 COST ESCALATION: CEPCI 2009 521.9

INPUT PARAMETERS ICR (BPBFINISH) -- Gas flowrate (scfm): 15,000 -- Reference temperature (oF): 77 -- Inlet gas temperature (oF): 105 -- Inlet gas density (lb/scf): 0.073901176 -- Primary heat recovery (fraction): 0.95 -- Waste gas heat content (BTU/scf): 0.137 -- Waste gas heat content (BTU/lb): 1.85 -- Gas heat capacity (BTU/lb-oF): 0.255 -- Combustion temperature (oF): 2000 -- Heat loss (fraction): 0.01 -- Exit temperature (oF): 199.75 -- Fuel heat of combustion (BTU/lb): 21502 -- Fuel density (lb/ft3): 0.0408

DESIGN PARAMETERS

Auxiliary Fuel Requirement (lb/min): 1.405360682 (scfm): 34.44511477 Total Gas Flowrate (scfm): 15034.88331

TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT ($) (Cost correlations range: 10,000 to 100,000 scfm)

Total Capital Investment - Base $634,909 Total Capital Investment - Escalated $848,334

ANNUAL COST INPUTS

Operating factor (hr/yr): 8760 Operating labor rate ($/hr): 23.38 2009 Technical labor rate Maintenance labor rate ($/hr): 25.718 Operator labor rate*1.1 Operating labor factor (hr/sh): 0.5 Maintenance labor factor (hr/wk): 0.5 Electricity price ($/kwh): 0.0685 Natural gas price ($/mscf): 5.23 Annual interest rate (fraction): 0.07 Control system life (years): 15 Capital recovery factor: 0.109794625 Taxes, insurance, admin. factor: 0.04 Pressure drop (in. w.c.): 20

ANNUAL COSTS

Item Cost ($/yr)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Operating labor $12,800.55 Supervisory labor $1,920.08 Maintenance labor $14,080.61 Maintenance materials $14,080.61 Natural gas $94,685.76 Electricity $35,185.15 Overhead $25,729.11 Taxes, insurance, administrative $33,933.35 Capital recovery $93,142.49

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Annual Cost $325,558RTO Average Pollutant Heat Content Calculations

Baytown Butyl Rubber Back End

Component NEI Emissions

(lb/hr) Molecular

Weight (lb/lbmole) Volumetric

Flow Rate (scf/min) -ΔHc (KJ/mole) Heat of Combustion (Btu/lb) Heat of

Combustion (Btu/scf) Volume

Fraction of Component in Exhaust Gas Vent Heat

Content (Btu/scf) VOC 44.09 0.0 2220 21,665 2,479 0.00E+00 0 Methane 16.04 0.00 890.4 23,884 994 0.00E+00 0 Ethane 30.07 0.00 1559.9 22,321 1,742 0.00E+00 0 Other HAP 44.09 0.00 2220 21,665 2,479 0.00E+00 0 Hexanes 5.88 86.17 0.438 4194.8 20,946 4,684 2.92E-05 0.137 Benzene 78.11 0.00 3301.5 18,187 3,687 0.00E+00 0 Toluene 92.13 0.00 3947.9 18,438 4,409 0.00E+00 0 Ethylbenzene 106.16 0.00 4607.1 18,673 5,145 0.00E+00 0 Xylenes 106.16 0.00 4595.2 18,625 5,132 0.00E+00 0 Air 15,000 0 0 0 1.00E+00 0

Total 5.88 15,000 1.00E+00 0.137

Data Source: ICR Emissions rates & Exxon control device design flow rate.TOTAL ANNUAL COST SPREADSHEET PROGRAM--STRAIGHT DUCTWORK [1]

Baytown Butyl Rubber Back End

ICR COST BASE DATE: CEPCI 1993 359.2 COST ESCALATION: CEPCI 2009 521.9

INPUT PARAMETERS

-- Inlet stream flowrate (acfm): 15000 -- Duct velocity (ft/min): [4] 3960 -- Duct length (ft): [5] 300 -- Material of construction: [6] 304 SS Sheet -- Insulation thickness (in.): (text input) [7] 0 -- Duct design: [8] Circ.-spiral -- Cost equation parameters: [9]

a: 1.56 b: 1 -- Cost equation form: [10] 1 -- Control system installation factor: [11] 1.5 (if no system, enter '0') -- Fan-motor combined efficiency (fraction): 0.6

DESIGN PARAMETERS

-- Duct diameter (in.): 26.34440427 -- Pressure drop (in. w.c.): [12] 1.921025267

CAPITAL COSTS
Equipment Cost ($)--base: $12,329 ' ' ' --escalated: $17,914 Purchased Equipment Cost ($): $19,347 Total Capital Investment ($): [13] $29,020

====================================================================

ANNUAL COST INPUTS

Operating factor (hours/year): 8760 Electricity price ($/kWhr): 0.0685 Annual interest rate (fractional): 0.07 Ductwork economic life (years): 15 Capital recovery factor (system): 0.109794625 Taxes, insurance, admin. factor: 0.04

ANNUAL COSTS

Item Cost ($/yr) Wt.Fact.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Electricity $3,386 0.437870428 Taxes, insurance, administrative $1,161 0.150106741 Capital recovery $3,186 0.412022832

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total Annual Cost $7,733 1

Notes: [1] Data used to develop this program were taken from 'OAQPS Control Cost Manual', 5th edition, Chapter 10. Prices are for CIRCULAR straight ductwork, only. [2] Base ductwork costs reflect this date. [3] PPI = Producer Price Index PCU 3444#1 ('Air-conditioning ducts and stove pipe') for year and quarter shown. Ductwork equipment cost has been escalated to this date via this PPI. [4] See 'Manual,' pp. 10-30 to 10-33. [5] Duct length is a site-specific parameter that can vary from < 10 to > 1000 ft. [6] Choices available are: carbon steel sheet (galv. CS sh.), stainless steel sheet (304 SS sh.), coated carbon steel plate (coat. CS pl.), 304 stainless steel plate (304 SS pl.), polyvinyl chloride (PVC), and fiber-reinforced plastic (FRP)

[13] Product of installation factor and Purchased Equipment Cost. Costs are presented both in terms of 2nd quarter '93 and above escalation date. Latter costs are based on Producer Price Index PCU 3444#1 ('Air-conditioning ducts and stove pipe') [7] Choices are: 0, 1, and 3. [8] Choices are: circular spiral (circ.-spiral) and circular longitudinal (circ.-long.) [9] Equation type and parameters depend on duct material of construction. Parameters reflect 2nd quarter 1993 costs. See 'Manual,' pp. 10-44 to 10-49. [10] Choices are: power function (1) and exponential (2). [11] Installation factor depends on control device ductwork is supporting. This factor, when multiplied by Purchased Equipment Cost, yields Total Capital Investment (TCI). If ductwork is installed alone, factor is 1.25 to 1.50. (Default = 1.50.) See 'Manual'. [12] Pressure drop applies ONLY to circular, spiral-wound galvanized duct with 10 joints per 100 feet. For pressure drop data for other duct types, see 'Manual,' Chapter 10.TOTAL ANNUAL COST SPREADSHEET PROGRAM--RECUPERATIVE THERMAL OXIDIZERS (RCO)

Baytown Butyl Rubber Front End

COST BASE DATE: CEPCI 1999 390.6 COST ESCALATION: CEPCI 2009 521.9

INPUT PARAMETERS ICR (FS12) -- Gas flowrate (scfm): 5,707 -- Reference temperature (oF): 77 -- Inlet gas temperature (oF): 203.5 -- Inlet gas density (lb/scf): 0.073901176 -- Primary heat recovery (fraction): 0.7 -- Waste gas heat content (BTU/scf): 4.744 -- Waste gas heat content (BTU/lb): 64.19 -- Gas heat capacity (BTU/lb-oF): 0.255 -- Combustion temperature (oF): 2000 -- Heat loss (fraction): 0.01 -- Exit temperature (oF): 742.45 -- Fuel heat of combustion (BTU/lb): 21502 -- Fuel density (lb/ft3): 0.0408

DESIGN PARAMETERS

Auxiliary Fuel Requirement (lb/min): 1.545232283 (scfm): 37.87334027 Total Gas Flowrate (scfm): 5744.557504

TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT ($) (Cost correlations range: 500 to 50,000 scfm, 70% Heat Recovery)

Total Capital Investment - Base $299,140 Total Capital Investment - Escalated $399,696

ANNUAL COST INPUTS

Operating factor (hr/yr): 8760 Operating labor rate ($/hr): 23.38 2009 Technical labor rate Maintenance labor rate ($/hr): 25.718 Operator labor rate*1.1 Operating labor factor (hr/sh): 0.5 Maintenance labor factor (hr/sh): 0.5 Electricity price ($/kwh): 0.0685 Natural gas price ($/mscf): 5.23 Annual interest rate (fraction): 0.07 Control system life (years): 15 Capital recovery factor: 0.109794625 Taxes, insurance, admin. factor: 0.04 Pressure drop (in. w.c.): 20

ANNUAL COSTS

Item Cost ($/yr)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Operating labor $12,800.55 Supervisory labor $1,920.08 Maintenance labor $14,080.61 Maintenance materials $14,080.61 Natural gas $104,109.57 Electricity $13,443.61 Overhead $25,729.11 Taxes, insurance, administrative $15,987.85 Capital recovery $43,884.51

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Annual Cost $246,036RCO Average Pollutant Heat Content Calculations

Baytown Butyl Rubber Front End

Component NEI Emissions

(lb/hr) Molecular

Weight (lb/lbmole) Volumetric

Flow Rate (scf/min) -ΔHc (KJ/mole) Heat of Combustion (Btu/lb) Heat of

Combustion (Btu/scf) Volume

Fraction of Component in Exhaust Gas Vent Heat

Content (Btu/scf) VOC 44.09 0.0 2220 21,665 2,479 0.00E+00 0 Methane 16.04 0.00 890.4 23,884 994 0.00E+00 0 Ethane 30.07 0.00 1559.9 22,321 1,742 0.00E+00 0 Other HAP 44.09 0.00 2220 21,665 2,479 0.00E+00 0 Hexanes 74.5 86.17 5.552 4194.8 20,946 4,684 9.73E-04 4.56 Methyl Chloride 8.89 50.49 1.13 841.8 7,174 940 1.98E-04 0.186 1,3-Butadiene 0.0114 54.09 0.00 0 0 0 2.37E-07 0 Xylenes 0.00228 106.16 0.00 4595.2 18,625 5,132 2.42E-08 0.000124 Vent Gas 5,700 0 0 0 9.99E-01 0

Total 83.4 5,707 1.00E+00 4.74

Data Source: ICR Emissions rates & estimated flow rate based on Exxon's comments.TOTAL ANNUAL COST SPREADSHEET PROGRAM--GAS ABSORBERS [1]

Baytown Butyl Rubber Front End

COST BASE DATE: CEPCI 1991 361.3 COST ESCALATION: CEPCI 2009 521.9

INPUT PARAMETERS:

Stream parameters:

Inlet waste gas flowrate (scfm): 7,000 -- Inlet waste gas temperature (oF): 200 Assume gas is cooled to 200 F after incinerator -- Inlet waste gas pressure (atm.): 1 -- Process operating hours, hr/yr 8760 -- Pollutant in waste gas: HCl HCl emissions, tpy 24.7 -- HCl emissions, lb/yr 49400 -- HCl concentration, ppmv 141.6254874 -- HCl molecular weight 36.5 -- Inlet gas poll. conc., yi (mole fraction): 0.000141625 -- Pollutant removal efficiency (fraction): 0.99 -- Absorbent: Aqueous caustic soda -- Inlet pollutant conc. in absorbent: 0 -- Waste gas molecular weight (lb/lb-mole): 28.85 -- Absorbent molecular weight (lb/lb-mole): 18 -- Inlet waste gas density (lb/ft3): 0.059879618 -- Absorbent density (lb/ft3): 62.4 -- Absorbent specific gravity: 1 -- Waste gas viscosity @ inlet temp. (lb/ft-hr): 0.044 -- Absorbent viscosity @ inlet temp. (lb/ft-hr): 2.16 -- Minimum wetting rate (ft2/hr): 1.3 -- Pollutant diffusivity in air (ft2/hr): 0.725 -- Pollutant diffusivity in absorbent (ft2/hr): 0.000102

Packing parameters:

-- Packing type: 2-in. ceramic Raschig rings -- Packing factor, Fp: 65 -- Packing constant, alpha: 3.82 -- Packing constant, beta: 0.41 -- Packing constant, gamma: 0.45 -- Packing constant, phi: 0.0125 -- Packing constant, b: 0.22 -- Packing constant, c: 0.24 -- Packing constant, j: 0.17 -- Surface area-to-volume ratio, a (ft2/ft3): 28 -- Packing cost ($/ft3): 20

DESIGN PARAMETERS:

-- Material of construction (see list below):[2] 1 -- Inlet pollutant concentration (free basis): 0.000141646 -- Outlet pollutant concentration (free basis): 1.41646E-06 -- Out. eq. poll. conc. in absorbent., Xo* (op. line): 0.16 -- Theoretical operating line slope (Ls/Gs,min.): 0.000876432 -- Ls/Gs adjustment factor: 1.5 -- Actual operating line slope (Ls/Gs, act.): 0.001314648 -- Gas flowrate, Gs (free basis, lb-moles/hr): 871.6075494 -- Absorbent flowrate, Ls (free basis, lb-mol/hr): 1.145856897 -- Gas flowrate, Gmol,i (lb-moles/hr): 871.7310087 -- Absorbent flowrate, Lmol,i (lb-moles/hr): 1.145856897 -- Outlet actual pollutant conc. in absorbent, Xo: 0.106666667 -- Gas poll. conc. in eq. w/Xo (Yo*): 0.0001 -- Outlet absorbent poll. conc. (mole fract. basis): 0.096385542 -- Gas poll. conc., Yo* (mole fract. basis): 9.999E-05 -- Outlet gas poll. conc., yo (mole fract.): 1.41645E-06 -- Slope of equilibrium line (m): 0.001037396 -- Absorption factor (AF): 1.267257067 -- ABSCISSA (column diameter calculation): 2.54088E-05 -- ORDINATE (column diameter calculation): 0.206062991 -- Superficial gas flowrate, Gsfr,i (lb/sec-ft2) 0.624401327-- Flooding factor, f: 0.7

-- Column cross-sectional area, A (ft2): 15.98094446 -- Superficial liquid flowrate (lb/hr-ft2): 1.290626107 -- Minimum liquid flowrate (lb/hr-ft2): 2271.36 -- Column diameter, D (ft2): 4.510828134 -- Number of transfer units, Ntu: 14.6299482 -- Gas film transfer coefficient, Hg (ft): 2.428660928 -- Liquid film transfer coefficient, Hl (ft): 1.06425965 -- Height of a transfer unit (ft): 3.268474473 -- Packing depth (ft): 47.81761222 -- Column total height (ft): 74.3557018 -- Column surface area (ft2): 1085.67026 -- Column gas pressure drop (in. w.c./ft packing): 0.980199783 -- Column liquid pressure drop (ft of H2O): 60 -- Packing volume (ft3): 764.1706052

CAPITAL COSTS:
Equipment costs ($): -- Gas absorber $124,852 -- Pump (assumes $16/gpm) $1,161 -- Packing $15,283 -- Auxiliaries (ductwork, etc.) $0

------------- -- Total (base) $141,296 ' (escalated) $204,103 Purchased Equipment Cost ($): $240,842 Total Capital Investment ($): $529,852

================================================================================== ===========================

ANNUAL COST INPUTS:

Operating factor (hr/yr): 8760 Operating labor rate ($/hr): 23.38 Maintenance labor rate ($/hr): 25.718 Operating labor factor (hr/sh): 0.5 Maintenance labor factor (hr/sh): 0.5 Electricity price ($/kWhr): 0.0685 Absorbent material (caustic) price ($/ton): 300 Absorbent carrier ( water) price ($/1000 gal): 0.2 Wastewater trtmt cost ($/1000 gal): 3.8 Overhead rate (fraction): 0.6 Annual interest rate (fraction): 0.07 Control system life (years): 15 Capital recovery factor (system): 0.109794625 Taxes, insurance, admin. factor: 0.04

ANNUAL COSTS: Item Cost ($/yr) Wt. Factor W.F.(cond.)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ Operating labor $12,801 0.067904392 ---- Supervisory labor $1,920 0.010185659 ---- Maintenance labor $14,081 0.074694831 ---- Maintenance materials $14,081 0.074694831 ---- Electricity $33,608 0.178283909 ---- Absorbent material (caustic) $6,617 0.035102384 ---- Absorbent carrier (water) $15 8.04854E-05 ---- Wastewater treatment $288 0.001529222 ---- Overhead $25,729 0.136487827 0.363967539 Taxes, insurance, administrative $21,194 0.112430325 ---- Capital recovery $58,175 0.308606135 0.42103646

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------

------------------------ Total Annual Cost $188,508 1 1

NOTES: [1] This program has been based on data and procedures in Section 5.2, Chapter 1 of the OAQPS CONTROL COST MANUAL (6th edition). [2] Enter one of the following: fiberglass-reinforced plastic (FRP)--'1'; 304 stainless steel--'1.4'; polypropylene--'0.95'; polyvinyl chloride (PVC)--'0.70'.TOTAL ANNUAL COST SPREADSHEET PROGRAM--STRAIGHT DUCTWORK [1]

Baytown Butyl Rubber Front End

ICR COST BASE DATE: CEPCI 1993 359.2 COST ESCALATION: CEPCI 2009 521.9

INPUT PARAMETERS

-- Inlet stream flowrate (acfm): 5700 -- Duct velocity (ft/min): [4] 3936 -- Duct length (ft): [5] 4800 -- Material of construction: [6] 304 SS Sheet -- Insulation thickness (in.): (text input) [7] 0 -- Duct design: [8] Circ.-spiral -- Cost equation parameters: [9]

a: 1.56 b: 1 -- Cost equation form: [10] 1 -- Control system installation factor: [11] 1.5 (if no system, enter '0') -- Fan-motor combined efficiency (fraction): 0.6

DESIGN PARAMETERS

-- Duct diameter (in.): 16.28921774 -- Pressure drop (in. w.c.): [12] 53.61309855

CAPITAL COSTS

Equipment Cost ($)--base: $121,974 ' ' ' --escalated: $177,222 Purchased Equipment Cost ($): $191,399 Other Purchased Equipment Cost ($):[13] $1,250,000 Total Capital Investment ($): [14] $1,537,099

====================================================================

ANNUAL COST INPUTS

Operating factor (hours/year): 8760 Electricity price ($/kWhr): 0.0685 Annual interest rate (fractional): 0.07 Ductwork economic life (years): 15 Capital recovery factor (system): 0.109794625 Taxes, insurance, admin. factor: 0.04

ANNUAL COSTS

Item Cost ($/yr) Wt.Fact.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Electricity $35,911 0.134922381 Taxes, insurance, administrative $61,484 0.231003648 Capital recovery $168,765 0.634073971

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total Annual Cost $266,160 1

Notes: [1] Data used to develop this program were taken from 'OAQPS Control Cost Manual', 5th edition, Chapter 10. Prices are for CIRCULAR straight ductwork, only. [2] Base ductwork costs reflect this date. [3] PPI = Producer Price Index PCU 3444#1 ('Air-conditioning ducts and stove pipe') for year and quarter shown. Ductwork equipment cost has been escalated to this date via this PPI. [4] See 'Manual,' pp. 10-30 to 10-33. [5] Duct length is a site-specific parameter that can vary from < 10 to > 1000 ft. [6] Choices available are: carbon steel sheet (galv. CS sh.), stainless steel sheet (304 SS sh.), coated carbon steel plate (coat. CS pl.), 304 stainless steel plate (304 SS pl.), polyvinyl chloride (PVC), and fiber-reinforced plastic (FRP)

[13] Other purchased equipment cost includes caustic loop, utility piping, and a new motor control center [14] Product of installation factor and Purchased Equipment Cost. Costs are presented both in terms of 2nd quarter '93 and above escalation date. Latter costs are based on Producer Price Index PCU 3444#1 ('Air-conditioning ducts and stove pipe') [7] Choices are: 0, 1, and 3. [8] Choices are: circular spiral (circ.-spiral) and circular longitudinal (circ.-long.) [9] Equation type and parameters depend on duct material of construction. Parameters reflect 2nd quarter 1993 costs. See 'Manual,' pp. 10-44 to 10-49. [10] Choices are: power function (1) and exponential (2). [11] Installation factor depends on control device ductwork is supporting. This factor, when multiplied by Purchased Equipment Cost, yields Total Capital Investment (TCI). If ductwork is installed alone, factor is 1.25 to 1.50. (Default = 1.50.) See 'Manual'. [12] Pressure drop applies ONLY to circular, spiral-wound galvanized duct with 10 joints per 100 feet. For pressure drop data for other duct types, see 'Manual,' Chapter 10.PUMPS

Baytown Butyl Rubber Front End

The EPA Control Cost Manual does not have specific cost equations for pumps.

25-HP Pump $2,134 Total Cost $4,268 Annual interest rate (fraction): 0.07 Control system life (years): 15 Capital recovery factor: 0.109795 Capital recovery $468.60

Data Source: http://www.grainger.com/Grainger/CENTURY-CloseCoupled-Pump-Motor-1XKP3