# Source Test Report of the Coker Steam Vent for Non-Methane and Non-Ethane Volatile Organic Compounds

Prepared for:
CITGO Refining and Chemicals Company LP West Plant Refinery P.O. Box 9176 Corpus Christi, Texas 78469-0321

Prepared by:

URS Corporation 9400 Amberglen Boulevard (78729) PO Box 201088 Austin, Texas 78720-1088

April 25, 2008

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## iii 40941948.04 

# Table of Contents

Page

1.0 Introduction............................................................................................................... ... 1-1 1.1 Coker Unit Description...................................................................................... 1-5 1.2 Process Operations............................................................................................. 1-6 1.3 Source Test Timing............................................................................................ 1-6 1.4 Source Test Chronology .................................................................................... 1-7

2.0 Summary of Results..................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Data Reduction Strategy .................................................................................... 2-2 2.2 Methane and Ethane Concentration Results ...................................................... 2-2 2.3 NMNE VOC Concentration Results.................................................................. 2-3 2.4 Vent Gas Volumetric Flow Rate Results........................................................... 2-6 2.5 NMNE VOC Emission Rate Results ................................................................. 2-8 2.6 Supplementary Data........................................................................................... 2-8

3.0 Sampling and Analytical Procedures......................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Total VOC Concentration by EPA Method 25A and Other Test Method 12.... 3-2 3.1.1 Low-Range THC Calibration (THC2)................................................... 3-3 3.1.2 High-Range THC Calibration (THC1) .................................................. 3-4 3.1.3 Dilution Ratio and Detection Limits...................................................... 3-4 3.1.4 Deviations from the Source Test Protocol............................................. 3-5 3.2 Methane and Ethane Concentrations by EPA Method 18 ................................. 3-8 3.3 NMNE VOC Concentration by EPA Methods 18, 25A, and Other Test Method 12 ........................................................................................ 3-9 3.4 Vent Gas Volumetric Flow Rate by EPA Methods 2, 3, and 4 ......................... 3-9

4.0 Calculations .............................................................................................................. .. 4-1 4.1 Vent Dry Gas Molecular Weight ....................................................................... 4-2 4.2 Vent Gas Velocity Calculation .......................................................................... 4-2 4.3 Vent Gas Volumetric Flow Rate Calculation – Actual Conditions ................... 4-3 4.4 Vent Gas Volumetric Flow Rate Calculation – Dry Standard Conditions ........ 4-3 4.5 Standard Dry Gas Meter Sample Volume ......................................................... 4-4 4.6 Concentration of NMNE VOCs in the Vent Gas (Per Interval) ........................ 4-4 4.7 Mass Emission Rate (MER) of NMNE VOCs (Per Interval)............................ 4-5 4.8 Mass Emission Rate (MER) of NMNE VOCs (Per Cycle) ............................... 4-6

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## iv 40941948.04 

# Table of Contents

Page

5.0 Quality Assurance Objectives for Measurement Data............................................. 5-1 5.1 Methane and Ethane Concentrations in the Vent Gas ....................................... 5-2 5.2 Total VOC Concentration in the Vent Gas........................................................ 5-3 5.3 NMNE VOC Concentration in the Vent Gas..................................................... 5-6 5.4 Volumetric Flow Rate of the Vent Gas.............................................................. 5-6 5.5 Project Conclusion ............................................................................................ 5-9

Appendix A – Correspondence and Technical Information Appendix B – EPA Method 25A Raw Data and Calibration Information Appendix C – EPA Method 18 Raw Data and Calibration Information Appendix D – EPA Method 2/4 Raw Data and Calibration Information

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## v 40941948.04 

# List of Tables

Page

1-1 Test Information........................................................................................................... .. 1-4 1-2 Source Test Chronology ................................................................................................ 1-8

2-1 Methane and Ethane Concentration Results – Run 1..................................................... 2-2 2-2 Methane and Ethane Concentration Results – Run 2..................................................... 2-3 2-3 Methane and Ethane Concentration Results – Run 3..................................................... 2-3 2-4 NMNE VOC Concentration Results.............................................................................. 2-6 2-5 Vent Gas Molecular Weight Results.............................................................................. 2-7 2-6 Vent Gas Volumetric Flow Rate Results....................................................................... 2-7 2-7 NMNE VOC Emission Rate Results ............................................................................. 2-8

3-1 Summary of Sampling and Analytical Methods............................................................ 3-1 3-2 THC Analyzer Calibration Summary ............................................................................ 3-6



# List of Figures

Page

1-1 Coker Steam Vent Diagram........................................................................................... 1-6

2-1 Total VOC Concentration Results Vs. Elapsed Time.................................................... 2-5 2-2 Total VOC Concentration and Vent Gas Differential Pressure Vs. Elapsed Time – Run 1 ............................................................................................. 2-9 2-3 Total VOC Concentration and Vent Gas Differential Pressure Vs. Elapsed Time – Run 2 ............................................................................................. 2-10 2-4 Total VOC Concentration and Vent Gas Differential Pressure Vs. Elapsed Time – Run 3 ............................................................................................. 2-11 2-5 Total VOC Concentration and Vent Gas Differential Pressure Vs. Elapsed Time – Run 4 ............................................................................................. 2-12

3-1 Schematic Drawing of EPA Method 25A/Other Test Method 12 Sampling System.... 3-7

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 1-1 40941948.04 

# 1.0 Introduction

CITGO Refining and Chemicals Company LP (CITGO) operates a Coker Unit located at the West Plant Refinery in Corpus Christi, Texas, under air permits 8778A and PSD-TX-408M3 issued by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). CITGO received a Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 114 Request for Information , dated August 4, 2006, (the “ 2006 Section 114 Request ”) from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. The 2006 Section 114 Request requested that CITGO submit a Source Test Protocol and conduct source tests to measure (1) par ticulate matter (as PM-10) and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) from the Coker Steam Vent, (2) particulate matter emissions from area sources and (3) volatile organic compound emissions from area sources. CITGO engaged URS Corporation (URS) of Austin, Texas to prepare a Source Test Protocol as requested in the 2006 Section 114 Request and to prepare test reports detailing the results of the source testing.

Upon EPA approval of the Source Test Protocol , URS mobilized to the site the week of February 5, 2007, and testing was performed on the Coker Steam Vent source from February 12 through February 15, 2007. A Source Test Report of the Coker Unit Steam Vent , presenting the results of the source testing prescribed by the Source Test Protocol on the Coker Steam Vent at the West Plant Refinery Coker Unit, was submitted to EPA on May 9, 2007.

CITGO received a second CAA Section 114 Request for Information letter, dated October 9, 2007, (the “ 2007 Section 114 Request ”) from the EPA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, Washington, D.C. relating to the West Plant Refinery in Corpus Christi, Texas, requesting further testing of the Coker Steam Vent. The 2007 Section 114 Request requested eight (8) specific items in an Enclosure. Item 5 reads:

Submit a Protocol for conducting a source test to measure flow, moisture content, particulate matter (PM), non-methane and non-ethane volatile organic compounds, and benzene from the coker drum steam vents for each drum during normal representative operating conditions. The source test shall be conducted as follows:

a. Test Methods 1,2,3 and 5 of 40 CFR Part 60 Appendix A and Test Method 202 of 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix M (including a nitrogen purge) shall be used to determine the flow, moisture and concentration and mass emission rate of particulate matter; b. The Test Method 5 results shall separately report both front-half and back-half catch results with specific attention paid to collecting and analyzing condensed particulate matter in the sampling train;

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 1-2 40941948.04 

## c. Test Method 18 shall be used to determine the concentration of all major components as determined by a pre-survey that shall include at least methane, ethane, toluene and benzene and the concentration of dissolved VOCs that may be collected in the impinger sampling train or condensate collection device; d. Test Method 25A of 40 CFR Part 60 Appendix A shall be used in combination with Methods 1,2,3, and 18 and the dilution methods of Other Test Method 12 ( www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/prelim.html ) to determine the concentration and mass emission rate of non-methane/non-ethane organic compounds; e. Four complete venting cycles shall be tested for each pollutant with each cycle being reported as a separate run; f. Each drum shall be separately tested for each pollutant; g. All steam vents on a given drum shall be tested simultaneously for a givenpollutant (e.g., for Drum A test both vents A-1 and A-2 simultaneously for nonmethane/non-ethane organic compounds and then again test both vents A-1 and A-2 simultaneously for particulate matter); h. Process parameters shall be recorded as frequently as is feasible but in no event less than every 15 minutes for each run and shall include the process parameters described in [Item 1 of the letter referenced above]; and i. All changes to methodology from the above prescribed methods and requirements shall be specifically reported in a separate section of the protocol and specifically approved in advance. All changes to methodology not planned and approved shall be specifically identified in a separate section of the test report.

As part of the test protocol, provide operating conditions under which measurements shall be made and for which emission measurements shall be representative of normal operation of the coker. Define the ranges of the values of each operating parameter listed in [Item 1 of the letter referenced above] that are representative of normal operation. List all operating parameters that will be monitored and recorded during the test and describe how each parameter will be monitored and recorded. The source test protocol should be organized in accordance with Attachment I.

CITGO engaged URS Corporation (URS) of Austin, Texas to prepare a Source Test Protocol of the Coker Unit Steam Vent in a manner consistent with Attachment I of the 2007 Section 114 Request. This protocol was submitted to EPA on November 30, 2007, and discussed several necessary deviations from the specifications in the 2007 Section 114 Request to accomplish this very complex measurement program. EPA gave conditional approval of this Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent in a letter dated January 18, 2008. In a second letter to CITGO dated February 29, 2008, EPA amended the 2007 Section 114 Request to

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 1-3 40941948.04 

## request that CITGO test the Coker Steam Vent A-1 for methane and ethane emission rates prior to a turnaround at the Coker facility that began in March 2008.

The supplementary testing for methane and ethane emissions was requested by EPA in addition to the entire scope of testing described in the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent , which is scheduled to commence after the completion of the turnaround at the Coker facility. The amended 2007 Section 114 Request also requested three (3) specific items in an Enclosure:

1. Please submit all of the data collected from source sampling and analysis of samples (including Method 18 GC analysis) during the sampling of the coker vent emissions that occurred from about February 20, 2008 through March 1, 2008. Categorize the data by testing method and ensure that the data is properly labeled. 2. Submit the process data that was required to be recorded by the October 9, 2007 information request letter. 3. Provide the hourly average coker feed rates for each hour of each day from February 19, 2008 through March 1, 2008, inclusive.

The precise and accurate quantification of methane and ethane concentrations in the Coker Steam Vent gas stream is related to the measurement of VOC emissions because methane and ethane have been determined by EPA to have negligible atmospheric photochemical reactivity. As such, the concentrations of methane and ethane can be subtracted from the measurement of total VOCs, quantified through the use of a total hydrocarbon analyzer, prior to the development of VOC mass emission rates. VOC results determined in this manner are referred to as non-methane/non-ethane VOC emissions (NMNE VOC).

The source testing of the Coker Steam Vent gas stream for all of the parameters requested by EPA is a challenging project that requires much more than the simple performance of standard source testing methodologies for pollutants in a matrix of air. The accurate and precise measurement of the mass emission rates of NMNE VOCs from the Coker Steam Vent cannot be performed without significantly modifying the existing prescribed source testing methods or developing entirely new test methods that are consistent with the steam vent gas stream characteristics. The reference test methods requested by EPA to be used as the basis for the quantification of these selected pollutants were primarily developed for use on combustion source gases exiting a stack or vent. The extremely high moisture content (90-100%) and the high velocity (over 300 ft/sec, or 200 mph) of the vent gas stream, the amount of target analyte present in the vent gas stream, the dynamic nature of the vent stream characteristics, and the batch nature of the coking process make the implementation of the EPA reference test methods,

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 1-4 40941948.04 

## as written, impossible. For example, the sampling system described in EPA Method 2 will be unable to condense the amount of moisture present in the vent gas stream and the electronic gas analyzers described in EPA Method 25A will have to be calibrated with procedures that do not exist in any EPA Method. Furthermore, the high degree of error associated with the quantification of a trace fraction (<5%) of dry gas in the steam vent gas stream will have a significant impact on the uncertainty associated with data reduction for pollutants on a dry gas basis.

URS mobilized to the site on February 22, 2008, and testing was performed on the Coker Steam Vent source from February 24 through February 28, 2008. URS followed the significantly modified test methods described in the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent to test for total VOC concentrations, methane and ethane concentrations, and vent gas volumetric flow rate. This Source Test Report of the Coker Steam Vent for Non-Methane and Non-Ethane Volatile Organic Compounds presents the results of the source testing requested by EPA in their letter to CITGO dated February 29, 2008. URS has organized this report in a manner consistent with Attachment II of the 2007 Section 114 Request except for one modification. All raw sampling and analytical data has been included in various appendices of the report and Section 4 has been limited to example calculations. General information regarding the testing at the Coker Steam Vent is summarized in Table 1-1.

Table 1-1. Test Information
Facility Name CITGO Refining and Chemicals Company LP, West Plant Refinery Contact Person(s) Mark Cheesman Telephone Number 361-844-4882 Facility Address P.O. Box 9176 Corpus Christi, Texas 78469-0321 Types of Process Sampled Coker Steam Vent A-1 Gas Stream Person Responsible for Conducting Test George Lipinski Telephone Number 512-454-4797 Testing Company Name URS Corporation Address 9400 Amberglen Boulevard Austin, Texas 78729 Person(s) Conducting Tests Kevin McGinn Walter Lin Carl Galloway Meggen DeLollis Test Methods Performed Modified EPA Method 2/4 EPA Method 18 Modified EPA Method 25A Modified Other Test Method 12 Date of Testing February 24-28, 2008

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 1-5 40941948.04 

## 1.1 Coker Unit Description The Coker Unit converts, via thermal cracking, residual oil from the vacuum or crude unit into gas oil that can be made into light products, weak fuel gases and petroleum (pet) coke. The volatile constituents of the cracked product are driven off by baking at high temperatures in a coke drum so that the fixed carbon and residual ash are fused together. The Coker Unit has two coke drums which are designated in this document as Coke Drum A and Coke Drum B. After a coke drum is full of solidified coke, its contents are steamed to further reduce anyremaining volatile hydrocarbon content of the coke, and the coke drum contents are waterquenched to lower the temperature. The top and bottom heads of the full coke drum are then removed, and the solid pet coke is subsequently ‘cut’ from the coke drum with a high pressure water nozzle, where it falls into a catch basin. Prior to this removal process, the Coker SteamVent on top of a given coke drum activates to safely depressurize the coke drum before the cokecutting process. The Coker Steam Vent is composed of two separate vent pipes which run horizontally to a point outside of the coke drum structure; the upper one (A-1) being 12” in nominal diameter and the lower one (A-2) being 8” in nominal diameter. At the time of testing, these vent pipes originated from separate points on top of the coke drum. Both vent pipes remain open during the coke-cutting process. The entire coking process operates in a continuous cycle where Coke Drum A is quenched and cut while Coke Drum B is filled, and vice versa.

The two carbon steel pipes that comprise a Coker Steam Vent activate simultaneously and vent steam from a given drum for approximately 45 minutes prior to and during the entire cutting process on the drum. The sampling was performed only on Coker Steam Vent A-1, as directed by EPA, by inserting “shepherd’s hook” sampling probes approximately 6 inches into the downstream outlet of the vent. The sampling point is marked by an ‘X’ in Figure 1-2. The EPA Method 2/4 and EPA Method 18/25A sampling point was approximately 258 inches from the nearest upstream disturbance.

The use of the shepherd’s hook probe apparatus introduced several difficulties to the test effort and affected the overall quality of the data collected. The high velocity of the steam vent gas stream quickly degraded the protective insulation and heating components of the probe, lowering critical sampling system temperatures. As a result, appropriate sample gas filtering components of the EPA Method 2/4 sampling train could not be utilized due to the concern that the sampling system would become clogged prior to the collection of a sufficient amount of gas volume. Details regarding the difficulties and limitations associated with the shepherd’s hook probe apparatus are provided in the September 19, 2007 letter from Mr. Edward Lewis of Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P. to Ms. Tahani Rivers of the Environmental Protection Agency, included in Appendix A of this document. y 45 m 

# REDACTED

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 1-6 40941948.04 

## Figure 1-1. Coker Steam Vent Diagram

1.2 Process Operations The Coker Unit operates on a continuous batch cycle comprised of the filling, quenching, and cutting of the two contiguous Coke Drums (A and B). The Coker Unit was operated under normal conditions while all Coker Steam Vent source testing was performed on Coke Drum A. Coker Unit Process data required by EPA to be recorded during the February 2008 testing has already been submitted to EPA and is not included in this test report.

1.3 Source Test Timing The “complete venting cycle” of Coke Drum A occurred during the period between the activation of the Coker Steam Vent and the optimal depressurization of the coke drum that was necessary before the coke-cutting process could begin. The “optimal depressurization” is defined by CITGO as the coke drum pressure at which the coke drum is considered ready for the initiation of the coke-cutting procedure (i.e., the point at which a large flange on the top of the coke drum is removed immediately prior to the insertion of the cutting lance into the coke drum), and was contingent upon the following parameters measured directly during the source test:

 Coker Steam Vent differential pressure;

 Coker Steam Vent absolute pressure; Vent A-1

Vent A-2

Coker Drum A



## t differential pressure; t absolute pressure; 

# REDACTED

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 1-7 40941948.04 

##  Coker Steam Vent temperature; and

 Coke Drum pressure.

This condition (i.e., end point) was determined on a run-by-run basis to ensure that the data collected would most accurately reflect actual operating conditions, because the duration of each venting cycle was dependent upon the batch process operation of the Coker Unit.

For the purposes of this emissions testing, the sampling approach was directed at collecting samples during the first 30-minutes after Coker Steam Vent activation, although data was collected over a longer period of time for most runs. The project-specific health and safety plan (HASP) dictates that sampling personnel end sampling activities and begin moving off of the Coker Unit prior to the removal of the top head from the Coke drum. All of the venting cycles sampled during the February 2008 test effort continued beyond 45 minutes, and efforts were made to continue sample collection over the extended time period for as long as sampling equipment remained operable within acceptable performance ranges and until health and safety limitations were encountered.

1.4 Source Test Chronology The Source Test of the Coker Steam Vent A-1 was conducted from February 24 to February 28, 2008. Four venting cycles, designated as Runs 1-4, were tested for total VOC concentration and vent gas volumetric flow rate. Three venting cycles were tested for methane and ethane concentrations. Table 1-2 provides a summary of the dates and times for the performance of each test run on the Coker Steam Vent A-1 gas stream. The test run durations achieved with the EPA Method 4 sampling system (for the determination of % moisture) were significantly shorter than those achieved with the EPA Method 18/25A dilution sampling system due to the problematic clogging of the shepherd’s hook sampling probe apparatus used as a component of the EPA Method 2/4 sampling system. However, differential pressure and vent gas temperature readings were recorded according to EPA Method 2 concurrently with the operation of the EPA Method 18/25A sampling system and for the same duration of the venting cycle. t temperature;

t 30-

45 m 

# REDACTED

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 1-8 40941948.04 

## Table 1-2. Source Test Chronology

Source Sampling System(s) Run Number Date Start Time End Time Duration (min)

1 2/24/2008 5:05 5:24 19
2 2/26/2008 5:05 5:27 22
3 2/27/2008 19:36 20:08 32 EPA Method 4

4 2/28/2008 17:57 18:05 8
1 2/24/2008 5:04 5:53 49
2 2/26/2008 5:05 5:51 46
3 2/27/2008 19:36 20:22 46 EPA Methods 2

and 25A 4 2/28/2008 17:57 18:40 43
1 2/24/2008 5:04 5:53 49
2 2/26/2008 5:05 5:51 46
3 2/27/2008 19:36 20:06 30 Coker Steam Vent A-1

EPA Method 18

4 2/28/2008

--- 1



### --- 1



### --- 1

1 

### Sample not collected. 

### 5:05 24
5:05 5:27

17:57 18:05 1 9
22

8
5:04 49
46
46
43
49
46
30 19

:36 20:06 5:51 5:53 18:40 5:05

36 1 9:
17:57
5:04
5:05 19:36 20:08 32

5:53

51 5 :
20:22 5:2 

# REDACTED

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 2-1 40941948.04 

# 2.0 Summary of Results

This section presents a summary of the results of the emissions testing of the Coker Steam Vent source for methane and ethane concentrations, NMNE VOC concentrations, volumetric flow rates, and NMNE VOC mass emission rates. The modified methods used for sampling and analysis were specified in detail in the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent and are discussed briefly in Section 3. Example calculations are presented in Section 4. Quality assurance objectives for the measurement data are discussed in Section 5.

2.1 Data Reduction Strategy EPA’s request for information communicated interest in developing the mass emission rates for the selected pollutants. Pollutant mass emission rates are typically expressed using an industry standard of mass per unit time, such as lbs/hr, by relating the concentration of a pollutant to the average volumetric flow rate of a gas stream both measured during a distinct unit of time. Due to the atypical nature of the Coker Steam Vent source, CITGO proposes that a more comprehensive emissions profile be developed to meet EPA’s request. The use of a simple average or time-weighted average is inappropriate for developing an emissions profile for the dynamic characteristics of the Coker Steam Vent source. Based upon the results from this test effort as well as previous Coker Steam Vent testing, parameters such as gas stream velocity, vent gas static pressure, PM concentration, and the concentrations of organic species have been observed to vary greatly during the venting cycle as the coke drum depressurizes and process parameters such as temperature and pressure fluctuate and steadily decrease. Typical combustion sources – for which the EPA Methods were originally developed – do not operate as dynamic batch processes. Instead, they produce effluent gas streams that are more or less static in their profiles.

The data reduction strategy used in this report integrated pollutant mass emission rates (as lb/min) throughout the “complete venting cycle.” Data gaps created by the limited operation of the EPA Method 2/4 and EPA Method 18/25A sampling systems during a “complete venting cycle,” as defined is Section 1.3, were interpolated by separating the venting cycle into three time intervals and developing mass emission rates for each of the areas of an “emissions curve.” Mass emission rates, in lb/min, were developed for each minute of the “complete venting cycle” and then used to calculate a total lb/cycle emission rate.

Section 2.2 presents a summary of methane and ethane concentration results obtained via EPA Method 18. Section 2.3 presents a summary of NMNE VOC concentration results. Section 2.4 presents a summary of volumetric flow rate results. Section 2.5 presents NMNE VOC mass emission rates in lbs/cycle. Section 2.6 presents supplementary data relevant to the testing of the Coker Steam Vent gas stream.

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 2-2 40941948.04 

## 2.2 Methane and Ethane Concentration Results Methane and ethane concentrations were measured according to EPA Method 18 and the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent conditionally approved by EPA. Tedlar bag samples were collected from the same dilution sampling system used for the measurement of total VOC concentration and analyzed with a GC/FID. An integrated sample was collected in a Tedlar bag during each of three time intervals that composed a vent cycle and analyzed at least in triplicate. 1 

## Three vent cycles were tested for methane and ethane emissions; however, no measurements were taken during the third interval of Run 3. The sampling data from each run are presented in Tables 2-1 through 2-3.

URS personnel were unable to collect any Tedlar bags through the EPA Method 18/25A dilution sampling system during all of Run 4. During Run 4, no excess sample flow was available at the outlet of the dilution sampling system for the collection of integrated Tedlar bags. Unique gas stream conditions, such as highly negative vent gas static pressure, may have existed in the Coker Steam Vent during Run 4 and prevented the dilution sampling system from providing enough sample gas volume for the operation of both THC analyzers as well as the collection of integrated Tedlar bags. In addition, the shepherd’s hook probe component used with the dilution sampling system may have been partially clogged with moisture and particulate matter (PM), restricting the sample gas flow rate through the sampling system prior to the dilution orifice.

Table 2-1. Methane and Ethane Concentration Results – Run 1

Interval

(min) Analysis Methane (ppmw) Ethane (ppmw)
A 81 0
B 92 0
C --- 1


### --- 1 

### 0-15

Average 87 0 A 20,240 2,852 B 19,893 2,808 C 20,219 2,840 15-30

Average 20,117 2,833 A 1,711 223 B 1,661 216 C 1,667 215 Run 1

30-46

Average 1,680 218

1 

### Only duplicate analyses were performed for methane and ethane concentrations during Run 1. 

### 0-15

1 5

- 30

30- 46 

# REDACTED

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 2-3 40941948.04 

## Table 2-2. Methane and Ethane Concentration Results – Run 2

Interval

(min) Analysis Methane (ppmw) Ethane (ppmw)
A 466 58
B 471 63
C 468 62 0-15

Average 468 61
A 0 0
B 0 0
C 0 0 15-30

Average 0 0 A 11,358 1,445 B 11,319 1,520 C 11,411 1,523 Run 2

30-49

Average 11,363 1,496



## Table 2-3. Methane and Ethane Concentration Results – Run 3

Interval

(min) Analysis Methane (ppmw) Ethane (ppmw) A 335,805 41,564 B 324,036 40,222 C 311,021 38,720 D 322,933 40,813 E 325,666 41,373 F 326,693 41,285 0-15

Average 324,359 40,663 A 149,598 18,443 B 145,419 18,292 C 143,382 18,021 D 142,392 17,877 Run 3

15-30

Average 145,198 18,158



## 2.3 NMNE VOC Concentration Results Vent gas sampling for the determination of total VOC concentration was performed according to EPA Method 25A and the dilution system procedures outlined in Other Test Method 12, significantly modified according to the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent conditionally approved by EPA. These methods were applied to measure the concentration of total hydrocarbons (THC) on a wet basis, as propane (C 3 

## H 8 

## ), using a flame 0-15

1 5

- 30

30- 49

0 -1 5

15

- 30 

# REDACTED

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 2-4 40941948.04 

## ionization detector (FID). The results are reported as a conservative estimate of total VOC concentration. The total VOC concentration, in ppmvw, was averaged over each specific interval during the venting cycle. Figure 2-1 presents the instantaneous total VOC concentration results per elapsed time of the vent cycle for all four sampling runs performed on the Coker Steam Vent A-1 gas stream during the February 2008 testing.

NMNE VOC concentration results were obtained by subtracting the methane and ethane concentrations (in ppm, on a wet basis) from the average total VOC concentration (ppm, on a wet basis) during each of the three intervals that composed a venting cycle. The response factor (RF) per carbon in an FID is usually higher for methane and ethane than propane per carbon. Since the FIDs in the two THC analyzers were calibrated with standards of propane in air, an average response factor of 1.13 for methane was determined experimentally by directly introducing a 440.9 ppm methane calibration standard to the high-level THC analyzer downstream of the dilution system before Runs 3 and 4. The methane RF was calculated according to Equation 25Aap-1 in Other Test Method 12. As no ethane calibration standard was available at the time of testing, a theoretical RF of 1 was used in all applicable calculations. This approach assumes a FID response for ethane proportional to the number of carbon atoms in a molecule. Methane/propane and ethane/propane equivalencies were developing using the methane and ethane concentrations measured with EPA Method 18 and the appropriate RFs, then subtracted from the total VOC concentration data obtained through EPA Method 25A/Other Test Method 12.

Table 2-4 presents the average NMNE VOC concentration results per venting cycle interval. During Run 3, the methane and ethane concentrations obtained using EPA Method 18 exceeded the average total VOC concentrations measured with EPA Method 25A/Other Test Method 12 during the second time interval (minutes 15-30 of the venting cycle). URS was unable to collect a Tedlar bag for the determination of methane and ethane during the final interval (minutes 30-46 of the venting cycle) of Run 3. URS personnel were also unable to collect any Tedlar bags through the EPA Method 18/25A dilution sampling system during all of Run 4. 15-30

30-46 

# REDACTEDSource Test Report – Coker Steam Vent2-540941948.04Figure 2-1. Total VOC Concentration Results Vs. Elapsed Time050,000100,000150,000200,000250,000300,000350,000400,000 0:00:0 0 0:02:00 0:04:00 0:06 : 00 0: 0 8 : 00 0: 1 0 : 00 0: 1 2 : 00 0: 1 4 : 00 0 : 1 6 : 00 0 : 1 8 : 00 0 : 2 0 : 00 0 : 2 2 : 00 0 : 2 4 : 00 0 : 26: 00 0:28: 00 0:30:0 0 0:32:0 0 0:34:00 0:36:00 0:38:00 0: 4 0 : 00 0: 4 2 : 00 0: 4 4 : 00 0: 4 6 : 00 0 : 4 8 : 00Elapsed Time (min:sec)

ppmvw as propaneRun 1Run 2Run 3Run 4

0:0 0:0 0 0:02:00 0:02 0:04:00 0:06 : 00

0: 0 8 : 00 0: 1 0 : 00 0: 1 2 : 00 0: 1 4 : 00 0 : 1 6 : 00 0 : 1 8 : 00 0 : 2 0 : 00 0 : 2 2 : 00 0 : 2 4 : 00 0 : 26: 00 0:28: 00 0:30:0 0 0:32:0 0 0:34:00 0:36:00 0:38:00 0: 4 0 : 00 0: 4 2 : 00 0: 4 4 : 00 0: 4 6 : 00 0 : 4 8 : 00 REDACTED

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 2-6 40941948.04 

## Table 2-4. NMNE VOC Concentration Results

Elapsed

Time (min) Interval (min) Total VOC (ppmw) Methane (ppmw) Methane/Propane Equivalence

(ppmw) Ethane (ppmw) Ethane/Propane Equivalence

(ppmw) NMNE VOC (ppmw)
0-15 15 238 87 33 0 0 205 15-30 15 15,188 20,117 7,577 2,833 1,889 5,722 Run 1 30-49 19 5,643 1,680 633 218 145 4,865
0-15 15 439 468 176 61 41 222
15-30 15 233 0 0 0 0 233 Run 2 30-46 16 6,382 11,363 4,280 1,496 997 1,105 0-15 15 151,650 324,359 122,169 40,663 27,109 2,372
15-30 15 59,824 145,198 54,688 18,158 12,106 -6,970 Run 3 30-46 16 7,406

--- 1



### --- 1



### --- 1



### --- 1



### --- 1 

### 0-15 15 14,938

--- 1



### --- 1



### --- 1



### --- 1



### --- 1



### 15-30 15 655

--- 1



### --- 1



### --- 1



### --- 1



### --- 1 

### Run 4
30-43 13 214

--- 1



### --- 1



### --- 1



### --- 1



### --- 1

1 

### Sample not collected.



## 2.4 Vent Gas Volumetric Flow Rate Results Vent gas sampling for the determination of volumetric flow rate was performed according to EPA Methods 2, 3 and 4, modified according to the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent conditionally approved by EPA. The separate EPA Method 2/4 sampling train was operated to obtain as accurately as possible (given equipment limitations and the nature of the vent stream) velocity and moisture measurements integrated throughout as much of the complete venting cycle as possible.

Due to equipment failure possibly caused by a component of the sample gas that interfered with the solutions used in a Fyrite combustion analyzer, URS personnel were unable to take measurements of oxygen and carbon dioxide concentrations in the vent gas during the February 2008 testing. In order to calculate vent gas molecular weight for the purposes of this source test, the dry gas molecular weight fraction was determined by using the average measured dry gas percentages of methane, ethane, and NMNE VOCs (as propane), with a balance of air, for each run. The average vent gas molecular weights calculated for Runs 1-4 are presented in Table 2-5.

The measurements obtained with the separate EPA Method 2/4 sampling train, the vent gas molecular weight, the moisture content, and the cross-sectional area of the carbon steel pipe were used to determine the average volumetric flow rate of the gas exiting the Coker Steam Vent 0-15
15-30
30-49
0-15
15-30
30-46
0-15
15-30
30-46
0-15
15-30
30-43 15
15
19
15
15
16
15
15
16
15
15
13 

# REDACTED

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 2-7 40941948.04 

## A-1 during three specific time intervals of the venting cycle. Average volumetric flow rate data, on a per interval basis, is presented in Table 2-6.

Table 2-5. Vent Gas Molecular Weight Results

Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Run 4 Moisture (%) 98.26 91 .48 91.41 98.66 Average propane conc., ppmvw 3,597 520 72,960 5,269 Average propane conc., ppmvd 207,303 6,103 849,201 392,918 Average propane conc., %, dry 20.73 0.61 84 .92 39.29 Average methane conc., ppmvw 7,295 3,944 --- 1



### --- 1 

### Average methane conc., ppmvd 420,353 46,269

--- 1



### --- 1 

### Average methane conc., %, dry 42.04 4.63

--- 1



### --- 1 

### Average ethane conc., ppmvw 1,017 519

--- 1



### --- 1 

### Average ethane conc., ppmvd 58,611 6,089

--- 1



### --- 1 

### Average ethane conc., %, dry 5.86 0.61

--- 1



### --- 1 

### Balance of Air, %, dry 31 .37 94.15 15 .08 60.71 Dry Gas Molecular Weight, g/g- mol 26.73 28.5 0 41.82 34.93 Vent Gas Molecular Weight, g-g-mol 18.15 18.89 20.05 18.23

1 

### Due to the incomplete methane and ethane concentration data obtained during these runs, only propane concentrations with a balance of air were used for the determination of dry gas molecular weights.



## Table 2-6. Vent Gas Volumetric Flow Rate Results

Interval

(min) Elapsed Time (min) Moisture (%) Collected Gas Volume

(dscf) Average Vent Gas Differential

Pressure (inches H 2 

### O) Average Vent Gas Velocity (ft/sec) Average Vent Gas

Flow Rate (dscfm)

0-15 15 21.75 369 238 15-30 15 8.33 229 148 Run 1
0-49 19 98.26 2.147
5.60 188 122
0-15 15 5.19 161 511 15-30 15 1.00 79 246 Run 2
30-46 16 91.48 9.295
1.11 83 258
0-15 15 0.81 68 214 15-30 15 1.64 96 305 Run 3
30-46 16 91.41 7.859
4.78 165 526
0-15 15 13.19 281 140
15-30 15 6.64 205 102 Run 4
30-43 13 98.66 0.993
8.14 227 113 0-15 15 15-30 15 0-49 19

15-30 15 0-15 15

30-46 16
0-15 15 15-30 15 30-46 16
0-15 15
15-30 15
30-43 13 21.75 8.33 5.60
5.19 1.00 1.11
0.81 1.64 4.78
13.19
6.64
8.14 

# REDACTED

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 2-8 40941948.04 

## 2.5 NMNE VOC Emission Rate Results NMNE VOC emission rates, calculated in lb/cycle, are presented for Runs 1 and 2 in Table 2-7. NMNE VOC emission rates are not presented for Run 3 due to incompatible and/or missing total VOC, methane, and ethane concentration data. NMNE VOC emission rates are not presented for Run 4 because no methane or ethane concentration data was obtained using EPA Method 18.

Table 2-7. NMNE VOC Emission Rate Results

Elapsed

Time (min) Interval (min) NMNE VOC Conc.

(ppmw) Moisture Conc.

(%) NMNE VOC Conc.

(ppmd) Vent Gas Flow Rate

(dscfm) NMNE VOC Emission

Rate (lb/min) NMNE VOC Emission

Rate (lb/interval) NMNE VOC Emission

Rate (lb/cycle)
0-15 15 205 98.26 11,825 238 0.323 4.84 15-30 15 5,722 98.26 329,744 148 5.58 83.7 Run 1
30-49 19 4,865 98.26 280,339 122 3.91 74.2 163

0-15 15 222 91.48 2,606 511 0.152 2.29 15-30 15 233 91.48 2,735 246 0.0770 1.15 Run 2
30-46 16 1,105 91.48 12,969 258 0.384 6.14 9.58



## 2.6 Supplementary Data This section presents supplementary data relevant to the testing of the Coker Steam Vent gas stream which may be pertinent to the review of the data collected through the February 2008 testing. Figures 2-2 through 2-5 present total VOC concentration and vent gas differential pressure versus elapsed time of the venting cycle for Runs 1-4. 15-30 15 0-15 15

30-49 19
0-15 15
15-30 15
30-46 16 

# REDACTEDSource Test Report – Coker Steam Vent2-940941948.04Figure 2-2. Total VOC Concentration and Vent Gas Differential Pressure Vs. Elapsed Time – Run 1Run 1020,00040,00060,00080,000100,000120,000 0 : 00:0 0 0 : 02:30 0:05:00 0:0 7 :30 0:1 0 : 0 0 0:1 2 : 3 0

0 :1 5 : 0 0 0 : 17:3 0 0 : 20:00 0:22:30 0:2 5 :00 0:2 7 : 3 0 0:3 0 : 0 0

0 :3 2 : 3 0 0 : 35:0 0 0 : 37:30 0 : 40:00 0:4 2 :30 0:4 5 : 0 0 0:4 7 : 3 0Elapsed Time (min:sec)

ppmvw as propane051015202530 inches H 2 OTotal VOCDifferential Pressure

0 : 00:0 0 0 : 02:30 0:05:00 0:0 7 :30 0:1 0 : 0 0 0:1 2 : 3 0

0 :1 5 : 0 0 0 : 17:3 0 0 : 20:00 0:22:30 0:2 5 :00 0:2 7 : 3 0 0:3 0 : 0 0

0 :3 2 : 3 0 0 : 35:0 0 0 : 37:30 0 : 40:00 0:4 2 :30 0:4 5 : 0 0 0:4 7 : 3 0302520151050 REDACTEDSource Test Report – Coker Steam Vent2-1040941948.04Figure 2-3. Total VOC Concentration and Vent Gas Differential Pressure Vs. Elapsed Time – Run 2Run 2020,00040,00060,00080,000100,000120,000 0 : 00:00 0 : 02:20 0 : 04:40 0 : 07:00 0 : 09:20 0 : 11:40 0:14:00 0:16:20 0:18:40 0:2 1 :00 0:2 3 :20 0:2 5 :40 0:2 8 : 0 0 0:3 0 : 2 0 0:3 2 : 4 0 0:3 5 : 0 0 0:3 7 : 2 0 0:3 9 : 4 0

0 :4 2 : 0 0 0 :4 4 : 2 0Elapsed Time (min:sec)

ppmvw as propane051015202530 inches H 2 OTotal VOCDifferential Pressure302520151050

0 : 00:00 0 : 02:20 0 : 04:40 0 : 07:00 0 : 09:20 0 : 11:40 0:14:00 0:16:20 0:18:40 0:2 1 :00 0:2 3 :20 0:2 5 :40 0:2 8 : 0 0 0:3 0 : 2 0 0:3 2 : 4 0 0:3 5 : 0 0 0:3 7 : 2 0 0:3 9 : 4 0

0 :4 2 : 0 0 0 :4 4 : 2 0 REDACTEDSource Test Report – Coker Steam Vent2-1140941948.04Figure 2-4. Total VOC Concentration and Vent Gas Differential Pressure Vs. Elapsed Time – Run 3Run 3050,000100,000150,000200,000250,000300,000350,000 0 : 00:00 0 :0 2 : 2 0 0:0 4 : 4 0 0:07:00 0 : 09:20 0 : 11:4 0 0:1 4 : 0 0 0:1 6 :20

0 : 18:40 0 : 21:00 0 :2 3 : 2 0 0:2 5 : 4 0 0:2 8 :00

0 : 30:20 0 : 32:4 0 0:3 5 : 0 0 0:3 7 :20 0:39:40 0 : 42:00 0 :4 4 : 2 0Elapsed Time (min:sec)

ppmvw as propane051015202530 inches H 2 OTotal VOCDifferential Pressure302520151050

0 : 00:00 0 :0 2 : 2 0 0:0 4 : 4 0 0:07:00 0 : 09:20 0 : 11:4 0 0:1 4 : 0 0 0:1 6 :20

0 : 18:40 0 : 21:00 0 :2 3 : 2 0 0:2 5 : 4 0 0:2 8 :00

0 : 30:20 0 : 32:4 0 0:3 5 : 0 0 0:3 7 :20 0:39:40 0 : 42:00 0 :4 4 : 2 0 REDACTEDSource Test Report – Coker Steam Vent2-1240941948.04Figure 2-5. Total VOC Concentration and Vent Gas Differential Pressure Vs. Elapsed Time – Run 4Run 4050,000100,000150,000200,000250,000300,000 0:00:00 0:02:30 0:05:00 0:07:30 0:10:00 0:12:30 0:15:00 0:17:30 0:20:00 0:22:30 0:25:00 0:27:30 0:30:00 0:32:30 0:35:00 0:37:30 0:40:00 0:42:30Elapsed Time (min:sec)

ppmvw as propane051015202530 inches H 2 OTotal VOCDifferential Pressure302520151050

0 :00:0 0 0 : 02 : 30 0 : 0 5: 00 0 : 0 7: 30 0 :10:0 0 0 : 12 : 30 0 :1 5 : 00 0 :17:3 0 0 : 20 : 00 0 : 22 : 30 0 :2 5 : 00 0 :27:3 0 0 : 30 : 00 0 : 3 2: 30 0 : 3 5: 00 0 : 3 7: 30 0 :4 0 : 00 0 :42: 30 REDACTED

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 3-1 40941948.04 

# 3.0 Sampling and Analytical Procedures

The modified sampling and analytical procedures that were described in the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent and conditionally approved by EPA were performed during the February 2008 testing of the Coker Steam Vent. These modified methods are briefly discussed in this section. Any deviations from the EPA-approved modified test methods during the source testing are discussed in detail. Table 3-1 provides a summary of the sampling and analytical methods used in the measurement of methane and ethane concentrations, total VOC concentrations, and vent gas volumetric flow rate from the Coker Steam Vent.

Table 3-1. Summary of Sampling and Analytical Methods

Parameter Sampling Methodology Analytical Methodology
Volumetric Flow rate EPA Methods 2, 3 and 4 N/A

Methane and Ethane EPA Method 18 Gas Chromatography with Flame Ionization Detector

Total VOC EPA Method 25A Flame Ionization Detector



## During certain stages of the batch operation of the Coker Unit, a vent gas stream, consisting mostly of steam, is released to the atmosphere through two carbon steel pipes on each Coke Drum. Pursuant to EPA’s request for information dated February 29, 2008, emissions testing using the shepherd’s hook probe apparatus was performed on Coker Steam Vent A-1, the 12” pipe, prior to a scheduled maintenance turnaround.

Total VOC concentration in the Coker Steam Vent gas stream was measured on a continuous basis using two total hydrocarbon (THC) analyzers equipped with FIDs according to EPA Method 25A and a dilution sampling system operated according to procedures specified in Other Test Method 12. Methane and ethane concentrations were measured using a gas chromatograph with FID according to EPA Method 18. The concentration of NMNE VOCs was calculated by subtracting the concentrations of methane and ethane from the average concentration of total VOCs during each of the three separate intervals of the venting cycle.

The methods used for the determination of NMNE VOC concentration do not require isokinetic sampling, nor are the determinations of vent gas velocity and vent gas volumetric flowrate a part of the methods. Rather, the sample gas was removed from the vent stream nonisokinetically. The mass emission rate of measured NMNE VOCs was developed using the gas

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 3-2 40941948.04 

## stream volumetric flow rate measured with an EPA Method 2/4 sampling train operated on the Coker Steam Vent A-1 during as much of the complete venting cycle as possible.

3.1 Total VOC Concentration by EPA Method 25A and Other Test Method 12 The total VOC concentration in the Coker Steam Vent gas stream was measured as THC using two THC analyzers that were calibrated at different yet complementary ranges. A sample of the Coker Steam Vent A-1 gas stream was extracted from the 12” carbon steel pipe using a shepherd’s hook probe apparatus and immediately diluted with high-purity zero air at a known dilution factor (averaging 114:1). The shepherd’s hook probe apparatus was located as close to the centroidal area of the pipe cross-section as possible. The diluted sample passed from the heated dilution probe to the two J.U.M 3-300A THC analyzers via a single heated Teflon sample line.

THCs in the diluted sample were measured on a wet basis by the two THC analyzers using FIDs. An FID operates by ionizing organic compounds in the sample stream using the energy of a hydrogen/helium flame. The flame oxidizes organic compounds to generate carbon dioxide and water, and in the process, ions are formed in an electrical field between a polarized jet and collector electrode. When negative ions migrate to the collector electrode, a current is produced proportional to the concentration of carbon atoms in the sample gas. The analog voltage output reading from each THC analyzer was recorded by a data acquisition system every ten seconds. Both analyzers were operated in accordance with EPA Method 25A for as long as possible during the complete venting cycle.

The low-range THC analyzer (0-100 ppmw, “THC2”) was calibrated according to EPA Method 25A and the dilution system procedures described in Other Method 12. In accordance with these requirements, EPA Protocol calibration gases of propane in air were first introduced to THC2 downstream of the dilution system. Calibration gases were then introduced at the tip of the dilution probe (upstream of the dilution system). The high-range THC analyzer (0-10,000 ppmw, “THC1”) was calibrated according to EPA Method 25A and calibration gases were only introduced downstream of the dilution system.

An EPM Dilution Probe and CAE Exemplar Flow Panel were used as part of the dilution sampling system. A stable dilution air pressure was maintained through all calibrations as well as the sampling period for all test runs. A critical orifice vacuum greater than 14.7” Hg (manufacturer’s specification) was also maintained through all calibrations as well as the sampling period for all test runs.

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 3-3 40941948.04 

## 3.1.1 Low-Range THC Calibration (THC2) A calibration error test was performed on THC2 within two hours of the beginning of testing for Runs 2-4. THC2 was not used during Run 1 due to an equipment malfunction (see Section 3.1.4 for details). EPA Method 25A requires that the THC analyzer be calibrated using four calibration gases:

 A zero gas, such as high purity air;

 A low-level calibration gas, containing propane at a concentration of 25-35% of the span concentration (the range of the analyzer);

 A mid-level calibration gas, containing propane at a concentration of 45-55% of the span concentration (the range of the analyzer); and

 A high-level calibration gas, containing propane at a concentration of 80-90% of the span concentration (the range of the analyzer).

The calibration error test was performed on THC2 upstream of the dilution probe. High-, mid-, and low-range pressurized calibration gases were introduced (individually) to establish linearity for an effective range of nominally 11,000 ppmw. An average dilution ratio for the dilution sampling system was determined following the calibration error test through the dilution system. The instrument responses for each of these gases (after dilution) met method requirements and were no more than ±5% of the respective calibration gas value divided by the average dilution ratio during Runs 2-4. Zero gas was introduced to the THC2 analyzer upstream of the dilution probe as high-purity dilution air. There is no analyzer response criteria for zero gas specified in EPA Method 25A.

Although not required by Other Test Method 12, or specified in the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent , a calibration error test was performed on THC2 downstream of the dilution system during Runs 2-4 as a supplementary quality assurance check. During the calibration error test, an excess of each of the three pressurized calibration gases of propane in air was introduced (individually) to the sampling system just downstream of the dilution probe to establish linearity for an instrument operating range of 100 ppmw. The instrument responses for each of these gases were no more than ±5% of the respective calibration gas value for Runs 3-4,and no more than ±6% for Run 2. Zero gas was introduced to the THC2 analyzer as nonpressurized ambient air. There is no analyzer response criteria for zero gas specified in EPA Method 25A.

Following the completion of a test run, a zero gas and mid-level was reintroduced to the sampling system upstream of the dilution probe to check the calibration drift over the test period

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 3-4 40941948.04 

## according to the procedures specified in EPA Method 25A and Other Test Method 12. The drift between the pre-run analyzer responses and the post-run analyzer responses for the mid-level calibration gas met method requirements and was 3% of the span (instrument operating range) during Runs 2-4. The drift between the pre-run analyzer responses and the post-run analyzer responses for the zero calibration gas was also 3% of the span during Run 3. No post-run zero drift determination was performed during Run 2. The drift between the pre-run analyzer responses and the post-run analyzer responses for the zero calibration gas was 3% of the span during Run 4, however, this drift determination was made by comparing instrument responses during calibration downstream of the dilution system. See Section 5 for details. All supporting documentation regarding the calibration of THC2 is documented in Appendix B.

3.1.2 High-Range THC Calibration (THC1) A calibration error test was performed on THC1 within two hours of the beginning of testing. During the calibration error test, an excess of each of the three pressurized calibration gases of propane in air was introduced (individually) to the sampling system just downstream of the dilution probe to establish linearity for an instrument operating range of 10,000 ppmw. The instrument responses for each of these gases met method requirements and were no more than ±5% of the respective calibration gas value during Runs 1-4. Zero gas was introduced to the THC1 analyzer as non-pressurized ambient air. There is no analyzer response criteria for zero gas specified in EPA Method 25A. A system response time test was also performed on THC1 on February 24.

Following the completion of Run 1, a zero gas and mid-level was reintroduced to the sampling system upstream of the dilution probe to check the calibration drift over the test period according to the procedures specified in EPA Method 25A and Other Test Method 12. The drift between the pre-run analyzer responses and the post-run analyzer responses for the mid-level calibration gas met method requirements and was 3% of the 0-100 ppmw span. A post-test calibration drift determination for the 0-10,000 ppmw span was not determined during Run 1. Post-run calibration drift determinations were made on THC1 during Runs 2-4, but not according to the procedures specified in EPA Method 25A or the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent . See Section 3.1.4 for details. All supporting documentation regarding the calibration of THC1 is documented in Appendix B.

3.1.3 Dilution Ratio and Detection Limits A dilution ratio (DLR) for the dilution sampling system was developed using THC2 (except during Run 1 – see Section 3.1.4 for details) and was applied as a multiplier to all of the measurements obtained with both THC analyzers used in conjunction with the same dilution sampling system per procedures described in the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent

.

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 3-5 40941948.04

## Lower detection limits were calculated for both THC analyzers by multiplying the runspecific DLR by a conservative instrument sensitivity of 2% of the instrument operating ranges (0-100 ppmw and 0-10,000 ppmw, respectively). Upper detection limits were calculated for both THC analyzers by multiplying the run-specific DLR by the upper limits of the operating ranges (100 ppmw and 10,000 ppmw, respectively). The effective measurement ranges and average DLRs were determined on a per run basis . Any THC results not covered by the two effective measurement ranges were rounded up to the lower limit of the nearest measurement range as determined during daily calibration. Table 3-2 presents a summary of the effective THC analyzer calibration ranges, dilution ratios, and detection limits for each test run.

3.1.4 Deviations from the Source Test Protocol Several deviations from methodology specified in the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent and/or Other Test Method 12 and EPA Method 25A were encountered during the February 2008 testing. The relative impacts of these deviations on data quality are discussed in Section 5. The deviations are as follows:

 The low-range THC2 analyzer was inoperable during Run 1. To mitigate this issue, the high-range THC1 analyzer, operating with an instrument range of 0-10,000 ppmw, was calibrated both upstream and downstream of the dilution system. The analyzer showed sufficient linearity across the entire operating range to meet EPA Method 25A requirements for the calibration error test at both the 0-100 ppmw and 0- 10,000 ppmw spans. The same approach for the determination of conservative detection limits as used in all other test runs was applied to THC1 during Run 1.

 URS personnel were required to exit the Coker Unit at least 15 minutes prior to the drum de-heading and coke-cutting procedure and did not have adequate time to perform all of the quality assurance checks required by EPA Method 25A and Other Test Method 12 and described in the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent . As a result, post-run calibration drift determinations were made on THC1 during Runs 2-4, but not according to the procedures specified in EPA Method 25A or the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent . See Section 5 for details.

 No post-run zero drift determination was performed on THC2 during Run 2.

 During Run 4, a zero-drift determination was performed on THC2 by comparing responses obtained by introducing a zero gas downstream of the dilution system instead of upstream of the dilution system.

 

## All zero gas introduced downstream of the dilution system to both THC1 and THC2 was ambient air rather than pressurized, high-purity zero air.

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 3-6 40941948.04 

## Table 3-2. THC Analyzer Calibration Summary

THC Analyzer Instrument Operating

Range (ppmw) Type of Calibration Dilution Ratio Lower Detection

Limit (ppmw) Upper Detection

Limit (ppmw) w/dilution 237.90 11,895.01 Run 1 THC 1 0-10,000 1 

### w/o dilution 119.0 23,790.02 1,189,501.19 THC 2 0-100 w/dilution 233.07 11,653.35 Run 2 THC 1 0-10,000 w/o dilution 116.5 23,306.69 1,165,334.70 THC 2 0-100 w/dilution 222.86 11,143.16 Run 3 THC 1 0-10,000 w/o dilution 111.4 22,286.33 1,114,316.31 THC 2 0-100 w/dilution 214.31 10,715.42 Run 4 THC 1 0-10,000 w/o dilution 107.2 21,430.84 1,071,542.11

1 

### Due to an equipment malfunction, only one THC analyzer was operable during Run 1. The analyzer was operated on a 0-10,000 ppmvw range and demonstrated sufficient linearity for both 0-100 ppmvw and 0-10,000 ppmvw ranges when calibrated. See Section 3.1.4 for details.

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 3-7 40941948.04 

## Figure 3-1. Schematic Drawing of EPA Method 25A/Other Test Method 12 Sampling System

Dilution Air

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 3-8 40941948.04 

## 3.2 Methane and Ethane Concentrations by EPA Method 18 The concentrations of methane and ethane in the Coker Steam Vent gas stream were measured using a gas chromatograph (GC) fitted with a FID. A diluted sample of the Coker Steam Vent A-1 gas stream was extracted via the EPA Method 18/25A sampling system to a Tedlar bag, prior to the interface of the sample gas with the two THC analyzers. An integrated bag sample was collected during each of three time intervals that composed a vent cycle. The Tedlar bag was then transported to a mobile laboratory until analysis by GC/FID. Three source gas samples were collected in Tedlar bags during the venting cycle for Runs 1 and 2. Two source gas samples were collected during the venting cycle for Run 3. URS personnel were unable to collect any Tedlar bags through the EPA Method 18/25A dilution sampling system during all of Run 4.

Methane and ethane concentrations in the diluted sample were measured on a wet basis by the GC/FID. Each source gas sample collected during Runs 2 and 3 was analyzed at least in triplicate and the final result was calculated as the average of all separate analyses of the sample. During the first 15-minute interval of Run 1, a deviation from The Source Test Protocol for the Coker Steam Vent and EPA Method 18 occurred when source gas samples were analyzed in duplicate instead of in triplicate. The dilution factors developed on a run-by-run basis through the operation of the EPA Method 18/25A sampling system (see Section 3.1.3) were incorporated into the EPA Method 18 analyses.

Prior to the start of sampling, the GC/FID analyzer was calibrated using EPA Protocol calibration gas standards containing the target analytes in a balance of nitrogen. The following calibration and QA procedures presented in EPA Method 18 were followed:

 The instrument was calibrated at three points before sample analysis and at one point after analysis; and

 A recovery study showed 90-110% recovery of a gas sample introduced as close to the probe as possible.

The recovery study was not performed exactly as described in EPA Method 18 because this method does not specify a procedure for performing a recovery study using both a dilution sampling system and bag sampling. Elements of both Section 8.4.1 and Section 8.4.2 of EPA Method 18 were followed to perform the recovery study during the February 2008 testing. However, a duplicate analyses were performed instead of triplicate analyses and methane or ethane were not spiked directly into the bag sample. Raw data and calibration information associated with the performance of EPA Method 18 is included as Appendix C.

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 3-9 40941948.04 

## 3.3 NMNE VOC Concentration by EPA Methods 18, 25A, and Other Test Method 12 The precise and accurate quantification of methane and ethane concentrations in the Coker Steam Vent gas stream is related to the measurement of VOC emissions because methane and ethane have been determined by EPA to have negligible atmospheric photochemical reactivity. As such, the concentrations of methane and ethane can be subtracted from the measurement of total VOCs, quantified through the use of a total hydrocarbon analyzer, prior to the development of VOC mass emission rates. VOC results determined in this matter are referred to as non-methane/non-ethane VOC emissions (NMNE VOC).

The response factor (RF) per carbon in an FID is usually higher for methane and ethane than propane per carbon. Since the FIDs in the two THC analyzers were calibrated with standards of propane in air, an average response factor of 1.13 for methane was determinedexperimentally by directly introducing a 440.9 ppm methane calibration standard to the highlevel THC analyzer downstream of the dilution system before Runs 3 and 4. The methane RF was calculated according to Equation 25Aap-1 in Other Test Method 12. As no ethane calibration standard was available at the time of testing, a theoretical RF of 1 was used in all applicable calculations. This approach assumes a FID response for ethane proportional to the number of carbon atoms in a molecule. Methane/propane and ethane/propane equivalencies were developing using the methane and ethane concentrations measured with EPA Method 18 and the appropriate RFs.

The concentration of NMNE VOCs in the Coker Steam Vent gas stream was calculated by subtracting the propane-equivalent concentrations of methane and ethane from the average concentration of total VOCs measured with the THC analyzers during each established interval of the venting cycle.

3.4 Vent Gas Volumetric Flow Rate by EPA Methods 2, 3, and 4 The Coker Steam Vent A-1 volumetric flow rate was determined according to procedures based upon EPA Methods 2 and 4. The EPA Method 2/4 sampling train utilized a separate shepherd’s hook probe apparatus than the one utilized by the EPA Method 18/25A sampling system. The EPA Method 2/4 shepherd’s hook probe apparatus was positioned as close to the centroidal area of the 12” pipe cross-section as possible. The modified procedures by which volumetric flow rate data was obtained on the high-moisture Coker Steam Vent gas stream have already been described in detail in the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent. Any deviations from those modified procedures are discussed in this section.

The EPA Method 2/4 sampling train consisted of the following components:

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 3-10 40941948.04 

##  Heated stainless steel probe liner;

 Teflon transfer line between the probe liner and the coiled condenser;

 Coiled condenser;

 Up to 16 optional knockout impingers (the first knockout impinger was empty, the second contained a modified Greenburg-Smith stem and nominally 100 mL of DI Water, the third contained a Greenburg-Smith stem and nominally 100 mL of DI Water, and the remaining knockout impingers were empty); and

 Modified Greenburg-Smith impinger containing silica gel.

According to the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent , the sampling probe and filter were to be maintained at 300 ° F ±25 ° F to keep the steam vent gas stream in the gas phase until condensation in the sampling train condenser coil and impingers. However, this approach was designed for the use of standard sampling probes and specialized sampling ports, not a shepherd’s hook apparatus. URS personnel could not maintain the shepherd’s hook probe temperature (reflected on URS data sheets as two components: “Probe” and “Hook Probe”) at 300 ° F ±25 ° F, or even at a stable temperature consistently above the vent gas temperature, due to the damage to probe insulation caused by the high-velocity gas stream (at times >300 ft/sec, or 200 mph). Refer to Section 5 for a discussion of the impacts of variable shepherd’s hook probe temperature on overall data quality for this source test.

URS personnel did not include a filter in the EPA Method 2/4 sampling train due to concerns that the filter would quickly become clogged with moisture and/or particulate matter when maintained at temperatures below 300 ° F ±25 ° F. As a result, small amounts of particulate matter were visible in the condensate collected in the sampling train impingers during all four test runs. Refer to Section 5 for a discussion of the measurement bias caused by particulate mass in the impinger contents for the determination of vent gas moisture concentration.

During the EPA Method 2 sampling, differential pressure measurements across a Type-S pitot tube were recorded to determine the vent gas velocity. These measurements were made with a magnehelic differential pressure gauge rather than a gauge-oil manometer due to the high vent gas differential pressure encountered in the Coker Steam Vent. It is important to note that the 0-30” H 2 

## O magnehelic gauge used during the February 2008 testing had 1” H 2 

## O divisions throughout the entire 0-30” H 2 

## O scale. A calibration check was performed on the magnehelic gauge according to EPA Method 2, Section 6.2.1. This calibration check data as well as other calibration information associated with equipment used in the EPA Method 2/4 sampling train is included in Appendix D.

In anticipation of significant changes in velocity head readings during the test run, the differential pressure readings, vent temperature readings, dry gas meter readings, and other t 300 °

300 °

w 300 ° 

# REDACTED

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 3-11 40941948.04 

## applicable sampling system operating parameters were recorded every two (2) minutes during the test runs and for as long as possible during the “complete venting cycle.” Accurate static pressure measurements for use in the determination of vent gas velocity were not successfully obtained with a magnehelic gauge until the latter half of Run 4, due to the clogging of the static pressure probe with moisture and particulate matter and other equipment malfunctions. The average of the accurate static pressure readings (measured from 18:27 to 18:39) obtained during Run 4 was applied to all vent gas velocity calculations for Run 1, 2, 3 and 4. This approach is discussed further in Section 5.

Due to equipment failure, possibly caused by a component of the sample gas that interfered with the solutions used in a Fyrite combustion analyzer, URS personnel were unable to take measurements of oxygen and carbon dioxide concentrations in the vent gas during the February 2008 testing. In order to calculate vent gas molecular weight for the purposes of this source test, the dry gas molecular weight fraction was determined by using the average measured dry gas percentages of methane, ethane, and NMNE VOCs (as propane), with a balance of air, for each run. The average vent gas molecular weights calculated for Runs 1-4 are presented in Table 2-5.

The dry gas sample volume was measured using a calibrated dry gas meter. The Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent specified that dry gas meters used in this test program would be calibrated using traceable critical orifices as standards. As an alternative, URS has developed an internal standard operating procedure (SOP) to calibrate a dry gas meter at low flow conditions (nominally 1-9 liters per minute) using a NIST-traceable volumetric flowmeter as a calibration standard. The dry gas meters used in the February 2008 testing were calibrated according to this SOP, which is based upon procedures specified in EPA Method 5 and EPA Method 30B. All pre- and post-run dry gas meter calibration data is included in Appendix D and a copy of the URS SOP is included as Appendix A. The dry gas meter calibration factors applicable to specific average sampling rates were used in all data reduction, per the URS SOP; however, these calibration factors were not recorded on the URS raw sampling data sheets at the time of testing.

The source sampling of a gas stream composed essentially of steam produces total dry gas volumes and dry gas sampling rates far below those normally achieved using EPA Method 4. One of the consequences of low sampling rates acquired with sampling trains composed of several large knockout impingers, joints, and unions is the possibility of a post-test leak check rate exceeding 4% of the average sampling rate achieved during the test run. In such a case, EPA Method 5 requires dry gas volume correction according to EPA Equation 5-1(a) Case I. During the February 2008 testing of the Coker Steam Vent, Run 1 required dry gas volume correction according to this equation. Supporting information for this dry gas volume correction m 18:27 to 18:39) 

# REDACTED

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 3-12 40941948.04 

## is provided in Appendix D. Due to URS operator error, no post-test leak check was performed on the EPA Method 2/4 sampling train during Run 2. The pre-run leak test was compared to the average sampling rate during Run 2 in lieu of a post-run leak test, but no dry gas volume correction was required.

The moisture content of the gas stream was determined from the total weight gain of the sampling train impingers according to EPA Method 4. A significant organic layer was not present in the condensate catch upon visual inspection of the impingers, and a separatory funnel was not used to remove the organic layer prior to the gravimetric determination of condensed
water.

The measurements obtained with the separate EPA Method 2/4 sampling train, the vent gas molecular weight, the moisture content, and the cross-sectional area of the carbon steel pipe were used to determine the average volumetric flow rate of the gas exiting the Coker Steam Vent A-1 during three specific time intervals of the venting cycle. Average volumetric flow rate data, on a per interval basis, is presented in Table 2-6.

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 4-1 40941948.04 

# 4.0 Calculations

This section presents calculations used in the determination of total VOC, methane and ethane concentrations, vent gas volumetric flow rates, and NMNE VOC mass emission rates for the February 2008 testing of the Coker Steam Vent. The calculation of NMNE VOC mass emission rates in a lb/cycle format rather than a typical lb/hour format is an approach developed specifically for this project and the Coker Steam Vent source. The complete venting cycle sampled during each test run was separated into three distinct intervals for the calculation of NMNE VOC mass emission rates in order to most accurately characterize the dynamic batch process of the Coker Unit. The following parameters were averaged for each distinct interval during a test run:

 Vent Gas Temperature;

 Vent Gas Differential Pressure;

 Vent Gas Velocity;

 Vent Gas Volumetric Flow Rate; and

 Total VOC Concentration.

Methane and ethane emissions were sampled by taking an integrated Tedlar bag sample during each of the distinct intervals that composed the complete venting cycle. The calculation of NMNE VOC concentrations was performed by subtracting methane and ethane concentrations from the total VOC concentration during each interval. The complete venting cycle was divided into the following intervals for each test run, starting with the activation of the Coker Steam Vent, and ending with the optimal depressurization of the Coke Drum:

 Run 1: 0-15 minutes, 15-30 minutes, and 30-49 minutes.

 Run 2: 0-15 minutes, 15-30 minutes, and 30-46 minutes.

 Run 3: 0-15 minutes, 15-30 minutes, and 30-46 minutes.

 Run 4: 0-15 minutes, 15-30 minutes, and 30-43 minutes. 0-15 m 15-30 d 30-49 m d 30-46 m d 30-46 m d 30-43 m 0-15 m 15-30
0-15 m 15-30
0-15 m 15-30 

# REDACTED

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 4-2 40941948.04 

## 4.1 Vent Gas Dry Molecular Weight The dry gas molecular weight of the vent gas exiting the 12” pipe (A-1) was calculated per run according to the following equation, based upon EPA Equation 3-1:

) CH ( 160

. 0 ) H C ( 301

. 0 ) H C (% 441

. 0 ) Air (% 290

. 0 M 4 6 2 8 3 d 

## 

Where:

M d 

## = dry gas molecular weight, g/g-mol; %Air = average percent air by volume, dry basis, per run;
%C 3 

## H 8 

## = average percent propane by volume, dry basis, per run;
%C 2 

## H 6 

## = average percent ethane by volume, dry basis, per run;
%CH 4 

## = average percent methane by volume, dry basis, per run; 0.290 = molecular weight of air, divided by 100; 0.441 = molecular weight of propane, divided by 100; 0.301 = molecular weight of ethane, divided by 100; and 0.160 = molecular weight of methane, divided by 100.

4.2 Vent Gas Velocity Calculation The velocity of the vent gas exiting the 12” pipe (A-1) was calculated according to procedures based upon EPA Method 2 during three time intervals of the venting cycle as:

) )(M (P ) (T C 85.49 V

W S S P S 

## P  



## Where:

V S 

## = velocity of the vent gas, per interval (ft/sec);
 P = average differential pressure measured, per interval, by Type S pitot (in. H 2 

## O);
T s 

## = average vent gas temperature, per interval (°R);
P s 

## = absolute vent pressure, per interval (in. Hg);
M w 

## = wet gas molecular weight, per complete cycle (lb/lb-mole);
C p 

## = Type-S pitot correction factor (0.84); and 85.49 = conversion constant, per Equation 2-7 of EPA Method 2.

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 4-3 40941948.04 

## 4.3 Vent Gas Volumetric Flow Rate Calculation - Actual Conditions The volumetric flow rate of the vent gas exiting the 12” pipe (A-1) was calculated according to procedures based upon EPA Method 2 during three time intervals of the venting cycle as:


#    A V 60 Q
s

ac 

## 

Where: Q ac 

## = actual volumetric flow rate, per interval (acfm); V s 

## = velocity of the vent gas, per interval (ft/sec); A = cross-sectional area of the vent (ft 2 

## ); and 60 = conversion from second to minutes.

4.4 Vent Gas Volumetric Flow Rate Calculation - Dry Standard Conditions The volumetric flow rate of the vent gas exiting the 12” pipe (A-1) at dry standard conditions was calculated according to procedures based upon EPA Method 2 during three time intervals of the venting cycle as:

      29.92 P
T 528 ) (Q ) B (1 Q S

S ac W sd



## Where: Q sd 

## = dry volumetric flow rate at standard conditions, per interval (dscfm); Q ac 

## = actual volumetric flow rate, per interval (acfm);
B w 

## = moisture fraction, per complete venting cycle; 528 = standard temperature (°R);
T s 

## = average vent gas temperature, per interval (°R); 29.92 = standard pressure (in. Hg); and
P s 

## = absolute vent pressure, per interval (in. Hg).

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 4-4 40941948.04 

## 4.5 Standard Dry Gas Meter Sample Volume The dry gas meter volume at standard conditions will be calculated as:



##    

      29.92 13.6 P BP

T 528 ) (V V m

m ac sd



## Where: V sd 

## = dry gas meter volume at standard conditions (dscf); V ac 

## = actual dry gas meter volume (dcf); 13.6 = conversion from in. H 2 

## O to in. Hg (in. H 2 

## O/in. Hg); 528 = standard temperature ( ° 

## R);
T m 

## = average dry gas meter temperature ( ° 

## R); 29.92 = standard pressure (in. Hg);
P m 

## = dry gas meter pressure (in. H 2 

## O); and BP = barometric pressure at the dry gas meter location (in. Hg).

V ac 

## was calculated according to EPA Equation 5-1(a) Case I during Run 1.

4.6 Concentration of NMNE VOCs in the Vent Gas (Per Interval) 

## The concentration of total VOC (as propane) was continuously measured throughout the venting cycle in units of parts per million volume, wet basis (ppmvw). NMNE VOC concentration was calculated by subtracting the concentrations of methane and ethane (as determined by EPA Method 18) from the concentration of total VOC (as determined by EPA Method 25A). The average concentration of NMNE VOC was calculated during three time intervals of the venting cycle as:



#      
3 RF C 2 3 RF C C ] C [ E E M M THC VOC 

##  





## Where: [C] VOC 

## = average concentration of NMNE VOC, as propane, per interval (ppmvw); [C] THC 

## = average concentration of total VOC measured, per interval (ppmvw);

[C] M 

## = concentration of methane, per interval (ppmvw);
RF M 

## = FID response factor for methane, determined directly (unitless); [C] E 

## = concentration of ethane, per interval (ppmvw); and
RF E 

## = FID response factor for ethane, determined theoretically (unitless).

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 4-5 40941948.04 

## All NMNE VOC concentrations measured as propane, per interval, were corrected to a dry basis (ppmvd) using moisture values obtained with the EPA Method 2/4 sampling train operated concurrently with the EPA Method 18/25A sampling system. Conversion of NMNE VOC concentration results from ppmvd to grams per dry standard cubic foot will be calculated using this equation:


#     

#     385 10 453.6 44.1 [C] ] C [ 6 VOC dscf / g VOC 

## 



## Where:

[C] VOCg/dscf 

## = concentration of NMNE VOCs as propane, per interval (g/dscf); [C] VOC 

## = concentration of NMNE VOCs as propane, per interval (ppmvd expressed as scf/10 6 

## scf for the purposes of this calculation); 44.1 = molecular weight of propane (lb/lb-mol); 453.6 = conversion from pounds to grams (g/lb); 10 6 

## = conversion from ppmvd to scf/scf (unitless); and 385 = ideal gas law constant (scf/lb-mol).

4.7 Mass Emission Rate (MER) of NMNE VOCs (Per Interval) 

## The mass emissions rate for NMNE VOCs, in lb/min, were calculated during three time intervals of the venting cycle as:

Where:
MER i 

## = mass emission rate of NMNE VOC, per interval (lb/min); [C] = concentration of NMNE VOC, per interval (g/dscf); 453.6 = conversion from grams to pounds (g/lb) ; 

## Q sd 

## = dry volumetric flow rate at standard conditions (dscfm) obtained through the operation of the EPA Method 2/4 sampling trains, per interval; and 60 = conversion from minutes to hours. 

#    453.6 Q ] C [ 60 MER sd i

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 4-6 40941948.04 

## 4.8 Mass Emission Rate (MER) of NMNE VOCs (Per Cycle) 

## The total mass emission rates for NMNE VOCs, in lb/cycle, was calculated from the mass emission rates of NMNE VOCs for each time interval of the venting cycle as follows:

Where:
MER Cycle 

## = mass emission rate of NMNE VOC, per venting cycle (lb/cycle);
MER i 

## = mass emission rate of NMNE VOC, per interval (lb/min);
T i 

## = total time of sampling interval (minutes); and cycle = 1 -- one complete venting cycle event. 

# cycle T MER i i 

#  

 1 Cycle 

# MER

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 5-1 40941948.04 

# 5.0 Quality Assurance Objectives for Measurement Data

Quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) activities were performed as an integral part of this sampling and analysis measurement program to ensure that results are of known quality. As previously discussed, the useability of the results from the February 2008 sampling effort is significantly limited by the nature of the stream measured (high moisture and velocity) and the shepherd’s hook sampling apparatus. To the extent that any of the test results are useable given these limitations, the review of the QA/QC activities indicates that the results are useable for the purposes of estimating emissions of NMNE VOC concentrations and mass emission rates only for Runs 1 and 2 of the February 2008 testing. The high variability of the NMNE VOC mass emission rate results during Runs 1 and 2 (163 and 9.58 lb/cycle, respectively) is of a magnitude not usually associated with the emissions testing of typical sources. The high variability of NMNE VOC concentrations may be associated with measurement interference due to the high concentration of moisture in the vent stream (> 90%) or with the batch nature of the Coking process itself. This testing is part of ongoing research of the potential emissions associated with the Coker Steam Vent source, and further testing is necessary in order to produce NMNE VOC mass emission rate results appropriate for use.

The data obtained through the February 2008 testing also indicates that the Coker Steam Vent VOC emissions are consistently composed of significant fractions of methane and ethane and that any evaluation of VOC emissions from this type of source in the future must include the accurate and precise quantification of methane and ethane. In addition, the results obtained for the determination of vent gas moisture concentration, velocity, and volumetric flow rate during Runs 1-4 are useable for the purposes of establishing a general data set for estimated Coker Steam Vent emissions profiles.

The QA objectives for this test program are designed to provide a quantitative assessment of the measurement system data. The two aspects of data quality that are of primary concern are precision and accuracy. Accuracy reflects the degree to which the measured value represents the actual or "true" value for a given parameter and includes elements of both bias and precision. Precision is a measure of the variability associated with the measurement system. This section presents QA objectives for each of the five sampling tasks:

 Methane and Ethane concentrations in the vent gas;

 Total VOC concentration in the vent gas;

 NMNE VOC concentration in the vent gas;

 Volumetric flow rate of the vent gas; and

 NMNE VOC mass emission rates from the Coker Steam Vent.

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 5-2 40941948.04 

## 5.1 Methane and Ethane Concentration in the Vent Gas 

## QA/QC activities associated with the collection of the methane and ethane emissions gas samples include:

 Use of pre-printed data sheets;

 Use of calibrated sampling equipment;

 Use of calibration and dilution gas of appropriate and documented quality;

 Collection of samples at appropriate operating conditions;

 Proper operation of the dilution sampling system;

 Performance of sampling system leak checks; and

 Collection of samples per the protocol and the method.

QA/QC activities associated with the analysis of emissions gas samples include:

 Calibration of the analytical instrumentation;

 Use of documented calibration standards;

 Replicate analyses; and

 Analyses of samples per the protocol and the method.

A review of the data quality associated with these measurements indicate that these data are representative and usable for the purpose intended for Runs 1 and 2. Only a rough estimation can be made of the methane and ethane concentrations per complete venting cycle during Run 3 due to the incomplete data set. The issues identified during the data quality review are discussed on a per run basis:

Run 3 

## The Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent 

## specified that a separate bag sample would be collected at each of the three identified intervals within a sampling run. During Run 3, URS personnel were unable to collect an integrated Tedlar bag sample (due to operator error) during the third interval of the test run (30-49 minutes after the activation of the Coker Steam Vent). As a result, a NMNE VOC concentration and mass emission rate could not be calculated for this time interval.

The incompatible total VOC, methane, and ethane concentration results obtained during the second interval of Run 3 (15-30 minutes after the activation of the Coker Steam Vent) also contribute to reducing the overall data quality associated with this test run. Refer to Table 2-4 for detailed concentration results. The averaging of the total VOC, methane, and ethane (30-49 m

-30 m (1

5 

# REDACTED

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 5-3 40941948.04 

## concentrations obtained over the entire test run, instead of performing emissions calculations per interval, also produces a net deficit of NMNE VOC.

Run 4 

## The Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent 

## specified that a separate bag sample would be collected at each of the three identified intervals within a sampling run. URS personnel were unable to collect any Tedlar bags through the EPA Method 18/25A dilution sampling system during all of Run 4. During Run 4, no excess sample flow was available at the outlet of the dilution sampling system for the collection of integrated Tedlar bags. Unique gas stream conditions, such as highly negative vent gas static pressure, may have existed in the Coker Steam Vent during Run 4 and prevented the dilution sampling system from providing enough sample gas volume for the operation of both THC analyzers as well as the collection of integrated Tedlar bags. In addition, the shepherd’s hook probe component used with the dilution sampling system may have been partially clogged with moisture and particulate matter (PM), restricting the sample gas flow rate through the sampling system prior to the dilution orifice.

5.2 Total VOC Concentration in the Vent Gas 

## QA/QC activities associated with the collection of the total VOC emissions gas samples include:

 Use of pre-printed data sheets;

 Use of calibrated sampling equipment;

 Use of calibration and dilution gas of appropriate and documented quality;

 Collection of samples at appropriate operating conditions;

 Proper operation of the dilution sampling system;

 Performance of calibration error checks;

 Performance of drift checks; and

 Collection of samples per the protocol and the applicable methods.

A review of the data quality associated with these measurements indicate that these data are representative and usable for the purpose intended for Runs 1,2, and 4 of the February 2008 testing. The use of the detection limit strategy developed exclusively for this project provides a conservative estimate of VOC concentrations in the vent gas. The issues identified during the data quality review are discussed on a per run basis:

Run 1 

## The Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent 

## specified that at least two THC analyzers, calibrated at different yet complementary ranges, would be used to quantify the entire

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 5-4 40941948.04 

## range of total hydrocarbon emissions in the vent gas stream. Due to an equipment failure, only one THC analyzer was used to quantify total hydrocarbon emissions during Run 1. The THC1 analyzer used during Run 1 was operated with an instrument range of 10,000 ppm and subjected to the entire scope of calibration error testing defined in the protocol for multiple analyzers. The THC1 analyzer demonstrated sufficient linearity across the spans of 100 ppm and 10,000 ppm for the purposes of this source test. The effect of using only one THC analyzer during Run 1 on overall data quality is negligible.

The post-run drift determination was performed on THC1 upstream of the dilution system using a calibration gas used during the calibration error test for the 100 ppm span. No post-run drift determination was performed using a calibration gas used during the calibration error test for the 10,000 ppm span. During Run 1, THC1 recorded diluted concentrations above 100 ppm for approximately 16% of the total sampling duration. No diluted concentrations exceeded 932.9 ppm. The certified concentration (taking the average dilution ratio into account) of the calibration gas used for post-run drift determination was 37.08 ppm, or 4% of the highest value recorded by the THC1 analyzer during the run. The post-run drift determination with this calibration gas met the method requirement of 3% of the span (100 ppm). Furthermore, the concentration of this calibration gas is comparable to the average diluted concentration measured by THC1 over the entire run (48.1 ppmw). The use of the 37.08 ppm calibration gas for the determination of analyzer drift is acceptable for the purposes of this source test because it represents the majority (84%) of the measurements recorded by the analyzer during Run 1.

Run 2 

## URS personnel were required to exit the Coker Unit at least 15 minutes prior to the drum de-heading and coke-cutting procedure and did not have adequate time to perform all of the quality assurance checks required by EPA Method 25A and Other Test Method 12 and described in the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent 

## . As a result, no zero drift determination was performed on THC2 or THC1 during Run 2. In addition, post-run calibration drift determinations were made on THC1 during Run 2, but not according to the procedures specified in EPA Method 25A or the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent



## .
During Run 2, THC1 recorded diluted concentrations above 100 ppm for approximately 4% of the total sampling duration. No diluted concentrations exceeded 919.5 ppm. The certifiedconcentration (taking the average dilution ratio into account) of the calibration gas used for postrun drift determination was 37.95 ppm, or 4% of the highest value recorded by the THC1 analyzer during the run. The post-run drift determ ination with this calibration gas met the method requirement of 3% of the span (10,000 ppm). Furthermore, the concentration of this calibration gas is comparable to the average diluted concentration measured by THC1 over the entire run (17.9 ppmw). The use of the 37.95 ppm calibration gas for the determination of THC1

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 5-5 40941948.04 

## analyzer drift is acceptable for the purposes of this source test because it represents the majority (96%) of the measurements recorded by the analyzer during Run 2.

The acceptable data quality associated with quantification of total VOC concentration during Run 2 is unaffected by the absence of post-run zero drift determinations for either THC analyzer. The THC data was reduced with a conservative detection limit of 2% of span multiplied by the average dilution ratio, amounting to an effective detection limit of 233.1 ppm for Run 2. Any concentration measured by the THC analyzers below this detection limit were substituted with the value of 233.1 ppm for the purposes of this source test. The drift of an instrument response close to zero is of no significant consequence with the use of this data reduction strategy.

Run 3 

## URS personnel were required to exit the Coker Unit at least 15 minutes prior to the drum de-heading and coke-cutting procedure and did not have adequate time to perform all of the quality assurance checks required by EPA Method 25A and Other Test Method 12 and described in the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent 

## . As a result, post-run calibration drift determinations were made on THC1 during Run 3, but not according to the procedures specified in EPA Method 25A or the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent



## .
During Run 3, THC1 recorded diluted concentrations above 100 ppm for approximately 37% of the total sampling duration. No diluted concentrations exceeded 2924.1 ppm. The certified concentration (taking the average dilution ratio into account) of the calibration gas used for post-run drift determination was 39.69 ppm, or 1% of the highest value recorded by the THC1 analyzer during the run. The post-run drift determination with this calibration gas met the method requirement of 3% of the span (10,000 ppm). However, the concentration of this calibration gas is not 

## comparable to the average diluted concentration measured by THC1 over the entire run (639.5 ppmw). The use of the 39.69 ppm calibration gas for the determination of THC1 analyzer drift is not 

## acceptable for the purposes of this source test. A significant degree of error may be associated with the total VOC results for Run 3.

Run 4 

## URS personnel were required to exit the Coker Unit at least 15 minutes prior to the drum de-heading and coke-cutting procedure and did not have adequate time to perform all of the quality assurance checks required by EPA Method 25A and Other Test Method 12 and described in the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent 

## . As a result, post-run calibration drift determinations were made on THC1 during Run 4, but not according to the procedures specified in EPA Method 25A or the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent



## .

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 5-6 40941948.04 

## During Run 4, THC1 recorded diluted concentrations above 100 ppm for approximately 3% of the total sampling duration. No diluted concentrations exceeded 2622.2 ppm. The certified concentration (taking the average dilution ratio into account) of the calibration gas used for post-run drift determination was 41.28 ppm, or 2% of the highest value recorded by the THC1 analyzer during the run. The post-run drift determination with this calibration gas met the method requirement of 3% of the span (10,000 ppm). Furthermore, the concentration of this calibration gas is comparable to the average diluted concentration measured by THC1 over the entire run (50.5 ppmw). The use of the 41.28 ppm calibration gas for the determination of THC1 analyzer drift is acceptable for the purposes of this source test because it represents the majority (97%) of the measurements recorded by the analyzer during Run 4.

5.3 NMNE VOC Concentration in the Vent Gas 

## QA/QC activities associated with the measurement of methane, ethane, and total VOC concentrations and described in the preceding sections are sufficient for the review of data quality associated with the quantification of NMNE VOC concentrations in the vent gas. A review of the data quality associated with these measurements indicate that these data are representative and usable for the purpose of calculating NMNE VOC concentrations for Runs 1 and 2 of the February 2008 testing.

5.4 Volumetric Flow Rate of the Vent Gas 

## QA/QC activities associated with the collection of the emissions gas samples for the determination of vent gas volumetric flow rate include:

 Use of pre-printed data sheets;

 Use of calibrated sampling equipment;

 Collection of samples at appropriate operating conditions;

 Performance of sampling system leak checks; and

 Collection of samples per the protocol and the applicable methods.

QA/QC activities associated with the analysis of emissions gas samples include:

 Calibration of the analytical instrumentation;

 Use of documented calibration standards; and

 Analysis of samples per the protocol and the applicable methods.

A review of the data quality associated with these measurements indicate that these data are representative and usable for the purpose intended. The issues identified during the data quality review is discussed on a per run basis:

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 5-7 40941948.04 

## Runs 1-4 

## According to the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent 

## , the sampling probe and filter were to be maintained at 300 ° 

## F ±25 ° 

## F to keep the steam vent gas stream in the gas phase until condensation in the sampling train condenser coil and impingers. However, this approach was designed for the use of standard sampling probes and specialized sampling ports, not a shepherd’s hook apparatus. URS personnel could not maintain the shepherd’s hook probe temperature (reflected on URS data sheets as two components: “Probe” and “Hook Probe”) at 300 ° 

## F ±25 ° 

## F, or even at a stable temperature consistently above the vent gas temperature, due to the damage to probe insulation caused by the high-velocity gas stream (at times >300 ft/sec, or 200 mph).

These temperature conditions achieved with the shepherd’s hook probe apparatus possibly resulted in a low bias to measured moisture concentrations because moisture could have condensed and remained inside of the probe apparatus – or drained back out into the vent – before condensation and collection in the appropriate section of the sampling train for gravimetric determination. Test Runs 2 and 3, with measured moisture concentrations of 91.52 and 91.41%, respectively, would be impacted the greatest. However, the slight increase in the measured moisture concentration in a range of 90-100% would have an insignificant impact on NMNE VOC mass emission rates. By substituting the highest moisture concentration measured during the February 2008 testing (98.68%) into the applicable calculations for the NMNE VOC mass emission rate during Run 2, the mass emission rate would increase by 0.2 lb/cycle – a relative deviation of 2%. This degree of low bias is acceptable for the purposes of this source
test.

URS personnel did not include a filter in the EPA Method 2/4 sampling train due to concerns that the filter would quickly become clogged with moisture and/or particulate matter when maintained at temperatures below 300 ° 

## F ±25 ° 

## F. As a result, small amounts of particulate matter were visible in the condensate collected in the sampling train impingers during all four test runs. Upon visual inspection, URS personnel estimated that less than 20 g of particulate were collected in the impingers during any given sampling run. The average amount of moisture collected during the source test was 2000 ml, or 2000 g, and this degree of high bias (2%) is acceptable for the purposes of this source test.

Accurate static pressure measurements for use in the determination of vent gas velocity were not successfully obtained with a magnehelic gauge until the latter half of Run 4, due to the clogging of the static pressure probe with moisture and particulate matter and other equipment malfunctions. The average of the accurate static pressure readings (measured from 18:27 to 18:39) obtained during Run 4 was applied to all vent gas velocity calculations for Run 1, 2, 3 and t 300 °



## 300 °



## w 300 ° 

# REDACTED

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 5-8 40941948.04 

## 4. This missing data procedure the most appropriate means for estimating Coker Steam Vent volumetric flow rate during the February 2008 testing.

URS has conducted testing on similar Coker Steam Vent sources and obtained reliable static pressure measurements between 0 and -30” H 2 

## O. In addition, vent gas static pressure appears to equilibrate to near atmospheric pressure during the first hour of a venting cycle. By substituting a reasonable, most extreme, and constant 

## static pressure of -30” H 2 

## O into the calculations per time interval for Run 1, the NMNE VOC mass emission rate is reduced by 5.739 lb/cycle, or approximately 4% relative deviation. By substituting a reasonable, most extreme, and constant 

## static pressure of -30” H 2 

## O into the calculations per time interval for Run 2, the NMNE VOC mass emission rate is reduced by 0.340 lb/cycle, or approximately 2% relative deviation. The high bias to NMNE VOC mass emission rates of applying the average static pressure of -1.36” H 2 

## O obtained directly during Run 4 is acceptable for the purposes of this
source test.

Run 2 

## URS personnel were required to exit the Coker Unit at least 15 minutes prior to the drum de-heading and coke-cutting procedure and did not have adequate time to perform all of the quality assurance checks required by EPA Method 2 and 4. As a result, a post-test leak test of the EPA Method 2/4 sampling train was not performed following Run 2. The pre-run leak test was used to determine that no dry gas volume collected with the sampling train should be corrected according to EPA Equation 5-1(a) Case I.

In similar cases during typical source testing efforts, a comparison of the moisture concentrations obtained during several test runs performed on a source can generate adequate evidence to determine whether or not excessive sampling train leakage occurred in a suspect sampling train. However, the batch nature of the coking process and variable measured moisture concentrations precludes such a comparison. A review of the average sampling rates achieved for Runs 1-4 (0.106, 0.214, 0.235, 0.121 cfm, respectively) indicates that the EPA Method 2/4 sampling train achieved an average sampling rate within the range of sampling rates encountered during the February 2008 testing.

It is important to note that while variable moisture concentrations measured in the Coker Steam Vent gas stream will raise or lower the reported dry concentration of NMNE VOCs, they will have negligible impact on the calculation of NMNE VOC mass emission rates. The presence of a significant leak in the EPA Method 2/4 sampling train during Run 2 would bias the moisture concentration results low. By substituting the highest moisture concentration measured during the February 2008 testing (98.68%) into the applicable calculations for the NMNE VOC

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 5-9 40941948.04 

## mass emission rate during Run 2, the mass emission rate would increase by 0.2 lb/cycle – a relative deviation of 2%. This degree of bias is acceptable for the purposes of this source test.

5.5 Project Conclusion 

## The accurate measurement of NMNE VOCs in the Coker Steam Vent gas stream is one of the primary concerns of the complex test program requested by EPA. EPA defines VOCs in 40 CFR 51.100(s) as “any compound of carbon, excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate, which participates in atmospheric photochemical reactions.” 40 CFR 51.100(s)(1) also lists many organic compounds which have been determined to have negligible photochemical reactivity (e.g., methane and ethane) and may be excluded as VOC if accurately quantified.

EPA requested in the “2007 Section 114 Request” that EPA Method 25A must be used in combination with EPA Methods 1, 2, 3, 18 and the dilution methods of Other Test Method 12 to determine the concentration and mass emission rates of non-methane/non-ethane organic compounds. However, it is well known that the FIDs used in these methods produce a response proportional to the carbon-hydrogen bonds present in the sample gas and do not differentiate between different classes of organic compounds. Furthermore, FIDs have varying sensitivity for specific classes of organic compounds.

It is difficult to categorize the bias inherent in the use of an FID for the measurement of VOCs using EPA Method 25A without a greater understanding of the typical concentrations of organic compounds present in the Coker Steam Vent gas stream. With the additional pending sampling of SVOCs using the SW-846 Method 0010 sampling train, it is very likely that some selected SVOCs will be quantified with the FIDs used by the THC analyzers and reported as VOCs. This potential high bias of VOC measurement and double-reporting of an unknown fraction of the SVOCs present in the Coker Steam Vent gas stream obtained with the SW-846 Method 0010 sampling trains must be carefully considered when evaluating the data produced through the future source testing required by EPA.

The results presented in this report for the February 2008 testing of the Coker Steam Vent indicate that the accurate and precise measurement of total VOCs, including compounds with negligible photochemical reactivity for potentia l exclusion as VOCs, will be a significant challenge during the pending test effort described in the protocol. The dynamic characteristics of the venting cycle demand a data reduction effort based upon the development of specific venting cycle time intervals, as vent gas volumetric flow rate and VOC concentrations change quickly over a short period of time and do not seem to be directly related. However, the incompatibility of the total VOC and methane and ethane concentration results obtained for Run

### Source Test Report – Coker Steam Vent 

## 5-10 40941948.04 

## 3 warrants further consideration of the appropriateness of subtracting data obtained from EPA Method 18 from data obtained with EPA Method 25A.

The EPA Method 18 pre-survey test effort ( described in the Source Test Protocol for the Coker Unit Steam Vent 

## ) will provide initial data for the speciation of VOCs in the Coker Steam Vent gas stream. This data will be used to determine the VOC compounds to be analyzed during the source test using a gas chromatograph (GC) and FID by EPA Method 18. However, it is important to note that the pre-survey data should also be used to reevaluate whether or not EPA Method 25A is appropriate for the accurate quantification of VOC concentrations in the Coker Steam Vent gas stream. The pre-survey samples will be analyzed by GC and mass spectrometry (MS) and will provide much more comprehensive data of the VOC concentrations in the Coker Steam Vent gas stream. CITGO will report the results of the pre-survey as soon as possible after laboratory analytical data are obtained and will present further discussion of VOC measurement using EPA Method 25A based upon these pre-survey results. Alternative VOC measurement methods and strategies may also be included in subsequent communication to EPA.

# APPENDIX A Correspondence And Technical Information

### EM SOP No.: 002-PS1 Procedure for Low-Flow Calibration of Effective Date: 15 March 2008 Dry Gas Meter Using a Flow Calibrator Expiration Date: 15 march 2009



# T HIS 

# D OCUMENT IS CONSIDERED 

# P ROPRIETARY BY 

# URS C ORPORATION


# . Page 1 of 6 

# EM SOP-002-PS1
Procedure for Low-Flow Calibration of Dry Gas Meter Using a Flow Calibrator

SOP Component Section
Identification of the test method 1 Applicable matrix or matrices 2
Detection limit 2 Scope and application 1, 2 Summary of test method 1
Definitions 4 Safety 3 Equipment and supplies 5 Reagents and standards 5 Sample collection, preservation, storage, handling, and chain-of-custody Not Applicable Quality control 7
Calibration 6 

## SOP Component Section
Procedure 6
Calculations 8 Method performance 2 Pollution prevention 10 Data assessment/acceptance criteria for QC 7
Corrective actions for unacceptable data 7 Contingency for handling unacceptable data 7
Waste management 10 Record keeping 9
References 11 Tables, diagrams, etc. 12


# 1.0 Purpose and Scope
This document describes the procedure used to calibrate the dry gas meters internal to sampling consoles. Dry gas meters are calibrated, and the calibration checked, by comparing the volume of gas that passes through the dry gas meter to the volume of gas that passes through a traceable flow calibrator. This document specifies identification procedures, calibration frequency, acceptance criteria, corrective actions, and data forms to be used for record keeping.
Any dry gas meter calibrated per this SOP is considered acceptable for use.

### EM SOP No.: 002-PS1 Procedure for Low-Flow Calibration of Effective Date: 15 March 2008 Dry Gas Meter Using a Flow Calibrator Expiration Date: 15 march 2009



# T HIS 

# D OCUMENT IS CONSIDERED 

# P ROPRIETARY BY 

# URS C ORPORATION


# . Page 2 of 6 

# 2.0 Applicability
This SOP applies to dry gas meters that are used in applications requiring a sampling rate between 1.0 and 9.0 liters per minute. This SOP is to be used on a project-specific basis when other standing calibration procedures do not adequately characterize dry gas meter performance. As this is a calibration, there is no sensitivity or detection limit associated with the SOP. A dry gas meter calibrated per this SOP is acceptable for use. A dry gas meter that does not meet the criteria of this SOP must not be used. 

# 3.0 Safety
This activity will be performed within the URS facilities. Operations under this SOP must comply with URS health and safety plans. This activity has no additional safety requirements.


# 4.0 Definitions

Reserved. 

# 5.0 Equipment and Supplies

• 

## Dry gas meter.

• 

## DryCal Flow Calibrator –calibrated to EPA standards by third party with appropriate documentation.

• 

## Stopwatch


# 6.0 Procedure
6.1 Pre sampling calibration procedure: 6.1.1 The dry gas meter must be calibrated at five different flow rates, in duplicate, by comparison of gas flow through the dry gas meter and through the DryCal flow calibrator. 6.1.1.1 Five different flow rates must be used. These span the range of (nominally) 1.0 to 9.0 liters per minute (0.035 to 0.32 cubic feet per minute). 6.1.2 FREQUENCY: The calibration must be performed before and after each field program where low-flow is necessary. In general, this procedure is described for a dry gas meter contained within a sampling console. It may be necessary to modify some of the connection steps slightly for calibration of a stand-alone dry gas meter. 6.1.3 All of these activities must be documented on a data sheet. An example data sheet is provided in Figure 1. Record console and calibrator identification numbers, date, and operator on the data sheet. 6.1.4 Record barometric pressure and ambient temperature.

### EM SOP No.: 002-PS1 Procedure for Low-Flow Calibration of Effective Date: 15 March 2008 Dry Gas Meter Using a Flow Calibrator Expiration Date: 15 march 2009



# T HIS 

# D OCUMENT IS CONSIDERED 

# P ROPRIETARY BY 

# URS C ORPORATION


# . Page 3 of 6 

## 6.1.5 Connect the outlet of the flow calibrator to the inlet of the console.

6.1.6 Record the initial volume from the console. 6.1.7 Start the stopwatch and the pump. 6.1.8 Record the DryCal flow rate every time the DryCal flow calibrator reaches its tenth data acquisition in the averaging series. 6.1.9 After the desired run time has elapsed, close the pump and record the final volume from the console. 6.1.10 Repeat Steps 6.1.5 through 6.1.9. There must be duplicate calibration runs for each flow rate. 6.1.11 Repeat Steps 6.1.5 through 6.1.10 at the next four flow rates. There must be duplicate calibration runs for each flow rate. 6.1.12 Review the data sheet, and ensure that it is filled out completely. 6.2 Post sampling calibration procedure: 6.2.1 The calibration of the dry gas meter must be checked at the flow rates under which sampling was performed, in duplicate, by comparison of gas flow through the dry gas meter and through the DryCal flow calibrator. 6.2.2 Perform steps 6.1.3 through 6.1.10 at the flow rate(s) which the sampling was performed. 

# 7.0 Quality Control
Quality assurance and quality control are addressed by following the steps outlined in this SOP. No additional activities are necessary. If the DGM fails this calibration check during a pre-test calibration check, it must not be used in this application. If the DGM fails this calibration check during a post-test calibration check, the project team must be notified about the results.


# 8.0 Calculations
Calculations are performed using documented software. Spreadsheets that are documented to be correct are maintained on the local network. For each of the runs above, calculate the volume of gas passing through the flow calibrator using the following equation:


# time FlowRate V cal

cal 

#  

### EM SOP No.: 002-PS1 Procedure for Low-Flow Calibration of Effective Date: 15 March 2008 Dry Gas Meter Using a Flow Calibrator Expiration Date: 15 march 2009



# T HIS 

# D OCUMENT IS CONSIDERED 

# P ROPRIETARY BY 

# URS C ORPORATION


# . Page 4 of 6 

## where:

V cal 

## = Volume of gas passing through the flow calibrator

FlowRate cal 

## = Flow rate of gas passing through the flow calibrator (averaged for the run).

Time = Duration of the calibration or calibration check run. For each of the runs above, calculate the volume of gas passing through the dry gas meter using the following equation:

initial final con 

# VolReading VolReading V 

where:

V con 

## = Volume of gas passing through the dry gas meter VolReading final 

## = Final Volume reading from the faceplate of the dry gas meter VolReading initial 

## = Initial Volume reading from the faceplate of the dry gas meter For each of the runs above, calculate the dry gas meter calibration factor, Y, using the following equation:

con cal 

# V V Y 

For the initial calibration, average the pair of DGM calibration factors generated at each flow rate. The average Y calculated must be between 0.90 and 1.10, and each individual Y at each flow rate must be within 2% of the average Y at each flow rate. Each average Y is applicable to a range of flow rates that may be observed during sampling. The applicability range of each Y spans from the midpoint between the flow rate it was calculated at and the next lower flow rate to the midpoint between the flow rate it was calculated at and the next higher flow rate. For the post calibration check, average the two individual DGM calibration factors. The average Y must be within 5% of the average Y from the initial calibration at the same flowrate. 

# 9.0 Record Keeping
As noted above, all calibrations must be recorded on individual data sheets. If a computer program is used to perform the calculations, the handwritten data sheet must be kept as well as the computer output. An example data sheet is shown in Section 12.0 – Exhibits. Documentation of these activities is kept as part of the project files. 

# 10.0 Pollution Prevention and Waste Management

Reserved.

### EM SOP No.: 002-PS1 Procedure for Low-Flow Calibration of Effective Date: 15 March 2008 Dry Gas Meter Using a Flow Calibrator Expiration Date: 15 march 2009



# T HIS 

# D OCUMENT IS CONSIDERED 

# P ROPRIETARY BY 

# URS C ORPORATION


# . Page 5 of 6 

# 11.0 References
Government Printing Office. “Method 5 – Determination of Particulate Emissions from Stationary Sources.” Code of Federal Regulations , Title 40, Part 60, Appendix A. Government Printing Office. “Method 30B – Determination of Total Vapor Phase Mercury emissions From Coal Fired Combustion Sources Using Carbon Sorbent Traps.” Code of Federal Regulations , Title 40, Part 60, Appendix A.

USEPA. Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems: Volume III, Stationary Source-Specific Methods , EPA/600/r-94/038c, September 1994.


# 12.0 Exhibits
Figure 1. Example Data Sheet

### EM SOP No.: 002-PS1 Procedure for Low-Flow Calibration of Effective Date: 15 March 2008 Dry Gas Meter Using a Flow Calibrator Expiration Date: 15 march 2009

Dry Gas Meter Calibration vs DryCal
Console ID Barometric Pressure (“ Hg)

DryCal ID Ambient Temperature (oF)

Initials Initials Calibrated by Date Reviewed by Date

Run 1A Run 1B Run 2A Run 2B Run 3A Run 3B Run 4A Run 4B Run 5A Run 5B Nominal Flowrate (ft 3 /min)

Start Time (hh:mm) DGM Initial Reading (ft 3 )

Stop Time (hh:mm) DGM Final Reading (ft 3 )

Test Duration (min)
Flowrate (ft 3 /min) Flowrate (ft 3 /min) Flowrate (ft 3 /min) Flowrate (ft 3 /min) Flowrate (ft 3 /min) Flowrate (ft 3 /min) Flowrate (ft 3 /min) Flowrate (ft 3 /min) Flowrate (ft 3 /min) Flowrate (ft 3 /min)

Notes CD S -2

3 Dry Gas Mete r vs DryCal Revision Date: March 2008



## Figure 1. Example Data Sheet



# T HIS 

# D OCUMENT IS CONSIDERED 

# P ROPRIETARY BY 

# URS C ORPORATION


# . Page 6 of 6

# APPENDIX B
EPA Method 25A Raw Data And Calibration InformationCITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing URS Raw THC Data Run 1 Average Dilution Ratio (High) = 119.0 HIGH - THC1 LOW - THC2

24 Hour Time Elapsed Time RAW (pp mw ) RAW (pp mw ) RAW x DL R (ppmw) A ctual (ppmw) 02/24/2008 05:04:05 0:00:00 -1.1 -5.8 -130.8 237.9 02/24/2008 05:04:15 0:00:10 -1.4 -5.8 -166.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:04:25 0:00:20 -1.3 -5.8 -154.6 237.9 02/24/2008 05:04:35 0:00:30 -0.9 -5.8 -107.1 237.9 02/24/2008 05:04:45 0:00:40 -1.3 -5.8 -154.6 237.9 02/24/2008 05:04:55 0:00:50 -0.7 -5.8 -83.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:05:05 0:01:00 -0.2 -5.8 -23.8 237.9 02/24/2008 05:05:15 0:01:10 -0.6 -5.8 -71.4 237.9 02/24/2008 05:05:25 0:01:20 -0.1 -5.8 -11.9 237.9 02/24/2008 05:05:35 0:01:30 0.4 -5.8 47.6 237.9 02/24/2008 05:05:45 0:01:40 0.1 -5.8 11.9 237.9 02/24/2008 05:05:55 0:01:50 -0.7 -5.8 -83.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:06:05 0:02:00 -1.4 -5.8 -166.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:06:15 0:02:10 -2.1 -5.8 -249.8 237.9 02/24/2008 05:06:25 0:02:20 -3.3 -5.8 -392.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:06:35 0:02:30 -4.1 -5.8 -487.7 237.9 02/24/2008 05:06:45 0:02:40 -4.5 -5.8 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:06:55 0:02:50 -4.6 -5.8 -547.2 237.9 02/24/2008 05:07:05 0:03:00 -4.8 -5.8 -571.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:07:15 0:03:10 -4.6 -5.8 -547.2 237.9 02/24/2008 05:07:25 0:03:20 -4.8 -5.8 -571.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:07:35 0:03:30 -4.8 -5.8 -571.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:07:45 0:03:40 -4.8 -5.8 -571.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:07:55 0:03:50 -4.8 -5.8 -571.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:08:05 0:04:00 -4.8 -5.8 -571.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:08:15 0:04:10 -5.0 -5.8 -594.8 237.9 02/24/2008 05:08:25 0:04:20 -5.0 -5.8 -594.8 237.9 02/24/2008 05:08:35 0:04:30 -4.8 -5.8 -571.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:08:45 0:04:40 -4.8 -5.8 -571.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:08:55 0:04:50 -4.8 -5.8 -571.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:09:05 0:05:00 -4.8 -5.8 -571.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:09:15 0:05:10 -4.8 -5.8 -571.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:09:25 0:05:20 -4.8 -5.8 -571.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:09:35 0:05:30 -4.8 -5.8 -571.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:09:45 0:05:40 -5.0 -5.8 -594.8 237.9 02/24/2008 05:09:55 0:05:50 -4.8 -5.7 -571.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:10:05 0:06:00 0.6 -5.8 71.4 237.9 02/24/2008 05:10:15 0:06:10 -1.1 -5.7 -130.8 237.9 02/24/2008 05:10:25 0:06:20 -3.5 -5.8 -416.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:10:35 0:06:30 -4.0 -5.7 -475.8 237.9 02/24/2008 05:10:45 0:06:40 -4.1 -5.8 -487.7 237.9 02/24/2008 05:10:55 0:06:50 -4.1 -5.7 -487.7 237.9 02/24/2008 05:11:05 0:07:00 -4.1 -5.8 -487.7 237.9 02/24/2008 05:11:15 0:07:10 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:11:25 0:07:20 -4.5 -5.8 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:11:35 0:07:30 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:11:45 0:07:40 -4.3 -5.8 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:11:55 0:07:50 -4.5 -5.7 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:12:05 0:08:00 -4.5 -5.8 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:12:15 0:08:10 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:12:25 0:08:20 -4.5 -5.7 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:12:35 0:08:30 -4.5 -5.7 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:12:45 0:08:40 -4.5 -5.7 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:12:55 0:08:50 -4.5 -5.7 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:13:05 0:09:00 -4.5 -5.7 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:13:15 0:09:10 -4.5 -5.7 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:13:25 0:09:20 -4.5 -5.7 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:13:35 0:09:30 -4.5 -5.7 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:13:45 0:09:40 -4.5 -5.7 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:13:55 0:09:50 -4.5 -5.7 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:14:05 0:10:00 -4.5 -5.7 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:14:15 0:10:10 -4.5 -5.7 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:14:25 0:10:20 -4.5 -5.7 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:14:35 0:10:30 -4.5 -5.7 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:14:45 0:10:40 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:14:55 0:10:50 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:15:05 0:11:00 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:15:15 0:11:10 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:15:25 0:11:20 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:15:35 0:11:30 -4.5 -5.7 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:15:45 0:11:40 -4.5 -5.7 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:15:55 0:11:50 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:16:05 0:12:00 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:16:15 0:12:10 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:16:25 0:12:20 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:16:35 0:12:30 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:16:45 0:12:40 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 HIGH THC1

1 05:04:05 0:00:00 05:04:15 0:00:10 05:04:25 0:00:20 05:04:35 0:00:30 05:04:45 0:00:40 05:04:55 0:00:50 05:05:05 0:01:00 05:05:15 0:01:10

:05:35 0:01:30 05:05:25 0:01:20 05:

05:05:55 0:01:50 05:05:45 0:01:40

0:02:10 05:06:15 05:06:05 0:02:00

05:06:25 0:02:20 05:06:35 0:02:30 05:06:45 0:02:40 05:06:55 0:02:50 05:07:05 0:03:00 05:07:15 0:03:10 05:07:25 0:03:20 05:07:35 0:03:30 05:07:45 0:03:40 05:07:55 0:03:50 05:08:05 0:04:00 05:08:15 0:04:10 05:08:25 0:04:20 05:08:35 0:04:30 05:08:45 0:04:40 05:08:55 0:04:50 05:09:05 0:05:00

09:15 0:05:10 05: 05:09:25 0:05:20 05:09:35 0:05:30

05:09:55 0:05:50 05:09:45 0:05:40

05:10:05 0:06:00 05:10:15 0:06:10 05:10:25 0:06:20 05:10:35 0:06:30

10:45 0:06:40 05: 05:10:55 0:06:50 05:11:05 0:07:00

1:25 0:07:20 05:

1 05:11:15 0:07:10

05:11:35 0:07:30 05:11:45 0:07:40 05:11:55 0:07:50 05:12:05 0:08:00 05:12:15 0:08:10 05:12:25 0:08:20 05:12:35 0:08:30 05:12:45 0:08:40 05:12:55 0:08:50 05:13:05 0:09:00 05:13:15 0:09:10 05:13:25 0:09:20 05:13:35 0:09:30 05:13:45 0:09:40 05:13:55 0:09:50 05:14:05 0:10:00 05:14:15 0:10:10 05:14:25 0:10:20 05:14:35 0:10:30

05:14:55 0:10:50 05:14:45 0:10:40

05:15:15 0:11:10 05:15:05 0:11:00

05:15:25 0:11:20 05:15:35 0:11:30 05:15:45 0:11:40 05:15:55 0:11:50 05:16:05 0:12:00 05:16:15 0:12:10 05:16:25 0:12:20 05:16:35 0:12:30 05:16:45 0:12: 40 

# REDACTEDCITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing URS Raw THC Data Run 1 Average Dilution Ratio (High) = 119.0 HIGH - THC1 LOW - THC2

24 Hour Time Elapsed Time RAW (pp mw ) RAW (pp mw ) RAW x DL R (ppmw) A ctual (ppmw) HIGH THC1

02/24/2008 05:16:55 0:12:50 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:17:05 0:13:00 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:17:15 0:13:10 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:17:25 0:13:20 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:17:35 0:13:30 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:17:45 0:13:40 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:17:55 0:13:50 -4.5 -5.7 -535.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:18:05 0:14:00 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:18:15 0:14:10 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:18:25 0:14:20 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:18:35 0:14:30 -4.3 -5.7 -511.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:18:45 0:14:40 -4.0 -5.7 -475.8 237.9 02/24/2008 05:18:55 0:14:50 -3.6 -5.7 -428.2 237.9 02/24/2008 05:19:05 0:15:00 -3.3 -5.7 -392.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:19:15 0:15:10 -2.8 -5.7 -333.1 237.9 02/24/2008 05:19:25 0:15:20 -2.4 -5.7 -285.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:19:35 0:15:30 -2.4 -5.7 -285.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:19:45 0:15:40 -2.3 -5.7 -273.6 237.9 02/24/2008 05:19:55 0:15:50 -2.4 -5.7 -285.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:20:05 0:16:00 -2.3 -5.7 -273.6 237.9 02/24/2008 05:20:15 0:16:10 -2.4 -5.7 -285.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:20:25 0:16:20 -2.4 -5.7 -285.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:20:35 0:16:30 -2.6 -5.7 -309.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:20:45 0:16:40 -2.8 -5.7 -333.1 237.9 02/24/2008 05:20:55 0:16:50 -2.8 -5.7 -333.1 237.9 02/24/2008 05:21:05 0:17:00 -2.8 -5.7 -333.1 237.9 02/24/2008 05:21:15 0:17:10 -2.9 -5.7 -345.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:21:25 0:17:20 -2.4 -5.7 -285.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:21:35 0:17:30 5.9 -5.7 701.8 701.8 02/24/2008 05:21:45 0:17:40 104.8 -5.7 12466.0 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:21:55 0:17:50 417.8 -5.7 49697.4 49697.4 02/24/2008 05:22:05 0:18:00 604.4 -5.7 71893.5 71893.5 02/24/2008 05:22:15 0:18:10 817.5 -5.7 97241.7 97241.7 02/24/2008 05:22:25 0:18:20 932.9 -5.7 110968.6 110968.6 02/24/2008 05:22:35 0:18:30 846.8 -5.7 100727.0 100727.0 02/24/2008 05:22:45 0:18:40 897.0 -5.7 106698.3 106698.3 02/24/2008 05:22:55 0:18:50 783.8 -5.7 93233.1 93233.1 02/24/2008 05:23:05 0:19:00 655.3 -5.7 77948.0 77948.0 02/24/2008 05:23:15 0:19:10 527.2 -5.7 62710.5 62710.5 02/24/2008 05:23:25 0:19:20 505.0 -5.7 60069.8 60069.8 02/24/2008 05:23:35 0:19:30 405.8 -5.7 48270.0 48270.0 02/24/2008 05:23:45 0:19:40 225.2 -5.7 26787.6 26787.6 02/24/2008 05:23:55 0:19:50 152.0 -5.7 18080.4 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:24:05 0:20:00 116.3 -5.7 13833.9 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:24:15 0:20:10 130.7 -5.7 15546.8 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:24:25 0:20:20 155.3 -5.7 18473.0 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:24:35 0:20:30 152.2 -5.7 18104.2 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:24:45 0:20:40 123.6 -5.7 14702.2 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:24:55 0:20:50 119.5 -5.7 14214.5 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:25:05 0:21:00 138.1 -5.7 16427.0 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:25:15 0:21:10 88.7 -5.7 10550.9 10550.9 02/24/2008 05:25:25 0:21:20 49.7 -5.7 5911.8 5911.8 02/24/2008 05:25:35 0:21:30 46.5 -5.7 5531.2 5531.2 02/24/2008 05:25:45 0:21:40 55.5 -5.7 6601.7 6601.7 02/24/2008 05:25:55 0:21:50 78.2 -5.7 9301.9 9301.9 02/24/2008 05:26:05 0:22:00 122.4 -5.7 14559.5 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:26:15 0:22:10 164.6 -5.7 19579.2 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:26:25 0:22:20 203.4 -5.7 24194.5 24194.5 02/24/2008 05:26:35 0:22:30 166.8 -5.7 19840.9 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:26:45 0:22:40 83.4 -5.7 9920.4 9920.4 02/24/2008 05:26:55 0:22:50 35.0 -5.7 4163.3 4163.3 02/24/2008 05:27:05 0:23:00 21.3 -5.7 2533.6 2533.6 02/24/2008 05:27:15 0:23:10 44.6 -5.7 5305.2 5305.2 02/24/2008 05:27:25 0:23:20 52.1 -5.7 6197.3 6197.3 02/24/2008 05:27:35 0:23:30 42.3 -5.7 5031.6 5031.6 02/24/2008 05:27:45 0:23:40 45.7 -5.7 5436.0 5436.0 02/24/2008 05:27:55 0:23:50 75.0 -5.7 8921.3 8921.3 02/24/2008 05:28:05 0:24:00 98.3 -5.7 11692.8 11692.8 02/24/2008 05:28:15 0:24:10 54.0 -5.7 6423.3 6423.3 02/24/2008 05:28:25 0:24:20 22.6 -5.7 2688.3 2688.3 02/24/2008 05:28:35 0:24:30 12.8 -5.7 1522.6 1522.6 02/24/2008 05:28:45 0:24:40 8.6 -5.7 1023.0 1023.0 02/24/2008 05:28:55 0:24:50 7.4 -5.7 880.2 880.2 02/24/2008 05:29:05 0:25:00 6.4 -5.7 761.3 761.3 02/24/2008 05:29:15 0:25:10 4.7 -5.7 559.1 559.1 02/24/2008 05:29:25 0:25:20 5.9 -5.7 701.8 701.8 02/24/2008 05:29:35 0:25:30 4.7 -5.7 559.1 559.1

2 05:16:55 0:12:50 05:17:05 0:13:00 05:17:15 0:13:10 05:17:25 0:13:20 05:17:35 0:13:30 05:17:45 0:13:40 05:17:55 0:13:50 05:18:05 0:14:00 05:18:15 0:14:10 05:18:25 0:14:20 05:18:35 0:14:30 05:18:45 0:14:40

05:19:05 0:15:00 05:18:55 0:14:50

05:19:15 0:15 05:19:25 0:15:20 5:10

05:19:35 0:15:30 

# REDACTEDCITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing URS Raw THC Data Run 1 Average Dilution Ratio (High) = 119.0 HIGH - THC1 LOW - THC2

24 Hour Time Elapsed Time RAW (pp mw ) RAW (pp mw ) RAW x DL R (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) HIGH THC1

02/24/2008 05:29:45 0:25:40 4.7 -5.7 559.1 559.1 02/24/2008 05:29:55 0:25:50 7.6 -5.7 904.0 904.0 02/24/2008 05:30:05 0:26:00 6.5 -5.7 773.2 773.2 02/24/2008 05:30:15 0:26:10 4.7 -5.7 559.1 559.1 02/24/2008 05:30:25 0:26:20 3.5 -5.7 416.3 416.3 02/24/2008 05:30:35 0:26:30 2.3 -5.7 273.6 273.6 02/24/2008 05:30:45 0:26:40 2.0 -5.7 237.9 237.9 02/24/2008 05:30:55 0:26:50 1.8 -5.7 214.1 237.9 02/24/2008 05:31:05 0:27:00 2.3 -5.7 273.6 273.6 02/24/2008 05:31:15 0:27:10 3.2 -5.7 380.6 380.6 02/24/2008 05:31:25 0:27:20 12.3 -5.7 1463.1 1463.1 02/24/2008 05:31:35 0:27:30 15.5 -5.7 1843.7 1843.7 02/24/2008 05:31:45 0:27:40 6.4 -5.7 761.3 761.3 02/24/2008 05:31:55 0:27:50 2.3 -5.7 273.6 273.6 02/24/2008 05:32:05 0:28:00 1.8 -5.7 214.1 237.9 02/24/2008 05:32:15 0:28:10 1.6 -5.7 190.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:32:25 0:28:20 0.6 -5.7 71.4 237.9 02/24/2008 05:32:35 0:28:30 0.6 -5.7 71.4 237.9 02/24/2008 05:32:45 0:28:40 0.4 -5.7 47.6 237.9 02/24/2008 05:32:55 0:28:50 0.8 -5.7 95.2 237.9 02/24/2008 05:33:05 0:29:00 2.6 -5.7 309.3 309.3 02/24/2008 05:33:15 0:29:10 9.1 -5.7 1082.4 1082.4 02/24/2008 05:33:25 0:29:20 20.6 -5.7 2450.4 2450.4 02/24/2008 05:33:35 0:29:30 32.1 -5.7 3818.3 3818.3 02/24/2008 05:33:45 0:29:40 57.4 -5.7 6827.7 6827.7 02/24/2008 05:33:55 0:29:50 81.2 -5.7 9658.7 9658.7 02/24/2008 05:34:05 0:30:00 88.0 -5.7 10467.6 10467.6 02/24/2008 05:34:15 0:30:10 116.0 -5.7 13798.2 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:34:25 0:30:20 119.9 -5.7 14262.1 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:34:35 0:30:30 67.2 -5.7 7993.4 7993.4 02/24/2008 05:34:45 0:30:40 20.4 -5.7 2426.6 2426.6 02/24/2008 05:34:55 0:30:50 5.2 -5.7 618.5 618.5 02/24/2008 05:35:05 0:31:00 1.3 -5.7 154.6 237.9 02/24/2008 05:35:15 0:31:10 3.8 -5.7 452.0 452.0 02/24/2008 05:35:25 0:31:20 4.3 -5.7 511.5 511.5 02/24/2008 05:35:35 0:31:30 0.8 -5.7 95.2 237.9 02/24/2008 05:35:45 0:31:40 -0.4 -5.7 -47.6 237.9 02/24/2008 05:35:55 0:31:50 -0.7 -5.7 -83.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:36:05 0:32:00 -0.7 -5.7 -83.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:36:15 0:32:10 -1.1 -5.7 -130.8 237.9 02/24/2008 05:36:25 0:32:20 -1.4 -5.7 -166.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:36:35 0:32:30 -1.1 -5.7 -130.8 237.9 02/24/2008 05:36:45 0:32:40 -1.3 -5.7 -154.6 237.9 02/24/2008 05:36:55 0:32:50 -1.4 -5.7 -166.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:37:05 0:33:00 -1.4 -5.7 -166.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:37:15 0:33:10 -1.6 -5.7 -190.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:37:25 0:33:20 -1.6 -5.7 -190.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:37:35 0:33:30 -1.9 -5.7 -226.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:37:45 0:33:40 -1.9 -5.7 -226.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:37:55 0:33:50 -1.9 -5.7 -226.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:38:05 0:34:00 -1.9 -5.7 -226.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:38:15 0:34:10 -2.1 -5.7 -249.8 237.9 02/24/2008 05:38:25 0:34:20 -2.1 -5.7 -249.8 237.9 02/24/2008 05:38:35 0:34:30 -2.3 -5.7 -273.6 237.9 02/24/2008 05:38:45 0:34:40 -2.3 -5.7 -273.6 237.9 02/24/2008 05:38:55 0:34:50 -2.3 -5.7 -273.6 237.9 02/24/2008 05:39:05 0:35:00 -2.4 -5.7 -285.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:39:15 0:35:10 -2.4 -5.7 -285.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:39:25 0:35:20 -2.6 -5.7 -309.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:39:35 0:35:30 -2.8 -5.7 -333.1 237.9 02/24/2008 05:39:45 0:35:40 -2.8 -5.7 -333.1 237.9 02/24/2008 05:39:55 0:35:50 -2.8 -5.7 -333.1 237.9 02/24/2008 05:40:05 0:36:00 -2.6 -5.7 -309.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:40:15 0:36:10 -2.8 -5.7 -333.1 237.9 02/24/2008 05:40:25 0:36:20 -2.9 -5.7 -345.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:40:35 0:36:30 -2.9 -5.7 -345.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:40:45 0:36:40 -2.9 -5.7 -345.0 237.9 02/24/2008 05:40:55 0:36:50 -3.1 -5.7 -368.7 237.9 02/24/2008 05:41:05 0:37:00 -3.1 -5.7 -368.7 237.9 02/24/2008 05:41:15 0:37:10 -3.3 -5.7 -392.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:41:25 0:37:20 -3.3 -5.7 -392.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:41:35 0:37:30 -3.3 -5.7 -392.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:41:45 0:37:40 -3.3 -5.7 -392.5 237.9 02/24/2008 05:41:55 0:37:50 -2.8 -5.7 -333.1 237.9 02/24/2008 05:42:05 0:38:00 -2.1 -5.7 -249.8 237.9 02/24/2008 05:42:15 0:38:10 -1.3 -5.7 -154.6 237.9 02/24/2008 05:42:25 0:38:20 -0.7 -5.7 -83.3 237.9

3 

# REDACTEDCITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing URS Raw THC Data Run 1 Average Dilution Ratio (High) = 119.0 HIGH - THC1 LOW - THC2

24 Hour Time Elapsed Time RAW (pp mw ) RAW (pp mw ) RAW x DL R (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) HIGH THC1

02/24/2008 05:42:35 0:38:30 -0.2 -5.7 -23.8 237.9 02/24/2008 05:42:45 0:38:40 0.3 -5.7 35.7 237.9 02/24/2008 05:42:55 0:38:50 0.6 -5.7 71.4 237.9 02/24/2008 05:43:05 0:39:00 0.8 -5.7 95.2 237.9 02/24/2008 05:43:15 0:39:10 0.6 -5.7 71.4 237.9 02/24/2008 05:43:25 0:39:20 0.6 -5.7 71.4 237.9 02/24/2008 05:43:35 0:39:30 0.6 -5.7 71.4 237.9 02/24/2008 05:43:45 0:39:40 -0.1 -5.7 -11.9 237.9 02/24/2008 05:43:55 0:39:50 -0.2 -5.7 -23.8 237.9 02/24/2008 05:44:05 0:40:00 -0.6 -5.7 -71.4 237.9 02/24/2008 05:44:15 0:40:10 -0.2 -5.7 -23.8 237.9 02/24/2008 05:44:25 0:40:20 2.3 -5.7 273.6 273.6 02/24/2008 05:44:35 0:40:30 2.6 -5.7 309.3 309.3 02/24/2008 05:44:45 0:40:40 2.5 -5.7 297.4 297.4 02/24/2008 05:44:55 0:40:50 3.0 -5.7 356.9 356.9 02/24/2008 05:45:05 0:41:00 4.8 -5.7 571.0 571.0 02/24/2008 05:45:15 0:41:10 7.9 -5.7 939.7 939.7 02/24/2008 05:45:25 0:41:20 13.0 -5.7 1546.4 1546.4 02/24/2008 05:45:35 0:41:30 19.2 -5.7 2283.8 2283.8 02/24/2008 05:45:45 0:41:40 27.7 -5.7 3294.9 3294.9 02/24/2008 05:45:55 0:41:50 35.5 -5.7 4222.7 4222.7 02/24/2008 05:46:05 0:42:00 44.1 -5.7 5245.7 5245.7 02/24/2008 05:46:15 0:42:10 54.8 -5.7 6518.5 6518.5 02/24/2008 05:46:25 0:42:20 60.2 -5.7 7160.8 7160.8 02/24/2008 05:46:35 0:42:30 68.0 -5.7 8088.6 8088.6 02/24/2008 05:46:45 0:42:40 75.8 -5.7 9016.4 9016.4 02/24/2008 05:46:55 0:42:50 81.6 -5.7 9706.3 9706.3 02/24/2008 05:47:05 0:43:00 92.2 -5.7 10967.2 10967.2 02/24/2008 05:47:15 0:43:10 94.4 -5.7 11228.9 11228.9 02/24/2008 05:47:25 0:43:20 92.9 -5.7 11050.5 11050.5 02/24/2008 05:47:35 0:43:30 103.1 -5.7 12263.8 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:47:45 0:43:40 108.3 -5.7 12882.3 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:47:55 0:43:50 106.1 -5.7 12620.6 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:48:05 0:44:00 114.3 -5.7 13596.0 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:48:15 0:44:10 125.1 -5.7 14880.7 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:48:25 0:44:20 130.2 -5.7 15487.3 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:48:35 0:44:30 131.0 -5.7 15582.5 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:48:45 0:44:40 141.4 -5.7 16819.5 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:48:55 0:44:50 147.0 -5.7 17485.7 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:49:05 0:45:00 132.6 -5.7 15772.8 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:49:15 0:45:10 147.5 -5.7 17545.1 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:49:25 0:45:20 140.5 -5.7 16712.5 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:49:35 0:45:30 138.1 -5.7 16427.0 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:49:45 0:45:40 126.5 -5.7 15047.2 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:49:55 0:45:50 128.7 -5.7 15308.9 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:50:05 0:46:00 117.0 -5.7 13917.2 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:50:15 0:46:10 166.4 -5.7 19793.3 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:50:25 0:46:20 224.4 -5.7 26692.4 26692.4 02/24/2008 05:50:35 0:46:30 168.8 -5.7 20078.8 23790.0 02/24/2008 05:50:45 0:46:40 58.4 -5.7 6946.7 6946.7 02/24/2008 05:50:55 0:46:50 17.5 -5.7 2081.6 2081.6 02/24/2008 05:51:05 0:47:00 5.2 -5.7 618.5 618.5 02/24/2008 05:51:15 0:47:10 2.0 -5.7 237.9 237.9 02/24/2008 05:51:25 0:47:20 0.8 -5.7 95.2 237.9 02/24/2008 05:51:35 0:47:30 2.0 -5.7 237.9 237.9 02/24/2008 05:51:45 0:47:40 3.2 -5.7 380.6 380.6 02/24/2008 05:51:55 0:47:50 1.6 -5.7 190.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:52:05 0:48:00 -0.2 -5.7 -23.8 237.9 02/24/2008 05:52:15 0:48:10 -0.7 -5.7 -83.3 237.9 02/24/2008 05:52:25 0:48:20 -1.3 -5.7 -154.6 237.9 02/24/2008 05:52:35 0:48:30 -1.3 -5.7 -154.6 237.9 02/24/2008 05:52:45 0:48:40 -1.1 -5.7 -130.8 237.9 02/24/2008 05:52:55 0:48:50 -1.4 -5.7 -166.5 237.9

Data Points 294 294 294 Maximum 932.9 110968.6 110968.6 Minimum -5.0 -594.8 237.9 Run 1 Averag e 48.1 5716.2 6910.4

4 

# REDACTEDCitgo Coker Steam Vent Testing

URS THC Raw Data Run 2
Average Dilution Ratio (Low) = 116.5 HIGH LOW

24 Hour Time Elapsed Time THC1 (ppmw) THC2 (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Dual-Range (ppmw) 02/26/2008 05:05:02 0:00:00 -0.6 -0.6 -69.9 233.1 -67.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:05:12 0:00:10 -0.6 -0.6 -69.9 233.1 -65.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:05:22 0:00:20 -0.6 -0.5 -69.9 233.1 -62.5 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:05:32 0:00:30 -0.7 -0.6 -81.6 233.1 -73.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:05:42 0:00:40 -0.7 -0.7 -81.6 233.1 -85.4 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:05:52 0:00:50 -0.7 -0.8 -81.6 233.1 -88.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:06:02 0:01:00 -0.7 -0.7 -81.6 233.1 -86.0 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:06:12 0:01:10 -0.7 -0.8 -81.6 233.1 -90.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:06:22 0:01:20 -0.9 -0.9 -104.9 233.1 -107.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:06:32 0:01:30 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -134.5 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:06:42 0:01:40 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -143.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:06:52 0:01:50 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -146.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:07:02 0:02:00 -1.4 -1.3 -163.1 233.1 -145.7 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:07:12 0:02:10 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -145.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:07:22 0:02:20 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -143.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:07:32 0:02:30 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -143.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:07:42 0:02:40 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -143.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:07:52 0:02:50 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -143.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:08:02 0:03:00 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -143.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:08:12 0:03:10 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -143.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:08:22 0:03:20 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -143.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:08:32 0:03:30 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -143.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:08:42 0:03:40 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -142.5 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:08:52 0:03:50 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -143.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:09:02 0:04:00 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -142.5 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:09:12 0:04:10 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -141.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:09:22 0:04:20 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -140.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:09:32 0:04:30 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -140.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:09:42 0:04:40 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -140.4 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:09:52 0:04:50 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -139.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:10:02 0:05:00 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -139.4 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:10:12 0:05:10 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -139.4 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:10:22 0:05:20 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -138.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:10:32 0:05:30 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -138.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:10:42 0:05:40 21.4 17.4 2493.8 2493.8 2026.1 2026.1 2026.1 02/26/2008 05:10:52 0:05:50 94.3 90.2 10989.1 10989.1 10507.0 10507.0 10507.0 02/26/2008 05:11:02 0:06:00 44.3 44.3 5162.4 5162.4 5157.4 5157.4 5157.4 02/26/2008 05:11:12 0:06:10 13.5 13.4 1573.2 1573.2 1560.8 1560.8 1560.8 02/26/2008 05:11:22 0:06:20 4.0 4.0 466.1 466.1 461.4 461.4 461.4 02/26/2008 05:11:32 0:06:30 1.1 1.0 128.2 233.1 115.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:11:42 0:06:40 -0.1 -0.1 -11.7 233.1 -9.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:11:52 0:06:50 -0.6 -0.6 -69.9 233.1 -66.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:12:02 0:07:00 -0.7 -0.8 -81.6 233.1 -89.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:12:12 0:07:10 -0.9 -0.9 -104.9 233.1 -103.0 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:12:22 0:07:20 -0.9 -1.0 -104.9 233.1 -113.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:12:32 0:07:30 -0.9 -0.9 -104.9 233.1 -110.5 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:12:42 0:07:40 -1.1 -1.0 -128.2 233.1 -115.4 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:12:52 0:07:50 -1.1 -1.0 -128.2 233.1 -122.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:13:02 0:08:00 -1.1 -1.1 -128.2 233.1 -126.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:13:12 0:08:10 -1.1 -1.1 -128.2 233.1 -126.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:13:22 0:08:20 -1.1 -1.1 -128.2 233.1 -131.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:13:32 0:08:30 -1.1 -1.1 -128.2 233.1 -128.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:13:42 0:08:40 -1.1 -1.1 -128.2 233.1 -129.7 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:13:52 0:08:50 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -137.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:14:02 0:09:00 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -139.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:14:12 0:09:10 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -138.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:14:22 0:09:20 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -139.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:14:32 0:09:30 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -141.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:14:42 0:09:40 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -143.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:14:52 0:09:50 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -147.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:15:02 0:10:00 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -150.0 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:15:12 0:10:10 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -148.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:15:22 0:10:20 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -147.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:15:32 0:10:30 -1.4 -1.3 -163.1 233.1 -151.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:15:42 0:10:40 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -151.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:15:52 0:10:50 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -144.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:16:02 0:11:00 -1.4 -1.3 -163.1 233.1 -153.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:16:12 0:11:10 -1.4 -1.3 -163.1 233.1 -155.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:16:22 0:11:20 -1.4 -1.3 -163.1 233.1 -157.0 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:16:32 0:11:30 -0.7 -0.9 -81.6 233.1 -105.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:16:42 0:11:40 -0.7 -0.7 -81.6 233.1 -77.5 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:16:52 0:11:50 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -140.4 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:17:02 0:12:00 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -146.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:17:12 0:12:10 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -141.5 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:17:22 0:12:20 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -143.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:17:32 0:12:30 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -140.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:17:42 0:12:40 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -140.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:17:52 0:12:50 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -138.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:18:02 0:13:00 -1.1 -1.2 -128.2 233.1 -139.4 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:18:12 0:13:10 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -140.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:18:22 0:13:20 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -144.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:18:32 0:13:30 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -141.9 233.1 233.1 HIGH - THC1 LOW - THC2

4 

# REDACTEDCitgo Coker Steam Vent Testing

URS THC Raw Data Run 2
Average Dilution Ratio (Low) = 116.5 HIGH LOW

24 Hour Time Elapsed Time THC1 (ppmw) THC2 (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Dual-Range (ppmw) HIGH - THC1 LOW - THC2

02/26/2008 05:18:42 0:13:40 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -142.5 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:18:52 0:13:50 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -145.7 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:19:02 0:14:00 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -143.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:19:12 0:14:10 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -143.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:19:22 0:14:20 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -144.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:19:32 0:14:30 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -139.4 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:19:42 0:14:40 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -140.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:19:52 0:14:50 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -141.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:20:02 0:15:00 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -138.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:20:12 0:15:10 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -139.4 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:20:22 0:15:20 -1.3 -1.1 -151.5 233.1 -129.7 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:20:32 0:15:30 -1.3 -1.1 -151.5 233.1 -123.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:20:42 0:15:40 -1.3 -1.1 -151.5 233.1 -122.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:20:52 0:15:50 -1.1 -1.0 -128.2 233.1 -115.4 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:21:02 0:16:00 -1.3 -1.1 -151.5 233.1 -129.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:21:12 0:16:10 -1.1 -1.1 -128.2 233.1 -133.0 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:21:22 0:16:20 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -137.7 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:21:32 0:16:30 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -141.5 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:21:42 0:16:40 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -145.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:21:52 0:16:50 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -147.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:22:02 0:17:00 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -149.5 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:22:12 0:17:10 -1.4 -1.3 -163.1 233.1 -148.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:22:22 0:17:20 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -150.0 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:22:32 0:17:30 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -150.0 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:22:42 0:17:40 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -150.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:22:52 0:17:50 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -147.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:23:02 0:18:00 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -146.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:23:12 0:18:10 -1.4 -1.3 -163.1 233.1 -148.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:23:22 0:18:20 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -148.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:23:32 0:18:30 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -144.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:23:42 0:18:40 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -143.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:23:52 0:18:50 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -144.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:24:02 0:19:00 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -141.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:24:12 0:19:10 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -143.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:24:22 0:19:20 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -145.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:24:32 0:19:30 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -144.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:24:42 0:19:40 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -146.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:24:52 0:19:50 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -145.7 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:25:02 0:20:00 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -147.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:25:12 0:20:10 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -150.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:25:22 0:20:20 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -151.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:25:32 0:20:30 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -152.7 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:25:42 0:20:40 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -154.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:25:52 0:20:50 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -147.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:26:02 0:21:00 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -145.7 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:26:12 0:21:10 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -148.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:26:22 0:21:20 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -151.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:26:32 0:21:30 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -149.5 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:26:42 0:21:40 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -137.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:26:52 0:21:50 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -134.0 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:27:02 0:22:00 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -139.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:27:12 0:22:10 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -144.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:27:22 0:22:20 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -146.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:27:32 0:22:30 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -145.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:27:42 0:22:40 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -147.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:27:52 0:22:50 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -150.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:28:02 0:23:00 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -153.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:28:12 0:23:10 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -153.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:28:22 0:23:20 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -150.0 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:28:32 0:23:30 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -143.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:28:42 0:23:40 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -139.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:28:52 0:23:50 -1.4 -1.3 -163.1 233.1 -147.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:29:02 0:24:00 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -150.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:29:12 0:24:10 -1.4 -1.2 -163.1 233.1 -141.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:29:22 0:24:20 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -138.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:29:32 0:24:30 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -140.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:29:42 0:24:40 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -140.4 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:29:52 0:24:50 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -141.5 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:30:02 0:25:00 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -142.5 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:30:12 0:25:10 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -144.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:30:22 0:25:20 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -147.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:30:32 0:25:30 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -150.0 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:30:42 0:25:40 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -153.7 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:30:52 0:25:50 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -155.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:31:02 0:26:00 -1.4 -1.4 -163.1 233.1 -158.0 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:31:12 0:26:10 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -147.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:31:22 0:26:20 -0.6 -0.8 -69.9 233.1 -95.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:31:32 0:26:30 -0.1 -0.3 -11.7 233.1 -34.7 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:31:42 0:26:40 -0.4 -0.4 -46.6 233.1 -44.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:31:52 0:26:50 -0.4 -0.4 -46.6 233.1 -43.4 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:32:02 0:27:00 -0.4 -0.4 -46.6 233.1 -47.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:32:12 0:27:10 -0.2 -0.3 -23.3 233.1 -34.3 233.1 233.1

4 

# REDACTEDCitgo Coker Steam Vent Testing

URS THC Raw Data Run 2
Average Dilution Ratio (Low) = 116.5 HIGH LOW

24 Hour Time Elapsed Time THC1 (ppmw) THC2 (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Dual-Range (ppmw) HIGH - THC1 LOW - THC2

02/26/2008 05:32:22 0:27:20 -0.7 -0.7 -81.6 233.1 -79.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:32:32 0:27:30 -0.9 -0.2 -104.9 233.1 -28.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:32:42 0:27:40 -0.9 -0.3 -104.9 233.1 -38.0 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:32:52 0:27:50 -0.9 -0.6 -104.9 233.1 -73.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:33:02 0:28:00 -0.9 -0.9 -104.9 233.1 -100.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:33:12 0:28:10 -0.9 -1.0 -104.9 233.1 -115.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:33:22 0:28:20 -1.1 -1.1 -128.2 233.1 -126.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:33:32 0:28:30 -1.1 -1.1 -128.2 233.1 -128.7 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:33:42 0:28:40 -1.1 -1.2 -128.2 233.1 -134.5 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:33:52 0:28:50 -1.1 -1.2 -128.2 233.1 -140.4 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:34:02 0:29:00 -1.1 -1.2 -128.2 233.1 -143.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:34:12 0:29:10 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -140.4 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:34:22 0:29:20 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -139.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:34:32 0:29:30 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -143.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:34:42 0:29:40 -1.3 -1.2 -151.5 233.1 -145.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:34:52 0:29:50 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -145.7 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:35:02 0:30:00 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -147.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:35:12 0:30:10 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -148.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:35:22 0:30:20 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -150.0 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:35:32 0:30:30 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -151.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:35:42 0:30:40 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -153.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:35:52 0:30:50 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -152.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:36:02 0:31:00 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -153.7 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:36:12 0:31:10 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -153.7 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:36:22 0:31:20 -1.4 -1.3 -163.1 233.1 -155.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:36:32 0:31:30 -1.4 -1.3 -163.1 233.1 -154.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:36:42 0:31:40 -1.4 -1.3 -163.1 233.1 -155.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:36:52 0:31:50 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -146.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:37:02 0:32:00 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -152.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:37:12 0:32:10 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -152.7 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:37:22 0:32:20 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -154.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:37:32 0:32:30 -1.4 -1.3 -163.1 233.1 -154.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:37:42 0:32:40 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -155.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:37:52 0:32:50 -1.4 -1.3 -163.1 233.1 -153.7 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:38:02 0:33:00 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -155.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:38:12 0:33:10 -1.4 -1.3 -163.1 233.1 -155.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:38:22 0:33:20 -1.4 -1.3 -163.1 233.1 -154.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:38:32 0:33:30 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -145.7 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:38:42 0:33:40 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -148.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:38:52 0:33:50 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -151.0 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:39:02 0:34:00 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -153.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:39:12 0:34:10 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -151.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:39:22 0:34:20 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -148.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:39:32 0:34:30 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -147.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:39:42 0:34:40 -1.4 -1.3 -163.1 233.1 -151.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:39:52 0:34:50 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -152.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:40:02 0:35:00 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -154.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:40:12 0:35:10 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -155.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:40:22 0:35:20 -1.4 -1.3 -163.1 233.1 -156.4 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:40:32 0:35:30 -1.4 -1.3 -163.1 233.1 -155.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:40:42 0:35:40 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -157.0 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:40:52 0:35:50 -1.4 -1.3 -163.1 233.1 -150.0 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:41:02 0:36:00 -1.3 -1.3 -151.5 233.1 -148.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:41:12 0:36:10 0.8 0.2 93.2 233.1 22.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:41:22 0:36:20 50.6 45.1 5896.6 5896.6 5257.8 5257.8 5257.8 02/26/2008 05:41:32 0:36:30 133.1 182.9 15510.6 23306.7 21319.6 -1.0 23306.7 02/26/2008 05:41:42 0:36:40 195.1 275.0 22735.7 23306.7 32046.7 -1.0 23306.7 02/26/2008 05:41:52 0:36:50 279.7 275.0 32594.4 32594.4 32046.7 -1.0 32594.4 02/26/2008 05:42:02 0:37:00 410.7 275.0 47860.3 47860.3 32046.7 -1.0 47860.3 02/26/2008 05:42:12 0:37:10 564.5 275.0 65783.1 65783.1 32046.7 -1.0 65783.1 02/26/2008 05:42:22 0:37:20 702.9 275.0 81911.4 81911.4 32046.7 -1.0 81911.4 02/26/2008 05:42:32 0:37:30 919.5 275.0 107152.5 107152.5 32046.7 -1.0 107152.5 02/26/2008 05:42:42 0:37:40 860.0 275.0 100218.8 100218.8 32046.7 -1.0 100218.8 02/26/2008 05:42:52 0:37:50 295.5 244.2 34435.6 34435.6 28454.0 -1.0 34435.6 02/26/2008 05:43:02 0:38:00 133.7 171.7 15580.5 23306.7 20003.6 -1.0 23306.7 02/26/2008 05:43:12 0:38:10 52.6 56.8 6129.7 6129.7 6616.0 6616.0 6616.0 02/26/2008 05:43:22 0:38:20 33.3 32.2 3880.6 3880.6 3757.6 3757.6 3757.6 02/26/2008 05:43:32 0:38:30 27.9 26.0 3251.3 3251.3 3031.0 3031.0 3031.0 02/26/2008 05:43:42 0:38:40 20.3 20.7 2365.6 2365.6 2407.5 2407.5 2407.5 02/26/2008 05:43:52 0:38:50 15.3 15.2 1783.0 1783.0 1771.0 1771.0 1771.0 02/26/2008 05:44:02 0:39:00 17.0 15.6 1981.1 1981.1 1820.1 1820.1 1820.1 02/26/2008 05:44:12 0:39:10 12.8 12.9 1491.6 1491.6 1502.1 1502.1 1502.1 02/26/2008 05:44:22 0:39:20 18.4 16.9 2144.2 2144.2 1967.3 1967.3 1967.3 02/26/2008 05:44:32 0:39:30 16.9 15.7 1969.4 1969.4 1824.3 1824.3 1824.3 02/26/2008 05:44:42 0:39:40 17.0 16.9 1981.1 1981.1 1966.7 1966.7 1966.7 02/26/2008 05:44:52 0:39:50 6.4 6.1 745.8 745.8 712.1 712.1 712.1 02/26/2008 05:45:02 0:40:00 1.3 1.3 151.5 233.1 147.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:45:12 0:40:10 0.8 0.6 93.2 233.1 70.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:45:22 0:40:20 0.8 0.6 93.2 233.1 70.9 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:45:32 0:40:30 0.9 0.8 104.9 233.1 88.4 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:45:42 0:40:40 1.3 1.1 151.5 233.1 127.4 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:45:52 0:40:50 56.0 65.5 6525.9 6525.9 7637.5 7637.5 7637.5

4 

# REDACTEDCitgo Coker Steam Vent Testing

URS THC Raw Data Run 2
Average Dilution Ratio (Low) = 116.5 HIGH LOW

24 Hour Time Elapsed Time THC1 (ppmw) THC2 (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Dual-Range (ppmw) HIGH - THC1 LOW - THC2

02/26/2008 05:46:02 0:41:00 5.9 6.0 687.5 687.5 697.7 697.7 697.7 02/26/2008 05:46:12 0:41:10 3.0 2.7 349.6 349.6 313.0 313.0 313.0 02/26/2008 05:46:22 0:41:20 4.0 3.7 466.1 466.1 428.3 428.3 428.3 02/26/2008 05:46:32 0:41:30 6.2 5.7 722.5 722.5 663.5 663.5 663.5 02/26/2008 05:46:42 0:41:40 8.6 8.1 1002.2 1002.2 941.5 941.5 941.5 02/26/2008 05:46:52 0:41:50 10.9 10.1 1270.2 1270.2 1171.4 1171.4 1171.4 02/26/2008 05:47:02 0:42:00 30.9 28.8 3600.9 3600.9 3360.2 3360.2 3360.2 02/26/2008 05:47:12 0:42:10 15.7 15.2 1829.6 1829.6 1773.6 1773.6 1773.6 02/26/2008 05:47:22 0:42:20 4.2 4.3 489.4 489.4 499.8 499.8 499.8 02/26/2008 05:47:32 0:42:30 3.5 3.2 407.9 407.9 367.4 367.4 367.4 02/26/2008 05:47:42 0:42:40 3.8 3.7 442.8 442.8 425.6 425.6 425.6 02/26/2008 05:47:52 0:42:50 4.5 4.1 524.4 524.4 473.6 473.6 473.6 02/26/2008 05:48:02 0:43:00 4.8 4.6 559.4 559.4 540.8 540.8 540.8 02/26/2008 05:48:12 0:43:10 3.8 3.5 442.8 442.8 408.0 408.0 408.0 02/26/2008 05:48:22 0:43:20 2.1 2.1 244.7 244.7 240.5 240.5 240.5 02/26/2008 05:48:32 0:43:30 -0.6 -0.5 -69.9 233.1 -56.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:48:42 0:43:40 -0.9 -0.8 -104.9 233.1 -91.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:48:52 0:43:50 -0.9 -0.9 -104.9 233.1 -99.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:49:02 0:44:00 -0.9 -0.9 -104.9 233.1 -100.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:49:12 0:44:10 -0.9 -0.7 -104.9 233.1 -82.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:49:22 0:44:20 -0.7 -0.6 -81.6 233.1 -73.6 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:49:32 0:44:30 -0.6 -0.5 -69.9 233.1 -55.0 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:49:42 0:44:40 -0.1 0.0 -11.7 233.1 -0.1 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:49:52 0:44:50 -0.1 0.2 -11.7 233.1 21.2 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:50:02 0:45:00 0.1 0.3 11.7 233.1 38.8 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:50:12 0:45:10 1.5 1.5 174.8 233.1 172.7 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:50:22 0:45:20 0.8 0.8 93.2 233.1 87.4 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:50:32 0:45:30 1.5 1.3 174.8 233.1 156.3 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:50:42 0:45:40 1.6 1.2 186.5 233.1 134.4 233.1 233.1 02/26/2008 05:50:52 0:45:50 59.2 59.9 6898.8 6898.8 6979.8 6979.8 6979.8

Data Points 276.0 276.0 276.0 Maximum 919.5 275.0 107152.5 Minimum -1.4 -1.4 233.1 Average 17.9 10.7 2439.2

4 

# REDACTEDCITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing

URS THC Raw Data Run 3
Average Dilution Ratio (Low) = 111.4 HIGH LOW

24 Hour Time Elapsed Time THC1 (ppmw) THC2 (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Dual-Range (ppmw) 02/27/2008 19:36:08 0:00:00 17.0 17.2 1894.3 1894.3 1915.4 1915.4 1915.4 02/27/2008 19:36:18 0:00:10 18.6 19.1 2072.6 2072.6 2124.6 2124.6 2124.6 02/27/2008 19:36:28 0:00:20 18.1 18.4 2016.9 2016.9 2050.6 2050.6 2050.6 02/27/2008 19:36:38 0:00:30 17.2 17.6 1916.6 1916.6 1961.3 1961.3 1961.3 02/27/2008 19:36:48 0:00:40 14.7 15.1 1638.0 1638.0 1683.3 1683.3 1683.3 02/27/2008 19:36:58 0:00:50 12.3 12.4 1370.6 1370.6 1386.9 1386.9 1386.9 02/27/2008 19:37:08 0:01:00 11.5 11.5 1281.5 1281.5 1286.4 1286.4 1286.4 02/27/2008 19:37:18 0:01:10 10.9 11.1 1214.6 1214.6 1239.0 1239.0 1239.0 02/27/2008 19:37:28 0:01:20 12.1 12.2 1348.3 1348.3 1358.4 1358.4 1358.4 02/27/2008 19:37:38 0:01:30 13.0 13.1 1448.6 1448.6 1458.3 1458.3 1458.3 02/27/2008 19:37:48 0:01:40 14.2 14.2 1582.3 1582.3 1579.8 1579.8 1579.8 02/27/2008 19:37:58 0:01:50 363.9 189.6 40550.0 40550.0 21132.5 -1.0 40550.0 02/27/2008 19:38:08 0:02:00 1629.2 275.0 181544.4 181544.4 30643.7 -1.0 181544.4 02/27/2008 19:38:18 0:02:10 2483.3 275.0 276718.2 276718.2 30643.7 -1.0 276718.2 02/27/2008 19:38:28 0:02:20 2758.6 275.0 307395.3 307395.3 30643.7 -1.0 307395.3 02/27/2008 19:38:38 0:02:30 2836.0 275.0 316020.1 316020.1 30643.7 -1.0 316020.1 02/27/2008 19:38:48 0:02:40 2859.7 275.0 318661.0 318661.0 30643.7 -1.0 318661.0 02/27/2008 19:38:58 0:02:50 2847.7 275.0 317323.9 317323.9 30643.7 -1.0 317323.9 02/27/2008 19:39:08 0:03:00 2865.0 275.0 319251.6 319251.6 30643.7 -1.0 319251.6 02/27/2008 19:39:18 0:03:10 2841.4 275.0 316621.8 316621.8 30643.7 -1.0 316621.8 02/27/2008 19:39:28 0:03:20 2859.7 275.0 318661.0 318661.0 30643.7 -1.0 318661.0 02/27/2008 19:39:38 0:03:30 2818.0 275.0 314014.3 314014.3 30643.7 -1.0 314014.3 02/27/2008 19:39:48 0:03:40 2843.4 275.0 316844.7 316844.7 30643.7 -1.0 316844.7 02/27/2008 19:39:58 0:03:50 2811.8 275.0 313323.5 313323.5 30643.7 -1.0 313323.5 02/27/2008 19:40:08 0:04:00 2818.5 275.0 314070.1 314070.1 30643.7 -1.0 314070.1 02/27/2008 19:40:18 0:04:10 2804.3 275.0 312487.7 312487.7 30643.7 -1.0 312487.7 02/27/2008 19:40:28 0:04:20 2789.4 275.0 310827.4 310827.4 30643.7 -1.0 310827.4 02/27/2008 19:40:38 0:04:30 2809.1 275.0 313022.6 313022.6 30643.7 -1.0 313022.6 02/27/2008 19:40:48 0:04:40 2586.0 275.0 288162.2 288162.2 30643.7 -1.0 288162.2 02/27/2008 19:40:58 0:04:50 2924.1 275.0 325837.2 325837.2 30643.7 -1.0 325837.2 02/27/2008 19:41:08 0:05:00 2839.4 275.0 316399.0 316399.0 30643.7 -1.0 316399.0 02/27/2008 19:41:18 0:05:10 2773.8 275.0 309089.1 309089.1 30643.7 -1.0 309089.1 02/27/2008 19:41:28 0:05:20 2783.1 275.0 310125.4 310125.4 30643.7 -1.0 310125.4 02/27/2008 19:41:38 0:05:30 2760.6 275.0 307618.2 307618.2 30643.7 -1.0 307618.2 02/27/2008 19:41:48 0:05:40 2780.4 275.0 309824.5 309824.5 30643.7 -1.0 309824.5 02/27/2008 19:41:58 0:05:50 2739.8 275.0 305300.4 305300.4 30643.7 -1.0 305300.4 02/27/2008 19:42:08 0:06:00 2698.8 275.0 300731.7 300731.7 30643.7 -1.0 300731.7 02/27/2008 19:42:18 0:06:10 2691.9 275.0 299962.8 299962.8 30643.7 -1.0 299962.8 02/27/2008 19:42:28 0:06:20 2700.5 275.0 300921.1 300921.1 30643.7 -1.0 300921.1 02/27/2008 19:42:38 0:06:30 2733.5 275.0 304598.4 304598.4 30643.7 -1.0 304598.4 02/27/2008 19:42:48 0:06:40 2765.0 275.0 308108.5 308108.5 30643.7 -1.0 308108.5 02/27/2008 19:42:58 0:06:50 2770.3 275.0 308699.0 308699.0 30643.7 -1.0 308699.0 02/27/2008 19:43:08 0:07:00 2750.8 275.0 306526.1 306526.1 30643.7 -1.0 306526.1 02/27/2008 19:43:18 0:07:10 2776.4 275.0 309378.8 309378.8 30643.7 -1.0 309378.8 02/27/2008 19:43:28 0:07:20 2760.8 275.0 307640.4 307640.4 30643.7 -1.0 307640.4 02/27/2008 19:43:38 0:07:30 2787.4 275.0 310604.5 310604.5 30643.7 -1.0 310604.5 02/27/2008 19:43:48 0:07:40 2748.1 275.0 306225.3 306225.3 30643.7 -1.0 306225.3 02/27/2008 19:43:58 0:07:50 2769.4 275.0 308598.8 308598.8 30643.7 -1.0 308598.8 02/27/2008 19:44:08 0:08:00 2692.5 275.0 300029.7 300029.7 30643.7 -1.0 300029.7 02/27/2008 19:44:18 0:08:10 2307.9 275.0 257173.1 257173.1 30643.7 -1.0 257173.1 02/27/2008 19:44:28 0:08:20 1986.2 275.0 221325.5 221325.5 30643.7 -1.0 221325.5 02/27/2008 19:44:38 0:08:30 1807.0 275.0 201357.0 201357.0 30643.7 -1.0 201357.0 02/27/2008 19:44:48 0:08:40 1714.7 275.0 191071.8 191071.8 30643.7 -1.0 191071.8 02/27/2008 19:44:58 0:08:50 1665.3 275.0 185567.1 185567.1 30643.7 -1.0 185567.1 02/27/2008 19:45:08 0:09:00 1645.6 275.0 183371.9 183371.9 30643.7 -1.0 183371.9 02/27/2008 19:45:18 0:09:10 1672.2 275.0 186336.0 186336.0 30643.7 -1.0 186336.0 02/27/2008 19:45:28 0:09:20 1671.9 275.0 186302.5 186302.5 30643.7 -1.0 186302.5 02/27/2008 19:45:38 0:09:30 1749.4 275.0 194938.5 194938.5 30643.7 -1.0 194938.5 02/27/2008 19:45:48 0:09:40 1634.6 275.0 182146.1 182146.1 30643.7 -1.0 182146.1 02/27/2008 19:45:58 0:09:50 810.7 275.0 90337.6 90337.6 30643.7 -1.0 90337.6 02/27/2008 19:46:08 0:10:00 283.0 275.0 31535.2 31535.2 30643.7 -1.0 31535.2 02/27/2008 19:46:18 0:10:10 146.4 224.7 16313.6 22286.3 25039.4 -1.0 22286.3 02/27/2008 19:46:28 0:10:20 93.1 142.8 10374.3 10374.3 15916.2 -1.0 10374.3 02/27/2008 19:46:38 0:10:30 85.1 127.4 9482.8 9482.8 14194.2 -1.0 9482.8 02/27/2008 19:46:48 0:10:40 64.6 69.5 7198.5 7198.5 7739.8 7739.8 7739.8 02/27/2008 19:46:58 0:10:50 60.9 65.5 6786.2 6786.2 7302.1 7302.1 7302.1 02/27/2008 19:47:08 0:11:00 57.0 60.7 6351.6 6351.6 6760.9 6760.9 6760.9 02/27/2008 19:47:18 0:11:10 60.1 63.8 6697.0 6697.0 7111.3 7111.3 7111.3 02/27/2008 19:47:28 0:11:20 35.2 38.2 3922.4 3922.4 4255.2 4255.2 4255.2 02/27/2008 19:47:38 0:11:30 38.6 40.8 4301.3 4301.3 4542.0 4542.0 4542.0 02/27/2008 19:47:48 0:11:40 53.5 55.9 5961.6 5961.6 6233.9 6233.9 6233.9 02/27/2008 19:47:58 0:11:50 52.1 55.2 5805.6 5805.6 6146.7 6146.7 6146.7 02/27/2008 19:48:08 0:12:00 55.0 57.2 6128.7 6128.7 6371.7 6371.7 6371.7 02/27/2008 19:48:18 0:12:10 51.8 54.8 5772.2 5772.2 6109.0 6109.0 6109.0 02/27/2008 19:48:28 0:12:20 44.3 46.4 4936.4 4936.4 5169.3 5169.3 5169.3 02/27/2008 19:48:38 0:12:30 46.3 48.8 5159.3 5159.3 5435.1 5435.1 5435.1 02/27/2008 19:48:48 0:12:40 45.8 47.7 5103.6 5103.6 5312.7 5312.7 5312.7 02/27/2008 19:48:58 0:12:50 44.5 46.9 4958.7 4958.7 5229.6 5229.6 5229.6 02/27/2008 19:49:08 0:13:00 8.9 10.5 991.7 991.7 1169.1 1169.1 1169.1 02/27/2008 19:49:18 0:13:10 2.8 3.6 312.0 312.0 399.4 399.4 399.4 02/27/2008 19:49:28 0:13:20 15.3 15.9 1704.9 1704.9 1767.4 1767.4 1767.4 02/27/2008 19:49:38 0:13:30 32.6 34.0 3632.7 3632.7 3788.0 3788.0 3788.0 HIGH - THC1 LOW - THC2

4 

# REDACTEDCITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing

URS THC Raw Data Run 3
Average Dilution Ratio (Low) = 111.4 HIGH LOW

24 Hour Time Elapsed Time THC1 (ppmw) THC2 (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Dual-Range (ppmw) HIGH - THC1 LOW - THC2

02/27/2008 19:49:48 0:13:40 34.1 35.2 3799.8 3799.8 3920.1 3920.1 3920.1 02/27/2008 19:49:58 0:13:50 33.3 34.9 3710.7 3710.7 3886.4 3886.4 3886.4 02/27/2008 19:50:08 0:14:00 24.7 25.3 2752.4 2752.4 2817.8 2817.8 2817.8 02/27/2008 19:50:18 0:14:10 33.1 34.4 3688.4 3688.4 3837.5 3837.5 3837.5 02/27/2008 19:50:28 0:14:20 31.4 32.0 3499.0 3499.0 3569.2 3569.2 3569.2 02/27/2008 19:50:38 0:14:30 42.8 43.7 4769.3 4769.3 4868.4 4868.4 4868.4 02/27/2008 19:50:48 0:14:40 37.9 39.0 4223.3 4223.3 4345.1 4345.1 4345.1 02/27/2008 19:50:58 0:14:50 62.3 63.2 6942.2 6942.2 7041.5 7041.5 7041.5 02/27/2008 19:51:08 0:15:00 48.0 51.0 5348.7 5348.7 5687.6 5687.6 5687.6 02/27/2008 19:51:18 0:15:10 66.5 82.8 7410.2 7410.2 9225.8 9225.8 9225.8 02/27/2008 19:51:28 0:15:20 58.4 73.5 6507.6 6507.6 8186.7 8186.7 8186.7 02/27/2008 19:51:38 0:15:30 27.5 28.6 3064.4 3064.4 3185.1 3185.1 3185.1 02/27/2008 19:51:48 0:15:40 30.9 32.4 3443.2 3443.2 3608.4 3608.4 3608.4 02/27/2008 19:51:58 0:15:50 25.3 26.5 2819.2 2819.2 2954.9 2954.9 2954.9 02/27/2008 19:52:08 0:16:00 27.9 28.5 3108.9 3108.9 3175.4 3175.4 3175.4 02/27/2008 19:52:18 0:16:10 30.6 31.7 3409.8 3409.8 3535.9 3535.9 3535.9 02/27/2008 19:52:28 0:16:20 9.6 10.0 1069.7 1069.7 1117.5 1117.5 1117.5 02/27/2008 19:52:38 0:16:30 24.0 24.5 2674.4 2674.4 2728.5 2728.5 2728.5 02/27/2008 19:52:48 0:16:40 18.7 19.0 2083.8 2083.8 2111.7 2111.7 2111.7 02/27/2008 19:52:58 0:16:50 24.0 24.3 2674.4 2674.4 2708.1 2708.1 2708.1 02/27/2008 19:53:08 0:17:00 20.8 21.1 2317.8 2317.8 2352.5 2352.5 2352.5 02/27/2008 19:53:18 0:17:10 25.3 25.3 2819.2 2819.2 2823.9 2823.9 2823.9 02/27/2008 19:53:28 0:17:20 24.2 25.1 2696.6 2696.6 2793.8 2793.8 2793.8 02/27/2008 19:53:38 0:17:30 23.0 23.2 2562.9 2562.9 2587.2 2587.2 2587.2 02/27/2008 19:53:48 0:17:40 26.0 26.8 2897.2 2897.2 2986.6 2986.6 2986.6 02/27/2008 19:53:58 0:17:50 19.2 20.3 2139.5 2139.5 2260.7 2260.7 2260.7 02/27/2008 19:54:08 0:18:00 25.8 26.5 2874.9 2874.9 2958.1 2958.1 2958.1 02/27/2008 19:54:18 0:18:10 21.6 22.4 2406.9 2406.9 2491.3 2491.3 2491.3 02/27/2008 19:54:28 0:18:20 22.5 22.7 2507.2 2507.2 2525.9 2525.9 2525.9 02/27/2008 19:54:38 0:18:30 20.8 21.4 2317.8 2317.8 2386.2 2386.2 2386.2 02/27/2008 19:54:48 0:18:40 20.4 20.8 2273.2 2273.2 2321.9 2321.9 2321.9 02/27/2008 19:54:58 0:18:50 23.6 24.1 2629.8 2629.8 2682.6 2682.6 2682.6 02/27/2008 19:55:08 0:19:00 18.7 18.8 2083.8 2083.8 2094.9 2094.9 2094.9 02/27/2008 19:55:18 0:19:10 23.5 23.7 2618.6 2618.6 2643.3 2643.3 2643.3 02/27/2008 19:55:28 0:19:20 22.0 22.8 2451.5 2451.5 2545.3 2545.3 2545.3 02/27/2008 19:55:38 0:19:30 18.6 19.4 2072.6 2072.6 2158.7 2158.7 2158.7 02/27/2008 19:55:48 0:19:40 23.5 24.0 2618.6 2618.6 2672.9 2672.9 2672.9 02/27/2008 19:55:58 0:19:50 22.5 23.4 2507.2 2507.2 2606.1 2606.1 2606.1 02/27/2008 19:56:08 0:20:00 19.9 19.8 2217.5 2217.5 2201.6 2201.6 2201.6 02/27/2008 19:56:18 0:20:10 22.6 22.6 2518.4 2518.4 2517.4 2517.4 2517.4 02/27/2008 19:56:28 0:20:20 20.6 21.2 2295.5 2295.5 2365.8 2365.8 2365.8 02/27/2008 19:56:38 0:20:30 18.6 19.2 2072.6 2072.6 2143.9 2143.9 2143.9 02/27/2008 19:56:48 0:20:40 22.3 23.0 2484.9 2484.9 2563.3 2563.3 2563.3 02/27/2008 19:56:58 0:20:50 17.0 17.6 1894.3 1894.3 1961.8 1961.8 1961.8 02/27/2008 19:57:08 0:21:00 16.7 16.5 1860.9 1860.9 1834.7 1834.7 1834.7 02/27/2008 19:57:18 0:21:10 20.3 20.3 2262.1 2262.1 2262.3 2262.3 2262.3 02/27/2008 19:57:28 0:21:20 17.4 17.6 1938.9 1938.9 1961.3 1961.3 1961.3 02/27/2008 19:57:38 0:21:30 15.2 15.7 1693.8 1693.8 1747.0 1747.0 1747.0 02/27/2008 19:57:48 0:21:40 17.4 17.8 1938.9 1938.9 1984.7 1984.7 1984.7 02/27/2008 19:57:58 0:21:50 14.0 14.4 1560.0 1560.0 1607.7 1607.7 1607.7 02/27/2008 19:58:08 0:22:00 13.5 13.2 1504.3 1504.3 1468.0 1468.0 1468.0 02/27/2008 19:58:18 0:22:10 17.5 17.4 1950.1 1950.1 1938.4 1938.4 1938.4 02/27/2008 19:58:28 0:22:20 14.8 15.4 1649.2 1649.2 1719.9 1719.9 1719.9 02/27/2008 19:58:38 0:22:30 11.6 12.1 1292.6 1292.6 1353.2 1353.2 1353.2 02/27/2008 19:58:48 0:22:40 12.8 13.0 1426.3 1426.3 1447.1 1447.1 1447.1 02/27/2008 19:58:58 0:22:50 14.8 15.0 1649.2 1649.2 1668.5 1668.5 1668.5 02/27/2008 19:59:08 0:23:00 12.8 12.5 1426.3 1426.3 1395.0 1395.0 1395.0 02/27/2008 19:59:18 0:23:10 19.2 19.0 2139.5 2139.5 2115.3 2115.3 2115.3 02/27/2008 19:59:28 0:23:20 108.0 135.7 12034.6 22286.3 15123.1 -1.0 22286.3 02/27/2008 19:59:38 0:23:30 342.6 275.0 38176.5 38176.5 30643.7 -1.0 38176.5 02/27/2008 19:59:48 0:23:40 585.1 275.0 65198.6 65198.6 30643.7 -1.0 65198.6 02/27/2008 19:59:58 0:23:50 748.9 275.0 83451.1 83451.1 30643.7 -1.0 83451.1 02/27/2008 20:00:08 0:24:00 801.3 275.0 89290.2 89290.2 30643.7 -1.0 89290.2 02/27/2008 20:00:18 0:24:10 842.1 275.0 93836.6 93836.6 30643.7 -1.0 93836.6 02/27/2008 20:00:28 0:24:20 888.8 275.0 99040.4 99040.4 30643.7 -1.0 99040.4 02/27/2008 20:00:38 0:24:30 885.3 275.0 98650.4 98650.4 30643.7 -1.0 98650.4 02/27/2008 20:00:48 0:24:40 911.5 275.0 101569.9 101569.9 30643.7 -1.0 101569.9 02/27/2008 20:00:58 0:24:50 950.0 275.0 105860.0 105860.0 30643.7 -1.0 105860.0 02/27/2008 20:01:08 0:25:00 990.3 275.0 110350.7 110350.7 30643.7 -1.0 110350.7 02/27/2008 20:01:18 0:25:10 1090.0 275.0 121460.5 121460.5 30643.7 -1.0 121460.5 02/27/2008 20:01:28 0:25:20 1266.7 275.0 141150.4 141150.4 30643.7 -1.0 141150.4 02/27/2008 20:01:38 0:25:30 1545.3 275.0 172195.3 172195.3 30643.7 -1.0 172195.3 02/27/2008 20:01:48 0:25:40 2018.7 275.0 224947.0 224947.0 30643.7 -1.0 224947.0 02/27/2008 20:01:58 0:25:50 2192.2 275.0 244280.4 244280.4 30643.7 -1.0 244280.4 02/27/2008 20:02:08 0:26:00 2301.3 275.0 256437.6 256437.6 30643.7 -1.0 256437.6 02/27/2008 20:02:18 0:26:10 2305.5 275.0 256905.6 256905.6 30643.7 -1.0 256905.6 02/27/2008 20:02:28 0:26:20 2302.8 275.0 256604.8 256604.8 30643.7 -1.0 256604.8 02/27/2008 20:02:38 0:26:30 2232.2 275.0 248737.7 248737.7 30643.7 -1.0 248737.7 02/27/2008 20:02:48 0:26:40 2345.5 275.0 261362.9 261362.9 30643.7 -1.0 261362.9 02/27/2008 20:02:58 0:26:50 2282.8 275.0 254376.1 254376.1 30643.7 -1.0 254376.1 02/27/2008 20:03:08 0:27:00 2345.8 275.0 261396.3 261396.3 30643.7 -1.0 261396.3 02/27/2008 20:03:18 0:27:10 1971.7 275.0 219709.7 219709.7 30643.7 -1.0 219709.7

4 

# REDACTEDCITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing

URS THC Raw Data Run 3
Average Dilution Ratio (Low) = 111.4 HIGH LOW

24 Hour Time Elapsed Time THC1 (ppmw) THC2 (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Dual-Range (ppmw) HIGH - THC1 LOW - THC2

02/27/2008 20:03:28 0:27:20 1705.6 275.0 190057.8 190057.8 30643.7 -1.0 190057.8 02/27/2008 20:03:38 0:27:30 1749.9 275.0 194994.2 194994.2 30643.7 -1.0 194994.2 02/27/2008 20:03:48 0:27:40 1769.8 275.0 197211.7 197211.7 30643.7 -1.0 197211.7 02/27/2008 20:03:58 0:27:50 1241.1 275.0 138297.8 138297.8 30643.7 -1.0 138297.8 02/27/2008 20:04:08 0:28:00 660.0 275.0 73544.9 73544.9 30643.7 -1.0 73544.9 02/27/2008 20:04:18 0:28:10 338.0 275.0 37663.9 37663.9 30643.7 -1.0 37663.9 02/27/2008 20:04:28 0:28:20 307.9 275.0 34309.8 34309.8 30643.7 -1.0 34309.8 02/27/2008 20:04:38 0:28:30 379.0 275.0 42232.6 42232.6 30643.7 -1.0 42232.6 02/27/2008 20:04:48 0:28:40 335.6 255.6 37396.5 37396.5 28476.4 -1.0 37396.5 02/27/2008 20:04:58 0:28:50 460.8 275.0 51347.7 51347.7 30643.7 -1.0 51347.7 02/27/2008 20:05:08 0:29:00 515.3 275.0 57420.7 57420.7 30643.7 -1.0 57420.7 02/27/2008 20:05:18 0:29:10 531.3 275.0 59203.6 59203.6 30643.7 -1.0 59203.6 02/27/2008 20:05:28 0:29:20 627.5 275.0 69923.3 69923.3 30643.7 -1.0 69923.3 02/27/2008 20:05:38 0:29:30 857.0 275.0 95496.9 95496.9 30643.7 -1.0 95496.9 02/27/2008 20:05:48 0:29:40 806.2 275.0 89836.2 89836.2 30643.7 -1.0 89836.2 02/27/2008 20:05:58 0:29:50 498.6 275.0 55559.8 55559.8 30643.7 -1.0 55559.8 02/27/2008 20:06:08 0:30:00 187.6 240.5 20904.6 22286.3 26804.8 -1.0 22286.3 02/27/2008 20:06:18 0:30:10 80.7 116.2 8992.5 8992.5 12946.0 -1.0 8992.5 02/27/2008 20:06:28 0:30:20 58.2 59.7 6485.3 6485.3 6651.2 6651.2 6651.2 02/27/2008 20:06:38 0:30:30 26.2 31.0 2919.5 2919.5 3453.8 3453.8 3453.8 02/27/2008 20:06:48 0:30:40 39.4 41.4 4390.4 4390.4 4613.4 4613.4 4613.4 02/27/2008 20:06:58 0:30:50 33.0 35.3 3677.2 3677.2 3932.9 3932.9 3932.9 02/27/2008 20:07:08 0:31:00 34.5 37.2 3844.4 3844.4 4150.2 4150.2 4150.2 02/27/2008 20:07:18 0:31:10 25.3 27.3 2819.2 2819.2 3038.1 3038.1 3038.1 02/27/2008 20:07:28 0:31:20 30.9 31.7 3443.2 3443.2 3537.5 3537.5 3537.5 02/27/2008 20:07:38 0:31:30 43.1 44.7 4802.7 4802.7 4979.1 4979.1 4979.1 02/27/2008 20:07:48 0:31:40 40.2 42.2 4479.6 4479.6 4701.1 4701.1 4701.1 02/27/2008 20:07:58 0:31:50 42.3 44.8 4713.6 4713.6 4987.8 4987.8 4987.8 02/27/2008 20:08:08 0:32:00 44.3 46.8 4936.4 4936.4 5213.2 5213.2 5213.2 02/27/2008 20:08:18 0:32:10 39.1 40.9 4357.0 4357.0 4554.2 4554.2 4554.2 02/27/2008 20:08:28 0:32:20 40.4 41.3 4501.8 4501.8 4605.1 4605.1 4605.1 02/27/2008 20:08:38 0:32:30 43.8 45.5 4880.7 4880.7 5068.9 5068.9 5068.9 02/27/2008 20:08:48 0:32:40 40.2 42.0 4479.6 4479.6 4677.6 4677.6 4677.6 02/27/2008 20:08:58 0:32:50 42.1 44.3 4691.3 4691.3 4932.6 4932.6 4932.6 02/27/2008 20:09:08 0:33:00 41.9 44.5 4669.0 4669.0 4958.2 4958.2 4958.2 02/27/2008 20:09:18 0:33:10 35.8 37.5 3989.3 3989.3 4173.1 4173.1 4173.1 02/27/2008 20:09:28 0:33:20 36.7 37.4 4089.5 4089.5 4165.4 4165.4 4165.4 02/27/2008 20:09:38 0:33:30 40.9 42.6 4557.6 4557.6 4748.5 4748.5 4748.5 02/27/2008 20:09:48 0:33:40 35.5 38.0 3955.8 3955.8 4229.3 4229.3 4229.3 02/27/2008 20:09:58 0:33:50 32.1 33.6 3577.0 3577.0 3739.5 3739.5 3739.5 02/27/2008 20:10:08 0:34:00 34.7 35.4 3866.7 3866.7 3949.7 3949.7 3949.7 02/27/2008 20:10:18 0:34:10 38.2 39.5 4256.7 4256.7 4405.7 4405.7 4405.7 02/27/2008 20:10:28 0:34:20 34.5 36.5 3844.4 3844.4 4071.0 4071.0 4071.0 02/27/2008 20:10:38 0:34:30 29.1 30.6 3242.7 3242.7 3407.5 3407.5 3407.5 02/27/2008 20:10:48 0:34:40 30.6 31.5 3409.8 3409.8 3512.5 3512.5 3512.5 02/27/2008 20:10:58 0:34:50 30.8 31.7 3432.1 3432.1 3528.8 3528.8 3528.8 02/27/2008 20:11:08 0:35:00 27.2 28.8 3030.9 3030.9 3203.9 3203.9 3203.9 02/27/2008 20:11:18 0:35:10 25.2 26.4 2808.1 2808.1 2937.7 2937.7 2937.7 02/27/2008 20:11:28 0:35:20 27.4 27.9 3053.2 3053.2 3111.1 3111.1 3111.1 02/27/2008 20:11:38 0:35:30 28.6 29.7 3186.9 3186.9 3305.0 3305.0 3305.0 02/27/2008 20:11:48 0:35:40 25.2 26.6 2808.1 2808.1 2964.6 2964.6 2964.6 02/27/2008 20:11:58 0:35:50 23.0 23.5 2562.9 2562.9 2613.2 2613.2 2613.2 02/27/2008 20:12:08 0:36:00 6.0 6.9 668.6 668.6 770.2 770.2 770.2 02/27/2008 20:12:18 0:36:10 4.2 4.0 468.0 468.0 442.7 442.7 442.7 02/27/2008 20:12:28 0:36:20 3.8 3.6 423.4 423.4 395.8 395.8 395.8 02/27/2008 20:12:38 0:36:30 3.3 3.2 367.7 367.7 352.9 352.9 352.9 02/27/2008 20:12:48 0:36:40 3.2 3.0 356.6 356.6 329.4 329.4 329.4 02/27/2008 20:12:58 0:36:50 3.2 3.0 356.6 356.6 337.1 337.1 337.1 02/27/2008 20:13:08 0:37:00 112.2 143.0 12502.6 22286.3 15930.6 -1.0 22286.3 02/27/2008 20:13:18 0:37:10 25.5 26.9 2841.5 2841.5 2999.4 2999.4 2999.4 02/27/2008 20:13:28 0:37:20 20.1 20.5 2239.8 2239.8 2284.7 2284.7 2284.7 02/27/2008 20:13:38 0:37:30 18.4 18.9 2050.3 2050.3 2105.6 2105.6 2105.6 02/27/2008 20:13:48 0:37:40 17.0 17.6 1894.3 1894.3 1963.9 1963.9 1963.9 02/27/2008 20:13:58 0:37:50 16.2 16.8 1805.2 1805.2 1869.9 1869.9 1869.9 02/27/2008 20:14:08 0:38:00 16.9 17.1 1883.2 1883.2 1902.1 1902.1 1902.1 02/27/2008 20:14:18 0:38:10 37.7 36.3 4201.0 4201.0 4046.6 4046.6 4046.6 02/27/2008 20:14:28 0:38:20 166.6 208.7 18564.5 22286.3 23261.1 -1.0 22286.3 02/27/2008 20:14:38 0:38:30 410.5 275.0 45742.7 45742.7 30643.7 -1.0 45742.7 02/27/2008 20:14:48 0:38:40 635.4 275.0 70803.7 70803.7 30643.7 -1.0 70803.7 02/27/2008 20:14:58 0:38:50 880.4 275.0 98104.4 98104.4 30643.7 -1.0 98104.4 02/27/2008 20:15:08 0:39:00 761.3 275.0 84832.9 84832.9 30643.7 -1.0 84832.9 02/27/2008 20:15:18 0:39:10 271.3 269.3 30231.4 30231.4 30009.7 -1.0 30231.4 02/27/2008 20:15:28 0:39:20 100.7 151.0 11221.2 22286.3 16820.7 -1.0 22286.3 02/27/2008 20:15:38 0:39:30 40.9 45.2 4557.6 4557.6 5036.3 5036.3 5036.3 02/27/2008 20:15:48 0:39:40 21.4 23.5 2384.6 2384.6 2622.4 2622.4 2622.4 02/27/2008 20:15:58 0:39:50 17.9 18.8 1994.6 1994.6 2090.9 2090.9 2090.9 02/27/2008 20:16:08 0:40:00 21.6 22.0 2406.9 2406.9 2445.9 2445.9 2445.9 02/27/2008 20:16:18 0:40:10 24.0 24.9 2674.4 2674.4 2773.9 2773.9 2773.9 02/27/2008 20:16:28 0:40:20 19.4 20.6 2161.8 2161.8 2297.9 2297.9 2297.9 02/27/2008 20:16:38 0:40:30 19.8 20.4 2206.3 2206.3 2274.0 2274.0 2274.0 02/27/2008 20:16:48 0:40:40 22.5 22.7 2507.2 2507.2 2534.2 2534.2 2534.2 02/27/2008 20:16:58 0:40:50 21.8 22.2 2429.2 2429.2 2477.0 2477.0 2477.0

4 

# REDACTEDCITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing

URS THC Raw Data Run 3
Average Dilution Ratio (Low) = 111.4 HIGH LOW

24 Hour Time Elapsed Time THC1 (ppmw) THC2 (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Dual-Range (ppmw) HIGH - THC1 LOW - THC2

02/27/2008 20:17:08 0:41:00 20.4 21.3 2273.2 2273.2 2370.9 2370.9 2370.9 02/27/2008 20:17:18 0:41:10 20.9 21.4 2328.9 2328.9 2381.1 2381.1 2381.1 02/27/2008 20:17:28 0:41:20 22.5 22.8 2507.2 2507.2 2538.7 2538.7 2538.7 02/27/2008 20:17:38 0:41:30 22.6 23.2 2518.4 2518.4 2581.1 2581.1 2581.1 02/27/2008 20:17:48 0:41:40 20.8 21.6 2317.8 2317.8 2411.7 2411.7 2411.7 02/27/2008 20:17:58 0:41:50 20.6 21.0 2295.5 2295.5 2343.4 2343.4 2343.4 02/27/2008 20:18:08 0:42:00 21.6 21.8 2406.9 2406.9 2434.1 2434.1 2434.1 02/27/2008 20:18:18 0:42:10 20.6 21.4 2295.5 2295.5 2379.6 2379.6 2379.6 02/27/2008 20:18:28 0:42:20 20.3 20.6 2262.1 2262.1 2293.4 2293.4 2293.4 02/27/2008 20:18:38 0:42:30 19.8 20.0 2206.3 2206.3 2231.1 2231.1 2231.1 02/27/2008 20:18:48 0:42:40 18.9 19.5 2106.1 2106.1 2169.9 2169.9 2169.9 02/27/2008 20:18:58 0:42:50 18.4 18.7 2050.3 2050.3 2081.7 2081.7 2081.7 02/27/2008 20:19:08 0:43:00 18.9 19.1 2106.1 2106.1 2129.6 2129.6 2129.6 02/27/2008 20:19:18 0:43:10 18.1 18.5 2016.9 2016.9 2060.7 2060.7 2060.7 02/27/2008 20:19:28 0:43:20 17.2 17.5 1916.6 1916.6 1951.1 1951.1 1951.1 02/27/2008 20:19:38 0:43:30 17.4 17.5 1938.9 1938.9 1948.5 1948.5 1948.5 02/27/2008 20:19:48 0:43:40 16.5 16.8 1838.6 1838.6 1871.0 1871.0 1871.0 02/27/2008 20:19:58 0:43:50 16.0 16.2 1782.9 1782.9 1802.6 1802.6 1802.6 02/27/2008 20:20:08 0:44:00 16.2 16.3 1805.2 1805.2 1813.9 1813.9 1813.9 02/27/2008 20:20:18 0:44:10 15.7 16.0 1749.5 1749.5 1777.7 1777.7 1777.7 02/27/2008 20:20:28 0:44:20 15.2 15.3 1693.8 1693.8 1707.8 1707.8 1707.8 02/27/2008 20:20:38 0:44:30 14.8 15.0 1649.2 1649.2 1671.0 1671.0 1671.0 02/27/2008 20:20:48 0:44:40 14.0 14.1 1560.0 1560.0 1570.5 1570.5 1570.5 02/27/2008 20:20:58 0:44:50 14.3 14.4 1593.5 1593.5 1607.3 1607.3 1607.3 02/27/2008 20:21:08 0:45:00 14.0 14.2 1560.0 1560.0 1577.6 1577.6 1577.6 02/27/2008 20:21:18 0:45:10 20.6 20.0 2295.5 2295.5 2230.1 2230.1 2230.1 02/27/2008 20:21:28 0:45:20 52.6 52.9 5861.3 5861.3 5890.2 5890.2 5890.2 02/27/2008 20:21:38 0:45:30 102.4 138.2 11410.6 22286.3 15404.6 -1.0 22286.3 02/27/2008 20:21:48 0:45:40 97.8 129.3 10898.0 10898.0 14410.0 -1.0 10898.0 02/27/2008 20:21:58 0:45:50 47.2 50.3 5259.6 5259.6 5599.9 5599.9 5599.9

Data Points 276.0 276.0 276.0 Maximum 2924.1 275.0 325837.2 Minimum 2.8 3.0 329.4 Average 639.5 116.7 71534.7

4 

# REDACTEDCITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing

URS THC Raw Data Run 4
Average Dilution Ratio (Low) = 107.2 HIGH LOW

24 Hour Time Elapsed Time THC1 (ppmw) THC2 (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Dual-Range (ppmw) 02/28/2008 17:57:01 0:00:00 8.7 9.5 932.2 932.2 1023.1 1023.1 1023.1 02/28/2008 17:57:11 0:00:10 9.1 9.9 975.1 975.1 1062.9 1062.9 1062.9 02/28/2008 17:57:21 0:00:20 9.2 10.0 985.8 985.8 1074.2 1074.2 1074.2 02/28/2008 17:57:31 0:00:30 10.3 11.1 1103.7 1103.7 1188.0 1188.0 1188.0 02/28/2008 17:57:41 0:00:40 10.3 11.3 1103.7 1103.7 1213.5 1213.5 1213.5 02/28/2008 17:57:51 0:00:50 9.8 10.7 1050.1 1050.1 1141.8 1141.8 1141.8 02/28/2008 17:58:01 0:01:00 7.9 8.6 846.5 846.5 925.6 925.6 925.6 02/28/2008 17:58:11 0:01:10 6.5 6.9 696.5 696.5 744.5 744.5 744.5 02/28/2008 17:58:21 0:01:20 5.9 6.0 632.2 632.2 638.1 638.1 638.1 02/28/2008 17:58:31 0:01:30 5.2 4.9 557.2 557.2 529.7 529.7 529.7 02/28/2008 17:58:41 0:01:40 3.8 3.3 407.2 407.2 352.6 352.6 352.6 02/28/2008 17:58:51 0:01:50 7.9 7.3 846.5 846.5 786.7 786.7 786.7 02/28/2008 17:59:01 0:02:00 5.5 5.3 589.3 589.3 569.4 569.4 569.4 02/28/2008 17:59:11 0:02:10 2.5 2.0 267.9 267.9 219.2 219.2 219.2 02/28/2008 17:59:21 0:02:20 1.3 0.6 139.3 214.3 65.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 17:59:31 0:02:30 0.9 0.2 96.4 214.3 21.5 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 17:59:41 0:02:40 0.4 -0.4 42.9 214.3 -37.8 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 17:59:51 0:02:50 0.1 -0.6 10.7 214.3 -63.9 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:00:01 0:03:00 -0.1 -0.7 -10.7 214.3 -72.2 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:00:11 0:03:10 0.1 -0.7 10.7 214.3 -70.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:00:21 0:03:20 -0.1 -0.6 -10.7 214.3 -69.2 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:00:31 0:03:30 0.1 -0.6 10.7 214.3 -60.9 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:00:41 0:03:40 0.3 -0.4 32.1 214.3 -43.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:00:51 0:03:50 0.3 -0.5 32.1 214.3 -49.6 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:01:01 0:04:00 0.3 -0.4 32.1 214.3 -47.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:01:11 0:04:10 0.3 -0.4 32.1 214.3 -44.3 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:01:21 0:04:20 0.3 -0.4 32.1 214.3 -48.1 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:01:31 0:04:30 0.3 -0.5 32.1 214.3 -48.6 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:01:41 0:04:40 0.4 -0.4 42.9 214.3 -41.3 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:01:51 0:04:50 0.4 -0.3 42.9 214.3 -29.5 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:02:01 0:05:00 0.6 -0.1 64.3 214.3 -7.4 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:02:11 0:05:10 0.6 -0.1 64.3 214.3 -14.4 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:02:21 0:05:20 0.6 -0.2 64.3 214.3 -17.8 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:02:31 0:05:30 0.6 -0.3 64.3 214.3 -27.5 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:02:41 0:05:40 0.4 -0.4 42.9 214.3 -37.8 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:02:51 0:05:50 0.4 -0.4 42.9 214.3 -39.9 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:03:01 0:06:00 0.6 -0.1 64.3 214.3 -12.3 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:03:11 0:06:10 0.6 -0.1 64.3 214.3 -15.8 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:03:21 0:06:20 0.6 -0.2 64.3 214.3 -17.3 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:03:31 0:06:30 0.8 0.0 85.7 214.3 -4.0 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:03:41 0:06:40 0.6 -0.2 64.3 214.3 -20.1 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:03:51 0:06:50 0.6 -0.2 64.3 214.3 -16.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:04:01 0:07:00 0.6 -0.2 64.3 214.3 -20.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:04:11 0:07:10 0.6 -0.2 64.3 214.3 -24.1 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:04:21 0:07:20 0.6 -0.2 64.3 214.3 -19.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:04:31 0:07:30 0.6 -0.1 64.3 214.3 -11.4 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:04:41 0:07:40 0.6 -0.1 64.3 214.3 -9.4 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:04:51 0:07:50 0.6 -0.1 64.3 214.3 -14.8 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:05:01 0:08:00 0.6 -0.1 64.3 214.3 -15.3 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:05:11 0:08:10 0.6 -0.1 64.3 214.3 -13.8 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:05:21 0:08:20 0.6 -0.1 64.3 214.3 -12.9 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:05:31 0:08:30 0.8 0.0 85.7 214.3 -0.1 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:05:41 0:08:40 0.8 0.0 85.7 214.3 0.4 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:05:51 0:08:50 0.4 -0.3 42.9 214.3 -31.9 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:06:01 0:09:00 0.3 -0.5 32.1 214.3 -49.2 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:06:11 0:09:10 0.4 -0.3 42.9 214.3 -35.9 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:06:21 0:09:20 0.6 -0.2 64.3 214.3 -17.8 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:06:31 0:09:30 0.6 0.0 64.3 214.3 -5.0 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:06:41 0:09:40 0.8 0.0 85.7 214.3 4.3 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:06:51 0:09:50 0.8 0.1 85.7 214.3 14.1 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:07:01 0:10:00 0.9 0.3 96.4 214.3 27.9 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:07:11 0:10:10 0.9 0.3 96.4 214.3 31.8 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:07:21 0:10:20 0.8 0.1 85.7 214.3 10.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:07:31 0:10:30 0.8 0.0 85.7 214.3 1.9 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:07:41 0:10:40 1.6 0.8 171.4 214.3 89.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:07:51 0:10:50 2.5 1.9 267.9 267.9 203.0 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:08:01 0:11:00 3.3 2.8 353.6 353.6 299.2 299.2 299.2 02/28/2008 18:08:11 0:11:10 45.3 51.4 4854.1 4854.1 5513.0 5513.0 5513.0 02/28/2008 18:08:21 0:11:20 843.8 275.0 90416.7 90416.7 29467.4 -1.0 90416.7 02/28/2008 18:08:31 0:11:30 1678.6 275.0 179869.1 179869.1 29467.4 -1.0 179869.1 02/28/2008 18:08:41 0:11:40 2047.2 275.0 219366.1 219366.1 29467.4 -1.0 219366.1 02/28/2008 18:08:51 0:11:50 2560.1 275.0 274325.5 274325.5 29467.4 -1.0 274325.5 02/28/2008 18:09:01 0:12:00 2622.2 275.0 280979.8 280979.8 29467.4 -1.0 280979.8 02/28/2008 18:09:11 0:12:10 1738.1 275.0 186244.7 186244.7 29467.4 -1.0 186244.7 02/28/2008 18:09:21 0:12:20 340.6 275.0 36496.7 36496.7 29467.4 -1.0 36496.7 02/28/2008 18:09:31 0:12:30 69.5 88.0 7447.2 7447.2 9429.8 9429.8 9429.8 02/28/2008 18:09:41 0:12:40 19.8 19.8 2121.7 2121.7 2120.5 2120.5 2120.5 02/28/2008 18:09:51 0:12:50 14.5 13.8 1553.7 1553.7 1476.4 1476.4 1476.4 02/28/2008 18:10:01 0:13:00 26.2 24.7 2807.4 2807.4 2650.8 2650.8 2650.8 02/28/2008 18:10:11 0:13:10 69.9 71.6 7490.1 7490.1 7667.3 7667.3 7667.3 02/28/2008 18:10:21 0:13:20 51.8 53.8 5550.6 5550.6 5768.5 5768.5 5768.5 02/28/2008 18:10:31 0:13:30 33.6 34.5 3600.4 3600.4 3699.9 3699.9 3699.9 HIGH - THC1 LOW - THC2

4 

# REDACTEDCITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing

URS THC Raw Data Run 4
Average Dilution Ratio (Low) = 107.2 HIGH LOW

24 Hour Time Elapsed Time THC1 (ppmw) THC2 (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Dual-Range (ppmw) HIGH - THC1 LOW - THC2

02/28/2008 18:10:41 0:13:40 28.6 29.0 3064.6 3064.6 3103.9 3103.9 3103.9 02/28/2008 18:10:51 0:13:50 23.5 23.9 2518.1 2518.1 2561.4 2561.4 2561.4 02/28/2008 18:11:01 0:14:00 20.4 20.4 2185.9 2185.9 2191.1 2191.1 2191.1 02/28/2008 18:11:11 0:14:10 21.8 21.7 2336.0 2336.0 2322.6 2322.6 2322.6 02/28/2008 18:11:21 0:14:20 19.1 19.0 2046.6 2046.6 2036.1 2036.1 2036.1 02/28/2008 18:11:31 0:14:30 20.9 20.8 2239.5 2239.5 2231.8 2231.8 2231.8 02/28/2008 18:11:41 0:14:40 20.9 21.0 2239.5 2239.5 2252.4 2252.4 2252.4 02/28/2008 18:11:51 0:14:50 19.8 19.6 2121.7 2121.7 2104.3 2104.3 2104.3 02/28/2008 18:12:01 0:15:00 19.8 19.7 2121.7 2121.7 2110.2 2110.2 2110.2 02/28/2008 18:12:11 0:15:10 20.3 20.2 2175.2 2175.2 2166.6 2166.6 2166.6 02/28/2008 18:12:21 0:15:20 14.2 16.3 1521.6 1521.6 1741.3 1741.3 1741.3 02/28/2008 18:12:31 0:15:30 12.0 12.7 1285.9 1285.9 1366.0 1366.0 1366.0 02/28/2008 18:12:41 0:15:40 1.5 0.9 160.7 214.3 96.5 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:12:51 0:15:50 13.5 13.8 1446.6 1446.6 1473.9 1473.9 1473.9 02/28/2008 18:13:01 0:16:00 18.6 20.3 1993.1 1993.1 2178.9 2178.9 2178.9 02/28/2008 18:13:11 0:16:10 7.7 7.8 825.1 825.1 833.3 833.3 833.3 02/28/2008 18:13:21 0:16:20 8.1 7.0 867.9 867.9 753.4 753.4 753.4 02/28/2008 18:13:31 0:16:30 18.7 18.9 2003.8 2003.8 2022.3 2022.3 2022.3 02/28/2008 18:13:41 0:16:40 11.5 11.2 1232.3 1232.3 1202.7 1202.7 1202.7 02/28/2008 18:13:51 0:16:50 10.1 9.9 1082.3 1082.3 1055.6 1055.6 1055.6 02/28/2008 18:14:01 0:17:00 9.6 9.2 1028.7 1028.7 982.0 982.0 982.0 02/28/2008 18:14:11 0:17:10 8.6 8.2 921.5 921.5 877.5 877.5 877.5 02/28/2008 18:14:21 0:17:20 8.7 8.4 932.2 932.2 900.5 900.5 900.5 02/28/2008 18:14:31 0:17:30 10.8 10.5 1157.3 1157.3 1121.3 1121.3 1121.3 02/28/2008 18:14:41 0:17:40 8.7 8.4 932.2 932.2 895.2 895.2 895.2 02/28/2008 18:14:51 0:17:50 10.3 9.9 1103.7 1103.7 1064.4 1064.4 1064.4 02/28/2008 18:15:01 0:18:00 10.9 10.7 1168.0 1168.0 1143.3 1143.3 1143.3 02/28/2008 18:15:11 0:18:10 12.3 12.0 1318.0 1318.0 1280.7 1280.7 1280.7 02/28/2008 18:15:21 0:18:20 12.0 11.7 1285.9 1285.9 1258.1 1258.1 1258.1 02/28/2008 18:15:31 0:18:30 10.3 10.1 1103.7 1103.7 1083.5 1083.5 1083.5 02/28/2008 18:15:41 0:18:40 7.6 7.1 814.4 814.4 756.3 756.3 756.3 02/28/2008 18:15:51 0:18:50 7.6 7.2 814.4 814.4 771.5 771.5 771.5 02/28/2008 18:16:01 0:19:00 7.9 7.5 846.5 846.5 801.4 801.4 801.4 02/28/2008 18:16:11 0:19:10 7.4 6.9 792.9 792.9 739.7 739.7 739.7 02/28/2008 18:16:21 0:19:20 8.1 7.7 867.9 867.9 824.4 824.4 824.4 02/28/2008 18:16:31 0:19:30 10.3 10.0 1103.7 1103.7 1073.7 1073.7 1073.7 02/28/2008 18:16:41 0:19:40 10.1 9.9 1082.3 1082.3 1056.0 1056.0 1056.0 02/28/2008 18:16:51 0:19:50 9.8 9.4 1050.1 1050.1 1004.0 1004.0 1004.0 02/28/2008 18:17:01 0:20:00 8.7 8.4 932.2 932.2 899.0 899.0 899.0 02/28/2008 18:17:11 0:20:10 7.2 6.8 771.5 771.5 728.3 728.3 728.3 02/28/2008 18:17:21 0:20:20 7.0 6.6 750.1 750.1 711.7 711.7 711.7 02/28/2008 18:17:31 0:20:30 6.9 6.4 739.4 739.4 685.1 685.1 685.1 02/28/2008 18:17:41 0:20:40 5.5 5.1 589.3 589.3 549.3 549.3 549.3 02/28/2008 18:17:51 0:20:50 5.5 4.9 589.3 589.3 526.8 526.8 526.8 02/28/2008 18:18:01 0:21:00 6.9 6.3 739.4 739.4 675.4 675.4 675.4 02/28/2008 18:18:11 0:21:10 6.4 5.9 685.8 685.8 636.6 636.6 636.6 02/28/2008 18:18:21 0:21:20 6.0 5.5 642.9 642.9 593.0 593.0 593.0 02/28/2008 18:18:31 0:21:30 5.7 5.1 610.8 610.8 544.9 544.9 544.9 02/28/2008 18:18:41 0:21:40 5.4 4.8 578.6 578.6 513.5 513.5 513.5 02/28/2008 18:18:51 0:21:50 5.2 4.7 557.2 557.2 498.8 498.8 498.8 02/28/2008 18:19:01 0:22:00 5.2 4.5 557.2 557.2 482.1 482.1 482.1 02/28/2008 18:19:11 0:22:10 5.0 4.5 535.8 535.8 480.2 480.2 480.2 02/28/2008 18:19:21 0:22:20 5.0 4.5 535.8 535.8 479.2 479.2 479.2 02/28/2008 18:19:31 0:22:30 5.0 4.3 535.8 535.8 465.9 465.9 465.9 02/28/2008 18:19:41 0:22:40 4.7 4.2 503.6 503.6 448.8 448.8 448.8 02/28/2008 18:19:51 0:22:50 4.7 4.1 503.6 503.6 439.4 439.4 439.4 02/28/2008 18:20:01 0:23:00 4.5 3.9 482.2 482.2 422.3 422.3 422.3 02/28/2008 18:20:11 0:23:10 4.3 3.8 460.8 460.8 409.0 409.0 409.0 02/28/2008 18:20:21 0:23:20 4.3 3.8 460.8 460.8 402.1 402.1 402.1 02/28/2008 18:20:31 0:23:30 4.2 3.7 450.0 450.0 392.8 392.8 392.8 02/28/2008 18:20:41 0:23:40 4.3 3.7 460.8 460.8 399.7 399.7 399.7 02/28/2008 18:20:51 0:23:50 4.2 3.6 450.0 450.0 388.9 388.9 388.9 02/28/2008 18:21:01 0:24:00 4.0 3.4 428.6 428.6 364.4 364.4 364.4 02/28/2008 18:21:11 0:24:10 3.8 3.3 407.2 407.2 349.2 349.2 349.2 02/28/2008 18:21:21 0:24:20 3.8 3.2 407.2 407.2 344.7 344.7 344.7 02/28/2008 18:21:31 0:24:30 3.7 3.0 396.5 396.5 319.7 319.7 319.7 02/28/2008 18:21:41 0:24:40 3.3 2.8 353.6 353.6 295.7 295.7 295.7 02/28/2008 18:21:51 0:24:50 3.3 2.6 353.6 353.6 279.0 279.0 279.0 02/28/2008 18:22:01 0:25:00 3.0 2.4 321.5 321.5 255.5 255.5 255.5 02/28/2008 18:22:11 0:25:10 3.0 2.3 321.5 321.5 248.2 248.2 248.2 02/28/2008 18:22:21 0:25:20 2.8 2.2 300.0 300.0 240.8 240.8 240.8 02/28/2008 18:22:31 0:25:30 2.8 2.3 300.0 300.0 242.7 242.7 242.7 02/28/2008 18:22:41 0:25:40 2.8 2.3 300.0 300.0 241.3 241.3 241.3 02/28/2008 18:22:51 0:25:50 2.8 2.2 300.0 300.0 233.9 233.9 233.9 02/28/2008 18:23:01 0:26:00 2.6 2.1 278.6 278.6 223.1 223.1 223.1 02/28/2008 18:23:11 0:26:10 2.6 2.0 278.6 278.6 210.9 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:23:21 0:26:20 2.5 1.9 267.9 267.9 201.0 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:23:31 0:26:30 2.3 1.7 246.5 246.5 183.3 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:23:41 0:26:40 2.3 1.7 246.5 246.5 179.5 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:23:51 0:26:50 2.3 1.7 246.5 246.5 184.8 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:24:01 0:27:00 2.3 1.8 246.5 246.5 188.3 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:24:11 0:27:10 2.3 1.7 246.5 246.5 180.9 214.3 214.3

4 

# REDACTEDCITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing

URS THC Raw Data Run 4
Average Dilution Ratio (Low) = 107.2 HIGH LOW

24 Hour Time Elapsed Time THC1 (ppmw) THC2 (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Dual-Range (ppmw) HIGH - THC1 LOW - THC2

02/28/2008 18:24:21 0:27:20 2.1 1.5 225.0 225.0 157.8 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:24:31 0:27:30 2.0 1.3 214.3 214.3 137.3 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:24:41 0:27:40 2.0 1.2 214.3 214.3 133.8 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:24:51 0:27:50 1.8 1.2 192.9 214.3 128.5 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:25:01 0:28:00 1.8 1.1 192.9 214.3 121.1 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:25:11 0:28:10 1.8 1.1 192.9 214.3 119.6 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:25:21 0:28:20 1.6 1.1 171.4 214.3 122.6 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:25:31 0:28:30 0.8 0.2 85.7 214.3 18.1 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:25:41 0:28:40 0.9 0.2 96.4 214.3 26.4 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:25:51 0:28:50 1.5 0.8 160.7 214.3 89.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:26:01 0:29:00 2.0 1.2 214.3 214.3 128.5 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:26:11 0:29:10 2.3 1.7 246.5 246.5 185.8 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:26:21 0:29:20 1.8 1.1 192.9 214.3 114.2 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:26:31 0:29:30 1.5 0.8 160.7 214.3 90.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:26:41 0:29:40 1.5 0.8 160.7 214.3 84.8 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:26:51 0:29:50 1.3 0.7 139.3 214.3 70.5 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:27:01 0:30:00 1.1 0.5 117.9 214.3 54.9 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:27:11 0:30:10 1.1 0.4 117.9 214.3 48.0 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:27:21 0:30:20 1.1 0.5 117.9 214.3 49.5 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:27:31 0:30:30 1.1 0.4 117.9 214.3 47.0 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:27:41 0:30:40 0.9 0.4 96.4 214.3 40.2 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:27:51 0:30:50 0.6 0.0 64.3 214.3 2.4 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:28:01 0:31:00 0.6 -0.2 64.3 214.3 -18.8 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:28:11 0:31:10 1.3 0.6 139.3 214.3 67.6 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:28:21 0:31:20 1.1 0.5 117.9 214.3 56.4 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:28:31 0:31:30 0.9 0.3 96.4 214.3 33.3 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:28:41 0:31:40 0.9 0.2 96.4 214.3 26.4 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:28:51 0:31:50 0.9 0.2 96.4 214.3 22.5 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:29:01 0:32:00 0.9 0.2 96.4 214.3 17.6 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:29:11 0:32:10 0.8 0.1 85.7 214.3 10.2 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:29:21 0:32:20 0.8 0.0 85.7 214.3 4.8 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:29:31 0:32:30 0.8 0.0 85.7 214.3 1.9 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:29:41 0:32:40 0.6 0.0 64.3 214.3 2.4 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:29:51 0:32:50 0.6 0.0 64.3 214.3 -2.6 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:30:01 0:33:00 0.6 -0.1 64.3 214.3 -5.5 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:30:11 0:33:10 0.6 -0.1 64.3 214.3 -8.5 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:30:21 0:33:20 0.6 -0.1 64.3 214.3 -9.9 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:30:31 0:33:30 0.6 -0.1 64.3 214.3 -13.8 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:30:41 0:33:40 0.6 -0.2 64.3 214.3 -16.3 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:30:51 0:33:50 0.6 -0.2 64.3 214.3 -20.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:31:01 0:34:00 0.6 -0.2 64.3 214.3 -23.1 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:31:11 0:34:10 0.6 -0.2 64.3 214.3 -23.1 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:31:21 0:34:20 0.6 -0.2 64.3 214.3 -23.6 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:31:31 0:34:30 0.4 -0.3 42.9 214.3 -29.5 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:31:41 0:34:40 0.4 -0.3 42.9 214.3 -32.9 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:31:51 0:34:50 0.4 -0.3 42.9 214.3 -35.4 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:32:01 0:35:00 0.4 -0.3 42.9 214.3 -35.9 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:32:11 0:35:10 0.4 -0.4 42.9 214.3 -38.4 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:32:21 0:35:20 0.4 -0.4 42.9 214.3 -40.8 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:32:31 0:35:30 0.3 -0.4 32.1 214.3 -43.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:32:41 0:35:40 0.3 -0.4 32.1 214.3 -45.6 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:32:51 0:35:50 0.3 -0.4 32.1 214.3 -47.1 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:33:01 0:36:00 0.3 -0.5 32.1 214.3 -48.6 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:33:11 0:36:10 0.3 -0.5 32.1 214.3 -52.1 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:33:21 0:36:20 0.3 -0.5 32.1 214.3 -53.0 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:33:31 0:36:30 0.3 -0.5 32.1 214.3 -56.0 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:33:41 0:36:40 0.1 -0.6 10.7 214.3 -59.5 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:33:51 0:36:50 -0.1 -0.6 -10.7 214.3 -64.3 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:34:01 0:37:00 0.1 -0.6 10.7 214.3 -63.9 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:34:11 0:37:10 -0.1 -0.6 -10.7 214.3 -66.3 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:34:21 0:37:20 -0.1 -0.6 -10.7 214.3 -67.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:34:31 0:37:30 -0.1 -0.6 -10.7 214.3 -67.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:34:41 0:37:40 -0.1 -0.6 -10.7 214.3 -67.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:34:51 0:37:50 -0.1 -0.7 -10.7 214.3 -70.2 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:35:01 0:38:00 -0.1 -0.7 -10.7 214.3 -70.2 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:35:11 0:38:10 -0.1 -0.7 -10.7 214.3 -71.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:35:21 0:38:20 -0.1 -0.7 -10.7 214.3 -73.6 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:35:31 0:38:30 -0.2 -0.7 -21.4 214.3 -75.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:35:41 0:38:40 -0.2 -0.7 -21.4 214.3 -76.6 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:35:51 0:38:50 -0.2 -0.7 -21.4 214.3 -78.1 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:36:01 0:39:00 -0.2 -0.7 -21.4 214.3 -78.5 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:36:11 0:39:10 -0.2 -0.7 -21.4 214.3 -79.5 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:36:21 0:39:20 -0.1 -0.8 -10.7 214.3 -80.6 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:36:31 0:39:30 -0.1 -0.8 -10.7 214.3 -81.0 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:36:41 0:39:40 -0.1 -0.7 -10.7 214.3 -80.0 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:36:51 0:39:50 -0.2 -0.8 -21.4 214.3 -83.5 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:37:01 0:40:00 -0.2 -0.8 -21.4 214.3 -85.0 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:37:11 0:40:10 -0.2 -0.8 -21.4 214.3 -85.4 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:37:21 0:40:20 -0.2 -0.8 -21.4 214.3 -87.4 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:37:31 0:40:30 -0.4 -0.8 -42.9 214.3 -90.3 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:37:41 0:40:40 -0.4 -0.9 -42.9 214.3 -93.3 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:37:51 0:40:50 -0.4 -0.9 -42.9 214.3 -96.2 214.3 214.3

4 

# REDACTEDCITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing

URS THC Raw Data Run 4
Average Dilution Ratio (Low) = 107.2 HIGH LOW

24 Hour Time Elapsed Time THC1 (ppmw) THC2 (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Raw X DLR (ppmw) Actual (ppmw) Dual-Range (ppmw) HIGH - THC1 LOW - THC2

02/28/2008 18:38:01 0:41:00 -0.4 -0.9 -42.9 214.3 -96.2 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:38:11 0:41:10 -0.4 -0.9 -42.9 214.3 -96.8 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:38:21 0:41:20 -0.4 -0.9 -42.9 214.3 -97.2 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:38:31 0:41:30 -0.4 -0.9 -42.9 214.3 -99.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:38:41 0:41:40 -0.4 -0.9 -42.9 214.3 -99.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:38:51 0:41:50 -0.4 -0.9 -42.9 214.3 -99.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:39:01 0:42:00 -0.4 -0.9 -42.9 214.3 -99.7 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:39:11 0:42:10 -0.4 -0.9 -42.9 214.3 -101.2 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:39:21 0:42:20 -0.4 -1.0 -42.9 214.3 -102.1 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:39:31 0:42:30 -0.4 -1.0 -42.9 214.3 -103.6 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:39:41 0:42:40 -0.4 -1.0 -42.9 214.3 -105.5 214.3 214.3 02/28/2008 18:39:51 0:42:50 -0.4 -1.0 -42.9 214.3 -107.0 214.3 214.3

Data Points 258.0 258.0 258.0 Maximum 2622.2 275.0 280979.8 Minimum -0.4 -1.0 214.3 Average 50.5 11.8 5506.0

4 

# REDACTEDProject ID=CITGODate=2/24/2008THC 1 0-10,000 ppm rangeInstrument ID=THC 1EPA Method 25A Calibration Error Test Results (Direct) 5% limitTHC 1 ID Number=00101269-33 CEM Absolute Cal ErrorSpan Value=10,000 Cylinder ID Certified Conc. Time Response Difference (% of Certified Conc.)Units=PPMV as C3H8Ambient Air0 03:20 -0.40 0.40NATechnicians=WLALM8952-08078499 03:13 8491.4 7.60.09%Dilution Ratio=119.27ALM29615-07064423 03:25 4372.7 50.31.14%ALM46880-01082494 03:28 2429.1 64.92.60%Time Dil. Air Press. Orifice Vac.(psi) ("Hg) THC 1 0-100 ppm range (for linearity)04:00 38.9 19.8EPA Method 25A Calibration Error Test Results (Direct) 5% limit04:03 38.9 19.7CEM Absolute Cal Error04:06 38.9 19.7 Cylinder ID Certified Conc. Time Response Difference (% of Certified Conc.)04:11 39 19.7Ambient Air0 03:20 -0.40 0.40NA05:04 38.9 19.9ALM06515386.7 03:40 82.8 3.94.50%05:53 38.7 19.8ALM04034953.4 03:48 53.6 0.20.37%05:55 38.7 19.8ALM01214226.0 03:49 25.8 0.20.77%THC 1 0-100 ppm rangeEPA Method 25A Calibration Error Test Results (w/ Dilution) 5% limitCEM Absolute Cal ErrorCylinder ID Certified Conc. Time Response Difference (% of Certified Conc.)Dilution Air0 04:34 -0.03 0.03NAALM8952-080771.26 04:00 71.90 0.640.90%ALM29615-070637.08 04:03 37.77 0.691.86%ALM46880-010820.91 04:06 20.36 0.552.64%Note: Operator may use either mid or low C3H8 standard for hourly drift checks, per URS SOP-27.EPA Method 25A Calibration Bias and Drift Tests (w/ Dilution)THC 15% Limit13% LimitCal Error Post-RunCEMS CEMS Cal Error DriftRun No. Certified Conc. Response Time Response (% of Certified Conc.)(% of Span)2Run 1 0 -0.03 04:34 -0.40 NA-0.37%37.08 37.77 04:03 39.40 6.25%1.63%1This QA/QC criteria as part of an hourly drift determination is not required by EPA Method 25A.2100 ppm span used.CITGO Coker Steam Vent TestingTHC Calibration Data Summary - Run 1Project ID=CITGODate=2/26/2008THC 1 0-10,000 ppm rangeInstrument IDs=THC 1, THC 2EPA Method 25A Calibration Error Test Results (Direct)5% limitTHC 1 ID Number=01101396-33 CEM Absolute Cal ErrorTHC 2 ID Number=00101269-33 Cylinder ID Certified Conc. Time Response Difference (% of Certified Conc.)Span Value=10,000 and 100Ambient Air0 03:15 0.2 0.2NAUnits=PPMV as C3H8ALM8952-08078499 03:18 8503.2 4.20.05%Technicians=WLALM29615-07064423 03:20 4338.1 84.91.92%Dilution Ratio=116.53ALM46880-01082494 03:24 2380.3 113.74.56%Time Dil. Air Press. Orifice Vac. THC 2 0-100 ppm range(psi) ("Hg) EPA Method 25A Calibration Error Test Results (Direct)25% limit03:42 38.5 20.1CEM Absolute Cal Error03:46 38.5 20.0 Cylinder ID Certified Conc. Time Response Difference (% of Certified Conc.)03:51 38.5 20.0Ambient Air0 03:15 0.05 0.05NA03:54 38.4 20.0ALM06515389.7 03:31 86.7 3.03.37%05:05 38.5 19.6ALM04034956.8 03:32 57.2 0.40.79%05:51 38.5 19.8ALM01214229.7 03:58 27.9 1.85.91%05:53 38.5 19.6THC 2 0-100 ppm rangeEPA Method 25A Calibration Error Test Results (w/ Dilution) 5% limitCEM Absolute Cal ErrorCylinder ID Certified Conc. Time Response Difference (% of Certified Conc.)Dilution Air0 04:01 -0.29 0.29NAALM8952-080772.93 03:49 73.38 0.450.62%ALM29615-070637.95 03:51 38.25 0.290.77%ALM46880-010821.40 03:54 21.11 0.291.36%EPA Method 25A Calibration Drift Tests (w/ dilution)THC 2 0-100 ppm range5% Limit33% LimitCal Error Post-RunCEMS CEMS Cal Error DriftRun No. Certified Conc. Response Time Response (% of Certified Conc.) (% of Span)Run 2 0.00 -0.29 03:15---1NA---137.95 38.25 03:20 36.31 -4.33%-1.94%EPA Method 25A Calibration Drift Tests (w/ dilution)THC 1 0-10,000 ppm range5% Limit33% LimitPre-Run Post-RunCEMS CEMS Cal Error DriftRun No. Certified Conc. Response Time Response (% of Certified Conc.) (% of Span)Run 2 0.00 -0.13 03:15---1NA---137.95 36.40 03:32 38.47 1.35%0.02%1Data unavailable.2This QA/QC procedure as part of calibration with a dilution system is not required by Other Test Method 12.3This QA/QC criteria as part of an hourly drift determination is not required by EPA Method 25A.Note: Operator may use either mid or low C3H8 standard for hourly drift checks, per URS SOP-27.Citgo Coker Steam Vent TestingTHC Calibration Data Summary - Run 2Project ID=CITGODate=2/27/2008THC 1 0-10,000 ppm rangeInstrument IDs=THC 1, THC 2EPA Method 25A Calibration Error Test Results (Direct)5% limitTHC 1 ID Number=01101396-33CEM Absolute Cal ErrorTHC 2 ID Number=00101269-33 Cylinder ID Certified Conc. Time Response Difference (% of Certified Conc.)Span Value=10,000 and 100Ambient Air0 18:06 0.10 0.10NAUnits=PPMV as C3H8ALM8952-08078499 18:16 8497.4 1.60.02%Technicians=WLALM29615-07064423 18:18 4469.5 46.51.05%Dilution Ratio=111.43ALM46880-01082494 18:20 2433.6 60.42.42%Time Dil. Air Press. Orifice Vac. THC 2 0-100 ppm range(psi) ("Hg) EPA Method 25A Calibration Error Test Results (Direct)15% limit18:39 38.5 20.3CEM Absolute Cal Error18:45 38.5 20.3 Cylinder ID Certified Conc. Time Response Difference (% of Certified Conc.)18:49 38.5 20.3Ambient Air0 18:06 -0.5 0.5NA18:51 38.5 20.3ALM06515389.7 18:24 89.7 0.00.02%18:55 38.5 20.3ALM04034956.8 18:27 58.9 2.13.66%19:36 38.5 20.3ALM01214229.7 18:29 28.6 1.13.65%20:22 38.5 20.120:30 38.5 19.7THC 2 0-100 ppm rangeEPA Method 25A Calibration Error Test Results (w/ Dilution) 5% limitCEM Absolute Cal ErrorCylinder ID Certified Conc. Time Response Difference (% of Certified Conc.)Dilution Air0 18:39 0.4 0.4NAALM8952-080776.27 18:16 77.0 0.81.02%ALM29615-070639.69 18:18 40.1 0.40.98%ALM46880-010822.38 18:20 21.9 0.41.94%EPA Method 25A Calibration Bias and Drift Tests (w/ Dilution)THC 2 0-100 ppm range5% Limit23% LimitCal Error Post-RunCEMS CEMS Cal Error DriftRun No. Certified Conc. Response Time Response (% of Certified Conc.) (% of Span)Run 3 0.00 0.37 18:06 -0.46 NA-0.83%39.69 40.08 18:18 40.96 3.19%0.88%EPA Method 25A Calibration Bias and Drift Tests (w/ Dilution)THC 1 0-10,000 ppm range5% Limit23% LimitCal Error Post-RunCEMS CEMS Cal Error DriftRun No. Certified Conc. Response Time Response (% of Certified Conc.) (% of Span)Run 3 0.00 0.91 18:39 0.17 NA-0.01%39.69 36.81 18:27 40.01 0.81%0.03%1This QA/QC procedure as part of calibration with a dilution system is not required by Other Test Method 12.2This QA/QC criteria as part of an hourly drift determination is not required by EPA Method 25A.Note: Operator may use either mid or low C3H8 standard for hourly drift checks, per URS SOP-27.CITGO Coker Steam Vent TestingTHC Calibration Data Summary - Run 3Project ID=CITGODate=2/28/2008THC 1 0-10,000 ppm rangeInstrument IDs=THC 1, THC 2EPA Method 25A Calibration Error Test Results (Direct)5% limitTHC 1 ID Number=01101396-33 CEM Absolute Cal ErrorTHC 2 ID Number=00101269-33 Cylinder ID Certified Conc. Time Response Difference (% of Certified Conc.)Span Value=10,000 and 100Ambient Air0 15:59 0.3 0.3NAUnits=PPMV as C3H8ALM8952-08078499 16:03 8513.9 14.90.18%Technicians=WLALM29615-07064423 16:06 4395.2 27.80.63%Dilution Ratio=107.15ALM46880-01082494 16:08 2387.9 106.14.26%Time Dil. Air Press. Orifice Vac. THC 2 0-100 ppm range(psi) ("Hg) EPA Method 25A Calibration Error Test Results (Direct)15% limit16:23 38.3 20CEM Absolute Cal Error16:26 38.5 20.3 Cylinder ID Certified Conc. Time Response Difference (% of Certified Conc.)16:30 38.5 20.3Ambient Air0 15:59 -0.3 0.3NA16:32 38.5 20.3ALM06515389.7 16:15 89.9 0.20.22%16:37 38.5 20.3ALM04034956.8 16:17 59.3 2.54.38%17:57 38.5 20.3ALM01214229.7 16:18 29.0 0.72.44%18:40 38.5 21.018:43 38.5 20.3THC 2 0-100 ppm rangeEPA Method 25A Calibration Error Test Results (w/ Dilution)5% limitCEM Absolute Cal ErrorCylinder ID Certified Conc. Time Response Difference (% of Certified Conc.)Dilution Air0.00 16:24 0.5 0.5NAALM8952-080779.32 16:28 79.4 0.10.07%ALM29615-070641.28 16:30 41.6 0.40.86%ALM46880-010823.27 16:33 23.1 0.20.92%EPA Method 25A Calibration Bias and Drift Tests (w/ Dilution)THC 2 0-100 ppm range5% Limit23% LimitCal Error Post-RunCEMS CEMS Cal Error DriftRun No. Certified Conc. Response Time Response (% of Certified Conc.) (% of Span)Run 4 0.00 0.45 18:47 -0.40 NA-0.85%41.28 41.63 18:43 44.99 9.01%3.36%EPA Method 25A Calibration Bias and Drift Tests (w/ Dilution)THC 1 0-10,000 ppm range5% Limit23% LimitCal Error Post-RunCEMS CEMS Cal Error DriftRun No. Certified Conc. Response Time Response (% of Certified Conc.) (% of Span)Run 4 0.00 1.17 18:47 0.19 NA0.19%41.28 39.33 18:43 40.13 -2.77%-1.14%1This QA/QC procedure as part of calibration with a dilution system is not required by Other Test Method 12.2This QA/QC criteria as part of an hourly drift determination is not required by EPA Method 25A.Note: Operator may use either mid or low C3H8 standard for hourly drift checks, per URS SOP-27.CITGO Coker Steam Vent TestingTHC Calibration Data Summary - Run 4

# APPENDIX C
EPA Method 18 Raw Data And Calibration Information

## EPA Method 18 Analytical Narrative

The methane and ethane concentration data presented in this report vary slightly from the raw data submitted to EPA immediately after the February 2008 testing of the Coker Steam Vent. These variations were the result of routine data reduction and quality assurance procedures associated with the use of a GC/FID and instrument software used to perform EPA Method 18. First, the analytical data obtained with the GC/FID was reintegrated to reduce the number of non-detects. Second, the methane and ethane chromatograph peak areas were re-measured to remove a slightly high bias caused by a peak from an unidentified organic compound with a similar retention time.CITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing

URS EPA Method 18 Raw Data
CITGO dilution ratios Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Coker Steam Vent (DLR) 118.95 116.53 111.43 Methane Ethane Methane Ethane C1 C2

C1 C2 Average Average ppm ppm Actual, Actual, Date/Injection Run x DLR x DLR 02/24/08 14 0.69 0.0 0.7 0.0 x DLR 81.49 0.0 1-1 86.8 0.0

15 0.77 0.0 x DLR 92.14 0.0

16 -- -- x DLR -- --

17 170.15 24.0 169.1 23.8 x DLR 20239.68 2851.9 1-2 20117.3 2833.3

18 167.24 23.6 x DLR 19893.36 2807.5

19 169.98 23.9 x DLR 20218.74 2840.5

20 14.38 1.9 14.1 1.8 x DLR 1710.79 223.4 1-3 1679.8 218.0

21 13.97 1.8 x DLR 1661.25 216.0

22 14.02 1.8 x DLR 1667.34 214.8 Average Average 23 992.21 977.9 994.7 980.6 1000 std, % REC 98.24 97.8 1000 std, % REC 98.5 98.1

24 997.01 983.0 1000 std, % REC 98.71 98.3

25 994.99 981.0 1000 std, % REC 98.51 98.1

4CITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing

URS EPA Method 18 Raw Data CITGO dilution ratios Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Coker Steam Vent (DLR) 118.95 116.53 111.43 Methane Ethane Methane Ethane C1 C2

C1 C2 Average Average ppm ppm Actual, Actual, Date/Injection Run x DLR x DLR 02/26/08 26 978.03 962.6 1000 std, % REC 96.83 96.3

29 4.00 0.5 4.0 0.5 x DLR 466.04 58.1 2-1 468.1 61.0

30 4.04 0.5 x DLR 470.83 63.4

31 4.01 0.5 x DLR 467.53 61.7

32 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 x DLR 0.00 0.0 2-2 0.0 0.0

33 0.00 0.0 x DLR 0.00 0.0

40 0.00 0.0 x DLR 0.00 0.0

34 97.46 12.4 97.5 12.8 x DLR 11357.68 1445.2 2-3 11362.7 1496.0

35 97.13 13.0 x DLR 11319.44 1519.7

36 97.92 13.1 x DLR 11410.98 1523.0 Average Average 37 983.81 970.0 983.2 969.2 1000 std, % REC 97.41 97.0 1000 std, % REC 97.3 96.9

38 986.90 972.7 1000 std, % REC 97.71 97.3

39 978.76 965.1 1000 std, % REC 96.91 96.5

4CITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing

URS EPA Method 18 Raw Data CITGO dilution ratios Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Coker Steam Vent (DLR) 118.95 116.53 111.43 Methane Ethane Methane Ethane C1 C2

C1 C2 Average Average ppm ppm Actual, Actual, Date/Injection Run x DLR x DLR 02/27/08 Average Average 41 1000.84 994.9 1003.7 997.8 1000 std, % REC 99.09 99.5 1000 std, % REC 99.4 99.8

42 1004.64 999.0 1000 std, % REC 99.47 99.9

43 1005.57 999.4 1000 std, % REC 99.56 99.9

44 845.4 Average 10% C3 diluted 94207.8 10% C3 diluted 93904.8

45 840.0 10% C3 diluted 93601.7

46 3013.56 373.0 2910.8 364.9 x DLR 335805.39 41564.2 3-1 324359.1 40662.8

47 2907.94 361.0 x DLR 324036.31 40221.7

48 2791.13 347.5 x DLR 311020.54 38720.2

49 2898.04 366.3 x DLR 322933.26 40812.6

50 2922.56 371.3 x DLR 325665.56 41373.3

51 2931.78 370.5 x DLR 326693.23 41285.2

52 1342.51 165.5 x DLR 149597.99 18443.0

53 1305.01 164.2 1289.9 162.1 x DLR 145419.20 18292.0 3-2 145197.8 18158.3

54 1286.72 161.7 x DLR 143381.80 18021.0

55 1277.84 160.4 x DLR 142392.26 17877.3 Average Average 57 991.45 983.3 988.5 980.2 1000 std, % REC 98.16 98.3 1000 std, % REC 97.9 98.0

58 987.34 979.0 1000 std, % REC 97.76 97.9

59 986.77 978.2 1000 std, % REC 97.70 97.8

02/28/08 Average Average 60 989.14 981.2 984.7 976.3 1000 std, % REC 97.93 98.1 1000 std, % REC 97.5 97.6

61 981.87 973.7 1000 std, % REC 97.21 97.4

62 983.04 974.2 1000 std, % REC 97.33 97.4

63 1045.51 1037.0

4CITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing

URS EPA Method 18 Raw Data CITGO dilution ratios Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Coker Steam Vent (DLR) 118.95 116.53 111.43 Methane Ethane Methane Ethane C1 C2

C1 C2 Average Average ppm ppm Actual, Actual, Date/Injection Run x DLR x DLR 0 103.52 103.7

4CITGOCoker Steam Vent TestingURS EPA Method 18Analytical SummarySample Analysis Multiple Injection SummaryMethane EthaneRunInjection 1(ppmv)Injection 2(ppmv)Injection 3(ppmv)Average(ppmv)StandardDeviation%RSDInjection 1(ppmv)Injection 2(ppmv)Injection 3(ppmv)Average(ppmv)StandardDeviationRSD (%)1-1 81.49 92.14--186.81 7.53 8.67 0.00 0.00--10.00 0.00 N/A1-2 20,239.68 19,893.36 20,218.74 20,117.26 194.19 0.97 2,851.86 2,807.55 2,840.48 2,833.29 23.01 0.811-3 1,710.79 1,661.25 1,667.34 1,679.79 27.02 1.61 223.39 215.98 214.78 218.05 4.67 2.142-1 466.04 470.83 467.53 468.13 2.45 0.52 58.09 63.39 61.67 61.05 2.71 4.432-2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A2-3 11,357.68 11,319.44 11,410.98 11,362.70 45.97 0.40 1,445.18 1,519.72 1,523.05 1,495.98 44.03 2.943-12335,805.39 324,036.31 311,020.54 323,620.75 12,397.65 3.83 41,564.15 40,221.69 38,720.17 40,168.67 1,422.74 3.54322,933.26 325,665.56 326,693.23 325,097.35 1,943.32 0.60 40,812.61 41,373.29 41,285.16 41,157.02 301.51 0.73-- -- -- 324,359.05 7,977.81 2.46 -- -- -- 40,662.85 1,067.28 2.623-23149,597.99 145,419.20 143,381.80 -- -- -- 18,442.97 18,291.97 18,020.97 -- -- --142,392.26 -- -- 145,197.81 3,192.68 2.20 142,392.26 -- -- 49,287.04 62,070.39 125.941This sample only analyzed in duplicate.2Six total analyses performed in order to verify the validity of the measurement. As all six injections passed QC criteria, all were used in the determination of the average.3This analysis performed four times. All analyses passed QC criteria, all were used in the determination of the average.CITGOCoker Steam Vent TestingURS EPA Method 18Calibration DataInitial CalibrationInjectionVolumeInjection1(RF)Injection2(RF)Injection3(RF) AverageStandardDeviation %RSDMethane 600 2686.70 2736.552764.652729.30 39.48 1.451100 2849.14 2862.74 2885.862865.91 18.56 0.652100 2981.80 2962.44 2969.932971.399.76 0.33Ethane 600 1453.04 1481.74 1496.851477.21 22.25 1.511100 1546.161555.21 1568.02 1556.4610.98 0.712100 1624.32 1614.451619.181619.32 4.94 0.31Propane 600 977.40 998.47 1006.96994.28 15.22 1.531100 1045.40 1049.20 1059.251051.287.16 0.682100 1105.281099.271103.12 1102.563.04 0.28Calibration VerificationDateInjection 1(RF)Injection 2(RF)Injection 3(RF) AverageStandardDeviation %RSDDeviationfrom Initial(%)Methane 2/24/2008Initial 1010.00 1010.00 1010.00 1010.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Final 992.21 997.01 994.99 994.74 2.41 0.00 1.512/26/2008 Initial 978.03--1--1978.03 NA NA 3.17Final 983.81 986.90 978.76 983.15 4.11 0.00 2.662/27/2008Initial 1000.84 1004.64 1005.571003.692.51 0.00 0.63Final 991.45 987.34 986.77 988.52 2.55 0.00 2.13Ethane 2/24/2008Initial 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 0.00 0.00 0.99Final 977.89 983.03 980.97 980.63 2.59 0.00 2.912/26/2008 Initial 962.57--1--1962.57 NA NA 4.70Final 969.95 972.70 965.10 969.25 3.85 0.00 4.032/27/2008Initial 994.91 999.03 999.41 997.78 2.49 0.00 1.21Final 983.26 979.03 978.24 980.18 2.70 0.00 2.95Propane 2/24/2008Initial 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 0.00 0.00 0.99Final 977.94 980.78 980.00 979.57 1.47 0.00 3.012/26/2008 Initial 960.50--1--1960.50 NA NA 4.90Final 968.93 971.54 964.82 968.43 3.39 0.00 4.122/27/2008 Initial--21001.06 1001.21 1001.14 0.11 0.00 0.88Final 984.97 981.23 979.88 982.03 2.64 0.00 2.771Only a single injection performed presampling.2First chromatogram stopped early, before propane was integrated.

### Citgo Coker Steam Vent Testing URS EPA Method 18

Recovery Study



## Cylinder Concentration (ppmv propane) Measured Concentration (ppmv propane) Dilution Factor Actual Concentration (ppmv propane) % Recovery

In j ection 1 100000 845.43 111.43 94208 94.2 In j ection 2 100000 839.99 111.43 93602 93.6 A verage 100000 842.71 111.43 93905 93.9

Note: Recovery study/audit samples NOT per Method 18. This is also a check of the dilution system. 10% propane was introduced at the probe through the dilution system and then to the bag. The gas was retained in the bag the same duration as samples. Bag was only analyzed in duplicate, not triplicate per method. Methane and ethane were not spiked.

# APPENDIX D
EPA Method 2/4 Raw Data And Calibration Information

# Calculation Summary

Location Coker A-1 Coker A-1 Coker A-1 Coker A Parameter M2/ M4 M2/ M4 M2/ M4 M2/ M4 Run Designation Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Run 4 Date 2/24/2008 2/26/2008 2/27/2008 2/28/2008 Time Start 05:04 05:05 19:36 17:57 Time Stop 05:24 05:47 20:08 18:05 05:04-05:24 05:05-05:47 19:36-20:08 17:57-18:05 Duct Diameter (ft) (equivalent if square duct) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pitot Tube Correction Factor 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 Nozzle Diameter (inches) 0.540 0.540 0.540 0.540 DGMCF 1.051 1.037 1.031 1.028 Standard Temperature (°F) 68 68 68 68 Barometric Pressure Measured (" Hg) 30.22 30.24 30.25 30.18 Stack Elevation (ft) (relative to Barometer) 000 0 Barometric Pressure (" Hg) 30.22 30.24 30.25 30.18 Average Stack Temperature (°F) 213.0 220.1 220.3 213.0 216.6 Average DGM Temp (°F) 82.5 75.1 66.0 73.6 Average Delta H (in wc) 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.16 Condensed Water (g) 2574.8 2112.4 1770.5 1546.3 2001.0 Test Duration (minutes) 20 42 32 8 Static Pressure (in wc) -1.36 -1.36 -1.36 -1.36 Meter Volume (acf) 2.078 8.983 7.507 0.967 Average square root of delta p 3.122 1.373 1.481 3.012 Absolute Stack Pressure (in Hg) 30.12 30.14 30.15 30.08 Absolute Stack Temperature (°R) 673.0 680.1 680.3 673.0 676.6 Flue Gas Moisture (%) 98.26 91.48 91.4 98.66 95.0 Moisture at saturation N/A N/A N/A N/A Moisture used in Calculation 98.26 91.48 91.41 98.66 95.0 Gas Molecular Weight (Wet) (g/g-mole) 18.15 18.89 20.05 18.23 Corrected Volume of Gas sampled (acf) 2.183 9.315 7.740 0.994 Volume at Meter (dscf) 2.147 9.295 7.859 0.993 5.073 Average Gas Velocity (f/sec) 249 108 113 240 177 Avg Flow Rate (acfh) 703,205 304,713 319,068 677,516 501,126 Avg Flow Rate (acfm) 11,720 5,079 5,318 11,292 8,352 Avg Flow Rate (scfh) 555,427 238,298 249,561 534,354 394,410 Avg Flow Rate (scfm) 9,257 3,972 4,159 8,906 6,573 Avg Flow Rate (dscfh) 9,639 20,311 21,441 7,166 14,639 Avg Flow Rate (dscfm) 161 339 357 119 244 Isokinetic Sampling Rate (%) 33.01 32.29 33.94 51.30 Sample Flow Rate (cfm) 0.106 0.214 0.235 0.121 0.17 Sample Flow Rate (L/min) 2.992 6.056 6.643 3.423 4.78 CITGO Coker A Testing

Averages

05:04 05:05 19:36 17:57 05:24 05:47 20:08 18:05 1 7:57- 18 : 0 5 19 : 36

- 20 : 08 0 5: 0 5- 0 5:47 0 5: 0 4- 0 5: 2 4

68 68 68 68 30.22 30.24 30.25 30.18

30.22 30.24 30.25 30.18 220.1 220.3 213.0 216.6 213.0

82.5 75.1 66.0 73.6 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.16

20 42 32 8 -1.36 -1.36 -1.36 -1.36

3.122 1.373 1.481 3.012 30.12 30.14 30.15 30.08 673.0 680.1 680.3 673.0 676.6 

# REDACTED

# Calculation Summary

Location Coker A-1 68 Parameter M2/ M4 30.22 mdd 24-Feb 0 dcw 1 -1.36 dcw

0.84 0.54 1.051

start 05:04 start 53.097 Final Initial stop 05:24 stop 55.210 1 2066.5 1057.3 start start 2 1433.3 1427.0 stop stop 3 1380.2 1378.6 start start 4 947.5 946.4 stop stop 5 1040.1 1038.9 start start 6 923.8 922.0 stop stop 7 923.8 921.7 start start 8 951.1 949.2 stop stop 9 890.2 889.4 start start 16-17, SB 3553.3 2010.4 stop stop 2574.8 Duration 20 Total 2.113

Delta P Delta H Stack Temp DGM In DGM Out av sqrt dP Averages 10.75 0.19 213.0 3.1217 Interval Individual 29.5 0.2 212 83 82 5.43139 1 Readings 24.5 0.2 213 83 82 4.949747 24.5 0.2 213 83 82 4.949747 20.5 0.2 213 83 82 4.527693 17.0 0.2 213 83 82 4.123106 14.5 0.2 213 83 82 3.807887 11.0 0.2 213 83 82 3.316625 2 10.0 0.19 213 83 82 3.162278 8.0 0.19 213 83 82 2.828427 7.5 0.19 213 83 82 2.738613 7.0 0.12 213 83 82 2.645751 6.5 213 2.54951 6.0 213 2.44949 3 Run 1

Nozzle Diameter (in) Std Temp (F)

Duct Diamter (ft)

Duct Depth (ft) Duct Width (ft) Pitot Tube Correction Factor Bar Press ("Hg, meas) Data Entry Are a

Static Press ("wc)

DGMCF Stk Elev (rel to Barometer)

DGM Volumes (as read) Times Impinger Catch Date Data Entered By (initials) Data Checked by (initials) Data Corrected by (initials)

Total Wt Gain

82.5 05:04 05:24 68 30 .2 2

-1

. 36

10.75 0.19 213.0 3.1217

29.5 0.2 212 5.43139 24.5 0.2 213 4.949747 24.5 0.2 213 4.949747 20.5 0.2 213 4.527693 17.0 0.2 213 4.123106 14.5 0.2 213 3.807887 11.0 0.2 213 3.316625 10.0 0.19 213 3.162278 8.0 0.19 213 2.828427 7.5 0.19 213 2.738613 7.0 0.12 213 2.645751 6.5 213 2.54951 6.0 213 2.44949 20 

# REDACTED

# Calculation Summary

6.0 213 2.44949 6.0 213 2.44949 5.0 213 2.236068 5.0 213 2.236068 6.0 213 2.44949 5.0 213 2.236068 5.5 213 2.345208 6.0 213 2.44949 5.5 213 2.345208

0 213 2.44949 6.0 213 2.44949 5.0 213 2.236068 5.0 213 2.236068 6.0 213 2.44949 5.0 213 2.236068 5.5 213 2.345208 6.0 213 2.44949 5.5 213 2.345208 

# REDACTED

# Calculation Summary

Location Coker A-1 68 Parameter M2/ M4 30.24 mdd 26-Feb 0 dcw 1 -1.36 dcw

0.84 0.54 1.037

start 05:05 start 61.307 Final Initial stop 05:47 stop 70.290 1 2248.4 1040.1 start start 2 1620.9 1433.3 stop stop 3 1192.4 1380.2 start start 4 947.9 947.5 stop stop 5 890.3 890.2 start start 6 923.1 923.8 stop stop 7 922.2 923.8 start start 8 950.0 951.1 stop stop 9 974.5 950.9 start start stop stop 2112.4 Duration 42 Total 8.983

Delta P Delta H Stack Temp DGM In DGM Out av sqrt dP Averages 2.44 0.19 220 1.3733 Interval Individual 15.0 0.19 213 76 75 3.872983 1 Readings 10.0 0.19 213 76 76 3.162278 6.5 0.19 213 76 76 2.54951 3.5 0.19 213 76 76 1.870829 2.0 0.19 213 76 76 1.414214 2.0 0.19 213 76 76 1.414214 1.5 0.2 219 76 76 1.224745 1.0 0.19 222 76 76 1 1.0 0.19 222 75 76 1 2 1.0 0.2 223 75 75 1 1.0 0.19 224 75 75 1 1.0 0.2 223 75 75 1 1.0 0.2 224 75 75 1 Run 2 Std Temp (F)

Date Static Press ("wc) Duct Depth (ft) Data Entry Are a

Bar Press ("Hg, meas)

Duct Diamter (ft)

Duct Width (ft) Pitot Tube Correction Factor Nozzle Diameter (in) DGMCF Stk Elev (rel to Barometer) Data Entered By (initials) Data Checked by (initials) Data Corrected by (initials)

Times DGM Volumes (as read) Impinger Catch

Total Wt Gain

75.1 68 30 .2 4

-1

. 36

05:05 61

. 307 05:47 7 0

. 290

42

2.44 0.19 220 1.3733

15.0 0.19 213 3.872983 10.0 0.19 213 3.162278 6.5 0.19 213 2.54951 3.5 0.19 213 1.870829 2.0 0.19 213 1.414214 2.0 0.19 213 1.414214 1.5 0.2 219 1.224745 1.0 0.19 222 1 1.0 0.19 222 1 1.0 0.2 223 1 1.0 0.19 224 1.0 0.2 223 1 1 1.0 0.2 224 1 

# REDACTED

# Calculation Summary

1.0 0.19 224 75 75 1 1.0 0.2 224 75 75 1 1.0 0.2 224 75 74 1 3 1.0 0.2 224 74 75 1 1.0 0.19 223 74 74 1 1.0 0.19 223 74 74 1 1.0 0.19 223 74 74 1 1.0 0.2 222 74 74 1 1.0 0.16 223 73 74 1 1.5 219 1.224745 1.5 219 1.224745 1.0 0.19 224 1 1.0 0.2 224 1 1.0 0.2 224 1 1.0 0.2 224 1 1.0 0.19 223 1 1.0 0.19 223 1 1.0 0.19 223 1.0 0.2 222 1 1 1.0 0.16 223 1 1.5 219 1.224745 1.5 219 1.224745 

# REDACTED

# Calculation Summary

Location Coker A-1 68 Parameter M2/ M4 30.25 mdd 27-Feb 0 dcw 1 -1.357 dcw

0.84 0.54 1.031

start 19:36 start 76.073 Final Initial stop 20:08 stop 83.580 1 1607.2 1053.9 start start 2 1622.6 1620.9 stop stop 3 1192.5 1192.4 start start 4 947.4 947.9 stop stop 5 890 890.3 start start 6 922.4 923.1 stop stop 7 921.7 922.2 start start 8 949.8 950.0 stop stop 9 944.8 936.4 start start stop stop 1770.5 Duration 32 Total 7.507

Delta P Delta H Stack Temp DGM In DGM Out av sqrt dP Averages 2.54 0.19 220 1.4813 Interval Individual 0.5 0.20 210 66 67 0.707107 1 Readings 0.5 0.19 222 66 67 0.707107 0.5 0.19 223 65 66 0.707107 1.0 0.20 225 67 67 1 1.0 0.21 230 65 65 1 1.0 0.19 230 65 65 1 1.0 0.20 225 66 65 1 1.0 0.21 224 66 67 1 1.0 0.20 220 66 69 1 2 1.5 0.20 226 70 70 1.224745 1.0 0.20 221 64 66 1 1.5 0.20 218 64 67 1.224745 2.0 0.20 221 68 68 1.414214 Run 3

Data Checked by (initials) Data Corrected by (initials)

Nozzle Diameter (in) Duct Depth (ft) Bar Press ("Hg, meas)

Static Press ("wc) Date Stk Elev (rel to Barometer) Duct Diamter (ft)

Pitot Tube Correction Factor Duct Width (ft) Data Entry Are a
Std Temp (F) Data Entered By (initials)

Times

Total Wt Gain DGM Volumes (as read) Impinger Catch

66.0 DGMCF 68 5 3 0.2

-1

. 3 57

19:36 20:08

32

2.54 0.19 220 1.4813

0.5 0.20 210 0.707107 0.5 0.19 222 0.707107 0.5 0.19 223 0.707107 1.0 0.20 225 1 1.0 0.21 230 1 1.0 0.19 230 1 1.0 0.20 225 1 1.0 0.21 224 1 1.0 0.20 220 1 1.5 0.20 226 1.224745 1.0 0.20 1 1.5 0.20 218 221 1.224745 2.0 0.20 221 Data Entry Are a Run 3

t y

Std Temp (F ) B ar Press ( "Hg, meas ) D ata Entered By ( initials ) Date Stk Elev (rel to Barometer) D ata C hecked by ( initials ) D uct Diamter (f t ) S tatic Press ( "wc ) Data Corrected b y ( initials ) D uct Depth (f t ) D uct Width ( ft ) Pitot Tube C orrection Facto r N ozzle Diameter ( in ) DG M C F

T im es DGM Volumes (as read) Impinger Catch

T o t a l Wt Ga i n

1.414214 

# REDACTED

# Calculation Summary

2.0 0.20 223 65 65 1.414214 2.5 0.20 214 63 63 1.581139 3.0 0.20 214 64 64 1.732051 3 4.0 0.05 221 2 4.0 215 2 4.5 218 2.12132 5.0 221 2.236068 5.0 216 2.236068 5.5 216 2.345208 6.0 218 2.44949 6.0 215 2.44949 2.0 0.20 223 1.414214 2.5 0.20 214 9 3.0 0.20 214 1.732051 4.0 0.05 221 2 4.0 215 2 4.5 218 2.12132 5.0 221 2.236068 5.0 216 2.236068 5.5 216 2.345208 6.0 218 2.44949 6.0 215 2.44949 

# REDACTED

# Calculation Summary

Location Coker A 68 Parameter M2/ M4 30.18 mdd 28-Feb 0 dcw 1 -1.36 dcw

0.84 0.54 1.028

start 17:57 start 628.343 Final Initial stop 18:05 stop 629.310 1 2585.3 1044.4 start start 2 1630.3 1622.6 stop stop 3 1185.9 1192.5 start start 4 947.1 947.4 stop stop 5 890.8 890 start start 6 922.3 922.4 stop stop 7 922 921.7 start start 8 949.8 949.8 stop stop 9 928.8 925.2 start start stop stop 1546.3 Duration 8 Total 0.967

Delta P Delta H Stack Temp DGM In DGM Out av sqrt dP Averages 9.50 0.16 213 3.0117 Interval Individual 26.5 0.20 214 74 73 5.147815 1 Readings 19.0 0.20 215 75 74 4.358899 17.0 0.20 213 74 73 4.123106 11.0 0.20 213 73 74 3.316625 8.5 0.02 213 73 73 2.915476 8.0 213 2.828427 8.0 213 2.828427 7.5 213 2.738613 6.5 212 2.54951 2 6.5 213 2.54951 6.5 213 2.54951 6.0 213 2.44949 6.5 213 2.54951 Run 4

Duct Depth (ft)

Pitot Tube Correction Factor Duct Width (ft) Data Entered By (initials) Std Temp (F) Data Entry Are a

Impinger Catch

Total Wt Gain

Data Checked by (initials) Data Corrected by (initials)

Nozzle Diameter (in)

DGM Volumes (as read) Times

73.6 Date Static Press ("wc) Bar Press ("Hg, meas) Stk Elev (rel to Barometer) Duct Diamter (ft)

DGMCF

17:57 18:05 -1

. 36 30 .1 8 68

8

9.50 0.16 213 3.0117

26.5 0.20 214 5.147815 19.0 0.20 215 4.358899 17.0 0.20 213 4.123106 11.0 0.20 213 3.316625 8.5 0.02 213 2.915476 8.0 213 2.828427 8.0 213 2.828427 7.5 213 2.738613 6.5 212 2.54951 6.5 213 2.54951 6.5 213 2.54951 6.0 213 2.44949 6.5 213 2.54951 

# REDACTED

# Calculation Summary

7.0 213 2.645751 7.5 212 2.738613 7.5 213 2.738613 3 8.0 213 2.828427 8.0 213 2.828427 8.0 213 2.828427 8.0 213 2.828427 8.5 213 2.915476 9.0 213 3 7.0 213 2.645751 7.5 212 2.738613 213 2.738613 7.5 8.0 213 2.828427 8.0 213 2.828427 8.0 213 2.828427 8.0 213 2.828427 8.5 213 2.915476 9.0 213 3 

# REDACTED

### Example Calculation, Run 1 Page 1

P bar =

= 30.22 = 0 = 30.22

0 X 0.1

P bar = 30.22

= 30.22
= -1.4 = 30.12

-1.4 13.6

P s = 30.12

V w(std) =

= 2574.8 g = 0.0022046 lb/g = 21.85 inHg - ft 3 /degR - lbmole = 528 degR = 18.00 lb/lbmole = 29.92 inHg

V w(std) = 2574.8 x 0.002205 x 21.85 x 528
18 x 29.92 V w(std) = 121.597 P bar,meas - (Elev X 0.1/100)

V 1c = Total weight of liquid collected

K=conversion of grams to pounds R = Ideal Gas Constant T std = Standard absolute temperature 

### Volume of Water Vapor Condensed, corrected to standard conditions, ft 3 

### - as per US EPA Method 5, Eq. 5-2 in. Hg

P s = 30.22 + ( P bar = Barometric pressure at the sampling site
in. Water P s = Absolute Stack Pressure in. Hg

) 

### Barometric Pressure at the Sampling Location, Corrected per EPA Method 2, Section 6.5

Barometric Pressure at the Sampling Location, Corrected per EPA Method 2, Section 6.5

P g = Stack Static Pressure in. Hg feet in. Hg

100 ) P bar,meas = Barometric pressure as measured Elev = elevation of sampling location relative to barometer P bar = Barometric pressure at the sampling site

P bar = 30.22 - (

M w = Molecular Weight of Water
P std = Standard absolute pressure 

### Adapted for the measurement of mass of water as opposed to the volume of water.

M w x P std V 1c x K x R x T std 30.22

30.22

2 3 0.2

30 .22

30.22
-1.4 30.12

30.22

30 .12 

# REDACTED

### Example Calculation, Run 1 Page 2



### Moisture Content, proportion, by volume - as per US EPA Method 5, Eq. 5-3

= 121.597 ft 3

= 2.147 ft 3

2.147 + 121.597

B ws 

### = 0.9826

Moisture content at saturation B ws 

### = N/A

= 86.7 X 673.0 = -434.4 X 452867.82 = 822.1 X 304759458 = -697.4 X 2.051E+11 = 224.0 sum = 1.0190
29.92 30.12
for further calculations B ws 

### = 0.9826 V w(std) = Volume of water vapor condensed
V m(std) = Dry Gas Volume V w(std) V m(std) + V w(std)

This calculated by polynomial fit: (86.7222826792858 + T s* (-0.645483277572566) +
T s 2 *0.00181527101645074 + T s 3 * (-2.28823297043421E-06) + (T s ) 4 *1.09201445204276E09)*100*29.92/P s )

x 100 1.09201445204276E-09 86.722282679285800 -0.645483277572566 B ws 

### = B ws 

### =

121.597

x = 101.22 sum 0.00181527101645074
-2.28823297043421E-06

### Example Calculation, Run 1 Page 3



### Molecular Weight of stack gas, lb/lb-mole - as per US EPA Method 2, Eq. 2-6

M s 

### =

= 26.73 lb/lb-mole = 0.983 proportion = 18.00 lb/lb-mole

M s 

### = 26.73 x ( 1 - 0.983 ) + ( 18.00 x 0.983 )
M s 

### = 18.15

V m(actual) = V m x Y

= 2.078 ft 3

= 1.051

V m(actual) = 2.078 x 1.051

V m(actual) = 2.18

= 2.078 ft 3

= 1.051 = 528 = 30.22 in. Hg = 0.19 in. H 2 O
13.6 in. H 2 O/in. Hg 542.50 degR

V m(std) = 2.078 x 1.051 x 528 x ( 30.22 + ( 0.19 / 13.6 ))
542.5 x 29.92 V m(std) = 2.147 V m(std) =

13.6 = Conversion factor Tm = Absolute average DGM temperature V m = Volume of gas sample, dry Y = Dry gas meter calibration factor

V m = Volume of gas sample, dry Y = Dry gas meter calibration factor 

### Dry Gas Volume, corrected to standard conditions, ft 3 

### - as per US EPA Method 5, Eq. 5-1

T m x P std M d (1-B ws )+18.0(B ws )

V m x Y x T std x (P bar + (deltaH / 13.6)) 

### Dry Gas Volume, corrected to actual conditions, ft 3

Tstd = Standard Temperature
P ba r = Barometric pressure at the sampling site deltaH = Average pressure differential across the orifice meter 18.0 = Molecular Weight of H 2 O M d = Dry molecular weight of stack gas
B ws = Proportion of water vapor, by volume

30.22 0.19

0.19 30.22 

# REDACTED

### Example Calculation, Run 1 Page 4

v s 

### = K p x C p x deltaP avg x sqrt(T s /(P s x M s ))

= 85.49 ft/sec[((lb/lb-mole)(in.Hg))/((degR)(in.H2O))] 1⁄2

= 0.84 = 3.12 in.H 2 O = 673.0 degR = 30.12 in. Hg = 18.15 lb/lb-mole

30.12 x 18.15

v s 

### = 248.71 ft/sec



### Average Stack Gas Volumetric Flow Rate - Actual Conditions

Q actual 

### = vs X A

= 248.71 ft/sec
= 0.79 ft 2



### Q actual 

### = 248.71 x 0.79 

### Q actual 

### = 195 cubic feet per second 

### Q actual 

### = 11720 cubic feet per minute 

### Q actual 

### = 703205 cubic feet per hour



### Q = 3600 x (1-B ws ) x v s x A x T std x P s T s x P std

= 3600 sec/hr = 0.983 proportion = 248.71 ft/sec
= 0.79 ft 2 = 528 degR = 30.12 in. Hg = 673.0 degR = 29.92 in. Hg 673.0

A = Cross sectional area of stack

3600= Conversion factor B ws = Proportion of water vapor, by volume v s = Average stack gas velocity

T std = Standard absolute temperature
P s = Absolute stack pressure
T s = Absolute stack temperature

v s = Average stack gas velocity 

### Average Stack Gas Velocity, ft/sec - as per US EPA Method 2, Eq. 2-7

P std = Standard absolute pressure 

### Average Stack Gas Dry Volumetric Flow Rate, dscf/hr - as per US EPA Method 2, Eq. 2-8

A = Cross sectional area of stack C p = S type pitot tube coefficient deltaP avg =ave. sqrt. of the velocity head of stack gas
T s = Absolute stack temperature K p = Velocity equation constant

3.12 x ( P s = Absolute stack pressure
M s = Molecular Weight of stack gas

85.49 x 0.84 x v s 

### = ) 0.5 673.0 30.12

6 7 3

. 0
30.12 

# REDACTED

### Example Calculation, Run 1 Page 5



### Average Stack Gas Wet Volumetric Flow Rate, wscf/hr

Q w 

### = Q (1-Bws)

= 9,639 dscf/hr = 0.983 proportion



### Q w 

### = ( 1.00 - 0.983 ) 

### Q w 

### = 555,427 wscf/hr



### = 9,257 wscf/min



### Isokinetic Variation, % - as per US EPA Method 5, Eq. 5-8

100 x T s x V m(std) x P std 60 x T std x P s x v s x A n x min x (1 - B ws )

= 100 = 673 degR = 2.147 ft 3
= 29.920 in. Hg = 60 Sec/Min = 528 degR = 30.12 in. Hg = 248.71 ft/sec = 0.0015904 ft 2

= 20 minutes = 0.983 proportion

100 x 673.0 x 2.147 x 29.92 60 x 528 x 30.12 x 248.71 x 0.0015904 x 20 x ( 1 - 0.983



### I = 33.01 B ws = Proportion of water vapor, by volume Q = Average Stack Gas Dry Volumetric Flow Rate



### I =

A n = Cross-sectional Area of nozzle min = Total sampling time B ws = Proportion of water vapor, by volume



### I = 60 = Sec/Min
T std = Standard absolute temperature
P s = Absolute stack pressure

v s = Average stack gas velocity

100 = Conversion to Percent
T s = Absolute stack temperature V m(std) = Dry Gas Volume
P std = Standard absolute pressure 9,639

## CITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing URS EPA Method 2/4 Data Reduction per Interval



# Run 1 Interval 1 Interval 2 Interval 3 Duration ( min ) : 15 15 19 Barometric ( "H g) : 30.22 30.22 30.22 Duct Diameter ( ft ) : 1.00 1.00 1.00 PTCF: 0.84 0.84 0.84 Vent Tem p

. ( de g F ) : 212.8 213.0 213.0 Delta H ( "H2O ) : 0.2 0.18 n/a Static ( "H2O ) : -1.36 -1.36 -1.36 Delta P ( "H2O ) : 21.8 8.3 5.6 SQRT Delta P: 4.63 2.87 2.36 Abs. Vent Pressure ( "H g) : 30.12 30.12 30.12 Abs. Vent Tem p

. ( R ) : 672.8 673.0 673.0 Moisture ( % ) : 98.26 98.26 98.26 Molecular Wei g ht (g /mol ) : 18.15 18.15 18.15 Velocit y ( ft/sec ) : 369 229 188 Vent Gas Flowrate ( acfh ) : 1,043,244 647,330 532,682 Vent Gas Flowrate ( acfm ) : 17,387 10,789 8,878 Vent Gas Flowrate ( scfh ) : 824,155 511,259 420,711 Vent Gas Flowrate ( scfm ) : 13,736 8,521 7,012 Vent Gas Flowrate ( dscfh ) : 14,302 8,872 7,301 Vent Gas Flowrate ( dscfm ) : 238 148 122 30.22 30.22 30.22

15 15 19

213.0 213.0 212.8

-1.36 -1.36 -1.36

0.2 0.18 n/a

21.8 8.3 5.6 4.63 2.87 2.36

672.8 673.0 673.0 30.12 30.12 30.12 

# REDACTED

## CITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing URS EPA Method 2/4 Data Reduction per Interval



# Run 2 Interval 1 Interval 2 Interval 3 Duration ( min ) : 15 15 16 Barometric ( "H g) : 30.24 30.24 30.24 Duct Diameter ( ft ) : 1.00 1.00 1.00 PTCF: 0.84 0.84 0.84 Vent Tem p

. ( de g F ) : 214.9 223.4 222.2 Delta H ( "H2O ) : 0.19 0.20 0.19 Static ( "H2O ) : -1.36 -1.36 -1.36 Delta P ( "H2O ) : 5.19 1.00 1.11 SQRT Delta P: 2.06 1.00 1.05 Abs. Vent Pressure ( "H g) : 30.14 30.14 30.14 Abs. Vent Tem p

. ( R ) : 674.9 683.4 682.2 Moisture ( % ) : 91.48 91.48 91.48 Molecular Wei g ht (g /mol ) : 18.89 18.89 18.89 Velocit y ( ft/sec ) : 161 79 83 Vent Gas Flowrate ( acfh ) : 456,121 222,428 233,331 Vent Gas Flowrate ( acfm ) : 7,602 3,707 3,889 Vent Gas Flowrate ( scfh ) : 359,481 173,107 181,914 Vent Gas Flowrate ( scfm ) : 5,991 2,885 3,032 Vent Gas Flowrate ( dscfh ) : 30,639 14,754 15,505 Vent Gas Flowrate ( dscfm ) : 511 246 258 30.24 30.24 30.24

15 15 16

214.9 223.4 222.2 0.19 0.20 0.19 -1.36 -1.36 -1.36

2.06 1.00 1.05 5.19 1.00 1.11

674.9 683.4 682.2 30.14 30.14 30.14 

# REDACTED

### CITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing URS EPA Method 2/4 Data Reduction per Interval



## Run 3 Interval 1 Interval 2 Interval 3 Duration ( min ) : 15 15 16 Barometric ( "H g) : 30.25 30.25 30.25 Duct Diameter ( ft ) : 1.00 1.00 1.00 PTCF: 0.84 0.84 0.84 Vent Tem p

. ( de g F ) : 223.6 220.4 217.1 Delta H ( "H2O ) : 0.20 0.20 0.13 Static ( "H2O ) : -1.36 -1.36 -1.36 Delta P ( "H2O ) : 0.81 1.64 4.78 SQRT Delta P: 0.89 1.27 2.17 Abs. Vent Pressure ( "H g) : 30.15 30.15 30.15 Abs. Vent Tem p

. ( R ) : 683.6 680.4 677.1 Moisture ( % ) : 91.41 91.41 91.41 Molecular Wei g ht (g /mol ) : 20.05 20.05 20.05 Velocit y ( ft/sec ) : 68 96 165 Vent Gas Flowrate ( acfh ) : 192,220 272,647 467,295 Vent Gas Flowrate ( acfm ) : 3,204 4,544 7,788 Vent Gas Flowrate ( scfh ) : 149,604 213,197 367,193 Vent Gas Flowrate ( scfm ) : 2,493 3,553 6,120 Vent Gas Flowrate ( dscfh ) : 12,853 18,317 31,548 Vent Gas Flowrate ( dscfm ) : 214 305 526 30.25 30.25 30.25

15 15 16

223.6 220.4 217.1

6 -1.36 0.20 0.20 0.13 -1.36 -1.36 0.81 1.64 4.78

30.15 30.15 30.15 1.27 2.17 0.89

683.6 680.4 677.1 

# REDACTED

### CITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing URS EPA Method 2/4 Data Reduction per Interval



## Run 4 Interval 1 Interval 2 Interval 3 Duration ( min ) : 15 15 13 Barometric ( "H g) : 30.18 30.18 30.18 Duct Diameter ( ft ) : 1.00 1.00 1.00 PTCF: 0.84 0.84 0.84 Vent Tem p

. ( de g F ) : 213.4 212.7 213.0 Delta H ( "H2O ) : 0.16 n/a n/a Static ( "H2O ) : -1.36 -1.36 -1.36 Delta P ( "H2O ) : 13.19 6.64 8.14 SQRT Delta P: 3.53 2.58 2.85 Abs. Vent Pressure ( "H g) : 30.08 30.08 30.08 Abs. Vent Tem p

. ( R ) : 673.4 672.7 673.0 Moisture ( % ) : 98.66 98.66 98.66 Molecular Wei g ht (g /mol ) : 18.23 18.23 18.23 Velocit y ( ft/sec ) : 281 205 227 Vent Gas Flowrate ( acfh ) : 794,801 579,358 641,694 Vent Gas Flowrate ( acfm ) : 13,247 9,656 10,695 Vent Gas Flowrate ( scfh ) : 626,549 457,161 506,134 Vent Gas Flowrate ( scfm ) : 10,442 7,619 8,436 Vent Gas Flowrate ( dscfh ) : 8,402 6,131 6,787 Vent Gas Flowrate ( dscfm ) : 140 102 113 15 15 13 30.18 30.18 30.18

213.4 212.7 213.0 0.16 n/a n/a -1.36 -1.36 -1.36 13.19 6.64 8.14 2.58 2.85 3.53 30.08 30.08 30.08 673.4 672.7 673.0 

# REDACTED

## CITGO Coker Steam Vent Testing URS EPA Method 2/4 Sampling and Leak Rate Data

Leak Correction per equation EPA Method 5-1 (a) Case I: Run 1 meter volume (acf) 2.113 4% of avera g e samplin g rate ( cfm ) 0.0042 final leak rate (cfm) 0.006 final leak rate - 4% of avg. sampling rate (cfm) 0.0018 leak volume (acf) 0.035 corrected meter volume (acf) 2.078

Run 2 meter volume (acf) 8.983 4% of average sampling rate (cfm) 0.0086 final leak rate (cfm) 1 

## 0.002 final leak rate - 4% of avg. sampling rate (cfm) n/a leak volume ( acf ) n/a corrected meter volume (acf) 8.983

Run 3 meter volume ( acf ) 7.507 4% of average sampling rate (cfm) 0.0094 final leak rate ( cfm ) 0.006 final leak rate - 4% of avg. sampling rate (cfm) n/a leak volume (acf) n/a corrected meter volume ( acf ) 7.507

Run 4 meter volume (acf) 0.967 4% of average sampling rate (cfm) 0.0048 final leak rate ( cfm ) 0.004 final leak rate - 4% of av g . samplin g rate ( cfm ) n/a leak volume (acf) n/a corrected meter volume (acf) 0.967

1 

## Only initial leak rate availableConsole IDAmbient Temperature (oF)DryCal IDBarometric Pressure (in. Hg)Initials mdd InitialsDate 3/12/2008 DateRun 1A Run 1B Run 2A Run 2B Run 3A Run 3B Run 4A Run 4B Run 5A Run 5B0.25 0.2515:59 16:04174.93 176.1816:04 16:09176.18 177.4255000000001.245 1.239 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0000.25199 0.254170.25228 0.254010.2523 0.254160.25252 0.254210.25273 0.254270.25284 0.254240.25318 0.254310.25337 0.254530.25359 0.254750.25361 0.254770.25376 0.254790.24972 0.254890.25396 0.255070.25394 0.254970.25414 0.2550.253 0.255 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!1.265 1.273 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!1.016 1.027 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!1Each DryCal reading recorded is average of 10 instantaneous readings.2Run average Ydis acceptable if the individual Yds are within 2% of the average and if the average Ydis between 0.9 and 1.1.Dry Gas Meter Calibration (vs. DryCal)1.021 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!Vcon--Total Volume (ft3)A18352111181368.429.26Calibrated by Reviewed by#DIV/0!#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!#DIV/0! #DIV/0!Nominal Flowrate (ft3/min)#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!Average Flowrate (ft3/min)Vcal--Total Volume (ft3)AcceptableRun Average Yd2Yd(Vcal/Vcon)Applicable Flowrate (ft3/min)Time (hh:mm)DGM Reading (ft3)Time (hh:mm)DGM Reading (ft3)Run DurationStartStopFlowrate Readings1(ft3/min)CDS-23s Dry Gas Meter vs DryCal
RevisionDate: March 2008