### M EMORANDUM

DATE: March 30 , 2011

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

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 estimated impacts of regul atory 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 during periods of process shu tdown

. These source categories are Butyl Rubber Production and Ethylene Propylene Rubber Production. The regulatory alternatives were developed in consideration 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 Review (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 regu latory alternatives in Section 2. Section 3 summarizes the estimated costs 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 propose d rulemaking in the Federal Register On October 21, 2010 (75 FR 65068) th 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 I Polymers and Resi ns NESHAP

– Butyl Rubber Production, Epichlorohydrin Production, Ethylene 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, and equipment leaks. The process “front

- end” includes pre

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

- end” includes all operations afte r 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.

In the propos ed amendments to the Group I Polymers and Resins NESHAP
, an exemption from the standards for periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction that had been included in the rule was removed. After these proposed amendments were published in the2 

### Federal Register, ExxonMobil submitted com ments and information stating that some processes at its facilities in the Butyl Rubber Production and Ethylene Propylene Rubber Production source categories regulated by the Group I Polymers and Resins NESHAP could not comply with the emissions standards during periods of shutdown. Specifically, ExxonMobil stated that it was not technically feasible t o achieve 98 percent organic HAP control from a flare , which is used to control front

- end process vents, d ue to low pressure in the front

- end process vents d uring these periods

. ExxonMobil estimates that there may be one to three shutdown events per year, and the upper limit of the amount of time that compliance with the emissions standards could not be met would be approximately 24 hours per shutdown event. Considering these comments, two regulatory alternatives were identified for processes controlled by flares in these source categories.

2.0 REGULATORY ALTERNATIVES

Considering the information provided by ExxonMobil after the proposal, two regulatory alternatives were identified for processes controlled by flares during periods of shutdown for the Butyl Rubber Production and Ethylene Rubber Production source categories. The first alternative was to require the emissions standards be met until the orga nic HAP content in the stream is less than 50 parts per million by volume (ppmv), at which time emissions streams could be vented to the atmosphere . The second alternative was to require streams to continue to be sent to the flare until the unit is fully shut down. This alternative would require a pump to provide the necessary pressure to send the waning stream to the flare, once the organic HAP content in the stream is less than 50 ppmv.

3 .0 COSTS AND EMISSION REDUCTIONS OF REGULATORY ALTERNATIVES

As noted in Section 2, two regulatory alternatives were identified to address organic HAP emissions from front

- end process vents from the Butyl Rubber and Ethylene Propylene Rubber Production source categories during periods of shutdown . The first alte rnative would require existin g controls to be used until the level of HAP in the emissions stream was below 50 ppmv. The only impact of this alternative would be costs due to the labor associated with the calculations, records, and reports to demonstrate compliance. We estimate the labor associated with this documentation would be 2 technical labor hours, 0.1 management hour, and 0.2 clerical hours per event
, and we assume there would be two shutdown events per facility per year. There are two facilities th at produce butyl rubber: ExxonMobil in Baytown, TX and ExxonMobil in Baton Rouge, LA. These costs consider that both ExxonMobil butyl rubber processes would be included in the revised Butyl Rubber Production source category. There is one facility in the Ethylene Propylene Rubber source category: ExxonMobil in Baton Rouge, LA. The estimated
costs for the first alternative are summarized in Table 1

.3 

### Table 1

. Estimated Impacts for Shutdown Regulatory Alternative 1

Source Category Emission Reducti on (tpy) Capital Costs ($) Annual Costs ($/yr) 1 

### Cost Effectiveness ($/ton) Butyl Rubber Production 0 $0 $ 443 N/A Ethylene Propylene Rubber Production 0 $0 $ 221 N/A

1 The costs associated with this alternative are for labor to produce the necessary documentation for compliance. Labor rates based on United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics f or NAICS 325200, May 2009 information, available at http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_325200.htm. Wages for technical labor are based on "Production occupations: Chemical Equipment Operators & Tenders" with a total compensation of $23.38/hour. Wages for management labor are taken from "Production occupations: First

- line supervisors/managers of production and operating workers" with a total compensation of $31.20/hour. Wages for clerical labor are based on "Office and administrative support occupatio ns: Office clerks general" with a total compensation of $14.22/hour.



### The second alternative would require that the emissions standards be met during the entire shutdown event. The costs of this alternative are for one 25

- horsepower pump per facility tha t would be operated only during shutdown events to obtain the pressure necessary to continue to send the emissions stream (s) to the flare. It is assumed these pumps would be operated for 24 hours per shutdown event and that there would be two shutdown eve nts per year per facility. It is also assumed that the flare would achieve a 98 percent HAP destruction e fficiency. Table 2 presents the costs of this second regulatory alternative. These costs consider that both ExxonMobil butyl rubber processes would be included in the revised Butyl Rubber Production source category. Details of these cos ts estimates are provided in Attachment s 1 and 2

.4 

### Table 2 . Estimated Impacts for Shutdown Regulatory Alternative 2

Parameter Butyl Rubber Production Source Category Ethylene Propylene Rubber Source Category HAP emissions (TPY) 1 

### 0.1 5 0.09
Pump
Capital Cost $4,268 $2,134
Capital Recovery $469 $234

Flare

Labor $340 $170

Maintenance Materials $154 $77

Natural Gas $16,000 $3,857

Steam $1,309 $316

Overhead $297 $148

Total Annual Cost $18,568 $4,802
HAP Reduction (TPY) 0 .14 0.0 9
HAP Cost Effectiveness ($/Ton) $130,163 $53,390
HAP Emission After Control (TPY) 0.003 0.00 2

1 HAP emissions associated with a 50 ppmv HAP content stream for 48 hours annually



### 4 .0 SECONDARY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

While the primary impact of the regulatory alternatives is to address organic HAP emissions that would be con trolled with a flare during shutdown periods , the application of the control technologies that would be required under the second regulatory alternative can also have other environmental effects. These impacts can be positive, such as a reduction in non

- H AP 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. The methodologies used to c alculate secondary impacts can be found in documentation for the MACT standard. 1

1 Memorandum. 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 Elastomer Manufacturing Industry

-- Supplementary Information Document for Proposed Standards. EPA

- 453/R

- 95

- 005a. May 1995.5 

### Air Pollution

For the ExxonMobil facilities for which we have performed a cost and impact analysis
, the secondary air pollution impacts are the increased criteria polluta nt 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 poll utants, emissions of carbon dioxide (CO 2 

### ) are also expected. Table 3 presents the revised estimated secondary air impacts for regulatory alternative 2.

Table 3

. Secondary Air Impacts for Shutdown Regulatory Alternative 2

Source Category Emissions (tp y) PM SO 2 

### NO X 

### CO CO 2 

### Butyl Rubber Production 2.43 0.49 0.01 28.36 97,225 Ethylene Propylene Rubber Production 0.201 0.040 0.001 2.345 8,042



### Water Pollution

No impact on water pollution for the second regulatory alternative is anticipated . Control of organic HAP emissions using combustion only does not result in any significant increase in wastewater discharge, since no water effluents are generated by a flare

. Energy Impacts

The energy demands associated with the control technologies for the second regulatory alternatives include the need for additional natural gas. The total nationwide energy demands that would result from implementing regulatory alternative 2 is presented in Table 4 . More details about the methodologies used can be found i n the MACT documentation. 2



### Table 4

. Energy Requirements for Shutdown Regulatory Alternative 2

Source Category Pump and Continued Use of the Flare

Natural Gas Cost ($

/yr) Natural Gas ( Mscf /yr)

Butyl Rubber Production $46,437 8,879

Ethylene Propylen e Rubber Production $3,841 734

2 See footnote 1

### Attachment 1

Capital and Annual Cost Summary SheetsCost Parameters Estimate HAP emissions (TPY) 0.0918 Pump Capital Cost $2,134 Capital Recovery $234
Flare Labor $170
Maintenance Materials $77
Natural Gas $34,354
Steam $2,812
Overhead $148
Total Annual Cost $37,796 HAP Reduction (TPY) 0.0899 HAP Cost Effectiveness ($/Ton) $420,202 HAP Emission After Control (TPY) 0.0018

Assumptions: 50 ppm Hexane concentration 5,700 scfm vent gas flow rate 2 Shutdowns/year for 24 hours/shutdown or 48 hours/year Flare achieves 98% reduction of HAP

Costs include: 1 - 25 HP Pump Natural gas needed to operate flare Labor to operate flare Table 1. Capital and Annual Costs for Alternative 2 for Baytown Butyl RubberTable 2. Capital and Annual Costs for Alternative 2 for Baton Rouge Butyl Rubber

Cost Parameters Estimate HAP emissions (TPY) 0.0538 Pump Capital Cost $2,134 Capital Recovery $234
Flare
Labor $170
Maintenance Materials $77
Natural Gas $12, 143
Steam $993
Overhead $148
Total Annual Cost $13,766 HAP Reduction (TPY) 0.0527 HAP Cost Effectiveness ($/Ton) $261,191 HAP Emission After Control (TPY) 0.0011

Assumptions: 50 ppm Hexane concentration 641 scfm vent gas flow rate 2 Shutdowns/year for 24 hours/shutdown or 48 hours/year
Flare achieves 98% reduction of HAP

Costs include:
1

- 25 HP Pump Natural gas needed to operate flare Labor to operate flareCost Parameters Estimate HAP emissions (TPY) 0.0918 Pump Capital Cost $2,134 Capital Recovery $234
Flare Labor $170
Maintenance Materials $77
Natural Gas $3,857
Steam $316
Overhead $148
Total Annual Cost $4,802 HAP Reduction (TPY) 0.0899 HAP Cost Effectiveness ($/Ton) $53,390 HAP Emission After Control (TPY) 0.0018

Assumptions: 50 ppm Hexane concentration 641 scfm vent gas flow rate 2 Shutdowns/year for 24 hours/shutdown or 48 hours/year Flare achieves 98% reduction of HAP

Costs include: 1 - 25 HP Pump Natural gas needed to operate flare Labor to operate flare Table 3. Capital and Annual Costs for Alternative 2 for Butyl Rubber (Baytown and Baton Rouge Facilities)Cost Parameters Estimate HAP emissions (TPY) 0.0918 Pump Capital Cost $2,134 Capital Recovery $234
Flare Labor $170
Maintenance Materials $77
Natural Gas $3,857
Steam $316
Overhead $148
Total Annual Cost $4,802 HAP Reduction (TPY) 0.0899 HAP Cost Effectiveness ($/Ton) $53,390 HAP Emission After Control (TPY) 0.0018

Assumptions: 50 ppm Hexane concentration 641 scfm vent gas flow rate 2 Shutdowns/year for 24 hours/shutdown or 48 hours/year Flare achieves 98% reduction of HAP

Costs include: 1 - 25 HP Pump Natural gas needed to operate flare Labor to operate flare

Table 4. Capital and Annual Costs for Alternative 2 for Baton Rouge Ethylene Propylene Rubber

### Attachment 2

Control Device Capital and Annual Cost S preadsheetsTOTAL ANNUAL COST SPREADSHEET PROGRAM--FLARES [1] Baytown Butyl Rubber

COST BASE DATE: March 1990 [2]

VAPCCI (Fourth Quarter 1998--FINAL): [3] 102

INPUT PARAMETERS

Vent flowrate (acfm): 7164.057088 Converted from scfm (lb/hr): 25753.88763 Calculated using scfm and density (scfm): 5,700 Calculated from Heat Content Spreadsheet -- Vent heat content (BTU/scf): 0.23 Calculated from Heat Content Spreadsheet -- Fuel density (lb/scf): 0.042016807 AP-42 -- Fuel heat content (BTU/scf): 1050 AP-42 -- Vent gas temperature (oF): 203.5 ICR -- Vent stream density (lb/scf): 0.0753 Assume density of air -- Vent gas pressure (psig): [4] 100 Estimate -- Liquid density (lb/ft3): 62.4 AP-42

DESIGN PARAMETERS

-- Gas velocity, max. (ft/sec): 60 -- Auxil. fuel requirement (scfm): 2278.333908 (lb/hr): 5743.698928 -- Total gas flowrate (scfm): 7978.618908 (acfm): 1263.121811 (lb/hr): 31497.58656 -- Flare tip diameter (in.)--actual: 8.947085826 --rounded: 10 -- Heat release rate (BTU/hr): 143615140.3 -- Flare height (ft): 67.61221707 -- KO drum max. velocity (ft/sec): 5.753903923 -- KO drum min. diameter (in)--actual: 61.67955833 --rounded: 66 -- KO drum height (in): 198 -- KO drum thickness (in): (see table below) 0.37 -- No. of pilot burners: (see table below) 1

CAPITAL COSTS

Equipment Costs ($):

-- Flare/self-supported: $48,418 -- Flare/guy-supported: $0 -- Flare/derrick-supported: $0

------------- Minimum flare cost: $48,418 Knockout drum cost: $8,798 Transport piping cost: [5] $2,261 Auxiliaries cost: $0

-------------- -- Total equipment (base): $59,477 ' ' (escalated): $66,206

Purchased Equipment Cost ($): $78,123

Total Capital Investment ($): $149,995

= = = = = ANNUAL COST INPUTS

Operating factor (hr/yr): 48 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/yr): 3.452054795 Maintenance labor factor (hr/sh): 0.5 Steam price ($/1000 lb): 4.65 Natural gas price ($/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

ANNUAL COSTS

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

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------ Operating labor $81 0.001344468 ---- Supervisory labor $12 0.00020167 ---- Maintenance labor $77 0.001285247 ---- Maintenance materials $77 0.001285247 ---- Natural gas $34,354 0.572283631 ---- Steam $2,812 0.046844613 ---- Overhead $148 0.002469979 0.006586611 Taxes, insurance, administrative $6,000 0.099946215 ---- Capital recovery $16,469 0.27433893 0.374285145

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------- ------------------------ Total Annual Cost $60,030 1 1

NOTES:

------------------- [1] Data used to develop this spreadsheet were taken from Chapter 7 of the 'OAQPS Control Cost Manual' (5th edition).[2] Base equipment costs reflect this date.

[3] VAPCCI = Vatavuk Air Pollution Control Cost Index (for flares) corresponding to year and quarter shown. Base equipment cost, purchased equipment cost, and total capital investment have been escalated to this date via the VAPCCI and control equipment vendor data.

[4] The fuel usage and other calculations are based on the vent stream pressure, which equals the pressure at the flare tip (1 psig, in this case). However, the system pressure is usually higher (approximately 10 psig).

[5] Pertains to 100 feet of piping, the minimum length recommended. For greater lengths, piping cost would be prorated by ratio of length to 100 feet (e.g., cost @ 200 ft. = 2 x cost @ 100 ft.).

Lookup Table for Knockout Drum Vessel Diameter vs. Thickness Diameter (in.) Thickness (in.)

----------------------- ----------------------------------------------- ------------------------ 0 0.25 36 0.37 72 0.5 108 0.75 144 1

Lookup Table for Number of Pilot Burners vs. Flare Tip Diameter Diameter (in.) # Burners

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 1 12 2 30 3 60 4Flare Average Pollutant Heat Content Calculations Baytown Butyl Rubber

Component NEI Emissions (lb/hr) MolecularWeight (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 3.82 86.17 0.285 4194.8 20,946 4,684 5.00E-05 0.23 Methyl Chloride 50.49 0.00 841.8 7,174 940 0.00E+00 0 1,3-Butadiene 54.09 0.00 0 0 0 0.00E+00 0 Xylenes 106.16 0.00 4595.2 18,625 5,132 0.00E+00 0 Vent Gas 5,700 0 0 0 1.00E+00 0

Total 3.82 5,700 1.00E+00 0.23

Data Source: ICR Emissions rates & Exxon control device design flow rate.

Assume 50 ppm HAP is 50 ppm Hexane

50 ppm Hexane = 3.824310927 lb/hrPUMPS Baytown Butyl Rubber

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

25-HP Pump $2,134 Total Cost $2,134 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--FLARES [1] Baton Rouge Butyl Rubber

COST BASE DATE: March 1990 [2]

VAPCCI (Fourth Quarter 1998--FINAL): [3] 102

INPUT PARAMETERS

Vent flowrate (acfm): 2529.018219 Converted from scfm (lb/hr): 9091.50363 Calculated using scfm and density (scfm): 2,012 Calculated from Heat Content Spreadsheet -- Vent heat content (BTU/scf): 0.13 Calculated from Heat Content Spreadsheet -- Fuel density (lb/scf): 0.042016807 AP-42 -- Fuel heat content (BTU/scf): 1050 AP-42 -- Vent gas temperature (oF): 203.5 ICR -- Vent stream density (lb/scf): 0.0753 Assume density of air -- Vent gas pressure (psig): [4] 100 Estimate -- Liquid density (lb/ft3): 62.4 AP-42

DESIGN PARAMETERS

-- Gas velocity, max. (ft/sec): 60 -- Auxil. fuel requirement (scfm): 804.5567764 (lb/hr): 2028.294394 -- Total gas flowrate (scfm): 2816.841776 (acfm): 445.943631 (lb/hr): 11119.79802 -- Flare tip diameter (in.)--actual: 5.31617133 --rounded: 6 -- Heat release rate (BTU/hr): 50703151.98 -- Flare height (ft): 40.17376574 -- KO drum max. velocity (ft/sec): 5.753903923 -- KO drum min. diameter (in)--actual: 36.64693983 --rounded: 42 -- KO drum height (in): 126 -- KO drum thickness (in): (see table below) 0.37 -- No. of pilot burners: (see table below) 1

CAPITAL COSTS

Equipment Costs ($):

-- Flare/self-supported: $26,546 -- Flare/guy-supported: $0 -- Flare/derrick-supported: $0

------------- Minimum flare cost: $26,546 Knockout drum cost: $4,519 Transport piping cost: [5] $1,175 Auxiliaries cost: $0

-------------- -- Total equipment (base): $32,241 ' ' (escalated): $35,888

Purchased Equipment Cost ($): $42,348

Total Capital Investment ($): $81,307

= = = = = ANNUAL COST INPUTS

Operating factor (hr/yr): 48 Operating labor rate ($/hr): 23.38 2009 Technical labor rateMaintenance labor rate ($/hr): 25.718 Operator labor rate*1.1 Operating labor factor (hr/yr): 3.452054795 Maintenance labor factor (hr/sh): 0.5 Steam price ($/1000 lb): 4.65 Natural gas price ($/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

ANNUAL COSTS

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ Operating labor $81 0.003139109 ---- Supervisory labor $12 0.000470866 ---- Maintenance labor $77 0.003000839 ---- Maintenance materials $77 0.003000839 ---- Natural gas $12,143 0.472300217 ---- Steam $993 0.038613159 ---- Overhead $148 0.005766992 0.015378646 Taxes, insurance, administrative $3,252 0.126495321 ---- Capital recovery $8,927 0.347212658 0.473707979

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ ------------------------ Total Annual Cost $25,711 1 1

NOTES:

------------------- [1] Data used to develop this spreadsheet were taken from Chapter 7 of the 'OAQPS Control Cost Manual' (5th edition).

[2] Base equipment costs reflect this date.

[3] VAPCCI = Vatavuk Air Pollution Control Cost Index (for flares) corresponding to year and quarter shown. Base equipment cost, purchased equipment cost, and total capital investment have been escalated to this date via the VAPCCI and control equipment vendor data.

[4] The fuel usage and other calculations are based on the vent stream pressure, which equals the pressure at the flare tip (1 psig, in this case). However, the system pressure is usually higher (approximately 10 psig).

[5] Pertains to 100 feet of piping, the minimum length recommended. For greater lengths, piping cost would be prorated by ratio of length to 100 feet (e.g., cost @ 200 ft. = 2 x cost @ 100 ft.).

Lookup Table for Knockout Drum Vessel Diameter vs. Thickness Diameter (in.) Thickness (in.)

------------------------ ------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ 0 0.25 36 0.37 72 0.5 108 0.75
144 1

Lookup Table for Number of Pilot Burners vs. Flare Tip Diameter Diameter (in.) # Burners

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 1 12 2 30 3 60 4Flare Average Pollutant Heat Content Calculations Baton Rouge Butyl Rubber

Component NEI Emissions (lb/hr) MolecularWeight (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 86.17 0.000 4194.8 20,946 4,684 0.00E+00 0 Methyl Chloride 2.24 50.49 0.29 841.8 7,174 940 1.42E-04 0.133 1,3-Butadiene 54.09 0.00 0 0 0 0.00E+00 0 Xylenes 106.16 0.00 4595.2 18,625 5,132 0.00E+00 0 Vent Gas 2,012 0 0 0 1.00E+00 0

Total 2.24 2,012 1.00E+00 0.133

Data Source: ICR Emissions rates & Exxon control device design flow rate.

Assume 50 ppm HAP is 50 ppm Methyl Chloride

50 ppm Methyl Chloride = 2.240796782 lb/hrPUMPS Baton Rouge Butyl Rubber

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

25-HP Pump $2,134 Total Cost $2,134 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--FLARES [1] Baton Rouge Ethylene Propylene Rubber

COST BASE DATE: March 1990 [2]

VAPCCI (Fourth Quarter 1998--FINAL): [3] 102

INPUT PARAMETERS

Vent flowrate (acfm): 805.7589145 Converted from scfm (lb/hr): 2896.602343 Calculated using scfm and density (scfm): 641 Calculated from Heat Content Spreadsheet -- Vent heat content (BTU/scf): 2.08 Calculated from Heat Content Spreadsheet -- Fuel density (lb/scf): 0.042016807 AP-42 -- Fuel heat content (BTU/scf): 1050 AP-42 -- Vent gas temperature (oF): 203.5 ICR -- Vent stream density (lb/scf): 0.0753 Assume density of air -- Vent gas pressure (psig): [4] 100 Estimate -- Liquid density (lb/ft3): 62.4 AP-42

DESIGN PARAMETERS

-- Gas velocity, max. (ft/sec): 60 -- Auxil. fuel requirement (scfm): 254.669872 (lb/hr): 642.0248873 -- Total gas flowrate (scfm): 895.7947818 (acfm): 141.8162642 (lb/hr): 3538.62723 -- Flare tip diameter (in.)--actual: 2.997933579 --rounded: 4 -- Heat release rate (BTU/hr): 16124306.07 -- Flare height (ft): 30 -- KO drum max. velocity (ft/sec): 5.753903923 -- KO drum min. diameter (in)--actual: 20.68541773 --rounded: 24 -- KO drum height (in): 72 -- KO drum thickness (in): (see table below) 0.25 -- No. of pilot burners: (see table below) 1

CAPITAL COSTS

Equipment Costs ($):

-- Flare/self-supported: $18,777 -- Flare/guy-supported: $0 -- Flare/derrick-supported: $0

------------- Minimum flare cost: $18,777 Knockout drum cost: $1,484 Transport piping cost: [5] $699 Auxiliaries cost: $0

-------------- -- Total equipment (base): $20,960 ' ' (escalated): $23,331

Purchased Equipment Cost ($): $27,531

Total Capital Investment ($): $52,859

= = = = = ANNUAL COST INPUTS

Operating factor (hr/yr): 48 Operating labor rate ($/hr): 23.38 2009 Technical labor rateMaintenance labor rate ($/hr): 25.718 Operator labor rate*1.1 Operating labor factor (hr/yr): 3.452054795 Maintenance labor factor (hr/sh): 0.5 Steam price ($/1000 lb): 4.65 Natural gas price ($/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

ANNUAL COSTS

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ Operating labor $81 0.006463953 ---- Supervisory labor $12 0.000969593 ---- Maintenance labor $77 0.006179231 ---- Maintenance materials $77 0.006179231 ---- Natural gas $3,857 0.308878364 ---- Steam $316 0.025302591 ---- Overhead $148 0.011875205 0.031667214 Taxes, insurance, administrative $2,114 0.169339009 ---- Capital recovery $5,804 0.464812822 0.634151831

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ ------------------------ Total Annual Cost $12,486 1 1

NOTES:

------------------- [1] Data used to develop this spreadsheet were taken from Chapter 7 of the 'OAQPS Control Cost Manual' (5th edition).

[2] Base equipment costs reflect this date.

[3] VAPCCI = Vatavuk Air Pollution Control Cost Index (for flares) corresponding to year and quarter shown. Base equipment cost, purchased equipment cost, and total capital investment have been escalated to this date via the VAPCCI and control equipment vendor data.

[4] The fuel usage and other calculations are based on the vent stream pressure, which equals the pressure at the flare tip (1 psig, in this case). However, the system pressure is usually higher (approximately 10 psig).

[5] Pertains to 100 feet of piping, the minimum length recommended. For greater lengths, piping cost would be prorated by ratio of length to 100 feet (e.g., cost @ 200 ft. = 2 x cost @ 100 ft.).

Lookup Table for Knockout Drum Vessel Diameter vs. Thickness Diameter (in.) Thickness (in.)

------------------------ ------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ 0 0.25 36 0.37 72 0.5 108 0.75
144 1

Lookup Table for Number of Pilot Burners vs. Flare Tip Diameter Diameter (in.) # Burners

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 1 12 2 30 3 60 4Flare Average Pollutant Heat Content Calculations Baton Rouge Ethylene Propylene Rubber

Component NEI Emissions (lb/hr) MolecularWeight (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 3.82 86.17 0.285 4194.8 20,946 4,684 4.45E-04 2.08 Methyl Chloride 50.49 0.00 841.8 7,174 940 0.00E+00 0 1,3-Butadiene 54.09 0.00 0 0 0 0.00E+00 0 Xylenes 106.16 0.00 4595.2 18,625 5,132 0.00E+00 0 Vent Gas 641 0 0 0 1.00E+00 0

Total 3.82 641 1.00E+00 2.08

Data Source: ICR Emissions rates & Exxon control device design flow rate.

Assume 50 ppm HAP is 50 ppm Hexane

50 ppm Hexane = 3.824310927 lb/hrPUMPS Baton Rouge Ethylene Propylene Rubber

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

25-HP Pump $2,134 Total Cost $2,134 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-1XKP3