# FINAL REPORT

REFINING ECONOMICS OF A SINGLE OCTANE NATIONAL CLEAN GASOLINE STANDARD

F or



## The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers

by



## MathPro Inc.

P.O. Box 34404 West Bethesda, Maryland 2 0827

- 0404

October 8 , 2010Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 i 

### T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S

1. Introduction and Summary 1 1.1 Proposed NCG Standard 1 1

. 2 Objective of the Study 2 1.3 Technical Approach 2 1.4 Effects of NCG and Single Octane NCG Standards on Refining Operations 4 1.5 Summary of Quantitative Results 5 1.6 Organization of the Report 8

2. Some Key Terms and Concepts 10 2.1 Measures of Refining Eco nomics Used in This Report 10 2.2 PADDs 10 2.3 Refining Processes 11

3. Information Used to Develop and Calibrate the Refin ing Models 13

4. Projected Refinery Operations for 2015 15

5. Te chnical Approach for Regional Refinery Modeling 17 5.1 Scope of the Analysis 17 5.2 Key Assumptions and Premises 18 5.3 Refined Product Volumes Held Constant 18

6. Energy and CO 2 Accounting Framework in the Refining Models 20 6.1 U.S. Refinery Energy Use 20 6.2 Conceptual Framework for Estimating Refinery Energy Use 21 6.3 Energy Accounting in the Refining Models 21 6.4 Comparison with EIA Framework for Reporting U.S . Refinery Energy Use 22 6.5 CO 2 Emission s Accounting in the Refining Models 23

7. Results of the Calibration, Reference, and Study Cases 24 7.1 Primary Effects of the NCG and the 94 RON and 95 RON NCG Standards 24 7.2 Detailed Model ing Results 27 7.3 Calibration of the Regional Models 30

8. Summary of the Effects of NCG and Single Octane NCG on Refining Operations 31

9. Additional Comments 35 9.1 Interpreting the Estimated Refining Cos ts 35 9.2 Refinery

- to

- Refinery Differences Affect Responses to New Standards 35 9.3 Holding Refined Product Volumes Constant in the Study Cases 36 9.4 “Over

- Optimization” 36 9.5 T h e Analysis Focuses on the Current U.S. Refi ning Sector 3 7 9.6 Reg io nal Average Octane Values in the Reference Cases 37Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

October 8, 2010 1 

## 1. I NTRODUCTION AND 

## E XECUTIVE 

## S UMMARY



### This report describes a study conducted by MathPro Inc. to analyze the technical and econo mic effects on the U.S. refining sector of a national clean gasoline (NCG) standard with a single octane grade. The single octane NCG standard would augment the federal and California standards for reformulated gasoline and would replace the standards for all special gasolines (“boutique fuels”) and for conventional gasoline (CG).

1.1 Proposed NCG Standard

A single octane NCG standard would consist of a set of gasoline property standards in combination with a single octane standard of 94 or 95 RON. Fo r purposes of this study, single octane NCG is defined as shown in Table 1. 1

.

NCG would have lower summer RVP and sulfur content than allowed under current regulatory standards and also would have to meet a Driveability Index standa rd. 1 

### NCG still would have to

1 The Driveability Index (DI) standard shown in Table 1 .1 applies to the D I definition recently adopted by ASTM

(a nd as specified in a recent report issued by the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers ), namely: DI (°F) = 1.5*T10 + 3.0*T50 + 1.0*T90 + 2.403*(Vol% Ethanol)

. The last term in the equation adjusts the DI upwards by about 24 numbers when ethanol is blended at 10%, to reflect ethanol’s observed adverse effects on driveability. Table 1.1: Proposed Standards for Single Octane NCG

Property Units Spec. Type Comments

Octane

Octane RON 94 Min With alternative standard of 95 RON Sensitivity RON

- MON 8 Min

Complex Model Properties

RVP (Summer season) psi 7 Max Corresponds to 6.8 psi at the refinery gate

Sulfur ppm 10 Max Corresponds to 5 ppm at the refinery gate

Benz ene vol.% 0.62 Avg The new federal MSAT2 standard

Aromatics vol.% 10 Min

Olefins vol.%

---- No Olefins limit for NCG

E200 vol.%

---- No E200 requirement for NCG

E300 vol.%

---- No E300 requirement for NCG Oxygen wt%

---- N o oxygen required, but the entire U.S. gasoline
pool is assumed to be E10

Ethanol Content vol% 10 Consistent with renewable fuel mandates

Driveability Index 1250 Max Represented as 1220 average at the refinery gate

Note: Average winter RV P and all other gasoline properties as specified in ASTM D

- 4814.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 2 

### meet requirements imposed by the Comp lex Model in federal RFG areas and by the Predictive Model in California.

Single octane NCG would replace the current three gasoline grades

– regular, mid

- grade, and premium, each with its own octane specified in terms of the average of their RON and MON ( usually referred to as (R+M)/2) )

– with one grade having at least 94 RON and with octane sensitivity (the difference between MON and RON) of at least 8 numbers.

Table 1. 2 shows current national averages for the RON, MON, and (R+M)/2 for the premium
and regular grades and for the entire U.S. gasoline pool. A 94 RON NCG standard would increase the U.S. gasoline pool’s average RON by about 1 number, and would increase the pool

average (R+M)/2 by a maximum of 2 numbers, depending on its effects on octane s ensitivity.

Table 1.2: Estimated U.S. Average Gasoline Grade Splits and Octane, 2008

Grade Split RON MON (R+M)/2

Pool 92.9 83.4 88.2
Premium 10.7% 97.6 87.5 92.6 Regular 89.3% 92.3 82.9 87.6



### Moving from the current U.S. gasoline pool to a single octane NCG would have significant effects on the technical and economic performance of the U.S. refining sector, including increases in (1) refining costs, (2) refinery investment in new process capacity, (3) crude oil use per barrel of gasoline output, (4) refinery energy use, and (5) refinery emissions of CO 2



### .

1.2 Objective of the Study

The objective of this study was to develop estimates of the effects of the proposed NCG an d single octane NCG standards (both at 94 RON and 95 RON) on U.S. refining economics and operations, by region and season.

The following sections discuss the technical approach adopted in this study for assessing such effects and the quantitative results of our analysis.

1.3 Technical Approach

We conducted the analysis by means of regional refinery LP modeling , using our proprietary refinery modeling system. We developed four refining models, representing aggregate refiningSingle Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 3 

### operations in PADD 1 (the E ast Coast) , PADD 2 (the Mid

- west) , PADD 3 (the Gulf Coast) , and California. 2 

### The study does not consider PADD 4 (the Mountain States) or PADD 5 ex California (the West Coast) , because (1) the total gasoline volume produced and consumed in that region is s mall and (2) unique issues involving small refineries arise in those areas.

The refinery modeling encompassed: (1) Calibration cases for 2007, (2) Reference cases for 2015, and (3) NCG and s ingle o ctane NCG Study cases for 2015.

 The Calibration cases served to calibrate the regional refining models to reported data for
2007.

 The Reference cases established the baseline for the analysis, in which each regional refining model produces projected 2015 refined product volumes with regulatory “business a s usual.” 3 

### The Reference cases reflect regional refined product volumes derived from national projections reported by EIA in AEO 2009 (April Revision) and a world crude oil price of about $100/b. 4



###  The Study cases assessed the progressive effects (relat ive to the baseline) of imposing the NCG and single octane NCG standards on the refining sector. The modeling was conducted for both the summer and winter seasons.

The refinery modeling was designed so that refining investments in new process capacity in the Reference, NCG, and single octane NCG cases all are made independently with respect to baseline 2007 refining capacity. This represents investment planning with “perfect foresight” regarding future regulatory standards for gasoline. 5



### We estimated th e regional average effects of the NCG standard and the 94 RON and 95 RON single octane NCG standards by comparing each 2015 Study case with its corresponding 2015 Reference case (not the 2007 Calibration case).

2 PADDs (Petroleum Administration for Defense Dis tricts) are geographical regions of the U.S. ; they are defined in

Section 2.

3 By “business as usual” we mean regulations now in place or scheduled to be in place by 2015, but no new ones.

4 EIA refers to the U.S. Department of Energy’s Energy Inform ation Administration. AEO refers to the Annual

Energy Outlook , a n EIA publication that provides long

- term projections of U.S. energy production, use, and prices.

5 In preliminary modeling for PADD 3, we also developed a series of cases in which refining investment was

“sequential;” i.e., refining investments made in the Reference case for major refining processes were carried forward to the NCG case; any additional investments made in the NCG case were then carried forward to the single octane NCG case. Because the modeling results with “sequential” investment were similar to those with “foresighted” investment, we adopted the assumption of “perfect foresight” in all subsequent refinery modeling.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 4 

### 1.4 Effects of NCG and Single Octane NCG Standards on Refining Operations

NCG Standard

The primary changes in gasoline properties required to meet the NCG standard would be: (1) a reduction in the RVP of conventional gasoline (CG) in the summer (from 9 psi to 7 psi), and (2) a reduction in the sulfur content of all gasoline (from 30 ppm average to 10 ppm max).

Refineries would meet the NCG standard primarily by (1) reducing RVP through additional debutanization and depentanization of gasoline blendstocks ( primarily straight run naphtha and
FCC naphtha) and (2) further reduc in g the sulfur content of FCC naphtha

, via post

- treatment. 6 

### Both responses, all else constant, would reduce gasoline pool octane (butanes have high octane and more severe desulfurization of FCC naphtha reduces its octane). Removal of butanes and pentanes from the gasoline pool also would reduce gasoline pool volume.

To replace the lost volume and octane refineries could (1) increase reformer throughput and severity ( which also would increase volume loss); (2) increase FCC c onversion to increase FCC naphtha output; (3) produce relatively more gasoline

- boiling range material in hydrocracking operations; and (4) increase crude throughput.

The NCG standard would have greater effects on refining operations in PADDs 1

- 3 than in California, because gasoline produced by refineries in PADDs 1

- 3 in 2015 would have, on average, higher RVP and sulfur content than gasoline produced by California refineries.

94 and 95 RON NCG Standards

A 94 RON single octane standard would raise the national gasoline pool’s RON by about 1 number and its (R+M)/2 by a maximum of 2 numbers; a 95 RON single octane standard would raise the national gasoline pool’s RON by about 2 numbers and its (R+M)/2 by a maximum of 3 numbers.

Refineries would meet t hese additional octane requirements primarily by modifying the operations of their upgrading (octane

- generating) processes

– (1) increasing reformer throughput and severity (as measured by the RON of the produced reformate), with resultant increases in th e concentration of reformate in the gasoline ; (2) upgrading straight run naphthas via pen/hex isomerization; (3) possibly increasing production of alkylate; and (4) removing from the gasoline pool C5s that have relatively high RVP and low octane. 7

6 FCC naphtha is a key gasoline blendstock



### . Most of the sulfur in gasoline comes from FCC naphtha.

7 C5s are gasoline blendstocks with relatively high RVP and low octane; hence, removing them from the gasoline

pool improves both average gasoline pool RVP and octane (but with volume loss). The octane of stra ight run naphthas may be improved significantly (with small volume loss) via a refining process known as pen/hex isomerization

. Alkylate is a high

- octane gasoline blendstock.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 5 

### These o perational changes (with constant refined product out

- turns) would require refineries to increase crude oil throughput to offset the volume loss es associated with the removal of low

octane blendstocks from the gasoline pool and with expanded reforming oper ations. They also would result in the production of gasoline with: (1) a “heavier” distillation curve (that is, higher DI); (2) increased aromatics content; (3) higher energy density (which translates into greater fuel economy); and (4) greater octane sen sitivity. 8



### The effects of the NCG and single octane standards on refining operations would be more pronounced in the summer than in the winter, because refineries are more octane

- constrained in the summer than in the winter

– higher RVP limits in the win ter allow blending more high

octane C4s in gasoline.

1.5 Summary of Quantitative Results

Table 1.3 summarizes the primary results of our analysis for PADDs 1

- 3, California, and the
total of PADDs 1

- 3 and California. (We report California separately bec ause the state’s unique gasoline standards significantly increase the cost of the single octane standard.)

Table 1.3: Estimated Effects of NCG and Single Octane NCG Standards on Refining Cost and on Refinery Crude Oil Use, Energy Use, and CO2 Emissions

PADDs 1-3 California Total

Single Octane Single Octane Single Octane

94 RON 95 RON 94 RON 95 RON 94 RON 95 RON

NCG NCG NCG NCG NCG NCG NCG NCG NCG

Effects on Costs Refining Cost Total ($B/y) 3.4 6.4 9.9 0.1 1.0 2.1 3.4 7.4 12.1 Capital charge & fixed cost 1.2 1.4 2.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 1.2 1.4 2.3
All other 2.1 5.1 7.9 0.0 0.9 1.8 2.2 6.0 9.8 Per gallon of gasoline (¢/gal) 3.1 5.9 9.2 0.3 6.7 14.4 2.8 6.0 9.8
Value of Improved Gasoline Energy Density (¢/gal) 0.7 1.1 2.0 0.1 1.5 2.1 0.6 1.2 2.0 Refinery Investment ($B) 4.3 4.7 6.9 0.0 0.2 0.9 4.3 4.9 7.8
Effects on Operations Change in Crude Oil Input per Barrel of Gasoline (b/b) 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.00 0.03 0.08 0.01 0.03 0.05
Percent Increase in Refinery Energy Use (Fuel & Power) 3% 5% 9% 0% 5% 12% 3% 5% 9%
CO2 Emissions 2% 4% 6% 0% 3% 9% 2% 4% 6%



### The top part of the table shows the effects of the NCG and single octane NCG standards on total refining costs, refining costs per gallon of gasoline, the offsetting value of the improved energy

8 Reformate has higher octane sensitivity than almost any other gasoline blend stock. Hence, expanding reformate’s

share of the gasoline pool increases not only the gasoline pool’s RON but also its octane sensitivity.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 6 

### density of gasoline, 9 

### and refinery investments

. The bottom part of the table provides estimates of certain physical effects of the changes in refining operations needed to produce NCG and single

octane NCG

– specifically, changes in crude oil inputs per barrel of gasoline output, and increases in refinery energy use and CO 2 

### emissions.

We assess ed the effects of the NCG and single octane NCG standards on the refining sector by comparing each of the St udy cases to a corresponding 2015 Reference case that represents regulatory “business as usual.” Thus, the numbers in Table 3 are estimates of the additional refining costs and the changes in refining operations that would arise from meeting each of the

g asoline standards

– NCG, 94 RON NCG, and 95 RON NCG.

Effects on Refining Economics

Estimated total refining costs (PADDs 1

- 3 and California) increase progressively from about $31⁄2 billion per year for the NCG standard to about $71⁄2 billion and $121⁄2 billion , respectively, for 94 RON and 95 RON single octane NCG standards. The corresponding increase s in average refining costs

– that is, total refining cost divided by total gasoline production

– are about 3¢/gal, 6¢/gal, and 10¢/gal , respectively. The incre ases in refining costs are somewhat offset by the
estimated improvements in gasoline’s energy density, valued at about 1⁄2¢/gal, 11⁄4¢/gal, and 2¢/gal respective ly

. 10



### The estimated average net cost s of the gasoline standards, after adjusting for the value of improved energy density, are about 21⁄2¢/gal, 5¢/gal, and 8¢/gal for NCG, 94 RON NCG, and 95 RON NCG, respectively. 11



### The marginal cost of gasoline production is highly sensitive to small changes in the volume of gasoline production , and it depend s on the interplay of (i) domestic refining costs, (ii) the prospective supply of imported gasoline, and (iii) the price

- sensitivity of domestic demand for gasoline. Analyzing this interplay was beyond the scope of the study. Rather, we held regional gasoline production volume s constant across the Reference and Study cases. In practice, the

9 As explained later in this report, the NCG and single octane NCG standards would increase the average energy

den sity of gasoline, leading to corresponding improvements in fuel economy and reductions in gasoline use.

10 Improvements in gasoline energy density increase vehicle fuel economy, leading to a reduction in aggregate

gasoline consumption by motorists at const ant vehicle miles traveled. We estimated the value of improvements in gasoline energy density (in cents per gallon) as the percent improvement in energy density times the marginal refining cost of gasoline. Essentially, this is an estimate of the value o f the resources (crude oil, power, fuel, etc.) saved in the refining sector from producing less gasoline. We have not included reductions in marketing and distribution costs associated with reduced gasoline consumption, as they are small relative to the r efining cost of gasoline. Nor have we included savings obtained by motorists from paying less federal and state gasoline taxes and less marketing and distribution markups, because these are transfer payments (i.e., other parties

– government and private c ompanies

– incur offsetting losses).

11 Net costs , as used in this report, may be thought of as social costs

– the cost of the additional resources society

uses to meet the new gasoline standards.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 7 

### refining sector’s response to the new gasoline standards likely would include reducing refined product out

- turns to moderate increases in marginal refin ing costs.

Estimated refining invest ment to support the NCG standard and 94 RON and 95 RON NCG standards is about $41⁄4, $5, and $8 billion, respectively. 12 

### The refining investments shown in Table 1 reflect “grassroots” investment economics, rather than “expansion” economics. Typically, the i nvestment for expanding existing refining units is about half to two

- thirds the investment for adding the same capacity in grassroots units. To the extent that refineries can expand existing units, rather than add grassroots units, our analysis may somewh at overstate the investment, and corresponding capital charges, associated with the new gasoline standards. Also, capital charges in the regional refinery models and in the cost analysis reflect an assumed
after

- tax rate of return on investment of 10%. R efiners often use higher rates of return for investment planning, but EPA typically uses lower rates of return (usually about 5%) when estimating the “social” (national) cost of fuel standards. Use of a 5% after

- tax rate of return on investment in stead of 10% would reduce estimated capital charges and fixed costs by about 25%.

Capital charges and fixed costs represent about 50% of the refining cost of a NCG standard, but only about 20% of the 94 RON and 95 RON NCG standards. The bulk of the estimated ref ining cost of the 94 RON and 95 RON NCG standards arises from increased refinery energy use. Estimated costs for California have a different profile than those for PADDs 1

- 3.

 For PADDs 1

- 3, the average net cost of the gasoline standards, after adjusting f or the value of improved energy density, would be about 21⁄2¢/gal, 5¢/gal, and 71⁄4¢/gal for the NCG and the 94 RON and 95 RON NCG standards, respectively. The incremental costs of the successive standards (e.g.

, the cost of moving from the NCG standard to t he 94 RON NCG standard) are similar

– about 21⁄2¢/gal (including the value of improved gasoline energy density).

 For California, the estimated cost of the NCG standard is low, because most gasoline produced by California refineries in 2015 already will have low RVP and very low sulfur content. On the other hand, the estimated incremental cost of moving from NCG to 94 RON NCG is about 51⁄4¢/gal (after adjusting for the value of improved gasoline energy density), significantly higher than the 21⁄2¢/gal estimated for PADDs 1

- 3. And the estimated incremental cost of moving from 94 RON NCG to a 95 RON NCG is even higher

-- about 71⁄2¢/gal (after adjusting for the value of improved gasoline energy density).

12 The investment cost of the NCG standard could be lower than estimated, depending on how many FCC naphtha

desulfurization units outside of California already are capable of controlling sulfur to 5 ppm. (We assume California refineries would have to produce ultra

- low sulfur gasoline in the 2015 Reference case to satisfy state standards imposed through the newly

- amended Predictive Model.) In this analysis, we assumed that all such units would have to be retrofitted to produce 5 ppm FCC naphtha. If none had to be retrofitted, our estimates of aggregate investme nts would be reduced by about $31⁄2 billion in PADDs 1

- 3. This would reduce aggregate refining costs (capital charges and fixed costs) by about $1 billion/year and refining costs per gallon of gasoline by about 1¢/gal.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 8 

### Refineries in California would incur higher costs to meet t he 94 RON and 95 RON NCG standards because California’s stringent gasoline standards, implemented through the Predictive Model, tightly constrain the blending space of California

- compliant

- gasoline; and because California’s summer gasoline season is about 8 months long, whereas the summer season in
PADDs 1

- 3 is about 6 months long. California refineries’ “least cost” responses to the 94 RON and 95 RON NCG standards would increase VOC, NOx, and toxics emissions, as calculated by the Predictive Model, becaus e they would increase gasoline’s aromatics content and raise its T50 and T90 (the temperatures at which 50% and 90% of the gasoline boils off). California refineries would be forced to moderate such property changes or offset their effects by changing oth er gasoline properties in order to produce California

- compliant gasoline.

Effects on Refining Operations

Estimated crude oil input per barrel of gasoline progressively increases with the successive standards. Crude oil input would increase to offset vo lume losses associated with (1) removal of C4s, C5s, and naphthas from the gasoline pool; and (2) increase d volume and severity of reformer operations.

Refinery energy use for the aggregate of the four regions increases by about 3% for the NCG
standard and by about 5% and 9%, respectively, for 94 RON and 95 RON NCG standards. Refineries would use more energy to support additional crude oil throughput, expanded upgrading operations, primarily pen/hex isomerization and reforming, and additional
fractiona tion.

Refinery CO 2 

### emissions also increase progressively across the NCG and single octane NCG standards. However, the percentage increases in refinery CO 2 

### emissions are lower than the percentage increases in energy use because, as NCG octane increases: (1) relatively less refinery energy comes from burning catalyst coke (a high CO 2 

### energy source) and more comes from natural gas and refinery gases ; and (2) the additional hydrogen produced in more extensive reformer operations reduces refinery calls for o n

- purpose hydrogen, thereby reducing CO 2 

### co

produced during on

- purpose hydrogen production.

Estimated increases in energy use and CO 2 

### emissions by California refineries are significantly greater than those for refineries in PADDs 1

- 3 for the 94 RON and 95 RON NCG standards.

1.6 Organization of the Report

The following sections of the report describe the development of the regional refining models, present the results of the analysis, and discuss analytical issues associated with the refinery
modelin g.

 Section 2 contains definitions of some key terms and concepts

 Section 3 provides information used to develop and calibrate our refinery models (refining capacity, refining inputs & outputs, gasoline properties, prices, etc.).Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 9 

###  Section 4 discusses the projections of prices, refinery inputs, and refined product out

- turns developed to establish the baseline (Reference case) for 2015, the target year for the analysis.

 Section 5 discusses the technical approach for the regional refinery modeling.

 Section 6 describes the regional refining models’ accounting framework for refinery energy use and CO 2 

### emissions

 Section 7 presents results of the refinery modeling analysis for the Calibration, Reference, and Study Cases.

 Section 8 summarizes the effects of the NCG and single octane NCG standards on refining operations.

 Section 9 provides additional comments , bearing on the scope of the analysis and on the interpretation of the results of the analysis.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 10 

## 2. S OME 

## K EY 

## T ERMS AND 

## C ONCEPTS



### A few terms and c oncepts that are essential elements of the analysis are likely to be unfamiliar to readers not well

- versed in the analysis of refining economics. Accordingly, we define and briefly discuss these terms and concepts here to facilitate understanding of this report.

2.1 Measures of Refining Economics Used in This Report

 The refining cost of complying with a gasoline specification or standard (such as NCG) is the
sum of  capital charges and fixed costs associated with investments in refining capacity made in order to produce gasoline complying with the new standard; and  reduction in cash flow

– the algebraic sum of changes in direct operating costs (e.g., the costs of crude oil, other refinery inputs, natural gas, electricity, catalysts and chemicals,

etc. ) and product revenues resulting from producing gasoline complying to the new
standard

.

 The n et cost (often called social cost ) of complying with a gasoline specification or standard (such as NCG) is the cost of the additional resources society expends to meet the new
standard or specification (without regard to which segments of society incur these costs)

.

In this study, the net cost of the various NCG standards is deemed to be the algebraic sum of the associated change in refining cost and the valu e of the associated increase in gasoline energy density.

 The marginal cost of gasoline (¢/gallon) is the additional refining cost incurred in producing
the last volume increment of gasoline

, at constant octane.

In general, the marginal cost of gas oline increases with increasing production volume.

2.2 PADDs

PADDs (Petroleum Administration for Defense Districts) are geographical regions of the U.S.; five in number. They were defined by the federal government during World War II for various
admini strative purposes, including data collection and reporting related to petroleum supply and consumption. They continue to be widely used for these purposes.

The five PADDs are shown on the map below.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 11 

### 2. 3 Refining Processes

U. S. refineries comprise many specialized refining processes. However, these processes can be thought of in terms of a few broad classes, shown in Table 2

. 1

.

Of these processes, a few are particularly relevant to this analysis

 The catalytic reforming p rocess is used by almost all U.S. refineries that produce gasoline. Reforming is the refinery’s primary source of high

- octane gasoline blendstocks and incremental octane.

Reforming upgrades low

- octane crude oil fractions and other refinery streams in t he gasoline boiling range to a high

- octane gasoline blendstock called reformate , typically with RON > 95 and octane sensitivity > 10. Reformate is the second largest constituent of the U.S. gasoline pool. Reformers also produce, as by

- products, hydrogen and still gas. Reformer hydrogen
constitutes almost half of U.S. refinery hydrogen consumption; reformer still gas goes to refinery fuel.

Reforming units can be operated over a range of severity (defined by the RON of the produced reformate), up to 102 .5 RON or higher . Reforming is the only refinery process that (1) is capable of producing gasoline blendstock with RON > 95 and (2) can be controlled to operate over a wide range of severity.

Consequently, the ability of U.S. refineries to produce 94 RON or 95 RON NCG will hinge on the capacities and capabilities of their reforming units. Petroleum Administration for Defense Districts (PADDs)

PADD 1 PADD 2

PADD 3 PADD 5 PADD 4Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 12 

##  The fluid cat cracking (FCC) process is the heart of almost all U.S. conversion refineries

– the refineries that produce large vo lumes of gasoline and other transportation fuels. FCC units convert heavy, low

- value crude oil fractions into lighter streams that can be blended into the refinery’s gasoline, jet fuel, and diesel fuel pools.

FCC naphtha , t he gasoline fraction produced by FCC units, contains virtually all of the sulfur that must be removed to produce low

- sulfur gasolines, such as NCG. (FCC naphtha is the largest constituent of the U.S. gasoline pool .)

 Alkylation and isomerization produce high

- octane gasoline ble ndstocks from various light refinery streams (C4s for alkylation; C5s and C6s for isomerization)

. The blendstocks that they produce, alkylate and isomerate , have relatively high octane (though significantly less than reformate) and low sensitivity.

The se processes are not controllable with respect to octane in the sense that reformers are, and they tend to run at full capacity; hence, they can offer little in the way of additional octane to the gasoline pool , except by expansion of the existing process capacity

. Table 2.1: Important Classes of Refining Processes in U.S. Ref ineries

Class Function Examples

Crude distillation Separate crude oil charge into boiling range Atmospheric distillation fractions for further processing Vacuum distillation

Conversion Break down ("crack") heavy crude fractions into lighter, Fluid cat cracking (FCC) higher

- valued streams for further processing Coking, Hydrocracking

Upgrading Enhance the blending properties (e.g., octane) and value Catalytic Reforming of gasoline and diesel ble ndstocks Alkylation, Isomerization

Treating Remove hetero

- atom impurities from refinery streams Hydrotreating

and blendstocks Caustic treating

Separation Separate, by physical or chemical means, constituents Fractionation of refinery streams for further processing Extraction

Blending Combine blendstocks to produce fi nished products that meet product specifications and environmental standards

Utilities Supply refinery fuel, power, steam, oil movements, Steam generation storage, emissions control, etc. Sulfur recoverySingle Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 13 

## 3

. I NFORMATION 

## U SED 

## T O 

## D EVELOP AND 

## C ALIBRATE 

## T HE 

## R EFIN ING 

## M ODELS



### Each regional refin ing model is defined by a unique set of “boundary conditions”

– constraints that represent actual or forecast market and technical conditions to which solu tions returned by the refinery model must conform. Boundary conditions in this study include refining capacity; refinery inputs of unfinished oils and blendstocks; refinery out

- turns of finished products, such as gasoline and diesel fuel; specifications for the properties of refined products (e.g., octane, RVP, and sulfur for gasoline); and certain regulatory standards that constrain refining operations (e.g., RFG standards implemented through the Complex and Predictive Models).

Exhibits A

- 1 through A

- 21 provide information that characterizes refined petroleum product markets in the U.S circa 2007. We derived this information from public data sources and used this information to establish the boundary conditions defining the regional refining models us ed in this study.

 Exhibit A

- 1 shows petroleum refining capacity, by region for 2007.

 Exhibit A

- 2 shows the annual supply of refined products by region and source of supply. These data, along with projections in AEO 2009 , were used to develop projectio ns of regional refined product supply in 2015.

 Exhibit A

- 3 shows annual refinery inputs, volumes of feed going to specific refinery processes, average crude oil properties, and net production of refined products, by region for
2007.

 Exhibit A

- 4 show s the same information as Exhibit A

- 3, but separately for the summer and winter seasons.

 Exhibit A

- 5 shows properties and distillation curves for the composite crude oils used in the regional refinery models.

 Exhibits A

- 6 a, A

- 6b, A

- 7a and A

- 7 b provide inform ation on regional refinery fuel use and fuel use relative to refinery inputs and outputs.

 Exhibits A

- 8 through A

- 13 show average properties of various gasoline classes at different time periods and levels of aggregation. Exhibit A

- 8 shows PADD

- level, sea sonal data provided by EPA for 2004 (the most recent year for which data of this type are available);
Exhibit A

- 9 shows national data (ex California), by gasoline type and season, for 2000

- 2006, Exhibits A

- 10a and A

- 10b show estimated properties of RFG for PADDs 1, 2, and 3 for
2000

- 20006, by season; Exhibit A

- 11 shows the properties of gasoline produced by California refineries in summer 2006; and Exhibits A

- 12a and A

- 12b and A

- 13 show data onSingle Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 14 

### gasoline properties and octane for 2004

- 2008, by producing regi on, that we derived from the
Alliance North American Fuel Surveys

. 13



###  Exhibits A

- 14 through A

- 17 provide information that we used to estimate average regional RVP and octane levels for 2007 and to project such levels to 2015. Exhibit A

- 14 shows
estimated annual grade splits for 2000

- 2008 in consuming regions by type of gasoline.
Exhibit A

- 15 shows the distribution of gasoline in consuming regions, by type of gasoline, that we estimated for 2007 and projected for 2015 (accounting for the implementation of the
8

- Hour Ozone Standard). Exhibit A

- 16 shows for 2007: the estimated distribution of CG and low

- RVP gasoline (i.e., all non

- RFG), by consuming region; the derived distribution of regional refinery production of CG and low

- RVP gasoline; and the calculat ed RVPs of the

non

- RFG gasoline pool produced in each refining region. Exhibits A

- 17a & A

- 17b show for 2007 and 2008, respectively, regional estimates of: the share of gasoline production shipped to various consuming regions; grade splits; and gasoline po ol octane. (Octane declined slightly in 2008 because of a continued decline across all regions in the market share of premium gasoline.)

 Exhibits A

- 18 through A

- 23 provide information on seasonal crude oil acquisition costs; seasonal refined product and WTI spot prices; seasonal wholesale gasoline prices, by type and grade, and seasonal No. 2 diesel fuel prices; seasonal spot prices for C4s and C5s; annual natural gas prices; and annual electricity prices.

13 Exhibits A

- 10a&b, A

- 12, and A

- 13 show estimated average properties and octane for RFG and CG by PADD of

origin , not consumption. We estimated average properties by producing region for both the Alliance surveys and the EPA federal RFG Area Surveys by assigning the surveyed cities to spec ific PADDs, according to the sourcing of their gasoline supplies. For example, cities assigned to PADD 3 included all of those located in PADD 3, along with the Washington metropolitan area and all cities in the southeast. Cities assigned to PADD 1 inclu ded Pittsburgh and all cities in the northeast, except those in New England (e.g., Boston), because the latter areas are supplied largely by imports. All cities in PADD 2 were assigned to PADD 2Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 15 

## 4

. P ROJECTED 

## R EFINERY 

## O PERATIONS FOR 

## 2015

Ex hibits B

- 1 through B

- 7 show our projections of refinery inputs and outputs for 2015. Thes e projections establish the boundary conditions for the 2015 Reference cases. We developed the projections primarily using data from the Department of Energy’s Petro leum Supply Annuals
2005

- 2008

, in combination with aggregate energy forecasts and regional energy demand
forecasts from AEO 2009

.

 Exhibits B

- 1 to B

- 3 show projections for 2015 of total U.S. petroleum supply and disposition, imports and exports of petroleu m products, and regional growth in consumption of refined products. We used these national projections in developing the regional projections shown in the subsequent tables.

EIA projects gasoline consumption (including a small volume of E85) to be about 9.4 million b/d in 2015

– only about 0.6% higher than consumption in 2007. However, projected net imports of finished gasoline and gasoline blending components (adjusted for subsequent ethanol blending) decline from about 1.1 million b/d to about 0.6 mil lion b/d. Hence, domestic production of finished gasoline (net of imported blendstocks and accounting for ethanol blending at terminals) is projected to increase by about 71⁄2 percent.

 Exhibit B

- 4 shows the projected annual supply of major refined product s, by region. These projections are based on the pattern of supply in 2007 (Exhibit A

- 2), the aggregate projections shown in Exhibit B

- 1, and the regional growth rates in product demand shown in
Exhibit B

- 3.

 Exhibits B

- 5 and B

- 6 show, respectively, pro jected annual and seasonal refinery inputs and refined product out

- turns, by region.

 Exhibits B

- 7 and B

- 8 show projected gasoline pool RVP and octane. Projected gasoline pool RVP (for CG and low

- RVP gasoline only) declines from 2007 (Exhibit A

- 15) to 2 015 because of implementation of the 8

- hour ozone standard and the NCG standard. 14 

### Projected gasoline pool octanes are similar to those estimated for 2008 (Exhibit A

- 16b), because we assumed grade splits estimated for 2008 would persist through 2015. 15



### W e conducted the refinery modeling using just two types of gasoline: RFG (federal or California) and “all other.” The “all other” category includes CG and low

- RVP gasolines.

14 The RVP shown in Exhibit B

- 6 for NCG incorporates the RVP e ffect of ethanol blending with the applicability of

the 1 psi RVP waiver only to CG.

15 Small differences in octane for PADDs 2 & 3 reflect resumption of shipments of premium grade gasoline from

PADD 3 to PADD 2 when E10 becomes ubiquitous. The decline in octane for CG produced by California refineries reflects our assumption that octane for regular grade gasoline would average about 87.5, rather than the three year average of 88.1 for Las Vega calculated using data from the Alliance gasoline surveys.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 16 

### Consequently, calculated RVPs for the “all other” category, shown in Exhibit B

- 6, reflect the weighted average of finished CG and low

- RVP gasolines, incorporating the effects of the 1 psi ethanol RVP waiver. Additionally, we combined premium and regular grade gasoline into a single gasoline pool with octane corresponding to the weight ed average of the octanes of the corresponding premium and regular grades (the weighting factors are the projected premium/regular grade splits). This approach simplifies the modeling without significantly affecting the results.

Projected shares of RFG, CG, and low

- RVP gasoline for 2015 are shown in Exhibit A

- 15. These projections assume implementation of the 8

- hour ozone standard by 2015 and consequent increases in the shares of low

- RVP and reformulated gasoline in the gasoline pool. Our
estimates of t he effects of the 8

- hour ozone standard on gasoline markets come from a MathPro study for the American Petroleum Institute (API). 16



### Exhibits A

- 1 (2007 refining process capacity), A

- 18 (crude oil prices), B

- 6, B

- 7, and B

- 8 establish the primary boundary conditions for the 2015 Reference cases. Nationally, the 2015 projections reflect, relative to refined product out

- turns for 2007 shown in Exhibit A

- 3, an increase in domestic production of finished, ethanol

- blended gasoline (net of imported gasoline
ble nding components) of about 9%; 17 

### a slight decline in jet fuel production; an increase of about 2% in distillate production; and a decline of about 16% in resid plus asphalt production.

16 

### “ Potential Effects of 8

- Hour Ozone Standard on Gasoline Supply, Demand, and Production Costs;” Prepared for

the American Petroleum Institute by MathPro Inc.; March 2005

17 The growth in net production of finished gasoline of 9% is higher than the 71⁄2% growth in net production of

gasoline estimated from projections in AEO 2009. The discrepancy arises because various “adjustments” incorporated in gasoline data reported in the AEO 2009 and included in Exhibit A

- 2 are not incorporated in the historical refinery net input and output data provided on EIA’s website (and in corresponding tables in the Petroleum Supply Annual) that we used to prepare Exhibit A

- 3 and to establish the regional base cases for 2007.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 17 

## 5

. T ECHNICAL 

## A PPROACH FOR 

## R EGIONAL 

## R EFINERY 

## M ODELING



### 5 .1 Scope of th e Analysis

As described in Section 1.3, we developed and analyzed a series of refinery modeling cases

– Calibration, Reference, and Study cases

– to assess the effects of the contemplated NCG and single octane NCG standards in PADDs 1, 2, and 3 and in Cal ifornia.

 The 2007 Calibration cases served to calibrate the models to historical data for summer and winter 2007.

 The 2015 Reference cases established the 2015 summer and winter baselines to which the Study cases are compared.

The Reference cases inc orporate refining capacity sufficient to produce projected refined product out

- turns, meet the Tier 2 sulfur standards for gasoline and diesel fuel, meet the MSAT 2 standards (benzene control), and supply the volumes of low

- RVP gasoline and RFG
to meet the (projected implementation of the) 8

- Hour Ozone Standard. 18 

### All gasoline in the Reference cases is E10.

 The Study cases assessed the progressive effects of first imposing the NCG standard and then imposing the 94 RON and 95 RON standards in combination wi th the NCG standard.

The refinery modeling was designed so that investments in new refining process capacity in the Reference cases and in the NCG and single octane NCG Study cases all are made independently
and with respect to baseline 2007 refining ca pacity. This represents investment planning with “perfect foresight” regarding future regulatory standards for gasoline.

In preliminary modeling for PADD 3, we also developed a series of cases in which refining investment was “sequential.” Under that ap proach, refining investments made in the Reference case for major refining processes were carried forward to the NCG case; any additional investments made in the NCG case were then carried forward to the 94 RON NCG case. This represents what might be cons idered “myopic” investment with regard to regulatory standards. Because the preliminary modeling results for “sequential” investment were similar to those of the “foresighted” investment cases, we adopted the assumption of “perfect foresight” for all subs equent refinery modeling.

18 In the Reference cases, the regional refining models a re endowed with refining process capacity as of 2007. The

models add refining capacity as needed to produce specified product volumes and to meet refined product standards. We did not incorporate in the regional models any capacity expansions after 2007 reported as planned or under construction, as many such projects have been delayed or placed on hold due to the decline in economic activity.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 18 

### 5 .2 Key Assumptions and Premises

The refinery modeling for the 2015 Reference cases incorporated the following assumptions regarding national and state policies affecting gasoline quality.

 All gasoline ethanol

- blended at 10 vol% ( National E10).

 Implementation of the federal MSAT 2 standard, limiting the average benzene content of gasoline to 0.62 vol%.

 Implementation of the 8

- hour ozone standard.

 Continuation of the 1 psi RVP waiver for ethanol

- blended CG and for low

- RVP gasoline in those states (mostly in the Midwest) that now grant the waiver. (The waiver does not apply to low

- RVP gasoline during the peak ozone months of July and August.)

 Continuation of the RVP waiver for NCG and single octane NCG that replace CG, but not for NCG and single octane NCG that replace low

- RVP gasoline, even in the Midwest.

 Continued use of the Complex Model for certifying federal RFG and of the Predictive Model for certifying California RFG.

The Reference cases reflect projected regional refined product volumes derived from national projections reported by EIA in AEO 2009 (April Revision) and a world crude oil price of about $100/b.

The regional refining models included representations of two types of reforming processes

– a medium

- press ure process (the older type) capable of a maximum severity of 100 RON and a low

- pressure process capable of a maximum severity of 102.5 RON. (These severities refer to the RON of the produced reformate.) The aggregate capacities of the two reforming proc esses represented in the regional models are consistent with capacities reported for each U.S. refinery.

5 .3 Refined Product Volumes Held Constant

In the Study cases, the regional refining models are constrained to produce the same volume of major r efined products as in the corresponding Reference cases, i.e. refined product volumes are fixed, except for light gases. Inputs of crude oil (the primary input) and light gases are priced and allowed to vary. Volumes of other refinery inputs (natural gas oline, pyrolysis gasoline, naphtha, kerosene, heavy gas oil, and residual oil) are fixed.

(For PADDs 1

- 3, the refining models represent refinery production of finished gasoline containing 10 vol% ethanol. For California, the refining model represents p roduction of a
sub

- octane California gasoline (CARBOB) for subsequent blending with 10 vol% ethanol to produce finished California gasoline. This approach is necessary in modeling the California refineries, because the California Predictive Model (used fo r certifying compliance with theSingle Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 19 

### California standards) operates on the properties of the produced CARBOB, not the finished gasoline.)

The regional refin ing models respond to the imposition of NCG and single octane NCG standards primarily by adjusting r efinery crude oil inputs, process capacity use, and process operations, but not by adjusting outputs of gasoline and other major finished refined products. However, we allow the regional refin ing models to expand sales of C 4 s, C5s, coker naphtha, and
FCC naphtha to comply with NCG and single octane NCG standards.

Although refineries, in practice, may alter refined product out

- turns in response to the imposition of new gasoline standards, specifying constant product out

- turns in the refinery models allows for a straightforward assessment of the costs of the various standards without having to pursue a more complicated “equilibrium” analysis of the effects of the standards on domestic production, imports of refined products, and refined product supply in ge neral.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 20 

## 6

. E NERGY AND 

## CO 2 

## A CCOUNTING 

## F RAMEWORK IN THE 

## R EFINING 

## M ODELS



### In the interest of facilitating subsequent “life

- cycle analysis” of single octane NCG, t his section provides an overview of the accounting framework in the regional refining mod els for estimating refinery energy use and the consequent CO 2 

### emissions. The accounting framework bears exclusively on refining operations. It does not address energy use and CO 2 

### emissions in the production and transport of crude oil and other refinery i nputs (e.g., natural gas, unfinished oils); nor does it address CO 2 

### emissions from the end

- use of refined products (e.g., combustion of transportation fuels).

6 .1 U.S. Refinery Energy Use

E nergy consumption in the U.S. refining sector is about 3 quads p er year

– about 3% of total U.S. energy consumption

– equivalent t o about 0.5 7 MM BTU/Bbl of refinery charge. U.S. refinery energy consumption, both total and per barrel of crude through

- put, tends to increase slowly over time. This trend reflects (1) U. S. refiners’ gradual shift to a heavier, higher sulfur crude slate and (2) increasingly stringent specifications on refined products, particularly the sulfur standards for gasoline and diesel fuel. E nergy use by California refineries is about 0.66
MM BTU/ Bbl of refinery charge

– higher than in the rest of the U.S. refining sector because of the heavy crude slate run by California refineries and because of California’s refined product specifications, the most stringent in the U.S.

T he energy consumed in re fining comes from numerous sources, some outside the refinery and some within. However, four sources

– purchased natural gas and electricity and refinery

produced still gas and catalyst coke account for about 95% of reported U.S. refinery energy consumpti on.

Still gas is a mixture of light gases (methane, ethane, etc.) produced as by

- products in various refining processes. These light gas streams are collected, treated, and burned in the refinery fuel system to generate process heat and steam.

Catal yst coke

– coke laid down on FCC catalyst

– is a by

- product of the cracking reactions that occur in the FCC reactor. The coke is burned off the catalyst in the FCC regenerator. The heat of combustion is used to provide process energy for the FCC reactor and to generate refinery steam. 19



### Refinery purchases of electricity reported by EIA reflect purchases from the grid and do not include refinery

- generated electricity, most of which comes from gas

- fired co

- generation units.

19 

### Petroleum coke (or marketable coke )

– which is not used as a refinery fuel

– is the primary by

product of refi nery coking units (cokers). Petroleum coke constitutes **≈** 25

– 35 wt% of coker output and has various non

- energy uses outside the refining industry.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 21 

### Gross power generation in U.S. refineries averaged about 2.6 gigawatts (63 gigawatt

- hours per day) in 2006. U.S. refineries sold **≈** 30 % of their gross power output to the grid, leaving about 1.9 gigawatts of indicated net power generation for internal use. Refinery purchases of natura l

gas for fuel use that are reported by EIA appear to include natural gas used for refinery power generation, without adjustment for refinery sales of electricity to the grid ; but not natural gas used by refineries as feed to hydrogen production units or n atural gas used by merchant hydrogen plants as either feed or fuel

.

6 .2 Conceptual Framework for Estimating Refinery Energy Use

In principle, there are several approaches for estimating refinery energy use and CO 2 

### emissions.

The most rigor ous approach , from a theoretical standpoint, is to develop complete energy, material, and carbon balances around each refinery. The difference between the energy embodied in all refinery outputs and inputs equals the energy expended in the refinery. Simi larly, the difference between the total carbon content of all refinery outputs and inputs equals the refinery’s carbon emissions. At first glance, this approach seems appealing because it rests on fundamental engineering principles of heat and material ba lance. In practice, the approach is unworkable. It requires the development of complete and tight material and energy balances for the refinery (including not only all refinery feed and product streams but also waste streams and losses, such as flue gas, flare gas, fugitive emissions, cooling water, waste water, etc.) and precise estimates of the energy and carbon content of each refinery input and output. Such properties vary with crude type, are subject to day

- to

- day fluctuation, and in many cases

are simply unavailable. Moreover, because the desired results

– refinery energy use and CO 2 

### emissions

– are residuals, the inevitable gaps in refinery material and energy balances and the inaccuracies in energy and carbon content would render such estimates u seless.

The most useful approach focuses exclusively on energy use within the refinery battery limits. This approach involves estimating energy use in each refining process and then estimating total refinery energy use as the sum of the energy used in e ach process

– that is, by summing the direct energy inputs to all refining processes, by energy source (power, steam, and fuel). This is the approach of choice in industry LP models of refining operations and the one followed in the regional refining mode ls used in this study.

6 .3 Energy Accounting in the Refining Models

Each process representation in the regional refining models includes input/output coefficients representing the process’s net per

- barrel consumption of fuel (foeb/B bl), steam K lbs/Bbl), and power (Kwh/Bbl). For a given process, the values of the fuel, steam, and power coefficients depend on the process operating conditions (e.g., severity, conversion, etc.) and feed streams.

In addition, the regional refining models contain representations of three refinery utilities:Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 22 

###  Fuel mixing, which transforms candidate refinery fuel streams

– natural gas, still gas, C3s, C4s, and light straight run naphtha

– into refinery fuel available to the various processes ;  Steam gen eration, which transforms catalyst coke and refinery fuel into steam available to the processes ; and  Power generation, which transforms natural gas into power and steam

. 20



### Finally, the models contain (1) constraints that equate net fuel, steam, and po wer consumption across all processes to the total refinery supplies of these energy forms and (2) accounting variables that sum the total volumes of

 Purchased natural gas use d as refinery fuel (and as feed to hydrogen production);  Refinery

- generated stil l gas and other fuel gas streams;  Catalyst coke generated in the fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) unit; and  Purchased electricity

.

The regional refining models r epresent all on

- purpose hydrogen used by refineries as being produced in the refinery (rather than some being produced by merchant hydrogen plants). 21 

### Hence, refinery energy use returned by the models includes natural gas used as fuel in the production of hydrogen purchased from merchant plants (located outside refinery battery limits).

The refi nery energy accounting does not cover (1) energy used in production and transport of ethanol or other alternative fuels produced outside of refinery battery limits, whether blended to petroleum products at the refinery or downstream; (2) energy used in pro duction and supply of purchased unfinished oils and blendstocks blended into gasoline and distillate fuels in the refinery, but not otherwise processed in the refinery; (3) power used in non

- process or off

- site activities (such as oil movements in and out of storage, product blending, lighting, etc.); and (4) energy losses due to flaring, fugitive emissions, etc.

6 .4 Comparison with EIA Framework for Reporting U.S. Refinery Energy Use

In this analysis, we compared the estimates of regional refinery ene rgy use returned in the Calibration cases with regional refinery energy use reported by EIA for 2007. The energy use estimates returned by the regional refining models were about 10% lower than the regional totals reported by EIA. This was consistent wit h results in previous studies: t he energy accounting framework described here produce s estimates of regional refinery energy use somewhat lower (by **≈** 10%) than the values reported by EIA.

20 Power generation was not active in this analysis.

21 Merchant hydrogen plants are not in the refinery p roper, but the energy they use and the CO 2 they generate in

producing hydrogen for refinery use are directly connected with refinery operations. In effect, the models treat purchased hydrogen as though the merchant hydrogen plants were integral parts of t he refining sector.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 23 

### Model

- generated estimates lower than EIA

- reported values are to b e expected. T he models do not explicitly represent some auxiliary refinery process units (such as certain distillation and other separation processes) whose operations consume some energy. T he models do not capture refinery energy use in non

- process or o ff

- site activities (e.g., oil movements in and out of crude and product tankage.) The models’ estimates of energy use in the individual refining processes
reflect the energy use coefficients specified for the various processes within the models. These

co efficients are based on information from technology providers (i.e., process developers and licensors)

– generally, the best information to be had. 22 

### However, i nformation from technology providers usually reflects best

- practice operation of new process uni ts at design conditions, and therefore probably understates actual energy consumption of the existing refinery capital stock in day

- to

- day refining operations.

In addition, the energy accounting framework differs in a few respects from that used by EIA in reporting regional refinery energy use, especially with respect to natural gas and power purchases. As discussed above, refinery purchases of natural gas used for fuel reported by EIA appear to include natural gas used for refinery power generation, with out adjustment for refinery sales of electricity to the grid

.

6 .5 CO 2 

### Emissions Accounting in the Refining Models

We use standard CO 2 

### emissions factors, shown in Table 6.1 , to convert computed volumes of purchased natural gas, refinery fuel gas stream s, FCC catalyst coke, and purchased power to refinery emissions of CO 2



### . ( The CO 2 

### emission s factor for electricity applies to the mix of fuels
used i n generating purchased power. The CO 2 

### emission s factor per K kWh of delivered power is about 0.638 MT.)

C onsistent with the discussion above, t he estimates of refinery CO 2 

### emissions reflect not only fuel consumption in all refining processes but also the natural gas used as feed for all on

- purpose hydrogen production (including that in merchant plants)

.

Table 6.1: CO 2 Emission Factors

Refinery Energy CO 2 Emission Factor

Source (Metric Tons/MM BTU)

Natural Gas 0.0531
Still Gas 0.0642
Petroleum Coke 0.1020 Purchased Electricity 0.0639

Note: The factor for purchased electricity reflects 50%/30%/20% sourcing from coal, natural gas, and nuclear + renew ables, respectively.

22 Information sourced by technology providers (i.e., process developers and licensors) can be obtained from articles

in journals and trade publications, papers presented at meeting, or private communications.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 24 

## 7

. R ESULTS OF THE 

## C ALIBRATION 

## , R EFERENCE 

## , AND 

## S TUDY 

## C ASES



### Exhibits C

- 1 through C

- 8 show the primary results of the analysis.

 Exhibit C

- 1 summarizes the primary effects of the NCG and 94 RON and 95 RON NCG standards on refining costs and operations for each region

– PADDs 1, 2, and 3 and California.

 Exhibits C

- 2 through C

- 7 show detailed modeling results for the Calibration, Reference, and Study cases for each region.

 Exhibit C

- 8 shows detailed supporting information for Table 1.3 (Section 1), which is a

summar y of the main economic results of the analysis.

 Exhibit C

- 9 compares selected results for the Calibration cases to reported information.

7 .1 Primary Effects of the NCG and the 94 RON and 95 RON NCG Standards

Exhibit C

- 1 summarizes the estimated effects of the NCG and single octane NCG standards on refining costs and operations for each region.

The top part of the exhibit pertains to costs and shows (1) changes in refining costs in $B/year and ¢/gal; (2) the offsetting value, in ¢ /gal, of the improved energy density of gasoline; (3) estimated refinery investments in billions of dollars; and (4) estimated investments, capital charges and fixed costs, and costs (in ¢/gal) associated with retrofitting existing FCC naphtha
desulfuriza tion units to meet the 10 ppm sulfur cap imposed by the NCG standard

. 23



### The bottom part of the exhibit pertains to refining operations and shows (1) changes in crude oil use per barrel of gasoline production; (2) changes in refinery energy use; and (3) changes in refinery CO 2 

### emissions.

All the effects on costs and on operations shown in the exhibit are calculated relative to the corresponding 2015 Reference cases.

Refining Costs

The refining costs of the standards, in ¢/gal of gasoline, are fairly similar in PADD 1, PADD 2, and PADD 3

– about 3¢/gal to 4¢/gal for NCG, 6¢/gal for 94 RON NCG, and 9¢/gal for 95 RON NCG. The increases in refining costs in PADDs 1

- 3 are somewhat offset by the indicated
increases i n gasoline energy density, valued at abo ut 3⁄4¢/gal, 11⁄4¢/gal, and 2¢/gal for the

23 These costs are incl uded in the refining costs reported in Exhibit C

- 1.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 25 

### respective standards. 24 

### The average net cost s of the gasoline standards in PADDs 1

- 3, after adjusting for the value of i ncreased gasoline energy density, are about 21⁄2¢/gal, 5¢/gal, and 71⁄4¢/gal for NCG, 94 RON NCG, a nd 95 RON NCG, respectively. The incremental costs of the successive standards are similar

– about 21⁄2 ¢/gal (accounting for the value of improved gasoline energy density).

Aggregate refining costs for PADDs 1

- 3 are about $31⁄2 billion , $61⁄2 billion , and $10 billion per

year for the respective standards. The aggregate net cost s of the standards, after adjusting for the value of improved gasoline energy density, are about $21⁄2, $51⁄4, and $73⁄4 billion per year for the respective standards.

Refining costs of the standards for California have a different profile. The estimated cost of the NCG standard is low, because most gasoline produced by California refineries in 2015 already will have low RVP and very low sulfur content , as required by the California RFG3 pr ogram

. On the other hand, the estimated incremental cost of moving from NCG to 94 RON NCG is
about 51⁄4¢/gal (after adjusting for the value of improved gasoline energy density), significantly higher than the 21⁄2¢/gal estimated for PADDs 1

- 3. And the estimat ed incremental cost of moving from 94 RON NCG to a 95 RON NCG is even higher

– about 71⁄2¢/gal (after adjusting for the value of improved gasoline energy density). The aggregate net cost of the standards would be about $ 0.1 billion , $ 1 billion , and $2 billi on per year , respective ly

.

Refineries in California would incur higher costs to meet the 94 RON and 95 RON NCG standards because California’s stringent gasoline standards, implemented through the Predictive Model, tightly constrain the blending space of C alifornia

- compliant

- gasoline; and because California’s summer gasoline season is about 8 months long, whereas the summer season in
PADDs 1

- 3 is about 6 months long. California refineries’ “least cost” responses to the 94 RON and 95 RON NCG standards would increase VOC, NOx, and toxics emissions, as calculated by the Predictive Model, because they would increase gasoline’s aromatics content and raise its T50 and T90 (the temperatures at which 50% and 90% of the gasoline boils off). California refineries

wo uld be forced to moderate such property changes or offset their effects by changing other gasoline properties in order to produce 94 RON and 95 RON NCG that compl ied with the California gasoline standards

.

24 Improvements in gasoline energy density increase vehicle fuel economy, leading to a reduction in aggregate

gasoline consumption by motorists at constant vehicle miles traveled. We estimated the value of improvements in gasoline energy density (in cents per gallon) as the percent improvement in energy density times the marginal refining cost of gasoline. Essentially, this is an estimate of the value of the resources (crude oil, power, fuel, etc.) saved in the refining sector from producing less gasoline.

We have not included reductions in marketing and distribution costs associated with reduced gasoline consumption, as they are small relative to the refining cost of gasoline. Nor have we included s avings obtained by motorists from paying less federal and state gasoline taxes and less marketing and distribution markups, because these are transfer payments (i.e., other parties

– government and private companies

– incur offsetting losses).Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 26 

### Refinery Investment

, Capital Charges

, and Fixed Costs

Estimated refining investment to support the NCG standard and the 94 RON and 95 RON NCG
standards is about $41⁄4, $5, and $8 billion , respectively. The investment cost of the NCG standard could be lower than estimated, depending on how many FCC naph tha desulfurization units outside of California already are capable of controlling sulfur to 5 ppm. ( In the 2015 Reference case, w e assume d that all California refineries produce ultra

- low sulfur gasoline to satisfy the CaRFG3

- A standards imposed through the newly

- amended Predictive Model.) In this analysis, we assumed that all FCC naphtha desulfurization units outside of California would have to be retrofitted to produce 5 ppm FCC naphtha. If none had to be retrofitted, our estimates of aggregate invest ments would be reduced by about $31⁄2 billion in PADDs 1

- 3. This would reduce aggregate refining costs (capital charges and fixed costs) by about $1 billion/year and refining costs per gallon of gasoline by about 1¢/gal.

The refining investments shown in E xhibit C

- 1 reflect “grassroots” investment economics, rather than “expansion” economics. Typically, the investment for expanding existing refining units is about half to two

- thirds the investment for adding the same capacity in grassroots units. To the

e xtent that refineries can expand existing units, rather than add grassroots units, our analysis may somewhat overstate the investment, along with capital charges, associated with the new gasoline standards.

Capital charges in the regional refinery models and in the cost analysis reflect an assumed after

tax rate of return on investment of 10%. Refiners often use higher rates of return for investment planning, but EPA typically uses lower rates of return (usually about 5%) when estimating the “social” (na tional) cost of fuel standards. Use of a 5% after

- tax rate of return on investment in the cost analysis , instead of 10%, would reduce estimated capital charges and fixed costs by about 25%.

Capital charges and fixed costs represent about 50% of the refin ing cost of the NCG standard, but only about 20% of the 94 RON and 95 RON NCG standards. They also represent a larger share of refining costs for all standards in PADD 1 than in PADD 2 or PADD 3.The bulk of the estimated refining cost of the 94 RON and 95 RON NCG standards in all regions arises from increased refinery energy use.

Crude Oil Use, Energy Use, and CO 2 

### Emissions

Estimated crude oil input per barrel of gasoline, refinery energy use (fuel and power), and CO 2 

### emissions increase progressively ac ross the Study cases in all regions.

 Crude oil inputs . For PADDs 1

- 3, crude oil inputs per barrel of gasoline progressively increase by about 0.01, 0.03, and 0.04 barrels per barrel of gasoline. For California, changes in crude oil use are larger, inc reasing to about 0.08 barrels per barrel of gasoline for 95 RON NCG. Crude oil inputs increase to offset volume losses associated with (1) removal of C4s, C5s, and naphthas from the gasoline pool; and (2) increase d volume and severity of reformer operatio ns.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 27 

###  Energy use . For PADDs 1

- 3, refinery energy use increases by about 3% for the NCG standard and by about 5% and 9% , respectively, for 94 RON NCG and 95 RON NCG standards. For California, increases in refinery energy are higher, reaching about 12% fo r 95 RON NCG. Refineries use more energy to support: additional crude oil throughput; expanded upgrading operations, primarily pen/hex isomerization and reforming; and additional fractionation. (We made no adjustments to estimated refinery energy use to account for changes in refinery inputs of crude oil and out

- turns of light gases, naphthas, and marketable coke.)

 CO 2 

### Emissions. For PADDs 1

- 3, refinery CO 2 

### emissions also increase progressively across the NCG and single octane NCG standards, by about 2% , 4%, and 6 % , respectively. For California, increases in refinery CO 2 

### emissions are higher, increasing by about 9% for 95 RON NCG. The percentage increases in refinery CO 2 

### emissions are lower than the percentage increases in energy use because, as NCG o ctane increases (1) relatively less refinery energy comes from burning catalyst coke (a high CO 2 

### energy source) and more comes from natural gas and refinery gases ; and (2) the additional hydrogen produced in more extensive and more severe reformer operatio ns reduces refinery calls for on

- purpose hydrogen, thereby reducing CO 2 

### co

- produced during on

- purpose hydrogen production.

7 .2 Detailed Modeling Results

Exhibits C

- 2 through C

- 7 show detailed modeling results for the Calibration, Reference, and Study ca ses for each region.

 Exhibit C

- 2 shows the use of in

- place refining process capacity; additions of new refining process capacity; information on fluid cat cracking, hydrocracking, and reforming operations; and refinery fuel use, energy use, and CO 2 

### emissi ons.

 Exhibits C

- 3a and C

- 3b show estimated refinery inputs and outputs.

In the Reference, NCG, and single octane NCG cases, the regional refining models are constrained to produce fixed volumes of all products, except light gases and petroleum coke

. Inputs of crude oil (the primary input) and light gases are priced 25 

### and allowed to vary. Volumes of other refinery inputs (natural gasoline, pyrolysis gasoline, naphtha, kerosene, heavy gas oil, and residual oil) are fixed. (Ethanol is treated somewhat d ifferently, as discussed in Section 5.3.)

The regional refining models respond to the imposition of NCG and single octane NCG standards primarily by adjusting refinery crude oil inputs, process capacity use, and process

25 Purchases of butane in the winter for all 2015 cases are capped at winter volumes in the 2007 baseline case. The

refining value of butane as a gasoline blendstock increases above prices projected using historical relationships between crude oil and natural gas pri ces and the price of C4s, particularly for the NCG and single octane NCG cases. We assume that infrastructure limitations would prevent significant increases in butane use in the winter.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 28 

### operations, but not by adjusting ou tputs of gasoline and other major finished refined products. However, we allow the regional refinery models to expand sales of C4s, C5s, coker naphtha, and FCC naphtha to comply with NCG and single octane NCG standards.

 Exhibit C

- 4 shows the estimated a verage properties for each gasoline type and for the entire gasoline pool.

In the Reference cases for PADD s 1

- 3, the gasoline pool properties that change most significantly are oxygen, aromatics, benzene, and energy content, and E200. The increase in

o xygen content and the decrease in aromatics content, energy content, and E200 are directly attributable to saturation of the gasoline pool with ethanol. Imposition of the federal MSAT2 standards causes the decline in benzene content. For California, the primary changes are reductions in aromatics and sulfur content. Aromatics content declines because the additional octane from increased ethanol blending reduces the call for high octane/aromatics reformate; sulfur declines to offset the increased NOx emis sions from blending ethanol at 10% in finished California RFG. (Note that Exhibit C

- 4 shows properties for CARBOB, not finished California RFG.)

In the NCG cases for PADDs 1

- 3, the primary changes in average gasoline pool properties (relative to the Refe rence case) are for summer RVP, summer aromatics, olefins, sulfur, and energy content. The increase s in aromatics and energy content occurs mostly to make up for the lost octane associated with removal of high RVP/high octane C4s in the summer, and partly to offset small octane losses associated with further reducing the sulfur content of FCC naphtha. The reduction in olefins occurs because of more stringent control of FCC naphtha sulfur. California gasoline pool properties do not change much in the NCG cases , because gasoline pool RVP and sulfur content in the Reference case are close to those of NCG.

In the 94 RON and 95 RON NCG cases for PADDs 1

- 3, the primary changes in average gasoline pool properties are in aromatics content, energy content, and E2 00. All of these
i ncrease because of the (1) increased use of reformate to produce higher octane gasoline and (2) the removal and sale of low

- octane C5 blendstock s. In California, the aromatics content of the gasoline pool increases significantly, refle cting increased blending of reformate needed to meet the 94 and 95 RON octane standard and to satisfy the 8 octane sensitivity standard. 26 

### To offset emissions increases associated with higher aromatics content, the California refinery model reduces the RVP of summer gasoline. (In the winter, the regional refinery model “reports” RVP lower and T50 higher than realized to facilitate compliance with the
amended PM

- 3.)

26 The octane sensitivity of California CARBOB in the NCG case is ab out 5.8. CARBOB’s low octane sensitivity

results from the relatively high proportion of alkylate and hydrocrackate in the gasoline pool. The octane sensitivity of CARBOB must increase to about 6.7 in the 94 RON and 95 RON NCG cases in order for finished California RFG to have an octane sensitivity of 8. Thus, in California, unlike the other regions, the octane sensitivity standard of 8 partially drives the increase in use of reformate in gasoline.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 29 

### For PADDs 1

- 3, the aromatics content of gasoline declines from the 2007 Calibration case to the 2015 Reference case because of the saturation of the gasoline pool to E10. The aromatics content of gasoline then progressively increases in the NCG, 94 RON NCG, and 95 RON NCG cases, so that it returns near to the average level in 2007. The modelin g results show the same pattern for California, but with aromatics levels rising in the 94 RON NCG and 95 RON NCG cases to higher levels than in the 2007 Calibration case.

 Exhibit C

- 5 shows the estimated weighted average aromatics conte nt of the gasoline pools produced in PADDs 1

- 3

, California

, and the combined regions

.

For PADDs 1

- 3, the aromatics content of gasoline declines from t he 2007 Calibration case to the 2015 Reference case because of the saturation of the gasoline pool to E10. The aromatics content of gasoline then progressively increases in the NCG, 94 RON NCG, and 95 RON NCG cases, so that it returns near to the average level in 2007. The modeling results show the same pattern for California, but with aromatics levels rising in the 94 RON NCG and 95 RON NCG cases to higher levels than in the 2007 Calibration case.

 Exhibit C

- 6 shows the estimated composition of each gasoline type and the entire gasoline pool.

In the Reference cases for PADD s 1

- 3, the most significant changes in gasoline pool composition are that (1) ethanol increases due to the RFS 2 mandate; (2) C4s decline in the summer because of RVP control needed to meet the 8

- hour ozone standards; and (3) reformate declines due to the octane boost resulting from the increase in ethanol blending. In the NCG Study cases, C4s decline further in the summer because of the reduction in RVP of the summer gasoline pool ; reformate increases to make up for the octane “lost” from summer RVP control and the desulfurization of FCC naphtha to 5 ppm, and to supply additional octane to meet the 94 RON and 95 RON octane standards.

In the Reference case s for California , ethanol content increases to 10%

, leading to a reduction in reformate. 27 

### In the Study cases, reformate increases progressively to supply octane “lost” due to RVP and sulfur control and to supply additional octane needed to produce 94 RON or 95 RON NCG.

 Exhibit C

- 7 shows the input prices used for crude oil, C4s

, and distressed gasoline blendstocks; the refining value of octane returned by the models; and differences between the refining value s and prices of volume

- constrained C4s.

For the 2015 Reference and Study cases, prices for crud e oil are constant year round

, whereas prices for iso

- butane and butane vary seasonally

– generally lower in the summer and higher in the winter.

As expected, the cost of octane increases relative to the Reference case in the summer NCG cases (due to th e reductions in octane resulting from RVP and sulfur control) and in both the

27 This is not reflected in Exhibit C

- 5 because the exhib it reports CARBOB, not finished gasoline, composition.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 30 

### summer and winter 94 RON and 95 RON NCG cases (due to the additional octane requirements).

 Exhibit C

- 8 shows the data used to calculate the estimated effects of the NCG and sing le octane NCG standards shown earlier in Table 1.3.

7 .3 Calibration of the Regional Model s

Exhibit C

- 9 compares the results of the Calibration cases with reported refinery operating data for 2007.

The regional refin ing models return crude oil inpu t volumes, charge rates for major processes, and coke make that are in relatively good agreement with reported volumes. 28 

### Gasoline pool properties returned by the models also are in reasonable agreement with those reported for 2004,
the most recent and mos t comprehensive regional data we have access to. Refinery energy use returned by the models is about 10% lower than the regional values reported by EIA, as expected.

Marginal refining costs for gasoline and distillate returned in the Calibration cases ge nerally are lower than reported market prices in 2007 for all regions. However, marginal refining costs have the same general relationship as market prices; that is, marginal costs for gasoline are higher than distillates in the summer and lower in the wi nter. In our experience, relatively small modifications in process capacity constraints, process yields, or required product output can change estimated marginal refining costs significantly, particularly when refining models become “capacity constrained. ” For example, increase s of about 2% and 4%, respectively, in gasoline and distillate output for the summer Calibration case for PADD 3 are sufficient to raise the marginal cost of producing gasoline and distillate close to reported market prices.

The se results indicate that the regional refinery models were reasonably calibrated to reported refining operations and were a useful starting point for developing the subsequent Reference and Study cases.

28 Hydrocracking charge rates were constrained to be no more than reported by EIA.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 31 

## 8

. S UMMARY OF THE 

## E FFECTS OF 

## NCG AND 

## S INGLE 

## O CTANE 

## NCG S TANDARDS

ON 

## R EFINING 

## O PERATIONS



### The technical and economic effects in the U.S. refining sector of the NCG and single octane NCG standards , delineated in Section 7 , stem from various changes in refinery operations that would be needed to produce gaso line to these standards. This section briefly summarizes the changes in refinery operations.

Exhibits C

- 10 a and C

- 10 b and Tables 8.1 a and 8.1 b ( shown below) s how key measures of refinery operations, refinery inputs and outputs, and gasoline properties and composition for the
R eference cases and for the NCG and single octane NCG Study cases , by region and by season.
The information in Exhibits C

- 10 a and C

- 10 b was developed from Exhibits C

- 2 through C

- 7 ; the
information in Tables 8.1 a and 8.1 b was devel oped from Exhibits C

- 10 a and C

- 10 b

.

Tables 8.1 a and 8.1 b show differences between the Study cases and the corresponding Reference cases in refinery operations, refinery inputs and outputs, and gasoline properties and composition. The se differences expl ain the economic effects presented in Section 7

.

In PADD 1, PADD 2, and PADD 3:

 Progressively increasing investment in refining process capacity is required to meet the standards. The NCG standard requires additional coking capacity; the 94 RON and 95 RON NCG standards require additional upgrading capacity (alkylation, isomerization, and reforming).

 Reforming charge rates and severity increase to support additional octane demands.

 Crude oil throughput and summer sales of “distressed” low

- octane gasoline blendstocks increase. Crude oil throughput increases to make up volume losses associated with the sale of additional C4s and “distressed” gasoline blendstocks and with expanded reforming operations. Sales of “distressed” low

- octane blendstocks i ncrease in the 94 RON and 95 RON Study cases to improve gasoline pool octane.

 RON, MON, CON and octane sensitivity increase in the 94 RON and 95 RON NCG cases. Octane sensitivity increases because the share of reformate in the gasoline pool increases (re formate has high octane sensitivity).

 The aromatics content, energy content, and DI of the gasoline pool progressively increase across the respective Study cases.

 The share of high octane blendstocks (alkylate, isomerate, and ref o rmate) in the gasoline pool increases progressively across the respective Study cases. Reformate shares increase in all region s ; isomerate and alkylate shares increase in some, but not in others.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 32 

### The response of the California refinery model to the NCG and single octane NCG s tandards is similar in terms of crude oil throughput, coker throughput, reforming operations, changes in octane and octane sensitivity, aromatics content and energy content of gasoline, and the share of high octane blendstocks in the gasoline pool. Howeve r, the California model sells different “distressed” gasoline blendstocks in the summer and maintains gasoline pool DI across the cases, largely because of emission standards imposed through the amended PM

- 3.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 33 Table 8.1a: Changes in Key Measures of Refinery Responses to NCG and Single Octane NCG Standards Relative to the Reference Case
Summer Season

PADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 California

94 95 94 95 94 95 94 95

NCG RON RON NCG RON RON NCG RON RON NCG RON RON
New Capacity & Operations New Capacity (K b/d) Hydrocracking -61 -140 -165 Coking 7 6 9 9 18 26 15 40 64 Alkylation 3 15 130 13
Pen/Hex Isomerization 36 200 142 Reforming 16 46 40 10
Coking Throughput (K b/d) 6 6 8 8 16 23 13 36 58 0 4 18
Fluid Cat Cracking Throughput (K b/d) -11 1 1 -7 13 29 -32 -26 22 -3 4 20
Conversion -0.9 -0.1 -0.1 -0.8 -0.5 -0.7 0.5 0.1 -0.8 -0.2 3.7 3.3
Hydrocracking Naphtha Out-turns (%) 8 5 4 -8 -3 1 2 -1 3 0 0 8
Reforming Charge Rate (K b/d) 23 31 47 76 142 174 130 248 429 9 62 132 Severity (RON) 0.9 4.1 4.8 0.0 2.9 5.7 0.4 3.0 3.7 -0.1 8.3 8.8
Inputs & Outputs (K b/d)
Crude Oil 10 22 32 47 101 142 102 195 257 -2 39 93

Excessed Material
C5s 6 14 27 37 25 114 Coker Naphtha 10 FCC Naphtha 30
Gasoline Properties & Octane
Octane
RON 0.1 1.0 2.0 0.1 1.8 2.8 0.1 1.6 2.6 -0.1 3.2 4.3
MON -0.1 0.7 1.7 -0.1 1.0 1.9 -0.1 1.1 2.1 0.1 2.4 3.3
CON 0.9 1.8 1.4 2.3 1.4 2.3 2.8 3.8 Sensitivity (RON - MON) 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.7 0.9 0.1 0.5 0.5 -0.1 0.8 1.0
Property RVP (psi) -0.3 -0.3 -0.4 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.1 -1.1 -1.1 -0.1 -0.2 -0.2 Aromatics (vol%) 1.1 3.0 4.1 1.4 4.3 6.7 1.9 4.2 6.1 0.3 6.6 7.8 Sulfur (ppm) -20 -20 -20 -12 -12 -12 -16 -16 -16 -3 -3 -4
Estimated DI 6 10 20 17 20 23 10 25 47 7 4 3 Energy Density (MM btu/b) 0.010 0.018 0.022 0.027 0.043 0.054 0.031 0.037 0.058 0.003 0.034 0.040
Gasoline Composition (%)
C4s -0.5 -0.5 -0.6 -1.8 -1.7 -1.6 -1.7 -1.5 -0.9 0.0 -0.6 -0.6 Alkylate 0.0 0.3 1.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 2.9 0.9 0.6 1.8
Isomerate 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 -0.6 0.0 4.2 3.0 -0.6 -0.2 -2.1
Reformate 2.2 1.6 2.3 2.1 4.2 4.4 2.5 4.2 5.8 0.9 3.2 8.8 Hydrocrackate -0.1 -0.3 -0.3 -1.9 -3.8 -3.7 -2.3 -2.7 -2.9 -0.9 -3.7 -2.9 FCC Naphtha -1.2 -1.0 -1.3 -0.6 0.3 0.7 0.1 -0.3 -1.4 -1.0 0.5 -4.3
All Other -0.3 -0.2 -5.5 2.2 1.0 0.8 1.2 -4.0 -6.5 0.7 0.1 -0.7Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 34 Table 8.1b: Changes in Key Measures of Refinery Responses to NCG and Single Octane NCG Standards Relative to the Reference Case
Winter Season

PADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 California

94 95 94 95 94 95 94 95

NCG RON RON NCG RON RON NCG RON RON NCG RON RON
New Capacity & Operations Coking Throughput (K b/d) 2 3 5 0 4 7 3 25 26 0 -4 7
Fluid Cat Cracking Throughput (K b/d) 18 20 11 0 4 -5 60 189 203 0 4 108
Conversion 0.2 0.6 1.1 0.0 0.2 0.3 -0.1 0.6 1.5 5.9 4.1
Hydrocracking Naphtha Out-turns (%) -0.3 -0.7 -9.5 0.1 0.7 -0.6 -0.6 -2.0 -2.0 -0.3 -0.5 -4.2
Reforming Charge Rate (K b/d) 29 37 51 -6 61 106 2 72 253 3 59 89 Severity (RON) -0.6 3.8 5.4 0.6 5.0 7.9 -0.7 2.8 3.1 0.0 6.0 7.7
Inputs & Outputs (K b/d)
Crude Oil 4 11 16 1 24 48 -5 83 114 0 16 36
Gasoline Properties & Octane
Octane
RON -0.1 1.2 2.2 0.0 1.9 2.9 0.0 2.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 4.2
MON 0.1 1.0 1.9 0.0 1.5 2.4 0.0 1.5 2.2 0.0 2.6 3.3
CON 1.1 2.1 1.7 2.6 1.7 2.6 2.8 3.7 Sensitivity (RON - MON) -0.1 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.4 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.8 -0.1 0.5 0.8
Property RVP (psi) Aromatics (vol%) -0.8 1.1 2.3 0.1 3.2 5.5 -0.4 2.1 3.7 0.4 4.0 4.0 Sulfur (ppm) -20 -20 -20 -11 -11 -11 -14 -14 -14 -2 -2 -2
Estimated DI 6 7 16 0 0 4 -2 10 37 0 3 -4 Energy Density (MM btu/b) -0.007 0.000 0.001 -0.001 0.015 0.024 -0.002 0.001 0.019 -0.001 0.019 0.030
Gasoline Composition (%)
C4s -0.9 -0.9 -0.9 -0.2 -0.3 -0.3 0.0 -0.5 -1.3 0.1 -1.7 -2.2 Alkylate 0.9 1.4 1.7 0.2 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.4 3.0 -0.1 3.2 6.4
Isomerate 0.0 0.0 3.7 -0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 3.8 2.9 0.6 -0.3 -2.5
Reformate 2.8 2.5 3.0 -0.3 1.9 2.6 -0.1 0.7 2.7 0.3 3.8 5.6 Hydrocrackate -0.3 -0.3 -0.3 0.0 -2.3 -2.3 -0.7 -2.8 -4.2 -0.4 -3.9 -8.3 FCC Naphtha -2.6 -2.2 -2.4 0.0 0.3 -0.1 0.5 2.6 2.4 -0.6 -0.7 1.3
All Other 0.2 -0.6 -4.8 0.6 0.0 -0.8 0.0 -4.3 -5.5 0.1 -0.5 -0.4Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 35 

## 9

. A DDITIONAL 

## C OMMENTS



### The following comments are intended to facilitate understanding of the nature, applicability, and limitations of the results of this analysis.

9 .1 Interpreting the Estimated Refining Costs

The various measures of refining sector costs defined in Section 2.1 and estimated in this study

are (appropriately) of particular interest to regulators and refiners . However, the se costs are not to be interpreted as indicators of corresponding changes in gasoline price s downstream of the refinery, including at the re tail level.

The costs estimated in this analysis are those that would be incurred in the production of NCG and the single octane NCGs. The se costs do not include any additional costs that may be incurred (or savings that may be realized) in the downst ream logistics system, from the refinery to the pump. Nor do they include any estimate of market conditions, such as supply/demand balances, that may prevail in a given period and influence retail gasoline prices in that period.

The results of the analy sis indicate that the largest components of the refining costs of NCG and the single octane NCGs would be the required increases in refinery crude runs and refinery

energy use. Consequently, the refining costs of NCG and the single octane NCGs would be a function of the prevailing crude oil price level. In particular, the costs estimated in this study correspond to an average crude oil price of about $100/Bbl.

Finally, the costs estimated in this analysis are regional (and seasonal) averages. Individ ual refineries within a given region may incur costs above or below the estimated regional averages, as discussed below.

9 .2 Refinery

- to

- Refinery Differences Affect Responses to New Standards

In complying with new regulatory program or standards, i ndividual refineries may experience different outcomes depending on their individual circumstances . In this instance

, these circumstances may include access to petrochemical markets as outlets for rejected refinery streams (C4s and C5s), the cost of exp anding existing or constructing grassroots process units, the extent of spare reforming capacity (if any), the ability to increase reformer operating severity, and the extent to which operations are constrained by the octane sensitivity of the gasoline poo l.

Accordingly, some refiners would incur high er costs (relative to the regional average) ; others would incur relatively low costs. Some refineries (most likely the low

- cost refineries) might respond to new gasoline standards by maintaining or possibly increasing gasoline out

- turns; other refineries m ight reduce gasoline out

- turns , and possibly other refined product out

- turns as well, because of high compliance costs.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 36 

### 9 .3 Holding Refined Product Volumes Constant in the Study Cases

Although refinerie s, in practice, may alter refined product out

- turns in response to new gasoline
standards , this analysis held the out

- turns of gasoline and other major refined products constant across the Reference and Study cases in each region (as discussed in Section 5 .3). In the Study
cases, t he regional refinery models respond to the imposition of NCG and single octane NCG standards primarily by adjusting refinery crude oil inputs, process capacity use, process operations, and sales of certain light products

– but no t by adjusting outputs of gasoline and other major finished refined products.

S pecifying constant product out

- turns across Reference and Study cases is customary in analyses of refining sector responses to new regulatory programs and standards. This ap proach is simple
in con cept, and it allows a straightforward and useful assessment of the refining costs of a regulatory program or standard . The approach would not be appropriate in an analysis of equilibrium market conditions, under which domestic refin ers and foreign suppliers compete to meet U.S. demand for refined products

. Such an analysis would have been well beyond the scope of this study.

An alternative approach for this analysis would have been to adjust the regional production volume s of gaso line in the Study cases so as to maintain the same gasoline pool energy content as in the Reference cases. This approach would have yielded somewhat lower estimated increases in energy use for the NCG, 94 RON NCG, and 95 RON NCG standards because (1) gas oline out

- turns would have be en reduced in proportion to the estimated increases in gasoline energy density and (2) gasoline is the most energy

- intensive of the refined products.

9 .4 “Over

- Optimization”

Our analysis relied on the use of regional ref ining models to assess the effects on the refining sector of possible NCG and single octane NCG standards. Regional models typically “over

optimize”

– that is, they return solutions indicating refining costs somewhat lower than can be realized in practice . Over

- optimization with a regional refining model is a consequence of implicit assumptions in such models that (1) each refinery in a region has access to all spare capacity in that region and (2) intermediate refinery streams and blendstocks may be tra nsferred among refineries at no cost to optimize refinery operations and meet product standards. The magnitude of over

- optimization in any given study is difficult to quantify.

Nonetheless, this analytic approach

– regional refinery modeling

– has been and remains the method of choice for analyzing the technical and economic effects of proposed regulatory programs and standards affecting refined products. Over

- optimization can be mitigated by good formulation practice and by designing studies such that the results of interest are in the
differences between cases (as in this study) as opposed to being in solutions returned in individual cases. In our view, this study yields estimates of the effects of the NCG and single octane NCG standards on the refin ing sector that are internally consistent and that reasonably represent the likely costs and effects of those standards.Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 37 

### 9

. 5 The Analysis Focuses on the Current U.S. Refining Sector

Our analysis establishes a consistent analytic and modeling framework sp ecifically to assess the effects on the current U.S. refining sector of the NCG and single octane NCG standards.

We did not attempt to model the U.S. refining sector as it may evolve in response to changes in crude oil price or the crude oil mix (e.g., th e likely increase in use of Canadian oil sands crudes)

,
n or as it may respon d to future s tandards , mandates, or market conditions by shutting down capacity. Including such possible scenarios in the analysis was beyond the scope of this study.

The anal ysis do es not address additional costs that may be incurred downstream of the refinery

– from the refinery gate to the pump

– in moving, storing, and distributing NCG and single octane NCG. Such costs would be low

– indeed, we think there likely would be cost saving s in the downstream

– because NCG and single octane NCG would replace existing gasoline types and would reduce the number of distinct gasoline types in commerce.

The analysis d oes not consider p rospective benefits of the NCG and single octane NCG

s tandards to automobile manufacturers. It is our understanding that the nationwide availability of NCG would improve emissions performance of the existing vehicle fleet; would allow automobile manufacturers to tailor engine designs in future v ehicles to a narrow and predictable range of gasoline properties, thereby enabling more economical and effective compliance with new emissions standards; and would enable use of improved emission control technology in future vehicles that is sensitive to t he sulfur content of gasoline

. It is also our understanding that the nationwide availability of single octane NCG with sufficiently high octane would enable use of advanced engine technologies that would facilitate meeting the stringent new federal fuel

e conomy standards.

9. 6 Regional Average Octane Values in the Reference Cases

T he estimated costs of the proposed Single Octane NCG standards are the dif ference s between the refining costs in the regional Reference cases and in the corresponding Study cases. This procedure a pplies the established methodology for assessing the effects of a new regulatory standard for fuels: analyze the refining sector first under “business

- as

- usual ” conditions (Reference case) and then under the same conditions plus the new standard (Study case).

In this approach, the estimated costs of the proposed standards depend, in part, on how the Reference cases are constructed. We developed the regional Re ference cases to represent, as best we could, prospective refining operations in the target year (2015), given energy market conditions projected by EIA and the set of fuel

- related regulatory standards that already are or would be in place by that time. M ost of the input elements that define the regional Reference cases, such as refined product demands, crude oil and refined product prices, gasoline and diesel fuel property standards, and ethanol blending levels, although important for establishing the
Ref erence cases, carry through to subsequent Study cases and so have little direct impact on the cost of meeting the Single Octane NCG standards. However, the octane levels in the Reference cases are another matter, because the estimated costs of the propose d Single Octane NCGSingle Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 38 

### standards depend critically on the octane differen tial between the Reference cases and the corresponding Study cases. If the octane levels in the Reference case were set higher than those used in this study, the estimated costs of the Single Octane NCG standards woul d be lower; correspondingly, if the octane levels in the Reference cases were lower, the estimated costs would be higher.

Exhibits A

- 17a, A

- 17b, and B

- 8 bear on the gasoline octane values used in this study. Exhibits
A

- 17a and A

- 17b provide our estimates of the average pool octane of the RFG and CG (all other) produced in each refining region. The estimates rely on data from: (1) EIA ( regular/premium grade splits and shipments of gasoline between PADDs); (2) CEC ( CARBOB octanes ) ; and (3) the Alliance’s North American Fuel Surveys ( grade octanes )

. Exhibit B

- 8 shows our projections of regional gasoline octane levels for 2015

.

The oc tane projections shown in Exhibit B

- 8 are based on the following assumptions.

 The r egular/premium grade splits reported in 2008 for each type of gasoline p ersist through 2015 in each region.

 The a verage grade octanes ((R+M)/2) for each grade of reformulated gasoline ( as estimated using Alliance survey data for 2006 to 2008) persist through 2015. That is, refiners would maintain their current practice for producin g ethanol

- blended RFG.

This assumption, in combination with unchanging grade splits, results in the projected pool

octane for finished reformulated gasoline in 2015 being the same as estimated pool octane in 2008 for all regions.

 Average octane ((R+M)/2) for each grade of CARBOB declines such that finished C alifornia RFG blended with 10% ethanol in 2015 has the same average octane as finished California RFG blended with 6% ethanol in 2008.

Th at is

, California refiners tak e advantage of the additional octane available from the 10% ethanol blending required in 2015, r elative to the 6% ethanol blending practiced in 2008. (The Predictive Model, used to demonstrate compliance with California RFG standards, creates strong incentives for ref iners to blend ethanol at 10% and to limit the aromatics content, and hence the octane, of gasoline.)

 The average octane of finished regular grade CG (all other) is lower in 2015 than the average over the period 2006 to 2008 in PADD 2

– 87.5 in 2015 vs. 88.3 in 2006

- 2008

– and in California (for sale outside the state)

– 87.5 in 2015 vs. 88.1 in 2006

- 2008.

The 87.5 octane assumed for 2015 is the average octane of finished, regular grade non

ethanol

- blended CG in the other regions of the country over 2006

- 2008. (This average
octane is about 0

– 0.3 octane numbers lower than the average octane over 2006

- 2008 of finished, regular grade ethanol

- blended RFG in PADDs 1, 2 and 3

– markets in which all gasoline was ethanol

- blended and refiners could produce RBOBs to take full advantage of ethanol’s octane.)Single Octane NCG Standard Final Report

O ctober 8 , 2010 39 

### That is, the transition from a non

- uniform marke t (in which both ethanol

- blended and

non

- ethanol

- blended gasoline was sold) to a uniform market (in which only ethanol

blended gasoline is sold) enables PADD 2 refiner s (and California refiners producing
ethanol

- blended CG for selected out

- of

- state markets) to tak e full ad vantage of ethanol’s

octane by uniformly produc ing sub

- octane CBOBs

.

 The average octane of finished regular grade CG remains at 87.5 in PADD 1 and PADD 3, and the average octane of finished premium grade CG remains unchanged in all regions.

That is, in PADDs 1 and 3, the octane of finished gasoline remain s the same as the regions mov e from a non

- uniform to a uniform ethanol

- blended market and is similar to
the octane of ethanol

- blended RFG in those regions.

The weighted average pool octanes for 2015, shown in Exhibit B

- 3, reflect the above assumptions . They also r eflect an assumed increase in shipments of premium grade gasoline from PADD 3 to PADD 2, and a corresponding decline in production of premium grade gasoline in PADD 2.

Underlying all the Reference case octane projections for 2015 is the assumption that, given the full saturation of the U.S. gasoline pool with 10% ethanol, refiners uniformly would take full advantage of the additional octane from ethanol by making compensating reductions in the
octane of sub

- grade CBOBs. This is consistent with the refining sector’s focus on cost minimization.

However, the availability of low

- cost octane from extensive ethanol blending might reduce some
refiner s ’ concern regarding “octane giveaway,” leading to regional average octane levels in 2015 higher than we projected. Had our Reference cases (representing “business

- as

- usual” refining operations in 2015) incorporated some degree of industry

- wide “octane giveaway,” the estimated costs of the proposed Single Octane NCG standards would be lower than those reported in this study.Single Octane NCG

Exhibit A-1: Estimated Aggregate Petroleum Refining Capacity, 2007 (K b/calendar day, except as noted)

Type of PADD PADD 4 & 5 Total
Process Process 1 2 3 ex Calif. California U.S.

Crude Distillation Atmospheric 1,589 3,640 8,440 1,860 1,918 17,447 Vacuum 638 1,457 3,890 655 1,115 7,756

Conversion Coking Delayed 44 363 1,192 136 349 2,085
Fluid 47 16 86 20 98 266
Other 39 22 61 Fluid Cat Cracking 692 1,187 2,943 354 682 5,858 Hydrocracking Distillate 225 618 131 362 1,336
Resid 39 122 160
Lube 51 38 89
Other 33 65 98 Visbreaking 12 10 22 Thermal Cracking 10 10

Upgrading Alkylation 97 246 581 78 176 1,177

Sulfuric 51 84 293 43 138 608
Hydrofluoric 46 162 288 35 38 569 Pen/Hex Isomerization 17 173 235 43 111 580 Reforming 294 851 1,756 314 421 3,635

Low Pressure 92 286 718 84 1,179
All Other 203 564 1,038 314 337 2,456 Polymerization 18 5 22 10 4 59
Dimersol 3 8 1 5 17

Ether Production MTBE 3 28 3 34
TAME 3 3

Hydrotreating Naphtha Feed 348 1,080 2,309 362 461 4,560 Naphtha/Aromatics Sat. 10 11 23 64 108 FCC Naphtha 321 335 1,095 81 119 1,951 Kerosene & Distillate 479 1,020 2,241 354 442 4,536
Distillate/Aromatics Sat. 18 85 45 148 FCC Feed/Heavy Gas Oil 44 542 1,400 99 598 2,683
Resid 10 244 254
Lube Oil 1 24 75 39 139
Other 16 3 224 11 65 319

Other BTX Plant 41 50 283 1 375
Other Aromatics 12 8 46 66
Butane Isomerization 38 24 107 26 47 242 Hydrogen (MM scf/d) Production 84 634 1,024 265 1,183 3,190 Recovery 31 178 684 119 120 1,132
Lube Oil 19 17 144 20 199 Solvent Deasphalting 20 16 200 35 59 330 Coke (K t/d) 5 19 70 6 19 119 Sulfur Recovery (K Sh t/d) 1.3 4.7 19.1 1.3 3.8 30 Asphalt 28 256 126 67 43 520

Complexity 9.0 9.5 10.7 6.9 13.2 10.2

1 Includes production and recovery. Sources: Capacity derived from "2007 Worldwide Refinery Survey," Oil & Gas Journal , Dec. 18, 2007; DOE 2007 Refinery Capacity Survey (DOE website); and Petrolum Supply Annual , 2007, EIA/DOE. Generalized Complexity Index Scores: Oil & Gas Journal , March 18, 1996, p. 74-80.

October 8, 2010 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit A-2:

Product/Source

Gasoline Refinery & Blender Production 2

Net Blendstock Purchases
Net Imports

Net Inter-PADD Net Adjustments
Production - Blndstk Purch 3
Net Imports Net Inter-PADD Shipments Shipments from Puget Sound Shipments from CA

RFG Refinery & Blender Production 2

Net Blendstock Purchases Net Imports

Net Inter-PADD Net Adjustments
Production - Blndstk Purch 3

Net Imports Net Inter-PADD Shipments Shipments from Puget Sound Shipments from CA

CG Refinery & Blender Production 2

Net Blendstock Purchases Net Imports

Net Inter-PADD Net Adjustments

Production - Blndstk Purch Net Imports Net Inter-PADD Shipments Shipments from Puget Sound Shipments from CA

Jet Fuel & Kerosene Refinery Production Net Imports Net Inter-PADD Shipments Net shipments from CA

Distillate Fuel Oil Refinery Production Net Imports Net Inter-PADD Shipments Net shipments from CA

Residual Oil Refinery Production Net Imports Net Inter-PADD Shipments Net shipments within P4&5

Other Products

Petrochemical Fdstk. Refinery Production Net Imports Net Inter-PADD Shipments

Lubes & Waxes Refinery Production Net Imports Net Inter-PADD Shipments

Asphalt & Road Oil Refinery Production Net Imports Net Inter-PADD Shipments Average Daily Supply of Major Refined Products, by Region (K b/d)

2007

PADD PDs 4&5 U.S.

12345 ex Calif 1 Calif. Total

3,331 2,614 1,412 293 1,625 901 1,017 9,275 1,763 2,103 3,345 288 1,490 692 1,086 8,989

879 200 -374 2 109 42 69 816

625 -1 51 63 1 62 738

239 154 -431 38 31 7

15 47 6 2 8 78 823 1,892 3,759 286 1,378 647 1,017 8,138
332 -8 -69 30 2 28 285 1,236 519 -1,864 5 105 110 1
-57 57
175 -175

1,275 412 318 1,087 70 1,017 3,092 1,276 412 367 1,053 68 985 3,108

551 100 -356 43 31 12 338

309 3 7 0 7 319

229 97 -362 36 31 5

13 3 3 19 664 301 763 1,007 34 973 2,735

-1 -14 -1 -1 -16

-35 35 35

-57 57

46 -46

2,056 2,202 1,094 293 538 831 0 6,183

487 1,691 2,978 288 437 624 101 5,881

328 100 -18 2 66 11 57 478

316 -1 48 56 1 55 419

10 57 -69 2 0 2

2 44 3 2 8 59 159 1,591 2,996 286 371 613 44 5,403

333 -8 -55 31 2 29 301 1,236 519 -1,829 5 70 75 1

130 -130

644 310 133 56 509 303 262 1,654

92 202 756 31 403 200 234 1,484
93 -7 -17 100 16 84 170
459 115 -606 25 6 31
55 -55

1,351 1,264 802 182 569 472 279 4,170

495 928 2,012 159 539 350 348 4,133
192 -166 8 1 -17 26 37 664 336 -1,044 15 29 43 1
95 -95

334 42 170 14 156 60 110 715
121 55 319 14 164 108 70 673
172 -3 -118 -8 -37 29 42
41 -10 -31
-11 11

27 48 559 1 9 3 7 643

18 39 334 1 7 2 6 399

5 5 233 2 1 1 244

4 4 -8

31 31 72 14 -3 17 147

18 17 141 17 0 17 191

-3 -3 -37 -2 -2 -44

16 17 -32 -1 -1

131 174 73 51 47 59 39 477

84 175 102 48 46 55 39 456

23 -6 3 1 4 21

24 -1 -23

Note: Increases in stocks are included in total product supplied and vice versa. 1 Includes refined products supplied by California refineries. 2 Includes "adjustments" reported by EIA for gasoline. 3 Adjusted for 10% ethanol blending with purchased blendstocks (5.7% in PADD 5). Source: Derived from Tables 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 & 26, Petroleum Supply Annuals, DOE/EIA.; CEC Refinery Reports; Prime Supplier Sales, EIA Website; Table M-21, FHWA; and Company-Level Import Data, DOE.

October 8, 2010 Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit A-3:

Net Inputs Crude Oil Natural Gas Liquids and LPG
Pentanes Plus Liquified Petroleum Gases
Normal Butane-Butylene Isobutane-Isobutylene Other Liquids Other Hydrocarbons/Oxygenates Other Hydrocarbons-Hydrogen Oxygenates 2

Fuel Ethanol

MTBE
Other Unfinished Oils Naphtha and Lighter Kerosene and Light Oils Heavy Gas Oils
Residuum Gasoline Blending Components Av-Gas Components

Process Feeds (K b/d) Catalytic Cracking Catalytic Hydrocracking Delayed and Fluid Coking

Crude Oil Qualities API Gravity (degrees) Specific Gravity Sulfur Content (wtg avg %) Annual Refinery Net Inputs and Outputs, by Region (K b/d)

2007

PADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 P45 ex CA CA US

1,745 3,456 8,138 1,394 1,944 16,640 1,513 3,226 7,315 1,361 1,741 15,156
16 92 247 55 8 419
49 98 3 21 171
16 43 150 52 -14 248

5 0 44 22 -14 58

12 43 106 30 190 215 137 575 -22 196 1,064

46 77 142 28 79 372

0 16 63 14 21 114

45 61 80 14 58 257

45 61 80 14 58 257

0 0

170 60 433 -42 72 693
32 19 25 -3 -16 57
-7 22 -33 -3 -12 -34
59 40 365 -31 94 526
86 -20 76 -5 7 145
-9 45
-1 0 0 -1

647 1,031 2,678 300 594 5,250

34 255 503 131 359 1,283 88 307 1,152 69 418 2,034

32.2 32.3 29.9 33.6 25.6 30.4
0.864 0.864 0.877 0.857 0.901 0.874

0.84 1.37 1.65 0.80 1.62 1.43

Note: Negative numbers indicate net production.

1 Estimated 2 Corresponds to RBOB, CBOB, and finished oxygenated gasoline production. Sources: Derived from (1) refinery input data from EIA Website; and (2) CEC Refinery Reports, 2005 - 2008.

October 8, 2010 Page 1 of 2 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit A-3:

Net Outputs Liquified Petroleum Gases Ethane-Ethylene

Ethane Ethylene Propane/Propylene
Propane Propylene Normal Butane/Butylene Isobutane/Isobutylene
Finished Refined Products 1
Finished Gasoline Outputs 2

Reformulated Motor Gasoline

with Ether

with Alcohol Non-Oxygenated Conventional Motor Gasoline

with Alcohol
Other Aviation Gasoline Kerosene-Type Jet Fuel
Kerosene
Distillate 0-15 ppm Sulfur 15-500 ppm Sulfur > 500 ppm Sulfur
CARB Diesel
Residual Fuel Oil
0-0.3 Sulfur
0.31-1.0 Sulfur Greater Than 1% Sulfur
Pet Chem Feedstocks

Naphtha

Other Oils Special Naphtha
Lubes
Waxes Petroleum Coke

Marketable Catalyst Asphalt and Road Oil
Still Gas
Miscellaneous

Fuel Use
Nonfuel Use Processing Gain Annual Refinery Net Inputs and Outputs, by Region (K b/d)

2007

PADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 P45 ex CA CA US

1,712 3,369 7,884 1,340 1,851 16,119
52 107 363 22 39 582

0 0 20 20

14 14

006 6 52 107 343 22 39 562

33 83 163 19 33 330

19 23 180 2 7 232 000 0
000 0 1,660 3,263 7,521 1,318 1,811 15,537

829 1,828 3,769 600 1,086 8,076 453 307 760 47 960 2,528

0 0 453 307 751 47 942 2,500

9 0 18 27 376 1,521 3,009 553 126 5,549

302 47 114 36 498 376 1,219 2,962 439 90 5,050 3 11 2 16 84 200 731 199 234 1,448

8 2 25 1 36 495 927 2,013 351 348 4,133 267 785 1,212 496 81 2,841

34 94 462 38 15 642
194 49 338 64 5 650

0 0 0 -247 247 0
121 55 319 108 70 673
40 0 32 6 3 81
55 5 25 31 20 136
25 51 262 71 46 455
18 39 334 1 6 399

18 31 151 0 0 200

8 183 1 6 199 1 5 35 1 42
17 14 132 0 17 179

1 3 9 0 12
53 140 462 39 129 823

20 97 345 23 99 584

33 43 117 16 31 239 84 175 102 55 39 456
65 137 334 - - 697

3 12 40 0 12 68

0001

3 12 40 0 12 68 -85 -190 -538 -183 -996

1 Excludes petroleum coke, still gas, and miscellaneous fuel use 2 Includes RBOB and CBOB volumes and associated oxygenate volumes. Sources: Derived from (1) refinery output data from EIA Website; and (2) CEC Refinery Reports, 2005 - 2008.

October 8, 2010 Page 2 of 2 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCGExhibit A-4:Product DescriptionNet InputsCrude OilPentanes PlusIso-butaneNormal ButaneOxygenatesMTBE (max)Fuel Ethanol for RFGFuel Ethanol for CGGasoline Blending ComponentsUnfinished OilsNaphtha & LighterKerosene & Light Gas OilsHeavy Gas OilsResiduumProcess Feeds (K b/d)Catalytic CrackingCatalytic HydrocrackingDelayed and Fluid CokingCrude Oil QualitiesAPI Gravity (degrees)Specific GravitySulfur Content (wtg avg %)Seasonal Refinery Net Inputs and Outputs, by Region(K b/d)2007PADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 PADD 45 ex CA CA USSummer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter1,796 1,751 3,489 3,409 8,119 8,051 1,482 1,460 1,910 1,916 16,841 16,5681,534 1,511 3,265 3,140 7,383 7,158 1,396 1,322 1,750 1,826 15,379 14,92955 36 98 97 3 5 20 23 175 16014 13 46 43 112 106 30 28 2 0 203 19026 67 116 40 16 25246 45 60 68 78 85 107 111 290 30946 45 30 31 74 78 93 97 243 2510 30 36 4 7 10 11 4 1 47 5822 -11 -10 51 37 61 24180 157 81 54 458 496 -47 -38 88 13 759 70833 21 22 22 36 28 -4 -1 -11 -31 76 42-8 -9 32 15 -36 12 -5 -14 -15 1 -27 1756 72 46 40 393 385 -31 -24 107 82 559 53698 73 -19 -22 65 71 -7 1 6 -38 150 113653 653 1,062 960 2,670 2,662 200 267 607 535 5,311 5,10333 32 258 254 514 509 134 134 368 376 1,317 1,30688 88 304 309 1,163 1,096 91 113 422 423 2,058 1,97432.3 32.2 32.4 32.3 29.8 29.6 33.7 33.8 25.7 25.5 30.5 30.30.864 0.864 0.863 0.864 0.877 0.878 0.857 0.856 0.900 0.902 0.874 0.8750.87 0.83 1.35 1.39 1.65 1.69 0.79 0.78 1.59 1.68 1.43 1.46October 8, 2010Page 1 of 2MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit A-4:Product DescriptionNet Outputs1Liquified Petroleum GasesEthane-EthyleneEthaneEthylenePropane/PropylenePropanePropyleneNormal Butane-ButyleneNormal ButaneNormal ButyleneIsobutane-IsobutyleneIsobutaneIsobutyleneFinished Refined Products1GasolinesReformulatedwith Etherwith AlcoholNon-OxygenatedConventional (incl. Eoh-blended)CARBOBAviation GasolineJet Fuel & KeroseneDistillate0-15 ppm Sulfur15-500 ppm Sulfur> 500 ppm SulfurResidual Fuel Oil0-0.3 Sulfur0.31-1.0 SulfurGreater Than 1% SulfurPet Chem FeedstocksNaphthaOther OilsSpecial NaphthaLubes & WaxesPetroleum CokeMarketableCatalystAsphalt and Road OilMiscellaneous, Non-fuel useSeasonal Refinery Net Inputs and Outputs, by Region(K b/d)2007PADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 PADD 45 ex CA CA USSummer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter1,752 1,722 3,415 3,330 7,870 7,860 1,326 1,309 1,844 1,856 16,251 16,06072 53 172 103 399 353 17 2368 39733 5690 0 0 0 19 19 20 1914 13 14 13000056 6651 51 106 103 342 344 20 2340 39562 55932 31 82 85 166 156 332 32619 20 24 18 176 188 230 23219 0 66 0 38 -10 -3 028150 -1019 63 401480 0 3 0 -3 -10 1 -102100 0 0 222100 0 0 221,679 1,669 3,243 3,227 7,471 7,507 1,309 1,286 1,776 1,817 15,518 15,490837 848 1,819 1,825 3,751 3,826 589 603 1,051 1,033 8,073 8,117459 445 303 314 757 783 28 0 1,549 1,546459 445 303 314 738 7831,500 1,5431928 0 49 3378 403 1,516 1,511 2,994 3,042 551 547 154 74 5,593 5,60539 57 869 960 931 9653 3 12 11 2 2 17 1689 95 198 203 751 756 202 191 225 282 1,474 1,519494 497 922 932 2,005 2,033 357 340 357 365 4,141 4,170273 264 792 817 1,211 1,366 252 243 337 358 2,871 3,05139 27 88 69 496 442 44 55 14 4 682 596182 207 42 46 298 225 60 43 5 3 588 523124 116 57 56 321 295 108 110 66 80 673 66239 48 0 0 32 28 90 83 78 8759 39 5 6 24 28 44 38 140 12326 29 52 50 265 240 67 71 455 45320 18 40 37 338 326 3 1 5 2 406 38420 18 31 29 154 141 1 1 205 1899 8 184 185 4 1 201 1951 0 4 3 34 43 1 1 40 4818 17 16 15 144 136 0 0 18 17 198 18753 57 140 141 467 452 40 38 132 124 835 81320 23 96 100 353 335 23 22 100 97 593 57833 35 44 41 114 117 17 15 32 27 242 23597 76 182 153 114 80 59 49 42 25 496 3870 -12 -12 13 13 0 21 Excludes petroleum coke, still gas., and miscellaneous fuel use.Sources: Refiney Net Inputs & Outputs, Downstream Feed Rates, and Crude Oil Qualities from EIA website andMonthly Refinery Reports, CECOctober 8, 2010Page 2 of 2MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit A-5: Distillation Curves and Whole Crude Properties for Regional Composite Crude OilsFractions & PADDProperties 1 2 3 Calif U.S.Volume (K b/d)1,541 3,297 7,260 1,798 15,242CRUDE FRACTIONSLPGs:Ethane 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001Propane 0.004 0.003 0.004 0.003 0.003Isobutane 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003Butane 0.010 0.010 0.009 0.010 0.010Naphthas:Very Light (C5-160) 0.045 0.047 0.046 0.032 0.045Light (160-250) 0.069 0.081 0.071 0.059 0.073Medium (250-325) 0.067 0.074 0.066 0.053 0.067Heavy (325-375) 0.051 0.048 0.046 0.035 0.045Middle Distillates:Kerosene (375-500) 0.129 0.127 0.122 0.104 0.121Distillate (500-620) 0.124 0.122 0.119 0.114 0.120Atmospheric Resid:Light gas oil (620-800) 0.162 0.162 0.158 0.167 0.161Heavy gas oil (800-1050) 0.168 0.170 0.167 0.199 0.172Resid (1050+) 0.098 0.063 0.055 0.088 0.070Asphalt (1050+) 0.069 0.089 0.132 0.132 0.107Total:1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000WHOLE CRUDEAPI Gravity31.2 32.1 29.8 25.5 30.2Sulfur (wt %)1.01% 1.35% 1.64% 1.50% 1.44%UtilitiesFuel (foeb/b) 0.015 0.015 0.014 0.014 0.014Steam (lb/b) 33.0 33.3 32.6 32.2 32.8Electricity (kWh/b) 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.88 0.850%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400Temperature (°F)

Percent OffPADD 1PADD 2PADD 3CaliforniaU.S.October 8, 2010MathProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit A-6a: Reported Refinery Fuel Use, by PADD

MM btu/ Region Type of Fuel fuel unit

U.S. Energy Use (Trillion btu) Crude Oil (K bbl) 5.8 LPG's (K bbl) 3.8 Distillate (K bbl) 5.8 Residual Fuel (K bbl) 6.3 Still Gas (K foeb @ 6.0MM btu/foeb) 6.0 Marketable Petroleum Coke (K bbl) 6.02 Catalyst Petroleum Coke (K bbl) 6.02 Other Products (K bbl) 1 5.25 Natural Gas (million cf) 1.1 Coal (K short tons) 21 Purchased Electricity (Million Kwh) 9.977 Purchased Steam (million lbs) 1.3

PADD 1 Energy Use (Trillion btu) Crude Oil (K bbl) 5.8 LPG's (K bbl) 3.8 Distillate (K bbl) 5.8 Residual Fuel (K bbl) 6.3 Still Gas (K foeb @ 6.0MM btu/foeb) 6 Marketable Petroleum Coke (K bbl) 6.02 Catalyst Petroleum Coke (K bbl) 6.02 Other Products (K bbl) 5.25 Natural Gas (million cf) 1.1 Coal (K short tons) 21 Purchased Electricity (Million Kwh) 9.977 Purchased Steam (million lbs) 1.3

PADD 2 Energy Use (Trillion btu) Crude Oil (K bbl) 5.8 LPG's (K bbl) 3.8 Distillate (K bbl) 5.8 Residual Fuel (K bbl) 6.3 Still Gas (K foeb @ 6.0MM btu/foeb) 6 Marketable Petroleum Coke (K bbl) 6.02 Catalyst Petroleum Coke (K bbl) 6.02 Other Products (K bbl) 5.25 Natural Gas (million cf) 1.1 Coal (K short tons) 21 Purchased Electricity (Million Kwh) 9.977 Purchased Steam (million lbs) 1.3

PADD 3 Energy Use (Trillion btu) Crude Oil (K bbl) 5.8 LPG's (K bbl) 3.8 Distillate (K bbl) 5.8 Residual Fuel (K bbl) 6.3 Still Gas (K foeb @ 6.0MM btu/foeb) 6 Marketable Petroleum Coke (K bbl) 6.02 Catalyst Petroleum Coke (K bbl) 6.02 Other Products (K bbl) 5.25 Natural Gas (million cf) 1.1 Coal (K short tons) 21 Purchased Electricity (Million Kwh) 9.977 Purchased Steam (million lbs) 1.3 2005 2006 2007 2008

3,231 3,352 3,338 3,295
0000 4,175 2,656 2,663 2,930

755 434 420 472 2,207 2,018 1,844 1,390 238,236 249,358 247,106 237,161

2,242 458 648 364 87,410 90,034 87,367 81,447

5,329 6,327 3,704 3,840 682,919 697,593 667,986 710,500
41 34 39 43 36,594 39,353 41,829 42,682 63,591 70,769 99,022 98,769

305 285 295 284

0000
722 329 185 52
366 23 22 29 1,146 920 826 399 22,317 21,232 22,890 21,328

1,067 0 0 0 11,745 11,033 11,973 12,198
141 54 21 29 35,603 36,225 28,709 27,872
33 31 32 31 3,520 3,576 3,984 4,192 4,912 5,716 5,784 5,204

641 651 649 663

0000
779 567 842 804

50 45 47 44
163 206 189 194 50,213 49,585 49,429 48,882
0000 17,342 16,502 15,701 15,005

1,686 1,961 395 18 106,480 114,721 120,047 138,894
8 3 7 12 9,875 10,488 10,555 10,804 5,033 7,298 10,738 11,022

1,575 1,708 1,678 1,643
0000
359 277 208 516

86 111 115 107

4133 111,798 125,046 120,930 114,447
29 194 58 27 41,270 45,395 42,690 39,346

1,300 1,971 1,510 1,698 395,980 395,627 363,004 381,022
0000 16,620 18,612 20,433 20,675 34,738 38,999 63,471 63,756

October 8, 2010 Page 1 of 2 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit A-6a: Reported Refinery Fuel Use, by PADD

MM btu/ Region Type of Fuel fuel unit

PADD 4 Energy Use (Trillion btu) Crude Oil (K bbl) 5.8 LPG's (K bbl) 3.8 Distillate (K bbl) 5.8 Residual Fuel (K bbl) 6.3 Still Gas (K foeb @ 6.0MM btu/foeb) 6 Marketable Petroleum Coke (K bbl) 6.02 Catalyst Petroleum Coke (K bbl) 6.02 Other Products (K bbl) 5.25 Natural Gas (million cf) 1.1 Coal (K short tons) 21 Purchased Electricity (Million Kwh) 9.977 Purchased Steam (million lbs) 1.3

PADD 5 Energy Use (Trillion btu) Crude Oil (K bbl) 5.8 LPG's (K bbl) 3.8 Distillate (K bbl) 5.8 Residual Fuel (K bbl) 6.3 Still Gas (K foeb @ 6.0MM btu/foeb) 6 Marketable Petroleum Coke (K bbl) 6.02 Catalyst Petroleum Coke (K bbl) 6.02 Other Products (K bbl) 5.25 Natural Gas (million cf) 1.1 Coal (K short tons) 21 Purchased Electricity (Million Kwh) 9.977 Purchased Steam (million lbs) 1.3

California Energy Use (Trillion btu) Crude Oil (K bbl) 5.8 LPG's (K bbl) 3.8 Distillate (K bbl) 5.8 Residual Fuel (K bbl) 6.3 Still Gas (K foeb @ 6.0MM btu/foeb) 6 Marketable Petroleum Coke (K bbl) 2 6.02 Catalyst Petroleum Coke (K bbl) 6.02 Other Products (K bbl) 5.25 Natural Gas (million cf) 2 1.1 Coal (K short tons) 21 Purchased Electricity (Million Kwh) 9.977 Purchased Steam (million lbs) 1.3

Note: Electricity conversion factor represents btu's in delivered power adjusted for generati o 1 Gross heat of combustion of 5.25 MM btu/b taken from CEC data. 2 The volumes of marketable coke and natural gas used for energy by California refineries are larger than the corresponding volumes reported by EIA for all of PADD 5. The abov estimates, calculated as 80% of the numbers reported by EIA for PADD 5. estimates, calculated as 80% of PADD 5's reported energy use. Source: Derived from EIA Website and from data provided by CEC. 2005 2006 2007 2008

111 115 113 118

0000
24 15 13 49

0000
167 121 83 49 8,208 8,496 8,304 9,121

176 154 473 234 2,652 2,664 2,599 2,641

502 142 62 68 21,585 24,830 22,513 22,762
0000 1,601 1,704 1,744 1,886

952 757 1,191 1,010

599 593 602 586

0000 2,291 1,468 1,415 1,509

253 255 236 292
727 770 743 745 45,700 44,999 45,553 43,383
970 110 117 103 14,401 14,440 14,404 12,257

1,700 2,199 1,716 2,027 123,271 126,190 133,713 139,950
0000 4,978 4,973 5,113 5,125 17,956 17,999 17,838 17,777

483 474 484 468

0 0 0 0 1,706 1,015 978 1,043

155 78 72 90

0 0 0 0 40,795 39,824 40,314 38,394

776 88 94 82 11,675 11,704 11,675 9,935
4 6 5 6 98,617 100,952 106,970 111,960
0 0 0 0 3,096 3,244 3,335 3,343 12,508 12,712 12,598 12,555

ion efficiency and transmission loss.

s , as reported by CEC,

v e numbers are

October 8, 2010 Page 2 of 2 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit A-6b: Estimated Refinery Fuel Use, by PADD

Region Type of Fuel 2005 2006 2007 2008

U.S. Energy Use (Billion btu/d) 8,830 9,138 9,111 8,992 Natural Gas (K foeb/d) 1 304 317 316 334 Still Gas (K foeb/d) 2 629 655 649 624 Catalyst Coke (K b/d) 239 247 239 223 Power (MM Kwh/d) 3 152 154 160 162

PADD 1 Energy Use (Billion btu/d) 825 784 810 780 Natural Gas (K foeb/d) 21 19 13 11 Still Gas (K foeb/d) 59 56 60 56 Catalyst Coke (K b/d) 32 30 33 33 Power (MM Kwh/d) 12 13 15 16

PADD 2 Energy Use (Billion btu/d) 1,763 1,791 1,781 1,820 Natural Gas (K foeb/d) 56 62 63 71 Still Gas (K foeb/d) 132 130 130 129 Catalyst Coke (K b/d) 48 45 43 41 Power (MM Kwh/d) 29 31 31 31

PADD 3 Energy Use (Billion btu/d) 4,355 4,691 4,627 4,533 Natural Gas (K foeb/d) 166 176 177 187 Still Gas (K foeb/d) 292 327 316 299 Catalyst Coke (K b/d) 113 124 117 108 Power (MM Kwh/d) 79 78 82 82

PADD 4 Energy Use (Billion btu/d) 305 311 310 324 Natural Gas (K foeb/d) 13 13 13 12 Still Gas (K foeb/d) 21 22 22 24 Catalyst Coke (K b/d) 7777 Power (MM Kwh/d) 4555

PADD 5 Energy Use (Billion btu/d) 1,577 1,561 1,581 1,536 Natural Gas (K foeb/d) 47 47 49 53 Still Gas (K foeb/d) 123 120 121 116 Catalyst Coke (K b/d) 39 40 39 34 Power (MM Kwh/d) 27 27 27 27

California Energy Use (Billion btu/d) 1,251 1,230 1,252 1,208 Natural Gas (K foeb/d) 25 25 27 30 Still Gas (K foeb/d) 109 106 107 102 Catalyst Coke (K b/d) 32 32 32 27 Power (MM Kwh/d) 21 21 21 21

Notes: Foeb defined as 6.3 million btu/b. 1 Calculated as the sum of energy (in foebs) from: (1) natural gas; (2) the minor categories of distillate, resid, marketable coke, other products, and coal; and (3) estimated natural gas used as fuel for purchased steam and hydrogen; less estimated natural gas used for refinery-based power generation. 2 Includes energy (in foebs) from LPGs and still gas. 3 Includes: (1) purchased power; (2) internally generated power not sold to the grid; and (3) estimated power used to produce purchased steam and hydrogen.
Source: Derived from: Annual Source and Disposition of Electricity for Non-Utility Generators, 2006 & 2007, EIA Website (EIA 906 & 920 Surveys); ARMS Modeling results for hydrogen production; and Exhibit A-6a.

October 8, 2010 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit A-7a: Estimated Refinery Energy Use, by PADD

Refinery Inputs, Outputs Average Region & Energy Use 2005 2006 2007 2008 2005-2008

U.S. Refnery Inputs (K b/d) 1 15,725 15,841 15,827 15,364 15,689 Refnery Outputs (K b/d) 2 15,266 15,367 15,416 15,021 15,267 Energy Use (Billion btu/d) 8,830 9,138 9,111 8,992 9,018
Fuel 7,314 7,606 7,518 7,377 7,454
Power 3 1,516 1,532 1,592 1,615 1,564

PADD 1 Refnery Inputs (K b/d) 1 1,710 1,630 1,659 1,593 1,648 Refnery Outputs (K b/d) 2 1,682 1,602 1,626 1,572 1,621 Energy Use (Billion btu/d) 825 784 810 780 800

Fuel 702 654 658 622 659
Power 3 123 130 153 158 141

PADD 2 Refnery Inputs (K b/d) 1 3,309 3,312 3,246 3,253 3,280 Refnery Outputs (K b/d) 2 3,222 3,236 3,176 3,185 3,205 Energy Use (Billion btu/d) 1,763 1,791 1,781 1,820 1,789
Fuel 1,471 1,482 1,476 1,507 1,484
Power 3 292 310 306 313 305

PADD 3 Refnery Inputs (K b/d) 1 7,441 7,655 7,755 7,343 7,549 Refnery Outputs (K b/d) 2 7,215 7,400 7,560 7,180 7,339 Energy Use (Billion btu/d) 4,355 4,691 4,627 4,533 4,552
Fuel 3,569 3,915 3,812 3,711 3,751
Power 3 787 777 816 822 800

PADD 4 Refnery Inputs (K b/d) 1 562 556 546 540 551 Refnery Outputs (K b/d) 2 543 537 525 520 531 Energy Use (Billion btu/d) 305 311 310 324 313

Fuel 261 264 263 272 265
Power 3 44 47 48 52 48

PADD 5 Refnery Inputs (K b/d) 1 2,702 2,688 2,621 2,634 2,661 Refnery Outputs (K b/d) 2 2,605 2,591 2,528 2,564 2,572 Energy Use (Billion btu/d) 1,577 1,561 1,581 1,536 1,564
Fuel 1,307 1,292 1,311 1,265 1,294
Power 3 270 269 271 271 270

California Refnery Inputs (K b/d) 1 1,928 1,904 1,841 1,866 1,885 Refnery Outputs (K b/d) 2 1,856 1,832 1,769 1,794 1,813 Energy Use (Billion btu/d) 1,251 1,230 1,252 1,208 1,235
Fuel 1,041 1,016 1,039 994 1,022
Power 3 210 214 214 214 213

Note: Excludes energy to produce power for sale to grid; iincludes estimated energy to produce purchased hydrogen. 1 Calculated as the sum of crude oil, heavy gas oils, and residuum imputs. 2 Calculated as the sum of liquified petroleum gases, finished refined products (excluding catalyst coke,still gas, & and miscellaneous fuel use), and output of gasoline and av-gas blending components (from refinery input table), less the sum of inputs of natural gas liquids, other hydrocarbons/oxygenates, naphtha and lighter materials, and kerosene & light oils. 3 Represents btu's in delivered power, adjusted for generation efficiency and transmission loss.
Source: Derived from Exhibit A-3 and A-6b.

October 8, 2010 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit A-7b: Average Per Barrel Refinery Energy Use, by PADD (Million btu per Barrel)

Average Region Refinery Energy Use 2005 2006 2007 2008 2005-2008

U.S. Per Refinery Input 0.56 0.58 0.58 0.59 0.57

Fuel 0.47 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48
Power 3 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.10 Per Refinery Output 0.58 0.59 0.59 0.60 0.59

Fuel 0.48 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49
Power 3 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.10

PADD 1 Per Refinery Input 0.48 0.48 0.49 0.49 0.49

Fuel 0.41 0.40 0.40 0.39 0.40
Power 3 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.09 Per Refinery Output 0.49 0.49 0.50 0.50 0.49

Fuel 0.42 0.41 0.40 0.40 0.41
Power 3 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.09

PADD 2 Per Refinery Input 0.53 0.54 0.55 0.56 0.55

Fuel 0.44 0.45 0.45 0.46 0.45
Power 3 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.09 Per Refinery Output 0.55 0.55 0.56 0.57 0.56

Fuel 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.47 0.46
Power 3 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10

PADD 3 Per Refinery Input 0.59 0.61 0.60 0.62 0.60

Fuel 0.48 0.51 0.49 0.51 0.50
Power 3 0.11 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 Per Refinery Output 0.60 0.63 0.61 0.63 0.62

Fuel 0.49 0.53 0.50 0.52 0.51
Power 3 0.11 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11

PADD 4 Per Refinery Input 0.54 0.56 0.57 0.60 0.57

Fuel 0.46 0.47 0.48 0.50 0.48
Power 3 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.09 Per Refinery Output 0.56 0.58 0.59 0.62 0.59

Fuel 0.48 0.49 0.50 0.52 0.50
Power 3 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.09

PADD 5 Per Refinery Input 0.58 0.58 0.60 0.58 0.59

Fuel 0.48 0.48 0.50 0.48 0.49
Power 3 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 Per Refinery Output 0.61 0.60 0.63 0.60 0.61

Fuel 0.50 0.50 0.52 0.49 0.50
Power 3 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11

California Per Refinery Input 0.65 0.65 0.68 0.65 0.66

Fuel 0.54 0.53 0.56 0.53 0.54
Power 3 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.11 Per Refinery Output 0.67 0.67 0.71 0.67 0.68

Fuel 0.56 0.55 0.59 0.55 0.56
Power 3 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12

Source: Derived from Exhibit A-7a.

October 8, 2010 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCGExhibit A-8: Reported Average Gasoline Properties, by Season,Gasoline Type, and Producing-PADD2004RFG CG PoolPADD --> 1 2 34&511234&511234&51Summer (K b/d) 492 247 819 329 1,620 2,951 534 820 1,867 3,770 534RVP (psi) 6.8 7.0 6.9 8.3 8.5 8.2 8.1 7.4 8.3 7.9 8.1Oxygen (wt %) 2.7 3.5 2.3 0.5 0.3 0.2 1.8 0.7 0.6MTBE (vol %) 8.2 8.7 0.4 0.0 0.8 5.1 0.0 2.5TAME (vol %) 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1ETBE (vol %) 0.0 0.0 0.0Ethanol (vol %) 3.2 9.4 1.6 1.3 0.9 0.0 2.4 2.0 0.4Aromatics (vol %) 21.0 18.9 18.7 28.5 28.4 27.3 29.1 24.0 27.2 25.4 29.1Benzene (vol %) 0.51 0.84 0.55 0.91 1.37 0.97 1.72 0.67 1.30 0.87 1.72Olefins (vol %) 13.7 5.3 11.4 13.2 8.7 12.1 10.2 13.5 8.3 12.0 10.2Sulfur (pm) 99 78 73 127 139 108 114 110 131 100 114E200 (% off) 47.0 46.6 48.8 43.7 46.6 44.6 44.8 45.7 46.6 45.5 44.8E300 (% off) 82.2 84.7 82.4 80.4 81.4 79.4 83.3 81.5 81.8 80.0 83.3API Gravity 57.6 58.8 58.7 57.3 58.3 58.1 58.3 57.5 58.4 58.2 58.3Winter (K b/d) 524 295 729 335 1,592 2,763 586 858 1,887 3,492 586RVP (psi) 13.0 13.3 11.8 13.2 13.2 11.9 12.6 13.1 13.2 11.9 12.6Oxygen (wt %) 2.4 3.3 2.1 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.0 1.6 0.8 0.5 0.0MTBE (vol %) 7.5 8.5 0.3 0.0 0.7 4.7 0.0 2.3TAME (vol %) 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2ETBE (vol %) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Ethanol (vol %) 2.7 8.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 2.1 2.3 0.2 0.0Aromatics (vol %) 19.8 17.3 18.0 23.9 25.0 23.9 26.6 21.4 23.8 22.7 26.6Benzene (vol %) 0.54 0.79 0.54 0.91 1.32 0.87 1.65 0.69 1.23 0.80 1.65Olefins (vol %) 14.3 4.9 11.4 15.9 8.6 12.1 9.6 14.9 8.0 12.0 9.6Sulfur (pm) 125 93 101 143 134 115 100 132 128 112 100E200 (% off) 53.9 58.4 55.9 50.3 52.1 49.7 50.7 52.5 53.1 51.0 50.7E300 (% off) 83.4 85.6 83.6 83.1 84.0 81.8 87.2 83.3 84.2 82.2 87.2API Gravity 61.2 63.2 62.2 61.6 61.9 61.7 61.8 61.4 62.1 61.8 61.81. Excludes California.Source: Derived from data provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.October 8, 2010MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit A-9: Average Properties of Gasoline Produced by U.S. Refineries (ex California), by Season and Gasoline Type2000-2006RFG CG Pool2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006Summer (K b/d) 1,748 1,734 1,744 1,756 1,846 1,732 1,591 5,308 5,378 5,630 6,034 6,014 5,629 5,975 7,056 7,111 7,375 7,791 7,860 7,361 7,565RVP (psi) 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.9 6.9 7.0 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 7.9 7.9 7.9 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Oxygen (wt %) 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.3 2.6 2.5 3.5 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.3 0.8MTBE (vol %) 9.0 8.9 8.7 8.7 7.3 6.8 0.1 1.6 1.7 1.7 2.1 2.0 1.6 0.0 3.4 3.5 3.4 3.6 3.3 2.8 0.0TAME (vol %) 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.1ETBE (vol %) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Ethanol (vol %) 1.2 1.2 1.5 1.7 3.2 3.2 9.5 0.9 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.6 1.9 0.0 1.0 0.9 1.1 1.2 2.0 2.2 2.0Aromatics (vol %) 19.3 20.1 20.2 19.7 19.7 20.2 19.0 28.4 28.1 27.9 27.3 27.9 27.6 28.4 26.1 26.1 26.1 25.6 26.0 25.8 26.4Benzene (vol %) 0.59 0.62 0.58 0.60 0.59 0.65 0.58 1.15 1.17 1.10 1.13 1.15 1.23 1.25 1.01 1.04 0.98 1.01 1.02 1.09 1.11Olefins (vol %) 10.7 11.7 10.5 10.9 11.2 11.8 10.9 11.7 12.5 12.0 11.7 11.2 11.8 11.2 11.5 12.3 11.6 11.5 11.2 11.8 11.1Sulfur (pm) 126 129 129 114 81 74 39 322 308 300 306 119 108 58 273 264 260 263 110 100 54E200 (% off) 47.6 47.2 47.5 47.8 47.9 48.6 46.7 45.2 45.2 45.0 45.2 45.2 45.7 45.0 45.8 45.7 45.6 45.8 45.8 46.4 45.4E300 (% off) 84.5 84.2 84.2 84.3 83.3 84.0 84.2 80.6 81.0 80.5 80.7 80.6 81.6 81.9 81.6 81.8 81.4 81.5 81.2 82.2 82.4T50 (°F) 205 206 204 204 205 202 210 212 213 214 213 213 211 213 210 211 212 211 211 209 212T90 (°F) 328 327 329 329 335 331 333 336 334 336 336 335 331 330 334 332 334 335 335 331 331API Gravity 58.9 58.5 58.6 58.7 58.3 58.5 58.1 57.7 57.5 57.7 57.0 58.1 58.4 58.2 58.0 57.7 57.9 57.4 58.2 58.5 58.2Winter (K b/d) 1,781 1,733 1,783 1,822 1,869 1,887 1,893 5,707 5,766 5,814 5,678 5,617 5,542 5,370 7,488 7,499 7,597 7,500 7,486 7,429 7,263RVP (psi) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Oxygen (wt %) 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.4 2.4 3.1 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.1 2.2 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 2.5MTBE (vol %) 8.1 8.0 7.7 7.5 6.7 6.4 2.9 1.3 1.5 1.3 1.4 1.8 1.2 0.5 2.9 3.0 2.8 2.9 3.0 2.5 1.1TAME (vol %) 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1ETBE (vol %) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Ethanol (vol %) 1.3 1.3 1.5 1.8 2.9 3.0 6.8 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.6 2.2 2.5 6.1 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.7 2.3 2.7 6.3Aromatics (vol %) 19.0 19.2 19.4 19.3 18.9 19.3 19.2 24.7 25.1 24.8 24.4 24.5 24.4 24.4 23.3 23.7 23.5 23.2 23.1 23.1 23.0Benzene (vol %) 0.65 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.62 0.66 0.66 1.08 1.13 1.07 1.08 1.09 1.16 1.20 0.98 1.02 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.03 1.06Olefins (vol %) 12.0 12.3 11.0 11.0 11.2 11.1 10.7 11.9 12.3 11.6 11.2 11.2 11.3 11.0 11.9 12.3 11.5 11.2 11.2 11.3 10.9Sulfur (pm) 204 191 194 174 107 86 43 296 298 295 259 121 99 55 274 273 271 238 118 96 52E200 (% off) 56.2 55.9 56.3 56.1 56.1 56.3 56.4 50.4 49.9 50.2 50.4 50.8 50.8 51.0 51.8 51.3 51.6 51.8 52.1 52.2 52.4E300 (% off) 85.8 85.5 85.5 84.9 84.7 85.2 85.2 83.4 83.2 83.1 82.9 83.3 84.0 84.3 84.0 83.7 83.7 83.4 83.7 84.3 84.5T50 (°F) 183 184 182 182 181 180 173 199 202 202 200 199 200 200 195 198 197 196 195 195 193T90 (°F) 319 319 323 327 327 325 326 326 328 328 329 327 325 323 324 326 327 329 327 325 324API Gravity 62.4 62.1 62.2 62.1 62.0 61.9 61.5 61.5 60.8 61.0 60.5 61.8 61.9 62.1 61.7 61.1 61.3 60.9 61.9 61.9 61.9Source: Derived from data provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.October 8, 2010MathProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit A-10a: Estimated Properties of Summer RFG, by PADD of Origin

Property 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

PADD 1 Refineries 1 RVP (psi) 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.9 6.9 6.9 Oxygen (wt%) 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.7 2.7 3.5 MTBE (wt%) 10.5 10.9 10.7 10.9 6.5 6.0 0.0 TAME (wt%) 0.9 0.8 0.7 1.0 0.1 0.3 0.0 Ethanol (wt%) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.4 4.4 10.2 Aromatics (vol%) 20.4 20.9 21.8 21.4 21.7 22.0 22.1 Benzene (vol%) 0.53 0.56 0.59 0.66 0.62 0.67 0.65 Olefins (vol%) 10.9 11.6 12.1 12.3 13.0 12.1 10.3 Sulfur (ppm) 118 108 101 90 82 65 43 E200 (%off) 47.6 47.0 47.5 47.2 47.6 47.8 45.8 E300 (%off) 84.8 84.4 84.2 83.8 83.5 85.0 85.5

PADD 2 Refineries 2 RVP (psi) 6.7 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.9 6.9 7.0 Oxygen (wt%) 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.6 MTBE (wt%) 2.2 2.1 0.6 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 TAME (wt%) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ethanol (wt%) 8.0 8.0 9.2 10.1 10.2 10.4 10.3 Aromatics (vol%) 17.8 19.4 18.6 17.9 18.5 17.5 17.3 Benzene (vol%) 0.76 0.77 0.71 0.70 0.80 0.82 0.80 Olefins (vol%) 5.4 6.5 6.3 6.6 6.2 5.3 4.9 Sulfur (ppm) 107 126 116 116 84 75 45 E200 (%off) 46.5 46.1 46.1 46.1 47.1 46.9 48.3 E300 (%off) 85.4 84.4 84.4 84.6 83.9 84.0 84.2

PADD 3 Refineries 3 RVP (psi) 6.8 6.7 6.8 6.8 6.9 6.9 6.9 Oxygen (wt%) 2.1 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.0 3.5 MTBE (wt%) 10.5 10.1 10.5 10.9 11.0 10.3 0.1 TAME (wt%) 1.1 1.1 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.0 Ethanol (wt%) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.1 Aromatics (vol%) 19.5 19.8 19.9 19.2 21.0 21.0 18.6 Benzene (vol%) 0.60 0.62 0.59 0.61 0.57 0.68 0.53 Olefins (vol%) 10.0 10.4 11.3 11.3 11.2 12.4 10.6 Sulfur (ppm) 156 145 147 132 71 78 41 E200 (%off) 49.1 48.3 48.9 49.9 49.0 50.5 47.8 E300 (%off) 84.0 84.2 83.6 83.6 81.9 83.2 83.9

Note: The estimates are developed by assigning cities included in EPA's area surveys to PADDs in which the gasoline likely was produced and then calculating a weighted average of gasoline properties (using relative city population). The area surveys do not distinguish between imported and domestically-produced gasoline. 2 Estimated from Missouri, Kentucky, Illinois, Indiana, & Wisconsin. 3 Estimated from Texas, Virginia, District of Columbia, & Maryland. Source: Derived from EPA RFG-Area Surveys, 2000-2006

October 8, 2010 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit A-10b: Estimated Properties of Winter RFG, by PADD of Origin

Property 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

PADD 1 Refineries 1 RVP (psi) - - - - - - - Oxygen (wt%) 2.0 1.9 1.9 2.0 2.7 2.8 3.5 MTBE (wt%) 10.0 9.8 9.7 8.9 5.5 4.9 1.1 TAME (wt%) 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 Ethanol (wt%) 0.3 0.1 0.1 1.1 4.9 5.5 9.5 Aromatics (vol%) 19.3 19.0 20.2 20.2 20.4 20.4 19.6 Benzene (vol%) 0.62 0.61 0.62 0.67 0.71 0.72 0.73 Olefins (vol%) 12.2 13.1 11.9 12.7 12.2 9.9 10.7 Sulfur (ppm) 149 145 142 139 114 84 46 E200 (%off) 56.3 57.2 56.7 56.4 56.5 56.6 58.3 E300 (%off) 86.8 87.5 86.8 86.4 85.3 86.1 87.0

PADD 2 Refineries 2 RVP (psi) - - - - - - - Oxygen (wt%) 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.7 MTBE (wt%) 1.5 1.4 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 TAME (wt%) 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ethanol (wt%) 9.0 8.8 9.4 10.4 10.5 10.6 10.7 Aromatics (vol%) 16.0 16.8 17.0 17.2 16.8 16.7 16.4 Benzene (vol%) 0.76 0.79 0.73 0.78 0.77 0.80 0.75 Olefins (vol%) 6.1 6.8 7.0 6.4 6.1 5.4 5.8 Sulfur (ppm) 237 224 225 197 99 91 45 E200 (%off) 59.1 58.5 59.3 58.7 59.4 57.6 59.3 E300 (%off) 85.4 85.0 85.1 85.5 85.0 84.9 85.4

PADD 3 Refineries 3 RVP (psi) - - - - - - - Oxygen (wt%) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.9 MTBE (wt%) 9.9 9.9 10.0 10.2 10.1 10.0 4.4 TAME (wt%) 1.1 1.2 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.3 Ethanol (wt%) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.9 Aromatics (vol%) 18.0 19.0 19.6 19.0 19.4 18.4 20.0 Benzene (vol%) 0.62 0.62 0.63 0.65 0.57 0.62 0.60 Olefins (vol%) 9.9 10.5 11.1 11.1 11.5 11.2 10.3 Sulfur (ppm) 231 221 223 208 105 84 46 E200 (%off) 54.8 54.4 55.2 55.7 55.6 56.8 55.5 E300 (%off) 84.9 84.3 83.9 83.7 83.4 84.9 84.1

Note: The estimates are developed by assigning cities included in EPA's area surveys to PADDs in which the gasoline likely was produced and then calculating a weighted average of gasoline properties (using relative city population). The area surveys do not distinguish between imported and domestically-produced gasoline. 1 Estimated from Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, & Delaware. 2 Estimated from Missouri, Kentucky, Illinois, Indiana, & Wisconsin. 3 Estimated from Texas, Virginia, District of Columbia, & Maryland. Source: Derived from EPA RFG-Area Surveys, 2000-2006

October 8, 2010 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCGExhibit A-11: Gasoline Produced by California Refineries --Volume and Average Properties, by Type and GradeSummer 20061California RFGTotalCARBOBFinished2Arizona CBG All Other FinishedPrem Reg Pool Prem Reg Pool Prem Reg 17.1% Pool Prem Reg 12.0% Pool PoolVolume (K b/d)161 724 884 170 767 937 1 53 54 21 116 137 1,127PropertiesRVP (psi) 5.6 5.6 5.6 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.7 6.7 6.7 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 7.0Oxygen (wt%) 2.0 2.0 2.0Aromatics (vol%) 23.7 24.8 24.6 22.5 23.5 23.3 22.3 25.8 25.2 25.7 30.3 30.9 30.8 30.8 24.3Benzene (vol%) 0.51 0.59 0.58 0.48 0.56 0.55 0.36 0.71 0.65 0.71 0.44 0.63 0.61 0.60 0.56Olefins (vol%) 6.1 5.9 5.9 5.8 5.6 5.6 2.2 11.1 9.6 11.0 6.7 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.0Sulfur (ppm) 7 10 10 7 10 9 6 22 19.4 22 5 26 23.7 23 12T50 217 214 215 214 210 211 220 217 218 217 227 222 223 223 212T90 309 312 311 307 309 309 321 321 321 321 315 332 330 330 312E200 (est) 39.2 42.5 41.9 43.3 46.4 45.8 35.0 42.5 41.2 42.4 37.6 43.2 42.5 42.4 45.3E300 (est) 88.0 87.0 87.2 88.9 88.0 88.1 85.5 85.5 85.5 85.5 85.6 79.0 79.8 80.0 87.0API Gravity 60.5 59.3 59.5 59.7 58.6 58.8 63.2 59.0 59.7 59.0 58.0 57.4 57.4 57.5 58.6Distillation (°F)IBP 103 106 106 91 100 100 95 93 93T10 151 149 149 152 142 142 136 132 133T30 184 180 181 193 174 174 185 156 160T50 217 214 215 214 210 211 220 217 217 227 223 224T70 249 252 251 254 255 255 264 277 275T90 309 312 311 307 309 309 321 321 321 314 331 328FBP 384 381 382 390 400 400 387 401 399OctaneMON 85.6 81.8 82.5 86.6 83.1 83.7 88.2 83.0 83.9 83.0 86.5 82.9 83.4 83.5 83.6RON 93.3 88.6 89.5 95.0 90.6 91.4 94.7 91.4 92.0 91.4 95.8 91.6 92.1 92.2 91.5CON 89.4 85.2 86.0 90.8 86.8 87.6 91.5 87.2 87.9 87.2 91.1 87.2 87.7 87.8 87.6Octane w 10% EthanolMON 84.7 80.7 81.4RON 91.8 86.9 87.8CON 88.2 83.8 84.61 The CEC Survey covered June 1 through September 30, 2006 (122 calendar days).Source: Derived from CEC 2007 Survey of California Refineries.October 8, 2010MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit A-12a: Estimated Average Gasoline Properties, by Gasoline Type and Producing-Region --Summer 2004-2008PADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 California2004 2006 2007 2008 2004 2006 2007 2008 2004 2006 2007 2008 2004 2006 2007 2008RFGRVP (psi) 7.0 6.9 6.8 6.8 7.0 7.0 7.1 7.6 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.9 7.2 7.4 7.0 7.0Oxygen (wt %) 2.7 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.2 2.1 3.3 3.4 3.4 1.7 1.2 1.8 1.9MTBE (vol %) 7.66 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00TAME (vol %) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Ethanol (vol %) 3.75 9.37 9.34 9.78 9.59 9.42 9.61 9.08 0.00 9.30 9.59 9.79 4.95 3.42 5.20 5.52Aromatics (vol %) 24.2 23.4 24.0 21.4 20.7 17.3 16.8 20.3 23.5 20.2 18.8 18.7 22.9 24.9 21.3 21.4Benzene (vol %) 0.52 0.63 0.69 0.60 0.77 0.82 0.68 0.83 0.55 0.60 0.56 0.58 0.61 0.65 0.59 0.57Olefins (vol %) 13.6 10.0 9.9 10.0 7.2 3.7 4.8 6.8 11.3 10.8 10.5 11.1 5.1 5.6 4.9 5.1Sulfur (pm) 95 33 28 29 97 38 27 26 80 39 21 25 19 19 13 13E200 (% off) 48.7 44.7 44.5 46.4 46.4 47.3 47.9 51.3 49.5 48.0 48.0 48.3 44.3 43.7 44.5 44.4E300 (% off) 82.5 84.2 83.6 86.9 83.0 83.5 83.2 85.0 81.6 83.0 83.6 85.3 87.3 84.7 86.9 88.2CGRVP (psi) 7.7 7.6 7.4 7.3 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.4 7.4 7.6 7.6 7.5Oxygen (wt %) 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.0 1.7 2.5 3.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.7MTBE (vol %) 2.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00TAME (vol %) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0Ethanol (vol %) 1.34 1.33 1.55 1.31 3.00 4.72 7.07 9.30 0.03 0.03 0.14 2.05Aromatics (vol %) 30.5 33.4 30.4 30.8 29.6 29.1 28.7 26.0 31.8 31.9 29.3 27.7Benzene (vol %) 0.71 0.90 1.04 0.81 1.19 1.37 1.24 1.15 0.97 1.13 1.09 0.95Olefins (vol %) 10.8 10.6 10.4 11.1 8.7 7.4 7.1 8.0 10.4 10.0 9.9 14.4Sulfur (pm) 113 40 35 29 154 62 36 39 92 38 37 30E200 (% off) 43.3 42.8 41.6 44.7 44.6 46.4 48.4 51.9 43.2 41.6 42.2 42.8E300 (% off) 80.7 81.0 82.2 84.2 80.6 81.9 81.8 84.1 79.6 78.9 79.6 81.3Note: Pool properties estimated using regional premium/regular grade splits for 2007.Source: Derived from Alliance North American Gasoline Surveys, Summer and Winter, 2004 - 2009.October 8, 2010MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit A-12b: Estimated Average Gasoline Properties, by Gasoline Type and Producing-Region --Winter 2004-2008PADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 California2004 2006 2007 2008 2004 2006 2007 2008 2004 2006 2007 2008 2004 2006 2007 2008RFGRVP (psi) 13.4 13.3 13.1 12.7 13.7 13.3 13.5 13.2 12.2 12.6 12.3 12.4 11.7 11.6 12.0 11.8Oxygen (wt %) 2.4 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.3 3.5 3.4 3.2 1.9 3.5 3.5 3.4 1.9 2.1 2.2 2.2MTBE (vol %) 5.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00TAME (vol %) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Ethanol (vol %) 3.71 9.99 9.93 9.81 9.51 9.99 9.81 9.01 0.00 10.09 10.09 9.62 5.53 5.90 6.27 6.31Aromatics (vol %) 21.7 22.0 18.6 19.6 17.4 16.6 15.1 19.2 19.7 19.3 17.5 18.2 20.6 20.3 20.5 20.1Benzene (vol %) 0.60 0.67 0.83 0.71 0.67 0.73 0.76 0.85 0.60 0.66 0.72 0.58 0.72 0.63 0.69 0.57Olefins (vol %) 11.7 10.9 13.0 10.1 6.1 6.2 6.6 5.1 10.1 9.3 10.4 9.0 4.5 5.2 5.2 4.1Sulfur (pm) 100 34 36 31 96 46 33 46 123 31 26 31 17 14 14 11E200 (% off) 54.9 55.0 56.2 57.6 58.8 57.9 57.4 59.1 58.0 56.4 56.8 56.8 50.4 50.4 50.2 52.0E300 (% off) 84.2 83.6 85.2 88.5 84.9 85.2 84.2 85.5 83.0 82.3 84.4 86.1 87.5 88.2 87.9 90.2CGRVP (psi) 14.0 13.5 13.3 12.4 13.2 14.5 14.6 14.6 12.6 12.4 12.2 12.2Oxygen (wt %) 0.0 0.0 0.7 3.5 0.9 1.9 3.0 3.4 0.2 0.1 0.2 1.8MTBE (vol %) 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.00TAME (vol %) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Ethanol (vol %) 0.00 0.00 1.96 9.89 2.54 5.33 8.46 9.57 0.20 0.21 0.51 5.24Aromatics (vol %) 30.1 27.3 21.9 20.2 22.1 22.7 21.0 22.3 25.8 25.0 26.4 23.7Benzene (vol %) 1.16 0.99 0.97 0.86 1.12 1.19 1.32 1.13 1.00 0.97 1.12 0.98Olefins (vol %) 5.6 11.0 11.5 8.8 6.6 7.7 8.6 8.1 10.3 11.5 11.4 10.1Sulfur (pm) 29 24 19 37 140 40 47 57 140 32 31 33E200 (% off) 48.0 48.4 52.2 57.3 48.6 56.3 59.1 60.1 50.0 50.0 50.1 51.9E300 (% off) 81.9 81.6 84.7 87.2 75.4 85.2 85.9 87.8 81.4 82.3 81.5 85.9Note: Pool properties estimated using regional premium/regular grade splits for 2007.Source: Derived from Alliance North American Gasoline Surveys, Summer and Winter, 2004 - 2009.October 8, 2010MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit A-13: Estimated Octane of Gasoline by Producing Region, Season, and Type and Grade of GasolineSummer WinterProducing Gas Premium Regular Premium RegularRegion Type Year RON MON (R+M)/2 RON MON (R+M)/2 RON MON (R+M)/2 RON MON (R+M)/2PADD 1 RFG Average98.3 87.2 92.8 92.6 82.9 87.7 98.4 86.9 92.6 92.8 82.6 87.72006 98.8 87.2 93.0 93.2 83.5 88.3 97.8 86.7 92.2 93.4 82.9 88.12007 98.3 87.2 92.7 92.5 82.6 87.6 98.7 87.5 93.1 92.4 82.6 87.52008 97.9 87.2 92.6 92.1 82.6 87.3 98.7 86.4 92.6 92.5 82.2 87.3CG Average98.6 87.3 92.9 92.3 82.7 87.5 98.3 87.6 92.9 92.2 82.8 87.52006 98.2 87.0 92.6 92.2 82.7 87.5 97.7 87.3 92.5 92.0 82.7 87.42007 98.7 87.7 93.2 92.2 82.8 87.5 98.2 88.4 93.3 92.0 83.2 87.62008 98.8 87.3 93.0 92.5 82.6 87.6 99.0 87.2 93.0 92.7 82.5 87.6PADD2RFG Average97.6 87.9 92.7 92.0 84.0 88.0 97.8 88.1 93.0 91.9 83.3 87.62006 98.6 88.6 93.6 91.5 85.2 88.3 98.1 88.0 93.0 91.5 82.9 87.22007 96.1 87.1 91.6 92.0 83.6 87.8 98.2 88.5 93.4 91.8 83.3 87.52008 98.1 87.9 93.0 92.6 83.1 87.9 97.3 87.8 92.5 92.4 83.8 88.1CG Average98.2 87.6 92.9 93.4 83.5 88.5 98.0 87.6 92.8 93.1 83.4 88.22006 98.3 87.5 92.9 92.8 83.4 88.1 97.6 87.6 92.6 91.9 83.2 87.62007 97.9 87.6 92.8 93.6 83.6 88.6 98.0 87.7 92.8 93.4 83.3 88.32008 98.2 87.7 93.0 93.8 83.5 88.7 98.4 87.4 93.0 93.9 83.7 88.8PADD3RFG Average98.6 87.6 93.1 92.1 83.0 87.5 98.4 87.3 92.8 92.0 82.7 87.42006 99.0 87.8 93.4 92.1 83.1 87.6 98.1 87.7 92.9 91.7 82.7 87.22007 98.6 87.9 93.2 92.2 83.0 87.6 98.6 87.4 93.0 92.3 82.8 87.62008 98.3 87.2 92.8 92.0 82.7 87.4 98.5 86.7 92.6 92.1 82.6 87.4CG Average97.6 88.1 92.9 92.3 82.7 87.5 97.8 87.9 92.8 92.2 82.7 87.52006 97.5 87.8 92.7 92.1 82.5 87.3 98.0 87.8 92.9 91.9 82.6 87.32007 97.5 88.3 92.9 91.8 82.4 87.1 97.6 88.4 93.0 92.2 82.8 87.52008 97.9 88.2 93.1 93.1 83.2 88.1 97.8 87.5 92.7 92.5 82.8 87.6PADD 4&5CG Average96.8 86.4 91.6 91.1 82.5 86.8 96.8 87.1 91.9 90.9 82.7 86.82006 96.8 86.5 91.6 90.7 82.5 86.6 96.3 86.9 91.6 90.5 82.5 86.52007 97.1 86.7 91.9 91.1 82.2 86.7 96.6 86.9 91.8 90.7 82.7 86.72008 96.4 86.1 91.2 91.4 82.9 87.1 97.3 87.4 92.3 91.5 82.8 87.2California RFG Average95.9 86.9 91.4 91.5 83.1 87.3 96.1 86.6 91.3 91.9 83.2 87.52006 95.6 86.8 91.2 91.4 83.0 87.2 96.3 86.6 91.5 91.7 83.2 87.42007 95.9 87.0 91.4 91.6 83.1 87.3 96.1 86.6 91.3 91.9 83.5 87.72008 96.0 86.9 91.4 91.6 83.1 87.3 96.0 86.4 91.2 92.1 83.0 87.5Source: Derived from Alliance North American Gasoline Surveys, Summer and Winter, 2006 - 2009.October 8, 2010MathProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit A-14: Gasoline Grade Splits, by Consuming Region and Gasoline Type

Conventional & RFG Oxygenated Region Year Prem Reg Prem Reg

PADD 1 2000 24% 76% 19% 81%
2001 23% 77% 18% 82%
2002 23% 77% 18% 82%
2003 21% 79% 16% 84%
2004 19% 81% 14% 86%
2005 17% 83% 12% 88%
2006 15% 85% 11% 89%
2007 14% 86% 11% 89%
2008 13% 87% 9% 91%

PADD 2 2000 18% 82% 13% 87%
2001 17% 83% 12% 88%
2002 17% 83% 12% 88%
2003 16% 84% 11% 89%
2004 14% 86% 10% 90%
2005 13% 87% 10% 90%
2006 12% 88% 9% 91%
2007 11% 89% 9% 91%
2008 10% 90% 9% 91%

PADD 3 2000 19% 81% 15% 85%
2001 18% 82% 14% 86%
2002 18% 82% 14% 86%
2003 16% 84% 13% 87%
2004 14% 86% 11% 89%
2005 13% 87% 9% 91%
2006 12% 88% 8% 92%
2007 11% 89% 8% 92%
2008 10% 90% 7% 93%

PADDs 4&5 2000 16% 84% 16% 84%

ex CA 2001 16% 84% 16% 84%
2002 16% 84% 17% 83%
2003 14% 86% 16% 84%
2004 13% 87% 14% 86%
2005 14% 86% 13% 87%
2006 13% 87% 12% 88%
2007 14% 86% 13% 87%
2008 12% 88% 12% 88%

California 2000 19% 81%
2001 19% 81%
2002 20% 80%
2003 19% 81%
2004 18% 82%
2005 17% 83%
2006 17% 83%
2007 17% 83%
2008 16% 84%

U.S. 2000 21% 79% 16% 84%
2001 20% 80% 15% 85%
2002 20% 80% 15% 85%
2003 19% 81% 14% 86%
2004 17% 83% 12% 88%
2005 16% 84% 11% 89%
2006 15% 85% 10% 90%
2007 15% 85% 10% 90%
2008 13% 87% 9% 91%

Note: 60% and 40% of mid-grade allocated to regular and premium, respectively. Source: Derivived from Prime Supplier Sales, EIA Website.

October 8, 2010 Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit A-15: Distribution of Summer Gasoline, by Type of Gasoline and Region -- Current and Projected under the 8-Hour Ozone Standard

Gasoline Type

EtOH

Conven- Mandate Low RVP Federal Calif. Arizona Region tional (Minn.) 7.8 7.0 1 RFG RFG CBG Total

Current 44.9% 2.6% 14.9% 2.5% 23.2% 11.0% 0.8% 100.0% PADD 1 42.3% 14.2% 5.2% 38.3% 100.0%

Subdistrict 1A 12.3% 6.4% 81.3% 100.0%
Subdistrict 1B 30.3% 6.0% 63.8% 100.0%
Subdistrict 1C 58.7% 22.2% 10.3% 8.8% 100.0%

PADD 2 64.3% 6.9% 10.2% 2.9% 15.8% 100.0% PADD 3 45.6% 27.5% 4.5% 22.5% 100.0% PADDs 4 & 5 ex CA 59.0% 33.3% 0.7% 7.1% 100.0%
California 100.0% 100.0%
Projected 33.4% 2.6% 22.1% 5.5% 24.4% 11.0% 0.9% 100.0% PADD 1 27.2% 24.3% 4.9% 43.5% 100.0%

Subdistrict 1A 11.6% 7.2% 81.3% 100.0%

Subdistrict 1B 7.7% 28.2% 64.1% 100.0%

Subdistrict 1C 45.4% 26.0% 9.6% 19.0% 100.0%

PADD 2 43.9% 6.9% 19.2% 11.2% 18.9% 100.0% PADD 3 45.4% 26.0% 4.6% 24.0% 100.0% PADDs 4 & 5 ex CA 43.9% 7.1% 40.1% 8.2% 100.0%
California 100.0% 100.0%

Note: Gasoline is classified by the area into which it is sold. Gasoline shares for the summer are estimated using annual dat a, on the assumption that relative sales of gasoline in geographic areas are the same across seasons. 1 Assumes small area with 7.2 RVP gasoline shifts to 7.0 RVP. Source: Derived from Exhibit B-8, "Refining Economics of a National Clean Gasoline Standard for PADDs 1-3," for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, MathPro Inc., 05/07/07; and Prime Supplier Gasoline Sales, 2007,

EIA Website.

October 8, 2010 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit A-16: Estimated Distribution of Summer
Conventional and Low-RVP Gasoline and Pool RVP, 2007

Gasline Distribution (%) Average

Conven- Low RVP RVP Region tional 7.8 7.0 1 Total (psi)

Within Region Use 73% 23% 4% 100% PADD 1 69% 23% 8% 100%

Subdistrict 1A 66% 34% 100%

Subdistrict 1B 84% 16% 100%

Subdistrict 1C 64% 24% 11% 100% PADD 2 84% 12% 3% 100% PADD 3 59% 35% 6% 100% PADDs 4 & 5 ex CA 64% 36% 100% California 0%
Refinery Production 73% 23% 4% 100% PADD 1 48% 52% 100% 8.1 PADD 2 86% 11% 3% 100% 8.7 PADD 3 70% 25% 6% 100% 8.3 PADDs 4 & 5 ex CA 52% 48% 100% 8.3 California 35% 65% 100% 8.0

Note: Average RVP reflects the effects of the 1 psi ethanol RVP waiver, except for low-RVP gasoline during July and August. Source: Derived from Exhibit A-14 and Exhibit B-6c, "Refining Economics of a National Clean Gasoline Standard for PADDs 1-3," for The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, MathPro Inc., 05/07/07.

October 8, 2010 

### Math ProSingle Grade NCGExhibit A-17a: Distribution of Refining Regions' Gasoline Production, EstimatedGrade Splits, and Pool Octane, by PADD -- 2007Supplying Share of Production Shipped To: Premium Pool OctaneRegion PADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 PADD 4 PADD 5 Grade Split RON MON (R+M)/2PADD 1Reformulated 100% 14.5% 93.5 83.4 88.4All Other 100% 10.9% 92.9 83.3 88.1PADD 2Reformulated 97% 3% 11.5% 92.6 84.2 88.4All Other 1% 95% 2% 2% 11.6% 93.8 83.9 88.9PADD 3Reformulated 35% 16% 38% 11% 13.1% 92.9 83.4 88.2All Other 48% 14% 35% 2% 2% 8.5% 92.7 83.2 87.9PADD 4-5 ex CAReformulatedAll Other 6% 86% 8% 13.4% 91.8 83.1 87.5CaliforniaCARBOB 100% 17.1% 89.4 82.4 85.9Reformulated 100% 17.1% 92.4 83.7 88.1All Other 100% 12.0% 93.5 83.4 88.5Note: The premium grade split includes 40% of the mid-grade share.Premium shares for conventional gasoline are adjusted to reflect no shipments of premium from PADD 3 to PADD 2Source: Derived from Exhibits A-10, A-12, A-13 & A-14; and Tables 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 34,Petroleum Supply Annual, 2007, EIA/DOE.October 8, 2010MathProSingle Grade NCGExhibit A-17b: Distribution of Refining Regions' Gasoline Production, EstimatedGrade Splits, and Pool Octane, by PADD -- 2008Supplying Share of Production Shipped To: Premium Pool OctaneRegion PADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 PADD 4 PADD 5 Grade Split RON MON (R+M)/2PADD 1Reformulated 100% 12.9% 93.4 83.3 88.3All Other 100% 9.0% 92.8 83.2 88.0PADD 2Reformulated 97% 3% 10.4% 92.6 84.1 88.3All Other 1% 96% 2% 2% 11.1% 93.8 83.9 88.8PADD 3Reformulated 34% 13% 40% 13% 11.6% 92.8 83.4 88.1All Other 49% 14% 35% 1% 1% 7.9% 92.7 83.1 87.9PADD 4-5 ex CAReformulatedAll Other 7% 84% 9% 12.5% 91.7 83.1 87.4CaliforniaCARBOB 100% 15.7% 89.4 82.4 85.9Reformulated 100% 15.7% 92.4 83.7 88.0All Other 100% 11.1% 93.5 83.4 88.4Note: The premium grade split includes 40% of the mid-grade share.Premium shares for conventional gasoline are adjusted to reflect no shipments of premium from PADD 3 to PADD 2Source: Derived from Exhibits A-10, A-12, A-13 & A-14; and Tables 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 34,Petroleum Supply Annual, 2007, EIA/DOE.October 8, 2010MathProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit A-18: Refiner's Average Crude Oil Acquisition Cost, by PADD ($/b)

PADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 PADD 4 PADD 5 U.S.

2005 53.26 50.63 49.30 50.59 50.60 50.32 Summer 54.85 52.54 51.85 52.45 52.69 52.53
Winter 58.88 54.40 54.03 53.72 55.47 55.06

2006 63.58 59.51 59.42 58.05 60.91 60.10 Summer 67.81 64.83 64.01 63.65 63.34 64.83
Winter 58.05 54.12 53.62 51.74 53.47 54.28

2007 72.18 67.16 67.57 63.49 68.14 67.98
Summer 71.63 65.92 66.54 62.90 67.37 66.96
Winter 90.45 86.69 87.38 81.78 87.69 87.58

2008 96.47 95.20 93.44 89.84 94.78 94.30 Summer 118.62 116.59 114.22 111.33 108.80 115.47
Winter 49.43 47.96 47.51 43.27 41.11 47.73

Projected 2015 1 105.30 100.51 99.49 96.63 101.22 100.58

Notes: Summer season defined as April through September for PADDs 1-4 and U.S. and March through October for PADD 5. Winter season defined as October through March for PADDs 1-4 and U.S. and November through February for PADD 5. Winter season extends across years. 1 The projected U.S. crude oil acquisition cost is estimated as 1.04 times EIA's projected price of imported crude oils. Regional crude oil acquisition costs are estimated using the average ratios of regional to U.S. crude oil acquisition costs from 2005 to 2008. Source: Derived from Crude Oil Acquisition Cost, EIA Website; and Annual Energy Outlooks

, 2006-2009, EIA/DOE.

October 8, 2010 Math ProSingle Octane NCGExhibit A-19: Refined Product (and WTI) Spot Prices, by Region($/b)PADD 1 PADD 3 CaliforniaRegular Distillate Residual Regular Distillate Residual ResidualGasoline Kero EPA Heating Oil Gasoline Kero EPA Heating Oil WTI Regular Kero CARB OilCG RBOB Jet Diesel Oil (1% Sulf) CG RBOB Jet Diesel Oil (1% Sulf) Propane Cushing CARBOB Jet Diesel (1.8% Sulf)2005 65.46 71.86 70.26 68.10 41.51 66.76 71.83 70.59 68.04 38.20 38.33 56.49 74.21 73.27 75.01 45.43Summer 70.15 73.64 72.21 69.68 42.79 72.20 73.29 72.50 69.56 40.73 37.70 58.12 79.25 77.16 79.52 47.10Winter 68.45 78.08 76.39 73.18 48.03 69.10 78.87 77.69 74.01 44.22 42.18 61.63 71.25 76.19 77.00 52.192006 76.52 79.13 81.95 81.55 75.74 46.14 76.61 80.67 81.41 75.84 44.67 42.56 66.02 86.63 85.35 87.00 53.33Summer 84.70 89.24 87.70 88.00 80.45 48.13 85.09 89.60 86.26 88.10 80.77 46.74 45.28 70.41 92.11 87.47 89.82 54.70Winter 68.41 68.24 75.06 74.00 69.59 40.24 66.79 67.05 73.66 73.67 68.83 40.44 40.34 59.03 76.68 79.76 81.20 49.182007 86.49 87.60 90.92 89.18 85.33 54.07 85.59 87.42 89.46 88.89 84.30 55.67 50.72 72.32 96.25 92.31 94.07 63.15Summer 89.45 91.99 90.01 88.04 83.82 53.75 89.78 93.05 88.71 87.96 83.11 55.69 49.47 70.22 98.65 90.84 93.42 61.16Winter 98.99 98.37 115.28 112.80 109.97 70.72 98.28 99.20 112.73 111.63 108.09 71.44 62.46 94.35 104.37 113.41 110.50 80.562008 102.83 104.05 127.38 122.60 119.81 76.09 103.69 107.15 124.39 121.10 117.96 77.95 59.31 99.57 110.32 123.35 121.80 88.29Summer 126.01 129.45 152.83 146.91 143.36 93.67 128.94 134.78 150.59 145.89 142.25 96.50 71.02 121.00 127.10 139.93 138.80 101.14Winter 54.66 53.33 70.24 67.33 66.54 41.00 52.86 53.14 66.96 64.73 63.96 43.79 31.03 50.63 56.50 62.67 61.27 48.21Sources: Derived from Average Monthly Spot Prices, EIA Website; and Average Monthly Prices for CARB diesel, OPIS.October 8, 2010MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit A-20a: Seasonal Average Wholesale/Resale Prices for Reformulated Gasoline by All Sellers($/b)PADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 PADD 4 PADD 5 California U.S.Reg Prem Reg Prem Reg Prem Reg Prem Reg Prem Reg Prem Reg Prem2000 40.97 46.15 42.60 48.20 38.85 42.16 44.15 49.63 44.23 49.71 42.06 46.96Summer 42.85 48.23 45.22 50.95 40.87 44.21 46.25 51.65 46.42 51.82 43.88 48.90Winter 40.29 45.53 40.83 46.10 37.63 41.17 43.60 49.15 43.52 49.07 41.83 46.732001 37.22 43.24 40.53 46.28 35.38 39.44 41.66 47.57 41.75 47.68 39.03 44.54Summer 41.37 47.81 46.22 52.38 39.42 43.62 45.16 51.29 45.36 51.52 43.49 49.35Winter 27.17 32.91 29.69 34.98 25.91 29.97 27.69 32.98 27.59 32.90 28.66 33.922002 34.41 40.58 37.16 42.45 33.33 36.80 37.74 43.24 37.78 43.29 35.72 41.15Summer 36.35 42.57 39.78 45.35 35.36 38.89 39.88 45.40 39.94 45.47 37.94 43.42Winter 40.78 46.96 42.68 47.66 39.40 42.76 42.35 47.89 42.42 47.97 42.23 47.612003 42.23 48.36 44.37 49.37 39.93 44.04 48.87 54.40 48.78 54.35 44.45 50.04Summer 41.89 48.23 44.41 49.49 39.37 43.68 50.71 56.31 50.58 56.24 44.53 50.34Winter 44.09 49.98 45.46 50.25 41.73 45.75 47.60 52.96 47.45 52.85 45.72 51.152004 53.98 60.06 55.47 60.35 51.99 56.42 61.68 67.34 61.67 67.33 55.99 61.58Summer 56.29 62.74 58.04 63.07 54.32 58.74 64.49 70.07 64.50 70.05 58.04 63.61Winter 56.57 62.09 58.20 62.81 55.15 59.83 60.20 66.13 60.15 66.11 58.86 64.532005 69.63 76.78 71.17 75.79 69.65 74.12 74.98 80.73 74.81 80.59 71.51 77.80Summer 75.19 82.46 75.95 80.58 74.46 78.91 80.00 85.90 79.84 85.77 76.84 83.29Winter 72.28 80.32 74.24 78.93 73.89 78.18 72.91 78.47 72.66 78.26 74.07 80.662006 83.85 91.62 83.92 89.34 83.25 88.76 87.88 94.06 87.94 94.10 85.04 91.98Summer 95.69 103.99 95.55 101.19 94.33 99.97 93.90 100.23 94.06 100.35 96.63 103.89Winter 72.80 80.21 71.69 77.49 71.77 78.57 78.12 84.67 78.20 84.75 74.94 82.452007 90.67 99.28 93.27 99.80 90.31 98.90 96.87 104.22 97.09 104.42 92.77 101.07Summer 95.26 104.61 101.12 108.02 95.39 104.46 98.97 106.42 99.18 106.63 97.25 105.73Winter 100.64 108.40 100.43 106.76 101.10 110.10 103.95 111.07 104.10 111.20 101.86 109.682008 107.42 116.33 110.38 117.05 107.91 116.86 112.25 119.29 112.30 119.37 109.13 117.43Summer 130.68 140.01 135.83 142.53 131.90 140.88 128.92 135.95 129.04 136.10 132.84 141.17Winter 59.80 68.35 61.49 68.27 59.30 68.14 58.56 65.47 58.47 65.42 61.64 70.06Notes: Winter season runs across years; PADD 5 and California winter season runs from November through February.Source: Derived from Gasoline Prices by Formulation, Grade, and Sales Type, EIA WebsiteOctober 8, 2010MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit A-20b: Seasonal Average Wholesale/Resale Prices for Conventional Gasoline by All Sellers($/b)PADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 PADD 4 PADD 5 California U.S.Reg Prem Reg Prem Reg Prem Reg Prem Reg Prem Reg Prem Reg Prem2000 37.89 42.22 38.83 42.96 36.66 40.42 41.06 45.14 43.00 48.88 38.37 42.51Summer 38.93 43.56 40.21 44.49 37.79 42.04 42.51 46.58 45.01 50.73 39.63 44.04Winter 37.42 41.84 37.99 42.06 36.21 39.91 40.52 44.59 41.58 47.86 37.76 41.932001 33.89 38.62 36.36 40.52 33.19 37.23 38.58 42.86 39.46 45.56 35.11 39.42Summer 36.91 41.89 41.15 45.40 36.18 40.59 42.77 47.01 41.77 47.70 38.82 43.25Winter 25.82 30.06 26.63 30.77 25.24 28.77 29.28 33.64 28.67 35.19 26.34 30.442002 32.62 37.24 33.63 38.02 31.85 35.96 35.21 39.64 35.63 41.28 32.92 37.36Summer 34.21 39.05 35.55 40.08 33.54 37.92 37.52 42.00 37.35 42.87 34.69 39.33Winter 38.91 43.43 39.41 43.73 38.08 41.84 40.40 44.86 39.45 45.05 38.94 43.182003 39.57 44.03 40.60 45.09 38.80 43.03 42.58 47.03 43.91 49.91 39.97 44.44Summer 38.73 43.27 40.59 45.17 38.19 42.50 42.98 47.40 44.84 50.98 39.59 44.14Winter 42.15 46.43 41.94 46.41 40.64 45.22 43.43 48.00 43.90 49.44 41.77 46.352004 52.05 56.71 52.11 56.87 50.60 55.47 54.16 58.64 56.21 61.75 51.94 56.86Summer 53.77 58.56 54.25 59.22 52.50 57.67 57.21 61.57 58.76 64.21 53.98 59.07Winter 55.89 60.75 56.17 60.82 54.37 58.86 56.74 61.41 55.92 61.90 55.73 60.612005 68.33 74.10 68.83 73.84 67.42 72.33 70.37 75.13 72.87 78.76 68.62 74.05Summer 72.46 78.55 73.22 78.42 71.24 76.56 76.41 81.12 78.05 83.85 72.98 78.70Winter 72.19 78.01 72.13 77.13 72.09 77.44 71.49 76.26 69.95 76.02 72.21 77.712006 79.84 86.94 80.48 86.42 79.29 86.42 82.62 87.78 85.91 92.18 80.37 87.18Summer 88.82 96.63 90.08 96.31 88.57 96.04 93.50 98.80 91.48 97.95 89.79 97.09Winter 70.06 77.06 69.90 76.01 68.56 76.15 71.93 77.26 76.99 83.56 70.22 77.292007 88.77 97.13 91.28 98.30 87.22 96.46 92.67 99.35 94.15 101.39 89.59 97.80Summer 92.86 102.38 97.92 105.41 91.91 102.25 100.07 107.12 96.72 103.93 94.69 103.67Winter 101.26 109.07 100.76 107.89 99.25 107.52 101.00 108.31 102.04 109.37 100.68 108.542008 107.42 116.19 107.03 114.39 106.17 114.64 108.89 116.11 110.82 117.67 107.27 115.56Summer 130.67 139.51 131.17 138.70 129.11 138.09 134.80 142.07 127.29 134.09 130.90 139.41Winter 59.07 68.04 58.50 65.74 57.83 66.30 56.57 63.47 56.58 63.50 58.77 66.98Notes: Winter season runs across years; PADD 5 and California winter season runs from November through February.Source: Derived from Gasoline Prices by Formulation, Grade, and Sales Type, EIA WebsiteOctober 8, 2010MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit A-20c: Seasonal Average Wholesale/Resale Prices for No. 2 Diesel by All Sellers, by Sulfur Level($/b)PADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 PADD 4 PADD 5 U.S.15 to 15 to 15 to 15 to 15 to 15 to< 15 ppm 500 ppm > 500 < 15 ppm 500 ppm > 500 < 15 ppm 500 ppm > 500 < 15 ppm 500 ppm > 500 < 15 ppm 500 ppm > 500 < 15 ppm 500 ppm > 5002000 37.8 36.7 37.9 37.7 36.0 34.8 40.5 40.3 41.2 40.0 38.0 36.5Summer 36.4 35.1 37.6 37.4 35.4 33.9 39.7 39.4 41.0 39.9 37.1 35.5Winter 39.0 38.3 38.8 38.8 37.4 36.3 42.6 43.0 42.8 42.2 39.3 38.02001 32.1 31.5 34.7 34.4 31.4 30.3 36.7 35.7 34.6 33.6 33.3 32.2Summer 33.4 32.6 37.2 36.4 33.2 31.9 39.3 38.2 36.0 34.9 35.3 33.8Winter 25.6 24.9 26.8 27.2 24.5 24.0 27.5 26.6 25.0 23.6 26.0 25.32002 30.4 29.3 31.2 30.8 29.6 28.6 32.4 31.8 31.8 30.1 30.7 29.6Summer 30.8 29.7 31.7 31.2 30.1 29.2 33.3 32.6 32.8 31.0 31.2 30.2Winter 39.2 37.5 39.1 38.0 37.9 36.2 40.3 40.1 38.3 36.9 38.8 37.32003 37.7 36.3 37.8 37.2 36.5 35.0 40.5 40.6 39.4 38.7 37.7 36.4Summer 35.0 33.9 35.8 35.4 34.1 32.6 38.9 39.1 38.6 38.3 35.5 34.3Winter 39.4 37.5 39.2 38.9 38.5 36.8 42.1 42.4 42.5 40.5 39.6 37.92004 49.5 47.3 49.4 48.7 48.5 46.5 53.6 53.3 55.5 54.2 50.2 48.2Summer 48.0 45.8 48.6 47.9 47.4 45.2 54.6 55.2 57.8 56.5 49.6 47.3Winter 60.5 58.5 59.7 59.0 58.5 57.2 62.7 63.6 58.9 59.9 60.2 58.92005 72.3 69.3 73.4 72.1 72.1 69.1 77.7 79.5 76.5 77.1 73.5 71.3Summer 73.7 70.4 74.0 72.9 73.1 69.9 79.2 82.1 80.8 81.1 74.8 72.5Winter 79.6 75.7 81.6 79.2 80.7 76.1 85.0 85.3 77.9 76.4 81.1 77.82006 84.1 77.9 85.8 82.9 84.2 78.0 91.4 92.2 88.8 87.5 85.6 80.4Summer 90.4 82.7 92.8 89.4 90.9 83.6 99.4 100.4 91.7 90.7 92.4 86.4Winter 76.9 72.4 79.2 76.4 76.2 70.3 85.0 84.0 82.1 81.1 78.0 72.92007 92.9 91.3 88.1 94.3 93.1 92.3 91.6 90.2 86.6 100.3 99.4 95.2 93.5 93.6 93.7 91.4 88.7Summer 92.2 90.3 87.0 94.4 92.7 91.4 91.4 89.4 86.3 100.5 98.6 94.5 93.0 92.4 93.2 90.5 88.2Winter 116.4 114.3 112.7 114.9 114.0 116.8 112.3 113.0 110.1 118.4 119.6 110.9 109.7 111.1 114.5 113.7 111.82008 127.8 125.5 126.8 126.2 125.4 129.4 125.0 125.2 122.1 130.2 131.5 123.9 123.9 126.0 125.4 124.4Summer 151.4 149.5 150.7 149.7 148.6 153.8 148.7 149.1 145.3 155.4 156.5 141.2 141.8 150.0 149.3 148.3Winter 74.1 71.2 73.6 71.8 71.9 74.6 70.9 70.3 70.0 75.3 75.6 63.9 63.0 71.8 70.9 71.5Notes: Winter season runs across years; pink indicates California seasons.Source: Derived from No. 2 Distillate Prices by Sales Type, EIA WebsiteOctober 8, 2010MathProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit A-21: Spot Prices for C4s and C5s ($/b)

Mont Belview, TX Los Angeles
Iso- IsoButane Butane C5s Butane Butane

2003 28.13 29.02 30.72 Summer 25.08 26.36 27.87
Winter 31.25 30.75 33.90

2004 36.78 36.86 41.92 Summer 36.01 35.96 41.47
Winter 42.16 42.89 48.25

2005 45.85 48.39 52.92 46.73 58.93 Summer 44.46 47.63 53.12 37.99 54.80
Winter 51.79 54.77 57.81 55.48 63.06

2006 50.52 51.99 60.52 44.70 58.60 Summer 52.49 53.69 64.24 42.72 59.47
Winter 47.18 49.19 56.40 46.69 57.74

2007 59.73 62.55 70.55 57.93 77.24 Summer 58.04 61.65 70.04 45.95 66.97
Winter 75.53 77.16 86.93 69.92 87.51

2008 70.62 72.39 87.92 45.45 67.53 Summer 84.36 85.41 108.40 66.19 88.85
Winter 38.08 41.01 43.81 24.72 46.22

Projected 2015 1 77.26 79.35 94.33 67.02 88.66 Summer 75.09 77.14 94.33 60.50 83.88
Winter 79.44 81.55 94.33 73.54 93.45

Note: Winter season extends across years. 1 Projected prices based on a projected WTI price of about $104/b and historical relationships between WTI, C4 and C5 prices. Source: Average Monthly Prices for C4s and C5s, OPIS.

October 8, 2010 Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit A-22: Annual Average Price of Natural Gas to Industrial Users, by Region ($/mcf)

Projected Region 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2015 1

PADD 1 5.10 6.90 5.70 7.52 8.66 10.72 11.43 10.01 6.96 5.29
PADD 2 5.24 6.94 5.30 7.25 8.08 10.08 9.79 9.20 8.44 6.42
PADD 3 4.05 4.65 3.52 5.39 6.11 8.10 7.00 6.87 8.87 6.75
PADD 4 5.15 5.75 4.05 4.81 6.36 8.07 9.98 7.59 8.62 6.56
PADD 5 4.80 5.89 4.75 6.49 7.41 9.35 9.18 9.13 10.80 8.21
California 5.29 6.60 4.93 7.19 7.89 9.84 9.30 9.07 10.71 8.14
U.S. 4.57 5.60 4.33 6.15 6.99 8.98 8.49 8.08 8.95 6.80

Note: Regional averages are calculated by weighting state prices by the distribution of crude oil distillation capacity. 1 Projected regional prices are based on the projected U.S. price and regional to national price ratios in 2008.
Source: Derived from Natural Gas Prices, EIA Website; and Annual Energy Outlook, 2009 (April Revision), EIA/DOE..

October 8, 2010 

### Math Pro

### Single Octane NCG

Exhibit A-23: Average Price of Electricity to Industrial Users, by Region (¢/kwh)

Projected Region 2007 2008 2015 1

PADD 1 8.19 9.16 7.80
PADD 2 5.63 6.28 5.35
PADD 3 7.23 7.84 6.67
PADD 4 4.93 5.17 4.40
PADD 5 9.13 9.96 8.48
California 9.52 9.54 8.12
U.S. 7.25 7.92 6.74

Note: Regional averages are calculated by weighting state prices by the distribution of crude oil distillation capacity. 1 Projected U.S. price is based on A EO 2009's projected price of electrcity to industrial users times the ratio of the 2007 price in the above table to the 2007 price reported in A EO 2009 . Regional projected prices are based on the projected U.S. price and regional to national price ratios in 2008. Source: Derived from Table 5.6B, Electric Power Monthly , EIA/DOE.

A nnual Energy Outlook 2009 (April Revision) , EIA/DOE.

October 8, 2010 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit B-1: Petroleum Supply and Disposition -- Historical 2003-2007 and
AEO 2009 Reference Case Forecast for 2015 (K b/d, except as noted)

Petroleum Supply. AEO Projected Growth Disposition & Prices and Historical Forecast 2007-2015 Refining Capacity 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2015 Cumulative Annual

Suppl y Crude Oil 15,340 15,529 15,284 15,195 15,071 13,924 -7.6% -1.0% Domestic 5,690 5,468 5,191 5,102 5,067 5,420 7.0% 0.8%

Alaska 990 910 864 741 719 508 -29.4% -4.3% Lower 48 4,710 4,558 4,327 4,361 4,348 4,912 13.0% 1.5% Net Imports 9,650 10,061 10,093 10,093 10,004 8,505 -15.0% -2.0%

Natural Gas Plant Liquids 1,720 1,809 1,717 1,738 1,783 1,782 0.0% 0.0%

Net Product Imports 1,640 2,098 2,476 2,368 2,109 1,659 -21.3% -3.0% Imports 2,600 3,057 3,577 3,583 3,430 2,916 -15.0% -2.0%

Gross Refined Products 2 1,850 2,069 2,449 2,171 1,938 1,528 -21.1% -2.9%
Unfinished Oils 340 490 582 689 717 725 1.0% 0.1%

Ethers
Ethanol 10 6 46 22 2 -91.1% -26.1%

Biodiesel Gasoline Blending Components 3 410 488 540 677 753 661 -12.2% -1.6% Exports 960 959 1,071 1,215 1,321 1,257 -4.8% -0.6%

Other Inputs 1 440 341 396 363 721 1,489 106.5% 9.5% Domestic Ethanol Production 221 255 319 425 957 125.2% 10.7% Domestic Biodiesel Production 6 16 32 112 249.8% 16.9% Liquids from Gas - - Liquids from Coal 74 - - Liquids from Biomass 11 - - Other 120 141 27 264 336 27.0% 3.0%

Disposition Refined Products Supplied 20,060 20,760 20,798 20,655 20,650 20,021 -3.0% -0.4% LPG 2,074 2,132 2,030 2,052 2,085 1,860 -10.8% -1.4%
E85 0 0 1 1 1 53 na na
Motor Gasoline 4 8,940 9,105 9,159 9,253 9,286 9,342 0.6% 0.1% Jet Fuel 1,580 1,630 1,679 1,633 1,622 1,475 -9.1% -1.2% Distillate Fuel & Kerosene 3,930 4,058 4,118 4,169 4,196 4,339 3.4% 0.4% Diesel Fuel 3,043 3,210 3,467 3,763 8.5% 1.0% Other 1,075 959 729 576 -21.0% -2.9% Residual Oil 770 865 920 689 723 686 -5.1% -0.7%
Other 5 2,766 2,970 2,891 2,858 2,737 2,267 -17.2% -2.3%
Energy Prices ($2007 ) Crude Oil ($/b) Imported Low Sulfur Light Crudes 6 46.95 61.94 69.65 72.33 103.87 All Imported Crudes 32.73 40.61 53.57 62.33 63.83 96.77 Natural Gas ($/mcf)
Lower 48 Wellhead 5.84 6.35 8.34 6.66 6.22 5.45
Industrial End-Use 6.64 7.52 9.42 8.40 7.73 6.51 Electricity, Industrial End-Use (¢/Kwh) 6.10 5.93 6.26 6.45 6.35 5.91 LPG, Industrial End-Use (¢/g) 160.6 185.5 199.9 220.1

Domestic Refining Crude Distillation Capacity (K b/d) 16,800 16,947 17,126 17,339 17,441 18,219 Capacity Utilization (%) 93.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 78.0

Note: Projected growth rates are calculated using 2004 as the base year because of the impact of hurricane Katrina in 2005. 1 Includes alcohols, ethers, petroleum product stock withdrawals, domestic sources of blending components, other hydrocarbons, and coal and natural gas converted to liquid fuel. 2 Includes non-ether, gasoline blending components for 1999-2001. 3 Includes imports of ethers in 2002 and thereafter. 4 Includes ethanol and ethers blended into gasoline. 5 Includes aviation gasoline, petrochemical feedstocks, lubricants, waxes, asphalt, road oil, still gas, special naphthas petroleum coke, crude oil product supplied, and miscellaneous petroleum products. 6 The projected price for imported low sulfur light crudes is adjusted upwards based on the historical relationship between WTI and Imported crudes. Source: Derived from Year-by-Year Tables 1, 8, 11, 12, & 13, Annual Energy Outlook 2009 (April Revision), EIA/DOE; and Tables A11, A13, & A14; Annual Energy Outlook 2008 (and previous), EIA/DOE.



### October 8, 2010 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit B-2: U.S. Imports and Exports of Petroleum Products -- Reported 2003-2008 and Projected 2015 (K b/d)
Historical Projected Commodity 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2015

IMPORTS 2,599 3,058 3,551 3,537 3,408 3,105 2,916 Gross Refined Products 1,853 2,075 2,449 2,170 1,939 1,549 1,528 Natural Gas Liquids 271 306 374 360 276 275 304

Pentanes Plus 46 43 47 27 29 22 26 Liquefied Petroleum Gases 225 264 328 332 247 254 278

Finished Motor Gasoline 518 498 603 475 413 302 0

Reformulated 249 213 239 53 0 0 0
Other 269 285 364 422 413 302 0 Jet Fuel (incl. Kerosene, & Aviation Gas ) 115 130 199 191 220 105 100
Distillate Fuel Oil 333 326 329 365 304 214 419
15 ppm or less sulfur 4 112 175 121 314 15 to 500 ppm sulfur 135 149 152 77 13 17 0 > 500 ppm sulfur 198 178 173 176 116 76 105 Naphthas (for Petrochemical) 87 134 151 132 94 92 106 Other Oils (Petrochemical) 146 158 159 174 150 125 150 Special Naphthas 11 8 14 15 17 16 16
Residual Oil 327 427 530 350 372 350 357

< 0.31 wt% Sulfur 50 89 93 32 46 18 32
0.31 to 1.00 wt% Sulfur 100 141 175 79 89 62 76
> 1.00 wt% Sulfur 178 198 262 240 237 270 249 Asphalt & Road Oil 12 43 43 50 40 25 25
Lubricants & Waxes 8 12 15 19 20 23 21
Miscellaneous Products 100000 0
Petroleum Coke 22 33 32 40 32 22 31

Unfinished Oils 335 491 582 689 717 765 725
Ethanol 1 10 40 48 29 35 2
Ethers 44 39 9 8 0 0 - Gasoline Blending Components 367 452 510 669 753 791 661
Reformulated 90 228 318 286 239
Conventional 420 441 435 505 423

EXPORTS 1,014 1,024 1,133 1,292 1,405 1,778 1,257 Finished Petroleum Products 897 916 1,010 1,144 1,247 1,612 1,100
Finished Motor Gasoline 125 125 136 142 127 172 102 Special Naphthas 22 27 21 14 18 13 8 Jet Fuel , Kerosene, & Aviation Gas 28 44 55 44 50 67 39
Distillate Fuel Oil 107 110 138 215 268 530 314
15 ppm or less sulfur 0 0 0000 0 15 to 500 ppm sulfur 50 33 39 64 176 456 270 > 500 ppm sulfur 57 77 99 151 91 73 43 Residual Fuel Oil 197 205 251 283 330 356 211 Asphalt & Road Oil 10 6 11 15 19 23 14
Lubricants & Waxes 41 45 45 59 64 65 39
Miscellaneous Products 636767 4
Petroleum Coke 361 351 347 366 366 378 370

Natural Gas Liquids 59 46 60 68 70 101 80

Other Liquids 59 63 64 80 88 64 77 Other Hydrocarbons/H2/Oxygenates 29 30 42 72 71 47 63 Motor Gasoline Blending Components 30 33 22 8 17 17 14



### October 8, 2010 Page 1 of 2 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit B-2: U.S. Imports and Exports of Petroleum Products -- Reported 2003-2008 and Projected 2015 (K b/d)

Notes on derivation of projections:
IMPORTS -- EIA projection of net product imports plus exports from Exhibit B-1. Gross Refined Products -- EIA projection from Table B-1 Natural Gas Liquids -- sum of projected pentanes and LPG Pentanes Plus -- average of imports from 2006 to 2008 Liquified Petroleum Gases -- average of imports from 2006 to 2008 Finished Motor Gasoline -- assumed no imports of finished gasoline Jet Fuel -- set at 100 K b/d (projected use of jet fuel in 2015 is about 150 K b/d lower than in 2008 Distillate Fuel Oil -- projected gross refined imports less projected import volumes of all other refined products Distillate Fuel Oil <= 15 pmm -- assumed to be 75% of total diesel fuel imports with advent of low sulfur diesel standard Distillate Fuel Oil 15 to 500 pmm -- assumed to be zero Distillate Fuel Oil > 500 ppm -- difference between projected total distillate fuel imports and imports of ultra low sulf ur diesel Naphthas (for Petrochemcial) -- average of imports from 2006 to 2008 Other Oils (Petrochemical) -- average of imports from 2006 to 2008 Special Naphthas -- average of imports from 2006 to 2008 Residual Oil Total -- average of imports from 2006 to 2008 Residual Oil by Sulfur Content -- total imports times pro rata share over last three years Asphalt & Road Oil -- average of imports from 2006 to 2008 Lubricants & Waxes -- average of imports from 2006 to 2008 Petroleum Coke -- average of imports from 2006 to 2008 Unfinished Oils -- EIA projection from Table B-1 Ethanol -- EIA projection from Table B-1

Ethers -- assumed to be zero Gasoline Blending Components -- EIA projection from Table B-1

Reformulated/conventional volumes based on shares in 2008 EXPORTS -- EIA projection from Table B-1

Finished Petroleum Products: Total -- difference between DOE projection of total exports and projected exports of NGL and other liquids Specific Finished Products -- share of finished products less coke in 2008 times the projected finished products less coke Petroleum coke -- average of exports from 2006 to 2008 Natural Gas Liquids -- average of exports from 2006 to 2008 Other Liquids -- average of exports from 2006 to 2008

Sources: Derived from Tables 20 & 27 (2000-2004) and Tables 23 & 29 (2005-2008), Petroleum Supply Annuals, EIA/DOE. DOE Refinery-Level Import Data (for ethanol imports, 2003-2005); and Exhibit B-1.



### October 8, 2010 Page 2 of 2 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit B-3: Projected Growth in Volume of Refined Product Consumption, by Region
2007 to 2015

Region

Petroleum PADD P4&5 ex

Product 1 2 3 C A 2 Calif. Total

Motor Gasoline & E85 0.3% -1.3% 3.9% 8.1% 1.7% 0.6% Jet & Kerosene -9.0% -11.0% -8.0% -7.5% -8.7% -9.1% Distillate 0.4% 3.1% 6.1% 6.9% 5.6% 3.4% Residual Oil -3.1% -46.1% -6.2% 1.8% 8.3% -5.1% Petro Feedstock -17.2% -16.6% -17.3% -17.2% -17.2% -17.1% Lubes & Wax -25.0% -2.8% -19.3% 11.0% 21.6% -12.4% Asphalt -28.6% -7.5% -23.2% 5.6% 15.7% -12.4%

Sources: Derived from Table 11 and Supplement Tables 1-10, Annual Energy Outlook 2009 (April Revision), DOE/IEA ; Tables 48, 49, & 50 (Prime Supplier Sales), Petroleum Marketing Annual 2007 , EIA/DOE; Table M21, Federal Highway Statistics 2007 , FHWA;

October 8, 2010 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit B-4: Projected Annual Supply of Major Refined Products, by Region -- 2015 (K b/d)

PADD PDs 4&5 U.S.
Product/Source 1 2 3 ex Calif 1 Calif. Total

Gasoline & E85 2 3,341 2,579 1,467 974 1,034 9,395

E85 15 23 10 0 5 53

Gasoline 3,326 2,556 1,457 974 1,029 9,342 Refinery & Blender Production 3 3,326 2,556 1,558 974 1,029 9,444

Net Blndstk Purchases 4 2,231 530 -2,346 259 -25 647
Net Imports 586 0 0 0 62 647 Net Inter-PADD Shipments 1,645 530 -2,346 164 7 From Puget Sound 0 0 0 -57 57
From California 0 0 0 175 -175
Production - Blndstk Pur 5 847 1,968 4,165 686 1,058 8,724 Net Imports 0 0 -102 0 0 -102

RFG 1,447 483 350 80 1,029 3,389 Refinery & Blender Production 3 1,447 483 350 80 1,029 3,389

Net Blndstk Purchases 4 684 99 -596 36 16 239 Net Imports 235 0 0 0 4 239 Net Inter-PADD Shipments 449 99 -596 48 0 0 From Puget Sound 0 0 0 -57 57 0

From California 0 0 0 46 -46 0

Production - Blndstk Pur 5 687 373 1,012 40 1,012 3,123 Net Imports 0 0 0 0 0 0

CG 1,879 2,073 1,107 894 0 5,953 Refinery & Blender Production 3 1,879 2,073 1,209 894 0 6,055

Net Blndstk Purchases 4 1,547 431 -1,750 222 -41 409 Net Imports 351 0 0 0 58 409 Net Inter-PADD Shipments 1,196 431 -1,750 116 7 0 From Puget Sound 0 0 0 0 0 0

From California 0 0 0 130 -130 0

Production - Blndstk Pur 5 160 1,594 3,154 647 46 5,601 Net Imports 0 0 -102 0 0 -102

Distillate & Resid Jet Fuel & Kerosene 586 276 122 280 240 1,504 Refinery Production 87 192 736 195 234 1,444 Net Imports 33 -2 -6 6 30 61 Net Inter-PADD Shipments 466 87 -607 55 Net shipments from CA 24 -24

Diesel Fuel Oil 1,356 1,304 851 504 295 4,310 Refinery Production 495 928 2,072 356 354 4,205 Net Imports 191 36 -166 0 45 105 Net Inter-PADD Shipments 671 339 -1,054 44 1 Net shipments from CA 104 -104

Residual Oil 323 23 159 61 119 686 Refinery Production 121 33 208 108 70 540 Net Imports 172 0 -28 -36 38 146 Net Inter-PADD Shipments 30 -10 -20 0 0 Net shipments within P4&5 -11 11

October 8, 2010 Page 1 of 2 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit B-4: Projected Annual Supply of Major Refined Products, by Region -- 2015 (K b/d)

PADD PDs 4&5 U.S.
Product/Source 1 2 3 ex Calif 1 Calif. Total

Other Products

Petrochemical Fdstk. 22 40 462 2 6 533 Refinery Production 18 39 212 2 6 277 Net Imports 4 0 251 0 0 256 Net Inter-PADD Shipments 0 1 -1 0 0

Lubes & Waxes 23 30 58 -3 20 129 Refinery Production 18 17 91 0 20 147 Net Imports -2 -2 -13 -2 0 -18 Net Inter-PADD Shipments 7 15 -20 -1 0

Asphalt & Road Oil 93 161 56 62 45 418 Refinery Production 71 162 70 58 45 407 Net Imports 11 0 -4 4 0 11 Net Inter-PADD Shipments 11 -1 -10 0 0

Note: Increases in stocks are included in total product supplied and vice versa. 1 Includes refined products supplied by California refineries. 2 Finished gasoline and E85 consumed in the PADD. 3 Finished gasoline produced by refineries and by within-PADD blenders; includes 10% ethanol. 4 Gasoline blendstocks, RBOB, CBOB, and GTAB ex ethanol 5 Finished gasoline made from refinery-produced gasoline blendstocks; includes 10% ethanol. Source: Derived from Exhibits A-2, B-1, B-2, and B-3.

October 8, 2010 Page 2 of 2 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit B-5: Projected Annual Refinery Inputs & Outputs, 2015 (K b/d)

Inputs & Outputs PADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 P45 ex CA CA US

Inputs 1 1,760 3,576 8,249 1,489 1,939 17,013 Crude Oil 1,477 3,204 7,135 1,411 1,735 14,961 Natural Gas Liquids and LPG 17 96 251 59 7 430
Pentanes Plus 0 51 99 4 21 175 Liquified Petroleum Gases 17 45 152 56 -14 255
Normal Butane-Butylene 5 0 45 24 -14 60 Isobutane-Isobutylene 12 44 107 32 0 195
Other Liquids 267 276 863 19 196 1,621
Fuel Ethanol 96 213 424 69 109 911
Unfinished Oils 171 63 439 -45 72 701
Naphtha and Lighter 32 19 26 -3 -16 58 Kerosene and Light Oils -7 23 -33 -3 -12 -34 Heavy Gas Oils 59 41 370 -33 93 531

Residuum 87 -21 77 -5 7 146 Gasoline Blending Components 0 0 0 -5 15 10

Outputs 1,728 3,490 8,002 1,432 1,845 16,498 Liquified Petroleum Gases 52 110 368 23 39 593 Ethane-Ethylene 0 0 20 0 0 20 Propane/Propylene 52 110 348 23 39 573
Propane Propylene Normal Butane-Butylene 000000

Normal Butane Normal Butylene Isobutane-Isobutylene 000000

Isobutane Isobutylene

Finished Refined Products 2 1,676 3,380 7,634 1,409 1,806 15,905
E85 15 23 10 0 5 53
Finished Motor Gasoline 3 847 1,968 4,165 686 1,058 8,724
Reformulated 687 373 1,012 40 1,012 3,123 Conventional 160 1,594 3,154 647 46 5,601 Aviation Gasoline 0 3 11 2 0 16 Jet Fuel & Kerosene 87 192 736 195 234 1,444 Distillate 495 928 2,072 356 354 4,205
0-15 ppm Sulfur 300 913 2,015 349 104 3,681 15-500 ppm Sulfur 0 0 > 500 ppm Sulfur 195 15 57 7 0 275
CARB Diesel 250 250 Residual Fuel Oil 121 33 208 108 70 540

0-0.3 Sulfur 40 0 21 6 3 70
0.31-1.0 Sulfur 55 3 16 31 20 126
Greater Than 1% Sulfur 26 30 171 71 46 344 Pet Chem Feedstocks 18 39 212 2 6 277
Naphtha 18 31 96 0 0 145
Other Oils 0 8 116 2 6 132 Special Naphtha 0 4 27 1 0 33
Lubes & Waxes 18 17 91 0 20 147 Asphalt and Road Oil 71 162 70 58 45 407 Miscellaneous (nonfuel use) 2 11 31 0 14 60

1 Excludes hydrogen purchases. 2 Excludes petroleum coke, still gas, and miscellaneous fuel use 3 Includes RBOB and CBOB volumes and associated oxygenate volumes.
Sources: Derived from Exhibits A-3 and B-4

October 8, 2010 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCGExhibit B-6: Projected Seasonal Refinery Inputs & Outputs, 2015(K b/d)PADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 PADD 45 ex CA CA USInputs & Outputs Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer WinterInputs11,780 1,761 3,664 3,562 8,300 8,235 1,497 1,475 1,969 1,953 17,211 16,985Crude Oil 1488 1466 3267 3141 7246 7024 1449 1372 1698 1772 15,147 14,775Natural Gas Liquids and LPG 14 39 109 156 213 326 35 79 21 39 392 639Pentanes Plus 62 40 99 99 2 5 20 23 183 167Liquified Petroleum Gases 14 39 48 116 114 227 33 74 2 16 209 473Normal Butane-Butylene 0 26 0 71 0 119 0 44 0 16 0 276Isobutane-Isobutylene 14 13 48 46 114 109 33 30 2 0 209 197Other Liquids 278 256 288 264 842 885 14 24 250 142 1,672 1,571Fuel Ethanol 95 96 213 214 420 428 68 69 110 108 906 916Unfinished Oils 183 160 75 50 422 457 -49 -40 125 19 756 645Naphtha and Lighter 34 21 20 21 33 26 -4 -1-12 -2171 46Kerosene and Light Oils -8 -10 30 14 -33 11 -5 -15 -24 -82 -41 -82Heavy Gas Oils 58 74 43 37 362 355 -33 -26 153 116 582 555Residuum 100 74 -18 -21 60 66 -7 18 6143 127Gasoline Blending Components-5 -5 15 15 10 10October 8, 2010Page 1 of 2MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit B-6: Projected Seasonal Refinery Inputs & Outputs, 2015(K b/d)PADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 PADD 45 ex CA CA USInputs & Outputs Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer WinterOutputs 1,741 1,738 3,552 3,497 7,995 8,037 1,438 1,426 1,835 1,856 16,562 16,553Liquified Petroleum Gases 73 54 181 109 406 359 22 25 40 39 721 585Ethane-Ethylene0 0 0 0 20 20 21 20Propane/Propylene 52 52 112 109 347 349 22 24 40 39 573 573Propane 32 31 87 89 169 1590 0 0 0 288 279Propylene 20 20 25 19 178 191 22 24 40 39 285 294Normal Butane-Butylene 19 0 68 1 38 -100 0 0 0 126 -10Normal Butane 19 0 65 0 410 0 0 0 0 125 0Normal Butylene0 0 3 1 -3 -10 0 0 0 0 1 -10Isobutane-Isobutylene210000000022Isobutane000000000000Isobutylene210000000022Finished Refined Products21,668 1,684 3,372 3,388 7,589 7,678 1,417 1,401 1,795 1,817 15,841 15,968E85 15 15 23 23 10 10 0 0 5 5 53 53Finished Motor Gasoline3841 853 1964 1971 4124 4206 678 694 1066 1049 8,675 8,774Reformulated 697 677 366 380 994 1029 29 50 1005 1019 3,092 3,155Conventional 144 177 1598 1591 3130 3177 649 644 62 29 5,583 5,619Aviation Gasoline 3 3 12 10 2 2 17 16Jet Fuel & Kerosene 85 90 190 194 733 738 201 189 220 248 1,428 1,459Distillate 493 497 923 933 2057 2086 365 348 350 358 4,189 4,2200-15 ppm Sulfur 310 289 909 916 1993 2037 357 342 101 108 3,669 3,69215-500 ppm Sulfur0 0> 500 ppm Sulfur 183 208 15 16 65 498 6 0 0 271 278CARB Diesel249 250 249 250Residual Fuel Oil 125 117 33 32 217 199 107 109 63 76 545 5340-0.3 Sulfur 39 48 0 0 21 19 89 82 0 0 150 1490.31-1.0 Sulfur 59 40 3 4 16 19 44 38 0 0 122 100Greater Than 1% Sulfur 26 29 30 29 179 162 66 70 0 0 301 290Pet Chem Feedstocks 19 17 41 37 216 2083 1 9 3 287 267Naphtha 19 17 32 30 99 901 1 0 0 150 138Other Oils0 0 9 8 117 118 4 1 0 0 131 127Special Naphtha0 0 5 4 24 31 1 1 30 36Lubes & Waxes 18 18 18 16 93 89 0 0 21 19 150 142Asphalt and Road Oil 69 74 161 163 71 69 60 57 47 44 407 407Miscellaneous (nonfuel use) 2 2 11 11 31 31 0 0 14 14 60 601 Excludes hydrogen purchases.2 Excludes petroleum coke, still gas, and miscellaneous fuel use3 Includes RBOB and CBOB volumes and associated ethanol volumes.Sources: Derived from Exhibits A-4 and B-5.October 8, 2010Page 2 of 2MathProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit B-7: Projected Distribution of Summer Conventional and Low-RVP Gasoline, and Gasoline Pool RVP Projected Under the 8-Hour Ozone Standard, 2015

Gasline Distribution (%) Average Pool RVP (psi)

Conven- Low RVP 8-Hour Region tional 7.8 7.0 1 Total Ozone Std. NCG

Within Region Use 57% 35% 9% 100% PADD 1 48% 43% 9% 100%

Subdistrict 1A 62% 38% 100%

Subdistrict 1B 21% 79% 100%

Subdistrict 1C 56% 32% 12% 100% PADD 2 63% 24% 14% 100% PADD 3 60% 34% 6% 100% PADDs 4 & 5 ex CA 56% 44% 100% California 0%
Refinery Production 57% 35% 9% 100% PADD 1 34% 66% 100% 8.7 7.1 PADD 2 66% 26% 8% 100% 9.1 7.5 PADD 3 54% 33% 12% 100% 8.9 7.3 PADDs 4 & 5 ex CA 52% 48% 100% 8.9 7.3 California 11% 89% 100% 8.3 6.9

Note: For the 8-Hour Ozone standard, average pool RVP reflects the effects of the 1 psi ethanol RVP waiver, except for low-RVP gasoline during July and August. For NCG, the 1 psi ethanol waiver applies only to conventional gasoline. Source: Derived from Exhibit A-15 and Exhibit B-6c, "Refining Economcs of a National Clean Gasoline Gasoline Standard for PADDs 1-3," for The Alliance of Automobile Manufactureres, MathPro Inc., 05/07/07.

October 8, 2010 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCGExhibit B-8: Projected Distribution of Refining Regions' Gasoline Production,Grade Splits, and Pool Octane, by PADD -- 2015PoolSupplying Share of Production Shipped To: Premium OctaneRegion PADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 PADD 4 PADD 5 Grade Split (R+M)/2PADD 1Reformulated 100.0% 12.9% 88.3All Other 100.0% 9.0% 88.0PADD 2Reformulated 97.4% 2.6% 10.4% 88.3All Other 0.9% 95.6% 1.8% 1.6% 9.1% 88.0PADD 3Reformulated 34.1% 12.6% 40.1% 13.1% 11.6% 88.1All Other 48.6% 13.7% 34.8% 1.5% 1.5% 9.1% 88.0PADD 4-5 ex CAReformulatedAll Other 7.0% 84.4% 8.7% 12.5% 87.4CaliforniaCARBOB1100.0% 15.7% 84.5Reformulated 100.0% 15.7% 88.0All Other 100.0% 11.1% 87.91 With 10% ethanol blending.Note: The premium grade split includes 40% of the mid-grade share.Premium shares for conventional gasoline reflect resumption of shipments of premium from PADD 3 to PADD 2Source: Derived from Exhibit A-16b.October 8, 2010MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-1: Estimated Effects of NCG and Single Octane NCG Standards on Cost andon Crude Oil Use, Energy Use, and CO2 EmissionsPADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 PADDs 1-3 CaliforniaSingle Octane Single Octane Single Octane Single Octane Single Octane94 RON 95 RON 94 RON 95 RON 94 RON 95 RON 94 RON 95 RON 94 RON 95 RONNCG NCG NCG NCG NCG NCG NCG NCG NCG NCG NCG NCG NCG NCG NCGEffects on CostsRefining CostTotal ($B/y) 0.5 0.8 1.1 0.9 1.8 2.6 1.9 3.9 6.1 3.4 6.4 9.9 0.1 1.0 2.1Capital charge & fixed cost 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 1.0 1.2 1.4 2.0 0.0 0.1 0.3Reduction in Cash Flow10.3 0.5 0.7 0.5 1.4 2.2 1.4 3.2 5.1 2.1 5.1 7.9 0.0 0.9 1.8Per Gallon of Gasoline (¢/gal) 4.2 5.8 8.8 3.0 6.0 8.8 3.0 5.9 9.4 3.1 5.9 9.2 0.3 6.7 14.4Value of Improved GasolineEnergy Density (¢/gal)$B/y 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.7 0.5 0.7 1.4 0.7 1.2 2.2 0.0 0.2 0.3Per Gallon of Gasoline (¢/gal) 0.1 0.5 0.7 0.7 1.7 2.3 0.8 1.0 2.2 0.7 1.1 2.0 0.1 1.5 2.1Refinery Investment ($B)1.0 1.0 1.7 1.3 1.3 1.7 2.0 2.4 3.5 4.3 4.7 6.9 0.0 0.2 0.9Costs Associated withRetrofitting to 5 ppm Sulfur2Investment ($B) 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.9 0.9 2.1 2.0 2.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0Capital charge & fixed cost ($B/y) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.6 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Per Gallon of Gasoline (¢/gal) 1.4 1.5 1.5 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Effects on OperationsChange in Crude Oil Inputper Barrel of Gasoline (b/b)0.01 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.03 0.05 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.00 0.03 0.08Changes in Energy Use (Fuel & Power)Total (Trillion btu/y) 13.4 19.0 25.2 18.2 32.4 45.4 33.9 70.9 121.7 65.5 122.2 192.3 1.9 19.1 44.9Percent Increase 5% 7% 10% 3% 6% 8% 2% 5% 8% 3% 5% 9% 0% 5% 12%Changes in CO2 EmissionsTotal (Million MT/y) 0.9 1.1 1.4 1.1 1.7 2.4 2.1 3.7 6.1 4.0 6.6 10.0 0.1 0.9 3.0Percent Increase 4% 6% 7% 2% 4% 5% 2% 3% 5% 2% 4% 6% 0% 3% 9%1 Cash Flow is defined here as refinery revenues (from the sale of refined products) less all direct (non-investment related)costs, such as purchases of crude oil, unfinished oils,gasoline blendstocks, natural gas, electricty, and catalysts.2 The indicated refining costs include the cost of retrofitting for desulfurization of FCC naphtha to 5 ppm for all FCC naphtha post-treaters.Estimated costs would be lower if some portion of these units already could produce 5 ppm FCC naphtha.October 8, 2010MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-2:Typeof ProcessProcessWt% Oxygen -->USE OF IN-PLACE CAPACITYCrude DistillationAtmosphericConversionFluid Cat CrackerHydrocrackingCokingUpgradingAlkylation*Iso-octene/octaneCatalytic Polymerization*Dimersol*Pen/Hex IsomerizationReformingHydrotreatingNaphtha Desulf.FCC Naphtha DesulfurizationBenzene SaturationDistillate DesulfurizationDistillate DearomatizationFCC Feed DesulfurizationHydrogenHydrogen* (MM scf/d)FractionationDebutanizationDepentanizationLt. Naphtha Spl. (Benz. Prec.)Med. Naphtha Spl.Hvy. Reformate Spl.FCC Naphtha SplittingHeavy FCC/Lt Cycle Oil SplittingOtherButane IsomerizationAromatics RecoveryBenzene ExtractionLubes & Waxes*Sulfur Recovery* (K s tons/d)Steam Generation (K lb/hr)Refinery Modeling Results -- Refinery Operations and New CapacityPADD 1(K b/d, except as noted)20152007 Single OctaneCalibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RONSum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win1,498 1,478 1,455 1,427 1,465 1,432 1,477 1,438 1,487 1,443546 546 546 524 529 540 546 546 546 54622 23 22 23 22 21 22 21 22 2182 82 82 83 82 86 82 87 82 8897 76 97 78 97 81 97 86 97 8818 15 17 15 12 15 13 15 12 1517 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 49257 220 219 172 245 196 274 225 280 247330 293 315 273 340 296 348 296 356 302349 349 349 336 346 349 349 353 349 35010 6 10 12 10 16 10 17 10 19393 398 438 414 450 418 442 413 434 42343 42 44 40 43 42 44 42 44 41104 113 113 157 113 170 113 149 113 138102 62 102 58 102 53 102 59 102 615 564 69 63 69 69 56 64 57 56 3925 66 6338 12 38 16 38 38 38 38 38 3820 17 25 20 25 21 27 22 30 2418 17 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 1811111111113,501 3,138 3,474 3,072 3,378 3,228 3,593 3,362 3,797 3,556October 8, 2010Page 1 of 8MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-2:Typeof ProcessProcessWt% Oxygen -->NEW CAPACITYCrude DistillationAtmosphericConversionFluid Cat CrackerHydrocrackerCokerUpgradingAlkylation*Pen/Hex IsomerizationReformingHydrotreatingFCC Naphtha DesulfurizationBenzene SaturationDistillate DesulfurizationFCC Feed DesulfurizationHydrogenHydrogen Plant* (MM scf/d)FractionationDebutanizationDepentanizationLt. Naphtha Spl. (Benz. Prec.)Medium Naphtha Spl.Hvy. Reformate Spl.FCC/Lt Cycle Oil SplittingOtherAromatics RecoveryBenzene ExtractionLube Oil ProductionRetrofittingTier 2 Diesel DesulfurizationUltra Low Sulfur GasolineOPERATIONSFluid Cat CrackerCharge RateConversion (Vol %)Olefin Max Cat. (%)Catalyst Coke (K b/d)HydrocrackerCharge Rate: Gas OilsAll OtherNaphtha as % of Out-turns (%)Kero & Dist. as % of Out-turns (%)ReformerCharge RateSeverity (RON)Fuel UseNatural Gas & Refinery Gases (foebEnergy UseFuel & Power (Billion btu/d)CO2 EmissionsCO2 Emissions (K MT/d)* Capacity defined in terms of volume of output.Refinery Modeling Results -- Refinery Operations and New CapacityPADD 1(K b/d, except as noted)20152007 Single OctaneCalibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RONSum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win18 24 24 273 1536165 52588949 64 41 2822222 2 35 5327 312 73 257 70 249588938 38 37 3873 10 0 0 346 349 353 353 350 350675 665 691 642 680 660 692 662 692 65468.2 70.2 66.9 69.9 66.1 70.1 66.8 70.5 66.8 71.03.0 4.8 4.6 5.0 0.3 4.5 0.130 31 29 29 29 30 30 30 30 3020 23 20 23 21 22 21 23 21 23989887868655.8 49.5 52.1 47.2 60.1 46.9 56.9 46.5 56.1 37.745.3 24.4 37.6 32.2 38.2 17.5 50.0 17.6 51.6 17.7247 215 235 190 258 219 266 226 282 241100.6 100.1 96.0 94.8 96.9 94.2 100.1 98.7 100.7 100.271 66 70 64 74 70 77 72 79 74727 695 720 672 748 718 767 729 786 74454 52 54 51 56 54 57 54 58 55October 8, 2010Page 2 of 8MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-2:Typeof ProcessProcessWt% Oxygen -->USE OF IN-PLACE CAPACITYCrude DistillationAtmosphericConversionFluid Cat CrackerHydrocrackingCokingUpgradingAlkylation*Iso-octene/octaneCatalytic Polymerization*Dimersol*Pen/Hex IsomerizationReformingHydrotreatingNaphtha Desulf.FCC Naphtha DesulfurizationBenzene SaturationDistillate DesulfurizationDistillate DearomatizationFCC Feed DesulfurizationHydrogenHydrogen* (MM scf/d)FractionationDebutanizationDepentanizationLt. Naphtha Spl. (Benz. Prec.)Med. Naphtha Spl.Hvy. Reformate Spl.FCC Naphtha SplittingHeavy FCC/Lt Cycle Oil SplittingOtherButane IsomerizationAromatics RecoveryBenzene ExtractionLubes & Waxes*Sulfur Recovery* (K s tons/d)Steam Generation (K lb/hr)Refinery Modeling Results -- Refinery Operations and New CapacityPADD 2(K b/d, except as noted)20152007 Single OctaneCalibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RONSum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win3,249 3,111 3,193 3,058 3,240 3,059 3,294 3,082 3,336 3,1051,068 890 1,042 890 1,021 890 1,046 890 1,058 890188 185 188 185 188 185 188 185 188 185301 308 301 311 301 311 301 315 301 318246 180 246 205 246 208 246 209 246 2195353535353333 3 3333173 173 173 148 173 142 173 149 160 151737 658 586 510 656 511 763 621 808 712825 772 852 750 936 750 951 765 962 797609 518 600 507 593 507 607 516 611 5056 6 35 6 36 6 43 6 481,032 1,049 1,049 1,049 1,018 1,049 1,027 1,049 1,039 1,049474 441 478 433 475 433 484 435 491 431712 799 799 826 799 813 785 799 783 799232 106 232 101 232 96 232 106 232 11218 5193 251 228 251 251 257 251 249 251 21124 24 15 24 24 24 24 24 2429 29 35 28 50 27 50 26 50 2716 15 17 16 17 16 17 16 17 1644444444446,413 5,457 6,797 5,452 7,150 5,394 7,237 5,653 7,232 5,967October 8, 2010Page 3 of 8MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-2:Typeof ProcessProcessWt% Oxygen -->NEW CAPACITYCrude DistillationAtmosphericConversionFluid Cat CrackerHydrocrackerCokerUpgradingAlkylation*Pen/Hex IsomerizationReformingHydrotreatingFCC Naphtha DesulfurizationBenzene SaturationDistillate DesulfurizationFCC Feed DesulfurizationHydrogenHydrogen Plant* (MM scf/d)FractionationDebutanizationDepentanizationLt. Naphtha Spl. (Benz. Prec.)Medium Naphtha Spl.Hvy. Reformate Spl.FCC/Lt Cycle Oil SplittingOtherAromatics RecoveryBenzene ExtractionLube Oil ProductionRetrofittingTier 2 Diesel DesulfurizationUltra Low Sulfur GasolineOPERATIONSFluid Cat CrackerCharge RateConversion (Vol %)Olefin Max Cat. (%)Catalyst Coke (K b/d)HydrocrackerCharge Rate: Gas OilsAll OtherNaphtha as % of Out-turns (%)Kero & Dist. as % of Out-turns (%)ReformerCharge RateSeverity (RON)Fuel UseNatural Gas & Refinery Gases (foebEnergy UseFuel & Power (Billion btu/d)CO2 EmissionsCO2 Emissions (K MT/d)* Capacity defined in terms of volume of output.Refinery Modeling Results -- Refinery Operations and New CapacityPADD 2(K b/d, except as noted)20152007 Single OctaneCalibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RONSum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win37 46 55 6346451 49 55 6030 96 17 146 88 191 36 36 3620 215 192 966 751 49 55 60111167 49 69 46 78 40 87 120 0 0 0 477 428 498 4271,040 968 1,048 950 1,041 950 1,061 954 1,077 94575.7 69.8 73.5 70.3 72.8 70.3 73.1 70.5 72.9 70.617.1 0.1 20.6 20.5 14.6 22.248 41 46 41 46 41 47 41 47 41193 216 170 212 193 212 194 217 194 23465 38 88 42 65 42 64 37 64 2066.9 67.3 59.8 67.0 52.3 67.1 56.9 67.7 61.3 66.414.3 13.8 22.9 14.2 31.6 14.1 26.0 13.3 20.7 14.9711 638 645 582 721 577 787 643 819 688100.6 100.4 94.8 92.6 94.8 93.3 97.7 97.7 100.5 100.6175 165 174 161 186 165 191 170 196 1741,643 1,521 1,631 1,494 1,703 1,521 1,748 1,555 1,787 1,587124 116 125 116 128 119 131 120 134 121October 8, 2010Page 4 of 8MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-2:Typeof ProcessProcessWt% Oxygen -->USE OF IN-PLACE CAPACITYCrude DistillationAtmosphericConversionFluid Cat CrackerHydrocrackingCokingUpgradingAlkylation*Iso-octene/octaneCatalytic Polymerization*Dimersol*Pen/Hex IsomerizationReformingHydrotreatingNaphtha Desulf.FCC Naphtha DesulfurizationBenzene SaturationDistillate DesulfurizationDistillate DearomatizationFCC Feed DesulfurizationHydrogenHydrogen* (MM scf/d)FractionationDebutanizationDepentanizationLt. Naphtha Spl. (Benz. Prec.)Med. Naphtha Spl.Hvy. Reformate Spl.FCC Naphtha SplittingHeavy FCC/Lt Cycle Oil SplittingOtherButane IsomerizationAromatics RecoveryBenzene ExtractionLubes & Waxes*Sulfur Recovery* (K s tons/d)Steam Generation (K lb/hr)Refinery Modeling Results -- Refinery Operations and New CapacityPADD 3(K b/d, except as noted)20152007 Single OctaneCalibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RONSum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win7,461 7,004 7,269 6,891 7,371 6,887 7,464 6,974 7,526 7,0052,590 2,457 2,590 2,297 2,590 2,352 2,590 2,508 2,590 2,567512 512 512 666 512 611 512 539 512 5171,185 1,185 1,185 1,265 1,185 1,268 1,185 1,290 1,185 1,292581 581 581 566 581 581 581 581 581 69822 11 22 10 12 10 12 10 15 10838 8888235 235 235 235 235 235 235 403 235 3631,500 1,160 1,149 1,005 1,285 997 1,488 1,139 1,668 1,3371,674 1,583 1,664 1,585 1,742 1,584 1,885 1,604 1,914 1,6101,494 1,423 1,494 1,339 1,494 1,372 1,494 1,459 1,467 1,4505 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 112,215 2,191 2,241 2,265 2,241 2,314 2,241 2,352 2,241 2,3601,142 1,099 1,172 1,043 1,158 1,069 1,161 1,125 1,182 1,1311,649 1,649 1,649 2,275 1,649 2,258 1,649 2,258 1,649 2,174589 480 589 479 589 480 589 500 589 4871 2175 186 186 378 186 482 186 442 186 175322 117 188 208 233 241107 107 107 107 29 107 107153 129 155 142 157 149 152 145 184 15816 12 16 12 16 12 16 12 16 17144 136 93 89 93 89 93 89 93 8912 12 13 12 13 12 13 13 13 1322,193 20,703 18,585 16,691 18,543 16,721 19,368 17,679 20,601 19,587October 8, 2010Page 5 of 8MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-2:Typeof ProcessProcessWt% Oxygen -->NEW CAPACITYCrude DistillationAtmosphericConversionFluid Cat CrackerHydrocrackerCokerUpgradingAlkylation*Pen/Hex IsomerizationReformingHydrotreatingFCC Naphtha DesulfurizationBenzene SaturationDistillate DesulfurizationFCC Feed DesulfurizationHydrogenHydrogen Plant* (MM scf/d)FractionationDebutanizationDepentanizationLt. Naphtha Spl. (Benz. Prec.)Medium Naphtha Spl.Hvy. Reformate Spl.FCC/Lt Cycle Oil SplittingOtherAromatics RecoveryBenzene ExtractionLube Oil ProductionRetrofittingTier 2 Diesel DesulfurizationUltra Low Sulfur GasolineOPERATIONSFluid Cat CrackerCharge RateConversion (Vol %)Olefin Max Cat. (%)Catalyst Coke (K b/d)HydrocrackerCharge Rate: Gas OilsAll OtherNaphtha as % of Out-turns (%)Kero & Dist. as % of Out-turns (%)ReformerCharge RateSeverity (RON)Fuel UseNatural Gas & Refinery Gases (foebEnergy UseFuel & Power (Billion btu/d)CO2 EmissionsCO2 Emissions (K MT/d)* Capacity defined in terms of volume of output.Refinery Modeling Results -- Refinery Operations and New CapacityPADD 3(K b/d, except as noted)20152007 Single OctaneCalibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RONSum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win171 110 30 6127 142 167 191130200 1424030 38 1727 16 81 211 201231 232 929 236 909 285 676 81 630000040 171 315 819213 84 369 33094 187 170 140464 30 511 448 404 170 0 0 0 1,444 1,204 1,430 1,306 1,405 1,3242,625 2,527 2,694 2,397 2,662 2,457 2,668 2,586 2,717 2,60073.6 72.8 72.5 72.1 73.0 72.1 72.6 72.7 71.7 73.624.7 25.6 24.0 29.3 17.0 28.6 17.7 24.5 31.0 38.4119 114 117 108 117 110 120 117 120 118389 342 475 545 520 485 478 391 456 387123 171 191 121 91 127 61 148 61 13048.1 34.8 42.5 42.6 44.1 42.1 41.3 40.7 45.2 40.636.1 52.2 42.5 42.5 40.8 43.1 44.1 44.6 39.0 44.61,456 1,146 1,203 1,046 1,333 1,048 1,451 1,118 1,632 1,299100.5 100.0 97.3 97.5 97.7 96.8 100.3 100.3 101.0 100.6452 417 434 407 452 415 463 426 481 4414,168 3,891 4,064 3,804 4,177 3,877 4,267 3,989 4,412 4,123317 299 322 304 328 309 331 315 339 320October 8, 2010Page 6 of 8MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-2:Typeof ProcessProcessWt% Oxygen -->USE OF IN-PLACE CAPACITYCrude DistillationAtmosphericConversionFluid Cat CrackerHydrocrackingCokingUpgradingAlkylation*Iso-octene/octaneCatalytic Polymerization*Dimersol*Pen/Hex IsomerizationReformingHydrotreatingNaphtha Desulf.FCC Naphtha DesulfurizationBenzene SaturationDistillate DesulfurizationDistillate DearomatizationFCC Feed DesulfurizationHydrogenHydrogen* (MM scf/d)FractionationDebutanizationDepentanizationLt. Naphtha Spl. (Benz. Prec.)Med. Naphtha Spl.Hvy. Reformate Spl.FCC Naphtha SplittingHeavy FCC/Lt Cycle Oil SplittingOtherButane IsomerizationAromatics RecoveryBenzene ExtractionLubes & Waxes*Sulfur Recovery* (K s tons/d)Steam Generation (K lb/hr)Refinery Modeling Results -- Refinery Operations and New CapacityCalifornia(K b/d, except as noted)20152007 Single OctaneCalibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RONSum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win1,683 1,771 1,555 1,581 1,553 1,582 1,594 1,597 1,648 1,617606 557 534 499 531 499 566 544 578 634368 368 368 368 368 368 368 368 368 368426 422 405 402 405 402 410 398 424 408170 118 169 96 176 95 176 125 176 1604 425 5 51555111 104 94 93 89 100 92 91 73 70320 308 254 245 263 248 350 328 421 366361 376 322 328 321 328 328 330 353 334115 124 105 249 125 271 119 270 69 28731 25 26 22 27 21 31 40 31 61359 345 330 352 329 332 339 366 385 38046 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 42585 555 556 521 553 521 560 525 576 6281,172 1,217 1,234 1,188 1,232 1,190 1,152 1,133 1,238 1,128145 64 134 75 134 75 150 74 163 94127 180 101 85 160 131 138 130 133 135114 104 91 90 90 92 60 52 541 50 27 49 26 50 37 504 38 38 34 17 6 19 17139 129 139 132 131 124 122 125 116 125114 32 6 2 3 92 34 11447 47 47 7 47 6 47 47 47 4718 17 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 1933333333332,487 1,808 1,930 1,356 1,989 1,379 2,393 2,034 2,335 2,672October 8, 2010Page 7 of 8MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-2:Typeof ProcessProcessWt% Oxygen -->NEW CAPACITYCrude DistillationAtmosphericConversionFluid Cat CrackerHydrocrackerCokerUpgradingAlkylation*Pen/Hex IsomerizationReformingHydrotreatingFCC Naphtha DesulfurizationBenzene SaturationDistillate DesulfurizationFCC Feed DesulfurizationHydrogenHydrogen Plant* (MM scf/d)FractionationDebutanizationDepentanizationLt. Naphtha Spl. (Benz. Prec.)Medium Naphtha Spl.Hvy. Reformate Spl.FCC/Lt Cycle Oil SplittingOtherAromatics RecoveryBenzene ExtractionLube Oil ProductionRetrofittingTier 2 Diesel DesulfurizationUltra Low Sulfur GasolineOPERATIONSFluid Cat CrackerCharge RateConversion (Vol %)Olefin Max Cat. (%)Catalyst Coke (K b/d)HydrocrackerCharge Rate: Gas OilsAll OtherNaphtha as % of Out-turns (%)Kero & Dist. as % of Out-turns (%)ReformerCharge RateSeverity (RON)Fuel UseNatural Gas & Refinery Gases (foebEnergy UseFuel & Power (Billion btu/d)CO2 EmissionsCO2 Emissions (K MT/d)* Capacity defined in terms of volume of output.Refinery Modeling Results -- Refinery Operations and New CapacityCalifornia(K b/d, except as noted)20152007 Single OctaneCalibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RONSum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win1310187 185 213 208 411 33 144013511 33 1411113 5 3 8 10152 158 167 158 192 173 187 191585 555 556 521 553 521 560 525 576 62878.7 76.1 73.0 72.7 72.8 72.7 76.7 78.6 76.3 76.80.9 3.0 18.5 27.129 27 27 26 27 26 28 27 29 30260 281 258 260 258 260 262 260 270 201108 87 110 108 110 108 106 108 98 16744.3 42.2 41.6 41.2 41.7 40.9 41.2 40.8 49.1 37.041.0 43.2 43.9 44.4 43.8 44.8 44.4 45.1 35.1 49.9335 334 282 273 292 276 344 332 415 36296.2 93.7 91.7 91.7 91.6 91.7 100.0 97.7 100.4 99.4121 120 116 111 117 111 122 118 130 1241,128 1,102 1,079 1,019 1,084 1,024 1,128 1,078 1,194 1,15798 97 95 90 95 91 97 93 103 99October 8, 2010Page 8 of 8MathProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit C-3:

Inputs/ Outputs

Crude Oi l
Other Input s Isobutane
Butane Butylene Natural Gas Liquids
Gasoline Blendstocks Straight Run Naphtha
Kerosene Heavy Gas Oil
Resid
Ethanol -- RFG
All Other
Purchased Energ y Electricity (MM Kwh/d) Natural Gas (K foeb/d)

Refined Products 1

Aromatics Ethane/Ethylene Propane Propylene Butanes/Butylenes
Aviation Gas Naphtha to PetroChem Special Naphthas
Gasoline:

CARBOB

Federal RFG

Arizona CBG

All Other Jet Fuel
Diesel Fuel

CARB Diesel

EPA Diesel

Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel

Other diesel Unf. Oil to PetroChem
Carbon Black Feed
Residual Oil Asphalt
Lubes & Waxes
Coke Sulfur (s tons/d)

Excessed Materia l
C5s Coker Naphtha FCC Naphtha
Crude Oil Input pe r Barrel of Gasolin e Refinery Modeling Results -- Refinery Inputs and Outputs
PADD 1 (K b/d)

2015 2007 Single Octane

Calibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RON

Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win

1,498 1,478 1,455 1,427 1,465 1,432 1,477 1,438 1,487 1,443

263 255 270 281 270 281 273 281 280 281

8 13 8 13 8 13 11 13 18 13
31 31 31 31 31

22
33 21 34 21 34 21 34 21 34 21

56 72 58 74 58 74 58 74 58 74
98 73 100 74 100 74 100 74 100 74
46 45 70 68 70 68 70 68 70 68
26 29 26 29 26 29 26 29

10 10 10 9 10 10 11 10 11 10
33 30 37 34 40 39 39 37 40 37

1,750 1,730 1,730 1,727 1,737 1,729 1,741 1,731 1,745 1,732
20.0 18.0 19.0 17.0 19.0 17.0 19.0 17.0 19.0 17.0

34 32 31 29 32 31 34 33 36 34
19 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
10 1 21 1 28 1 29 1 32 1

837 848 841 854 841 854 841 854 841 854

459 445 697 677 697 677 697 677 697 677

378 403 144 177 144 177 144 177 144 177 97 104 93 100 93 100 93 100 93 100
494 498 493 497 493 497 493 497 493 497

39 27

273 264 310 289 310 289 310 289 310 289

182 207 183 208 183 208 183 208 183 208

124 116 124 117 124 117 124 117 124 117
97 76 69 74 69 74 69 74 69 74
18 17 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18
20 21 26 21 27 22 27 22 28 22
1.2 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.4 1.2 1.4 1.2

6 14
6 14

1.789 1.743 1.730 1.671 1.742 1.677 1.757 1.684 1.768 1.690

October 8, 2010 Page 1 of 4 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit C-3:

Inputs/ Outputs

Crude Oi l
Other Input s Isobutane
Butane Butylene Natural Gas Liquids
Gasoline Blendstocks Straight Run Naphtha
Kerosene Heavy Gas Oil
Resid
Ethanol -- RFG
All Other
Purchased Energ y Electricity (MM Kwh/d) Natural Gas (K foeb/d)

Refined Products 1

Aromatics Ethane/Ethylene Propane Propylene Butanes/Butylenes
Aviation Gas Naphtha to PetroChem Special Naphthas
Gasoline:

CARBOB

Federal RFG

Arizona CBG

All Other Jet Fuel
Diesel Fuel

CARB Diesel

EPA Diesel

Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel

Other diesel Unf. Oil to PetroChem
Carbon Black Feed
Residual Oil Asphalt
Lubes & Waxes
Coke Sulfur (s tons/d)

Excessed Materia l
C5s Coker Naphtha FCC Naphtha
Crude Oil Input pe r Barrel of Gasolin e Refinery Modeling Results -- Refinery Inputs and Outputs
PADD 2 (K b/d)

2015 2007 Single Octane

Calibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RON

Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win

3,249 3,111 3,193 3,058 3,240 3,059 3,294 3,082 3,336 3,105

230 25 4 243 287 245 287 241 287 237 287
45 43 52 56 53 56 49 56 46 56
67 71 71 71 71
10 10 10 10
55 36 62 40 62 40 62 40 62 40
22 22 20 21 20 21 20 21 20 21
32 15 30 14 30 14 30 14 30 14
46 40 43 37 43 37 43 37 43 37

30 31 37 38 37 38 37 38 37 38
30 36 178 177 178 177 178 177 178 177

25 23 25 23 26 24 26 24 27 25
107 110 120 121 128 126 126 121 124 116

3,431 3,341 3,524 3,458 3,561 3,459 3,559 3,463 3,566 3,470

31.0 29.0 31.0 29.0 31.0 29.0 31.0 29.0 31.0 29.0

82 74 73 65 73 66 78 70 87 77
24 18 25 19 25 19 25 19 25 19
65 71 107 100 98

3333333333

4354545454 1,819 1,825 1,964 1,971 1,964 1,971 1,964 1,971 1,964 1,971

303 314 366 380 366 380 366 380 366 380

1,516 1,511 1,598 1,591 1,598 1,591 1,598 1,591 1,598 1,591 198 203 190 194 190 194 190 194 190 194
922 932 924 932 924 932 924 932 924 932

88 69

792 817 909 916 909 916 909 916 909 916

42 46 15 16 15 16 15 16 15 16 9898989898

76 78 51 54 51 54 51 54 51 54
182 153 161 163 161 163 161 163 161 163

16 15 18 16 18 16 18 16 18 16
99 101 109 102 112 102 115 103 117 104
3.6 3.6 3.7 3.5 3.7 3.5 3.8 3.5 3.9 3.6

27 37
27 37

1.786 1.704 1.626 1.551 1.650 1.552 1.677 1.564 1.698 1.576

October 8, 2010 Page 2 of 4 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit C-3:

Inputs/ Outputs

Crude Oi l
Other Input s Isobutane
Butane Butylene Natural Gas Liquids
Gasoline Blendstocks Straight Run Naphtha
Kerosene Heavy Gas Oil
Resid
Ethanol -- RFG
All Other
Purchased Energ y Electricity (MM Kwh/d) Natural Gas (K foeb/d)

Refined Products 1

Aromatics Ethane/Ethylene Propane Propylene Butanes/Butylenes
Aviation Gas Naphtha to PetroChem Special Naphthas
Gasoline:

CARBOB

Federal RFG

Arizona CBG

All Other Jet Fuel
Diesel Fuel

CARB Diesel

EPA Diesel

Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel

Other diesel Unf. Oil to PetroChem
Carbon Black Feed
Residual Oil Asphalt
Lubes & Waxes
Coke Sulfur (s tons/d)

Excessed Materia l
C5s Coker Naphtha FCC Naphtha
Crude Oil Input pe r Barrel of Gasolin e Refinery Modeling Results -- Refinery Inputs and Outputs
PADD 3 (K b/d)

2015 2007 Single Octane

Calibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RON

Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win

7,461 7,004 7,269 6,891 7,371 6,887 7,464 6,974 7,526 7,005

741 1,100 709 1,059 717 1,072 719 1,034 792 1,063

8 138 120 8 133 10 95 83 124
216 216 216 216 216

10 10 10 10 10
98 97 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65
36 28 33 26 33 26 33 26 33 26
12 11 11 11 11
393 385 366 358 366 358 366 358 366 358

65 71 61 66 61 66 61 66 61 66
76 78 84 87 84 87 84 87 84 87
4 7 345 350 345 350 345 350 345 350

61 58 62 59 63 60 63 61 66 63
244 234 269 260 278 270 260 253 275 250

8,007 7,934 8,200 8,191 8,270 8,190 8,285 8,201 8,287 8,218
208.2 178.0 208.0 178.0 208.0 178.0 208.0 178.0 208.0 183.0
19 19 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
168 144 154 140 156 139 169 150 181 162
176 188 180 192 180 192 180 192 180 192
38 45 112 115 105
12 11 12 10 12 10 12 10 12 10

34 43 24 31 24 31 24 31 24 31 3,766 3,840 4,211 4,295 4,211 4,295 4,211 4,295 4,211 4,295

757 783 840 870 840 870 840 870 840 870

3,009 3,057 3,371 3,425 3,371 3,425 3,371 3,425 3,371 3,425 787 756 766 738 766 738 766 738 766 738 2,005 2,033 2,058 2,086 2,058 2,086 2,058 2,086 2,058 2,086

496 442

1,211 1,366 1,993 2,037 1,993 2,037 1,993 2,037 1,993 2,037

298 225 65 49 65 49 65 49 65 49 184 185 117 118 117 118 117 118 117 118
25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25
327 296 216 200 216 200 216 200 216 200
114 80 71 69 71 69 71 69 71 69
144 136 93 89 93 89 93 89 93 89
356 350 382 368 387 368 393 374 399 376
12.4 12.0 12.9 12.4 13.1 12.4 13.3 12.5 13.4 12.6

25 11 4
25 114

1.981 1.824 1.726 1.604 1.750 1.603 1.772 1.624 1.787 1.631

October 8, 2010 Page 3 of 4 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit C-3:

Inputs/ Outputs

Crude Oi l
Other Input s Isobutane
Butane Butylene Natural Gas Liquids
Gasoline Blendstocks Straight Run Naphtha
Kerosene Heavy Gas Oil
Resid
Ethanol -- RFG
All Other
Purchased Energ y Electricity (MM Kwh/d) Natural Gas (K foeb/d)

Refined Products 1

Aromatics Ethane/Ethylene Propane Propylene Butanes/Butylenes
Aviation Gas Naphtha to PetroChem Special Naphthas
Gasoline:

CARBOB

Federal RFG

Arizona CBG

All Other Jet Fuel
Diesel Fuel

CARB Diesel

EPA Diesel

Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel

Other diesel Unf. Oil to PetroChem
Carbon Black Feed
Residual Oil Asphalt
Lubes & Waxes
Coke Sulfur (s tons/d)

Excessed Materia l
C5s Coker Naphtha FCC Naphtha
Crude Oil Input pe r Barrel of Gasolin e Refinery Modeling Results -- Refinery Inputs and Outputs California (K b/d)

2015 2007 Single Octane

Calibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RON

Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win

1,683 1,771 1,555 1,581 1,553 1,582 1,594 1,597 1,648 1,617

18 4 166 200 176 20 4 176 202 186 206 186
3 4 8 6 10 10 10
20 20 20 20 20

20 23 20 23 20 23 20 23 20 23
51 37 15 10 15 10 15 10 15 10

11111
107 82 153 116 153 116 153 116 153 116

6 86868686

4 1 10 7 10 7 10 7 10 7

19 18 18 17 18 17 19 18 20 19
94 97 99 94 100 94 93 91 98 91

1,829 1,909 1,735 1,743 1,736 1,743 1,752 1,748 1,761 1,752

37 35 33 31 33 31 39 36 42 40

3 1 2 12 18

16 33 12 21 12 21 12 21 12 21

1,051 1,034 967 946 967 946 967 946 967 946

869 960 905 917 905 917 905 917 905 917

28

154 74 62 29 62 29 62 29 62 29 240 282 241 248 241 248 241 248 241 248
356 365 350 358 350 358 350 358 350 358

219 233 249 250 249 250 249 250 249 250

14 4

118 125 101 108 101 108 101 108 101 108

5 3

66 118 63 76 63 76 63 76 63 76
42 25 47 44 47 44 47 44 47 44
18 17 21 19 21 19 21 19 21 19
100 99 94 93 94 93 95 93 99 95
2.9 2.8 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.7 2.9 2.8

41

10
30

1.601 1.713 1.608 1.672 1.606 1.672 1.648 1.688 1.705 1.710

October 8, 2010 Page 4 of 4 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-4:PropertyOctane &VolumePropertyRVP (psi)Oxygen (wt%)Aromatics (vol%)Benzene (vol%)Olefins (vol%)Sulfur (ppm)E130 (vol% off)E200 (vol% off)E215 (vol% off)E300 (vol% off)E310 (vol% off)Estimated DI1Energy Density2OctaneRONMONCONSensitivityVolume (K b/d)Refinery Modeling Results -- Pool Gasoline PropertiesPADD 120152007Single OctaneCalibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RONSummer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer WinterRFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool6.8 8.2 7.4 12.0 12.0 12.0 6.8 8.6 7.1 12.0 12.0 12.0 6.8 7.1 6.9 12.0 12.0 12.0 6.7 7.1 6.8 12.0 12.0 12.0 6.6 7.1 6.7 12.0 12.0 12.03.3 0.0 1.8 3.3 0.0 1.7 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.319.2 28.5 23.4 19.3 22.9 21.0 18.9 26.5 20.2 16.3 22.6 17.6 19.8 28.5 21.3 16.0 19.8 16.8 22.2 28.5 23.3 16.1 28.5 18.7 23.4 28.5 24.3 19.3 22.3 19.90.51 0.91 0.69 0.51 0.91 0.70 0.51 0.62 0.53 0.51 0.62 0.53 0.51 0.62 0.53 0.51 0.62 0.53 0.51 0.62 0.53 0.51 0.62 0.53 0.51 0.62 0.53 0.51 0.62 0.5316.9 7.9 12.9 16.6 13.2 15.0 12.7 13.2 12.8 14.8 13.2 14.4 11.6 4.0 10.3 13.3 4.0 11.4 13.2 4.0 11.6 13.0 4.9 11.3 12.0 8.0 11.4 12.5 5.8 11.125 17 22 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 23 25 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 58.1 9.1 8.5 16.1 17.0 16.5 8.0 10.8 8.5 17.0 15.5 16.7 8.3 6.4 8.0 17.1 12.1 16.1 8.0 7.2 7.9 17.1 12.5 16.1 7.4 7.6 7.5 16.0 15.3 15.845.6 43.7 44.7 55.8 46.5 51.4 46.3 50.0 46.9 55.8 57.7 56.2 46.7 46.2 46.6 52.9 60.3 54.5 45.5 48.0 45.9 52.8 59.5 54.2 44.4 46.7 44.8 52.8 54.7 53.277.9 80.4 79.0 82.2 80.4 81.3 79.5 81.5 79.9 82.4 83.8 82.7 79.4 80.4 79.5 83.7 91.0 85.2 79.7 80.4 79.8 85.6 83.9 85.3 79.3 80.4 79.5 83.8 89.5 85.01,202 1,177 1191 1,083 1,127 1104 1,191 1,147 1183 1,078 1,066 1076 1,188 1,195 1189 1,093 1,036 1081 1,196 1,179 1193 1,087 1,066 1083 1,207 1,186 1203 1,099 1,067 10925.074 5.217 5.138 4.995 5.134 5.061 5.075 5.084 5.077 4.979 5.002 4.983 5.080 5.117 5.086 4.979 4.967 4.977 5.093 5.106 5.095 4.973 5.021 4.983 5.093 5.125 5.099 4.984 4.988 4.98593.7 91.8 92.9 93.4 92.1 92.7 93.0 93.0 93.0 92.8 92.7 92.8 93.2 92.4 93.0 93.1 91.3 92.7 94.0 94.0 94.0 94.0 94.0 94.0 95.0 95.0 95.0 95.0 95.0 95.083.1 84.4 83.7 83.4 84.1 83.8 83.6 83.0 83.5 83.8 83.3 83.7 83.4 83.6 83.5 83.5 84.7 83.7 83.9 85.6 84.2 84.4 85.9 84.7 85.1 85.4 85.2 85.2 87.0 85.688.4 88.1 88.3 88.4 88.1 88.3 88.3 88.0 88.2 88.3 88.0 88.2 88.3 88.0 88.2 88.3 88.0 88.2 89.0 89.8 89.1 89.2 90.0 89.4 90.1 90.2 90.1 90.1 91.0 90.310.6 7.4 9.2 9.9 7.9 9.0 9.4 9.9 9.5 9.0 9.5 9.1 9.7 8.7 9.6 9.6 6.6 9.0 10.1 8.4 9.8 9.6 8.1 9.3 9.9 9.6 9.8 9.8 8.0 9.4459 378837445 403848697 144841677 177854697 144841677 177854697 144841677 177854697 144841677 1778541 ASTM Driveability Index: calculated by formula using modeling results for E130, E215, & E310 for CARBOB and E130, E200, & E300 plusan ethanol adjustment (2.403 for each percent of ethanol in the finished blend) for all other gasoline.2 Million Btu per barrel.October 8, 2010Page 1 of 4MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-4:PropertyOctane &VolumePropertyRVP (psi)Oxygen (wt%)Aromatics (vol%)Benzene (vol%)Olefins (vol%)Sulfur (ppm)E130 (vol% off)E200 (vol% off)E215 (vol% off)E300 (vol% off)E310 (vol% off)Estimated DI1Energy Density2OctaneRONMONCONSensitivityVolume (K b/d)Refinery Modeling Results -- Pool Gasoline PropertiesPADD 220152007Single OctaneCalibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RONSummer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer WinterRFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool6.9 8.7 8.4 13.8 13.7 13.7 6.9 8.7 8.4 13.8 13.7 13.7 6.9 7.5 7.4 13.8 13.7 13.7 6.9 7.5 7.4 13.8 13.7 13.7 6.9 7.5 7.4 13.8 13.7 13.73.3 0.7 1.1 3.3 0.8 1.2 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.316.0 29.3 27.0 16.0 24.8 23.3 21.6 20.4 20.6 16.0 17.1 16.9 16.0 23.4 22.0 16.0 17.3 17.1 16.0 26.9 24.9 18.8 20.4 20.1 22.0 28.5 27.3 19.1 23.2 22.40.84 1.37 1.28 0.79 0.92 0.90 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.6211.4 8.1 8.7 11.1 9.3 9.6 3.4 8.7 7.7 10.9 7.6 8.2 12.1 4.6 6.0 12.0 5.7 6.9 5.5 6.5 6.3 5.7 6.8 6.6 8.5 5.9 6.3 5.0 7.0 6.625 17 18 25 15 17 9 19 17 25 14 16 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 59.6 9.3 9.4 20.0 18.3 18.6 6.6 10.4 9.7 19.2 18.5 18.7 8.5 8.1 8.2 17.9 18.7 18.6 7.2 8.5 8.3 20.5 17.9 18.4 7.3 8.5 8.3 19.1 18.3 18.554.0 47.5 48.5 61.3 56.9 57.7 54.0 50.1 50.8 55.4 59.8 58.9 49.2 49.8 49.7 56.7 59.5 59.0 47.3 50.0 49.5 61.3 58.6 59.1 51.5 48.6 49.1 55.4 59.5 58.782.0 81.2 81.3 82.4 83.8 83.5 84.9 82.0 82.5 82.0 85.7 85.0 83.7 80.9 81.5 81.4 85.9 85.0 82.2 80.8 81.1 82.0 85.6 84.9 88.6 79.2 81.0 84.2 84.8 84.71,122 1,152 1147 1,028 1,042 1040 1,124 1,146 1142 1,074 1,033 1041 1,153 1,161 1159 1,072 1,033 1041 1,177 1,159 1162 1,028 1,044 1041 1,125 1,175 1165 1,066 1,039 10445.048 5.163 5.144 4.930 5.057 5.035 5.037 5.031 5.032 4.945 4.930 4.933 5.041 5.063 5.059 4.933 4.931 4.931 5.014 5.089 5.075 4.962 4.944 4.947 5.063 5.091 5.086 4.962 4.955 4.95792.7 92.9 92.9 92.9 92.7 92.7 91.7 92.4 92.2 92.7 91.9 92.1 93.1 92.1 92.3 93.2 91.8 92.1 94.0 94.0 94.0 94.0 94.0 94.0 95.0 95.0 95.0 95.0 95.0 95.084.1 84.9 84.8 83.9 85.1 84.9 84.9 83.6 83.9 83.9 84.1 84.0 83.5 83.9 83.8 83.4 84.2 84.0 86.0 84.6 84.9 86.0 85.5 85.6 86.4 85.6 85.7 87.0 86.3 86.488.4 88.9 88.8 88.4 88.9 88.8 88.3 88.0 88.1 88.3 88.0 88.1 88.3 88.0 88.1 88.3 88.0 88.1 90.0 89.3 89.4 90.0 89.7 89.8 90.7 90.3 90.4 91.0 90.6 90.78.6 8.0 8.1 9.0 7.6 7.8 6.8 8.7 8.4 8.9 7.9 8.1 9.5 8.2 8.5 9.7 7.6 8.0 8.0 9.4 9.1 8.0 8.5 8.4 8.6 9.4 9.3 8.0 8.7 8.6303 1516 1819 314 1511 1825 366 1598 1964 380 1591 1971 366 1598 1964 380 1591 1971 366 1598 1964 380 1591 1971 366 1598 1964 380 1591 19711 ASTM Driveability Index: calculated by formula using modeling results for E130, E215, & E310 for CARBOB and E130, E200, & E300 plusan ethanol adjustment (2.403 for each percent of ethanol in the finished blend) for all other gasoline.2 Million Btu per barrel.October 8, 2010Page 2 of 4MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-4:PropertyOctane &VolumePropertyRVP (psi)Oxygen (wt%)Aromatics (vol%)Benzene (vol%)Olefins (vol%)Sulfur (ppm)E130 (vol% off)E200 (vol% off)E215 (vol% off)E300 (vol% off)E310 (vol% off)Estimated DI1Energy Density2OctaneRONMONCONSensitivityVolume (K b/d)Refinery Modeling Results -- Pool Gasoline PropertiesPADD 320152007Single OctaneCalibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RONSummer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer WinterRFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool6.9 8.3 8.0 11.8 11.9 11.9 6.9 8.7 8.4 11.8 11.9 11.9 6.8 7.4 7.3 11.8 11.9 11.9 6.8 7.4 7.3 11.8 11.9 11.9 6.8 7.4 7.3 11.8 11.9 11.93.3 0.0 0.7 3.3 0.1 0.7 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.316.0 27.0 24.8 16.0 21.5 20.4 16.0 19.3 18.6 16.0 16.3 16.2 16.5 21.5 20.5 17.9 15.3 15.9 16.0 24.5 22.8 21.2 17.6 18.3 16.2 26.9 24.7 16.2 20.8 19.90.55 0.97 0.89 0.53 0.87 0.80 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.54 0.55 0.55 0.43 0.62 0.58 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.52 0.62 0.60 0.54 0.52 0.53 0.55 0.62 0.61 0.54 0.62 0.6010.7 11.3 11.2 10.0 10.3 10.3 11.7 9.7 10.1 12.5 7.6 8.6 9.0 7.4 7.8 4.5 7.9 7.2 8.4 7.5 7.7 7.0 8.0 7.8 11.9 6.2 7.4 12.7 6.4 7.725 23 23 23 22 22 25 21 21 25 17 19 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 57.4 9.0 8.6 15.8 15.9 15.9 7.5 10.5 9.9 17.3 16.8 16.9 7.5 8.7 8.5 16.2 17.1 16.9 7.9 8.1 8.1 16.9 16.0 16.2 9.0 8.0 8.2 16.9 15.1 15.450.6 42.4 44.1 57.2 49.3 50.9 54.0 50.1 50.9 58.8 57.3 57.6 54.0 50.1 50.9 65.0 56.0 57.9 48.9 49.5 49.4 58.8 56.3 56.8 46.3 46.2 46.2 49.2 54.4 53.381.5 79.5 79.9 82.0 83.9 83.5 81.9 83.0 82.8 87.1 85.1 85.5 81.5 81.6 81.6 85.0 85.7 85.6 88.8 78.7 80.7 82.7 85.7 85.1 82.8 79.9 80.5 81.5 85.8 84.91,157 1,190 1184 1,075 1,099 1094 1,131 1,142 1140 1,040 1,059 1055 1,132 1,154 1150 1,008 1,065 1053 1,140 1,171 1165 1,057 1,067 1065 1,175 1,190 1187 1,128 1,084 10935.038 5.207 5.173 4.950 5.113 5.080 5.021 5.030 5.028 4.978 4.952 4.957 5.028 5.067 5.060 4.956 4.955 4.955 5.037 5.072 5.065 4.994 4.949 4.958 5.071 5.090 5.087 5.001 4.970 4.97692.7 92.0 92.2 92.7 91.6 91.8 92.4 92.4 92.4 92.3 91.9 92.0 92.4 92.5 92.5 91.7 92.1 92.0 94.0 94.0 94.0 94.0 94.0 94.0 95.0 95.0 95.0 95.0 95.0 95.083.7 83.8 83.7 83.7 84.2 84.1 83.8 83.6 83.6 83.9 84.1 84.0 83.8 83.5 83.6 84.5 83.9 84.0 85.8 84.5 84.8 85.2 85.6 85.5 85.7 85.7 85.7 85.1 86.6 86.388.2 87.9 88.0 88.2 87.9 88.0 88.1 88.0 88.0 88.1 88.0 88.0 88.1 88.0 88.0 88.1 88.0 88.0 89.9 89.2 89.4 89.6 89.8 89.8 90.4 90.3 90.3 90.0 90.8 90.69.1 8.3 8.4 9.0 7.3 7.7 8.6 8.8 8.8 8.5 7.8 8.0 8.6 9.0 8.9 7.1 8.2 8.0 8.2 9.5 9.2 8.8 8.4 8.5 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.9 8.4 8.7757 3009 3766 783 3057 3840 840 3371 4211 870 3425 4295 840 3371 4211 870 3425 4295 840 3371 4211 870 3425 4295 840 3371 4211 870 3425 42951 ASTM Driveability Index: calculated by formula using modeling results for E130, E215, & E310 for CARBOB and E130, E200, & E300 plusan ethanol adjustment (2.403 for each percent of ethanol in the finished blend) for all other gasoline.2 Million Btu per barrel.October 8, 2010Page 3 of 4MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-4:PropertyOctane &VolumePropertyRVP (psi)Oxygen (wt%)Aromatics (vol%)Benzene (vol%)Olefins (vol%)Sulfur (ppm)E130 (vol% off)E200 (vol% off)E215 (vol% off)E300 (vol% off)E310 (vol% off)Estimated DI1Energy Density2OctaneRONMONCONSensitivityVolume (K b/d)Refinery Modeling Results -- Pool Gasoline PropertiesCalifornia20152007Single OctaneCalibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RONSummer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer WinterCarbob CBG CG Pool Carbob CG Pool Carbob CG Pool Carbob CG Pool Carbob CG Pool Carbob CG Pool Carbob CG Pool Carbob CG Pool Carbob CG Pool Carbob CG Pool5.6 6.8 8.0 6.0 10.0 11.0 10.1 5.6 8.3 5.8 10.0 11.0 10.0 5.6 6.9 5.7 10.0 11.0 10.0 5.5 6.9 5.6 10.0 11.0 10.0 5.5 6.9 5.6 10.0 11.0 10.00.0 0.0 0.9 0.1 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.2 0.0 3.3 0.1 0.0 3.3 0.2 0.0 3.3 0.1 0.0 3.3 0.2 0.0 3.3 0.1 0.0 3.3 0.2 0.0 3.3 0.123.5 25.2 30.8 24.6 22.8 30.3 23.3 21.1 22.8 21.2 20.0 26.4 20.2 21.2 25.8 21.5 20.5 23.7 20.6 27.6 30.8 27.8 24.0 30.8 24.2 28.9 30.8 29.0 24.0 30.8 24.20.58 0.65 0.61 0.59 0.58 0.61 0.58 0.58 0.62 0.58 0.58 0.62 0.58 0.58 0.62 0.58 0.58 0.62 0.58 0.58 0.62 0.58 0.58 0.62 0.58 0.58 0.62 0.58 0.58 0.62 0.585.7 9.6 6.8 6.0 6.8 6.8 6.8 5.7 6.8 5.8 8.5 6.8 8.4 4.8 1.7 4.6 7.5 6.8 7.4 4.9 6.8 5.1 7.0 1.5 6.8 4.9 6.8 5.0 8.8 6.8 8.710 19 18 11 10 17 11 7 14 8 7 18 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 4 5 5 57.5 11.0 8.7 7.8 13.2 9.5 12.9 6.7 13.6 7.1 14.4 14.0 14.3 6.6 10.4 6.9 14.6 13.7 14.6 6.9 7.9 7.0 13.2 14.3 13.2 6.7 9.0 6.9 12.9 14.0 12.940.5 41.2 42.5 40.8 45.0 44.7 45.0 38.5 52.9 39.4 46.4 52.6 46.6 38.7 42.5 38.9 46.3 54.3 46.6 39.0 43.0 39.2 45.2 48.0 45.3 38.8 42.5 39.0 44.6 56.3 45.049.9 53.8 48.3 49.7 52.7 51.0 52.6 48.0 58.1 48.7 54.0 55.2 54.0 48.0 50.9 48.2 53.9 58.3 54.0 48.3 48.9 48.3 53.4 52.8 53.4 48.5 46.1 48.3 53.5 59.8 53.786.5 85.5 79.8 85.5 86.0 79.8 85.6 84.9 79.8 84.5 86.3 79.8 86.1 84.7 79.8 84.4 86.0 79.8 85.8 84.3 79.8 84.0 87.7 79.8 87.4 84.6 79.8 84.3 89.8 79.8 89.589.6 88.2 83.3 88.7 89.1 80.5 88.5 88.1 80.5 87.6 89.0 83.5 88.8 88.0 81.0 87.5 88.8 80.9 88.6 87.5 82.5 87.2 90.8 80.5 90.4 88.0 84.0 87.8 92.8 81.0 92.51,182 1,168 1,196 1183 1,125 1,174 1128 1,206 1,122 1201 1,113 1,123 1113 1,208 1,207 1208 1,114 1,112 1113 1,204 1,213 1205 1,116 1,153 1117 1,204 1,2121204 1,110 1,096 11095.228 5.175 5.241 5.229 5.169 5.245 5.175 5.228 5.038 5.216 5.154 5.075 5.151 5.230 5.052 5.219 5.154 5.036 5.150 5.258 5.136 5.250 5.174 5.071 5.171 5.264 5.147 5.256 5.185 5.066 5.18289.0 91.9 92.2 89.6 89.1 92.5 89.3 87.4 92.1 87.7 87.6 91.9 87.7 87.4 91.9 87.6 87.6 91.9 87.7 90.7 94.0 90.9 90.7 94.0 90.8 91.8 95.0 92.0 91.8 95.0 91.982.8 84.3 84.8 83.1 82.7 84.5 82.9 81.6 83.7 81.7 81.4 83.9 81.5 81.6 83.9 81.8 81.4 83.9 81.5 84.0 86.0 84.1 84.0 85.6 84.0 85.0 85.3 85.0 84.8 85.6 84.885.9 88.1 88.5 86.3 85.9 88.5 86.1 84.5 87.9 84.7 84.5 87.9 84.6 84.5 87.9 84.7 84.5 87.9 84.6 87.3 90.0 87.5 87.3 89.8 87.4 88.4 90.1 88.5 88.3 90.3 88.36.3 7.7 7.3 6.5 6.3 8.0 6.4 5.8 8.3 6.0 6.2 8.0 6.2 5.7 8.0 5.9 6.1 8.0 6.2 6.7 8.0 6.8 6.7 8.4 6.7 6.8 9.7 7.0 7.0 9.4 7.1869 28 1541051960 741034905 62967917 29946905 62967917 29946905 62967917 29946905 62967917 29946Note: An octane senstivity for Carbob of about 6.8 would increase to about 8.0 when blended with 10% ethanol.1 ASTM Driveability Index: calculated by formula using modeling results for E130, E215, & E310 for CARBOB and E130, E200, & E300 plusan ethanol adjustment (2.403 for each percent of ethanol in the finished blend) for all other gasoline.2 Million Btu per barrel.October 8, 2010Page 4 of 4MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-5: Refinery Modeling Results -- Average Aromatics Content of the Gasoline Pool,PADDs 1-3, California, and Combined RegionsPADDs 1-3 California Total2007 2015 2007 2015 2007 2015Calibra- Refer- 94 95 Calibra- Refer- 94 95 Calibra- Refer- 94 95tion ence NCG RON RON tion ence NCG RON RON tion ence NCG RON RONSummer 25.2 19.4 21.0 23.5 25.4 24.6 21.2 21.5 27.8 29.0 25.1 19.6 21.1 24.0 25.8Winter 21.3 16.6 16.3 18.8 20.6 23.3 20.2 20.6 24.2 24.2 21.6 17.0 16.8 19.5 21.0Annual 23.2 18.0 18.6 21.1 23.0 24.2 20.9 21.2 26.6 27.5 23.4 18.3 18.9 21.8 23.5Note: California average reflects CARBOB, not finished RFG.October 8, 2010MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-6:GasolineBlendstockTotal (%)C4sNatural Gas LiquidsIsomerateRaffinateNaphthas (C5-250°)HydrocrackateAlkylatePoly GasFCC NaphthaReformatePy GasEthanolVolume (K b/d)Refinery Modeling Results -- Gasoline Composition (Vol. %)PADD 120152007Single OctaneCalibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RONSummer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer WinterRFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 1000.9 5.9 3.2 10.1 14.7 12.3 1.0 4.2 1.5 11.4 9.5 11.0 0.9 1.5 1.0 10.9 6.7 10.0 0.8 2.2 1.0 10.8 7.4 10.1 1.0 0.7 0.9 10.4 8.9 10.12.8 1.2 2.1 3.8 2.0 2.4 2.0 2.5 2.0 2.4 2.0 2.5 2.0 2.4 2.0 2.5 2.0 7.0 5.8 7.2 5.70.4 0.9 0.6 0.3 2.1 1.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 2.0 0.6 1.2 0.2 0.3 2.6 0.7 1.4 0.2 0.3 2.8 0.8 2.3 0.4 4.7 1.04.7 18.4 11.1 11.4 8.5 10.0 10.7 14.5 11.4 9.0 17.8 10.9 9.9 20.9 11.8 5.5 31.9 11.0 8.2 25.5 11.2 3.9 32.9 9.9 3.6 15.3 5.6 3.1 12.1 5.01.7 0.9 2.5 1.2 1.2 1.0 2.1 1.6 1.1 0.9 1.6 1.3 0.9 0.7 1.6 1.3 0.2 3.4 0.7 6.3 1.38.4 16.0 11.9 5.4 12.7 8.9 13.9 11.5 10.9 8.7 12.7 5.9 11.5 8.6 13.0 9.5 11.6 13.2 11.8 11.0 6.7 10.1 14.2 7.3 13.0 8.9 15.9 10.34.1 2.2 1.5 2.0 1.8 2.3 0.9 2.0 2.2 1.8 1.2 2.5 1.5 1.8 1.5 1.8 1.4 2.6 1.6 2.1 0.6 1.8 1.4 1.6 1.4 2.1 0.6 1.856.0 26.5 42.3 42.0 39.2 40.7 40.9 44.3 41.5 38.7 39.6 38.9 47.0 7.5 40.3 45.8 36.3 47.4 6.9 40.5 46.3 36.7 41.6 33.3 40.2 41.9 15.8 36.510.4 31.1 20.0 15.4 18.2 16.7 17.3 22.7 18.3 13.0 21.1 14.7 14.8 47.5 20.4 13.0 34.3 17.4 17.4 32.0 19.9 11.5 39.0 17.2 21.0 18.4 20.6 16.5 22.4 17.710.5 5.6 10.0 5.2 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0437 378 815 445 403 848 697 144 841 677 177 854 697 144 841 677 177 854 697 144 841 677 177 854 697 144 841 677 177 854October 8, 2010Page 1 of 4MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-6:GasolineBlendstockTotal (%)C4sNatural Gas LiquidsIsomerateRaffinateNaphthas (C5-250°)HydrocrackateAlkylatePoly GasFCC NaphthaReformatePy GasEthanolVolume (K b/d)Refinery Modeling Results -- Gasoline Composition (Vol. %)PADD 220152007Single OctaneCalibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RONSummer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer WinterRFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 1000.9 5.7 4.9 15.7 15.5 15.5 0.9 4.1 3.5 13.1 14.1 13.9 0.5 2.0 1.7 12.3 14.0 13.7 0.5 2.1 1.8 15.3 13.2 13.6 0.5 2.2 1.9 11.7 14.0 13.63.0 0.60.1 11.2 9.4 3.9 10.5 9.3 10.9 8.2 8.7 6.3 7.6 7.4 6.9 9.1 8.7 6.5 7.2 7.1 10.1 8.4 8.7 9.2 7.4 2.8 9.3 8.1 3.3 8.5 7.50.7 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.1 0.9 0.2 0.2 1.1 0.9 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.8 0.7 0.3 0.2 1.0 0.87.5 6.2 10.9 6.9 7.6 14.3 4.8 6.6 8.6 6.9 7.3 8.8 8.5 4.5 7.6 7.0 10.3 6.6 7.3 8.5 6.6 7.0 7.1 7.1 7.1 3.4 6.8 6.114.6 2.7 4.7 5.6 4.6 10.3 6.1 6.9 6.5 6.6 6.6 6.0 4.9 8.1 6.6 3.8 3.1 7.5 3.5 4.3 3.9 3.2 14.1 1.9 4.222.3 11.3 13.1 5.6 10.1 9.3 21.3 10.1 12.2 5.6 10.9 9.9 14.4 11.8 12.3 4.3 11.4 10.0 28.0 8.6 12.2 19.9 7.9 10.2 23.3 9.6 12.2 17.4 9.0 10.60.7 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.241.6 26.4 29.0 43.3 19.8 23.9 4.4 31.3 26.3 43.4 16.3 21.5 53.5 19.3 25.7 51.8 14.3 21.5 26.0 26.7 26.6 12.9 24.0 21.9 33.5 25.5 27.0 17.1 22.4 21.49.9 32.2 28.5 10.1 28.6 25.4 26.5 24.1 24.6 15.1 24.8 22.9 6.9 31.2 26.7 7.6 26.2 22.6 15.1 31.9 28.7 25.6 24.6 24.8 22.3 30.5 29.0 22.9 26.2 25.610.0 2.0 3.3 10.0 2.4 3.7 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0303 1516 1819 314 1511 1825 366 1598 1964 380 1591 1971 366 1598 1964 380 1591 1971 366 1598 1964 380 1591 1971 366 1598 1964 380 1591 1971October 8, 2010Page 2 of 4MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-6:GasolineBlendstockTotal (%)C4sNatural Gas LiquidsIsomerateRaffinateNaphthas (C5-250°)HydrocrackateAlkylatePoly GasFCC NaphthaReformatePy GasEthanolVolume (K b/d)Refinery Modeling Results -- Gasoline Composition (Vol. %)PADD 320152007Single OctaneCalibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RONSummer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer WinterRFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool RFG CG Pool100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 1000.5 4.5 3.7 10.2 12.7 12.2 0.5 3.4 2.8 9.2 11.2 10.8 0.5 1.3 1.2 10.9 10.8 10.8 0.5 1.6 1.3 8.4 10.8 10.3 0.7 2.3 1.9 9.5 9.5 9.50.1 0.18.8 5.5 6.1 11.8 4.5 6.0 15.3 3.1 5.5 6.8 5.4 20.6 1.7 5.5 12.9 3.5 5.4 6.2 10.6 9.7 6.1 10.0 9.2 10.6 8.5 10.4 8.32.9 2.8 2.8 1.9 2.3 2.2 2.8 2.2 0.4 0.3 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.9 0.7 1.6 1.3 0.7 0.6 2.9 2.32.2 9.1 7.7 5.9 7.6 7.2 4.5 10.7 9.5 6.1 13.5 12.0 16.1 12.9 16.3 10.8 11.9 12.5 5.9 7.2 6.3 6.6 6.5 6.8 3.4 4.1 6.3 2.9 3.61.7 1.4 3.0 2.4 6.4 5.1 9.2 4.4 5.3 3.5 2.8 1.4 5.5 4.6 3.0 2.4 12.6 2.6 2.8 2.2 1.4 1.120.0 14.0 15.2 7.7 16.8 14.9 16.6 12.9 13.6 11.4 13.3 12.9 18.7 12.5 13.7 12.8 13.4 13.3 25.3 10.9 13.8 10.9 14.0 13.4 32.6 12.5 16.5 15.9 15.9 15.90.6 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.40.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.243.5 35.5 37.1 39.5 33.3 34.6 44.5 31.1 33.8 36.6 26.6 28.6 40.7 32.2 33.9 8.0 34.6 29.2 32.7 33.6 33.4 21.3 33.7 31.2 43.5 29.6 32.4 52.9 25.5 31.112.1 24.6 22.1 13.0 18.0 17.0 8.7 17.8 16.0 17.5 12.5 13.5 9.5 20.8 18.5 27.8 9.7 13.4 12.8 22.0 20.1 19.2 13.0 14.2 6.2 25.6 21.7 5.4 19.0 16.21.5 1.2 1.5 1.2 1.3 1.1 1.3 1.0 1.3 1.1 1.3 1.0 1.3 1.1 5.2 1.0 1.3 1.1 1.3 1.010.0 0.1 2.1 10.0 0.2 2.2 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0757 3009 3766 783 3057 3840 840 3371 4211 870 3425 4295 840 3371 4211 870 3425 4295 840 3371 4211 870 3425 4295 840 3371 4211 870 3425 4295October 8, 2010Page 3 of 4MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-6:GasolineBlendstockTotal (%)C4sNatural Gas LiquidsIsomerateRaffinateNaphthas (C5-250°)HydrocrackateAlkylatePoly GasFCC NaphthaReformatePy GasEthanolVolume (K b/d)Refinery Modeling Results -- Gasoline Composition (Vol. %)California20152007Single OctaneCalibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RONSummer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer WinterCarbob CBG CG Pool Carbob CG Pool Carbob CG Pool Carbob CG Pool Carbob CG Pool Carbob CG Pool Carbob CG Pool Carbob CG Pool Carbob CG Pool Carbob CG Pool100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 1000.5 4.5 3.3 0.8 8.7 7.6 8.7 0.9 3.8 1.1 9.6 10.1 9.6 0.8 4.0 1.0 9.8 9.2 9.8 0.5 0.5 0.5 8.0 6.5 7.9 0.5 0.5 0.5 7.5 6.6 7.512.6 14.8 10.8 12.6 10.9 10.1 9.0 18.1 9.6 10.1 9.7 8.8 12.6 9.0 10.7 10.4 10.0 9.4 9.8 9.5 7.8 2.6 7.5 7.3 5.9 7.21.7 3.7 2.7 1.8 1.9 10.7 2.5 1.5 12.3 2.2 2.1 18.4 2.6 2.2 13.1 2.9 1.8 31.8 2.7 1.1 18.5 2.2 1.8 1.7 0.1 13.2 1.0 1.8 1.810.2 9.5 9.0 8.4 13.2 12.3 13.0 12.6 12.2 11.4 12.6 12.2 9.2 8.7 8.2 27.2 8.8 10.1 9.4 3.8 23.6 4.417.7 16.4 12.9 12.0 18.7 17.5 10.4 10.1 19.7 18.4 10.3 10.0 18.2 16.8 18.2 13.7 13.2 19.8 11.9 19.3 17.0 16.50.3 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.1 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.5 1.0 1.029.3 33.6 24.6 29.3 28.2 33.4 28.6 30.3 26.3 30.1 28.1 43.9 28.6 29.6 22.1 29.1 28.3 16.8 28.0 30.6 30.3 30.6 28.6 8.7 27.9 25.9 24.8 25.8 30.7 3.0 29.926.8 30.2 48.9 27.9 26.9 46.2 28.3 25.5 26.8 25.6 25.4 17.5 25.2 26.1 31.8 26.4 25.3 30.3 25.5 29.2 22.8 28.8 28.4 47.6 29.0 34.2 36.9 34.4 30.2 50.9 30.81.4 0.1 10.0 0.6 10.0 0.3 10.0 0.6 10.0 0.3 10.0 0.6 10.0 0.3 10.0 0.6 10.0 0.3836 28 38 902 941 74 1015 905 62 967 917 29 946 905 62 967 917 29 946 905 62 967 917 29 946 905 62 967 917 29 946October 8, 2010Page 4 of 4MathProSingle Octane NCG

Exhibit C-7: Prices for Crude Oil, C4s, and Distressed Blendstocks, by Region ($/bbl, except as noted)

2015 2007 Single Octane

Product/ Calibration Reference NCG 94 RON 95 RON
Blendstock Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win Sum Win

PADD 1 Composite Crude 71.63 90.45 105.30 105.30 105.30 105.30 105.30 105.30 105.30 105.30
Iso-butane 59.05 76.53 76.10 80.44 76.10 80.44 76.10 80.44 76.10 80.44
Butane 59.05 76.53 76.10 80.44 76.10 80.44 76.10 80.44 76.10 80.44
Distressed Blendstocks
C5s 72.09 72.09 72.09 Coker Naphtha FCC Naphtha
Octane (¢/oct gal)
RON 3.32 1.32 6.63 2.27 CON 3.29 1.57 1.75 0.87 1.84 0.67

V alue above Price on
V olume Constrained C4s
Iso-butane 7.89 11.75 26.80 25.17 23.11
Butane 9.65 13.88 27.85 25.61 21.89

PADD 2 Composite Crude 65.92 86.69 100.51 100.51 100.51 100.51 100.51 100.51 100.51 100.51
Iso-butane 63.65 79.16 79.14 83.55 79.14 83.55 79.14 83.55 79.14 83.55
Butane 60.04 77.53 77.09 81.44 77.09 81.44 77.09 81.44 77.09 81.44
Distressed Blendstocks
C5s 73.08 73.08 73.08 Coker Naphtha FCC Naphtha
Octane (¢/oct gal)
RON 2.74 1.46 6.14 2.58 CON 1.85 1.85 1.22 0.76 2.37 0.76

V alue above Price on
V olume Constrained C4s
Iso-butane 9.27 9.79 10.27 12.26 10.85
Butane 13.21 14.14 14.40 14.24 14.06

PADD 3 Composite Crude 66.54 87.38 99.49 99.49 99.49 99.49 99.49 99.49 99.49 99.49
Iso-butane 61.65 77.16 77.14 81.55 77.14 81.55 77.14 81.55 77.14 81.55
Butane 58.04 75.53 75.09 79.44 75.09 79.44 75.09 79.44 75.09 79.44
Distressed Blendstocks
C5s 75.09 75.09 75.09 Coker Naphtha FCC Naphtha
Octane (¢/oct gal)
RON 3.73 2.08 7.46 3.62
CON 2.76 1.62 1.41 0.76 1.90 0.75

V alue above Price on
V olume Constrained C4s
Iso-butane
Butane 4.69 2.04 4.25 2.04 8.33 2.04 3.56 2.04 3.28

California Composite Crude 67.37 87.69 101.22 101.22 101.22 101.22 101.22 101.22 101.22 101.22
Iso-butane 66.97 87.51 83.88 93.45 83.88 93.45 83.88 93.45 83.88 93.45
Butane 45.96 69.92 60.51 73.54 60.51 73.54 60.51 73.54 60.51 73.54
Distressed Blendstocks
C5s 60.50 60.50 60.50 Coker Naphtha 59.00 59.00 59.00 FCC Naphtha 76.00 76.00 76.00
Octane (¢/oct gal)
RON 3.98 3.78 10.24 7.89 CON 1.50 1.77 1.26 1.35 1.68 1.29

V alue above Price on
V olume Constrained C4s
Iso-butane 2.73 9.55 24.69
Butane 19.33 20.61 18.93 24.48 39.64

October 8, 2010 

### Math ProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-8: Backup to Table 1.3 -- Estimated Effects of NCG and Single Octane NCG StandardsPADDs 1-3 California TotalConver- Single Octane Single Octane Single Octanesion Refer- 94 RON 95 RON Refer- 94 RON 95 RON Refer- 94 RON 95 RONFactors ence NCG NCG NCG ence NCG NCG NCG ence NCG NCG NCGEffects on CostsGasoline Volume (K b/d) 7,068 7,068 7,068 7,068 960 960 960 960 8,028 8,028 8,028 8,028Change in Refining CostTotal ($K/d) 9,274 17,638 27,232 137 2,695 5,818 9,411 20,333 33,050Capital charge & fixed cost 3,390 3,717 5,471 1 139 762 3,391 3,856 6,232Reduction in Cash Flow15,883 13,921 21,761 137 2,556 5,056 6,020 16,477 26,817Per gallon of gasoline (¢/gal) 3.1 5.9 9.2 0.3 6.7 14.4 2.8 6.0 9.8Value of Increase in GasolineEnergy Density (¢/gal)0.7 1.1 2.0 0.1 1.5 2.1 0.6 1.2 2.0Gasoline Energy Density (MM btu/b) 4.994 5.006 5.014 5.029 5.195 5.196 5.224 5.232 5.018 5.029 5.040 5.054Cost Savings ($K/d) 1,9843,3266,039325998282,0163,9256,867Refinery Investment ($B)4.3 4.7 6.9 0.0 0.2 0.9 4.3 4.9 7.8Effects on Refining OperationsCrude Oil InputVolume (K b/d) 11,64711,72711,86511,9511,5641,5621,5951,63813,21113,28913,46013,589Change per Barrel of Gasoline (b/b) 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.00 0.03 0.08 0.01 0.03 0.05Fuel & Power UseGases -- Natural & Refinery (foeb/d)Natural Gas 273 292 283 295 38 38 36 37 311 330 320 331Refinery Gases 382 389 415 428 77 77 84 91 459 467 500 519Catalyst Coke (K b/d) 185 186 192 193 27 26 28 29 212 213 219 222Power (MM Kwh/d) 95 96 97 101 18 18 18 20 113 114 116 121On-Purpose HydrogenProduction (MM scf/d) 3,512 3,540 3,275 3,133 1,219 1,218 1,145 1,202 4,731 4,758 4,420 4,334October 8, 2010Page 1 of 2MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-8: Backup to Table 1.3 -- Estimated Effects of NCG and Single Octane NCG StandardsPADDs 1-3 California TotalConver- Single Octane Single Octane Single Octanesion Refer- 94 RON 95 RON Refer- 94 RON 95 RON Refer- 94 RON 95 RONFactors ence NCG NCG NCG ence NCG NCG NCG ence NCG NCG NCGEnergy Use (Billion btu/d) 6,1936,3726,5276,7191,0591,0641,1111,1827,2517,4367,6397,901Gases -- Natural & RefineryNatural Gas 6.3 1,7201,8371,7841,8572372412292311,9572,0782,0132,088Refinery Gases 6.3 2,4092,4542,6162,6964854855315762,8942,9393,1473,272Catalyst Coke 6.02 1,1151,1201,1541,1621601591671771,2741,2801,3211,339Power 9.977 9499619731,0051771781841971,1261,1391,1571,202Percent Increase 3% 5% 9% 0% 5% 12% 3% 5% 9%CO2 Emissions (K MT/d) 487 498 505 514 94 94 96 102 581 592 601 616Gases -- Natural & RefineryNatural Gas 0.335 91 98 95 99 13 13 12 12 104 110 107 111Refinery Gases 0.405 155 158 168 173 31 31 34 37 186 189 202 210Catalyst Coke 0.626 116 116 120 121 17 17 17 18 132 133 137 139Power 0.638 60.7 61 62 64 11 11 12 13 72 73 74 77Hydrogen Production 0.018 64 65 60 57 22 22 21 22 87 87 81 79Percent Increase 2% 4% 6% 0% 3% 9% 2% 4% 6%1 Cash Flow is defined here as refinery revenues (from the sale of refined products) less all direct (non-investment related)costs, such as purchases of crude oil, unfinished oils,gasoline blendstocks, natural gas, electricty, and catalysts.Notes: California gasoline energy density reflects mostly CARBOB, rather than finished gasoline blended with 10% ethanol.Energy conversion factors are in terms of MM btu/unit; CO2 conversion factors are in terms of MT/unit.Energy conversion factor for electricity is equal to (3412 btu/Kwh)/((.38 generation efficiency)*(90% transmissionefficiency))October 8, 2010Page 2 of 2MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-9: Selected 2007 Calibration Results vs. Reported InformationPADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 CaliforniaSummer Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer WinterReported Calibration Reported Calibration Reported Calibration Reported Calibration Reported Calibration Reported Calibration Reported Calibration Reported CalibrationCrude Inputs (K b/d)1534 1,498 1511 1,478 3265 3,249 3140 3,111 7383 7,461 7158 7,004 1750 1,683 1826 1,771OperationsCharge Rates (K/b/d)Fluid Cat Cracking 653 675 653 665 1062 1,040 960 968 2670 2,625 2662 2,527607585535555Hydrocracking 33 29 32 31 258 258 254 254 514 512 509 512368368376368Coking 88 82 88 82 304 301 309 308 1163 1,185 1096 1,185422426423422Operating IndicesFCC Conversion 68.2 70.2 75.7 69.8 73.6 72.8 78.7 76.1Reformer Severity 100.6 100.1 100.6 100.4 100.5 100.0 96.2 93.7Coke Make (K b/d)Catalyst 33 30 35 31 44 48 41 41 114 119 117 114 32 29 27 27Marketable 20 20 23 21 96 99 100 101 353 356 335 350 100 100 97 99Prices/Marginal Cost ($/b)Gasoline1RFG 91.99 82.62 98.37 98.78 76.18 99.94 93.05 78.33 99.20 94.66 98.65 77.91 104.37 95.96Conventional 89.45 80.80 98.99 97.88 75.56 101.96 89.78 77.49 93.05 94.13 75.68 95.94DistillatesJet Fuel 90.01 78.16 115.28 97.46 72.20 108.56 88.71 78.37 112.73 99.11 90.84 74.16 113.41 96.95CARB Diesel93.42 75.49 110.50 97.11EPA Diesel 88.04 77.96 112.80 97.47 72.34 99.30 87.96 78.47 111.63 100.56Off-road Diesel 83.82 77.27 109.97 96.51 71.79 97.86 83.11 77.96 108.09 100.06Prem/Reg Differential (¢/g)2RFG 22 16 18 8 16 9 15 9 22 14 21 8 18 7 22 9Conventional 23 16 19 8 18 9 17 9 25 14 20 8Pool Gasoline Properties3RVP (psi) 7.4 7.4 12.0 8.3 8.4 13.7 7.9 8.0 11.9 5.6 5.6 10.0Oxygen (wt%) 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.7 0.7 1.1 0.8 1.2 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.7 0.0 0.0Aromatics (vol%) 24.0 23.4 21.4 21.0 27.2 27.0 23.8 23.3 25.4 24.8 22.7 20.4 24.6 23.5 22.8Benzene (vol%) 0.67 0.69 0.69 0.70 1.30 1.28 1.23 0.90 0.87 0.89 0.80 0.80 0.58 0.58 0.58Olefins (vol%) 13.5 12.9 14.9 15.0 8.3 8.7 8.0 9.6 12.0 11.2 12.0 10.3 5.9 5.7 6.8Sulfur (ppm) 110 22 132 25 131 18 128 17 100 23 112 22 10 10 10E200 (vol% off) 45.7 44.7 52.5 51.4 46.6 48.5 53.1 57.7 45.5 44.1 51.0 50.9 41.9 40.5 45.0E300 (vol% off) 81.5 79.0 83.3 81.3 81.8 81.3 84.2 83.5 80.0 79.9 82.2 83.5 87.2 86.5 86.0Refinery Energy Use4Per Refinery Input (MM btu/b)50.49 0.44 0.43 0.55 0.51 0.49 0.60 0.53 0.52 0.68 0.63 0.59Per Refinery Output (MM btu/b)60.50 0.44 0.43 0.56 0.52 0.50 0.61 0.54 0.53 0.71 0.64 0.601 Reported prices are for regular grade gasoline; ARMS marginal costs are for pool gasoline.2 Wholesale/terminal price differential. ARMS differential assumes 5 octane number difference.3 Reported pool gasoline properties are based on EPA data for 2004 and CEC survey data for CARBOB in summer 2006.4 Reported data are for annual operations.5 Refinery inputs include crude oil, gas oils, and residuum.6 Refinery (net) outputs are light gases plus all other refined product outputs (except for coke): less the following refineryinputs:C4s, natural gas liquids, gasoline blendstocks, oxygenates, naphthas, and kerosene.Sources: Exhibits A-4, A-7, A-8, A-19, A-20a&b, C-2, C-3, C-4, and C-7.October 8, 2010MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-10a: Key Measures of Refinery Responses to NCG and Single Octane NCG StandardsSummer SeasonPADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 CaliforniaRefer- 94 95 Refer- 94 95 Refer- 94 95 Refer- 94 95ence NCG RON RON ence NCG RON RON ence NCG RON RON ence NCG RON RONNew Capacity & OperationsNew Capacity (K b/d)Hydrocracking171 110 30 6Coking 18 24 24 27 37 46 55 63 127 142 167 191Alkylation 3 15 130 13Pen/Hex Isomerization 36 200 142Reforming 16 46 40 10CokingThroughput (K b/d) 98 104 104 106 335 343 351 358 1299 1313 1335 1357 405 405 410 424Fluid Cat CrackingThroughput (K b/d) 691 680 692 692 1,048 1,041 1,061 1,077 2,694 2,662 2,668 2,717 556 553 560 576Conversion 66.9 66.1 66.8 66.8 73.5 72.8 73.1 72.9 72.5 73.0 72.6 71.7 73.0 72.8 76.7 76.3HydrocrackingNaphtha Out-turns (%) 52.1 60.1 56.9 56.1 59.8 52.3 56.9 61.3 42.5 44.1 41.3 45.2 41.6 41.7 41.2 49.1ReformingCharge Rate (K b/d) 235 258 266 282 645 721 787 819 1,203 1,333 1,451 1,632 282 292 344 415Severity (RON) 96.0 96.9 100.1 100.7 94.8 94.8 97.7 100.5 97.3 97.7 100.3 101.0 91.7 91.6 100.0 100.4Inputs & Outputs (K b/d)Crude Oil1,455 1,465 1,477 1,487 3,193 3,240 3,294 3,336 7,269 7,371 7,464 7,526 1,555 1,553 1,594 1,648Excessed MaterialC5s 6 14 27 37 25 114Coker Naphtha10FCC Naphtha30Gasoline Properties & OctaneOctaneRON 93.0 93.0 94.0 95.0 92.2 92.3 94.0 95.0 92.4 92.5 94.0 95.0 87.7 87.6 90.9 92.0MON 83.5 83.5 84.2 85.2 83.9 83.8 84.9 85.7 83.6 83.6 84.8 85.7 81.7 81.8 84.1 85.0CON 88.2 88.2 89.1 90.1 88.1 88.1 89.4 90.4 88.0 88.0 89.4 90.3 84.7 84.7 87.5 88.5Sensitivity (RON - MON)19.5 9.6 9.8 9.8 8.4 8.5 9.1 9.3 8.8 8.9 9.2 9.3 6.0 5.9 6.8 7.0PropertyRVP (psi) 7.11 6.85 6.80 6.69 8.37 7.39 7.39 7.39 8.36 7.28 7.28 7.28 5.77 5.68 5.58 5.58Aromatics (vol%) 20.2 21.3 23.3 24.3 20.6 22.0 24.9 27.3 18.6 20.5 22.8 24.7 21.2 21.5 27.8 29.0Sulfur (ppm) 25 5 5 5 17 5 5 5 215558554Estimated DI 1183 1189 1193 1203 1142 1159 1162 1165 1140 1150 1165 1187 1201 1208 1205 1204Energy Density (MM btu/b) 5.077 5.086 5.095 5.099 5.032 5.059 5.075 5.086 5.028 5.060 5.065 5.087 5.216 5.219 5.250 5.256Gasoline Composition (%)C4s 1.5 1.0 1.0 0.9 3.5 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.8 1.2 1.3 1.9 1.1 1.0 0.5 0.5Alkylate 11.5 11.5 11.8 13.0 12.2 12.3 12.2 12.2 13.6 13.7 13.8 16.5 17.5 18.4 18.2 19.3Isomerate 2.0 2.0 2.0 5.8 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.1 5.5 5.5 9.7 8.5 9.6 9.0 9.4 7.5Reformate 18.3 20.4 19.9 20.6 24.6 26.7 28.7 29.0 16.0 18.5 20.1 21.7 25.6 26.4 28.8 34.4Hydrocrackate 1.0 0.9 0.7 0.7 6.9 4.9 3.1 3.2 5.1 2.8 2.4 2.2 12.3 11.4 8.7 9.4FCC Naphtha 41.5 40.3 40.5 40.2 26.3 25.7 26.6 27.0 33.8 33.9 33.4 32.4 30.1 29.1 30.6 25.8All Other 24.2 24.0 24.1 18.8 17.9 20.1 18.9 18.7 23.2 24.4 19.2 16.7 3.8 4.6 4.0 3.11 Octane sensitivity for the California gasoline pool is less than 8 because we modeled CARBOB, not finished Calfornia RFG.Otober 8, 2010MathProSingle Octane NCGExhibit C-10b: Key Measures of Refinery Responses to NCG and Single Octane NCG StandardsWinter SeasonPADD 1 PADD 2 PADD 3 CaliforniaRefer- 94 95 Refer- 94 95 Refer- 94 95 Refer- 94 95ence NCG RON RON ence NCG RON RON ence NCG RON RON ence NCG RON RONNew Capacity & OperationsCokingThroughput (K b/d) 83 86 87 88 311 311 315 318 1265 1268 1290 1292 402 402 398 408Fluid Cat CrackingThroughput (K b/d) 642 660 662 654 950 950 954 945 2,397 2,457 2,586 2,600 521 521 525 628Conversion 69.9 70.1 70.5 71.0 70.3 70.3 70.5 70.6 72.1 72.1 72.7 73.6 72.7 72.7 78.6 76.8HydrocrackingNaphtha Out-turns (%) 47.2 46.9 46.5 37.7 67.0 67.1 67.7 66.4 42.6 42.1 40.7 40.6 41.2 40.9 40.8 37.0ReformingCharge Rate (K b/d) 190 219 226 241 582 577 643 688 1,046 1,048 1,118 1,299 273 276 332 362Severity (RON) 94.8 94.2 98.7 100.2 92.6 93.3 97.7 100.6 97.5 96.8 100.3 100.6 91.7 91.7 97.7 99.4Inputs & Outputs (K b/d)Crude Oil1,427 1,432 1,438 1,443 3,058 3,059 3,082 3,105 6,891 6,887 6,974 7,005 1,581 1,582 1,597 1,617Gasoline Properties & OctaneOctaneRON 92.8 92.7 94.0 95.0 92.1 92.1 94.0 95.0 92.0 92.0 94.0 95.0 87.7 87.7 90.8 91.9MON 83.7 83.7 84.7 85.6 84.0 84.0 85.6 86.4 84.0 84.0 85.5 86.3 81.5 81.5 84.0 84.8CON 88.2 88.2 89.4 90.3 88.1 88.1 89.8 90.7 88.0 88.0 89.8 90.6 84.6 84.6 87.4 88.3Sensitivity (RON - MON)19.1 9.0 9.3 9.4 8.1 8.0 8.4 8.6 8.0 8.0 8.5 8.7 6.2 6.2 6.7 7.1PropertyRVP (psi) 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 13.72 13.72 13.72 13.72 11.88 11.88 11.88 11.88 10.03 10.03 10.03 10.03Aromatics (vol%) 17.6 16.8 18.7 19.9 16.9 17.1 20.1 22.4 16.2 15.9 18.3 19.9 20.2 20.6 24.2 24.2Sulfur (ppm) 25 5 5 5 16 5 5 5 195557555Estimated DI 1076 1081 1083 1092 1041 1041 1041 1044 1055 1053 1065 1093 1113 1113 1117 1109Energy Density (MM btu/b) 4.983 4.977 4.983 4.985 4.933 4.931 4.947 4.957 4.957 4.955 4.958 4.976 5.151 5.150 5.171 5.182Gasoline Composition (%)C4s 11.0 10.0 10.1 10.1 13.9 13.7 13.6 13.6 10.8 10.8 10.3 9.5 9.6 9.8 7.9 7.5Alkylate 8.7 9.5 10.1 10.3 9.9 10.0 10.2 10.6 12.9 13.3 13.4 15.9 10.1 10.0 13.2 16.5Isomerate 2.0 2.0 2.0 5.7 7.4 7.1 7.4 7.5 5.4 5.4 9.2 8.3 9.7 10.4 9.5 7.2Reformate 14.7 17.4 17.2 17.7 22.9 22.6 24.8 25.6 13.5 13.4 14.2 16.2 25.2 25.5 29.0 30.8Hydrocrackate 1.6 1.3 1.3 1.3 6.6 6.6 4.3 4.2 5.3 4.6 2.6 1.1 12.6 12.2 8.8 4.4FCC Naphtha 38.9 36.3 36.7 36.5 21.5 21.5 21.9 21.4 28.6 29.2 31.2 31.1 28.6 28.0 27.9 29.9All Other 23.2 23.4 22.6 18.4 17.8 18.4 17.8 17.1 23.4 23.3 19.1 17.9 4.1 4.2 3.6 3.71 Octane sensitivity for the California gasoline pool is less than 8 because we modeled CARBOB, not finished Calfornia RFG.Otober 8, 2010MathPro